1984 03-19e- - ~ ,
•
A G E N D A
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
March 19, 1984
ITEM:
Minutes of Previous Meeting Held March 5, 1984
APPROVED
1. Mr. Erich Knehans; Input on Paragon Steel Structures
2. Re-appointment of Wally Lovan to Economic Development Corp
Board of Directors - 3 Year Term
3. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
4. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Zoning & Development Ordinance
5. Air Quality Board - Information, Question & Answer Session
Mr. Dell Tredinnick
6. Department Reports
APPROVED
APPROVED
APPROVED
NO BUSINESS
Meridian Citv Council
March
Regular meetingof the Meridian City Council was called to order by Mayor Grant Kingsford
at 7: 30 p. m.
Council Members Present: Bill Brewer; Ron Tolsma; Bert Myers; Bob Giesler;
Others Present: Doug Nichols; Cedric Knehans; Erich Knehans; Vern. Schoen; Wally Weber;
Bruce Stuart; Steve Gratton; Gary Smith; Earl Ward; Kenny Bowers;
Gary Schaffer; Art Reinhart;Liz Rodosovich; Ron Spidell; Ray Hamming;
Dell Tredinnick;ROnald E. Weber; Wayne Crookston Jr.; Harriet G.;
Jack H. Niemann;
Minutes of the previous meeting held March 5, 1984, were approved as written.
Item
1 Mr. Erich Knehans; Input on Paragon Steel Structures, Home made of Steel
Mr. Knehans, representing Paragon Steel Structure, told the Council that he would like
their input on the possibility of the erection of the steel homes in Meridian. Knehans
said these would be occupied by his sons and their families.
Vern Schoen, City Building Inspector, told the Council that the UBC does not allow an
engineered structure, that these would be the same as a mobile home. Schoen siad that
this does not meet the codes that the City now has.
Knehans again expressed that they are requesting information and input only, not a
building permit.
Councilman Myers suggested that Knehans should work with Schoen on this.
Knehans said that Schoen had "refused" to see the buildings.
Knehans also said that the structure had been approved by the developer, with the use
of stucco siding.
Councilman Brewer said that he would like to see the City "give them a fair chance",
and "maintain an open mind", to see if there could be a workablesolution.
There was discussion. (Tape on File)
Knehans expressed that he would like to work up a presentation with slides and present
it to the Mayor and Council and Department heads at their convenience.
It was decided that Knehnas should contact City Clerk, Jack Niemann, on arrangements.
Item
2 Re-appointment of Wally Lovan to~BOard of Directors, Economic Development Corporation
Mayor Kingsford proposed the re-appointment of Wally Lovan to the Board of Directors,
Economic Development Corporation for a 3 year term.
The Motion was made by Brewer and seconded byMyers to approve of the Mayor's re-appointment
of Wally Lovan to the Board of Directors, Economic Development Corporation for a
3 year term.
Motion Carried: Brewer, yea; Tolsma, yea; Myers, yea; Giesler, yea;
~ ~
Meridian City Council 2. March 19, 1984
Item
3 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on Comprehensive Plan .Amendment
Mayor Kingsford: "Council members you have had the Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law prepared by our Attorney on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, are there any
comments?"
Brewer: "I would like to say that they are beautifully done."
The Motion was made by Brewer and seconded by Giesler to approve of the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment as .prepared by the
City Attorney.
Motion Carried: Brewer, yea; Tolsma, yea; Myers, yea; Giesler, yea;
Item
4 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on Zoning & DevelopmentOrdinance
Mayor Kingsford: "Council members you have also had the Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law prepared by our Attorney on the Zoning & Development Ordinance, are there any
comments on these?"
There was none.
The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Brewer to approve of the Findings of Fact
and Conclusions of Law on the Zoning & Development Ordinance as prepared by the City
Attorney.
Motion Carried: Brewer, yea; Tolsma, yea; Myers, yea; Giesler, yea;
Item
5 Air Quality Board - Information, Question & Answer Session
Mr. Dell Tredinnick, Mr.Art Reinhart, Mr. Ron Spidell, and Ms. Liz Rodosovich were
present representing the Air Quality Board.
Mr. Tredinnnick gave a visual presentation on the workings of the emmission testing,
and answer questions.
Mr. Tredinnick said that not everything has been worked out yet, and that this was
basically an information session, as to how things are coming along.
Item
6 Department Reports
There were no Department Reports.
Being there no other business to come before the Council .
The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Brewer to adjourn at 8:26 p.m.
Motion Carried: Brewer, yea; Tolsma, yea; Myers, yea; Giesler, yea;
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
GRANT KINGSFORD: MA R
a ~.
• " •
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
P~lERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AP4ENDMENTS
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Amendments to the 1978 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, herein-
after referred to as the "Plan", were initiated by the Meridian
Planning and Zoning Commission on the Commission's own initiative,
pursuant to the Plan and to Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code.
At the time that the amendments were initiated and considered by
the Commission, there was pending before the Commission and City
Council an application for annexation and zoning of land which was
proposed to be a regional shopping center. The application for
the regional shopping center was ultimately denied by the City
Council. The denial of the regional shopping center annexation
removed the necessity for, some of the "Amendments" originally
recommended by the Commission.
However, the denial of the regional shopping center annexa-
AMBROSE,
FITZ6 ERALD
6CROONSTON
Attorneys and
CounNloro
P.O. BOK 127
Msrlobn, IENo
B3M2
TsNp1aM BBB~~81
ti on did not remove the need for amendments to the Plan as other
changes in the area necessitated an update and amendment of the
Plan. The annexation of land, the planned addition by the
Idaho Department of Transportation of an interchange at I-84 and
Eagle Road, and negotiations between the City and Ada County
regarding the Area o£ Impact require that the Plan be amended.
•
The City Council has received the Commission's Findings of
fact and Conclusions regarding these Amendments and, in making the
Council's Findings and Conclusions, has greatly relied upon the
Commission's Findings and Conclusions. The Local Planning Act
contemplates that the Council is to use and rely upon the .work,
expertise, and findings of the Commission in regard to the
planning process.
THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN MAKES
THE FOLLOWING:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That the Amendments were initiated by the Commission
pursuant to the Plan and the Local Planning Act, Title 67, Chapter
65, Idaho Code; that the Commission made Findings of Fact and
Conclusions and made a recommendation to the City Council
recommending that the City Council adopt .the amendments.
2. That after receipt of the Commission's recommendation,
AMBROSE,
FIT]GERALD
6 CROOKSTON
Attorneys and
CiOUneBlOf9
P.O. Boz ll]
MerMNn, lOelw
B9e12
Telephone SSBdNI
the City Council gave Notices of Hearings and several public hear-
ings were held on the Amendments; that public hearings and work-
shops, after required notices having been given, were held as
follows:
May 9, 1983, at 7:30 p.m.
