1992 09-08
A G E N D A
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
SEPTII~ffiER 8, 1992
ITEM:
1:
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST 11, 1992: (APPROVED)
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
BY WAYNE & IZARIN FORREY: (APPROVED)
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
BY NAHAS: (APPROVED)
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PEI~IIT
BY GARY FARNSWORTH: (APPROVED)
FIIdDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON PROFOSID AMIIVDMIIVTS TO THE ZONING
AND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE: (APPROVED)
FII~IDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON ANNEXATION & ZONING REQUEST WITH
PRELIMINARY PLAT, STRATE SUBDIVISION7: (APPROVED)
PUBLIC HFARTNG: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING WITH PRELII~IINARX PLAT
BY G.L. VOIGHT, FIELDSTREAM SUBDIVISION: (APPROVED)
PUBLIC HEARING: PRNr.TMrrvr,Ry PLAT ~ USTICK MEADC7WS SUBDIVISION: (APPROVED W/CONDITIONS)
MERIDIRN PLRNNING & ZONING SEPTEMBER B, 1992
The Regular Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning
Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:30
P. M.
Members Present: Charlie Rountree, Jim Shearer, Tim Hepper, Moe
Alidjani:
Others Present: Roy Wilder, Don Bryan, Dennis Lind, Devin Brady,
Gary Rlbright, Matt Butterfield, John Schafer, Tammy Schafer,
Gary Hanners, Marla Hanners, Jason Barfuss, Wayne Crookston, Dan
Torfin, Jim Markle, Gary Voight, Chris Findlay, Charles Fuentes,
Dennis Lind:
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST il, 1992:
The Motion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Rountree to
approve the minutes of the previous meeting held August 11, 1992
as written:
Motion Carried: R11 Yea:
ITEM #1: FINDINGS OF FRCT 8 CONCLUSIONS ON REOUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY WAYNE 8 KRREN FORREY:
The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Yea;
Alidjani - Yea;
Motion Carried: All Vea:
The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the
Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the
property described in the application with the conditions set
forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #2: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON REQUEST FDR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY NAHRS:
The Motion was made by Rlidjani and seconded by Shearer that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
•
MERIDIAN PLANNING R ZONING
SEPTEMBER 8, 1992
PAGE 2
i
Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Yea;
Alidjani - Yea;
Motion Carried: All Yea:
The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer that the
Mer-idian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the
Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the
property described in the application with the conditions set
forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #i3: FINDINGS DF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ON REQUEST FDR
CDNDITIDNRL USE PERMIT BY GARY FARNSWDRTH:
The Motion was made by Shearer and seconded by Rlidjani that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission her-ebv adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Yea;
Alidjani - Yea;
Motion Carried: All Yea:
The Motion was made by Shearer and seconded by Alidjani that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City .Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the
Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the
property described in the application with the conditions set
forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM ii4: FINDINGS OF FACT 8 CONCLUSIONS ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
TO THE ZONING AND DEVELDPMENT ORDINANCE:
The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Hepper that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Yea;
Rlidjani - Yea;
Motion Carried: All Yea:
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING
SEPTEMBER 8, 1992
PAGE 3
The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Alidjani that the
Meridian Planning and Zoninq Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council that the Planning and Zoning Commission's proposed
Rmendments to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan be approved and
adopted.
Motion Carried: R11 Yea:
ITEM #5: FINDING OF FRCT 8 CONCLUSIONS ON ANNEXATION 8 ZONING
REQUEST WITH PRELIMINARY PLAT, STRATE SUBDIVISION:
The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Rountree that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Yea;
Rlidjani - Yea;
Motion Carried: All Yea:
The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Rountree that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the
Rnnexation and Zoning requested by the Rpplicant for the property
described in the application with the conditions set forth in the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and that the Applicants
be specifically required to t he all ditches, canals and
waterways as a condition of annexation and that the Applicants
meet all of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, specifically
including the development time requirements.
Motion Carried: R11 Yea:
ITEM #6: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING WITH
PRELIMINARY PLAT BY G.L. VOIGHT, FIELDSTREAM SUBDIVISION:
Johnson: I will open the Public Hearing at this time and invite
the applicant or a representative to come forward.
Jim Merkle, 2150 N. Canter Place, Eagle, was sworn by the
attorney.
