Loading...
1991 12-10 A G E N D A MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DECEMBER 10, 1991 I ITEM: MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 12, 1991: (APPROVED) 1: FINDINGS OF FACT ON REZONE REQUEST BY SELLS, PATCH & GIBBON: (APPROVED) 2: FINDINGS OF FACT ON ACCESSORY USE PERMIT BY KATHY ROOT: (APPROVED) 3: FINDINGS OF FACT ON ANNEXATION & ZONING REQUEST BY WOODS: (APPROVED) 4: PUBLIC HEARING: REZONE REQUEST BY CHURCH OF CHRIST & WARRIOR ENTERPRISES: (FINDINGS TO BE PREPARED) 5: PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION & ZONING REQUEST BY BRENT BARRUS:(FINDINGS TO BE PREPARED) 6: PUBLIC HEARING: REZONE REQUEST W/PRELIMINARY PLAT & VARIANCE BY MERIDIAN-PLACE LTD & PROPERTIES WEST: (FINDINGS TO BE PREPARED) 7: PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION & ZONING REQUEST W/PRELIMINARY PLAT BY PETERSON & CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT: (FINDINGS TO BE PREPARED) MERIDIAN PLRNNING & ZONING DECEMBER 10. 1991 The Regular meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Cowwission was called to order 6y Chairwan Jiw Johnson. Mewbers Present: Moe Alidjani, Jiw Shearer, Tiw Hepper, Charlie Rountree: Others Present: Gary Lee, Jon Barnes, Hob Jones, Dan Frison, Helen Sharpe, Glen L. Olison Raxton, Don Bryon, Joe Siwinich, Alan Venable, Roy Johnson, Terry McCarthy, Boh Harwon, David Mortensen, Dan Wood, Rowon Yorgensen, Wayne Crookston, Gary Swith, Brent Barrus, Mike Hagood, Verl King: MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD NDVEMBER 12, 1991: The Motion was wade by Rountree and seconded 6y Hepper to approve the sinutes of the previous weeting as written: Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM M1: FINDINGS OF FRCT ON REZONE REQUEST BY SELLS, PATCH b GIBBON: The Motion was ^ade by Hepper and seconded by Rountree that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Cowwission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Abstain; Alidjani - Yea: Motion Carried: 3 - Yea; 1 - Abstain; The Motion was wade by Hepper and seconded by Rountree that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Cowwission hereby recowwends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the Rezone requested by the Applicant for the properties described in the application with the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirewents, Fire Departwent requirewents, Sewer Departwent requirewents, the Nawpa Meridian ]rrigation requirewents, the fire and life safety codes, and the Uniforw Building Code, and other Ordinances of the City of Meridian, and shall be subject to design review. Motion Carried: 3 - Yea: 1 - Abstain: ITEM N2: FINDINGS OF FACT DN ACCESSORY USE PERMIT BY KRTHY ROOT: The Motion was ^ade by Rountree and seconded by Alidjani that the Meridian Planning and Zoning hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Facts and Conclusions. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 2 Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Yea; Alidjani - Yea: Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was ^ade by Rountree and seconded by Alidjani that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~~ission hereby approves the Accessory Use Per~it 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, which specifically include the requirements and conditions cites in the Conclusions of Law nu~ber five (5), six (6) and seven (7) set forth above, and that the property be required to ^eet the water and sewer require~ents, the fire and life safety codes, and the Uniform Building Code, and other Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The conditional use shall be subject to annual review upon notice to the Applicant by the City. Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM M3: FINDINGS OF FACT ON ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST BY WOODS: The Motion was ^ade by Alidjani and seconded by Rountree that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~~ission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Alidjani - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Yea; Motion Carried: R11 Yea: Johnson: In the Decision and Reco~~endation there is a clarification we wish to make regarding the square footage lot size. With the sentence continues that the lot sizes 6e limited to 7,000 sq. ft. we are inserting the word in there siniaua, a ^ini~u• a 7,000 sq. ft.. Rountree: I would suggest you carry that correction on dawn to the square footage size also, for the hope. Johnson: We can do that. MERIDIRN PLRNNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 3 The Motion was ^ade by Rountree and seconded by Shearer that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~~ission hereby reco~~ends 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 that the Rpplicant be specifically required to t he all ditches, canals, drainages and waterways as a condition of annexation, that the lot sizes be a ^iniAUS of 7,000 and the structure sizes constructed thereon be a ^inieu^ of 1,300 square feet in size and that the Applicants weet all the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, specifically including the developeent tiAe requirewents. Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was ^ade by Rountree and seconded by Alidjani to reco~~end approve to the City Council on the preli~inary plat. Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM #4: PUBLIC HERRING: REZONE REQUEST BY THE CHURCH OF CHR]ST AND WARRIOR ENTERPRISES: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing, is there a representative present? Mike Hagood, 903 E. 1st, was sworn by the attorney. Hagood: I've put money down on this Church building to purchase to run ^y Karate School in that building. All of this is subject to the rezoning. If it goes through then we will make the other adjustaents and purchase the building for the school. Hepper: Did you read the coaaents from the Ada County Highway Departaent and the other City Departaents? Hagood: Yes I did and I do not have any problems with any of the requirements. As far as the parking area shall be paved and drainage retained on site. Is this so it will not go into the city sewer? Clerk Nie~ann: So it won't go into the street. Hagood: You also required that I show a parking plan. Presented a parking plan to the Coesission for their review. Discussion. tTape on file) - MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 4 Shearer: Are you planning any renovation? Hagood: None right now. We are going to go in the way it is for now. Shearer: I feel that the sidewalk by your parking should be connected to the First Street sidewalk and put in such a manner that it could be connected on to the west from you. Hagood: That would be fine. Crookston: I don't know what the condition of the building is but our Ordinances would require you to bring that up to code, are you prepared to do that? Hagood: Yes we are. Rountree: I have a question for the City Clerk. Could you explain what the zoning is right now and with the requested zoning what that brings about in terms of different uses. Clerk Niemann: It's zoned R-35 right now. He is asking for a CC. Johnson: Any one else to testify? Hearing and seeing none I will close the Public Hearing. The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to have attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law with one of the conditions set forth in that specifically address the extension of the sidewalk down E. Washington to First Street. Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded 6y Shearer to pass on a favorable recommendation to the City Council. Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM p5: PUBLIC HERRING: ANNEXATION 8 ZONING REQUEST BY BRENT BARRUS: Johnson: I will now open the Public Hearing. Is there a representative present for this? Brent Barrus, 5720 W. Overland, was sworn by the attorney. MERIDIRN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 5 Barrus: We are anticipating building a health and racquet club on Fairview in the Doris Subdivision. This is the property that we want annexed into the City. If you know where the Meridian Boat Shop is, it's the two lots directly west of that. Rountree: Do you have a site plan showing how you propose to place to the building and your access on and off of Fairview. Barrus: Not yet. Rountree: Have you seen the RCHD and City Engineer's cowwents? Barrus: Yes we have. Frow the City Engineer I'd like a little clarification, it indicates there, we do anticipate hooking up to the sewer and it indicates that we are required to put the eight inch line through our property, it goes on to mention that the sewer will be extended like a half of mile beyond Locust Grove. I want to wake sure that is not our responsibility. Johnson: Yes that's right. Rountree: What kind of a tiwe line do you have for this project? Barrus: We would like to start in the spring. Johnson: What are you looking at just in terws of square footage? Barrus: The ground floor should be in the neighborhood of 2,000 square feet. We anticipate this to be a two story building. Hepper: If this developwent didn't go through, if you couldn't get your financing would you still want to retain the annexation? Barrus: Yes. If this doesn't go through we will build an office cowplex. Johnson: Thank you. Is there anyone else to testify on this? Hearing and seeing none, I will close the public hearing. The Motion was wade 6y Shearer and seconded by Alidjani to have the attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for this request. Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was wade by Shearer and seconded by Alidjani to pass on a favorable recowwendation to the City Council. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 6 Motion Carried: R11 Yea: ITEM #6: PUBLIC HERRING: REZONE REQUEST W/PRELIMINARY PLRT 8 VARIANCE BY MERIDIAN PLACE LTD 8 PROPERTIES WEST: Johnson: I will now open the Public Hearing. Is there a representative present? Gary Lee, JUB Engineers, 250 So. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the attorney. Lee: The requested rezone is for existing R-4 to R-@. The purpose for the rezone is to allow for a slightly ssaller lot in the R-4 zone it is @,000 sq. ft. and a 70 foot sinisu^ frontage is required. These lots are sosewhat ssaller. The preliminary plat before you consists of three hundred lots on about 79 acres. Gave brief history of property. (See Tape) The anticipated developsent here will consist of houses that will range fros S@0,000 to 5120,000. in value. The ^inisus here will be about 1300 sq. feet as well. There will two and three car garages throughout. Explained water and sewer systes plans, and streets. Stor^ drainage will include sose standard subsurface disposal syste^s but we are also working with RCHD on sose alternatives. We are trying to develop ^ore open areas for collection of store water. The irrigation systes are currently in existence. The ditches that transport water along the east boundary to the northerly properties and also along the south boundary will both be piped. Johnson: The original plat called for the inclusion of a park. 1 notices that has been rewoved. What was your reason for resoving that? Lee: Mainly the way the park was situated we felt that that park really wouldn't be a benefit to the lots owners in that developsent except for the ones issediately adjacent to the park. Johnson: Did elisinating the park allow you to increase the nusber of lots or the lot sizes? Lee: It increased the lot sizes. Johnson: When you drew this up you apparently didn't sake any allowances for foot traffic to the grade school? Lee: There are a couple of easesents that are indicated on the plat. We did allow for a ten foot wide easesent and for access to the school. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 7 Rountree: So these are pedestrian easements not utility. Lee: Right. Rountree: Will there 6e screened fenced and gated? Lee: They will be fenced off and surfaced as well. Rountree: Concerned about odd shaped lots. What's the difference in number of lots to increase the street frontage? Lee: That is a concern of ours also and we have addressed this. Rountree: Corner lots, side street lots, and lots that have a choice of frontage are becoming a problem with people wanting privacy in their back yards and not being able to fence the• to meet City Ordinances. Can you give me the difference in lot m ounts and the potential economic impact? Lee: 1 would estimate for every block that we have shown in here you'd probably loose a lot. Rountree: E. Meadowgrass Street your identifying as a Collector, what does that mean in terms of roadway design to you? Lee: It's a wider roadway section and the main thing is that you don't have direct access to it from these residential lots. It forces you to use your local streets for all your access to your hoses. Hepper: On the R-B what is the minimum square footage allowed under R-B? Lee: I think 6,000 sq. feet. Hepper: Is there any particular reason that these lots are down scaled in size other than to try to squeeze as many lots as possible out of the development? Lee: It's market oriented. Hepper: Being a building, I know that a lot with 66 feet of frontage is pretty hard to get anything but a 1300 sq. ft. house on there. What's your overall density for the project? Lee: It's about 3.7 for the overall project. MERIDIAN PLANNING 6 ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 8 Hepper: We've had some comments about traffic on some of these other subdivisions. It looks like you are going to have potentially over 200 houses coming onto a Collector Street all trying to access Locust Grove at 8:00 in the morning. Would it be possible to have another access to Locust Grove? Lee: We've allowed two accesses to Locust Grove already. At this time we are performing a traffic study at the request of RCHD. Rountree: You indicated there would be a well lot in this subdivision. Where is this lot located? Lee: Lot 4, Block 4. Rountree: What's the store water drainage pattern? Lee: It basically goes from east to west. We are going to retain store water on site and it will ultimately end up in the south slough. EHplained the concept. tsee tape) Hepper: Did we address whether there will be a ber^ out in front? Lee: There will be a berm. Along Locust Grove we plan to dedicate 33 ft. of right of way on our half of the street and we've allowed for an additional seven feet for future right of way which the City requires and in addition to the seven there is a 10- ft. wide area that will be landscaped. Rountree: What kind of a time schedule? Lee: First phase we are planning to start construction in the spring. Hepper: The Fire Department made comment about having just one access to the subdivision until the last phase is finished, would there be any other access for emergency vehicles? Lee: We could probably plan those if it is required. Crookston: The collector, RCHD won't allow access to that, right? Lee: They discourage access to a Collector. They will look at each case by case. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 9 Crookston: It seews to we like I renenber at least one other subdivision where they have that collector idea and people fence along it. Also then on these corner lots you have a site problen if you are going to fence those. Lee: ACRD has policies on that also. Johnson: We would like soweone frow the application to address the down size lots. Please cowe forward and be sworn. Dan Frison, 1178 Fleetwood, Boise, was sworn by the attorney. Frison: The target of this project all along has been to keep the density as low as possible and still weet the pricing dewands of the warket place. Gave soave statistics on new hoses sold in 1991. tsee tape) Rountree: What's the lot got to sell for to have a reasonable profit? Frison: About 18,500. Johnson: Rnyone else to testify? Bob Jones, 2183 Hower Rd., Eagle, was sworn by the attorney. Jones: Possibly I can address soave of the concerns about the lot sizes that you expressed earlier. I would like to pass out for your inspection a brochure on a subdivision very siwilar to this that waybe address soave of the lot sizes and Bone of the hooves that will fit on thew. tJonathori Park Subd. - Boise) By varying the lot sizes it adds soave integrity to the subdivision and the marketability of it. Crookston: Are there two story hooves in Jonathon Park? Jones: Ves there are. Crookston: Are you aware of the Mleridian Ordinance that requires a ten foot setback on two story sides? Jones: Yes I aw. Johnson: Anyone else to testify? John Barnes, 1034 Justin Place, Meridian, was sworn 6y the attorney. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZGNING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 10 Barnes: We've really put a lot of time into this development. Our market range is from 580,000 to 5115,000.. In the landscaping we do plan to put a nice berm with a fence and a lighted sign. We do feel it is important that we have the zone change from the market point of view to get us in the market where we need to be. We know there are a couple of things that are going to come up and one is the traffic and we are doing a traffic study for that. Explained about impact fees being put into effect April, 1992. The other one is schools. We as developers are very concerned about schools also. We have been meeting with the School District and are working with them to try to resolve this problem. Johnson: You say we, how many people are on that committee? Barnes: 15 people on the committee. Hepper: What's the minimum square footages of the houses to be built? Barnes: We would probably say a minimum of 1380 to 1400 sq. ft.. Hepper: What was the density before this was? Johnson: 4.6 and it is 3.7 now. Anyone else to testify? Bob Harmon, 2770 N. Ten Mile Rd., was sworn by the attorney. Harmon: I'm the Secretary for the Ada West Properties Group who is the general partner in the Meridian Place LTD, we've been working with John Barnes to get this property developed. We are excited to have a good developer like Mr. Barnes. We would like to express a positive approval for Mr. Barnes's plans. Johnson: Anyone else from the public? Dave Mortensen, 1833 S. E. 3rd Way, was sworn by the attorney. Mortensen: I would like to affire that this subdivision be approved because I've built in Mr. Barnes's subdivisions and a lot of other developers subdivisions. The design of this one I helped on a lot, and the way the houses sit on the lots is very attractive. Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify? Don Bryan, 2070 N. Locust Grove, was sworn by the attorney. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 11 Bryan: Voiced concerns about drainage problems. Every hearing I've been to I keep hearing about water retention, I'm not familiar with that, but is that where they keep all the storm water there on site? Eng. Smith: I think that the drainage districts have said that they can't except water from a parcel of ground that's being developed at no higher rate than what the amount of water that runs off of that at this time. The excess amount of water has to be retained on site and disposed off or it has to be detained on site and discharged into the drainage at no greater rate than what it would normally run off in an undeveloped state. Explained what type of drainage this project will have. Bryan: Between the City and Nampa Meridian Irrigation who is responsible for deciding what goes where and how the stipulation on what goes in? Eng. Smith: The drainage district has to approve of their plans for discharge. Bryan: Also voiced concerns about increased traffic. Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify? Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the attorney. Sharp: I don't care what the plans look like on this project, I'm opposing this because my family moved out here to have some farm land without having houses right on top of us. We are not doing enough planning. Johnson: Anyone else from the public to testify? John Barnes: I would like to address the gentleman's concern about the drainage irrigation. We did meet with all the irrigators downstream and we have sized the pipe to handle all the inches they presently handle. We have really gone out of the way to be sure that we don't have any type of drainage problem. Johnson: If there is no one else to testify, I will close the public hearing at this time. DISCUSSION HELD ON IRRIGRTIDN. tTRPE ON FILE) The Motion was ^ade by Shearer and seconded by Alidjani to have the attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. MERLDIRN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 12 Rountree: Could we have discussion on this? First off I think the idea of taking the park out of the area, having a fair amount of experience with parks, is probably not a bad idea. The Collector Street into the area is a good idea, however, I would like to see access totally restricted on the Collector Street to side streets which would impact at least one building lot. Fire Department stated concerns about one access. If it is going to be phased in this fashion there should be an additional access provided. Then also the final concern is density. The Motion was withdrew by Shearer and the second withdrew by Alidjani. The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to have the attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law containing an additional two conditions related to access into this development, that at such time there is a minimum of 100 dwellings in the development phases that at that point a second access point be provided into the subdivision before any further development continues and also that no access be allowed on E. Meadowgrass Street as a Collector designation which would impact Lot 2 of Block 5. Motion Carried: All Yea: No recommendation at this time for the City Council. RECESS - 10 MINUTES: ITEM p7: PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXRTION 8 ZONING REQUEST W/PRELIMINARY PLAT BY PETERSON 8 CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT Johnson: I will now open the Public Hearing. Is there someone fro^ the applicant that would like to come forward. Roy Johnson, 9390 Ustick Rd. It10, Boise, was sworn by the attorney. Johnson: What we are proposing is 143 lots on approximately 43 acres giving us a density of 3.34 per