HomeMy WebLinkAboutEagle Partners AZMERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: SEPTEMBER 15, 1998
APPLICANT: EAGLE PARTNERS ITEM NUMBER: 5
REQUEST: ANNEXATION & ZONING
AGENCY 'COMMENTS
CITY CLERK: NO INFORMATION SUBMITTED
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT: 3
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: j
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: I`
ADA
COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: _>
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: V
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: .19
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL,
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION
OF EAGLE PARTNERS LLC, 603 SOUTH
EAGLE ROAD, THE APPLICATION FOR
ANNEXATION AND ZONING, NORTHWEST
CORNER OF EAGLE ROAD AND MAGIC
VIEW DRIVE, MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
ORDER OF DECISION
The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for public
hearing on July 21, 1998, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant's Representative,
having appeared and numerous other witnesses having testified and the City Council
having duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter therefore makes the
following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and Order of Decision:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The notice of public hearings on the application for annexation and. zoning
was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said public hearings scheduled for
April 14, 1998, and June 9, 1998, before the Planning and Zoning Commission, the first
publication appearing and written notice having been mailed to property owners or
purchasers of record within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the property under
consideration more than fifteen (15) days prior to said hearings and with the notice of public
hearing having been posted upon the property under consideration more than one week
before said hearing; and that copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio
and television stations as public service announcements; and the matter having been duly
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the April 14, 1998, and June 9,
1998, public
hearings;
and the applicant,
affected property owners,
and
government
subdivisions
providing
services within the
planning jurisdiction of the
City
of Meridian,
having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence.
2. The notice of public hearings on the application for annexation and zoning
were published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said public hearings scheduled for
April 7, 1998 and July 21, 1998, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and
written notice having been mailed to -property owners or purchasers of record within 300
feet of the external boundaries of the property under consideration more than fifteen (15)
days prior to said hearings and with the notice of public hearing having been posted upon
the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing; and that copies
of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio and television stations as public
service announcements; and the matter having been duly considered by the City Council at
the April 7, 1998, public hearings; and the applicant, affected property owners, and
government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of
Meridian, having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence.
3. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth
in Idaho Code §§ 67-6509 and 67-6511, and §§ 11-2-416E and 11-2-417A, Municipal Code
of the City of Meridian.
4. The City Council takes judicial notice of its zoning, subdivisions and
development ordinances codified at Title 11, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, and all
current zoning maps thereof, and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
December 21, 1993, Ordinance No. 629 — January 4, 1994, and maps and the ordinance
Establishing the Impact Area Boundary.
5. The property which is the subject to the application for annexation and zoning
is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein as if set forth in
full. The property is approximately 4.13 acres in size. The property is located adjacent and
to the west of Eagle Road and to the north of Magic View Drive.
6. The Applicant is the record owner of the property and has filed a written
request for annexation.
7. The property is presently zoned by Ada County as Rural Transition (RT), and
is used primarily vacant and unused.
8. The Applicant requests the property be zoned (C -G), General Retail and
Service Commercial.
9. The Applicant has requested the annexation and this zoning, and the
application was not initiated at the request of the City of Meridian.
10. The property is located at 603 South Eagle Road.
11. The proposed site subject property lies adjacent to the south of the Greenhills
Estates No. 3 Subdivision and borders Lots 1, 3, 4 and part of Lot 5 in said subdivision and
is kitty corner and to the southwest of the Mountain View Subdivision. The site is
immediately east of the Magic View Subdivision and immediately west of the St. Luke's
Regional Medical Center, and is adjacent to Eagle Road and in close proximity to the Eagle
Road Interchange with Interstate 1-84.
12. The city limits of the City of Meridian are adjacent and abut on the south and
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
on the east of the subject real property.
13. The land within the proposed` annexation is contiguous to the present city
limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation.
14. The property to the north and to the northwest of the subject property is
developed as residential housing and the property to the east of the subject property is
developed as St. Luke's Regional Medical facility and the property to the south has been
developed to include the Texaco Convenience Store and gasoline station, and the property
to the west is residential.
15. The property which is the subject of this application is within the Area of
Impact of the City of Meridian.
16. 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.
17. The Applicant submitted development plans for the subject real property
which are identified as "Chevron/McDonald's and by I.P. Co. Credit Union, Eagle Road and
Magic View Drive, Meridian, Idaho, BRS Architects, 5/98, job number 9464 sheet SS -2.1 of
site and building data 6/98".
18. The applicant proposes to develop the subject property in the following
manner. The northern 108 feet of the subject property to be reserved as a roadway right-
of-way and dedicated to the ACHD with the inclusion thereon of a berm in the northern 1/3
of the reserved right-of-way; and adjacent and to the south of the reserved right-of-way a
parcel depicted as Parcel B which is depicted as 150 feet in width across the entire subject
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
property which shall be developed with a credit union building 5,000 square foot in size with
a future expansion of additional 2,600 square feet together with parking and landscaping,
with a drive-through on the southern side of the proposed building. A parcel depicted as
Parcel A is 292 feet in width across the entire subject property to be developed as a
McDonald's/Chevron fast food convenience facility with fuel islands including eight pump
stations, a vacuum air compressor and hose B/BB, a car wash, trash enclosure, together
with the convenient store and associated parking, berming and landscaping as depicted on
the site plan.
19. Traffic volume on Eagle Road is quite high and serves as a major
interchange and north/south collector with Interstate 1-84.
20. Giving due consideration to the comment received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction public facilities
and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the
public if the following conditions of development are imposed:
20.1 Applicant shall be responsible to install a water main within the right-of-way of
the new street along the north boundary of.the proposed site. Location and
sizing of the new main should be coordinated with the Meridian Water
Department.
20.2 Water service to the proposed site could be to the existing water line installed
along the northerly side of Magic View Drive. Developer to provide the Public
Works Department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic
water requirements for the proposed site.
20.3 As Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the
building plan review process Applicant shall be required to enter into an
Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian. In addition to these
assessments, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged
against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
water and sewer mains to their current points.
20.4 In order to assure that the affected and subject area will be served
adequately by essential public facilities and services the pretreatment
required and addressed on the building permit application redlines for
obtaining City sewer service, which is required.
20.5 In compliance with the requirements of the Central District Health for
approval of appropriate proposal for central sewage and central water, as
well as approval for plans for food establishments.
20.6 Sanitary Sewer service to the proposed site could be to the existing line
installed in Magic View Drive directly adjacent to the south.
20.7 The treatment capacity of the City of Meridian's Wastewater Treatment Plant
is currently being evaluated. Approval of development to be contingent upon
City's treatment plant ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage
generated by this proposed development.
20.8 The Applicant shall be required to connect the property to Meridian water and
sewer, extend the water and sewer lines to serve the property, and resolve
how the water and sewer mains will serve the property, all of which shall be
at the Applicant's, or its successor's, or successors' cost and expense. Said
water and sewer requirements shall be performed on or before the time that
the Applicant or its successor, or successors desire to use the property or
place a user on the property.
20.9 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included
in the project are to be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches are
to be piped should be shown on the site plans. Plans will need to be
approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users
association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public
Works Department with no variances for tiling of any ditches crossing this
project.
20.10 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer
is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for all off-street
parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site.
20.1 1 A Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review with the
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District with all laterals and wasteways affected
to be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. Any
surface drainage leaving the site must be approved by the Nampa & Meridian
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
Irrigation District in accordance with their drainage plans. The Developer
must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805.
20.12 The stormwater run-off will be managed with appropriate Best Management
Practice.
20.13 Pressurized irrigation shall be installed and constructed.
20.14 Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of
the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with the design
of site drainage pian.
20.15 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within the project will have
to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-
517. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape
irrigation.
20.16 All ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition of annexation.
20.17 The proposed roadway north of the proposed Idaho Power Credit Union
needs to be dedicated as a public roadway with a stub to the west. Future
development in this area will need to have proper access to the traffic signal.
Applicant shall be responsible to install a water main within the right-of-way
of the new street along the north boundary of the proposed site. Location
and sizing of the new main should be coordinated with the Meridian Water
Department.
20.18 Developer comply with the State of Idaho Transportation Departments
requests that a full control area is necessary to maintain adequate traffic
operations on Eagle Road and in the vicinity of Interstate 1-84 interchange.
20.19 All development approach locations shall be in accordance with the
requirements of the State of Idaho Transportation Department.
20.20 Roadway and roadway approaches to be approved by the ACHD.
20.21 Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of
the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed
in site-specific requirements.
20.22 Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in
Sections 11-2-414.D.4. and 11-2-414.D.5. of the City of Meridian Zoning and
Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -.Page
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
(ADA) requirements.
20.23 No signage details were submitted. Detailed signage plans must be included
as part of this application for review and approval.
20.24 A developer shall comply with all life safety codes of the City of Meridian and
shall also comply with City code requirements for water supplies, sprinkler
systems, as regulated by the Fire Department.
20.25 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
20.26 A development agreement be required as a condition of annexation setting
forth these conditions of development.
21. It is found that if the developer pays for the requested improvements and
complies with the conditions set forth in these findings of fact no. 20 and all subparts
the economic welfare of the City and its residents and tax and rate payers will be
protected, which requirement shall be included in a development agreement, a
condition of annexation and zoning designation.
22. It is found that the following are development considerations which must
be taken into account, in order in assure the proposed development is designed,
constructed, operated and maintained in a manner which is harmonious and
appropriate in appearance with the existing, or intended character of the general
vicinity, in order to assure that the proposed use will not change the essential character
of the affected vicinity and will insure that the proposed uses will not be hazardous or
disturbing to the existing, or future neighboring uses, particularly considering the
impact of proposed development on potential to produce excessive traffic, noise; smoke,
fumes, glare and oders:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
22.1 To minimize the impact of the neighborhood to the north the applicant shall
dedicate to the ACHD a reserved right-of-way on the northern 108 feet of the
subject property;
22.2 A roadway placed on the northern boundary of the site will also provide
potential elimination of future traffic concerns in the area.
22.3 All speaker drive-throughs to be located on the south side of the
McDonald's/Chevron fast food convenience facility.
22.4 All speaker drive-throughs to be located on the south side of the Credit Union
facility.
22.5 All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section
11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. No
temporary signage or flashing signs shall be permitted. Submission and
approval of all signage plans including but not limited to pole signs, reader
boards, banners, etc., and specifically any "golden arches" type signage
associated with McDonalds and any outside signage associated with the
Chevron Gas Stations. These conditions shall be in addition to the
requirements of Meridian's sign ordinance.
22.6 The development shall include an additional 20 foot buffer on the north side
of the Credit Union facility and an additional 15 feet of landscaping between
the Credit Union and the McDonald's/Chevron fast food convenience facility.
22.7 The development shall include construction of a solid wood fence that runs
from the southerly boundary of Magic View north to the 108 foot reserved
road right-of-way.
22.8 To minimize the impact of the neighborhood to the north the applicant shall
dedicate to the ACHD a reserved right-of-way on the northern 108 feet of the
subject property; further a landscaped berm shall be developed in the
northern 35 feet of the reserved right-of-way and which landscaped berm
shall be maintained by developer.
22.9 The Credit Union facility shall operate during normal business hours
between 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and not open to customers on weekends.
22.10 A minimum of 68 three-inch caliper trees will be required for the paved
square footage proposed.
22.11 Particular attention needs to be paid to lighting plans to eliminate as much as
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
is reasonably necessary to, eliminate and/or reduce glare to neighboring
properties to the north and west, and in accordance with city Ordinance
Section 11-2-414D3.
22.12 A minimum of a 35 -foot -wide landscape setback is required adjacent to the
right-of-way of Eagle Road.
22.13 Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section
11-9-606. B.
22.14 Future development in this area will need to have proper access to the traffic
signal.
22.15 A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation to insure
that the development considerations herein found reasonable are enforced.
23. It is the finding and policy of the City Council that agreements are difficult to
enter into prior to annexation ordinances being passed; that the City Council finds that a
Development agreement shall be entered into prior to the final plat being approved and
prior to issuance of any building permits.
24. The applicant requested zoning of the subject real property as General Retail
and Service Commercial (C -G) is consistent with the commercial designation on the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map which designates the subject
property as commercial.
25. The proposed development will serve existing and growing needs and will
provide services to surrounding institutional, commercial and residential development.
26. The development of the property as a (C -G) General Retail and Service
Commercial District, as requested by the Applicant, will be compatible to the
development in the surrounding area subject` to the conditions of development herein
found to be reasonable in relation to the requested zone (C -G) General Retail and
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
Service Commercial Zoning District and is accordance with the adoptive
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian.
27. There are no major or scenic features of major importance that affect the
consideration of this application.
28. The subject annexation request and zoning designation and proposed
development relates to the goals and policies of the Comprehensive plan of the City as
follows:
28.1 The consideration of the provisions of the Comprehensive plan and the
requirements of the Zoning ordinance assure that the processing of such
application is the management of growth with the aim to achieve high-quality
development. Enhancement of Meridian's quality of life for all residents is
achieved by applying the criteria of the Comprehensive plan and the Zoning
ordinances of the City to all applications such as the subject application.
28.2 This proposed new growth development will finance public service expansion
by the requirement herein that the applicant comply with the requests
submitted of the political subdivisions responses within the Meridian Urban
Service Planning Area submitted in the record of this matter.
28.3 The expansion of commercial development is facilitated by the granting of
this application subject to the conditions herein set forth.
28.4 The application is consistent with Meridian's self identity.
28.5 The proposed development will be consistent with the goal of supplying
employment and economic self-sufficiency for the existing and future
residents of the City and the reduction of the reliance upon Boise and the
strengthening of the City's ability to finance and implement public
improvements, services and its open space character.
28.6 The preservation and improvement of the character and quality of Meridian's
man-made environment while maintaining its identity as a self-sufficient
community is achieved by applying the criteria of the Comprehensive plan
and the Zoning ordinances of the City to the subject application.
28.7 Compliance with the requests of the Political subdivisions providing services,
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -,Page 11
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
assures that community services are being provided for existing and
projected needs and that the land use patterns of the City are balanced to
insure that revenues pay for services and that the Urban Service Planning
Area is visually attractive, efficiently managed and clearly identifiable.
28.8 Compatible and efficient use of land through innovative and functional site
design is achieved by applying the criteria of the Comprehensive plan and
the Zoning ordinances of the City to the subject application.
29. The property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer, if
applicant extends the lines.
30. Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are
pressures on land previously used for agricultural uses to be developed into commercial
uses and other uses.
31. The legal description for annexation included in the application doesn't
include a portion of the S. Eagle Road right-of-way between the subject site and the St.
Luke's site. Applicant shall submit an annexation perimeter legal description for the
proposed site. The legal description shall include all those portions of adjacent public
rights-of-way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian (Ord. No. 659,
8/2/94), and '/z of all other adjacent Public Right -of -Ways. The legal description shall be
prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor, Licensed by the State of Idaho, and shall
conform to all the provisions of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 158. The legal
description for annexation must place this parcel contiguous to the existing city limit
boundary which is required for the preparation for the annexation ordinance.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The City of Meridian has authority to annex real property upon written
request for annexation and the real property being contiguous or adjacent to city
boundaries and that said property lies within the area of city impact as provided by Idaho
Code Section 50-222. The Municipal Code of the City of Meridian Section 11-2-417
provides the City may annex real property that is within the Meridian Urban Service
Planning Area as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
2. The Commission may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and
policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State.
3. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority and responsibility as
provided by "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975" codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho
Code by the adoption of "Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted December 21,
1993, Ord. No. 629, January 4, 1994.
4. The following are found to be pertinent provisions of the City of Meridian
Comprehensive Plan and are applicable to this Application:
1. The Goals of the Comprehensive Plan are set forth at Page 5 and
include:
1.1 To preserve Meridian's environmental quality and to make
provisions for and improve the total natural environment by
adopting City-wide and Urban Service Planning Area policies,
which deal with area -specific policies and programs.
1.2 To ensure that growth and development occur in an orderly
fashion in accordance with adopted policies and procedures
governing the use of land, residential development the provision
of services and the distribution of new housing units within the
Urban Service Planning Area.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
1.3 To encourage the kind of economic growth and development
which supplies employment and economic self-sufficiency for
existing and future residents, reduces the present reliance on
Boise and strengthens the City's ability to finance and
implement public improvements, services and its open space
character.
1.4 To provide housing opportunities for all economic groups within
the community.
1.5 To preserve and improve the character and quality of Meridian's
man-made environment while maintaining its identity as a self-
sufficient community.
1.6 To encourage cultural educational and recreational facilities
which will fill the needs and preferences of the citizens of
Meridian and to insure that these facilities are available to all
residents of the City.
1.7 To provide community services to fit existing and projected
needs.
1.8 To establish compatible and efficient use of land through the
use of innovative and functional site design.
1.9 To encourage a balance of land use patterns to insure that
revenues pay for services.
1.10 To create an Urban Service Planning Area which is visually
attractive, efficiently managed and clearly identifiable.
2. Under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS at page 17
Retail, commercial and office development are frequent partners
within Commercial Activity Centers. In order to support residential and
industrial developments, areas should be set aside as Commercial
Activity Centers and their development carefully guided.
Various commercial activity centers are designated on the
generalized land use map. Planning policies pertaining to commercial
activity centers are presented in the land use chapter of the plan.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
MIXED -PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT AREAS at page 17
Mixed use is a planning category which refers to the coordinated
development of several major uses as part of a single project, such as
specialty retail/commercial, variable density residential, offices,
motels, industrial, service, commercial, and public and semi-public
uses. Certain areas have been designated for mixed -planned uses.
The development of mixed and planned compatible land uses should
be carefully guided through specific project plans, in accordance with
the mixed-use policies contained in the Land Use chapter of the Plan.
Economic Development Goal Statement
Policies, Page 18
1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive
atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial
enterprises to locate in Meridian.
1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where
commercial and industrial interests and activities are to
dominate.
1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial
or industrial developments should be harmonized with the
natural environment and respect the unique needs and
features of each area.
1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not
in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
1.6 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping
facilities which are effectively integrated into new or existing
residential areas, and plan for new shopping centers as growth
and development warrant. (Emphasis added.)
3. Under LAND USE
EXISTING CONDITIONS, Page 21
Commercial and retail areas are established along major arterials, and
include small commercial center and individual businesses. Uses
include retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited manufacturing.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
Area of Impact, Page 22
Comprehensive Plan Map
The proposed future land use delineation's for the impact area are
shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map — Generalized Land Uses, . .
The land use element is based upon these objectives:
4. Planned mixed uses along I-84, Franklin Road, U.P. Railroad, and
Fairview Avenue corridors. (Emphasis added.)
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS, Page 25
In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be
guided by performance and developments standards. These
standards consider, among other aspects:
1. Traffic Volume and Type
2. Trip Generation
3. Impacts on Arterial Street System
4, Proximity to Other Commercial Development
5. Impacts on Neighborhood' Residential Areas
6. Accessibility of Site
7. Parking Demands
8. Pedestrian Circulation
9. Available Utility Systems
10. Aesthetics (Design Considerations)
11. Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses
12. Internal Circulation Design
13. Drainage
COMMERCIAL POLICIES, Page 26
4.6U Community shopping centers will be encouraged to
locate at arterial intersections and near high -traffic intensity areas. (Emphasis
added.)
4. Under TRANSPORTATION, Page 43
Existing Conditions
a. Eagle Road, North of Overland, is listed as a principal
arterial
5. Under COMMUNITY DESIGN, at Page 71
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
Community Identification Goal Statement
Create visual quality and functional identity for the City of
Meridian and its surrounding environment.
Policies
1.1 All commercial and industrial developments should be
reviewed by the City for adequate site planning.
1.3 Open space areas within all development should be
encouraged.
1.4 Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and
emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances
should be screened from view.
Special Community Design Areas Goal Statement
2.11J Require businesses and government to install and
maintain landscaping.
2.21J Encourage area beautification through uniform sign
design that enhances the community.
2.3U Encourage the beautification of streets, parking lots,
public lands, and state highways.
2.51J Encourage the use of attractive open space,
landscaping, lighting, and street furniture for the benefit of the
public.
Entryway Corridors
Entryway corridors are arterial roadways entering the
community that introduce both visitors and residents to Meridian. City -
designated gateway arterials include the following streets:
p. Eagle Road (North and South entrances)
Entryway corridors are a community's front door. It is
acknowledged that the corridor's trees (or lack thereof), commercial
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
signage, and site character provide the first, and often times the most
lasting, impression of the entire community.
Therefore, the entire community and, most specifically its
governing bodies, have the right and the responsibility to guide the
development and redevelopment that occurs along entryway
corridors.
Entrance Corridors Goal Statement
Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically -
pleasing entrances to the City of Meridian.
Policies
4.2U Support ACHD corridor development standards for the
entryways to the City.
4.3U Use the Comprehensive Plan, subdivision regulations, and
zoning to discourage strip development and encourage clustered,
landscaped business or residential development on entrance
corridors.
4AU Encourage landscaped setbacks for new development on
entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of
development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors.
Quality of Environment Goal Statement
Policies
5.2U Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts
from the visual quality of its surroundings, especially in areas of
prominent visibility.
5. The requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial, (C -G) is
defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 11. as follows:
(C -G) General Retail and Service Commercial: The purpose of the (C -G) District is
to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost
entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed
commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC,
{
proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel -related
services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All
such districts shall be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the
City of Meridian, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and
encourage clustering of commercial development.
6. That Section 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, B,
Commercial, lists commercial uses allowed in the various zoning districts of the City; that
drive-thru's are listed as conditional uses in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C-
G) district.
7. That the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under LAND USE, Mixed -Use
Area at Eagle Road, in 5.16U, states that all development requests will be subject to
development review and conditional use permit processing to insure neighborhood
compatibility.
8. By authority of the City of Meridian under the Comprehensive Plan, a
conditional use permit is required for Applicant to construct and operate any stores or
facilities on this parcel of land.
9. That Planned Development is defined in 11-2-403 B, at page 20 of the
Zoning Ordinance booklet, as follows:
An area of land which is developed as a single entity for a number of uses in
combination with or exclusive of other supportive uses. A PD may be entirely
residential, industrial, or commercial or a mixture of compatible uses. A PD does not
necessarily correspond to lot size, bulk, density, lot coverage required, open space
or type of residential, commercial or industrial uses as established in any one or
more created districts or'this Ordinance.
and a Planned General Development is defined as follows:
A development not otherwise distinguished under Planned Commercial, Industrial,
Residential Developments, or in which the proposed use of interior and exterior
spaces requires unusual design flexibility to achieve a completely logical and
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
complimentary conjunction of uses and functions. This PD classification applies to
essential public services, public or private recreation facilities, institutional uses,
community facilities or a PD which includes a mix of residential, commercial or
industrial uses.
and a Planned`Commercial Development is defined as follows:
Any development in which the principal use of land is for commercial purposes.
10. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Locale
Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as
follows:
Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision
development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school
districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to
current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to
accommodate the subdivision.
11. That pursuant to the authority of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may
impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible,
would be retroactive and apply to all lots in the City, because of the imperilment to the
health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian.
12. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows:
Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as
highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from
residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') wide,
and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement.
13. That Section 11-9-605 L states, in part, as follows:
All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting,
crossing, or lying adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or laterals touch
either or both sides of the area being subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed
with tiling or other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to said ditch, lateral
or canal.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
14. That 11-9-607 A, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows:
The City's policy is to encourage developers of land development and construction
projects to utilize the provisions of this Section to achieve the following:
1. A development pattern in accord with the goals, objectives and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan ....;
5. A more convenient pattern of commercial, residential and industrial uses as
well as public services which support such uses.
15. That 11-9-607 E, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows:
A PD shall be allowed only as a Conditional Use in each district subject to the
standards and procedures set forth in the Section. A PD shall be governed by the
regulations of the district or districts in which said PD is located. The approval of the
Final Development Plan for a PD may provide for such exceptions from the district
regulations governing use, density, area, bulk, parking, signs, and other regulations
as may be desirable to achieve the objectives of the proposed PD,rod vided such
exceptions are consistent with the standards and criteria contained in this Section.
16. That 11-9-607 F, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows:
1. Planned Developments - Planned developments shall be subject to
requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and also subject to all
provisions within this Ordinance. .. .
8. Financial Guarantees - The developer shall post financial guarantees for all
approved on-site improvements if required pursuant to 9-606 C.
17. Since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has
authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. See Burt vs. The City of Idaho
Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P2d 1075 (1983).
18. The development of the annexed land, if annexed, shall meet and comply
with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian including, but not limited to: Section 11-9-616
which pertains to development time schedules and requirements; Section 11-9-605 M,
which pertains to the piping of ditches; and Section 11-9-606 B 14., which pertains to
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page'21
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
pressurized irrigation systems.
19. The development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the
Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian.
20. Section 11-2-417 D of the Zoning and Development Ordinance provides in
part as follows:
If property is annexed and zoned, the City may require or permit, as a
condition of the zoning, that an owner or developer make a written
commitment concerning the use or development of the subject property. If a
commitment is required or permitted, it shall be recorded in the office of the
Ada County Recorder and shall take effect upon the adoption of the
ordinance annexing and zoning the property, or prior if agreed to by the
owner of the parcel.
21. As a condition of annexation and the zoning of (C -G) General Retail and
Service Commercial, the Applicant shall enter into a development agreement as authorized
by Sections 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D. of the real property, which is the subject of this
application, prior to the passage of an annexation and ordinance of zoning designation; that
the applicant enter into a Development Agreement for the development of the subject
property, condition of annexation, a condition of zoning (C -G) General Retail and- Service
Commercial, authorized by Sections 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D, Municipal Code of the
City of Meridian.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
ORDER OF DECISION
NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF
FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby order and this does
order:
1. That the applicant prepare the legal description for the annexation
included in the application which legal description includes a portion of south Eagle
Road right-of-way between the subject site and St. Luke's site. Applicant shall submit an
annexation perimeter legal description for the proposed site. The legal description shall
include all those portions of adjacent public rights-of-way contiguous to the Corporate City
Limits of the City of Meridian (Ord. No. 659, 8/2/94), and %2 of all other adjacent Public
Right -of -Ways. The legal description shall be prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor,
Licensed by the State of Idaho, and shall conform to all the provisions of the City of
Meridian Resolution No. 158. The legal description for annexation must place this parcel
contiguous to the existing city limit boundary which is required for the preparation for the
annexation ordinance.
2. That the City Attorney shall prepare for consideration by the City Council the
appropriate ordinance for the annexation and zoning designation. (C -G) General Retail
and Service Commercial Ordinance shall not be finally approved by the City Council until
provisions of parts 1 and 3 of this order have been met; and
3. Developer enter into a Development Agreement, that provides in the event
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 23
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
the conditions therein are not met by the Developer that the property shall be subject to de -
annexation, with the City of Meridian which provides for the following conditions of
development to -wit:
3.1 Applicant shall be responsible to install a water main within the right-of-way of
the new street along the north boundary of the proposed site. Location and
sizing of the new main should be coordinated with the Meridian Water
Department.
3.2 Water service to the proposed site could be to the existing water line installed
along the northerly side of Magic View Drive. Developer to provide the Public
Works Department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic
water requirements for the proposed site.
3.3 As Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the
building plan review process Applicant shall be required to enter into an
Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian. In addition to these
assessments, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged
against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the
water and sewer mains to their current points.
3.4 In order to assure that the affected and subject area will be served
adequately by essential public facilities and services the pretreatment
required and addressed on the building permit application redlines for
obtaining City sewer service, which is required.
3.5 In compliance with the requirements of the Central District Health for
approval of appropriate proposal for central sewage and central water, as
well as approval for plans for food establishments.
3.6 Sanitary Sewer service to the proposed site could be to the existing line
installed in Magic View Drive directly adjacent to the south.
3.7 The treatment capacity of the City of Meridian's Wastewater Treatment Plant
is currently being evaluated. Approval of development to be contingent upon
City's treatment plant ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage
generated by this proposed development.
3.8 The Applicant shall be required to connect the property to Meridian water and
sewer, extend the water and sewer lines to serve the property, and resolve
how the water and sewer mains will serve the property, all of which shall be
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
at the Applicant's, or its successor's, or successors' cost and expense. Said
water and sewer requirements shall be performed on or before the time that
the Applicant or its successor, or successors desire to use the property or
place a user on the property.
3.9 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included
in the project are to be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches are
to be piped should be shown on the site plans. Plans will need to be
approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users
association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public
Works Department with no variances for tiling of any ditches crossing this
project.
3.10 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer
is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for all off-street
parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site.
3.11 A Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review with the
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District with all laterals and wasteways affected
to be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. Any
surface drainage leaving the site must be approved by the Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District in accordance with their drainage plans. The Developer
must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805.
3.12 The stormwater run-off will be managed with appropriate Best Management
Practice.
3.13 Pressurized irrigation shall be installed and constructed.
3.14 Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of
the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with the design
of site drainage plan.
3.15 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within the project will have
to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-
517. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape
irrigation.
3.16 All ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition of annexation.
3.17 The proposed roadway north of the proposed Idaho Power Credit Union
needs to be dedicated as a public roadway with a stub to the west. Future
development in this area will need to have proper access to the traffic signal.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
Applicant shall be responsible to install a water main within the right-of-way
of the new street along the north . boundary of the proposed site.' Location
and sizing of the new main should be coordinated with the Meridian Water
Department.
3.18 Developer comply with the State of Idaho Transportation Departments
requests that a full control area is necessary to maintain adequate traffic
operations on Eagle Road and in,the vicinity of Interstate 1-84 interchange.
3.19 All development approach locations shall be in :accordance -with the
requirements of.the State of Idaho.Transportation Department.
3.20 Roadway and roadway approaches to be approved by the ACRD.
3.21 Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of
the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed
in site-specific requirements.
3.22 Paving and striping shall be•in-accordance "with the standards set forth in
Sections 11-2-414.D.4. and 11-2-414.D.5. of the City of Meridian Zoning and
Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities
(ADA) requirements.
3.23 No signage details were submitted. Detailed signage plans must be included
as part of this application for review and approval.
3.24 A developer shall comply with all life safety codes of the City of Meridian and
shall also comply, with City code requirements for water supplies, sprinkler
systems, as regulated by the Fire Department.
3.25 All construction shall conform -to the requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
3.26 A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation
3.27 To minimize the impact of the neighborhood to the -north the applicant shall -
dedicate to the ACHD a reserved right-of-way on the northern 108 feet of the
subject property; further a landscaped berm shall be developed in the
northern 35 feet of the reserved right=of-way and-whichlandscaped berm
shall be maintained by developer.
3.28 A roadway placed on the northern boundary of the site will also provide
potential elimination of future traffic concerns in the area.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page:
'26
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
3.29 All speaker drive-throughs to be located on the south side of the
McDonald's/Chevron fast food convenience Store.
3.30 All speaker drive-thrdughs to be located on the south side of the Credit Union
facility.
3.31 All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-
2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. No
temporary signage or flashing signs shall be permitted. Submission and
approval of all signage plans including but not limited to pole signs, reader
boards, banners, etc., and specifically any "golden arches" type signage
associated with the McDonalds and any outside signage associated with the
Chevron Gas Stations. These conditions shall be in addition to the
requirements of Meridian's sign ordinance.
3.32 The development shall include an additional 20 foot buffer on the north side
of the Credit Union facility and an additional 15 feet of landscaping between
the Credit Union and the Chevron/McDonald's facility.
3.33 The development shall include construction of a solid wood fence that runs f
from the southerly boundary of Magic View north to the 108 foot reserved
road right-of-way.
3.34 The Credit Union facility shall operate during normal business hours
between 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and not open to customers on weekends.
3.35 A minimum of 68 three-inch caliper trees will be required for the paved
square footage proposed.
3.36 Particular attention needs to be paid to lighting plans to eliminate as much as
is reasonably necessary to eliminate and/or reduce glare to neighboring
properties to the north and west, and in accordance with city Ordinance
Section 11-2-414D3.
3.37 A minimum of a 35 -foot -wide landscape setback is required adjacent to the
right-of-way of Eagle Road.
3.38 Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section
11-9-606.B.
3.39 Future development in this area will need to have proper access to the traffic
signal.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 27
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
It is therefore concluded that the annexing and zoning of the property is in the best
interest of the City of Meridian,'and it is concluded that the annexation shall be conditioned /
upon meeting the requirements of this Decision and Order.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
ROLL CALL
COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD
COUNCILMAN RON ANDERSON
COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE
COUNCILMAN GLENN BENTLEY
MAYOR ROBERT RRIE (TIE BREAKER)
MOTION: APPROV
091598 -Final
RW
E�D
SEP 15 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN
VOTED 1,
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 28
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
a
July 13, 2000
CUP 00-013
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING July 18, 2000
APPLICANT Chevron / McDonalds ITEM NO.
REQUEST Findings - CUP for proposed modifi rations to include an additional pole sign for
a C -G zone - 603 South Eagle Road
j
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CL's-
CITY ENG►, f`
CITY PLANN,
CITY ATTORN6 t attached Findings
CITY POLICE DE,
A
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT
CITY WATER DEPT: A' r�-
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DIST,\
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
w
RECEI
JUL 12 2000
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CLERK OFFICE
OTHER: �2
Contacted: PA In Date: j Phone:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
.. .r " .. r. a .w^ r.—..fir .� �—•i--„-r
JUL 1 2 2000 �
inte ro:ffice -
M_ E M O R..,A,SN D; U M- CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CLERKOFFICE
To: William G. Berg, Jr. s WD
DICTATED DY ArIO `' -
a
SENT Wit HOUT Sf�id�T'.i�:�
From: William F. Nichols KIS ABSEI C TO AVOID -DELAY
Subject: * -EAGLE PARTNERS (77 FOOT POLE SIGN)
File No.: CUP -00-013 b- f
Date: July 11, 20008
} s Please find attached the original FINDINGS OF FACT
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION�ANd ORDER GRANTING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ,SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, pursuant to action of
the Council at their July 5, 2000;=meeting: `The Findings will be on -the Council's y
agenda for their July 18, 2000, meeting.
* E.
I have also attached the original of the ORDER OF CONDITIONAL
rt
APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE'PERMIT; if the Council approves the r
FINDINGS.
Please serve copies of both documents upon the -Applicant and
appropriate. departments.
If you have any questions please advise. w
msg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\EAGLE PARTNERS CUP SIGNAGE\C1kLtrCUPffds&0rder13
4 a
-+ s
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: _Au_ up st 18, 1998
APPLICANT: EAGLE PARTNERS ITEM NUMBER: 1
REQUEST: ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 4.13 ACRES — NW CORNER OF EAGLE AND MAGIC VIEW
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK: SEE ATTACHED MINUTES FROM 7/21/98
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
PLEASE DEFER FINDINGS
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
S
To:
Mayor Corrie
CC:
Meridian City Councilman, City Clerk
From:
John Prior, Assistant City Attorney
Date:
08/14/98
Re:
Eagtle Partners Annexation and Zoning
0
This is a request to the Mayor and City Council that they defer consideration of the
Eagle Partners Annexation and Zoning until Special Counsel has had an opportunity
to review the proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Special Counsel
has advised that they would prefer to have the development agreement prepared in
advance of the approval of this particular project. It is anticipated that the
development agreement should be ready by the Seprtember 1, 1998 meeting of the
City Council. Thank you for your consideration.
1
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 8
Corrie: Entertain a motion for the city recommendation.
Rountree: I move that the Meridian City Council approves the conditional use
permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application,
with the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Bird: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr.. Rountree, seconded by Mr. Bird, the decision and
recommendation that was read. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the
motion.
MOTION CARRIED: All Ayes, 1 abstain.
ITEM #7: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 4.13 ACRES TO C-
G BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC.
JO ANN BUTLER, 607 N. 8TH STREET, BOISE. WAS SWORN IN BY
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNY.
Butler: I understand that right now we are just dealing with annexation and
zoning, is that correct, and the conditional use separately. Okay. Again, good
evening to the Mayor and Council members. Your ordinances and your plans set
forth the standards and the criteria and the guidelines that we have to meet when
we request annexation and zoning. Of course, before we ever did request
annexation and zoning, we made a particular attempt to go through each of your
ordinances and.your plan to make sure that we weren't making a frivolous
application. I gave a package to the council and mayor yesterday and to your
staff, in which I did a synopsis or a summary of each of those standards and
criteria that are listed under your ordinance to show exactly how these requests
meet with your zoning ordinance and your comprehensive plan, because I
believe that you are going to hear tonight testimony from several that state boldly
that we don't meet your comprehensive plan. I was fortunate enough to be
involved and sat in on many of the public hearings when this city went through its
comprehensive plan process back in 1992 and 1993. As those of you on the
council will remember, you had packed houses, polite listening sometimes, but
sometimes people a little upset about the decisions that the city was making then
on identifying things like commercial activity centers, which, this property sits
right smack dab in a commercial activity center that this community decided back
in 1993 should be set on the comprehensive plan map and be identified in the
comprehensive plan. In many ways, the hard decision that this community had
to make, were made in 1993. You had a lot of citizen input, you had a lot of
hearings, and you made those decisions, and those are not easy decisions. This
year you also went through extensive negotiations with Ada County in finally
setting the area of impact, which I believe is also contiguous with urban service
planning area. So, you have gone through a lot of work and what this application
MERIDIAN CITY COU •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 9
for annexation and zoning represents is just a progressive outflow from your
decisions back in 1993. We are not cutting against the grain, we are not asking
for anything that this city hasn't already contemplated was in the best interest in
Meridian when you made those legislative decisions, several years ago. I'm not
going to take apart bit by bit each of the standards and criteria that I have listed
for you in my packet to the city. 1 know that you understand that the Idaho codes
suggest that representatives for applicants such as Eagle Partners submit
suggested findings and conclusions. We do that, we spend the time and effort
to do that because one, we have already done it before we request annexation
and zoning, and we do it as an assistance and help to the city to help provide you
with a synopsis and we hope it does help. We think it does provide you with all
of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions that you will need to supplement your
findings in reaching the proper result, which is to grant annexation and zoning.
I'm really not going to spend more time than that on the annexation arid zoning
issues, I think a lot of the other issues you may hear are maybe addressed by
others in the audience deal with mostly with the conditional use, so I will save
time for that. I will reserve time for a rebuttal, if that is okay with the council and
then stand for questions.
Corrie: Any questions from council at the present time?
Bird: Not at this time.
Butler: Thank you.
Corrie: Anyone else from the audience like to issue testimony? Dick?
RICHARD WILLIAMS, 3133 AUTUMN WAY, MERIDIAN, ID 83642. WAS
SWORN IN BY ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Williams: I didn't expect to be up here this quick, Mr. Mayor. My name is Dick
Williams. As most of you know, I'm a past member of the Meridian City Council
sitting on this council from 1976-1981. 1 was the President of the City Council
when they developed the first comprehensive plan and was an integral part of the
development of that plan. I like you had put in many, many hours in the
development of this plan. I was also the chairman of the Ada Planning
Association for a year while I served as the president of the City Council, so
planning and zoning is a real hot button with me. I've lived here for 29 years,
raised four kids that have gone through the Meridian school system, I'm proud to
be a member of the City of Meridian and always have liked to live in Meridian, I
chose to live in Meridian, I didn't have to. Tonight I represent the Greenhills
Estates subdivision, which is a 123 homes that is on the northerly portion of this
proposed development. If I could, the people that are in Greenhills if you could
raise your hand or stand up and say hi, to let you know we are in force here
tonight. One of the things I would like to do, first of all, is for the public record is
present petitions opposing this development from 80% of the 123 homes within
MERIDIAN CITY C0U1& a
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 10
that subdivision. To show you that we are not in favor of this proposed
development for a number of reasons. Secondly, I would like to go on and put
into the public record, the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law that were
developed by this City Council in January of 1997, 16 months ago, that denied
this application and the reasons for the denial. I'm reading from your Findings of
Facts. The project is not in compliance with the terms of the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan and therefore the annexation and zoning application is not
in conformance with the comprehensive plan. That it is concluded that the
annexing and zoning of the property would not be in the best interest of the City
of Meridian. I would like to submit this as-- Additionally last year, just for your
own edification and since you don't have anything else to°read tonight. Submit
the information that we have presented last year, why this application does not
comply or meet with the comprehensive plan. Submit why this application does
not comply with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan or Zoning ordinance. One
thing I would like to bring up, we're not sure which site plan we are dealing with.
Back in November, the developer came to our subdivision and said this is our
site plan, we've got a gate here, a barrier so there won't be any traffic after hours
between the credit union and their proposed development. What they submitted
to you a month later, eliminated that gate. This is what they originally sent to
you. Then later on they changed the plan again. In this plan, what they didn't
have in the first plan, they parcelized (sic), did a partialization (sic) of this lot.
Now in 1983 or 1984, the Idaho Transportation Department purchased this lot,
they didn't condemn it, they bought it. They split off this section, they resold the
lot, that's the one split that the county allows. Now we see, their propose to sell a
lot to ACRD, they've got a lot line for the credit union and another lot for their
development, which interestingly, their lot line is in the middle of their proposed
roadway, so they have ingress and egress out of this proposed road. Then after
the Planning and Zoning, which approved this and sent this to you, they changed
the site plan again, without public hearing. Now, they have a cross access
easement between the properties that didn't exist before. This we feel is a major
change in the plan which should in the least sent this back to P & Z because it is
a major plan change, no publication, no public notice. They used to have the
dumpster here, in order to get this crossed access they moved the dumpster up
here. This is just what we think, is the latest site plan, we are not sure. A week
ago, I asked them for their latest site plan, they gave me this one. So, I don't
know. We don't believe that the due process has been followed, because due
process is predicated upon what was originally submitted and noticed, and this
has not been done. We have a number of other concerns about this a lot of
which deal with the comprehensive plan. Major statement, first page,
comprehensive plan, "manage to grow to achieve high quality development—
enhance Meridian's quality of life for our residents." I won't go through all of
these they're in the notes. "The importance of maintaining compatible land use is
to ensure an optimum quality of life ... the development of areas should be based
on functional plans and proposals in order to ensure that the proposed uses
conformed to the comp plans, comp plan policies that are compatible with
surrounding neighborhoods." I can't see how a five lane major artery, which the
MERIDIAN CITY COA •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 1 I
ACHD's numbers say will generate 22,000 cars a day, on that road, will enhance
the quality of life in my backyard. There are a number of other items up here, the
fumes which you folks denied an application by Albertson's for gas pumps on
Cherry Lane and Ten Mile, for the exact same reasons that we are asking for
denial of this, noise, vapors, lights 24 hours a day shining your bedroom window.
It's amazing, you could come over to my house at 3 o'clock in the morning in my
front room and read the newspaper and not turn a light on, of course the blinds
are open. The vapor problems when they fill the gas tanks. They dump probably
11,000-12,000 gallons of gas on a tank load. You can just hear those vent
when—if you have ever been around a gas tank that has been filled like that, you
can hear the vents whistling and that's vapors coming out. This type of
development across from a hospital, I doubt that the fire chief would be happy
with that one. We have other folks, with your permission Mayor, call and
(inaudible) in order to keep this fairly orderly tonight, we have some people that
would like to testify on this. The first one I would like to ask come up is Kathy
Todd.
KATHLEEN TODD, 3020 AUTUMN WAY, MERIDIAN, 83642. WAS SWORN IN
BY THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Todd: Mayor Corrie and members of the City Council, as a mother and speaking
on behalf of the parents and the children in our neighborhood, we are extremely
concerned over the McDonalds proposal. It used to be safe for our children to
plan in our front yards and ride their bikes down the neighborhood streets,
however, because of the travel congestion that currently exists on Eagle Road,
all of that has changed. At times, and these times are becoming longer and
more frequent, there is so many cars on Eagle Road, that we have major
gridlock. Cars are unable to enter or exit from our neighborhood. At St. Luke's
which is currently just a medical center, not a hospital, the cars have been sitting
through several lights waiting to get out of their parking lot. We also have many
cars throughout the day, that are using our neighborhood as a short cut. All of
this current congestion is frustrating many drivers. We are seeing many of these
frustrated drivers cutting through our neighborhood and exit onto Franklin, they
are irate, frustrated and speeding. How many close calls must we have, or will it
take a death of one of our children, or one of the adults before the congestion
problem is addressed. Have any of you been stuck in this gridlock, if not, urge
you to come and experience, it is quite an experience. Can you even imagine
more traffic and more congestion with yet another gas station and another fast
food. Our whole neighborhood is at risk and our children won't be safe and
neither will we. Other concerns are the high level of noise and intense smells.
With gas stations and fast foods, noise and smells are a given, they're inevitable.
We can only imagine the 24 hour intensity of blasting stereos and loud noises at
such a close proximity to our homes and the smell of gas, garbage, hamburgers
and french fries 24 hours a day, every day, is nauseating. I like McDonalds, but
'24 hours a day would be a little too much. The comeback will be, but we have
the credit union as a buffer. Well, I'm sorry, but the wind currents won't know
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 12
that the credit union is their idea to stop. It will be a 24-hour noise and smell
pollution for all of us, depending on which way the wind blows. Another concern
is the truck stop syndrome, we feel that if Chevron is allowed to go in next to
Texaco, we will have a truck stop atmosphere. Truckers are already spending
the night at Texaco, and you can't convince us that they would not be welcomed
at Chevron, this is not appropriate for a residential neighborhood, nor is it
appropriate for a medical center, soon to be hospital. They are ahead on their
schedule, as far as their building. Again, added congestion and added noise, 24
hours a day. We have another neighbor Mrs. Velestan, who was supposed to
get up tonight also, but we are extremely concerned with the types of people who
tend to stop at and congregate at these areas. We realize that we all need to
fuel our cars, our boats, etc., but we don't feel that we need two gas stations side
by side in the middle of the mile stretch. Intense high volume 24-hour business,
naturally bring undesirable people and eventually crime. As a family oriented
neighborhood, we don't want this, we will loose all of our privacy, we won't be
able to enjoy our front yard or our backyards, and for those of our who back up
against this proposal, we won't be able to enjoy the insides of our own homes.
