Loading...
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