December 5, 1983, at 7:30 p.m.
January 23, 1984, at 7:00 p.m.
February 13, 1984, at 7:30 p.m.
March 5, 1984, at 8:00 p.m.
3. That attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated
herein, as if set forth in full, are the original Plan Amendments
that the Commission recommended the City Council adopt.
4. That the City Council made changes and amendments to the
Amendments as proposed by the Commission as a result of the work-
shops and public hearings; that attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and
incorporated herein, as if set forth in full, are the changes to
the Amendments that have been made by the City Council; that no
changes have been made in the Amendments since or as a result of
the last public hearing held r4arch 5, 1984, at 8.00. p.m.
5. That no amendments have been made to the Plan prior to
these; that amendments have not been proposed to the City Council,
either by the Commission or by private entities, more frequently
than every six (6) months, even though the Commission could make
recommendation itself more frequently pursuant to Section 67-6507,
Idaho Code.
6. That notices of public hearings and workshops pertaining,
to these Amendments have been made available to newspapers, radio:
and television stations.
7. That the Commission, in its Findings of Fact and Con-
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
6 CROOKSTON
Attomsye BM
Counsabrs
P.O. BOR t9
MsrltllAn, IENa
83812
T~lapoone 888.181
clusions on the Amendments, states that it considered all the
planning elements and obtained all the necessary information
r
required in the Plan to proceed with an Amendment; the City Council
hereby adopts those statements and findings pertaining to the
Planning Components; the Council also specifically considered the
•
following Plan components; economic development; land use; public
services, facilities and utilities; and transportation.
8. That the City Council, the Ada County Commissioners and
appointed citizens are, pursuant to 67-6526, Idaho Code, negotiatin
an Area of Impact Agreement; that said negotiations are not
complete but a part of said process has been to set a different
Area of Impact than the one proposed in Ordinance 319; that as
part of said Area of Impact Agreement, a new Urban Service Planning
Area boundary has been set forth; that the new Urban Service
Planning Area is the result of the negotiations process and a chahg~
in that boundary must be reflected in the Plan.
9. That the Federal Department of Transportation has changed
the designation of I-80 to I-84.
10. That the Idaho Department of mransportation has decided
that an I-84 Interchange will be constructed at Eagle P,oad; that
along with a freeway interchange, development of one kind or
another is likely to come about as a result of the access to the
freeway; that, historically, in areas of population, such as
Treasure Valley and the Boise-Meridian area particularly, growth
and development occur where transportation facilities and access
exist; that the Eagle Road/I-84 area already is within the
proposed Area of Impact of the City of Meridian.
11. That the proposed plan for the interchange at Eagle Road
AMBROSE,
FITZGERAID
S CROOKSTON
Attomsye NA
GounNlma
P.O. BOK CZI
MerlOlAn, IEaho
83NZ
TNplloneBB&Net
includes changing the route of State Highway 30 to go west along
Fairview Avenue from Boise until it reaches the intersection of
• •
Fairview and Eagle Road and then the route goes south on Eagle
Road until it connects to the freeway; that this change and the
addition of an interchange will increase the traffic along-Eagle
Road and decrease traffic through the center of Meridian, along
East First Street.
12. That now included within the Area of impact are two
freeway interchanges, one in existence at i-84 and Meridian Road,
and one in the planning stage at I-84 and Eagle Road; that at the
time of the adoption of the 1978 2eridian Comprehensive Plan, there
was only the ore interchange at Meridian Road.
13. Thadl through negotiations under 67-6520, Idaho Code,
the western boundary of the Area of Impact of the City of Boise
and Boise's Urban Service Planning Area has been set as basically
one-quarter mile west of Cloverdale Ttoad.
14. That the City of Meridian has annexed land, Upland
Industries Annexation, east of Eagle Road, which extends to
within approximately one-half mile of Cloverdale Road. That at the
time of this annexation, the Urban Service Planning Area touched
upon the area east of Eagle Road but did not include that portion
half way to Cloverdale Road.
15. That the annexation of the Upland Industries land and
gMSROSE,
FITZG ERALD
6 CROOKSTON
Anomaye and
CounsNOra
P.O. Boz It7
MerlElan, IEa110
B3B42
Teleptrone BBBJMI
the construction of the Eagle Road interchange will encourage
development, in one fashion or another, residential, commercial or
industrial, of all the area abutting Eagle Road extending from
north of Fairview Avenue to south of Overland Road.
16. That the land included in the extension of the Urban
Service Planning Area to the east is included in the Area of Impact
even under the proposed Area of Impact Agreement; that it drains
to the west toward Meridian, and the land uses and sewage treatment
allowed in the area will affect Meridian's well water supplies due
to filtration; that the land can be sewered by means of gravity
flow.
17. That the land deleted from the Urban Service Planning
Area basically known as Southgate, but which is south of Overland
Road, can only be sewered by means of lift stations and it is the
policy of the City of Meridian to avoid lift stations if at all
possible.
18. That it is the goal of the Council to encourage develop-
ment of industrial and commercial uses at interchange access; that
such uses require and tend to locate where there are sufficient
transportation facilities such as iailway and freeway access; that
Meridian has in its Area of Impact two, one at Meridian Road and
one under planning at Eagle Road; that one of the best locations
for such uses are at freeway interchancxes where access to the
freeway is the best.
19. That since interchange development of commercial and
AM BROSE,
FITZGERALO
BCROOKSTON
A~~pmeys entl
Couneelorn
P.O. BOx 427
Merltllan, Itlehp
B3M2
TNSpMMBB&4481
industrial uses is encouraged and since they require good transpor-
tation, it is also the goal of the Commission to encourage the
construction of an overpass at Locust Grove and I-84; this overpass
would encourage interchange development and would aid in the
traffic congestion that now exists in the center of Meridian.
20. That since the Planning and Zoning Commission made its
Findings of Fact and Conclusions on these Plan Amendments, the
proposal and possibility of a regional shopping center at Eagle
Road and I-84, at least under the proposal made by Quong-Watkins
Properties, is not presently realistic or viable; that the City
can provide public services to the Meridian Road/I-84 location for
a regional shopping center with less cost to the City, which
location was originally depicted in the Plan as the location of a
regional shopping center in the 2-leridian Area of Impact.
21. That development of interchanges other than the
Meridian Road/I-84 interchange for uses such as commercial and
industrial, other than regional shopping centers, is likely to
occur due to their location and ease of transportation access.
22. That the City needs to plan for the development of the
freeway interchanges and overpasses within the Area of Impact as,
historically, development has occurred at those locations.