The crime will increase at our expense, again, unavoidable if Chevron is allowed
to go in. We have a nice neighborhood and want to keep it that way. If any of
your were in our position, I'm sure you would be standing here just as I am now,
fighting to save your children's safety an for the safety for you entire
neighborhood. Please turn down Chevrons proposal, thank you.
Corrie: Any questions.
Bird: I have none.
Todd: Thank you.
Corrie: Who was the other one, Dick?
ROBIN BROWNING, 912 S. WATERTON AVE., EAGLE, ID. SWORN IN BY
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Browning: Good evening gentleman, I have been requested to speak to you
tonight on behalf of the Greenhills Estates residence. I am a top producing real
estate agent in Ada County and have been for over ten years and I have sold
somewhere in the range of $50 million dollars in residential property, that is the
market that I specialize in. Just to let you know, as a realtor I can tell you that a
home is usually the largest investment that someone makes, as an individual,
and that investment has some right to protection from permanent, dramatic and
negative impact of surrounding development. The type of development that's
being proposed here, typically decreases the value of a residence by
approximately 20%. 1 can't give you specific numbers on these individual
properties because there is no way of knowing until after the development is
completed, but I can tell you that it also severely limits any future appreciation of
MERIDIAN CITY COAL •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 13
those existing homes. That's a tremendous detriment to the financial situation of
a lot of the families that purchase homes in those neighborhoods. It's very
difficult as a realtor to anticipate that kind of negative impact, but this is one of
those situations where it is pretty obvious to see what is going to happen. I can
give you a personal example, I live in Eagle, I live in a home that is about three
years old and the home that I live in used to be bordered by farm. Currently, the
realignment of Highway 55 is in my backyard. Now, I have a buffer, I don't have
McDonalds behind me and I don't have a Chevron station, so that is definitely an
advantage, but I do have a five lane road, which is.Highway 55 running directly
behind my house, on the other side of a sound wall. Since the road was
approved to go in, where it has been placed. The next door neighbors who put
their house on the market two years ago, went from a sales price of $219,000,
which was fair market for that house and I think was approximately what they
paid for it, and they were unable to sell it for just short of two years and finally got
ride of it for just over $180, 000 dollars. That was really a difficult situation for
them. There haven't been any other lots that adjoin Highway 55 in my
neighborhood that have sold since that road was proposed and approved. There
have been other lots in the neighborhood that have sold, but that has really
created a problem for the people who border that road. So, it does negatively
impact the community. I've lived in Boise all of my life and I have people who
come in from out of the area, when I'm showing them property, they ask me, they
say "who approves this stuff? Why do you have house sitting next to some of the
things you do?" I don't really have any good answers for them. It's a situation
where, it's really up to the people who have the ability the foresight to plan for
those areas to protect the neighborhoods that are already in existence. We
always know that growth is going to occur and I benefit directly from the growth
that occurs in this community, by way of residential development. So, I have
been on both sides of this issue, but when you have vacant ground. Of course,
everybody wants a park to be placed next to their neighborhoods, and that would
be ideal, but there can be better buffers between busy areas and residential
neighborhoods. I think that's what the people in this particular area are asking
for is some consideration in that direction, so...
(END OF TAPE)
Rountree: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: You indicated in your testimony that better buffers is a possible
solution, what does that mean?
Browning: Well, in a neighborhood where I just sold a home that is similar in
price and lot size to the neighborhood that the Greenhill Estates is located in it's
over in Versailles Heights subdivision off of Eagle and Chinden, which is also a
very busy area. The adjacent property is office, so it is used eight hours of the
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 14
day, low rise not high rise, no high signs, no neon lights, limited number of
people that are coming and going and that has a minimal impact on the
neighborhood and on the property values. Helps a lot, so that's an excellent
alternative if you are looking for one. In some of the developments that I have
seen, you also see higher density residential, that is a buffer between those
areas like patio homes, condominiums, apartment complexes and so forth. So,
there are certainly alternatives to the use of the type of ground that's being
proposed here.
Bird: You stated in Eagle that your property value was because of, basically
Highway 55 coming through. Am I right? We already own—Eagle is a five lane
road. I don't think you would want to build anymore residential on that would
you?
Browning: I'll tell you what, it's interesting that you mentioned that, I was in an
office meeting a few years ago and one of the realtors in the meeting said, all of
these lots need to be developed and sold, so we have to sell the good lots as
well as the bad lots. I remember thinking, okay, I'll tell you what, you sell the bad
lots and I'll sell the good lots, because I don't want to have to go back to the
clients that I have sold property to and explain why their properties haven't
appreciated. That's the truth, that's what is going to happen.
Corrie: I guess my question Robin is, if the families life center, whatever this mall
is going to be on ---planned Fairview and Eagle Road, what from your standpoint
as a real estate agent, what do you think that will do to Eagle Road? What you
would think, would it be more traffic?
Browning: You're talking about the center that is being proposed right now?
don't think there is any question that there is going to be a lot more traffic. When
I saw the proposal for the project that is being submitted right now, first of all, it
amazes me that there is a road proposed to go where it is, directly behind this
neighborhood.
Corrie: I'm talking about the Eagle Road.
Browning: Oh, in the general area?
Corrie: Right.
Browning: There is absolutely no question that that area is going to grow and it's
going to grow dramatically. There are all kinds of different uses, but ... you know
when you—when we extend Cole Road, we go in and purchase the properties
from the homeowners that are negatively impacted, because we recognize as a
government that those properties—it's such a negative, it's such a hardship for
the people who own those properties that the government has an obligation to
reimburse somehow. That's not what is being proposed here, but as a council
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 15
for planning and zoning and planning purposes, we have, I think an obligation to
be considerate of the existing neighborhoods. You're not talking about
somebody who is asking for a new subdivision, you're talking about existing
homes and a large number of them that are nice, that have a community that has
been established there.
Corrie: Thank you. Did you have anybody else?
CHARLES HOREL, 3043 AUTUMN WAY, MERIDIAN, 83642. WAS SWORN IN
BY ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Horel: Mr. Mayor and members of the council, I appreciate your time tonight. I'm
going to try to make this as brief as possible. There is a couple of things, of
course you are all familiar with this, the comprehensive plan and one of the
things—I get pretty emotional about talking about some of this stuff. I like
Meridian, I love Meridian, I like having my kids, no I love having my kids go to
school here in Meridian. We moved here because it was a great quality of life.
Right here, the front page of this, "Quality of life, well let me think for a moment,
it's all of the things.that make meridian a wonderful place to live, work and raise
our families." I couldn't say it better. We just feel in our community situation right
now, this proposal of adding a gas station, a McDonalds, how does this increase
or make the quality of life for us better. I don't know. This is a pretty tough
question, I know that progress doesn't stop, it's like—it's just like gravity, it keeps
on working all of the time. I digress, but anyway, the comprehensive plan of
1993 has part of its contents references to natural resources and hazardous
areas. As stated on pages 31-33, we have several issues to which the plan
eludes, because of the verbiage in the section on water quality policies, 2.1 U -
2.3U. We feel that the City of Meridian is ultimately concerned with these issues.
Keeping this in mind, I want to present you with a copy of the Idaho Wellhead
Protection Agency -Plan; in case.you haven't got one. I think you already have,
but here's another one. This is a voluntary program endorsed by the state
department or the DEQ. Part of that program states that the quality of water is
the utmost importance to all of the states inhabitants. One of the things that I'm
trying to get to here is that because of this proposed development, we have a
community well, which sits literally within (Inaudible) feet of this. Because of the
adjacent proximity to this proposed development, we feel that the community well
has the possibility of being compromised and we feel this is a very real issue.
One of the issues, that if someone becomes ill or incapacitated due to source of
contamination to our water supply through or because of this development, who
ultimately is responsible? Who is going to step up to the plate and accept
responsibility, and say, you know, we shouldn't have put that there and we did
contaminate your water, we're sorry but, you know, who's going to step up and
say we accept that responsibility? We know that (A) that there is gas pumps
going in there, we know that there is refuse and grease, who knows what else,
antifreeze for sure. What we don't know, there is some intangibles here about
the flow of these materials into our aquifer, which would effect our community.
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 16
well. With the addition of that development, we would have an increase in traffic.
Proposal by ACHD, of course you all know about, is a five land road adjacent to
our community and this piece of development and a projection of 22,000 auto
day trips, which would make it one of the busiest intersections in Idaho. Now,
that would create a tum going right around our wellhead, if a—the wildest
scheme scenario, what if a hazardous waste spill took place because of a truck
making a turn too sharp, or whatever. What if this happens? What happens to
our quality of water? There is a lateral ditch, which also runs parallel with these
properties. What happens if there is contamination to that water, again, due to
some unforeseen source of contamination? All of the people in Greenhill Estates
are greatly concerned about this. Again, if a spill occurs, who ultimately is
responsible? We ask that the City Council of Meridian would utilize this plan, the
Idaho Wellhead Protection Plan, in this decision, not only with this particular
development, but with all of the developments that are being proposed, in and
around Meridian, for the best interest of all of the citizens in the community. An
additional problem that I have is noise. I mean, we've got water, we've got
health issue here, we've got a noise issue. If indeed we have got a 22,000 per
day traffic situation behind our houses, are we affecting the standards, the noise
standards set forth by DEQ? Who ultimately is responsible for monitoring these
things? Are these in violation of state laws? Also, we have emission standards
to which we have to live by. Again, with the addition of a five land road behind
the existing homes in Greenhill Estates, would the emission standards of the
state or community be compromised? These issues are just brought to your
attention, so that—the community neighbors and the citizens of Meridian, we
know we want and need the protection of our health and welfare. We the
homeowners of Greenhill Estates ask that you take these issues into
consideration in determining what is going to happen with this and future
projects. The quality of life, again is stated here in the comprehensive plan is (A)
one in Meridian and I would like to see it kept that way. Thank you.
Corrie: Thank you Chuck. Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Do you want to enter anything in the...
Horel: Yes.
Corrie: Thank you. Just as a reminder, those plaques and what have you, we
will enter them as testimony. We will have them available for you if you want to
use them again or... incase we had.
Williams: Those are for the�city your honor.
HOWARD FOLEY, 2875 AUTUMN WAY, MERIDIAN, ID 83642. WAS SWORN
IN BY ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 17
Foley: I have been a resident of this community for 20 years and have lived in
Greenhills for the last 15 years, raised my family there, my sons have gone
through the public school'system, Meridian High School. I want to address what
I think are some of the legal components of the issue that is before the council
tonight. Ms. Butler in her opening indicated that the applicant had made efforts
to abide by the zoning ordinances and application requirements. I think they are
deficient in a couple of aspects and I want to point those out to you. This is a
copy of the zoning ordinance 2-416. Sixteen is the requirements for an
application and we have highlighted the two that we think are problematical. Item
#11 requires the applicant to show the necessity and the desirability of the
development pertaining to the zoning amendment and it's harmony with adjacent
development. If the council approves the request before it tonight, it will be
required of course, by an ordinance to amend the zoning for the particular
property. I think it is incumbent upon the applicant to establish to you the
necessity and desirability of this development. Item #15 which I will address in a
little more detail, requires the applicant to provide you with a statement of how
the proposed zoning amendment relates to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
Our City of Meridian zoning ordinance also provides the section 2-402, that the
ordinance is based upon the officially adopted comprehensive plan that is
purposes are to promote the achievement of proposals of the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan. To encourage orderly growth and to protect residential
communities, industrial and civic areas from the intrusion of incompatible uses
and to protect against intrusions and hazards. The zoning ordinances also
provide. 1 apologize going back and forth. But further provide general standards
applicable to zoning amendments that the new zoning will be harmonious with,
and in accordance with, the plan. The proposed uses -will be designed,
constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious. The proposed uses will
not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighbors. The zoning
change will—will the area be served adequately by essential public services.
You will see through this particular ordinance, your ordinance, and my ordinance,
that the theme of harmony and compatibility exists. It's equally clear and the
reason that I point out to you that there is an emphasis in the zoning ordinances
to comply with the comprehensive plan, that the application here is extremely
problematical and in our view. The comprehensive plan as we pointed out last
time the applicant was here, provides for general policy desirable components of
orderly planned growth. If you look at the plan, you don't see the Eagle area in
that plan, what you see is a circle, that really looks like it was drawn on to
accommodate St. Luke's and there really isn't much of anything else. The
comprehensive plan at paragraph 5.7 and paragraph 1.4, require this council to
do a detailed market analysis when a mixed-use development is proposed. We
would submit to you that the proposal of the applicant can't be anything but
mixed use. Their proposal is to put a gas station, a fast food restaurant, a credit
union, a car wash adjacent to the gas station, all on one parcel or as Mr. Williams
pointed out, now perhaps were up to three parcels, if in fact the proposal is to
subdivide it illegally, without application for subdivision permits. The
MERIDIAN CITY COU* •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 18
comprehensive plan goes on to talk about neighborhood identity and on page 74,
paragraph 6.51-1, it directs that the council—that land use planning reflect the
characteristics of neighborhoods. in paragraph 6.6U, the neighborhood policy
plans that land planning should accommodate the neighborhoods and the plans
should address themselves to the improvement of existing neighborhoods. The
goals of the comprehensive plan direct the council to look toward orderly growth,
compatibility of the uses, preservation of neighborhood integrity. The plan on
page 15, directs that the council do it's best to ensure the high quality of life for
all citizens. On page 18 it addresses itself to interchange development. If you
look at the comprehensive plan, the comprehensive plan discusses interchanges
at Locust Grove, at McDermott, but there is a significant area.that is missing and
that is the Eagle Road area, simply is not addressed in our comprehensive plan.
We would suggest and submit to the council that what is proposed here is in the
nature of a strip development. There is a proposed commercial, office, that now
abuts residential areas it violates the policy which requires a significant and
sufficient buffers and mitigation by application with conditional use permit. It
requires the preservation of neighborhoods, it requires that the zoning be
compatible with the comprehensive plan itself. This is a chart that is contained
within the comprehensive plan and identifies the different type of roadways, the
interstate, principal arterials, minor arterials, collectors, minor collectors. The
area that we're discussing here this evening is an area that is right in here. You
will see there is no roadway there, you will see it is not a collector, it is not a
minor arterial, there's simply nothing there at all. Additionally, if you look at the
definitions of arterials and I submit to you that's what's being proposed here.
When we start talking about vehicle trips per day at 20,000-22,000, that's a huge
number, it's a number that is now consistent with what travels up and down
Eagle Road. I want to- assure you that this is not something that we simply
manufacture so we can present a good argument. I_would submit to you that Mr.
Terri Little when he testified before Planning and Zoning on April 14, 1998, at
page 43 of the transcript, uses the number of 22,000. It's a little difficult to
understand whether he is talking only about this parcel, or something else that
maybe going to develop. It seems extremely clear to me what he is talking about
on behalf of ACHD is this... he is talking about this roadway that is going to come
in here and then if you read the transcript he will talk about a straight shot.
Know, I don't know if that is subject to a lot of interpretations but I've been born
and raised in Idaho and a straight shot seems to me to be pretty much this
direction. It sure seems to me that the point of all this is going to be to hook on to
Locust Grove. That's what I think ACHD has in mind for you and for the rest of
us. We have deep and great concern as I hope you will, that's what's in the mind
of ACHD when they are talking about this number of trips off of this property. I'd
also direct your attention to the minutes of ACHD meeting on the 8th of January
of 1997, where that exact same figure is used. You will see if you read that
transcript further that Mr. Borup for planning and zoning attempted to get Mr.
Little to identify for him their plans to bring that road in off of Eagle Road and then
bend it back to Magic View. If you read that, you will see that he avoided making
any statement, he talks about flexibility, he talks about the need to look into the
{
MERIDIAN CITY COUOL
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 19
future and he talks about straight shots. That is a great concern to us. This—I'
would also make reference in terms of planning procedures, that not only is this
type of roadway or thisItype of a major arterially not contained or even discussed
in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. It is not discussed in the Ada County long-
range plan or the Transportation Improvement Plan or Ada Plannings Destination
Traffic Flows for the year 2010 and the year 2015. This simply doesn't exits, I
know that you all knowthat Franklin Road was proposed for an expansion to five
lanes. So, we are going to have five lanes on Franklin Road and if Mr. Little and
ACHD is correct, we are going to have five lanes % of a mile away running down
the back of our property line. That's what is on the table for your consideration.
Before Ms. Butler jumps up here and says that it's really not what they have in
mind, I want to say I agree with her. I don't want to go out of my way to agree
with other attorneys but that is absolutely true. If you look in your records to the
March 10 letter from Mr. Strite, who represents the applicant, he says in the
second paragraph in asking for a 30 day delay, "as you are aware, ACHD and
the Meridian City Council have come to the unfortunate conclusion that a new
roadway will be required, thus necessitating a total site redesign." I want to
apologize if I'm making this too basic to talk about things you already know. This
is the roadway that everybody is talking about here. This is the amount that Mr.
Williams or this section that Mr. Williams talks about appears now to have been
sectioned off to ACHD for a roadway. This is a bend that Mr. Little won't tell
Planning and Zoning for sure is going to come this way. This is the straight shot
that we are all talking about. While I'm over here and --1 want to finish one other
thing, I'm sure your council will discuss with you what Mr. Williams talks about in
our legal power lunch we call due process. Its simply nothing more than being
fair. Telling people what you've got in mind so that everybody can discuss it and
have public hearings and do those sort of things. I want to draw your attention to
the fact that there have been three revisions to this site plan and this latest
revision has been done in June. I want to tell you that this site plan which is
before you has never been, discussed by planning and zoning, and it's not fair.
It's not due notice and itjs not proper notice and it's not due process. I want to
tell you that this element right here, which is this cross access easement, will
bring traffic in off of Eagle Road onto this straight shot, ACHD five lane, 22,000
vehicle units per day road. 1 can assure you at least in my mind, they aren't
going to use the first turn in. I don't see a truck and tractor rig with three trailers
on the back of it making lithat quick of turn across traffic this way. They've got to
come all the way down the back of our neighborhood, go through this cross
access easement, fuel up and do whatever. Then their choice is one of two, to
exit off of magic view where there is no light or turn and come back this way to
avoid that turn and come back down, the back of our neighborhood, 24 hours a
day. That's exactly what will happen. I'll submit to you if you will look at the
other two site plans, thati is not obvious, and I'll submit to you if you look at that
one it's not real obvious either as to what the changes are. But, that's what the
changes are. The final thing I want to discuss is the basic concept of, is the tail
wagging the dog here? I have a great concern about that and the people in
Greenhills have concern about it. Quite frankly, I think the applicant has great
MERIDIAN CITY COUNW
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 20
concern about it. This body is the final body, you are the arbitrators, you're the
people who decide land planning decisions in Meridian. It's not the
Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District, it's not the ADA County Highway District, it's
not anybody else, and before—someone through reaction or however this is
being done by ACHD, imposes on all of us a four or five lane road that exists in
none of the plans, has never been discussed in the comprehensive plan and gets
improved. I submit that fairness and due process in the very least requires some
determination by this council as to what kind of land use planwe are going to do.
I see in the record that it's been suggested to planning and zoning that the only
use for this property is that which is proposed. The only thing that we can do
there is put a McDonalds and a Chevron gas station and last time it was a Meriott
Hotel and now a credit union. I suggest to you, if you go to any major medical
facility, such as St. Luke's has built out on Eagle Road across from this, and
walk a six block or ten block or a 1 mile radius around here, you won't find it just
peppered with gas stations and credit unions. You'll find doctors offices, you'll
find clinics and that's exactly what you will find. That's exactly what our petition
says, we understand that there is going to be some growth in that area, we didn't
come here to whine at you that we would like it to be fields forever, we
understand that's not going to happen, we would like it to happen, but we know
it's not going to. We think for all of us, for our comprehensive plan, for our city,
for our southern entryway and we just really don't need another gas station. You
are going to se an exhibit in a°few seconds about how many we have got.
Certainly some 8-5 type of professional semi-professional office space is the
appropriate thing. The things that will do for us, not only to enhance the
entryway into our city, it will also provide non -minimum wage type of jobs and
people who will support programs that have been important to an awful lot of us.
Little league baseball, little league, youth soccer, optimist football, those are the
type of people and organizations that support those things. It's not the applicant
and it's not the applicant's employees. I think you have the ultimate decision to
decide for the all of us, what our city is going to look like and we implore you not
to decide that this is the only choice that you have, it's an extremely bad choice
and it should not be made by the Ada County Highway District.
Corrie: Any questions from the council? Is there anyone else in the public who
would like ... yes, sir.
RICHARD L. MOORE, 3050 MAGIC VIEW DRIVE, MERIDIAN, ID 83642.
SWORN IN BY THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Moore: Well, I have heard a lot of people talk about how long they have lived in
Meridian, I was born here and I'm 67 years old, so I've been around for a day or
two. When I grew up, Meridian was probably 1,500 something like that, if that
much. Graduated 50 years ago from high school, our class was about 93, 1 have
no idea how many is in the school now, but it's grown a little bit around the area
anyway. I'm not saying that I'm proud of the growth, but I think it is inevitable that
growth is coming. I live probably the closest to anybody to the current station out
MERIDIAN CITY COAL •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 21
there, I live just across the street from Texaco. Yeah, they come in and dump
gas, I smoke, I'm not proud of that, but I don't stop smoking when they are
pumping gas and so far I'm still here, I haven't blown up yet. I don't think that is
a real problem, what I'm saying. I'm out there, I'm not in the City of Meridian
actually. All of these people from Greenhills are not in the City of Meridian by
choice, in other words, the City of Meridian should have the choice, not the non-
residents really. I'm for that and I can also speak for at least 11 of the 22-5 acre
subdivision, or tracks out in the subdivision. At least 11 1 have talked with and
they are all for it, thank you.
Corrie: Thank You Mr. Moore. Anyone else who wishes to give testimony?
