The URL can be used to link to this page

Locust Grove AZ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY i A Good Place to Live OFFICIALS COUNCILMEN WAVNES.FORREY,AICP,CityClerk JANICE GASS Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAl~t A , ROBERT GI SLER BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney 33 EAST IDAHO MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE JOHN SHAWCROFT, waste water suet. KENNY BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN IDAHO 83642 Chairman Zoning a Planning BILL GORDON, Police Chief Phone (208) 888-4433 JIM JOHNSON GARY SMITH, P.E.. Cify Engineer FAX (208) 887-4813 Centennial Coordinator GRANT P. KINGSFORD PATSY FEDRIZZI Mayor TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your com nts end recommendations will be considered by the Meridian ~ may we have your answer by: ~ ~ ,l 9L't TRANSMITTAL DATE ~ ~ Z' Z3 - ~3 HE>4RING DATE : ~' ~ ^I) '9 ~ .~... -~ RED BY- LO/eCATION OF PROPERTY OR,f'PROJECT: i JIM JOHNSON P/Z MOE ALIDJANI,P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/I CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C 806 GIESLER, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C BRUCE STUART, WATER DEPT. JOHN SHAWCROFT, SEWER DEPT. BUILDING INSPECTOR FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY fiARY SMITH, P.E. ENGINEER WAYNE FORREY, AICP, PLANNER HERIDIAN SCH40L DISTRICT MERIDIAN POSIT OFFICE (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) ADA .COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDLAN IRR..DISTRICT SETTLERS IRaIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.-(PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) U S °WEST (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) CITY FILES OTHER; YOUR CONCISE REMARKS C:o~.~ ~... .. ~,,,..., ~„ . _. APPLIATION FOR ANNEXATION APPROVAL & r ZONING OR REZONE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FILING INFORMATION I. GENERAL INFORMATION Locust Grove Center (PROPOSED NAME OF SUBDIVISION) Northeast corner of_Fairview Ave. and Locust Grove intersection (GENERAL LOCATION}-~ (LEGAL DESCRIPTION - ATTACH IF LENGTHY) SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 Section 5, T.3N,, R.lE, B.M. Avest Limited Partnershi (OWNER(S) OF RECORD) (NAME) (TELEPHONE N0.) 6904 Randolph Drive BoiS~, ID 83709 (ADDRESS) Roger H. Allen 377-0023 (APPLICANT) (NAME) (TELEPHONE N0.) 6904 Randolph Drive Boise, ID 83709 (ADDRESS) W&H Pacific, Inc. 342-5400 (ENGINEER, SURVEYOR OR PLANNER) (NAME) (TELEPHONE NO.) 960 Broadway, Suite 312 Boas TD 8370 (ADDRESS) .Ada County Planning & Zoning - Meridian C itv Cnunr.il (JURISDICTION(S) REQUIRING APPROVAL) Commercial (TYPE OF SUBDIVISION - RESIDENTIAL, COMPdERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL) +50 40.45 ACRES OF LAND IN CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP. (ACCEPTED BY:) (FEE) • APPLICATION FOR ANNEXAT~ APPROVAL & ZONING AVEST -NOVEMBER 23, 1993 -Page 1 The following is submitted in compliance with Section 2-417, ANNEXATION AND ZONING UPON ANNEXATION. 1. APPLICANT: Avest Limited Partnership 6904 Randolph Drive Boise, Idaho 83709 Phone: 377-0023 2. OWNER: Roger Allen 6904 Randolph Drive Boise, [daho 83709 Phone: 377-0023 3. REQUEST FOR ZONING: See attached request for zoning amendment -Exhibit A. 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION See attached legal description -Exhibit l3. 5. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF ADJOINING RIGHTS-OF-WAY, ETC. Adjoining rights of way include: a. Fairview Avenue b. Locust Grove Road c. Applewood Avenue d. Dixie Lane (Private right-of-way) 6. PRESENT •USE:' Present land use is agricultural with the original farm house and out--buildings intact. 7. PROPOSED USE: The proposed land use is as a commercial shopping center, rental storage facility and transitional. 8. PRESENT DISTRICT: The present zoning district lies within Ada County and is zoned. RT. 9. PROPOSED DISTRICT The proposed zoning district is CG. 111.1 iN AM Ii: 0~36AN X 2 l)OC APPLICATION FOR ANNEXA~N APPROVAL & ZONING AVEST -NOVEMBER 23, 1993 -Page 2 10. PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS: The subject property has many characteristics that make it desirable to be ,... amended to CG. a. From a traffic planning standpoint, the location of this site makes it highly functional to receive commercial uses. The site is located at the intersection of a principal arterial and a major collector that is signaled. b. The continued growth of residential developments around this site is increasing the demand for a commercial site to keep pace with neighborhood needs. c. It is the intent of the planning effort in this area to cluster commercial development thus avoiding strip development. This site is of adequate size to accommodate Commercial and Multiple Use(s). 11. DESIRABILITY The layout concepts contemplated by the land owner would provide substantial buffers to existing development and provide a much needed amenity to the neighborhood. 12. PROPERTY MAP See attached -Exhibit C. 13. VICINITY MAP (27 copies): See attached. 14. MAILING ADDRESS LIST: See attached -EXHIBIT D. 15. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN See attached -EXHIBIT E. 16. FEE CALCULATION The fee for this application has been calculated as follows: Area = 40.45 acres Annexation Fee = $400 + (40 X 15) _ $1,000.00 Mailing Fee = 70 owners X $1.29 = 90 0 Total $1,090.30 17. AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE See Exhibit F . Affidavit of compliance with posting requirements will be provided within one week following submittal. 18. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AGENDAS AND LETTERS See Exhibit G. FILENAME: 0946ANX2. DOC EXHIBIT B - O~rship ,, , ~ ; I. ,,, , Annex and Zone Application ~ - Avest Dec. 17, 1993 ' ~ ~ ' THIS INDENTURE made the 31st day of December, 19~2~L ~b~~ire~r~ R~C~E~a.~ ALLEN and VIRGINIA A. ALLEN, husband and wife ("Grantors' and AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, an Idaho Limited Partnership, whose address is c/o Roger H. Allen, 6904 Randolph Drive, Boise, Idaho 83709 ("Grantee"); WITN ESSETH: The Grantors, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten and No/100ths Dollars, lawful money of the United States of America, and other good and valuable consideration, to them in hand paid by the Grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, have granted, bargained and sold, and by these presents do grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm unto the Grantee, and to its successors and assigns forever, the following described real property situate in the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ON "EXHIBIT A" ATTACHED HERETO SUBJECT TO: Ali encumbrances, liens, easements, covenants, agreements, reservations and restrictions of record or visible upon a physical inspection real property, and rights of tenants in possession. TOGETHER WITH all and singular the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appurtaining, the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof; and all estate, right, title and interest in and to the said real property, as well in law as in equity, of the said Grantors. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD all and singular the above-described real property, together with the appurtenances unto the said Grantee, and to its successors and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, tie Grantors have hereunto executed this Grant Deed as of the day and year first above written. GRANT DEED - 1 • ~ • STATE OF IDAHO ) ss: County of Ada ) On this ~C day of February, 1993, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ROGER H. ALLEN and VIRGINIA A. ALLEN, husband and wife, known or identified to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. ~•,,- ~ T n •L -- • Notary Public for Idaho yY ~. ,~ .. = Residing at '"~rl !-fL ,Idaho ra y/ ~, •.• My Commission Expires: ~- ~3 ~(,SE~C~L~ l •. l~. `:^~. lr,,/,`j.~1. GRANT DEED - 2 EXHIBIT C -Plats 81/2 x 11 e.,.,o,r ~.,ri ~~no onplication 1993 i ~~ o r ~ r i ~ ~ k f aL i ~-==~~I ~~ _`~_~ ~ -~ ~- - - - --~ M I DLBWIdi~p ~ I I II ,i 3 ~ ., • EXHIBIT B, -LEGAL DESCRIPTION • SOUTHWEST CIUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TQWNSI-ItP 3 NORTN, RANGE t EAST OF THE BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; D(C>1'1'THAT PORTION DEEDED TO THE STATE OF IDAI-10 fN WARRANTY DEED DATED JULY 15, 1955 EXECUTED BY FLORA E. DOAN AND GLEN G. DOAN, HER HUSDAND, RECORDED AUGUST 1, 1955 UNDER RECORDER'S FEE N0.300794, AS FOLLOWS: A STRIP OF LAND LYING SITUATE 6ETWEEN THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTI-IWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, AND A LINE PARALLEL TO AND 50.0 FEET DISTANT NORTHERLY FROM THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTER LINE OF HIGHWAY AS SURVEYED AND SHOWN ON THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF U.S. 30 • PROJECT N0. F- 3281 (5) HIGHWAY SURVEY ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FIIGHWAYS OF THE STATE OF 1DAH0 AND LYING OVER AND ACROSS THE SOUTF-IWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST t]UARTER, EXCEPT THE EAST 10 FEET THEREOF, OF SECTION 5 TOWN~HIF' 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, BEGINNING AT STATION 71 PLUS 69.Q OF THE SAID HIGHWAY SURVEY, W--IICH STATION IS A POIrJT nN TANGENT APPROXIMATELY 21.2 FEET NORTH FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SF..CTION 5, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, THENCE , RUNNING SOUTH 89 58' EAST, 1327.2 FEET TO STATION p4 PLUS 97.0 OF SAID SURVEY, WHICH STATION IS A POINT ON 'I'ANGENT~APPROXIMATELY 13.0 FEET NORTH ANU ~ 327.2 FEET EAST FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE t EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN. END OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION:, • ~~ .~ . • Page 1 of 1 • ~H I BIT F -Affidavit Annexation Approval & Zoning Avest Dec. 17,1993 AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIAAICE As of January 4. 1994 Avest will post notice of the request to be on the agenda for the P&Z Meeting for Zoning and Conditional Use on January 11. 1993 on our property on the H.E. corner of Locust Grove a-Frd'F'~alrview Avenue. Roge~/~'/ Al~.en C~'P. J l~GO~ ,Lt ` ~ v w- - Kathleen K. Weber G. P. Executive O f fices: 600 North Maple Grove Road Boise, Idaho 83704 (208) 376-8750 EXHIBIT G -Neighbor Letter Annex and Zone Application Avest Dec. 17,1993 12/20/93 Re: 40 acres, corner of Fairview Ave. and Locust Grove Dear Neighbors, We'd like to invite you to a neighborhood meeting to discuss plans for development of the 40 acre site at Locust Grove and Fairview Ave. in Meridian, Idaho owned by Avest Limited Partners. This is not an official public hearing, but a chance for us to get together as neighbors and discuss plans for the development of this 40 acres. Two meetings will be held December 27th and December 28th at 7:00 p.m. at Meridian City Hall. December 27th meeting will focus mainly on the concerns of the neighbors who live in Mirage Subdivision, adjacent to the north boundary of the Avest property. We will explore possible transitional use or screening methods for this portion of the property. December 28th meeting will concentrate on buffering possibilities for the homes facing on Locust Grove at the west side of the development. We'll have some pictures of types of screening currently being used and information concerning future widening of Locust Grove . We will be available to answer questions and hear your concerns on either of these two nights. Please feel free to come and leave at your convenience. If you are unable to attend one of the following meetings, we still want to hear your concerns. Enclosed is a stamped, self-addressed envelope for your, comments. Historical Information: 1. The 40 acre parcel on the corner of Locust Grove and Fairview Ave. has been identified by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council in the new Comprehensive Plan as a potential Community Shopping Center site. A community shopping center would use approximately 15-20 acres of this parcel. 2. Avest does not develop and sell properties. We continue to own them after development--We want to be a good neighbor. 3. Other developments owned by Avest or Avest Partners are: the Southshore Shopping Center, S.E. Boise; Southshore Residential Subdivision, S.E. Boise; and four Boise self-storage facilities (Stor-It Rental Storages). Sincerely, Kathleen Weber General Partner cc Wayne Forrey: City Planner Will Berg: City Clerk Fxccufive C)fficcs: C00 North ~~1~~plc C~~mvc~ RoUc~ I;Dist, ldnh~~ 837(14 (208) 37C-H7 SO ~XHIBIT G -Neighbor Agenda Annex and Zone Application Avest Dec. 17, 1993 Agenda Neighborhood Meetings Dec. 27th & 28th Re: 40 Acre Parcel, NE Corner of Locust Grove Rd. ~ Fairview Avenue 1) Introduction and Welcome 2) Surrounding Neighborhood Development Plans and Activities 3) Site Proposal for 40 acres, corner of Locust Grove and Fairview 4) Monday Night Agenda: a- Proposals for Transitional Use and Buffering for Neighbors in Mirage Meadows b) Open Discussion with Mirage Meadows Neighbors C) Akernative Proposals d) Other 5) Tuesday Night Agenda: a) Proposals for Transitional Use and Buffering for Neighbors on Locust Grove Rd. b) Open Discussion with Locust Grove Neighbors. C) Alternative Proposals d) Other 6) Questions and Ideas: • • ~~~ 1 5 194 ~~'i''If QF ~ER~DIAN ~ Update to Landscape Plan for Rental Storage Conditional Use Permit To incorporate ACHD and Neighbors' Requests Avest Limited Partnership 600 North Maple Grove Boise, Idaho Ph: 376-8750 Fag: 376-2365 Evergreens, Deciduous Trees and Shrubby List Trees and Shrubs to be chosen from the followine list: Evergreen Trees: Austrian Pine (Pinus Nigra) Koster Blue Spruce (Picea Pungers) Deciduous Trees: Sweet Gun (Liquidambar) Japanese Maple (Acer Palmatum) Golden Locust (Rabina) Evergreen Shrubs: Tall -Common Juniper (Juniperus Commonis) Low - Pfitzer Juniper (Juniperus Media) - Bolden Plume Juniper (Juniperus Media) Deciduous Shrubs: Flowering Quince (Chaenomeles) Flowering Plum (Cistine) Plant Specifications: Evergreens: Shrub 6' to 8' Evergreen ~ 10' to 12' Evergreen Deciduous Trees: Shrub 6' to 8' Deciduous ~ 10' to 12' Deciduous • _. _ _ ~z ., ~~ ~~~ 8 - ~ti F- -r - - - Y ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ^~~ W o, _ tv O~ N ~'. N N N ~~ W €a °' ~~ / N jp~g N T N ~, • February 10, 1994 Meridian City Hall 33 East Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 Attn. Mr. Will Berg Dear Will, • R~C~~~~~ F F ~ 1 5 194 CITY Q~ .~fi~l~3ff~~~.~ I am enclosing some updates to our Annexation and Zoning and CUP file. Please find the letters to the neighbors of Oakcrest and the neighbors of Locust Grove, Mr. Don Bryan and Ms. Karen Blaney. Also included is a newly revised landscape plan to update the entrance changes required by ACHD on the storage entrance to the CUP project. Thanks, ~~ Kathleen Executive Offices: 600 North Maple Grove Road Boise, Idaho 83704 (208) 376-8750 • R~C~I~I;~ FED 1 ~ fa~a~ ~CiTY ~~ ~~~~~~~ Karen Blayney 2-14-94 2000 North Applewood Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Karen, I am enclosing the sketch of the proposed buffering between your property and Stor-It's property. Instead of doing two drawings, I have just put in a dotted line to indicate your property and/or~ fence line. The landscaping would be essential the same. We discussed two different options and we would like to do which ever one you feel would be best for you. Option One: You keep your fence on your present property line, we will plant to soften and screen our buildings from your view, and we will water and maintain this area along with our other planting areas. Optian Two: If you wish to incorporate this piece of property into your yard, we would grant a permanent easement which would only require maintenance to keep it in effect. We would plant and sod as above, but you would maintain it. We would install the water lines to this area and have them operate on our sprinkler system. You would have no water expenses. We also talked about the closure of Applewood. ACHD has pretty much agreed to let us do this if we develop the storages, with the agreement that we make a walking path and emergency access tie into the loop drive planned approximately 400 feet to the south. This would be done by installing ballards at the end of Applewood. These would be permanent, carved top wooden ballards, not the temporary striped closures that are sometimes used. Finally, I see no reason not to keep the access centered on the roadway, thus creating additional parking for your home and the neighbor across the street. I was relieved to hear that your comments in our Stor-It office were not in regard to our service to you as a customer. We try very hard to be responsive and concerned about our service to each and every customer. We are, as I mentioned, not a Executive Offices: 600 North Maple Grove Road Boise, Idaho 83704 (208) 376-8750 . • • warehouse-type of storage. We cater to neighborhood storage and want to provide a safe, convenient, easily accessible "extra closet" or "garage" for those in our neighborhood. I was glad to hear that we provided adequate service to you on your move from your old home into this new one. And, I hope you will use our services again. I've enclased two copies of the sketch, so you can keep one, and one for you to make comments or revisions on and note which is most acceptable--and return to me. I've enclosed an envelope. Sincerely, Virginia Allen, General Partner Avest LTD i ~- __--~ ~~ ^, ~,, _. ? .~ ~ cn I ''~`~ I r _. ... , '1 :~s~ cionrn ~~~a~ o . __ . ~- --- _~', ~i wl~~ ~NJ ~+~wm ~.lb~dsb _____.~_.___.__.. _.__.M.__ .___.~----.- __ __--- --_.. . c11 ~j ~ u! G ~ ~ ~ ~; lL ~,; ~ v ~I ~ Ll~ Ct., ~. Y ~~ ~~ • • R.ECEI`TE~ ~E8 1 ~ ~~~ ~~'~' CDF ~~:3~I~IAN February 14, 1994 Dear Locust Grove Neighbors, We az-e the owners of the 40 acre parcel directly to the east of your property. We were glad to find that five of you were able to attend our neighborhood meeting held on December 29th, 1993. We would like to get together with you one more time as we now have some additional information and would like to gather any additional thoughts you might have concerning Locust Grove and our proposed project. You may be aware that on January 11th the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously approved its Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law which recommended approval of our application to the City Council for the Annexation and Zoning and Conditional Use of storage for this property. We would like to plan an informal meeting with the seven homeowners that border on Locust Grove. We will plan to meet at 6:30 at the Homestead Restaurant 704 E. Fairview Ave. in Meridian on February 22. We are looking forward to a productive and informative meeting and hope you can attend. Please return your response in the envelope provided. Sincerely, ~~ Kathleen Weber General Partner Executive Offices: 600 North Maple Grove Road Boise, Idaho 83704 (208) 376-8750 .. • PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE LINE AND RETURN THIS FORM IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE: WILL TRY TO ATTEND. WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND. WOULD LIKE SUMMARY OF MEETING NOTES. Name: Address: Thanks, Kathleen • • ~~~"~'' ~~' ~~~i~~cu~~~i February 4, 1994 Mr. Don Bryan 2070 Locust Grove Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Don, We want to thank you for your interest and input on our project concerning our 40 acre parcel. Your input at the neighborhood meetings and the P&Z Meetings have been very thoughtful and beneficial to all involved. We know that you have some specific and unique concerns and situations that need our individualized attention. If possible we would like to meet on the property some afternoon or early evening in February to discuss ideas and actually look at some things about which you are concerned to see how we might deal with them as we move ahead with our plans. Knowing your concerns early on would help us address your concerns in our planning. Please contact us at 376-8750 about a date and time we could meet that would work with your schedule. Sincerely, Kathleen Weber General Partner Executive Offices: 600 North Maple Grove Road Boise, Idaho 83704 (208) 376-8750 M ~ • ~AL~~~~f A.<x.~ S.~e Y-~~,~, February 4, 1994 Dear Oakcrest Neighbors, We are the owners of the 40 acres directly to the south of your back property line. We were glad to find that 11 of you were able to attend our neighborhood meetings held December 28th and 29th, 1993. We feel that the meetings were very helpful and we would like to take this opportunity to clarify in writing some of the ideas discussed at those meetings. We know that some of you are exited and want the storage we are proposing as a buffer and see the advantages of the landscaping and privacy and closure this project will bring to your backyards. To clarify our proposal a little further we have enclosed several attachments that will hopefully give you a better understanding of our proposed project. They include: 1) A plat of our proposed project and street plan. 2) An example of a 2 story home - vs - a single sided storage building. 3) A list of benefits we feel storage provides. 4) Typical landscape rendering for our storages. You will recall that our proposal is to enter into an agreement with each of you neighbors to allow you to make use of our 15' setback as part of your back yards. We are still willing to do this. Many of you seemed favorable toward our proposal but expressed concerned about the cost of installing sprinklers and the cost of water to maintain the added yard area. We have analyzed our position and we feel we can modify our proposal to you to include installing a sprinkler system and hooking it into our system. This way there would be no cost of installation or Executive Offices: 600 North Maple Grove Road Boise, Idaho 83704 (208) 376-8750 • cost of water to you and we would still allow you to use the additional 15 feet of land for your back yard. We would ask each of you to maintain the grass and shrubs though, as we would have a difficult time getting into each back yard for maintenance. This would be your only requirement, to maintain the 15' additional land. Our time schedule to develop the area bordering your property would be between 2-3 years. We know that several of you are very favorable to our proposal but we would like to give you one more opportunity to express any concerns or questions you may have concerning our proposal. Please complete the attached questionnaire. There is a place for you to check if you would like additional information. We will try to get back with you either by phone or personally if you have specific questions. Thanks, Kathleen Weber • • Name: Address: City, State and Zip Phone: Day: Evenings: Questionnaire: I favor the storage proposal. ^ I am undecided, please give me some more information. ^ I am not in favor of the storage proposal. ^ I would like a neighborhood meetin ^ g Comments ~~.- ~-- r ...Ir+.+M•~ c i a ~ . ~ „ a ~ C C K '0 (1 ~ y^ I ~ O f l i f i i ,~ \ ~ ~~~ i i~~ ~ -~ \, MOIWW ~ ~ ~i-'. i i • 1 ~~ L~----'1 n r. rn s o N h N o n~j ~~ D e n r 2 Z 1 b IT . ~_ -~^ IT 1 m i \ ~ ~m 3 z rn ~ r ~'l Y^n N U~ C N e i II r L O P P R ~ E 1 ~ -- i r ~ m ~ ~ ~ y o a f° ~ m ~ i~ • V ~~ -inn a ~n~n~z *<~ fl.y ~c ~ ~.~' ~ ~ ~ 0 3 a_d G. a c~ a m C. ~ at t~D c~D ~. 'p ", °r,' .. N O .Q Q ~i V V ~I o c~ ~ n ? m ~+' 'C bi y ~ ~ ~ a a N o -+~ cD ~ n ~ p ~ ~ eD 3 0' ~ V ~ ~ o 3 r*3o-~ ~~'~so~~3a,~d~o~y ? ~ p cD ~c ~° ~, c ~ ~ o ~p ~ d 2 ~ r* fl. ~a<o ~ ° A ~cQDpQ~nt~ y vi'~ ~. ~ ~ ~ o ~ co ~.' .o e~ ~ ~°- s~~~ nom' (~ cy~~ ~ ~ c~'~a~~~~ yy ~ ~~~~ x ~ yx~~°~~? O ~* d r ~ ~ y C1 n > > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n <D M ~ ~ ~D ~' ~ < LL m ~ ~y ~ ~ ? ~ C ~D e~ c .~ ~ ~ .s D' o ~ ~D ~* a vii C. ~ ~ O ~ Q. ~ ~p o 9 !D pt .. ~ 0 a ~ ~ .a N o y, N ~ G N fy ~ ~ eD o Z N ~ O ~ O ~ ~ O 3 m D 8 t h Y r m -i O z • ~~~ I l }~`` 1 rte, r ~, ~{{ .J ~~ r v 2 r~ ~~ ~_ -u ~~ b ~ ____ __ ~\ . _ _---- -- 1 . _~. ~ U ~ S~ -- ~. ~u ~'+ ~~ ~ A r ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~~ q€ ~ ~ m -~ 2~ m m • • NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian,Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 p.m., on January 11, 1994, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of AVest Limited Partnership, for annexation and zoning of approximately 40.45 acres of land located in the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 5, T. 3N, R. 1W, Boise-Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and which property is generally located on the northeast corner of Fairview Avenue and Locust Grove intersection. The Application requests annexation with zoning of CG. Further Applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit of the parcel of land above described for a self service rental storage facility. A more particular legal description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the Application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. Dated this 27 day of December, 1993. ~~ ~~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK _... -- G fGC -~ -- - .~ F1 12~ ~J / ~.: qZ..~. 4 E ~ I ~ -3'"~"_'_ Y8 d ~ ~~ d ~ ~, i 1 ~• r L ~ ~' ~ ~ c '°' ~' n I .r. ~ ~ '~-~ ,~ 'y ' 9 ~ ~ ~ ~, . < < I ~ ~~ s i .~. ' ~ J ` ---~ / ~ ..... ~ ' i ~ '' % ~ 9 I ~ f _ I I ~ ~ s 92 it = it f •~=' • ~ ' • 'ON ' 1Sb' ~ :, ,~ ~1 a .c ~ sz z .- 6 •w, ~ 'i ~ I ~ ':. zl~ t ~~ ~'~ I, `t ~ CZ 22 ~ I 2l I ~:~ s~nor,y~w ~ ' nd~lr~~ ~ ~ -~.~..~-....... ` _'.1.Sa~, a SM0©ti;3W <~ 1-~---~' - ~ - ~ Z Z 1 ! 1 i ~`• i I !. _ _ t ~~ ,~~ - ~ ~ G ~ C Nlf 1Q bid ' / 11 ~ ~ ~ ; ~ I f t•- ~~ ~1 it ~ i C ~.. 2 i ? t ~ ~ f1 I -~ ~ GI 9i ~ ~'~~ ~ . 9 it ! ~ i ! v C1, ! X 1. ~ ~ t i S _ 2 Z MOCV3w N33eali'ci ! '~, ,N,,,~:':,y N~?_~~ 3 ' < L 1 ! .~ G1~ rn c o 15d3t -~ ky0 d3w ~1 `I \" ~ ~ ~ ~ " ° "' ~~ '~ ~ n•r ~fi ~Ti ~ 'lS 3n11dwbf101 3 ti0L£8 al ~aslo8 1 j a~cd - anw~ a~dey~ 'oN 009 ~sany ddHi A1.IN1~lA • E, TOURMALINE ST. . t W I 0 ~IJ r d ! 4 ~ Ii -- ~ _ ~ Flo . s . ~ "' .~ i ~' ~,s,` e ~ d 1 z __ 1 1 1 s 22 21 1 ~ N p 11 O Iri i 21 i~ O N x LL M 9 6 N v{i 2 ,r 23 t p V ~ '~R .ft. . 1B 21 .211 RT VICINITY MAP Avest - pyre 1 ~ 600 No. Maple Grove U Boise, ID .83704 i It\ ~2"__'l~_"u L'' ^MEAbOtiv$ le ~~A~7 ~' ~ w .f-~ 1 1 ~ E -<<:0 ~'' ~ r'µ' C- ~f d I~1L ;pCEN MEL~Ow i i _X 1 1 d~ I ~ N "~~ rd IS 1 w' IJ I 1 f u d ~~ s -~ I ~ Deb ~ z ~ r r 1 1 ~ 1 r R ~ c' ~~ :~ { I.I.. ~~ .~ ,\ ! ~ f ' • '" ;~ ~ e ! ~ Ic ( 1: I ;t ~ BAST ly 'K (vo:'lle) i ~- ! • 71 INd - 2~?LI 1 s ! rBl a IC /M~Fl14GE,'~ I' ~~- ~`\;! ~~, ~j I ~ \ , .1 ~,. ' ~ _". ~ ~` ~~,~^ ~~ \`J~V If 1 Z~ .rte y 1 ~~~. \ I ` t ` I `~, C / I ~.r - ' ~ .Q- ~ s (~I iDL sT. /I i y I 3i ~ JI I ~! l O. 2 7 M Q . - -. M.. ~ .,,_ . 1 3 ~ ~ I ._ .:~~ ~-2b 1 i I v V I -- r -~.,~_- ~ __ _ RT ~O ~ James and Andrea Terry • Mark and Nancy Campbell-Adams ~ Michael and Gregory McCarthy 2080 N Sequoia Piace 2072 N Sequoia Place 10365 Martingale Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Boise, Idaho 83709 Amyx/Benedict Construction, Inc. 4130 Patriot Circle Meridian, Idaho 83642 Margaret Hurt 2067 N Applewood Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 e__ C/a+./L ~uhlcet`t 2041 N Applewood Piace Meridian, Idaho 83642 8Sf3_/o3S Jonathan and Denise Harve 2064 N Applewood Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 ', Theodore and Laurie Roy 2043 N Whittier Place .Meridian, Idaho 83642 Craig and Marcy Dugger 2044 N applewood Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 c__ - Robert and Maureen Wignot 2059 N Whittier Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Robert and Kimber Hall 2048 N Whittier Place Meridian., Idaho 83642 Beehives Homes, Inc. 1406E 1st Street, ~212A Meridian, Idaho 83642-1746 James and Norreen Stipp 2005 Applewood Meridian, Idaho 83642 Leonard Valgene Hamson 1905 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 John and Davalee Leavitt 1985 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Ernest and Cheryl Oster 2062 N ~Yhittier Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Charles and Barbara Wright 2046 N Whittier Meridian, Idaho 83642 Kenneth ,Alverson 1785 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Karen Blayney (~ 149 N Rainbow Boise, Idaho $3704 Robert Glenn 2604 N Cole Road Boise, Idaho 83704 Wade and Nancy Miller 2005 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 c 0 Patrick and Candilee Gittings a 2051 Applewood Court Meridian, Idaho 83642 ~ € M ~ ~ a~ ~ Q j ~ a Hardee Construction ~ 6477 Fairview Ave. ~ o ~ Boise, Idaho 83704-4267 m _ ~ N X UQ W James and Isabella Spagnoletti 2053 N Whittier Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Douglas and Colleen Bowman 2056 N Whittier Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Todd and Laura Zimmerman 1715 Oakcrest Drivel Meridian, Idaho 83642 Steven and Susan Hook 1805 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Daniel and Sharon Sears 1885 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Robert Koga 1965 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Jess, Pilar, & Agueda Cortabital~te 2365 E Fairview Meridian, Idaho 83642 0 Terry and Dana True 2010 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 Richard and Phyllis Akerstrom 2050 Dixie Lane Meridian, Idaho 83642-0000 Jerry Rodman 10608 Cruser Boise, Idaho 83709 Norma~i and Donna Bazker PO Box 294 Volcano, California 95689-0294 Adrian Mansayon & Cheri Corder Elizabeth and Barry Gwin 1555 E Carol 1515 E Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Brent and Luana Barrus 5720 tiV Overland Meridian, Idaho 83642 William Wylie 1930 E Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Ralph Vanpaepegham 1490. E Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Richard and Thelma Bross 1975 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 Richard and Nola Lee 1875 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 Doyle and Rosalie Nally 1620 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Brent and Tina Thompson 1694 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Chester and Lorraine Hosac 1157 E McMillan Road Meridian, Idaho 83642-5237 W S Enterprises 7261 Glenridge View Boise, Idaho 83709 Eugene and Lynette Beck 1872 E Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Lloyd and Mazgazet Murray 1970 Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Robert and Jean Mgore 1835 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 Carolyn Haynes 1560 E Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642-0504 Jerry Lee and Kathy Everhart 1668 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Mazk and Julie Osterhout 1740 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Val and .Sheila Larsen 2075 N Sequoia Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Eileen Allison 1935 E Carol ' Meridian, Idaho 83642 Winston and Marlene Clouss 1915 N locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 Joyce Kay and Robert Davis 1805 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 John and Blace Shope 1640 E Uakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Shane and Susan Thomas 1710 Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 John and Arlen:.:; Killilee 2U55 N Sequu~a Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Don Bryan '.'.070 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642-1826 Turner Family Partnership 2040 E Fairview Boise, Idaho 83707-0000 c 0 U .Q Q Q ~ =M N €~ ~ ~ ~ M L. a ~ y ~ ~ t'-' ~ Q~~a w ~o ~, c 0 m _ ~ n m W UQ :• . Perry and Terri Chase Robert and Tinh Stucker 1404 Carol 1432 E. Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian„ Idaho 83642 Steve and Mary Michels 1630 E. Paradise Meridian, Idaho 83642 EXHIBIT E -Addresses CU Permit Application Avert Dec. 17, 1993 P~. y Steven Hoppe 2325 E Fairview Ave. 114eridian, Idaho 83642 Dee and Ilelena Lowe 2115 E Fairview Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Charles Harvey and Karin Hagan 2065 E Fairview Boise, Idaho 83642 Roger Crandlemire 1400 Floating Feather Road F~2gle, Idaho 83616 Gregory and Terry McCarthy 1385 E. Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Curt and Wilma )ohn 1845 `V. Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Glenn and Vida Michels 1630 E. Paradise Meridian, Idaho 83642 Keith and Mary Lou Shumway 1370 Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642-0713 Daniel and Deborah Woodall 3167 Lakewood Way Boise, Idaho 83706-5241 Dorothy Naumann 1 !~A5 E. Carol St. it?eridi~n Idaho 43642 • .. L.v~.~inc i'homp~ :~iPatsy D onahue 2295 E Fairview Ave. Meridi:ars, Idaho 83642-5' . Q ~. ll. L. Carpenter to ... M N ~ ~ General Delivery ~ a Priest River Q °~,' ~ a ~ ci _ ~ W c0 ~ I- O Ted and Tressie Snodgrass m ~ N = 2030 E Fairview c a~ w v Q Meridian, Idaho 83642 Mark and Gail Dealy 1145 Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 l.emaz and Loma Anderson 1795 W. Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dan and Cara Emigh t 935 W. Cazol St. Meridian, Idaho 83642 John and Gail Cresson P.O. Box 334 Donnelly, Idaho 83615-0334 Herbert and Violet Benn 1870 W. Carol Meridiar,~, hlaho 83642 Steven and Marla Porter 1900 W. Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Keith Wl~ittig 1875 E. ~;arol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Arthur and Rucla Edwards 2255 E Fairview Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Harry and Mary Lee Jensen 2075 E Fairview Meridian, Idaho 83642 Lawrence Tuckness 1915 E Fairview Meridian, Idaho 83642 Joseph and Gail Dealy 1445 Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Darrel Byers 1853 W. Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Francis and Eileen ~emond 1975 W. Cazol Meridian, Idaho 83642 James and Mary Jensen P.O. Boa 239 Donnelly, Idaho 83615 Gilbert and Lynn Tuning 1830 W. Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Thomas and Dazlene Densley ', 1910 E. Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Helen Harris 1835 E. Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Ferry and Terri Chase Robert and Tinh Brucker • Steve and Mary Mkhels 1404 Carol • 1432 E. Carol 1630 E. Paradise Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 • • - --a- - EXHIBIT D -Addresses LIST AZ..1.~ Annexation Approval & Zoning VEST Avest Dec. 17,1993. Page 2 ge 2 Jerry Lee and Kathy Everhart Patrick and Candilee Gittings 1668 E Oakcrest Drive 2051 Applewood Court Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 ''`"~ Brent and Tina Thompson Margaret Hurt 1694 E Oakcrest Drive 2067 N Applewood Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 i/ Shane and Susan Thomas Jonathan and Denise Harvey 1710 Oakcrest Drive 2064 N Applewood Place ~ Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Mark and Julie Osterhout Hardee Construction 1740 E Oakcrest Drive 6477 Fairview Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Boise, Idaho 83704-4267 Chester and Lorraine Hosac Craig and Marcy Dugger 1157 E McMillan Road 2044 N applewood Place / Meridian, Idaho 83642-5237 Meridian, Idaho 83642 John and Arlene Killilee Theodore and Laurie Roy 2055 N Sequoia Place 2043 N Whittier Place ~ Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Val and Sheila Larsen James and Isabella Spagnoletti 2075 N Sequoia Place 2053 N Whittier Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 James and Andrea Terry Robert and Maureen Wignot 2080 N Sequoia Place 2059 N Whittier Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Mark and Nancy Campbell-Adams Ernest and Cheryl Oster 2072 N Sequoia Place 2062 N Whittier Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Michael and Gregory McCarthy Douglas and Colleen Bowman 10365 Martingale Street 2056 N Whittier Place Boise, Idaho 83709 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Amyx/Benedict Construction, Inc. Robert and Kimber Hall 4130 Patriot Circle 2048 N Whittier Place Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Paul and Denise McGuire Charles and Barbara Wright 2041 N Applewood Place 2046 N Whittier Meridian, Idaho 83642 1i- Meridian, Idaho 83642 • • EXHIBIT D -Addresses LIST Annexation Approval & Zoning ATTA Avest Dec. 17,1993 EST Page 3 e 3 Todd and Laura Zimmerman 1715 Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Beehives Homes, Inc. 1406E 1st Street, ~1212A Meridian, Idaho 83642-1746 Kenneth Alverson 1785 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Steven and Susan Hook 1805 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 James and Norreen Stipp 2005 Applewood ~-~' Meridian, Idaho 83642 Karen Blayney 149 N Rainbow Boise, Idaho 83704 Daniel and Sharon Sears 1885 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Leonard Valgene Hamson 1905 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Robert Glenn 2604 N Cole Road Boise, Idaho 83704 Robert Koga 1965 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 John and Davalee Leavitt 1985 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 Wade and Nancy Miller 2005 E Oakcrest Drive ~ Meridian, Idaho 83642 Jess, Pilar, and Agueda Cortabitarte 2365 E Fairview Meridian, Idaho 83642 Steven Hoppe 2325 E Fairview Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Lorraine Thompson and Patsy Donahue 2295 E Fairview Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642-5705 Arthur and Ruela Edwards A & R Green Thumb 2255 E Fairview Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dee and Helena Lowe 2115 E Fairview Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 D.L. Carpenter General Delivery Priest River Harry and Mary Lee Jensen 2075 E Fairview Meridian, Idaho 83642 Charles Harvey and Karin Hagan 2065 E Fairview Boise, Idaho 83642 Ted and Tressie Snodgrass 2030 E Fairview Meridian, Idaho 83642 Lawrence Tuckness 1915 E Fairview Meridian, Idaho 83642 Roger Crandlemire 1400 Floating Feather Road Eagle, Idaho 83616 • • EXHIBIT D -Addresses LIST ATT, Annexation Approval & Zoning [JEST Avest Dec. 17,1993 ~ ge 1 Page 1 Terry and Dana True Eugene and Lynette Beck 2010 N Locust Grove 1872 E Carol Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Jerry Rodman William Wylie c/o David Suhr 1930 E Cazol 10608 Cruser Meridian, Idaho 83642 Boise, Idaho 83709 Eileen Allison Don Bryan 1935 E Carol 2070 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642-1826 Lloyd and Mazgazet Murray Richard and Phyllis Akerstrom 1970 Cazol 2050 Dixie Lane Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642-0000 Richazd and Thelma Bross Norman and Donna Bazker 1975 N Locust Grove PO Box 294 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Volcano, California 95689-0294 Winston and Mazlene Clouss Turner Family Paztnership 1915 N Locust Grove c/o Northwest Property Management Meridian, Idaho 83642 PO Box 7031 2040 E Fairview Robert and Jean Moore Boise, Idaho 83707-0000 1835 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 Adrian Mansayon and Cheri Corder 1555 E Cazol Richazd and Nola Lee Meridian, Idaho 83642 1875 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 Elizabeth and Barry Gwin 1515 E Cazol Joyce Kay and Robert Davis Meridian, Idaho 83642 1805 N Locust Grove Meridian, Idaho 83642 W S Enterprises 7261 Glenridge View Carolyn Haynes Boise, Idaho 83709 PO Box 504 1560 E Cazol Brent and Luana Barrus Meridian, Idaho 83642-0504 5720 W Overland Meridian, Idaho 83642 Doyle and Rosalie Nally 1620 E Oakcrest Drive Ralph Vanpaepegham Meridian, Idaho 83642 1490 E Cazol Meridian, Idaho 83642 John and Blace Shope 1640 E Oakcrest Drive Meridian, Idaho 83642 ~ .,r, w t~ ~ ~, ~ ,-~ ~. w w N ~ W c,a V ~ .., 8 sulPito9 luoyfo43 ~,,, ._ ~ ~ w... i! _- \ "WO ~°i r• o M m <i r ______ i ~' I ~. I - oL __ ~ __ ~ C ~~ ___ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ J ' _ ~~ ~ ~o ~N J~' In J ~ I N ± 1! N -~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~,I n f ~, _ „~ F• ~~ J i lu OC »w L I ~, I ~~~~~ ~; ~ ~,~ H; s ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~i i ie ~ '.7 ~ ~ ! 3 3 I 9 - ~"~ ~v o i ~ ~ '' '~I a 6 ~ v e 4 e U a C Q ~ a ° N a vl 9 ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ w a ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~9 ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ l ~~ t ~~ ~ + ~~ F t , ~ ! ~ L[ wa d. .~' ~, ys +; Y~1 Y~~~.e ~,} •;~, ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~., ~^ ~ ~~ r • Z O H W J W w ~W F-~ ~ ~ r~ W ~Q xo cx O~Z .g F ~Q 9 a 4 roil ~K -_ ~. .. . ~~ -~ ~ _~ zl a J a :.- i ~- ~ ~ Dear City Council Members and P&Z Commission, The enclosed bound copies contain thoughts and material that we will be presenting at the P&Z and City Council meetings. Please note that the packet includes presentation material for both our Annexation, Zoning and Conditional Use Permit requests. These materials are provided in support and clarification of our applications on the parcel at the N.E. corner of Locust Grove and Fairview Avenue. We hope that they will assist in your favorable support of this project. Sincerely, ~~ Kathleen K. Weber General Partner Executive Offices: 600 North Maple Grove Road Boise, Idaho 83704 (208) 376-8750 -~ • • AMENDED ORDINANCE NO. 654 AN AMENDED ORDINANCE OF THE 'CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4, SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, have concluded that it is in the best interest of said City to annex to the said City real property which is described in Section 1 below: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho: Section 1. That the real property described as: The SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4, Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and shall be zoned C-G, General Retail and Service Commercial; that the annexation and zoning is subject to the conditions referenced in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as adopted by the Meridian Council on the request for annexation and zoning. Section 2. That the property shall be subject to de- annexation if the owner shall not meet the following requirements: a. That the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land. b. That the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan adopted January 4, 1994. c. That, as a condition. of annexation, the Applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address inclusion into the subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G., H 2, ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - AVEST Page 1 • • EXHIBIT E -COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS ATTACHMENT TO ANNEXATION REQUEST AVEST -NOVEMBER 23, 1993 -Page 1 The following discussion relates to the 40 acre Avest pazcel located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Fairview Avenue and Locust Grove Road, Meridian, Idaho. The pazcel is immediately adjacent to the City of Meridian city limits and is within the City's azea of impact as negotiated with Ada County. Current zoning on the entire pazcel is RT, rural transition. Planned uses for the site include a community shopping center, a rental storage facility and transitional residential uses. The application for annexation and zoning of this pazcel meets the following goals of Meridian's 1993 Comprehensive Plan. GOAL 1: Preserve Meridian's environmental quality and improve the total natural environment. With all needed utilities available to this site and the fact that Fairview Avenue and its high capacity for traffic conveyance is a given factor, the proposed uses for the site should not lessen the environmental quality at this location. Proper landscaping should improve the natural environment. Traffic flow and pedestrian travel, especially in the residential transitional azea will be addressed with Gaze. GOAL 2: Ensure that growth an development occur in an orderly fashion in accordance with adopted policies. The uses proposed are situated in a high growth area of the community. Infrastructure has previously been extended past the site. Development of the site into a combined shopping center and storage area will best utilize these services. The location of this site provides the city of Meridian an economical means to add shopping and rental storage facilities to the community base. The size of this pazcel provides an opportunity for integrated planning and certainly grouping commercial shopping at a central, easily accessible location should help development in an orderly fashion. GOAL 3 Encourage the kind of economic growth and development which supplies employment and economic self-sufficiency for existing and future residents, reduces the present reliance on Boise and strengthens the City's ability to fiance and implement public improvements, services and its open space character. The development of this site as proposed provides jobs serving the entire northeastern and eastern portions of Meridian. Residents of this azea will be able to shop in their own community and will have an option to shopping in neighboring Boise. The added tax base should provide revenue from the commercial and storage facilities above and beyond the demand for services (especially education.) EXHIBIT E - ~PREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS ATTACHMENT TO ANNEXATION REQUEST AVEST -NOVEMBER 23, 1993 -Page 2 GOAL 4: Provide housing opportunities for all economic groups within the community. The proposed transitional residential (a retirement center or an apartment complex) enhances the diversity of housing opportunities in the general vicinity. The proposed transitional residential uses will also act as a buffer between the existing neighborhood to the north and commercial uses. GOAL 5: Preserve and improve the character and quality of Meridian's man-made environment, while maintaining its identity as aself-sufficient community. The planned uses provide a blending of the man-made environment and the commercial uses will make a statement that Meridian has the facilities of aself-sufficient community. The storage units indirectly help achieve this goal by providing enclosed storage of goods and personal belongings, removing them from storage within neighborhoods. Storage of RV's out of the residential areas greatly improves the appearance and circulation within neighborhoods. GOAL 6: Encourage cultural, educational and recreational facilities which will fulfill the needs and preferences of the citizens of Meridian and insure that these facilities are available to all residents of the City. The shopping center, although retail sales oriented, often provide educational, cultural, and recreational experiences. Senior citizens often make shopping an outing and social affair and to provide a large array of shopping experiences at one locations may help towards this goal. GOAL 7: Provide community services to fit existing and projected needs. Currently, Meridian is served by one shopping center just north of the center of town and four storage facilities southwest of the downtown core. The proposed site, with services already extended to the site, can serve the entire northeastern and eastern portions of Meridian in addition to a good portion of what will eventually become the western outskirts of Boise. GOAL 8: Establish compatible and efficient use of land through the use of innovative and functional site design. Land uses proposed for the site will provide Meridian with a shopping center, rental storage, and transitional uses which are presently lacking in this portion of the city. The presence of a full complement of utilities to serve the site means a functional site design can be prepared without constraints imposed by lacking facilities. • EXHIBIT E - ~PREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS ATTACHMENT TO ANNEXATION REQUEST AVEST -NOVEMBER 23, 1993 -Page 3 GOAL 9: Encourage a balance of land use patterns to insure that revenues pay for services. The site is currently served by adequate infrastructure. Fairview Avenue is designated as a principal arterial in both the current Comprehensive Plan and in the 2000 Urban Functional Street Classification (UFSC) Map. Adjacent to the site, Locust Grove Road is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a minor arterial. The 2000 UFSC Map designates both legs of Locust Grove as a minor arterial. Fairview Avenue is presently undergoing improvements at the intersection with Locust Grove Road. The applicant participated in this improvement by providing right-of--way for the signal. Adequate sewer and water serves the site. Sewer has been extended along Fairview Avenue. The depth of the sewer trunkline is sufficient to provide gravity service to the south 3/4 of the site. The rear (north) portion will gravity feed into the trunkline in Applewood (Mirage Meadows Sub.). Water service is presently available to the site via main lines in Fairview Avenue and Locust Grove Road. Ample capacity is available for both domestic and fire flows. The proposed use will have minimal impact on existing schools and parks. GOAL 10: Create an Urban Service Planning Area which is visually attractive, efficiently managed and clearly identifiable. A combination community shopping center, storage area, and transitional use provides an opportunity for a well landscaped entry located within a primary gateway to Meridian. Sensitive planning of the site layout, perimeter and site landscaping and coordinated site architecture will lend a visually attractive, clearly identifiable image to Meridian. i ~ • K, L of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian and other matters. d. 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, 11-9-605 M. which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways, and 11-9-606 B 14. which pertains to pressurized irrigation. e. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the Applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns. f. Meet the requirements and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and meet the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. g. The requirements and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and meet the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. Section 3 . That the City Clerk shall cause one (1) copy of the legal description, and map, which shall plainly and clearly designate the boundaries of said property, to be filed with the Ada County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax Commission within ten (10) days following the effective date of this Ordinance. Section 4. EFFECTIVE DATE: There being an emergency, which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval as required by law. PASSED by the City Council and approved by the Ma~yyor of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this ~ day of N~~ 1994. APPROVED: ,~„~ , 'MAYOR -- GRANT P. K N FORD ATTEST : a~~' r. ~ era Y ~~~, S~~~L 'gyp. ~~~~f~'; y .: (J '`.J~ x W ~.. !ra WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. -- ITY CLERK ;;;; °~ ~'~ .~ .=~,~~? '~' '~* ~jY~.~r' Ara`'' ~r;: ~~~ rir ~:. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - BVEST Page 2 ~ k • . STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, ) I, WILLIAM G. BERG, JR.•, City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, full and correct copy of an Ordinance entitled."AN AMENDED ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS THE SW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4, SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE," passed as Amended Ordinance No. 654, by the City C ncil and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the s% day of aaG; ., 1994, as the same appears in my office. DATED this ~`~~ day of /Yl~l/. , 1994. City Clerk, City o eridian Ada County, Idaho STATE OF IDAHO,) SS. County of Ada, ) r, .lit JTF~g ,r`='e:..y::7'.'i:,~,"~i. .fir-tir°'~ ~, !x ~`:': •~.:5'. :.' .~. ;~ n _ On this /~~- day of lVov. , 1994, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above 3 written. . -",,~, ,,: _• ,_ . ., - SEAL of ry Public for Idaho Re iding at Meridian, Idaho M Commission Expires O 0~ o .-~. _., . ,~. ~~in~ta...~~-~cs ANNERATION ORDINANCE - AVEST Page 3 • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 8881x433 • FAX (208) 88713813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner 8 Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman • Planning 8 Zoning GRANT P. KlNGSFORD Mayor August 15, 1994 Roger Allen Avest Limited Partnership 6904 Randolph Drive Boise, ID 83709 "Courtesy Notice of Awareness" RE: Property at Locust Grove and Fairview Dear Mr. Allen, It has been brought to our attention that the property listed above is in violation of Ordinance #623 of the City of Meridian. As the owner of this property, you are responsible for complying with the enclosed ordinance involving weeds and waste matters. Please remedy this situation as soon as possible. If there is any problem concerning this, please contact our office. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, .c~+~ ~~ William G. Berg, Jr. City Clerk C~ KECEIVEI~ AUG 1 5 1994 CITY OF MERII3I~.~V August 15, 1994 __ To Whom it May Concern: - __ AVEST Corporation has purchased the 40 acres at the corner of Locust Grove and Fairview. That 40 acres has been annexed into the city limits of Meridian. Approval for storage sheds has been granted. The storage units would be on the -- Before any other development on this property can take place it has to go back - -before the -Planning...and-Zoning_Council, and ail .neighbors within 30Q hundred feet ___ _ ___ would have to be notified by certified mail of any meetings. -At this-time-the - ---- corporation has not applied to Planning and Zoning for any further development, nor have they begun construction on the approved storage units. /~~~--~ William Berg Meridian City Clerk 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 • • Meridian City Council June 21, 1994 Page 7 CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the public that would like Qrdinance #653 read in its entirety? Seeing none I will entertain a motion on Ordinance #653. Cowie: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve Ordinance #653 with suspension of the rules. Tolsma: Second Kingsford: Moved by Bob, second by Ron to approve Ordinance #653 with suspension of the rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Corrie -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Kingsford: The next 2 items on the agenda need to be tabled pursuant to not having them prepared, Counselor would you care to explain that to the Council for their edification. Crookston: Certainly, I have not been able to specifically find out what the status of these 2 matters is, and therefore I did not prepare the ordinance because I wasn't able to ascertain the exact status. Hopefully, we will have #hem at the next meeting. Kingsford: Does there need to be any change in the request for you to prepare that? Any questions from the Council? ITEM #9: ORDINANCE#654 - AVEST ANNEXATION: Kingsford: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS THE SW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4, SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the public that would like Ordinance #654 read in its entirety? Seeing none I will entertain a motion. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move we approve Ordinance #654 with suspension of the rules. Tolsma: Second Kingsford: Moved by Walt, second by Ron to approve Ordinance #654 with suspension C~ Meridian City Council June 21, 1994 Page 8 of the rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Corrie -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Kingsford: The next item on the agenda, likewise, Counsel has advised us that will be dealt with by the board of Sewer Appraisers which consists of the Mayor, City Clerk and City Engineer. So that item will be deleted, we have scheduled a meeting for next Tuesday the 28th at 6:30 in this chamber. ITEM #11: BOB McCAMMON: GREGORY ASHTON TORT CLAIM: Kingsford: Is Bob here? Mr. Crookston are you up to speed on that, is that something that we can handle at a public meeting or is that pending. Crookston: They have filed the tort claim, it has been turned over to our insurer. I have discussed it with the insurer and it is of such a nature that I feel that in fact there is no claim. And I think it is appropriate to have the Council specifically deny the claim. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I have read through all of these things, I agree with what the Counselor says. This appears to be a ambulance chasing attorney that is trying, but anyway I don't see how somebody drives a semi and totals out someone else`s car and has $200 to the semi and then has some sort of injury and has the City be responsible for the ice and stuff on the street when it is clearly ACHD's responsibility. I don't see where there is any claim agonist us the City. Corrie: Mr. Mayor, may I ask you Counselor, if this does go on through and the courts decide it is a trivious thing, do they have to pay our court costs and what that amounts to? Crookston: Not unless they actually sued the City, unless they sue the court has no involvement at all. Corrie: Thank you. Kingsford: The typical claim that you (inaudible). Tolsma: I move we deny the claim. Morrow: Second \,\~ ENGI~yFcc,P RUBBLE ENGINEERING, INC. 9 y 9550 Bethel Court ^ Boise, Idaho 83709 208/322-8992 ^ Fax 208/378-0329 RV June 14, 1994 PN: 94086 City of Meridian Meridian City Hall 33 E.Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 ATTN: Shari Stiles Planning and Zoning Administrator RE: Annexation/Zoning SE Corner of Locust Grove and Fairview (NEB-I Company) Dear Ms. Stiles: ~~~~~~ JUN 1 4 t99~ CITY OF ~FNiDIAN In response to your comments dated June 9, 1994, concerning our annexation request we offer the following comments: 1. This is a true statement and we understand that this annexation is contingent upon the Locust Grove Center (Avert) property. 2. We will provide a legal description for the City's use which includes the property and right-of--way to the centerline; however, understand that ownership of the land does not extend to the centerline. 3. Yes, a development agreement may be necessary addressing tiling of ditches, pedestrian walkways, ACRD right-of--way dedication, however we request that only a 15' setback be required adjacent to the right-of--way as required in the Zoning Ordinance for the C-G Zone. Thirty five feet is excessive as it will consume parking which may be required for the intended uses of the property. 4. Yes, we agree with this. ." i. • • Ms. Stiles June 14, 1994 Page 2 5. Yes, we agree with this. Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, es . Merkle, P.E. cc: Bill Geyer JCM/mf/769.1tr .'` - • • Meridian City Council March 15, 1994 Page 6 ITEM #3:,~i FINDINGS OF FACT AN[) CONCLUSLONS OF LAW: REQUEST FAIL AVN1EXi4?`iON AND ZONING V1/ITH A CONDITIO AL USE PERMIT FOR LOCUS GROVE CENTER BY AVAST Ll~M1TED PARTNERSHIP: Kingsford: At this time I will ask the City Attorney to outline what the Council has placed in those findings. Crookston: Well in summary, what the findings of fact indicate is that the property, excuse me all. the property would be zoned CG. There would be a proposal to have a development agreement for that property as to be used for everything other than the storage. There is a conditional use permit for the storage with a development agreement for that portion of the land that is going to be developed in storage. That is where the conclusions come out. And to have in the development agreement that the development agreement we could do them both for the property to be used for the shopping center and what they discussed for a retirement area together with that portion of the land that is going to be used for storage, it could be done separately. It is my suggestion however that no ordinance for annexation be passed until we have the development agreements signed and executed and in place. Kingsford: Any questions of the Council on these findings? Is there a motion on the findings? Morrow: So moved Yerrington: Second Kingsford: Moved by Walt, second by Max to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law on the request by Avest, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Yerrington -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All yea Kingsford: The appropriate measure then Counselor is to approve the Conditional Use Permit or Crookston: No, not until you have a development agreement. Kingsford: Point of interest in that agreement, development agreement,. I thir~lc t.e~ quest~n of Dixie L~ g `Vi'e' tq be addressed. And the stub street tit- we required from Dave Leaders property that stubs to this needs to be addressed as C ~ ~ , ~ • Meridian City Council March 15, 1994 Page 7 well. So those things need to be hooked together also. ITEM #4: ANNEXATION AND ZONING WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT: SPORTSMAN POI NTE #4: Kingsford: The preliminary plat was done at the last meeting I believe, we will skip over that and handle that with the ordinance agenda item #9. ITEM #5: ORDINANCE #634 - SCOTTSDALE ESTATES SUBDIVISION: Kingsford: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING AND CHANGING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NE 1 /4 OF THE NW 1 /4 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO: AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the public that would like to have Ordinance #634 read in its entirety? Tolsma: I move we approve Ordinance #634 with suspension of the rules. Yerrington: Second Kingsford: Moved by Ron, second by Max to approve Ordinance #634 with suspension of the rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Yerrington -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All yea ITEM #6: ORDINANCE #635: ELK RUN SUBDIVISION NO. 2: Kingsford: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF THE NE 1 /4 OF SECTION 24, T. 3N, R. 1 W, B.M., MERIDIAN,. ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the public that would like Ordinance #635 read in its entirety? Is there a motion on Ordinance #635? Yerrington: I move we approve #635 with suspension of the rules. Tolsma: Second • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: MARCH 15 1994 APPLICANT: AVEST LIMITED AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 3 PARTNERSHIP REQUEST: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT GEN Y CITY CLERK: COMMENTS CITY EINGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ~I~- MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: vI F' Pp'~ OTHER: ~ D BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE A PORTION OF THE S W. 1/4 OF THE S.W. 1/4 SECTION 5, T 3 N., R.1 E., B.M. MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation. and zoning application having come on for consideration on March 1, 1994, 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 City Council having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the Applicants appearing through Kathleen Weber and Roger Allen, 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 March 1, 1994, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the March 1, 1994, hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations. 2.~ That the property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 1 • • reference is incorporated herein; that the property is approximately 40.45 acres in size. 3. That the property is presently zoned by the county as R-T (Rural Transition); that the Applicant requests that the property be zoned General. Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) and has requested a conditional use permit to allow storage. units. 4. The general area surrounding the property is used mostly as residential property with some being used agriculturally; that the property to the north is used residentially as R-8 zoned property; that the land to the west across Locust Grove Road is not in the City of Meridian and is used as residential property similar to what the City zones as R-4; the property to the south across Fairview Avenue is agricultural or vacant land; the property to the east is a commercial building with several different types of uses. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 6. That Roger Allen, who is the general partner of the limited partnership that owns the property, is the Applicant; that the owner has consented to the application and has requested this annexation, zoning and conditional use and the application is not at the request of the City of Meridian. 7. That the Applicant's annexation and zoning application stated that the present use of the land is agricultural with the original house and out-buildings intact; that the proposed use is for a commercial shopping center, rental storage facility and transitional uses; that a possible transitional use was stated to FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 2 • • be a retirement center; that the land is presently zoned by Ada County as Rural Transitional (RT); that the Applicant lists the following as characteristics that make it desirable to be zoned C- G: "a. From a traffic planning standpoint, the location of this site makes it highly functional to receive commercial uses. The site is located at the intersection of a principal arterial and a major collector that is signaled. b. The continued growth of residential developments around this site is increasing the demand for a commercial site to keep place with neighborhood need. c. It is the intent of the planning effort in this area to cluster commercial development thus avoiding strip development. This site is of adequate size to .accommodate Commercial and Multiple Use(s)." 8. That one of the Applicant's representatives, Kathleen Weber, stated at the Planning and Zoning hearing that the development would compare with the South Shore project in Boise; that berming at the back of the building goes up six feet on the building; that they would screen out the noise from the traffic; that there would be a retirement center next to Mirage Meadows; that their storage buildings provide a single sided, one story landscaped buffer for maximum backyard peace and quiet; that they intend to close Apple Street; that they would meet the Ada County Highway District site specific requirements; that bike lanes and walking paths would be incorporated into the development with sidewalks possibly within the berming along Locust Grove; that ACRD will decide the alignment of Carol street but AVest would work with both ACHD and the neighbors regarding this concern; that each and every part of the project will have to go through conditional use FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 3 • • hearings and design review and such will be required; that there would be a 400 foot buffer for Mirage Meadows from the rear of the proposed shopping center; that the requirements for approval regarding irrigation and the comments of Gary Smith would be met; that regarding the widening of Locust Grove Road such would be in the hands of ACRD but they would participate with berming sidewalks and landscaping; that they agree to pay impact fees and/or make a monetary donation to the City for purchase of property that is more suitable for parks; that Kathleen Weber's testimony before the City Council was basically the same. 9. That one of the Applicant's representatives, Roger Allen, stated at the Planning and Zoning hearing that the City would maintain control over development of the property through required design review and conditional use permit approval; that the project would have a 12 to 16 million dollar value; that they would pay impact fees, whatever those might. be; that there would be a minimum of twenty feet of berming all the way around the shopping center and it would be nicely landscaped, sprinkled and sodded; that there would be sidewalks along Fairview Avenue; that they would like to pursue a retirement center in the northwest portion of the property; that for the neighbors across Locust Grove, there would be landscaped berming six to eight feet high; that in the back there would be clusters of at least three trees every 40 feet; that in the area next to Mirage Meadows they were proposing to have the neighbors backyards extended to the back of the storage buildings and it could be for the use of the neighbors if the neighbors would FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 4 • • maintain the property; that pedestrian walkways would be provided; that they would provide a pedestrian walkway along what is now Dixie Lane; that they would provide detailed plans for landscaping, drainage, building and other needed information for each conditional use application; that they would help the City identify some alternative neighborhood parks and agree to pay all City imposed impact fees for the purpose of adding to and maintaining its parks, bike paths, libraries, etc. That Mr. Allen testified further at the City Council hearing that the exits from the property would not align with the homes on Locust Grove Road; that they would do some berming along Locust Grove Road on the west side of the road; that they would enter into a development agreement; that they desired a General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) zoning and the shopping center would be developed as a commercial planned development. That regarding the proposed conditional use for a storage facility, the Applicant presented, as part of the information packet presented at the Planning and Zoning level, a section dealing with the conditional use; that section provides a list of benef~.ts of rental storage, some layout drawings of how the storage portion would fit into the entire development, a layout drawing for the storage area which included a loop road, a layout drawing showing the entrance into the storage area, a site study showing how the line of vision from a two story house would interfere with privacy into existing adjacent homes, a biographic sketch of Stor- It Rental Storages, a statement of Elements Important to Meridian, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 5 • • a statement of Elements Important to Stor-It Rental Storage and Customers, and a statement as to Landscape Design; all such statements and representation are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 10. The Applicant's representative, Larry Durkin, testified that previous developments they had done, such as Southshore in Boise, had been very successful; .that property values had not declined around Southshore; that residential rental vacancies had not increased; that the development in Meridian would increase the ability of Meridian residents to shop in Meridian. 11. As stated above, the Applicant submitted two bound packets of information for support and clarification of the applications, one to assist the Planning and Zoning Commission and one which updated the first, for the City Council; that in the first packet of information, the Applicant states that the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area for multiple use including a community shopping center; that infrastructure is in place for a shopping center; that the City will maintain control over development of the property through required design review and conditional use permit approvals; that the Comprehensive Plan anticipates a community sized shopping center at this location; that all physical ingredients for a major shopping center are present at this site; and that the information lists the benefits of a shopping center, including providing physical improvements of additional widening of Locust Grove, bike lanes, a minimum 20 foot landscaped berming along Locust Grove, sidewalk along Locust Grove, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 6 ~ • preferably in the berming, and modern landscaping and buffering. 12. That the updated packet of material that was submitted to the Council, sets forth matters relating to neighborhood meetings and negotiations between .the Applicant and the surrounding neighbors; with regard to the Locust Grove Road neighbors the Applicant states several solutions to their concerns that could be done on their side of the road and on the shopping center side of the road which included the Ada County Highway District plans to widen Locust Grove Road to five lanes; that this would be necessary before the shopping center would open; that shopping center entrances on Locust Grove Road would be located between lot lines in Doris Subdivision; that for the berming and landscaping along Locust Grove Road there would be landscaping along the shopping center portion, the berming would be two to four feet high to retain automobile lights within the parking lots, the berm/landscape area would be twenty feet wide the full length of the shopping center, there would be extended and widened landscaping at entrances on Fairview Avenue and Locust Grove Road, and there would be landscape islands in parking sections per City requirements; that the berming and landscaping at the possible retirement center would be six to eight feet high and twenty feet wide. 13. That with regard to the neighbors in Mirage Meadows the Applicant stated that there would be minimum impact and the neighbors would be at least 400 feet from the rear of the shopping center; that with regard to the neighbors east of Applewood street FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 7 i • the storage would be a transitional use; that with regard to the neighbors west of Applewood street, the Applicant stated that they expressed a desire to storage as a transitional use also and Applicant would provided adequate buffering and transitional use in this area; that Applewood would become a twenty foot wide walking and bike path and that traffic would be limited. to emergency vehicles. 14. That with regard to the other neighbors, the Applicant stated their concerns and stated how they felt its development would assist the community at large. 15. The Applicant also included in the packet a summary of what the comments of the neighbors were, copies of the minutes of the meetings between the Applicant and the neighbors, and copies of the letters that the Applicant had sent to some specific neighbors. The Applicant states with regard to Locust Grove Road residents' meeting, that it would contribute $11,000.00 dollars for landscaping on the west side of Locust Grove Road. 16. The Applicant also submitted copies of letters that it had sent to abutting land owners which explained things that the Applicant was willing to do to the soften the impact of the development on the adjacent property owners and their homes. The Applicant also submitted letters of support for the development. 17. That in the packet the Applicant sets forth the Ada County Highway District (ACRD) requirements and what it was willing to do with regard to ACRD requirements; that such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 8 • • 18. Applicant also set forth in the packet submitted to the Council a response to the City of Meridian Staff comments; that such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that the Applicant stated that it would enter into a development agreement with the City. The Applicant set forth its position with regard to a neighborhood park which was that it did not feel that such was appropriate. 19 Applicant further set forth in the packet of materials submitted to the City Council its desires for the northwest corner of the property and that was for a retirement housing center. 20. The Applicant set forth in the packet of information a summary of what it was requesting and what it was agreeing to; that such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 21. There were property owners appearing at the Planning and Zoning hearing to make comments on and object to the application; that such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; there were property owners at the hearing before the City Council and they stated in substance as follows: a. J. Clous stated that the development would cause more traffic; .that Mayor Brent Coles had been an employee of Dakota Development and therefore he questioned the import of Coles' letter in support of the application; that the berming of Locust Grove Road on his side of the road would cause him to lose land; that he wants more that 2-4 feet of berming; that he wants contingency zoning so that if this development does not come to fruition the zoning would revert back to agricultural. b. Terri McCarthy stated that she assumed that the north 1/2 of the property would be residential; that .the City should consider market saturation of storage places. c. Matt Hibbs stated that he wondered about the park FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 9 • situation and that he had not. been notified as the Applicant had stated he would be. d. Karen Blayney stated that she was still apposed to the commercial zoning; that she had lived next to a shopping center before and it was not satisfactory; that she was told before she moved to her new house that the north 1/2 of the property would be residential. e. Elizabeth Gwin stated that the Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, states that residential land should be protected; she does not feel that her residential land is being protected; that there was no control over what would be stored in the storage units; that she was apposed to the development in the fashion proposed. f. Bob Moore submitted a letter voicing his objection; that he testified that he was apposed for the reasons stated in the letter including traffic, lowering of property values, noise, and that he desires traffic calming. The letter specifically includes objections relating to growth and traffic, lowering of property values, traffic in front of his home, loss of land for the widening of Locust Grove Road, a desire for traffic calming for the area, the shopping center would not be compatible with the neighborhood, increased noise, increase in crime, glare from headlights, that approval of the project would be an injustice to the people in the neighborhood, and that there were other areas where the shopping center could be located. g. Don Bryan testified that the traffic and light glare would be bad; that he had concerns over irrigation delivery to his property and concerns over drainage; he wanted the ditch that delivered irrigation to him to be tiled before construction started and was concerned over what happened to the ditch even after it was tiled. 22. That the Meridian Police Department, Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Planning Director, Central District Health Department, and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments; that those comments are incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. 23: The City Planner, Wayne Forrey, commented that the annexation and land use request of C-G complies with the current FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 10 ! • Comprehensive Plan with the exception of a neighborhood park and the updated landscape/screening and development review standards which apply to this area of the City; that this site is adjacent to residential subdivisions and pedestrian access must be provided for interconnection; .that an acceptable pathway/pedestrian access concept design plan must be submitted to the City and to ACRD prior to final annexation approval; the Comprehensive Plan indicates a need fora neighborhood park site in this area; that the Applicant must specify types of anticipated transitional uses for City analysis; that ACHD has requested a traffic study to be included in the development agreement or conditional use permit conditions pertaining to the shopping center component of the project; that the Applicant needs to submit detailed rental storage site development plans; that a variance would be required for a security guard's dwelling; that as a condition of annexation approval, a development agreement addressing subdivision access, linkage, screening, buffering, transitional land uses, traffic study and recreation services, must be entered into prior to annexation approval; that the project will be subject to a development review and Zoning Administrator and Buildings inspector checklists. 24. That in prior requests for annexation and zoning the Planning Director has commented that annexation could be conditioned on a development agreement including an impact fee to help acquire a future school or park sites to serve the area and that annexations should be subject to impact fees for park, police, and fire services as determined by the City and designated in an FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 11 • approved development agreement. 25. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 26. That the parcel of ground requested to be annexed is presently included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area (U.S.P.A.) as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 27. That the property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer. 28. 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 and other uses. 29. That the following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan: A. Under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, Economic Development Goal Statement Policies, Page 19 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interests and activities are to dominate. 1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 12 • • 1.6 It is the policy of the City. of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into new or existing residential areas, and plan for new shopping .centers as growth and development warrant. 1.8 The City of Meridian intends to establish a Design Review Ordinance which will foster compatible land use and design within the development, and with contiguous developments; and encourage innovations in building techniques, so that the growing demands of the community are met, while at the same time providing for the efficient use of such lands. B. Under LAND USE 1. EXISTING CONDITIONS, Page 21 Commercial and retail areas are established along major arterials, (East First Street, Cherry Lane, Fairview Avenue, Franklin and Meridian Roads) and include small commercial center and individual businesses. Uses include retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited manufacturing. 2. GENERAL POLICIES, Page 22 The following land use activities are not in compliance with the basic goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Strip commercial and strip industrial. b. Scattered residential (sprawl or spread). 3. COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS, Page 25 a. Community Shopping Center - As a retail commercial enterprise, it is designed to serve a multi-neighborhood area and can be both complimentary to and competitive with a Regional Shopping Center. b. In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided by performance and developments standards. These standards consider, among other aspects: 1. Traffic Volume and Type 2. Trip Generation 3. Impacts on Arterial Street System 4. Proximity to Other Commercial Development 5. Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas 6. Accessibility of Site 7. Parking Demands FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 13 • • 8. Pedestrian Circulation 9. Available Utility Systems 10. Aesthetics (Design Considerations) 11. Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses 12. Internal Circulation Design 13. Drainage 4. 5. c. A Community Shopping Center is defined as having between 100,000 and 200,000 square feet of gross floor area, and between eight to 30 acres of site area. COMMERCIAL POLICIES,. Page 26 a. 4.6U Community shopping centers will be encouraged to locate at arterial intersections and near high-traffic intensity areas. b. 4.7U Community shopping centers must be planned for future integration of adjoining residential uses. MIXED-PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT, Page 28 Mixed-use Area at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue Plus Area North of Fairview Avenue. These areas are within Ada County, but nearly surrounded by the City of Meridian. The area is characterized by large rural lots, and a sparse development pattern. In order to stimulate planned development in these areas, the following policies apply: a. 5.16U All development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility. b. 5.17U A variety of coordinated, planned and compatible land uses are desireable for this area, including low-to-high density residential, office, light industrial and commercial land uses. c. 5.18U Existing residential properties will be protected from incompatible land use development in this area. Screening and buffers will be incorporated into all development requests in this area. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 14 • • d. 5.19U A planned community shopping center is anticipated near the Locust Grove Road/Fairview Avenue intersection. C. Under TRANSPORTATION, Page 42 1. Existing Conditions a. Cherry Lane/Fairview, East of Meridian Road, is listed as a principal arterial b. Locust Grove Road is listed as a Minor arterial. D. Under COMMUNITY DESIGN, at Page •71 1. Entryway Corridors c. Fairview Avenue (East entrance). 2. Entrance Corridors Goal Statement - Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically pleasing approaches to the City of Meridian. 3. Policies, Page 71 a. 4.3U Use the Comprehensive Plan, subdivision regulations, and zoning to discourage strip development and encourage clustered, landscaped business development on entrance corridors. b. 4.4U Encourage 35-foot landscaped setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. 4. Neighborhood Identify Goal Policies, Page 72 a. 6.4U Limit the conversion of predominantly residential neighborhoods to nonresidential uses, and require effective buffers and mitigation measures through conditional use permits when appropriate nonresidential uses are proposed. 30. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use, Rural Areas, page 28, it states as follows: "Land covered by this policy section has characteristics which generally allow for agricultural and rural residential FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 15 • activity due to the existence of irrigation systems, soil characteristics and relative freedom from conflicting urban land uses. Where community growth creates pressure for new development, it must be recognized that agricultural land can no longer economically continue to be identified or used as agricultural land to the exclusion of orderly city growth and development." 31. That Section 6.3, of the LAND USE section of the Comprehensive Plan, states that land in agricultural activity should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services (municipal sewer and water facilities) can be provided. 32. That Section 6.3, of the LAND USE section of the Comprehensive Plan, states as follows: "Existing rural residential land uses and farms/ranches shall be buffered from urban development expanding into rural areas by innovative land use planning techniques." 33. That the property is included within an area designated on the Generalized Land Use Map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a commercial area; that the commercial area is in an area that is listed as Mixed/Planed Use Development area. 34. That the requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial, (C-G) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 11. as follows: ,~C-Gl 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. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 16 • • 35. That Section 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, B, Commercial, lists commercial uses allowed in the various zoning districts of the City; that Shopping Centers, Community, are not listed as allowed uses in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) district; that Shopping Centers, Neighborhood, are not listed as allowed uses in the General Retail-and Service Commercial (C-G) district; that individual department stores, retail stores, restaurants, and storage facilities, indoors or outdoors, are allowed uses in the C-G district; that planned commercial developments, are an allowed use in the C-G district. 36. That Planned Development is defined in 11-2-403 B, at page 20 of the Zoning Ordinance booklet, as follows: "An area of land which is developed as a single entity for a number of uses in combination with or exclusive of other supportive uses. A PD may be entirely residential, industrial, or commercial or a mixture of compatible uses. A PD does not necessarily correspond to lot size, bulk, density, lot coverage required, open space or type of residential, commercial or industrial uses as established in any one or more created districts or this Ordinance." and a Planned General Development is defined as follows: "A development not otherwise distinguished under Planned Commercial, Industrial, Residential Developments, or in which the proposed ,use of interior and exterior spaces requires unusual design flexibility to achieve a completely logical and complimentary conjunction of uses and functions. This PD classification applies to essential public services, public or private recreation facilities, institutional uses, community facilities or a PD which includes a mix of residential, commercial or industrial uses." 37. That under 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, A Residential, a Planned Unit Development - General. Planned Residential, is an allowed conditional use in the C-G district; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 17 . • under B Commercial, Planned Commercial Development, is a permitted use in the C-G district and Planned Unit Development - General, is an allowed conditional use in the C-G district. 38. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in population, and the housing for that population, does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for school services to current and future students. 39 ." That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 18 • • development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all lots in the City, because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City. of Meridian. 40. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (10') wide." 41. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." 42. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" 43. That Section 11-9-605 R states as follows: "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi- improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 19 • • 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value, especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." 44. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: "Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle-Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments." 45. That 11-9-607 A, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "The City's policy is to encourage developers of land development and construction projects to utilize the provisions of this Section to achieve the following: 1. A development pattern in accord with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 5. A more convenient pattern of commercial, residential and industrial uses as well as public services which support such uses." 46. That 11-9-607 E, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "A PD shall be allowed only as a Conditional Use in each district subject to the standards and procedures set forth in the Section. A PD shall be governed by the regulations of the district or districts in which said PD is located. The approval of the Final Development Plan for a PD may provide for such exceptions from the district regulations governing use, density, area, bulk, parking, signs, and other FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 20 • • regulations as may be desirable to achieve the objectives of the proposed PD, provided such .exceptions are consistent with the standards and criteria contained in this Section." 47. That 11-9-607 F, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: 1. Planned Developments - Planned developments shall be subject to requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and also subject to all provisions within this Ordinance. 8. Financial Guarantees - The developer shall post financial guarantees for -all approved on-site improvements if required pursuant to 9-606 C." 48. As stated above in Paragraph 9, the Applicant submitted material on the conditional use application for storage units in the bound material on the annexation and zoning; that such material on the conditional use is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full; .that the Applicant submitted no other materials on the conditional use request and did not specifically address the conditional use for the storage at the public hearing; that as found above, the Planning Director stated that the Applicant needs to submit detailed rental storage site development plans and that a variance would be required for a security guard dwelling residence. 49. That under the Meridian Zoning Ordinance storage facilities, whether indoors or outdoors, are a permitted use in the C-G zone; that outdoor storage is a conditional use in the C-N and C-C zones; that indoor storage is a permitted use in the C-G zone, but is not stated to be a permitted or conditional use in the C-N and C-C~zones; that such may be permitted in those zones under a conditional use under the provisions of 11-2-407 D, USES NOT FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 21 • -, SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED OR LISTED IN DISTRICTS. The current Comprehensive Plan, recently adopted, does state that in the Mixed- Use Area at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue development requests will be subject to .development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility; that Applicant states, in the packets of information submitted, that the required storage use is an allowed use in the C-G zone, which they have applied to have the property zoned, but they applied for a conditional use permit, apparently in accordance with the new Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 50. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council were given and 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 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 City Council has judged these annexation, zoning and conditional use applications under Idaho Code, Section 50-222, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, Meridian City Ordinances, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 22 • • 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 Council 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 property owner, and 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. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). 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, and Section 11-9-605 M., which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways. 10. That this Application has been submitted prior to the adoption of the proposed amendment to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan; that as a condition of annexation the Applicant must agree FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 23 • • that the Meridian Comprehensive Plan shall. apply to the land and any development and this must be agreed upon in a development agreement that must be entered into prior to passage of_ an annexation ordinance. 11. As stated by the Planning and Zoning Commission, this Application has been difficult for the Council to decide because of the opposition to the Applications; that the Council understands the objections and sympathizes with them on an individual basis; that the duty of the Council, however, is not to be controlled by the interests of individual property owners and their concerns; that the duty of the Council is to assess the applications on the basis of the overall good of the City and its citizens; that the Comprehensive Plan and the Ordinances of the City have measures to try and insure that adjacent property owners are impacted by development as little as possible; that it is with this duty and background that the Council has undertaken to make these Findings and Conclusions. _ 12. That the Applicant's proposed use of the property is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the current Comprehensive Plan which controls this application, states, in the LAND USE section, under 5.19U, that a community shopping center is anticipated near the Locust Grove Road/Fairview Avenue intersection. 13 ." The Applicant has stated and represented that its intention is to construct and operate a community shopping center, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 24 • • but the Applicant has requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G), which does. not allow for a community shopping center. 14. That the City adopted the Comprehensive Plan at its meeting on January 4, 1994, and has not amended the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the changes made in the Comprehensive Plan; thus, uses may be called for or allowed in the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance may not address provisions for the use. 15. That the Applicant and the City are therefore caught in a no-man's-land situation, i.e., the Comprehensive Plan calls for a community shopping center at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue but the Zoning Ordinance only allows for a community shopping center in the Community Business District and not in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) district; the Applicant has not requested the land to be zoned, Community Business District; that a shopping center could be allowed in the C-G district under a Planned Development; that the Applicant has stated that he would develop the area of the property planned for a shopping center under a planned development procedure. 16. That it is concluded that the City could annex the property and zone it C-G but the Applicant could still not construct a community shopping center; however, once the property was zoned C-G, the Applicant could place many different uses on the property without additional approval from the City other than building permits, which limits the control that the City should have over the development and the uses of the property due to the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 25 • mandates of the Comprehensive Plan and the testimony of those objecting to the development of the property in a commercial manner. 17. That it is concluded that since the Applicant has represented in the packet of information submitted to the City that, "The City will always control the development through the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review approval process.", and since Kathleen Weber indicated that each•and every part of the project will have to go through conditional use hearings and design review and such will be required, and since the Comprehensive Plan, under LAND USE, Mixed-Use Area at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue, in 5.16U, states that all development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to insure neighborhood compatibility, and since Roger Allen stated that ". the shopping center portion will be developed as a commercial planned development .", and the City should have control over any uses that are to be placed on the land, it is therefore concluded that the development of that portion of the land not to be used for storage is conditioned on being developed as a_Commercial Planned Development, which is allowed in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) district. 18. Therefore, it is concluded that since the Applicant has stated that he is agreeable to developing the property as a community shopping center under a commercial planned development process, the property should be annexed and zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G), but only capable of being developed FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 26 • • as a planned commercial development. The development of the storage shall be addressed below. 19. That, as a condition of annexation and the zoning of C-G, the Applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address, among other things, the following: 1. Inclusion into the development of~the requirements of 11- 9-605 a. C, Pedestrian Walkways. b. G 1, Planting Strips. c. H, Public Sites and Open Spaces. d. K, Lineal Open Space Corridors. e. L, Pedestrian and Bike Path Ways. 2. The concerns of the owners of property along Locust Grove of having lights, particularly automobile headlights, shine into their yards and homes. 3. Payment by the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, of any impact, development, or transfer fee, adopted by the City, as agreed to by the Applicant in statements by its representative during the public hearing. 4. Addressing the subdivision access linkage, screening, buffering, transitional land uses, traffic study and recreation services. 5. An impact fee to help acquire a future school or park sites to serve the area. 6. An impact fee, or fees, for park, police, and fire services as determined by the city. 7. Appropriate berming and landscaping. 8. Submission and approval of any required plats. 9. Submission and approval of individual building, drainage, lighting, parking, and other development plans under the Planned Development. guidelines, including plans for the storage units. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 27 • • 10. Harmonizing and integrating the site improvements with the existing residential development. 11. Establishing the 35 foot landscaped setback required under the Comprehensive Plan and landscaping the same. 12. Addressing the comments of the Planning Director, Wayne Forrey. 13. The sewer and water requirements. 14. Agreeing that the Meridian Comprehensive Plan is applicable to the land and any development. 15. The annexation and zoning of the land. 16. Traffic plans and access into and out of the development. 17. Meeting the representations made as part of the application and hearing process. 18. And any other items deemed .necessary by the City Staff, including design review of all development, and conditional use processing as required under the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 20. That Section 11-2-417 D of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance states in part as follows: "If property is annexed and zoned, the City may require or permit, as a condition of the zoning, that an owner or developer make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subject property. If a commitment is required or permitted, it shall be recorded in the office of the Ada County Recorder and shall take effect upon the adoption of the ordinance annexing and zoning the property, or prior if agreed to by the owner of the parcel. ."; that since the above section states that the development agreement shall take effect upon the adoption of the ordinance annexing and zoning the parcel and since no development agreement has been agreed on, or even discussed, it is concluded that the development agreement is information that the City Council needs prior to the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 28 • • final action on the annexing, zoning and conditional use applications, which is the annexation ordinance, and therefore pursuant to 11-2-416 F 2. the City Council may continue the matter from meeting to meeting until the development agreement is executed by all necessary parties. 21. That it is concluded that the annexing and zoning of the property is in the best interests of the City of Meridian, but it is concluded that there shall be no~ annexation until the requirements of paragraph 19 are met and the annexation and zoning is conditioned upon meeting the requirements of paragraph 19 of these Conclusions. 22. That regarding the conditional use permit request for storage units, it is concluded that Roger Allen, a representative of the Applicant, stated that Applicant desired to develop the shopping center under a commercial planned development, but he did not state that Applicant also desired to develop the storage under a commercial planned development; that the Planning and Zoning Commission concluded that if the Applicant agreed to develop the all of the property as a commercial planned development and enter into a development agreement, the property would then be annexed and the Applicant could pursue the development of the storage units as part of the commercial planned development; that it is concluded that under a conditional use and a development agreement, the same controls on the storage units could be had by the City as under a planned unit development for the storage. 23. That it is concluded that 11-2-418(C) of the Revised and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 29 • • Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian .sets forth the standards under which 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 City Council concludes as follows: a. The use, would not in fact, constitute a conditional use under the Meridian Zoning Ordinance since storage is stated to be a permitted use in the C-G district, but the new Comprehensive Plan states that all development requests in the Mixed-use Area at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility, and therefore the conditional use application is deemed to be appropriate, as is the granting of such conditional use. b. The use should be harmonious-with and. in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, if the requirements in these .Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are met, but the Comprehensive Plan 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 as long as development is undertaken to meet the. representations of the Applicant and those that may be required by the City under design review. d. That the use would not be hazardous nor should it be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses as long as development is undertaken to meet the representations of the Applicant and those that may be required by the City under design review. 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. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 30 • h. That sufficient parking for the property and the proposed use will be required and the parking ordinance shall be met including the preparation of a parking plan and landscaping. i. The development and uses will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. 24. It is concluded that the conditional use should be granted if a development agreement is entered into regarding the development of the storage units and such is hereby made a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit for the storage units; that such a development agreement could be made a part of the development agreement required as a condition of approval for the annexation and zoning of the property, and such makes logical sense since there will be no annexing and zoning until the development agreement is entered into for the annexing and zoning. 25. That the requirements of the Meridian Police Department Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Planning Director, Central District Health Department, and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, shall be met and addressed in a development agreement. 26. 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. 27. That the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land; that the development of the property shall be FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 31 • subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the development agreement. 28. That proper and adequate access to the property is available and will, have to be maintained, with appropriate. buffering and head light glare reduction for the property to the west of Locust Grove Road. 29. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant and its. assigns. ' 30. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C- G), and the issuance of a conditional use permit would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 31. That if these conditions of approval are not met, the property shall not be annexed and the conditional t~se permit shall not be granted. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OP' FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN MORROW VOTE COUNCILMAN YERRINGTON COUNCILMAN CORRIE COUNCILMAN TOLSMA VOTED MAYOR KINGSFORD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 32 • • DSCISION The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby decides that the property. set forth in the application is approved for annexation, zoning and issuance of a conditional use permit under. the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, including that the Applicant develop the land which was represented not to be land for storage as a commercial planned unit development and that the Applicant enters into a development agreement, for both the land that was represented not to be used for storage and for land to be used for the storage facility, as outlined in the Conclusions of Law, prior to an annexation and zoning ordinance being passed; that an' annexation and zoning ordinance, and the issuance of a conditional use permit, shall not occur until a development agreement is entered into as that agreement is information that the Council needs to decide whether to pass an annexation and zoning ordinance and issue a conditional use permit or deny the applications; that if the Applicant is not agreeable with these Findings of Fact. and Conclusions and is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement, the property will not be annexed. There shall be no development or use, whatsoever, of the property set forth in the. Application as being used for other than storage, even. if annexed and zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G), unless done as a planned commercial development and such is approved by the City of Meridian prior to commencement of construction. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - AVEST PAGE - 33 • RIECEI~IED BAR - ~ 199~t Gi~y DF 1~[1EI~IDIAN City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 Gentlemen: Meridian, Idaho March 3,1994 We wish to express our opposition to the proposed annexation and zoning of approximately 33.1 acres of land located in the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T. 3N, R. 1W, Boise-Meridian, Ada, County, and which property is generally located on the SW corner of Franklin and Locust Grove roads. Our principal concern is the increase in the automobile traffic this would bring to our already overburdened streets. Yours truly, Nathan ~ Connie West 160 So. Locust Grove Meridian, ID 84642 • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 32 MOTION CARRIED: All yea Kingsford: Next item is to ask the Counselor to prepare appropriate ordinance. Yerrington: So moved Tolsma: Second Kingsford: Moved by Max, second by Ron to have the City Attorney prepare a zoning and annexation ordinance for Tuthill Subdivision, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All yea Yerrington: Mr. Mayor, could we take a small break before we tackle the next item? Kingsford: Some of these guys have a limited capacity. (FIVE MINUTE RECESS) Kingsford: Call the meeting back to order. ITEM #14: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LOCUST GROVE CENTER BY AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: Kingsford: At this time I will ask the owner or his representative to come forward and begin. Kathleen Weber, 600 North Maple Grove Road, Boise, was sworn by the Attorney. Weber: Mayor Kingsford, Council Members and Ms. Stiles, I am Katleen Weber, a general partner of Avest and CEO of Stor-It rental storage units of Boise. Thank you for this opportunity to give some background information about AVest, Stor-It rental storage and our communications with neighbors in regard to the application before you tonight. Assisting me in showing you plats tonight is Stor-It's construction property manager, Scott Weber. After I comment, Mr. Allen will go over your presentation packets and the corresponding supplement packet. Also, after my remarks and those of Mr. Allen 1 would like to have you meet Mr. Larry Durkin and joint venture partner in shopping center developments. He is here i Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 33 CJ tonight to make a few comments. Also, Mr. Bill Slight of BRS Architects is here tonight if you have any technical questions you would like to ask. The approval process began on this 40 acre parcel at the northeast corner of Locust Grove and Fairview Avenue in Meridian approximately a year and a half ago. We are glad to be here tonight presenting our project. What we have before you tonight are 2 applications. One application is for annexation and a CG zoning for this entire property. The second application is a request for a conditional use permit for a rental storage complex on a portion of the property. We are bringing both these applications at the same time so we can hopefully begin storage construction this spring. We fully understand that the conditional use permit for storage is contingent upon the annexation and zoning application approval. We have some pictures of the South Shore Development in southeast Boise and recent Stor-It developments in which Avest partners are involved. As background information for our conditional use permit for storage I have some detailed plats for landscaping, elevation, loop road incorporation, bike paths, entry design on Fairview and buffering concepts that were discussed with neighbors. I'll read in nine comments concerning communication with neighbors around the project. We have been doing projects in the valley for over 32 years. The most recently completed project is the Southshore Shopping Center in southeast Boise. Even though it was zoned and approved long before the surrounding neighborhoods developed in this area, it was re-designed after neighborhood meetings to conform the neighbors needs and expectations. The Locust Grove property will be developed in the same manner. Southshore is a true asset to the neighborhood it serves. It is a 200,000 square foot foot shopping center on approximately 18 acres with Kmart and Albertsons anchors and is a joint venture with some of the same people that are participating in this project. Mr. Larry Durkin of Dakota Development and the majority owner of Southshore Partners, Mr. Roger Allen. You have been provided a copy of the resume for Mr. Allen and a resume of Mr. Durkin's company, Dakota Development. Dakota Development's projects including 59 Shopko stores, 2 Kmars, and 23 other shopping center developments around the country. Also included in our supplement is a letter from the Mayor of Boise, Mayor Coles, concerning the spirit of cooperation with which the Southshore shopping center was developed and his opinion of its benefit to the City of Boise. May 1 read this short letter into the records? The letter is addressed to Larry Durkin of Dakota development. Dear Larry, I wanted to congratulate you on a project well done with the Southshore Development on Parkcenter boulevard. This is one of those projects where the neighborhood had developed around the commercial zoning and from the time you stepped into the development of the project there had been a lot of controversy surrounding the idea of a 200,000 square foot shopping center being constructed at that location. However, because of your ability to work with the neighbors and provide solutions to their needs we Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 34 now have a very nice shopping center providing services to a growing neighborhood area of our community. I want to thank you for your integrity in developing this project and following through with everything you said you would do at the neighborhood meetings. Accordingly I would be happy to be a reference for you in any other part of the country where you are developing. As I recognize you have projects with national tenants throughout the country. Very truly yours H. Brent Coles, Mayor of Boise. Avest have been in the storage business in the Boise valley for 20 years. I have been with the company the last 10 years. During that time Stor-It has grown from a 900 unit 2 location business to 4200 units and 4 locations. These are pictures of our State Street location and our newest annex to our Maple Grove location. Space for living and working is a highly valued commodity. Today people and business need rental storage to utilize their space more effectively. We provide space to the neighborhoods and community - a convenient place to store extra items such as snowmobiles, boats, motorcycles, and out-of-season toys that might otherwise be stored in yards, already too full garages, or on City streets. We provide temporary and permanent small business inventory space. Avest owns, supervises construction phases, and operates all of our own facilities. We do not build and sell we are here to to be a part of the Meridian community and will be sensitive to the concerns of our neighbors. The front elevation shows our typical front fencing of vinyl coated black fencing with brick sandstone pillars, landscaped groupings of low shrubs, evergreens, grass and deciduous trees. You will note from the side elevation and this would apply to the back of the complex and the plan view that the perimeter is a single sided, landscaped, low profile buildings. All access doors, lighting and traffic are on the interior of the project. Because of our storage design, Stor-It's neighbors on State Street have told us that storage make a good neighbor. And I want to show you why neighbors in Mirage Meadows have also decided that they would like storage as a neighbor. The bottom 3 pictures on the neighborhood picture chart show the backyards and views of some of the Mirage Meadows neighbors. This chart shows what kind of privacy the neighbors would have is storage were built on the site instead of housing. We have 2 letters of support from residents in Mirage Meadows who would be directly impacted by our storage facility stating that they are in support of our development. They believe that this project will screen out much of the traffic noise generated on Fairview and provide maximum privacy for their backyards. We believe that, too! Stor-It doesn't have dogs, children, lights, or any other neighborly competition for visual, auditory or actual space. What Avest heard form the neighbors adjacent to our land, and what we will be most sensitive to, is that the neighbors want to retain their privacy from people, businesses, traffic, pollution, and noise. Both the storage complex and proposed retirement center on the northeast corner of the property, would serve this buffering purpose. Since our meetings with ACRD they have C~ Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 35 requested a loop road be incorporated into the project. This next plat shows that detail. This loop road will provide internal flow within the project without putting any further demands on Locust Grove or Fairview. This blue line is a proposed bike pedestrian pathway for the surrounding neighborhood access and emergency accesses that ACHD has recommended. ACRD has also agreed to the closure of Applewood making it a 20' paved, bike, walking, and emergency vehicle pathway. Kingsford: Kathleen, can I interrupt? Looking now at Locust Grove I see some additional, those are curb cuts right? Weber: Yes they are, and those are in compliance with the curb cuts that ACRD specified in there letter. Kingsford: I thought there was the illusion there might only be one, and I wanted to make that clear. Weber: The curb cuts along Locust Grove those are in the very preliminary stage, those will come into effect when we come for the conditional for that area. This also shows the storage entry located 250' back from Fairview. This shows the access to the stoarges off the loop road and as a shared access with the Shoshoni Building. The plat you are looking at right now has had some revisions based on meetings with Shoshoni owners and they are agreeable to this new plat that Billy Ray Strite has drawn that I would like to submit here tonight. Its' kind of an incorporation of our meetings with the Shoshoni owners knowing what ACHD was expecting for that entrance off of Fairview into our project and we incorporated all of that. Finally, I'd like to call your attention to a detail landscape design for the entrance to the storage facility. As we discussed earlier this landscaping design continues around the perimeter of the complex. It includes grass, deciduous trees such as sweet gum, golden locust, evergreens such as spruce, and pine, shrubs such as juniper, flowering quince and flowering plum. That's all the plats I have at this time. Thank you Scott. Avest has actively communicated with and listened to as many residents in the Locust Grove Fairview Avenue as possible over the past few months. 1 will give you nine brief summary comments they have made regarding this project. We have had numerous meetings with the neighbors and made concerted efforts to address their concerns and reach compromises that benefit both of us. Comment #1: The city received 15 letters prior to our neighborhood meetings. Eleven of those people who wrote but did not attend our neighborhood meetings, were sent follow up information from us. These letters are in your City files. Comment #2: Two neighborhood meetings were held December 27th and December 28th. We sent out 130 invitations to these • • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 36 meetings with response envelopes. From this mailing we received 2 return letters. These neighbors received further information from us. The first neighborhood meeting held December 27th discussed concerns of the Mirage Meadows neighbors, 21 attended representing 13 residences. On Tuesday December 28 the focus was on the Locust Grove neighbors concerns. Mr. Larry Sale from ACHD attended this meeting to make us aware of ACHD's plans for Locust Grove. Mr. Sale answered questions and told neighbors that our project is not driving the expansion of Locust Grove. Locust Grove is planned as a 5 lane minor arterial by 1997 or 1998 regardless of development of Avest's 40 acre parcel. 