Packard Acres Sub. No. 2 FP 00-018TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City
Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall
Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: September 13, 2000
Transmittal Date: August 22, 2000 Hearing Date: September 19, 2000
File No.: FP 00-018
Request: Final Plat approval of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres for
proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
By: Packard Estates Development, LLC
Location of Property or Project: South of Ustick Road between Locust Grove and
Vintage Lane
Sally Norton, P/Z **
Kent Brown, P/Z **
Thomas Barbeiro, P/Z **
Richard Hatcher, P/Z **
Keith Borup, P/Z **
Robert Corrie, Mayor
Ron Anderson, C/C
Tammy deWeerd, C/C
Keith Bird, C/C
Cherie McCandless, C/C
Water Department
Sewer Department
Sanitary Service (no C/C only)
Building Department Your Concise Remarks:
Fire Department
Police Department
City Attorney
City Engineer
City Planner
Gen - 26 PP/FP/PFP - 24 AZ - 27 ** no FP
Meridian School District **
Meridian Post Office (FP/PP)
Ada County Highway District
Community Planning Assoc.
Central District Health
Nampa Meridian Irrig. District
Settlers Irrigation District
Idaho Power Co. (FP/PP)
U.S. West (FP/PP)
Intermountain Gas (FP/PP)
Bureau of Reclamation (FP/PP)
Idaho Transportation Department **
Ada County (Annexation)
--k
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
MAYOR
Robert D. Corrie
A Good Place to Live
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
CITY OF MERIDIAN
(208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
PUBLIC WORKS
Ron Anderson
33 EAST IDAHO
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Keith Bird
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297
Tammy deWeerd
(208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813
PLANNING AND ZONING
Cherie McCandless
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854
TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City
Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall
Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: September 13, 2000
Transmittal Date: August 22, 2000 Hearing Date: September 19, 2000
File No.: FP 00-018
Request: Final Plat approval of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres for
proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
By: Packard Estates Development, LLC
Location of Property or Project: South of Ustick Road between Locust Grove and
Vintage Lane
Sally Norton, P/Z **
Kent Brown, P/Z **
Thomas Barbeiro, P/Z **
Richard Hatcher, P/Z **
Keith Borup, P/Z **
Robert Corrie, Mayor
Ron Anderson, C/C
Tammy deWeerd, C/C
Keith Bird, C/C
Cherie McCandless, C/C
Water Department
Sewer Department
Sanitary Service (no C/C only)
Building Department Your Concise Remarks:
Fire Department
Police Department
City Attorney
City Engineer
City Planner
Gen - 26 PP/FP/PFP - 24 AZ - 27 ** no FP
Meridian School District **
Meridian Post Office (FP/PP)
Ada County Highway District
Community Planning Assoc.
Central District Health
Nampa Meridian Irrig. District
Settlers Irrigation District
Idaho Power Co. (FP/PP)
U.S. West (FP/PP)
Intermountain Gas (FP/PP)
Bureau of Reclamation (FP/PP)
Idaho Transportation Department **
Ada County (Annexation)
Sent By: City of Meridian;
2088886854; Aug -2-00 2:57PM;
REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
PRELIMINARY PLAT AND/OR FINAL PLAT
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FOVvED
AUG 16 2000
Cn..y OF
MEJUIDIANpi,��ffiGtZONWG
'E TABLE FOR SUBMISSION:
The submission deadline for ALL applications (other than Final Plats and Variances) is
5:60 p.m. of the fust business day of every month, Applications must be submitted to the
Planning & Zoning Department, located 'at 200 E. Carlton Ave., Ste. #20 1, Meridian.
NO EXCEPTIONS WILL BE MADE.
The Planning and Zoning Commission will hear the request at the monthly meeting
following the month that a complete application is received by the deadline date.
Incomplete applications will be returned to the applicant and will not be processed until
all required application elements are completed.
Applicants are encouraged to arrange for a pre -application meeting with a Planner at least
ten (10) business days BEFORE the submission deadline to address any concerns or
questions regarding the project.
GENERAL INFORMATION
�"��i A
1. Name of AnnAnnexation AW Sut�ivision: �L)t> NO, Z.
C��#'�
2. General Location:
3. Owners of Record: 7 t;�:N' .� ( �/'. L•l--C,
Address: 4!o I 7/oCvZI. y. PI�v
G�,{Zip `b31t 3 Telephone:
4. Applicant: AL?'oyo-
Address: _ , Zip Telephone:
5_ Engineer: Oma% /IV _ � Firm: 1'15;,A t/Ati D hcj iwl I- r,
6. Name and address to recmeive City billings- Name: 1 G 6PP•p�/i�j
Address (o22-,;7 N . 044,00* -Lt > 1Telephone.-_-, _2. 3 4,00 _
X3-113
PRELIMINARY PLAT CHECKLIST: Subdivision Features
1. Acres:
2. Number of building lots: C01
3. Number of other lots: 7
4. Gr bss density per acre:_ _ �_, (PV%
5. Net density per acre: _
6. Zoning Classification(s):
7. If the proposed subdivision is outside the Meridian City Limits but within the
jurisdictional mile, what is the existing zoning classification? Kb+
8. Does the plat border a potential green belt? D
Sent By: City of Meridian;
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
2088886854; Aug -2-0(L— 2:57PM; Page 6
Have recreational easements been provided for?—H a
Are there proposed recreational amenities to the City? N D Explain
Are there proposed dedications of common areas? Explain
For future parks? —Explain
What schools) service the area? A Iz- I Ari Ott. Do you propose any
agreements for future school sites? N Explain
Are there any other proposed amenities to the City?_{tel o Explain
14. ' 'Type of Building (Residential, Commercial, Industrial or combination): F -t? -.6A VA-L-
15.
im15. '; Type ofDwelling(s) (Single Family, Duplexes, Multiplexes, other): Ll�i`J�.f/• �iMit
16. Proposed Development features:
a. Minimum square footage of lot(s): 8040
b. Minimum square footage of structure(s): +00
i
C. Are garages provided for'? Square footage:
d. Has landscaping been provided for? ' Describe: (,14Vyi&oN AF.0&-14
e. Will trees be provided for?_ g64Will trees be maintained?
f. Are sprinkler systems provided for? !� 847
g.: Are there multiple units? N b Type:
Remarks:
L Are there special set back. requirements? HO Explain:
L Has off street parking been provided for? HO Explain
j. Value range of property: -P I V0 ;0D0 . X10 rclyTo�/Lrs
k.: Type of financing for development:
1. Were protective covenants submitted? o Date:
17. Does the proposal land lock other property? hl0 Does it create Enclaves?.
STA;1'EMENTS OF COMPLIANCE:
1. Streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks are to be constructed to standards as required by Ada
County Highway District and Meridian Ordinance. Dimensions will be determined by
the City Engineer. All sidewalks will be five (5) feet in width.
2. Proposed use is in conformance with the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
3. Development will connect to City services.
4. Development will comply with City Ordinances,
5. Preliminary Plat will include all appropriate easements.
6. Street names must not conflict with City grid system.
2
El
August 4, 2000
TEA�ETS LAND
SURVEYING
Shari Stiles, Administrator
Meridian Planning and Zoning Department
33 East Idaho Street
Meridian, Idaho 83642
RE: Final Plat Application
Packard Acres Subdivision #2
Dear Ms. Stiles:
2501 Bogus Basin nd. • Boise, Idaho 83702
(208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
This is the final plat application for Packard Aces Subdivision #2. Attached, you will find thirty
(3 0) copies of the final plat; four (4) copies of the construction plans; ten (10) copies of a map at
1" = 300'; and a copy of the current deed to the property.
The final plat meets the approved preliminary plat for Packard Acres Subdivision. It also
complies with the conditions of approval. As required by City Ordinance, the plat was drawn
according to the standards for development in the R-4 Zone and the appropriate notes are on the
face of the plat. This plat also complies with acceptable engineering and surveying practices as
well as local standards.
Please review the attached information and schedule a public hearing before the City Council. If
you have any questions or want additional information, please let me know. Thank you for
considering this request. I look forward to hearing from you regarding this matter.
Respectfully,
qJOW I
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's Land Surveying
C\2 �` N
n £ Z o
next. x��Ri11A3Rir`nR�^��FiF"x., 5 J 8W
O �w±r'.�Y;.�Brminrrrnr:�rm.'mao:mQ�Y. g �- m<� � 9 W 3
ZaWarrarasaaWraWaa>Waar>aWarW
z�?i7;gr_""j�r'iY�iSf Fg3;^„ s _ _�; "• g � �g < iW S
^- BRwmnmNmoBmnYSr'.�.Rs _ m " W i M
F� mV So$z'a.S^ .-T _ t S jb
O o HwzHzz Hzz zzw zH^ c w H 0 zS mo 4w Z S
m� wz H g 0 to. �w gi�r W m
:� $ "SSkW - _ d� °&
�Zmr^ w•>wwddlri 0 w1'8 g 6
J e
\ a ; _ _mm nAmm„. ?WO �o
Ye
►-� 3 m o o u,^`� _+SBo6§666o'•^^^o��''.0'.?r�
Q z w �g�mFJ,L.�S888888888gy^8y �ro��Rn^ J �o S z
O ? O W �n�oxxm:R&RB��xxsxxR3�=sn�gr� g =Fg E x< o Uy r a
I---\ w _ � O Oo H o
1--� z v z zo 88888'0 8888' 000 Oo,8om,'o$$00'0800�
o w -
~Q��QO o ” Rr
� ¢ N - � I.M.
��Rwrr�RRr"�R
Z z C=D¢ " aS$r R181�8 RFa18 3YYY3SxrgYO"e u GaYN<H g s z W�op�gg
w < F-= o suuuui,su �a g �W0 o� F
O u uuuuuu SS w R,• 8 c
W m w N a m Y m m PI p 2 o$ Z W < Z< 4 4 Z N y
N Q Y n k ZZ <
W Ha Ino¢'n 6
9L
o "xx xx"
^ �29R 8 101 a� 8$ n3<�81818C r+R81 §o ouW mi oW -H < IS $a�
oa �yZ H gym
o araa>rr Wa Wra WaWrh1aa>ar WraW �F -g 08Wo L�I I�
Unn°+ry 1+.1- ^n.w„.Y„--r+lni.m Non emNPww is uz0
z �P„I �I In mm M" 1rI ..pp II�� q iy JJ
<�Y.I♦IPPRII �IaV Ynt .O PIS V m a�N yYr..� PIN: .w.e '_eRw h1Y.1 W q W< �I 00 OWS�S W1 . S
wiiih..1f IY.uOflnp� p NOmONmwm HQ f :sv
Z Z w H w Z Z w Z w Z w Z H^^ w H W Z 6 < W < J O J OJ W F Y _ W Z J
F ¢¢ S= �Z FW i< m, F )
p� W _ J9W" SJ m�
��3 W o�E� Je IM ^
YW�
i�J1 r�nn S$R ma 1ria
rtl W ♦ $ W
�Hg$WNniin P c, R in RzYASNII.1�8 "m
P
J 88 Y i�Io oCum.BnsIPj :^0 �n 1"ni YHe Yb88
W +$$r� Heim aYnxx
O O - - -
m 1.�
rn Y w o 0 0 0 o OYOC 3-?JY3 HIM f Y
N P .61'119z A.LZ�9E.005 =8880000m888088.88888101
8888888 --- W
m Sra;dd ddddd0d c 9NImejo SISYB s++44445!44 m"�wb rRxnwnnnnww L .G > �
� N 'vy R S
anmw4=bDYIe3C9 £rol Yet n.nla tJ• a
I.iiw W u u b z
°C °� =` aN77.K-G9NCY7 SSYd913S n^�b.
w m : VIVO WLh39 -40 1N/Od
r � $
'9N LN3Y35Y3 r,
(33-1dNn 35377Y 'GH'7r pF
IN m P� - - - - _ _ - _ - _ LO'E99 M .ZEILZ.00 S
g N N r r u
Ig 0 2�JN Pg
6 �I �)� S
m-
Ry I
\ W N
En
1.
"961 �0a'OSZ
A .EL,2.00 S {• >I a
,Iru aru Z111
ww ,mw y N 2 H
H a N 1
W u a Zay. o - �I►G
A.Y��i.w■ j. l.RR.m .O.R.aON �mW I .mea $
LnRI m x ,C4'VO4 M „ZE�LZ.00 5 $ N Y wa i = `oo10 i I• m I �o� 6
)
z i g" = s �g RR.m Q.A.wN I I �•vlo Z
A o
Z-. $ wE I N I n A Ao P O
O W O O O W W N m W r _ JIP
W m U�m P
W �I-mnl tS p:01N A� N .mm zvQ i,na
I �l l m y s 0� = A .a�v.w ■ w e Ira
m l I .nrG I .mm I I .orae .alga
I.7 I 41ol
Y- b ) = N l I m •1
1 0 0 0 • • W m soup Q� was mw mw $ .mw r� M1 y m
• s C_AtlM NI�A30 'N Y d I ,IrG N� wasa'3AV WIA30 N 1~ q
ON
IN!
3 ` CN a469L A .EZ.9L.00 S C I RR.m N WT— - SZL6L A .Ea 9Zr0a S .
�k J .ILK .mw ,mw .K6 a-N I a V .mw ,V' P
" u'R m
P �°� e� N r N IR sw ° P
g^a \I•F z
O Q.Az to may' �• s,'�
5� \0 Pp0'iaaE � oo' 0� 0 1 - - - r I .ez.R.w■ a C� �N
I S o-9 • ^ N �- J �r�j I zl
l Y - Q Q tz .Y e i
��'ya• N 6 $r N p qY N S S t I mA14 i Lai it Z
+ 4
00 rI.S
01 j!
j IarGB • .nn F
zcr
'Id A�M3WI5 NN. I i R.R.m ` 0EE91 3 .[L.yL.00 N ,ch
co
'c sr �v I 1d Alt13W15 'N RR.m
W r 0) 8 N O B >.Ea S S a�gw N O) I N �S Jf•' u I >.; t:
ofyy $
tn
NPI �fyN ' mY 1%
m P �ml = W vo In
m .a weO - R �a w - _Qo`w ,mA -.wa1 _.fiao _ _ ,w•ee
Q
--_ ,ma 0 .er% ,error a
.56'6L9 3 „W.SE.00 N 1Z6'E99 3 .Ee.9Z.00 N N >_
r
a311VldNn¢e anns 531tl153 W NVIHEIGHVHO Q fi
n PW 2 V
V
Ww W
W i'
By: City or ivieri.dian; 2088886854; Aug -2-00 2:56PM; Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINAL SUBDM. SION PLAT CHECKLIST
INCOMPLETE SUBMITTALS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED
SUBb1VISION NAME: �C��! 4--A) Z-
ENGINEER: 47
The final plat shall include and be in compliance with all item required under Title 50, Chapter 13
of the IdAlLo Code. The final plat submittal shall include at least the following:
TTF,11 DESCRIPTION C MMENTS
1. Thirty (30) copies of written application
for approval as stipulated by the Council
2. ' Pniof of current ownership of the real
property included in the proposed final plat
and consent of recorded owners of the plat
(wrarrty deed, signature sheet of final plat)
3. A statement of conformance with the approved
preliminary plat and meeting all requirements
or conditions.thereof
4. A statement of conformance with all require-
ments and provisions of this Ordinance C/
5. A statement of conformance with acceptable
engineering, architectural and surveying v
practices and local standards
6. Street name approval letter from Ada County
7. Three (3) copies of the final engineering
construction drawings for streets, water, sewers,
sidewalks, irrigation and other public
improvements
8. Thirty (30) prints of the final plat at a
scale of one inch equals three hundred feet
(1" = 300D. Include subdivision and street 41-11,
names, lot and block numbersz4n
Sent By: Citywof Meridian;
2088886854;
r.
FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT CHECKLIST
Aug -2-0 1 0 "1 2:56PM; Page 3
Page 2
9. Thirty (30) folded copies of the final plat containing
the following requirements and three (3) copies of the
signature page of the1nal plat. Plat shall include:
a. Approved Plat Name
b. Year orplatting
c. Sectional location of plat - County
d. North arrow
e. Scale of plat (not smaller than I "=100')
✓
f Streets and alleys with widths and bearings
g. Street names
h. Consecutive numbering of all lots in each
block, and each block lettered or numbered
L Each and all lengths of the boundaries of
each lot including curve table
j. Exterior boundaries shown by distance and
bearing (heavier lines than streets and
lots) including curve table
k. Descriptions of survey monuments
✓
1. Initial point and tie to at least two
public land survey corners or, in lieu
thereo4 to two monuments recognized
by the City Engineer or County Engineer
or surveyor; and also, if required by
the City or countygoverning bodies,
give coordinates based on the Idaho
Coordinate system
in Easements
n. Basis of bearings.
0. Pertinent notes for easements,
restrictions, designations, etc.
p. Land Surveyor - signed seal
q. Land Surveyor business name City
location
r. Legend of symbols
s. Minimum residential house size
✓
t. Adjacent platted subdivision names
10. Fee Paid - Lots (a?, $10.00/Lot
11. Other Informflon as Requested by Administrator,
City Engineer, Planning & Zoning Commission,
or City Council
Sent By: City of Meridian; 2088886854•
Aug-2-00---,2:56PM;
Page 4
FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT CHECKLIST
Page 3
12. Substantial difL-rencOs between the approved preliminary plat and the final plat, variances not
yet: applied fior, non-conformance with cormnents of staff and/or agencies, etc., will be cause
for: rejection and/or possible resubmittal to Planning & 7,oning Commission for approval.
REVIEW BY: Shari Stfies. PlaMing & Zoning Administrator
Gga D. Sm& P ., City Engineer
ACCEPTANCE DATE:
OTHER ITEMS
1. L=iscape plan for common lott,
2. �,ot frontages
C\2
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF THE
APPLICATION OF PACKARD
ESTATES DEVELOPMENT FOR
APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR
PACKARD ACRES SUBDIVISION
NO. 2, LOCATED SOUTH OF
USTICK ROAD BETWEEN
LOCUST GROVE ROAD
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FILE COPY
CASE NO. FP -00-018
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
This matter coming before the City Council for Final Plat approval
pursuant to Meridian City Code § 12-3-7 on October 17, 2000, and continued until
November 8, 2000, and continued from January 2, 2001, and tabled until January 16,
2001, and the Council finding that the Administrative Review is complete which has
included certain comments and conditions as stated in a letter to the Mayor and Council
from Bruce Freckleton, Engineering Technician III, and Shari Stiles, Planning and
Zoning Administrator, listing 7 General Comments and 25 Site Specific Comments,
which are herein found fair and reasonable, and at the January 16, 2001 meeting, Shari
Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, commented at the hearing, and Pat Tealey
testified on behalf of the Applicant, and Wanda Sharp, Dale Sharp and Craig Groves
appeared and testified, and the Council having considered the requirements of the
preliminary plat the Council takes the following action:
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL
PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 (FP -00-018)
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Plat of "PACKARD ACRES SUBDIVISION NO. 2" as evidenced in
Plat bearing the Project No. 1408, Sheet 1 of 2, By: Tealey's Land
Surveying, and Packard Estates Development, LLC, Developer, is
Conditionally Approved subject to those conditions of Staff comments as
set forth in the Memorandum to the Mayor and City Council from Bruce
Frecicleton, Engineering Technician III, and Shari Stiles, Planning and
Zoning Administrator, dated September 28, 2000, listing 7 General
Comments and 25 Site Specific Comments, a true and correct copy of
which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A", and a copy of a Statement
received by the North Wingate Lane Residents, and consisting of eight
pages, and by this reference incorporated herein, with the additional
requirements that:
1.1 Additionally, at the City Council meeting on January 16, 2001,
action taken by the Council consisted of the following revisions to
the Staff comments of September 28, 2000, as follows:
Under Site Specific Comment number 9, it shall read as follows:
9. Show Wingate Lane on the final plat map as a 15 -foot wide
easement, and reference the existing 15 -foot wide recorded private
lane easement.