MERIDIAN PLRNNING & ZONING
SEPTEMBER 8, 1992
PAGE 4
Merkle: I am the Engineer for this project. This is a SS lot,
single family residential subdivision on approximately 16 acres
located off Ten Mile Road just south of Ustick Rd.. We are
bordered on the north by Candlelight Subdivision. The street
access will be off of Ten Mile Road by the southwest corner. R11
streets within the subdivision are public and will be constructed
to RCHD Standards. The district has required a stub street to be
provided to the south at some location. (Explained to
Commission) Sewer service is existing and we will tie into that.
The developer will either pr^ovide manies to the City for the well
development fund or provide pressurized irrigation to each
platted lot. The property right now is currently located within
the 100 year flood plain by the Nine Mile Creek. There is an
application by Candlelight to be removed from that flood plain
because they are going to reconstruct the culvert under Ten Mile
Road which will allow the flow to go through. We are currently
working with them regarding this application. Storm water will
be retained on site and will discharge into the drain somewhere
along the north boundary. I'd be happy to answer any questions
you might have.
Ro~_intree: I see in the access pcint to the south there is a
little cubical there. I assume it's a lot, it doesn't show it
with a lot or a block number on it. What will that be?
Merkle: There's an existing landowner that has an existing
easement along the north and the east of this property that
provides him access. The developer is working with him to
r^esolve the access issue. (Explained further)
Rountree: Where are you going to detain the storm water?
Merkle: Explained on the map where water would be detained.
Rountree: Have you seen the comments from RCHD?
Mer4<le: Yes and we have no problem.
Rlidjani: Have you seen the City Enq_ineer's comments?
Merkle: Yes I have, no problem. We've talked with RCHD and they
would rather not have two accesses so close together out of the
s~_ibdivision.
Hepper: Which side of the drain ditch is the easement road for
maintenance?
Merkle: On the north and east.
.J
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
SEPTEMBER 8, 1992
PAGE 5
L
Johnson: Would you address house size, lot size and price range?
Merkle: Lot size is minimum of II, 000 but as far as the price I
don'+, have that.
Crookston: What kind of protection are you going to have frort
the lots away from or protection from the Nine Mile Drain
Merkle: I believe the City Ordinance is to fence along that
drain and I think that's what the developer is planning to do.
Crookston: Is Nine Mile dedicated or is that an easement?
Merkle: It's an easement.
Hopper: This shows a green strip along Ten Mile Road there is
that a berm or landscaped area?
Merkle: Yes.
Johnson: Thank you. Could the developer come forward and be
sworn?
Gary Voight, 1277 E. 17th, Idaho Falls, Idaho, was sworn by the
attorney.
Johnson: I'd like to know the price range of homes and also
square footage of homes.
Voight: The price range of homes will be $100,000.00+ and
minimum square footage will be 1350.
Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else to testify? No response. I
will close the public hearing.
The Motion was made by Shearer and seconded by Hepper that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Yea;
Alidjani - Yea;
Motion Carried: All Yea:
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
SEPTEMBER II, 1992
PAGE r,
The Motion was made by Shearer and seconded by Alidjani that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Co~;ncil of the City of Meridian that they approve the
annexation and zoning as stated above in the Conclusions for the
property described in the application with the conditions set
forth in the Preliminary Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
and that the Rpplicant be specifically required to the all
ditches, canals and waterways as a condition of annexation and
that the Rpplicant meet all of the Ordinances of the City of
Meridian, specifically including the development time
requirements and the conditions of these Preliminary Findings of
Fact and Conclusions and that if the conditions are not met that
the property be de-annexed.
Motion Carr^ied: All Yea:
The Motion was made by Rcuntr°ee and seconded by Shearer to
recommend approval of the preliminary plat.
Motion Carried: R11 Yea:
ITEM ii7: PUBLIC HERRING: PRELIMINARY PLAT ON USTICK MEADOWS
SUBDIVISION:
Johnson: I will now open the Public Hearing. Is there anyone
who wishes to testify? I will close the public hearing. We will
go back to Item it6. I will now reopen the public hearing.
Jim Merkle, 2150 N. Canter Place, Eagle, was sworn by the
attorney.
Merkle: This project is located on the south side of Ustick and
laying east of the Nine Mile Creek on the north side of the
existing Sunnybrook Farms Subdivision. It is approximately 240
single family residential lots on approximately 73 acres. The
density would be about 3.3 units per acre. Explained some
changes made per ACRD. There will be a var^iance request for the
one long culdesac. (Further Explanation - see tape) The
developer will either deposit monies to the City or provide
pressure irrigation it has not been determined yet. Entire
project is outside the flood plain. Explained walkways.