acre. We are requesting a Zone of R-4. I have a couple of questions concerning the remarks from the City Engineer. One of the comments that Gary asked is that we should include the little parcel of land from ACRD in our plat. That corner has been deeded to ACHD, we don't have any access to it so that would have to be something that would have to come fro^ ACRD. The second item is that we need to go to the MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 13 center of the road, however ACRD claiws the first 25 feet and they have been deeded an additional 10 feet for a total of 35 feet as part of the widening of Meridian Road. We have been talking with Gary about the location of the sewer line. Irrigation, I do not have any swall irrigation lines that continue through. We have the south slough on the north side and the Cresson Lateral along the west side but other than that there are no local irrigation ditches crossing through the property. I do have Bowe lots that are less than 8,000 sq. feet and I will fix that and have it back to you before the next meeting. Regarding the plat on the roadway, Gary has asked that we have a second access to the south which would go into Meridian Manor. Certainly we would prefer not to put a roadway through there we could give it emergency access. Discussion. tSee tape) Eng. Swith: Explained request for another access. My big concern is we are getting a lot of sewer lines that are running between lot lines and we've already experienced one problew in Glennfield Manor where it was set up that the sewer line was to have an access road constructed over it, a fence was to be built to separate it and what happened is they sold the lot, the lot owner went in and built everything over the sewer line and there is no access now. Discussion. tSee tape3 Johnson: We do have a couple of nice parks in here and we do feel like the parks are an asset. The developer will improve the park and provide the grass. Along the south slough, the requirements of Nampa Meridian are that we have 40 feet from the center line to the lot line. We have approximately 25 feet along the top which we are going to level out and also plant that area so that it is also a park setting. The other comment was that the maximum length of lots in the City is 1,000 ft. we have some problem with that. Explained. We ask for a variance on the length of the requirements. I will be happy to answer any questions. Rountree: The access to the one section you show private park, on the easterly, it looks pretty skinny for waintenance vehicles and such. .]ohnson: It's 10 feet wide, it is fairly adequate to get a vehicle in there. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 14 Rlidjani: I would rather see it wide enough so that if you do need an emergency vehicle in there you could get it in there. Rountree: What's the easement shown on lots 14 and 15? Johnson: That is an access point. Hepper: What is the minimum square footage of the houses? Johnson: We would like to have our square footages mixed. Hepper: Didn't the school district have something in there about how they would like to see the prices ranges of the houses 6e from E75 to f90. I'd like to see the 1300 sq. ft. instead of the mix myself. Rountree: Have you dealt with the covenants for this subdivision at this time? Johnson: We have not. Chairman Johnson: We need to enter a letter from Bedelco, Inc. dated 12-04-91 into the record. They state three basic objections to this request. Is there anyone else that would like to testify on this application? Veryl King, 2518 N. Meridian Rd., was sworn by the attorney. King: I would like to recommend there be an access on the west side of this and I have no problems other than that. Johnson: Rnyone else to testify? Erwin James Venable, 2625 Venable Lane, was sworn by the attorney. Venable: I represent ^y Bother and the other owners on Venable Lane. We have the property west of this subdivision, as Mr. King stated I think we need an access to the west. Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else to testify? Bob Flat en, 1111 No. Rdkins Lane, was sworn by the attorney. Flat en: I agree with Mr. Hepper about protecting the square footage. When the homes are protect a little better, we've gat better property value. Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify? MERIDIRN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE IS Ramon Yorgensen, 5000 Fifeshire, was sworn by the attorney. Yorgensen: The development business is an economic business. Explained another project that has a mixed footage in the Meridian area and how nice it will be. This is not a low end project. I would respectfully request that we could have the mixed footages. Secondly we have gone with larger lots and have provided a park for the subdivision. There has been discussion about having an access to the west, the access would probably cost about (25,000.00 and we don't think it would be an as desirable subdivision with this. One option I would like to propose is that possibly we could move that access from the north to the west to satisfy some of these requests that have been made. Rountree: This looks like a good project and I feel the way that it is laid out there is room for flexibility. Alidjani: Hack to the easement that is ten foot. Can you negotiate a little bit to give it a few feet? Yorgensen: We are trying to meet all the minimum requirements. We will have our engineer look at this and see if there is a way to get a couple more feet. Johnson: Anyone else like to testify? Hearing none I will close the public hearing. The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to have the attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to pass on a favorable recommendation to the City Council on the annexation and zoning. Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to adjourn the meeting at 10:05 P. M.: Motion Carried: All Yea: (TAPE ON FILE) MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING DEC. 10, 1991 PAGE 16 ATTEST: cc: Mayor & Council, P & Z Me®bers, Atty., Bldg., Eng., Police, Gass, Stuart, Ward, ACRD, NMID, ACC, Hallett, Valley News, Mail (7) File (7) .clk APPROVED: BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MERIDIAN CHURCH OF CHRIST AND WARRIOR ENTERPRIZES, INC. REZONE APPLICATION LOTS 11 THROUGH 15, BLOCK 2, F.A. NOURSE'S THIRD ADDITION MERIDIAN, IDAHO AM BROSE, FITZGERALD B CROOKSTON Attorneys antl Counselors P.O. Bos 42] Merltllan, ItlaNo Bae42 reieonone ee&448i FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing December 10, 1991 at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioner, Warrior Enterprises appearing through Mike Hagood, 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 December 10, 1991, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the December 10, 1991, 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 Church of Christ, Inc., and the Applicant, Mike Hagood, has an agreement to purchase the property, and which property is described in the application which FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1 description is incorporated herein; that the property is presently zoned R-15 Residential; the area in which Applicants' property is located is developed in larye part as a residential area; that some of the nearby land is used commercially and many other properties on East First have been rezoned to commercial designation and are used commercially. 