Under Site Specific Comment number 13, it shall read as follows:
13. Provide a ten -foot -wide easement for public utilities, drainage,
and irrigation along the southern boundary of Lot 20, Block 2, and
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL
PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 (FP -00-018) -2
west of 15 -foot -wide easement for Wingate Lane along Lots 17-22,
Block 2, and Lot 10, Block 5.
Under Site Specific Comment number 15, it shall read as follows:
15. Provide detailed fencing and gate plans that also show the
proposed location of irrigation clean out structures for approval prior
to signature on the final plat. Irrigation plans must be approved by
downstream water users. Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to
applying for building permits. The applicant needs to provide
revised detailed fencing and gate plans.
Under Site Specific Comment number 19, it shall read as follows:
19. Wingate Lane borders the eastern boundary of this subdivision.
The easement for this private roadway needs to be shown along the
backs of Lots 17-22, Block 2, and Lot 10, Block 5. All headgate and
cleanout structures are to be located outside of the 15 -foot -wide
easement and be accessible to water users without requiring entrance
onto individual building lots or climbing over fences.
Under Site Specific Comment number 20, it shall read as follows:
20. The City requires that there be a gate across E. Challis Street on
the east boundary of Wingate Lane, and one on the west boundary
of Wingate Lane. This shall allow pedestrian traffic, as well as
bicycles.
Under Site Specific Comment number 23, it shall read as follows:
23. Staff foresees a problem with buyers of Lots 17-22, Block 2,
trying to access Wingate Lane if the easement is part of the platted
lots. The developer shall have their attorney draw up a release of
dominant parcel interest in the private lane easement and record it
prior to signature on the final plat. Also provide a recorded copy of
deed restriction to prohibit access to Wingate Lane and forbid gates
or removal of permanent fencing on these lots prior to applying for
building permits. Fencing shall be set at the western boundary of the
15 -foot easement for Wingate Lane.
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL
PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 (FP -00-018) -3
2. The final plat upon which there is contained the Certification and signature
of the City Clerk and the City Engineer verifying that the plat meets the City's
requirements shall be signed only at such time as:
a. The Plat dimensions are approved by the City Engineer; and
b. The City Engineer has verified that all off-site improvements are
completed and/or the appropriate letter of credit or cash has been
issued guaranteeing the completion of off-site and required on-site
improvements.
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the
/6 _10
day of , 2001.
By: L,
G%, r.� Ca7u-n - P�'Jide•i.t Aee.21L 131�'d.
Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public
Works Department.
B 1�A 1()_ Dated:
City Clerk
/_M_b'd
msg/ZAWorkVv \Meddian\Meridian 15360M\BridgeTower AZ017 CUP043 PP017\FPOrder025
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL
PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 (FP -00-018)
` t��tr�rttlrtrtrryrc,
4.
SEAL
Y �►G�A c1
-p'(.v 1� rj
Nil
Y
Mayor-Yk
and Crty Council ( C% �
To:
City of Meridian `-'' October 16, 2000
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 83642
From: North Wingate Lane Residem
2445 North Wingate Lane % t�fiice
Meridian, Idaho 83642 city
Re: Statement of expectations for developers of Packard Estates Development, LLC.
The residents of North Wingate Lane feel it is necessary to restate their position
concerning use, access, or development of Wingate Lane by anyone not directly now
living in a residence on the lane. We are supported byprevious documents and
proceedings that specifically prohibit any kind of access to North Wingate by others not
presently living on the lane. We are very weary of having to keep such a vigilant watch
on the proceedings for development of the lands that abut North Wingate Lane. We have
made it clear in the past that all traffic of any kind, including pedestrian and bike traffic,
will be prohibited now and in the future from traveling on or across North Wingate Lane.
We expect the compliance of Packard Estates Development, LLC. to the city council for
the construction of permanent gates (for the use of emergency vehicles only ) and fences
to assure this.
The property owners on the lane established this lane as a private lane, July 25, 1913.
Ada County has already ruled that no more houses may be built along North Wingate
Lane that would require entrance and exit directly from the lane.
The residents of the lane pool money to maintain the lane. In the past, great damage
has occurred because of use by construction vehicles that have illegally used the lane to
access the developing areas of Packard Estates Development, LLC. Enforcing
compliance has been difficult. The council has stated that permanent, not wire, fences and
gates were to be constructed along North Wingate Lane before development began. The
wire fences have been lowered whenever someone wanted to use the lane to access or
crossover to the east or west development. Only emergency county access is allowed.
All other accesses, including utility, ACRD, or irrigation, must be done on the
development property and not involve the lane in any way, or at any time.
No gates will be installed to allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles across
North Wingate Lane. This allowance would only invite problems. Sometimes this area is
referred to as the unconstructed portion of E. Challis. It is not. It is part of our
established, permanent private lane.
We greatly appreciate the efforts of Mr. Bruce Freckleton, and Ms. Shari Stiles. They
have been very helpful to explain and interpret the somewhat confusing documents
concerning these proceedings. We also appreciate any other entity that is working to
assure that legal concerns are correctly dealt with on this matter. Please help us put to
rest any further worries concerning our proper right to keep our private lane as such.
Sincerely, ��, CY
North Wingate Lane Residents
���
Attachment Enclosed:
MEMORANDUM:
September 28, 2000
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engine *
Shan Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator
Re: Request for a Final Plat Approval of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 — 60 Single-
family Building Lots on 23.02 Acres in an R4 Zone by Packard Estates Development,
LLC (File# FP -00-018)
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the
applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by
motion of the Meridian City Council:
LOCATION & SURROUNDING USES
The subject property is located west of Wingate Lane, south of Ustick Road, and east of Locust Grove
Road. The parcels) is currently zoned R-4. The South Slough borders the property on the north,
along with property owned by Vem Allem-an on the north and northwest boundaries. The southwest
portion of the property borders Chamberlain Estates Subdivision. Chateau Meadows East No. 8
Subdivision is south of the property, along with two five -acre parcels in Ada County. The northeast
portion of the property borders other acreages with single-family homes in Ada County. The property
is located in an area designated as single-family residential in the Comprehensive Plan.
SYrE SPECIFIC C0NIl4i N -n
Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat and development agreement.
2. Applicant has indicated previously that the pressurized irrigation system within this
development is to be connected to the existing system within Packard Subdivision. The
common areas within the development will be a subject to City of Meridian water assessments
for the domestic backup. Payment of water assessment fees is required prior to city signatures
on the final plat map.
3. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all lots
impacted by filling.
4. The design of drainage areas shall ensure that water is retained only during major storm events
for a maximum 24-hour period.
FP -00-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
11173 OF 7RF_ ISURE 1:4 LLEY
D.
Robert . Come
?me
A Good Placc to Live
LEGAL, DEP;SRT\B\T
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY OF MERIDIAN
(209)'-88-2499 Fax 288-2501
PUBLIC WORKS
Ron :X.r,derson
33 EAST IDAHO
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Keith Bird
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297
Tantmv de Weerd
(208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-1813
PLA_\tiTNG .IIID ZONING
Chore McCandless
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-3218
DEPARTMENT
(208) 8845533 • FAX 888-0854
MEMORANDUM:
September 28, 2000
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engine *
Shan Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator
Re: Request for a Final Plat Approval of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 — 60 Single-
family Building Lots on 23.02 Acres in an R4 Zone by Packard Estates Development,
LLC (File# FP -00-018)
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the
applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by
motion of the Meridian City Council:
LOCATION & SURROUNDING USES
The subject property is located west of Wingate Lane, south of Ustick Road, and east of Locust Grove
Road. The parcels) is currently zoned R-4. The South Slough borders the property on the north,
along with property owned by Vem Allem-an on the north and northwest boundaries. The southwest
portion of the property borders Chamberlain Estates Subdivision. Chateau Meadows East No. 8
Subdivision is south of the property, along with two five -acre parcels in Ada County. The northeast
portion of the property borders other acreages with single-family homes in Ada County. The property
is located in an area designated as single-family residential in the Comprehensive Plan.
SYrE SPECIFIC C0NIl4i N -n
Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat and development agreement.
2. Applicant has indicated previously that the pressurized irrigation system within this
development is to be connected to the existing system within Packard Subdivision. The
common areas within the development will be a subject to City of Meridian water assessments
for the domestic backup. Payment of water assessment fees is required prior to city signatures
on the final plat map.
3. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all lots
impacted by filling.
4. The design of drainage areas shall ensure that water is retained only during major storm events
for a maximum 24-hour period.
FP -00-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 2
5. Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, pressurized
irrigation system approved and activated, drainage lots constructed, fencing and gates installed,
and road base approved by the Ada County Highway District prior to applying for building
permits. Landscaping shall be installed prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. A letter of
credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing, pathways,
landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final
plat.
6. Applicant shall be responsible to construct a six -foot -high, permanent perimeter fence along
Property boundary (and westerly easement line of Wingate Lane), except where the City has
expressly agreed, in writing, that such fencing is not necessary. Fencing is to be in place prior
to applying for building permits.
7. Revise the following notes:
(5.) u adjacent to the exterior subdivision boundary lines.
(7) u Lot 10, Block 5, Lot 1, Block 8, and Lots 32 and 33, Block 2u
(8) u aad T et 33 R4)et_ Tu_
(12) Access to Wingate Lane is specifically prohibited
(13) This subdivision is subject to the terms of a development agreement recorded as
Instrument No. , records of Ada County Idaho
easement t
(14) (Provide a blanket o the City of Meridian over Lot 33, Block 2 for the
operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer intercepter.)
(15) Lots 1, 23, 24-26, and 29, Block 9 shall be subject to the terms of the existing
temporary sanitary sewer easements along their western boundary. No permanent
structures, fences, trees, or brush shall be placed within said easements
8. Remove 20 -foot -wide sanitary sewer easement south of E. Chemise Drive, and reference the
existing easement instrument number north of E. Chemise Drive.
9. Show Wingate Lane on the final plat map as a 20 -foot wide easement, and reference the
existing 15 -foot wide recorded private lane easement. The extra 5 -foot width is required by the
City of Meridian as the minimum width for an emergency access.
10. Widen Lot 33, Block 2, by ten feet to accommodate the South Slough sewer interceptor main.
Provide a blanket easement to the City of Meridian for the extension of the South Slough Sewer
Interceptor (see plat note #14 above). This portion of the sewer trunk line shall be constructed
at the time this subdivision is developed.
11. Revise the reference to the sewer easement along the western side of the subdivision to read:
20 foot -wide temporary sanitary sewer easement, Instruments Nos. and
(Make sure you reference both easements, Cassell, and PNE/Edmonds)
12. Add an arrow symbol to the plat legend that depicts front of house orientation. Place symbol
on Lot 27, Block 2, toward N. Devlin Way. An arrow is required because less than minimum
FP -400-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 3
street frontage is shown on the other lot side.
13. Provide a ten -foot -wide easement for public utilities, drainage, and irrigation along the southern
boundary of Lot 2, Block 2, and west of 20 -foot -wide easement for Wingate Lane along Lots
17-22, Block 2, and Lot 10, Block 5.
14. Detailed landscaping plans for all common areas, including species, size, quantities, and
locations, and pathway details must be submitted for approval to the Planning & Zoning
Department prior to City Engineer signing Final Plat.
15. Provide detailed fencing and gate plans that also show the proposed location of irrigation
cleanout structures for approval prior to signature on the final plat. Irrigation plans must be
approved by downstream water users. Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to applying for
building permits.
16. Sanitary sewer and water service to this site will be via extensions of the existing mains
installed in adjacent developments. Applicant will be responsible to construct lateral sewer and
water mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate
main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department.
17. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all
street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established
normal groundwater elevation.
18. Sidewalks are to provide a clear five -foot -wide walkway pathway without encroachment of
mailbox structures.
19. Wingate Lane borders the eastern boundary of this subdivision. The easement for this private
roadway needs to be shown along the backs of Lots 17-22, Block 2, and Lot 10, Block 5. The
easement width needs to be increased to 20 feet wide to meet Meridian Fire Department
requirements. All headgate/cleanout structures are to located outside of the 20 -foot -wide
easement and be accessible to water users without requiring entrance onto individual building
lots or climbing over fences.
20. One of the City's requirements in the development agreement conflicts with Ada County
Highway District's requirements. The applicant is not to construct the 20 -foot -wide portion of
E. Challis Street at the east boundary, and is to deposit money to complete construction of E.
Challis Street and remove the gates when (and if) the two five -acre parcels to the south are
developed (when Wingate Lane can be vacated). The City put a condition that a 20 -foot -wide
gate be constructed at the easement line of Wingate Lane that allows emergency fire
department access only (with appropriate signage). ACHD's condition of approval is to install
gates and allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles across the unconstructed portion of E.
Challis Street. The homeowners along Wingate Lane have requested that all access to Wingate
Lane be prohibited. Staff requests the City Council to specifically address this issue and
instruct staff of preferred direction.
FP -00.018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 4
21. Another requirement of the development agreement is provide a pathway along the South
Slough, as it is designated as a pathway in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. However,
Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District will not allow a license agreement for a pathway along live
irrigation ditches. Perhaps, instead of designating a pathway, the applicant could pave over the
sewer easement along the slough as a "sewer access road" to satisfy the pathway requirement
and avoid problems with Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District.
22. All damages to Wingate Lane caused by the developer or contractors are to be repaired
immediately. Homeowners along Wingate Lane have reported that damage to the lane
presently exists from construction equipment and work on the irrigation system. No building
permits will be accepted until the repair work is complete. The developers have agreed that no
construction traffic will be allowed to access Wingate Lane.
23. Staff foresees a problem with buyers of Lots 17-22, Block 2, trying to access Wingate Lane if
the easement is part of the platted lots. The developer shall have their attorney draw up a
release of dominant parcel interest in the private lane easement and record it prior to signature
on the final plat. Also provide a recorded copy of deed restriction to prohibit access to Wingate
Lane and forbid gates or removal of permanent fencing on these lots prior to applying for
building permits. Fencing shall be set at the western boundary of the 20 -foot easement for
Wingate Lane.
24. Submit copies of proposed restrictive covenants and deed restrictions for review. This
information was required at the preliminary plat stage; application indicates covenants have not
been submitted.
25. . Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved preliminary plat
does not relieve Applicant of responsibility for compliance. c, A
_GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
W/a��re/rsectmig, 1. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, in
crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City
Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage
district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to
the Public Works Department.
2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed
from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used
for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
3. One -hundred -watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated
by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense.
Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants.
FP -UO -018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 5
4. Submit oFinalp letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the
subdivision and street names. Make any corrections necessary to conform.
5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent.
6. Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 12-5-2.K.
7. If possible, respond in writing to this memorandum by noon on October 3, 2000. Submit
three copies of the revised Final Plat Map to the Public Works Department for compliance
review prior to development plan approval.
FP -00-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
�
Z
I
d _
y
jz
_o
I
.
�4IL� t
UST
J
o
J
�C!v A�.r �'.�e ✓.G 4J
'tic
J W I o
� 1
1
� C;hn CLrr
-r7
i
Tj
� 0
� v
..
It
jrf
{
/
..fes _
L-A
7-C
I1
'jr �� 4
/—G,.✓e,, y c % h .ef7-
7-A j!. a 1. ( zo �— C ° i d (L y ! c� /� ..r ...� .� a ... i Z,•_�
C r •r- 7 A a�vL E �Z a .` . e .� y ✓ ! 4 • e L.�j 1+•f i:! E e ,.0 .
4 Jo -e- Y17 a v t
L,j r L C. {^ �/' A / r -a•..0 J ""t �.•'i r .i. �_T! L / e G ^r
J b l S U PIONEER TITLE
` RECOPI O -REQUEST OF
iADA COUNTY RECDR
J.OAVWg'
8011 E, IDAHO DEED FEE 6rj DEPUTY
1. DATE, NAMES RPRALPTA 3 ADDRESSES 99087122
1.1. Date. This warranty deed is executed and delivered by Grantor to Grantee, or
assigns, on Aug. 27, 1999.
1.2. Name of Grantor and Address. The name of the Grantor is Edmonds
Construction, Inc., an Idaho corporation, whose mailing address is 1966 North Stoneview, Boise,
Idaho 83702 ("Grantor").
1.3. Name of Grantee and Address. The name of the Grantee is PACKARD ESTATES
DEVELOPMENT, LLC, an Idaho limited liability company, whose mailing address ks
6223 N. Discovery Way, Boise, Idaho 83713, ("Grantee").
2. CONVEYANCES
2.1. Grant. For value received, Grantor grants, bargains, sells and conveys to
Grantee, or assigns, all of its, title and interest in and to certain real property located in Ada
County, Idaho, and more particularly described on Exhibit "A" which is attached to this warranty
deed.
2.2. Covenants. Grantee, or assigns, their successors and assigns, shall have and
hold the property. The Grantor covenants to and with the Grantee, or assigns, that it is the owner
in fee simple of the property, that it is free from encumbrances and that it will warrant and
defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever.
3. SIGNATURE
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION, INC.,
an Idaho corporation,
ByG-��
Wirt monds, President
WARRANTY DEEDPage 1
14418-001 \\COMPAQ2500R\F1LES\e\edmonds constructionMarx:r,Deed #3A.doc. 07-02-99
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss.
County of Ada )
On O yo 27, 1999, before me, the undersigned, a notary public in and for said county
and state, personally appeared Wirt Edmonds, known to me to be the President of Edmonds
Construction, Inc., the corporation whose name is subscribed to the within instrument on behalf
of said corporation and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the
same day �.,W,y,gpr�in this certificate first above written.
CITA.Rp
N Y PUBLIC FOR
pUB N Re iding at
'o��'j, •.N.•••�,��.•' Commission Expires 7 - ��5
48811111111
WARRANTY DEED
14418-001 \\C0MPAQ2500R\F1LES\e\edmonds construction\Warranty Deed #3A.doc. 07-02-99
Page 2
' EXHIBIT
A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE -1
EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
THE SOUTH 935 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 2 OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,
RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN; THENCE
EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 34 1/2 RODS; THENCE
SOUTH PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION
TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
SAID SECTION; THENCE
WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE
NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION TO THE
PLACE OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPT:
A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 3
NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 5; THENCE
ALONG THE NORTH -SOUTH CENTER OF SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 5 SOUTH 0
DEGREE 27'32" WEST 1,673.35 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE
ALONG A LINE THAT IS 935.00 FEET NORTH OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST -WEST
CENTER OF SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 5 SOUTH 09 DEGREES 40'20" EAST
182.20 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE
LEAVING SAID PARALLEL LINE SOUTH 0 DEGREE 26'23" WEST 80.77 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE
CONTINUING SOUTH 0 DEGREE 26'23" WEST 119.58 FEET TO A POINT ON THE RIGHT
OF WAY LINE REPRESENTING THE LOCATION OF A FUTURE ROAD; THENCE
ALONG SAID FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY LINE NORTH 89 DEGREES 33'37" WEST 159.29
FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE
ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE RADIUS IS 20.00 FEET, WHOSE CENTRAL ANGLE
IS 90 DEGREES 00'00" WHOSE LENGTH IS 1,831.42 FEET, AND WHOSE LONG CHORD
BEARS NORTH 44 DEGREES 3337" WEST 28.28 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY;
THENCE
NORTH 0 DEGREE 26'23" EAST 99.58 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE
LEAVING SAID FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY LINE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 3337" EAST, 179.29
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
8
Q
Li
'iN :DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 2083642406
1999.09-21 10:31 #133 P.01/03
SUBDIVISION EVALUATION SHEET
>sed Development. Name PACKARD SUB. NO 2 City Meridian
„ PT I Reviewed 09/25/97 Preliminary Stage XXX Final
street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY
ET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this
opment in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance.
