1992 04-14
A G E N D A
MERIDIAN PLAPdNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
ITEM:
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD MARCH 10, 1992: (APPROVED)
1: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON ANNEXATION & ZONING REQUEST
BY MC BEE, INC. CANDLELIGHT SUBDIVISION: MAKE RECO.NIMEPdDATION
ON PRELIMINARY PLAT IF FINDINGS APPROVED: (APPROVED)
2: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON ANNEXATION & ZONING REQUEST
BY THE WESTPARK COMPANY: (RECOMMENDED APPROVAL)
3: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT ON SPORTSMAN POINTE SUBDIVISION:
(APPROVED PORTION
4: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT ON THE LANDING SUBDIVISION W$THIN USPA)
REZONE ON THE PORTION THAT LIES SOUTH OF WHERE WALTMAN LANE
INTERSECTS THE PROPERTY: (FINDINGS ~ BE PREPARED)
5: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING W/PRELIMINARY
PLAT, CREEKSIDE MANOR:(FINDINGS ~ BE PREPARED)
6: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING W/PRELIMINARY
PLAT: MAWS ADDITION: (FINDINGS TO BE PREPARED)
7: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY JOINT
SCHOOL DISTRICT: (RECOMMENDED APPROVAL)
8: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT ON MERIDIAN PLACE #3: (RECOMMENDED APPROVAL)
i •
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING APRIL 14 1992
The Regular Meeting of the Planning 8 Zoning Commission was
called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson.
Members Present: Moe Rlidjani, Tim Hepper.
Members Absent: Charlie Rountree, Jim Shearer.
Other Present: Bob Waitley, Steven Breen, Renee' Rtlanson,
Elaine Town, Juan Klug, Ted Harper, Sid Harmon, Raleigh Hawe,
Addy Huston, Liz Bolts, Don Bryan, Norman Fuller, Ralph Labato,
Roy Johnson, Judi Thacker, Pat Thacker, David 8 Diana Aulbach,
Shelly Hupko, Loren Townley, Chuck Fuller, Matt Lorcher, Anthony
Hill, Kasandra Hill, Richard Parcells, Richard Jewell, Larry
Bertetto, Dale Newberry, Terry Harper, Ken 8 Debbis Lilienkamp,
Wade 8 Rletha Carstens, Marcia Rnderson, Chuck Leihe, Steve
Rnderson, Dale Thon, Dan Evans, Sylvia Evans, Rhonda DeMers,
David Turnbull, Craig Shoemaker, David Kline, Mike 8 Laurie Luke,
Violet 8 George Devee, Julie Parker, Carol Johnson, Susan flaker
Thon, Linden L. Carr, John Gunderson:
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD MARCH 10, 1992:
The Motion was made by Rlidjani and seconded by Hepper to approve
the minutes of the previous meeting held March 10, 1992 as
written:
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #1: FINDINGS OF FACT 8 CONCLUSIONS ON RNNEXRTION 8 ZONING
REQUEST BY MC BEE, INC. CANDLELIGHT SUBDIVISION: MAKE
RECOMMENDATION ON PRELIMINARY PLAT IF FINDINGS RPPROVED:
The Motion was made by Alidjani 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 - Rbsent; Shearer -
Absent; Alidjani - Yea;
Motion Carried: All Yea:
The Motion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Hepper that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends 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
MERIDIAN PLRNNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 2
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 Applicant
meet all of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, specifically
including the development time requirements and the conditions of
these Finds and Conclusions and that if the conditions are not
met that the property be de-annexed.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #2: FINDINGS OF FACT 8 CONCLUSIONS ON ANNEXATION & ZONING
REQUEST BY THE WESTPARK COMPANY:
The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Rlidjani that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adapts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Rbsent; Shearer -
Absent; Alidjani - Yea;
Motion Carried: R11 Yea:
Discussion with City Attorney about the Urban Service Planning
Area. lSee tape)
The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Alidjani that the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of Meridian that if the property is
included in the Urban Service Planning Area they approve the
annexation and zoning 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 and compliance with the
Ordinance of the City of Meridian; that the owner be requested to
allow the application to be postponed until the Urban Service
Planning Rrea issue is resolved and if the consent is not given
that the Application be denied.
Motion Carried: R11 Yea:
ITEM #3: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINRRY PLRT ON SPORTSMAN POINTE
SUBDIVISION:
Chairman Johnson: I'd like to make a couple of comments before
we start the public hearing. We have six public hearings this
evening so I'm going to ask at this time that we limit comments
to three minutes. I will now open the Public Hearing. Is
there anyone present who wishes to testify?
MERIDIRN PLRNNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 3
Dawn Couch, 2280 S. Locust Grove, was sworn by the attorney.
Couch: Voiced concerns about school overcrowding, traffic, water
problem with pressure, fire and police protection, and zoning.
When will project begin and end? Is there a problem with the
sewer? What kind of landscaping will be placed on Locust Grove?
Alidjani: You are concerned about the zoning, what did you mean?
Couch: Well last month when we were here there was a lot of
discussion of R-8, R-4, so I'm concerned as to what it is going
to be zoned.
Chairman Johnson: R-4. Is there someone from the Applicant who
would like to testify?
Greg Johnson, 3157 N. Leather Place, was sworn by the attorney.
Johnson: We have revised this request to address some of the
concerns that the local people have. We revised the request to
be all R-4 zoning, the preliminary plat has a density of 3.2 per
acre, the lot sizes are quite comparable to the project to the
west, we are berming both Overland Road and also Locust Grove
Rd., there will be a good sized park in the neighborhood and at
this point we have met with the School District again, they have
not determined whether or not they want a school site in this
project but they would like to continue meeting further. They
know that they would like one in the immediate area, they just
haven't decided where they would like it.
Chairman Johnson: Have they indicated what size area they are
looking for.
Johnson: A grade school, they have been talking somewhere
between ten and eleven acre sites.
Chairman Johnson: Schools are always a problem and I'm
interested in the School's reaction to your offer to cooperate
and talk about a site.
Johnson: I approached the School District when we first started
planning this in February, at that time they were not interested
in this site because it wasn't centrally located in this section
yet. The last meeting that we had, they are not as concerned
with that any more, they do want a site in that section
somewhere. We feel this will be a quality project in that
neighborhood.
`~
MERIDIRN PLRNNING & ZONING
RPRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 4
Chairman Johnson: Thank you
Any questions for the developer?
Hepper: Questioned about the buffer zone.
Johnson: The lots that back up to that subdivision, they are
100 feet frontages with some as deep as 140 feet. Those lots
will have larger homes on them.
Hepper: What's the minimum square footage?
Johnson: We haven't proposed to restrict them any further than
the other lots. We won't have any mixed concepts in there.
We've been talking in a range of 1300 sq. feet, but we haven't
determined that yet.
Hepper: Would you be at all inclined to put a minimum plan of
1300 sq. feet?
Johnson: Yes we are going to set one higher than 1300 but we
don't know what's it's going to be. We have other property down
by Overland and other areas, it would be very difficult to market
if we get to large. I would be reluctant to say that we would
want something larger than 1500 sq. feet minimum at this point.
We would like the flexibility. If you would like to restrict it
deeper into the project or to the West we would probably be doing
that anyway.
Discussion of square footage. (See tape)
Johnson: Will the approval be subject to that being annexed or
do we have to go through a whole preliminary plat procedure?
Atty. Crookston: You can ask that it be tabled for anything that
lays outside the Urban Service Planning Rrea until a later date.
Johnson: I'm not sure I understand that fully. Can it be
approved subject to that happening or do we have to go through
preliminary plat process on that portion at that time?
Chairman Johnson: You don't have to start over.
Johnson: I would request that we table that portion then.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you very much. Anyone else to testify?
Larry Bertetto, 665 Rntigua, Meridian, was sworn by the attorney.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE S
Bertetto: I have concerns about the square footage. The fact
that when you see on the plans 1300 square foot and that's what
is in writing. I believe the minimum in Meridian Greens for
single family, single story house in that subdivision is 2200 sq.
ft., a two story is 2400 sq. ft.. Also the developer talked
about the land being the same size. I think the lot minimum is
8,000 sq. ft. and the minimum lot size in Meridian Greens
subdivision is 10,000 sq. ft., so that's considerable about of
difference.
Hepper: A lot of these houses backing up to Meridian Greens here
have 100 foot frontage with 155 foot of depth so they are at (in-
audible) -
Bertetto: I thank the builder for making that change.
Chairman Johnson: Anyone else from the public to testify? No
response. I will close the public hearing.
The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Alidjani to approve
the preliminary plat on that portion within the Urban Service
Planning Area, with the stipulation that the whole project be
1500 sq. feet with those along the west side having a minimum of
1600 square feet.