Johnson: Who would maintain those walkways?
Merkle: The homeowners.
Johnson: Is that a berm area again on the north?
•
MERIDIgN PLRNNING d ZONING
SEPTEMBER D, 1992
PgGE 7
Merkle: Yes.
C~
Ro+_mtree: What's the time projection for Chateau to be complete
to Teo Mile?
Merkle: When the property to the west of the drain develops they
will be req+.+ired to punch it out thre•,rgh at that time. We don't
know right now.
Rountree: Does it connect onto the east
Merkle: Yes all the way to the east it connects out to Linder
Road.
Hepper: What's the minimum square footage for the homes?
Merkle: That question I'll refer to the developer.
Hepper: Nave you seen the comments from Settlers Ire^igation
District?
Merkle: Yes I have.
Hepper: What do you propose to do about that?
Merkle: We are going to have to work with Settlers to see if -
obviously the developer has the choice of providing the well fund
to the City or pressurized irrigation and we would try to meet
with Settlers to either tr^ansfer the water rights if they will
allow or provide pressure irrigation that the developer wants to.
We are aware of it and we don't have an answer right now.
Hepper: On that street to the south here, that loop, did gCHD
say anything about possibly putting a stub street in there?
Merkle: No. They decided not to require one there because we
ae,e so close to Chateau.
glidjani: Have you seen the City Engineer's comments
Merkle: Yes No problem.
3ohnson: Thank you. gnyen.e else to testify?
Chris Findlay, 300 Crestline, Soise, was sworn by the attorney.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
SEPTEMBER E7, 1992
PAGE 3
Johnson: The question is about the square footage?
Findlay: Between 1200 and 1300 sq. feet.
Johnson: What would be a high end in terms of square footage?
Findlay: Probably 260.0 sq. feet.
Johnson: Thank you. Any other questions No response. Anyone
else from the public to testify?
Ray Wilder, 3340 N. Ten Miie Rd., was sworn by the attorney.
Wilder: There is no way that they can use Settlers water to
irrigate 246 or 29r3 houses because they only have the right to
the water about 40 hours every ten days. It's a rotation ditch
and the ditch comes back about a half a mile east of there and
our water is all banded together on a rotation system. Voiced
further concerns about water.
Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
John Schafer, 520 Sunset, Nampa, was sworn by the attorney.
Schafer; The concern that I have with the s~_ibdivision in
comparison to other subdivisions developed in this area is about
traffic patterns out of the subdivision onto Ustick Road.
Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Charles Fuentes, was sworn by the attorney.
Fuentes: Owns a piece of property nearhy -- explained access was
given in 1904 when Mr. William Carter- bought this property, this
section line there was 20 feet traded to access Ustick Road so
Mr. Carter could have access to this 40 acres. Explained further
- see tape) Presented three sworn affidavits from long time
residents of this area (Read one of the affidavits to Commission
- see tape). Copies were made and submitted for the record.
Discussion. (see tape)
Johnson: Thank you. Anyone e]se to testify?
Denr•is Lind, 242D W. Chateau, was sworn by the attorney.
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING
SEPTEMF.ER b, 1992
PAOF_ 9
Lind: Voiced concerns about increased traffic. Also would like
to see a park area fcr this subdivision.
Jahnscn: Thank you. Anyone else to testify° No response. I
will close the p•~~rblic hearing. What's the Cemmissior,'s pleasure?
Discussicn.
Johnson: I will re-open the public hearing so the Engineer can
respond to some of the comments.
Mer41e: We are in negotiation with Settlers about the water
situation. Access onto Ustick as far as increasing traffic,
Ustick is designated a major^ arterial by the Ada County Highway
District. A collector road can t:andle up to two hundred lots.
There are no provisions for any kind of a park but we will be
addressing that in the near future.
Findlay: We had offer Mr. Fuentes access onto his proper^ty and
then we've also offered him access to Lct ~2 and he declined bath
of those offers as far as giving him access down this back side.
Fuentes: They did want to give me access that comes into the back
of my home. The other comment I have, in talking with all my
neighbors, they received a registered letter from the people and
I did not receive any notice of this hearing. I'm just glad that
I' m here.
Cr^ookst on: Is your property within three hundred feet of the
external boundaries of this property^
Disc~.assior..
Clerk Niemann: The School District looked at a site out there
and they have no plans for- a school in that area.
Johnson: Thank you. I will close the public hearing.
Alidjani: Where do we stand with this on the easement?