23. That with the proposed construction of an interchange at
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
&CROONSTON
AttorMye eM
Counaelon
P.O. BOx I2]
McNOIen, Itlaho
83MY
Telephone BB&a81
Eagle Road, the traffic patterns of the Area o£ Impact, and par-
ticularly, the City of P!ieridian, will change; likewise, if
development occurs at any of the interchange areas, particularly
Eagle Road and I-84 and Meridian Road and.I-84 interchange areas,
as well as the-pYObahle developmeli,t of the Upland Industries
i
location at Fairview and Eagle Road, traffic will increase signifi-
cantly requiring upgrading of roads and the enlargement of rights-
of-way.
24. If development occurs at interchanges, particularly at
Eagle Road and Meridian Road, traffic in those areas will signifi-
cantly increase and that increase must be controlled and guided to
avoid impact on residential areas and congestion in and around
those interchanges.
25. That the land deleted from t*Le Urban Service Planning
Area known as Southgate, south of Overland Road, can only be
sewered by means of lift stations and it has been the policy of
the City to avoid lift stations whereever possible; the inability
to gravity flow sewage from the Southgate, south of Overland, area
removes it from consideration, presently, as a development area.
26. The land included in the extension of the Urban Service
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
BCROOKSTON
Attorneys sntl
Countwloro
P.O. BO%s27
Maritllan, Itlano
BJes1
TalspnoM BBBM81
Planning Area to the east of Eagle Road can be sewered by means of
gravity flow; likewise, the drainage of this land is to the west
and any sewage disposal other than a public system would infiltrate
into the well water available to the City of Meridian which relies
completely on wells for its water. For any development to occur in
this area, and in all of the eastern portion of the Urban Service
Planning Area without damage to the present City water,-such
development requires municipal sewage disposal.
27. That the present capacity of the Meridian Sewage
Treatment Facility is for a population of 21,000; that current
utilization is a population equivalence of 7,000; that the plant
has the capability of being expanded to serve a population
equivalence of approximately 42,000;.that in order to serve all
the annexed property in the City of Meridian, the sewer treatment
plant would have to have a capacity of approximately 50,000 popu-
lation equivalence; that not all annexed property would require
sewer service at one time; to allow growth, either residential,
commercial, or industrial, additional means of treating sewage
will 'nave to be planned and eventually developed, publicly or
privately, to compliment service by the existing plant.
2£3. Water service for any area in the Urban Service Planning
Area may be able to be supplied by the City, but as additional use
is required, new wells will have to be developed for public use
with public funds and/or with private funds.
29. The removal of the southwestern areas from the Urban
Service Planning Area would have little impact on transportation
planning; but as above mentioned, the addition of land between
Eagle Road and Cloverdale from Fairview to Overland would have a
significant affect on transportation planning.
30. Except in annexed areas, police protection will still be
AMBROSE,
FIRGEflALO
d CROOKSTON
Atiwnaya an0
Couneslws
P.O. Box 4Y7
Marl0lan, tOano
83N2
relaononaaea~ee~
provided by County services in both Southgate and east of Eagle
Road as it is at the present time. No change will occur in this
until annexation occurs and, at that time, the Meridian police
will be impacted.
31. Except in annexed areas, fire protection will still
be furnished by the Meridian Rural Volunteer Fire District which is
not funded by the City; this, of course, like police protection,
would change if and when annexation occurs, and then fire protection
would have to be provided by the City and a means to provide and
fund that service would have to be considered.
32. Population, public services, facilities and utility
considerations are negated by the dropping of Southgate as a
Technological Industrial Review Area and the addition of another
in the east extension of the Urban Service Planning Area.
33. Economic development will be encouraged by the extension
of the Urban Service Planning Area to the east in that that area
is easier to sewer than the Southgate Area and, thus, less expensi
to develop; the extension will allow the area to be served by City
services, even if much of the cost is passed on to developers; the
location of an interchange at Eagle Road will cause the area to be
more attractive for development.
34. Land use in the east extension of. the i7rban Service
AMBROSE,
FIT2G ERALD
H CROOKSTON
Attomeyc er10
Counselors
P.O. Bos 12]
MerlCien, IENo
83814
Tslep~one BBB~Ib1
Planning Area will change from agriculture to commercial, residen-
tial and industrial; this change will occur very gradually, at
least until the economic rescession is alleviated; and then the
change will occur more rapidly; the long-term effects are that the
area will experience continued development; land sales would
increase and property values would increase.
35. That the Amendments would have little affect on housing
since there already is an abundance of available building lots.
36. There would be no impact on hazardous areas or special
areas or recreation due to the Amendments and the-City felt
there was no comment necessary on natural resources.
37. The Amendments will have no, or at least minimal, affect
on the soils.
38. The Community design would be enhanced due to the Amend-
ments in that the City would have design review over all development
and all development plans would include landscaping, irrigation,
screening and siting to create asthetically pleasing developments.
39. That the testimony and evidence submitted at the public
hearings held on the Amendments, and the City Council's changes
thereto, generally supported the .Amendments; that the Council con-
sidered testimony and evidence particularly that submitted by the
Meridian Chamber of Commerce.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That all the requirements of the 1978 Meridian Comprehen-
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
B CROOKSTON
AHOmsys antl
Counealon
P.O. Box 42T
MerlElan, ItlMo
83812
TslspAOne 88&4481
sive Plan Amendment Provision and Procedures and of the Local
Planning Act, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including all
notice requirements and planning considerations have been met; that,
specifically, Section 67-6508, Idaho Code, has been complied with-
concerning the review and updating of the Meridian Comprehensive
Plan using most of the components stated therein.
2. That the Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan were ini-
tiated by the Planning and Zoning Commission (Commission) as
authorized under the Plan's Amendment Provision and Procedure;.
that while a letter of application was not submitted, such formali
was rightfully dispensed with since the Amendments Caere initiated
by the Commission and not a private individual or firm; that even
though a formal letter of amendment was not prepared, all the
information, plus much more, was obtained by the Commission, and,
thus, the requirements in the Amendment Provision and Procedures
were complied with.
3. That the Comprehensive Plan is designed for the planning
of the City of Meridian and its Area of Impact as adopted in
Ordinance No. 319, and which is now being negotiated pursuant to
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code.
4. That the 1978 Meridian Comprehensive Plan was adopted
pursuant to the Local Planning Act, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho
Code, and all requirements of that act were met and complied with.
5. That the City Council may take judicial notice of the
AMBROSE,
FITZO ERALD
d CROOKSTON
Attomeye sntl
Counaelore
P.O. Bo,127
Marltllan, itlel~o
830e2
Talep~one 8B&d81
economic conditions and of governmental actions, policies, and
decisions, and one is that the City Ordinances and policies require
development to pay for its own way which reduces the costs to the
City for public facilities which alleviates some of the City's... -.-
concerns regarding eventual sewer and water service in the Urban
Service Planning Area, one of which is the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of the Commission regarding these Amendments, and one
of which is the Council's Findings of Fact and Conclusions on the
Quong-Watkins Properties Annexation, in that the proposed develop-
ment of a regional shopping center at Eagle Road and I-84 did not
appear to be economically feasible for the City and, thus, it
serves no purpose to open that location to development for a region
al shopping center.