Motion Carried: R11 Yea:
ITEM #4: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT ON THE LRNDING
SUBDIVISION W/REZONE ON THE PORTION THAT LIES SOUTH OF WHERE
WALTMAN LANE INTERSECTS THE PROPERTY:
Chairman Johnson: I will now open the Public Hearing. Is there
someone representing the developer present?
Dave Turnbull, 11322 W. Hickory Bark Drive, Boise, was sworn by
the attorney.
Turnbull: Our preliminary plat consists of generally two
portions, one being a request for a preliminary plat on existing
zoning, the other being a application for a rezone with
preliminary plat. I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.
Hepper: Have you seen the comments from the City Engineer?
Turnbull: Yes I have. Basically what it is is a 30 feet
reciprocal easement, it can be handled in that manner or as
private drive.
i •
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 6
Hepper: Have you talked to Meridian School's about possible
school sites?
Turnbull: Yes twice. We did sometime ago when we were doing the
first preliminary plat, which consisted of 90 lots. They didn't
express any interest at that time. When we submitted the
application for the second preliminary plat again we approached
the School District asking if they were interested in a school
site in our property areas there and they declined. They felt it
was not central with the area they wanted to locate.
Hepper: Did you have any problems with the City Engineer's
comments?
Turnbull: No. The traffic study is underway now.
Hepper: Do you plan on piping those ditche s?
Turnbull: They hadn't addressed that. There is the Kennedy
Lateral whi ch could be re-piped.
Hepper: Th is development is large enough to afford a partial
development of a City Park. It d oesn't appear tha t you have
anything in here.
Turnbull: No but we are willing to address that.
Hepper: Do you have a comment on w hy the applicant couldn't go
R-8 rather than R-4?
Turnbull: Basically we've been going as you can see, if you take
the first preliminary plat and the second preliminary plat as a
total we have something in the order of 430 lots. We have done
some larger lots in the current phase. We've been trying to
maintain that, but when we get down by the freeway and are
impacted by problems that the freeway causes, it's just a matter
of marketing.
Chairman Johnson: I think what you'll run into there with the
City's attitude is to buffer that between the freeway with an R-
4. At this point we are discouraging an R-B zone.
Turnbull: You can see what we've done on Linder Road and I think
it's done rather nicely. Rddressed the buffer by the freeway
(see tape) -
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 7
Hepper: Another concern is the number of streets down there
proposed going into any future development that might have backed
up to this development. You've got 340 lots and only two access
points.
Turnbull: We would pro
street stub to the west.
at one point and time
objection to that. We
going to work. We
neighborhood.
pose to provide at least one additional
We don't own that property but I'm sure
that will be developed. We have no
want to provide something here that's
are sensitive to the needs of the
Hepper: I would think that to the west you should have at least
one other tin-audible) -
Turnbull: I agree.
Alidjani: The only concern I have is, 1000 feet of one road
going from one end all the way to the other. If you go phase by
phase can you situate something so that when one phase is done at
least you can have another access.
Turnbull: I can't control what the other surrounding property
owners are going to do as far as their own ground. I know what
accesses we currently have and could provide.
Discussion - tsee tape)
Hepper: What is the minimum square footage? You have minimum
square footage in R-4 with 1100 and R-8 with 1000.
Turn6u11: That's not what we are proposing. In proposals one
through three of the Landing, we have been requiring 1300 sq. ft.
minimum.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Rhonda DeMers, 1241 W. Kimra, was sworn by attorney.
DeMers: Voiced concerns about traffic, school overcrowding and
the sizes of the lots.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Ken Lilienkamp, 1259 W. Kimra, was sworn by the attorney.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
RPRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 8
Lilienkamp; Concerned about the Linder Road congestion, school
overcrowding, water situation and lot sizes are to small.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. There are traffic studies being
done in that area. Anyone else to testify?
Steven Breen, 6302 Northview, Boise, was sworn by the attorney.
Breen: I'm here tonight on behalf of the Johnson Family Estate.
We own the property just south of Waltman Lane and adjoin the
proposed subdivision. Concerned about the volume of cars and
traffic congestion.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else to testify?
John Calhoun, 660 So. Linder, was sworn by the attorney.
Calhoun: Concerns about additional traffic on Waltman Lane.
Where Waltman Lane comes through, I own the property just west of
this subdivision. I'd like to see Waltman Lane lined up with the
Waltman Lane on the west side of Linder that goes west of Linder.
Need a stop light at Linder and Franklin. There is really a
problem with Waltman Lane & Meridian Rd.. We need another
access.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Matt Lorcher, 740 Waltman Lane, was sworn by the attorney.
Lorcher: I'd like to see Waltman Lane stay a dead end street.
Waltman lane runs east and west and it intersects with Meridian
Road at the east and dead ends at the west. Rlso Waltman Lane is
a bridge on Ten Mile drain and according to Ada County Highway
files the bridge was inspected last year and it did not pass.
It's now on a critical list. There are currently nineteen homes
located on Waltman Lane and each homeowner is satisfied with our
quiet lane as it is today. (Further - see tape)
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Gary Fors, 843 Lilac, was sworn by the attorney.
Fors: I agree with everything that Mr. Lorcher just stated.
What would be wrong with bringing the traffic onto the freeway on
Linder.
MERIDIRN PLRNNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PRGE 9
Chairman Johnson: How would you do that? That would be up to
the Highway District. Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Rnthony Hill, 780 Waltman Lane, was sworn by the attorney.
Hill: If this road could be widened the full 60 feet with curbs
and gutters the full length of that and that includes widening
the bridges and moving all the utilities, I believe this should
be done before traffic is put onto this street. As it is now,
this street will not handle that type of traffic.
Chairman Johnson: Anyone else to testify?
Loren Townley, 521 Waltman Lane, was sworn by the attorney.
Townley: Meridian Road and East First is a very dangerous
intersection right now and it's getting worse.
Clerk Niemann: There's going to be a light installed there.
Townley: The 91 Traffic Safety Section advised there was seven
major accidents at that intersection. Five of these were serious
accidents with injuries. New housing will put more vehicles into
this intersection. One of my main concerns is a bus stop that's
right there at that intersection for the Grade School and Junior
High. (Further explanation - see tape)
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Jean Klug, 722 W. 3rd St., was sworn by the attorney.
Klug: Voiced concerns about water resources. Statistics
gathered show a usage of 500 gal. per day per home. Hook to City
water or drill a well.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else to testify?
Rugstina Jacobson, B16 Waltman, was sworn by the attorney.
Jacobson: What we have basically is three proposals for the
developer. This is going to impact very severely. We have a
very quiet lane at this point and time, and it's a great place to
raise children. When this road is put through we are basically a
half mile straight shot. What we would like the developer to do,
we would like Waltman Lane widened to meet Rda County specs,
~~
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 10
which would be a 60 foot road, it would be required for them to
put new soil underneath to match the asphalt on the top. They
will also have to put in the curbs and the gutters, they will
have to put in lights, they will have to move every single
utility pole because they are all in to close and will not allow
a 60 foot road with sidewalk. They would also have to completely
replace the bridge. We also would like to see something done
with lights for traffic. We would like all these improvements to
be done before the developer is allowed to develop this area.
Otherwise, Waltman Lane cannot handle it. The second proposal to
allow the developer to get some money possibly to make all these
improvements that he would be required to make would be to allow
him to go ahead and start selling the homes but to block off
Waltman Lane. Our third proposal is for the developer to make
another exit onto Linder and to by-pass Waltman all together.
Chairman Johnson; Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Mark Pierce, 1348 W. Kimra, was sworn by the attorney.
Pierce: My questions are concerning the west exits. Rs you know
I live in Crestwood and there are a lot of kids in that
subdivision and that traffic that goes through there now is
quickened up. My question is to the developer, if your thinking
about going through Fenway Park and then opening that up onto
Kimra and then out to Linder Road, that was my main concern.
Traffic concerns. What is the pricing as far as the houses that
will be put up there?
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. You've been sworn, go ahead and
make your comment.
Breen: The design has already begun for the intersection change
at Waltman Lane and Meridian Road, the light will be there. They
have a November 15th completion date on the schedule. What we
are concerned with is that we are only looking at doing part of
the job by doing the intersection. We hope that you guys will
require that this road be made complete.
Chairman Johnson: Anyone else to testify?
Roy Johnson, 9225 Chinden Hlvd., Boise, was sworn by the
attorney.
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE it
Johnson: I just have a couple of comments to clarify some of the
things that have been said tonight. #1 - We do have a traffic
study in progress. #2 - Tomorrow ACHD imposes an impact fee.
Impact fees are used for the development of Collector or Rrterial
Streets that are of public interest and that are off site public
development. This development has a number of lots remaining in
subdivisions #2 & #3 and it also has the number of lots they have
here that will be all be paying impact fees and those fees
certainly could be used to upgrade Waltman Lane and that is at
the discretion of the ACHD.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Ted Harper, 582 Kearney Drive, was sworn by the attorney.