Crookston; If there's a conflict between the two property owners
and then^e is a claim of an easement that is r.ot reccrded but
the-re :___ a claim by Mr. Fuentes for the easement that needs to be
asserted by him. Either by prescriptive rights or permission
rights. He needs to establish that through a ce~_irt action. I
±hink however that the City needs to be concerned that nobodies
access is cut off but it's not sufficient at this j!~ncture to
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 'ONING
SEPTEMDER 6, :992
PRGE im
stop the processing of the app]icatian.
Johnson: I think we have an obligation to mention that in our
oration.
The Metier, wa<; made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning recommends approval to the City
Council provided the conditions with respect to the Settlers
Canal Irrigation, the access to the Fuentes property and a
specific decision and ir.fermation provided to the City on a
common area witho~_it resolution of these areas i would recommend
we deny at this point.
Motion Carried: R11 Yea:
Clerk Niemann: The ACRD is having a rneetiny her^e at City Hall on
Thursday at ?:00 P. M.:
The Motion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Rountree to
adjourn at 8:50 P. M.:
Motion Carried: All Yea:
fTRPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPRGVED:
J JOH , CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
~ _/
.. .
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
G.L. VOIGT
ANNEXATION AND ZONING
NORTHWEST 1/4, SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST,
BOISE-MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled annexation and zoning application having
AM BROSE,
FITZGERALD
BCROOKSTON
Attorneys Ntl
Counselors
P.O. Boz 1ZT
Merltllan, ItlNo
83812
Tslepeons 888-4181
come on for consideration on September 8, 1992, at the hour of
7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East
Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Planning and Zoning
Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony and
the Applicant appearing in person, and 'Having duly considered the
matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning
was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said
public hearing scheduled for September 8, 1992, the ttrst
publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing;
that the matter was duly considered at the September 8, 1992,
hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express
comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were
available to newspaper, radio and television stations;
2. That the property included in the application for
annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this
reference is incorporated herein; that the property is
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1
approximately 16.5 acres in size; it is in the northwest quarter,
Section 2, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise-Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho.
3. That the property is presently zoned by the county as
RT (Rural Transition) and the proposed use would be for R-4
Residential type development.
4. The general area surrounding the property is used
agriculturally and residentially; that the residential property
is zoned R-4, Residential.
5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the
present City limits.
6. The Applicant is not the owner of record of the property
but the owner of record has requested the annexation and consented
to the Application.
7. That the property included in the annexation and zoning
application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian.
8. That the entire parcel of ground is included within the
Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning
Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
9. That the Application requests that the parcel be annexed
and zoned R-4 Residential; that the present use of the property
is for agriculture; that the applicant indicated that the intended
AMeROSE, development of the property is for an R-4 type subdivision and in
FITZG ERALD
B CROOKSTON
the letter accompanying the Application stated the density would
Attorneys enC
°o1nse1ora be approximately 3.32 dwelling units per acre.
P.O. Bo~l27
°°"°tix:i°NO 10. That the property is in the CHERRY LANE Neighborhood as
TNSplwne 888~ep1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2
set forth in Policy Diagram in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan;
that under Housing Development on page 25 and 26 of the
Comprehensive Plan property inside the Urban Service Planning Area
may be developed at greater densities than one dwelling unit per
acre and it is the policy that a density of greater than 1
dwelling unit per 5 acres may not be exceeded outside of the Urban
Service Planning Area.
11. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan
it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain
in agricultural activity until it is no longer economical to
exclude orderly growth and development to maintain agricultural
pursuits.
12. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population
increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for
agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision
lots.
13. That the property can be serviced with City water and
AMBROSE,
FIRGERALD
E OROOKSTON
Attorneys ene
COUnseloro
P.O. Box X17
MarlElen,lMllo
83MII
TelepKOne BBBM61
sewer.
14. Ada County Highway District, the Department of Health,
the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, Settlers Irrigation
District, city Engineer, Bureau of Reclamation and City Fire
Department may submit comments and such shall be incorporated
herein as if set forth in full.
15. That the R-4, Residential District is described in the
Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 1 as follows:
(R-4) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The
purpose of the (R-4) District is to permit the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3
-~~ • i
establishment of low density single-family
dwellings, and to delineate those areas where
predominantly residential development has, or is
likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive
Plan or the City, and to protect the integrity of
residential areas by prohibiting the intrusion of
incompatible non-residential uses. The (R-4)
District allows for a maximum of four (4) dwellings
units per acre and requires connection to the
Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of
Meridian.