• • • �• �. •:u 1.INNI••-: •1 1c •
A � -
\ _'
• -1 • • •111=1 �• � - •�. • • • •- 1• -�
The above street name comments have been read and approved by the following agency
representatives, of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures
must be secured by the representative or his designee in order for the street names to be
officially approved.
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEEENCY�IPRESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES
Ada County Engineer John Priester
Ada Planning ASSOC. Ann Hurley
Date
Date
City of Meridian Representative Date
Fire District Meridian Representative Date ` "
NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ada County Engineer at the
time of signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed !!II
Sub Index Street Index SN 1E 5 Section
NUMBERING OF LOTS AND
TM$UM6M—CfTI.FRM
d. -r --R81 :DEVELOPMENT SERVICES _ 2083642406 1999j09-21 10:32 #133 P.03/03
MERIDIAN EVALUATION SHEET
Proposed Development Name Packard Acres Sub. File #
Date Reviewed 911/99 Preliminary Stage XX Final
Engineer/Developer Teaiey's Land Surveying
The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET
NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in
accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance.
The following street name exists and shall appear on the plat:
"E. USTICK RD."
The following street names are approved as extensions of existing roads:
"E. CHALLIS ST." "N. HICKORY WAY" "E. MEADOWGRASS ST." and'E. LOCHMEADOW ST"
'MALACHITE" is a duplicate and cannot be used. You must choose another name_
The above street name comments have been read and approved by the following agency
representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures must
be secured by the representative or his designee in order f7 the street names to be officially
approved.
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTE�,'i G7NCY REPRESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES
Ada County Engineer John Priester�I rx`/? ����C?'` � _ Date
Ada Planning Assoc. Sue Hansen ✓ Date _ I
2 c? -
City of Meridian Representative `J Date
Meridian Fire District Representative Date
NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ada County Engineer at the
time of signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed 1111
Subindex Street Index 3N 1E 5 Section
NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS 42,L
TR�SUSSISM CITY.FRM —�
]nRr,sw
f,t•Y,lM
]IfYtl,D•Y lm
f� Ai
a n,o,umw
+�1 T ]/1R
h f•RM1r6 "��j
l
mafa•m
Ma,r•r!.
p
E. KAMAY DR. F
n+•,nm. msna,
L G
bib^�;,,'•' "�°' Z9 2B 27 33 !„m,m••o
nr,.w,a
low, A` .; 32 3
,r'173I ��— 26 m••ruM �..
31 19
25 a 20 18 < 30 LOCATION OF PROPOSEDD
_ > PARKARD ACRES SUBDIVISION
d ✓ � � 21 17 z 8�p29 NO. 2
�.
ui a 28 Arm
22 16
_ z zZ
15 27 26 25 24 23 OOH /
OGS E. CHEMIRE DR. 0`' 22
�\, 23 .
•� �=
14 13 IZ 11 10 21 ]+,a,],.•o
1 2 3 45 b 7 8 9 20
•,,.,]ora �,.�,, x .
e a E. CHEMISE DR. 19
s' w
6 7 ¢ I 2 3 4 18
2 �� 5 8 Q 8 0� 6 5 17
I {�$ 3 4 9 z E. CHALLIS ST. r8LOCK26,
�]•.],•,,,
•,a•'''�I•.3•" ,a �• N •.]•'r• I Via•• RT
...........
lr
I
s7
9 P f i 300 SCALE VICINITY MAP OF
PACKARD ACRES SUBDIVISION NO. 2
1'I 517UATED IN THE E 1/2, NW 1/4, SECTION 5
T.3N., RJE., B.M., MERIDIAN, AOA COUNTY, IDAHO
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING
7301 BOGUS BASM R0. BCW— IDAHO &TM (M) XS -0030 FAX (200 SM—MM
Date: 8/25/93 Own: maw OWg# 1408-2-300
n
g, gCaLLL«aLSASA3:>+'n'^8«nGRC,3G,eG:
F�Feni:n°nT„+w Tin«5�^'''q^nn:^„,4:Qgi�4•'n
SFi^�„!'F888888..•' '8_S:RBS'pc:^r?pr
�gS:^'"• YgY€Y'S6CS•S SLSRe56aAn-osA
88 g8888R,g Saba R.Sa888R
RRRa��R3" �$$$LGLRRRR$YRRRLCC$
�La:aR SR” � RSS5SS5 +o
-RSeRg,SS::SS^.ga:L,RGRSS�^.,r L,Rr:SS°G
�77&F:aalC r.S«"1A$�«S«y61 fA y,G«SLB-"" :•
°iA^FF=«RAp«S.>;Y«a:?�� .., CICGj,:FRRFFF
��asss=ssn.a:!=.�xa�r,ss:-=asaaso:�o sn:
r�^ nYsin« - 6R
�':^„�6S&BRRaA;,SBS^SgL��^�«gR77a^=7S
88.8888.8Ra$g88aSS_SaSaaa88,R a 0$8888
avow 319Y3 MIaON ",•
m 9NIZIUS JO SISYB
O..
s91wer7ssravaltmr tl xy I !!' '"• ,>
,`JriI1I1R?3S�t71A1t71d ° ',; • "
a
�sanx......................--...._.........._._...----------_._—._.._..__..__..----• OE "Z
M .ZE LZL00 S M .ZE,LZ.001' .S 8w 5
N N. - - - ,fie•° - --x.Z[.¢.ar r - - - -•IZin �v •sv .vs"� .srw `_ ___ � � a ss
d mla a c-,�^ w craM.
22
w .xrn .x'ee .•h Ix
<
N
- 0._fw A.aZ.K.Ws IO m-
W
Z • m N
ml. N ,", o .sx .>:: P R..cs .K ^ ~ ��Ce 1 -j
y S O H a,le I $ r i `-
iV
t .
r
� W N O -
1z z 3y a m H o yy�3 c S.x� ,Ei'Voi M .ZE�LZ.00 S N "¢ a s q l
Z f ¢J n pD N i 1. W W .Lrm ir0a .K'fA .WCv .WW 011. .12.005 4W 3..ORaO f .Or'WI ,� I^R x.6i.r1.0a 511 .FZ.YLa05 RIa I�
E1.R.00 x1
:IW 4 R N i IP
c.r Py m zu:
W V• .a I C� N s C N x .L1.Lx.00 9 yf .ar0a 1 .ar0a LI x.Q.L00 s w z .K .K
i I • • ❑ x m• ]., ¢' ,orw .arw . .ux m - •i .a .arw 6
I 8 W 3AY NI-1A3a 'N ^ 3
3 h ka a i • o-. AYM NI-IA30 'N C "+,Nt- .aa¢ ae x C .ar• °ss1.
g Nc•. .srwz ^ .fza.w v a:A w ar.v
�; 1 I 1h �•� C' a o dcx .ara .mw .1ccc c� s. 1 I N - V p .w sL Www
_ r
. 1 arar w� n p: m Vis. P :.rya,
N
C P _ r. .cru • .cz.as.m s
J •Ary.Qa f�a c_� .� A^ s i =In
t• N
`�� �^•a ',I
4x 6 •• ^. �_ N >: � `` m Lia .¢ m
h 0 '•r': 4a;d is � T •f;� � ° ^- �gb i .arm ~ .vc. _• p H
,O ♦ .men ^ aro .¢.K.00 x
hO q•I' 8 j$ xl •a' ld Al213M15 'N .•w 1
'� m 8s '-ld AlM3WIS 'N c ��8.� �• i �rzcnl ]:¢.x.rvx a.¢.K.vvx .•
y _ a c 8 N $ ti, .[L'rn • �.vx. s u R ry �� N w s_ t�a I s
W `• 4 �I> 8 In.' .Inw n.a .arm v • cv-x m it ..
va 1 J ^ E .¢.x. s R N .o i .¢.K.ve x., 3 •r
.w
_ /�
z - ? a
.
------
--2L—
- .avwx _ _ 'x_
vrLK ] ca.mx rn r .59'099 3 .ZE.L6.00 N3 16'E99 3 .00,OZ,00 N
9L'f (3 .9.0.00 N) a s; v g a
8 A k: � I A .arra M^da
N r 33 naps .,3_.-...a I•il'!-t3i3a N'!H7
0=311 H'1 dfH(1 w¢
�Y o
g
cI�SS
iw
cm -ME
§_ E -
g��
O s
Id
� ¢g �o� W •nJ J< Jr-
�Zl�
1�•I 12-i �
J u fln �7-
LH o R
MF M-•
F
LL -W
0 3 m z O W_
Z r o
N j O
o
W 6 N u
i
NW E5
o
U Q N
t/7 Q
I�
n
g, gCaLLL«aLSASA3:>+'n'^8«nGRC,3G,eG:
F�Feni:n°nT„+w Tin«5�^'''q^nn:^„,4:Qgi�4•'n
SFi^�„!'F888888..•' '8_S:RBS'pc:^r?pr
�gS:^'"• YgY€Y'S6CS•S SLSRe56aAn-osA
88 g8888R,g Saba R.Sa888R
RRRa��R3" �$$$LGLRRRR$YRRRLCC$
�La:aR SR” � RSS5SS5 +o
-RSeRg,SS::SS^.ga:L,RGRSS�^.,r L,Rr:SS°G
�77&F:aalC r.S«"1A$�«S«y61 fA y,G«SLB-"" :•
°iA^FF=«RAp«S.>;Y«a:?�� .., CICGj,:FRRFFF
��asss=ssn.a:!=.�xa�r,ss:-=asaaso:�o sn:
r�^ nYsin« - 6R
�':^„�6S&BRRaA;,SBS^SgL��^�«gR77a^=7S
88.8888.8Ra$g88aSS_SaSaaa88,R a 0$8888
avow 319Y3 MIaON ",•
m 9NIZIUS JO SISYB
O..
s91wer7ssravaltmr tl xy I !!' '"• ,>
,`JriI1I1R?3S�t71A1t71d ° ',; • "
a
�sanx......................--...._.........._._...----------_._—._.._..__..__..----• OE "Z
M .ZE LZL00 S M .ZE,LZ.001' .S 8w 5
N N. - - - ,fie•° - --x.Z[.¢.ar r - - - -•IZin �v •sv .vs"� .srw `_ ___ � � a ss
d mla a c-,�^ w craM.
22
w .xrn .x'ee .•h Ix
<
N
- 0._fw A.aZ.K.Ws IO m-
W
Z • m N
ml. N ,", o .sx .>:: P R..cs .K ^ ~ ��Ce 1 -j
y S O H a,le I $ r i `-
iV
t .
r
� W N O -
1z z 3y a m H o yy�3 c S.x� ,Ei'Voi M .ZE�LZ.00 S N "¢ a s q l
Z f ¢J n pD N i 1. W W .Lrm ir0a .K'fA .WCv .WW 011. .12.005 4W 3..ORaO f .Or'WI ,� I^R x.6i.r1.0a 511 .FZ.YLa05 RIa I�
E1.R.00 x1
:IW 4 R N i IP
c.r Py m zu:
W V• .a I C� N s C N x .L1.Lx.00 9 yf .ar0a 1 .ar0a LI x.Q.L00 s w z .K .K
i I • • ❑ x m• ]., ¢' ,orw .arw . .ux m - •i .a .arw 6
I 8 W 3AY NI-1A3a 'N ^ 3
3 h ka a i • o-. AYM NI-IA30 'N C "+,Nt- .aa¢ ae x C .ar• °ss1.
g Nc•. .srwz ^ .fza.w v a:A w ar.v
�; 1 I 1h �•� C' a o dcx .ara .mw .1ccc c� s. 1 I N - V p .w sL Www
_ r
. 1 arar w� n p: m Vis. P :.rya,
N
C P _ r. .cru • .cz.as.m s
J •Ary.Qa f�a c_� .� A^ s i =In
t• N
`�� �^•a ',I
4x 6 •• ^. �_ N >: � `` m Lia .¢ m
h 0 '•r': 4a;d is � T •f;� � ° ^- �gb i .arm ~ .vc. _• p H
,O ♦ .men ^ aro .¢.K.00 x
hO q•I' 8 j$ xl •a' ld Al213M15 'N .•w 1
'� m 8s '-ld AlM3WIS 'N c ��8.� �• i �rzcnl ]:¢.x.rvx a.¢.K.vvx .•
y _ a c 8 N $ ti, .[L'rn • �.vx. s u R ry �� N w s_ t�a I s
W `• 4 �I> 8 In.' .Inw n.a .arm v • cv-x m it ..
va 1 J ^ E .¢.x. s R N .o i .¢.K.ve x., 3 •r
.w
_ /�
z - ? a
.
------
--2L—
- .avwx _ _ 'x_
vrLK ] ca.mx rn r .59'099 3 .ZE.L6.00 N3 16'E99 3 .00,OZ,00 N
9L'f (3 .9.0.00 N) a s; v g a
8 A k: � I A .arra M^da
N r 33 naps .,3_.-...a I•il'!-t3i3a N'!H7
0=311 H'1 dfH(1 w¢
�Y o
g
cI�SS
iw
cm -ME
§_ E -
g��
��„ W Sib
Id
� ¢g �o� W •nJ J< Jr-
�Zl�
W Fv _
in Iil i m m- W W em < 0� tm7i
a
J u fln �7-
(208) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854
TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City
Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall
Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: September 13, 2000
Transmittal Date: August 22, 2000
Hearing Date: September 19, 2000
File No.: FP 00-018
Request: Final Plat approval of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres for
proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
By: Packard Estates Development. LLC
Location of Property or Project:
Vintage Lane
South of Ustick Road between Locust Grove and
Sally Norton, P/Z **
MAYOR
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
Meridian School District **
Robert D. Corrie
. A Good Place to Live
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Ada County Highway District
Keith Borup, P2 **
(2°8) _' 9 •Fax 288-2501
Ron Anderson
33 EAST IDAHO
PUUBLIBLI C WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Keith Bird
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297
Tammy deWeerd
(208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813
Cherie McCandless
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218
PLANNING .AND ZONING
Idaho Power Co. (FP/PP)
—_ 'Cherie McCandless, C/C
� -Water Department
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854
TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City
Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall
Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: September 13, 2000
Transmittal Date: August 22, 2000
Hearing Date: September 19, 2000
File No.: FP 00-018
Request: Final Plat approval of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres for
proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
By: Packard Estates Development. LLC
Location of Property or Project:
Vintage Lane
South of Ustick Road between Locust Grove and
Sally Norton, P/Z **
Kent Brown, P/Z **
Meridian School District **
Thomas Barbeiro, P/Z **
Meridian Post Office (FP/PP)
Richard Hatcher, P/Z **
Ada County Highway District
Keith Borup, P2 **
Community Planning Assoc.
Robert Come, Mayor
Central District Health
Ron Anderson, C/C
Nampa Meridian Irrig. District
Tammy deWeerd, C/C
Settlers Irrigation District
Keith Bird, C/C
Idaho Power Co. (FP/PP)
—_ 'Cherie McCandless, C/C
� -Water Department
U.S. West (FP/PP)
Intermountain Gas (FP/PP)
Sewer Department
__
Bureau of Reclamation (FP/PP)
Sanitary Service (no C/C
only)
Idaho Transportation Department **
Building Department
Your Concise Remarks:
Ada Cou (A)�
Fire Department
Police Department
Z�-
City Attorney
City Engineer
City Planner
Gen - 26 PP/FP/PFP - 24 AZ .27 ^ no FP
TTG,
pendia iAte4��1
SEP 2 2 2000
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Z0'39dd bbL0b8880Z
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
MAYOR
Robert D. Comic A Good Place to Live
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY OF MERIDI.,A.N
Ron Anderson 33 EAST IDAHO
Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Tammy de Weerd (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813
Cherie McCandless City Clcrk Office Fax (208) 8SS-421 S
60:92 00, SE d9S
LEGAL DEPARTMENT -
(208) 288.2499 • Fax 288.2501
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 887-2211 • Fax 887.1297
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(20S) 984-5533 • Fax 988-6854
TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City
Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall
Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: September 13, 2000
Transmittal Date: August 22, 2000 Hearing Date: September 19, 2000
File No.: FP 00-018
Request: Final Plat approval of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres for
proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
By: Packard Estates Development, LLC
Location of Property or Project: South of Ustick Road between Locust Grove and
Vintage Lane
Sally Norton, P/Z **
Kent Brown, P/Z **
Thomas Barbeiro, P/Z
Richard Hatcher, P/Z
Keith Borup, P/Z `*
Robert Corrie, Mayor
Ron Anderson, C/C
Tammy deWeerd, C/C
Keith Bird, C/C
Cherie McCandless, C/C
Water Department
—�� Sewer Department
Sanitary Service (no C/C only)
Building Department
Fine Department
Police Department
City Attorney
City Engineer
City Planner
Gen - 26 PP!FP/PFP - 24 AZ - 27 •• no FP
zi
Your Concise Remarks:
Meridian School District *-
Meridian Post Office (FP/PP)
Ada County Highway District
Community Planning Assoc.
Central District Health
Nampa Meridian Irrig. District
Settlers Irrigation District
Idaho Power Co. (FP/PP)
U.S. West (FP/PP)
Intermountain Gas (FP/PP)
Bureau of Reclamation (FP/PP)
Idaho Transportation Department **
Ada County (Annexation)
ACHD
- f !�� Ada County Highway District
INTER -OFFICE MEMO
June 17, 2002
Right -of -Way & Development Department
Planning & Development Division
To: ACHD COMMISSION RECEIVED
From: Development Services JUN 2 0 2002
Subject: Final Plat: Packard Acres No. 2 City of Meridian
City Clerk Offiet-
Meeting Date: June 26, 2002
FACTS & FINDINGS:
Packard Acres No. 2 is a 6 common 60 buildable -lot residential subdivision on 23.00 -acres.
This site is located south of Ustick Road approximately 1/4 mile east of Locust Grove Road.
2. The preliminary plat was approved on October 18, 1995. All conditions of the preliminary
plat have been satisfied.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the final plat of Packard Acres No. 2 and authorize the President to endorse.
SUBMITTED BY:
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT STAFF
DATE OF COMMISSION APPROVAL
Cv
O
z
O
1--1
ori m
U p
-
LL-
W
S im
Z�C§o
"$
Q�yi
Q O
W N
0_
N
LLJ
U
A
U
a
c ZVI=.id 49M dv STYd60VW I Y IV k;
¢' �l1fMR"JM.YV JA(W
's _
g• ❑alltl�drin I p � 8
� I
LL*SLE A ZE L.Mo
00 S M "ZE,L3.0019 i •
b
SIS g r N_ Gad b I a 6
�I: ♦�' C 3 byF4 -S $ " ;; m .S n8
N pp
q�
3I °I� • - s ! y ibL m • .a=.♦ ,ma '.wm IC!