6. That the Amendments were changed as they went through the
hearing process; that the Commission and Council have the right
to make changes in amendments so long as a hearing is held after
changes are made; that hearings were held after changes; that the
Council held its final hearing March 5, 1984, and since that date
no changes in the Amendments have been made.
7. That not a great amount of change has occurred within the
Meridian Area of Impact necessitating planning changes which was
due in large part to the economic conditions since the adoption of
the 1978 Comprehensive Plan.
8. That one overriding significant change has occurred with-
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
Attornaya end
Counaelore
I P.O. BOx IE7
Marloltln,MNo
8382
Tslapilone 8BBM8t
in the Area of Impact; that change is the proposed construction of
an interchange at the intersection of i-84 and Eagle Road; that
the proposed construction of the interchange at Eagle Road and the
accompanying increase of traffic and changes in routes and flows is
a substantial change in the actual conditions of the entire Area
of Impact and results in a material discrepancy between the
conditions in the Area of Impact and the 1978 Meridian Comprehen-
sive Plan; that planning for the eventual construction and the
impact on the area that it will have is imperative at this time
and not during construction or after it is constructed; that this
one single change is sufficient to justify most of the Amendments
to the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the extension of the
Urban Service Planning Area to the east and the encouragement of
commercial and industrial uses adjacent to the interchanges.
9. That changes in the routing of Highway 30 to follow Eagle
Road from Fairview to the Interstate along Eagle Road and the
construction of an interchange will have a significant affect upon
the traffic going through downtown Meridian and will cause a need
to change former minor arterials to major arterials and collectors
to minor arterials and to add some major arterials and some new
collectors.
10. That the construction of an interchange at Eagle Road
AMBRDSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
AttomWaanA
CounpBlOro
P.O. Bpz IY7
Mer101an, IAYII0
B36t2
T~IapNOne BBB~/E7
and the associated projected development will cause such an impact
on transportation that it is necessary to encourage and promote the
construction of a freeway overpass at the extension of Locust
11. The removal of the southwestern areas from the Urban
Services Planning Area would have little impact on transportation
planning and the addition of land between Eagle Road and Cloverdale
from Fairview to Overland would have a significant affect on trans-
portation planning.
12. In order to handle the increased traffic flows generated
by industrial and commercial development along Eagle Road, a free-
way interchange is essential. The off and on ramps, frontage
roads and streets within a development would have to be designed
to fit the special needs of the type of development. Eagle Road
from the freeway to Fairview and from the freeway to Amity would
have to be widened. This would compliment plans by Ada County
to designate Eagle Road a principal arterial and its designation
as part of the State Highway system by the Idaho Transportation
Department. Many of these concerns have already been addressed by
the State agency because of the impact of the interchange.
13. The City of Meridian and the Ada County Highway District;
will need to plan for improvements which will be necessary for
Franklin Road, Overland Road and Locust Grove.
14. Meridian will need to work with the State Transportation)
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
B CROOKSTON
Attomeya aM
Couneelon
P.O. Box I2T
MerMien, IANo
838/2
Taleptgna B88~/181
Department towards improvements on Meridian Road between Franklin
and Overland Roads, improvement of the Meridian interchange, and
plans for an overpass at Locust Grove.
15. The changes in the Transportation Functional Definitions
are mandated due to the change in traffic flows and Highway 30
routing expected to acoompany the Eagle Road interchange.
16. That the construction of an interchange at Eagle Road
will cause demand for development around the interchange due to the
access to the freeway; that for development to occur, the area
around the interchange must have the capability of connecting to
and receiving public services; that the closest services are those
provided by the City of Meridian; that the sewage and drainage of
the land and development in the area will have a significant
impact on the City if not controlled by the City.
17. That it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian
to include all of the area included in the east extension of the
Meridian Urban Service Planning Area so that the area can be
controlled as to not be detrimental to the City in regard to
sewage, water, transportation, aesthetic development, land uses,
community design, and economic development.
18. That it is necessary to extend the Urban Service Plann--
AMRROSE,
FIT2G ERALD
d CROOKSTON
Attorneys AnO
Counaelore
P.O. Bow 4T]
Meritllan, ItlNo
83812
Telephone BBB~IMt
ing Area to the east so that the recently annexed area designate d
as the Upland Industries Annexation will be included in that Qlann-
inga area; that this annexation is an additional overriding factor
necessitating many of the Amendments and constitutes a material
discrepancy between the Plan and existing conditions.
19. That since interchanges, particularly those in populated
AMBROSE,
FITZOERALO
d CROOKSTON
Attomaye ~~
COUIIMIOI~
P.O. Box t7T
MMUI~n, IONro
B3M3
TsbpMns BBB Ml1
areas, tend to draw economic development to the interchange due
to increased access and exposure and. since the Area of Impact now
will have two freeway interchanges, one at Meridian Road and one
at Eagle Road, it is in the best interest of the City and the Area
of Impact to encourage development of commercial and industrial use;
at those interchanges; however, the findings made for the ~uong-
Watkins Properties Annexation indicated that the expense to the
City to supply water, sewer, police and fire protection for a
development of the magnitude of a regional shopping center was too
great without more aid from the developer; that due to these find-
ings, it is concluded that the Commission's recommendation that an
interchange Enterprise Area designation be used and that both the
Eagle Road and Meridian Road Interchanges receive such designation
should not be adopted; it is concluded that, due to the economic
feasibility of providing services to a development the magnitude of
a regional shopping center, such a center should be located closer
to existing services such as the site presently designated in the
Plan as the Regional shopping site; that this finding, however, is
not to be treated or interpretted as forever foreclosing any site
other than the Meridian Road/i-84 Interchange as a site for a
regional shopping center, or, for that matter, foreclosing the
Eagle Road site, as economic conditions, tax structures, developer
assistance, and other factors can and will likely change. Since
the Plan is a planning document, it is only concluded that, at the
present time and with economic conditions as they are, the inclusic
of an Interchange Enterprise Area designation is not desire able.
It should be noted that the Plan is not intended as a legalistic
document and is definitely not a zoning device or a means to grant
or deny a particular or definite purpose or use.
20. The change throughout the Comprehensive Plan. to I-84 is
mandated by the change in designation of the Interstate by the
U. S. Department of Transportation.
21. The change in the Mixed-Use Review Area west of Kuna-
Meridian Road, north of I-84, and south of Waltman Lane, is not a
change in designation of allowable use or goals in the area as it
remains a Review Area.
22. The changes in the Amendments relating to the Library
District are to reflect the change in name and are mandated by that
change.
23. The deletion of the area known as Southgate from the
Urban Service Planning Area is required by the fact that the area
is believed to be unserviceable by gravity flow sewer; that since
the City has a policy of not allowing lift stations, the Area
should be removed from the Urban Service Planning Area.