Harper: My major concern again is the traffic, both up Waltman
and out to Linder and I believe that probably taking the R-8
zoning away and making it all R-4 would limit a lot of the
traffic. Would like to hear about the traffic study when it's
through.
Chairman Johnson: I'm sure that at the Council the traffic study
will be brought up. Anyone else to testify?
Turnbull: Comments on domestic water situation (see tape) -
As far as density on the rezone portion, I don't recall the exact
number but going from an R-4 to an R-8 I think you've added
something in the neighborhood of 7 lots.
Chairman Johnson: Rnyone else to testify?
Aldrige, lin-audible) was sworn by the attorney.
Aldrige: Wondering about the future of the project. (in-
audible) -
Chairman Johnson: Thank you.
Fors: Back to the water, what's your position on it? I want to
know.
Chairman Johnson: What do you mean by what's our position? We
have done water studies. There was an analysis given and we are
in good shape with respect to water that we now have and our
ability to keep water flowing.
~J
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
RPRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 12
Fors: I'm talking about the irrigation water for the
subdivisions. Now what's your position on that?
Chairman Johnson: We don't have a position on water. The water
with respect to irrigation is controlled by the irrigation
district.
Fors: No we are not talking about an irrigation district, we are
talking about you are drilling a well on this particular
subdivision, your not taking irrigation water from the irrigation
district, now what's your - What happens if a well goes dry or
whatever? Okay. What's your position on that?
Chairman Johnson: We don't have a position that I know of.
Clerk Niemann: We don't have any control over that. If Water
Resources grants them a permit to dig a well we don't have any
control aver that.
Fors: What your saying is your allowing this irrigation, it's
supposed to be pressurized irrigation is what I was under the
assumption. That's pressurized from the irrigation district, not
drilling a new well.
Chairman Johnson: There are alternatives available. There's
nobody on this board here today that is a water expert. We don't
have the answer to your question but you can address that to the
City Council.
Fors: So what your saying is, if some neighbors well goes dry,
you don't care.
Chairman Johnson: Nobody's saying that. Did you hear anybody
say that?
Fors: No.
Chairman Johnson: Okay we are not saying that.
Fors: Well what are you going to do about it?
Chairman Johnson: If that happens then that would have to be
addressed.
Fors: And it will have to be. But what's happened in the past
they dig deeper wells.
i •
MERIDIRN PLRNNING & ZONING
RPRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 13
Chairman Johnson: I don't have the answer to that sir. I assume
it's the people that own the well.
Rtty. Crookston: The responsibility for the well is who ever owns
the well. That's why the Department of Water Resources has
implicated a permit process for drilling a well.
Fors: Where's that responsibility laying? Is it Mr. Johnson, or
is it mine, or is it, what happens here? And your saying your
going to blame it onto -
Chairman Johnson: We didn't say we were blaming it on anybody.
We are just saying we don't have any control over that you see.
Fors: You can take control.
Chairman Johnson:
Fors: Stand up.
Chairman Johnson:
Donna Aldrich, 265
Aldrich: Wants Wa
Chairman Johnson:
your testimony we
Council.
How do we do that sir?
Thank you. Rnybody else?
Waltman Lane, was sworn by the attorney.
ltman Lane was left as is.
I now close the public hearing. Thank you for
appreciate it and it will be passed on to the
The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Rlidjani to have
the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law prepared and to table
the preliminary plat, I think we also need to have a stipulation
in the Findings of Fact on the R-4 zone that the minimum square
footage of the houses be 1300 square feet.
Motion Carried: R11 Yea:
ITEM #5: PUPLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXRTION 8 ZONING
W/PRELIMINRRY PLAT, CREEKSIDE MRNOR:
Chairman Johnson: A portion of this application lays outside the
Urban Service Planning Area which means that we can't take any
action on it tonight but we can except public testimony. I will
open the public hearing, is there someone from the applicant who
would now like to address the commission.
MERIDIAN PLRNNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PRGE 14
Richard Jewell, 1082 Rrlington, Eagle, was sworn by the attorney.
Jewell: We have been in communication with the City Engineer and
the Clerk regarding this issue on the Planning Area. The
original property or the main piece of property my understanding
is that it is in the Planning Area. There's a second piece of
property that we are including in the subdivision, which I
understand is not. There are 30 lots, the lots will range from
8000 to 11000 square feet. We are asking for an R-4 zone. The
property on the west side borders Ten Mile Creek, we have been in
communication with both the irrigation district and with the
people who are in control of the waters there. Most of the items
on the list have been discussed with their respecting agencies.
Alidjani: Which list are you referring to?
Jewell: The list from the City on the comments. The wet land
issues I understand have been discussed with some of the
adjoining property owners. The main reason the wet lands are
even there right now is because of the drainage that comes down
from the subdivision in Country Terrace. There is very minimal
wet lands in the portion that we are subdividing. Sewer and
water service will be provided up to Country Terrace, whether
they would like to connect to it or not. Traffic concerns have
been addressed by us in respect that there be a second access,
not all the traffic will go through Country Terrace. Is there
any particular portion of the items on the list prepared by the
City that you'd like to discuss.
Hepper: What was the setbacks on the frontages?
Jewell: It's required to have 20 and in many of the cases
there's probably 25.
Hepper: Okay but the restrictive covenants are 20?
Jewell: I believe so, I don't remember.
Hepper: Lot 15 down there with a 20 foot frontage and a 15 foot
minimum is that lot buildable?
Jewell: Yes you have about 100 feet between lot 14 and the east
boundary of the subdivision.
Hepper: What's the minimum square footage of the houses?
Jewell: We have 1800 sq. feet now, that would be the minimum.
We are envisioning probably 2000+ for the majority of them.
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING
RPRIL i4, 1992
PAGE 15
Hepper: On your application here it states 1600 sq. foot
minimum.
Jewell: We will be raising that to 1800.
Rlidjani: Are you referring to the City Engineer's comments?
Jewell: Dn some of them.
Rlidjani: Do you have any problem with any of the Engineer's
comments?
Jewell: Not as this moment. I've tried to address as many as I
could.
Chairman Johnson: On that list specifically are three questions.
How will access be provided to the existing well lot?
Jewell: For some reason no access was provided to the lot. One
thing I guess needs to be clarified, the majority of this
property was or is tin-audible) out of Country Terrace. Of
course the well lot serviced the entire subdivision. We are
connecting to City water, however we are still going to go ahead
and provide an access to the well lot because otherwise it would
be landlocked. There's an easement between lots 14 & 15 which is
a large easement. What we are going to do is actually label it
as such and there will be provisions made to make sure that there
is a drive-in surface made available for them to access the lot
anytime that they want.
Rlidjani: Gravel or blacktop?
Jewell: Either gravel or concrete.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else to address this issue?
John Gage, 1675 Country Terrace Way, was sworn by the attorney.
Gage: I'm here this evening representing the Homeowner's
Rssociation for the Country Terrace Subdivision. Dne of the
objections we have to this subdivision is as follows. Country
Terrace does not meet the Highway District's standards as a
Collector Road, which it could became when you combine our
subdivision with the one that is proposed here tonight and
Meridian Greens #t^c. Voiced concer^ns about increase in traffic on
Country Terrace Road.
MERIDIRN PLANNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 16
Rlso concerned as to what is going to happen to the condition of
our road during construction with all the heavy traffic. Who is
going to pay to repair it. The developer has made an offer to
build an access road in the future from the Meridian Kuna Highway
after the lots are sold and money is available in exchange for
the Highway Department vacating Calderwood Street. Yet the plat
he is submitting doesn't show this road as part of the
subdivision. Received a bid od 5150,000 to bridge Ten Mile creek
and to build this road to the Kuna Highway to Highway District
standards. This 5150,000 is going to add 55,000 per lot over and
above the normal development costs. We think it's doubtful that
market conditions are going to make this feasible, leaving no
funds available to construct this road. If we are wrong and the
developer is right about being able to finance this road out of
the sale of lots, then let him front the money now to build that
road as both an access road for construction and as the primary
access to the subdivision. We are therefore suggesting as an
alternate to his proposal that approval of the project be
predicated on the developer first building a gravel road from the
Meridian Kuna Highway to the project as part of the project and
then having him also provide a 100X band to pave the road and to
put in the curbs, gutters and sidewalks upon completion of
selling one half of the lots all to Highway District Standards
and from the funds generated from the sale of these lots.
Hepper: Do you know whether the developer owns the ground to the
west?
Gage: The land is available.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Craig Shoemaker, 1901 Country Terrace, was sworn by the attorney.
Shoemaker: As President of the Homeowners Association I am here
to voice a few of our concerns. One of our main concerns is
property value, water situation, and road impact with lot
drainage problems. (Further - see tape)
Hepper: How many houses are in Country Terrace Subdivision?
Shoemaker: Twenty-eight.
Crookston: You have dry line sewers in Country Terrace, how
about the water?
Shoemaker: I would guess that maybe it is there.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 17
Clerk Niemann: Not a dry line water.