NIC A"MOO a
" o•" _j a W 6 '0fmi, +3AY90 N p
• o m J o� •.•.em - I I 7 i 1 } pq j/ W
ig m . J J
c pl !i zo J s•r .moa ' i .moa ' ' .;O a
2 G F 2a�R VN NJI.Y.mc ].p.R.00 F.Y.mN I A.QY.w cl ♦ VI$ IP 2
K V O o g o < tl ( c.x'ar 3 A&M.0o m XI '! m - e- i a,
v a m x®$ g
L* "k M .ZE,LZ.00 S n $ �� o W�
ag .♦r -I•a .M. r a i
N I < V m n O N` a W •aA AOA N.tl.a.m■R•IW •m9a I I N.R,l.al• a !b
=I � � � r�ili .tc � o[ a.vs.m ,o.+amN - I ■� I
N 6` 260i <vooc R-P1�1� m o $ $ Rf- t N ' n
< W �. r c rc r y IRv l A • m
'w.mc 12
pwp I c to -
• • ❑ an $ i wau In .n,♦r.al N wa = OD � I v
_ Q .t►yl .am Jam ♦ ! PI s W .mW 1 1 ,00m i
I$ I N
W AVM NI'IA30 "N
IN C c d S i .mm �C '3AY Nana 'N I
xw0-.s7�+c Nsw.aN � C •a i t .Q1N.mN �aYia�w.ms �
GI F S� tni b ♦ ia'p-sN Jt�c .mm .mw .N.a c{" I I - w .wrt ,arH ,mr. g
ii•a,� ♦ m r W n 10 O�
=I b-
$ $
'lt 8 9� i� �� ,�� r� O it - i • uls .pro N -aN - s.
,m
t O
49
139
/i R'�►d1 i t A� a Aet N sQ q m a .s: _ �Im❑
'! N s'¢is No ■ ,v ae a. ! a.w.m x Id 331NY5 •N :� W
o $ m $ 6 _ �j5oo ow a.a
g W 4g N S �,K1 - .v,s. ■ 6 A5� m '� I N Z
i N �j G: l a
��� °I 1 .moi i i w no �• N Y Iv. Jra a i .aoaa a a as > m i) 3
I� m
T h
ml,o •
B
;egg•��I P6 Y �Y. ALJ A ii In
n m 1'r, is W i%nN
�g
1 f'lA y_ � - �-• A
� Jf i/S—li fQiYl fqq �,M'•I �QO— .
L'6L9 3 .ZE.LZ.00 N
¢ 3 .Ef,ZE.6B S
_ ,CNR _ _ N .fOlf _ .IYFII �1CAf1 a O
16 E99 3.00,BZ.00 N $ $ $ F
G .$4L.00'a i Y •I a j Q j
1 I d
Z.
ato Y 6
- •e ❑Bt15 531tl193 Nltllll38HtlH❑ g
ill
6 Jill
D/ 'ZC,/ tj W+Lou;
(on) xv.4 KW -'SK (SM) MM MMI *JSIKW)O Otl N&W same mr
!)NUaAZMs axvi sAmaL
0HY01 'A.LN= YCIV Viii --m-8 1-3L-8 --NE-j
9 NOUMS '*/L MN T/11, 3 3H1 Ni auvaLis
'ON Koisuiaims sauov auxo-fd LA
rwese.cxlr � � L.._-40 c1VW ALINIDIA UVOS OOC
_ , � � d 6 � � _��.'
00
1000'
..... Will
6
ollmst"ll, Pp
L
'
'iS Sll-lVH:) 3
Z
6
S 9 L 9
Ll <
C: 9
z Lo
>
> z
< L
61 a0 3SIW3H0 '3 m
OF 6 2 L 09 G
§
ze '80 383WIHD '3
92: LF fo
z z
91 OF
m> -va
<
6zm'ON E: Ll Ln
NOISIAiaens sov a?1V)1bI e 0
Vd z z
Xc3sodOdd JO NOUV:)O OE 91
OF
FIE
EE LZ
9F
-6v
vo a
No lkvwv)l '3 � r
sseexlwuc
Ails i s wttmtw
Ri
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 9
Stiles: The 6th
Bird: -- that would be tabled to February the 6th.
Stiles: Yes, please.
Bird: Is that what you're recommending, Shari?
Stiles: Yes.
De Weerd: Mr. President, I move we table the request by Glenn Johnson Homes
for a Variance No. 00-021 to February 6, 2001.
Bird: Do I hear a second?
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Been moved and seconded that we table the variance for a one-year
extension for Glenn Johnson Homes at Hartford Subdivision to February 6, 2001.
Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 10. Tabled from January 2, 2001: FP 00-018 Request for Final Plat
approval for of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres by
Packard Estates Development for proposed Packard Acres
Subdivision No. 2 — south of E. Ustick Road between N. Locust
Grove Road and Wingate Lane:
Bird: Item No. 10 is tabled from January 2nd. Request for Final Plat approval for
of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres by Packard Estates
Development for proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 — south of East
Ustick Road between North Locust Grove Road and Wingate Lane. Staff?
Stiles: Mr. President, Council, I don't know if anyone is here from Ada County
Highway District to address this issue or if the applicant has anyone here. We
did request Ada County Highway District to be in attendance. They indicated at a
meeting that we had with them last week that they would be here. There's pretty
significant issues dealing with Wingate Lane that we felt that they needed to
address. If they're not here I don't know that we can continue. We could go
ahead with some of the other items that we've met on. Do you have the
comments from staff dated September 28, 2000?
Bird: Could you refresh us on the comments from staff on the 28th so they can
be heard?
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 10
Stiles: I'll just go over the items that we had met about. We did meet with the
applicant and their engineer and there are a few items that remain to be decided.
The first item would be Item 9, on our memo dated September 28, 2000. After
discussion with Bill Nichols, Legal Counsel, we agreed that the 15 -foot wide
easement would be what needs to be shown on the plat. It was put out that we
couldn't require anything in addition to that 15 -foot existing easement that is the
private lane easement for Wingate Lane. On Item 9, the 20 -foot wide easement
would be changed to 15 -feet and the last sentence would be deleted. Item 12,
on our comments has been fixed on the new plat that's been submitted. Item 13,
is regarding an easement for public utilities, drainage and irrigation. We had
asked for an additional easement that would be along these lots and also along
the Wingate Lane lots. As there is an existing easement for the Wingate Lane
here, they would need to provide an additional easement beyond that for utilities,
irrigation and drainage. Their response was that they would work out a solution
with the Public Works Department that we would like that item to remain as is
except it should reference lot 20, block 2 and 15 -foot wide easement in lieu of the
20 -foot wide easement. I know this isn't making any sense to you if you don't
have the comments. I will get a copy to Bill so he can know what's going on. On
Item 15, we asked for detailed fencing and gate plans. They had submitted
previously some fencing and gate plans. Those were not approved. The
irrigation plans, they indicate that this was done as part of a prior approval. The
irrigation plans were subject to approval by downstream water users and that can
be coordinated through the Public Works Department. I still need details on the
fencing and gate. Part of the Wingate Lane discussion has a lot to do with that
fencing and gate plan. Item 19, the third sentence may be deleted as it was
talking about the 20 -foot wide easement. All headgate/cleanout structures are to
be located outside of the 15 -foot wide easement not the 20 -foot wide easement.
Item 20, this is probably the biggest issue remaining on this subdivision. Wingate
Lane has always been an item of contention since the beginning of this project.
Wingate Lane runs north and south from Ustick Road to — there are two five -acre
parcels that are still in the County. I'll go back to the arial so you can see it a little
better. This property is currently still in the County, this property is in the County
it is owned by Helen and Dale Sharp. Packard Acres No. 1 Subdivision is east of
Wingate Lane. All of this area is where Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 is
proposed. As part of the final approval of the Development Agreement and the
Preliminary Plat, Ada County Highway Districts' comments in their Conditions of
Approval were that there would be a public road in this location linking Packard
Acres No. 1 and Packard Acres No. 2. The way that Ada County Highway
District comments read, was that there would be a gate constructed on the east
and west sides of Wingate Lane across this public road. I think I still need to go
back the other one again, sorry, this public road here. What was proposed was
there would be a gate here and a gate on the other side of that 15 -foot wide
easement. There would, in essence, be a permanent fence constructed on each
side of that 15 -foot lane to prevent anyone in this subdivision or the public in
general from accessing Wingate Lane and using it to access Ustick Road. Ada
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 11
County Highway District, in their Conditions of Approval, said the applicant is not
to construct a 20 -foot wide portion of East Challis Street at the east boundary.
He (sic) is to deposit money to complete construction of East Challis Street and
remove the gates when and if the two five -acre parcels to the south are
developed. Which was when at least this portion of Wingate Lane could be
vacated. The City put a condition that a 20 -foot wide gate be constructed at the
easement line of Wingate Lane that allows Emergency Fire Department access
only with appropriate signage. ACHD also had a condition of approval to install
gates and allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles across the un -
constructed portion to East Challis Street. The homeowners along Wingate Lane
have requested that all access to Wingate Lane be prohibited. This is one of the
major items that we are at an impasse and it needs to be decided through the
Ada County Highway District and the Council, which of those conflicting
requirements will stand. The original conditions of approval of this project
required a bike path to be located along the South Slough. The South Slough is
designated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a multiple use pathway. Staff
has agreed to not require the pathway but has asked that they pave over the
sewer access road that will be constructed along the City's trunk line. Item No.
23, staff had asked, after consulting with our Attorney that the developer have
their attorney drop a release of Dominant Parcel Interest in the Private Lane
Easement and record it prior to signature on the Final Plat. Also provide a copy
of the recorded deed restriction to prohibit access to Wingate Lane and forbid
gates or removal of permanent fencing on these lots prior to planning for building
permits. Fencing shall be set at the western boundary of the 15 -foot easement
for Wingate Lane. This requirement as staff asked for, due to the fact that some
of these lots, particularly probably this lot due to the size of that lot, it would not
be unreasonable to think that the person buying that property would love to come
down Wingate Lane. Perhaps have a gate, and park his RV in the back. That
was an attempt to have all of these lots give up their right to access to that lane
until such time it could be vacated. Those are the major items and the remaining
items that need to be determined — still not seeing anyone from Ada County
Highway District. Do you have any questions of me?
Bird: Council any questions for Shari?
Anderson: Mr. President, help me to understand the gate stuff and the issue
there on Item 20, with Wingate Lane so that I get this straight in my mind.
Wingate Lane will have a 15 -foot easement; is that correct?
Stiles: Yes.
Anderson: Wingate Lane comes south from Ustick Road. It services a couple of
five -acre parcels that are going to be south of this subdivision? Is that correct?
Stiles: Yes, those plus everything north to Ustick Road. All of these lots all
access Wingate Lane as their only access.
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 12
Anderson: The Ada County Highway District is asking for a gate to go across
Challis both to the east and west of Wingate? The City of Meridian wants access
through there for the Fire Department and pedestrians?
Stiles: I believe Ada County Highway District is not aware of how their condition
actually read. We would like to have access for pedestrians and bicycles and
agree with Ada County Highway District on that point but realize the neighbors
did not want that.
Anderson: Wingate's a gravel road is that correct?
Stiles: Yes.
Anderson: These homeowners that are south of where Challis crosses it, it's
their desire to continue to access their homes down this gravel road on Wingate?
They don't want to go through a paved subdivision to get to their parcels is that
what I'm understanding?
Stiles: Correct.
Anderson: That's the purpose of the gates?
Stiles: Yes. Ada County Highway District, the way their report read, was that
they would not construct that 15 -foot wide portion of Challis. They would put up
a deposit to construct it in the future and that on the east and west sides of the
un -constructed portion they would put up these gates. Now the Highway District
is telling us that they really meant to put two gates on Wingate Lane on the north
and south boundaries of Challis so that these property owners back here would
have to go through two sets of gates to get to their house.
Anderson: Or come through the paved subdivision and then just go through one
gate.
Stiles: And do away with the gates.
Anderson: I think I'm understanding.
Stiles: The neighbors are wanting to know what the legal precedents is or what
allows Ada County Highway District to basically condemn a portion of their
private lane, their existing easement and to allow construction of gates across
that lane.
Bird: Any other questions for staff?
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 13
Anderson: This will just be a question of the attorney and maybe he doesn't
know the answer to this. I've always understood property rights; laws to say that
you have to provide access to the property. My question is, if that was the case
and they put a gate on the north side of this Challis Drive and blocked off
Wingate, the people that own property to the south, if they still had access to
their properties through this Challis Drive and through that subdivision? Doesn't'
that still fulfill the requirements of the law? You're not blocking them off from
access to their property you're just forcing them to go a different way then what
they want to go apparently.
Nichols: Councilmen Anderson, members of the Council, as a general
proposition what you've stated is correct. The difference though here, is that in
this case the Sharp's have a 15 -foot easement that's attached if you will to their
property that runs all the way from Ustick Road to their property boundary. If I
recall correctly there's even, I think kind of a joint maintenance thing with the
property owners in terms of how they're going to share costs of road and so on.
To cut of their access to Ustick Road on that easement, in effect takes away a
part of the easement that goes along with their land. I don't think that's — if that's
what ACHD thinks they want to do, it doesn't, it wouldn't be what my advice
would be but that's a different issue as far as this Council goes. Staff's
recommendation is essentially that you block off vehicular access to Wingate
Lane and allow these cars to access the Sharp's property only on Wingate but
still have some perhaps pedestrians on this 15 -foot easement. The other thing is
where this Packard Subdivision is, that property is a party or a piece of the
original property to which this 15 -foot easement attached. That property has
deeded access if you will, to Wingate Lane. That's for the purpose of going up
and down so we're asking the developer or requiring the developer to give up
part of that. By my way of thinking they would rather go through their subdivision
anyway, the streets are going to be better. I think there's — it would seem to me
putting a gate on the north and the south side of Challis, interferes with the
easement and creates the — it's the vehicle and open the gate, shut the gate,
open the next gate and shut that gate. Or install one of those electric ones with
the garage door opener type deal and I don't think that's right under these
circumstances.
Anderson: That was one of my other questions. Are we talking about some
elaborate gate system that has automatic openings or are we talking about a
manual chainlink fence? Get out and shove the gates out of the way type of deal
or does it even specify?
Nichols: Looks like Mr. Sale is here so perhaps he can take off his coat, stay
awhile and enlighten us on the whole issue.
De Weerd: Your timing is always impeccable.
Bird: Somebody forgot to tell you we start at 6:30 now didn't they?
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 14
Sale: Perhaps they did and I forgot.
Bird: Sorry Larry.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Anderson: Mr. President, maybe we could brief Larry I guess on kind of where
we were. We were getting comments from staff and I was seeking clarification
on the gates. Staff had indicated that the original request was that there would
be gates on Challis Drive to the ease and west of Wingate. Now they're not sure,
they're thinking that Ada County Highway District is now asking for gates on
Wingate. We're kind of confused as far as where the gates are and what the
legal requirements would be to provide access to the property (inaudible) of
Challis. That's kind of where we're at, at this point.
Sale: Mr. Anderson did you ever have one of those bad dreams that you kept
having and it wouldn't go away?
Anderson: Yes, I've had a couple of those.
De Weerd: I'm sure those residents have.
Bird: Would you state your name Mr. Sales?
Sale: My name is Larry Sale, I'm Development Services Supervisor for Ada
County Highway District. I'm semi -pleased to be here with the Council tonight.
This has been and obviously still is a real thorny issue. I went back through the
Commission minutes to make sure that we hadn't said it wrong, but we didn't say
it wrong. After listening, at that time if you remember this was October of 1995.
At that time there was a lot of testimony from the neighbors about their desire
and their need to keep Wingate Lane open. Now how much of that testimony
was actually related to Wingate Lane and how much of it was just related to
opposing the subdivision, I don't know. At any rate, after discussing this
subdivision for two or three meetings, the Commissioners made a motion to find
that there was unique and compelling circumstances and that sometimes
pollicies had to be set aside to or interpreted differently to accommodate the
public good. They made a motion to require the developer of Packard
Subdivisions to dedicate right-of-way for what's the name of the street, Challis
across Wingate Lane but to not construct it, to pave it up to each side of the
Wingate Lane easement and to gate the public right-of-way. That is an action
that's unique in Ada County with one exception. That is there's a public street
named Preece Drive or Preece Street that runs east and west from Milwaukee to
Cole. It used to run that lane. When the Home Depot was approved in Boise,
because of the great difference in land use between the commercial and Mulda
family on the west side of a certain line, and an old existing single-family
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 15
neighborhood on the east side of that line. Our Commissioners vacated a one -
foot strip of Preece Drive and it has a gate in it. The gate is only for emergency
access so that the Fire Department and Emergency vehicles can get through it
because nobody else has access to that gate. This, I guess was a like situation.
Quite frankly I hoped and still hope that the situation would resolve itself and I
guess it partially has. At least one of the two parcels south of Challis has been
sold. The Commission's action went on to say that this was a temporary
situation, that the developer would be required to deposit the cost of removing
the gates and completing Challis Street across this Wingate Lane at the time the
two parcels to the south were developed. That's the way it is. It probably isn't a
— if it were a permanent decision I would feel badly about it. I think under the six
circumstances that it was something the Commissioner's obviously felt they
should do. It does have a sunset, it isn't a permanent situation and when the
other parcel to the south develops then the gates will be removed. It is possible
to go back and revisit the issue. If the neighbors in the are have changed their
opinions about the need for the complete Wingate Lane, I suspect the
Commissioner's would change that decision. I'm here to offer that as a
possibility of the City if you would help me make that request we would take it
back to the Commissioners and revisit that decision. Any questions?
Bird: Questions, Council?
Anderson: I guess it's not really a question as much as it is a comment. It would
seem like building two streets and leaving a 15 -foot section of dirt in the middle of
it doesn't seem to make rhyme or reason to me. When you've got the equipment
there, you've got the asphalt spreader, you've go the concrete trucks, you've got
your curb machine your set up there doing curb. It would make more sense to
me to go ahead, even if you wanted to allow to continue, that easement of
Wingate to go ahead to pave it, put the curbs and the sidewalks in that you could
still put in your gates. Those could be removed fairly easily but it seems like a lot
of additional expense to come back after the fact to put in 15 feet of asphalt and
curb and gutter and sidewalk. They could still have their access come in from
Ustick Road, they would just drive over, however wide road that is of asphalt and
go on down their lane. Then it makes it easy in the future to make that a third
string.
Sale: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Anderson, you're absolutely correct. As everyone in the
room knows, there was some testimony at the time that indicated that the
Wingate Lane easement might (sic) be superior to a public road. Since that
testimony, we've received documentation that convinces us that it is not superior
to a public road, it is just another easement on private land. The owner of the
public land dedicates right-of-way over the easement then the right-of-way takes
precedent. At that time, there was a lot of -- there was a great deal of testimony
opposing to the extension of what is now Challis. The Commissioner's didn't
want to give up the ultimate ability to make the connection but they felt in view of
the overwhelming neighborhood testimony, they needed to listen to that.
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 16
De Weerd: Mr. President, when they do open that are they going to then gate
Wingate to the north of East Challis to restrict the access out onto that gravel
road?