24. That the Commission made the following finding in its
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
fi CROOKSTON
AttorMys eM
CounMMxe
P.0.8ox /21
MsrlElen, IOeho
83E/Y
Tslp~one BSB~M61
Findings of Fact and Conclusions:
i
"That 67-6508, Idaho Code, requires the Commission to
perform certain planning functions and to adopt, update,
and review a comprehensive plan using the planning
components set forth therein; that the Commission initially
adopted the 1978 Comprehensive Plan using all of the
components; that in .initiating the present amendments,
the Commission reviewed and acknowledged the planning it
had done in adopting the original plan; additionally, it
considered and studied all of the components required by
67-6508, Idaho Code, and have made findings above regarding
their significance and how the amendments will effect
them; that in considering the components and the findings
made thereon, it is concluded that the Amendments should
be adopted as they are in the best interest of the City
and the Area of Impact; that the Commission's concerns
regarding the ability to service the Urban Service Planning
Area with water, sewer and other governmental services are
abated greatly by the City's Ordinance and policies that
require development to pay its own way pertaining to City
services and are overridden by the necessity to plan for
the impact of the proposed construction of the Eagle Road
interchange and the associated development that will likely
be associated with the interchange.";
that the Council adopts said finding except that portion which
states "it is concluded that the Amendments should be adopted as
they are in the best interest of the City and the Area of Impact;"
the changes made to the Amendments by the Council were felt to be
necessary due to the cost of servicing a regional shopping center
located at Eagle Road and I-84 and, therefore, the idea of
Interchange Enterprises and related designations were deleted and
the 1978 Plan relating to a regional shopping center left unchange
25. It is concluded that the Amendments as changed by the
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
Attansya end
Couneeloro
I P.O. BOx 177
MsrlOlan, ICMo
83812
TelspMne 88&1181
Council are in the best interest of the City and the Area of
Impact; that the annexation of the Upland Industries property, the
planned construction of the Eagle Road/I-84 Interchange., the in-
ablility to sewer the area known as Southgate,. south of Overland
Road, and the Area of Impact negotiations, including changes in
the Urban Service Planning Area, necessitate the adoption of the
Amendments as changed by the City Council.
APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian City Council hereby approves-and adopts these
AMSROSE,
FITZG ERALD
B CROOKSTON
Attorneys entl
Counselors
R.o.eocaT
Meritllen, ItlNo
89812
Telepttons B8B~1181
Findings of Fact and Conclusions on the Amendments to the 1978
Meridian Comprehensive Plan, which Amendments as changed by the
Council are attached hereto.
Roll Call
Councilman Geisler
Councilman Myers
Councilman Tolsma
Councilman Brewer
Mayor Kingsford (Tiebreaker)
Motion
Approved: `~ LfdZ`v
Denied:
Voted
~a
' f '• ~ • • •
~~EXAIBIT "A"
Honorable Joseph L Glaisyer
City of Meridian Councilmen
728 Meridian Street
Meridian, Idaho 83642
APPLICATION TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MERIDIAN, IDAHO, AS
C2IGINATED BY THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING CO`1MISSION.
The recommended amendements to the Comprehensive Plan are as follows:
CHANGE I-80 to I-84
Page 18 Eastern Industrial Review Area 1.
Technical Industrial Review Area 1.
Page 19 Western Industrial Review P.rea 1.
Page 22 Mixed-Use teview Aceas
THE AREA !JEST)
THE AREA EAST --Three Tires
THE AREA WEST
Page 23 Mixed-Use Areas Between 180N and Overland Road
--Two times
Page 23 Mixed-Use Review Area !:est of Kuna-Meridian toad, North of
1-SON and Sout~o~ltman Lane
Page 34 Top of page - second and third paragraph
Page 35 Map - Arterial Transportation Concept Plan
Page 36 Eastern Industrial Review Area
a.
Western Industrial Review Area
a.
Technical Industrial Review Area
Page 41 11.
Pa ye 59 Capital Improvements Program (CIP)
Priority One:
Priority Two:
Priority Three:
Page 74 Map - Meridian Community Planning Area Boundary
page Z '~
Recommended~endr~ts to the Comprehensive Plan, ~idiari,
planning and zoning commission
Page 15 Add the following before section titled: ECONOMIC POLICIES
Add: Interchange Enterprises
Meridian is encouraging the potential development of
regional enterprises. These would include, but not be
limited to: a regional shopping center, technical
industrial park, vocational technical school and service
commercial enterprises. Such development would serve the
region and help Meridian to achieve its goal. of economic
self-sufficiency.
Page 18 Eastern Industrial Review .Area
Add 2. It is the policy of Meridian to encourage and promote the
development of an overpass at the intersection of Locust
Orove and I-84 by the Idaho Department of Transportation
Change 2. to 3.
Change 3. to 4.
Page 20 Regional Shopping Center
Change to: Meridian is encouraging the potential development of a
Regional Shopping Center within an Interchange Enterprise
Area. It would have a significant impact on economic
.growth of Meridian toward the goal of economic self-
- sufficiency desired by the community.
Page 23 MIXED-USE .',EVIEb! A4E.4 WEST OF KUNA-MERIDIAN ROAD, NORTN OF I-80N AND
SOUTH OF ti'A.LTMAN LANE.
Change to: This area is located in proximity to an Interchange
Enterprise .Area, is relatively level. in topography.
and will have excellent access to a freeway interchange.
Page 32 TRANSPORTATION
Functional Definitions
Change to: Principal Arterials - Cherry Lane/Fairview
Franklin
Eagle - South to Amity
Highway 20/26 (Chinder~ ~ra~k.lir
Kuna-Meridian.^.oad (Highway 69)(Sout o
Overland- Kuna-Meridian Road~to the East
page 33 Minor Arterials - Ten Mile
Overland
Linder -
Meridian
Ustick -
Locust G
(between Cherry Lane 6 Overland)
- Ten Mile to Kuna-Meridian ..",oad
Highway 20/26 to Franklin
Road - North of Fairview
rove - Fairview to Overland
" Page 3.
?ecommen Amen ments to the Comprehensive Plan, Meridian, aho
Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 33 (Continued) Collectors -
Linder (Franklin to Freeway)
Ten Mile (North of Cherry Lane)
Black Cat
Amity
Gruber
Meridian - Cherry Lane to Kuna-
Meridian Raod
East First (Fairview to Franklin)
Locust Grove - North of Fairview
Victory
Mcllillan
Pine - Ten Mile to Eagle
Chateau - Ten "!ile to Eagle
Page 37 Move: CHERRY PLAZA and paragraph
to No. 7.
!love: NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTERS and paragraph
to No. 7.
Move: OLD TOWN and paragraph
to No. 7.
Delete: REGINAL SHOPPING CENTER and paragraphs
including No.'s 1. E 2.