JOHN JACKSON, 3500 COMMERCIAL CORP, MERIDIAN, ID 83642. WAS
SWORN IN BY ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Jackson: Members of the council, I'm not here to contest this development, I'm
not here to impede competition, it's a very fierce business that we are in and I've
accepted that a long time ago. What I am opposed to is this proposed road and
what it's going to do to the traffic in that area. That definitely impacts our
location. The—I'll move over there to kind of explain it a little bit better, initially as
I understand it and there has been several changes that I've had difficulty
keeping up with on this site planus well. It's going to be the road as you see it
there, five lanes that goes basically to the edge of their property which leads to
nowhere else at this point in time, what happens after that, no one seems to
know. That's going to give a huge advantage to a new competitor over an
existing business, I don't feel that's fair. I'll try to explain some of the problems
that I will have. Right now, we have—this is our only access off of Eagle Road is
Magic View. We have two curb cuts, one which is in line with our first one here
and one that's down beyond our property line. All of our traffic comes in and out
of these two curb cuts. They'll also have this access, but they will also get a
signalized—which is initially a curb cut about a $400,000 tax payer curb cut I
might add, that eventually will perhaps become a 22,000 car per day road.
That's a signalized extra curb cut that makes it much more convenient to get into
and out of their property, cars can come in here, come through and exit out.
Ours, you have to come in do a 180 and come back out. That's a lot more
convenient. Our business is a very convenient oriented business, it's extremely
sensitive to accessibility and if you are not as successful as your competitor, you
are going to be hurt very badly. That's just a fact of the nature. It would be a
severe handicap for us. I also see, I think this is even in the testimony of the P &
Z, not this last go around, but the time before about a lot of our customers are
going to want to use the signalized curb cut initially, particularly if they are
heading north. What are they going to do? Right now there is no other way to
get there except to drive through this property, so we've got 5,000 trips a day or
so right now and a lot of them are going to start going through this property to get
to the intersection. That seems crazy, but it's what they are going to do to get to
the light, so they can make a left turn, including trucks. I know they aren't set up
1
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 22
for trucks, we weren't either, but they come. There is nothing you can do to stop
them. They are there, there's food, there's room and they are going to show up.
We didn't want them ourselves, in fact, they started tearing up our landscaping
breaking our curb cuts, so we went in and made some changes to our property to
provide a little more space for them, because we couldn't stop them. You just
can't stop them. We put them behind our store, got them out of the way and
buffered them from the rest of the traffic and gave them room to get out of the
way of vehicular traffic. You know, in a truck you can't see people, particularly
pedestrians, they are walking to and from the store. This store has a lot more
emphasis on food than ours, but they have less parking around the store. So
that surplus parking is going to park around the perimeters of the property. So,
you are going to have pedestrians walking from the parking to the store, with
trucks going up and down—they used to practically—this also being with this
version of cross easement agreement, is also going to be an access point, which
on the current landscaping plan right here, which threw me, you can see, this is
the one that is part of the application now as I understand it, there shows a
dumpster there and no access. Now it's obvious, they are going to expect
people to go north and south here, and here. I think their trips per day are
estimated at around 6,000. So, we have about 11,000 people coming and going,
how many of them are going to start using these as streets, and how many
pedestrians are we going to have in overflow, parking over here, crossing in front
of these two internal streets that are going to be created, including truck traffic.
Which trucks as I say, you can't see people, particularly little kids, that's why they
have mirrors in front of buses, because you run over, you can't see anything
there. I think it is a very extreme hazard. The advantage that they would enjoy
with the signalized curb cut soon to be intersection is going to put a severe
hardship on us, and you know, I'll get back to my notes... well, the other thing, I
think I can talk about it from here. The first curb cut off of Eagle Road, if that is a
22,000 car a day, count that it's something like 50 feet from Eagle Road.
Twenty-two thousand cars a,day, require a tremendous amount of queuing, in
most instances, several hundred feet. You are talking a huge intersection here,
like a Fairview and Cole. As you know, at peak periods those cars back up 1,200
feet sometimes. You are talking way back. Most of the time, an ACHD would
never allow a curb cut that near. In fact, there was a (Inaudible) in Boise that
pulled out of this market because they couldn't get curb cuts even on their own
sites. They were trying to push them back several hundred feet. They couldn't
get access, but here we've got two of them right in a row, on a 22,000 car a day
street. I don't understand the logic there, because there is no queuing, there is
no stacking. People will stack up on that street, people will be trying to go north
and south on these new de -facto in -turn streets on this property, it's just chaos.
It's very unsafe, it's very unorganized, and then you throw the trucks in there and
it's going to be a nightmare. The testimony that I think Terri Little gave during
one of the proceedings about magic view, he said that with the four cornered
signalized intersection at this new road that is going somewhere will provide
enough breaks and interference in the Eagle Road traffic, that Magic View Drive
would be able to operate adequately and safely for many years to come. As you
MERIDIAN CITY COU* •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 23
can see, this road on the applicants property is bent in toward Magic View, our
property just to the south remains in and stays in and then it queues back out,
it's designed for deceleration and acceleration and it's not even being used. I
submit that could be used at very low cost and increase the safety of Magic View
Drive, which the break that we have with the light now, I don't think this road is
necessary, and the safety figures substantiates that. We have had four
reportable accidents, no fatalities in five years at this intersection. One of them I
know for a fact, was a truck that pulled out of Magic View, got off the pavement
slightly and there was a big drop off to the dirt and it was a top heavy load and it
simply flipped it over, there was no collision. I don't see that there is a hazard
here, I see a huge hazard internally, the internal circulation between properties,
but I don't see the problem with Magic View, even without the acceleration and
deceleration lane, which like I say, seems to me it could be utilized to enhance
safety even more. Also, I would submit that this proposed road as it is now, you
can't call it a road, it's just an access, signalized curb cut access, ITD would
never allow another curb cut there, if it weren't for a purported road. This is a
controlled access highway, you don't just get curb cuts they don't allow them,
they like to keep the traffic flowing. So, without the officious of a road there,
there would not be a curb cut. They would never allow it, but that's what we have
because of the proposed road. You know, I want to reiterate some of the things
there were said. When we built our store, ACHD had some written comments.
Nothing was ever said about proposed road. There wasn't any plan as was
pointed out to you in the Meridian Comp Plan that's in 20.10.15 (sic) ACHD long
range plan, all these different plans, it was nowhere to be seen, including our
written report form ACHD., Well, six months after we open the door, here is a
new proposed road. Where is the good faith in the government there. To me, I
was being misled and I'll ultimately be suffering a severe hardship by this, which,
at least I could've been told about it. I could've made a call whether to go in
there, under this kind of condition ultimately, which I wouldn't have. You don't go
up against somebody at a severe disadvantage. As I mentioned we're extremely
sensitive to access and if you have a handicap access compared to your
competitor across the street, they will kill you. People, they don't like traffic, they
don't like the hassles, they are going to go to the easiest place. I guess, I will
close with the fact that, I think this comment was even made at the last time the
Meridian City Council heard this project, I think it was an opening statement by
one of the gentleman, I don't know who was on the council at that time, who
ultimately voted against it as the rest of the council did. He made the comment
that he thinks this sort of development should be on the other side of the
freeway, on the south side. I would agree, that's what we did on Meridian Road,
we didn't go next door to Chevron, we went on the other side of the freeway,
where there wasn't housing we were going to devalue, or we weren't going to
impact the quality of life of the neighborhood. We went to the other side of the
freeway, and it's doing fine. There is no stations over there, there is no fast food
restaurants over there, there's nothing over there, there is no duplication. I could
see maybe a need, which is one of the things that is supposed to drive
something like a conditional use permit and show the need. I don't see the need
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 24
here. I'm speaking, maybe I'm biased, I'll admit that. Practically, at least there is
nothing over there. My words are substantiated by the point that, that's what we
did on Meridian Road. I think that is about it . It seems like there was one other
point, but I probably taken enough time. I'm available for any questions.
Corrie: Council? Anyone else issue testimony in the public hearing. Is there
anyone else? Okay, Ms. Butler.
Butler: Thank you Mayor Corrie and council members. I'll try to respond to some
of the issues that were raised. Many of these are conditional use issues, as you
know. i'll try to address them, but make it short because I know we are going to
hear the conditional use in just a minute. I apologize if this is a little disjointed.
Based on the forecast that Meridian, through it's work with APA, Idaho Power
Company, and others, the statisticians that you worked with when you put
together you're comprehensive plan. You decided at that time that Meridian
needed to support its economic development by designating those commercial
activity centers in the city. The comprehensive plan states and I quote "the
comprehensive plan map represents a compilation of input and ideas expressed
by citizens, community groups and local leaders. You set those areas, and you
said that, for example, that medical facilities should be encouraged to locate
within or nearby those commercial activity centers" that is on page 39 of the
comprehensive plan. In fact, that's exactly what you did—what happened. You
said in your comprehensive plan that we want to set these commercial activity
centers in a certain location, we want to encourage medical facilities to locate in
or nearby them and that's what has happened. I'll quote a few more things from
the plan, because the comprehensive plan has obviously been an issue. Mr.
Foley is correct that the applicants are requested by the city to respond to each
of these statements, the standards and the comprehensive plan standards and
the ordinance standards, and in fact, we have done exactly that. The plan says
that retail, commercial and office development are frequent partners within
commercial activity centers, in order to support residential and industrial
developments, areas should be set aside...
(END OF TAPE ONE)
Butler: ... has guided through a very long and extensive review, our
development. From the original development, what came before the P & Z was a
unified cluster development that's promoted by your comprehensive plan. It
fosters the policy of Meridian for compatible land use and design, including the
extensive landscaping that you require along gateways and into Meridian. I'll
quote again from the plan or take it—the design of Eagle Partners project does
recognize the importance just like you do in your comprehensive plan, to
maintain and attractive and desirable living environments and close proximity to
work, balancing neighborhood interests with business interests. Meridian
through it's comprehensive plan strives to arrange major land uses to preserve
both the integrity and emanates of residential neighbors and the economic vitality
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 25
of commercial activity centers. The land use element in the comprehensive plan
of Meridian is based on the objective to provide mixed planned uses along 1-84,
which you state "must be attractive and compatible with high volume corridors",
which is what you have here. Eagle Road is specifically addressed in your
comprehensive plan, Mr. Foley was just incorrect when he stated that. Page
E28 of your comprehensive plan, Eagle Road is specifically addressed and says
that the 1-84 corridor that is compatible with high volume corridor as well as the
Eagle road corridor, must be a planned mixed use development and that is what
you have beforeyou tonight. In addition to the commercial land use policies, this
project conforms to Meridians Comprehensive Plan Land Use 1-84 Mixed Use
Policies; which apply to all of the areas adjacent to 1-84. I'm quoting from the
plan "these areas are unique, they're surrounded by arterials immediately
adjacent to the freeway, are relatively level in topography, have a distinct linear
shape and are greatly effective by contiguous industrial, residential and
commercial land uses. In order that compatible land uses and efficient use of the
land might occur, this corridor is anticipated for a variety of planned compatible
mixed uses, probably mixed uses for these areas could be commercial,
combined medium to high density residential, open space uses as a means to
buffer highway noise, tourist lodging, industrial, office, medical and related land
uses." You have striven within this commercial activity center to set the stage so
you can provide good mixed uses throughout this area. We have been working
diligently with the city to ensure that the character—and I'm quoting from the
zoning ordinance now, some of the areas that Mr. Foley commented on the
zoning requirements that we have to meet "to ensure the character site
improvements and type of development is harmonized with previously developed
land in the area" and because it is located adjacent or near existing residences or
residential areas, the project has been designed to be harmonious with those
residential uses. The Eagle Partners have made all reasonable efforts through
the long planning process with your staff to reduce the environmental impact on
residential areas, including noise and traffic reduction. Your Comprehensive
Plan goes on to say "because these areas are near 1-84, high quality visual
appearance is essential and development and proposals in the area are subject
to design review guidelines and conditional use permitting processes and that is
exactly what we have got. Through staffs work, we have extensive conditional—
conditions of approval placed on this project, we have to enter into development
agreement, which the planning and zoning commission has recommended to
you, to ensure that we develop this project in a way that is compatible with the
area. I'll try to, again, just comment on a few of the comments that were made
here earlier. It was suggested that the project should be denied by something
other than land use issues, which is what the city has to decide on, the land use
issues. What did you do in 1993? What did your comprehensive plan say? Are
we in compliance with that Comprehensive Plan? Do we meet your zoning
ordinance? Do our conditions of approval set by the city ensure mitigation of
potential problems, because remember conditional use is an allowed use, it is an
allowed use that the city has already decided in it's zoning ordinance. You will
take the opportunity to look at hard and put on it conditions of approval, to ensure
MERIDIAN CITY COU `` •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 26
any possible negative effects will be mitigated. It was suggested that this council
should make a decision on something other than land use; that you should try to
regulate the market, you should not determine whether or not we meet your
Comprehensive Plan, but whether because there are existing service stations in
the area, that is your decision. As you know legally, that is not your Bailiwick,
you are here to work on land use decisions. As I was sitting in the back row
listening, Tracy Eddie who is very, very active in running the Chevron stations in
and around the Treasure Valley with her husband and Eagle Partners, came up
to me and said things like "but we don't pay minimum wage, but we do support
baseball, but we do these things. We carol during Christmas time, we go and
chant for people, we are not bad people, why are they saying these things?" You
know, these are people that have worked very hard during their lives to put up a
very good business. They deserve the support of the city because they took the
time to look through your ordinances, to look through your Comprehensive iPlan,
to work with the city, to try to build a quality development that leads into Meridian.
Several people talked about quality of life and Meridians Comprehensive Plan
dwells on quality of life. It's very hard to say what quality of life is so I'm going to
offer something, quality of life is the equitable or the fair sharing of the burdens
and the benefits of urban life. You spent a lot of time this past year working with
ADA County to set your urban services planning area.- You are an urban area.
You are extending your services into this area. You have said that we don't want
to necessarily just help residential (Inaudible), who benefit from residential
development, we're saying that we need to protect all of our citizens and
residential development does not do it. We need a broader tax base, we need
commercial development and we need industrial development and it was very
hard for you in 1993 to set those areas that would be commercial activity centers,
but you said we want to provide mixed uses, we want to provide people easy
access to work, to play and to their homes. A couple of factual points. On the
plat, this is not a subdivision, there has never been a lot split on this parcel.
ACHD has indicated that it will not make a decision on the road. It has given two
alternatives, both at the north end of this site, and won't make a decision until this
City Council makes a decision on this particular project. As you could hear,
many people are upset, I think less with our project, but with ACHD's proposal
one of a couple to extend the fourth leg from the light at St. Luke's. It was not
our choice, we worked very long and very hard with ACHD to have Magic View—
move°the light to Magic Vie. It was not necessarily ACHD's decision either, they
were working very hard with ITD who, as I understand it, did not want a light at
Magic View so close to the interchange. So, it appears that, although they
haven't made their decision that the roadway would go the fourth leg from the St.
Luke's light. That is not a subdivision, that's a local government taking our
property, something that we're not real happy about. It's made our neighbors
upset with us, when it really isn't us. I hope the council will work with ACHD to—
if that road is what is causing the neighborhood the negative effects work with
ACHD to provide mitigation along that northerly boundary, berming, sound wall,
whatever ACHD can offer up to the city. Mr. Williams mentioned the 1997
Findings of Fact that were made in connection with this property, but not this
MERIDIAN CITY COI
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 27
project. I was not involved with the project at that time, but you did make a
decision involving this property, but not this project. It's a new project, something
that people went back to redesign based on the Findings. You have to hear this
new again, in light of this Comprehensive Plan. The other thing about this plan,
somebody said we're not sure what plan we are dealing with, so let me clarify
that, you are dealing with the plan that went before the Planning and Zoning
Commission. The plan that is mounted there, as I understand it, Byron Smith
asked at the hearing to make a correction on our plan, they talked about the fact
that it seemed like we had, an over abundance of parking and that they thought
our count was wrong and they asked us to clarify that and we did clarify that. on
the plan by counting out the spaces and changing the count on the plan and
submitted that on the staff. Somebody talked about an access between
McDonalds—or the credit union and the Chevron site. That was a working
concept that was not before you, but when we redid the count of the parking the
architect didn't take that off, but the only reason that plan came over to staff was
to correct the parking issue. So, the only plan that is before you is the plan that
was before Planning and Zoning Commission. I could address—well I'll just
briefly say the issues of noise, smells, and so on, that are conditional use issues
that are addressed by conditions of approval—and appreciate somebody's
acknowledging that when they lit their cigarette they didn't blow up from fumes.
Noise and lighting issues are clearly things we will address in the conditions of
approval. At the Planning and Zoning Commission, George Kyler from
McDonalds, who will probably speak in a little while reminded the commission
that it is not a 24 hour McDonalds, that they have state of the art re -circulating
equipment, and I'll have him speak to that, but there are no fumes. He invited
the commission to come to any of his locations so that they would understand
that. Somebody mentioned that water quality is a concern. That is clearly a
concern for Meridian too. That is why you set your urban services planning area
and why you are trying very hard to extend your services throughout the area of
impact and your urban service planing area, so you can avoid water quality
problems. The central district health and the DEQ require extensive regulations
for all the uses on site, much more extensive regulations than those that
presently effect the wells in the area, because all of Greenhill Estates as I
understand it and other areas are on septic, individual septic. I don't know how
long they've been in existence, but I can only guess that it will be much better
when centralized sewer and portable water, not from individual wells is extended
into this area. l guess at this point, I think I've responded to some of the
questions, and I guess I'll summarize in this.annexation and zoning section of the
hearing to say that we have pointed out each and every standard and how we fit
the Comprehensive Plan in our written submittals. I apologize having read so
much to you. I know that you will be able to look at that at your leisure. I do want
to set a tone that this not a slap/dash proposal that people didn't think about the
ordinances and Comprehensive Plan. We are respectfully asking that the
Council grant the annexation and zoning, that you have been trying to do for
years out there. Thank you.
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 28
Corrie: Thank you, Any questions form the council at this point? Council,
discussion, questions, staff?
Rountree: The lateness of the receipt of the proposed Findings of Fact and
Conclusions from the applicant as they indicated was something they provided
us to be factored into our current Findings of Fact and decision, coupled with the
testimony this evening, are we in a position—at least I fee, that new Findings of
Fact need to be drafted, for the annexation question.
Prior: That is entirely up to you folks. Obviously, for the annexation and zoning
we do need to prepare Findings, if that is what you are asking.
Corrie: Any other comments from council, questions?
Rountree: Just a general comment, I would like to see all of the testimony,
including the additional information that the applicant has presented to us in their
draft Findings of Fact and Conclusion, compared and/or resulting in a revision of
the Findings of Facts. I guess that is my position on that, in the way of
discussion. If the hearing is still open, I'll hold comments till it is closed.
Corrie: Any comments?
Anderson: I was just wondering if Mr. Little would like to comment on ACHD or
anything, is here? Maybe he can explain the roadway and why that proposal is
there.
TERRY LITTLE, 5876 WEST DRAWBRIDGE, BOISE, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Little: The collector road that is on the diagram there. I did provide a schematic
to the Planning and Zoning Commission of a couple of alternatives and left
copies of those and showed those fast time. I didn't bring the transparencies with
me. I don't know if Larry Sale has those, he is here tonight as well. I would point
out that there is a note on the 2015 long-range plan map. The first footnote says
ACHD determines the location of collectors and developing areas, so there is
very much authority for that, unfortunately, I wish we would've had that in place.
We are playing catch up in this county as you know trying to get ahead of that.
We do have an item in our budget this year to go out and preplan well ahead and
get ahead of Mr. Jackson and others before they come in. What I said at the
planning and zoning with regard to this collector road was that we were not
intending in any way a straight shot. We had two alternatives, one in which,
turned along the west side of this parcel that is proposed for development and
the second one, that goes farther west, but comes in at the first street to Magic
View, west of Eagle Road, so it just goes to approximately to the next property
line as 1 recall. We have three levels of planning, one is just with this property.
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 29
One is with the short three lanes at the intersection and one would come out into
five lanes. The long term—I would point out that the through capacity of the road
is a three lane road, we are just talking about widening out to five lanes where it
comes out to Eagle Road. A lot of times a five lane road will widen to 6,7,8 lanes
at an intersection. We are talking about a three lane road that would widen out
as you approach Eagle Road. The only reason we would go to more lanes would
be if one of the adjacent properties wanted to pay the difference and get access,
we could put a turn lane somewhere perhaps on that north south segment or
something like that. It's really a three lane capacity road it widens out to reduce
the congestion at the Eagle Road. As I said, intent is not in any way to be a
straight shot to the west, but to bring it around. The right turns would continue to
go out to Eagle Road and the vast majority of those—so a good percentage of
the—as much as a third of the traffic would continue to use Magic View, in our
opinion. The road again, also would be about a 30mph road, we're not talking
about highway 55 through Eagle, which is a 55mph road. We're talking a very
low speed road, it's a whole different matter when it comes to noise and
mitigation issues to have a collector road that widens out when the traffic is going
as slow as this will be, compared to a through arterial or rural highway, such as
55 character of it up in Eagle. As you see, the concept is fairly sharp turn curve
in the road. We've went through the technical reasons, I think, for not moving the
signal with the council and a joint meeting with our commission, I won't belabor
that fact. It's my understanding that they have issued us a permit for the
roadway on the west side at St. Luke's driveway. That is Larry's understanding
as well. So ITD has, it's our understanding—it's already issued us a permit for
that. So, that battle we believe is over, we feel like that is the way it's got to go
there. The traffic range, I think somebody else came up with 22,000, 1 didn't
dispute it at the Planning and Zoning, certainly is a range, it depends on what
you approve for uses out there, what the traffic will be. I think that is in the high
range of what you can expect out there given that Magic View will continue to
function for the right turns coming from the freeways and the left turns in the gaps
that will be created by the signal and will be created even more so by the signal
with a fourth leg on it. I think I pointed out at that meeting, we looked at similar
situations which we've got. In Boise, for instance, on Vista with about 25,000 a
day and we require a road like this near Target (sic), we found no one going up
and making a right on the road during the very peak of the peak hour there.
Costco is another example, where there is horrendous traffic on Franklin, and
yet, people make a right turn out of a driveway without going back to the signal,
in the gaps that occur. That was the main thing, I think Larry could address
maybe some more of the details of the road and those kind of things. I could try
to answer traffic questions.
Corrie: I think you have done great, thanks.
Prior: Mr. Mayor, may I impose on the council and ask a couple of questions of
this particular gentleman, with your permission. Sir, I have a couple of brief
questions. On the right hand side of the particular drawing, it shows a berm and
MERIDIAN CITY COU*
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 30
that statement on there says "berm by others at this time." Since ADA county
high way district is proposing to take over the road, I believe on that side, is that
my understanding then that you will be maintaining that berm as—are you
committing to maintaining that berm on that side of the property abutting the
residential neighborhoods.
Little: I will defer that question to Mr. Sale, he has written and corresponded with
you on that and I will let him answer the question about that, if I could.