3. That the Applicants propose to have the property zoned (C-C) Community Commercial and use the property for a karate school. 4. That the C-C District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 7 as follows: (C-C) COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT: The purpose of the (C-C) District--'s to permit the establishment of general business uses that are of a larger scale than a neighborhood business, and to encourage the development of modern shopping centers with adequate off-street parking facilities, and associated site amenities to serve area residents and employees; to prohibit strip commercial development and encourage the clustering of commercial enterprises. All such districts shall have direct access to a transportation arterial and collector and be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. 5. That the property is contained in OLO TOWN as shown on AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD B CROO KSTON Attorneys end Counselors P.O. Box d2T Meridian, Ideno 83842 Telep~ane BBBd081 the Policy Diagram at Page 7 of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan even though not zoned Old Town; the Old Town is described in the Zoning Ordinance as follows: (OT) OLD TOWN DISTRICT: The purpose of the (OT) District is-to accommodate and encourage further expansion of the historical core of the community; to delineate a centralized activity center and to encourage its renewal, revitalization and growth as the public, FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2 quasi-public, cultural, financial and recreational center of the City. A variety of these uses integrated with general business, medium-high to high density residential, and other related uses is encouraged in an effort to provide the appropriate mix of activities necessary to establish a truly urban City center. The district shall be served by the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. Development in this district must give attention to the handling of high volumes of traffic, adequate parking, and pedestrian movement, and to provide strip commercial development, and must be approved as a conditional use, unless otherwise permitted. b. That the property where the complex is to be located has frontage on East First Street and Washington Street; that the property in the past has been used as a church but at the present time the property is not being used. 7. That sewer and water is available to the property, but the use may require additional charges and fees. $. That comments may be submitted by the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, Meridian Police Department, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Fire Department, and the Meridian Sewer Department and other agencies and those comments will be incorporated herein as if set forth in full herein. 9. 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 AMBROBE, FITZG ERALD B GROOKSTON Allorneya anE Counaelora P.O. Box I2] MerlElan, IGNo eae/2 TalaD~ona 888~UBt 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' FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3 property. 2. That the City has the authority to take judicial notice 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. 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 1475, 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 new zoning would be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and no Comprehensive Plan amendment is required. (b) The area is in OLD TOWN which is designed for a mix of uses and a rezone of the subject property is in line with that designation. AMBROBE, FITZGERALD dCROOKSTON Atiorneya antl Counaeloro P.O. Boa IZ] Merltllen, Itla~o eaelz Telap~one 88&/181 (c) The area around the proposed zoning amendment is developed in a residential and commercial fashion that would be allowed in Old Town and the new zoning would not be contrary to the allowed uses. (d) There has been a change in the area, the rezoning FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4 of other property to commercial uses and use of residential property for commercial use, which dictate that the property should be rezoned. (e) That the property is not supposed to be re-designed and therefor will still be harmonious with the surrounding area. (f) The propose uses should not be hazardous or disturbing to the existing or future uses of the neighborhood. (g) The property will be able to be adequately served with public facilities, and connection to municipal sewer and water is required. (h) The proposed use 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 proposed use should not involve any detrimental activity to any person's property or the general welfare. (j) Development should not cause a significant increase in vehicular traffic and should not interfere with surrounding traffic patterns in that the property has substantial street frontage. (k) That this rezone will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural or scenic feature of major importance. (1} The proposed zoning amendment is in the best interest of City of Meridian. 8. It is further concluded that the comments, AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD 6 CROOKSTON AtlomaYS end Counealora P.O. BoM 62] Meritlian, ItlaNo eaedz Televnona 88&6681 recommendations and requirements of other governmental agencies will have to met and complied with. 9. That the Applicant shall comply with the ordinances of the City of Meridian, specifically including b r i n g i n g t h e structure on the premises up to building, electrical, plumbing, fire and life safety codes. FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5 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 COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends AMBROBE, FITZG ERALD B CROOKSTON Atlornera an0 Counselara F.O. BoY lZ7 M.nai,n, iaano esBez raiaFnon,eee-ue~ to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the Rezone 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 that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, Fire Department requirements, Sewer Department requirements, the Nampa Meridian Irrigation requirements, the building, electrical, plumbing, fire and life safety codes, and the other Ordinances of the City of Meridian. MOTION: APPROVED: ~--' VOTED~~ VOTED ~ Lam`"~ VOTED ~- VOTED~~'v VOTED DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6 i ., ~ BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BRENT BARRUS ANNEXATION AND ZONING LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 1, DORIS SUBDIVISION MERIDIAN, IDAHO AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD &CROONSTON ALLOmeye end Counselors P.O. Boz a27 Medtllen, Idaho B38'2 TeLOnone BBB~dB1 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on December 10, 1991, 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, Brent Barrus 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 December 10, 1991, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the December 10, 1991, 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 reference is incorporated herein; that the property is FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1 e • • AMBROSE, FIT2GERglO BGROOKSTON Allorneye entl Couneelore P.O. Box ~P7 Mentllen, IOeno asenz reiePnone Bee~~ai approximately 2 acres in size; it is located on the north side of Fairview Avenue Road and approximately one-quarter of a mile west of Locust Grove Road. 3. That the property is presently zoned by Ada County as Commercial and the proposed use would be for an athletic facility and the requested zoning is General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G). 