Crookston: Do you know what the subdivision's plans are about
connecting to city sewer?
Shoemaker: The majority of the homeowners that I've talked to,
we want to stay where we are just the way we are. We do not want
to connect.
Chairman Johnson: You mentioned you represent the Homeowners, do
you have a list of people that you represent or do you represent
all of them or the board of directors?
Shoemaker: I know I don't represent all of them. I was asked to
talk instead of having a bunch of different people come up here.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Norm Fuller, 1103 W. Camellia, was sworn by the attorney.
Fuller: We met with the Developers this afternoon and we don't
have any big problem, I think we are going to cooperate.
Chairman Johnson: When you say, "we" your meaning who?
Fuller: The developers of Meridian Greens. We have no interest
in connecting on to 3rd Street, their subdivision at all, unless
it goes out to Meridian Road then we probably would.
Alidjani: When Country Terrace was put together was that a
dedicated road or area of an easement or a culdesac or something
to extend that road as they are proposing today.
Fuller: Yes. Country Terrace way was originally going to go on
through which is now Kingsford but they didn't want that blocked
off.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else?
Sylvia Evans, 2020 S. Meridian Rd., was sworn by the attorney.
Evans: My concern is the property, the easement coming out for
Meridian Road would come right beside mine. Also there is a
parcel of land sitting back there, what would they put on there
because we do have a real water problem.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else?
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 18
Pat Thacker, 165 E. Overland Rd., was sworn by the attorney.
Thacker: I own the property north of this proposed subdivision.
I have some high ground, I have some low ground and then I also
share, my property line with five people in Country Terrace. I
dug a test hole to see where all the water on the lower part of
my property was coming from and that water is groundwater, it
subs up, it's about three feet down. It's definitely a wetlands.
There is a tremendous amount of duck and geese that live there.
The Irrigation District, Nampa Meridian Irrigation District tried
to take out all the trees on that ditch, cut them all down, they
wanted to put a road on either side and spray it. That also
violates 404C, which is a Federal Clean Water Act and the
wetlands is also a Federal mandate that they not be destroyed.
(Further explanation - see tape)
Chairman Johnson: Anyo
Susan Baker-Thon, 1889
attorney.
Thon: We need some
Covenants, the size of
us do wish to remain on
ne else to testify?
Country Terrace Way, was sworn by the
assurances for our comfort about the
those homes, and access. The majority of
our own water and sewer system.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else?
Ralph Lobato, 1712 Country Terrace, was sworn by the attorney.
Lobato: I do agree that the access r^oad to Meridian-Kuna Highway
be put in first before construction starts. I do differ in
opinion on the sewer. I'd like to see at least a connection if
we are not individually connected to the city sewer.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else?
Addy Houston, 1771 Country Terrace, was sworn by the attorney.
Houston: In reviewing my title insurance there seems to be a
discrepancy on property lines on two or three of the homes that
adjoins this property and until this is cleared up I would think
that something should be held up.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else?
Sid Harmon, 1635 Country Terrace Way, was sworn by the attorney.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PRGE 19
Harmon: The one point I wanted to make is to ensure that the
application process concerned for this property in this
development does address the State Stream Rlteration Permit and
the Federal 404C Permit procedures to ensure that those permits
are looked at as far as the wetlands are concerned.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else?
Steve Anderson, 1713 Country
attorney.
Anderson: To the Commission,
late tonight. To my neighbors
and expressing your concerns.
will do everything we can to
a goad quality project.
Terrace Way, was sworn by the
I want to thank you for working
I want to say thank you for coming
I'm sure the builder and myself
make sure that this project will be
Jewell: I'd like to address some of the subjects that have been
brought up here tonight. The future Meridian Greens traffic
through Country Terrace probably wouldn't happen one out of a
hundred times because they would have to go out of their way to
get there. There is no direct access to Meridian Greens. The
future road to Meridian Road in exchange for Calderwood is new
information to me. I was not aware of it and I don't know where
the information came from. We asked the Rda County Highway
District if there was any problems in vacating it especially
since if it dropped out to Meridian Road it may cause undue
traffic there. However, it's possible some access could be made
however we'd have to loose a lot and Meridian Greens would have
to loose a lot to put it in there plus we would have to get
additional right of way from somewhere to be able to punch it
through. Whoever mentioned about the bridge there is absolutely
correct, there is no way we could ever put a bridge in and
develop this property at our expense. We have no intentions.
Values of the properties on our proposed development will in
general probably exceed those in Country Terrace. The
restrictive covenants have been well developed. We do not plan
on having any basements. We will be abiding to FHA drainage
grading.
Chairman Johnson: Northwest Design Service sent a letter to the
ACHD - maybe I misunderstood what you said, it's a request is
hereby made for the exchange of Calderwood right of way for the
new proposed street right of ways as shown on the preliminary
plat. Tie that in with your opening comment.
MERIDIRN PLRNNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 20
Jewell: The exchange was in regard to right of ways within the
property and ACHD has asked us to resubmit a letter, they prefer
that we just go in a vacate it rather than go over it with
exchanges. The only other thing was the wetland areas. The wet
areas have never been identified or dedicated as wetlands. The
well lot and the property north of that are in fact lower than
our development, everything drains that way. Our intentions are
to intercept it and to drain it off into Ten Mile before it gets
to that property. Actually what we will be doing is improving
the well lot for Country Terrace Subdivision.
Gage: In his original testimony I believe he touched on building
this road we are concerned about, yet he just stated that he
couldn't possibly afford to build a bridge across Ten Mile Creek,
my question is who are we kidding. You don't build a bridge
across Ten Mile Creek you can't get access to the subdivision.
Jewell: There is suggestion that we implied there would be a
road from our development to Meridian Road, this has never been.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else?
Larry Bertetto, 665 Rntigua, was sworn by the attorney.
Bertetto: The question I'd like to ask is this subdivision going
to connect to 3rd Way in Meridian Greens?
Chairman Johnson: I think the Meridian Greens #2 I think they
designate that area south. The extension of 3rd Street would be
where the road would connect but on this plat it doesn't show 3rd
Street going down that far south.
Hepper: Would there be a problem with emergency vehicles having
only one access.
Alidjani: Yes you do.
Jewell: The extension to the future Meridian Greens was my
original concept because that was the way that they were going to
develop that in the future. 1 approached the owners engineers on
it and presented them my conceptual design and asked them if they
could foresee any problem at the time, naturally they couldn't
comment on it but I left ward for them to let me know if there
were. The owner of the property should have had access for this
information. If there is no lot, that is correct we do not have
legal access.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 21
Alidjani: So you'd have a culdesac.
Chairman Johnson: Anyone else? No response. I will close the
Public Hearing.
The Motion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Hepper to have
the attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for
this request.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #6: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXRTION & ZONING
W/PRELIMINRRV PLAT: MAWS RDDITION:
Chairman Johnson: I will open the Public Hearing. Is there a
representative from the applicant present? We did receive today
one letter that Jack has entered into our record. Basically it's
a concern from Dennis Baker not interested in the vacation of
Adkins Lane.
Pat Teely, 479 Main, Boise, was sworn by the attorney.
Teely: This application is for an R-8 zone on 9.39 acres, the
total subdivision comprises 43 lots for a density of 4.6 units
per acre. Well below the density allowed for an R-8 zone however
we need that for the dimensional, in other words to get down to
60 foot wide lots. We believe this is consistent with the zoning
that you have provide for Mr. Baker in the Danbury Subdivision
area. We are providing for the extra right of way far
improvements to Pine Street and to Locust Grove and will build
these in conjunction with the application. Water and sewer will
also be extended north on Locust Grove as part of this
application. We have read the Engineer's comments and don't have
any problems with what he's requested. Can I answer any
questions?
Hepper: Do you have any landscaping figured?
Teely: There's nothing shown here but we will landscape along
the Locust Grove and Pine Street in order to buffer the
subdivision.
Hepper: Will there be curb, gutter and sidewalk?
Teely: That's correct.
~ i
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 22
Hepper: From the edge of the sidewalk to the property line how
much landscape area will there be?
Teely: We had originally intended far 20 feet. Whatever it
would take to build a maintainable four foot berm along there.
Hepper: Would the property line be at the top of the berm?
Teely: That would be at the right of way at Locust Grove and
Pine. There will be a landscape easement in there.
Hepper: I see on the map you've gat a couple duplex lots
indicated.
Teely: Correct.
Hepper: I didn't see anything on the application. Do you plan
on applying for a couple duplex lots then?
Teely: Yes we do.
Hepper: Do you have a minimum square footage in mind for the
duplexes?
Teely: The developer, Mr. Gregory could probably address that
better than I.
Hepper: What's your minimum square footage proposal for the
building lots?
Teely: We designated 1000 sq. feet. We would like to keep it
between 1000 and 1100 sq. feet minimum.