Sale: Mr. President, Ms. De Weerd that wouldn't be necessary we would just
treat this as another driveway. It wouldn't have enough traffic on it to warrant any
special safety requirements. We would probably require that it be paved back to
the right-of-way line so that they wouldn't track mud and gravel onto the
pavement.
De Weerd: Yes, but that's going to poor quite a bit of traffic out onto Wingate
then to Ustick. If you've ever driven in any of those subdivisions I would look for
that access myself.
Sale: To be honest, I have not driven Wingate Lane since that day. I haven't
gone down there looking for it. It doesn't matter to us if there's a concern about
traffic using Wingate Lane it can be gated. It's just another driveway as far as
we're concerned. The owner of that driveway can gate it, the developer can gate
it, and you or the Highway District could require it to be gated that's a simple
matter.
Anderson: I would imagine those properties if they didn't need the access would
vacate that and then that property could be used by the homeowners that bought
that wouldn't they? (Inaudible) vacated easement.
Nichols: Councilmen Anderson that would be a pretty major chore I would think
because all of those parties that have to — it wouldn't be like a vacation of a
public easement or where you simply petition the City. You have to have all the
parties to whom the easement runs would have to release the easement,
extinguish it.
Anderson: Not likely to happen.
Bird: Mr. Sales, as I understand it right now, the Commission is saying bring
Challis in there and then gate east and west sides so you have no access on
Wingate at all?
Sale: Mr. President, that's correct.
De Weerd: Was that also the recommendation of our staff, Shari?
Stiles: In lieu of any alternative to come forward, yes.
Anderson: Maybe we could hear from (inaudible), his point of view. Just the
whole picture I guess.
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 17
De Weerd: And the residents.
Bird: Yes, we can. Do you have any other questions for Mr. Sale?
Anderson: Not right now.
Sale: If you would like I would read into the record the action of the —
Bird: Would you please?
Sale: This was the concluding discussion of the discussion of Packard
Subdivision No. 2 on October 18, 1994. Commissioner here we're moved to
accept staff recommendations but to alter it whereby the developer has the
opportunity to cross Wingate Lane with the public right-of-way. The portion
crossing Wingate Lane will remain gravel, the portions east and west will be
gated in a manner which will allow pedestrian access and that at the time the
Rickord and Sharp parcels developed, the public right-of-way will be open and
will provide connectivity between the two neighborhoods. This motion is made
because of the unique and compelling circumstance and requires a little different
approach to the policies. To implement this motion, the developer will be
required to dedicate the right-of-way, will not construct the roadway, would
deposit the cost of constructing the roadway into the Road Trust Fund. Further
that the developer's required to provide an easement physical connection from
the Rickord property to the public road system and the subsequent lot
purchasers of the subdivision not be responsible for the maintenance of Wingate
lane. In as much as they will not have access to it. Commissioner East Lay
seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Bird: Thank you Mr. Sale. Okay, Represent?
De Weerd: You were early and under our old schedule.
Bird: Would you please state your name?
Tealey: Mr. President and members of the Council, my name is Pat Tealey,
office address 2501 Bogus Basin Road. I'm here representing the applicant.
The applicant is also here for any input that he can offer on this issue. I'm glad
Larry showed up, I was going to ask for at the worst, another deferment
(inaudible) which we all don't want to do. I think you all have been here from the
beginning of this and stayed at this. This actually started in 1994 and here we
are six years later, still with the same basic issue, what to do with Wingate Lane.
It hasn't gone away, won't go away and shouldn't go away, there are people with
— the Sharp's definitely do have an access easement across the 15 feet as being
platted as part of Packard Acres No. 2. This is an easement only there is no
ownership involved in this by any other parties. The parties to this easement
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 18
range all the way from Ustick down to the Sharp's parcel. They all own their
adjoining land in feet. The access is simply that an easement, there is no
ownership involved in this at all. I think that was one of the major issues from the
start that the City and the Highway District didn't know this. They thought each,
that there was natural ownership in the land itself, the 15 feet so there are other
rights perceived by this misunderstanding. Mr. Nichols has reviewed the
easement and in our staff meeting has basically indicated that the easement is in
fact only for access purposes. It is not exclusive; in other words that 15 -foot strip
can only be used for access. There are other easements that can be granted
pertinent to this land. The access cannot be impeded, that's the only thing that
really goes with the easement. In other words we can't block their access to their
parcel. As stated there were at the time, two five -acre parcels north of what is
going to be platted as Challis Street. The Rickord parcel, one of the five -acre
parcels where the cursor is right now has been bought by the developers of
Packard Acres, the only people that access Wingate Lane. South of what would
be Challis would be the Sharp's parcel where the cursor is right now. The people
to the north of the platted subdivision really aren't affected by anything we're
doing down in this area of Wingate Lane. We are not affecting their access from
Ustick Road. We aren't doing anything north of our property line, which is about
south of where that cursor is. I forget which parcel it is. From here north this
parcel here can access (inaudible) and all of these parcels over here along
Wingate Lane can access from Ustick Road and won't be impeded by anything
that we're doing in Packard Acres No. 2. The issue is boiling down to the access
to the Sharp parcel. The developer of course would like to see no gates on
Challis, which I think is the proper solution, however the powers that be have
offered other solutions to it. The solutions that you hear about the gates I believe
are only there to address the neighbors concern, the Sharp's concern. Certainly
the public would be better served by a connected street in that area, both as a
safety issue and an access issue. There is a newly constructed school I think
which you can see the pad over there. The way the neighbors want it, there will
be no pedestrian or vehicle access from the west of the cursor to that school over
there. It seems natural that they ought to be able to walk the sidewalks and bike
along the streets to get to that school and to other — just their neighbors. This is
a neighborhood that we're actually building out there and we're throwing a barrier
up between these two neighborhoods. Basically, if you want to go to Eagle
Road, you have to head west a half mile, north a half mile and east a mile to get
over to Eagle road. You're pretty good with that cursor Shari. As stated, I think
the solution of the gates was there to address the Sharps' issue. If that's a
solution that comes down the developer will live with it. We don't think it's a good
solution, I don't think you think it's a good solution and I believe that if the
Highway District were to address this again that you wouldn't come up with the
same solution once the issue has been understood. However you must respect
the public input and if the Sharp's carry enough weight to get those gates built
and the other neighbors, we're not just saying just the Sharp's. They're the only
ones that really access this thing though, then that has to be respected and we
will build the gates. You just have to tell us what kind. Do we want to build
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 19
physical barriers there where no access across that 15 -foot area is allowed which
is what the City of Meridian's solution is or do we want to allow pedestrian and
bicycle access across that area which is the ACHD's solution? I believe that's
really the only two issues. Stated again, I don't believe those gates would be
there in any normal solution, this is something out of the ordinary. As far as the
other conditions that were put on the plat, we have had talks with staff; we don't
have any problems with what they're asking for. We have a couple of other
conversations to have with the Public Works Department about the sewer access
road and sewer easement. I believe that can be handled by staff, we work with
them they work with us. All references to the 20 -foot easement for Wingate Lane
should be reduced to the 15, which is the existing. We have had talks with staff
and with the Fire Department as far as what they want. I believe we can work
out Item No. 23, which states that the attorney draws up the release of
(inaudible), a parcel interest. I believe the attorney for the applicant and Mr.
Nichols the City Attorney, can work that out against themselves. Are there any
questions I would be glad to answer?
Bird: Council, any questions?
Anderson: This is Packard Estates No. 2. No. 1, where will they gain their
access how will you get into that?
Tealey: From Hickory.
Anderson: Which is? Is that on the map there?
Tealey: You just see the end of it right here.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members.)
Anderson: My other question would be then as developers, you folks have met
with the Sharp's and weren't able to work out any details on them using the
subdivision roads to gain access to your property? Has that been explored or
that's not an acceptable solution to them?
Tealey: I believe the answer is it's not an acceptable solution to them. They
have traditionally come down from Ustick and used Wingate Lane and they want
to do that in the future. There is a road in Packard Acres No. 1 that dead ends
into their property a little bit further — about where the end of the picture is there's
a road that dead ends into the Sharp parcel from Packard Acres No. 1. There's
also Challis, which will go across the top there, which they can get back down
Wingate Lane. They choose not to use those paved public access roads they
choose to use Wingate Lane as their access. They have the easement to do it
so we're not fighting that at all, never have fought it it's just the solution is just
not, at this time a good solution.
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 20
Bird: Mr. Tealey, if we allow gates or no gates across there and stuff what do
you think that 90 percent of the traffic is going to go to get out? They're going to
come right up and go up Wingate Lane to the north to get to Ustick.
Tealey: I'll bet you there'll be a few that adventure up there and want to go out
there the first few times. That is a dusty road, it is bad access to Ustick. The
entrance is very dangerous actually at that intersection and certainly, I guess my
solution to that problem would be, again excuse me for going to the picture
again.
De Weerd: Just grab the microphone Mr. Tealey.
Tealey: My solution to the problem would be to gate it right here. The Sharp
parcel could access out Challis this way and this way. They could come into this
street that we're platting as part of Packard Acres No. 1. Get out this way and
get out this way. These people here would still guarantee their access and the
traffic that would go north of Ustick would be stopped by that gate right there. As
long as we're talking about gates that would be my solution.
Bird: The only problem is the Sharp's and that other property which you guys
have already purchased I understand, have an easement coming down Wingate.
Wingate no way is going to be able to take any more traffic than it already is. I
disagree with you, I think that the people in that subdivision are (sic) going to go
up Wingate a lot more than they're going to come out to Fairview or any place
else coming through their subdivision, if that's an access to get out to. The thing
Mr. Tealey, that I see is maybe, and Wingate is not capable of handling anymore
traffic than it already is. I don't know whether it's considered a public road or it's
a private lane, as I understand. I don't know if it's even considered to be that.
Tealey: I don't even believe it to be a private lane there's an access easement.
Bird: It's an access easement that goes all the way down to Sharp's property.
It's a real problem.
Tealey: It's an odd situation but I don't believe it's without parallel in Ada County.
Certainly there are situations like this that arise. I agree there would be extra
traffic down there and something has to be done to stop that traffic is what that is.
My solution would be to put the gate at the north end of our property. It doesn't
inhibit the access for anybody that uses Wingate Lane to the north of the
subdivision. It would hinder the Sharp's access if they were to come down
Ustick, however they would have to go through a gate. They would be routed
with public access from two different sources though. It is an odd situation and I
think that's where the solution was born on it. We sat here from meeting after
meeting after meeting trying to hammer this out and this is what came out of it. If
the gates are what have to be fine we'll do it you just tell us what kind of gate you
want there. I don't think again though, the developer, myself, and I even think
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 21
the Highway District and the City don't think that's a good solution because it just
doesn't make sense to gate a public road. However in this situation it may make
the only sense that we can get out of this.
Bird: Any other questions?
Anderson: I have none.
Bird: Thank you Mr. Tealey. Council any questions of anybody here before we
go forward, of staff or Mr. Sales?
Anderson: I have none.
De Weerd: Not at this point.
Bird: Council discussion?
Anderson: I know this isn't a public hearing but are the Sharp's here? Would it
be appropriate to hear their views on this particular issue since we're talking
about access to their property?
Nichols: Councilmen Anderson, members of the Council there's not prohibition
against hearing from them. There's nothing in the Ordinances or statues that
says that you can't ask them something or have them state their position.
Bird: With Council permission? Is everybody agreeable? Would Mr. and Mrs.
Sharp like to give you a couple free minutes here?
Helen Sharp: I'm Helen Sharp, I of course am the one that lives on the end of
the lane. To a few staff, thank you for wanting to listen to us I think it's only fair. I
find the thing that's very, very interesting when they asked did you have meetings
with the members of the lane? No, the only one we met was Craig after he
bought it and told us what was going to be done. The meetings with Ada County
Highway was more than two, my husband and I went to several meetings and it
was stated, they had no jurisdiction over a private lane. If you will contact Ada
County they will tell you it is a private lane and there is to be no more access. I
have been down to the records, I have been to Planning and Zoning, and I've
been to all of them. They have it flagged, there will be no more on Wingate Lane
as it's a private lane. A private lane constitutes no more than four, which means
our Ada County is illegal because they granted building permits on more than
four acres. As you can tell I'm very disturbed and I'm having a real problem.
We've been there since 1968, and now they're going to say because of public we
should allow them to cut us off so that we haven't got the access to Wingate
Lane. If you're going to bring the garbage trucks down -- our friends coming
down Wingate to see us they're going to have to go through the subdivision. Can
you imagine what a nice turn that's going to be coming from their subdivision on
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 22
Wingate Lane? Do you who live in a subdivision, would you like to have more
traffic through your subdivision? The words we're getting out there is no. As far
as access into that new school which is a lovely building, they can't come in that
way they have to go around the front so they would have to revamp that. My
question to you, I could go on for a long time, has this really been completely
pursued? I'm sure that the minutes that Shari has as to the gates on the east
and the west is a little different than what he's saying on the north and the south
because I was at the meeting when it said no, we have no jurisdiction on a
private lane. That is a private lane. Thank you.
Bird: Thank you, Council? Council Mr. Sharp would like to speak, agreeable?
Anderson: Sure.
Dale Sharp: I'm Dale Sharp and I live on Wingate Lane. They say we're the only
ones concerned but I think in our letters to the — has been made part of the
meetings previously that all of the neighbors are very much concerned of any
additional traffic whether it be foot traffic or bicycle traffic. People come down
there and they walk their dogs down there and they won't move aside for us to
get through. It's like we have a right to be there, we can exercise on this lane.
We're not the exercise for the subdivisions there. They should use their own
subdivision for that purpose. As far as access, we do have that Private Road
Agreement. It's been in effect since 1913 and it very clearly states that it is a
Private Road Agreement. As such it should be — we should adhere to that. The
Ada County Planning and Zoning did say that there would be no more access off
of Wingate Lane, four or more houses. The developer says well it's not that it's
another sort of enterprise but it is houses. Speaking for the neighbors, they are
very much concerned. Thank you.
Bird: Thank you. Council what's your pleasure?
McCandless: Mr. President, am I to understand that this has been more or less
of a private road into the Shari's residence?
Bird: It's a private lane.
Helen Sharp: Yes, it's a private lane, (inaudible) access from Ustick. Right now
it's our only access to our property, (inaudible) the original agreement for this
piece of property because of the first one on the front coming right off Ustick.
They made the agreement and I'm sure they owned all of that property because
we were the only two houses on that road. In order for us to get down there the
agreement was made by these other (inaudible) that we would have access to it.
I think another problem too is when people buy that land —
Bird: Ma'am — Mrs. Sharp.
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 23
McCandless: Thank you.
Bird: Mr. Nichols is that, as she stated a private road?
Nichols: President Bird, I think it's simply an access easement. To boil this
down here, the issue before the Council's whether to grant Final Plat approval
and if so with what conditions. You have before you a report from your staff
dated September 28, which has — Shari's gone through and made some
corrections, some notations, updated that staff report. That staff report includes
a condition if you will, that Wingate Lane be gated off on the east side and the
west side of that lane. Mr. Sale has been here to clarify the issue and read into
the record the minutes from the Ada County Highway District meeting as which
that's the same thing as said with the exception of the allowance of pedestrian
access. I guess what I'm saying to you is, we do not have an issue other than
the applicant saying maybe we could gate someplace else and so forth. As far
your staff, ACHD, and so on it's a gate on both sides of Wingate Lane where it
crosses Challis. Leave it unimproved, the developer makes his deposit and at
some point in time it's likely the Sharp property will be developable. They'll want
to develop it or their successors or somebody they sell to. At that time this issue
goes away. Right now, what you have before you is your recommendation, your
staff with those notations that she's made. I guess what I'm telling you is we can
get lost in the issue of what is Wingate Lane and try to divine what -- it would
take somebody a tremendous vision in 1913 to see what was happening out
there now. You have to make the best soup with the ingredients you have now
and I think that's where you are.
Bird: Council, we have allowed the Sharp's to speak and the developer is here if
it would be with your approval he would like to speak for a short period. Like two
or three minutes.
Groves: Mr. Bird, Council members, thank you very much. My name is Craig
Groves, I am one of the managing members for Packard Estates Development.
Unfortunately, I wasn't at these Public Hearings back in 1994 and if I were I
probably wouldn't be in this position here today. We acquired an ownership
interest in this project back in July of 1999. We have met with Mr. and Mrs.
Sharp just a couple of times and met with some of the other neighbors out on
site. Really, we're at your guidance here. Whatever you guys decide is
appropriate, you know we'll live with that. I would like to make just two points.
The first point is that as a property owner, developer of the project, we are giving
up a tremendous amount of our rights. One of the conditions of the Preliminary
Plat approval is that you're asking us to basically give up our dominant ownership
interest in Wingate Lane on those properties that adjoin there forever. We're
agreeing that we will draft a document to make it part of the plat, make it part of
the covenance that will prohibit any access onto Wingate Lane. We certainly
agree with that but the other condition of giving up that 15 feet forever is a big
issue. We can work through that issue also. The next issue that we have is that
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 24
in our meeting with Mr. and Mrs. Sharp and the other owners, they've been very,
very adamant that they want absolutely a solid locked gate going east and west
across Challis. That's really not our understanding of the development
conditions of approval, what the Ada County Highway District adopted and what
the City of Meridian adopted. It's very clear that they will allow pedestrian and
bicycle access across there through those gates. For that reason, and I would
like to see the Council do today is give us our Final Plat approval and defer the
rest of the question back to the Highway District as far as the gate and the types
of gate issue. Thank you.
Bird: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Groves?
Anderson: I have none.
Bird: Council, I believe we've heard from everybody that's necessary, what's
your pleasure?
Anderson: I just have one more question for Shari about the gate. Are we in
agreement with Ada County Highway District about the type of gate and the type
of access that we're talking about? Is it pedestrian and bicycle is that what the
City of Meridian's wanting too?
Stiles: I believe that we would want to have pedestrian and bicycle access
through there so the children can get to the Elementary School. It is the Sharp's
desire that there be absolutely no access to it.
Anderson: Is there a question — are we requesting emergency access for Fire
Department too or is that not an issue?
Stiles: Yes, then we would need to have Fire Department, emergency access.
Bird: Any other questions Council? Discussion? I entertain a motion.
Anderson: Mr. President, I guess in light of all of the testimony we've heard I
agree with the City Attorney. This has already been through Public Hearings at
Planning and Zoning and at the Ada County Highway District. At this time I'm not
sure that we're going to resolve the Sharp's issue with the road so both the
developer and the City are in agreement with a solution how this can still get
done. I don't see any reason to deny the Final Plat at this point. The only
remaining issue seems to be the type of gating system and I would feel
comfortable having that worked out at staff level. I would make a motion that we
approve this Final Plat for 61 building lots and 3 other lots for Packard Estates
Development and instruct the City Attorney to drop the appropriates Findings of
Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Bird: Before that's seconded, Mr. Anderson does that include staff comments?
Meridian City Council Meeting
January 16, 2001
Page 25
Anderson: Yes it does. Subject to the staff comments.
Bird: Do I hear a second?
De Weerd: Second.
Bird: Been made and seconded to approve Final Plat for 61 building lots and 3
other lots for Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 with staff comments. Any
discussion Council?
De Weerd: Mr. President, just a question for staff. Have you the answer to work
with ACHD on the gates, or the developer would work with ACHD on that? Is
that normal protocol in regard to what kind of gates and those kinds of issues?
Stiles: It would probably be more appropriate to work with the Emergency
Services on what types of gate they would want there. I don't think there's any
real president for gates crossing a public road.