4. The general area surrounding the property is used commercially and residentially; the property is part of Doris Subdivision, a residential subdivision. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 6. The Applicant, Brent Barrus, is the owner of record. 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 C-G; that the present. use of the property is vacant ground; that the applicant indicated that the intended development of the property would be for a health and racquet club or for office uses if the health facility was not developed. 10. There were no property owners in the immediate area that testified objecting to the Application. 11. That the property is in the NORTH CURVE Neighborhood as FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2 set forth in Policy Diagram in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 12. That the property can be serviced with City water and sewer. 13. Ada County Highway District, the Department of Health, Settlers Irrigation District, City Engineer, Bureau of Reclamation and City Fire Department may submit comments and such will be incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District did submit comments and such are incorporated herein. 14. That the General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 9 as follows: (C-G) GENERAL RETAIL AND SERVICE COMMERCIAL: The purpose of the (C-G) District is to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel-related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial development. 15. That proper notice was given as required by law and all gMBROSE, FIT2G ERALD 6 CROOKSTON Fitorneye end Couneelore P.O. BoM d2] Maritlisn, Itlefto eaedz TelePNOne BBB~U81 procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given and followed. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3 AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD SCROOKSTON Altomeye anG Counaelora P.O. Box lZ] MerlEbn, IGeho Baelz TaleOaone 8B8~la81 CONCLUSIONS 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met; including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land 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; 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 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4 gMBROSE, F1T2G ERALD fl CROOKSTON Allorneys end Counaelora P.O. Boa 127 Meritl lan, Idaho 83812 TelaPNOne BBB-1181 the owner and the annexation is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. 8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. 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 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 any waterways and canals within the property will have to be tiled. 10. That proper and adequate access to the property is available and will have to be maintained. 11. That since the Applicant's property is in the NORTH CURVE NEIGHBORHOOD of the Comprehensive Plan, the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan 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 conditions should be those stated above 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. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5 13. That any 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. I4. That any of the requirements of the Nampa Meridian or Settlers Irrigation Districts shall be met as well the requirements of the City Engineer, 15. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning of C-G 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 AMBROBE, FITZG ERALD dCROOKSTON Allornaya entl Counaelora P.O. Box l2] Meritlien, IEano easaz Teievnoneaee-a~si and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER HEPPER COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED h'~ ~^' VOTED L ;Tim. VOTED VOTED ~~`'`~v VOTED DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6 _. AMBROBE, FITZGERALD B CROOKSTON Attorneys entl Counselors P.O. Bax IB] Meritllan, Itlaho Baez Telephone 886<~81 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 that the Applicants be specifically required to t le all ditches, canals and waterways as a condition of annexation and that the Applicants meet all of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, specifically including the development time requirements. MOTION: APPROVED: ~~~f DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 7 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MERIDIAN PLACE LIMITED AND PROPERTIES WEST REZONE APPLICATION A PORTION OF THE S 1/2 NE 1/4, SECTION 6, T.3 N., R. 1 E. MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS gMBROSE, FITZG ERALD 6 CROOKSTON AROmBys and Couneelorn P.O. Boa l27 MsrlElan, IAeKo 83812 TebPNOne BBB-1881 The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing December 10, 1991 at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioners appearing through Gary lee, Applicant's engineer, 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 December 10, 1991, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the December 10, 1991, 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 Applicants 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 t area in which Applicants' property is located is in large part used agriculturally and with some residences. 3. The property is presently zoned R-4 Residential and the Applicants propose to have the property zoned R-8 Residential. 4. That the R-4 and R-8 Districts are described in the Zoning Ordinance, i1-2-408 B. 1 and 2 as follows: (R-4) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The purpose of the -~ 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 istrict is to permit the estabT shment 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 Plan 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. That the property is contained in the NORTH CURVE AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD B CROOKSTON Attorneys entl COUnaelOrB P.O. Boa ~2] McNEIan, Itlano B3Bez TBIePnOne BBB-b181 Meridian Comprehensive Plan; that under Housing Development on Neighborhood as shown on the Policy Diagram at Page 7 of the 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. 6. That the property has frontage on Locust Grove Road; FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2 that the property, as presently planned, will only have one access on to Locust Grove until the final stages of development; that the property in the past has been used agriculturally. 7. That sewer and water is available to the property. 8. That comments may be submitted by the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, Meridian Police Department, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Fire Department, City Engineer, and the Meridian Sewer Department and other agencies and those comments will be incorporated herein as if set forth in herein. 9. That proper notice has been given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission have been followed. CONCLUSIONS AM BROSE, F1T2G ERALO 8 CR00 KSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Boa 62] MerlE lan, Kano 83862 Talevnmeeea+6si 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 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. 