Steve Gregory, 1135 N. Mitchell, was sworn by the attorney,
Discussion on Mr. Baker's letter. (See Tape)
Hepper: Do you have a minimum square footage for the duplexes?
Gregory: Probably 1050 per unit.
Chairman Johnson: Anyone else?
Richard Parcells, 1095 N. Locust Grove, was sworn by the
attorney.
MERIDIRN PLANNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 23
Parcells: Concerns about traffic impact and a traffic light at
Locust Grove and Fairview. I own five acres that is just north
of the proposed subdivision. The other question I have would be
concerning a drainage ditch that runs along the fence line of my
property and the proposed subdivision property.
Clerk Niemann: Drdinance states they have to t he the ditch.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else?
Dale Newberry, High Micro Tool, 1410 E. Pine, was sworn by the
attorney.
Newberry: I just wonder about the advisability of running
residential up so close to industrial. With Hi-Micro on the east
and the other 52 acres on the south side, there's a large portion
that is designated industrial. I seems separation would be good.
Concerns about traffic problems because of the buses. The
industrial area out there is growing slowly and it seems like the
residential is promoted out there it will deter that industrial
growth.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else?
Don Bryan, 2070 N. Locust Grove, was sworn by the attorney.
Bryan: I'm here for the same concerns I've had the last couple
years, which are school overcrowding and additional traffic.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. We really appreciate your comments
on that. There is no question but what - we know that our
infrastructure is being stressed with all the development here.
(Further explanation - see tape) We did try to make some headway
on the water problem.
Bryan: Yes but we've made it worse.
Atty. Crookston: I received a call yesterday from Andy
Harrington, who is the attorney for Nampa Meridian Irrigation
District and he clarified apparently a previous offer he made to
our City Engineer that Nampa Meridian, and this is tentative, he
is going to do some research as to what the developers, what
rights the developers had obtained from Nampa Meridian to do what
they did in that Jackson Stub drain. He said also that
tentatively they would do the work and they would pay for the
costs if the City would obtain the rights to go on the property
to replace that 1B" line with a cc^4" line.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 24
Crookston: I don't think the City has a responsibility but if we
can be a instigator of solving the problem, that's up to the
Council but the City may be interested in doing that.
Chairman Johnson: Anyone else to testify? No response. I will
close the Public Hearing.
The Motion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Hepper to have
the attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #7: PUBLIC HERRING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SY
JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT:
Chairman Johnson: I will open the public hearing. Is there
someone representing the school who would like to come forward?
Chuck Liehe, 600 N. Edgewood Lane, Eagle, was sworn by the
attorney.
Liehe: I'm representing the Meridian School District tonight and
we are requesting a conditional use permit to move the
Rlternative School from the 2 1/2 Street address to the end of
Lanark Street. The reasons are, first of all we own the property
and its larger it would accommodate the school. Evidentally the
adjoining property owners don't care because we've had no
negative comments about us moving it there and the District has
budgeted money to move it. I'll answer questions if you have
any.
Chairman Johnson: There is a letter from Bill Curtis and is in
reference to this request. Letter was read aloud.
Alidjani: Did you have any problem with the Engineer's comments?
Liehe: No problem with the City Engineer's comments.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else?
Charles Haws, 2815 Arthur Street, Boise, was sworn by the
attorney.
Haws: I have several questions. The first being why is the
school district moving the buildings.
Chairman Johnson: He gave several reasons.
MERIDIAN PLRNNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PAGE 25
Haws: Yes but where is all the money coming from? What is it
going to accomplish to move these buildings down there?
Chairman Johnson: I really don't have any answers to that.
Haws: But it's on a dead end street, that's going to create
more problems in an industrial area.
Discussion. (tape on file)
Chairman Johnson: So you have traffic, money and parking as
concerns, right. Vou have a lot of good concerns and a lot of
those things will need to be answered by the School District.
Thank you. Anyone else? No response. I will close the Public
Hearing.
The Motion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Hepper to have
the attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Motion Carried: Al Yea:
The Motion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Hepper to pass on
a favorable recommendation to approve this Conditional Use
Permit.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINRRY PLRT ON MERIDIAN PLACE #3:
Chairman Johnson: I will open the Public Hearing. Is there a
representative present?
Julie Parker, was sworn by the attorney.
Parker: That portion of the drain that runs common to our west
boundary, I think it's Mr. Raleigh Hawe's property to the west
there, if it is in fact determined that any of that drain does
lay within our property it will be tiled. They are still asking
that three to four lots in the culdesac area of what is called
Teaco Street be for duplexes.
Rlidjani: Can you specifically tell us which lots?
Parker: Probably lots 7,8 8 9 of Block 4.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PRGE 26
Raleigh Hawe, 530 Blue Heron Ln., was sworn by the attorney.
Howe: I have some concerns about the drain on the west side of
this property that runs north and south. There is a drain the
that should be put in. The problem with this area is that it has
some wets that occurs in the westerly direction primarily in the
northwesterly direction and if this t he were not put in it might
create a wet spot of some hundred yards or two hundred yards down
in a north westerly direction. I understand they are putting in
a perforated t he going east and west on their south boundary on
this. There is a t he coming dawn on the Stokesbury Lateral in
an east west direction from Locust Grove to the half mile point,
part of that the is on Jon Barnes's properties and I'm not sure
that that boundary or the property line doesn't fall same place
in this particular plats area also. Who maintains the ditch and
the maintenance for repair or replacement for either the t he or
an open ditch situation should a problem arise. I'm not sure
that there is an easement granted through subdivisions for repair
or replacement of tiles. (Explained further problems w/water)
Crookston: If it's an irrigation ditch, which an irrigation
district has control over, either an easement or title to. They
have the right to go across the property to get to wherever the
problem exists.
Chairman Johnson: What if it is maintained by the homeowner
rather than the irrigation district?
Crookston: If it's within a easement or title the irrigation
district has the right to go down the easement. Their problem
is, is can they go across a lot for another property owners land
to get to their easement. That's another question that is a
problem. Where there is no easement and it's a ditch that is
basically the ditch users, I don't know the answer to that.
Discussion Held. fSee tape)
Howe: What type of fence will be placed on their west boundary?
I would prefer it not to be wood.
Chairman Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else?
Liz Bolts, 984 Claybourne, was sworn by the attorney.
MERIDIRN PLANNING & ZONING
PPRIL 14, 1992
PRGE 27
Bolts: Concerns about speeding vehicles, overcrowding of
schools, water supply, water pressure and duplex rental
situation.
Howe: In the northwest corner of this particular piece of
platted property there is a concrete irrigation box that splits
the water that goes north and then splits it that comes down to
my property in a southerly direction. I want an easement in that
particular area to access that water and to do what maintenance
is necessary to clean that box out and get that divider set so I
can shut the water off as it goes to the northerly direction so I
can.
Chairman Johnson: Dur Engineer's comments address that. Thank
you. Anyone else? No response. I will close the public
hearing.
The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Alidjani to
recommend approval of the preliminary plat with 2 conditions.
One is that the minimum square footage of the houses in the
subdivision be limited to 1300 square feet, the second would be
that the duplex lots not be allowed and that they be building
lots of 1300 square foot minimum for the structure. Rlso to
provide a walkway access to the Elementary School maybe from
Teaco Street or that vicinity.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
The Motion was made by Rlidjani and seconded by Hepper to adjourn
at 11:15 P. M.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS?
MERIDIRN PLANNING 8 ZONING
APRIL 14, 1992
PRGE 28
APPROVED:
i
~~',~~ _
J M J HN ON CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
_l
[ate ~. "'A. ~.. ..~__
JRCK NIEMANN, CITY CLERK
pc: Mayor 8 Council, Atty,
P & Z Members, Eng., Stuart,
Ward, Fire, Police, Gass,
Bldg., ACRD, ACC, NMID, Settlers,
APR, CDH
Mail (8)
File (8>
clt
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT N0.2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
LANARK STREET
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing
April 14, 1992, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioner
appearing through Chuck Liehe, the Planning and Zoning Commission
of the City of Meridian having duly considered the evidence and
the matter makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That a notice of a public hearing on the Conditional
AM BROSE,
FIT2G ERALO
BCROOKSTON
Attomeya enD
Couneeloro
P.O. Box l2T
MMEIan, IENo
aauz
TeleOhone 8884181
Use Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to
the said public hearing scheduled for April 14, 1992, the first
publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing;
that the matter was duly considered at the April 14, 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 this property is located within. the City of
Meridian and the Applicant owns the property; the property is
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 1
ii • •
described in the application which description is incorporated
herein.
3. That the property is zoned Industrial, which requires
a conditional use permit for the operation of a private school
which the application requests; the Applicant proposes to operate
the Meridian Academy at the location which is school for student
that have dropped out of public school and are beyond the age of
mandatory school requirement but yet the students desire to return
to continue their education; enrollment is limited and not all
students are accepted.