19 attended this meeting representing 11 residences. Please note that this was combined total for both meetings of 19 different residences and we have incorporated many of their ideas and suggestions into our final plans. Comment #3: Mirage neighbors on Oakcrest who were unable to attend either of the earlier neighborhood meetings were personally visited at their homes. As a result, another 13 neighbors were- shown maps and received explanations of what the neighborhood meetings were about and were given an opportunity to share their ideas for buffering uses along their property lines. These neighbors were informed that notes from the neighborhood meetings were on file at City Hall for them to review if they wished. Comment #4: Letters were recently sent to the Mirage subdivision owners modifying our original proposal to reflect their additional requests and asking if they felt a need for more information or another neighborhood meeting with those that are directly affected by our storage development. Two have responded to this mailing, Mr. Rama and Mr. Miller, both were in favor of storage. Comment #5: Ms. Karen Blayney of Mirage Meadows subdivision expressed some personal concerns specific to her residential lot. After a lengthy phone conversation, she was sent a landscape plan and letter to confirm our intentions to deal directly with those issues that specifically concerned her. WE asked for comments regarding the plan. Comment #6: On February 22nd another meeting specifically with the neighbors on Locust Grove adjacent to the project was held. Six people attended, Mr. and Mrs. Moore, Mr. and Mrs. Clouss, and Mr. and Mrs. Mansayon. Mr. Allen will summarize this meeting and discuss how we have addressed their concerns in our planning. Mr. Botkin of Locust Grove phoned and stated that he has no specific concerns and would no be able to attend this meeting. So we have actual communication with 4 out of 7 neighbors. Comment #7: On February 24th Avest representatives me with Mr. Don Bryan on his property to look over his water situation and note his concerns. He asked that we be sure his water ditch is clear and we have already taken steps to do this. Comment #8: Avest has met with he architect for the Shoshoni building owners. This commercial building is on the eastern boundary of the property. Billy Ray Strite, of BRS Architects designed this entry and is here tonight. He can answer any questions you may have regarding this shared access. This current plan meets the requirements of ACHD • • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 37 as well as Stor-It an the Shoshoni owners. From all these meetings we feel confident that we reached preliminary agreements with the Mirage neighbors, Ms. Blayney, Locust Grove residents, Mr. Bryan and the Shoshoni owners. We will continue this process as our project proceeds. Finally, Comment #9: The supplement to the presentation packet also contains some important correspondence from adjacent land owners in support of our project. There is a letter from Mr. Jon Barnes, President of Properties West, Inc., and I believe current President of the Homebuilders Association for the valley, expressing his support of the applications before you tonight. Also, there are letters from 3 land owners in the Chateau Meadows subdivision of Meridian, expressing their first-hand knowledge of Stor-It's Methods of operation in the Boise community over the past years. I present these as letters of recommendation. In summary, I would like to say that Avest wants to be an active member of this community and neighborhood, we want to be a good neighbor not just to those families who directly touch our property, but to those people who are less directly affected, too. Mr .Allen, Mr. Durkin and I have made an effort to be available and to listen to everyone who has wanted to express an opinion or gather more information about the proposed project. Even those who have come from a number of blocks away. We want the entire to develop in a pleasing, upscale manner. We feel that our project, on the fringe of this newly developing Meridian neighborhood will both serve as a gathering place and a convenience to this neighborhood. Thank you for this opportunity to present this background information, I would like to now turn over the discussion to Mr. Allen and defer an questions you might have to him. Kingsford: Can I ask if possible w limit remarks so that everyone has opportunity to speak. Roger Allen, 6904 Randolph Drive, Boise, was sworn by the Attorney. Allen: I'm Roger Allen, general partner of Avest Limited Partnership the applicant here tonight. Four points that I wish to cover, 2 of those points I hope that you have in packets that have previously been presented to you. One of them addresses the annexation and zoning and conditional use permit application. Following the Mayor's suggestion I'm going to just refer you to that packet, It does discuss 5 important issues that we feel are important in your consideration and deliberation about our application. The second supplement that as presented to you and I hope you have in your packet, does anyone not have these, I have some extras. They contain a lot of supplemental information that has come about since our presentation to the Planning & Zoning Commission back on January 11th. There are 2 items in that, that I would like to address primarily concerned with the neighbors and also ACHD recommendation and requirements, also I will • • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 38 conclude then with a couple of points one addressing staff comments in your staff report packet and then 1 would like to give just a brief summary of what we are asking you to approve tonight and what we are agreeing to. I might also add Mayor that this is exactly the same material and presentation that was made at the Planning & Zoning Commission hearing and if I'm not mistaken most of these people were at that meeting. We have worked closely. with them o general meetings and on a one to one basis. These are the major issues that we identified in this first packet. What are the highest and best use for the 40 acre parcel? Is a shopping center supportable this site? How should the balance of the site be developed? Why annex and zone the property now? And the neighbors concerns. I have various overheads on that and I will leave them up for you to view. There is one in the second portion that I would like Kathleen, I know I'm way out of order here, but we are going to mind what the Mayor told us. Because we are asking this evening for a Conditional use permit approval for the rental storage portion I'd like you to view this one overhead on the benefits of the rental storage proposal. These are the things that we hope that you will take into consideration in your deliberation concerning our Conditional Use Permit. The rental storage business is a quiet business it is very low demand on City services, it adds value to the City's tax base in terms of real property taxes, City Impact fees might be imposed and of course ACRD impact fees. We have little or no impact on schools, it provides community employment with the company and by the services that we make use of. Storage are very low traffic generators, storage use helps the appearance with neighborhoods by providing indoor storage of goods and providing a place for recreational vehicles to be parked other than front yards and on city streets. Avast builds inward design complexes and that is a point that I hope if you don't understand what I'm saying there that you will inquire. All of our complexes use a single sided building for perimeter security. It gives an attractive appearance on the outside, there is no chain link or razor wire. They generate little or no noise and all lighting is contained within the complex. We used to use the high lights throughout the facility now we put all of those down below the eaves so no light is escaping the interior of the project. All buildings are low profile single story and Avast insists on attractive well designed and maintained sites. So I hope you will take those factors into consideration in your deliberation on the conditional use permit. Kathleen on the supplemental package you will find those overheads, you might just put the first page up there. That is the cover page you have on that packet, it is updated material and modification as a result of input from meetings with our formal neighborhood meetings and agendas and so forth, small neighborhood meetings, direct phone conversations with neighbors. We've had a number of conversations that way, letters of support, the ACRD requirement summary that I would like to look at in just a second and adjacent land developers we have met both with Wingate Subdivision • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 39 Dan Woods, Shoshoni property owner Jim Boyd, Dove Meadows and nine across the street with Roger Crandlemire. The main purpose of those meetings were to address ACHD concerns about traffic flow in the Mirage Meadows, Wingate and Dove Meadows and we feel that we have a solution to those. Scott if you would put up that other plat it would show the surrounding area and how that has been resolved. In the additional information, the 2 areas that I would like to comment on have to do with the neighbors and just briefly some of the agreements that we have reached with the neighbors. This particular overhead addresses what we feel is really the City and the greater neighborhood of Meridian and we have received letters from neighbors, from current storage customers, phone calls have been logged on a Meridian phone. It has been interesting we do have an ad in the yellow pages stating a site at Locust Grove in anticipation of this and also as a market study that about 25% of our phone calls at our Maple Grove office are from people calling on that particular line. So there is definitely a need for rental storage I know that Meridian has four I~believe are located on the south side of Meridian and there also located in and near industrial and commercial areas. we find that a lot of our customers are women and others who don't particularly like to go into industrial area and we feel that having a storage facility on the north side would be beneficial. The next one there Kathleen has to do with Mirage Meadows, we have proposed to the Mirage Meadows people the seven there, east of Applewood which is a transitional use. We presented alternatives housing and road connections and so forth and the storage was an acceptable transition. We haven't heard from anyone other than I think was Mrs. Blayney who had some concerns and we are not for sure where we stand with her, but we have tried to work with her and submitted additional information to her. Storage is a good transitional use and its often preferred and I have some examples of that where people have actually elected to have storage used as a transitional use as opposed to apartments or higher density use property. The Mirage Meadows neighbors west of Applewood which don't really border on the rental storage portion we have received no negative comments from them. In fact jokingly they said maybe you could extend storage on down to our area so that we would have the privacy and the quiet that the buildings would provide and landscaping. These are concerns that address those people and I guess if we were to categorize our neighborhood meetings, we had a great deal of concern for those adjacent to our property. Those in Mirage Meadows are approximately 400 to 450 depending on the final configuration of the shopping center portion of our application, they are that distance 400 to 450 feet from the shopping center area where it would even begin to have, we provided some transitional use. So, that was one group of concerns, the other group and probably the (inaudible) are those homes directly across Locust Grove from our site. The one on the rights shows a very close proximity at the homes that are along there. The first two there on either side of • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 40 • Carol Street, those face onto Carol street and so we are dealing with a sideyard situation for them on Locust Grove. The next 4 are really our major concern because they do border on what would be part of the shopping center proposal and then there is one up at the very top that faces across into what would be the retirement center and there we feel like we can adequate berming, and landscaping on that side of the road. The problem becomes and if you look at the overhead the positive out of the special meeting that we had with these neighbors traffic would flow much better with four lanes. They had a real concern about the traffic getting in and out of their driveways and I think with the 4 lanes and actually 5 lanes with a center turn lane that won't be as much a problem. The widened road would provide greater separation to the shopping center, the wider the road gets the further it pushes the shopping center to the east. And another question or problem that they were concerned about with stacking room at Fairview and Locust Grove in just brief comment to that ACHD requires approximately 250 feet before you can have an entrance near a major intersection like Locust Grove and Fairview. So in the 250 feet we can stack approximately 36 automobiles and so that will be 36 automobiles coming through each change of the light and the main concern that was expressed was the access out from Carol Street. Now Carol Street is 400 feet from Fairview and Locust Grove so the stacking in there before those people would be limited in their ability to get in and out of Carol Street I think has been more than adequately addressed. Suggested solutions that came out of this meeting that we had specifically with the Locust Grove people, driveway adjustments. We talked about combining driveways so that you don't have a driveway here and a driveway here, where there were 2 adjacent if they could bring those together the advantage of that is you could increase the berming and landscaping that can be done along there. I want you to keep in mind that ACHD, Larry Sale attended a number of the meetings, 2 different meetings and addressed their concerns and basically it boiled down that Locust Grove is scheduled fora 5 lane load to begin 1997 -1998 somewhere in that time period. And as they do that the people along Locust Grove namely those who face directly on it are going to be impacted there is just no way that they are not going to be impacted. And I drove out Locust Grove here just this last week and between Fairview and McMillan I counted 5 different subdivisions in that area that will join in and the traffic will flow into Locust Grove just out to McMillan and so the traffic on Locust Grove is going to increase and I think ACHD is correct in planning ahead and looking ahead for that. They are going to be impacted and and need to address those issues. One suggestion from Larry Sale was to design the turn arounds so that they are not backing out onto Locust Grove and most of them have quite large yards so that would be a possibility. Careful alignment of entrances across from the center we talked about that and I think that we have come to an agreement that if we can adjust our exits from the shopping center U Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 41 n U along their lot lines that then we could do berming across the street and deflect some of the lights as they are coming out of the entrances to the shopping center. Basically we will not line our exits from the shopping center up with the homes directly across the street, we'll try to place those so they are between the lot lines it allows a lot more room for landscaping and berming. Kingsford: Roger, did I hear you wrong, did you say that you would be wiling to do berming off your site. Allen: Yes, in fact the next item the developer will provide berming material, we talked about this we could either work it out with ACRD at the time they are doing their excavation. We of course would be doing considerable earth moving at the time. We have volunteered and put it on public record of course that we will provide the berming material across the street. The only thing we ask them in that case that it requires some planning ahead and that is why we held this meeting this early, we could be a year to 2 years off from coming forward with our application for the shopping center, and for them to think about where would they like their berming, where would they like it placed and so forth. We are willing to do that and the last item that we discussed and that 1'll mention is the landscaping allowance from the shopping center developers that we would place in a trust fund at the time we begin the shopping center development, 511,000. That was derived from the fact that and I skimmed over an earlier overhead from the factor that I'm sure the people across Locust Grove and they even suggested well why don't you build a 12 foot berm along Locust Grove and then put the shopping center on the other side of that. That won't work, you know that isn't realistic and in the packet of information you have we talked about a 2 to 4 foot berm and landscape and landscaped entrances that go deep into the parking lot, not just along Locust Grove and as we thought about that why not transfer some of this berming and the screening across the street and if we are going to do that why don't we pay for some of that. We determined that to the first 2 homes on Carol and either side of Carol Street that we would allow a 51,000 landscaping sprinkling however they want to use it as long as it was in the general area of landscaping. The next 4 homes which we feel are more directly impacted would be 52,000 each and then a $1,000 for the last. I realize that is a very small amount but maybe it would be helpful and we do want that on record. Kathleen would you go directly to the one concerning that staff comments, there are only a few comments that I would like to address. Responses to Gary Smith's comments, now these are from your staff and I'm sure you have their comments and their letters in your packet. Item #1 a legal description that of course we will comply with, that is coming forward from W&H Pacific and will be submitted right of way. Item #2, this item has been resolved, we didn't spend any time on it but Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 42 • it involves some of the road layout and the first plat back here, the tying in of Oakwood, Apricot, Applewood and whatever the names of the roads will be in Wingate Subdivision. Those have all been through ACHD and I think if you for verification of that if you look at the ACHD comments that they make no mention of this and in their previous letters to P & Z they did those have been addressed and resolved and basically their comments I guess we skipped over those. Item 3, 4 and 5 we'll just simply comply with those. The other comment from staff was Mr. Wayne Forrey, he addressed pedestrian path access I think we have covered enough of that and gone through it. The park site we have some information there if you would like to explore that. We don't feel that is an appropriate site for the park site we have made gestures to pay our fair share whatever that might be, whether determined by impact fees, as t understand you are studying to impose on developers where agreeing to pave roads now or in the future as they may come along. To do whatever we can do to help identify a neighborhood park and pay our fair share. The traffic study in your ACHD you'll notice they are requesting a traffic study not for the conditional use permit for the rental storage but for the time we come forward with the shopping center, and of course we understand that. Detail plan for rental storage we have submitted now most of this material you have it in packets. Item #6 at the bottom, a variance for on site home security home guard that has been requested or is in the process of being requested. We understand why we need that. Development agreement will be entered into between the developer and the City. This is what we feel we are requesting, annexation of the 40 acres with a CG zone, a conditional use permit to build a rental storage complex and we understand that all construction and development will be subject to the CU PUD and Wayne has corrected us on that and we are in agreement to it. And design review including neighborhood involvement, staff direction, agency approval, Planning & Zoning public hearings, City Council public hearings and approval, what we are saying there is that we understand your annexation, your action on item a and item b. I should say that item a is not carte blanche approval for anything other than item b which we are requesting at this time with the conditional use permit and that was submitted with the necessary information for that. What we are agreeing to is to meet all commercial development at entryway requirements both at current and future in your Comprehensive Plan, pedestrian walkways will be provided as follows and we have mentioned those, the CU permit for the shopping center and a full traffic study as per ACHD requirements. Detailed plans including landscaping plans have been submitted and will be submitted with each application as we come forward with those. A variance permit will be requested as mentioned for the resident managers quarters, we will enter into a development agreement with the City. We will help identify and work on the park problem, the shopping center portion will be developed as a commercial planned development as per Mr. Crookston's • • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 43 comments. We concur and agree to abide by all of the other requirements and conditions of approval. That concludes my remarks, I would like to relinquish my remaining minutes Mr. Mayor.(End of Tape) Kingsford: Roger, I want to advise you we had shorter sessions in a 2 hour class. Larry Durkin, 380 East Park Center Blvd, Boise, was sworn by the Attorney. Durkin: My name is Larry Durkin, I'm President of Dakota Development and I'll try to be more brief than Roger. I read the findings of fact and I just want to jump right to a couple of the points that were brought up in there. The Southshore shopping center in southeast Boise has been a tremendously successful and well received development. Some of the comments in the staff report that t received people were concerned about traffic and people were concerned about adjacent property values. There has been no decrease in any of the property values next to or in the neighborhood of the Southshore shopping center. In fact they have continue to increase at the same level the Boise market. In addition since we first announced the building of the shopping center, there hasn't been a house on the market for sale longer than 10 days since we announced the shopping center and that is through last week. I received a call from Elizabeth Gwin and she expressed some concerns about this and I did relay that information to her and happily will provide names and phone numbers of the parties that I know have sole their homes in the neighborhood of the Southshore shopping center. We're had praise from the City staff of the City of Boise, for that center we've had praise from the Pier Point homeowners association which is immediately adjacent to the center and we do attend their annual meetings each year and address concerns that come up from time to time and intend to do so with this development as well. The property values haven't decreased, the traffic hasn't increased in fact we are providing a service to the area where previously people had to drive great distances to find the type of shopping that would offer them and I will go into that in a minute. But again on the property values, prior to building the shopping center there was a 280 unit across the street as of last Friday they still enjoy a 99% occupancy rate, the rents haven't decreased and their occupancy has remained strong. Why should we build a shopping center here? We all want to build successful centers all of our centers have 100% occupancy rate now and I don't want to start a trend any different. We hired a Eagle, Idaho consulting firm called Craig Smith and Associates and we said we would like to develop a shopping center here before we go any further you go out and tell us if you think that is a market and they developed a survey, conducted a survey of over 500 Meridian residents in early October to determine where they bought their groceries, where they bought their general merchandise where you would typically buy at a • • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 44 discount department store like Shopko or Target and it wasn't surprising to find that the grocery shoppers the majority of the Meridian area people shop at Albertsons's because there isn't a lot of other choice. About 44°~ of the more than 500 people surveyed travel all of the Meridian and go to Waremart to do their grocery shopping either as a first choice or a second choice. Our development would likely include a grocery store which would keep .more of the shopping Meridian, but what was really a surprise to me was the general merchandise discount department store shopping habits. As you saw from our Company resume we do a lot of discount store development for Shopko, Kmart, Walmart and others. The only general merchandise discount store that you have in Meridian is the Payless Drug Store that is classified as a discount store. Well, the study shows that less than 5% of the Meridian discount store shopping was done at Payless, 95% of the shopping was done outside of the area at Shopko, Target and Kmart which is in the City of Boise. We are convinced that the study that a center will be successful here, that a general merchandise discount department store like a Shopko, Target, Kmart, will be very successful here. It will bring in high volume and sales and in fact it will decrease the travelling requirements for the people of Meridian. Right now the average shopper in Meridian travels to a general merchandise discount store twice a month, to do they are traveling all the way into Boise to one of the companies that I mentioned. The center will decrease the travel, so we are convinced that a center will be successful, our services it will offer will be unique with the exception of food shopping, are not presently offered in the City of Meridian. So, with that I keep my comments and am willing to answer any comments or questions. Kingsford: Any questions for Mr. Durkin? Thank you, anyone else from the public. J. Clouss, 1915 North Locust Grove, was sworn by the Attorney. Clouss: Mr. Mayor and City Council, there are a few statements that I would like to talk about as far as what they have made tonight. I've got some concerns about the larger road bringing more traffic there are ideas are that a larger road will flow more traffic. It basically makes, people collect to larger roads because traffic is easier to travel south its just going to put more traffic in front of my house. That is going to make it harder for me to get out of my driveway. The letter that was written from the Mayor of Boise, I think I might be wrong about this but I don't think so 1 believe he was employed by Dakota Development at one point in . time before he became the Boise Mayor so I don't know if that is a conflict in interest or whatever, they have brought that up a couple of times that they have read letters from the Boise Mayor. Also, I have some concern about the center u Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 45 line of Locust Grove Road being moved. When we originally talked, Mr. Sales was talking about moving the center line maybe to the east which would when they did widen Locust Grove would basically effect my side of the road less if they do that. Now I think what is going on or the last word that 1 got is that they are going to leave the center line the same and they are just going to expand the easement ad take the right of way away from my side as well. Now I'm getting request to put more berming on my side of the road which is going to take more of my front yard, so I'm going to get eaten from the Locust Grove expansion and also from this berming idea that we've got going on. I still think we can berm that side of the road with the development and things facing Fairview. I realize you need some curb appeal and some line of sight to the road but we are going to be on the end of the development up along Locust Grove I think we can do better than the 2 to 4 foot berming, so that would be a concern to me. I also have a concern about basically zoning the 40 acres to commercial at this point, to be honest with you we could have done a lot worse in developers than what we have gotten that bought that piece of property. At least the developers at Avest are at least listening to us and we are holding meetings and we seem to be at least communicating. So we could have done a lot worse, I'm still nervous about maybe a major tenant not coming in, these folks seeing better use of their investment somewhere else, sell their property off. If it is zoned commercial maybe the next time we won't get such a nice, communicatable developer, but I would like to see some sort of a contingency on here on your planning and zoning to say if this development is sold that basically goes back to the agricultural zoning that it currently is and that they start again and apply for zoning and we go through this again. The one comment that Mr. Durkin about property value, our house has been on the market in this day and age and I don't feel that it is overly priced in fact its less than it should be. Its been on the market for like a year, we've had a lot of showings but very few offers when they find out that there is a shopping mall going across the road. There are very few people interested in living across the road from a shopping center, its just cut and dried. We are about 96% of appraisal is what we've got on a current offer on our house and that is contingent on the sale of theirs. All of those stipulations have to go in. So its by any means not sold and we are even below our appraisal and our appraisal is low. I mean our appraisal is lower than the standard appraisals in the area, its approximately 555 a foot and they are building for 580 to 585. Our home is 5 year old, its 565 approximately is the appraisal value of our house. So, I would like you to consider those concerns and do what you can to help up out. Kingsford: Anyone else from the public? Terry McCarthy, 1385 South Carol Street, was sworn by the Attorney. • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 46 McCarthy: I've lived in Meridian at the current address since November of 1982 and I have watched the City of Meridian grow. I feel that when the homeowners in this area bought they looked at that piece of property there at Locust Grove and Fairview and assumed at least the north half of it would be residential and the southern half of it would probably go commercial as with the rest of the property adjacent to Fairview. That intersection has very heavy bus traffic all times of the day that is going to be impacted by this development. There is going to be a whole lot more traffic due to the development. The developer as they stated has 3 different plans that they want on this property. One is the storage units, as they said there are 4 different storage units within the City of Meridian at this time. Two of them are quite large and a couple of them are small. I think that the City Council should consider market saturation in considering this portion of the development. I feel the size of the shopping center is large for the size of the City at this time. You look around you see that Spouse Reitz moved out of Cherry - Plaza, as they mentioned Payless very little of the people they surveyed had shopped regularly at Payless. That tells me that the draw is not there for that type of a service at this point. They have talked about the long range plans including a retirement center. I know that according to the Idaho Business Review Western Health Care is building a nursing home at the corner of West Pine and Linder Road, it will service approximately 150 people. I feel that there is also a possibility of market saturation. Western Health Care is supposed to open in late 94 early 95. There is also a retirement center in Mirage Meadows so we've got one fairly large development that is going on in that area and one small place that already exists for retirement homes, so those things need to be considered in approving this development. Thank you. Kingsford: I might just comment with regard to Wester Health Care, the owner of that or the guy who hopes to develop it called me a couple of weeks ago and jumped the gun on putting that in the business review and in fact wasn't sure he had that land tied up. I will consider your comments that is not a done deal, as they had indicated. Anyone else from the public? Matt Hibbs, 1655 East Meadowgrass, was sworn by the Attorney. Hibbs: Just a few comments I agree with Mr. Clouss we could do worse with developers, a friend of mine is one of them that sent a letter in from Chateau Meadows and they are personal friends with the Weber's and they speak highly of them, so I don't have a problem with the developer. A lot of my neighbors and I speak for at least 2 other families that couldn't make it tonight, are concerned about the park situation. I looked at the proposed City plan and saw a parksite up on Ustick and I'm wondering when that will happen. But, at the last meeting that • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 47 • I attended which was when there was an accidental notification of this development. Ms. Weber had asked, indicated that anyone that had attended would be contacted and I have not received any contact on that. And so 1 just wanted to put that out. That is it. Kingsford: Anyone else from the public? Karen Blayney, 2000 North Applewood Avenue, was sworn by the Attorney. Blayney: I just wanted to come and say that I'm stilt opposed to zoning this 40 acres commercial. For 16 years 1 lived close to a shopping center and I saw the increase in the traffic and the noise and the litter and all that other stuff. When I bought the property out here in Mirage meadows about a year and a half ago kind of knowing that probably the area along Fairview would be commercial but I was told it was going to be residential. And I just got tired of all the traffic and noise that this other shopping area brought to my last so I moved out here thinking I was going to get away from it, but it kind of followed me. Its just kind of like a headache being close to it. Its not these developers specifically but its like the developers all make these developments sound like its going to be good for us, but I have seen the bad side of it and I've already got not good feelings about living close to a shopping center. I just want to go on record as being totally opposed to this land being zoned commercial, thank you. Kingsford: Anyone else? Elizabeth Gwin, 1515 South Carol Street, was sworn by the Attorney. Gwin: The big question I have is in the Comprehensive Plan it says in here I think it is in your land use policies that it is your policy to protect and maintain residential neighborhoods property values and to improve each neighborhoods physical condition and enhance its quality of life for residents. I have a big problem with the protecting and maintaining our property values because it doesn't seem to be the case. Jay, his property has been on the market just as he said and I think that is a good example. He is not in what is supposed to be a sellers market right now he hasn't been able to sell his property for even as much of the appraisal, a lot of property's are getting offers for over the appraisal. We have our property for sale right now, I don't know we have got a lot of lookers but not to many takers. I haven't questioned the realtor about why because they didn't seem to think that the business that we are adjacent to right now is any problem because its strictly a 9 to 5 business and I haven't been able to contact him and ask him if it is because of this 40 acre development or not. But I have a real • • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 48 problem, when Mr. Durkin said it didn't affect property values when obviously Jay has a real nice home there that is sitting there and he has an offer under the appraisal value, when we have a market for that type of a home. That is the only question I have is what will you do to help us maintain our property values. I don't know what you promised that with your policy but that is your policy. If you could give me some answers on that t'd like to know what you will do specifically to make sure this development doesn't detract from our property values there. Another question 1 have is I am opposed to the annexation and rezoning of this property and one thing with he storage units that 1 don't think was brought up is we really don't have a lot of control over what is stored in those units. There are laws but. people tend to break laws and I have read a couple of articles where people have stored hazardous materials that they didn't want to dispose of because it costs a lot to dispose of hazardous waste. I'm not saying that would happen, but what if it does and we have a spill over there. The City has wells - around and some of these chemicals are really potent. I believe the chemical perk is one of those that they are having trouble with down in Garden City and I know that it takes really a small amount of something like that if it gets in the aquifer. I would like to see that addressed, what can be done to insure that we are not going to have that problem with pollution, because so far the wells in our subdivision have been in good shape when they have been tested and we've had ours tested in 86 and I think some of the houses have been sold in the last few years in the back of the subdivision and their wells have been fine easy sell so we need to protect that. Another thing, I wanted to also state that don't think that there is less opposition to this just because we have fewer people in attendance. A lot of the people have just began to feel real helpless about this development whether or not they could affect the outcome on this especially after the Planning & Zoning meeting and rather abusive treatment they received there. So, that is part of the reason that people are not in attendance tonight. So there is still quite a lot of opposition to this. That is all I have to say, thank you. Bob Moore, 1835 North Locust Grove was sworn by the Attorney. Moore: I'll keep this very brief Mr. Mayor and fellow Councilman, I want to pass out a letter to you that contains some of our concerns regarding this development. As Liz just mentioned I think there is a great deal of apathy in our neighborhood regarding this development. I think AVest has been a very fine, a very professional job here in representing to you what they honestly feel is going to be done. I feel like 1 should embrace Mr. Durkin and Mr. Allen for saving our neighborhood it sounds to me like they are going to greatly improve our property values and there is probably no concern that we should have. However, I guess I'll just keep it brief here and let you know that my home sits on a 1 /2 acre it is • • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 49 right across North Locust Grove from this development. My wife and I have lived there for 23 years and raised 4 children and we spent most of that 23 years improving our property and our home. I don't mean this to be an attack on the City Council or Planning Commission but rather a plea from ourselves and our neighborhood to be heard and to reject this application based on the following facts. The effects of the existing growths and traffic has already tremendously affected our lives. And if that isn't enough we are now being asked to make further concessions alter our driveways what have you to accommodate this additional traffic. All that is going to do is further degrade our neighborhood and further erode my front yard. Our neighbors as Jay just spoke lost the sale of his home, he indicated that it had been reduced from appraisal about 6°~. I now see other homes such as Liz and other homes for sale in the area. I see families leaving there and I think this is a sad day for that neighborhood and for the City of Meridian we are being forced out of there. As I mentioned traffic in front of our home is already a major problem. And ~it is a safety problem I have to back out on North Locust Grove to get out of my driveway. And in addition to that the traffic noise and the speed has virtually forces us our of our front yard. ACRD is now proposing additional widening of our street and Jay had the concerns I do that the widening is going to take place on both sides of the center line that and its going to take even more property off of our front property line and reduce our front yards. Its just absurd. I am going to skim over this because some of it is probably a little bet redundant with the testimony you have heard tonight. I want to mention here that I do feel that the widening of the road on North Locust Grove is like loosening your belt when you gain weight it doesn't address the problem. No one with ACRD or Meridian really addresses the problem with that traffic, and I think there is a lot of research done on traffic calming and would like to see you gentleman read and pursue some of that research. I understand that maybe you have but I think there is some good material out there that you should look at regarding traffic calming and traffic planning. And I see in the Statesman this week that ACHD is addressing that in Boise and in other parts of Ada County where they have created these problems by this so called traffic planning, now they are trying to go back in and figure out what they can do to calm the traffic. But anytime roads are widened its a proven that the traffic just simply fills that road up, it increases traffic. It doesn't solve the problem. The shopping center is just not compatible with this neighborhood for the following reasons, the majority if not all of the homeowners are very much opposed to this development. The increased noise from the parking tot is one of the reasons. Those noises as this lady just mentioned a minute ago she lived across from a shopping center for 16 years she knows all about parking lot sweepers, soil removal equipment, boomboxes, public address systems such as what we have at the Idaho Athletic Club, I live 2 blocks from there and I can here it everyday in the summer time. • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 50 And the garbage and delivery trucks are a real problem also. The City of Meridian Police Department keeps a pinhole and they have up until January. The pin map shows the areas of various crimes and traffic accidents. The Cherry Plaza Shopping Center area was completely full of pins for theft, assault, traffic accidents, vagrants and various other crimes including possible gang activity. The proposed center is considerably larger than what Cherry Plaza is so in my mind that is just going to increase the problem that Cherry Plaza has now. Also the glare of lighting from automobiles, signs in parking lots, we are looking right into those lights. And I'm not convinced anything can be done about it. During Planning Commission's review of the application there was considerable opposition show by the neighborhood and other citizens as Liz mentioned. And I have to say that we were absolutely appalled by the Chairman's reaction to that testimony and for the most part the entire Commission. Mr. Johnson boasts of not being an elected official and seemingly answers to no one. I saw him intimidate people, bring people to tears and seemed to pride himself in his arrogance, and I'm not sure that our concerns were ever heard. In addition Mr. Johnson doesn't live in the City of Meridian, I understand that he doesn't have to sit on the Commission, but it seems to me that he should be a resident. The Comprehensive Plan states that any new development cannot reduce the quality of life or devalue the property of any resident. It also states that the public should be aware and involved in the City's planning decision. We as neighbors in that area are aware, we are involved and as a neighborhood we are opposed to this development. There seems to be a mindset that this project is going to regardless of the so called findings of fact and regardless of the neighborhood opposition and regardless of the alternatives. Approval of this shopping center is an injustice, it is our quality of life, our home, our property and our right to exist as a peaceful neighborhood and that is at stake. No personal group has the right to increase and well being at the expense of another persons property and quality of life. This shopping center proposal would do both. As an alternative Meridian already has a lot of property set aside for commercial development in areas that do not impact established homes and residences. Those areas are shown on the Comprehensive Plan and should be ideal for a shopping center. In closing I would tike to say is please don't force us out our homes that is what you are doing if you approve this project. Thank you Kingsford: Anyone else from the public? Don Bryan, 2070 North Locust Grove Road, was sworn by the Attorney. Bryan: Well, this is kind of a rerun for me since I have attended all the others. My neighbors were stating they have been through this with Planning and Zoning. so I will be brief on this one because this is the one that means the most to say the • Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 51 • least. You know most of my concerns. I'm concerned with the traffic and the light glare as well as anybody else. And the water contamination with the storage units, but my biggest concern is irrigation water and the storm drainage water. Dixie Lane, I'm afraid I'm going to be in here this summer as soon as irrigation water comes in. We've got 3 developments going in, 2 directly behind me that is affecting my lateral and this project here. One is in the middle of being done, phase one which isn't affecting the ditch that I'm on. The other one I don't know where it stands with Mr. Woods, there is approximately 2 to 3,000 feet of ditch its not tiled they are going to have to the as a stipulation of their developments. Well, they are not going to the them until the last dog is dead or whenever they go to that phase of the development. Well that ditch, nobody takes care of that ditch and that is what is going to happen with this project. I talked with Mr. Allen and he assured me he would take care of it and I just wanted to get it on record that has been agreed upon. I would request that as soon as they, if and when they- proceed with this development on the storage facility t would like to see them the the entire length of ditch on their property as an initial of starting their project. Because as soon as the people move out of that house and the acreage that irrigates out of that ditch its going to go to weeds again. And Dixie Lane is kind of a funny little lane, it used to be a private lane and the only reason you would approve the Woods' development Kearney Meadows 2 years ago was that Dixie Lane was an emergency access to their development with break down ballards and access road through the back of their subdivision. And now all the sudden we have a bike path and a walking path and we can do away with that lane. I wonder how that came about to do away with that emergency access that backs developments. Unless that is something that has been taken care of in the past. Another one of my concerns I talked t everybody about you guys at the workshop last week about my concerns with the tiling of the ditch and as it becomes part of the property owners on the 42 lots that are going to be on my ditch after it is buried. And each one of those people are responsible for that ditch where it enters their property and leaves their property. Now, how am I going to be able to find a pluggage or something in that lateral if I have to go to 42 homeowners and find out which one has got a hole board in it and pumping water out of it. That is one of my concerns. I would like to know at what extent this conditional use permit would give them as far as the loop road and are they going to develop the loop road with the storage facility and if they do to what extent and what is going to become of the proposed retirement center parcel which abuts me, is that going to become a weed patch or is going to stay agricultural until it gets developed. I would like to get that on record what is going to happen to that, how that is going to be maintained. Also, we have a ditch, I talked to Mr. Allen about it, there is a ditch running through that property we may, or he may be able to terminate but there is a lot of water that comes down that I use sometimes, that is going to have Meridian City Council March 1, 1994 Page 52 • to be resolved sometime down the road. And also, at the initial meetings that we had, Mr. Allen proposed a thought of a 15' setback behind those Mirage Meadows homes, he has a 15' foot setback before he can build a building and he is either going to have to landscape that area and maintain it or give it over to an easement to the property owners that its affecting. He was talking about turning that land over, that 15' area turning it into part of their backyards as an easement. 1 don't know if that is legal or feasible or if they can do that, maybe they decided not to do that, but if they do then my lateral comes back down the property line back inside their yards and I can foresee some problems there. They start digging holes for landscaping and swimming pools or jacuzisis they are going to run into a big pipe if it .doesn't have any water in it they will just tear it out and put their hot tub in. So that needs to be addressed, and find out what happened to that 15' easement and if he is going to keep it or what. And also there is a kind of a no mans land on one spot that affects his development is his corner, northeast corner is a 4 way corner of those 4 properties and my lateral comes across Dixie Lane at that point and it dog legs because the other developer that did it first since he was first he moved the ditch and now it comes down and dog legs over to Mr. Allen's land that is going to have to be corrected and buried properly on that Dixie Lane culvert and he assured me he would do that. I just want to state it for the record. I believe that is all I have? Kingsford: Those are real good points Don, thank you. Anyone else from the public? Seeing none I will close the public hearing. Counselor, there is no doubt there are additional findings in the developers portion and others from the adjacent landowners. We need to prepare findings. Tolsma: So moved Morrow: Second Kingsford: Moved by Ron, second by Walt to have new Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law prepared, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All yea ITEM #15: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE FOR GLENN AND MILDRED NYBORG: Kingsford: At this time I'll open the public hearing and invite the owner or his designee to speak first. • MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING: FEBRUARY $, 1994 APPLICANT: AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7 REQUEST: ANNEXATION AND ZONING WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LOCUST GROVE CENTER 3 ~6' g~Sb ~a,c AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: ~ P (/ /~ ` (/ CITY BUILDING DEPT: ~~/ ~/(/ MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: Yy'/"' G ~ MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ~p 1P/ ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ~ GO ~ lr•v ADA STREET NAME COMMITTE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: ~~_~~~ BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ANNERATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE A PORTION OF-THE S.W. 1/4 OF THE S.W. 1/4 SECTION 5, T.3 N., R.1 E., B.M. MERIDIAN. IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on January 11, 1994, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Planning and Zoning Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the Applicants appearing through Kathleen Weber and Roger Allen, 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 January 11, 1994, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the January 11, 1994, 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 FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 1 r • • annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein; that the property is approximately 40.45 acres in size. 3. That the property is presently zoned by the county as R-T (Rural Transition); that the Applicant requests that the property be zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) and has requested a conditional use permit to allow storage units. 4. The general area surrounding the property is used mostly as residential property with some being used agriculturally; that the property to the north is used residentially as R-8 zoned property; that the land to the west across Locust Grove Road that is not in the City of Meridian but in Ada County that is used as residential property which is similar to what the City zones as R- 4; the property to the south across Fairview Avenue is agricultural or vacant land; the property to the east is a commercial building with several different types of uses. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 6. That Roger Allen, who is the general partner in the limited partnership that owns the property, is the Applicant; that the owner has consented to the application and has requested this annexation, zoning and conditional use and the application is not at the request of the City of Meridian. 7. That the Applicant's annexation and zoning application stated that the present use of the land is agricultural with the original house and out-buildings intact; that the proposed use is FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 2 • • for a commercial shopping center, rental storage facility and transitional uses; that the land is presently zoned by Ada County as Rural Transitional (RT); that Applicant lists the following as characteristics that make it desirable to be zoned C-G: "a. From a traffic planning standpoint, the location of this site makes it highly functional to receive commercial uses. The site is located at the intersection of a principal arterial and a major collector that is signaled. b. The continued growth of residential developments around this site is increasing the demand for a commercial site to keep place with neighborhood need. c. It is the intent of the planning effort in this area to cluster commercial development thus avoiding strip development. This site is of adequate size to accommodate Commercial and Multiple(s)." 8. That one of the Applicant's representatives, Kathleen Weber, stated at the hearing that the development would compare with South Shore project in Boise; that berming at the back of the building goes up six feet on the building; that there would be a retirement center in the northwest corner; that they would screen out the noise from the traffic; that there would be a retirement center next to Mirage Meadows; that their storage buildings provide a single sided, one story landscaped buffer for maximum backyard peace and quiet; that they intended to close Apple Street; that they would meet the Ada County Highway District site specific requirements; that there would be bike lanes and walking paths would be incorporated into the development with sidewalks possibly within the berming along Locust Grove; that ACHD will decide the alignment of Carol street but the AVest would work with both ACHD and the neighbors regarding this concern; that each and every part FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 3 • • of the project will have to go through conditional use hearings and design review and such will be required; that there would be a 400 foot buffer for Mirage Meadows from the rear of the proposed shopping center; that the requirements for approval regarding irrigation and the comments of Gary Smith would be met; that regarding the widening of Locust Grove Road such would be in the hands of ACRD but they would participate with berming sidewalks and landscaping; that they agree to pay impact fees and/or make a monetary donation to the City for purchase of property that is more suitable for parks. 9. That one of the Applicant's representatives, Roger Allen, stated at the hearing that the City would maintain control over development of the property through required design review and conditional use permit approval; that the project would have a 12 to' 16 million dollar value; that they would pay impact fees, whatever those might be; that there would be a minimum of twenty feet of berming all the way around the shopping center and it would be nicely landscaped, sprinkled and sodded; that there would be sidewalks along Fairview Avenue; that they would like to pursue a retirement center in the northwest portion of the property; that for the neighbors across Locust Grove, there would be landscaped berming six to eight feet high; that in the back there would be clusters of at least three trees every 40 feet; that in the area next to Mirage Meadows they were proposing to have the neighbors backyards extended to the back of the storage buildings and it could be for the use of the neighbors if the neighbors would FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 4 • maintain the property; that pedestrian walkways would be provided; that they would provide a pedestrian walkway along what is now Dixie Land; that they would provide detailed plans for landscaping, drainage, building and other needed information for each conditional use application; that they would help the City identify some alternative neighborhood parks and agree to pay all City imposed impact fees for the purpose of adding to and maintaining its parks, bike paths, libraries, etc.. 10. That the Applicant submitted a bound packet of information for support and clarification of the applications to assist the Planning and Zoning Commission; that in the packet of materials the Applicant states that the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area for multiple use including a community shopping center; that infrastructure is in place for a shopping center; that the City will maintain control over development of the property through required design review and conditional use permit approvals; that the Comprehensive Plan anticipates a community sized shopping center at this location; that all physical ingredients for a major shopping center are present at this site; and that the information lists the benefits of a shopping center, including providing physical improvements of additional widening of Locust Grove, bike lanes, a minimum 20 foot landscaped berming along Locust Grove, sidewalk along Locust Grove preferable in the berming and modern landscaping and buffering. 11. There were property owners appearing at the hearing to make comments on and object to the application; that the property FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 5 • • owners stated the following: a. Wade Miller stated that he supported the plan; that he had talked to several of his neighbors and they were in support of taking care of the landscaping that was planned next to the storage units. b. John F. Jansen stated that he wondered whether this development is pushing Locust Grove to be a five lane road or whether Locust Grove. was pushing this development. c. Barry Gwin stated that he was opposed to the annexation until an acceptable development can be designed and proposed for the property; he recommended that the Meridian downtown core be developed first; he desired that the property be developed residentially. d. Elizabeth Gwin stated that she opposed the development and that 'she wanted the City to police development and make sure that they put in what they stated they were putting in; she subsequently stated that Mr Allen's other developments are not as rosy as he would have you believe. e. Terry McCarthy stated that the City does not have the manpower to police subdivisions; he objected to the Idaho Athletic Club and what it has resulted in; he subsequently stated that if the property was developed more than two blocks deep that was more than necessary to keep Fairview the same as developed from Boise to Meridian. f. Beverly Donahue stated that there would be automobile headlights shining into the homes on the west side of Locust Grove Road at all hours of the night; she also had concern over the entrances and exits from the shopping center. g. Debbie Woodall stated that she had addressed this development during the hearings on the comprehensive plan; that she was concerned with the traffic that would be generated; she also stated that she wondered about enforcement of subdivision requirements. h. J. Clouss stated that he was against commercial zoning; that the South Shore development mentioned had a large buffer area but this one did not; that he was opposed to this development. i. Karen Blayney stated that she was opposed to the FINDINGS OF FACT ~ CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 6 • • development; that she desired berming so that she does not look onto storage; that she does not want to pay for water for taking care of landscaping; that she is concerned about the traffic. j. Susan Janson stated that she wondered whether other developers had come forward with similar proposals and whether this was the best location for this type of development; that if it was not good for the neighbors then it was not good. k. Don Bryan stated that he was not taking sides at this time; that he wants his irrigation water continued to be delivered and the ditch tiled; that he had concerns over access to the ditch; that he was very concerned over the elevation of the land because his land may become too low. m. Fern VanPaepaghem stated she was against the commercial development; that the developer had shown very little concern about the west side of Locust Grove Road and that she was concerned how she would get out of her subdivision with all the traffic; she also stated that she desired the property be adequately bermed and screened. 12. The City received, prior to the January 11, 1994, hearing, letters from the following people with the following comments a. Carolyn J. Haynes stated that she was very much opposed to the application; that it would only increase traffic on N. Locust Grove Road which was already heavily traveled. b. Elizabeth A. Gwin stated that she protested the annexation and rezoning of the 40.45 acres; that she was against anymore annexations until the City has a full time department for inspection; that the area along N. Locust Grove was starting to look terribly shabby; that the proposed project would only bring minimum wage jobs; and that the City should not expect adjacent neighbors to allow this development at the loss of about six percent of the property value. c. Oskar Casey stated that he was a renter of Stor-It Rental Storage in Boise and he voiced approval of the storage to be placed on the property. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 7 • • d. Lisa M. Waller stated that she was a renter of Stor-It Rental Storage in Boise and she voiced approval of the storage to be placed on the property. e. That various letters were received as part of the Comprehensive Plan hearings which stated objection to the development of the proposed land for commercial purposes; that the individual letters are noted but they will not be individually addressed in these Findings since they were not presented specifically as part of this application. f. That there were letters received after the hearing held on January 11, 1994, and they will not be spoken to or noted since they were received after the hearing closed. 