Bird: Any other questions or discussion?
De Weerd: No.
Bird: Hearing none, Roll -call vote, Mr. Clerk please.
Roll -call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 11. Ordinance No. 01-900: AZ 00-009 Request for annexation and
zoning of 101.4 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Autumn Faire
Subdivision by Gem Star Properties, LLC — southwest corner of
Black Cat and Ustick Roads:
Bird: No. 11, Ordinance NO. 01-900. Request for annexation and zoning of
101.4 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Autumn Faire Subdivision by Gem Star
Properties, LLC. Clerk would you read the Ordinance by title only please?
Berg: Thank you Mr. President, Ordinance No. 01-900: An Ordinance finding
that certain land be known as Autumn Faire Subdivision lies contiguous or
adjacent to the City limits of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho;
finding that the owner has made a request for annexation in writing to the
Council; and that said land be annexed to the City of Meridian and zoning
designated low-density residential district R-4; and declaring that the said land by
proper legal description as described below be a part of the City of Meridian,
County of Ada, State of Idaho repealing all Ordinances, resolutions, orders or
cqff
CENTRAL
DISTRICT
HEALTH
DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL BOISE, ID 83704-0825 (208) 375-5211 0
FAX 327 8
To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect andpromote the health and quality of our environment.
02-0122
February 25, 2002
David Navarro
Ada County Recorder
650 Main Street
Boise, ID 83702
RE: Packard Acres #2 Subdivision
Dear Mr. Navarro:
."iWEIVED
FEB 2 6 2002
City of Meridian.
City Clerk Off ieF
Central District Health Department, Environmental Health Division, has reviewed and does
approve the final plat on this subdivision for central water and central sewer facilities. Final
approval was given on February 22, 2002.
If you have any questions, please call.
Sincerely,
Michael H. Reno
Senior Environmental Health Specialist
cc: Department of Housing and Urban Development
City of Meridian
Tealey's Land Surveying
Packard Estates Development, LLC
MR:bm
Serving Valley, Elbnore, Boise, and Ada Counties
Ada / Boise County Office
Ada -WIC Satellite Office
Elmore County Office
Valley County Office
707 N. Armsrong PI.
1606 Robert St,
520 E. 8th Street N
703 N, 1 st Street
Boise, ID 83704
Boise, ID 83705
Mountain Home, ID 83647
P O. Box 1448
Enviro. Health: 327-7499
Ph. 334-3355
Enviro. Health: 587-9225
McColl, ID. 83638
Family Planning: 327-7400
FAX: 334-3355
Family Health: 587-4407
Ph. 634-7,19.4
Immunizations: 327-7450
WIC: 587-4409
FAX 634-2174
Senior Nutrition: 327-7460
FAX 587-3521
WIC: 327-7488
FAX: 327-8500
ACH
Ada County Highway District
David E. Wynkoop, President 318 East 37th Street
Dave Bivens, 1st Vice President Garden City ID 83714-6499
Judy Peavey -Derr, 2nd Vice President Phone (208) 387-6100
Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner FAX (208) 387-6391
Sherry R. Huber, Commissioner E-mail: tellus@ACHD.ada.id.us
RECEIVED
March 6, 2002 MAR - 8 2002
City of MeridiarL
TO: Packard Estates Development, LLC City Clerk Office
6223 N. Discovery Way, #120
Boise, Idaho 83713
FROM: Development Review Division Ac�
SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat: Packard No. 2 / Wingate Lane s/o Ustick Road
On February 27, 2002, the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District (hereafter called "District")
took action on the staff request to modify previous Commission Action on the Preliminary Plat as stated on
the attached staff report.
In order that the Final Plat may be considered by the District for acceptance, the Developer shall cause the
following applicable standard conditions to be satisfied prior to District certification and endorsement:
1. Drainage plans shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the District.
2. If public street improvements are required: Prior to any construction within the existing or
proposed public right-of-way, the following shall be submitted and subject to review and
approval by the District.
a. Three complete sets of detailed street construction drawings prepared by an Idaho
registered professional Engineer.
b. Execute and Inspection Agreement between the Developer and the District together
with initial payment deposit for inspection and/or testing services.
C. Complete all street improvements to the satisfaction of the District, or execute a Surety
Agreement between the Developer and the District to guarantee the completion of the
construction of all required street improvements.
3. Furnish a copy of the Final Plat showing street names as approved by the Local Government
Agency having such authority together with the payment of fee charged for the manufacturing
and installation of all street signs.
4. If Public Right -of -Way Trust Fund deposit is required, make the deposit to the District in the
form of cash or cashier's check for the amount specified by the District.
5. Furnish easements, agreements and all other datum or documents as required by the District.
6. Furnish Final Plat drawings together with the plat and plan review fees for District acceptance
and endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement of the Owner and the
Land Surveyor's certification.
7. All of the material must be submitted to District staff two -weeks prior to Commission review of
the final plat.
8. Approval of the plat is valid for one year. The Commission will consider an extension of one
year if requested within 15 -days prior to the expiration date.
Please contact staff at (208) 387-6170, should you have any questions.
Cc: Planning & Development Chron/File
Planning & Development Services -City of Meridian
A
r_ -
Ada County Highway District
MEMO Right -of -Way & Development Department
Planning Review Division
To: ACHD Commissioners
From: Gary Inselman, Christy Richardson
Subject: Packard Acres Subdivision, Staff Request for Modification of Previous Commission Action
Date: February 13, 2002 Regular Agenda
ACHD REVIEW & APPROVAL
On October 18, 1995, the ACHD Commission reviewed and approved the preliminary plat for Packard No. 2
Subdivision. Packard No. 2 Subdivision is platting as Packard Acres Subdivision. A private road, Wingate
Lane, bisects the site. The previous Commission action required the developer dedicate right-of-way but not
construct the streets across Wingate Lane. The developer was also required to install two gates, one at
each end of the unconstructed portion of the public streets across Wingate Lane, that would allow passage
of pedestrians and bicycles along the unconstructed section of the street but not automobiles (Exhibit "A").
The developer owns the property that Wingate Lane is constructed upon. The owners of the property at the
south end of the Lane, the Sharps, have a non-exclusive easement to use Wingate Lane but they have no
ownership of the lane. The parcel directly north of the Sharps (formerly the Reichert parcel) is currently
owned by the developer and will be the subject of a development application in the future as a residential
subdivision (Exhibit "B"). There is a house currently on this parcel that the developer desires to access from
the public streets within Packard Acres No. 1 and cannot because of the fence and gates currently in place.
The Commission meeting minutes reflect that the Commission did not intend for the Reichert parcel to
access the public streets east of Wingate Lane located within the first phase of Packard Acres (Exhibit "C")
The final plat for Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1 was approved and signed by the Commission on April 4,
2001 and recorded July 26, 2001. This first phase of the development includes two stub streets to the east
side of Wingate Lane, East Challis Street and East Meadowgrass Street (Exhibit "D"). The street
improvements have been constructed but not accepted for public maintenance. The developer constructed
the gates as required at the end of the public right-of-way along the east side of Wingate Lane. However,
the pedestrian gate at the end of East Challis Street is locked and the latch for the pedestrian gate at East
Meadowgrass Street is too tight to open. The vehicle gate at the end of East Challis Street is locked as well.
This gate is the District's only access to the ACHD storm drain pond constructed in this phase of the
development on Lot 15, Block 2. The developer granted ACHD an easement to access the pond from East
Challis Street across a 20 -foot wide strip of ground that includes the 15 -foot wide Wingate Lane. The
developer has stated that the locks are not his. They are not ACHD locks.
ACHD POLICY
Section 7203.5 Continuation of Streets
7203.5.1 Consideration for Future Development
The street design in a proposed development shall cause no undue hardship to
adjoining property. An adequate and convenient access to adjoining property for use
in future development may be required. If a street ends at the development boundary,
it shall meet the requirements of sub -section 7205, "Non -Continuous Streets".
7203.5.2 Existing Adjacent Development
An existing street, or a street in an approved preliminary plat, which ends at a
boundary of a proposed development shall be extended in that development. The
extension shall include provisions for continuation of storm drainage facilities.
The policy on the continuation of streets requires that the right-of-way for East Challis Street and East
Meadowgrass Street be dedicated to the public and that the streets be constructed.
The ACHD Legal Department has provided a written legal opinion relating to this matter. See attached
Memo (Exhibit "E"). The Legal Department concludes: "Absent a significant safety concern, public streets
and public rights-of-way should remain open and accessible to the public".
The Traffic Department has reviewed this matter and concluded that there is no significant safety concern in
opening the two streets in question and extending them across Wingate Lane.
ACHD PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL PROCESS
In November the applicant submitted plans to ACHD's Development Review Division that included the first
phase of the development west of Wingate Lane. The plans are acceptable for public street construction
with the exception of this issue of gating the public right-of-way.
Development Review Division staff have delayed approving the plans and allowing construction to proceed
until this issue is resolved (Exhibit "F").
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting a modification of previous Commission action as it relates to the crossing of Wingate Lane
with the public streets. Staff is concerned about the gating of a public right-of-way. These streets are
necessary for connectivity in the area and will not deny the Sharp's access to Wingate Lane. Although the
previous Commission action was acceptable to the developer at the time, circumstances have changed. As
stated above, the developer currently owns the Reichert parcel and plans to submit a preliminary plat
application for development of this parcel in the near future. Joint School District No. 2 has constructed and
opened an elementary school within the section. One of the access points for the school is through Packard
Estates Subdivision (Exhibit "D"). Staff believes that the previous decision contradicts District Policy and
creates an impractical situation for residents in the area trying to circulate within this section.
OPTIONS
1. Deny staff's request and uphold the previous Commission action.
2. Approve staff's request. Require that East Challis Street and East Meadowgrass Street be
constructed and dedicated to the public across Wingate Lane. Delete the requirement for the gates.
3. Require the developer revise and resubmit the preliminary plat to delete the public streets crossing
Wingate Lane. This option would require significant costs to the developer to redesign Packard
Acres No. 1 and to reconstruct the stub streets to provide permanent turnarounds.
Staff recommends Option 2, the modification of the previous Commission action on Packard No. 2
Subdivision and require East Challis Street and East Meadowgrass Street be constructed and dedicated to
the public across Wingate Lane without the gates across the public streets.
NOTIFICATION
Residents along Wingate Lane were notified by mail of the Commission meeting and staffs
recommendation.
COMMISSION ACTION FEBRUARY 27 2002
The ACHD Commission acted on this item February 27, 2002. The Commission voted to approve the staff
request and modify the previous Commission action per option 2 as recommended. All other conditions of
approval from the Commission action dated October 18, 1995 are still in effect.
The Commission also made a special recommendation to the City of Meridian as follows:
Recommend that the City of Meridian require the developer to install a gate on Wingate Lane north of
Lot 15, Block 2 of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1. The developer and residents along Wingate
Lane have come to an agreement for the installation of the gate by the developer and maintenance of
the gate by the residents.
Attachments:
Exhibit "A" ACHD staff report
Exhibit "B" Wingate Lane map
Exhibit "C" October 18, 1995 Commission Meeting Minutes
Exhibit "D" Vicinity Map
Exhibit "E" Legal Department Memo
Exhibit "F" Plans Acceptance letter
JAMES E. BRUCE, President
SHERRY R. HUBER. Vice President
SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretary
October 20. 1995
TO: Pacific Northwest Electric/Edmonds' Construction
3131 E Lanark, Suite C
Meridian, ID 83642
FROM: Karen Gallagher, Coordinator
Development Services Divisi
lt
SUBJECT: Packard No. 2 Wingate Lane s/o Ustick Road- PRELIMINARY PLAT
On October 18, 1995, the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District (hereafter called
"District") took action on the Preliminary Plat as stated on the attached staff report.
In order that the Final Plat may be considered by the District for acceptance, the Developer shall
cause the following applicable standard conditions to be satisfied prior to District certification
and endorsement:
Drainage plans shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the
District.
2: If public street improvements are required: Prior to any construction within the
existing or proposed public right-of-way, the following shall be submitted and
subject to review and approval by the District:
a• Three complete sets of detailed street construction drawings prepared by
an Idaho Registered Professional Engineer, togethe with payment of plan
review fee.
b. Execute and Inspection Agreement between the Developer and the District
together with initial payment deposit for inspection and/or testing services.
C. Complete all street improvements to the satisfaction of the District, or
execute Surety Agreement between the Developer and the District to
guarantee the completion of construction of all street improvements.
ada county highway district
313 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714-6499 . Phone (2 EXHIBIT 'A'
October 20, 1995
Page 2
3. Furnish copy of Final Plat showing street names as approved by the Local
Government Agency having such authority togethe with payment of fee charged
for the manufacturing and installation of all street signs, as required.
4. If Public Rights -of -Way Trust Find deposit is required, make deposit to the
District in the form of cash or cashier's check for the amount specified by the
District.
5. Furnish easements, agreements, and all other datum or documents as required by
the District.
6. Furnish Final Plat drawings for District acceptance, certifications, and
endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement. The final plat
must contain the signed endorsement of the Owner's and Land Surveyor's
` certification.
7. Approval of the plat is valid for one year. An extension of one year will be
considered by the Commission if requested within 15 -days prior to the expiration
date.
Please contact me at 345-7680, should you have any questions.
KG
cc: Development Services
Chron
John Edney
Chuck Rinaldi
Tealey's Land Surveying
City Of Meridian
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
Development Services Division
Preliminary Report
Preliminary Plat - Packard No. 2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Wingate Lane s/o Ustick Road, City of Meridian
Packard No. 2 is a 95 -lot residential subdivision on 35.23 -acres. The site is located south of Ustick
Road approximately 1/4 -mile east of Locust Grove Road, north of Packard Subdivision No. 1. This
development is estimated to generate 950 additional vehicle trips per day.
Roads impacted by development:
Locust Grove Road - Minor arterial with bike lane designation
- Traffic count 2,794 on 1-18-94
Ustick Road - Minor arterial with bike route designation
- Traffic count 1,791 on 8-18-92
ACHD Commission Date - October 18, 1995 - 12:00 p.m.
Facts and Findings:
General Information
RT - Existing zoning
R-4 - Requested zoning upon annexation
95 - Lots
35.2 - Acres
265 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ)
West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone
Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District
Locust Grove Road
Minor arterial with bike lane designation
Traffic count 2,794 on 1-18-94
No Frontage
Ustick Road
Minor arterial with bike route designation
Traffic count 1,791 on 8-18-92
No frontage
2. This subdivision proposes to plat and construct a public street across an existing private road,
Wingate Lane. Wingate Lane is a narrow gravel road providing access to Ustick Road for 12-
13 homes (two of which have been incorporated into this proposed development). Several
residents are opposed to improving Wingate Lane to public road standards and/or having a
public road cross the private road. District legal staff has advised DS staff that there is no
statute prohibiting the crossing of a private road with a public road, however the authorized
users of the private road have rights that will be prior to the public road. For example, those
rights would probably preclude the closure of that private road without the permission of the
authorized users. The developer has submitted an opinion from an attorney stating that a public
roadway can be built across the private easement and utilities can be constructed across the
private easement so long as the use of the private easement is not unreasonably blocked.
District legal staff has reviewed the opinion and generally concurs with its contents.
3. The site plan proposes 5 stub streets, none of which connect to existing streets.
1. The Hickory Way stub (to the south) will connect to Packard Subdivision No.1 when that
subdivision is constructed (also being developed by this applicant).
2. The Devlin Avenue stub (to the south) will eventually connect to Kearney Place
Subdivision when Kearney Place Subdivision and the intervening property are developed.
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 2
3. The Carnelian Street stub (to the west) will connect to Chamberlain Estates Subdivision
No.1 when that approved subdivision has been constructed.
4. The Quartz Street stub (to the west) will eventually connect to Chamberlain Estates
Subdivision No.2 when Chamberlain is constructed and when the intervening property is
developed.
5. The Devlin Way stub (to the north) will eventually connect to Ustick Road as a residential
collector when the intervening farm has been developed. Lot access will be restricted as per
District policy.
4. Packard Subdivision No. 1 abuts the southern boundary of the proposed subdivision. Packard
Subdivision No. 1 connects to Fairview Avenue via Hickory Way, a 41 -foot back-to-back
collector street. With the development of the 95 lots in Packard No.2 and other approved
development, Hickory Way will carry 7,000 vpd at Fairview Avenue. When Packard No. 2 is
constructed with its only street connection through Packard No. 1, a section of Hickory Way
will temporarily have 12 -lots with direct access and/or front -on housing and 1,500 vpd and
another section will have 2 -lots with direct access and 1,900 vpd. This situation will last until
other properties are developed and an additional collector street connection can be constructed
out to Eagle Road, one-quarter mile east of Packard No. 1 Subdivision. District policy states
that the ADT on local streets will typically be less than 1,000 but may reach 2,000 is some
situations. Although the 1,500 to 1,900 vpd on Hickory Way will be temporarily high volumes,
they will decrease when new residential collector street connections are made to Eagle Road
and Ustick Road. However, there is no way to forecast how long this temporary arrangement
will remain.
5. Chamberlain Estates Subdivision No. l has 99 -lots. All roads within Chamberlain Estates No.l
are local streets. The traffic study states that Cougar Creek Road will reach 1,000 vpd at Locust
Grove Road and Chateau Drive will reach 2,600 vpd with the development of Packard No.2.
6. It is difficult for staff to anticipate which street connections will be constructed first. The
applicant has direct control over the scheduling of construction for Packard No. 1, but as stated
above, no more than 400 additional vehicle trips should be routed to Hickory Way.
Chamberlain Estates No.l is the only other parcel that has received preliminary plat approval
(and has applied for a time extension) and can be expected to develop in the near future;
however, this possible street connection would be of insignificant value because the trip
destination point for the majority of vehicles in this area is to the southeast, to Boise,
encouraging use of Hickory Way.
7. This application was heard by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on June 22,
1995, and was tabled until September 12, 1995, to receive a response from the District.
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 3
Site Specific Requirements:
Provide documentation to the District that the authorized users of the private road have
subordinated their rights to use the road to the Highway District to the extent that public roads
and utilities may cross the easement for the private road, or an opinion from a practicing
attorney that such crossings can legally occur.
2. Construct all internal streets to a 37 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot sidewalk
(Meridian width requirement) within a 50 -foot right-of-way.
3. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shall be constructed with median islands, maintaining a
minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb. Coordinate with District Traffic Services
Division.
4. All landscaped medians shall be separate platted lots owned and maintained by a homeowners
association.
5. Maintain a minimum radius of 100 -feet on all curves having other than 90 -degree angles of
deflection.
6. E. Challis Street (as depicted on the drawing on file dated September 15, 1995) shall be
dedicated but not constructed across Wingate Lane until the two properties south of the street
crossing are developed and construction has been approved by the Ada County Highway
District Commission. The developer shall deposit the cost of constructing E. Challis Street
across Wingate Lane and removing the gates required below to the Public Rights -of -Way Trust
Fund.
7. Provide and install two gates, one at each end of the unconstructed portion of E. Challis Street
across Wingate Lane, that will allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles along the
unconstructed section of the street but not automobiles.
8. Construct a 14 -foot wide all weather road along the route of the sanitary sewer line in all
unplatted areas of the proposed subdivision, including the portion of E. Challis Street across
Wingate Lane.