4. That the Industrial District is described in the Zoning
Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 12. as follows:
(I-L) Light Industrial: The purpose of the (I-L) District is
to provide for fight in ustrial development and opportunities
for employment of Meridian citizens and area residents and
reduce the need to commute to neighboring cities; to
encourage the development of manufacturing and wholesale
establishments which are clean, quiet, and free of hazardous
or objectionable elements, such as noise, odor, dust, smoke
or glare and that are operated entirely or almost entirely
within enclosed structures; to delineate areas best suited
for industrial development because of location, topography,
existing facilities and relationship to other land uses.
This district must also be in such proximity to insure
connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the
City of Meridian. Uses incompatible with light industry are
not permitted, and strip development is prohibited.
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
d CROOKSTON
Attomsye en0
Counselor
P.O. Bow t7/
M•nal•n, IaeNo
ex~x
T•Iplwne SSB-eNl
5. That the use proposed by Applicant is not a specific
allowed use in the Zoning Schedule of Use Control, 11-2-409;
however 11-2-407 D. 1. provides as follows:
"When a use is not specifically listed as a permitted use,
such use shall be hereby expressly prohibited unless by
application and authorization (as provided for under
Conditional Use) it is determined that said use is similar
to an compatible with listed permitted uses. Such uses may
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 2
then be permitted as Conditional uses.an allowed conditional
use in the R-4 district pursuant to 11-2-409 B.
6. Private schools are allowed as a conditional use in the
Industrial Zone; that while the school proposed to operated by the
Applicant is in fact operated by Joint School District No. 2, a
public school district, the school proposed to be operated is the
Meridian Academy which is not in the nature of a public school
because of the reason stated above.
7. Other property in the area is generally used for
industry and commercial uses; that there are no nearby residences
where the school will be located.
8. That proper notice has been given as required by law and
all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission have been
given and followed.
9. That sewer and water is available to the property.
10. That the City Engineer, Meridian Fire Department, Sewer
Department, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, and Central
District Health Department have submitted comments and they are
incorporated herein as if set forth in full herein.
11. That the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) has not
submitted comments but they may and they shall be incorporated
herein as if set forth in full herein.
12. That there was an owner of property in the area that
AMBROSE,
FITZGERAlO
dCROOKSTON
Attomeye snE
Counselors
P.O. Boz 12T
Mer161en, ICNo
&1612
Talspfrone B66d161
submitted a letter question a school going into the area and
requesting that a boundary fence be repaired; there also was one
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 3
property owner in the area appeared at the hearing voicing his
disapproval of the Application.
CONCLUSIONS
AMBROSE,
FITZOERALO
SCROOKSTON
Attomsys end
Counselors
P.O. Boa 427
MMICI4n, loauo
ex4z
Tslspllons SSBd/81
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 grant
conditional uses pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and, pursuant
to 11-2-418 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of
Meridian;
3. That the City of Meridian has authority to place
conditions on a conditional use permit and the use of the property
pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and pursuant to 11-2-418(0) of
the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian,
Idaho;
4. That 11-2-418(C) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances
of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council shall review
applications for Conditional Use Permits; that upon a review of
those requirements and a review of the facts presented and the
conditions of the area, the Planning and Zoning Commission
concludes as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 4
a. The use, would in fact, constitute a
conditional use and a conditional use permit
is required by ordinance.
b. The use should be harmonious with and in
accordance with the Comprehensive Plan but
the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional
use permit to allow the use.
c. The use apparently would be designed and
constructed, to be harmonious in appearance
with the intended character of the general
vicinity.
d. That the use would not be hazardous nor
should it be disturbing to existing or future
neighboring uses.
e. The property has sewer and water service
available.
f. The use would not create excessive
additional requirements at public cost for
public facilities and services and the use
would not be detrimental to the economic
welfare of the community.
g. The use would not involve a use,
activity, process, material, equipment or
conditions of operation that would be
detrimental to person, property or the
general welfare by reason of excessive
production of traffic or noise.
h. That sufficient parking for the property
and the proposed use will be required.
i. The development and uses will not result
in the destruction, loss or damage of a
natural or scenic feature of major
importance.
5. That the comments of the City Engineer must be met and
AM9ROSE,
FIT2GERALD
B CROOKSTON
Atlomeye mE
Counselors
P.O. BOx 1Y7
MMENn, IArtNo
BSSIR
TalapNOne BSNIEI
complied with, particularly the extension of sewer and water
through the property for further extension to the east.
6. The requirements of the Ada County Highway District, if
submitted prior to City Council action, must be met; that the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 5
requirements of the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District shall be
met.
7. That all ordinances of the City of Meridian must be met,
including but not limited to, the Uniform Building Code, Uniform
Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, the fire and Life Safety Code,
and all parking and landscaping requirements.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts
and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONER HEPPER VOTED
COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED
COMMISSIONER SHEARER VOTED ~~`
COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI VOTED-
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends
AMBROSE,
FIT2G ERALO
E CROONBTON
Attorneys ane
CounMllora
P.O. Box ll7
MerlElAn, IEMo
B38t2
TalaD~ona BB8~181
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:
APPROVED:
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 6
~° ~ ii • •
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SKYLINE DEVELOPMENT, INC.
REZONE APPLICATION
A PORTION OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SECTION 13, T. 3 ., R. 1 W.
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
AMSROSE,
F1T2G ERALD
S CROOKSTON
Attomeya a~W
Couneeloro
R.o. Boa uT
Me~IGIan, IENo
83M2
TeleOAOne SSB-H!i
The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing
April 14, 1992 at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioner
appearing through Dave Turnbull, the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the City of Meridian having duly considered the
evidence and the matter, makes the following Findings of Fact and
Conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That a notice of a public hearing on the Rezone
Application was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to
the said public hearing scheduled for April 14, 1992, the first
publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing;
that the matter was duly considered at the April 14, 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 this property is located within the City of
Meridian and is owned by the Applicant and which property is
described in the application which description is incorporated
herein; that the property is presently zoned R-4 Residential; the
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1
area in which Applicants' property is located is developed as a
R-4 Residential and the Applicant has developed property in the
area has R-4 Residential.
3. The property is a part of The Landing Subdivision; the
R-4 zone is the zone that was placed on the property at the time
that it was annexed which annexation was at the request of the
Applicant; that the Applicant proposes to now have the property
zoned R-8 Residential; that the apparent purpose for the change
to R-8 is that the Applicant feels such zoning is more appropriate
for the land that is adjacent to I-84.
4. That the R-4 District and the R-8 District are described
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALO
6 CROOKSTON
M~omsys NE
Counselors
P.O. Bov t2Z
MBrlElan, IENo
88NZ
TalsDlrons BB&MBl
in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 1 and 2 as follows:
(R-4) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The purpose of
the (R-4) District is to permit the establishment of
low density single-family dwellings, and to delineate
those areas where predominately residential development
has, or is likely to occur in accord with the
Comprehensive Plan of 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) dwelling
units per acre and requires connection to the Municipal
Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian.
(R-8) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.: The purpose
of the (R-8) Disc tr ct is t-' o permit the establishment of
single and two (2) family dwellings at a density not
exceeding eight (8) dwelling units pre acre. This
district delineates those areas where such development
has or is likely to occur in accord with the
Comprehensive PTan of the City and is also designed to
permit the conversion of large homes into two (2) family
dwellings in well-established neighborhoods of
comparable land use. Connection to the Municipal Water
and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian is required.
5. Even though R-8 zoning is requested, the Applicant lists
the density as 4.02 dwelling units per acre on the Application for
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2
AMSROSE,
FIT2GERALO
ECROOKSTON
Attorneys antl
Counaelon
P.O. Boz a21
Msrltllan, Itleho
s3eaz
Telephone BB&N81
preliminary plat which was submitted in conjunction with this
rezone request.
6. The significant difference between the R-4 and R-8
zoning is in the bulk and coverage requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance; the R-8 Zone allows duplexes, 60 feet of street
frontage and 6,000 square foot lots whereas the R-4 zone allows
only single-family dwellings and requires 70 feet of road frontage
and 8,000 square foot lots as a minimum.
7. That the initial phases of The Landing Subdivision have
been zoned and developed as R-4 developments; the other
subdivisions in the area are R-4 subdivisions; the property along
Waltman lane, which is property to the east of the subject
property is a much older area and is developed at an R-4 density,
or much less dense; that the original Crestwood Estates
Subdivision, while developed before the adoption of the present
Zoning Ordinance, is mostly developed at an R-4 density; that the
continuation of Crestwood Estates Subdivision, including what is
now known as Fenway Park Subdivision, is zoned and developed under
the R-4 requirements; that there is property to the west, across
Linder Road and adjacent to I-84 which is not in the City limits,
that is developed at one dwelling unit per acre.