13. That the Meridian Police Department, Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Planning Director, Central District Health Department, and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments; that those comments are incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. 14. The City Planner, Wayne Forrey, commented that the annexation and land use request of C-G complies with the current Comprehensive Plan with the exception of a neighborhood park and the updated landscape/screening and development review standards which apply to this area of the City; that this site is adjacent to residential subdivisions and pedestrian access must be provided for interconnection; that an acceptable pathway/pedestrian access concept design plan must be submitted to the City and to ACRD prior to final annexation approval; the Comprehensive Plan indicates a need for a neighborhood park site in this area; that the Applicant must specify types of anticipated transitional uses for City analysis; that ACRD has requested a traffic study to be included in the development agreement or conditional use permit conditions FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW p$9e $ • pertaining to the shopping center component of the project; that the Applicant needs to submit detailed rental storage site development plans; that a variance would be required for a security guard dwelling residence; that as a condition of annexation approval, a development agreement addressing subdivision access, linkage, screening, buffering, transitional land uses, traffic study and recreation services, must be entered into prior to annexation approval; that the project will be subject to a development review and Zoning Administrator and Buildings inspector checklists. 15. That in prior requests for annexation and zoning the Director has commented that annexation could be conditioned on a development agreement including an impact fee to help acquire a future school or park sites to serve the area and that annexations should be subject to impact fees for park, police, and fire services as determined by the city and designated in an approved development agreement. 16. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 17. That the parcel of ground requested to be annexed is presently included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area (U.S.P.A.) as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the , Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 18. That the property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer. 19. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW page 9 • • increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots and other uses. 20. That the following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan: A. Under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, Economic Development Goal Statement Policies, Page 19 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interest and activities are to dominate. 1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 1.6 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into 'new or existing residential area, and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. 1.8 The City of Meridian intends to establish a Design Review Ordinance which will foster compatible land use and design within the development, and with contiguous developments; and encourage innovations in building techniques „ so that the growing demands of the community are met, while at the same time providing for the efficient use of such lands. B. Under LAND USE 1. EXISTING CONDITIONS, Page 21 Commercial and retail area are established along major arterials, (East First Street, Cherry Lane, FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 10 U Fairview Avenue, Franklin and Meridian Roads) and include small commercial center and individual businesses. Uses include retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited manufacturing. 2. GENERAL POLICIES, Page 22 The following land use activities are not in compliance with the basic goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Strip commercial and strip industrial. b. Scattered residential (sprawl or spread). 3. COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS, Page 25 a. Community Shopping Center - As a retail commercial enterprise, it is designed to serve a multi-neighborhood area and can be both complimentary to and competitive with a Regional Shopping Center. b. In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided, by performance and developments standards. These standards consider, among other aspects: 1. Traffic Volume and Type 2. Trip Generation 3. Impacts on Arterial Street System 4. Proximity to Other Commercial Development 5. Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas 6. Accessibility of Site 7. Parking Demands S. Pedestrian Circulation 9. Available Utility Systems 10. Aesthetics (Design Considerations) 11. Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses 12. Internal Circulation Design 13. Drainage c. A Community Shopping Center is defined as having between 100,000 and 200,000 square feet of gross floor area, and between eight to 30 acres of site area. 4. COMMERCIAL POLICIES, Page 26 a. 4.6U Community shopping centers will be encourage to locate at arterial intersection and near high-traffic intensity areas. b. 4.7U Community shopping centers must be FINDINGS OF FACT ~ CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 11 • planned for future integration of adjoining residential uses. 5. MIXED-PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT, Page 26 Mixed-use Area at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue Plus Area North of Fairview Avenue These areas are within Ada County, but nearly surrounded by the City of Meridian. The area is characterized by large rural lots, and a sparse development pattern. In order to stimulate planned development in these areas, the following policies apply: a. 5.16U All development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to ensure neighborhood compatibility. b. 5.17U A variety of coordinated, planned and compatible land uses are desireable for this area, including low-to-high density residential, office, light industrial and commercial land uses. c. 5.18U Existing residential properties will be protected from incompatible land use development in this area. Screening and buffers will be incorporated into all development requests in this area. d. 5.19U A planned community shopping center is anticipated near the Locust Grove Road/Fairview Avenue intersection. C. Under TRANSPORTATION, Page 42 1. Existing Conditions a. Cherry Lane/Fairview, East of Meridian Road, is listed as a principal arterial b. Locust Grove Road is listed as a Minor arterial. D. Under TRANSPORTATION, Page 42 1. Special Community Design Areas Goal Statement - Policies. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 12 a • a. 2.1U Require businesses and government to install and maintain landscaping. b. 2.3U Encourage the beautification of streets, parking lots, public lands and state highways. E. Under COMMUNITY DESIGN, Page 69 1. Entryway Corridors c. Fairview Avenue (East entrance). 2. Entrance Corridors Goal Statement - Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically pleasing approaches to the City of Meridian. 3. Policies, Page 71 a. 4.3U Use the Comprehensive Plan, subdivision regulations, and zoning to discourage strip development and encourage clustered, landscaped business development on entrance corridors. b. 4.4U Encourage 35-foot landscaped setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. 4. Neighborhood Identify Goal Policies, Page 72 a. 6.4U Limit the conversion of predominantly residential neighborhoods to nonresidential uses, and require effective buffers and mitigation measures through conditional use permits when appropriate nonresidential uses are proposed. 21. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use, Rural Areas, page 28, it states as follows: "Land covered by this policy section has characteristics which generally allow for agricultural and rural residential activity due to the existence of irrigation systems, soil characteristics and relative freedom from conflicting urban land uses. Where community growth creates pressure for new development, it must be recognized that agricultural land can no longer economically continue to be identified or used as agricultural land to the exclusion of orderly city growth and development." FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 13 22. That Section 6.3, of the LAND USE section of the Comprehensive Plan, states that land in agricultural activity should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services (municipal sewer and water facilities) can be provided. 23. That Section 6.3, of the LAND USE section of the Comprehensive Plan, states as follows: "Existing rural residential land uses and farms/ranches shall be buffered from urban development expanding into rural areas by innovative land use planning techniques." 24. That the property is included within an area designated on the Generalized Land Use Map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a commercial area; that the commercial area is in an area that is listed as Mixed/Planed Use Development area. 25. That the requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial, (C-G) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 11. as follows: 1C-G1 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. 26. That Section 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, B, Commercial, lists commercial uses allowed in the various zoning districts of the City; that Shopping Centers, Community, are not listed as allowed uses in the General Retail and Service Commercial FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 14 • • (C-G) district; that Shopping Centers, Neighborhood,-are not listed as allowed uses in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) district; that individual department stores, retail stores, restaurants, and storage facilities, indoors or outdoors, are allowed uses in the C-G district; that planned commercial developments, are an allowed use in the C-G district. 27. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in population does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for school services to current and future students. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 15 • 28. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which if possible would be retroactive and apply to all residential lots in the City, because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. 29. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (10') wide." 30. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." 31. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" 32. That Section 11-9-605 K states as follows: "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi- improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 16 • • 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value, especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." 33. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle-Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments. 34. That 11-9-607 A, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "The City's policy is to encourage developers of land development and construction projects to utilize the provisions of this Section to achieve the following: 1. A development pattern in accord with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 5. A more convenient pattern of commercial, residential and industrial uses as well as public services which support such uses. 35. That 11-9-607 E, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW page 17 • • part as follows: "A PD shall be allowed only as a Conditional Use in each district subject to the standards and procedures set forth in the Section. A PD shall be governed by the regulations of the district or districts in which said PD is located. The approval of the Final Development Plan for a PD may provide for such exceptions from the district regulations governing use, density, area, bulk, parking, signs, and other regulations as may be desirable to achieve the objectives of the proposed PD, provided such exceptions are consistent with the standards and criteria contained in this Section." 36. That 11-9-607 F, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: 1. Planned Developments - Planned developments shall be subject to requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and also subject to all provisions within this Ordinance. . . 8. Financial Guarantees - The developer shall post financial guarantees for all approved on-site improvements if required pursuant to 9-606 C." 37. That the Applicant submitted material on the conditional use application for storage units in the bound material which was submitted with the bound material on the annexation and zoning; that such material on the conditional use is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full; that the Applicant submitted no other materials on the conditional use request and did not address the conditional use for the storage at the public hearing; that as found above, the Planning Director, state that the Applicant needs to submit detailed rental storage site development plans and that a variance would be required for a security guard dwelling residence. 38. That proper notice was given as required by law and all FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 18 • • procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given and 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 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 under Idaho Code, 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. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 19 • • 7. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant with the consent of the property owner, and 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. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). 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, and Section 11-9-605 M., which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways. 10. That this Application has been submitted prior to the adoption of the proposed amendment to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan; that as a condition of annexation the Applicant must agree that the Meridian Comprehensive Plan shall apply to the land and any development and this must be agreed upon in the development agreement to be entered into. 11. That this Application has been difficult for the Planning and Zoning Commission to decide because of the opposition to the Application; that the Commission understands the objections and sympathizes with them on an individual basis; that the duty of Commission, however, is not to be controlled by the interests of individual property owners and their concerns; that the duty of the Commission is to assess the applications on the basis of the overall good of the City and its citizens; in that regard, it is FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 20 • specifically noted that the persons objecting were property owners relatively near the property; there were no objections from people who were not too distant from the proposed project; that the Comprehensive Plan and the Ordinances of the City have measures to try and insure that adjacent property owners are impacted by development as little as possible; that the property involved is at the intersection of a major and minor arterial which have been historically developed commercially; that it is with this duty and background that the Commission has undertaken to make these Findings and Conclusions. 12. That the Applicant's proposed use of the property is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the Comprehensive Plan, which controls this application, states, in the LAND USE section, under 5.19U, that a community shopping center is anticipated near the Locust Grove Road/Fairview Avenue intersection. 13. The Applicant has stated and represented that its intention is to construct and operate a community shopping center, but the Applicant has requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G), which does not allow for a community shopping center. 14. That the City only adopted the Comprehensive Plan at its meeting on January 4, 1994, and has not amended its Zoning Ordinance to reflect the changes made in the Comprehensive Plan; thus, uses may be called for or allowed in the Comprehensive Plan FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW page 21 • • but the Zoning Ordinance does not address provisions for the use. 15. That the Applicant and the City are therefore caught in a no-man's-land situation, i.e., the Comprehensive Plan calls for a community shopping center at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue but the Zoning Ordinance only allows for a community shopping center in the Community Business District; the Applicant has not requested his land to be zoned, Community Business District. 16. That it is concluded that the City could annex the property and zone it C-G but the Applicant could still not construct a community shopping center; however, once the property was zoned C-G, the Applicant could place many different uses on the property without additional approval from the City other than building permits, which limits the control that the City should have over the development and uses of the property due to the mandates of the Comprehensive Plan and the testimony of those objecting to~ the development of the property in a commercial manner. 17. That it is concluded that since the Applicant has represented in the packet of information submitted to the City that, "The City will always control the development through the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review approval process.", and since Kathleen Weber indicated that each and every part of the project will have to go through conditional use hearings and design review and such will be required, and since the Comprehensive Plan, under LAND USE, Mixed-Use Area at Locust Grove Road and Fairview FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW page 22 • • Avenue in 5.16U, states that all development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to insure neighborhood compatibility, that the Applicant should not be too unhappy if a means were found that would allow the development of a community shopping center that would still allow the City to have adequate control over any uses that were placed on the land; therefore if a shopping center is to be constructed in the CG zoning district, without additional applications by the Applicant and approval by the City, the development of a shopping center must be conditioned on being developed as a Commercial Planned Development, which is allowed in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) district. 18. Therefore, it is concluded that if the Applicant is. agreeable to developing the property with a community shopping center under the commercial planned development process, and having that as a condition of annexation and zoning, the property should be annexed and zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G); that it is concluded that if the Applicant is not so agreeable, the City would not have sufficient control over the property and it should not be annexed. 19. That, also as a condition of annexation and the zoning of C-G, the Applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address, among other things, the following: 1. Inclusion into the development of the requirements of 11- FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 23 i • 9-605 a. C, Pedestrian Walkways. b. G 1, Planting Strips. c. H, Public Sites and Open Spaces. d. K, Lineal Open Space Corridors. e. L, Pedestrian and Bike Path Ways. 2. The concerns of the owners of property along Locust Grove of having lights, particularly automobile headlights, shine into their yards and homes. 3. Payment by the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, of any impact, development, or transfer. fee, adopted by the City, as agreed to by the Applicant in statements by its representative during the public hearing. 4. Addressing the subdivision .access linkage, screening, buffering, transitional land uses, traffic study and recreation services. 5. An impact fee to help acquire a future school or park sites to serve the area. 6. An impact fee, or fees, for park, police, and fire services as determined by the city. 7. Appropriate berming and landscaping. 8. Submission and approval of any required plats. 9. Submission and approval of individual building, drainage, lighting, parking, and other development plans under the Planned Development guidelines, including plans for the storage units. 10. Harmonizing and integrating the site improvements with the existing residential development. 11. Establishing the 35 foot landscaped setback required under the Comprehensive. Plan and landscaping the same. 12. Addressing the comments of the Planning Director, Wayne Forrey. 13. The sewer and water requirements. 14. Submit development plans for the storage units 15. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan is applicable to the land and any development. 16. The annexation and zoning of the land. 17. Traffic plans and access into and out of the development. 18. Meeting the representations made a part of the application process. 19. And any other items deemed necessary by the City Staff. 20. That it is concluded that there shall be no annexation until the requirements of paragraph 18 and 19 are met. 21. That regarding the conditional use permit request for FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW page 24 • • storage units, it is concluded that if the Applicant agrees to develop the property as a commercial planned development and enters into a development agreement, the property would then be annexed and the Applicant can pursue the development of the storage units as part of the commercial planned development. 22. That, if annexed, the requirements of the Meridian Police Department Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Planning Director, Central District Health Department, and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, shall be met and addressed in a development agreement. 23. That, if annexed, 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. 24. That, if annexed, the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land; that the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the development agreement. 25. That proper and adequate access to the property is available and will have to be maintained. 26. That, if annexed, these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant and its assigns. 27. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C- G) would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 28. That if these conditions of approval are not met, the FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 25 • property shall not be annexed. 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 BREAICER) VOTED RECOI~II~IENDATION 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 for the property described in the application under the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, including that the Applicant agree that the development of the property will be done as a commercial planned unit development and that the Applicant enter into a development agreement as outlined in the Conclusions of Law prior to annexation; that if the Applicant is not agreeable with developing the property under the commercial planned use provisions and entering into the proposed development agreement, it is recommended that the property not be annexed. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 26 • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 33 Conclusions prepared. Shearer: Second Johnson: Its moved and seconded to have the City Attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, all in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #14 PUBLIC. HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LOCUST GROVE CENTER BY AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: Johnson: I'll now open the public hearing, is there a representative of the application that would like to come forward at this time please do so. Kathleen Weber, 600 North Maple Grove Road, Boise, was sworn by the Attorney. Weber: Mr. Chairman, Commission members and Mr. Forrey, I would like to give some background information about AVest and share some specifics concerning the application before you tonight. Then, roger Allen would like to discuss some major issues to be considered prior to your recommendation to City Council. The approval process was begun on this 40 acre parcel a year and a half ago when Mr. Jack Niemann was the City Planner for Meridian. Since the City of Meridian was planning to revise their Comprehensive Plan rather than amend the old comprehensive plan, Jack suggested that we wait... So, we agreed to postpone presenting our project until the new plan was adopted. In June, 1993, a moratorium was placed on building in Meridian... So, we waited some more. In November of 1993, when the project could finally. be presented, the Meridian Council found it had a few more Comprehensive Plan details to work out in regards to talks with County Commissioners. This process has been good for Meridian...So, Avest has been patiently waiting. WE are very hopeful that now a finally proceed with our project. I am really anxious about the prospects of finally being able to go forward with this presentation. Then I received the agenda for this meeting and found we were last on the agenda. I decided that someone must think I really need lesson in patience. So I'm really trying and all these people are too. We are doing a good job. We want to be sure that what we have before you tonight is clearly understood. Avest has two applications for you to consider. One, is an application for annexation and zoning request for a CG zone for the 40 acre parcel at the corner of Locust Grove and Fairview Ave. The second application is a request for a conditional use permit for a rental storage complex. We are anxious to have approval for the storage use so we can begin ~ r.~~ ~ • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 34 building as soon as weather permits. We would like to start this project in April of this year. This is why we are bringing both applications at the same time even though the Conditional use permit is contingent upon the annexation and zoning application. We have brought along some pictures of developments in which Avest or Avest Partners are majority or sole owners. We have been doing projects i the Valley for over 32 years. The most recent completed project is the Southshore Shopping Center in southeast Boise. It was designed to conform to the neighbors needs and expectations and serves as a true asset to the neighborhood. Southshore is a 200,000 square foot shopping center with a Kmart and Albertsons anchor and was joint ventured with some of the same people that will participate in this project. Namely the developer of southshore Mr. Larry Durkin,-and the majority owner of Southshore Mr. Roger Allen. Mr. Durkin's father had a surgery today so Larry could not be here. On his behalf though I would like to furnish a copy for the record of the very impressive resume of Mr. Durkin's Company Dakota Developments, and its accomplishments over the past years, including 59 Shopko Stores, 2 Kmarts and 23 other Shopping center developments around the country. Also included for the record is a letter from the Mayor of Boise, Mayor Coles, concerning the spirit of cooperation with which the Southshore Shopping Center was developed and his opinion of its benefit to the City of Boise. May I read this short letter into the record? It is addressed to Mr. Larry Durkin, Dear Larry, I wanted to congratulate you on a job well done with the Southshore Development, on Park Center Blvd. This is one of those projects where the neighborhood had developed around commercial zoning and at the time you stepped into this development of the project, there had been a lot of controversy surrounding the idea of a 200,000 square foot shopping center being constructed at that location. However, because of your ability to work with the neighborhood, provide solutions to their needs we have a very nice shopping center providing services to a growing neighborhood area of our community. I want to thank you for your integrity in developing this project and following through with everything you said you would do at the neighborhood meetings. Accordingly I would be happy to be a reference in any other part of the country you are developing. If I recognize your projects with national tenants throughout the country. Very truly yours, H. Brent Coles, Mayor of Boise. I have a copy of Durkin's resume and also a copy of this letter that I would like to submit to you City Clerk Mr. Berg. I'm not sure that you know this, this first billboard here is of our Southshore Shopping Center, it gives you some pictures of the different-shops along the top left-hand corner there, some of the berming and landscaping in front of the Albertson's, the center picture there is of the Kmart store. directly from the neighborhood that is adjacent to that property. You'll notice the local sign that was agreed upon the neighbors and Kmart and the City of Boise. Also the Key bank is one of the pads • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 35 that is out at the front of the shopping center there. And a real important picture, is in the bottom left-hand corner there, that is the back of the shopping center, it is quite well landscaped, the berming goes up 6 feet high on the building. So when you walk along that sidewalk along the back of the shopping center you look right into the greenery, you don't look into the building back and thins like that. The bottom right-had picture there is the entry way where we put in quite extensive landscaping, island areas and that happens throughout the shopping center complex too. The shopping center that will be eventually proposed for this site is approximately the same size as this one. So, it gives you a good idea of what we do. This is only an 18 acre parcel. Avest has been in the storage business for the past 20 years. We own, supervise construction, and operate all of our own facilities. Our storage companies are our mainstream investment tool. Stor-it's newest location at 7800 West State in Boise is noted for its beautiful lawn and landscaping at the entrance to Boise from Eagle and highway 55. And we brought some pictures of that area also. It is quite an extensive lawn area, my manager claims it takes him 5 hours to mow every week and eventually that will all be taken out we thought it would be nicer to look at the grass rather than the gravel so we went ahead and did all the landscaping. It is our philosophy that landscaping pays off you can never do enough landscaping. It brings in more good ideas and thoughts about an area than anything we have ever found it is worth every dollar spent. In the State Street location is similar to the proposed site at Locust Grove and Fairview in that we have a neighboring residential subdivision bordering the northern side (or back) of the property. We are certain that eh neighbors in Meridian will find as our neighbors on State Street have fond that, storage and Stor-it in particular makes a good neighbor. In fact we make perfect neighbors. We screen out the noise from the traffic (in this case Fairview Avenue noise), we provide privacy for their backyards. Stor-it doesn't have dogs, children, lights, or any visual, auditory or actual space. Our storage buildings provide a single sided, one story, landscaped buffer for maximum backyard pease and quiet. And that is the type of complex whether it not being any chain link fences around it where the neighbors are it would a one-sided complex so all they would see is the back of a building. In our neighborhood meetings with the neighbors who would a directly affected by this Stor-it development, we got very favorable response to this project and were even asked by several neighbors on to the west of applewood, if we couldn't extend the storage on in their direction. We also have some pictures of the neighborhoods directly adjoining our property on Locust and Fairview for your reference. And some of the neighbors may want to use them too. Avest held 2 neighborhood meetings we sent out 130 invitations and included response stamped envelopes. On Monday, December 27, the topics discussed mainly concerned the Mirage • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 36 Meadows neighbors - 21 attended. On tuesday, December 28, the topic was mainly the Locust Grove neighbors concerns regarding the need for sidewalks and bike lanes etc. in light of expansion of Locust Grove from a 2 lane to a 5 lane road by ACHD in 1997. Avest invited Mr. Larry Sale from ACRD to attend this meeting to make us aware of ACHD's plans for Locust Grove. 19 attended this meeting, approx. 10 were neighbors that didn't attend Monday night. I also spent an afternoon canvassing the Mirage neighbors on Oakcrest after the formal meetings for those that were not able to attend either of the neighborhood meetings. I wanted to get the input from these neighbors directly adjoining our property. As a result another 13 neighbors were shown maps and received lengthy explanations of what the neighborhood meetings were about and were given an opportunity to share ideas for buffering uses. Notes from the neighborhood meeting .were put on file at City Hall on Thursday following the meetings and I informed neighbors that the notes were there for their reading. The meetings were informative to both neighbors and Avest. It was the first opportunity for any of the neighbors to really know what was being planned on .the land adjoining their property. Due to a prior notice of development being sent out before Avest had developed a plan many of the neighbors had unfounded fears regarding the development. To their credit, they came with open minds and the discussions were both productive and congenial. Once Avest was able to explain the possible transitional uses of the land, most of the neighbors seemed favorable to the storage use as a buffer and provider of maximum privacy. The retirement center proposed for the northwest corner of the property appeared to also be an acceptable buffering use for the neighbors to the west of Applewood. As I mentioned earlier, several even asked if there was a possibility of the storage being extended along their property lines. Several directly impacted neighbors stated that they would not favor having a playground border their property once we discussed the noise pollution, animals, and other aspects that parks might bring to their backyards. What Avest heard and what will be most sensitive to, is that the neighbors want to retain their privacy from people, business, .traffic, pollution, and noise. Both the storage complex and a retirement center, with strategically placed, three sided carports or storage areas along property lines would serve this purpose. These are the things that have been incorporated in our development proposal as a result of the neighborhood meetings and staff recommendations. 1. We would be favorable to closing Applewood and extending it only as a recreational pedestrian path to our shopping center loop road with emergency access wooden ballards to keep traffic out. As a result Avest has already incorporated this closure of Applewood feature into its project design. This will calm the traffic levels in Mirage meadows and is supported by staff reports for these needed amenities. Also we have had talks with Dove Subdivision • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 37 owner Mr. Dave Leader, about incorporating some. use of the abandoned Dixie Lane form Mirage at Oakcrest to the front of the shopping center as a pedestrian as well. Mr. and Mrs. Stipp ad Karen Blayney who face directly on to Applewood and Mr. Burckett whose bedroom window faces onto. Applewood will be especially benefitted by this abandonment of Applewood. 2. Avest has met with the architect for the Shoshoni Building owners and designed an acceptable shared access which meets the requirements of ACHD as well as storage and the Shoshoni owners. 3. All of the site specific requests from ACHD have been reviewed and are acceptable and we will be able to meet them. Many neighbors wrote to the City Council upon the initial notice of the project. All letters from neighbors have been responded to personally be Avest. The City received 15 letters prior to our neighborhood meetings. Avest responded to the 11 people that wrote and were not able to attend our neighborhood meetings. The response letters are in your City files. Also AVEst received only 2 letters from the 130 mailed to attend the neighborhood meetings. Following are the concerns from neighbors letters prior to the neighborhood meetings and our comments regarding them: Bike lanes were a concern: these will ben incorporated into the AVest development with sidewalks possibly within the berming along Locust Grove. Walking path from Applewood to shopping center loop road and a walking/bike path from Dixie at Mirage to the front of the shopping center. Carol street alignment was mentioned: ACHD will -more or less decide this matter but Avest will work with both ACHD and the neighbors regarding this concern. Concern about CG zone: Most neighbors were more comfortable with this request after it was explained that each ad every part of the project will have to go through Conditional use hearings and design review where they will have opportunity for input. Avest must request this zoning to attract the tenants it wishes to have participate in this project and the City does not relinquish any control over the project since it is all under Conditional use permit. We are asking for this zone because having it makes it possible to design this property to its highest and best use. Zoning the entire property CG allows the necessary flexibility to comprehensively plan all parts of the land in a compatible mixed- use design. Neighbors will always have neighborhood meetings, staff, P&Z, and Council meetings in which to respond and be heard prior to any proposed development approval. Buffering noises, irrigation, traffic: There is a minimum 400 foot buffering area between Mirage Meadows residents for the rear of the proposed shopping center. This will insure buffering from commercial activities. In addition the planned storage and/or retirement center makes a good transition from residential to mixed-use and ten to commercial. 2. Also the requirements for approval regarding irrigation and • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 38 engineering requirements referred to in the letter form Mr. Gary Smith will be met. 3. Locust Grove Road has been designated to be widened to 4 to 5 lanes by 1997 which will increase traffic. We feel Avests participation such as berming, sidewalks, -and landscaping will soften the effects of this road development for the neighboring homes facing Locust Grove. Public Facilities: Some neighbors letters proposed using a playground to buffer residential housing from Commercial development. While agreeing that neighborhood parks are desirable, the best place for it might not be near busy corner of Locust Grove and Fairview or a shopping center or along the proposed 5 lane Locust Grove Road. In addition, there are other alternative buffering concepts for this piece of property that appear favorable tot he neighbors who are. directly adjacent to this property. It has been stated in the Idaho Business Review that the Church being built on hickory a few blocks east of our project, will have some wonderful. community facilities like amphitheaters, softball diamonds, swimming, tennis, all open. to the public. WE all need to support the Church in their efforts. In addition, I believe the Comprehensive Plan does specify a community park on the corner of Locust Grove and Ustick. Avest wants to be an active member in this community and neighborhood. We want to be a good neighbor not to just those families that directly touch our property, but to those people who are less directly affected. We have made an effort to hear from everyone who wished to express an opinion of the proposed project. Even though some have come form several blocks away. We want the entire area to develop in a pleasing upscale manner and we feel that our project on the fringe of this newly developing Meridian neighborhood will both serve as a gathering place and a convenience to this neighborhood. Because we now consider this our neighborhood, avest agrees to pay impact fees and or make a monetary donation to this city for purchase of another site away from the commercial aspect of our property that is more suitable for a park for our neighbors to use and enjoy. It is our understanding that the City is working on implementing this concept and we want it to be known that we firmly support having all of the developers pay their fair share in order to preserve and create community public amenities. Thank you for this opportunity gentlemen to present this portion of the project. I would like to now turn over the discussion to Mr. Roger Allen, and I have a copy of what I just read for Mr. Berg. Johnson: Any questions of Kathleen Weber? Rountree: You talked about a loop road, would you point that out? Weber: 'Yes, this is not a complete drawing, so I will. The loop road which ACRD has asked us to incorporate into our project would • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 39 begin here at the shared access with the Shoshoni Building and the Stor-it access to the complex here. You would enter here, would make a turn here going around the front of our complex, approximately along here, and their specifications that we discussed with Mr. Sale from ACHD concerning the radiuses of these turn angles and would proceed along the back of the complex right here that is where the loop road would go. Johnson: While you are there, where is the proposed retirement center again? Weber: This big area in question right here we wanted to wait until we had a chance to discuss with the neighbors but it had been as far back as a 1 1/2 years ago in our mind that it was a very unique location for a retirement center based on the senior citizens who are not able to walk or drive. They would have walking access to a shopping center and Mr. Bill Stipp who is helping us to kind of design this project when he saw that piece of property right there he said this is a retirement center. This would be a great use for this, and we see many examples of that in Boise. And I believe with Locust Grove being expanded this could possibly become a buffering for them to have easy access to other areas. Johnson: Thank you Rountree: When you showed the pictures on Southshore, you indicated behind the buildings berming and what not, would that be located along your loop road, 'how would that fit with your site plan, is that going to be discussed? Johnson: You need to be sworn. Roger Allen, 6904 Randolph Drive, was sworn by the Attorney. Allen: It has been interesting sitting here this evening hearing subdivision after subdivision after subdivision being approved and really very few comments concerning the subdivisions and we come forward with one grocery. store to feed all of these people and look at the turn-out that we have. I want to thank the neighbors who have turned out here this evening, I see a lot of familiar faces who attended the neighborhood meetings. I'm sorry that others could not make it because I think that we all benefited from those meetings. I realize. the hour is late and I will make my comments as brief as possible. I believe that each of you have in your packet I hope a summary of our presentation, does everyone have one of those if not i have some copies. Because of the interest and the number of people here this evening, I would like to just quickly go through each of the 2 sections that are covered in this • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 40 presentation packet. The first one concerns zoning and annexation and the second one the Conditional Use permit application. I think it addresses some of the major issues that were discussed and thought through when the Comprehensive Plan was put together over the last year and a half or so. And we have identified 5 major issues and kathleen if you would put that up, these 5 major issues we feel is what is the highest and best use of the 40 acres is a shopping center supportable at this site. How should the balances of the property be developed? Why annex and zone the property now and then the neighbors concerns. Let me just quickly run through these and I will somewhat summarize them, I realize it is getting late. The highest and best use of the 40 acre parcel, the City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan identifies this area for multiple use including a community shopping center. And I know that Wayne gathered a lot of information from neighbors and during that period and had open hearings and people attended. Throughout the community it was felt that a major community sized shopping center and I might add that the definition used generally for community sized shopping center is somewhere between 100,000 to 200,000 square feet and we do have almost exactly 200,000 square feet in the Southshore center. The infrastructure is in place for a multiple use and shopping center meaning the sewers the water and the roads and the street lights and so forth either are in place or will be in place. The parcel is large enough to be developed with a blending of multiple uses. The 40 acres is located at a major intersection of a major arterial and a minor arterial being Fairview and Locust Grove. The 40 acres is close to the City of Meridian not out on the. fringe of Meridian and the City will maintain control over development of the property through required design review and conditional use permit approval and I don't mean to keep going over that but I know there is mis-understanding from neighbors even though we went over it in the neighborhood meetings. What we are asking for is the property be annexed into the City and as I understand the process once its annexed it must be given a zone. We are asking for a zone that allows us a great deal of flexibility. And the natural thought is you zone it CG and the first thing you know you will be building a bar or a tavern out there. We all know that it is the furthest thing from our mind but there is always that threat, but as I understand the Comprehensive Plan and Wayne you might want to clarify, but this area has been designated a multiple use area and all developments within that area have to come back through the neighborhood meeting process,the City Staff direction, the P&Z hearing, and City Council for approval. So we would be coming back through, we are not asking for a shopping center tonight, we are not asking for a retirement center we are asking for a Conditional use permit for the rental storage portion of the development. WE feel that evidence supports a multiple use for this property. The major issue #2 is a major shopping center supportable at this site. • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 41 We already mentioned the Comprehensive Plan anticipates a community sized shopping center and specifically identifies this area under land sue policy #5.19U on this acre the ingredients for a shopping center site. Major tenants have expressed a very strong preliminary interest int he site.. WE are working and only in a preliminary way with 2 different major (end of tape). We have done what is called a slash report and most of you-know that is a market study and basically that study is done for a specific site to identify whether or not a major tenant feels that they can locate a store there and it will be successful and it is a real simple process and I have an overhead on it. Basically they say how many people are int eh area, how much-money do they have, how much of that money will they spend on my particular product how much will my competition take from that, how much is left to be spent on my particular product. From that they make a very easy process very complex and it requires a great deal of study. Those. are called slash reports, we have done the slash report unfortunately it is done for a specific tenant and that tenant is not willing to share that tonight, as soon as it is available and when we came through with the Conditional Use permit for the shopping center that of course will be made available to the City. The results of that report were favorable. WE have also done a market study on this site, and the market survey involves calling 700 people within the Meridian area and asking them if this kind of a facility were built there would you trade there. And that has been completed and that has been very favorable. Fairview Avenue we do not feel it is favorable for residential development. We feel that there are meany benefits of a major shopping center at this location and Kathleen just real quickly you can see there that the Comprehensive plan encourages commercial and industrial development speaks to it in several different places throughout the plan. This would work towards the goal of making Meridian independent of other cities. Jobs would be created both at the center and for suppliers and sub- contractors. It would add to Meridian's tax base both in real property taxes and just to give you some idea the shopping center at Southshore is in the 12 to 16 million dollar range that is the kind of real property value that we are talking about as a tax base for the City. City impact fees, whatever those might be those will be paid. And of course ACHD fee which is already in place. We've mentioned the infrastructure is already i place for the shopping center. Shopping centers are fairly low demand on services, the kind of services that Meridian is just being bombarded with or has a tremendous need for in terms of schools and libraries and parks and those kinds of things. The shopping center does not impact those kinds of services. The property meets all Comprehensive plan physical requirements. We would provide physical improvements such as additional widening .of Locust Grove, we've already mentioned that ACHD has that in their schedule for 1997 to be widened to a 5 lane road. And I can • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 42 confirm now, is Larry still here, I assume in the road section that Larry put in the report that you have from ACRD the Locust Grove road section would 70 to back at curb to back at curb and I assume that is a 5 line road. So anyway we are looking at between a 4 and 5 lane road to handle the traffic. projected by ACRD in the near future. A minimum 20 foot landscape berm along Locust Grove and I might also add along Fairview and you might on this shopping center I guess we don't pick up a good one there but generally at the entrance ways we come in the parking lot area in other words there is a berming along the front of the shopping center and it extends back in to the shopping center to take the traffic on in and those can all be landscaped. We see a minimum of twenty feet all the way around the shopping center portion and nicely landscaped sprinkled and sodded. There will be sidewalks along Locust Grove and as I understand now from ACHD reports they are going to require sidewalks along Fairview Avenue, for awhile that was questionable whether it was a State .highway at one time. There will be sidewalks there, our preference is to bury this sidewalk in the berming which when discussed with the neighbors was desirable from their standpoint rather than putting a curb and then the gutter and then the sidewalk, it is much safer if you can get the children and people walking back away from the traffic along the streets. And of course modern landscaping and buffering provide centralized shopping rather than strip commercial in your Comprehensive Plan speaks specifically to strip commercial which so often happens up and down a major road like Fairview. It will provide a pleasant place for Meridian Residents to shop within their own community rather than going to the other communities of Nampa and Boise and so forth, and it could be a gathering place. Often times shopping center are places where people meet for lunch and do a little shopping and can be a meeting place for them. We feel that a major shopping center is supportable at this site. The major issue #3, how should the balance of the property be developed. I'm just going to skip over that, those are our thoughts and comments it is not conducive to residential, allow transitional uses that are well landscaped and we feel that we have presented some ideas to the neighbors both along Locust Grove and in Mirage Meadows which are our direct neighbors and the ones we really feel the most allegiance to or that we are going to impact the most and we want to deal with them as best we can. Why annex and zone the property now, issue #4. I do want to emphasize a couple of points here. If you are going to annex and zone the entire property and that is a proper thought, why don't you when you come in with the shopping center, request that zoning and when you want a retirement center, come in and request that zoning and so forth. What that does it causes piece meal development, it is much more difficult to attract users and major tenants, the trade offs are less likely when approached on an individual basis, it greatly lengthens the approval process, it delays the tax revenue from the property for • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 43 the City of Meridian. And the reason to annex and zone it now the City will always control the development of this property through the Conditional use and design review approval process, I don't mean to keep repeating that but it certainly fits there, aids in the overall coordination of planning for the site and the basic rules would be in place. It makes it much easier and almost a necessity in negotiating with potential major shopping center tenants . I just want to expand on that, just to say it is very difficult to go out to major tenants like your Target Stores and your Albertson's and your Shopko's and Kmarts and say to them I have this piece of property, its in the County and its zoned RT and I'm going to build a shopping center on there would you like to take a look at that site? And their response is generally Yeah, sure come back when you area little more certain. We feel that zoning the entire property at this time does not remove any control of the City, it allows us to do a great many things and have the flexibility to work with those tenants. It makes it possible to negotiate. with a joint venture management for a potential retirement home which I'll get to in just a moment, and the City would gain immediate tax revenues from the annexation. The major issue #5, the neighbors concerns. A lot of their fears and concerns are of unknowns and they need to be addressed. Development of this parcel must proceed with care and the spirit of cooperation with the neighbors and I think I will leave the rest of that for you to read down through. I would like to put that overhead up that has the loop road and the overall layout, this one was prepared after a meeting with ACHD and the Dove Meadows developer Dave Leader and Dan Wood who is doing Wingate Subdivision up towards the north. Just below Wingate Subdivision is Dove Meadows this is a plan that we submitted to ACRD for their perusal and study and you can see that there is an interlinking with Mirage Meadows but the roadway has been designed such that it does make it rather difficult. In other words if a residential street, they are connected neighbors in Mirage Meadows can pick up the children in Dove Meadows for whatever and yet you don't encourage through traffic to come down too many corners, this seem to be an acceptable compromise with the Dove Meadows and Wingate development. It allowed up to address the desires of both of those developers and many of the people in Mirage Meadows subdivision that said whatever you do please don't bring commercial traffic in through our subdivision we don't need more traffic in that area. And so that is one of the things that we have done. The other thing is the Applewood which a little stub right there, at Larry Sale's suggestion of ACHD that it be made a 20 foot paved walking bike path connecting to the loop road within the shopping center and could be used of course for walking purposes, probably some wooden ballards up there so the emergency vehicles could knock them down incase of emergency, but otherwise restrict vehicles through there. We hope that is an acceptable solution for the people in • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 44 Mirage Meadows. We haven't had a chance to meet with them since that time and of course this has not been approved or signed off by ACHD but I did take it from the report that Larry submitted to you. Kathleen if you would circle the transitional area there I'm sorry that it showed up and it says transitional use, that area from the very beginning when we began working on alternative layouts and possible layouts for the sites we were working .with Billy Ray Stripp and laid out the shopping center portion of it and we said we want some storage in this area and he immediately went to that area and circled and said this would be ideal for a retirement type of center and that is the last item I want to address. The rental storage portion would be backing up to the Mirage Meadows subdivision and also Dove Meadows subdivision when that is platted as I understand that is not being platted, the second portion of it. The only other thing I want to point out on the plat would be the commercial portion of it, I think there is some mis- understanding. This is would be commercial the retail commercial shopping center that is between 18 to 20 acres in that portion and the loop road that was referred to earlier, it is curved into there and that was a suggestion of ACRD, Larry again suggesting that we make those gradual turns for the emergency vehicles and so forth on a 100 foot radius curve there. So that is then what we are proposing, the shopping center area, a Conditional use permit for the rental storage portion and the transitional use indicated up there for a retirement center. I know it is late and 2 quick things here. This is what we would like to .pursue on that portion of the property in the northwest corner of the 40 acres we wold like to build a retirement center on this parcel, the very unique location of this parcel is ideal for a retirement center. It is near residential which is important for a retirement center. People in those center don't like to be placed in the middle of a commercial development in the middle of a industrial zone. So they could be near a residential zone. More importantly it would be near an activity center the shopping center if it is approved and there are numerous examples throughout.the valley. There are 2 near the Hillcrest shopping center, there is one near the Collister shopping center over in the Boise area. Because the shopping center provides an activity area, a gathering place, someplace for them to go each day where there are people and activities going on. This would be a valuable asset and make a significant contribution to the City. It can provide the same buffering and screening as was mentioned in the staff report. For the neighbors across Locust Grove, by berming along Locust Grove and I can see that being the typical 6 or 8 feet high landscaped over the top and so forth and carried on there I think would be desirable for those people on that end of Locust Grove. For the neighbors in the Mirage Meadows by using the same single sided low profile privacy wall used for the rental storage and parking garages and for the retirement center, we feel a portion of our property has unique • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 45 characteristics that are not available for most other parcels of land as ideally suited for a retirement center and we would like the opportunity to explore this. When we talk of a single sided building what we are referring to is not the typical double sided buildings that you see in a typical rental storage, but a single sided building looks something like this a long straight wall and all of the doors and accesses are from the other side. Our typical landscaping pattern is for every 40 feet we like to see either a cluster of either 3 to 5 and alternating trees and shrubs to break up that vertical Iook. This is what we are proposing that would adjoin the neighbors to the north in Mirage Meadows of course we would have our city setback area 15 feet I'm not sure. This would then both provide a privacy wall for them, and I want the commission to know and the City Director that we typically put this in and maintain it and so forth. One day we were thinking about that and it is a maintenance headache for us and we thought what if we went to the neighbors in Mirage Meadows and said if we put this in and put in the grass and so forth and allowed you to come-back in to this area and add it to your backyard you can use it if you will maintain it. We would enter into some kind of a maintenance agreement and I want. that on record and we are willing to pursue that. We talked about some of the details and we are not going to get into that this evening. We are making that offer that seems to me would be a real benefit to the people in Mirage Meadows and especially the way those lots are designed most of the lots don't have a large backyard, 20 to 25 feet and I know 2 of them there on Applewood only have 5 or 10 feet from their property line, but we would another 10 feet and you would have the privacy, no litter, no lights so forth, that is our idea. We would like to keep the front open for security purposes, anyone within the complex could get real nervous when the front is open like that and you can look down through it. This last point I will quickly cover, we use a brick type pillar usually about 7 1/2 feet high with a black vinyl fencing between those pillars which makes it very attractive no barbed wire, by using the single sided building we have no fences around the perimeter of the property so we can landscape from our building out to the setback area whatever that might be. I guess I need to take this one second, because I have seen a picture floating around of one of our facilities at Maple Grove, which shows the typical old storage construction. We have a chain link fence, we have razor wire along the top. That facility was built in 1976 it is in an industrial zone, not a residential or a commercial zone. We have is scheduled for complete renovation the reason we have held up on that is die to Mr. Larry Sale and ACHD's widening of Maple Grove they haven't done it yet we don't want to go in and make our improvements until it is decided how wide that road is going to be and .those improvements are in place. So we do have the old style buildings, we do not build those any more. Up here we have our State Street site,the one in the middle is an ~ r.'