9. Provide legal and physical means of access from the Reichert parcel to the public street system.
Standard Requirements:
A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein
shall be made in writing to the Development Services Supervisor. The request shall
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 4
specifically identify each requirement to be reconsidered and include a written explanation of
why such a requirement would result in a substantial hardship or inequity.
Requests received prior to the date scheduled for Commission action shall be rescheduled for
discussion with the Commission on the next available meeting agenda.
2. A request for an appeal of the Commission's action shall be made in writing to the
Development Services Supervisor within 15 calendar days of the action and shall include a
minimum fee of $110.00. The appeal will be scheduled to be heard by the Commission within
20 calendar days after receipt. The request for appeal shall specifically identify each
requirement to be reconsidered and include a written explanation of why such a requirement
would result in a substantial hardship or inequity.
3. A right-of-way permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction
within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit
pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for
details.
4. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACHD prior to
issuance of building permit (or other required permits). The proposed drainage system shall
retain all storm water on-site and shall conform to the requirements of the City of Meridian.
Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot
owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees,
fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and
their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable).
5. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways
are not being shared with the adjacent property.
6. Construct pedestrian ramps on the corner of all street intersection in compliance with Idaho
Code, Section 40-1335.
7. Dedicate a 20'x 20' right-of-way triangle (or appropriate curve to keep street improvements
within the public right-of-way) at all intersections abutting and/or within the development prior
to issuance of building permit (or other required permits).
8. Continue existing irrigation and drainage systems across parcel.
9. Continue borrow ditch drainage abutting parcel (culvert may be required).
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 5
10. Provide written approval from the appropriate irrigation/drainage district authorizing storm
runoff into their system.
11. If street improvements are proposed, locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and
drainage ditches and appurtenances, etc.) outside of the public right-of-way, as may be required
by the District. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained from the appropriate entity.
12. Locate proposed sign(s) out of the public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision sight -triangle
of all street and driveway intersections.
13. Install a stop sign on every unsignalized approach of a project street to an intersection involving
a collector or arterial as the cross -street. The stop sign shall be installed when the project street
is first accessible to the motoring public.
14. The developer is required to install street name signs at the locations approved by the Ada
County Highway District. Purchase street name signs, sign poles, and mounting hardware from
ACHD's Traffic Operations Department or an approved outside supplier. The District will not
manufacture street signs until a copy of the recorded plat showing the recording data has been
provided to Development Services staff.
15. Provide a clear vision sight triangle at all street intersections. Within this triangle no
obstruction higher than 36 -inches above the top of pavement will be allowed, including
landscaping, berms, fences, walls or shrubs. The triangle shall be defined by the long leg
measured down the centerline of any collector 350 -feet; and the short leg measured down the
centerline from the collector street curb line 20 -feet. Provide notes on the plat and street
construction plans of these restrictions.
16. Submit three sets of street construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action.
10. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by
ACRD.
11. All public streets and drainage systems shall be designed and constructed in conformance with
District standards and policies.
12. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations
presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or
Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215.
13. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit
(or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes.
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 6
14. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable
requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy.
Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services
Division at 345-7662.
Submitted by: Date of Commission Approval:
Development Services Staff
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 7
N 1/4 SECT. 5 T3.N., R.I.E.
WINGATE LANE EXHIBIT
V.L. & CRAIG & JOHN &
HULDA SUSAN SHIRI-EY SITUATED IN NW 1/4 SECTION 5
HOLLADAy LACY SCHEY T.3N., R.E., B.M.,
212445 212405 ADA COUNTY, IDAHO
120800 120775 N
GARY & BILLIE JO''
PREMOE
212465 A LAGHE
oG�
S 120850OHN & JULIE 0 150 300 600
KAAAY DRIVE BLAKESLEE
CRAIGE
9 28 ER SCALE IN FEET
27 33 212485 THOMPSO I" = 300'
32 120880
31
26 ` DIXIE ROBER
PROPERTY OWNERS KEY
25 20 I 30 ❑ V.L. & HULDA HOLLADAY
L ER & AR
'-- < DAUVE CRAIG & SUSAN LACY
Ct 21
17 = 29 121040 ❑ JOHN & SHIRLEY SCHEY
J22 6 28 21253 WILLIAM GALLLAGHER
"
JOHN &JULIE BLAKESLEE
L�. 15 27 6 zs 1 24 23 CRAIG & ROBERTA THOMPSON
22 E]GARY & BILLIE JO PREMOE E. CHUIERE sr.
4{
14 21 � CATHERINE PET ERSO❑ DIXIE ROBERTS
13 12 10 131450 ❑ ALBERT & MARY DAUVEN
r
2 3 4 5 6 7 W
CATHERINE PETERSON
8 9
1 --a- ❑ GARY IMBS, WIRT EDMONDS &
E. CHEAISE ST, J CRAIG GROVES
In W FRED & ANA HELEN SHARP
y . 7 2 3 4 Q -F-- 15=
J 2 U y7j
---- z -- 3-y 14 13 12
2 N 5 8 J 8 7 b S W 16 11
— Ld
W
D h
3 4 9
E. CHALLIS ST. Q -----I
e +_
23 22 21 GARY IMBS 6
WIRT EDMONDS24D; CRAIG GROVES 2 4
CHAT U H DOWS 244350 244300
S -VB DIY ION O8
25 - (RIECHERT PARCEL) MEAppWcxtAss --- _ ��,
v tg U
".
26 4 I 3 0
W----- -
27 __ I ---
t2
__
0 17 4
28 J 2 z
W 16 FRE ANE A
24455 3 > 6
o<FLOCH7AADOW O15
43za s
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING
2501 BOGUS DAM RD. *- BOISE, IDAHO 83702
;406-WINGATE.dwg 1-17-02 :1.2,'730 0^-
EXI-IIBIT 'B'
Icno
President
Vice President
(E, Secretary
Minutes of the regular Commission meeting held
1995, at 12:00 noon, in the offices of the Ada
District, 318 East 37th Street, Boise, Idaho.
Commissioners Bruce, Huber, and Eastlake present.
Approximately twenty-five citizens present.
October 18,
County Highway
Ada County Highway District staff present: Jerry Nyman, Kent
Brown, Terry Little, Larry Sale, Karen Gallagher, Mike Brokaw,
Dave Wynkoop, Steve Spickelmier, John Edney, Dave Szplett, Joe
Rosenlund, D. Brown, and Alice Sinsel.
Commissioner Bruce called the meeting to order at 12:03 p.m.
CONSENT AGENDA: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS; REVISED LICENSE
AGREEMENT ALLEY, BLOCK 31 LAMBERTON'S ADDITION•CHANGE ORDER
NO. 5 NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT OVERLAY PROJECT NO.
52128.0(4) - Larry Sale requested that item A-9, Chesnut Hills
Preliminary Plat, be remanded to staff to be brought back next
week; that item A-5, Parhelion Condos, and item A-3, Auto Park,
Preliminary Plats, be removed from this agenda and placed on
next week's agenda for discussion. Commissioner Eastlake re-
quested that under item A* -10, 95 -77 -CU, 5580 Coffey Street,
that the Highway District include a special recommendation to
ITD that they install sidewalks along their frontage on Chinden
Boulevard. She explained her request and the need for the
sidewalk because of the residential area in the near vicinity.
After discussion, Commissioner Huber moved to approve the items
listed under the Consent Agenda with the following exceptions:
that items A-3 and A-5 be deferred for one week; that item A-9
be remanded to staff; and that item A-10 have a special recom-
mendation for sidewalks along Chinden Boulevard. Commissioner
Eastlake seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION OF STAFF REQUIREMENTS,
SUB NO. 2 - Larry Sale explained that
requested that this item be deferred
discussion. 'Commissioner Huber state
tion and stated that if everyone is
need to be deferred any further. She
trict shouldn't get involved in any
crossing Wingate Lane; she suggested
stalled in public right-of-way across
PRELIMINARY
PLAT
PACKARD
Mr. and Mrs .Sharp had
to an evening meeting for
d that she had a sugges-
in agreement, it might not
suggested that the Dis-
legal issue with regard to
that the sewer be in -
the lane; that it be
ada county highway district EXHIBIT 'C'
318 East 37th • Boise. Idaho 83714-&dQQ • Phnr)ca (,)nu)'1AF Ston
Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995
Page 2
Discussion, Packard Sub No 2 (Continued
gated east to west. She stated that solution would allow the
Sharps to use Wingate Lane with no disruption in any of the
services or use and would allow non -vehicular interconnectiv-
ity. If and when the Sharp and Reichert properties develop,
the connection could be opened up to vehicular traffic. Discus-
sion held concerning the ability of the District to gate a
public road and the method by which a temporary cul-de-sac
would be installed which would eliminate the use of Wingate
Lane from Packard No. 1. Also discussed was the alignment of
the future sewer facility and the phasing of the development.
Larry Sale stated that he doesn't have a problem with the sug-
gested solution as long as there is no legal problem with plac-
ing the gate across public right-of-way. Commissioner Eastlake
agreed with Commissioner Huber's suggested solution for this
point in time; at some future date it may be appropriate to
open the gates and pave that section of roadway to allow
interconnectivity between the two neighborhoods; it would also
put the burden of the gates on the developers rather than on
the Wingate Lane residents.
Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, stated that he believes Commis-
sioner Huber's idea is a pretty good one because it would limit
the access to the lane and allow them free access to receive
the mail, newspaper, etc. He wanted to make sure that the
gates are very well constructed to make sure people don't get
through there.
Larry Sale pointed out that there should be some provision made
for the two property owners to the south to be able to use the
public road system. The Commissioners stated that they would
not have anything more than they have currently, the use of
Wingate Lane.
Ted Hutchinson, Healy's Land Surveying, 109 South 4th Street,
stated that they have ,no problem with placing the gates on the
east and west sides of the lane, with the understanding that
the roadway will be public roads constructed to ACHD standards,
with the short strip of gravel gated on either end.
Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, pointed out that the agreement
for ownership of Wingate Lane will indicate that the people on
the east side of the lane will own the adjacent portions of the
lane. She wanted to know if they will be required to assist in
the maintenance of the lane;,that needs to be taken into consid-
eration. She stated that they have people who live.on the lane
who would like to speak about this matter. Commissioner Bruce,
speaking about the letter submitted by Mrs. Sharp from her
attorney, pointed out that any time the District makes a mis-
take, she has an absolute right to ask for injunctive relief.
Mrs. Sharp stated that since this is a new idea, the neighbors
#`
should have the opportunity to provide input.
Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, stated that he believes Commis-
sioner Huber's idea is a pretty good one because it would limit
the access to the lane and allow them free access to receive
the mail, newspaper, etc. He wanted to make sure that the
gates are very well constructed to make sure people don't get
through there.
Larry Sale pointed out that there should be some provision made
for the two property owners to the south to be able to use the
public road system. The Commissioners stated that they would
not have anything more than they have currently, the use of
Wingate Lane.
Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995
Page 3
Discussion, Packard Sub No 2 (Continued
Floyd Reichert, 2575 Wingate Lane, stated that it is not fair
for him not to be able to use public roads that are close to
his property. Consideration should be given to the future of
the community to have an even flow of traffic through that mile
section. He is not in favor of a two -gate system which bars
him from having access to a public road that's right at his
place. He stated that he is being penalized because someone
else wants to live in 1913. Discussion held concerning the
Possibility of connecting with one of the public roads to the
west of the gate. Mr. Reichert stated that he would have to
depend on the developer for that access; he does not own land
adjacent to the roadway.
Ted Hutchinson stated that the developer agrees with Commission-
er,Huber's recommendation and thinks they can probably work
something out with the Reicherts to provide some access to a
public road from their property.
Larry Sale asked if it is the intent of the Commission that the
developer be responsible for the ultimate construction of the
roadway between the two subdivisions. He suggested that the
roadway be constructed only as wide as required by the City of
Meridian.
Dave Wynkoop pointed out that the gates on public right-of-way
is a skittish issue and suggested that the Commission find that
this is a unique and compelling circumstance in order to place
the temporary gates across public right-of-way. Discussion
held concerning the possibility of requiring a license agree-
ment for placement of the gates.
Commissioner Huber moved to accept the staff recommendations,
but to alter it whereby the developer has
the opportunity to
cross Wingate Lane with a public right-of-way; the
portion
crossing Wingate Lane will remain gravel; the portions east and
west will be
gated in a manner which will allow pedestrian
access; and that at the time the Reichert
and Sharp develop, the cels
public right-of-way will be opened and pwillrppro-
vide connectivity between the two neighborhoods. This motion
is
X
made because of the unique and compelling circumstance and
requires a little different
approach to the policies. To imple-
ment this motion, the developer will be
a y
required to dedicate
the right-of-way, would not construct the roadway, eos-
it the
wroad ould dtrust
cost of constructing the roadway into the
fund. Further, that the
developer is required to provide an
easement and physical connection from the
Reichert property to
the public road system and that the subsequent lot
purchasers
in the subdivision not be responsible for the maintenance of
Wingate Lane, inasmuch
y
they will not have access to it. CommiS-
sinner Eastlake seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
Y
SITE
Sch
EXHIBIT 'D'
APWI
CHD*' Ada County Highway DistrictgallowE
INTER -OFFICE MEMO Legal Department
February 4, 2002
TO: Commissioners; Director Schweitzer; M. Neal Newhouse;
Diane Kushlan and Gary Inselman
FROM: Brad Flinders, Senior Staff Attorney
SUBJECT: Legal Opinion — Packard Acres No. 2 and Wingate Lane
The following question has been submitted to the Legal Department in connection with Packard Acres
No. 2: Is Ada County Highway District ("ACHD") authorized to gate or allow the gating of public streets and
public rights-of-way?
Summary of Conclusion
ACHD owns the public streets and public rights-of-way under its jurisdiction in trust for the use and
benefit of the public. Absent a significant safety concern, public streets and public rights-of-way should
remain open and accessible to the public.
Discussion
Idaho law allows highway districts to acquire and hold title to an interest in real property for public right-
of-way purposes without incurring an immediate obligation to construct or maintain a highway. The
highway district commissioners may proceed with highway construction when it is determined "that the
necessities of public travel justify opening a highway within the right-of-way." Idaho Code §40-202(2). In
the meantime, the public right-of-way retains its public nature without any corresponding duty on the part of
the highway district to maintain or improve it for the benefit of the traveling public. Id. at subsection (4).
Highway districts are in fact statutorily absolved from liability for any injury or damage due to the lack of
such maintenance. Id.
In other respects, however, the legal status of unopened public rights-of-way appears to be equivalent
to that of opened highways. That is to say, in both cases the real property in question is owned by a public
agency in trust for the use and benefit of the public, without any apparent distinction between them except
as noted above. That being the case, the following statement of the Idaho Supreme Court in connection
with public streets should apply with equal force to unopened public rights-of-way:
"The state and its political subdivisions are without power to make a valid contract permanently
alienating any part of the public streets and highways or permitting a permanent encroachment or
obstruction thereon limiting the use of the public thoroughfares by the public."
State ex rel. Rich v. Idaho Power Co., 81 Idaho 487, 346 P.2d 596 (Idaho 1959) (citations omitted). Since
no legal authority to the contrary appears to exist the Legal Department views this statement as expressing
the law in Idaho with respect to all public rights-of-way, whether opened or unopened. Unless necessary
for some reason of public safety, ACHD has little or no basis for allowing gates on public rights-of-way.
Packard Acres No. 2/Wingate Lane
Legal Opinion — Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 'E'
Al
.jHR Ada County Highway District
Judy Peavey -Derr, President
Dave Bivens, 1 st Vice President
318 East 37th Street
Sherry R. Huber, 2nd Vice President
Garden City ID 83714-6499
Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner
Phone (208) 387-6100
David E. Wynkoop, Commissioner
FAX (208) 387-6391
E-mail: tellus@ACHD.ada.id.us
David N. Marks, P.E.
December 27, 2001
Tealey's Land Surveying
2501 Bogus Basin Road
Boise, Idaho 83714
RE: Packard Acres Subdivision No.2
PLANS ACCFMNCE
The District has reviewed the plans for the above referenced project, and they are accepted for public
street construction with the following stipulation:
✓ The plans cannot be finalized prior to the Commissioner's review of the Wingate Lane
crossing sometime in January. At that time a revised set of plans may be necessary to show
the new proposed Wingate Lane crossing.
By stamping and signing the improvement plans, the Registered Engineer ensures the District that
the plans conform to all District policies and standards. Variances or waivers must be specifically
and previously approved by the District in writing. Acceptance of the improvement plans by the
District does not relieve the Registered Engineer of these responsibilities.
The fees and surety amount are attached. Please provide two additional sets of plans, plus an
additional set of plans for each contractor, arrange for an inspection agreement to be signed, pay the
inspection fee deposit, and schedule a pre -con when these items have been accomplished.
Submit to Idaho Department of Water Resources a Shallow Injection Well — Notice of Construction /
Inventory Form at least 30 -days prior to construction of the facility. Provide a copy of the form to
the District prior to scheduling the final plat for signature.
All fees must be paid and the following documents received two weeks prior to scheduling for the
signature of the final plat. Please provide: an 8 '/2" x 11 " reduction of the plat, a vicinity map, a copy
of the CC & R's, and the maintenance and operation manual for any drainage facilities to be located
in a common lot to be owned and maintained by the homeowners association.
Maintenance and Operation Manuals shall be bound and include the following:
Note: Multi phase developments under the same Homeowners Association must have one manual
that includes all previous phases of the development.
EM BIT V
1. An 11" x 17" plan view of the subdivision showing the location of all storm drainage
facilities.
2. An 8 1/2" x 11 " copy of the final plat(s).
3. Engineering drawings of the facility. These drawings must show the details of each facility
that accepts ACHD drainage that the homeowners are responsible for maintaining. The plan
sheets must be folded and appended to the manual.
4. A written description of the maintenance required by the Homeowners Association.
5. An itemized estimate of the annual operating and maintenance costs for the Homeowners
Association.
6. A statement describing the primary purpose of the facility is for storm water. Any additions to
the facility, such as park benches or additional landscaping, should be considered temporary and
may be removed when heavy maintenance of the facility is needed. Replacement of these items
will be the responsibility of the Homeowners Association.
CC & R's Requirements
1. The recorded restrictive covenants shall include a section describing the maintenance
responsibilities of the property owners within the development.
2. The Maintenance and Operation Manual outlined above must be referenced.
3. The recorded restrictive covenants shall include wording that:
a. Gives the District the right to inspect such facilities, and if necessary, promptly
perform any required maintenance.
b. Requires District concurrence with any proposed changes in the previously approved
documents.
C. Allows the District to assess the costs of any required maintenance to the property
within the development, including the use of liens and/or assessment of maintenance
costs against the real property taxes owed by the lots within the development.
d. Prohibits the Homeowners Association from dissolving without written approval from
ACRD.
Required Post Construction Submittals:
Record Drawings and Engineer's Storm Drainage Inspection Certificate
The following submittals are required after construction and prior to District acceptance of the public
street improvements within the subdivision:
1. An electronic record of the as -built construction drawings and final plat of the subdivision.
2. Letter stamped and signed by the engineer of record certificating that the storm drainage system
has been constructed in conformance with the accepted construction plans and that the system
functions as designed.