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 FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3 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 new zoning would be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and no Comprehensive Plan amendment is required. (b) The area is in the North Curse Neighborhood and a rezone of the subject property is in line with that designation. (c) The area around the proposed zoning amendment is developed in a residential fashion that would be allowed in the North Curve and the new zoning would not be contrary to the allowed uses. (d) There has not been a change in the area but the requested zone change is merely to a different residential district. (e) That the property as R-8 Residential will be harmonious with the surrounding area. (f) The proposed use should not be hazardous or disturbing to the existing or future uses of the neighborhood. (g) The property will be able to be adequately served with public facilities, and connection to municipal sewer and water is required. AM BROSE, FITZG ERALD 6CROOKBTON Attorneys entl Counselors P.O. Boz ~2T MerlGlen, ItleKo eae'z TelepKOne B98-N61 (h) The proposed use 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. FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4 (i) The proposed use should not involve any detrimental activity to any person's property or the general welfare. (j) Development may cause a significant increase in vehicular traffic and this problem must be addressed in the design of the subdivision. (k) That this rezone will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural or scenic feature of major importance. (1) The proposed zoning amendment is in the best interest of City of Meridian. 8. It is further concluded that the comments, recommendations and requirements of other governmental agencies will have to rnet and complied with. 9. That the Applicant shall comply with the ordinances of the City of Meridian. 10. That even though the property is requested to be zoned to R-8, the developer indicated that only single-family homes would be constructed and such shall be a limitation on the subdivision; that the collector street, Meadowgrass Street, shall not have access from individual lots; that when there are 100 lots developed that subdivision shall have an additional access on to Locust Grove Road. D L,.~ ~~ ~~~ 1~9 ~~ AMBROSE, PITZGERALD B CROO KSTON Attorneys antl Counaebra P.O. Boz 121 Merltllan, ItleNo Bsa1z TalePnone BB8~181 FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5 APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROIL CALL COMMISSIONER HEPPER COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION AM BROSE, FITZGERALD BCROOKSTON Attorneys antl Couneelore R.o. ~.1zT MerlOlan, ItlaKo 83818 Telephone BBBJ181 The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the Rezone 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 that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, fire Department requirements, Sewer Department requirements, the Nampa Meridian Irrigation requirements, and the other Ordinances of the City of Meridian. MOTION: APPROVED:! VOTED ~~' VOTED _ VOTED C~ VOTED-~~l I'll ~~ VOTED. DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACE ANO CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6 ,~ BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DORAN PETERSON AND CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT ANNEXATION AND ZONING A PORTION OF THE NE 1/4 SECTION 1, T.3 N., R. 1 W. MERIDIAN, IDAHO qM SROSE, FITZG ERALO B CROO KSTON Atlpra8y88n0 Counselors P.O. Box 82T MerlElan, IEaNo e3soz TBIapKOne 888-081 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on December 10, 1991, 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, Capital Development appearing through Roy Yorgason, and through the engineer, Roy Johnson, 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 December 10, 1991, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the December 10, 1991, 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 AM BROSE, F1T2G ERALO dCROO KSTON Atlomeya antl Counselors v.o. Bo. ~zT Metltllan, ItlaKo 83817 TelsO~one 888-G~81 reference is incorporated herein; that the property is approximately 43 acres in size; it is located on the west side of Meridian Road and approximately one-half mile north of Cherry !ane and is adjacent to the South Slough. 3. That the property is presently zoned by Ada County as RT (Rural Transition and the proposed use would be for R-4 Residential. 4. The general area surrounding the property is used agriculturally and residentially. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 6. The Applicant Doran Peterson is the owner of record and the other Applicant, Capital Development has a purchase agreement. and both parties have requested the annexation and zoning. 7. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 8. That the entire parcel of ground is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 9. That the Application requests that the parcel be annexed and zoned R-4 Residential; that the present use of the property is for agriculture; that the applicant indicated that the intended development of the property is for an R-4 subdivision. 10. There were no property owners in the immediate area that testified objecting to the Application. I1. That the property is in the CAIRNS Neighborhood as set FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCIIJSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2 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 in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain in agricultural activity until it is no longer economical to exclude orderly growth and development to maintain agricultural pursuits. 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. Ada County Highway District, the Department of Health, gMBROSE, F1T2G ERAlD 6CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counaelora P.O. Box e2T MerlElen, IOeNo eaBez TeISPNOne 888~e/81 Settlers Irrigation District, City Engineer, Bureau of Reclamation and City Fire Department may submit comments and such will be incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District did submit comments and such are incorporated herein. 16. That the R-4, Residential District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 1 as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3 (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 and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. 17. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local AMBROSE, FITZOERALD BCROOKSTON At~ornsya an0 Counaelon R.O. BoR ~2T Meridian, IENo s3e.z raaonona eee-uai Punning 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; Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4 AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD BCROOKSTON AllomeYe end Counaelore P.O. Box ~P7 Maritllan, Itlaaa eseax TelapDOne 88&x81 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 Applicants, one of whom is the record owner, and the annexation is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. 8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. 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 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 all waterways and canals within the property will have to be tiled; that the development of the property as a residential subdivision will require meeting the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5 pressurized irrigation ordinance. 