Page 33 Odd: INTERCHANGE ENTERPRISE AREAS
Interchange Enterprise Areas shall plan for the smooth and
easy flow of traffic; lessening the impact on neighboring
residential areas. Frontage roads, well planned parking
with controlled access, and use of existing streets shall be
carefully .considered.
Page 41 POLICIES (LIBRARY)
Strike l., 2., 3.a, 3.b,3.c, 4.
Insert 1. Due to the anticipated growth within Urban Service
Planning Area, the City of Meridian should encourage
the Meridian Free Library District to expand services
as needed.
~ SOUTH
GATE
ro
`~~~~^
~~~~ MIXED USE
...~ COMNiUNI'I`~ UrUan Service Planning Area
NEIGHBORHOODS
A!!• RURAL RESI:DENT[AL RESERVE
T TECHNICAL INDUSTRIAL REVIEW AREA
?T-W INDUSTRAAI; REVIEW AREAS
REGIONAL SIliOPPING CENTER
® COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER
JUNIOR a SIiNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
F.LFhIF.NT4r~F"mot'+innr~
CHIN ll!•:N HLVU.
N
~~
o ,. ~~ ~,~
1 NILE
FRONTAGE RD.
~ OVERLAND RD.
I
PROPOSED ELE&IENTARY SCHOOLS
PROPOSED JUNIOR HIGH
rvwwuy WATERWAYS & OPEN SPACE Cc)RRIDORS
ao BIKE ~ PEDESTRIAN WAYS
*The Meridian Policy Diagram is intended
to meet the requirements of then 1975 Land
Planning Act regarding a proposed land
use map.
EXISTING
~~ IAN POLICY DIAGRA~~ _
I ItUN'1'AGF. RD
~!'%% MIXED USP:
~ SOUTH
~ GATE
~~ ~
^~~~~ COR,r,UNII l C rt;uu Service Planning Area
'~~NEIGHBORHWDS
,_; MURAL RESIDENTIAL RESERVE
T "TECHNICAL INllUST'R1AL REVIEW AREA
T'-W INDUSTRIAL REVIEW AREAS
< INTERCHANGE ENTERPRISE AREA
~® COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER
11~ JUNIOR a SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS
-,.Ii:, ,.-;rr,; c
N
~~
,~ ,:. ,
:~~
MILE
PROPOSED ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
PROPOSED .IUNIUR HIGH
nrw~ww WATERWAYS & QPEN SPACE CORRIDORS
po BIKE a PEDESTRIAN WAYS
*The Meridian Policy Diagram is intended
to meet the requirements of the 1975 Land
Planning Act regarding a proposed land
use map.
POSED CHANT
- ~'IEf~IAN POLICY DIAGRA~"` - ~
- :~n~F:u 1~sL~
~~~ ~;OM~AIIiNi'C1 ~-~r~~:,n S~.rrvic~~ I'lannir,K -lrea
NE.IGHHOItII00I)S
etef atta NUHAI. I2ESIUEN'I'IAL EtESERVE
T 'fECI1NIC~~I. 1NlltiJ'I'RIAL REVIEW AREA
T-W IN1xJS•rRIAC. rtevlew 4REAs
INTERCHANGE ENTERPRISE AREA
® COMMUNITY SFiOPFING CENTER
JUNIOR ~ SENIOk HIGH SCHOOLS
~. PA1:)POSFll ELEp]Lti"GARY SCHUU;,
,/~ PNOPOSF:1) .1UNI<)R HIGFI
nnu~aynwP~~I'ERWAYS & QYF;N Sl'ACF; Cf"lRRll)~flt5
(~o B11KE ~ PEDF.ST'RIAN wAYS
"'The .Meridian Policy Diagram is intended
to mEet the requirements of the 1975 Lind
Plan~~ing Act regarding a proposed land
use neap.
P~tOPOt~D
~ M~iID1AN POLICY DiIAGF~M'~.
AD _~~~___ _ •__T ~ __
)AD f~_~
T--- -------
I
I I
I I
I i
I I
~ 1
/ I
/ I
~ o 01
I
I °` °`
I
PROPOS~D
ROAD 8 STREET
APRIL 1982
I I
I I
<'I
~I
=`I
c>I I c
I I m
LOAD .......L........
I I
I I w
I I o
I
I Y ~I
U ~ V
I y ~I
I ~ ~I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
3
~~~
PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS
MINOR ARTERIALS
COLLECTORS
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
• I ~• ~~~~__~~_ ~CKCAT __RO_
._~~~~~~~~ I ~~~~~~
I I
I W
I i
i
I a
...........1 ...........................1..............------------- TENMI E ~_ it1
I
I I W
I
1 I
I
i I
I
~
I
~ I ~,,
..........~ ............
I ...............~.........................
I . .
~~~ CINDER ROAD.
a°I
I
°aI
<
° I
i
iI
°CI °~ °~ <
°~
I I a
I
KUNA-MERIDIAN
~~~ I
MERI AN
~_-
-
ROAD
I
I HWY. 69
i _
_
EAST ~ FIRST
I I I F
1 I
H 2i ZI
I i a
I I I al
J h LOCUST I GROVE
........}
............. ..............
.......................
. ..
~ ~ ~
I
I
} I
~I Z
Q i
J I
I ~IW
I I W I ml z
a ~
' ~
~ I a I c7
I I EAGLE I I ROA[
1 ^ ~_ ~~~
I
I W
I I >
I LL
t
EXHIBIT "B"
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
AMENDED CHANGES IN PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO
THE MERIDIAN COAiPREHENSIVE PLAN AS
INITIALLY PROPOSED BY THE MERIDIAN
PLANNING AND ZONING COD'kMISSION:
Page 1. No Changes.
Page 2. At page 15 - Add the following kefore the
Section entitled ECONOPAIC POLICIES:
Interchange Development
Meridian is encouraging the development of
interchange accesses and commercial and
industrial development at interchange accesses.
The locations where access and development is
encouraged are at Ten P•lile Road, Meridian Road,
Locust Grove Road and F.agle Road.
At page 18 - Amend the Change to read as follows:
It is the policy of Meridian to encourage and
promote the development of an overpass, if an
interchange is not feasible, at the intersection-
of Locust Grove Road and I-84 by the Idaho
Department of Transportation.
At pace 20 - Delete the Change.
At page 32 - No chance.
At page 33 - No change.
Page 3: At page 33 - No change.
At pace 37 - Delete the Change.
At page 33 - Delete the Change.
At page 41 - No change.