. ~ • ,~' 1 Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 46 addition at the Maple Grove site that we just completed showing the brick pillars the black vinyl fence and the landscaping of that. Because the staff report refers to and I know there has been concern and we have heard comments and by they way this is my last item, the concern for a neighborhood park. And I know the Comprehensive Plan speaks to a neighborhood park in a general way in that you would like to a neighborhood park for every 1,000 in population. We feel that this site, the transitional area seems to be the one that has attracted attention' we should have put a retirement center on there in the beginning, since it has become a question if that would be a good neighborhood park. Our concerns about a neighborhood park there, 1. It would attract children from across Locust Grove and we have said a number of times here this evening, Locust Grove is scheduled to be a 5 lane road,that is like building a park on the other side of Fairview Avenue, granted it doesn't have the same traffic, but it is going to be designed to carry that same traffic.. We have a neighborhood park directly across Locust Grove and we all know that children from the Carol and the one to the north those subdivisions they are going to be attracted to a park in that area . It doesn't seem to be a good idea to us anyway to attract those children from across Locust Grove and have the traffic back and forth especially if the shopping center is approved there and the traffic it will generate, and it will generate its own traffic. Children will also be attracted to the shopping center and here we would have truck traffic in the rear of the center and then of course the shopping traffic. Shopping centers tend to be adult centers and really not designed for children and play areas, but we all know how kids are it doesn't take them long to find a new place to play. The park would be on the fringe of a residential area. We feel that a neighborhood park should be accessible from several directions. Just a quick little map, a section map, we have Fairview on the bottom, top would be Ustick, the white area there would be Locust Grove. As I understand the Comprehensive Plan is a community park designed for somewhere in that area, which would be a mile from Fairview to Ustick Road, so we are 3/4 of a mile from Mirage subdivision to that neighborhood park. You can see that the arrow pointing to a park in that area that basically really should only serve Mirage Meadows, we don't want to attract the children form across the street even though that might be the case, you would have very limited scope and I think with a limited budget of the City that would be a consideration, can the City afford to support and maintain a neighborhood park in that particular area. You will notice over on the right hand side the neighborhood community church, park, and recreational facility, that is quite a large facility that is being proposed in conjunction with that church and it seems to me it make sense for the City to cooperate. This is from the article in the Idaho Business Review, "an 11 acre park including a baseball field for church members and little league • • ," C` Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 47 is planned. An amphitheater for concerts and other church and community gatherings is being designed. Wilde said he wants his congregation wants the new facility to be a center for the community as well as for church members." So we feel that maybe the park needs in that area although they aren't exactly adjacent to Mirage subdivision and we can't have neighborhood parks next to every subdivision but maybe that would answer the park needs in that area. So that there is no mis-understanding, I went through our application and I went through Wayne~'s staff report and put down what we are requesting and what we are agreed to. We are requesting that you annex the 40 acres with a CG zone into the City of Meridian, we are asking for a Conditional use permit to build the rental storage complex. All construction and development will be subject to a conditional use design review including neighborhood involvement, staff direction, agency approval, Planning & Zoning public hearings and City Council public hearings and approvals. What we feel we are agreeing to is that we will meet all commercial development entryway requirements both current and future whatever they might be we are very comfortable .with that we have never lost one dollar on any development ever investing in landscaping and I appreciate the comment we won't be unreasonable on that but it is a good investment. We will work closely with Wayne and staff and I understand Wayne will be leaving we wish you the best of luck in your endeavors. We will work with staff and whatever is needed there to be a good neighbor and provide the kind of entryway into Meridian that you want. Pedestrian walkways will be provided, as we mentioned from Applewood to the loop road around the center there is an emergency vehicle access but it will otherwise be limited to foot traffic. We will provide a pedestrian walking path along the old Dixie Lane connecting Wingate and Dove Meadows and Mirage Subdivision to the shopping center. I met with Dave Leader today, I talked with him on the phone, he has indicated that he would be willing to tie Apricot into that walkpath and also I think he calls it Grapewood that culdesac to the south of Apricot and so that might be something the City would want to do to tie those in and tie in the church activity center that they are proposing. We are willing to do that and I will just add a precaution for. the City, that if we provide Dixie Lane access up towards Fairview and then into the shopping center, the City would want to be real sensitive to keeping open the north end of Dixie Lane some kind of a pathway whether it be just a pathway through subdivision lots and as that old home in there at the end of Oakcrest is acquired and put into the development there needs to be an access on into there to get onto Oakcrest and to tie those neighborhoods in. We agree to provide the Conditional use permit of the shopping center will contain a full traffic study as per ACHD requirements. We will provide detail plans including landscaping plans, drainage plans, building plans, and other needed information will be provided for each C.U. permit application. We • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 48 are agreeing that a variance permit will be requested if deemed necessary for the resident manager of the facility and I understand what that is in the commercial zone we probably need a variance for a residence for a person to live, but we definitely want a security person on site and a maintenance. person on site at our rental storage facility. We are entering into a development agreement with the city. We will help the City identify some alternative neighborhood parks and we will of course agree to pay all city imposed impact fees for the purpose of adding to and maintaining its parks, bikepaths, libraries, etc. We are in concurrence of the other requirements and conditions of approval, Kathleen indicated to me I didn't read to you all the benefits of rental storage facility there are many, they are quiet, clean, convenient, and that is it. Johnson: Okay Roger, thank you very much. Any questions of Roger before we turn it to the public? Shearer: Yes, I have one. With this presentation are you indicating that your landscaping and so on will be comparable to Southshore shopping center? Allen: In our shopping center area, yes. We just never found that landscaping didn't pay. You can be excessive of course, but generally clean, attractive appearance is important. Alidjani: It seems to me that there are 3 different projects, one is the present time, you are making a presentation for storage unit and shopping center and transitional use. what is your time table for each one of those and how far apart are they from one another? Allen: Okay, I have a time table in your packet there, I think the very last page in that presentation packet. To answer that directly, and I'm sorry Mr. Chairman, I should address you first. We would like to begin phase 1 of the rental storage development this spring and would be finished by fall. Generally, those occur over a 2 year period, so the rental storage we would build in 3 phases as you .notice on the plan that is submitted, we have 3 phases to that. Our time table is to begin that right away and to complete it over the next 2 to. 3 years. To be realistic on the shopping center and knowing the time it takes in negotiating with tenants and signing of leases and arranging of finances it would be 2 years probably 3 before the shopping center was actually under construction. It doesn't mean that there is a lot of work going on before that. And the retirement center, we would like to own and operate that but we want to do it as a joint venture as we have done Southshore, with the developer that knows that business, that is in the business maybe even a national franchise type of operation and join in with them. I don't have a time table on that • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 49 I would imagine it would be at least a year in negotiations to find some one for that, does that help Mr. Alidjani? Alidjani: Well I looked at the record that is in the packet. Johnson: Any other questions? Hepper: Your proposed use for a retirement center and that, if you can't find somebody that wants to put a retirement center there, potentially you might be coming back to us Later on saying that you have another use in mind for that now what we had didn't work out, you had all these public hearings and stuff like that would you go through that again is this something that is pre-fixed this is really what you are going to try to hold to or is that just a concept you have in mind? Allen: Mr. Chairman, definitely it is that is what we have identified. We feel that site is extremely unique in that it has the residential flare and yet is has the attraction of a shopping center from people that we have already talked with about it. It does make sense for a community or a retirement type of center. If we were to come back before you I am certain that we would begin with a review staff and a different proposal. We would talk to staff we would definitely have meetings with neighbors, we found that to be very productive and after the meetings with neighbors then we would come forth with our application again under the C.U, permit but never would the City. We feel that it is an ideal site and we feel that Meridian has need for a place for older people and this is not a nursing home that we are talking about but a retirement type that will provide meals and a place to live it kind of an apartment and they plan activities through the day but it is not a nursing they don't actually provide medical services and that type of thing. They are very popular the ones that I know several people that live in them and that would be our plan for that. Johnson: Any more questions? Thank you Roger, I'll now open the hearing to the public I would like to take those people with small children that .need to leave first. Is there someone from the public that would like to come forward? Wade Miller, 2005 East Oakcrest, was sworn by the Attorney. Miller: I would like to state that I was at one of Mr. Allen's neighborhood meetings, and it was very productive. I whole heartedly support his plan. My property is directly adjacent to the storage facilities and I feel that it would be a benefit for myself, my family to have that type of a transition from the commercial that is going to be on Fairview, whether strip or a large complex into the residential neighborhood. • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 50 Johnson: Thank you Mr. Miller, do you have any questions Charlie? Rountree: I had a question, the concept was possibly looking at some kind of agreement with adjacent property owners to care 10 feet of the landscaping, is that something that you would support? Miller: Oh yes, I would support that and I have talked to a number of my neighbors and they were pretty enthusiastic about it as well. I am familiar with the unit on State Street, I think it is a very nice unit I would like to have something like that back up to my house. Johnson: Thank you, anyone else from the public? John F. Jansen, 2100 N. Amethyst, was sworn by the Attorney. Jansen: Well firstly, it was a wonderful presentation and the neighborhood meetings and the impact area to the east of Locust Grove seem to be addressed quite a bit. Our house borders the Locust Grove on the opposite side of the street. As far as the impact on our side very little has been addressed which is a major concern, but really the first thing is a point of clarification. A questions was raised to ACHD as to whether Locust Grove is going to be 5 lanes, I didn't hear a real positive answer on that from ACHD. The reason I wanted the clarification is the planed development driving the need for a 5 lane highway down Locust Grove, or is vice versa. All the attention has been that Locust Grove is going to be 5 lanes, that has not been a real clear point I guess in my mind. . Johnson: Okay, do you have any other questions? Jansen: Well, yes, the next concern or question would be that we are asking to shoulder the responsibility of parks and recreation on a private church. Again this is a concern. Johnson: Well, that church has been before this Commission on more than one occasion. The church has made it clear they did want to do that for the public. The thing that I questioned when it came up was their time table, we do not know their time table for the further development. Right now they have the building going, the park and the soccer fields and the baseball fields are kind of in limbo as to when that would actually be developed, but we are familiar with that plan it did come before us and did go before the City. Jansen: Is there a difference between their invitation to use their facility and my wanting to use a private church facility for my children to go play on? • • Planning & Zoning January i1, 1994 Page 51 Johnson: I doubt seriously the children would, notice any difference, there may be a difference philosophically. Jansen: I would say there certainly is, and the final point. I don't doubt a need for a expanded shopping center, but I just want to make sure that the need does not justify the location. Johnson: Okay, thank you very much. I will ask Mr. Sale, if he still here, if he would address the time table on the 5 lane road for Locust Grove. Anything else you need to address at this time would be fine, you need to be sworn. Larry Sale, ACRD, was sworn by the Attorney. Sale: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, answering the last 2 questions first, and then a couple of points. Locust Grove road is on the ACHD 5 year work. program identified for a design in 1995, right of .way acquisition beginning in 1996 and construction possibly in 1998. It has been our experience that the schedules usually slips, I can assure it probably won't be constructed any earlier than that but some time within this century is probably a good guess. Its ultimate configuration at Locust Grove Road will have 4 through driving lanes, 2 lanes in each direction and a 2-way left turn lane. I gave away a document yesterday that I don't have with me, if it is on your pathway plan it will have 2 bike lanes. That will be a total ultimate constructed width of 70 feet from curb to curb with the bike lanes. A substantial amount of Locust Grove has been approved for 4 lanes starting immediately north of this proposed project and running for several hundred feet. WE. like to get by as long as we can before we make expensive improvements like tearing out existing improvements so we would no doubt live with that 4 lane section north of this project as long as traffic would allow. Its obvious to us that the intersection of Chateau and Locust Grove will require 5 lanes on Locust Grove before the intervening sections. We can.live with 4 lanes north of Chateau for example much longer than we can at the intersection. We will need turn lanes at Chateau. From Fairview north to those existing improvements the improvements when constructed will probably be constructed to a 5 lane facility. The gentleman's other question was is this development driving the decision as to whether or not Locust Grove will have 4 or 5 lanes. That answer is no, as a matter of fact this development doesn't drive the widening of any street, residential development drives the widening of streets. Commercial projects do not generate traffic, they attract traffic that is already on the streets coming from the places that we live. Earlier, Mr. Allen had a question about sidewalks on Fairview, we will require this project to construct curb and gutter and sidewalk along Fairview as the development proceeds along that frontage. That was made more, it was strengthened as I drove into ,~~ ~ • ,; Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 52 town and observed that the athletic club that you have not far from this project is apparently a raving success. (End of tape) because there were cars parked all over the place including some out on Fairview in front of a new curb and gutter that the project just put in. As a side issue the developer will be reimbursed for the installation of the curb and gutter and the pavement widening along the frontage as he will be for any right of way that we acquire along Fairview or Locust Grove through the impact fee program. He will be required to absorb the cost of the sidewalk because that is a, the Highway .District's only concern at this time with this project is, forget that. The storage project by itself is a relative non-issue with us, it is a very low generator of traffic, the traffic comes at of f peak hours . It is a good use for this location and we like it. We have a policy that requires the preparation and submittal of traffic study for any significant commercial development. We discussed among ourselves whether we should require that traffic study at this time or wait until the more intensive development that was proposed, I discussed that with Mr. Forrey and on his assurance and on the record here I would like to say that the Highway District will defer the submittal of a traffic study for the storage facility because there is nothing to study. We do request that the City make available to ACHD any future applications on this site so that at that time we will require a traffic study of the more intensive development. That concludes my comments to date Mr. Chairman and I think the questions that were raised. Johnson: Thank you Mr. Sale, any questions for the ACHD's representative tonight? Thank you Larry, returning to the public is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission? Barry Gwin, 1515 Carol Street, was sworn by the Attorney. Gwin: Chairman Johnson and members of the Commission, I am here to oppose the annexation of this property by the City until an acceptable development can be designed and proposed for this property.. I appreciate the effort that the City has done on the Comprehensive Plan, but the idea of a satellite shopping center that strategy that is now proposed I believe will be better suited for a higher populated urban setting such as in a large city where they have limited vehicle access to shopping centers and requiring pedestrian traffic to get to the shopping areas. We in this area have a lot of people that drive to and from their shopping and a mile here and a mile there really doesn't make a whole lot of difference to most people. I would therefore propose that we as a City promote a development of a down town core rather than split stores over the entire City disrupting the previously developed residential areas. I would further propose this site be considered for a residential development such as the adjacent properties, this • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 53 . would better retain the integrity and the continuity of the . existing neighborhoods. Johnson: Thank you very much, any questions for Mr. Gwin? Rountree: Barry, your first comment was you were opposed until a design is firmed up for something at this site., but then you basically indicate that you feel the site has a better use for something else. Gwin: Mr. Rountree, at this point the proposal to put a shopping center in and some storage areas and a retirement center, I don't think is conducive with the existing residences that are already out there. There is a lot of people that have concerns including myself that this is going. to develop a lot of truck traffic, a lot of noise, a lot of trash that is similar in other areas of other shopping centers. We have concerns that as in other shopping centers that there is a transient problem, a crime problem-that would be developed and pushed out into our area. We have some nice quiet clean residential developments that have sprung up in the last few years and that is the reason that we purchased those areas is to keep out in a nice quiet residential area. We don't want to be forced into a commercial zone, and that is what this proposal is doing to us. I feel that continuing that residential theme would be beneficial to everyone that lives out there. I think that it would continue that theme right along Fairview all the way out. Hepper: I have a quick question, Meridian has just recently re- done their Comprehensive Plan; and they had numerous public hearings, did you attend any of those public hearings and address any of those issues? Gwin: At this point in time, where we are at is not in the City of Meridian, so I wasn't notified of those particular meetings and I unfortunately am on the road so I wasn't able to attend those. Hepper: There were public notices, it was in the paper for weeks and weeks, and that was designated for that area. If you are opposed to that we would like to hear it. Gwin: I appreciate your comment, but at this time I still feel that this is a good process but I don't necessarily believe that the Comprehensive Plan should be considered concrete and I think that in the future you should continue to review that Comprehensive Plan and flex with the citizenry in the area. Shearer: Would you buy a home lot on the corner of Fairview and Locust Grove? • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 54 Gwin: If the development was much rather have a residentia noise and a proper engineering commercial developments that we end up with trash, noise, live basically right behind Meridian Glass. I am very development. bermed and shielded, I think I would 1 lot with berming and shielding from type of development then to have the I am backed up to right now. Because we end up with a lot of things. I the .Idaho Athletic Club, and the familiar with that commercial type Johnson: Anyone else from the public like'to come forward? Elizabeth Gwin, 1515 South Carol Street, was sworn by the Attorney. Gwin: I guess you got my letter, I too oppose the annexation of any more property along North Locust Grove. right now my feeling is I wish the City of Meridian would just stop annexing property along Locust Grove. So far I have some pictures here I wanted to show you, these are some pictures, I'm not a photographer, I took of different developments along North Locust Grove and this is what we are getting from the City of Meridian. Presently where we live is in the County, but this is what starting to surround our area. One is of the Maws Addition subdivision, this is on Pine Street and North Locust Grove, apparently there is no landscaping in place at all. These people were told they would get berms for landscaping, they haven't gotten that. And then there was some compromise made, I think Mr. Forrey met with the neighbors and supposedly the developer is supposed to provide them with a fence, there is no fence in place. As far as I know the people haven't heard a thing from the developer at this time. The next one is along North Grove, it is just past Chateau Street. Suddenly the berming and landscaping and sidewalk ends and you can see there are weeds, rocks. I think the residents that bought in that area had to put up their own fencing, at their own expense. That has been there for quite a while, the weeds are growing up on it. Another view is something that has intruded on our subdivision, and this is the City of Meridian annexed the property for the Idaho Athletic Club, if you look at that there is inadequate parking, just like Mr. Sale said people are parking along the road. There is no landscaping in place at all, no water system, no screen fencing and there are pretty huge windows in the back of that building that intrude into the private backyards of 2 of my neighbors, and I listed their addresses there. So this is what we are dealing with from the City of Meridian and this is why I would just rather see you stop annexing any property right now until you can get your act together and get your inspectors out there and do some follow up on these subdivisions and developments and make sure that they do what they say they are going to do. So that is all I have to say about it. Johnson: Thank you, any questions? This isn't a pep rally. • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 55 Terry McCarthy, 1385 South Carol Street, was sworn by the Attorney. McCarthy: As I .said I live at 1385 South -Carol Street, that is one of the backyards that the Idaho Athletic Club looks into. Igo along with Mrs. Gwin that the City of Meridian, I feel, does not have the manpower right now to review its developments, its businesses to see that the codes are being met. I liked to thank Mr. Forrey for coming over between Christmas and New Years and visiting with Liz and myself and going over and visiting the Idaho Athletic Club and pointing out all the violations of the City Ordinances that they have on their property. These are items that should have been addressed prior to that business opening. Those were not addressed, my fear is that is we allow additional developments, commercial developments those will be opened prior to meeting all the codes that the City has in place. I don't want to see that happen anymore. It is a real nuisance to have it, it infringes on our privacy, we have trash on our lot from this business and I don't think it is a good development. I feel that the other sites within the City limits are within the area that could be more better suited for such a development that Mr. Allen would like. The corner of Franklin and Locust Grove is an opportune site. I would say that at the business park where there is Pizza Hut, McDonalds, all those that is another place that would be more suited. Its got the going home side of the street that Mr. Allen talks about that the shopping centers want. I think those places should be considered before this lot should be considered. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you, any questions? Beverly Donahue, 3775 North Locust Grove, was sworn by the Attorney. Donahue: For the record, I was involved with the Comprehensive Plan, I came to quite a few meetings. .The goals that we had on North Locust Grove, because I came to speak in that area, was we wanted to get a bike path going up that way and connect to the schools that are going to be built and to Chief Joseph and tot he parks going up further. The main goal of the Comprehensive Plan was pedestrian access connecters will be required in all new developments to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood identity and that was one of my strong issues that I was in favor of with the school district. The problem is when I went to one of these meetings the other day with the ACRD, the comment was that Locust Grove will go to 5, the question I had to him was North Locust Grove going up that street is a bus route, because our bus barn is below that that. Needless to say, Chief Joseph is a cross walk on~North Locust Grove that the kids going to and from those neighborhoods to Chief Joseph and he said to me that if it went to Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 56 5 lanes, those kids would not be crossing the street anymore. They would have to be bussed to the school they go to within a mile, they can't even walk to their school. So this was a major concern because we are taking our neighborhood now that we try to preserve and keep and identity to all these subdivisions because we are having growth on North Locust Grove and we all want to fit in as a good community. So this is one of my main concerns, if we put a shopping center there and it is going to like they said promote traffic or its is going to make it want tb come there, we've got children, we've got a school down the street and I kind of had an idea maybe why don't we put a park -along side North Locust Grove, move the shopping center over, because the assets to access on that shopping center I don't have a thing, all those people exiting that shopping center those headlights are going to hit all those homes across the west side of North Locust Grove. So every time at 10:00 o'clock at night those people are going to have headlights going into their homes. There will be no privacy, I don't care if you put up 10 trees or a berms or whatever, when they exit that is going to hit their homes. So their neighborhood is going downhill because of that and you are not going to have a re-sale value because I don't know about you, but I would not buy a house if I had headlights that were going to be hitting by house every night. That was one of my ideas that I did bring up at that one meeting. For the better of the City of Meridian I think we need to take a closer look at what we are doing along Fairview and how much traffic we are getting into now. We've got that Idaho Athletic Club, I'm scared to death when it snows or cold weather to even turn right down that street because those people are pulling in and out of that athletic club when they are done. My main concern is that they do go ahead with this mini-storage on the other side is there going to be a turn lane turning into that with that Shoshone shopping center that is going to be mandatory so those people wanting to turn across cross traffic or are they going to be at their own will dodging into that entrance? I don't know if that has been addressed or not, I didn't see it in the plans. Other than that another reason for having a park along North Locust Grove, would also alleviate some of the traffic if they put the shopping center between the park and the shopping center and if they did put a retirement behind the people that wanted to go shopping the elderly would also. have a place where they could sit and eat, thank you for your time. Johnson: Thanks Beverly, one question. Alidjani: I have one question, would you give us your address again? Donahue: 3775 North Locust Grove. • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 57 Alidjani: Is it also north on Fairview? Donahue: Yes, I'm above Ustick. Alidjani: Thanks • Johnson: Anyone else like to come forward? Shearer: We might mention Jim that the traffic study will dictate the turn lanes, etc. at the time of development. Debbie Woodall, 1950 West Carol, was sworn by the Attorney. Woodall: First of all I'd like to state that you mentioned that we should have been at the meetings for the Comprehensive Plan. I was at one of the meetings for the Comprehensive Plan and I did address the issue of this complex going in at the corner of Locust Grove and Fairview. At that time I was called to waive my comments and to come to the Planning & Zoning because it was more beneficial here. That is why we are here. Please don't patronize us about not going to the meetings because we do. The second issue I'd like to talk about is traffic. I live in Carol subdivision and I was never notified because I do not live within the 300 feet boundary that they say you have to notify, I never got a notification of a neighborhood meeting, I never got invited to one but yet my only way to get to my home is by via Carol Street. There is one way in and one way out and that is it. That shopping center is going to be coming right out onto Locust Grove as I am trying to get out of my subdivision to go to work and to take my kids to school. Nothing has been addressed about that, I see the entrances all coming out facing Carol. That shopping center is going to right there, I am aghast when he said a grocery store, my god we are going to have tons of traffic. I am really very. nervous about how we are going to get in and out of that subdivision. There is only one way in and out. We have no alternative routes to take, do we put a stop light, there is one not even a block away at the corner of Locust Grove and Fairview. If the traffic is backed up, just that little ways we are going to still have problems. I don't know how to get away from that except for not to have any entrances along that section right there so we can get out of that subdivision, because that is a very crucial. The police have to get in there, the fire department, everything. So there is only one way in and out. I also am concerned about once again as a couple of people have brought up about the enforcement that the City has, they tell these planners and developers go ahead and build this it all sounds good, whose going to make sure they abide to all of this, nobody does. I can see it when I drove down Locust Grove also. I'm very concerned about that. He mentioned that there was a grocery store that might be going in, why are we I=''', ~.,._ Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 58 wanting a huge grocery store to go in when Albertson's is only a mile away, to me that doesn't seem very feasible at all. I don't know if Albertson's is thinking about moving I have no idea, but doesn't seem live a very likely. My concerns for getting in and out of Carol Street are very big. Johnson: Okay, thank you Mrs. Woodall, anyone else. that would like to come forward? J. Clouss, 1915 North Locust Grove, was sworn by the Attorney. Clouss: I've got a couple things to address. One is that I have a house that sits right on Locust Grove and the headlights are going to be right in our front room. I'm not sure how to address that, we have lost the sale of our house because the question was do you want to live there, no nobody wants to live there. So property values in that area are going to go down even though you do get a tax base from the commercial that they are proposing to put in. So, I'm definitely against the commercial zoning of that 40 acres. Another thing that I would like to point and that was in a few things in their statements or presentation earlier about the Southshore shopping center. They mentioned that when the development was done, there was commercial zoning on the property, so the people realized what they were buying into when they bought property in that area. When we brought property there, I had no idea that commercial would come up Locust Grove. I guess you might call it naive or whatever, but I just didn't see Meridian expanding that way and coming up to us. I could see residential over there, one of the proposals we made was to have one house per acre like we have in our current subdivision, a little bit larger lots that way the people that are currently in the Chateau subdivision wouldn't have the direct line out of houses into other peoples backyards, you wouldn't have that problem because of the boundary size, but that is one thing that I wanted to bring up. People weren't aware when they bought their property that .there was going to be a shopping center there. Number 2, the Southshore has a buffer area between the residential area, all the way around it. It has roads on 2 sides, five lane roads on 2 sides with no adjoining residential on to those 5 lanes. The other 2 sides have their land right which is zoned for multi-.family dwellings, whatever. Those come out into and face the shopping center, so I guess if you want to rent,- that is what you get for your renting dollar. At least they know its there when they buy or rent. And we don't have that advantage here. I guess in closing I just want to say we are opposed to this going commercial, I think that the commercial would be better seen down on eagle road where we have access to the freeway, if you feel that Fairview needs somewhere along commercial venture; but down on that corner we have the freeway access, eagle road is definitely high impact, there is very little residential • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 59 around there to contend with. You are impacting through people, let them buy into it and know what they are buying. That is all I have. Alidjani: Your address is it out of Carol of north of Carol? Clouss: It is north of Carol. Alidjani: Would it be north of Chateau or' south of Chateau? Clouss: South Alidjani: Thank you Johnson: Thank you Jay, any other questions? Anyone else? Karen Blayney, 149 Rainbow, Boise, was sworn by the Attorney. Blayney: I'm really nervous being up here so my voice might quiver a little. I own the lot right on the corner of Applewood and Oakcrest and just built a new home. When I bought that property a year and a half ago it was stilled zoned agricultural and not ever dreamed that they were going to zone it commercial and so I just found out about this about the time they started building my new house. I was shocked that I was going to be bordering a commercial development because I right now live on Fairview and Five Mile and I've been around Commercial developments for the last 10 years and there is a lot of traffic and stuff and it has really increased the traffic in the area. One of the things I was really looking forward to was getting out in this area where is was a lot quieter and I did shop for about 6 months before I purchased some property. For the last 16 years I have dreamed of owning my own property and finally building a home and I've managed to finally do it and now I am faced this all this traffic and noise and vagrants hanging out. One of the things Mr. Allen did say is that it would attract kids and having been around shopping areas, kids do go over there and play and I'm a little concerned about the traffic in there and the kids playing in that area just because there are no parks right there. The other thing would be the traffic, when Mr. Sale was up here he did talk about the 5 lane road being developed a few years down the line, from what Mr. Allen said it looks like we would have 2 or 3 years of the traffic from the shopping center going out into the existing road conditions. I would be looking right at the back of those storage units, what I would like to see is at least some berming and stuff, so I don't have to look at those metal buildings. I mean 3 trees every 40 feet just isn't going to make it. I don't want to be looking at the back of those buildings because I don't care what color it is its still ugly. As far as his proposal for us maintaining the 15 foot section, I wouldn't i Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 60 have a problem with that, the problem I would have is paying for the water to continue to water and keeping it green. Mr. Allen did make looking at the back of the storage unit attractive, well the only thing I've got to say is if it is so attractive I will sell him my house and he can live there and look at it. That is basically all I have to say. Johnson: Thank you, no questions apparently. You need to be sworn to ask a question. We have to get you oh the tape and sort of thing. Susan Janson, 2100 North Amethyst, was sworn by the Attorney. Janson: My question is, have other developers come forward with other locations or this first developer that you folks have talked with, are we jumping too soon? Johnson: This is the first developer that has ever approached-this commission. Janson: I think you know my point though, are we jumping too soon with this one. Is this the best alternative or have we done our homework? Johnson: This is something that the City of Meridian has had in their Comprehensive Plan since 1978. Janson: For this particular location? Johnson: No, I'm answering your question as truly as I can. To have sites designated for shopping centers, and we started and you know with the regional shopping center along the freeway and that didn't come to fruition. But it is in Meridian's Comprehensive Plan it is their desire to maintain their own identity and you can't do that unless you have commercial developments. Janson: And I would agree. Johnson: We are looking for good commercial development, suitable sites and improve our tax base so that we can maintain our own identity not become just a bedroom community, that is our goal whether we will reach it or not remains to be seen. It has been in the Comprehensive Plan. Janson: Definitely, and with the amount of growth coming in and certainly all the new residential we have to have a spot to go buy our groceries as the gentleman from ACHD mentioned we do have to have somewhere to buy groceries at, the question is where is the best spot. One of the neighbors mentioned when we all bought, we Planning & Zoning January il, 1994 Page 61 were out in an agricultural area. We bought 3 years aqo and it is a beautiful area. We did not know what we were getting into and that is what we are all here today to defend what we bought and to back up our home. Now we are sitting 2 miles down from Eagle which is 5 lanes and its sitting there and is ready. .Have there been no developers that have come to the City of Meridian and wanted to develop there. Johnson: Not this type of development,'we've had developers. There is a proposal right now that is coming, its either been approved or right on the corner or southeast corner of Eagle and Fairview that is being developed, part of that is commercial. Janson: Certainly, they have Yellow Trucking and what not. Johnson: No, that is on the other side. That is an industrial park on the east side. Janson: Okay, are you understanding. my point? What I'm saying is ACRD is saying that it will be the next century by the time we get 5 lanes in there. So we are already a ways out here, can't we slow down and find a better location that when people go in and they buy there they know what they are getting, instead of coming into an agricultural based residential with young children, Chief Joseph elementary, can't we slow it down and make sure we put it in the right spot? Definitely we need it. Johnson: I guess its a question of where is the right spot. Without being argumentative, a lot of people see that as being the right spot. That property from an economic standpoint is way to expensive to develop residential. You won't see much more development if any on Fairview residential. Janson: Well, then do agriculture. Johnson: Well, its the people that own the property that decide what they want to do with it. Its not the city. Janson: Its you folks that approve what they do with it, if it is not good for their neighbors then it is not the right location. Johnson: We haven't had very many developments come before this Commission or the City Council where we didn't have opposition. Nobody wants anything in their own backyard. Janson: No, I agree Johnson: That happens all the time, so we get immune to this a little bit. • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 62 Janson: Well, you see I find that insulting though. I really do, Johnson: Your argument is with your realtor and the people that tell all you people that, wait a minute I'm making a point here, the point I'm making is that how could you come to Meridian buy a piece of property and think that that portion there will never be developed commercial. I heard somebody say that tonight and I can't believe that. Janson: Why do you call going to area that doesn't have residential putting it there and Johnson: I don't have a problem with it, we haven't had any applications for that. Janson: That is what I asked when I first came up here. Johnson: And I answered it Janson: So what is the rush, don't you think that eventually somebody will with the amount of growth coming this direction? Johnson: Perhaps, maybe a second one, we're not going to have just one. Janson: I think you should wait for it. Johnson: Okay, anyone else. Don Bryan, 2070 North Locust Grove, was sworn by the Attorney. Bryan: I'm afraid to say anything. I'm stuck between a rock and a hard spot on this development. Since I'm so closely affected by, it, and between one side, well two sides, I'm the man in the middle. And which ever way I go, I'm not going to take sides for awhile I'm going to wait until the City Council meeting, but right off the bat I'd like to commend Roger Allen and his. staff for the time they spent with all the neighbors and the way they proposed their project and made sure everybody was happy with it. The problems I've had with developers in the past it really was a good idea and I commend him for that. Some of my concerns are the Locust Grove Road, it started out when 2 or 3 years ago it was 50 foot right of ways, and then the new 4 lane was going to 60 feet and today I heard it was going to 70 feet for 5 lanes, and the traffic study is going to be composed when the development takes hold and gets going is it going to end up 7 lanes, where does it stop, it keeps getting bigger and bigger. We are talking 1998 before construction so that is one of my concerns. My heart really goes out the people that live on Locust Grove in the Doris :r'; • • ~: Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 63 subdivision, they are stuck, they have back out on Locust Grove, they are going to across the street from a -major development. There is a no win situation for them. And I feel for them, however, I don't feel for the people that are living in my ex- hayfield, because I feel the same. way they do now that they are being infringed upon by development because when Mirage Meadows went in that is where I cut my hay and leased the land for the stock car race and I didn't want to see-that development go in. I worked with that developer and really got burned and you well know and that is why I'm so anxious to work with Roger, I think that he has got a good proposal. I'm not. taking a side though, yet. So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I would much rather look at the back of a one-sided garage or storage facility then I would a subdivision, everybody and their dogs and their kids, noise, boomboxes, traffic, I think I would be much more happy with the back of a storage facility or garage. Because of the fact that I have horses and I'm in my own little world. So that is how I feel about the development, and I will wait until the City Council to voice other concerns, but I'd like to confront a few of the problems we are going to have with Mr. Allen, they are not problems we can work them out, he has already talked to me about working them out. Upon commencement of the construction if and when it gets going on the storage facility, they are going to terminate that small house as a residence that is on the property right now that takes of 15 acres that they keep for stock on. my ditch lateral runs down the length of that entire side of his proposal. The reason it runs down his side is because they moved it over when they did the other development instead of tiling it and its been a problem with weeds and getting water down to there. What I would like to see since nobody is going to be there, and it such a hard piece of land to irrigate, I would like to see him the that ditch right off the bat when he first turns the. ground over to get that ditch tiled, so I won't have problems in the future. And along that same note, I have concerns about the access to that ditch and where is comes across the 3 different developments at the intersection of Dixie Lane and the 3 different people. There is going to be an area in there that is going to be no mans land and I don't want them to all fight over it while I'm not going to do it because its not on my land, there is a zig-zag that needs to be corrected and Roger told me he would take care of it. I just wanted to go on the record to make sure that was addressed. Another concern of mine is the elevations of the land, in the future the development of the retirement center or whatever he puts on that land the way it has been developed around my perimeter on the north and the east they have built up the land where it is much higher than my area that if and when I develop or whatever I do to my property its going to be the low man in the valley, because everybody is so far above my I'm going to have to haul in tons and tons of fill and put a 4 foot foundation to do any developing if i Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 64 somebody was interested in doing that to my land. So something needs to be looked at that when they do their drawings. Johnson: Don, I don't remember, how many acres do you have? Bryan: Two, it is 1.6 or 1.7. Everything else I believe I can cover at the City Council meeting after you guys do your findings of facts. Johnson: You know the procedure Bryan: I know the procedure and I don't want to waste your time and mine. Are there any questions? Johnson: Any questions of Mr. Bryan? Bryan: I didn't say anything about storm drainage did I? Johnson: Anyone else like to testify? Fern VanPapeghan, 1490 Carol Street, was sworn by the Attorney. VanPapeghan: I am against the commercial development on Locust Grove and Fairview. They show 4 exits coming out on Locust Grove headed west. They have shown very little concern about the west side of Locust Grove for their development. I'm also concerned how we are going to get out of our subdivision with all the traffic and what have you. We have to wait 4 or 5 years for extra lanes to handle all this traffic and they are going ahead with their development. I want to go on record as being very much against it and I want to know how many units in this proposed retirement center? Shearer: It is not proposed yet. VanPapeghan: Well they've got it on the drawing board, is it one story, is it 3 story or haw many units? Shearer: It isn't proposed yet, it is just a proposal to do something there. VanPapeghan: Well, any way I'm very concerned for our value of our property. I think it is going to be a real pain in the neck. Because if want to sell it is like Jay we are going to be in trouble, nobody is going to want to live with it. When we moved out there 29 years ago we were out in the country and I do not mind running into Albertson's to buy a loaf of bread or to buy my lottery ticket. • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 65 Johnson: Let's hope you win the lottery. VanPapeghan: I'd love it, I'd probably leave the area and move to the mountains if I do. Anyway I understand that Albertson's has bought Meridian Drug and is expanding there, so I don't think they are probably planning on moving out in that new development. It could be someone else, but I am against the project. Shearer: A lot of the concerns you have will be addressed at such time as they present for design review.' The traffic study when it is done will dictate what the developer will have to do to the existing road. Turn signals and lanes all of those things will be determined by the traffic study. VanPapeghan: How long are we going to have to wait for that to happen. If he stalls Shearer: .The traffic study will not start and will happen before the development (end of tape) VanPapeghan: I've been waiting 29 years to get a stop light at Fairview ad Locust Grove. We just accomplished that. Shearer: That is because of the growth that everybody is complaining about that we got that stop light. VanPapeghan: We needed it for a long time and with the school buses, the bus depot being to the south and traveling to the grade schools and what have you that is a busy street. I think we have all the traffic there we really need. Shearer: Well you know every place in Meridian is being impacted with traffic. We at 1990, what was our population something like 11,000. Johnson: 9,978 Shearer: So in 1990 we were 9,000 and something, last year there was a 1,008 new homes built in the City of Meridian. VanPapeghan: I think it was too many, I think they are over developed. Shearer: Now when you put that into perspective that is 2,50 added to the City, the traffic is going to be impacted and. VanPapeghan: I think they have over developed Meridian, really you go out Cherry Lane . i 1 ~. . • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 66 Shearer: You can't buy a lot in Meridian to build a house on unless you have a realtor and tim can give you the particulars he has been running around trying to find one to build some houses for some people on. VanPapeghan: I know, but I think as far as city water and sewer when you add these new developments you haven't really had adequate to supply. Shearer: There have been 2 major wells added just this year. VanPapeghan: But didn't they have trouble in a new subdivision to the Shearer: We have had trouble in several subdivisions, one just went on the line about 2 months ago over here at Vineyards which are all interconnected. We have the capability to pump approximately 5,000 gallons more than we did before those 2 pumps went on line. VanPapeghan: Well, anyway I am still against it. Johnson: Anyone else? Did you want to add to your comment? Woodall: You mentioned that should we have been more concerned those items, and I too find it offensive. One of the things that I would really like you know is, or to find out, I went to a City Council meeting, I voiced my opinion I was told to come to Planning & Zoning and now you are telling me I should have gone to City Council to voice my opinion. Johnson: I'm not telling you that, you are an exception to the rule. Most people when they do this have never been here before. Woodall: You gentlemen are here to listen as a neighborhood, and you had a roomful, practically our whole neighborhood, w need to stop and take a look this isn't for our neighborhood. As much as you joke and I have found it somewhat offensive that nobody is taking us seriously. Johnson: We take you seriously, I don't think you understand what we are here for. Our main purpose tonight Woodall: Your here for the citizen, when I vote for whoever I vote for, but what I'm saying is when I see the Planning & Zoning is to make sure that our community stays viable and represents the need of citizens. You have a roomful of citizens right here, they are telling what their needs are. And although Mr. Allen he has a beautiful drawing I've gone down to the parks center, I don't know • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 67 how many of you have gone down there at 12:00 o'clock, at night, me and my husband drove down there. We drove around the back, the bushes are like that, they are very small, they are nothing. The lights were so bright, there was no place that you could go to walk that you could the stars. That is what we came to Meridian for, we did not come to Meridian for Boise. If I wanted Boise I would have moved to Park Center. I didn't want that I came to Meridian, who had a picture of a nice hometown on their back, that is not Meridian anymore. You of the Planning & Zoning need to listen to your citizens and preserve what we need in our neighborhood. This shopping center is not what we need in our neighborhood. Maybe you might think it is a great tax base but please move it someplace else, move it to someplace it~doesn't impact any citizens. We are not talking people who have only been here a year or two, people in our subdivision those houses have been there for years. Who would have known 30 years that Meridian would have been like this. I really think that the Planning & Zoning needs to take a more serious look at how our citizens are being impacted, does it matter or is it just a tax base that you are looking for? Shearer: We spent all summer doing exactly what you are talking about, and our big input when a development comes nobody wants it in their backyard. The logistics of Fairview, East 1st, Cherry Lane are obvious locations for commercial development. Woodall: Then put some buffers where those residential area are. What is being proposed does not have buffers to my subdivision. I am coming out to a shopping center, there are no buffers. Seriously take a look at some buffers. What he is proposing is not offering us citizens on Locust Grove any buffers. Shearer: I feel for the people that are built right on Locust Grove, they have the old house that are fronting on Locust Grove. And it would be a bad situation even without this development, just the number of subdivisions, it is going .to be, and there are going to be more subdivisions to the north on Locust Grove. I know you hate to hear it but. Woodall: I think people are willing to accept that, I think what you are hearing though is that ,this proposal is not going to work for our neighborhood, it needs to go back and not just. Mr. Allen I would have really like to have been invited to your meeting, Johnson: Mam, you have to talk to us, that is one of the rules of the Commission. Woodall: But you testified to me that there were neighborhood, there weren't .any neighborhood meetings except for maybe 300 feet in • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 68 Carol and yet I am impacted by the shopping center. I got no input, I would really like to Johnson: I think what he did was voluntary on his part he wasn't required to do that, he did that in the best interest of the people that live there. There is no requirement that he do that. Woodall: Planning & Zoning you really need to listen to what your citizens are asking and you have a roomful of citizens right now and they are telling you please stop it before it goes any further and sit down and think about what is happening. Johnson: Well, there are several of us that don't feel that way, I'm sorry. Development is just one of those things that you can't put a lid on. You can't stop the people from coming, they are going to keep coming here. And there are people out there who are just dying to sell their .property and have it developed. If you don't believe me, try to go out and buy some land. VanPapeghan: I would like to make one more comment, when he mentions 3 bushes on 40 feet, I don't think that is adequate for berming are screening or anything, I probably have 50 bushes on 40 feet at my house because I wanted it private. We have it screened and we have it private out there. Alidjani: Well I believe you already bought your lottery so you can afford all those trees. VanPapeghan: We've been there for 29 years and we have been growing them ever since. I think 3 bushes in 40 acres is not adequate to screen. Johnson: Thank you, anyone else? McCarthy: Looking at Fairview Avenue from Orchard Street in Boise to out beyond Ten Mile in Meridian all of the development that is along there particularly on the north side is maybe a block deep at the most maybe 2 blocks deep. Mr. Allen's development is substantially more than 2 blocks deep and I understand your concern you want a community shopping center but I think for the pattern that has gone on Fairview I think it needs to stay the block to 2 blocks deep, put residential on the north end of that and keep is consistent with what the neighborhoods are in the area. Again there are other areas within Meridian that you can put a shopping center that can be a deep as what Mr. Allen is proposing, out by the freeway on Franklin other places, Eagle Road. Thank you. Donahue: The problem is we all have to work tomorrow too, I think in the future when we have this long of talks I think we should • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 69 close it off at 11:00 and have it at the next meeting because there are this many people that need to speak and there is this much of an impact of a decision that needs to be made. We should maybe stop these meetings at 11:00 and do it for the next following one. Because half the people have left, I'm sure they are tired, we are all tired, we need to go home and really think seriously what impact it is going to have on our lives. I've got to go, good night. Johnson: Does anyone else have anything before I close the public hearing? Gwin: I want you to know I spent the last 3 months driving around to Mr. Allen's developments looking them over, trying to decide if that would be something I want in my area. I spent a lot of time talking to neighbors, and I spent a lot of time looking at the developments I gave you the pictures of. I also spent a lot of time at City Council meetings. The letter I wrote to you, I sat down at my typewriter and I decided I would try to compose my thoughts. Johnson: You wrote 2 letters didn't you? Gwin: I wrote a lot of letters, but the last letter I wrote. Johnson: You are talking about the one you wrote on January 10th, that is the one you we are over our head, it is a travesty, how dare you and a boondoggle. Gwin: Yes, that is it. I put a lot of thought into that as you know and a lot of feeling and that is the way I write so you will probably get some more like that. Listen to what the people in this area are saying, I live in Doris Subdivision it has been there since 1959, it is a good area to Iive we have big lots, we have a lot of really nice houses some are located along North Locust Grove not all of them are old houses. Mr. Clouss's house is about 5 years old.. They are well maintained, they are well kept. You are not going to see those kind of lots and brick houses, roman stone houses, you are not going to see those built for middle class people anymore so our neighborhood is valuable it is something that needs to be preserved and as far as Mr. Allen's development there are a lot of things that he hasn't said that happen around Southshore and I'm not sure if it would be good for me to repeat what people around Southshore told me. Some of them told it to me in confidence and they don't want their names used, it is not the rosy picture he is painting for you, and also there are some aspects of his developments aren't exactly as lovely as he has laid them out to you. I wish that all of you and the City Council would take time to drive at least drive through out neighborhoods, at `~ • • -,~. Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 70 least go look at these sites of the pictures I gave you and see what is happening to Locust Grove Road it is just starting to look like a junky along there. We don't need anymore bad development. Development can come in but it doesn't have to destroy neighborhoods and it doesn't have to be shoty and I don't think that is what you want from Meridian and it is sure not what I want, I don't want it for any area of Meridian. If you want to see more pictures, I thought about driving up and down a few other roads and taking some pictures of things that have really distressed about development. Development doesn't have to be that way. I don't know how much input you can give to the developers but get them to put some innovation into. their development, so that you don't end us with something that is worthless in a few years. I think you are really asking a lot of the people in this area because as soon as this development goes. in they are probably going to take a 6~ cut on the value of their property and that means quite a lot to people when they have to sell their property. Mr. Clouss can testify to that, his realtor has told him that already and he hasn't been able to sell his property and its not anything that is an undesirable home its a nice home if you just drive by and look at it you'll see it is a nice 2 story house, he built it himself and its a decent place but like I said he is not able to sell it right now. Have a little feeling and compassion for our neighborhood. Shearer: We do mam, I know you don't believe that but we do. Gwin: Some of you do. Woodall: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, I wanted to get up as soon as Mrs. Woodall talked because it was very emotional and I wanted to let her know that I believe within 300 feet there were approximately 90 people that were notified, Mrs. Gwin gave me an additional list of some people that would like to know what is going on with that piece of property and I included those additional 40 names on my list and Mrs. Woodall is on my list and I will. go home and find out why possibly it was returned to me but I want her to know we did invite her she is on my list. I noticed in Carol it is West Carol, East Carol and North Carol and possibly the north or one of those things have been left off, but her name is on my list. Johnson: Mr. Forrey, would you like to give us some concludin remarks? g Forrey: One though that I'd like to pass onto the Commission and tot he citizens. Based upon the experience that some property owners have had with Idaho Athletic Club, I could see why the confidence would be low. In our ability as public administrators I ;r~? . ,: ~,, 1 t • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 71 to deal with development. I've met with Mr. Wardle,. he is a fine gentleman, I am not commenting on the business side, but he was unaware that he needed screening, landscaping, irrigation tot he landscaping or a receptacle around the trash and that is City fault. It is not the Commissions fault and not the City Councils fault that is City staffs fault. The City recognizes that, there is an opening for a new Zoning Administrator for the City, the City wanted me to go full time I am just able to work part time in the community so the Council is putting money behind that. They recognize that somebody has to track and help developers and enforce the Ordinance. Now in the-case of buffering or ordinance is very specific. Mr. Allen has no choices, it says that he has to buffer his property from the adjoining residential. And so you will have a marvelous opportunity to define what the proper buffer is and the City staff will uphold that and I'm sure Mr. Allen will participate, but ineffect he has no choice because the ordinance says that you have to be buffered. And I'm saying now that there is a renewed commitment, I don't think the commitment was ever lacking it is just that the City of Meridian didn't have the people power inside City Hall to get out and cross all the is and dot the i's. I think it has been recognized now as very critical in the development process. City staff is taking this very serious, I've taken a lot of notes, we read the minutes verbatim. The Commission is at every meeting they have instructed staff to follow up to those conditions, right Don? Please don't feel that the Commission or the Council does not have a commitment to high quality development they certainly do and we are going to catch up we are getting better, we are getting smarter at this . If this project is approved and I don't think the decision has been made but if it is I can assure you that the City staff will make sure that you are taken care of regardless if you are in the County or in the City you will be taken care of. We will have quality development or a permit will not be issued, thank you. Johnson: Thanks Wayne, anyone else have anything to add before we close the public hearing. I'll now close the public hearing, what is your pleasure gentlemen? Rountree: I make the motion that we have Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law prepared on ,the topic. Shearer:. Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to have the City Attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, all in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea G y DATE: ~ ~ ! ~ / MERIDIAN CITY C~IL AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ~ APPLICbNT: d C .-.~..~- C,M.~rtr2 AGENCY COMMENTS: MERIDIAN POLICE - ~` ~ ~' MERIDIAN FIRE DEPT. - MERIDIAN CITY ENGINEER - MERIDIAN ATTORNEY - MERIDIAN POST OFFICE - MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT - MERIDIAN BUILDING DEPT. - ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA STREET NAME COMMITTEE - CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH - NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION - SETTLERS IRRIGATION IDAHO POWER - US WEST - INTERMOUNTAIN GAS - BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Pw~"~P~ ~ f ~~~ eel ~~- MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY - kl~ MERIDIAN PLANNING DIRECTOR - J~ G OTHER COMMENTS: HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS COUNCIL MEMBERS A Good Place to Live WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk RONALD R. TOLSMA I S e CI TY OF MERIDIA N OBERT D. CORR E GARY D. SM TH P.E. City Eng neer WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, waste water supt. 33 EAST IDAHO WAYNE S. FORREY, AICP KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief " " MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Planner 8 Zoning Administrator W.L. BILL GORDON, Police Chief JIM JOHNSON WAYNE G. GROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Chairman - Planning 8 Zoning Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM January 8, 1994 TO: MAYOR, COUNCIL, PLANNING ZONIN FROM: Gary D. Smith, PE RE: AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSH (Annexation, Zoning, CUP) I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments for your information and or as consideration for conditions of the applicant during the hearing process: 1. The property appears to be adjacent to existing city limnit boundary. The annexation legal description needs to be written to include 1/2 the width of the adjacent portions of public right of way. 2. Development of this parcel needs to address the continuation of the stub streets exiting from Mirage Meadows and Dove Meadows subdivisions. 3. Any sewage flow into Mirage Meadows needs prior city approval because of the limited capacity in the Chateau Ave. sewer line. 4. A 10" dian. water line exists in Locust Grove Rd. A 10" dia. water line and 10" diameter sewer line exist in Fairview Ave. and in an easement. An 8" diameter sewer line is being built in Dixie Lane in an easement. All easements and facilities therein must be protected from encroachment by any improvements to the land. 5. Drainage and irrigation ditches cross this property and they must be piped in accordance with the ordinance and good engineering practices so that flows are not impeded. HUB OF TREASURE VALL~ A Good Place to Live OFFICIALS COUNCILMEN WAVNES.FORREY,AICP,CityClerk CITY OF MERIDIAN A R JANICE GASS, Treasurer 08ERTGESLER BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO MAX YERRINGTON WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR.. Attorney ROBERT D. CORRIE JOHN SHAWCROFT, waste water supt. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 chairman zoning 6 Planet KENNY BOWERS. Fire Chie( BILL GORDON, Police Chief Phone (208) 888-4433 JIM JOHNSON GARY SMITH, P.E., City Engineer FAX (208) 887-4813 Centennial Coordinator GRANT P. KINGSFORD PATSY FEDRIZZI Mayor TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your com ~nts and recommendations wj.ll be considered by the Meridian ~' may we have your answer by ~ _ ~ ~ l 9 `'( TRANSMITTAL DATE : ~ 2-" Z3 ' ~3 HE;4RING DATE = ~' ~ ~~~ " J .. 1 . n . n _ r ~~ RE~UEST~ Ei Y LOCATION OF PROPERTY A JIM JOHNSON P/Z MOE ALIDJANI,P/Z .- JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSfORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C BOB GIESLER, C/C MA% YERRINGTON, C/C BRUCE STUART, WATER DEPT. JOHN SHAWCROFT, SEWER DEPT. BUILDING INSPECTOR FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY GARY SMITH, P.E. ENGINEER WAYNE FORREY, AICP, PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT -MERIDIAN POST OFFICE (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) ADA GOUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT AOA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRR:,DISTRICT SETTLERS IRaIGATIOM°DISTRICT IDAHO POWER. CO,°~(PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) tI 5•r-WEST (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS} BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) CITY FILES OTHER ~ °1 ~~ ~~ YOUR CONCISE REHARKS: 7~~ ~ ~ w; c-c ~~~ ~ to ~ ~-~ ~r~ r ~ ~-t1 ~~ /rr-' • ':~ ~~~ ~ ~~ JAMES E. BRUCE, President GLENN J. RHODES, Vice President SHERRY R. HUBER, Secretary Sc eber vest a Partnership a Boise, ID 83704 fi~ ~ (,crust 6~ t~w~l c '' ° ~~ s~ December 17, 1993 Re: Fairview at Dixie Lane/Rental Storage Entrance Dear M[~' . Weber In response to your letter of December 5, 1993, the following answers to your questions are keyed to the numbered paragraphs in your letter: 1. Joint driveways shared by two or more owners/users are encouraged along arterials and other busy streets. 2. A. Deposit the cost of a 5-foot sidewalk along Fairview Avenue abutting the portion of the property being developed to the ACHD Public Rights-of-way Trust Fund; B. Construct a paved entrance at least 30-feet in width from the existing pavement of Fairview Ave. for a distance of 20-feet behind the new right-of-way line. C. Dedicate 57-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Fairview Ave. abutting the parcel. The dedicator will be compensated for the additional right-of-way from available impact fee revenue in this benefit zone. 3. Requirements for the improvement along Fairview Ave. (construction or road trust cost cf sidewalk) will be imposed as each phase of development abutting Fairview is proposed. 4. The City will route your application package to the Highway District for an official response to the City when they receive your application. t Services Supervisor cc: Chron Project File Wayne S. Forrey, AICP ada. county highway district 318 East 37th ~• Boise, Idaho 83714 • Phone (208) 345-7680 • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live OFFICIALS WAYNES.FORREY,AICP,CityClerk JANICE A CITY OF MERIDIAN COUNCILMEN A G SS, Treasurer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. ROBERTGIESLER MAX YERRINGTON WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney 33 EAST IDAHO ROBERT D. CORRIE JOHN SHAWCROFT, waste water supt. MERIDIAN IDAHO 83642 KENNY BOWERS, Fire Chief , Chairman Zoning 8 Planning BILL GORDON, Police chief Phone (208) 888-4433 JIM JOHNSON GARY SMITH, P.E., City Engineer FAX (208) 887-4813 Centennial Coordinator GRANT P. KINGSFORD PATSY FEDRIZZI Mayor Memorandum To: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, Mayor d City Council From: Wayne S. Forrey, AICP -Planning Dir ctor ;~~ Date: January 6, 1994 Regarding :Annexation and .Zoning to Commercial General (CG) with a Conditional Use Permit Application for Self Service-.Rental Storage. Annexation and land use request of CG complies with the current. Comprehensive Plan with the exception of a neighborhood park and the updated landscape/screening and Development Review Standards which apply to this area of the City. .Current City development ordinance provisions are inadequate and are in the process: of being updated to address Commercial development at entryways into the community. This site is adjacent to residential subdivisions and pedestrian access must be provided for interconnection. An acceptable pathway/pedestrian access concept design plan must be submitted to the City and ACRD prior to final annexation approval. The Comprehensive Plan indicates a need for a neighborhood park site in this area. All other services are available or within reasonable service areas for extension. The applicant must specify types of anticipated transitional uses for citizen, P&Z Commissioner and City Council plus City. staff analysis. -What type of transitional land uses are acceptable to adjacent residential'"owners to effectively buffer proposed CG development? One possible transitional use would be a neighborhood park next to Mirage Meadows Subdivision in a "L" shape configuration with frontage on Locust Grove Rd. to help screen and buffer the homes along Locust Grove. If a neighborhood park is incorporated into this development, the recreation and residential screening policies of the Comprehensive Plan would be achieved. The Ada County Highway District (ACRD) has requested a traffic study be included in the Development Agreement or Annexation or Conditional Use Permit conditions pertaining to the Shopping Center component of this project. The applicant needs to submit detailed rental storage site development plans to determine compliance with landscape, screening, drainage and other improvement requirements. A variance maybe required if the applicant desires to have a security guard dwelling unit included in the rental storage component of this project. ~ • Avest Annexation and CUP request -Page 2 Memo - WSF As a condition of annexation approval, the developer/owner must enter into a Development Agreement addressing subdivision access linkage, screening, buffering, transitional land uses, traffic study and recreation services. This agreement must be approved by the City prior to annexation approval. As the site improvement plans are prepared and submitted, City staff will review and approve as necessary to achieve a high quality project as called for in the Comprehensive Plan and in neighborhood meetings. This project will be subject to development review and Zoning Administrator ands Building Inspector Checklists. CENTRAL •• DISTRICT ~1'HEALTH DEPARTMENT REVIEW SHEET "'"`"`"` " `"` Environmental Health Division JAN 1 0 1994 Return to: ^ Boise ^ Eagle ^ Garden city Meridian ^ Kuna ^ Acz Rezone # CITY OF MERIDIAN Conditional Use # ~'D CUSS' (7/? /r/~ ~~~,, ~Z Preliminary /Final /Short Plat !/C=Si L. Tjj - f ttae~NEJ2 s/S~i ^ I. We have Objections to this Proposal. ^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ^ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type. of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ^ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ^ 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of: ^ high seasonal ground water ^ solid lava from original grade ^ 6. We can Approve this Proposal for individual sewage disposal to be located above solid lava layers: ^ 2 feet ^ 4 feet ® 7. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: ~ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water well ^ interim sewage ®central water ^ individual sewage ^ individual water ^ 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: ^ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water ^ sewage dry lines ^ central water ^ 9. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ^ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ^ I I. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ^ 12. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ^ food establishment ^ swimming pools or spas ^ child care center ^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store 13. s7~2,~t r.~~z-2 ~/s~oSaL ~~"T~ods S~io~~a~ b-e q~~s'iq~e~ Date: ~/~/~ r~` ~~^" ~G~~D^~ F 7~~ Reviewed By: Dpi d vN~ Gv~2 . CDND 10/91 rcb, rcv. II/93 jll t ~~ ~+ OFFICIALS WAYNE S. FORREY, AICP, City Clerk JANICE GASS. Treasurer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR.. Attorney JOHN SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. KENNY BOWERS, Fire Chief BILL GORDON, Police Chief GARY SMITH, P.E., City Engineer • HUB OF TREASURE VALLE• DECEIVED A Good Place to Live COUNCILMEN CITY OF MERIDIAN~~'" ' ' 'gs~ ROBERTGIESLER~ 33 EAST IDAHO CITY OF MERIDIAN OBERTD.ICORR E MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 n~~~Dt\ p~® Phone (208) 888-~i31 W V FAX (208) 887-4813 GRANT P.KINGSFORD 2 7 QEC 1993 Mayor NAMPA 8 MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT Chairman Zoning 6 Plani JIM JOHNSON Centennial Coordinate PATSY FEDRIZZI TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your com nts and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian ~ ~- may ±•~e have yot!r answer by : ~lnnt~r l 9 H _e_~. =._.~_.____..~~_. _._.._._.__ TRANSMITTAL DATE : ~ Z' Z3 - `j'~j _.. °HE>~RING DATE : _ ~' ~ '1I) ' 9 f .. ,, ~ (~ r/ ~~,, L R E ®U E 5 T : ~~'1'~v~,o~•L ~1 CT ~_ '~- Zc~~..~ k ~ t ~ ~. CaS~+..~~7 ~J~l ~Q G'4'ri~-F C~-+~-~ B Y >~t''LIYy'' L~,~ ~ __ __ ,. .. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: 1 `T'r ~ JIM JOHNSON P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DLSTRICT MOE ALIDJANI,P/Z MERIDTAN POST OFFICE (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z AOA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR NAMPA MERIDIAN IRtI`.~DLSTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRr7IGATION'DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POWER CQ°°~("PRELIM AND FINAL PLAiS) BOB GIESLER, C/C ,l1S tJEST (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) BRUCE STUART, WATER DEPT. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) JOHN SHAWCROFT, SEWER DEPT. CITY FILES BUILDING INSPECTOR OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS+~11 laterals and waste ways must POLICE DEPARTMENT be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be CITY ATTORNEY ine on si e. any sur ace rainage eaves 6ARY SMITH, P.E. ENGINEER the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District WAYNE FORREY, AICP, PLANNER must review drainage plans. The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. It is recommended that irri ation water be made available to a eve opments within this District. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. Contact Donna Moore ° ~ at 343-1884 or 466-7861 for further information. a ~ ~~_. nson, Foreman, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District I~ ~. ~ RECEIVED JAN 1 11944 CITY OF MERIDIAN ~c~ia dr ~1~e~ridiacc ~~,etgut~acz ?>t 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-888-6201 10 January 1994 Phones: Area Code 208 W & H Pacific, IriC. OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 960 Broadway, Suite 312 Boise 343-1884 BOlSe, ID 83706 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Boise 345-2431 RE: Land Use Change Application for Locust Grove Center Dear W & H Pacific: Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above- referenced development. If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call on Donna Moore at the District's office or John Anderson, the District's Water Superintendent at the District's shop. Sincerely, DAREN R. COON, SECRETARY/TREASURER NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT DRC/dnm cc: File Water Superintendent Roger H. Allen enc. ~~~~ APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 f '-~ OFFICIALS WAYNE 5. FORREY, AICP, City Clerk JANICE GASS. Treasurer BRUCE D. STUART. Water Works Supt. WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR.. Attorney JOHN SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. KENNY BOWERS. Fire Chief BILL GORDON, Police Chief GARY SMITH. P.E.. City Engineer • HUB OF TREASURE VALL~ ~~~~~E~ A Good Place to Live COUNCILMEN CITY OF MERIDIAN~A" ' ' '~~~ ROBERTGI SLE 33 EAST IDAHO CITY OF MERIDIAN MAX YEARINGTO ROBERT D. COAR MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4~i33 FAX (208) 887813 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor 27 Q~C 1993 NAMpA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT Chairman Zoning 6 Pla JIM JOHNSON Centennial CoordlnF PATSY FEDRIZZI TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your com nts and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian ~ ~' ~ may ~..-e h a ~~ e your answer b y : ~~w~l _9 `'~ __._.._.-- ___~. TRANSMITTAL DATE : ~ 2-` Z3' ~~ - HEARING DATE R E CZ U E 5 T = y~ ~1 C7~ ~- Zc'h~-~-. ' 1.~ ~ , ~ BY: ~:. ~ , Lc~C.c ~~ fl CIS P~..~~~ ~ .tD LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: ~~- ' JIM JOHNSON P/Z ° MEAIOIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE ALIDJANI,P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) JIM SHEARER, P/1 ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR _ NAMPA MERIDIAN IRR..DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRiGATIOi': DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POIJEA COy~(PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) BOB GIESLER, C/C 11:5: 41EST (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) BRUCE STUART, WATER DEPT. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) JOHN SHAWCROFT, SEWER DEPT. CITY FILES BUILDING INSPECTOR OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REHARKS+~11 laterals and waste ways must POLICE DEPARTMENT be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be CITY ATTORNEY a ne on si e. any sur ace rainage eaves 6ARY SMITH, P.E. ENGINEER the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District WAYNE FORREY, AICP, PLANNER must review drainage plans. The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. It is recommended that irri ation water be made available to a eve opments within this District. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. Contact Donna Moore A A /I at 343-]884 or 466-7861 for further information. ~ ~ RECEIVED ~a~ ~ ~ ~s4 CITY OF MERIDIAN ~fia & ~?~~ud~aci ~J~,ugatlo~ ?~c~uct 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-888-6201 10 January 1994 W & H Pacific, Inc. 960 Broadway, Suite 312 Boise, ID 83706 Phones: Areo Code 208 OFFICE: Nampo 466-7861 Boise 343-1884 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Boise 345-2431 RE: Land Use Change Application for Locust Grove Center Dear W & H Pacific: Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above- referenced development. If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call on Donna Moore at the District's office or John Anderson, the District's Water Superintendent at the District's shop. Sincerely, DAREN R. COON, SECRETARY/TREASURER NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT DRC/dnm cc: File Water Superintendent Roger H. Allen City of Meridian P & 7~ enc. C~Oo I,~~% APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS • 23,000 • • REC~I~I~D JAN - 3 199+ CITY OF MERIDIAN To: Wayne Forrey Will Berg From: Avest Re: Entry Modification -Rental Storage / Shoshoni Property Dear Staff, The enclosed modified plats incorporate suggestions from our neighbors encompassing their concerns about connecting commercial traffic to their subdivisions (Mirage Meadows, Wingate Subdivision and Dove Meadows Subdivision) and suggestions provided by Larry Sale from A.C.H.D. who attended our Tuesday night neighborhood meeting. Larry Provided some valuable information for our neighbors. We have since met with Larry at his office and the developers of Dove Meadows and Wingate Subdivisions and the enclosed plan is a compilation of their input also. There are no significant changes as far as our application is concerned. The changes are: 1. A re-design of the entry to the rental storage to incorporate the loop road around the shopping center and to combined the entry with the entry to the Shoshoni property. We have already met with Jerry Teal, the architect for the owners of the Shoshoni property, and he assures us that the owners are very agreeable to a joint entry. The entry off from Fairview will be built to A.C.H.D. standards and will then become a private road within our properties. The re-design does not change the location or legal description for our conditional use permit for the rental storage. 2. Make Applewood, the road to our north, an emergency access roadway only with no through traffic. It would be paved 20' wide and can also serve as a bike/walking path connecting to the shopping center. This provides the neighbors with access without pulling commercial traffic through their neighborhood. 3. Inclusion of a loop access roadway around the shopping center. Larry suggested this road should have a curve radius of about 100'. This is shown on the attached plat and more detail will be shown in our shopping center application. Executive Offices: 600 North Maple Grove Road Boise, Idaho 43704 (ZOS) 376-5:50 • • 4. The interconnection of Apricot (Dove Meadow), the "new Dixie Lane" (Wingate Sub.), and Oakcrest Drive (Mirage Meadows) is shown on the larger vicinity plat. This is the result of meetings with Larry at A.C.H.D., Dave Leader of Dove Meadows, Dan Wood of Wingate Sub. and the neighbors of Mirage and Doris Subdivisions. Thirty one of the neighbors of Mirage Meadow have signed a petition requesting their neighborhoods not be directly connected to commercial traffic. You should have a copy of that petition in your file. This vecinity map shows how this can be accomplished and appears to be acceptable to all parties involved. Sincerely, ~~/ ~~ 7 ~ Kathleen Weber General Partner • ~ ~~ ~9 ~~ ~p~ " ~~~~ RECEIVED n n / ~~~'" JRN 1 0 1994 ~X'"~' CIiY OF iNERIDIAN ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ . ~~~~, ~ ~ ~ ~.`,_"~" ~Q ~~~ ~r~-~- ~ ~- , Qom, ~ / ~ ~5°y. ifi~ v ~ ~~p~ ~~ CENTRAL •• DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT REVIEW SHEET "`"`"`"` - `~- Environmental Health Division ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~Jglf Return to: Rezone # ~I'I''+l f~F I~E~IDIR~I Conditional Use # ,_0 Cvs~ G ~~~~ C~j~ ~Z Preliminary /Final /Short Plat ^ Boise ^ Eagle ^ Garden city [b~ Meridian ^ Kuna ^ Acz ^ I. We have Objections to this Proposal. ^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ^ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ^ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ^ 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of: ^ high seasonal ground water ^ solid lava from original grade ^ 6. We can Approve this Proposal for individual sewage disposal to be located above solid lava layers: ^ 2 feet ^ 4 feet ® 7. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: ~ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water well ^ interim sewage ®central water ^ individual sewage ^ individual water ^ 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: ^ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water ^ sewage dry lines ^ central water ^ 9. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ^ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ^ I I. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ^ 12. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ^ food establishment ^ swimming pools or spas ^ child care center ^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store 13. -s7~ ~-~r ~-~r.~i~ D~S,p~sa ~ tii~ T~u~s ,S7 ~u~Gi` d ~ CT~.S' yr e~ Date:,/~/~ ' ~r'Xv'..~n-- / ECR'~-r>,497J.~% ~F 7/f~ Reviewed By: `mil ~' ~' ~'ti J /n~'i4-~1Z . [DHD 10/91 rcb, rev. I I/93 jll • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live COUNCIL MEMBERS WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk y v CITY OF MERIDIAN RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE GARY D. SM TH, P.E City Eng eer WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, waste water supt. 33 EAST IDAHO WAYNE S. FORREY, AICP KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief " " MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Planner & Zoning Administrator W.L. BILL GORDON, Police Chief JIM JOHNSON WAYNE G. GROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888-0433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Chairman - Planning 8 Zoning Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM January 8, 1994 TO: MAYOR, COUNCIL, PLANNING ZONIN FROM: Gary D. Smith, PE RE: AVE3T LIMITED PARTNERSH (Annexation, Zoning, CUP) I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments for your information and or as consideration for conditions of the applicant during the hearing process: 1. The property appears to be adjacent to existing city limnit boundary. The annexation legal description needs to be written to include 1/2 the width of the adjacent portions of public right of way. 2. Development of this parcel needs to address the continuation of the stub streets exiting from Mirage Meadows and Dove Meadows subdivisions. 3. Any sewage flow into Mirage Meadows needs prior city approval because of the limited capacity in the Chateau Ave. sewer line. 4. A 10" dian. water line exists in Locust Grove Rd. A 10" dia. water line and 10" diameter sewer line exist in Fairview Ave. and in an easement. An 8" diameter sewer line is being built in Dixie Lane in an easement. All easements and facilities therein must be protected from encroachment by any improvements to the land. 5. Drainage and irrigation ditches cross this property and they must be piped in accordance with the ordinance and good engineering practices so that flows are not impeded. /~~Pi'vec~ /-61-9 ~ ~ 111 ~ ~~2 ~,~ -,,C~~, DEVELOPMENT January 7, 1994 Mr. Roger Allen 6904 randolph Drive Boise, Idaho 83709 Dear Roger: I am sorry I will be unable to attend the meeting with you on Tuesday, but I look forward working with you again. I expect this project to develop very similarly to the Southshore Shopping Center in Boise. In the event you need to provide a profile of Dakota Development, .Inc. , either for the record for any other use, I am enclosing an updated list of the projects we have developed over the past two years and have noted projects we will begin this Spring. There are other projects started but not finalized at this time. Good luck, and should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Tom or myself. Sincerely, r urkin Presi e Dakota Development, Inc. LJD:cj Enclosure ^ PHONE 12081343-5223, FAX 343-4954 380 EAST PARKCENTER BLVD. SUITE 105 BOISE, IDAHO 83706 • 11~~ • DAKOTA DEVELOPMENT DAKOTA DEVELOPMENT PROFILE In September of 1991 Dakota Development was incorporated as an Idaho corporation. The firm is owned by Ron Van Auker and Larry Durkin. Mr. Durkin is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the company and holds the title of President. Dakota Development has pursued and developed major tenant anchored retail projects throughout the Midwest and West. A complete list is attached to this resume. Mr. Durkin has developed commercial and retail projects in many states both as an employee of Shopko Stores, Inc. and as a developer since 1984 (see attached). Mr. Van Auker owns and develops industrial projects and office projects throughout the West. These activities are conducted through his company and are in no way affiliated with Dakota Development. He provides advice and financial support to Dakota from time to time. Mr. Van Auker has owned his own general contracting company for many years and has built buildings throughout the United States and overseas. At the present time Dakota Development's staff includes four people to assist in the development and management of the properties. A brief description of their individual positions in the company is as follows: ^ PHONE (2081343-5223, fAX 343.4954 380 EAST PARKCENTER BLVD. SUITE 105 BOISE, IDAHO 83706 • • Dakota Development Profile January 7, 1994 Page 2 Larry Durkin Market research, major tenant lease negotiations and retail consulting. Celeste Johnson Administrative Assistant to Larry Durkin, Office Manager, Contract Administrator, property management and tenant relations. Tom Bauwens Vice President of Construction. Tom oversees the architects, engineers, tenants and general contractors as well as the construction budgets. Susan Baird Secretary/Receptionist Dakota Development leases offices at 380 E. Parkcenter Boulevard, Suite 105, Boise, Idaho. Banking for the company is primarily done through Key Bank of Idaho, Vice President Rich Toney (208/387-4288). Other banking references are available upon request. Legal consultation is provided by Dale Higer of the firm Stoel, Rives, Boley, Jones & Grey (208/389-9000). While architectural services can vary from market to market, Billy Ray Strite Architects of Boise, Idaho (208/336-8370) is consulted on all projects. Dakota will continue to develop credit tenant projects, manage existing properties and look to the future opportunities in mortgage brokerage and real estate acquisition through affiliate companies. • • DAKOTA DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS 1992 Boise, Idaho Kmart/Albertson's, with retail shops -- 200,000 sq. ft. Key Bank -- 6,000 sq. ft. Multi-tenant building -- 6,000 sq. ft. Payless Shoe Source -- 3,000 sq. ft. Pizza Hut (sale) -- 3,500 sq. ft. Sioux Falls, South Dakota Builders Square -- 90,000 sq. ft. Office Max -- 25,000 sq. ft. Blockbuster Video (sale) -- 6,500 sq. ft. Ground Round Restaurant (sale) -- 7,000 sq. ft. Rhinelander. Wisconsin Walmart (sale) -- 116,000 sq. ft. 1993 Siena Vista. Arizona Super Valu (sale) -- 69,500 sq. ft. Yuma, Arizona Super Valu (sale) -- 69,500 sq. ft. Hemet, California Super Valu* (sale) -- 69,500 sq. ft. Monroe. Wisconsin Shopko (sale)-- 72,000 sq. ft. Platteville Wisconsin Kmart -- 94,000 sq. ft. • 1994 Helena. Montana Albertson's* -- 47,000 sq. ft. Shopko* -- 116,000 sq. ft. Multitenant -- 12,000 sq. ft. Pad -- 4,000 sq. ft. Helena. Montana Buttrey Food Store -- 46,000 sq. ft. Ernst Home Center -- 49,000 sq. ft. Pad A -- 7,000 sq. ft. Pad B -- 7,000 sq. ft. Lewiston, Idaho Key Bank -- 6,000 sq. ft. Shari's Restaurant -- 3,500 sq. ft. • * Presently under development. SHOPKO STORES DEVELOPED BY LARRY DURKIN BETWEEN 1984 AND 1988 California (1): Redding Idaho (8): Boise (2), Coeur d'Alene, Idaho Falls, Lewiston, Nampa, Pocatello, Twin Falls Iowa 1 : Mason City Minnesota (1): St. Cloud Montana (3): Billings, Great Falls, Missoula Nebraska (7): Lincoln (2), Omaha (4), Norfolk Nevada (3): Reno (2), Sparks Ore og`(3): Bend, Eugene (2) South Dakota (3): Rapid City, Sioux Falls (2) Utah (,15~ Bountiful, Brigham City, Layton, Logan, Murray, Ogden (2), Orem, Provo, Salt Lake City, Sandy, Spanish Fork, Taylorsville, West Jordan, West Valley City Washingtonton (7): Kennewick, Spokane (3), Union Gap, Walla Walla, Yakima Wisconsin (71: DePere, Grafton, Madison (4), Marinette ~ City of Meridian ~ INTER-OFFICE MEMO DATE ~~ ~`~`,n.'~`'~`~'~t~1~ !~ ``~~ ~ wl r FROM: --T `. n s SUBJECT: { ~Z~'~y, ~~"=~(Sl+~~~. ~ ~~r: rf~GF7il~ TO: h OtNCI ~-~ ~ ~-c~ ~~I ~~~~ r~~s is ~ " . ~ ti ~ . P , fL-~ ! t~ ~r` fiE '~.''~ ~ rc C;'C~ ~Q f/ S~ C~l/~.. ~C( AGCY ~ !~ r ~ . ~~ .~~ ' ~ ~'~ J ;roc{ ~ ~; ~. ky-219~~ti~~t!~` ,un ~R~.a ~~ ~n~-2tiS~c~tsn a,1ra , ,, U ~~~ ~=-~- CtTI'ZE1'L= ~i~'-F C~.;~1C`.,.['Gi" 't'O Ct?1r~Ail~UtrrGC~ ~1tW7. .\ ;;- „~„ October 14, 1993 ;~. _ 1385 South Carol Street Meridian, ID 83b42 Phone 888-6712 Meridian City Planning and Zoning Meridian City Council 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dear Council Members: In planning for the future of the city of Meridian, please consider the fallowing: We have resided at our current address since November 1982. We have watched the City of Meridian grow from a small farm community into a busy suburb of Boise. While the growth is necessary to meet the needs of the thriving industries which have moved to the Treasure Valley, there are some amenities which are necessary to maintain the quality of life in our community. The number and size of parks in the west end of Ada County are very limited. There are few ball fields for our children to play on. It would be much more beneficial for the city to purchase the property at the northeast corner of Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue for a city park than it would be for the property to be rezoned for commercial use. With the growth this area has experienced, the park would be a welcome addition. When considering the highest and best use for the property at the northeast corner of Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue, the planners should consider the pattern of commercial versus residential real estate in the subdivisions west of the property. The pattern has been to zone the first one-half block north of Fairview as commercial/light industrial and zone the area beyond that as residential. If the City chooses to zone more than one half block north of Fairvie*a Avenue for commercial use, we request that the City include guarantees that same of the problems that have arisen from other commercial developments adjacent to existing residential property not occur. Example are: 1. When Idaho Athletic Club was built, the original plans did not call for windows in the north wall. When the building was erected, three large windows were installed in the upper floor. These windows have taken away the privacy the residents on South Carol Street previously enjoyed. The lights from the building are turned on prior to 6:00 a.m. and are not turned off until after midnight. There are no window coverings on the windows to prevent the lights from shining into neighboring yards and homes. By the same token, there is nothing to prevent individuals inside the Idaho Athletic Club from violating the residents' privacy. 2. Idaho Athletic Club installed outside spealters on their building. They turn on their radio when they open their doors and leave it on throughout the day. This has created a nuisance for the residents adjacent to the facility. 3. The City has not required Idaho Athletic Club to erect a retaining wall to prevent run off water from running onto adjacent property; even though their sidewalk and property are higher than the property to the north of the facility. • • 4. The city has not required Idaho Athletic Club to install a fence between their property used for parking and the adjacent residential property. 5. The city has not required Idaho Athletic Club to enclose their trash dumpster. By Friday each week, the dumpster is filled and by trash day, the trash is overflowing. On several occasions, trash has blown onto the adjacent residential property. 6. A plumbing business is operated out of an old barn west of the Idaho Athletic Club. That facility's trash blows onto adjacent residential property. Nearly all of the main arterials connecting the subdivisions, schools and businesses are still rural two lane roads. With the increased traffic caused by the rew homes that have been built and continue to be built, there is a great need for widening the roads. In addition, bicycle lanes would be welcome additions. Children who reside in the Doris Subdivision at Locust Grove Road and South Carol Street must ride a bus to school because there are no sidewalks or bicycle paths along Locust Grove Road to protect them from the traffic that travels on Locust Grove Road. The initial cost of sidewalks would save the long term costs of bussing the children this short distance. The walk to ~~hief Joseph Elementary School would be approximately one half mile. Thank you for ycur consideration of these suggestions in planning for the future of our community. / GLG~ ~~ Terr McCarthy ~ -~~ e ~ ~~ Greg McCarthy ~, ._._..4f _.~ _ C. R. & Unda Powell ~~ ~^ ~ 1710 E Oakcrest Dr(ve `J -' ' - ~ •' Meridian, Idaho a3642 ~zar ~Cr1C~lC~,V~ ~rtY ~autin~ ~ ~o~l'v~ ~J (~~ a,r'~ h w.e3 ~¢,r ~ C~ ~ Q v~, ~ hc~~e u~" v ee; ~~ V'S ~ - h, e ¢~ ~'csn ~ l 4 ~~, I.t~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~.rs~ e~ o -~ cam, ro Pa ~ ~ ct~ c~ v ~ 6 v~ ~-~-:~ o-E- ~ ~r c1 t k ~ ~- P ~° n e~ h.bav-he©~ u~a~~~ h•~ con~~~~~-~z~~e r ~ r ec~~~~yy erc~c~( c~~u~~o~o~~u.`F o`~ ~~ F / / ~`~~. ~ ~ w .~ ~~~ ~ X cam' ~%< ~ r tit ~. c.~ ~y , ~' ~, r 'J `/ r ~ l Y~ ~~~ ~~~ ~" c~ La ~y1d~~ v'c r,~ ~ v.~e. ,~ ~~ ~ ~f h o~ ~ ~o~ U~l~ ~ ~- I~ r~ 1 5 q y_ << ~"/ d CG/2'f~ ~t1~ ~1'`" ~LI' ~~- ~Cr1~l oS LC°l~~v C~`~'OZ l < ~~ t .. 1 i '~~~~~ 9'! Get GWtI.~ ~ ~-r1 ~ ,. n~~~~ ~ ~I ~ ~. . ~` 0~ ; ~y, ~ g ~ 3 -Yl.~ 2,N,t.o~ca.,~.-, ~a~cz, ,= d p x~ ~c~ `Y1 N.~iu''~ ~ ~ ~y ~j ~p C~~-Q ~/ 'aGTiv~ U LU.tI ~~ ~ D ~~_ ems. -~ ~--.~ .. ~~ ~~ ~~.,~. ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.,~- ~a ~~ n U • ~ _ _. -; :~~.ric~ian Pl~nnin7 ~ Zoning and Meridian City Council , 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 33642 Dear Gentelmen; Please do not chanc3e the zoning of the property on the Northeast corner of Locust Grove and Fairview to commercial use. I live on one or the orriginal subdivisions along Locust Grove called nori~ Subdivision. ~a'he primary reason that my wife and T *1c?rChq^°~: ti~~ ~~~'~n~ttr .~,]nc i~~n;aiicn c .t'in r.tii~} `mac. .a.~~ni ~' • ~• .. .• j ..... - 1 •. ~ ~. •~ setting. 3inc~ we .~iovea in to the area over 500 subdivisio:l lots have 'peen developed. Also, there has been a lot more co~imercial development along Fairview Avenue. I can realy see the difference between the two types of developments. The residencial irnprov.aents may bring more traffic at rush hour to the intersection of ?~oc~ast Grove and Fairview and there is no longer a place to walk my dog without staying on asphalt or concrete. 3ut, with the commercial lots that have been developed there is a tremendous increase in noise and the trash that is developed by the businesses are al4aays blowing into my yard. There is an increase in heavy truck traffic and the commercial developments always bring a chance of contamination of my property by spillage of hazardous materials. -,1ith the major increase in chilcren in the area and no place for t.?1a=n t~ ~~1_at~; *sy f.ir~t c-Noise. for zoning and ia.se of t~•le -~ro?erty on the ortheast corner of Locust Grove and rairveiw would be a Park or "t;ecreation area. In this way the City could reverse the trend of continualy lowering the quality of our area by allowing developers to jam more and more people into smaller and smaller areas. GVe could have a place for the young people to play without being out in the street. There could be an exa:~~ple shown to other parts of your city that quality is possible. If a Park is not in your vision of Meridians future then at least continue with the residencial zoning that you have allowed in the adjacent properties. I can live with more neighbors, but I do not ~~r ~ ~ 3 ~d 1 want to live next door to any more comercial properties. There is ~- " a fine commercial development in Cherry T?laza that is never fully rented. And, just two miles away on Eagle Road and Fairview is a great area already zoned and developed for commercial investment. Please do not change the zonning on the Northeast corner of Locust Grove and Fairview to commercial. Use the power you have to develope Meridian into a city the citizens are proud of rather than one they are hoping to move out of. ~'?Z=~n't ~~ou for yo:;r cor~si~?eration of ti1i3 ~33~.i`. Respecfully yours; Barry Gwin Y'5Y 5 Carol St . Meridian, Idaho 83642 888-7441 October 12, 1993 Meridian City Planning and Zoning, Meridian City Council Members 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 Gentlemen, • --. ._ .. I am writing to ask you that the property at the northeast corner of Fairview and North Locust Grove not be zoned commercial. My neighbors and I are already dealing with the noise, increased traffic, and loss of privacy caused by the commercial business along Fairview and the massive residential developments to the north of our neighborhood. The enjoyment and use of our property and the surrounding area has been decidedly reduced by the addition of these developments. Our neighborhood along with the residents of the new subdivisions have need of something different than the proposed commercial development of this property which will no doubt only add to the problems as stated above. We need a place for our families to be able to walk without traffic and for our children to play . Please consider all or part of this property to be set aside as a public park. This property is large enough to accommodate much needed playing fields for local sports teams along with areas for walking and children to play. The existing farm house could be converted into any number of different facilities, but why not make it into Meridian`s first museum focusing on its history as a farming community. Such an area would act as a buffer against the noise from Fairview and would be a wonderful enhancement to the surrounding neighborhoods. I as a resident of the Meridian area would be glad to work on such a project in every aspect of its development. Please consider my ideas as part of the effort to maintain and enhance the quality of life in the Meridian area. I want Meridian to continue to be "a town of neighborhoods, not just of subdivisions." Sincerely r,~ /' . ,,~' ~ GG'~Y~ ~. ' Elizabeth A. Gavin 1515 S Carol St Meridian, Idaho 83b42 October 12, 1993 = ~~" - ~ ~- -= Meridian City Planning and Zoning, n ;; - a ~~ . ~ '.... J Meridian City Council Members . - . , 33 East Idaho Avenue ~" ~ ' " ~ ""+ ~- " ' - Meridian, Idaho 83642 Gentlemen, I am writing to ask you that the property at the northeast corner of Fairview and North Locust Grove not be zoned commercial. My neighbors and I are already dealing with the noise, increased traffic, and loss of privacy caused by the commercial business along Fairview and the massive residential developments to the north of our neighborhood. The enjoyment and use of our property and the surrounding area has been decidedly reduced by the addition of these developments. Our neighborhood along with the residents of the new subdivisions have need of something different than the proposed commercial development of this property which will no doubt only add to the problems as stated above. We need a place for our families to be able to walk without traffic and for our children to play . Please consider all or part of this property to be set aside as a public park. This property is large enough to accommodate much needed playing fields for local sports teams along with areas for walking and children to play. The existing farm house could be converted into any number of different facilities, but why not make it into Meridian's first museum focusing on its history as a farming community. Such an area would act as a buffer against the noise from Fairview and would be a wonderful enhancement to the surrounding neighborhoods. I as a resident of the Meridian area would be glad to work on such a project in every aspect of its development. Please consider my ideas as part of the effort to maintain and enhance the quality of life in the Meridian area. I want Meridian to continue to be "a town of neighborhoods, not just of subdivisions." Sincerely r~ , ~~~ . ~~~ Elizabeth A. Gwin 1515 S Carol St Meridian, Idaho 83642 ~?~~~:~~J~:~ O C i i 8 i893 C3 ~ ;~ v 1 ~i:;°~lei:l:~t L nette Bec1~ y 1872 East Carol Drive Meridian, ID 83642 October 18, 1993 Meridian City Planning and Zoning Meridian City Council 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Meridian City Planning and Zoning, Meridian City Council: My name is Lynette Beck and I reside at 1872 East Carol Drive in Meridian. I received a certified letter concerning the development of the 40 acres of land northeast of Fairview and Locust Grove. As a homeowner with a vested interest in the development of the Locust Grove area, I would like to express my concerns and give alternative suggestions to help enhance the development plan. Many houses have been built in our area with no designated parks where children can play or for adults to walk. With what I see as several more subdivisions soon to go in, I think this should be considered seriously as a partial use of this land. At this point, many people are walking in our subdivision because of the low traffic flow and its more scenic surroundings. A place for children to play baseball, soccer, and .other activities is much needed in our area. If the 40 acres is to be developed into commercial property, I would suggest that high berms with walls and landscaping be placed along Locust Grove with no driveway access to Locust Grove. The traffic flow at certain times of the day is already quite high. Other concerns I have with the commercial development of this land is the noise problem which we are already experiencing from the new development of commercial property on Fairview and which will certainly increase. I also use irrigation to water our pasture, and would not like to see that compromised in any way. There will also be increased litter and probable lower property values in the area. I believe all of these issues need to be addressed, with sensitivity to the people who have invested in housing in the area before this development plan was proposed. • • Thank you for taking the time to read my concerns and suggestions. I know it is impossible to come to a decision that will make everyone happy. But I would ask that you please consider these matters in the decision you will have to make, so that the homeowners and City Council can work together to make Meridian a great place to live. Sincerely, ~u~~~ Lynette Beck OCTi83993 Eugene Beck ~ ~~:~ ~s :.is:.i.l~~i= 1872 East Carol Drive Meridian, ID 83642 October 18, 1993 Meridian City Planning and Zoning _.__ Meridian City Council 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Meridian City Planning and Zoning, Meridian City Council: My name is Eugene Beck and I reside at 1872 East Carol Drive in Meridian. I received a certified letter concerning the development of the 40 acres of land northeast of Fairview and Locust Grove. As a homeowner with a vested interest in the development of the Locust Grove area, I would like to express my concerns and give alternative suggestions to help enhance the development plan. Many houses have been built in our area with no designated parks where children can play or for adults to walk. With what I see as several more subdivisions soon to go in, I think this should be considered seriously as a partial use of this land. At this point, many people are walking in our subdivision because of the low traffic flow and its more scenic surroundings. A place For children to play baseball, soccer, and other activities is much needed in our area. If the 40 acres is to be developed into commercial property, I would suggest that high berms with walls and landscaping be placed along Locust Grove with no driveway access to Locust Grove. The traffic flow at certain times of the day is already quite high. Other concerns I have with the commercial development of this land is the noise problem which we are already experiencing from the new development of commercial property on Fairview and which will certainly increase. I also use irrigation to water our pasture, and would not like to see that compromised in any way. There will also be increased litter and probable lower property values in the area. I believe all of these issues need to be addressed, with sensitivity to the people who have invested in housing in the area before this development plan was proposed. • • y Thank you for taking the time to read my concerns and suggestions. I know it is impossible to come to a decision that will make everyone happy. But I would ask that you please consider these matters in the decision you will have to make, so that the homeowners and City Council can work together to make Meridian a great place to live. Sincerely, Eug a Beck • ~~~~~93 ~w ~iiu- Cona~u af_~=~. ~~v.~ w ~~ 6n d~G ,/ ~~~~~~ ~G~. ~ ~. ~~ i ~~~~ ~o f 1~4., ~ ~C G'~~L ~ lJ2dL '--LQJ •.__lJLI/! __~llJl71~... Y._ ~i'Zk:e~~2 ~~ __ - ___ -- --~T~'~- - __ ~ora~__ ~~J_ ~... -- , - ~ . ~r~IV~2~/_~~U~o ~~ !U _G~oz~ --~-c.~----/flab ~~~~ C~ CG~~~ . ,~ Q ., _ C~aJ ~ .~ v • • c~v Cie z~~ ~.~:.~/ ~~7 " cie nPr/L/~. ina ~ ,~//c ~~ c Cho/ 2'+t ~ T ~ ,~, ~1~~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ a ~;~ ~ ~~ L/.~+.- Gl~u/o/ ~rv ~ ~ ,nom i~~. A~ ~~ ~i IQh~ ~ ~~~ -~~~y • • Meridian Planning and Zoning, Meridian City Council 33 East Idaho Av Meridian, Idaho 83642 Gentlemen, The attached letter was sent to Mr. Terry Little at Ada County Highway District to request that a separate bike lane be installed along ~~North Locust Grove Road. Please consider this request in your plans for development along North Locust Grove as part of positive cooperative effort between The City of Meridian and The Ada Count Highway District. • Mr. Terry Little Ada County Highway District 313 East 37th Street Boise, Idaho Dear Mr. Little; • The Ada County Highway District needs to plan for and construct a bike path along North Locust Grove Road. I am a lon3 time resident of the Locust Grove area north of Fairview. Over the past few years the Meridian area has taken off in growth. This growth has spawned an increase of several thousand children with no place to ride their .bikes except in the narrow roads that now exist. The Meridian School District has plans to build more schools and the City of Meridian may even build a park along Locust Grove. To make a safe path for the young people to travel up and down Locust Grove to schools and areas such as parks or playgrounds we need a bike path. A bike path should not be just a concept on paper or just stating the children should use the sidewalks. The sidewalks are for pedestrians not bicycles. The sidewalks do not run the full length of the roadway and many areas where the sidewalks end are very hazardous for bike riders~or pedestrians. What I am asking for is positive action 5etween the Highway District and the City of Meridian to build a seperate lane solely for bike riders. In this way the Children of Meridian can feel safe traveling to school or to play. Repectfully yours; .~~ rry win 1515 Carol Meridian Idaho cc: Meridian City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning, -~ ~ .~.~. ~~ ,, - Meridian City Council : ~- ~ ~ .~ - - - 33 East Idaho Av '~ Meridian, Idaho 83642 Gentlemen, The attached letter was sent to Mr. Terry Little at Ada County Highway District to request that a separate bike lane be installed alongNorth Locust Grove Road. Please consider this request in your plans for development along North Locust Grove as part of positive cooperative effort between The City of Meridian and The Ada Count Highway District. • • • Mr. Terry Little Ada County Highway District 318 East 37th Street Boise, Idaho Dear Mr. Little, Please consider the inclusion of a bike lane along North Locust Grove Road from Fairview to highway 20 in any plans to widen that road. The City of Meridian has taken in much of the property along the road already and has plans to take in the remaining parcels in the near future. Much of this area is being developed into residential housing with areas set aside for schools and a park at present. There is a real need for a safe psrt of the road for bike traffic. The bike lane should he designated for the use of bicycles only. It is not appropiate to~.e~t~ect pedestrians to share sidewalks with bicycles or to expect cyclists to share traffic lanes with '. automobiles. Please remember the bike lane when plans are made to improve North Locust Grove Road. Sincerely yours, ~~ /' f ~~ j~;~'r~il~1 C~ Elizabeth A. Gwin 1515 Carol St Meridian, Idaho 83642 • T0: CITY COUNCIL OF MERIDIAN CITY PLANNING AND ZONING .~, ~, c.; OCTOBER 6, 1993 .1560 S. CAROL ST. MERIDIAN, ID. 83642 This letter is in regard to the application of Roger Allen for the annexation and zoning of approximately 40.45 acres located in the Southwest4 Southwest ~, Section 15, Township 3 North, Range 1 East,Boise-Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and which property is generally located on the Northeast corner of Fairview Ave. and Locust Grove Intersection. The application requests annexation with zoning of C-B, which is for commercial use. It was originally zonned for Residental use which i feel it should be left at. I feel this development would not help the residental orooerty value if it was to be changed to commerical. The increase in traffic would greatly increase the noise along Locust Grove ,which is considerably heavy now. One of the proposed entrances on Locust Grove appears to be directly across from the Doris Subdivision entrance which I feel would cause a traffic hazard. My property is located on the N W Cornerrof North Locust Grove and Carol St., lot 8 of the Doris Subdivion, Meridian, Id. The address is 1560 Soutf~ Carol St. Meridian, Id 83642. Sincerely,~q ~, Carolyn Hayn"es • T0: CITY COUNCIL OF MERIDIAN CITY PLANNING AND ZONING '~ r ~ ~ .' r _ ~. , OCTOBER 6, 1993 ,1560 S. CAROL ST. MERIDIAN, ID. 83642 This letter is in regard to the application of Roger Allen for the annexation and zoning of approximately 40.45 acres located in the Southwest Southwest 'a, Section 15, Township 3 North, Range 1 East,Boise-Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and which property is generally located on the Northeast corner of Fairview Ave. and Locust Grove Intersection. The application requests annexation with zoning of C-B, which is for commercial use. It was originally zonned for Residental use which i feel it should be left at. I feel this development would not help the residental property value if it was to be changed to commerical. The increase in traffic would greatly increase the noise along Locust Grove which is considerably heavy now. One of the proposed entrances on Locust Grove appears to be directly across from the Doris Subdivision entrance which I feel wouuld cause a traffic '~; hazard. My property is located on the N W Cornerr~,of North Locust Grove and Carol St., lot 8 of the Doris Subdivion, Meridian, Id. The address is 1560 Souti~ Carol St. Meridian, Id 83642. Sincerely, .C ~o~~--~: J Carolyn Ha nos • October 18, 1993 Meridian City Council Meridian City Hall 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Meridian City Council Members: I am strongly opposed to rezoning the acreage at the northeast corner of Fairview and Locust Grove. I am requesting that this acreage not be zoned commercial. I would like to see the City of Meridian find an acceptable alternative. I am currently building a new home on Oakcrest and chose to move to Meridian in this location specifically because of the quiet and peaceful country setting. My lifetime dream has been to have my own house and now it is coming true. But, my house is not even completed and already I am threatened with commercial development in my backyard. I like the Meridian area because it is smaller and quieter than Boise and has still retained the charm and tranquility of a smaller community. Please do not lower my quality of life and my property value. Rezoning this 40.1 acres from its current agricultural state to commercial will create a traffic nightmare for Fairview and Locust Grove because it will greatly increase traffic in the area with three accesses onto Fairview and two accesses onto Locust Grove. Traffic has already increased because there is alot of residential building going on, which neccessitated installation of a traffic light. We do not need another shopping center on the Boise side of Meridian. There are two shopping centers in the Cherry Lane and Fairview area and they are close to Locust Grove. There are other locations in this same vicinity in which a shopping center could be built. They are already zoned commercial and they are not being utilized. We need to wisely plan development in the City of Meridian and not make the same mistakes that Boise did. (We don't need a shopping center on every corner). With this acreage zoned commercial there will also be an increase in noise, litter, lower property values and a reduction in our quality of life. There is an alternative to the current 40.1 acres being zoned commercial and a strip transitional residential. I would like to see the strip right along Fairview zoned commercial with a barrier behind it. Then a park put in for the many kids that live in this area that have no place to place except the street. Meridian does need more parks because Meridian is growing rapidly. The rest could be zoned residential for nice homes like the others in this area. S'ncerel , ren yn y 1855 E. Oakcrest Meridian, ID 83642 • • TO: City Hall FROM: Dan Emigh Cara Emigh ~ T q ": ,, ~ ., :. ti_. ,. .