8. That there was testimony at the hearing objecting to
the Application; there were several residents in the Waltman lane
area objecting that the increased traffic would overburden the
area and the interchange system at Waltman Lane and Meridian Road
and East First Street would be totally inadequate; there was
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3
testimony that the impact of so many homes would severely
overcrowd the schools; there were concerns about the increase of
traffic on Linder Road; there was objection based on the size of
the lots; there was testimony that there is a bridge on Waltman
Lane that could not handle projected traffic.
9. That the Applicant's engineer, Roy Johnson indicated
that there was a traffic study in process; that the traffic study
has not been received.
10. That comments were submitted by the City Engineer, Nampa
Meridian Irrigation District, Ada County Highway District,
Meridian Fire Department, and the Bureau of Reclamation and those
comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in herein.
11. That proper notice has been given as required by law and
all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission have been
followed.
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 Applicants'
property.
2. That the City has the authority to take judicial notice
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
a cROOKSror+
Attorneys and
Counseloro
P.O. Box l27
Meddlan, Idaho
ex~z
Telephone BBBM81
of its own ordinances, other governmental statues and ordinances,
and of actual conditions existing within the City and state.
3. That the City of Meridian has authority to place
conditions upon granting a zoning amendment.
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
ii • •
4. That the City has judged this Application for a zoning
amendment upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section 11-2-
416 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian
and upon the basis of the local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67
Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Comprehensive Plan of the City of
Meridian, and the record submitted to it and the things of which
it can take judicial notice.
5. That 11-2-416 (K) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances
of the City of Meridian sets forth standards under which the City
shall review applications for zoning amendments; that upon a
review of those requirements and a review of the facts presented
and conditions of the area, the Planning and Zoning Commission
specifically concludes as follows:
(a) The R-8 zoning would be harmonious with and in
accordance with the Comprehensive Plan since the
property is included in the Linder Acres Neighborhood
and no Comprehensive Plan amendment would be required.
(b) The area is not intended to be rezoned in the
future and was zoned R-4 within the last two or three
years.
(c) The area included in the proposed zoning amendment
is intended to be developed in the fashion that would
be allowed under the new zoning as the entire area is
in the Linder Acres Neighborhood as set forth in the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
(d) There has been no change in the area or adjacent
area which dictate that the property should be rezoned.
The area is developed in the R-4 fashion, or even less
density, and there is nothing to indicate that the
zoning should be more dense than R-4.
AM BROSE,
FIT2GERALD
6CROOKSTON
•ttomsye Intl
Counselors
p.0. Boz 1E7
Mxltllan,IOMro
Bx~z
TelepNOne BBBI181
(e) That the property, if designed in an R-8 fashion
and under R-8 requirements and limitation would not be
designed and constructed to be harmonious with the
surrounding area, which is developed in the R-4 fashion.
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5
(f) The R-8 use would not be hazardous to the existing
or future uses of the neighborhood but could be
disturbing to the property owners in the adjacent
subdivisions and in the Waltman Lane area.
(g) The property, whether developed in the R-4 or R-8
fashion, would be able to be adequately served with most
public facilities, however the density of R-8 would
increase the impact on highways and streets over and
above the impact that R-4 development would have.
(h) R-8 development would not create excessive
additional requirements at public cost for public
facilities and services and would not be detrimental to
the economic welfare of the community.
(i) The R-8 zone and development could involve a use
detrimental to the R-4 developed property in the area
or the general welfare of the area in that the traffic
would be increased more than it would be under R-4
development and the R-8 development could lower the
property values of the R-4 property. While the
development at any density would increase the traffic
impact, the impact would be greater at the R-8 density
and the area has been largely developed in the R-4
fashion or with less density.
(j) Development at the R-8 density would cause an
increase in vehicular traffic over and above what the
traffic increase would be if developed as R-4.
(k) That a rezone would not result in the destruction,
loss or damage of any natural or scenic feature of major
importance.
(1) The proposed zoning amendment is not in the best
interest of City of Meridian.
6. It is further concluded that, if the City Council
AMBROSE,
FIRGERALD
d CROOKSTON
Attomsys And
CounNlOro
P.O. Boz ART
Mx101~n, IUNo
B3E~Y
Tsl~pllo~ro SB6N81
disagrees with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning
Commission, the comments, recommendations and requirements of
other governmental agencies would have to be met and complied with
as would the ordinances of the City of Meridian.
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CDNCll1SI0NS OF LAW - PAGE 6
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts
and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONER HEPPER
COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE
COMMISSIONER SHEARER
COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER)
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, based on these
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
AROmeye me
Counaelore
P.O. Box t2]
MerlElan, IGno
Bae.x
Telavnone BBBiaB1
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of Meridian that this request for rezone
be denied.
MOTION:
APPROVED:,// _
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
UOTED `~~
VOTED
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 7
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
GREGORY & MAWS
ANNEXATION AND ZONING
NORTHEAST 1/4 SECTION 7, T. 3N., R. lE., BOISE MERIDIAN
NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF EAST PINE STREET AND LOCUST GROVE
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled annexation and zoning application having
come on for consideration on April 14, 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 Council having heard and
taken oral and written testimony and the Applicant appearing
through Pat Tealey, and having duly considered the matter, the
Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
AMSROSE.
FITZGERALD
6 CROOKSTON
Attamys ~n0
DounNIM
R.o. Boz ~xT
MMEI~n, IENw
eaezz
TNNMwne ~1
1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and
zoning was published for fifteen days weeks prior to the said
public hearing scheduled for April 14, 1992, the first publication
of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the
matter was duly considered at the April 14, 1992, hearing; that
the public was given full opportunity to express comments and
submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were made
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
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1
reference is incorporated herein; that the property is
approximately 9.38 acres in size; it is located in the Northwest
Quadrant of the intersection of East Pine Avenue and Locust Grove
Road.
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERA~D
d CROOKBTON
Attorneys and
CounNloro
P.O. Box 1Y7
MarlElen, Itleho
WN2
Telaplana BBB N61
3. That the property is presently zoned by the county as
D-2 and the requested Zone is R-8, Residential.
4. The general area surrounding the property is used
agriculturally, residentially, and industrially.
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 Applicant has an agreement to purchase the property.
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 as indicated in paragraph 3 above; that the present use
of the property is for agriculture and a residence; that the
applicant indicated that the intended development of the property
is for mostly a single family R-8 subdivision, with a couple of
duplexes; the Applicant testified the duplexes would have 1.050
square feet on each side.
10. There were property owners in the immediate area that
testified as to the Application; that one owner questioned having
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2
residential so close to industrial; another property owner
presented concerns about traffic and two people testifying were
concerned about drainage and school overcrowding.
11. That the property is between Old Town and the Eastern
Industrial Review Area and there is no specific designation in the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan for the area within which the property
to be annexed is located; 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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. That the property can be serviced with City water and
sewer.
15. That the Ada County Highway District, Department of
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALO
i CROOKSTON
Allpny~.na
counwlnt
P.O. BOK IZ7
MrtIAIN, IE/110
NM2
TAlplgns!lNN7
Health, the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, School District,
City Engineer, Bureau of Reclamation and City Fire Department
submitted comments and such are incorporated herein as if set
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3
forth in full.
16. That the R-8, Residential District is described in the
Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. Z, and such is incorporated herein
as if set forth in full; that the Applicant submitted a
preliminary plat.
17. That the Applicant's representative stated that
Applicant would landscape East Pine and Locust Grove Road which
would be maintained by a homeowners association; the Meridian
Ordinance requires tiling of all ditches included in the area to
be annexed as part of the development of the subdivision.
18. That proper notice was given as required by law and all
procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given
and followed.
19. That the Application notes that the legal description
supplied with the Application was not based on a ground survey but
on compiled information.
AM8f10SE,
FITZGEMLD
iGROONSTON
Anom.y..~e
GounNbn
vo.eo:rn
wraun, a.no
we.s
r.uFnw. ees«a
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
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
pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the
Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
BCROOKSTON
Atlomeye enE
CiOUnMlon
P.O. Boz IY7
MerW4n, IONo
tatwx
Telepltoee BSl~e/!1
exercise of the City's annexation authority is a Legislative
function.
3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this
annexation and zoning use application contained in Section 50-222,
Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City
Ordinances, 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, who has a Purchase Agreement for the property, 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.
9. That the development of annexed land must meet and
comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in
particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
AKOmeyl eno
Counselors
V.O. Box 127
Merlolan, loelw
exlz
TNep8one 8861181
schedules and requirements; that the Applicant will be required
to connect to Meridian water and sewer; that the property will be
subject to Site Planning Review and the Subdivision and
Development Ordinance; that as a condition of annexation ditches
that are property boundaries or only partially located on the
property must be completely tiled, including that portion not
located on the property if it is a boundary.
10. That proper and adequate access to the property is
available and will have to be maintained, however Phase I will
have to be developed before Phase II to meet the Fire Department's
comments.