16. That the Applicant submitted an application for
preliminary plat along with the application for annexation and
zoning which application included a preliminary plat.
17. That proper notice was given as required by law and all
procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given
and followed.
18. That these Findings of Fact have been prepared prior to
hearing and the Commission reserves the right to amend these
Findings of Fact after the hearing is conducted.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local
Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have
been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's
property.
2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land
AMBROSE,
FIRGERALD
6 CROOKSTON pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the
A1Coonselontl Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that
Mxltlhhl, Itleho
R'OBOxexT exercise of the City's annexation authority is a Legislative
83812
Telephone BBB1M1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
function.
3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this
annexation and zoning application under Section 50-222, Idaho
Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City
Ordinances, the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the
record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial
notice.
4. That all notice and hearing requirements set forth in
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City
of Meridian have been complied with.
5. That the Commission may take judicial notice of
government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions
existing within the City and State.
6. That the land within the proposed annexation is
contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and
the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation.
7. That the annexation application has been initiated by
the Applicant, with the consent of the owner and the annexation
is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian.
8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a
legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions
upon the annexation of land.
AMBROSE, 9, That the development of annexed land must meet and
FITZG ERALO
d CROOKSTON
comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in
Attomsys en0
COaO°°I°~° particular Section 11-9-616 which pertains to development time
P.O. Box IZ]
Msrla~~a.no schedules and requirements; that the Applicant will be required
T°IePtpns lBBiMt
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5
-- ~ • i
to connect to Meridian water and sewer; that the property will be
subject to Site Planning Review and the Subdivision and
Development Ordinance.
10. That proper and adequate access to the property is
available and will have to be maintained.
11. That since the Applicant's property is in the CHERRY
LANE NEIGHBORHOOD of the Comprehensive Plan, the annexation and
zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan
and does not conflict with the Rural Areas policies.
12. It is concluded that the development, with a density of
3.32 dwellings units per acre, is an R-4 type development and
should be zoned in that fashion.
13. Therefore, based on the Application, these Preliminary
Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the Ordinances of the City
of Meridian, it is ultimately concluded that Applicant's property
should be annexed and zoned R-4; that the development of the
property shall be at a density of not more than 4 dwelling units
per acre; that any representations of Applicant's representative
shall be a restriction on the development and all representations
shall be met; that the conditions should be those stated above and
upon issuance of final platting and other conditions to be
explored at the City Council level; that such annexation would be
nMeROSE, orderly development and reasonable if the conditions are met; that
FITZG ERr1LD
d CROOKSTON
the property shall be subject to de-annexation if the R-4 density
Attorneys en0
°ouoa°I°~' is exceeded and no dwellings other than single family dwellings
R.O. ROZ 127
MerIE~Zaho shall be allowed and this restriction shall be noted on the plat
TslsOhone BBB1~p1
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6
''
of the subdivision.
14. That all ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled
as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled the property
shall be subject to de-annexation.
15. That any requirements from the Nampa Meridian and
Settlers Irrigation Districts shall be met as well as any
requirements of the Bureau Reclamation and the City Engineer.
16. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the
annexation and zoning or R-4, Residential, would be in the best
interest of the City of Meridian.
17. That if the conditions of approval are not met the
property shall be subject to de-annexation.
18. That these Conclusions have been prepared prior to
hearing and the Commission reserves the right to amend these
Conclusions after the hearing is conducted,
gMSROSE,
FITZG ERALD
B CROOKSTON
Attomaye ane
C.OUnNloro
F.G. BOR /27
Msrlolen, IONo
83MY
Telapllone BB&1/Et
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCI_IJSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 7
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Preliminary Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONER HEPPER VOTED
COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED ~y
COMMISSIONER SHEARER VOTED !~ -
COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI VOTED(, G~
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
d CROOKSTON
Attomeye en8
Counselors
P.O. ~K t2T
Merl8len, IBeNo
&9812
Telephone BB&//6t
to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the
annexation and zoning as stated above in the Conclusions for the
property described in the application with the conditions set
forth in the Preliminary Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
and that the Applicant be specifically required to the all
ditches, canals and waterways as a condition of annexation and
that the Applicant meet all of the Ordinances of the City of
Meridian, specifically including the development time requirements
and the conditions of these Preliminary Finds and Conclusions and
that if the conditions are not met that the property be de-
annexed.
MOTION:
APPROVED• DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 8