~t~....,.....~., SUBJECT: Development of the field at the corner of Fairview Ave. and Locust Grove. DEAR SIRS: My wife and I are residents at 1935 West Carol St. We are writing this letter in hopes of having some input as to the development of the property at the corner of Locust Grove and Fairview Ave. I understand that a Shopping Center, Mini storage, and Transitional housing may be built on this property. We are very concerned about our neighborhood and the quality of life and property values. We think our neighborhood could be better served if a Park or additional housing in the same price range as the rest of the neighborhood were to be developed instead of a shop- ping center. If a shopping center is to go in then we feel that a tall berm along Locust Grove and a fence should be installed to eliminate the extra noise and debris. Please do not build any Transitional housing as this will affect the overall property value of the area. Possibly a strip along Fairview could remain Commercial property and the area to the North could be a communi- ty park as there are no community parks in our neighborhood. Sincerely, Dan Emigh Cara Emigh Qsn ~r/~"LL ,. ~./ a • • D ~ C 2 9 1993 CITY OF A~ERIDIAM MI~~IUTES QF THE NEIGHD0t*HC3QD M):;k'TIIdGS ltELD BY AVE:.T LIMITED PAR?'NErStllf' C!~t~i~~ER"IING T1tEIF: DEVELOPMENT i3F T1E 4~ 4CRE PARCEL Ot! T1{1= N. E. CORNER (JF LOt:.!!;T GF;UVE A1JD FAIRVIEW AVENUE QN DF..Gt=MS?1R ~'?, A"JD .L~. 190:3. l~IHd: The owners of the prcF~erty at ±he N. E. corner of Locuat Grove and Fairview Avenue ire Meridian, Idaho invited all j.nterested neighbors to ati_end two evening meetings 12/~?.~9:3 and ! 2/28!n3 to ~ji~cuss the prc,p,~F::r?d do~.~olc,pment. of thj.s property. WftAT: The general partnerrs of Avrst, Ltd, f2c~ger and Gini A11en and Kathleen Weber, sent l~t.t~rs to all owr,c~re within 3[n.© feet or tl7P property es well ac ,~orne 3~-SIC! oths~r eurro~~nc.iir,y neighbors whn wo~.xld be impacted by this d~~ve-? oF?ment and rn~ay wish to have j. -,put reg~ard.ing the developn:~~nt dc~-lrn. All were invited t.o comfy wi.t:h their concerns and suguestions. T`,is rroperty is designHte<I =_s a mixed-use, w.itl: a possible c~mm _,.ni ty shopping center .t r; the new Merman C,:,!~~,pr ~hensive Plan recJnLly adopted after n y~=~;r-long cemrr:unity and fact--fin~:iing p"r~ a.c:d. The owners are looting forward to beginning developing a pt~rtien ~~f the pro~~erty imm,:~•diat.ely. A Planning and Zoning r eq~aest t5 scheduled to be tce~-t~-d at tt7e January 11, 1~~94 Merl Jinn Fle.,ning end Zoning mFet.j.ng. A1.1 de~iolr,I.?ment of this property will be subject to design re~vi_ew and thesc-> neighborhood m~~e±ingC will help t.hA owners to go forward with 3 c^nditional use request that will be attractive, anc! meet the expectu~:.iuns of the ~_urroundina neighbors. In r;dciition, the. new b>>sineES entity w9.1_':. be beneficial to Meri.,ltan's economy. The _first request will be fc,.r a rental storage the easterly portion of the property. It will project. The company, Stor-It Rental Storages anise, is a locally owned business, and has be~ business for over 2a years. ~; Executive Offices: 600 North Maple Grove Road development along be a three phase has four sites in =n in tt:n storage E3oise, Idaho 8370 (208) 376-8750 • • f ' ~ ~ Summary of the Meetings: 12/27/93 7:00 p. m. Approx:imately 20 people were in attendance. This meeting focused mainly on the neighbors that were directly north of the proposed storacxe development. Their backyards adjoin the subject property. The developer showed the phasing of the development. The first phase would be on the south-east corner of the property and the final phases two and three would develop the property directly adjacent to the backyards of the neighbors in the Mirage Meacjows Subdivision. Neighbors in Mirage Meadows expressed concerns regarding noise, lights, privacy, fencing, traffic, and property values. The owners of the proposed development showed renderings of how the property is planned and the structural designs already in the plan to address some of these concerns. The entire storage facility would be screened :from neighbors by single-sided low height perimeter storage buildings with the exception of the south end which faces Jn Fa:irview Ave. This would be fenced with a stone pillar and black anodized chain link fence and landscaped area. The perimeter buildings would shelter the neighbors from existing traffic noise that now enters their neighborhood from Fairview .Ave. traffic and any tenants that are using the storage company roadways. There would be no pole lighting. Low intensity building lighting would reflect on interior roadways. The entire perimeter would be landscaped according to city requirements. Pictures of landscaping at other Stor-It Rental Storage sites were shown. Scaled drawings were displayed. to show that the privacy that would be afforded with this development and design would be far superior to having another home, possible two-story with an adjoin backyard if the property was developed for residential homes instead of storages. Mos~ -:~ighbors expressed a preference for the privacy offered by 'the storages as opposed to further residential development. The owners pointed out that the storage company would not stress schools and other city services, yet would bring economic strength to Meridian. All storage traffic would route out Dixie Lane and on to Fairview. No traffic would enter Mirage Meadows or adjoining neighborhoods. Additionally roads now designed to link with roads'in Mirage Meadows could with ACRD approval be abandoned. This would produce a traffi~~ calming effect since the roads would only serve those who live i!~ the area and would not become "shortcuts" to be used for ethers going to other destinations. • • A petition was provided for neighbors to sign if they would like to have ACRD consider closing the roads with are planned to link Mirage Meadows with other Eubdivi~ions to the east as they develop. More than half of the people in attendance signed the petition addressed to ACRD. (See Attached) A proposal was discussed where the owners would give the Mirage Meadows homeowners that directly adjoin the storage development an easement of the 15' setback area on the northern border of the storages in phase 2 and 3 could be used to er.pand their backyards. Most of the backyards in this area are .minimum. The developer would pay the taxes and sod the easement area and the homeowners would water and mow it. The bads of ttie storage building would provide a solid fence-wall at the back of their yards. They could run side fencing up to the building. The easement would be granted as long as all neighbors agreed to the terms and maintained the easement as they now regularly maintain their backyards. A similar arrangement was worked out between neighbors and Waremart on Fairview Ave in Boise a few years ago. The owners felt the increased backyard size would be a favorable resale feature of the homes and would insure the value of the homeowner's property. The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p. m. The meeting tomorrow night will primarily address the homeowners who live on Locust Grove across the street from the 40 acres who will be impacted by future development of this site and those in Mirage Meadow who• would adjoin development on the north west portion of the property. 12/28/93 7 p. m. Approximately 19 people were in attendance. Larry Sale from ACRD was invited end attend this meeting to discuss future plans for widening Locust Grove and the possible other road extensions as the new subdivisions to the east of Mirage Meadows continue to develop. The plan to berm and landscape the east side of Locust Grove from Fairview to the northwest corner of the property was proposed by the owners. In addition a meandering sidewalk inside the berm away from traffic was proposed for foot traffic. Mr. Larry Sale mentioned that the sidewalk may be under consideration to be a 7' rather than-the normal 5' width. It was discussed that the location of access on to Locust Grove from the property would be largely determined by ACRD requirements. The proposed community shopping center would be on the southwesterly corner of the forty acres. There is currently a commercial Glass Company on the adjacent corner of Locust Grove and Fairview. There are five homes, three of which face Locust Grove who would face the western boundary of the 40 Acre Locust .. Grove Development. Two homE~s have side yards on Locust Grove that would be across the street from the west side of the proposed community shopping center. Many questions were answered by Mr. larry Sale concerninc the widening of Locust Grove and a schedule was shown for the impact of Locust Grove being widened to a ~i:a lane minor arteri~~l by 1997. Mr. Sale assured the neighbors that most of the right of way would probably come from the undeveloped 40 acres owned by Avest but he did point out that these neighbors along N. Lac:ust Grove would be impacted. Something will need to be done about those on Locust Grove having to back into traffic and shoring driveway access was discussed so that neighbors could be facing outward as they enter Locust Grove. Mr. Sale also gtatecl that if the widening of Locust Grove adversely affected to a meae;urable degree the properties along Locust Grove across from they 40 acre site that theses properties could possibly be purchased by ACID. Larry Sale also suggested that the owners might need t.o a provide turn around areas on their own property in order to have convenient access once Locust Grove ie expanded to 3-5 lines in 1995-9t3. Current ACRD planning will no longer allow new re~cidential construction to face onto a minor or mayor arterial. On the northwest corner of the 90 acres it has not been determined what will be developed. The owner suggested a retirement-type center is being considered since the needs of senior citizens for convenient shopping and services would be served by close proximity. There were additional homeoF!ners not present at the 12/27/93 meeting attending this second meeting. Concerns were similar and those attending this meeting were mostly favorable to the rental storage development that is being initially requested by Avest owners on a portion of the 40 acre site. Many questions were asked concerning specifics on the proposed shopping center such as set backs from Fairview and Locust Grove, positioning of mayor and minor tenants, type of tenants, signege and lighting for the center, entrances to the center, and hours for businesses to be open. The developer was able to answer most of these concerns in a general way based on knowledge from developing the Southshore Stopping Center in southeast Boise. There seemed to be a willinctness on the part of the owner- developers, adjoining neight~ors end concerned community members to work together to develop this project as a convenient, planned, well-maintained anti landscaped, community gathering place for one of the main entrances to the City of Meridian. The meeting was adjourned at: approximately 10:30 p. m. Sincerely submitted, Kathleen K. Weber General Partner ` ~ ~ • I'ctition To: ACIID Re: Roadways in the vicinity North Fast of t;ocust Grove and rairview Ave. in Meridian Idaho. More Specifically, Applewood, Oakcrest, and Apricot roads. Dear Sirs: We the undersigned are neighbors and owners of property in the vicinity of the above described roadways namely, Applewood, Oakcrest and tl~e soon to be developed Apricot Road in Dove Meadows Subdivision. We would prefer that these roadways not be interconnected. They would destroy neighborhood identify and encourage traffic back and forth through each individual neighborhood rather than directing traffic to designated major Connector or Arterial Roadways like Locust Grove and I-Iickory. All of the owners and developers of the effected properties adjacent to these roads are agreeable to this proposal. 5571 ~~ ~_~L_:~ > ,,. ~~ : .. N~m~ /~r1rlr~SC Plio118 _ Sign-In Sheet Name Address Phone •' .'1 ... ~) 7? ~~~ v~., W,ao~ ~ Nl~~c.~( M~~~~ ZooS ~. oA4ccrtEST 888 • 49 Z7 • ~. Sign-In Slieet _1 -, Na e Address Phone t'Y~a • • RECEIVED January 26, 1994 JAN Z 7 1994 Meridian Planning & Zoning, Meridian City Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 Gentlemen, I am writing to emphasize my continuing opposition to the proposed annexation and rezoning of the 40 acre site at the corner of Fairview and North Locust Grove Roads. I have spent considerable time viewing finished projects done by Mr. Allen. I have also talked with some residents who live near to these projects. Some of my neighbors and I have consulted with a professional in the field of city planning and have done research and reading on this subject. I have come to the conclusion that it is in the best interest of the City of Meridian and area residents to delay the annexa- tion of this property until a study can be made into how this development can be altered so that it will work as a part of the neighborhood rather than be an unwanted intrusion that degrades the quality of the area. Any study that is done should include the input of the suround- ing neighbors. They live in the area and are aquainted with exsisting problems that need to be solved before this project is started. Also since they are the ones who must live with the end result of this development, they should have the chance to help shape the development so that it is compatible with their needs and wants. I strongly oppose the building of the storage units. They are very unattractive and do not belong in a residential area. These units are open 24 hours a day which doesn't recommend them for compatibility with a residential setting. Storage units would be better place din an industrial area where warehouse units sfe~ae~eptable. The shopping center is needed but not in the configuration that is proposed by Mr. A11en. His plan is too large for the area. It should be scaled down to about one half the size of what he is planning for the site. It should not be a duplicate of the South Shore Shopping Center. The buildings on this site should be of a lower and more consistent profile than his other center. There also needs to be more consideration in the plan toward pedestrian use which includes access and safety. The shopping center should not intrude along Road where there are private residences that Instead let the area across from these homes light office facilities, an extension of the or perhaps some type of town houses that are in this town. North Locust Grove be developed into retirement center, in short supply .. Y ~'. Page 2 January 26,1994 Meridian Planning & Zoning, Meridian City Council Members C~ I Also the City needs to look into alternatives to windening the road. Widening the road will result in more traffic congestion, and noise. Traffic will speed up on the wider road and cause unsafe conditions for motorists and pedestrians alike. These wide roads act as a barrier between residential areas and take away the feeling of neighborhood that is only achieved when people can feel comfortable and safe to move about freely on foot and on bicycles and children can play safely between each others homes. Please consider an in depth study of our area bef-are anymore annexation takes place. There needs to be more public imput and planning take place. Our area need not be degraded by development if such development is done carefully and in a way that improves and enhances. the neighborhood to the benefit of* those who"live :there. Sincerely, G' ~~~ ~~~ Elizabeth A. Gwin January 12, 1994 • DECEIVED JAN 1 2 1994 Mr. Brent Kingsford Mayor of Meridian 33E Idaho Street Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Mayor Kingsford, • CITY OF MERIDIAN I attended the Planning and Zoning Committees public forum this evening and le$ feeling very frustrated. When I went there this evening I was under the impression that they wanted to hear the publics concerns over the proposed development at Locust Grove and Fairview. Obviously I wasn't one of the "public" they had in mind, ie. someone that would be directly affected. As a novice to the political process I approached the committee, was sworn in and I asked the question " Is this the best location or merely the first?". I was told by Chairman Jim Johnson that he had grown tired of people like me who just don't want it in their own back yard. I am not a confrontational type person . The back of my bedroom at 2100 N. Amethyst is about to be turned into a five lane expressway leading to a 200,000 square foot shopping center. It is not an unreasonable question to ask whether or not the committee has considered all alternatives. I have always considered myself a responsible citizen. I not only vote in every election, but I also educate myself on the issues so as to make informed decisions. This is the first time, however, that I have ever addressed a concern in the political forum. What a major disappointment! Most Sincerely, Susan Ann Janson 2100 N. Amethyst Meridian, ID 83642 cc: Planning and Zoning Committee City Planner City Council f • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 60 have a problem with that, the problem I would have is paying for the water to continue to water and keeping it green. Mr. Allen did make looking at the back of the storage unit attractive, well the only thing I've got to say is if it is so attractive I will sell him my house and he can live there and look at it. That is basically all I have to say. Johnson: Thank you, no questions apparently. You need to be sworn to ask a question. We have to get you on the tape and sort of thing. Susan Janson, 2100 North Amethyst, was sworn by the Attorney. Janson: My question is, have other developers come forward with other locations or this first developer that you folks have talked with, are we jumping too soon? Johnson: This is the first developer that has ever approached this commission. Janson: I think you know my point though, are we jumping too soon with this one. Is this the best alternative or have we done our homework? Johnson: This is something that the City of Meridian has had in their Comprehensive Plan since 1978. Janson: For this particular location? Johnson: No, I'm answering your question as truly as I can. To have sites designated for shopping centers, and we started and you know with the regional shopping center along the freeway and that didn't come to fruition. But it is in Meridian's Comprehensive Plan it is their desire to maintain their own identity and you can't do that unless you have commercial developments. Janson: And I would agree. Johnson: We are looking for good commercial development, suitable sites and improve our tax base so that we can maintain our own identity not become just a bedroom community, that is our goal whether we will reach it or not remains to be seen. It has been in the Comprehensive Plan. Janson: Definitely, and with the amount of growth coming in and certainly all the new residential we have to have a spot to go buy our groceries as the gentleman from ACHD mentioned we do have to have somewhere to buy groceries at, the question is where is the best spot. One of the neighbors mentioned when we all bought, we • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 61 were out in an agricultural area. We bought 3 years ago and it is a beautiful area. We did not know what we were getting into and that is what we are all here today to defend what we bought and to back up our home. Now we are sitting 2 miles down from Eagle which is 5 lanes and its sitting there and is ready. Have there been no developers that have come to the City of Meridian and wanted to develop there. Johnson: Not this type of development, we've had developers. There is a proposal right now that is coming, its either been approved or right on the corner or southeast corner of Eagle and Fairview that is being developed, part of that is commercial. Janson: Certainly, they have Yellow Trucking and what not. Johnson: No, that is on the other side. That is an industrial park o the east side. Janson: Okay, are you understanding my point? What I'm saying is ACHD is saying that it will be the next century by the time we get 5 lanes in there. So we are already a ways out here, can't we slow down and find a better location that when people go in and they buy there they know what they are getting, instead of coming into an agricultural based residential with young children, Chief Joseph elementary, can't we slow it down and make sure we put it in the right spot? Definitely we need it. Johnson: I guess its a question of where is the right spot. Without being argumentative, a lot of people see that as being the right spot. That property from an economic standpoint is way to expensive to develop residential. You won't see much more development if any on Fairview residential. Janson: Well, then do agriculture. Johnson: Well, its the people that own the property that decide what they want to do with it. Its not the city. Janson: Its you folks that approve what they do with it, if it is not good for their neighbors then it is not the right location. Johnson: We haven't had very many developments come before this Commission or the City Council where we didn't have opposition. Nobody wants anything in their own backyard. Janson: No, I agree Johnson: That happens all the time, so we get immune to this a little bit. e • • Planning & Zoning January 11, 1994 Page 62 Janson: Well, you see I find that insulting though. I really do, Johnson: Your argument is with your realtor and the people that tell all you people that, wait a minute I'm making a point here, the point I'm making is that how could you come to Meridian buy a piece of property and think that that portion there will never be developed commercial. I heard somebody say that tonight and I can't believe that. Janson: Why do you call going to area that doesn't have residential putting it there and Johnson: I don't have a problem with it, we haven't had any applications for that. Janson: That is what I asked when I first came up here. Johnson: And I answered it Janson: So what is the rush, don't you think that eventually somebody will with the amount of growth coming this direction? Johnson: Perhaps, maybe a second one, we're not going to have just one. Janson: I think you should wait for it. Johnson: Okay, anyone else. Don Bryan, 2070 North Locust Grove, was sworn by the Attorney. Bryan: I'm afraid to say anything. I'm stuck between a rock and a hard spot on this development. Since I'm so closely affected by it, and between one side, well two sides, I'm the man in the middle. And which ever way I go, I'm not going to take sides for awhile I'm going to wait until the City Council meeting, but right off the bat I'd like to commend Roger Allen and his staff for the time they spent with all the neighbors and the way they proposed their project and made sure everybody was happy with it. The problems I've had with developers in the past it really was a good idea and I commend him for that. Some of my concerns are the Locust Grove Road, it started out when 2 or 3 years ago it was 50 foot right of ways, and then the new 4 lane was going to 60 feet and today I heard it was going to 70 feet for 5 lanes, and the traffic study is going to be composed when the development takes hold and gets going is it going to end up 7 lanes, where does it stop, it keeps getting bigger and bigger. We are talking 1998 before construction so that is one of my concerns. My heart really goes out the people that live on Locust Grove in the Doris r ~ • RECEIVED L~f`G JAMES E. BRUCE, President GLENN J. RHODES, Vice President SHERRY R. HUBER,Secretary JAN 1 8 1994 CITY OF MERIDIAN January 13, 1994 TO: Roger H. Allen 6904 Randolph Drive Boise ID 83709 FROM: Larry Sale, erv' or Development v' SUBJECT: MERIDIAN CU & ANNEXATION FAIRVIEW & LOCUST GROVE SELF- STORAGE UNIT Your application for the above referenced project was acted on by the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District on January 12, 1994. The attached staff report lists the conditions of approval and street improvements which are required. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 345-7680. LS cc: Development Services Chron Meridian City Hall W & H Pacific ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714 • Phone (208) 345-7680 • ~ ~ • ~ v `NTFR-DEPARTMENT RECEI~lED ~oRRESPOrrDENCE JAMES E. BRUCE, President ~~~ ' ~ 1~~~ n~RCUFLG/DSTECH GLENN J. RHODES, Vice President 1-12-94 SHERRY R. HUBER, Secretary Gj•[`Y OF MERIDIAN TO: ACRD Commission PATE: January 7, 1994 FROM: Development Services SUBJECT: Meridian CU& Annexation Fairview & Locust Grove Self-storage Units (Applica:t - Roger H. Allen, 6904 Randolph Dr., Boise, ID 83749) (Representative - W~H Pacific, Inc, 960 R.roadway Blvd., Boise, ID 83706} FACTS & FINDINGS• 1. Roger H. Allen is requesting annexation. into the City of Merid- ian for 40 acres of property located at the northeast corner o.f Fairview Avenue and Locust Grove Road. A conditional use approval for self-storage units on a portion of the parcel is also requested.. ?.. GENERAL INFORMATION: ACRES - 4G ZONING - Commercial S.F. OF PROJECTED BUILDING - Need specific site plan VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY - Need specific site plan TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE - 265 L.F, OF FRONTAGE ON Fairview Avenue - 1,300-feet MOST RECENT TRAFFIC COUNTS - 1992 Volume - 16,487 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION MAP DESIGNATION - Principal Arterial. ADA COUNTY RIDGE-TO-RIVERS PATHWAY PLAN - Route EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY - 100-feet REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY.- 57-feet from centerline L.F. OF FRONTAGE ON Locust Grave Road - 1,300-feet MOST RECENT TRAFFIC COUNTS - None Available FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION MAP DESIGNATLON - Minor Arterial ADA COUNTY RIDGE-TO-RIVERS PATHWAY PLAN - Lane EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY - 50-feet REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WRY - 90-feet IMPACT FEE BENEFIT ZONE - West Ada IMPACT FEE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT - Western Cities ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714 • Phone (208) 345-7680 "~exi;i?n +~U Fa~.rv~ ew % Locust Grove ~el.f-storage Units ;Tanuary 7 , 1394 Page 2 s . t"ai:rview Avenue is improv?~, with 75-feet F~f paving. The appli - ~.ant will be r.eguired to construct curb., 5-f.oat sidewalk and pavement widening along this frontage. 4. ~~ocust Grove toad is improved with Z4-feet of paving. The applicant will be requi:ced to dedicate additional right-of-way and widen this roadway. 5. The. District will defer requiring a traffic impact. study until the proposed commercial uses are proposed for development. Eefore the. balance of the property is developed, the District will require the submittal ~f a traffic impact study. The City of Meridian. has assured staff that the later requirement for a traffic impact study will be implemented.. 6. This application is scheduled for public hearing by the Meridi- an Planning & Zoning Commission on Januaxy 11, 1994. The following requirements are provided to Meridian Planning ~ ?oning as conditions for approval. _ SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS: 1. Dedicate 57-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Fairview Avenue abutting parcel (7 additional. feet). The owner will be compensated for this additional right-of-way from available impact fee revenuos in this benefit zone. ?. Construct curb, gutter, 5-f oat. concrete. sidewalk and. match paving along Fairview Avenue abutting parcel. Improvements: shall be constructed to a 89-foot back-to-back street sec- ~~:ion. The developer will be compensated for these improve- ments (excluding sidewalk) from available. impact fee revenues in this benefit zone. 3. Dedicate. 45-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Locust Grove Raad abutting parcel t20 additional feet. The awner will be compensated for this additional right-of-way from available impact fee revenues. in this benefit zone. 4. Construct curb,. gutter, 5-foot concrete sidewalk and match. paving along Locust Grove Raad abutting parcel. Improvements shall be constructed to a 70-foot back-to-back street sec- tion. The developer will be compensated. for these improve- ments (excluding sidewalk? from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone. 5. Dedicate a 20' x 20' triangle (or appropriate curve? of right- of-way at the corner of Fairview Avenue and Locust Gro•,re Road '~~Ieriflian CU ~'airv~ & Locust Grove Self-rage Units . :'a.nuary 7, 199 Page 3 ab~.~.tting paree~ to keep the. street improvements in the public right-af~-way. 6 , :'~ t.raffic impact study will be required before approval of any ai.gnificant commercial development. STANDARD REQUIREMENTS: 1.. Street and drainage improvements. required. in the public right- nf-way shall be designed and Constructed i.n conformance with nistrict standards and policies. 2. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats., drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to ACRD shall be sealed, signed. nd dated by a Registered Professional Engineer e>r Frof.essi.onal Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Cade, Section 54-1215. 3, Fravide written approval from the appropriate irriga- tion/drainage district authorising storm runoff into their system. 4. Locate obstructions (utility facilities,. irrigation and drain- age appurtenances, etc.} outside of the proposed street im- grovements. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained rrom the apprapriate entity. 5. Continue existing irrigation and drainage: systems across par- re1.. 6. Submit three sets of street. construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action. 7. Submit site drainage plans and calculatians for review and. appropriate action by AGHD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of City of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located. in the public right-of-way or in a drainage. easement set aside specif- ically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. 8. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate. action by ACRD. 9. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5-feet from the side lot property lines when the driveways are not being shared with the adjacent property. r~~er:i<iian CU Fai.rv & T~ocust Grove Self -~orage Units ' January 7, 1994 gage 4 1~. A right-af•-way permit must be obtained from ACRD for all. street and utility construction within she public right-of- way. Contact r.:onstruction Services at 345-7567 (with zoning file number) for details. 1.1. A request for modification,variance or waiver of any require-~ Trent or policy outlined herein. shall be made., in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services. within 15 calendar days, of the original Commission action. The request shall include. a 4taternent explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345--7662. STAFF SUBMITTING: DATE OF COMMISSIQN APPROVAL: JAN 12 ~9~4r I,arr-r Sale ~~ I I I ~ I E TOURMa~ivE 5T ~ 1 v IIS I• c 1 2 > z a 6 '11] ~ 6 7 4 N / 12 _ -- •n I . o~n bt sr~ i = ~- ~10 S I • ] ,~ }~ i 4 ~ i ~s,• e r' s I z ... l i~ l 4 22 2J l v ~- S 13 O w 2 = ZI 2~ O N s O a r d ~ W : I. 2 a IS = = 1! 2t ~ i VICINITY MAP Avest -Page 1 600 No. Maple Grove Rnica In R~704 11 `' "2. 'L~" ~_t-- I MEADOWS •~~,,. ~'~EA~T I =~ , W `\/ 1.~= r C- /e itJ_11vAEEN Mf4~Qw ~~2 2 X !' 7 I I / l~y'L"a r _ S le ~ 6 .~ s I' 3 • '`~ ~`A ~ J ~I' ~ ~ IS 1 -~/N ~. ,rT ~ le ( 1~ ~ N I IJ J I I 1 6~ 2 i] e~ 2 ~] - ' ~• ~~ ~ ~~ I •~ i ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ME~,DOWS~~~ . BAST= ~~+''' i ~ - ~ 1 S2 , e ~ Irue ~~. „ ~ ~ IC ,; ~ e A ST ~e :~ N0. I ~ •. ~ ~ ~I ~ tJ0! e, <<~ p ~- ~; '1~ ..17. J6 2T tt 29 tA»A-JV~y i , i ~ i roc ,s T ~~ I ~ • I~ ~I =--~ ~ ~ ~ I 3 e I i ~ . ~ ~ ~ J - 3 i JI I V ~ Q J . ~ - - ;v- - ~~ ----- • - '~; ~ ° i . ~ .~ i A.Q.~ T ~ 3 i Z i. ... ~,~ ~ - -~ ,._ ~ f ./\ ~ _ _ , ' ~• _ < RT i8 _ N / y_4 r q Y _ _~" 30 - - _ _. _ ~ . ._ 2 Thursday, January 20, 1994 AYa(lsy Newr Special Rsport An interview with Meridian Planning and Zoning Chairman Jim Johnson Q. You people have been very busy lately due to the accelerated growth in Meridian. How are you able w ~? A. I believe we're doing O.K, there is always room for improvemem. Q. Some of your meetings recadly have been heavily attended and a good deal of testimony has beat in opposition to the eppticant's requests. Why is that? A. I'm ttm sure; I would guess we do a poor job of teaching basic economip in our schools, and then, of encase, the Nimby syndrome is always presertt. Q. What is the "Nimby" syndrome? A. Nimby is simply an acronym for"Notlnmybarkyard." Q. You, personally, have received some criticism as not beingpartitailarlysensitivetothesometimeshighlyanotional objetxons w developmtmt in ottr area. Why do you think that is? A. I have ro problem with divorcing the emotion from the task a<hand. Thal dttesn-t t-eceaaarily translate ro a lack of empathy on my part It's just that I fcel that emotion can cloud the issue and lead ro bad decisions and inhibit us from carrying out our responsibilities as I perceive them to be. I choosetoletyourpaideloctedotllcials shoulderihatburden. Q. What do you perceive your job to be7 A. it'sreallynotverycomplicated;the Planning and Zoning Commission has four basic functions to perform on an application: 1. Test ttte.application against our City's Ordinances; 2. Test the application against the City's Comprehensive Plan; 3. Assesstite application initslegality by way of ordering Finding and Facts and Conclusions of Law; aId 4. To gather valuable testimony and information to pass on to the City Council. We also make recommetdations, ftegttadly, W the. Cotmcil. Q. Let's get back to the public fot a minute. What is their role in this process? A. It's an importam one. Every opportunity 4 extended them w otter ittpttt. Q, Why is It, do you think, Utat oftentimes Choy leave your meetings frustrafedT A. A lot of it is ignorance. Md 1 don't mean that disparagingly. Igrorance with the whole process, how the system works, and when they ask questions I feel they are used to irtstant answet§. which is almostttever possible. The powers of govemmem are quite limited atd many people don't relate to that Q. Let's talk about the public testimony some moo:. Do the objections to development pretty much fall into those commatonesofcongestion,traffic,safety,crowdedschools, ! etc.? ft A. Itisraremcetingtiratauniqueobjectionisproposed.For r Please turn to Page Six /, The Valley News Serving Meridian and Western Ada County Since 1903 Greg & Vicki Szymanski, Editors & Publishers/ Owners Frank Thomason, Ph.D., Managin Editor/Writer/ Sports F.ditor/Photographer/Civic-F~ucation Reporter ?ere: Foley. Community Editor Published weekly oo Thursdays ' 815 East First Street -- P.o. Box 299 Meridian.Idaho 83680.0299 Telephont: (208) 888-1941 suascltlrnort RATES: sn tx* y« TLe Valey rle~vs NSl'S Na 636040) ie pubtiabed weekly oo T7nudays Secordrluspo3tarelnid.~tMendi~n.Idiln. POSTMASTER: Smd address ~ngea to 6 Thursday, January 20, 1994 Jim~Johnson ~ ~ '~ FYUlll C ContinuedfiomPageTttro the most part I see them as inconver fences brought about by growth, and tat major tragedies. It is incredible tome 100 years ago that some people actually almost break loco tears when Acme Rebekah L~ testifyfngbeforeus.Itreallymakesyouwonderwheretheir #26, Independent Oni~ priorities are. The inwnvenience of a closer neighbor, an Odd Fellows, was imi! obsttuctedview,moretrafficandsoon,paleincomparison on January 19, 189-! tomajorprioritiesinone'slifesuChasdeath,ilhtess,injury, Lizzie Badley, at Hui divorce, poverty and hunger, for examples Idaho. Charter mem! ' were D.L. Badley, L. Q. Some' of the other things that come up regaMing Badley, A.S. French, t development how do you feel about impact fees? French, W.S. Greer, CIS A. I am forimpact fees,and 1 favorreal estate ttansferfees Initiates were Daisy D:~ and I know that our infraswcture needs a be maintained Payne, I.W. Daly, Ma!~ and kept abreast with our growth; in other words, it needs Daly, J.P. Davis, Mina I to be paid for. I am not happy, however, with the recent Lowe, ].H. Greer, t impactfcesthatwereenactedbyAdaCounty.Thesepeople Hadley,FloraGrcerand' did a wonderful job of collecting data before they made a Nelson. decision and them made a poor decision and were not responsive to the input they collected. 75 years ago January 24,1919 Q. lust what do you mean? - ~ The strike at the I~! A. The impact foes that were put in place' are heavily Products Company play skewered fn favortheCityofBoise.Zoneswereestablished"' now alt over. Abon and in the Meridianareaourlmpactfeesarehigherthanfor hundred people a similar development in Boise. They created an unlevel employed at this busy 1,~ playing field and I don't agree with that. It is an obstacle a drying potatoes fo us in attr~ting the type of commercial growth we warn in government contract. n! Meridian. of half of the employees womenandgiriswhosc ~• Q. You mentioned commercial growth. Why do we [reed cor-cistsinparingandso!~ that? the spuds and in this w~ ~!' A. In my opinion for several reasons; it greatly improves inspecting the potatoc,: our tax base and if we are to accomplish our goals as set government is very st downintheComprehensivePlanandremainaseparateand Women seem w be tr distinct entity, which we do want to do, it's paramount. thanmenforthis work, w i is not hard but tedious Q.°Howdoyoufeel aboutdevelopers?Thereisaperception•: they givebetiersatisfact~ they don't always have the best interests of the community. Severaloftitegiris,last~c• in mind. concluded that their h~ A. 1 believe that developers, in the main, get a bum rop. were long, and their Most of them are just ordinary people that have worked inadequate. They dire hard to become people of some substance, that are willing figure, however, that a to risk their capital to better themselves. They are really [tot raw have the war ! great risk takers. Sure they are in it forthe money, aren't we acareity of labor, and t' all? I do what i do and have done foriha prat 30 years so that • places vacated were t cen provide far my family in the way that 1 choose to do: • filled upbyothers. This ~~ 1 don't do it forthe prectice. Allofus work forthe monetary ~ several of the dozen r benefit. That's the capaitalistic system and it is the best originally comprising system on earth, l don't like the class envy that is so visible "strikers" applied for ~ ihesedays.Itseemstheonlytypeofbigotrystillacceptable ~ at the old rate and ~~ in our society is economic bigotry. This is where more reinstated. Related ad: education ih basic economics is needed. Without those ~ Sale--Cooked potato I individuals with entrepreneurial spirit we would have to and trimmings. 25¢ pc! look elsewhere for jobs. Where would you go? To the lbs. Apply Idaho Pnxl~ government? This growth has been good for Idaho and is • Company. good for our community and, of course, it isn't without Two old landnratl: some sacrifice: Meridian 'village will h disappeared by the ens! Q. Why do you do what you do? Why do you volunteers tttfs week. First, the Bo~~ work with P & Z? ~ ~ ~ hall,onwestBroadway(r A. It's anexciting time a be alive. I like the challenges that ' the site of the Amcri~ are presented as we grow. I would hope in some small way Legion hall) the scene to have a positive influence on what happens ih Meridian. many social affairs Personally; it's a great diversion forme, also. And it's a way publicenter4vnments tic ofpaying somethingback a the Meridian area Ntatsupports me. ,~,. ., .. Q. What has brought you the greatest satisfaction these past ten years you have been on the Commission? A. ICnowingthatl'vebearconsistent.knowinSthatlhave ~ndyoureluba' tried very hard ro be non-political and the feeling of community net contributing in some small way s the whole process of govenunent. t0 The Valley New' P.O. Box 299 Meridian, Ida' sasso-o299 ~~~eive~ ~-//_q 4 ,~n 1 / 11 /94: PUBLIC HEARING PRESENTATION BY KATHLEEN WEBER, GENERAL PARTNER AND REPRESENTATIVE FOR AVEST,LTD. MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION MEMBERS, AND MR. FORREY, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT AVEST AND SHARE SOME SPECIFICS CONCERNING THE APPLICATION BEFORE YOU TONIGHT. THEN, ROGER ALLEN WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS SOME MAJOR ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED PRIOR TO YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL. THE APPROVAL PROCESS WAS BEGUN ON THIS 40 ACRE PARCEL A YEAR AND A HALF AGO WHEN MR. JACK NIEMAN WAS THE CITY PLANNER FOR MERIDIAN. SINCE THE CITY OF MERIDIAN WAS PLANNING TO REVISE THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RATHER THAN AMEND THE OLD COMP PLAN, JACK SUGGESTED THAT WE WAIT... SO, WE AGREED TO POSTPONE PRESENTING OUR PROJECT UNTIL THE NEW PLAN WAS ADOPTED. IN JUNE, 1993, A MORATORIUM WAS PLACED ON BUILDING IN MERIDIAN... SO, WE WAITED SOME MORE. IN NOVEMBER OF 1993, WHEN THE PROJECT COULD FINALLY BE PRESENTED, THE MERIDIAN COUNCIL FOUND IT HAD A FEW MORE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DETAILS TO WORK OUT IN REGARD TO TALKS WITH THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN GOOD FOR MERIDIAN ... SO, AVEST HAS BEEN PATIENTLY WAITING. WE ARE VERY HOPEFUL THAT NOW, WE CAN FINALLY PROCEED WITH OUR PROJECT. **I AM REALLY ANXIOUS ABOUT THE PROSPECTS OF FINALLY BEING ABLE TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS PRESENTATION. THEN...., I RECEIVED THE AGENDA FOR THIS MEETING AND FOUND WE WERE "LAST" ON THE AGENDA, I DECIDED THAT SOMEONE MUST THINK I REALLY NEED A GOOD LESSON IN PATIENCE--SO...I'M TRYING!! • • WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD. AVEST HAS TWO APPLICATIONS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER. ONE, IS AN APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND A ZONING REQUEST FORA "CG" ZONE FOR THE 40 ACRE PARCEL AT THE CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE AND FAIRVIEW AVE. THE SECOND APPLICATION, IS A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RENTAL STORAGE COMPLEX. WE ARE ANXIOUS TO HAVE APPROVAL FOR THE STORAGE USE SO WE CAN BEGIN BUILDING AS SOON AS WEATHER PERMITS. WE WOULD LIKE TO START THIS PROJECT IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR. THIS IS WHY WE ARE BRINGING BOTH APPLICATIONS AT THE SAME TIME EVEN THOUGH THE C.U. PERMIT IS CONTINGENT UPON THE ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION. WE HAVE BROUGHT ALONG SOME PICTURES OF DEVELOPMENTS IN WHICH AVEST OR AVEST PARTNERS ARE MAJORITY OR SOLE OWNERS. WE HAVE BEEN DOING PROJECTS IN THE VALLEY FOR OVER 32 YEARS. THE MOST RECENTLY COMPLETED PROJECT IS THE SOUTHSHORE SHOPPING CENTER IN SOUTH EAST BOISE. IT WAS DESIGNED TO CONFORM TO THE NEIGHBORS NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS AND SERVES AS A TRUE ASSET TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SOUTHSHORE IS A 200,000' SHOPPING CENTER WITH A KMART AND ALBERTSONS ANCHOR AND WAS JOINT VENTURE WITH SOME OF THE SAME PEOPLE THAT WILL PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROJECT, NAMELY THE DEVELOPER OF SOUTHSHORE, MR. LARRY DURKIN, AND THE MAJORITY OWNER OF SOUTHSHORE, MR. ROGER ALLEN. MR. DURKIN'S FATHER HAD A SURGERY TODAY SO LARRY COULD NOT BE HERE. ON HIS BEHALF, I WOULD LIKE TO FURNISH A COPY, FOR THE RECORD, OF THE VERY IMPRESSIVE RESUME OF MR. DURKIN'S COMPANY, DAKOTA DEVELOPMENTS, AND ITS ACCOMPLISHMENTS OVER THE PAST YEARS, INCLUDING 59 SHOPKO STORES, 2 KMARTS AND 23 OTHER SHOPPING CENTER DEVELOPMENTS AROUND THE COUNTRY. ALSO INCLUDED FOR THE RECORD IS A LETTER FROM THE MAYOR OF BOISE, MAYOR COLES, CONCERNING THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION WITH WHICH THE SOUTHSHORE SHOPPING CENTER WAS DEVELOPED AND HIS OPINION OF ITS BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF BOISE. MAY I READ THIS SHORT LETTER INTO THE RECORDS? • • AVEST HAS BEEN IN THE STORAGE BUSINESS FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS. WE OWN, SUPERVISE CONSTRUCTION, AND OPERATE ALL OF OUR OWN FACILITIES. OUR STORAGE COMPANIES ARE OUR MAINSTREAM INVESTMENT TOOL. STOR-IT'S NEWEST LOCATION AT 7800 WEST STATE IN BOISE IS NOTED FOR IT'S BEAUTIFUL LAWN AND LANDSCAPING AT THE ENTRANCE TO BOISE FROM EAGLE AND HIGHWAY 55. PLEASE NOTE THE PICTURES WE HAVE BROUGHT TONIGHT. THE STATE STREET LOCATION IS SIMILAR TO THE PROPOSED SITE AT LOCUST GROVE AND FAIRVIEW IN THAT WE HAVE A NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION BORDERING THE NORTHERN SIDE (OR BACK) OF THE PROPERTY. WE ARE CERTAIN THAT THE NEIGHBORS IN MERIDIAN WILL FIND, AS OUR NEIGHBORS ON STATE STREET HAVE FOUND THAT, STORAGES AND STOR-IT IN PARTICULAR MAKES A GOOD NEIGHBOR. IN FACT. WE MAKE PERFECT NEIGHBORS. WE SCREEN OUT THE NOISE FROM TRAFFIC (IN THIS CASE FAIRVIEW AVENUE NOISE), WE PROVIDE PRIVACY FOR THEIR BACKYARDS--STOR-IT DOESN'T HAVE DOGS, CHILDREN, LIGHTS, OR ANY OTHER "NEIGHBORLY" COMPETITION FOR VISUAL, AUDITORY OR ACTUAL SPACE. OUR STORAGE BUILDINGS PROVIDE ASINGLE-SIDED, ONE STORY, LANDSCAPED BUFFER FOR MAXIMUM BACKYARD PEACE AND QUIET. IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORS WHO WOULD BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THIS STOR-IT DEVELOPMENT, WE GOT VERY FAVORABLE RESPONSE TO THIS PROJECT AND WERE EVEN ASKED BY SEVERAL NEIGHBORS ON TO THE WEST OF APPLEWOOD, IF WE COULDN'T EXTEND THE STORAGE ON IN THEIR DIRECTION. WE ALSO HAVE SOME PICTURES OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS DIRECTLY ADJOINING OUR PROPERTY ON LOCUST AND FAIRVIEW FOR YOUR REFERENCE. AVEST HELD TWO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS WE SENT OUT 130 INVITATIONS AND INCLUDED RESPONSE STAMPED ENVELOPES. ON MONDAY, DEC. 27, THE TOPICS DISCUSSED MAINLY CONCERNED THE MIRAGE MEADOW NEIGHBORS - 21 ATTENDED. ON TUESDAY, DEC. 28, THE TOPIC WAS MAINLY THE LOCUST GROVE NEIGHBORS CONCERNS REGARDING THE NEED FOR SIDEWALKS AND BIKE LANES ETC. IN LIGHT OF EXPANSION OF LOCUST GROVE FROM A 2 LANE TO A 5 LANE ROAD BY ACHD IN 1997, AVEST INVITED MR. LARRY SALE FROM ACHD TO ATTEND THIS MEETING TO MAKE US AWARE OF ACHD'S PLANS FOR LOCUST GROVE. 19 ATTENDED THIS MEETING, APPROX. 10 WERE NEIGHBORS THAT DIDN'T ATTEND MONDAY NIGHT. • • I ALSO CANVASED THE MIRAGE NEIGHBORS ON OAKCREST AFTER THE FORMAL MEETINGS THAT WERE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND EITHER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. AS A RESULT, ANOTHER 13 NEIGHBORS WERE SHOWN MAPS AND RECEIVED LENGTHY EXPLANATIONS OF WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS WERE ABOUT AND WERE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE IDEAS FOR BUFFERING USES. NOTES FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WERE PUT ON FILE AT CITY HALL ON THURSDAY FOLLOWING THE MEETINGS AND I INFORMED NEIGHBORS THAT THE NOTES WERE THERE FOR THEIR READING. THE MEETINGS WERE INFORMATIVE TO BOTH THE NEIGHBORS AND AVEST. IT WAS THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS TO REALLY KNOW WHAT WAS BEING PLANNED ON THE LAND ADJOINING THEIR PROPERTY. DUE TO A PRIOR NOTICE OF DEVELOPMENT BEING SENT OUT BEFORE AVEST HAD DEVELOPED A PLAN MANY OF THE NEIGHBORS HAD UNFOUNDED FEARS REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT. TO THEIR CREDIT, THEY CAME WITH OPEN MINDS AND THE DISCUSSIONS WERE BOTH PRODUCTIVE AND CONGENIAL. ONCE AVEST WAS ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE POSSIBLE TRANSITIONAL USES OF THE LAND, MOST OF THE NEIGHBORS SEEMED FAVORABLE TO THE STORAGE USE AS A BUFFER AND PROVIDER OF MAXIMUM PRIVACY. THE RETIREMENT CENTER PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY APPEARED TO ALSO BE AN ACCEPTABLE BUFFERING USE FOR THE NEIGHBORS TO THE WEST OF APPLEWOOD. AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, SEVERAL EVEN ASK IF THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY OF THE STORAGE BEING EXTENDED ALONG THEIR PROPERTY LINES. SEVERAL DIRECTLY IMPACTED NEIGHBORS STATED THAT THEY WOULD NOT FAVOR HAVING A PLAYGROUND BORDER THEIR PROPERTY ONCE WE DISCUSSED THE NOISE, POLLUTION, ANIMALS AND OTHER ASPECTS THAT PARKS MIGHT BRING TO THEIR BACKYARDS. WHAT AVEST HEARD, AND WHAT WE WILL BE MOST SENSITIVE TO, IS THAT THE NEIGHBORS WANT TO RETAIN THEIR PRIVACY FROM PEOPLE, BUSINESS, TRAFFIC, POLLUTION, AND NOISE. BOTH THE STORAGE COMPLEX AND A RETIREMENT CENTER, WITH STRATEGICALLY PLACED, THREE SIDED, CARPORTS OR STORAGE AREAS ALONG PROPERTY LINES WOULD SERVE THIS PURPOSE. • • THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED IN OUR DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL AS A RESULT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. WE WOULD BE FAVORABLE TO CLOSING APPLEWOOD AND EXTENDING IT ONLY AS A RECREATIONAL PEDESTRIAN PATH TO OUR SHOPPING CENTER LOOP ROAD WITH EMERGENCY-ACCESS WOODEN BALLARDS TO KEEP TRAFFIC OUT. AS A RESULT AVEST HAS ALREADY INCORPORATED THIS CLOSURE OF APPLEWOOD FEATURE INTO ITS PROJECT DESIGN. THIS WILL CALM THE TRAFFIC LEVELS IN MIRAGE MEADOWS AND IS SUPPORTED BY STAFF REPORTS FOR THESE NEEDED AMENITIES. ALSO WE HAVE HAD TALKS WITH DOVE SUBDIVISION OWNER, MR. DAVE LEADER, ABOUT INCORPORATING SOME USE OF THE ABANDONED DIXIE LANE FROM MIRAGE AT OAKCREST TO THE FRONT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER AS A PEDESTRIAN PATH AS WELL. MR. AND MRS. STIPP AND KAREN BLANEY WHO FACE DIRECTLY ON TO APPLEWOOD AND MR. BURKETT WHOSE BEDROOM WINDOW FACES ONTO APPLEWOOD WILL BE ESPECIALLY BENEFITTED BY THIS ABANDONMENT OF APPLEWOOD. 2. AVEST HAS MET WITH THE ARCHITECT FOR THE SHOSHONI BUILDING OWNERS AND DESIGNED AN ACCEPTABLE SHARED ACCESS WHICH MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF ACHD AS WELL AS STORAGE AND THE SHOSHONI OWNERS. 3. ALL OF THE SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FROM ACRD HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND ARE ACCEPTABLE AND WE WILL BE ABLE TO MEET THEM. MANY NEIGHBORS WROTE TO THE CITY COUNCIL UPON THE INITIAL NOTICE OF THE PROJECT. ALL LETTERS FROM NEIGHBORS HAVE BEEN RESPONDED TO PERSONALLY BY AVEST. THE CITY RECEIVED 15 LETTERS PRIOR TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. AVEST RESPONDED TO THE 11 PEOPLE THAT WROTE AND WERE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. THE RESPONSE LETTERS ARE IN YOUR CITY FILES. ALSO AVEST RECEIVED ONLY 2 LETTERS FROM THE 130 MAILED TO ATTEND THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS. • FOLLOWING ARE THE CONCERNS FROM NEIGHBORS LETTERS PRIOR TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AND OUR COMMENTS REGARDING THEM: BIKE LANES WERE ACONCERN: -THESE WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE AVEST DEVELOPMENT WITH SIDEWALKS POSSIBLY WITHIN THE BERMING ALONG LOCUST GROVE. WALKING PATH FROM APPLEWOOD TO SHOPPING CENTER LOOP ROAD AND AWALKING/BIKE PATH FROM DIXIE AT MIRAGE TO THE FRONT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER. CAROL STREET ALIGNMENT WAS MENTIONED: -ACRD WILL MORE OR LESS DECIDE THIS MATTER BUT AVEST WILL WORK WITH BOTH ACHD AND THE NEIGHBORS REGARDING THIS CONCERN. CONCERN ABOUT "CG" ZONE: -MOST NEIGHBORS WERE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS REQUEST AFTER IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT EACH AND EVERY PART OF THE PROJECT WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH CONDITIONAL USE HEARINGS AND DESIGN REVIEW WHERE THEY WILL HAVE OPPORTUNITY FOR INPUT. AVEST MUST REQUEST THIS ZONING TO ATTRACT THE TENANTS IT WISHES TO HAVE PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROJECT AND THE CITY DOES NOT RELINQUISH ANY CONTROL OVER THE PROJECT SINCE IT IS ALL UNDER C.U. PERMIT. WE ARE ASKING FOR THIS ZONE BECAUSE HAVING IT MAKES IT POSSIBLE TO DESIGN THIS PROPERTY TO ITS HIGHEST AND BEST USE. ZONING THE ENTIRE PROPERTY "CG", ALLOWS THE NECESSARY FLEXIBILITY TO COMPREHENSIVELY PLAN ALL PARTS OF THE LAND IN A COMPATIBLE MIXED-USE DESIGN. NEIGHBORS WILL ALWAYS HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS, STAFF, P&Z, AND COUNCIL MEETINGS IN WHICH TO RESPOND AND BE HEARD PRIOR TO ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL. BUFFERING NOISES, IRRIGATION, TRAFFIC: THERE IS A MINIMUM 400' BUFFERING AREA BETWEEN MIRAGE MEADOWS RESIDENTS FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER. THIS WILL INSURE BUFFERING FROM COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES. IN ADDITION THE PLANNED STORAGE AND/OR RETIREMENT CENTER MAKES A GOOD TRANSITION FROM RESIDENTIAL TO MIXED-USE AND THEN TO COMMERCIAL. 2. ALSO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL REGARDING IRRIGATION AND ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS REFERRED TO IN THE LETTER FROM MR. GARY SMITH WILL BE MET. • 3. LOCUST GROVE ROAD HAS BEEN DESIGNATED TO BE WIDENED TO 4- 5 LANES BY 1997 WHICH WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC. WE FEEL AVEST'S PARTICIPATION SUCH AS BERMING, SIDEWALKS, AND LANDSCAPING WILL SOFTEN THE EFFECTS OF THIS ROAD DEVELOPMENT FOR THE NEIGHBORING HOMES FACING LOCUST GROVE. PUBLIC FACILITIES: SOME NEIGHBORS LETTERS PROPOSED USING A PLAYGROUND TO BUFFER RESIDENTIAL HOUSING FROM COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. WHILE AGREEING THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS ARE DESIRABLE, THE BEST PLACE FOR IT MIGHT NOT BE NEAR BUSY CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE AND FAIRVIEW OR A SHOPPING CENTER...OR ALONG THE PROPOSED 5 LANE LOCUST GROVE ROAD. IN ADDITION, THERE ARE OTHER ALTERNATIVE BUFFERING CONCEPTS FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT APPEAR FAVORABLE TO THE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY. IT HAS BEEN STATED IN THE IDAHO BUSINESS REVIEW THAT THE CHURCH BEING BUILT ON HICKORY A FEW BLOCKS EAST OF OUR PROJECT, WILL HAVE SOME WONDERFUL COMMUNITY FACILITIES LIKE AMPHITHEATERS, SOFTBALL DIAMONDS, SWIMMING, TENNIS---ALL OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. WE ALL NEED TO SUPPORT THE CHURCH IN THEIR EFFORTS. IN ADDITION, I BELIEVE THE COMP PLAN DOES SPECIFY A COMMUNITY PARK ON THE CORNER OF LOCUST AND USTICK. AVEST WANTS TO BE AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THIS COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD--WE WANT TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR NOT JUST TO THOSE FAMILIES WHO DIRECTLY TOUCH OUR PROPERTY, BUT TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE LESS DIRECTLY AFFECTED. WE HAVE MADE AN EFFORT TO HEAR FROM EVERYONE THAT HAS WISHED TO EXPRESS AN OPINION ABOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT--EVEN THOSE WHO HAVE COME FROM SEVERAL BLOCKS AWAY. WE WANT THE ENTIRE AREA TO DEVELOP IN A PLEASING, UPSCALE MANNER AND WE FEEL THAT OUR PROJECT, ON THE FRINGE OF THIS NEWLY DEVELOPING MERIDIAN NEIGHBORHOOD, WILL BOTH SERVE AS A GATHERING PLACE AND A CONVENIENCE TO THIS NEW NEIGHBORHOOD-- BECAUSE WE NOW CONSIDER THIS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AVEST AGREES TO PAY IMPACT FEES AND/OR MAKE A MONETARY DONATION TO THE CITY FOR PURCHASE OF ANOTHER SITE AWAY FROM THE COMMERCIAL ASPECTS OF OUR PROJECT AND THUS MORE SUITABLE FOR A PARK FOR OUR NEIGHBORS TO USE AND ENJOY. IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CITY IS WORKING ON IMPLEMENTING THIS CONCEPT AND WE WANT IT TO BE KNOWN THAT WE FULLY SUPPORT HAVING ALL DEVELOPERS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE IN ORDER TO PRESERVE AND CREATE COMMUNITY PUBLIC AMENITIES. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT THIS PORTION OF THE PROJECT, I WOULD LIKE TO NOW TURN OVER THE DISCUSSION TO MR. ALLEN. ,yti \~ BOISE C 17 5' 1 I K1,1'R (11~I~IC:fa RF TltE AtAYf)R ~~ l~ il. t3ltt;N'1' Cl)LF:S , MAYUIt August 17, 1993 Larry Durkin Dakota I?eve]opTaent 380 E. nark Center Boulev~~r.'ta Heise, Yd 83706 Dear Larry; p~2 /-/i 9~ ~~' ~~ COI~MCII. MY.Hk1:116 SAItA IIAI(t:R ANNI: STI'[~LS lIALltiftA'I'li ct>uNC1T. rrtfsiaclvt b1.1RitCIMI: MAI'P 1•AUf,A FC-IiNf:Y CAHUI,YN TIiIiTN:LING COUncu., rearY•M MU(I: WI:TIIF Itisl.i. I wanted to aal7gratulate you c-rI a jab well done with the SouthahOre Development on Park Center aouleVard~ This wade ene of theee projects wYiera th® neighbarhood haq tleVelOp6d around the commercial zon,~ny and, at the'tlme you stepped into the development of ttYe project, there had bean a lot of contrvve~'sy surrounding the idea of tt 2oot000 square foot shopping center being aonstruetod at that lvca~.ion. However, because of your ability to work with the naiyhborhord And praviAc~ solut,iuns to their needs, W6 now havQ a very rlicc 3hoppiny center provi.Qiny ;3ervices to a growit><y r1eJ.yYiborhood area at ru>" oommunity. I want to thank you fur your integrit~- in QeV~slopiny this project and following througtl with everything yr,u t~did you would d0 dt thE: neighborhood meetings. According].y~ I would bC happy to be d reference for you ire arty other part of the country where you 8~re developing, ac I rccogr~ize you have projects WiC~ltrativnal tenants throughout the gauntry. very truly yours, ~~ ,~~~. H. Brent Coles Mayor ~tHC/ 1 i Cl'1'Y I TALL • 7f~ NC11t'1'1 i C:ANITUI,1ifiUl.hVAK11 • I'.CI, UC/X 6W • 1T(>TtiF, lf)AI10 R3701.OTiUO • 'Ltktrlt~l•11'l2 ' . AEI /syurr! f)~I~xnvl~llify ~Inplui'rr JAN-10-94 MON 12:09 • JAN 1 0 1994 CITY OF MERIDIAN January 10, 1994 RE: MEETING WITH MR. FORREY CONCERNING STAFF REPORT. PEAR WAYNE, 1.. BRING YOU UP-TO-DATE ON NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AND PERSONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CANVASING RESPONSES AND IDEAS. 2_ MEETING WITH ACHD - MR. LARRY SALE, MR. DAN WOOD (WINGATE SUB.), MR. DAVE LEADER (DOVE SUB.). CONNECTION OF ROADS = APPLEWOOD, APRICOT AND DIXIE, PATHWAYS/PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE ACCOMMODATIONS MADE. 3. RESPONSE TO NEIGHBOR LETTERS. CHURCH SITE OM HICKORY. WE NOTICED THAT THE LETTERS REQUESTING PARKS WERE FROM CAROL STREET AND WERE NOT NEEDING DIRECT BUFFERING EXCEPT FOR ONE AND THAT THE LETTERS REQUESTING PARKS WERE SENT PRIOR TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS WHERE WE DX$CUSSED ALTERNATIVE USES FdR BUFFERING? 4. WHAT KIND OF VARIANCE REQUIRED FOR RESIDENT MANAGERS. 5. CAN THE S'T'AFF REPORT BE REVISED TO NOT INCLUDE COMMENTS ON 'TIME PARK AND INCLUDE OUR DIFFERENT BUFFERING USES SUGGESTED AND LIKED BY THE NEIGHBORS INSTEAD? (STORAGES, RETIREMENT CENTER WITH STORAGES) THANKS, KATHLEEN ,executive O~ces: 600 North Mapie Grave Read Boise, Idaho $37D4 (208) 375-$750 ...,nssr.r.~.e,,,ar..r.~ nw OFFICIALS WAYNE S. FORREY, AICP, City Clerk JANICE LASS. Treasurer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR.. Attorney JOHN SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. KENNY BOWERS. Fire Chief BILL GORDON, Police Chief GARY SMITH, P.E.. City Engineer HUB OF TREASURE VALLE~ A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208)888-4433 FAX (208) 887-4813 GRANT' P. KINGSFORD Mayor RECEI~IED DEC 2 8 1893 CITY OF MERIDIAN COUNCILMEN RONALD R. TOLSMA ROBERT GIESLER MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE Chairman Zoning 6 Planni JIM JOHNSON Centennial Coordinator PATSY FEDRIZZI TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comq~,~nts end recommendations will be considered by the Meridian ~ ~" may we have your answer bye ( 9L~ TRANSMITTAL DATE : ~ Z" Z3 - `j 3 HEARING DATE ~ ~ ~ '~~ ~ J l /A~ ' p L.OC,C.y~' R E Q U E 5 T : y't'Y~l~L ~ cJ~ ~k- Zc~~-. k ~ t -t'~ ~ ~S~t-c~ dal ~Q L~t,r,. ~ G'4`~ r BY: ~~ LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJE CT: - JIM JOHNSON P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE ALIDJANI,P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE (PRELIM AND fINAI PLATS) JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIH HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR NAMPA MERIDIAN IRR. DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRI7IGATION°DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO".-(PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) BOB GIESLER, C/C UPS:-WE5T (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) BRUCE STUART, WATER DEPT. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM AND FINAL PLATS) JOHN SHAWCROFT, SEWER DEPT. CITY FILES ~ ~~ BUILDING INSPECTOR OTHER FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY GARY SMITH, P.E. ENGINEER WAYNE FORREY, AICP, PLANNER -~--ter-- -~., } ~~ ti ~ ; '~f ,. t 5 ~~, ~ ~~ 4 y { ~ 1 ~,~ i 9 t': , ~ ~ ~ 1. ~~~ ~~ '~ ~ ~~7 J't7fi. 1 s.. ~°'~" ~ i t} Y u ~~ (~ r r :.;~ ~ R' ~ 1,~F~i 't '~~. ~v~ _ ~ ~ ~ ._~t r., f' ~ ~ t 3. 1. y~ ' ~ ~ .~~tr ~ f; r 'F Ji'~ ~ '~' y. 1' .~! ~ ~-C ~ n ~ -44 1- ~F/~ ~ -, ~ ~ .! Z' f y ~ry x~ ~ ;~ ~'r~~e ~G.4 .. i t e14 Y S~~E S' f}~1«IC ~~ Y 'r~ yj ~1 1.: ~ 1 'tt :~: yy 7 ~ " ~ r I ~• 1 ~ , ,. ~ :~~ M.~. ` ' ~' F ' i ~. t'~!~4 ~ t.~y ~ ~' t ~ ^ ' r Y G ` ! y ~ ~~~ A ~ ? 1~ ~ ~~ ~~l ~' , ~~ i` ~ ' ~ yt .3 ~G ~ 6 r x ' ~ ~, .:~ v' . ~ y ~ nt i'F -~ f ~/ k i `~ i ~ ~r ,fit rt r ~u-. '.< ,.c, ~.~. l.,,r.' > S, ~ i .,. ~ ~,, y, t .'u _ ~r C ) : '~ c { ^c ~~ - i ti-~' I* x t: - ~: s'.Y N~~'. '~1 x ^ • r ~ z ~ ~ yi ~ °th ~ d `~ ~ a ~ 4°- '~- ~ off. ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ t z , L IS- ~ ~ LODP IQO/~D ~`~ ~ ~ `'' L UJ ALK /IU G P/~TH ~L W A q i' ~ rn1' I ~/~/~~•~~ rte'/~'l ~ ri ~ ~. J ,~ J d2C?~y~ C~C'l~ 3'~-R4- ~~.; 4e, th -- Z Y ~ ---" 2 Q 1 N O D _~ Ul ~~ ~nrw rrtvns aar Npt R~i'S T_~ !__+'~TTa TR~~cn~+u _ _.__. - ---may ~~, ~ ~, ., r.f .a/ ~--- ~ _L _. ~, ~1' O .~ ~ . r.., O re ~ zl r.., O O ~ z .~ 0 ~~ 0 O .,., r~ V .~ U a~ H ~ ~ ~ •~ ~I y ~ ~ bA ~ v ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ''~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V1 O ~^" ~ ~ ~ °' ~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~ o ~ o ~ c. a a~ O ~ a .