Prior: That will be all Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Thank you, Terri. Larry would you like to comment on that question
LARRY SALE, 35051INDER DRIVE, BOISE, ID. SWORN IN BY THE
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Sale: Mr. Mayor, members of the council, with regard to the previous question,
there is a saying about the county that ADA County district maintains
landscaping with roundup, and unfortunately, we aren't in the business of
maintaining the landscapes. We are hopeful that in this situation, that regardless
of the standard of the road, which is ultimately constructed the standard of that
road will depend entirely upon your land use decision. We have determined that
there is, and my memory fails me now, as to how many feet exactly, but I think
it's about 35 feet from the property line of the adjacent subdivision to the
sidewalk of the five lane proposal. That is surplus area that could be devoted to
a berm and landscaping. While no decision has been made by the highway
district commissioners, it's staffs opinion that the highway district would require
that land, make it available to the city or a business owners association of the
properties that may develop within this overall Magic View area or be dedicated
to the homeowners -association of the Greenhill Estates subdivision. Highway
district, I think, and again, this is staff speaking, highway district staff would be in
favor of providing the materials for construction of a berm or whatever
landscaping facility the city would determine is appropriate. Then making those
materials available for someone to put them together and assume their
maintenance. Any other questions.
Prior: Mr. Mayor, may I have a follow up on that please. If I understand what
you are saying, you folks aren't going to maintain the berm and either ask the
homeowner association to maintain it, or the city to maintain it, is that basically
what you are saying?
Sale: That's correct.
Prior: One other question if I may Mr. Mayor. ACHD Commission has not made
a final decision on any of these things is that correct?
MERIDIAN CITY COU* •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 31
Sale: Mr. Mayor and MR. Prior, it's good to meet you—
Prior: Finally.
Sale: We've talked a long time and written letters back and forth. There was a
reference earlier I think by Mr. Foley that we shouldn't let the highway district do
the land use decision here. Particularly in this case, the highway district has the
figuratively bit our lip to avoid making comments to the council that may sway the
council one way or the other, with regard to the land use decision. The highway
district has informed the city that the highway district will not take action on the
conditional use permit application, until the city makes a determination on the
land use issue. So that conditional use is being held in abeyance at highway
district office until City Council decides the land use issue and then highway
district will review the conditional use permit and forward it's recommendations
on to the city.
Rountree: Now that your up here, I was going to get you up here in the next
hearing, but that's okay we'll get it out of the way now.
Sales: Mr. Rountree, Somehow over the weekend I encountered an ear infection
and I can't hear anything out of this ear, can you speak up, I'm serious.
Rountree: There was an illusion, I guess, that the applicant is dismayed that they
would loose this property to a county entity in the way of a road. It would be my
assumption that they would be compensated for that road by ADA County
Highway District, what is the situation in reality?
Sale: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Rountree, that's correct. The highway district would pay
the developer for the right of way that's dedicated, including the surplus area
north of the proposed roadway. To make a fine point, there was a comment
earlier that this would be a tax supported construction. It may be a fine point, but
the money expended will not be from tax revenue, the money expended will
come from impact fees that are paid by developers in this area that would use
the roadway. We are all tax payers, it doesn't matter, but in this case, the funds
come out of a different pocket.
Anderson: The projected Traffic volumes in the range of 22,000 ADT are based
on an assumption on ACHD's part I believe, did you do the projections or were
those provided by—
Sale: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Rountree, I did not and that's one thing I didn't bring with
me tonight, I don't know if Terry did. We did a set of, I think, five development
scenario that --for exemplary purposes for the city. If you classify the land and
these fashions, then this is what the trip generations will be. I'm not familiar with
those, I can't recite them from memory. Sorry.
MERIDIAN CITY COU* •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 32
Anderson: That's all I have.
Corrie: Any other questions of the council?
Rountree: I would have a question for Ms. Butler.
Butler: Councilman Rountree.
Rountree: A question has come up about the berm, which is part of the
buffering. A landscape area, if you will, an element that we see as a buffer
between dissimilar uses. You've indicated that the land is going to be there, but
on the plans to be, apparently developed and/or maintained by others, my
question is in this good faith effort on the part of Eagle Partners, are they willing
to accept the responsibility of that buffer and the care and feeding of it for
perpetuity.
Butler: Councilman Rountree, I think there are—the answer specifically to your
question, would take me talking to my client. Let me tell you a little bit of history
on this project at one time, the neighbors and I don't know if that was collectively
or several individual neighbors had said that they would prefer to have that.
There is a canal that runs by there and some people did indicate that they would
just prefer to have their lot lines extended, if not held by the homeowners
association don't know that there is actually a homeowners association, but a
group that would be made up of the association to hold it in perpetuity. Mr. Little
or Mr. Sale, whoever mentioned business owners in the area, possibly getting
together to take care of that berm is one way to look at it. It has happened in—
the only one I'm`aware of is Boise City. Mr. Little and Mr. Sale would know a bit
more about how the Broadway and Park Center Corridors and the medians in
there work, but I believe there is some arrangement in that area between ACHD
and the city on how that's maintained. So I'm not answering your question
specifically on, will this particular property owner maintain something, if this road
does extend further west before it turns at the next property line. Clearly there is
going to have to be a cooperative effort. So, I think this is something that would
take discussion amongst the city, ACHD, other land owners in the area, both
business and the residence; we are certainly willing to do that, because as I said,
I'm not quite sure how the residents still feel about them wanting to take this
over. I would be willing to try to mediate some kind of way to take care of that.
Rountree: You are correct in that you have addressed, but not answered one
half of my question. The other half is, would the applicant be willing to develop
this parcel as a berm?
Butler: If you would give me a few moments and since that will be a conditional
use issue, we can talk about it during the next portion of the hearing.
Rountree: Thank you.
MERIDIAN CITY COU* •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 33
Corrie: Any other questions, discussion, council?
Rountree: None.
Corrie: I will close the public hearing and invite the council's pleasure, as far as
the annexation and zoning request.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, my pleasure would be to take a look at`the testimony
received tonight, the information again; I pointed out that we received this
evening from the applicant as far as a draft Findings of Facts, that information be
incorporated into a new findings. I would like to have some time to think about
what I have heard. Yet again, some 18 months or so from the past, I would like
to review the previous findings as it relates to the previous application and make
sure'that I'm comfortable with any decision come to at this point.
Corrie: Will I entertain that as a motion then?
Rountree: I don't know what the other folks want to do. I guess the question I
have is, do we keep the hearing open or have a continuance, if that is
appropriate.
Prior: Mr. Mayor, if I'm understanding President Rountree's comment, at this
time it would be appropriate to, if that is their desire to table it at this time, the
council can gather all of the information. As far as a personal preference, there
has been a considerable amount of information—new information that has been
provided. If I'm to do.findings, I'm going to need an opportunity to basically go
through all of this myself, but if I understand Councilman Rountree, you would
like some time to absorb some of this and spend some time going through all of
the. information and new information that has been submitted. The proper
procedure would be to table this and allow you the time to consider and absorb
this new information and the proper procedure would be to make a motion to
table this, based on that.
Rountree: I'd like to have a time certain with that as well. I have a question for
council, what is your timeline in terms of generating a new Findings of Fact?
Prior: Obviously I'm looking over the shoulder of the City Clerk and I see a stack
there --there are a considerable number of pages and I think it would be who of
all of us, that I read through everything that's been made available tonight. I will
make a commitment that I will read through everything that has been made
available. In light of that and the fact that I'm presently the only attorney with the
City of Meridian at this time, I'm going to need a little bit of time, maybe a little
more than what is usual, but obviously if you direct me otherwise I'll do whatever
you tell me to do.
9
MERIDIAN CITY COUS •
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 34
Rountree: Okay.
Foley: Mr. Mayor, I apologize, I wonder if we might have the opportunity to also
submit some proposed Findings of Fact. We didn't know that the applicant was
going to do this.
Prior: If that is the desire of Mr. Foley, Mr. Mayor, the public hearing will need to
be reopened to allow the submission of other information. I know Jo Ann he's
closed the public hearing, the City Council may open the public hearing if they
desire to do so, by motion.
Corrie: We've still got another public hearing on this one next.
Prior: On the conditional use permit, but not on the annexation. (inaudible)
There would need to be a motion to re—
Bird: We've got an outside firm retained, can't they help do it.
Rountree: They could.
Bird: Give it to them.
Corrie: They would have to read the materials, they would've be able to—
Bird: They've got more people to,,do it than we've got, evidently.
Rountree: Whatever, if that's your pleasure.
Bird: I don't have a problem either way, this thing has been dragging on and
dragging on, let get it decided one way or the other.
Corrie: Either the 18th or the 1 st of September.
Bird: I'm not for either one of those days, lets go for the 1st meeting of the month.
Corrie: August 4th or August 18th? If you make the motion, you pick the date. If I
make the motion, I pick the date.
Bird: I'll make the motion then.
Rountree: Make the motion.
Prior: I think I like your date better.
Bird: I just think it's gone on long enough, but I do want to see all of this stuff
come through and have time to look things over. We've got this stuff from the
MERIDIAN CITY COU
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 35
'applicant just tonight, just before the meeting, we need to read that over. I would
make the motion that we table this until...
Prior: Councilman Bird, do you desire to allow Mr. Foley to provide his own
findings on this as well?
Bird: I don't know, can we—we haven't opened up the...
Corrie: The public hearing has been closed.
Bird: The public hearing has been closed.
Corrie: The council can open if you desire so. May I ask a question here
Howard, is this in reference to the annexation and zoning?
Foley: Yes.
Corrie: Normally we don't do that, but it's entirely up to the council.
Bird: I was going to say, we close the thing, we would have to reopen. We've
got the thing taken care of, this same thing. These applicants have been put
through this procedure three or four times already, the same testimony that they
heard at Planning and Zoning, no, let's leave it like this. I make the motion we
table this until August 4th.
Corrie: Okay, I need a second. No second.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I would move that, even though the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law issue was pointed out by Ms. Butler at the openingW the
public hearing --to reopen the public hearing for the purposes of receiving the
Findings of Facts from the --from Mr. Foley and once receiving the Findings of
Facts that have been prepared, to close the hearing.
Anderson: Second.
Prior: Mr. Mayor.
(Inaudible)
Corrie: Motion by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Anderson to reopen the public
hearing. They quit discussion. All of those in favor of the motion say, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: Two ayes. One nay.
Corrie: Reopen the public hearing. Mr. Foley, I believe you wanted to testify.
MERIDIAN CITY COUP. �-
JULY 21;-1998
PAGE 36
.i
Foley: I just make the request that we be allowed -to submit proposed Findings of
Fact and. Conclusions of Law, also.
Anderson: Do you have those prepared now, at this time?
Foley: I do not, I would have those within a week.
Prior:, Mr. Mayor, -the -law and Ms. Butler correctly pointed; out to me that the
applicant is the'one who is'permitted to -submit Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law on -these projects.. Mr. Foley can'submit any other information. The
public hearing is open at�this point. What would be required is that the public
hearing bib -continued till the next available date to allow Mr. Foley provide that
information. He can not provide, as Ms. Butler pointed out, Findings of Fact, Mr.
Foley can provide additional information that he would like this council to
consider.
Anderson: Do,you have additional information?
Foley: I would have if given a week.
Rountree. I would, given -that the information is not available this evening, I
would move that we close the hearing.
Bird: That was in the original motion was to give the information and close it, so
that was taken care of already and loaded. It's closed.
Anderson: I'll second.it. ,
Corrie: Alright the motion- has been made thatwe,close.the:public, hearing..
Butler: Can I ask a point of clarification, Mr. Mayor and council members? Point
of clarification, the public hearing has been closed, the public hearing has been
reopened for somebody in opposition, in turn to submit further information. Do
we have the opportunity to rebut that information.
Prior: You do.
Bird: You do.
Butler: Only at the public hearing, will we be given that information in enough
time, prior to the hearing to {rebut it or should we just take the time at the hearing.
Rountree: Point of information, I think.my motion just'closed-the.hearing, it did
'not extend the public hearing. r ,
Prior:. They did close the public hearing, Jo Ann.
I
MERIDIAN CITY COUTO 1
JULY 21, 1998
PAGE 37
Butler: It's just a point of clarification.
(Inaudible)
Prior: They withdrew their motion to open the public hearing and now they have
closed the—we're turning this into a circus here. Basically, at this point the
public hearing is closed and what has been submitted is what's going to be
considered on this annexation as of right now.
Butler: Okay, I'm sorry...
Bird: The original thing we voted on 2-1 was we open it up for those one facts
and then we close it, so it's over with, we don't have to take another vote. With
that motion you open it up for the one facts, which was not allowable, and we
close it at the same time.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I (Inaudible) question.
Corrie: Motion has been made to close the public hearing, any further
discussion? Oh, there can't be --All those in favor say Aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we direct City Council with insistence that he
may need.to review the information received this evening, the previous findings
presented.by Planning and Zoning and redraft. Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law for this application for annexation and. that we table this item.until August
18th.
Anderson:, I'll second that.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Anderson, to request new
Findings of Fact and be tabled till August the 18th. Further discussion.
Bird: It's going on the 18th, are we going to settle on the 18th .
Corrie: All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONALUSE PERMIT
FOR A CHEVRON C -STORE, MCDONALD'S W/ DRIVE -UP WINDOW AND
IDAHO POWER COMPANY CREDIT UNION WITH DRIVE -UP BANKING BY
EAGLE PARTNERS LLC.
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JULY 21 1998
APPLICANT: EAGLE PARTNERS ITEM NUMBER: 7
REQUEST: ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 4.13 ACRES
AGENCY COMMENTS
"CITY CLERK: Scc AITA64I Q-EOIStI-) FLAT
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY. BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: 4
OTHE
SEE ATTACHED FINDINGS
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
i
i� FW14VED
July 23, 1998 J U L. 3 f 1998
TO: MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL CITY OFNERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO STREET
MERIDIAN, ID 83642
RE: APPLICATION OF EAGLE PARTNERS FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF
PROPERTY AT NW CORNER OF EAGLE ROAD AND MAGIC VIEW DRIVE.
z
MY NAME IS HARVARD D. HANKS. I RESIDE AT 2930 MAGIC VIEW DRIVE,
MERIDIAN, ID.
THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL ITEMS OF OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT VOICED. I
WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO SOME OF THESE WITH FACTS NOT COLORED BY
L EMOTION.
1. IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT THIS PROJECT WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC IN THIS AREA.
IT IS NOT REALISTIC TO BELIEVE THIS. INCREASED TRAFFIC WILL COME
FROM FURTHER DEVELOPMENT NORTH ON EAGLE ROAD AND THE
CONNECTION OF EAGLE ROAD TO HIWAY 55, NOT FROM ANY DEVELOPMENT
PROPOSED FOR THIS AREA.
2. NOISE HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS POSSIBLY INCREASING. THERE PRESENTLY
IS CONSIDERABLE NOISE COMING FROM BOTH I-84 AND EAGLE ROAD. IT
SEEMS TO ME THAT WITH ADDITIONAL BUILDINGS AND A NATURAL BUFFER
INSERTED THAT THIS NOISE WILL DECREASE NOT INCREASE.
3. INCREASED TAX REVENUE FROM A COMMERCIAL PROJECT HERE WOULD
PROBABLY REDUCE TAX INCREASES FOR AN EXISTING SUBDIVISION.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND TIME TO REVIEW THIS MATTER.
SINCERELY,
xvaL>.
HARVARD D. HANKS
2930 MAGIC VIEW DR. `
MERIDIAN, 11)83642
ece+vec� a�'1�
_ �� c, ►deaf � � - -
_ d6Se4-- --_
s�a
:«wrc.
PLANNING AND ANG COMMISSION •
JUNE 9, 1998
PAGE 6
Nelson: I have none.
de Weerd: None.
MacCoy: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All aye
ITEM #3: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT FOR WILKINS RANCH
AT THE LAKES SUBDIVISION BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT LLC — EAST OF
BLACK CAT/USTICK INTERSECTION AND SOUTH OF USTICK ROAD:
Nelson: Mr. Chairman, I'd -like to make a motion that we continue public hearing
for item #3 until our next scheduled meeting Wednesday the 17th.
Smith: Second.
MacCoy: Any discussion?
de Weerd: I have none.
Smith: None.
MacCoy: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
MacCoy: We'll continue the public hearings on all three items on May 17th.
ITEM #4: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST
FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 4.13 ACRES TO C -G BY EAGLE
PARTNERS LLC:
MacCoy: Is a representative here from Eagle Partners? Not yet we don't, okay.
Commissioner's do you have any comments on what was written?
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I have a number of comments.
MacCoy: Alright, go ahead.
Smith: My first question actually, clarification, Mr. Prior, there was some
discussion earlier about the applicant's non-compliance in his existing facilities
and there was some question as to whether or not those non -conforming uses
were whether.we had any kind of stick to hold over the applicant on this project
1
I
PLANNING AND Z G COMMISSION
JUNE 9, 1998
PAGE 7
based on his non-compliance on other projects within the City's jurisdiction. Is
that in fact true or —
Prior: Under our subdivision zoning ordinance, I believe it's 11-9-613E but don't
hold me to it, if an applicant, party or anybody — an interested party — actually it's
an applicant, party and — applicant party for our purposes is violating any
ordinance in the City of Meridian you do have the authority to turn down this
project if that's your desire. I guess I proceed with caution that you want to make
sure that that applicant is violating an ordinance —
Smith: Well that brings up my next question is there's question of letters being
sent to the applicant on other facilities and he said he never got one and there
was a question with the City as to whether we found those letters or not and have
those letters been found or are they just floating out somewhere in space. Does
anybody know?
Stiles: Chairman, Commissioners, I have'not had time to look in Dean Ehlert's
files for that information, I do have records of phone calls made to the applicant
directly and the dates of those but I don't have the times and dates with me
tonight.
Prior: Commissioner Smith, also for clarification, I spoke with Bruce Freckleton
prior to the meeting and he indicated that Ms. Butler — is Ms. Butler out here?
Yes she is. Ms. Butler can confirm this, apparently Mr. Eddy is working with Mr.
Freckleton and Joann and they're going to try to come to reasonable resolution of
the issue with the lights over on the stores and apparently there's something —
there is a resolution that — and it seems like it's a pretty cost effective resolution
apparently if I'm understanding Bruce correctly.
Freckleton: I don't have any kind of cost estimates or anything but it seems like a
fairly reasonable solution.
Prior: So at this point — in the Findings, if you read the Findings in both -- I
believe under the annexation and the zoning, I included that the Chevron gas
station will submit all plans for any type of lighting and all lighting will be
approved, it was one of the conditions. So in other words the lighting is going to
conform to what you folks want it to conform to if this project goes through at the
other location. As far as the other two locations, if Mr. Eddy doesn't conform and
Chevron doesn't conform that's my problem and I can pursue separately civil and
criminal penalties and sanctions against that particular person and that particular
business as we see fit so I separated the issues and I wanted to make sure that I
addressed the issue of the lighting for this particular project and as far as the
other ones I didn't think it was necessary to hold this project up, if we really want
to make him conform and follow what was set out in the conditional use permit
for the other project, I can do that criminally and civilly on my own without having
PLANNING AND ZGW.G COMMISSION •
JUNE 9,1998'
PAGE 8
to worry about it holding this 'thing up and I don't have any problem with doing
that.
Smith: My problem is I cannot in good conscience go ahead and approve this
project, move it forward, knowing full well that we went through the same issues,
I wasn't on the commission at the time but I've been on party to enough of these
public hearings to know that we go over the same issues on every project,
lighting being one, specifically and there's nothing going to stop this from
happening again on this project if it's been going on in the other ones, been
notified and that's why I asked the question, I know you addressed it in the
Findings about the lighting but where I'm getting to is until the other projects are
in compliance with the City ordinances there's no reason to allow a third one or a
fourth one or endless more projects to go out there and be problems for the City
and I'd — where I'm getting to with this thing is to put some kind of condition if the
ordinance will allow it prior to the issuance of a building permit to make sure the
other two projects are in compliance with the City's ordinances.
Prior: You're talking about an issue — you're not going to necessarily going to be
able to include that as a condition because one, you're talking about a piece of
property that is collateral to the actual project so you're not going to be able to do
that, I mean if its your desire and obviously I've heard one voice but if it's your
desire to do that, we can do that under a code section that says the party or an
entity to this project is not in compliance, it can be held up that way but you can't
make it a condition that this person can form his other things in order to get a
conditional use permit or an' annexation, we just can't legally do that, we're not
going to get away with that.
Smith: Well that's what I'm trying to find out.
Prior: Well I just told you.
Smith: So in other words, we either delay this thing right now or — let me back up
— we either deny it right now or we approve it and we totally have to disregard the
other projects.
Prior: No, like I said the process is in the works, Ms. Butler has been on the
phone with me, I think I'spoke with Joanne just about every day last week and
again she left a couple of messages on my voice mail this afternoon I didn't get a
chance to return and I will tomorrow Joanne and the issues are being addressed,
that's why I felt comfortable with it, she's given me assurances that these things
are going to be addressed and she spoke with Bruce Freckleton in regards to this
thing, its — I was concerned at the last public hearing' -about this and a little
irritated when I saw this was happening. She has assured me that things are
going to be addressed and they're going to be taken care of, I'm comfortable with.
that, I'll hold her to her word because she in all likelihood will be back here some'
PLANNING AND ZAG COMMISSION
JUNE 9, 1998
PAGE 9
day and if her word isn't any good now I can assure you the kind of treatment
she'll get when she comes back. The other thing is 1 have no reason to believe
that she's not going to — that Bruce and Mr. Eddy aren't going to work this out so
i; don't think that it is something that should hold this project up on. That's my
personal opinion, I probably shouldn't express that but I guess I just did. I'm
sorry we —actually this is our first fight isn't it Byron, we disagreed.
a
Smith: When we get in a fight you'll know it. I just want to clarify what —
Prior: Its entirely up to you, if that's your desire to do that, that's fine, I just
wanted to make sure that the rest of the Commission were informed as to the
status and Mr. Freckleton over there is working with Joanne and Mr. Eddy and 1
think they'll come to a reasonable resolution of this, I don't think its something
that you know — and besides that I do have an alternative, if they don't come to a
resolution then I'll just pursue it myself criminally and civilly, I can go after them
that way and I'm not afraid to do that, join the list I mean —
Smith: I'm willing to take Ms. Butler at her word and not hold this thing up any
farther then.
MacCoy: Any more comments?
t
Nelson: Yeah, I would comment that item #4 is actually the annexation, zoning
and maybe more appropriate to discuss that sort of thing on the (inaudible) — if
we plan on —
I
Smith: Well I got other things to discuss on (inaudible) so —
Nelson: Oh, okay. Well let's do it.
MacCoy: Any other (inaudible). I've got one thing 1'd like to point out on page 15
I think it is, if you read starting on page 14, item #4, change of water service, it
goes into some length of discussion on page 15 at the top it says that — it ends
by talking about the booster 'pumps and being able to get the water to the third
floor of the hotel building which is not part of the thing anymore, the motel was
stricken some time ago and Chevron took it out of the plan so I'd like to have the
material corrected before we pass it on to the City Council. Okay, John?