4MDROSE.
t2G ERnLD
ROONSTON
~romeye ena
ouneebre
O Bm Q7
„i0un, leeno
&7N2
-pnona BebeMt
ADDITIONS TO PROPOSED AMEND:'IENTS:
Page 5: .Add before the paragraph "Neighborhood" the following:
•
Community Urban Service Planning Area Boundary
Commencing at the corner of Black Cat and
Ustick Roacl going South alono Black Cat Road
to Ten P4ilc Drain, along Ten Mile Drain to
Linder Road, South to Overland Road, Easterly
along Overland to City Limits and south along
City Limits, yoi.ng straight fast to the present
City Limits of Meridian Greens, around
Meridian Greens the southern most City Limits
to the southeast corner of Meridian Greens
Subdivision; and thence north following the
eastern boundary of t?eridian Greens to a point
which is one-quarter (1/4) mile south of
Overland Road; and thence directly east to the
quarter section line which is one-quarter (1/4)
mile west of Cloverdale Road; and thence
directly north to the quarter section line
which is one-quarter (1/4) mile north of
Fairview Avenue; and thence directly west to
the one-half section line which is equal
distant between Eagle Road and Locust Grove
Road; and thence directly north to Ustick
Road; and thence along Ustick Road to the
corner of Ustick Road and Black Cat Road, the
point of commencement.
Page 7: Change the Meridian Policy Diagram to reflect
the change in the Community Urban Service Plannign
Area Boundary.
AM PROSE,
IZGERAEO
HOONSTON
Imrnays an0
unaebrs
Bm at7
Nun. ItlaNa
tl38a]
none BBbINt
1~ 4
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAPd
FINDILdGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
ZONING ORDINANCE AND
SUBDIVIDION ANII DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
PRELIMINARY STP.TEMENT
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to the
Local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code,
specifically 67-6514, began a review in 1978 of the Meridian
zoning ordinances and subdivision ordinances. The Commission
expended a great deal of time and effort on an arduous and difficult
task. They held numerous workshops and several public hearings
and extensive public comment and input were received and the
Commission made changes and corrections as a result thereof. The
result of the Commission's efforts was culminated in the document
known as the Zoning and Development Ordinance which was presented
for public hearing before the Commission on March 11, 1982. On
April 12, 1982, the Commission voted to recommend the Ordinances
to the City Council. On April 19, 1982, the Commission made a
recommendation to the City Council that the Council adopt the
Ordinances as approved by the Commission.
The City Council wishes to publicly thank Annette Hinricks,
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
Attomays eM
Counaebre
P.O. eoz 12T
MsriObn, Matlo
83812
Tel~plwrlm 88&0181
Don Sharp, Lee Mitchell, Tom Eddy, Bob Spencer, Burl Pip]cin,
Ken Tewksbury, and Rick Orton. Their time and efforts are
sincerely appreciated. Their product and tenure as Commissioners
will have a significant enlightening impact upon the growth and
quality of life in the City of Meridian for many years to come.
The City Council received the Zoning and the Subdivision and
Development Ordinances as recommended by the Commission and held
workshops and public hearings thereon. and made changes as a result
thereof.
It should be pointed out that the ordinances are a product
of a legislative process and should be treated and interpreted as
such. They are not the result of any one person's or several
peoples' request for zoning or a subdivision. They do not deal
with any one particular parcel of ground, however large or small.
They are a comprehensive statutory scheme for zoning and subdivisio
and development of the entire City of Meridian, and the area within
its jurisdiction.
THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CLTY OF MERIDIAN MAKES THE
FO LL047I NG :.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision and
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERgLD
B CROO KSTON
Altomeye en0
Coonealoro
P.O. BOZt9
MerMlen, IEeho
83&12
Telephone 886181
Development Ordinance, hereinafter referred to as "Ordinances",
were initiated as a result of the Local Planning Act, Title 67,
Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and specifically Section 67-6514. This
section required that the City conduct a review o£ its existing
•
zoning and subdivision ordinances and to make changes and amendmen
therein to bring those ordinances into accord with the requirements
of the Local Planning Act.
2. That most of the existing zoning and subdivision ordin-
ances were originally adopted by the City in 1955; that additions,
changes, and amendments have been made throughout the years as
conditions have mandated and which have been required in the best
interests of the City.
3. That at the time of the adoption of the original zoning
and subdivision ordinances, P4eridian was very rural and had a popu-
lation of approximately 2,000; that most of the City did not
have central water or sewer; the existing ordinances, specifically
the zoning ordinances, were not restrictive, allowed for haphazard
growth, and allowed for cumulative zoning--that is, if you had
a residential zone, only residences could be constructed therein,
but if you had a commercial zoning,,you could construct both
residences and a commercial operation. The same was true with
industrial zoning.
4. That the City has endeavored to control the growth and
AMBROSE,
FITZGERAID
d CROOKSTON
Attorneys and
Counaelore
P.O. eoa t2l
Mstltllan, ItlNo
8382
TsNPhoM BBB~N61
direct it under the ordinances it had and with changes and amend
ments thereto; however, significant growth and continued pressures
for growth have occurred. The City now has an approximate
population of 7,000. Even though pressures for growth subsided
in 1980, 1981 and 1982, such pressures were extremely evident at
the time the new Ordinances were begun and pressures for growth
have once again surfaced.
5. That the City has adopted a Comprehensive Plan and has
AMBflORE,
FITZGERALD
d CROOKSTON
Attorneys Antl
Countulort
P.O. Box 127
MxIEIAn, IENo
&'iB/R
TNaphone BBB~IMI
proposed amendments to it. The Plan and Amendments have as an
overriding goal to encourage orderly growth and development,
particularly commercial and industrial, and to achieve economic
growth and balance, The Comprehensive Plan contains specific
objectives for land use which are to recognize 1) the importance
of maintaining compatible land uses to ensure the optimum quality
of life; 2) the responsibilities and rights of land ownership;
3) the role of the City in regulating the use of land resources
for the benefit of future generations; and 4) the economic desir-
ability of the multiple-use of public services whenever feasible.
The Comprehensive Plan also indicates that in land use, polluting
industries, strip commercial and strip industrial, and scattered
residential (sprawl or spread) are not activities which are in
compliance with the Plan. To effectuate these goals, planning and
guidance are necessary; that the Comprehensive Plan, as part of its
implementation, requires the use of a zoning ordinance and map,
subdivision ordinance, and a planned unit development provision;
the Plan further states that the zoning districts shall not be
contrary to the Comprehensive Plan.