~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 0 ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °' ~ ~ ~~ ~ 4~ v ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~•~p., ~ a~ a ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~I ~ p o ~ U a~ a~ ~, v ~ ~ ~° ~ ~ o a~ ~ o a ~ ~ o ~ v .., a~ e~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ o u aA ~" ~ ~' '~~~~ ~ ~ ~ a O O ~ ~ v a a~ A ~ a~ a ~ .°~ ~ ,~aaN C O O O .~ .~ .~:r" • O .~ O M .~' 0 4~ o •~ a~ 3 .~ a~ a~ 0 ~ o za .a ~ ~ ~~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ a~ ~" .~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ •~ ~ ~zo i~ r~ V ~/1 V 0 I~ O V C~ ' O ~b1D .~ i z 1 4~ 4~ O ~~ ~~ 0 a~ 0 ~7 O ~ ~ °~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ , ' O ~ ~ ~ a d' .~ 3 H v b 0 w y V u .~ ~. .~ a~ ~ ~ ~ 0 r~ ~ V ~ ~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ ~ o ~, ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ •~ e~ ~; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ a~ ~ O ~ a "~ ~ •~ ~ O ~ y ~ •~ ~~ "'~ ~ ~, b~Q a~ ~ e~ H ~ ~I C .~ 0 A U d o ~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~~ 0 4~ v o ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ `~ O ~ b~A ~ ~ O ~~ • e~ ~ v ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •O rig ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~, 3 ~ ~ ~ .9 ~ ~ ~ 'o ~ ~ ~ a ~ , fl^~ ,o ~ y o V ~~ a~ '~ v a .~ a~ A U H °o 0 ~. V A .~ i=+ 0 c' v, a L s ._ Z 3 0 m ~_ .L a '~ .~ L/1 W l~ ~i 0 0 a~ U aA O . ~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O a V ~ r~ V O ~ ~ o ~, a ~ o O a ~, ~~ ~ ~ a ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ c o V O ~~a• ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ w o~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ U c `~' ~ ~ ~~~ ¢' 7 t~ a o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~1 ~ ~1 ~ y a~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~.+ o ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ a ~ G ~ G N ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ °~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ v v' ~ ~ •~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ o c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' v O Nom., ~ rn ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~+ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ap ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0i0 ~ ° ~~~ ~ aA~ ~~a ~ ~ •~ c ~~ ~ ~~~W A ~ ~U ~ ~ ~ o ~, U ~ d ~i 0 a ~° '~ ~~~ .~ ~~ ~i t ~; v a 1 ~ e~ ' ~ > O ~ .~ b r. 0 0 0 bA • p as .,'" .:: ~ v ~ b ~ ~ p b >, p O iy a ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ; y ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ p • .~ a~ an ~ p ,~ ~ p wo > a b ^~ bn .a a ~ o v "O ~ y .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .U ~ o ~ o c ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ao~ "ti cs, „4, ~ o p 0 E~ i, r.- ~ ~ a v, .^, V 3 p ~o > > a 'd ~ o a~ a b~ y o~ ~° s p a o, '~ 0 0~ ,~, p p~ o p~~ o~~~ C.+ y ;~ •~ o o~ o ~,' ~ ~o C a e~ b v a~ on y y ~ as'"i ' ~ o a ~°.°. ~ .c Q a~ ~' ~ ~ L i i E i i Agenda Neighborhood Meetings Dec. 27th & 28th Re: 40 Acre Parcel, NE Corner of Locust Grove Rd. 8~ Fairview Avenue 1) Introduction and Welcome 2) Surrounding Neighborhood Development Plans and Activities 3) Site Proposal for 40 acres, corner of Locust Grove and Fairview 4) Monday Night Agenda: a) Proposals for Transitional Use and Buffering for Neighbors in Mirage Mesdows b) Open Discussion with Mirage Meadows Neighbors C) Alternative Proposals d) other 5) Tuesday Night Agenda: a) Proposals for Transitional Use and Buffering for Neighbors on Locust Grove Rd. b) Open Discussion with Locust Grove Neighbors. C) Alternative Proposals d) Other 6) Questions and Ideas: ~~~ i MINUTES OF THE NEIL}IHORHCIUD t1E:ETINGS }IE:LI? i?Y AVf:aT LIMITEI? FARTNERSIdIP CONCERNING TFfEI12 Ut•'"CLOI`1'tENT OF' TN1: 90 ACRE: PARCEL OtJ THE N. E. CORNrR OF LOCUST GRnVF AtJI? FAIRVIEW AVF_tdUE ON nC:CEMBCR ~7, nNf1 2E3, 195'0. W1-(0: The owners of the property at the tJ. E. corner of Lor.uet Grove end Fairview Avenue i.n Meridian, Id:~ho invited all intersstecl neighbors t4 attend two ovening meetings 1:'/.7/y0 and 1212n/93 to discuss the (,ropora<,~~ devolopme~nt of thic~ propF'rtY• 41((AT: The neneral partners of AveSt, Ltd, RogAr and Gini Allen ' and Kathleen Weber, gent 1F"ters to all owners within ~1~01 feOt of ±he property as well ac nnm!e 10-90~ other r>urrovnding nelghbors who would be impacted t,y th-t s r(rv~l vrmcynt and may wis1- ko have j.nput regarding the dFVr?l.c~pmr+nt desj.nn. A.il w~•re invited to cc,m~- with their concerns any? !,ugcaeetic~ns. ~o with a portsi bl e , This property is d~!eignated as a mi~:ed--u~ _, community chopping center in the new Mrrl.dian Comprehensive Pl.+~n rr_r.Pn+_ly adopted after n y~+ar ]ong community and fart-fin!iinq period. The owners are loolcing forward to bogirening developing fl porn^^ of the property lmm+~dlately. A Flgnning and 4oning request is scheduled to be,heerd at thry Jmentroflthis~propertyinr+ i'lanning end Toning meeting- A].l develop ' w:L11 be subject to desj.gn review and these neighborhood meetings will help the owners tc+ go :Corward with a condj.tional use requer~t that will be attractive, end meet the expectations of the surrounding neighbors. In +~clrlj.tion, the n~•w business entity w:[.ll. Le beneficial to Meridi+n'R economy. The first request will be for a rental. storage development alone ' the Easterly portion oS the property. It will be a three phase project. The company, Star- It. Rental Storages has four sites i.n DuiGe, is a locally owned busj.neFS, and hag been in the ctornae business for over 20 years. r ' Executive Offices: 600 North lllople Gro~•e P.onct Roise, fcfuh~' t33%0~ (Z0~) 376-8750 ' Summary of the Meetings: 12/27/93 7:00 p. m. Approximately 20 people were fn attendance. This meeting focused mainly on the neighbors that were directly north of the proposed storage development. Their backyards adjoin the subject property. The developer showed the phasing of ' the development. The first phase would be on the south-east corner of the property and the final phases two and three would ~ develop the property directly adjacent to the backyards of the neighbors in the Mirage Meadows Subdivision. Neighbors in Mirage Meadows expressed concerns regarding noise, ' lights, privacy, fencing, traffic, and property values. The owners of the proposed development showed renderings of how the property is planned and the structural designs already in the plan to address some of these concerns. The entire storage facility would be screened from neighbors by single-sided low height perimeter storage buildings with the exception of the south end which faces on Fairview Ave. This would be fenced ' with a stone pillar and black anodized chain link fence and landscaped area. The perimeter buildings would shelter the neighbors from existing ' ^, traffic noise that now enters their neighborhood from Fairview Ave. treSfic and any tenants that ere using the storage company roadways. There would be no pole lighting. Low intensity ' building lighting would reflect on interior roadways. The entire perimeter would be landscaped according to city requirements. Pictures of landscaping at other Stor-It Rental Storage sites ' were shown. Scaled drawings were displayed to show that the privacy that would be afforded with this develo~ssiblentwoestor wwith an far superior to having another home, p y adjoin backyard if the property was developed for residential homes instead of storages. Most neighbors expressed a preference ' for the privacy offered by the storages as opposed to further residential development. The owners pointed out that the storage company would not stress schools and other city services,. yet ' would bring economic strength to Meridian. All storage traffic would route out Dixie Lane and on to Fairview. Ho traffic would enter Mirage Meadows or adjoining neighborhoods. Additionally roads now desigovaltbelabandoned. roads in Mirage Meadows could with ACHD app This would produce a traffic calming effect since the roads could ' only serve"those who live in the aroinandowotherndestinations. "shortcuts to be used for others g 9 A petition was provided for neigeb~o~ g° lanneduto link re thn d p a wi to have ACHD consider closing th t as they Mirage Meadows with other subdivisions to the eas le in attendance signed the eo f the p p develop. More than half o ' petition addressed to ACHD. (See Attached) A proposal was discussed where the owners would give tt~e Mirage development ' Meadows homeowners that directly adjoin the storage k area on the northern border of the b ' ac set an easement of the 15 ld be used to ev.pand their 3 cou storages in phase 2 and ards. Most of the backyards in this area are minimum. The back th y e developer would pay the taxes and sod the easement area grid k of the storage b ac homeowners would water and mow it. The lid fence-wall at the back of their ' building would provide a so ards. They could run side fencing up to the building. The th y e easement would be granted as long as all neighbors agreed to now regularly maintain th ey terms and maintained the easement as their backyards. A similar arrangAm?nt was worked out between hbors and Waremart on Fairview Ave in Boise a few years ago. nei bl g e The owners felt the increased backyard size would be a favora f the ' resale feature of the homed and would Ensure the value o homeowner's property. The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p. m. The meeting tomorrow ' night will primarily address the homeowners who live on Locust Grove across the street from the 40 acres who will be impacted by future development of this site and those in Mirage Meadow who ' would adjoin development on t)~e north west portion of the property. 12/28/93 7 p. m. Approximately 19 people were in attendance. ' Larry Sale from ACRD was invited and attend this meeting to end the possible G rove discuss future plans for widening Locust the east of t o other road extensions as the new subdivisions ' Mirage Meadows continue to develop. The plan to berm and landscape the east side of Locust Grove from roposed by aas t ' p y Fairview to the northwest corner of the proper sidewalk inside the berm in d g er the owners. In addition a mean roposed for foot traffic. Mr. Larry Sale was ffi t p c ra away from mentioned that the sidewalk may be under consideration to be a 7' ' rather than the normal 5' width. It was discussed that the roperty would be the p location of access on t~ Locust Grove from ' largely determined by ACRD requirements. The proposed community shopping center would be on the currently a i ' e southwesterly corner of the forty acres. There mmercial Glass Company on the adjacent corner of Locust Grove co three of which face Locust and Fairview. There are five homes, boundary of the 40 Acre Locust t ern Grove who would face the wes u Grove Development. Two homes have side yards on Locust Grove ' that would be across the street from the Weuestionsowereeanswered proposed community shopping center. Many q Sale concerning the widening of Locust Grove and a ' by Mr. larry widened schedule was shown for the impact1997LocMst Saleeassured the to a five lane minor arterial by robabl come from neighbors that moat of the right °Avast butlhepdid point out that ' the undeveloped 40 acr~s LocustbGrove would be impacted. these neighbors along Something will need tonbdesh~~engb~~~Ve~ayeaccesscwas discussed soy to back into traffic a g .enter Locust that neighbors could be facin outward as they of Locust Grove Grove. Mr. Sale also stated that if the wideni~go erties along adversely affected to a measurable degree the p p ro erties ' Locust Grove across from the 40ACHDe sLarryhSalehalso suggested could possibly be purchased by that the owners might need to a provide turn around areas on their own property in order to have convenient access once Locust ' Grove is expanded to 3-5 lines in 1995-96• Current ACRD planning will no longer allow new residential construction to face onto a minor or mayor arterial. On the northwest corner of the 40 acres it has noteB~eend a determined what will be developed. The owner Ru99 ' retirement-type center is being consinerandsEervices would be senior citizens for convenient shopp 9 served by close proximity. ' There were additional homeowners not present at the 12/27/93 meeting attending this secondweretmostlyCfavorableeto theirentald ' those attending this meeting initially requested by Avast storage develoo~{ion ofathes40eacge site. owners on a p s ecifics on the pr-,posed Many questions were asked concerning p shopping center such as set backs from F{ireio~ tenantsussignagel positioning of mayor and minor tenants, YP and lighting for the oeener'Thetdeveloper was ableeto answerumost ' for businesses to be p of these concerns in a general way based on knowledge from developing the Southshore Shopping Center in southeast Boise. ' a willingness on the part of the owner- There seemed to be developers, ad~olning neighbors and concerned community members to work together to develop this project as a convenient, planned, well-maintained and landscaped, community gathering place for one of the main entrances to the City of Meridian. ' The meeting was ad3ourned at approximately 10:30 p. m• Sincerely submitted, ' Kathleen K. Weber General Partner 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sign-In Sl~ect ~, A ,7.i«e~nn Phone «.-ag-~3 i ~- Sign-fin Sheet Name flddress Phone Y)po,C/r' ~3S ~V.cC~'J~~ ~~'~~~ R88-yV %7- t-~ ~ H H H 1 S ~p'l~,~?1 7 7 "Ld~:> C• VHK~KF_ST °pV ~ Tom"' /'/..~ .,~_ c~ ~l,~ii ~'I~ a~1a .tl YJ _!1!~n•~~ll~a C1" fl~~j Y7J~-. ~-. 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NEIGHBORHOOD STATS ... AVEST MAILED ENVELOPES. MONDAY NIGHT MEETING TUESDAY NIGHT MEETING PERSONALLY TALKED TO CITY RECEIVED AVEST RECEIVED AVEST RESPONDED TO NOT ATTEND MEETINGS. 130 LETTER5 TO MEETII~lCiS AND RESPONSE 21 ATTENDED 19 ATTENDED 13 PEOPLE ON OAKCREST AND LEFT MAFS 15 LETTERS PRIOR TO MEETINGS 2 LETTERS 11 LETTERS OF THOSE THAT WROTE BUT DID TO SUMMARIZE LETTERS... 3 = CONCERNED ABOUT BIKE LANES 1 = CONCERNED ABOUT CAROL ALIGNMENT 5 = CONCERNED ABOUT CG ZONE 2 = CONCERNED ABOUT MOVING DEVELOPMENT TOWARDS EAGLE INTERCHANGE 11 = CONCERNED ABOUT IRRIGATION, VALUES, NOISE, TRAFFIC 8 = CONCERNED ABOUT PUBLIC FACILITIES i i ~ctition To: ACRD Re: Roadways in the vicinity North cast of Locust Grove and T'airvicw Ave. in Meridian Idaho. More Specifically, Applewood, Oakcrest., and Apricot roads. Dear Sirs: We the undersigned are neighbors and owners of property in tl h~ soonty le~vood, Oakcrest and t of the above described roadways Do cl ~ allows Subdivision. We would to be developed Apricot Road ~n prefer that these roadways not be interconnected. They rwlh ~ldo a retch neighborhood identify and encourage traffic back and fo g individual neighborhood rather than directing traffic to dcsig~~ated A~1Jcoif tl~c Connector or Arterial Roadways like Locust Grove and T~i~ckory owners and developers of the effrcted properties adjacent to these roads are agreeable to this proposal. Address Phone r ~~,~ y Name ~~ J~ J~ _ ~ r I ~ r~~ JI ~ V ~rr1d N. ~o~us"r ~~~ , •.' i ~~ ~ '~ ,, ,~~ - •I X57 I rLn dQ~~ Q 377 --dd ~,~ ~~~~- ~ iy~~~ Ji {~ ~ .,-.. ~, Petition To: ACRD Roadways in the vicinity North cast of Locust Grove and Re: rairview Ave. in Mcrid~an 1dal~o. More Spccifical y, Applewood, Oakcrest, and Apricot roads. Dear Sirs: he undersi ned are neighbors and owners of property in tthe sooc~ty Wet g lcwood, Oakcrest and of the above described roadways Dovel Me doves Subdivision. We would to be developed Apricot Road in refer that these roadways not be interconnected. They thithrou h each P neighborhood identify and encourage traffic bay ~~ to designated major individual neighborhood rather than dire cu Grove and Hickory. All of the Connector or Arterial Roadways like L wners and developers of the effected properties adjacent to these roads are 0 agreeable to this proposal. N~ime ~. ;. Address Phone ~ ~~. u~Py 1~ 1~ r Locust Grove Residence meeting 2/22/94 Agenda• Purpose of the meeting Working together ACRD Plans Roadway Alignments: Carol Street Shopping Center Entrances Berming and Landscaping East side of Locust Grove Entrances) Alignments Entrance landscaping roadway extentions. Berming Parking Lot Landscape Islands West side of Locust Grove Driveway adjustments Combine Provide turn-arounds Extensive Berming Dirt for Berming -ACRD/developer Developer/Major Tenant landscaping fund - Either side of Carol Street 1,00o each $2,000 Next 4 to the North 2,00o each $s,ooo Next 1 to the North i,ooo $i,ooo $i i,ooo ~ - i fl February 14, 1994 Dear Locust Grove Neighbors, We are the owners of the 40 acre parcel directly to the east of your property. We were glad to find that five of you were able to attend our neighborhood meeting held on December 29th, 1993. We would like to get together with you one more time as we now have some additional information and would like to gather any additional thoughts you might have concerning Locust Grove and our proposed project. You may be aware that on January 11th the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously approved its Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law which recommended approval of our application to the City Council for the Annexation and Zoning and Conditional L'se of storage for this property. We would like to plan an informal meeting with the seven homeowners that border on Locust Grove. We will plan to meet at 6:30 at the Homestead Restaurant 704 E. Fairview Ave. in Meridian on February 22. We are looking forward to a productive and informative meeting and hope you can attend. Please return your response in the envelope provided. Sincerely, Kathleen Weber General Partner ' Executive Offices: 600 North Maple Grove Road [ioise, Idaho 83704 (208) 376-8750 ~~ i r ,... PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE LINE AND RETURN THIS FORM IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE: WILL TRY TO ATTEND. WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND. WOULD LIKE SUMMARY OF MEETING NOTES. Name: Address: Thanks, Kathleen ~ - February 4, 1994 Dear Oakcrest Neighbors, We are the owners of the 40 acres directly to the south of your 1 back property line. We were glad to find that 11 of you were, able to attend our neighborhood meetings held December 28th and 29th, 1993. We feel that the meetings were very helpful and we 1 would like to take this opportunity to clarify in writing some of the ideas discussed at those meetings. We know that some of you are exited and want the storage we are proposing as a buffer and see the advantages of the landscaping and privacy and closure ' this project will bring to your backyards. To clarify our proposal a little further we have enclosed several .~ attachments that will hopefully give you a better understanding of our proposed project. They include: 1) A plat of our proposed project and street plan. 2) An example of a 2 story home - vs - a single sided storage building. 3) A list of benefits we feel storage provides. ' 4) Typical landscape rendering for our storages. You will recall that our proposal is to enter into an ' agreement with each of you neighbors to allow you to make use of our 15' setback as part of your back yards. We are still willing to do this. Many of you seemed favorable toward our proposal but ' expressed concerned about the cost of installing sprinklers and the cost of water to maintain the added yard area. We have analyzed our position and we feel we can modify our proposal to you to include installing a sprinkler system and hooking it into ' our system. This way there would be no cost of installation or n i cost of water to you and we would still allow you to use the additional 15 feet of land for your back yard. We would ask each ' of you to maintain the grass and shrubs though, as we would have a difficult time getting into each back yard for maintenance. This would be your only requirement, to maintain the 15' , additional land. Our time schedule to develop the area bordering your property would be between 2-3 years. We know that several of you are very favorable to our proposal but we would like to give you one more opportunity to express any concerns or questions you may have concerning our proposal. Please complete the attached questionnaire. There ' a place for you to check if you would like additional information. We will try to get back with you either by phone personally if you have specific questions. Thanks, ' Kathleen Weber is or LI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Name: Address: City, State and Zip Phone: Day: Evenings: ----------------------------------------- Questionnaire: I favor the storage proposal. I am undecided, please give me some more information. I am not in favor of the storage proposal. I would like a neighborhood meeting. Comments: 1 1 t 1 n LI February 4, 1994 Mr. Don Bryan 2070 Locust Grove Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Don, We want to thank you for your interest and input on our project concerning our 40 acre parcel. Your input at the neighborhood meetings and the P&Z Meetings have been very thoughtful and beneficial to all involved. We knew that you have some specific and unique concerns and situations that need our individualized attention. If possible we would like to meet on the property some afternoon or early evening in February to discuss ideas and actually look at some things about which you are concerned to see how we might deal with them as we move ahead with our plans. Knowing your concerns early on would help us address your concerns in our planning. Please contact us at 376-8750 about a date and time we could meet that would work with your schedule. Sincerely, 1 f Kathleen Weber General Partner i~ 1 ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Karen f3layney 2-14-94 2000 North Applewood Meridian. ID 83642 C-ear Karen, I am enclosing the sketch of the proposed buffering between your ' property and Stor-It's property. Instead of doing two drawings, I have dust put in a dotted line to indicate your property end/or fence line. The landscaping would b'.' essential the same. We discussed two different options and we would like to do which ' ever one you feel would be best far you. Option One: You keep your fence on your present property line, we ' ~ will plant to soften and screer, our buildings from your view, and we will water end maintain this area along with our other planting areas. Option Two: If you wish to incorporate tt-,i5 piece of property into your yard, we would grant a permanent basement which would only require maintenance to keep it in effect. We would plant and sad as above, but you would mAintair, it. We would install the water lines to this area and have them operate on our sprinkler system. You would have no water expenses. ' We also talked about the closure of Applewood. ACRD has pretty much agreed to let us do this if we dFathoa+ndhemergencysaccess ' the agreement that we make a walking p tie into the loop dri~•e planned approximately 400 feet to the south. This would be done by ir.ctallincl ballards at the end of Applewood. These would be permanent, carved top wooden ballards. not. the temporary striped closures that are sometimes used. Finally. I see no reason not to keep the access centered on the roadway, thus creating additional X+arking for your home and the neighbor across the street. I was relieved to hear- that your comments in our Star-It office ' were not in regard to our service to you as a customer. We try very hard to be responsive and concerned about our service to each and every customer. We are. as I mentioned, not a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1- 1 warehouse-type of storage. We cater- to neighborhood storage and wart to provide a safE, conver,ier,t~ easily accessible "extra closet" or "garage" for those in our neighborhood. I was glad to tear that we provided adequate service to You °ouywillmuse ourT~ your old home into this new or,e. And, I hope y services again. I've enclosed two copies of the sketch, so you car, keep or,e, end one for you to make comments or revisions on and note whict, is most acceptable--and return to me. I've enclosed an envelope. Sincerely, Virginia Allen, General Partner Avast LTD r ~'' Wade Miller 2005 E. Oakcrest Dr. Meridian, ID 83642 Ms. Kathleen Weber Avest, Limited Partnership 600 N. Maplegrove Rd. ' Boise, ID 83707 February 14, 1994 ' Dear Ms. Weber, ~I am in total support of the development proposed by your firm and look forward to having a company of such integrity and high ' standards of building as a neighbor to our subdivision. There is no doubt in my mind that the property will be developed in a professional manner with consideration of those of us that will be directly affected by your designs. I attended one of the neighborhood meetings that your company sponsored and was impressed by your sincere concern for our involvement in the decision making process. Hopefully these meetings will continue spurring community involvement and support with each meeting. My property will be directly backed by your proposed storage facility. I feel that this type of transition from retail commercial to residential is ideal. I am familiar with your State Street facility and I hope that your plans to build a ' similar facility in our area. is successful. I plan to attend all Planning and Zoning, City Council, and t Neighborhood meeting concerning this project. As long as your firm is willing to work closely with those of us impacted by your decisions, I will continue to support your efforts in any way ' that I am able. I look forward to a lasting relationship based on mutual respect. ' Sincerely yours, Wade Miller ~ r~o er~zies vvesz', i»c. p p / 1401 Shoreline Dr. P.O. Box 2797 Boise Idaho 83701 (208)345-7523 November 12, 1993 ' Mr. Jim Johnson, Chairman Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission ~ ' Meridian City Hall Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Roger Allen 40 acre commercial center at Locust Grove Road and ' Fairview Avenue Dear Jim: This letter is written as testimony in favor of Roger Allen's request for a commercial center at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue. I have known Mr. Allen personally for 25 years and know that he is highly qualified both financially and with the technical ability and experience to build a fine shopping center at that location. The location is excellent to serve the needs of a rapidly growing community. Thereof ore, I would strongly encourage your approval of his request. Your prompt attention to this request is appreciated. n el J n Barnes P e ident cc: Roger Allen ' JB/ld i 1 w ~~ ~~ .~~ ~~~ i • ~.~~ ~~ ~~~ • • ~~ ~s ~'~. - ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ February 18, 1994 TO: Meridian City Council Members. My wife and I are residents of the Chateau Subdivision in Meridian. Our address is 1812 E. Green Meadow Ct. ~_. It is our understanding that the owners of the property at the N.E. corner of Locust Grove and Fairview are asking for a zone change which would allow multiple-use development of the 40 acre field directly south of us. The new Comprehensive Plan identifies this as a potential site for a planned community shopping area. I know a lot of time was spent on the Comprehensive Plan and that part of the concern was to eliminate strip commercial development which is beginning to happen on Fairview. It seems like the neighbors will all have a better chance to get proper attention to their needs if the project is a planned development of the entire 40 acres. I think Meridian needs to expand its business base to support our schools and parks, etc. I would support the necessary zoning to accomplish this goal and have confidence that the developers will work with all the neighbors to assure that this project maintains our rural quality of life. Sincerely, hl'~ Tim Tr bo Automated Business Services, Inc. ' 1220 Vista Avenue • Boise, Idaho 83705 • (208) 342-8606 • Fax (208) 389-9591 i 1 February 2, 1994 TO: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission: I am a resident in the Chateau Meadows Sub. in Meridian. My address is 1944 E. Green Meadow Ct. I have had a professional relationship with Stor-It Rental Storages for the past 5 or 6 years and I wanted to tell you of the personnel, management, and overall experience I have had with Stor-It. I am in the advertizing business and Stor-It uses my services when ordering advertizing items for their four Boise locations. The Managers of Stor-It facilities are very experienced, congenial, and competent. I know the owners personally and find them to be a very forthright, down to earth, respectable family. I know that a Stor-It facility in Meridian would be a welcomed addition to our tax base as well as an improvement to the community at large. As "space" becomes a more highly valued commodity there is a need for alternatives for businesses and individuals to be able to store their goods. I want to recommend that you adopt the 40 acre parcel at the NE corner of Locust Grove and Fairview as a zone that would allow this use. Also, concerning the use of the 40 acres as a Community Shopping Center, I know that the owners of Avest dba Stor-It have done other shopping centers in the valley with great success. I feel that this organization would be able to add a nice landmark, much needed, planned, development to the City of Meridian. ' Sincerely, 1 Olaf Wiedemann i ' Planning and Zoning Commission ' Dear Commission Members. My wife, Terri, and I are residents of the Mirage subdivision (1838 E. Green Meadow Ct.) in Meridian and wish to inform you of our first hand knowledge of the developers of the 40 acre parcel at the corner of Locust Grove and Fairview. We have witnessed the growth of the main company. Stor-It Rental Storages, represented by Avast Limited Partners, from 1982 to the present. The Managers of Stor-It facilities are very accommodating, friendly, and professional. We have stored at their location on ' Maple Grove in Boise. Their facilities are well-kept and the maintenance and landscaping is very pleasing and above average in the amount of grass and plants and trees far typical storage facilities. We know that now days any commercial development comes up against much scrutiny from neighbors and realize that most of the comments you receive will be from those that would rather not have their existing neighborhood change. F.ven though Terri and I will have a neighbor of this project is approved) where we now have an alfalfa field, we knew development of this large piece of ground was inevitable when we bought our home in Mirage Meadows. Realistically we knew that this 40 acres would probably not be residential with the commercially developed Fairview Ave. bordering the South boundary of the property. It is my understanding that the developers are asking far a zone change which would allow multiple-use development of this land. A planned community shopping area with proper attention to the needs of the homes directly adjacent to the development--and the transitional land surrounding it, will be gc+od for the Meridian ' economy. I support the necessary zoning to accomplish this goal and have ' confidence that the owners of this property will work with all the neighbors to assure the continued peace and privacy of our semi-rural. Sincerely. ' Greg Burkhart ii i ' ebrua 14, 1994 F ry Roger C. Crandlemire Quaff! ~,icfge farm 1400 floarinB geatFier Road eagle, I~fako 83616 ' Mr. William G. Berg, Jr. Meridian City Hall 33 East Idaho Street Meridan, Idaho 83642 Gentlemen. The purpose of this letter is to he SW 1h4 of Section 5, T 3N,~Rg1WaBo~e~MeridianoAdacres of ' land located in the SW 1/4 of t County, Idaho. ., I am the owner of nine (9) plus acres across Fairview, corner of Locust Grove. It would be difficult to see the beauty of the Stor-It facility at 7800 West State and not applaud this ' intended land use. In view of the groCehhe taxebase and at the same time promote revenue fromreta,l and blanking, ' nothing but enhan accruing to the City of Meridian. ' With warmest regards, ' Ro er C. Crandlemire g ' RCC/et Kathleen Weber cc: Stor-It ' 7800 West State Street Boise, ID 83703 F 1 r1 1 1 .~ i 1 ~; ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ U ~ i ~ A ~ ~ x ~ i ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ •~ '~ .~ ~~ .~ ~ 1 ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ 0 ~ ~ o 1 A ~ 3 , ~ •~ ~ • p ~ ~ • ~ v ~ a 1 ~ ° V. • • v 1 .~ o ~ .~ L~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ `~ c ~ '° ~~ o ~ ~ c°V ~ v ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ d .~ a~~ ~ ~ ~w ~ ~ ~; p ~ ~ ~ o y .~ ~ o r% y ~..1 U o ~ A ~ ~. ~ o ~ ~ •~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ o ~" d ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ a~ ~ c ~ ~ ,woo ~ ~ ~aAU~ ~ C a~ a~ a~ ^~ C a~ 0 U 4~ 0 A x U .~ N a a °o a~ U O c~ .. r..~ 0 ~ ~ ~ o ~ a~ ~ ~ a~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~; 3 ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ o .~ ~ o ~ °o " ~ ~ ~ ~-, ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ w° p o a~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o 0 ~ ^o ~ aA ~ ¢' ~ ~ ~ ~ ., . ~ ~ ~ ~ E~ ~ a ~ ~ z 1 JAMES E. BRUCE, President GLENN J. RHODES, Vice President . SHERRY R. HUBER, Secretary November 17, 1993 Mr. Roger Allen 6904 Randolph Drive Boise, Idaho 83709 Re: Dixie Lane north of Fairview Avenue, Meridian Dear Roger: The Ada County Highway District has no ownership of or interest in Dixie Lane in Section 5, T3N, R1E, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. As a related subject, we expect to require the owner of the property west of Dixie Lane (and north of Fairview and east of Locust Grove) to provide a public street from East Apricot Drive in the proposed Dove Meadows Subdivision to connect with the street stubbed into said property from the north. Additional street connections to Fairview Avenue may be required as well. ' Sinc ely, ' v Development Services cc: City of Meridia Dove Meadows Su Central Files Chron n bdivision File [1 ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714 • Phone (208) 345-7680 ~~ ~_ r" 1~3~~ To: Wayne Forney Will Bcrg From: Avert Re: Entry Modification -Rental Stc~ragc /Shoshoni Property Dear Staff, The enclosed modified plats incorporate suggestions from our neighbors encompassing their concerns about connecting commercial traffic to their snbctivisions (Mirage Meadows, Wingate Subdivision and Dove Meadows Subdivision) and suggestions provided by harry Sale from A.C.H.D. who attended our Tuesday night neighborhood meeting. Larry Provided some valuable information for our neighbors. We have since met with Larry at his office and the developers of Dove Meadows and Wingate Subdivisions and the enclosed plan is a compilation of their input also. There are no significant changes as far as our application is concerned. The changes are: 1. A re-design of the entry to the rental storage to incorporate the loop road around the shopping center and to combined the entry with the entry to the Shoshoni property. We have already met with Jerry Teal, the architect for the owners of the Shoshoni property, and he assures us that the owners are very agreeable tv a joint entry. The entry off from Fairview will be built to A.C.H.D. standards and will then become a private road within our properties. The re-design does not change the location or legal description for our conditional use permit for the rental storage. 2. Make Applewood, the road to our north, an emergency access roadway only with no through traffic. It would be paved 20' wide and can also serve as a bike/walking path connecting to the shopping center. This provides the neighbors with access without pulling commercial traffic through their ncighborhoocl. 3. Inclusion of a loop access roadway around tl~e shopping center. Larry suggested this road should have a curve radius of about 100'. This is shown on the attached plat and more detail will be shown in our shopping center applicatiun. Ex~cuti~~c D/~iccs: (i(10 Nnrlft Ai~~i~fc• Grrn•c Rc~n~i ftrrsc, Iclnhn R37c~•# (lC-~a) 3%<-8: S~ .rrmu.-~s:arcts~ ra~ 4. The v~terconnection of Apricot (Dove Meadow), the "new Dixie Lane" (Wingate Sub.), and Oakcrest Drive (Mirage Meadows) is shown on the larger vicinity plat. This is the result of meetings with Larry at A.C.H.D., Dave Leader of Uovc Meadows, Dan Wood of Wingate Sub. and the neighbors of Mirage and Doris Subdivisions. Thirty one of the neighbors of Mirage Meadow have signed a petition requesting their neighborhoods not be directly connected to commercial trafFic. You should have a copy of that petition in your file. This vecinity map shows how this can be accomplished and appears to be acceptable to all parties involved. Sincerely, Kathleen Weber General Partner ' ~- 3-9~{ To: Larry Sale ACRD ' From: Avest Re: Roadways, (Fa1rv1GW Avenue and Locust Grove) ' Loop Road, (40 Acres NE Corner Fairview and Locust Grove). ~~' Attached is a vicinity plat showing a proposal for the road connections between ~~ Apricot, Oakcrest and "Dixie Lane" as discussed. I have talked with Dave Leader (Dove Meadows Subdivision) about this proposal and he is favorable to this alignment. I have taken a copy to Dan Wood (Wingate Subdivision) and hope to hear from him right away ' however, he did indicate that this proposal seemed the best choice. It changes his plat very little and if I understood our discussion correctly there would be no need for the suggested connection between Dove Meadows and Wingate further to the East if this proposal is agreeable. I have also included on the plat a proposal for a Loop Access Road around the '. Shopping Center and an emergency access road (bike and walking path) connecting to Applewood from the North. The Loop Access Road would work well with the storage portion of the property. Please see the plat showing more detail of the entrance and landscaping proposals for the rental storage portion of the property. We just flip-flopped the office and entry and it should work fine. 1 1 We plan a meeting this week with the Shoshoni (Church) people to discuss the joint entry between our properties. We talked to Jerry Teal Friday and he indicated they would be very cooperative and that they probably would just go along with whatever he recommends. We would of course build it to the specification you gave us - 41 foot entry with curb, gutter and sidewalk (is sidewalk required on Fairview?) and a low landscaped vision triangle etc. Steve Sweet of W H Pacific will be doing our engineering and will of course submit full drawings to meet ACRD requirements. ~. t h 1 I would prefer to not address the alignment from the shopping center with Carol Street out of Doris Sub. until we have more definite plans for the shopping center. We have no strong preference either way. We appreciate you coming to one of our neighborhood meetings. I think some concerns of the neighbors were addressed and answered and it gave us all a better feeling about ACRD plans for this area. I am not sure all of them were happy in every case but at least we had factual information with which to work. Thanks again. If you need additional information let me or Kathleen know. We can be faxed at: Kathleen 376-8750 or my office at: 376-2365. Phone numbers are 376-8750 or 377-0023. Roger Allen ~, ! i W e~nom~e rrou.o4a a 0 J ~ ~ ~ ~ 7_ W OC a __ ~ •. `~r~ V 77 L~ t 1 1 1 1 1 'o 0 m Q c ~~ z g or ~_ _ __~~_ ~~ ~-~IM d~ _'~ ~ ~ t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _ ~ m @ S ,. wwtna~a~a~ ( ~ ~.. ~----- IBC=~-~~~~® ~_~- ~ II ~ 0 ~ ~ $ -~___~ I - --- 6 ...... v w ~C ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ "~Z O / C C O o N o ! a 0 . % ~ o { c $ r i i ~~a~ V e = ~ i u 0. i 7 ~ y rl ~' i ~-_~ Update to Landscape Plan for Rental Storage Conditional Use Permit To incorporate ACHD and Neighbors' Requests Avest Limited Partnership 600 North Maple Grove Boise, Idaho Ph: 376-8750 Faz: 376-2365 ,w .~ ~M N Y r jj~ `~ N 44 8'~ i0 J [~~ ,~ ~ N ~N ~~ N •~ N ,~ n - - ~O m r~ w.~+v Mt a -z ~ ~ ]~ t _ - _ ~~ -~ F - ~ - _....,...K °~ .~' :a . d}y$ js* 7 ~~ O °o 8 N ~0` ~~ Evergreens, Deciduous Trees and Shrubby List Trees and Shrubs to be chosen from the following list• _ Evergreen Trees: Austrian Pine (Pinus Nigra) Koster Blue Spruce (Picea Pungers) Deciduous Trees: Sweet Gun (Liquidambar) Japanese Maple (Acer Palmatum) Golden Locust (Rabina) Evergreen Shrubs: Tall -Common Juniper (Juniperus Commonis) Low - Pfitzer Juniper (Juniperus Media) - Bolden Plume Juniper (Juniperus Media) Deciduous Shrubs: Flowering Quince (Chaenomeles) Flowering Plum (Cistine) Plant Specifications: Evergreens: Shrub ~ " ~ 6' to 8' Evergreen 10' to l 2' Evergreen Deciduous Trees: Shrub 6' to 8' Deciduous ~ 10' to 12' Deciduous r n ~~ ro,l~a 700 ~~ w ~w ~" ~ ~ -~ W a ~ ~ a ' uvi I O ~ ~ 1- b M ~_ i J -_- -- _~ 9 ~~ ~~ A 2I Q J a A W J W ' RESPONSE TO CITY OFFICIALS & FINDINGS OF FACT REPORT: Response to Mr. Gary Smith's comments - Letter dated 1-8-94. Item 1. Legal Description with 1/2 width of R.O.W. our engineer, W&H Pacific, will submit. Item 2. This item has been resolved with ACRD. Items 3,4 and 5. We will comply. Response to Mr. Wayne Forrey's - Staff report dated 1-6-94. Item 1. Pedestrian Access - See plan. Applewood will be closed allowing pedestrian access to rear loop road of Shopping Center Development. Dixie Lane will be developed as a bike/pedestrian path to Fairview and front of Shopping Center development. Bike pathways will be incorporated along Locust Grove as per City Bike Path Plan. The results will be a complete circulation pathway ' along Dixie Lane allowing access to residents of Dove and Wingate Subdivisions to Shopping Center loop road and Fairview, to Locust Grove and back to Applewood incorporating the Mirage neighbors ' and Chateau residents for a complete looping pathway within this planned Shopping Development. The City will need to require access to the Dixie Lane pathway either from Dove Meadows and/or Wingate Subdivisions. I don't believe either of these r subdivisions have received final approvals in this area yet. Item 2. Park Site - See attached "Neighborhood Park". Item 3. Acceptable Land Uses: a) Storage ' b) Retirement Center Item 4. Traffic Study - See ACHD letter in response to our application and need for Traffic Study. Traffic study will be ' submitted with the Planned Commercial Development application as per ACHD requirement. Item 5. Detailed Plan for Rental Storage Use - We have provided: a) Entry detail - with update for ACHD loop road and shared access with adjacent property. b) Elevation Plan/ Rendering c) Landscape Plan with plant detail and front of facility detail including fencing. ' Item 6. A variance for "on site" security guard home facility will be requested as per Staff recommendation. Item 7. Development Agreement will be entered into between the 1 developer and the City of Meridian. 1 ~ ~ o .~ ~ H G C O ~ a•+ a+ Y N~ U 'a O v a ~ as ~ c °• ~ '~ ea `~ vs ° ~ ~ d ~ ~+ ~ 'O ~ ~ = H C C N V N O y C 3` ++ v~~ v v ` N s~ p 0 ''"'' ~ y~ ~ ' H o ~ ~ o3~s`~ c~eaN .° ~ y s ° _ ° a ° ° ~ ° ~ ~+re~ o•-md ~ a~E.Q.fl° cd~ ° ~' d •- o o o ~~° ~ ~ ~+ fNq ~ ~ Y ~ d C ea y ~ p a•+ f~11 C ~ ~ E ~ L ~O ~~ ~•~~-p J~C ~~ N N Z i O O E 'i C- O ' N O ~+ N O •- d c - •- >N Q.~ C O O~ C•t~~ Vii"'-per ~ +O+ N ~ ~ ~ d ~ d ~ d •~ d ~ C ~ ~ N ~~ ~~ L d dt L C•N~'C d N N ~ ~ a+ fl. N N ev ;~ 'C ~ ~ O~ ~ C ~~ `~ O L D C N N C O ~+ J '~ ~ v O~ Q `O C Lev O~~ C N ~ Y Q ~ ~. d ~~ v i _~ C a = d •, r 0 O~~ V ' ev ++ - ++ O Cs ~`O ~ V ~ ~ ~ O N ~ ~ N ~ ~ C > C _'C N 7 Z N V O y N t ~~ C d O Q ~o ~~~ c•v ~o ~da,NC~ ~o~s° .a ~ ~ a .~ +~ ea N ~ L~ 03. or ~~ ~~~-cd 3 c°- ' O ~~ 3`mc Y'~ L~ 0~•3o°a o°~a O C L, O co C~ ~+ O .~ ~c°~ ~H~ ~Q r= oo~aE ~dd~ ~ o °' ~ ~ ~ -a -a ca ~ a c p .. 3'° ~ r '~, ddd ca~~ ' ~ L ^ _ V i~ i; i 1 Page GA "' ~~~~~ 8~151~~3-; The ldnho Ili«intsa Rt~dew Church develops Fairview acreage as $2.8 million community center By Brad Carlson The Idaho Business Rtwiew MERIDIAN-Capital Chris- tian Center's development on 33 acres near Fairview and Eagle roads is taking shape as the church progresses toward having a complete community center with worship, school and park Facilities. A sanctuary/auditorium is en- closed. Atotal of 11,000 square feet of construction is under roof, and crews hope to complete an- other 11,000 to 12,000 feet before snow falls, said Fastor Ken Wilde. Total cost is expected to be 52.8 million, with the first phase costing 51.8 million to 52 mil- lion, he said. Completion of the first phase is expected in late spring. It will have 35,000 to 40,000 square feet of building space. in addition to the sanctuary, an office complex and 16 classrooms will be built. "We have a committee plan- ning to start some grades next fall;' said Wilde, a former high school principal: An 11-acre park, including a The church is considering eventually having sport courts and swimming facilities. baseball field for church membertt and Little League players, is planned. An amphitheater for crm- certs and other church and com- munity gatherings is being de- signed.. Wilde said the congregation wants their new facility to be: a center for the cotmmunity as well as for the church members. The west Boise-Meridian area is more spread-out than other Treasure Valley communities, and will benefit by having the center, he said. "Our vision is that a church should be involved in the com- munity;'the pastor said. In general, more people are at- tending church in recent years, Wilde said. He speculated That as members of the populous, now- middle-aged "baby boom" gcncra- tion raise their children. they want to do so in a church setting. Capital Christian Center is act- ing as its own general contractor on the project, which began about a year ago. The church is considering eventually having oport crnirts and swimming facilities, a youth ac- tivities center and a retirement center. Ten more classrooms are planned. .~ V t . 'ir ~ ~ ' ~ O d ~ ~+ d ~ W ~ ' O ~ ` V L ~• ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V c ~ ~ o a ~ •Q ~ ~ eQ ` 0 d ~ ` y to H 'a ~ ~ O _ d L W ' H = ~ ~ U = v t+ C ~ Q ~' ~ O d ~+ ~~.. ~ ~ Q fl. U H O W d N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ d ~~ ~ ~ p v Q ~ W O ~ 3 ~ O ' ~ > L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ' O C s. W d _~ M ~ 7 ~ ~ Y ~C i 'O V ' L ~ 'p O ~ 7 H ~ O ~Z o ~ z ~ ~ . W 3 !Q ~ d .~ .~ ~. M N .~ ~ H r cv ' ~ ,. .. O `~ ~ t o. O H d C C ~C d V H C O of L d N d r d O c c~ v ~ C O d L ~ d L. L ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ C9 ~ ++ i c f+ N ~ O d ~. ~ v ~ H t ~ O d +~+ ~; J C O! y y ~y (Q O ~ ~ y i. ^ H ~ ~ ~ ~ m~ ~ ~ ~ ~+ ~ L O O ~ ~ C O O N H ~ N Q d d ~ d 'C 'O H ~ ~ ~ ~ +~+ 3 ~ •- (~ '~ ~ O = O ww,, t ~uu W ~ w f+ O O d ` ~ = O J C7 C. O .«+ N1 L d O O ~L+ ~O C ~ ~ L ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ O H O ~ ~ ~ 7 t _ d ~ ~ ~ ~ H t O ,~ Y d Z V i' H O d y.. O O .L d ~ ~ O ~. u. ~ v 3 d ~ ~ r N ~ O ~ d 1 1 ~I V• w~~ W d C N V 3 m ~~ _ °er ~s~, ~ ~ L = as _ L Q ,~ Cf C N c 3 `° as ~ .~ c ~ C o, a o~ ~ -a o m = a .,: G ~ ~ ~+ > v a=a m ego ~ Q O $ o c c N .+ O ca v ~ ~ c ~^ m r ~~_ ~+ ~ y V 'C =++~ ';_~ O d ~ 'V ''+ > ,~ C ~ O > O a_ ~ ~ v ~' °' c ~' ~ v ~ .c ,` ~v a ~ O e=a ~ °•°-'c ~ ~ ~ ~o o ~ _~ O ~ c V ~ .Q ~_ V V Q c o. ~~ ~ .~ ~ s 3 c .~ L L 3 ea r d ~ a L ~ ~ ~ ; v °' ~ ~ ~ a ~ 'a a ~~ ~ ~ m w O ~ ~ ~ ` O ~ ~ ~ O ` ~ d C ~ _ a,d _ t o O ~ O = c ~ o c 3~ 3~ ~- ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~V ~ c m d•- c ~ 's ~ c as _ '° 'C c = ~ v m ~~ ~.a = ~o Q 'a ~o c ~ °~3 . = o v o. a ~ ~`m a m ~~ ~N - v~~ ~ ~ o ° m ~~ v~ ~°' ~; ca c ° oa E Q c ~ 00 p° c ~a ~ r '~,o°' ~ _ _ c m ~~~ ~ ~ ~ cv ~ m c u~ ~ M ~ ~N m ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N = W ~ ~ V ~ d .~ D. dj O ~ m v O 3 ~ ~ V ~ ~' ~ ~t r ~ p v O -Op w tl1 0 ~ ~ d~ ea ~ ~ ~> O ~ t ea = = d tl~ Q ~ m O- A ~ -~ ~ +r d O ~ ~ d O O ~ m ~ d C d V 0.~ ~+ C~ C O O CY ~_ d ~ r+ d ~ C1 v N m ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O > = t11 ~~ O =~ O ~ ~ .3 ~° ~ ~a ~ co ~ o = d ;ova ~.' °' ~ a°' aE ~~ E ° m era vs `~ c V cE~ d~ ac ao v = mm~ ~ eao~ ad „m m rmc N ~ 0 ~ ~ ~~,. ~ ~ O O ~ O V d'~' ~ .O .O C C m ~ a~ N ~a o~ a 3 3~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ r ,~ / :NI ,\ .1 1 '~~ IIOIS1;~ ' t11~l~It;t; UN Till: AfAI'CIR ~ r t- I ••~ K r-~ K ~ ~. t11tt;N~r c;cll.FS ~~ 'i MAYUu August 17, 1993 COI~NCII. NI:Nh/.ur. SA1tA IIAKIat ANNI•: RT1T•L:S IIAUSItA l'll t:uuNCli P(iES10LhT !~t. J(:K(1M1? MAI'1' 1'A111.A FC,ItNI:!• CAlrrtl.Yn TI?It7'IiI.IN(~ COUNCIL, MNt-TY•M , 1'llltl= 1N1%Tlllalla•I. ' Larry Durkin Dakota Dsva] o~tment 380 E. 1'arY. Grnter $oulev~~i~il Boise, YD 83706 ' Dear Larrys ' I wonted to congreltulate you orl a job well done with the SouthahOre Development or>, ,ark Center 8oulevarC{. This wAe one of those projects wller® the neighborhood haq deV61Op6d ' ~.-~ around the commercial zvni.liy and, at the timQ you stepped into the development oP i:lie project, there ltad been a lOt Of controve~r;y surrounding ttre idea ai a 200, 000 square toot shopping center being ' Constructed at tl>tat locat;lon. However, •Lecause ot° your ability tO work with the neiyhbc,rhood And provide st,luLiuny to their neeAs, We now have a very nice sl~~rrppirly center pi oviAilly r~etvice:s to a ' yrowlrly cles,~ytr<borhood area of our community. I want to tha»k you far yuur integrity in QEsv~slujriny this pro jeCt ' and following tlirouytl with everythitTy yr,u rsitid you would dO at t116 neighborhood mootinq~l. Acc:vrdingly, I would ber happy to be d reference for you i><~ ariy other part of the country where you dre developing, dC 1 rcaoyni~e you have projects witll national tenants throughout the oountry. very txuly yours, H. Brent Coles Mayor ' ttt3f~/ 1 i '~ • .. C:1'1'Y IIAId. • 7fA NfNfl'li C:AI.1'hC-1, li(i111.kVA1tU • 1'.11. LtUX EAU • 11U1RF, 111A11b R3'r01.Ottb0 ~ 7A-I~I,M•1422 Arr Isqunl(llyn~rlurrill ~•%n,lrlut~•r ~ ~ r r ' DEVFtUDNEtJT DAKO'T'A DEVELOI'lv1~NT PRO)~II~ In SepletnUcr of 1991 Dakota Development was incorparatcd as atr Idaho corporation. T1re firm is owned by Ron Van Atrkcr and Larry Durkin, Mr. D~rlrkitr is responsible for lire day-to-day orerntirnt of fire cotrrpany and holds the title of President. ' Dakota Development has pursued and developed major tenant anchored retail projects throughout die Miclwesl and Wesl. A complete list is attached to this resume. Mr. Durkin has developed c;otrrrrrercial arrd retail projects in many states both as an employee of Stropko Stares, Itrc. and as a developer since 1984 (sec attached). ' Mr. Van Aukcr owns and devclo s industrial ~ro'ects and office ~ro'erts lhrou bout P f J 1 J S the West. These activities arc conducted tlu•ough his com~~any and are in no way ' affiliated with Dakota Developnrcnt. He provides advice and financial support to Dakota from time to time. Mr. Van Aukcr has owned his own general contracting company fctr many years and has built buildings throughout il>le Unilcd States and overseas. ' At the present time Dakota Development's staff includes four pconle to assist in the . development and manabemerrl of die properties. A brief description of their ' individual Irusitions in fire company is as follows: ~. ^ PHONE 12061 34i~5223, fA1< 3434954 380 EAST PAFKCENTCR QIV~. SUITE 105 8015E, IDAN0831DG ,~ Dcvelo mcnt Profile Dal.ota p ' January 7, 1994 Page 2 rr Du ki Market research, major tenant lease negotiations and retail ' consulting. ~ .feste Johnson Administrative Assistant to I.~~trry Durkin, Office Manager, Contract Adrnirrislrator, l~ropcrty management and tenant relations. ' Vioe President of Constr•trctior~. Tom oversees tlic 1'~m ~uwenti architects, engineers, tenants and general contractors as ' well as the construction budgets. ' Susan i3a~td SecretarylReceptionist Dakota Development leases offices at 380 E. Parkce~~ter Boulevard, Strite 105, Boise, Idaho. Liankin for the company is primarily done through Kcy Bank of Idaho, Vice S President. Rich Toney (208/387-4288). Other bar~}:ir~g references are available upon ' request. ' ~ Legal consultation is provided by Dale ttiger of the firm Stoel, Rives, Bulcy, Janes & Grcy (208/389.9000). ' While architectural services can vary from market to market, Dilly Ray Strile Architects of Boise, Idaho (208/336-8370) is consulted on all projects. ' Dakota will continue to develop credit tenant projects, manage existing properties ar~d~ look to the future opportunities in mortgage brokerage and real estate acquisition ' through affiliate companies. /"~ i Z?~.>~.n'1'A )FVE oPMr_cvT PRO~LC:~r.~ ~? 1 Iloi se, ls~ Kmart/Albcrlson's, with retlil shops -- 200,000 sq. ft. ' Key Bank -- 6,000 sy. ft. ~4ulti-tenant building -- G,000 sq, ft. ' Payless Shoe Source -- 3,000 sq, ft. Pizza Nut (sale) -- 3,500 sq. !t. ' Sioux Talls, South 1?akota Guilders Square -- 90,000 sq, ft. ' Officc Max -- 25,000 sq. ft. I3lackbuster Video (sate) -- 6,500 sq. ft. Gr~~und Round Restaurant (sale) -- 7,000 sq. it. '~ hint) nder L.___ a , W ~•S ~ n ' Walmart (sale) -- 116,0(}0 sq. ft. ~~ ~i~rr~ Vist1, Arizona ' Super Valu (sale) -- 69,500 sq. ft. ' ~'~Inl~~j~ona Super Valu (salc-,) -- 69,500 scl. ft. N~~~ 1if~uua ' Super Valu'~ (sale) -- 69,500 sq. ft. ' 1 mr ~Ilisconsin Shopko (sale)-- 72,000 sq. f~. r PI tevill~yj~ ein ' Kmart -- 94,000 sy. fl. i ti i r Q~f rni 1 ~t loo (81: L~~~.: Mir n ~ ~1~_ ~vlon vi ~• L ~~s3~r~1i Qru Qn-1-~~ Crnr;h Dakot~.._~1 Was iin t n 7 Wig in SH P O STORES L~i`V~t.C)I'1/L) j31' LAh~~1~iN B~ t~~~rFN 19 4 A1~~ ) y8~ Redding Boise (2), Coeur d'Alene, Idaho Falls, ><,ewiston, Nampa, / Pcx:atetlo, Twin Falls Mahn City St. (:loud Billings, Great Falls, Missoula Lincoln (2), Umaha (4), Norfolk Reno (2), Sharks Fiend, I'sugene (2) Rapid City, Sioux Falls (2) Bountiful, Brigt~arn City, Layton, Mogan, Murray, Ogdtn (2), Urcrn, T'rovU, Salt Lalc City, sandy, Spanish Furk, Taylorsvillc, West ]orlon, West Valley City hcnncwic:k, Spokane (3), Union Gap, Walla Walla, Yakima UePere, Grafton, Madison (Q), Marinette i r }~rle.n~ M,~~ntnn,~ Albcrtson's* -- 47,000 sq• ft. Shalrko* •• 11 6,000 sq. ft. Nlultitenant -- 12,000 ~q• ft• Pad -- 4,000 sq. ft. ~~clcna, Nlott_l~nB Ilutlrey T~nnci St~tY: -- 4E~,0(10 '~h. ft. ~ Ernst liomc Center -• 49,000 sq. fl. 1'ad A -.. 7,000 sq. ft. Pad i~ -- 7,000 sq. ft. ~,' 1 Kcy Kank -- f-,000 sq. ft. Shari's Festaurant -- 3,500 sq. ft. "' Presently under dcvei~Pment. ~-- Roger H. Allen ' Personal Information FAKILY: 12/16/93 ' 1~ite: ' Virginia (Crowell) Born 1938, Married 35 years, ~' B.A. Degree in Elementary Education - Boise State University. Several teaching experiences. Daugbtera: (3) Kathleen: Married, Co-Valedictorian Borah H.S., B.S. ' Degree in Finance and Real Estate - Boise State University, 1985. Currently, CFO, Stor-It, Rental Storage and general partner in Avest Limited ' Partnership. Shawna: Married, Head Cheerleader Borah H.S. 1985., BS Degree in Economics - University of Utah. Delta Gamma ~,.., Sorority. Real Estate Sales in Utah. Vonnie: Married, BS Degree fn Elementary Education - University of Nevada Las Vegas. Teaching First Grade in Las Vegas. ' PER80NAL INFORMATION: Roger: Born 1938, Boise, Idaho. Married 35 years. Education A.A. Degree, Boise Junior college - 1958 - Accounting ' B.S. Degree, University of Nevada - 1961 - Accounting M.B.A. Degree, Northwestern University - 1962 - Finance ' Graduate of the School of Mortgage Banking, a three-year professional program co-sponsored by the Mortgage Banking Association and Northwestern and Stanford ' Universities. C.C.I.M. Designation in the field of investment and commercial real estate, offered by the Realtors ' National Marketing Institute of the National Association of Realtors. ' Licensed Real Estate Broker. (Inactive) ' OCCIIFATION 1982 to present, Private Businessman, Real Estate and Developer Consultant Investor . , , 1966 to 1983, Professor of Real Estate and Finance at Boise ' State University. Developed the majors in Finance and Real Estate plus 11 other courses presently offered at the University. ' 1962 to 1966, Vice President, Mortgage-Insurance Corp. Duties included Appraisal, Mortgage Loan Origination ~, t and Loan Marketing. POHLICATIONS ' "ThA Real Estate Game", A textbook on Real Estate Investment and Taxation. ' "Real Estate Investment and Taxation", Published by South-Western Publishing Co. This text fs used at several Colleges and Universities. ' "Case Studies in Real Estate Development" Published by Boise State University. ACTIVITIES ' In addition to teaching at Boise State University, I have developed over $25 million dollars worth of real estate including mobile home parks, recreation lot developments, residential subdivisions, commercial property, a shopping center and rental storage facilities. 0 ' ROGER H. ALLEN CHRONOLOGY OF ACTIVITY DATE DESCRIPTION 1962 Master of Business Administration Degree from Northwestern University. 1963 Developed a 27 apace mobile home park in Hoiee Idaho , . 1964-1967 V.P. and Loan Manager for Mortgage-Insurance Corporation, a mortgryge banking firm. ' 1965 1966 Approved appraiser for 5 insurance companies. 1966 Became and instructor at Boise State college - Finance and Statistics. Purchased a 42 apace mobile home park, developed another 51 spaces adjacent to the 42 ' spaces. Allen s Mobilote. 1968 1968 Developed a 92 space mobile home park - Owyhee Mobilote. Sold All ' en s Mobilote. ]969 Purchased a 42 lot subdivision in McCall - Rtver Sub ' . and created Voshka Corporation. 1970 Promoted to Resistant Professor at Boise state College. 1070 Sold Owyhee Mobilote. 1972 1972 Developed Mountain Pines Mobile Estates - McCall, Idaho. t ' S arted Stor-It Indoors, a rental storage business. 1973 1973 Promoted to Associate Professor - Boise State University. 1974 Developed Ski Valley Estates - McCall, Idaho, Shawnee Corp. Began develo ment f A ' 'r` 1975 p o igh Valley Ranch, phase I. Developed Baccalaureate Degree Program in Real Estate for Hoiee State 1975 University - approved by the State Hoard of F,ducation epring of 1975. Publish d e a real estate text book called "The Real Estate Game", an investment and taxation text used in the re l t ' 1975 a es ate course at B. S. U. Obtained a salesman license in real estaL-e brokerage. 1976 Purchased Hillview ranch (32 acres) in SE Boise 1976 . Sold Mountain Pines Mobile Estates in McCall 1976 1976 . Acquired commercial property in Meridian - Formed Wallco. ' 1976 Expanded Stor-It Indoors at Maple Grove - 10 ac. zoned M-1. Added 100 unit 1976 s at Maple Grove. Developed phase II of High Valley Ranch - 49 lots 1977 1977 . Meadow Wood Ptnre. acquired 16 acres in SE Boise. Formed Shawnee Development Corporation - SE Boise 1977 Acquired Lazy Seven Sub. Valley County, Idaho 1977 Sold Meridian commercial property - Wallco. 1977 1978 Purchased Sawtooth Storage, added 220 beye to Stor-It Indoors. Prom t d ' 1978 o e to Full Professor - Boise State University Developed plan for Southshore Subdivision and Shopping Center a d , pprove for 250 housing units and 275,000 sq. ft. shopping center plus 30,000 sq ft of Office. ' 1978 Formed Delta East Ltd. Ptnre for development of Southehore 1978 . Acquired 120 acres in South Eaet Boise. 1978 1978 Developed phase one of Evergreen Terrace, a 108 lot sub. in McCall, Idaho. S ld S ' 1978 o awtooth Storage. Obtained a real estate brokers license St 1979 , ate of Idaho. Publish d " e Real Estate Investment and Taxation" text . South-Western Publishing. 1979 Developed 88 lots in South Shore Sub. 1979 Purchased 22 acres in Meridian for 91 lot subdivision 1979 . Sold 80 acres south of Gowen Fleld. '/,.~ ROGER H. ALLEN ' CHRONOLOGY OF ACTIVITY (Continued) DAT E DESCRIPTION ' 1979 1979 Formed R. Allen and Associates for the development of eouthshore. Allen-Monte 1979 e partnership formed to develop Meridian Sub. Purchased Meadow Wood 16 1979 acres in SE Boise. Purchased Taylor land SE Boise - Delta East. ' 1979 Completed phase 2 Evergreen Terrace in McCall - 54 lots 1979 . Purchased 80$ control in Stor-it Indoors. 1980 1981 Sold Real Estate One, a real estate brokerage company. ,~ D ' elta Eaet sold Taylor lend to Stitzel. 1981 Paid off Ellie Contract - Stor-It indoors 1981 1982 . 2nd Edition "Real Estate investment and Taxation". 1982 Purchased balance of Stor-It Indoors for 100 ownership. Sold Meadow Wood ' 1982 property in sE Boise. Developed Apple St and SE Corridor for shopping center 1982 . Sold Meadow View Sub. - Meridian, id. 1983 Developed phase 3 Evergreen Terrace. ' 1983 Purchased K. Montee interest in Delta East, R. Allen end Associates and , Hillview Rnnch. 1983 1983 Added 2 new buildings at Stor-It Indoors - Maple Grove Site. R. Allen and Associ t d ' 1983 a e sold 4.5 acres to Buttreye for Supermarket. Discounted and cashed out the G Hei t 1983 . s contract on Stor-It. Shawnee Development bought 1C. Montee interest in Corp. 1984 Stor-It Indoors built 3 additional buildings at M.G 1984 . Purchased 6 acres on Federal way. 1984 Developed 5 buildings plus an Office et Federal Way. 1984 1984 Exchanged 40 acres So. of Gowen Field for 13.6 acres on State St. Computerized Stor-It 1984 Indoors. Completed lot sales in South Shore Sub. ' 1985 Added 4 additional bldgs. at Fed. Way site. 1985 1985 Refinance 5 loans to Stor-It Indoors. Puget Sound S.B. I ncorporated Integrated Custom Software to develop and market "Custom Pak" software. .1985 Paid off IFNB loan on Owyhee Mobilots. 1986 Added 4 Bldgs at Federal Way site. 1987 Added 2 Bldge at Federal Way site. 1987 Added outdoor spaces at Federal Way. 1988 Delta East sold Triangle to River Run for Office 1988 1988 . Added 8 Bldge. at Federal Way to complete development. 3rd Edition f "R 1989 o eal Estate Investment" text completed. Developed Phase I State Street storages ' 1990 . Developed Phases 2 & 3 State Street. 1991 Developed Phases 4,5 & 6 at State Street. 1992 Developed Phases 7,8 & 9 at State Street ' 1992 1992 . Developed Southshore Shopping Center in South East Boise. Purchased 40 acres Locust Gro d F i 199 , ve an a rview in Meridian. 2 Purchased 5 acres next to Maple Grove site. 1993 95,000 eq. ft. addition at Stor-It Maple Grove site. 1993 W ' ork progressing on Shopping Center site on 40 acres in Meridian. 1993 Site approval for Stor-It (140,00 eq, ft. addition) 40 acres in Meridian.