Prior: Yes. I'll speak with my secretary.
-Smith:,-Mr.-Chairman; I'd like to -make a motion that we -approve these:Findings
'of Facfiand Conclusions of Law as -written with the exception- of item #4, page,14-
y oy to be stricken ,,as noted by -Chairman MacC ken from the Findings of.Fact.
_
Nelson: Second.
PLANNING AND ANG COMMISSION •
JUNE 9, 1998
PAGE ,10
MacCoy: Okay, I've got roll call.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Commissioner Borup — absent, Commissioner Smith — aye,
Commissioner Nelson — aye, Commissioner de Weerd — aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All,aye.
MacCoy: Do you have anything else to add? (Inaudible) Alright, is there a
decision or recommendation to.be given?
Nelson: Mr. Chairman, the'Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
recommends that the property set forth in the application be approved by the City
Council for annexation and 'zoning under the conditions set forth in these
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law including that the applicant or
successors in interest assign heirs, executors or personal representatives either
in a development agreement, enter into a development agreement, that if the
applicant is not agreeable with these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
and/or is not agreeable with entering into the development agreement the
property should not be annexed.
Smith: Second.
MacCoy: All in favor of this motion?
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
MacCoy: Any disapproval's? None, so it stands as we move forward —
Freckleton: Excuse me, Chairman MacCoy?
MacCoy: Yes?
Freckleton: One thing I just wanted to bring to light, back in my comments when I
reviewed this application some time ago the legal description that was submitted
for annexation did not include half right-of-way of Eagle Road so we do need to
receive from the applicant a revised legal description that includes that right-of-
way.
Prior: Joanne, you got that?
Freckleton: Thank you.
MacCoy: Okay is that it from the staff? Anything more Bruce? Anything else?
Alright, moving on to item #5.
iA
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JULY 21 1998
APPLICANT: F-AGLE PARTNERS ITEM NUMBER: 7
REQUEST: ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 4.13 ACRES
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK: S&5 PrITA CAI 2E DISC 17 PLAT.
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY: SEE ATTACHED FINDINGS
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:/
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER: (J
I J
4
US WEST:
�U
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING
603 SOUTH EAGLE ROAD
NORTHWEST CORNER OF.EAGLE ROAD AND MAGIC VIEW DRIVE
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS`£OF LAW
The above entitled; annexation and zoning application having
come on for public hearings on April 14, 1998, and June 9, 1998, at
the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant's Representative,
Joanne Butler, appearing personally, the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the 'Cityi of Meridian having duly considered the
evidence and the matter makes the following Findings of Fact and.
Conclusions of Law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The notice of public hearing on the application for
annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks
prior to said public hearings scheduled for April 14, 1998, and
June 9, 1998, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days
prior to said hearings; that the matter was duly' considered.at the
April 14, 1998, and June 9, 1998, hearings; that the public was
given full opportunity to ,express comments and submit evidence; and
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1
ANNEXATION AND ZONING —EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
y
i
0
that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and
television stations.
2. The property included in the application for annexation
and zoning -is described in the application, and by this reference
is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The property is
approximately 4.13 acres in size. The property is located in the
northwest corner of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive.
3. The Applicantl'is the record owner of .the property.
4. The property is presently zoned by Ada County as Rural
Transition (RT), and is,used.,primarily for agricultural purposes.
The Applicant requests 'the property be zoned (C -G), General Retail
and Service Commercial. The Applicant has requested the annexation
and this zoning, and the application is not at the request of the
City of Meridian.
5. The Applicant intends to develop a Chevron C -Store,
McDonalds with a drive -up window, and an Idaho Power Company Credit
Union with a drive -up window.
6. The property is located at 603 South Eagle Road. The
property adjoins the city limits of the City of Meridian.
7. The Applicant's Representative, Joanne Butler was sworn
in by the Assistant City Attorney. Mrs. Butler noted areas in the
immediate vicinity that have been annexed by the City. She asked
that if the request is; denied, could the Commission specifically,
state the reasons for the denial. Mrs. Butler noted that the
proposed annexation is;adjacent to and abuts the City limits and
is within the area of impact. She noted that the applicant is
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
•
E
the owner of record of the property and requests that the whole
parcel be annexed. The applicant intends to build a Chevron
service station, McDonalds Restaurant with drive -up window and an
Idaho -Power Credit Union facility with a drive -up window. She
noted that the property can be served with both City water •and
sewer. She noted that sianitary sewer will be from the extension
of an .existing line. She noted that zoning of this parcel would
be consistent with the "Comprehensive Plan. She noted the land
has been designated as mixed planned use development on the land
use map of the Meridian'. Comprehensive Plan. She noted that the
integrity and identityi of adjoining residential areas canbe
preserved through the use of buffering, screening, and
landscaping techniques. She acknowledged that the development:`
should be conducted as a conditional use especially when there
are more than two uses, like this project. She acknowledged that
all reasonable efforts' should be made to reduce the impact of
noise and.''traffic on residential areas. She noted that ACHD was
there to offer comments and request support for their decision.
Mrs. Butler concluded by requesting that the Commission recommend
approval of this project by Eagle,Partners.
8. Billy Ray Strite started his testimony by noting that
the most pertinent item to be discussed was what could be done to
minimize impact on the neighborhood to the north. He noted that
ACHD and ITD met with the City Council and determined that a
roadway should be placed on the north boundary of the site. He
noted that the roadway'would be 108 feet of the right of way for a
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
future five lane road. #He noted ,that the uses of the project have
been moved to the south. He noted that the conditional use is for
the drive-thru; he acknowledged that the only drive-thru with
speakers would be the Chevron/McDonalds. He noted that the speaker
system will be generally, located on the south westerly portion of
the site. He noted"tha't there will be no speaker system on the
Idaho Power Credit Union facility and because of concern for the
traffic, they have moved the drive-thru to the south side of the
building. He noted that the stacking lane for the Chevron/
McDonalds is on the south side of the building. Mr.. Strite noted
that the plans call for,,a 20 foot buffering on the north side of
the Credit Union and an additional fifteen feet of landscaping
between the Credit Union and the Chevron McDonalds. Mr. Strite
noted that the developer will build a solid wood fence that runs
from the southerly boundary of Magic View north until it reaches
the new 108 feet of right-of-way roadway section. Mr. Strite
concluded by requestingithat the Commission make a recommendation
in order to move the project forward as the project has been
pending for almost 2 1-� years.
9. Mr. Richard Williams began his testimony by requesting
that the Findings of Fact 'and Conclusions of Law of February 1997
on the project be entered into public record. He noted that the
Findings of Fact were denied for the project by the City Council.
Mr. Williams noted that the project severely impacts the
residential neighborhoods. He noted that there will be a 108 foot
right of way in the 'residents' back yards, not including the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -'EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
McDonalds'. He noted that a conditional use requires a community
necessity and the Chevron station is a community necessity. He
noted that the project does not conform to the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Williams requested that a�moratorium be imposed on the whole
area to allow the proper planning for the area. Mr. Williams
concluded by noting that the project was not `proper planning for
the area.
Commissioner Nelson asked Mr. Williams what he would like to
see on the site. Mr. Williams noted that he would like to see it
developed as a professional office.
10. Mr. Harvard D. Hanks noted that the traffic in and out
of Magic View Drive would become more difficult with the addition
of a new service station.
11. Mrs. Beverly 'Sherman's testimony pertained to the fact
she is a mother of two young children, and that she does not like a
gas station that close to her residential neighborhood. She is
concerned about the contamination of the groundwater. She noted
that there are no specifics in regards to the proposed road and
does not think there needs'to be a gas station there.
12. Mr. Gary Skeen stated he is the representative for Idaho
Power Federal Credit Union. Mr. Skeen noted that his business
would be a good buffer for the nearby residents. The hours of
operation are 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., and they `are not open on
weekends. Mr. Skeen requested approval of the project.
13. Mr. Dave Pearcy stated his concern about traffic getting
in and out off of South Eagle -Road and Magic View Drive. He felt
FINDINGS OF FACT.AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5=.--
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -'EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
that another road where the present light is located would help
alleviate the traffic'congestion.
14. Mr. Chuck Horell wanted to know if the proposal was for a
subdivision. Chairman Johnson clarified the issue noting that the
Credit Union is a tenant of Eagle Partners.
15: Mr. George Kyler stated that he represents McDonalds
Corporation. He also noted that he has made an attempt to contact
neighbors and discuss the proposal but very few neighbors have
attended the meetings. Mr. Kyler noted that he took issue with
people claiming the exhaust from his restaurant creates an
unpleasant odor. He noted that his restaurant uses electro -static
filters. He felt it was unjustified to accuse his corporation of
providing low paying jobs to communities. He noted that bio or the
i
employees who work at the Meridian McDonalds live in Meridian.
16. Mr. Dick Moore's testimony was as follows: He noted that
he approves of the project and that he would like to see it
proceed. His intent when'he moved to the area was to subdivide when
the covenants expired.
_ 17.
Mr.
Terry
Little testified that
he is
employed by the
A.C.'H.D.
He
noted
that they have studiedv
Magic
View Drive along
with ITD and that it lacks adequate spacing from the interstate for
safe operations. Mr. Little noted that putting a street across
from the St. Luke's light would help alleviate the traffic
concerns. He felt that five lanes at the intersection and then at
about 300 feet back go 'to three and hook to Magic View would be
adequate for many years'in the future. He noted that Eagle Road is
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6
ANNEXATION,AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
i
the most important arterial street in the county. Mr. Little
stated: "Today its nearly 30,000 in that section which is like a
Fairview type traffic volume pretty much although it flows much
better because access isi limited on it and you don't have the side
street conflicts, we believe we have to control those side street
conflicts, and this road that was proposed is one way to do that
and we believe its the best way."
Commissioner Nelson inquired whether ITD was in agreement that
y
only one signal light be permitted. Mr. Little noted that ITD was
in agreement that the only signal light should be at the St. Luke's
entrance.
18. Mr. Patrick Nickel acknowledged that the economics of
this particular parcel makes office development cost prohibitive,
and that commercial development is more logical.
19. Mr. Richard Williams re -addressed the Commission. He
inquired to the why, if Eagle Road is a limited access road, does
A.C.H.D. want to add another access within 1600 feet. Mr. Williams
expressed his concern that the newly proposed road might be
extended to Locust Grove Road. Mr. Williams noted that if the new
road is connected to Magic View it would cost the taxpayers
$750,000.00 to construct the road. He also noted that ITD's
decision was a staff level decision and he believes the board of
ITD may not be in total, agreement with their decision.
Commissioner'Smith inquired as to what Mr. Williams would like
to see at the site. Mr. Williams reiterated that he would like to
see it turned into professional office space.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -'EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
r
Commissioner Smith inquired whether Mr. Williams agrees that a
8:00 to 5:00 use would be preferable to a 24 hour, 7 days a week
use. Mr. Williams agreed that he would like to see an office type
development for professional people.
20. Mrs. Butler addressed the Commission again. She noted
that the area is designed for mixed use and that the proposal does
conform to the standards`set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. Mrs.
Butler noted that the issue of pollution came up in regards to the
service station. She noted that there are extensive regulations
governing the service station business. Mrs. Butler requested that
the Commission deliberate on the testimony and make a decision
tonight.
21. Mr. Billy Ray,Strite requested permission to address the
Commission again. Mr. Strite noted that a study indicated that
there were 5 scenarios provided for the 75 acres west of the
project and four out of 'the five required 108 feet of right of way
as proposed with the 30' feet buffer. He also noted that even if
the 75 acres went all residential, the road would,still be there.
Mr. Strite also rioted that 24 hour- count on Eagle Road
indicates that traffic drags to 10% of peak use after 10:00 p.m.
Commissioner Borup' asked Mr. Strite about the accuracy of
22,000 vehicle trips a day' on Eagle Road. Mr. Strite noted that
the figure on Eagle Road,is closer to 30,000 cars a day.
Commissioner Borup inquired about the traffic count on the new
108 foot right of way., Mr. Strite noted that Terry Little from
ACHD could answer that question.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
Commissioner Borup inquired about why the two other Chevron
stations are not in compliance with the City ordinance. He noted
that the lighting at the other stations violates City code. Mr.
Strite noted that he cannot answer about the other Chevron stations
but the proposal is to use recessed fixtures on the new proposed
Chevron station.
Commissioner Maccoy noted his displeasure with the lighting
situation at the Meridian First Street Chevron.
Commissioner Smith inquired about the material, overall height
and scale of the proposed credit union building. Mr. Strite noted
that the building would be 60 x 90 feet with a 4 and 12 pitch. It
will have asphalt d6cor shingles. EIFS or stucco will border at the
bottom of the wains coat of dark colored brick. There will be four
large columns supporting, a canopy `A' type roof entry supported by
two columns.
Commissioner SmithYlinquired about the 3 lanes for the Credit
Union drive-thru. He wanted an explanation about the drive-thru
lanes. Mr. Strite noted that the third lane is a bypass lane and
the other two lanes would be used for banking. He also noted that
the south wall of the entry will have a walk up ATM.
Commissioner Smith inquired about the 105 parking spaces as he
estimates only 57 would be required. Mr. Strite noted that
McDonalds requested additional parking and there is the possibility
of expanding the credit union to 5,000 square feet. Commissioner
Smith stated he would like to see some of the extra parking turned
into landscaping along Eagle Road. Mr. Strite noted that the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
U
landscaping exceeds the 5% minimum.
w Commissioner Smith inquired about the berm along the proposed
roadway to the north. He noted that the plans call for maintenance
by others. He wanted to know who is the "others". Mr. Strite
noted that the property will no longer belong to the applicant and
it was his understanding that ACHD would care for the berm He
noted that once ACHD takes the property it is no longer part of the
Application.
22. Rod Truax testified that he lives near the northwest
corner of the project. He noted that the plans .proposed are a
significant improvement over the original proposal. He noted that
the roadway is still a major concern. Mr. Truax. noted that he
would like to see the Chevron building rotate a full 180 degrees
and put the canopy and lights on the other side of the building in
case Chevron decides to put in "their own landing lights." F
23. Mrs. Butler again addressed the Commission. She noted
that, the concern over the other Chevron store's lighting was
discussed with Shari,.Sti,les. She noted that the reason the Chevron
is proposed today -is because of requests from neighbors.
24. Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles,
addressed the Commission stating there was a conversation and
letter sent out by Dean Ehlert, Code Enforcement Officer,
requesting that Chevron address the lighting issue.
25. The Assistant City Attorney requested that the station
owner address the issue of the lighting at the other Chevron
stations.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -'EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
i
26. Mr. Steve Eddy addressed the Commission stating he has
had more positive comments about the lights. Further, he noted he
met with the Mayor about the lights. He noted that the Mayor -felt
the Locust Grove location was a safer, more inviting environment
because of the lights. Mr. Eddy noted that two guys signed off on
the occupancy permit for the station.
Commissioner Smith inquired about whether the canopy lighting
was included in the set of plans. Mr. Eddy responded that the
typical canopy light is, 400 watts, metal halite bulb, and it is
common throughout the industry. Mr. Eddy noted that the lights
11
proposed for the new Eagle Road were a full flush surface mount
that had no visual effect fromthe side. He noted that it would be
like the lights at the Chevron on Garrett and Chinden.
Commissioner Smith inquired about the reason for removing the
lights on the East First, Chevron and putting others in.
Mr. Eddy stated "East First has I think 21 canopy lights and
we replaced those just for a brighter image at that stations and I
haven't heard one complaint on that station. This is the first
time that's been brought up here at this meeting on ,the East First
Station."
Mr. Eddys also noted that Locust Grove's biggest problem is
there are too many lights and if some were removed, it would fix a
lot of the problem.
27. Chairman Johnson inquired about the ownership of the
proposed property-, and whether 'it will be rental property. Mr.
Strite noted that the property is eligible for one split and that
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -'EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
would allow it to be split into 2 parcels, one to Idaho Power
Credit Union and the other would remain with the Applicant.
28. Commissioner Nelson wanted to know more about the
proposed roadway, its traffic counts, and vision for future
development. Mr. Little noted that there were 2 options. Option A
and B with long and short term variations of each. Each option
varies in respect to how many lanes are at the intersections and
how far those lanes extend down the roadway. Mr. Little noted tnat
ACHD staff recommendations are to follow variation B.
Commissioner. Borup inquired about extending the roadway west
and how that would affect trip figures. Mr. Little noted that the
figure was based on the connector to Magic View. He didn't
envision at this point extending the roadway further west along the
residential property lines.
29. There was no.further testimony given at the hearing.
30. The Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce
Freckleton, and the Planning and Zoning Administrator,
Shari Stiles, submitted general comments and site
specific comments. Their general comments and site
specific comments are incorporated herein as if set
forth in full. Their general comments included the
following:
1. This application is for a parcel of land across S. Eagle
Road from the St. Luke's West site, and north of the
newly constructed Jackson's Food Store. The legal
description for annexation included in the application
doesn't include a portion of the S. Eagle Road right-of-
way between the subject site and the St. Luke's site.
Applicant shall submit an annexation perimeter legal
description for the •prroposed site. The legal
description shall include all those portions of adjacent
public rights;of-way contiguous to the Corporate City
Limits of the City of Meridian (Ord. No. 659, 8/2/94),
and '-� of all other adjacent Public Right -of -Ways. The
legal description shall be prepared by a Registered Land
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -:EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
Surveyor, Licensed by the State of Idaho, and shall
conform'to all the provisions of the City of Meridian
Resolution No. 158. The legal description for
annexation must place this parcel contiguous to the
existing city limit boundary.
2. Any existing, irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the
property to be included in 'this project, shall be tiled
per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped
should be shown on the site plans. Plans will need to
be approved by the appropriate. irrigation/drainage
district, or lateral users association, with written
confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public
Works Department. No variances have been requested for
tiling of any ditches crossing this project.
3. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within
this project will have to be removed from their domestic
service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may
be used for 'non-domestic purposes such as landscape
irrigation.
4. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with
Section 11-2-414 of the City of Meridian Zoning and
Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in site-
specific requirements,.
5. Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the-,
standards set forth in Sections 11-2-414.D.4. and 11-2--
414.D.5. of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development
Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with
Disabilities (ADA) requirements.
6. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed
architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted
to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-
street parking areas. All site drainage shall be
contained and disposed of on-site.
7. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not
to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas
and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-
414.D.3.
8. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards
set forth inSection11-2-415 of the City of Meridian
Zoning and Development Ordinance. No temporary signage
or flashing signs will be permitted.
9. Determine the' seasonal high groundwater elevation, and
submit -a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
prepared by a soil scientist with the design of site
drainage plan.,
10. Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City
Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B.
11. All construction shall conform to the requirements of
the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The site specific comments were as follows:
1. Sanitary °Sewer service to the proposed site could be to
the existing Tine installed in Magic View Drive directly
adjacent to the south.
2. Water service' to the proposed site could be to the
existing water line installed along the northerly side
of Magic View' Drive. Please provide the Public Works
Department with informationonanticipated fire flow and
domestic water requirements for the proposed site.
3. The 'treatment capacity of the City, of Meridian's
Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently being evaluated.
Approval of this application needs to be contingent upon
our ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage
generated by this proposed development.
4: Assessment fees for water and sewer service are
determined during the building plan review process.
Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment
Agreement with the City of Meridian. In addition to
these assessments, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees
will also be charged against this parcel to help
reimburse the parties responsible for installing the
water and sewer mains to their -current points.
5. A minimum of 68 three-inch caliper trees is required for
the `paved „square footage proposedr Please review the
landscaped., plan showing sizes and quantities of
plantings.
6. The existing lighting at the two Meridian Chevron
stations is not in compliance with City Ordinance, and
requests to conform have been ignored. Particular
attention needs to be paid to lighting plans.
7. A minimum 35 -foot -wide landscape setback beyond required
right-of-way on Eagle Road is required as a condition of
annexation.
8. The proposed. 'roadway north of the proposed Idaho Power
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14
ANNEXATION AND ZONING —EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
Credit Unidn needs to be dedicated as a public roadway
with a stub to the west. Future development in this
area will need to have, proper access to the traffic
signal. Applicant shall be .-responsible to linstall a
water main within the right-of-way of- the new street
along the north boundary of the proposed site. Location
and sizing of the new main should be coordinated with
the Meridian Water Department.
9. No signage details were submitted. Detailed signage
plans must be included as part of this application for
review and approval.
10. A deyvelopment agreement is required as a- condition of
annexation.
31. The Meridian Sewer Department comments were as follows:
That pretreatment will be required and addressed on the building
permit application redlines.
32. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted
comments requiring a Land Use Change/Site Development application
be filed for review. Additional comments were that all laterals
and wasteways must be protected. All municipal surface drainage
must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site',
the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review the drainage
plans. The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. It is
recommended that irrigation water be made available to all
developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
33. The Central District Health submitted comments, which
respective comments are as follows: After written approval from the
appropriate entities were submitted they could approve the proposal
for central sewage and central water. They also require plans be
submitted for a plan review for `a food establishment. The
stormwater run-off will be managed with an appropriate Best
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
e.
Management.Practice.
34. The Meridian Fire Department submitted the comments that
this would not affect th'e Meridian Fire Department. An additional
comment was that all codes would need to be met, such as water
r
t
supplies, sprinkler systems and hydrants.
35. The State of Idaho Transportation Department's letter to
Doug Houston of Olson & Associates Architects included the
following comments: That the proposed approach in the full control
of access area is not acceptable. The full control area is
necessary to maintain adequate traffic operations on Eagle Road in
the vicinity of the interchange. The approach location could be
moved to the north to provide an access that would be acceptable in
the partial control of access area.
36L. The Ada County Highway District Staff submitted roadway
proposals. The Ada County Highway District Board did not approve
or submit a final -determination of the roadway project for this
development.
37.` The Meridian Police Department had no comments.
38. The,propertyis adjacent and abutting the present city
limits of the City of Meridian.
39." The property which is the subject of this application is
within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian.
4
40. The entire parcel of the property is included within the
Meridian Urban Service Planning Area, as the Urban Service Planning
r
Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
41. The property can be physically 'serviced with City water
FINDINGS OF FACT AND.CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16
ANNEXATION AND ZONING-- EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
and sewer, if applicant extends the lines.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. All the procedural requirements of the Local Planning
Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met;
G
including the mailing of notice to owners of! property within 300
feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property.
2. The City of Meridian has authority to annex land
pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-222 and Section 11-2-417 of the
Revised and, Compiled„ Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The
exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative
function.
3. The Planningr and Zoning' commission has judged this
annexation and zoning application under Idaho Code Section '50-222,
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, Meridian City Ordinances,
Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted
I
to it and things of which it may take judicial notice.
4. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing
requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the
Ordinances of the City of Meridian.