6. That the following sections of the Local Planning Act
require the City to adopt or address the various zoning and
• ~
i ~
development processes and requirements required in each respective
AMBROSE,
FITZGERAID
B CROOKSTON
Attomeye uM
CounNlore
P.O. Soz 4Y7
Merltllan, IOYw
83842
Tslsplrona BB&NBt
section, to wit:
a. 67-6511 requires adoption of a zoning ordinance
and notice requirements.
b. 67-6512 indicates that the City should adopt a
procedure for processing conditional use or
special use permit applications.
c. 67-6513 requires adoption of a subdivision
ordinance.
d. 67-6515 indicates the City should adopt a procedure
for processing applications for planned unit
developments.
e. 67-6516 requires .adoption. of a procedure for
processing variance applications with notice
requirements.
f. 67-6518 indicates the City should adopt standards
for land use and development.
g. 67-6519 requires that the City adopt procedures
for processing all permits authorized under the
Local Planning Act and that reasonable fees may
be charged for processing those applications.
h. 67-6527 grants the City power to adopt criminal and
civil penalties for violations of the ordinances
and regulations adopted under the auspices of the
Local Planning Act.
i. 67-6534 requires the adoption of a hearing procedure
for the conduct of public hearings required under
the ordinances.
j. 67-6535 requires the adoption of standards and cri-
teria to judge applications for permits and that
decisions denying or granting applications shall
be .based on those standards and criteria; it
further requires that decisions be in writing and
be accompanied with written findings and conclusions
informing the applicant of the basis for the decisio
k. 67-6536 requires that a transcribable record of
all applications and proceedings be maintained.
7. That the Idaho Supreme Court and Idaho Appellate Court
have ruled that applicants for land use permits and uses shall be
afforded constitutional due process.
8. That the City Council held public hearings and work-
shops on the Ordinances; that the following is a schedule of the
hearings and workshops:
Workshop May 9, 1983 7:30 p.m.
Workshop June 13, 1983 7:30 p.m.
Workshop June 27, 1983 7:30 p.m.
Workshop July 25, 1983 7:30 p.m.
Public Hering November 21, 1983 7:30 p.m.
Workshop January 23, 1984 7:00 p.m.
Workshop February 13, 1984 7:30 p.m.
Public Hearing March 5, 1984 8:00 p.m.
that notice of all workshops were duly given and notices of :all
public hearings were duly given including publication in the
Valley News the first of which publication on each notice was at
least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing.
9. That the City Council received public input, comment,
and testimony at said hearings; that changes were made as a result
of some of the comment; that no changes have been made since the
last public hearing held March 5, 1984.
10. That notices of public hearings and workshops have been
AMBROSE;
FITZGERALO
B OROOKSTON
Anameye enU
Counaslan
P.U. Box •1T
Mv1Al~n, 1081io
8302
TaIpAOM 88BJ~61
made available to newspapers, radio and television stations.
•
11. That the Ordinances as recommended by the Planning
and Zoning Commission and the changes made thereto by the City
Council are not attached hereto as they are very lengthy but
the Ordinances and the changes by the Council are incorporated
herein by this reference as if set forth in full.
12. That in the Implementation section of the Comprehensive
AMBROSE,
FIT2G ERALD
R CROONSTON
Attomays antl
Coonaelon
Plan under Zoning Ordinance and' Map it states that the text of a
"zoning ordinance establishes the conditions under which land may
be used to create a stable and future land use development
pattern of the City of Meridian"; that it further states in "-
Implementation under Subdivision "Subdivision regulations establish
various standards .for the subdivision of property development
and protect prospective homeowners by ensuring that they are not
purchasing a substandard lot, that they have access to a .street
built to adequate specifications, that adequate facilities and
utilities have been installed, and that the public services of
parks, schools, bicycle and pedestrian paths are given considera-
tion. The regulations also guarantee that new subdivisions will
be an asset instead of a liability, if and when annexed by the City
that these provisions in the Comprehensive Plan indicate what
pux'poses the Ordinances should serve.
13. That the public testimony and evidence generally
supported the Ordinances. Various groups and individuals had
~,
P.O. Box 171
Metltllan, Itll~o
83844
opinions and suggestions and those were duly considered by the
Council.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That all the requirements contained in the Local
Planning Act for the adoption and amendment of a zoning ordinance,
a subdivision ordinance, a planned unit development provision, and
the other components contained in the Ordinances have been met.
2. That notices of all meetings, workshops and public
hearings where these Ordinances have been considered have been
duly and properly given; that where publication has been required,
the notices have been duly and properly published at least fifteen
(15) days prior to the hearing or meeting.
3. That the provisions of the Local Planning Act, Title 67,
Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and particularly 67-6511, 67-6512, G7-6513,
67-6514, 67-6516, 67-6519, 67-6535 and 67-6536 require the adop-
tion of the Ordinances; that even if there were no other reason
for the adoption of these Ordinances, the above lacy requires the
adoption of the Ordinances.
4. That the adoption of the Ordinances are required to imple-
ment the Comprehensive Plan and are to be used as a guide,
standard, and criteria for zoning and subdividing and developing.
5. That the Ordinances meet the requirements of the Local
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
Atlomaye BnO
Couneelon
I P.O. BOZ IY7
MerlOlen, IUNo
89812
TeNptaM BBB~IM1
Planning Act as those requirements pertain to the following;
a zoning ordinances; a subdivision ordinance; provisions for planne<
unit developments; procedures for processing conditional or special
uses, variances, and other land use permits; standards for land use
and development; processing of permits authorized by the Local
Planning Act; provisions for enforcement of the Local Planning Act
and the Ordinances themselves; setting standards and criteria with
which to judge and decide land use applications; seeing that a
transcribable record of proceedings are maintained; and providing
that decisions on applications be in writing and based on findings.
6. That the City has previously endeavored to abide by
the Local Planning Act; that the adoption of these Ordinances will
aid the City, residents and developers to better meet the require-
ments of the Local Planning Act; that the Ordinances will give
applicants for land use permits a better knowledge and understand-
ing of what is required to obtain a permit and how their applica-
tion will be processed and acted upon; applicants will be better
able to understand their rights; under. the Ordinances due process
will continue to be afforded applicants.
7. That the pressure of growth and development which existed
AMSROSE,
FITZGERALD
8 CROOKSTON
Attorneys and
Counselors
P.O. Bo><e27
Mwldlen, Itleho
89862
Telephone 888de81
upon the City .strenuously until 1980 and which growth. pressure has
begun again necessitate that such growth and development be
planned, guided, directed, and be sustained but as controlled
growth; that the Ordinances will provide a means of accomplishing
this.
8. That sustained planned and directed growth is in the hest
interest of the City and adoption of these Ordinances will facili-
tate that type of growth.
9. That the Ordinances are in compliance with the 1978
Meridian Comprehensive Plan and the Local Planning Act of 1975.
10. That it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian
and its citizens to adopt these Ordinances.
APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Merdian City Council hereby approves and adopts these
AMSROSE,
FIT2GERALO
B CROOKSTON
Attomays ano
Counsalwa
P.O. Boz 12]
MarMlan,lANo
S38a2
Tslaplwne SBBM81
Findings of Fact and Conclusions on the Zoning Ordinance and the
Subdivision and Development Ordinance as changed by the City
Council.
Roll Call
Councilman Geisler
Councilman Myers
Councilman Tolsma
Councilman Brewer
Mayor Kingsford (Tie Breaker}
Vote
Motion
Approved
Denied