11. That the Applicant's property is not specifically
included in a defined neighborhood as designated in the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan but is located between Old Town and the Eastern
Industrial Review Area; that it is concluded that the property is
in compliance with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan since the
proposal is in large part similar to the development of the Old
Town area and with the development of Danbury Fair Subdivision and
therefore the Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive
Plan and does not conflict with the Rural Areas policies.
12. Therefore, based on the Application, the testimony and
evidence, these 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 as
requested; that the development of the property shall meet the
representations of the Applicant and his agents and included in
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6
i ~
AMSROSE,
FITZG ERALD
dCROOKSTON
Allomeye sn0
Counselors
P.O. Roe IZ]
MsrlCien, IEetlo
eaeez
Tslep~ona SSB MBI
the Application, and there shall only be the number of duplexes
as stated on the preliminary plat and the size of each duplex
until shall be a minimum of 1,050 square feet; that the conditions
shall also include 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 orderly development and
reasonable if the conditions are met; that the property shall be
subject to de-annexation if the conditions are not met and
strictly adhered to.
13. 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.
14. That the requirements of the Nampa Meridian Irrigation
District shall be met as well the requirements of the Bureau
Reclamation, the City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, and
the Meridian Fire Department.
15. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the
annexation and zoning of R-8, Residential would be in the best
interest of the City of Meridian.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 7
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends
to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the
annexation and zoning 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 and to the all ditches,
canals and waterways as required in these Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law 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.
MOTION:
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
AMBROSE,
PITZGERALD
d CROOKSTON
AttOtMye end
Counselor
P.O. Boz eR7
Ma~IElen, Iosoo
axes
Tslepnona BBBJI81
COMMISSIONER HEPPER VOTED_~~ -
COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED !~~
COMMISSIONER SHEARER VOTED __
COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI VOTED ~U
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
APPROVED:~~~_
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 8
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
GLENN L. JOHNSON
ANNEXATION AND ZONING
SW 1/4 NW 1/4 OF SECTION 19, T.3 N., R.1 E., B.M.
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
S CROOKSTON
Attomeye an0
Counaalors
P.O. Box l27
MarlElAn, 10No
aaB/z
TalepKOne geB~/81
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled annexation and zoning application having
come on for consideration on April 14, 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 Council 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 April 14, 1992, the first publication
of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the
matter was duly considered at the April 14, 1992, hearing; that
the public was given full opportunity to express comments and
submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were made
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
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Page - 1
AMRROSE,
FIT2GERALO
BCROOKSTON
Attomeye NE
CounNlOra
P.O. BoY ~YT
MxI01~n, laeno
ex.z
Talsplrona tlB8i~81
reference is incorporated herein; that the property is
approximately 8.9 acres in size; it is near the southeast quadrant
of the intersection of Meridian-Kuna Highway and Overland Road.
3. That the property is presently zoned by the county as
R-2; that the Applicant requests that the property be zoned R-4
and stated that the use proposed would be for R-4 Residential.
4. The general area surrounding the property is used
agriculturally and residentially; that the residential property
to the east is not within the City limits but other land in the
area Meridian Greens subdivision is in the City limits and is
zoned R-4 but developed at less density than R-4.
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
and the owners of record are Steven and Marcia Anderson and Lee
R. Stucker and Fae M. Stucker and they have consented to the
application to be annexed.
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 parcel of ground requested to be annexed is not
presently included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area
as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan.
9. As found above the Application requested that the parcel
be annexed and zoned R-4. The applicant has indicated that the
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Page - 2
i •
intended development of the property is for an R-4 subdivision and
the Applicant has submitted a proposed preliminary plat.
10. There were property owners in the immediate area that
testified objecting to the Application; the objections were based
on increase in traffic, that there was a wetlands area in the
property that needed protection, that connection to Meridian-Kung
Highway needed to be completed as part of this development, ground
water and drainage problems in the area, and concerns about road
connection to Meridian Greens subdivision.
11. That the property is in the MERIDIAN HILLS Neighborhood
as 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.
12. That property outside the Urban Service Planning Area,
but within the Area of Impact, may be annexed and developed but
only at densities allowed; however, the Meridian Zoning Ordinance
requires all residential zones to connect to City water and sewer
and if the property is outside the Urban Service Planning Area it
cannot receive water or sewer.
13. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan
AMBROBE,
F1T2G ERALD
d CROOKSTON
Attorneys and
CounNlore
P.O. Box 177
MM01An, 101t1o
&'1812
Tebplans t188~N61
it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLl1SI0NS OF LAW
Page - 3
in agricultural activity until it is no longer economical to
exclude orderly growth and development to maintain agricultural
pursuits.
14. 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.
15. That the property can be physically serviced with City
water and sewer but since it is outside the Urban Service Planning
Area the Urban Service Planning Area must be amended for the City
to legally provide water and sewer service and other urban
services.
16. 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.
17. That the R-4, Residential District is described in the
AMSROSE,
FITZG ERALD
bCROOKSTON
Atbrneya Ntl
COYn!llOrs
P.O. BOa /2]
Meritllen, ItlANo
eae/z
TalapNOna SSB.NBt
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 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
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Page - 4
and requires connection to the Municipal
Water and Sewer systems of the City of
Meridian.
18. That the Applicant stated in the Application that
Applicant intends to have a density of about 3.37 dwelling units
per acre and stated at the hearing that the house sizes would be
a minimum of 1,800 square feet and probably 2,000 square feet
plus, with the lot sizes having a range of 8,000 to 11,000 square
feet.
19. That proper notice was given as required by law and all
procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given
and followed.
CONCLUSIONS
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
6 CROOKSTON
Attomeya end
Counselors
P.O. Bow aY7
MarlElen, IUaho
e3eaz
Telspeona BS&aa61
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
pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the
Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that
exercise of the City's annexation authority is a Legislative
function.
3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this
annexation and zoning use application contained in Section 50-222;
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Page - 5
AMBROSE,
FIRGERALD
BCROOKSTON
Attomaye anE
Couneelon
v.o.9o=esT
MarlElen, Idelio
83M2
Telephone BSB~~81
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances,
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 owners 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.
9. That the development of annexed land must meet and
comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in
particular Section 11-9-616 which pertains to development time
schedules and requirements; that before development can occur the
Applicant will be required to request and receive an amendment to
the Urban Service Planning Area and if the City does not amend the
Urban Service Planning Area to include the land requested to be
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF IAW
Page - 6
AM BROSE,
FITZGERgLD
B CROOKSTON
Allomaya end
Coonaslore
D.O. Boz 1YT
Menelen, leano
exaz
Taleplwne l
annexed the land will only be able to be developed as land outside
the Urban Service Planning Area may be under the Comprehensive
Plan of the City of Meridian and if the Urban Service Planning
Area is amended, the Applicant shall be required 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 since the Applicant's property is in the MERIDIAN
HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD of the Comprehensive Plan, the annexation is
in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and but the requested
Zoning would not be since the land is not within the Urban Service
Planning Area and therefore does, at the present time, conflict
with the Rural Areas policies.
11. Therefore, based on the Application, the testimony and
evidence, these Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the
Comprehensive Plan, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian,
it is ultimately concluded that Applicant's property could be
annexed but the zoning, as requested, shall have to be delayed.
Land must be zoned at the time of annexation but the zone
requested would be in violation of the Comprehensive Plan and
therefore the land cannot be zoned. If the Applicant does not
consent to having the Application postponed to determine whether
the land will be included in the Urban Service Planning Area, it
is recommended that the Application be denied.
If the land is ultimately included in the Urban Service
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Page - 7
Planning Area, the conditions should be those stated above and
upon issuance of final platting and other conditions to be
explored at the City Council level; annexation would be orderly
development and reasonable if the conditions are met; that the
property shall be subject to de-annexation if the R-4 density is
exceeded or if dwellings other than single family dwellings are
allowed and this restriction shall be noted on the plat of the
subdivision.
12. 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; the concern over the wetlands
issue must addressed before the City Council as there have been
wetlands along Ten Mile Creek.
13. That the requirements of the irrigation districts and
Ada County Highway District shall be met as well the requirements
of the Bureau Reclamation and the City Engineer.
14. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
E CROOKSTON
Attomeya enE
COUneelora
P.O. Box 12l
MerlElan, IEWo
88814
TaleP8one 88&1181
annexation and zoning of R-4, Residential would be in the best
interest of the City of Meridian.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Page - $
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONER HEPPER VOTED w
COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED
COMMISSIONER SHEARER VOTED _
COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI VOTED E,~ ~'-
i
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
bCROOKSTON
Attomsys NO
Counsalore
P.O. Boa 1I7
MsRCIAn, IEAno
B381Y
Telephone l8&H!t
to the City Council of the City of Meridian that if the property
is included in the Urban Service Planning Area they approve the
annexation and zoning 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 and compliance with the
Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that the owner be requested
to allow the Application to be postponed until the Urban Service
Planning Area issue is resolved and if the consent is not given,
that the Application be denied.
MOTION:
APPROVED: 1~--~ DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Page - 9