5. The Commission may take judicialL notice of government
ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within
the City and State.
6. The land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to
l '
the present city limits,of the City of Meridian, and the annexation
would not be a shoestring annexation.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page•17
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
7. The annexation application has been initiated by the
Applicant, and is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian.
8. Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population
increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for
agricultural uses to be developed into commercial uses' and other
uses.
9. The following, pertinent statements are made in the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are specifically applicable to this
Application:
1. Under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS at page 17
Retail, commercial and office development are
frequent partners within Commercial Activity
,Centers. In order to support residential and
industrial developments, areas should be set aside
as Commercial Activity Centers and their
development carefully guided.
Various commercial activity centers are
designated on the generalized land use map.
Planning policies pertaining to commercial activity
centers are presented in the land use chapter of
the plant
MIXED -PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT AREAS at page 17
Mixed use is a planning category which refers to
the coordinated development of several major uses
as part of a single project, such as specialty
retail/commercial, variable density residential,
offices,` motels, industrial, service, commercial,
and public and semi-public uses. Certain areas
have been designated for mixed -planned uses. The
development of mixed and planned compatible land
uses should be carefully guided through specific
project plans, in accordance with the mixed-use
policies contained in the Land Use chapter of the
Plan.
Economic Development Goal Statement
Policies, Page 18
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18•
ANNEXATION AND ZONING = EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
• • ,
1.1 The 1City of Meridian shall make every effort
to create a positive atmosphere which
encourages industrial and commercial
enterprises to locate in Meridian.
1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to
set aside areas where commercial and
industrial interests and activities are to
dominate.
1.3 The character, site improvements and type of
` new commercial or industrial developments
should be harmonized with the natural
environment and respect the unique needs and
features of each area.
1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not
in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
1.6 It is' the policy of the City of Meridian to
support shopping facilities which are
effectively integrated into new or existing
residential areas, and plan for new shopping
centers as growth and development warrant.
(Emphasis added.)
2. Under LAND USE.
EXISTING CONDITIONS, Page 21
Commercial and retail areas are established along
major arterials, and include small commercial
center and individual businesses. Uses include
retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited
manufacturing.
Area of,Impact, Page 22
Comprehensive Plan Map
The proposed future land use delineations for the
impact area are shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map
- Generalized Land Uses, The land use element
is based upon these objectives:
4. Planned mixed uses along I-84, Franklin Road,
U.P. Railroad, and Fairview Avenue corridors.
(Emphasis added.)
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS, Page 25
In all 'cases, the locations of Commercial Activity
Centers should be guided by performance and
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19
ANNEXATION AND ZONING _ EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
0
developments standards. These standards consider,
among other aspects:
1. Traffic Volume and Type
2. Trip Generation
3. Impacts on'`Arterial Street System
4. Proximity to Other Commercial Development
S. Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas
6. Accessibility of Site
7. Parking Demands
8. Pedestrian Circulation
9. Available Utility Systems
10. Aesthetics (Design Considerations)
11. Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses
12.f, Internal Circulation Design
13. Drainage
COMMERCIAL POLICIES, Page 26
4.6U Community shopping centers will be
encouraged to locate at arterial intersections
and near high -traffic intensity areas.
(Emphasis added.)
3. Under TRANSPORTATION, Page 43
Existing Conditions
a. Eagle Road, North of Overland, is listed
as a principal arterial
4. 'Under COMMUNITY DESIGN, at Page 71
Community Identification Goal Statement
Create visual quality and functional identity
for the City of Meridian and its surrounding
environment.
Policies
. 1.1 All commercial and industrial
..developments should be reviewed by the City
for adequate site planning.
i
1.3 Open space areas within all development
should be encouraged.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW = Page 20
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
1.4 Major entrances to the City should be
enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land
uses along these entrances should be screened
from view.
Special Community Desiqn Areas Goal Statement
2.1U Require businesses and government to
install and maintain landscaping.
2.2U Encourage area beautification through
uniform sign `design that enhances the
community.
2.3U Encourage the beautification of streets,.
parking lots, public lands, and state
highways.
2.50 Encourage the use of attractive open
space, landscaping, lighting, and street
furniture for the benefit of the public.
Entryway Corridors
F
Entryway corridors are arterial roadways
entering the community"that introduce both visitors
and residents to -Meridian. City -designated gateway
arteriais include the following streets:
p. Eagle Road (North and South entrances)
Entryway corridors are a community's front
door. It is acknowledged that the corridor's trees
(or lack thereof), commercial signage, and site
character provide the first, and often times the
i most lasting, impression of the,entire community.
Therefore, the entire community and, most
specifically its governing bodies, have the right
and the responsibility to guide the development and
redevelopment that occurs along entryway corridors.
Entrance,Corridors Goal Statement
Promote; encourage, i develop and maintain
aesthetically pleasing entrances to the City of
Meridian.
Policies
4.2U Support ACHD corridor development standards
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
a
for the entryways to the City.
4.3U Use the Comprehensive Plan, subdivision
regulations, and zoning to discourage strip
development and encourage clustered, landscaped
business or residential development on entrance
corridors.
4.4U Encourage landscaped setbacks for new
development on entrance corridors. The City shall
require, as a condition of development approval,
landscaping along all entrance corridors.
Quality of Environment Goal Statement
.Policies
5.2U Ensure that all new development enhances
rather than detracts from the visual quality of its
surroundings, especially in areas of prominent
visibility.
10. The property is included within an area designated on
the Generalized Land Use Map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as
a Mixed/Planned Use Development area and a commercial designation
is just to the south of the parcel.
11. The requested zoning of General Retail and Service
Commercial, (C -G) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B.
11. as follows:
(C -G) General -Retail and Service Commercial: The purpose of
the (C-G)"District is to provide for commercial uses which are
customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a
building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed
commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are
located in` close proximity to major highway or arterial
streets; to fulfill the need of travel -related services as
well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring
public. All such districts shall be connected to the
Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian, and
shall not constitute strip commercial development and
encourage clustering of commercial development.
12. That Section 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL,
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22
ANNEXATION AND ZONING EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
a:
B, Commercial, lists commercial uses allowed in the various zoning
districts of the City; that drive-thru's are listed as conditional
uses in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) district.
13. That the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under LAND
USE, Mixed -Use Area at Eagle Road, in 5.16U, states that all
development requests will be subject to development review and
conditional use permit processing to insure neighborhood
compatibility.
14. Therefore, by the authority of the City of Meridian
i
under the Comprehensive Plan, a conditional use permit is required
for Applicant to construct and operate any stores or facilities on
this parcel of land.
15. That Planned' Development is defined in 11-2-403 B, at
k
page 20 of the Zoning Ordinance booklet, as follows:
An area of land which is developed as a single entity for a
number of uses in combination with or exclusive of other
supportive use's.) A PD may be entirely residential,
industrial, or commercial or a mixture of compatible uses. A
PD does not necessarily correspond to lot size, bulk, density,
lot coverage required, open space or type of residential,
commercial or industrial uses as established in any one or
more created districts or this Ordinance.
and a Planned General Development is defined as follows:
A development riot otherwise distinguished under Planned
Commercial, Industrial, Residential Developments, or in which
the proposed use 'of interior and exterior spaces requires
unusual design flexibility to achieve a completely logical and
complimentary conjunction of uses and functions. This PD
classification applies to essential public services, public or
private recreation facilities, institutional uses, community
facilities or a PD which includes a mix of residential,
commercial or industrial uses.
and a Planned Commercial Development is defined as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 23
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
Any development in which the principal use of land is for
commercial purposes.
16. That in 199'2 the Idaho. State Legislature passed
amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code,
relating to subdivision ordinances, states as,follows:
Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects
of subdivision development on the ability of political
subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to
deliver services without compromising quality of service
delivery to current residents or imposing substantial
additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the
subdivision.
that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in
population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being
able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer,
parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those
F.
moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase
in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School
District which provide', school service to current and future
residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in
population, and the housing for that population, does not
sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost -of providing
fire, police,, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and
recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in
population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for
school services to current and future students; that the industrial
and commercial developments do provide taxes for providing fire,
police, emergency health';care, water, sewer, parks and recreational
services for people that are here, and which will come here.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
i >
17. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and
direction of the Idaho' State Legislature, the City may impose
either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property,
which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all lots in
the City, because of, the imperilment to the health, welfare, and
safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian.
18. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows:
Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to
incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial
or industrial uses` to screen the view from residential
properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet
(201) wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right
of way or utility easement.
19. That Section 11-9-605 L states, in part, as follows:
All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of
natural waterways, intersecting, crossing, or lying adjacent
and' contiguous, or which canals, ditches or laterals touch
either or both sides of the area being subdivided, shall be
covered and enclosed with tiling or other covering equivalent
in ability to detour access to said ditch, lateral or canal.
20. That 11-9-607,A, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in
part as follows:
The City's policy is to encourage developers of land
development and construction projects to utilize the
provisions of this Section to achieve the'
*following:
1. A development pattern in accord with the goals,
objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan . . .
5. A more convenient pattern of commercial, residential and
industrial uses as well as public services which support
such uses.
21. That 11-9-607 E, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in
part as follows:
A PD shall be allowed only as a Conditional Use in each
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -,EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
district subject to the standards and procedure's set forth in
the Section. A PD shall be governed by the regulations of the
district or districts in which said PD is located. The
approval of the Final Development Plan for a PD may provide
for such exceptions from the district regulations governing
use, density, area, bulk, parking, signs, and other
regulations as may be desirable to achieve the objectives of
the proposed PD, provided such exceptions are consistent with
the standards and criteria contained in this Section.
22. That 11-9-607 F, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in
part a's follows:
1. Planned Developments - Planned developments shall be
subject to ,'requirements set forth in the Zoning
Ordinance and also subject to all provisions within this
Ordinance. . .
8. Financial Guarantees - The developer ,shall posts
financial guarantees for all approved on-site
improvements if required pursuant to 9-606 C.
23. Since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative
function, the `City has authority tot place conditions upon the
annexation of land. See Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105
Idaho 65, 665 P2d 1075 (1983).
24. The development of the annexed land, if annexed, shall
meet and comply with 'the Ordinances of the City of Meridian
including, but not limited to: Section 11-9-616 which pertains to
'development time schedules and requirements; Section 11-9-605 M,
which pertains to the piping of ditches; and Section 11-9-606 B
14., which pertains to pressurized irrigation systems.
25. The development of the property shall be subject to and
controlled by the Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinance
of the City of Meridian.
26. Section 11-2-417 D of the Zoning and Development
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONSOFLAW - Page 26
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -'EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
3
Ordinance provides in part,as follows:
If property is annexed and zoned, the City may require
or permit, as a condition of the zoning, that an owner
or developer make a written commitment concerning the
use or development of the subject property. If a
commitment is required or permitted, it shall be
recorded in the office of the Ada County Recorder and
shall take ,.effect upon the adoption of the ordinance
annexing and zoning the property, or prior if agreed to
by the owner of the parcel.
It is concluded, however, that it is more appropriate to enter into
a development agreement' for the.. development of the' property, and
therefore as a condition of annexation, a development agreement
must be entered into prior to development of the property or
issuance of final plat approval.
27. As a condition of annexation and the zoning of (C -G)
General Retail and Service Commercial, the Applicant shall enter
into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-
417 D. The development'agreement shall address, but not be limited
to, the following matters:
a. Inclusion into the development the requirements of
11-9-605;
b. Payment `by the Applicant, or if required, any
successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors
or personal representatives, of any impact,
development, or transfer fee, adopted by the City;
C. Addressing the property access linkage, screening,
buffering, transitional land uses and traffic
study;
d. 'An impact fee, or fees for fire, police; emergency
health care, water, sewer, and parks and recreation
services'as determined by the City;
e., Appropriate berming and landscaping;
4
f. Submission and approval of any required plats;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 27
ANNEXATION AND -ZONING';- EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
rd
g. Submission and approval of individual building,
drainage, lighting, parking, and other
developmental plans of the property;
h. Harmonizing and integrating the site improvements
with the surrounding residential development and
other development;
i. Addressing and complying with the present general
and site specific comments of and the comments
hereafter made by the Planning and Zoning
Administrator;
j. Addressing and complying with the present general
and site specific comments of and the comments
hereafter made by the City Engineer and the
Assistant to the City Engineer;
k. Addressing and complying with the comments and
requirements of the Ada County Highway District;
1. Addressing and complying with the comments and
requirements of other governmental agencies
submitting comments;
M. The sewer and water requirements;`
n. Traffic' plans and access into and out of any
development; and
o. Submission and approval of all signage plans
including but not limited to pole signs, reader
boards, banners, etc., and specifically any golden
arches" type signage associated with the McDonalds
and an ,outside signage associated with the Chevron
Gas Stations. These conditions shall be in
addition to the requirements of Meridian's sign
ordinance.
I
p. Any other items or matters deemed necessary by the
City Staff, including design review of all
development, and conditional use processing.
28. That Section 11-2-417 D of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance `
states that a development agreement should be recorded in the
office of the Ada County Recorder and take effect upon the adoption
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 28
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
of the ordinance annexing and zoning the property, or prior if
agreed"to by the owner of the parcel. That it has been the
experience of the City that development agreements'are difficult to
enter into prior to the annexation ordinance being passed; that it
is concluded that the development agreement shall be entered into
prior to the final plat being approved and prior to issuance of any
building permits.
29. The development of the property as a (C -G) General
Retail and Service Commercial District, as requested by the
Applicant, would be `compatible to the development in the
.surrounding area.
30. It is therefore concluded that the annexing and zoning
of the property is in 'the best interest of the City of Meridian,
and it is concluded that the annexation shall be conditioned upon
meeting the requirements of these Findings'of Fact and Conclusions
of Law and if they are'not met the land may be de -annexed.
31. The requirements of the Meridian City Engineer, Meridian
Planning, and Zoning Administrator, Meridian Water District,
Meridian Fire Department, Ada County Highway District, Central
District Health Department, ''the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District and other governmental agencies shall be met and addressed
in a development agreement. -
32. All ditches`, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a
condition of annexation and if not so tiled, the property shall be
subject to de -annexation.
33. Pressurized- irrigation shall be installed and
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 29
ANNEXATION AND ZONING'- EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
constructed, and if not so done the property shall be subject to
de -annexation.
34. The Applicant, shall be required to connect the property
to Meridian water and sewer, extend the water and sewer lines to
serve the property, and ,resolve how the water and sewer mains will
serve the property, all of which shall be at the Applicant's, or
its successor's, or successors' cost and expense. Said water and
sewer requirements shall be performed on or before the time that
the Applicant or its successor, or successors desire to use the
property or place a user on the property.
35. These conditions shall run with the land and bind the
Applicant and its successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors
or personal representatives.
36. With compliance of the conditions and requirements
contained herein, the annexation and zoning of the property as (C-
G) General Retail and Service Commercial District would be in the
best interest of the City of Meridian.
37. If these conditions of approval are not met, the
property shall not be 'annexed "or if already annexed, it shall be
de -annexed.
.,
t
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 30
ANNEXATION AND ZONING - :EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
V
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF;LAW
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian
hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law.
ROLL CALL'
COMMISSIONER BORUP' VOTED
COMMISSIONER DeWEERD VOTED
E
ti
COMMISSIONER SMITH VOTED
COMMISSIONER=NELSON VOTED
CHAIRMAN MACCOY (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
A
DECISION`AND RECOMMENDATION
The Planning -and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the
property set forth in'the application be approved by the City
Council for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in
these Findings of Factand Conclusions of Law, including that the
Applicant or its successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors
or personal representatives enter into a development agreement;
that if the Applicant isnot agreeable with these Findings of Fact
and Conclusions of Law and/or isnot agreeable with entering into a
development agreement,"the property should not'be annexed.
LOTION:
APPROVED : '��ia
DISAPPROVED:
7-20-98 -- Final f
a ,p
It
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 31
ANNEXATION AND ZONING -!EAGLE PARTNERS LLC
i
t
tPINK & BUTUIR
,Attorneys and Counselors at Law
1�
(208) 388-1000 607 North 8th Street, Suite 310
Facsimile (208) 388-1001 P.O. Box 639
Boise, Idaho 83701
sbattys@primenet.com § '
t
3
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Mayor & City Council Members
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho +83642
Re:. Eagle Partners
Our File No.: 496.14
July 20, 1998
Michael T. Spink
388-1092
JoAnn C. Butler
388-1093
FF"IvED
J U L 2 3 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
As you may know, this firm is representing Eagle Partners in connection with its application
for annexation, zoning and conditional use for the property located at the corner of Eagle and Magic
View Roads. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission has approved the conditional use for
the project and has recommended that the City Council approve the annexation and zoning of this
property., We will be meeting w4th'the City Council in connection with this recommendation on
Tuesday, July 21.
We look forward to discussing this project with the City Council on -Tuesday. For the
convenience of the Mayor and Council Members, and as allowed under Idaho law, we have prepared
suggested Findings of Fact (enclosed) to supplement your own, which Findings reference the
standards adopted by Meridian. We have also provided certified transcripts from the April 17 and
June 9, 1998 hearings before the Planning & Zoning Commission.
We believe that the factual circumstances surrounding the Eagle Partners' project clearly
shows that there is substantial evidence on the record as a whole to support a decision by Meridian to
annex the property into MeridianRand to zone it General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G).
Sincerely,
P i
JoAnn C. Butler
JCB:la
Enclosure
cc: (via Hand Delivery)
John Prior
Eagle Partners
Steve Brown
Billy Ray Strite
Shari Stiles
i •
SPINK & BUTLER
Attorneys and Counselors at Law
(208) 388-1000
607 North 8th Street, Suite 310
Michael T. Spink
Facsimile (208) 388-1001
P. O. Box 639
Boise, Idaho 83701
388-1092
JoAnn C. Butler
sbattys@primenet.com
388-1093
RECEIVE])
July 22, 1998
J U L 2 3 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Will Berg, City Clerk
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Eagle Partners
Our File No.: 496.14
Dear Will:
As requested, enclosed
F
isa copy of the letter that I sent to the Mayor and City Council
Members on July 20, 1998.
Sincerely,
JoAnn C. Butler
JCB:jcb
Enclosure
t
q M61 1 0 ;M4
SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, President
GARY E. RICHARDSON, Vice President
SHERRY R. HUBER, Secretary
Stephen C. Brown, Esq. I
Ellis, Brown & Sheils, Chartered#
P.O. Box 388
Boise, ID 83701 I
Re: MCU-43-97/IFA-74 -98 ,
Dear Mr. Brown:
June 11, 1998
Eagle Partners Eagle Road/St. Luke's Driveway
Thank you for your letter of June 4, 1998. The Highway District has agreed in principle to
acquire a substantial amount of right-of-way along the north edge of your client's property in
order to construct a collector roadway into the developing property west of Eagle Partners'.
While the cost you describe in your.letter seems high by comparison with others in the vicinity,
the District will tentatively accept this value in view of the closing statement you provided.
This transaction will obviously involve a substantial amount of public,funds, so I am sure that
your clients will not object to certain procedures to assure`the expenditure is being made
properly. For example,'please provide me with a copy of a recorded Warranty Deed that shows
the correct ownership of the parcel and a surveyor's calculation of tiie'area of the parcel for
confirmation of the land value.
The preliminary layout of the proposed street will require a 108 -foot wide strip across the north
end of the property. The precise details and dimensions of the acquisition will be determined
through the conditional use permit review process after the City of Meridian makes a decision
on the appropriate zoning of the property.
Thank you and your clients for the, patience and understanding you have exhibited during this
drawn-out procedure. The potential major development and traffic generation volumes from
this area quite caught the City and Ethe District by surprise, and we did not have ready answers
to the questions that arose.
I
In future correspondence, please refer to IFA -74-98 when the correspondence deals with the
right-of-way acquisition process. ,
Sin rely, i
arry Sal
Impact ee Administrator 1.
cc w/attach.: Chron .
Traffic Services • `
Attorney
Shari'Stiles/City"`df'Meridian '�
Impact Fee Corresp. `
Director
' Commission x
ada county highway district ImpactWa4397.10
318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714-6499
Phone (208) 387-6100 FAX (208) 345-7650 • E-mail: tellus@achd.ada.id.us
REcElvIED
J U L 2 1 1998
a
r CITY OF MERIDIAN
July 21,
.1998
ill
-Illy
Meridian City Council, a
I live in the Greenhill estates subdivision. I have many concerns about the proposal to
put a Chevron and McDonalds adjacent to our subdivision. I am concerned that we do
not have a long term plan for the area between the freeway and our neighborhood. We
'
are looking at only 5 acres at a time. I would like to ask that you develop a plan for all
of the area between Greenhill'and the interstate. The city needs to look at the big picture
and not just one parcel at a time. As an existing neighborhood we deserve to be protected
from a 24 hour noisy, commercial development. We need to have a buffer between our
neighborhood and a busy noisy operation: Texaco is close enough!
I am also concerned about the noise. I lay in my bed at night and listen to the music
pumping out of the speakers at the Texaco. I hear car doors being shut and loud
conversations. I -also- hear and feel the vibrations from the semi truck that idle their
engines all hours,ofthe night. Texaco is close enough!
Security is also a,problem. 24 hour gas stations tend to bring in some pretty shady
characters at night. I don't think we need to have more strangers any closer to our yards.
Our neighborhood is easily accessible to any thief who would like to walk into our
garages and homes. I feel that a a 24 hour gas station is not even anoptionthis close to
where people live.
#y
Another concern I have is one of vanity. I want to be proud to say I live in Meridian. But
as Meridian has become the fast food capital of Idaho, it is getting embarrassing . Do we
k
want all visitors to our town to see that we have a McDonalds every mile? This will be
the `third McDonalds in the area.? Also, another gas station brings in more trucks to an:r
area that is starting to look and, sound like a truck -stop.
I am opposed'to the Chevro`n/McDonalds project and ask that a long term plan be made
►
ibpa
concerning the area of land that is between the Greenhill neighborhood and the interstate.