10. That proper and adequate access to the property is available and will have to be maintained, however the interior accesses may have to be adjusted to meet any of the requirements of the Meridian Fire Department. 11. That since the Applicant's property is in the CAIRNS NEIGHBORHOOD of the Comprehensive Plan, the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and does not conflict with the Rural Areas policies. 12. 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 be at a density of not greater than four (4) dwelling units per acre; that the conditions should be those stated above and upon issuance of final platting and other conditions to be explored at the City Council level; that such annexation would be 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 and no dwellings other than single family dwellings shall be allowed and this restriction shall be noted on the plat of the subdivision. 13. That all ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled AMBROSE, FIT2GERglD BGROOKBTON Attorneys ene Counselore P.O. Box aP MerlElen, IEeho essez TaleOhone BBB~~81 as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled the property shall be subject to de-annexation. 14. That any of the requirements of the Nampa Meridian or FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6 Settlers Irrigation Districts shall be met as well the requirements of the Bureau Reclamation and the City Engineer. 15. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning or R-4, Residential would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 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 COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED` _ VOTED - ~~ VOTED I ~- VOTED `~~~'~ VOTED DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends AMBROSE, FITZGERALD SCROOKSTON Altorneye ono Counsalare P.O. Boa 627 Marlolan, IEAno eaedz TelePnona BBB~det 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 that the Applicants be specifically required to t he all ditches, canals and waterways FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 7 AMRROSE, FITZG ERALD E CROOKSTON Allomays and Counselors R.o. eox ~zT MeriOlan, IEa~o easaz TalsV~one BBe-ea81 as a condition of annexation and that the Applicants meet all of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, specifically including the development time requirements. MOTION: APPROVED: ~~ ~ DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 8 ~ BEDELCO, INC. ~ 5204 SORRENTO DRIVE BOISE, IDAHO 83704 December 4, 1991 ~~ ~G I Mayor and City Council City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 ~~~......ddd Re: Peterson -Capital Development Hearing SW 1/2 S 1/2 NE 1/2, Sec. 1, T. 3 N., R.1 W., B.M. Dear Mayor and Council; This letter is in regard to the advertised hearing for annexation and zoning of the above referenced property. Please accept this letter as our testimony, as we will be unable to attend the hearing on December 10, 1991. We are the owners of the Meridian Manor Subdivisions that abut this property on the south. We are now in the process of developing Meridian Manor No. 7 Subdivision adjoining the Peterson -Capital Development property. We have great concern about three items: (1) we apparently will have a dead end street running to the south boundary of the Peterson -Capital Development tract, (2) will the City still assure us that we will have access to the new interceptor sewer running along the South Slough, and (3) how will our water line loop through the Peterson -Capital Development tract in order to give our developments a looped water system. Originally our preliminary subdivision plat showed a cul-de-sac at the west end of our northerly road. At the request of the City we agreed to eliminate the cul- de-sac and turn this road north to the boundary of the Peterson -Capital Development tract. This was agreed to in conjunction with the comments in the next paragraph concerning sewers. This connection between the properties was to eventually give another access to our subdivisions, eliminating adead- end street, and also allowing for interconnection of the water, sewer and other utility systems. If, at this late date, this road connection is eliminated, we protest vigorously. In the planning of our property north of Five Mile Creek we negotiated an arrangement with the City to install a temporary sewage lift station to pump sewage under Five Mile Creek. This temporary lift station became necessary because the interceptor sewer on the south side of Five Mile Creek had not been installed low enough for a gravity sewer under the Creek, and no other sewer was available in the area. It was decided to allow the installation of a temporary lift station until the time a sewer line was available to serve our subdivisions by gravity. As your know, the City is now in the process of installing an interceptor sewer along the north side of Five Mile Creek to about the northwest corner of our property, then north along a major ditch and then east along the South Slough to Meridian Road. When we became aware the City was planning this sewer interceptor, we delayed our development (about a year now) in orde~cooperate with the City and not stall the temporary lift station. Instead of installing the lift station we agreed to participate with the same amount of money to aid in constructing a sewer line to connect to the interceptor, and also locate the sewer line to provide future service to a portion of the Peterson -Capital Development tract. We were told that the City would acquire the necessary easements to accomplish this. After postponing our development for a year, we are now greatly concerned whether the easement and sewer line will be provided. If the development of the Peterson -Capital Development tract does not provide for this line in the immediate future, we protest vigorously. We were asked by the City, and agreed, to provide a 10" water main in our northerly road for a future looped water system through the Peterson -Capital Development tract. Our Engineer has designed, and the City has approved, the design of our water system based on this assumption. We believe that the looped water system is beneficial to the fire protection water flows for our development and also for the Peterson -Capital Development tract, as it would provide another water source toward the westerly end of their development. If this looping will not be provided, we protest vigorously. As an additional comment, in reviewing the subdivision layout accompanying the Notice of Hearing it appears that the block arrangement violates the Meridian "Subdivision and Development Ordinance". Section 9-605 of this Ordinance requires that "---; blocks shalt not be less than five hundred feet (500') nor more than one thousand feet (1,000') in length. It appears that only one block in the entire development conforms to this requirement. We have always carefully followed the Ordinance in planning our developments, and hope that the City will require the same of this developer. We would like to be adjacent to a development comparable to ours. In our opinion, long straight streets of 1,000 to 1,500 feet does not enhance any neighborhood. When a tract of land is of sufficient total size, all land development design manuals strongly suggest that curvelinear streets should be used. We regret we cannot attend the Hearing; however, please enter this letter in the record as our testimony. Thank you. BEDELCO INC. W. Burton Smith, President WBS:wb