Thank you,
47
Ann Bowen
3067 Autumn Way a.
Meridian Idaho
t,
j
887-0889
,•
e
f
t
i-
BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ele- -
EAGLE PARTNERS L.L.C. J
ANNEXATION . AND ZONING J U L 2 1 1998
LOT 1 OF AMENDED MAGIC VIEW SUBDIVISION CITY OF MERIDIAN
603 SOUTH EAGLE ROAD
;7
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW'
a
The above entitled annexation and zoning application having
come on for consideration, by the Planning and Zoning Commission and
the City Council on various dates and at the hour of 7:30 o'clock
p.m., or a3 soon as possible thereafter, on said dates, and
continued to, and for, additional public hearings, all at the
meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the
Petitioner's representative, Billy Ray Strite, of BRS Architects,
appearing and the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City
Council having heard and taken oral and written testimony and
having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning
t
Commission makes the following amendments:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That notice of the time and place of the public hearing
on the annexation and .zoning, and a summary of the proposal under
consideration, (all hereafter referred to as the "notice") was
mailed, by certified mail, to property owners within the area under
EAGLE PARTNERS - ANNEXATION AND ZONING PAGE - 1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
�4D Z Y r-
JUS 2 1 1998 ASG 1 3X96
CITY qF MERIDIAN q'j1( Q���IAN
IDAHO WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN
Prepared by the:
Division of Environmental Quality u
1410 North Hilton
Boise, Idaho 83706-1290
In cooperation with the:
Idaho Wellhead Protection Work Group
MARCH 1996
4
Pc T.YED
PETITION JULCITY OF MERIDIAN*
We the undersigned property owners and residents of Greenhill Estates Subdivision
in Meridian, Idaho, do hereby petition the City Council of Meridian, Idaho, to reject
Application of Eagle Partners, LLC, for annexation and zoning to construct a
Chevron C -Store, McDonalds fastfood restaurant and Idaho Power Credit Union at
the corner of Magic View Drive and Eagle Rd in Meridian, ID.
A virtually identical proposal, made by the identical applicant, was rejected by the
Meridian City Council in February,.'1997, by a unanimous NO vote. No facts supporting
e
the denial in 1997 have changed. No new facts have arisen which could support
reversing that decision in the ten (10) months between the original decision and this
application or the 17 months to now.
We realize'that this area will develop, but believe it should develop as a buffer between
the existing residential neighborhood of Greenhill Estates, containing 100 + homes,
and higher use commercial that will most likely go south of Magic View Dr. The Meridian
Comprehensive Plan"REQUIRES that development be -in harmony with the existing
uses. This proposal provides no measurable buffer and`is not in harmony with our
neighborhood.
This development will exacerbate the existing noise levels, increase traffic flows
behind existing residential housing, create a 24 hour daylight situation for the
neighborhood, create a safety hazard for children from increased traffic from transient
pedestrian traffic and significantly rdevalue existing property values in a well
established and premier subdivision:
A.
This application does not comply with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. We believe
that it must be denied. Meridian does not need another gas station and more french
fries.
NAME
ADDRESS
TEL NR..
PETITION Meridian City Coci
I
NAME
Re: Eagle partners LLC Appi ttion Page 2 J?F;cF"vE1D
ADDRESS
J U L 2 1 1998
TEL NR. CITY OF''WRIDIAN.
PETITION
]RFC1E;TWDc rn
JUL 2 t 199
CITY OF MERIDIAN
We the undersigned property owners and residents of Greenhill Estates Subdivision 01' Z
in Meridian, Idaho, do Hereby petition the City Council of Meridian, Idaho, to reject
'Application of Eagle Partners, LLC, for annexation and zoning to construct a
Chevron C -Store, McDonalds fast food restaurant and Idaho Power Credit Union at
the corner of Magic View Drive and Eagle Rd in Meridian, ID.
A virtually identical proposal,,made,by the identical applicant, was rejected by the
Meridian City Council in February, 1997, by a unanimous- NO vote. No facts supporting
the denial in 1997 have changed. No new facts have arisen which could support
reversing that decision in the ten (10) months between the original decision and this
application or the 17 months to now.
We realize that this area will develop, but believe it should develop as a buffer between
the existing residential neighborhood -of Greenhill Estates, containing 100,+ homes,
and higher use,commercial that will most likely go south of Magic View Dr. The Meridian
Comprehensive Plan REQUIRES that development be in harmony with the existing
uses. This proposal provides no measurable buffer and is not in harmony with our
neighborhood.
This development will exacerbate the existing noise levels, increase traffic flows
behind existing residential housing, create a 24 hour daylight situation for the
neighborhood, create a safety hazard for children from increased traffic from transient
pedestrian traffic and significantly devalue existing property values in a well
established and premier subdivision:
This application does not comply with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. We believe
that it must be denied. Meridian does not need another gas station and more french
C
fries.
NAME ADDRESS TEL NR.
PETITION Meridian City C*clil,-, Re: "Eagle Partners LLC Applittion Page 2
JUL 21.19 8
NAME ADDRESS TEL NR. CM OF NERIDIAN
2L
W, L
y cQ7
4
W7- 7�a:3
3
i {
clAdMk
i
PETITION,.
,} JOL 2 1 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN"
We the undersigned property owners and residents of Greenhill Estates Subdivision��
in Meridian, Idaho, do hereby petition the City Council of Meridian, Idaho, to reject
Application of Eagle Partners, LLC, for annexation and zoning to construct a
Chevron C-Store, McDonalds fast food restaurant and Idaho Power Credit Union at
:the dorner.of Magic View'Drive and Eagle Rd. in' Meridian,, ID. +_
A virtually-identical,.proposal, made. by.the.identical applicant,"_was>rejected by.the_ _
Meridian City Council in February, 1997, by a unanimous NO vote. No facts supporting
,the denial in.1997;have changed. No new fadts have arisen which could support
reversing that decision in the ten (10) months.between the original decision and this
Application or thex17,months to-now.-
'We ebalize'that
o-now:-'Werealize`that this'area will develop, but believe'it should develop as°a buffer between LLf-
the existing residential neighborhood of Greenhill Estates, containing 100 + homes,
and higher, use Voinmercial that'will most likely go south of Magic View'Dr.-ThecMeridian
Comprehensive Plan REQUIRES that development be in harmony with the existing
Uses'. This proposal provides no measurable buffer and is not in harmony with our °
neighborhood.- 4'
This development will exacerbate the existing noise levels, increase traffic flows
behind existing residential housing, create a 24 hour daylight situation for the
neighborhood, create-a safety hazard for children from increased traffic from transient
*pedestrian traffic,and significantly devalue existing property values in a well
established and premier subdivision.X
This application does not comply with the,.Meridian Comprehensive Plan. We believe_ M
that it must be denied. Meridian does not need another gas station and more french
fries.
NAME
ADDRESS— --
TEL.NR.- w -
fi UP -2 r -i
1—
J U L 2 1 1998
-PETITION
CITY -OF MERIDM
=-
we,the undersigned property owners and residents of Greenhill Estates Subdivision
in Meridian, Idaho, do hereby petition'the City Council of Meridian, Idaho, to reject
Application of Eagle Partners, LLC, for annexation and zoning to construct a
Chevron C -Store, McDonalds fastfood restaurant and Idaho Power Credit Union at
k
the corner of Magic View Drive and Eagle Rd in Meridian, ID.
A virtually identical proposal, made by the identical applicant, was rejected by the
Meridian City Council, in February, 1997, by a unanimous NO vote.. No facts supporting
the denial in 1997 have changed. No new facts have arisen` which could support
reversing,' that decision in the ten (10) months between the original decision and this
application or the 17 months to now..
We realize that this area will develop, but believe it should develop as a buffer between
the existing residential neighborhood of Greenhill Estates, containing 100 + homes,
and higher use commercial that will most likely go southof Magic View Dr. The Meridian
Comprehensive Plan REQUIRES that development be in harmony with the existing
uses. This proposal provides no,measurable buffer and is not in harmony with our
neighborhood.
This development will exacerbate the existing noise levels, increase traffic flows
behind existing residential housing, create a 24 hour daylight situation -for the
neighborhood, create a safety hazard for children from increased traffic from transient
pedestrian traffic and, significantly devalue existing property values in a well
established and premier subdivision.
k
This application does not comply with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. We believe
that it must be denied. Meridian does not need another gas station and moreftench
fries.
NAME
ADDRESS
TEL NR.
i
J
JUL2 1, 1998PETITION
CITY OF�MERIDIAN
We the undersigned property owners and residents of Greenhill Estates Subdivision O!
in Meridian, Idaho, do hereby petition the City` Council of Meridian, Idaho, to reject
Application of Eagle Partners, LLC, for annexation and zoning to construct a
Chevron C -Store; McDonalds fast food restaurant and Idaho Power Credit Union at
the corner of Mag' ic°View°Drive and -Eagle Rd in -Meridian ID -- -w
A Artually`identical proposal, made -by the identical appli'cant; was -rejected, by the
Meridian City Council in -February, 1997, by,a unanimous NO vote: No facts supporting
the deniai'iri 1997`have changed:`'No new`facts'have arisen` -which could'support— --
reversing that decision in the ten (10) months between the original decision and this
application or.the 17'months to now. -
We`realize that this area will -develop, but'believe`ititiould'develop as a,buffer between "
the existing residential neighborhood of Greenhill Estates; contain—'ih M0 + homes,
and higher use commercial that will most likely ,go'south of Magic View Dr. The Meridian
Comprehensive'Plan REQUIRES that development be in harmony with the existing
uses. This proposal provides no measurable buffer and is' not in harmony with our
neighborhood.
This,development`will exacerbate the existing noise levels, increase traffic flows,
behind existing residential housing, create a 24 hour daylight situation for the
.neigl borhood, create a safety -hazard for:children from.increased,traffic.from transient._
pedestrian traffic and significantly devalue existing property values in a well
established -aind`prem ier.subdivision.
.-.-
This-application,does,not comply -with the Meridian".Comprehensive~Plan.-We believe_.
that it must be denied. Meridian does not need another gas station and more french
fries:---
--'-
ries:._-.
—,......,_ NAME- w,. a ADDRESS _ - x , ..,., —....,_.,.>_,TEL -NR . _.
g- 33
Z/O -70
I",
' - 5-9 �.
,J
PETITION Meridian City ALI Re: Eagle Partners LLC Application Page 2
k
J U L 2 1 1998
4
NAME ADDRESS TEL NR. CITY OF MERIDIAN
k
A/'-/ o S�p 441 W,;,jj
SAX R -4, z�r
l�
e
�
f
1.
�i RECErYIED
PETITION
J U L 2 1199$
CITY `OF ��MO0ERIDIAN
We the undersigned property owners and residents of Greenhill Estates Subdivision
i�U
in Meridian, Idaho, do hereby, petition the City Council of Meridian, Idaho, to reject
Application of Eagle Partners, LLC, for annexation and zoning to construct a
Chevron C -Store, McDonalds fast food restaurant and'ldaho Power Credit Union at {
the corner of Magic View Drive and Eagle Rd in Meridian, ID.
F'
A virtually identical proposal, made by the identical applicant, was rejected by the
Meridian City Council in February, 1997, by a unanimous NO vote. No facts supporting
the denial in 1997 have changed. No new facts have arisen which could support
reversing,that decision in the ten (10) months between the original decision and this
application or the 17 months to now.
We realize that this area will develop, but believe it should develop as a buffer between
the existing residential neighborhood of Greenhill Estates, containing 100 + homes,
and higher use commercial that will most likely go south of Magic View Dr. The Meridian
Comprehensive Plan REQUIRES that development be in, harmony with the existing
uses. This proposal provides no measurable buffer and is notin harmony with our
neighborhood.
I'
'this development will exacerbate the existing noise levels, increase traffic flows
behind existing residential housing, create�a 24 hour daylight situation for the
neighborhood, create a safety hazard for children from increased traffic from transient
pedestrian traffic and significantly devalue existing property values in a well
established and premier subdivision.
This application does not comply with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. We believe
4,
that it must be denied. Meridian does not need another gas station and more french
fries.
NAME ADDRESS
ljk� /�,, w,.An,
TEL NR.
PETITION Meridian City Ancil Re: ,'Eagle Partners LLC A fation Page 2 j?P;cEtVF41D
pp 9
J U L 21 1998
NAME ADDRESS TEL NR. CITY OF MERIDIAN
I �
1.,� rW11111116L
! l,MR ®RIZ VMS W NONA►.�l/�
do�v d)I�IS
Nil
F
PETITION
0
IZEC MD
J U L 2 1 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN
We the undersigned property owners and residents of,Greenhill Estates Subdivision
in Meridian, Idaho, do hereby petition the City Council of Meridian, Idaho, to reject
Application of Eagle Partners, LLC, for annexation and zoning to construct a
Chevron C -Store, McDonalds fast food restaurant and Idaho Power Credit Union at
the corner of Magic View Drive and Eagle Rd in Meridian, ID.
A virtually identical proposal, made by the identical applicant, was rejected by the
Meridian City Council in February, 1997, by a unanimous NO vote. No facts supporting
the denial in 1997 have changed. No new facts have arisen which could support
reversing that decision in the ten (10) months between the original decision and this
application or the 17 months to now.
We realize that this area will develop, but believe it should develop as a buffer between
the existing residential neighborhood of Greenhill Estates, containing 100 + homes,
and higher use commercial that will most likely go south of Magic View Dr. The Meridian
Comprehensive Plan REQUIRES that development be in harmony with the existing
uses. This proposal provides no'measurable buffer and is not in harmony with our
neighborhood.
This development will exacerbate the existing noise levels, increase traffic flows
behind existing residential housing, create a 24 hour daylight situation for the
neighborhood, create a safety hazard for children from increased traffic from transient
pedestrian traffic and significantly devalue existing property values in a well
established and premier subdivision.
This application does not comply with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. We believe
that it must be denied. Meridian does not need another gas station and more french
fries.
NAME
ADDRESS
TEL NR.
i,�u-�.-� G .!�%c.P�-•-�--- �' � 3 ' .�„� [.y �i ,�h e�Q;u-..,_. � �r 1- ' i s -i/
310cl ( W)% -7 f -G
'4 PETITION Meridian Ci CaTincil Re: Ea FBcvTvED
ty gle Partners LLC Application Page 2
J U L 21 1998
NAME ADDRESS E TEL NR. CITY OF MERIDIAN
:3eo C. �,7,S7
6,7- ,o(3
S'3'3' -J371
i
v
N
p �
y
j
PETITION
• RECEIVED ,
JUL 2 1 1598
CITY OF MERIDIAN
We the undersigned property owners and residents of Greenhill Estates Subdivision <f /�7_4
in Meridian, Idaho, do hereby petition the City Council of Meridian, Idaho, to reject
Application of Eagle Partners, LLC, for annexation and zoning to construct a
Chevron C -Store, McDonalds fast food restaurant and Idaho Power Credit Union at
the corner of Magic View Drive and Eagle Rd in Meridian, ID.
A virtually identical proposal, made by the identical applicant, was rejected by the
Meridian City Council in February, 1997, by a unanimous NO vote. No facts supporting
the denial in 1997 have changed. No new facts have arisen which could support
reversing that decision in the ten (10) months between the original decision and this
application or the 17 months to now.
We realize that this area will develop, but believe it should develop as a buffer between
the existing residential neighborhood of Greenhill Estates, containing 100 + homes,
and higher use commercial that will most likely go south of Magic View Dr. The Meridian
Comprehensive Plan REQUIRES that development be in harmony with the existing
uses. This proposal provides no measurable buffer and is not in harmony with our
neighborhood.
This development will exacerbate the existing noise levels, increase traffic flows
behind existing residential housing, create a 24 hour daylight situation for the
neighborhood, create a safety-haiard for children from increased traffic from transient
pedestrian, traffic and significantly devalue existing property values in a well
established and premier subdivision.
This application does not comply with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. We believe
that it must be denied. Meridian does not need another gas station and more french
fries.
NAME
ADDRESS
0
Q
TEL NR.
VA
0
3
PETITION Meridian City CoTi"ncil 'Re: Eagle Partners LLC Application Page 2
RECEIVY4D
fi
J U l 2 '1 1998
NAME ADDRESS TEL NR. CITY OF MERIDIAN
b a4--t.4A ( I ).AJC _ j �gg SO <f 0-1 I i A I C111 A yfy- ( Cx((l
d �
fi.
p
g
d �
fi.
g
4
d �
fi.
4
4.
d �
4
PcETYED
C,� s. � t,:,.� JUL 2 11998
PETITION ` 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN
We the undersigned property owners and residents of Greenhill Estates Subdivision
in Meridian, Idaho, do hereby petition the City Council of Meridian, Idaho, to reject
Application of Eagle Partners, LLC, for annexation and zoning to construct a
Chevron C -Store, McDonalds fast food restaurant and Idaho Power Credit Union at
the corner of Magic View Drive and Eagle Rd in Meridian, ID.
A virtually identical proposal, made by the identical applicalnt, was rejected by the
Meridian City Council in February, 1997, by a unanimous NO vote. No facts supporting
the denial in 1997 have changed. No new facts have arisen which could support
reversing that' decision in the ten'(10) months between the original decision and this
application or the 17 months to now.
We realize that this area will develop, but believe it should develop as a buffer between
the existing, residential neighborhood of Greenhill Estates, containing 100 f homes,
and higher use commercial that will most likely go south of Magic View Dr. The Meridian
Comprehensive Plan REQUIRES that development be in harmony with the existing
uses. This proposal provides no' measurable buffer and is not in harmony with our
neighborhood.
This development will exacerbate the existing noise levels, increase traffic flows
behind existing residential housing, create a 24 hour daylight situation for the
neighborhood, create a safety hazard for children from increased traffic from transient
pedestrian traffic and significantly'devalue existing property values in a well
established and premier subdivision.
This application does not comply with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. We believe
that it must be denied. Meridian does not need another gas station and more french
fries.
4
NAME ADDRESS TEL NR.,
0
I
PETITION Meridian City Council
NAME
Re: Eagle Partners LLC Application Page 2
R-EUME.X*47:Q)
J U L 2 1 1998
ADDRESS TEL NR. CITY OF MERIDIAN
a
T �
4
a
T �
JUN-23-1998(TUE) 12:49
TO:
CC:
FROM:
DATE:
TIME:
RE:
O'UR FILE NO.:
MESSAGE:
SPINK&BUTLER
2083881001
•
SPINK. & BUTLER
607 N. 8`4 Street, Suite 310
P.O. Box 639
Boise, Idaho 83701
208/388-1000
208/388-1001 (fax)
E-mail Address: sb=, a,nrimenet.com
FAX COVER SHEET
i
John Prior 884-4259
City Cleric, Will Berg 887-4813
JoAnn C. Butler
June 23, 199$
12:51 PM
Eagle Partners/Eagle and Magic View Roads
496.14
Please see the attached letter.
P. 001
Transmission is 2 pages, including chis cover sheet
Contact Lisa Arnold or Jackie Call -Hildebrand at (208) 388-1000
if the entire transmission is not received.
Original will X_ will not be sent via U.S. Mail.
The information contained in this transmission is attorney privileged and confidential information which is intended only for the
use of the individual or entity named above. If you have received this communication in error, please call the person and
number named above. Collect calls accepted.
1..
JUN 23 '98 12:54 2083881001 PAGE.01
JUN-23-1998(TUE) 12:49 SPINK&41ff LER 2083881001
SPINK & BUTLER
, Attorneys and Counselors at Law
(208) 388-1000 607 North 8th Strcct, Sure 310
P. O• Box 639
Facsimile (208) 388-1001 Boise, Idaho 83701
sbatty4primenet.com
June 23, 1998
VIA FACSIMILE
John Prior
City Attorney
33 East Idaho
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Eagle Partners/Eagle and Magic 'View Roads
Our file No.: 496.14
Dear John:
P. 002
Michael T. Spink
3884092
JoAnn C. Butler
388.1093
.FCENED
JUN 2 3 1998
CIS' OF MERIDIAN
I
As you are aware from my numerous appearances before the public bodies of Meridian,
this firm represents Eagle Partners in connection with the above -reference annexation, zoning,
and conditional use applications. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission has
recommended approval of these applications to the City Council_ The City Council was
originally scheduled to hear these applications on July'7.
Because Billy Ray Strite, the applicant's representative will be out of town on July 7, we
are respectfully requesting that the City Council hold its hearing on these matters on July 21,
1998. Would you please advise at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
,s
JoAnn C. Butler
JCB:jch
cc: Will Berg, [via fax]
JUN 23 '98 12:54 2083881001 PAGE.02
JUN-10-1998(WED) 12101 SPINK&BUTLER - 2083881001 P.001
•
SPINK & BUTLER
607 N. 8t" Street, Suite 310
P.O. Box 639
Boise, Idaho 83701
208/388-1000
208/388-1001 (fax)
E-mail Address: sbatty a&rimenet.com
FAX COVER SHEET
C3mTvED
JUN 10 1998
CIS' `F MERIDIAN
TO:
Shari Stiles
887-1297
CC:
John Prior
884-4259
Steve Eddy
345-7747
Steve Brown
345-9564
Terry Debban
(via mail)
Billy Ray Strite
336-8380
Dave Johnson
343-3391
FROM:
JoAnn C. Butler
DATE:
June 10, 1998
TIME:
I �'— PM
RE:
Eagle Partners/Eagle and Magic View Roads
OUR FILE NO.: 496.14
MESSAGE:
Please see the attached letter addressed to Shari Stiles regarding the above -referenced
matter.
Transmission is 2 pages, including this cover sheet.
Contact Lisa Arnold or Jackie Call -Hildebrand at (208) 388.1000
if the entire transmission is not received.
Original will _X_ will not be scat via U.S. Mail.
The information contained in this uza -mission is attorney privileged and confidential informus
ation Which is intended only for the e of the individual or entity
nomed above. if you have received this communication in error, please call the person and number named above. Collect calls accepted.
JUN 10 '98 12:01 2083881001 PAGE.01
JUN-10-1998(WED) 12:01 SPINK&BUTLER 2083881001 P.002
K
SPINK &- BUTLER
(208) 388.1000
Facsimile (208) 388-1001
sbattys®pnmCnct.com
VIA FACSIMILE
Shari Stiles
Meridian Planning & Zoning
200 E. Carlton
Meridian, ID 83642
Attorneys and Counselors at Law
607 North 8th Street, Suite 310
P. O. Sox 639
Boise, Idaho 6.3701
June 10, 1998
Re: Eagle Partners/Eagle and Magic View Roads
Our File No.: 496.14
Dear Shari:
Michael T Spiuk
388.1092
JoAnn C. Buticr
385-1093
As you know, last night the Meridian Planning & Zoning Conunission recommended
approval of the annexation and zoning, and approved the conditional use for the above -referenced
project. This project will now be heard by the City council.
The City Council will review the recommendation for annexation and zoning and will also
review a development agreement. My understanding is that Meridian has a form development
agreement and that I should amend that form and return it to both you and to John Prior for.review_
Would you please fax to me today a copy of the form document so that I can deliver to you an
amended version of the document well before the City Council hearing.
Please confirm for me that this City Council hearing will be held July 7, 1998.
Of course, please contact me if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
JoAnn C. Butler
JCB:jch
cc: John Prior [via fax]
Steve Eddy [via fax]
Dave Johnson [via fax]
Terry Debban [via mail]
Steve Brown [via fax]
Billy Ray Strite [via fax]
JUN 10 '98 12:01 2093881001 PRGE.02
got Ay,
ARCHITECTS
BRS Architects, A.I.A.
1087 West River Street, Suite 160
Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone 208 336-8376
Fax 208 336-8380
33 East 1dahb`Str&'tN`
Attn: Wil
Dear M
IS
Mr. sffW5.
`