The District cannot accept the street and drainage improvements for public maintenance or release the
developer's financial surety until these requirements have been met:
January 11, 2001
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 16, 2001
APPLICANT Packard Estates Development ITEM NO. I Q
REQUEST Final Plat approval for 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres
for proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 - south of East Ustick Road btw
North Locust Grove Road and Wingate Lane
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
COMMENTS
See Previous Item Packet
6v�
Contacted: j- Te a (c .�i Date: (11Z-101 Phone: :,� C)(0 3
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
December 29, 2000
FP 00-018
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 2, 2001
APPLICANT Packard Estates Development ITEM NO. 5
REQUEST _Final Plat approval of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres
for Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
south of E. Ustick Road between N. Locust Grove and Wingate Lane
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
COMMENTS
See previous Item Packet
OTHER:
Contacted: Pa_t- CL&L= Date: t Z1C'I Phone. 3J' "�'6'-3L-
U
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
November 17, 2000
FP 00-018
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 21, 2000
APPLICANT Packard Estates Development ITEM NO. 2
REQUEST Regeust for Final Plat approval of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres
for proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 - s/o Ustick Road between
Locust Grove Road and Vintage Lane
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
Contacted: Pat Tealev
COMMENTS
See previous item packet
Date: 17 -Nov Phone: 385-0636
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
November 3, 2000 FP 00-018
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 8, 2000
APPLICANT Packard Estates Development ITEM NO. 1
REQUEST Tabled 10/17/00 - Request for Final Plat approval foo 61 building lots and 3 other
lots on 23.02 acres for proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No 2 - s/o Ustick Road between
Locust Grove Road and Vintage Lane
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
COMMENTS
5,-e- re-,utausr
�-t
-'.2 ok Ka- C)k e_
OTHER:
Contacted:?a,1- :e Date: ( Phone: :385
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
To: Mayor and City Council
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 83642
From: North Wingate Lane Residents
2445 North Wingate Lane
Meridian, Idaho 83642
October 16, 2000
�ECEIVEn
OCT 232000
City of Mcridian
City Clerk Office
Re: Statement of expectations for developers of Packard Estates Development, LLC.
The residents of North Wingate Lane feet it is necessary to restate their position
concerning use, access, or development of Wingate Lane by anyone not directly now
living in a residence on the lane. We are supported by previous documents and
proceedings that specifically prohibit any kind of access to North Wingate by others not
presently living on the lane. We are very weary of having to keep such a vigilant watch
on the proceedings for development of the lands that abut North Wingate Lane. We have
made it clear in the past that all traffic of any kind, including pedestrian and bike traffic,
will be prohibited now and in the future from traveling on or across North Wingate Lane.
We expect the compliance of Packard Estates Development, LLC. to the city council for
the construction of permanent gates (for the use of emergency vehicles only ) and fences
to assure this.
The property owners on the lane established this lane as a private lane, July 25, 1913.
Ada County has already ruled that no more houses may be built along North Wingate
Lane that would require entrance and exit directly from the lane.
The residents of the lane pool money to maintain the lane. In the past, great damage
has occurred because of use by construction vehicles that have illegally used the lane to
access the developing areas of Packard Estates Development, LLC. Enforcing
compliance has been difficult. The council has stated that permanent, not wire, fences and
gates were to be constructed along North Wingate Lane before development began. The
wire fences have been lowered whenever someone wanted to use the lane to access or
crossover to the east or west development. Only emergency county access is allowed.
All other accesses, including utility, ACRD, or irrigation, must be done on the
development property and not involve the lane in any way, or at any time.
No gates will be installed to allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles across
North Wingate Lane. This allowance would only invite problems. Sometimes this area is
referred to as the unconstructed portion of E. Challis. It is not. It is part of our
established, permanent private lane.
We greatly appreciate the efforts of Mr. Bruce Freckleton, and Ms. Shari Stiles. They
have been very helpful to explain and interpret the somewhat confusing documents
concerning these proceedings. We also appreciate any other entity that is working to
assure that legal concerns are correctly dealt with on this matter. Please help us put to
rest any further worries concerning our proper right to keep our private lane as such.
Sincerely,
North Wingate Lane Residents
Attachment Enclosed:
October 13, 2000 FP 00-018
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 17, 2000
APPLICANT Packard Estates Development ITEM NO. 5
REQUEST Tabled from October 3, 2000 - Request for Final Plat approval of 61 building lots and
3 other lots on 23.02 acres for Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 - s/o Ustick Road between Locust
Grove Road and Vintage Lane
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
COMMENTS
See previous item packet
OTHER:
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
September 29, 2000
'111
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 3, 2000
APPLICANT Packard Estates Development ITEM NO. 5
REQUEST Request for final plat approval of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres
for Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 - s/o Ustick between Locust Grove Road and Vintage Lane
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
COMMENTS
See attached comments
vv
OTHER:
Contacted:-P/a {— TV6L( (?,ice Date: ,}— Phone: -3�7�J -���✓ �� i
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
MEMORANDUM: SEP 2 8 2000 September 28, 2000
CITY OF MERIDIAN
To: Mayor & City Council CITY CLERK OFFICE
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City En inee *
Shari Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator
Re: Request for a Final Plat Approval of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 — 60 Single-
family Building Lots on 23.02 Acres in an R-4 Zone by Packard Estates Development,
LLC (File# FP -00-018)
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the
applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by
motion of the Meridian City Council:
LOCATION & SURROUNDING USES
The subject property is located west of Wingate Lane, south of Ustick Road, and east of Locust Grove
Road. The parcel(s) is currently zoned R-4. The South Slough borders the property on the north,
along with property owned by Vern Alleman on the north and northwest boundaries. The southwest
portion of the property borders Chamberlain Estates Subdivision. Chateau Meadows East No. 8
Subdivision is south of the property, along with two five -acre parcels in Ada County. The northeast
portion of the property borders other acreages with single-family homes in Ada County. The property
is located in an area designated as single-family residential in the Comprehensive Plan.
SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS
1. Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat and development agreement.
2. Applicant has indicated previously that the pressurized irrigation system within this
development is to be connected to the existing system within Packard Subdivision. The
common areas within the development will be a subject to City of Meridian water assessments
for the domestic backup. Payment of water assessment fees is required prior to city signatures
on the final plat map.
3. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all lots
impacted by filling.
4. The design of drainage areas shall ensure that water is retained only during major storm events
for a maximum 24-hour period.
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
MAYOR
A Good Place to Live
LEGAL' DEPARTMENT
(208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501
Robert D. Come
CITY OF MERIDIAN
PUBLIC WORKS
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
33 EAST IDAHO
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297
Ron Anderson
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Keith Bud
(208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
PLANNING AND ZONING
Tammy deWeerd
City Clerk Office Fax (208)j Tj1 T j T�j
1 �( �-/
DEPARTMENT
08) 884-5533 FAX 888-6854
Cherie McCandless
L
ift
MEMORANDUM: SEP 2 8 2000 September 28, 2000
CITY OF MERIDIAN
To: Mayor & City Council CITY CLERK OFFICE
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City En inee *
Shari Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator
Re: Request for a Final Plat Approval of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 — 60 Single-
family Building Lots on 23.02 Acres in an R-4 Zone by Packard Estates Development,
LLC (File# FP -00-018)
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the
applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by
motion of the Meridian City Council:
LOCATION & SURROUNDING USES
The subject property is located west of Wingate Lane, south of Ustick Road, and east of Locust Grove
Road. The parcel(s) is currently zoned R-4. The South Slough borders the property on the north,
along with property owned by Vern Alleman on the north and northwest boundaries. The southwest
portion of the property borders Chamberlain Estates Subdivision. Chateau Meadows East No. 8
Subdivision is south of the property, along with two five -acre parcels in Ada County. The northeast
portion of the property borders other acreages with single-family homes in Ada County. The property
is located in an area designated as single-family residential in the Comprehensive Plan.
SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS
1. Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat and development agreement.
2. Applicant has indicated previously that the pressurized irrigation system within this
development is to be connected to the existing system within Packard Subdivision. The
common areas within the development will be a subject to City of Meridian water assessments
for the domestic backup. Payment of water assessment fees is required prior to city signatures
on the final plat map.
3. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all lots
impacted by filling.
4. The design of drainage areas shall ensure that water is retained only during major storm events
for a maximum 24-hour period.
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 2
5. Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, pressurized
irrigation system approved and activated, drainage lots constructed, fencing and gates installed,
and road base approved by the Ada County Highway District prior to applying for building
permits. Landscaping shall be installed prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. A letter of
credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing, pathways,
landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final
plat.
6. Applicant shall be responsible to construct a six -foot -high, permanent perimeter fence along
property boundary (and westerly easement line of Wingate Lane), except where the City has
expressly agreed, in writing, that such fencing is not necessary. Fencing is to be in place prior
to applying for building permits.
7. Revise the following notes:
(5) ...adjacent to the exterior subdivision boundary lines.
(7) ...Lot 10, Block 5, Lot 1, Block 8, and Lots 32 and 33, Block 2...
(8) ... and rot 33 Bleev 2...
(12) Access to Wingate Lane is specifically_ prohibited.
(13) This subdivision is subject to the terms of a development agreement recorded as
Instrument No. , records of Ada County, Idaho.
(14) (Provide a blanket easement to the City of Meridian over Lot 33, Block 2 for the
operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer intercepter.)
(15) Lots 1, 23, 24-26, and 29, Block 9 shall be subject to the terms of the existing
temporary sanitary sewer easements along their western boundary. No permanent
structures, fences, trees, or brush shall be placed within said easements.
8. Remove 20 -foot -wide sanitary sewer easement south of E. Chemise Drive, and reference the
existing easement instrument number north of E. Chemise Drive.
9. Show Wingate Lane on the final plat map as a 20 -foot wide easement, and reference the
existing 15 -foot wide recorded private lane easement. The extra 5 -foot width is required by the
City of Meridian as the minimum width for an emergency access.
10. Widen Lot 33, Block 2, by ten feet to accommodate the South Slough sewer interceptor main.
Provide a blanket easement to the City of Meridian for the extension of the South Slough Sewer
Interceptor (see plat note #14 above). This portion of the sewer trunk line shall be constructed
at the time this subdivision is developed.
11. Revise the reference to the sewer easement along the western side of the subdivision to read:
20 -foot -wide temporary sanitary sewer easement, Instruments Nos. and
(Make sure you reference both easements, Cassell, and PNE/Edmonds)
12. Add an arrow symbol to the plat legend that depicts front of house orientation. Place symbol
on Lot 27, Block 2, toward N. Devlin Way. An arrow is required because less than minimum
street frontage is shown on the other lot side.
r
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 3
13. Provide a ten -foot -wide easement for public utilities, drainage, and irrigation along the southern
boundary of Lot 2, Block 2, and west of 20 -foot -wide easement for Wingate Lane along Lots
17-22, Block 2, and Lot 10, Block 5.
14. Detailed landscaping plans for all common areas, including species, size, quantities, and
locations, and pathway details must be submitted for approval to the Planning & Zoning
Department prior to City Engineer signing Final Plat.
15. Provide detailed fencing and gate plans that also show the proposed location of irrigation
cleanout structures for approval prior to signature on the final plat. Irrigation plans must be
approved by downstream water users. Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to applying for
building permits.
16. Sanitary sewer and water service to this site will be via extensions of the existing mains
installed in adjacent developments. Applicant will be responsible to construct lateral sewer and
water mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate
main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department.
17. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all
street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established
normal groundwater elevation.
18. Sidewalks are to provide a clear five -foot -wide walkway pathway without encroachment of
mailbox structures.
19. Wingate Lane borders the eastern boundary of this subdivision. The easement for this private
roadway needs to be shown along the backs of Lots 17-22, Block 2, and Lot 10, Block 5. The
easement width needs to be increased to 20 feet wide to meet Meridian Fire Department
requirements. All headgate/cleanout structures are to located outside of the 20 -foot -wide
easement and be accessible to water users without requiring entrance onto individual building
lots or climbing over fences.
20. One of the City's requirements in the development agreement conflicts with Ada County
Highway District's requirements. The applicant is not to construct the 20 -foot -wide portion of
E. Challis Street at the east boundary, and is to deposit money to complete construction of E.
Challis Street and remove the gates when (and ii) the two five -acre parcels to the south are
developed (when Wingate Lane can be vacated). The City put a condition that a 20 -foot -wide
gate be constructed at the easement line of Wingate Lane that allows emergency fire
department access only (with appropriate signage). ACHD's condition of approval is to install
gates and allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles across the unconstructed portion of E.
Challis Street. The homeowners along Wingate Lane have requested that all access to Wingate
Lane be prohibited. Staff requests the City Council to specifically address this issue and
instruct staff of preferred direction.
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 4
21. Another requirement of the development agreement is provide a pathway along the South
Slough, as it is designated as a pathway in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. However,
Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District will not allow a license agreement for a pathway along live
irrigation ditches. Perhaps, instead of designating a pathway, the applicant could pave over the
sewer easement along the slough as a "sewer access road" to satisfy the pathway requirement
and avoid problems with Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District.
22. All damages to Wingate Lane caused by the developer or contractors are to be repaired
immediately. Homeowners along Wingate Lane have reported that damage to the lane
presently exists from construction equipment and work on the irrigation system No building
permits will be accepted until the repair work is complete. The developers have agreed that no
construction traffic will be allowed to access Wingate Lane.
23. Staff foresees a problem with buyers of Lots 17-22, Block 2, trying to access Wingate Lane if
the easement is part of the platted lots. The developer shall have their attorney draw up a
release of dominant parcel interest in the private lane easement and record it prior to signature
on the final plat. Also provide a recorded copy of deed restriction to prohibit access to Wingate
Lane and forbid gates or removal of permanent fencing on these lots prior to applying for
building permits. Fencing shall be set at the western boundary of the 20 -foot easement for
Wingate Lane.
24. Submit copies of proposed restrictive covenants and deed restrictions for review. This
information was required at the preliminary plat stage; application indicates covenants have not
been submitted.
25. Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved preliminary plat
does not relieve Applicant of responsibility for compliance.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing
or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City Ordinance
12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or
lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public
Works Department.
2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed
from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used
for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
3. One -hundred -watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by
the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense.
Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants.
4. Submit "Final" letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision
and street names. Make any corrections necessary to conform
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 5
5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent.
6. Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 12-5-2.K.
7. If possible, respond in writing to this memorandum by noon on October 3, 2000. Submit three
copies of the revised Final Plat Map to the Public Works Department for compliance review
prior to development plan approval.
To: Mayor and City Council
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 83642
From: North Wingate Lane Residents
2445 North Wingate Lane
Meridian, Idaho 83642
October 16, 2 I U
�
�,�ti or1c offlc
city tie
Re: Statement of expectations for developers of Packard Estates Development, LLC.
The residents of North Wingate Lane feel it is necessary to restate their position
concerning use, access, or development of Wingate Lane by anyone not directly now
living in a residence on the lane. We are supported by previous documents and
proceedings that specifically prohibit any kind of access to North Wingate by others not
presently living on the lane. We are very weary of having to keep such a vigilant watch
on the proceedings for development of the lands that abut North Wingate Lane. We have
made it clear in the past that all traffic of any kind, including pedestrian and bike traffic,
will be prohibited now and in the future from traveling on or across North Wingate Lane.
We expect the compliance of Packard Estates Development, LLC. to the city council for
the construction of permanent gates (for the use of emergency vehicles only ) and fences
to assure this.
The property owners on the lane established this lane as a private lane, July 25, 1913.
Ada County has already ruled that no more houses may be built along North Wingate
Lane that would require entrance and exit directly from the lane.
The residents of the lane pool money to maintain the lane. In the past, great damage
has occurred because of use by construction vehicles that have illegally used the lane to
access the developing areas of Packard Estates Development, LLC. Enforcing
compliance has been difficult. The council has stated that permanent, not wire, fences and
gates were to be constructed along North Wingate Lane before development began. The
wire fences have been lowered whenever someone wanted to use the lane to access or
crossover to the east or west development. Only emergency county access is allowed.
All other accesses, including utility, ACRD, or irrigation, must be done on the
development property and not involve the lane in any way, or at any time.
No gates will be installed to allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles across
North Wingate Lane. This allowance would only invite problems. Sometimes this area is
referred to as the unconstructed portion of E. Challis. It is not. It is part of our
established, permanent private lane.
We greatly appreciate the efforts of Mr. Bruce Freckleton, and Ms. Shari Stiles. They
have been very helpful to explain and interpret the somewhat confusing documents
concerning these proceedings. We also appreciate any other entity that is working to
assure that legal concerns are correctly dealt with on this matter. Please help us put to
rest any further worries concerning our proper right to keep our private lane as such.
Sincerely,
North Wingate Lane Residents
Attachment Enclosed: � n�^
MEMORANDUM:
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer
Shari Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administratorr�
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 • FAX 888-6854
September 28, 2000
Re: Request for a Final Plat Approval of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 — 60 Single-
family Building Lots on 23.02 Acres in an R-4 Zone by Packard Estates Development,
LLC (File# FP -00-018)
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the
applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by
motion of the Meridian City Council:
LOCATION & SURROUNDING USES
The subject property is located west of Wingate Lane, south of Ustick Road, and east of Locust Grove
Road. The parcel(s) is currently zoned R-4. The South Slough borders the property on the north,
along with property owned by Vern Alleman on the north and northwest boundaries. The southwest
portion of the property borders Chamberlain Estates Subdivision. Chateau Meadows East No. 8
Subdivision is south of the property, along with two five -acre parcels in Ada County. The northeast
portion of the property borders other acreages with single-family homes in Ada County. The property
is located in an area designated as single-family residential in the Comprehensive Plan.
SITE SPECIFIC CONaVIF1V'I'S
Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat and development agreement.
2. Applicant has indicated previously that the pressurized irrigation system within this
development is to be connected to the existing system within Packard Subdivision. The
common areas within the development will be a subject to City of Meridian water assessments
for the domestic backup. Payment of water assessment fees is required prior to city signatures
on the final plat map.
3. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all lots
impacted by filling.
4. The design of drainage areas shall ensure that water is retained only during major storm events
for a maximum 24-hour period.
FP -00-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
HUB OF TRE4SURE (:4LLEF
MAYOR
A Good Place to Live
Robert D. Come
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Ron Anderson
33 EAST IDAHO
Keith Bird
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Tanuny deWeerd
(208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218
Cherie McCandless
MEMORANDUM:
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer
Shari Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administratorr�
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 • FAX 888-6854
September 28, 2000
Re: Request for a Final Plat Approval of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 — 60 Single-
family Building Lots on 23.02 Acres in an R-4 Zone by Packard Estates Development,
LLC (File# FP -00-018)
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the
applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by
motion of the Meridian City Council:
LOCATION & SURROUNDING USES
The subject property is located west of Wingate Lane, south of Ustick Road, and east of Locust Grove
Road. The parcel(s) is currently zoned R-4. The South Slough borders the property on the north,
along with property owned by Vern Alleman on the north and northwest boundaries. The southwest
portion of the property borders Chamberlain Estates Subdivision. Chateau Meadows East No. 8
Subdivision is south of the property, along with two five -acre parcels in Ada County. The northeast
portion of the property borders other acreages with single-family homes in Ada County. The property
is located in an area designated as single-family residential in the Comprehensive Plan.
SITE SPECIFIC CONaVIF1V'I'S
Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat and development agreement.
2. Applicant has indicated previously that the pressurized irrigation system within this
development is to be connected to the existing system within Packard Subdivision. The
common areas within the development will be a subject to City of Meridian water assessments
for the domestic backup. Payment of water assessment fees is required prior to city signatures
on the final plat map.
3. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all lots
impacted by filling.
4. The design of drainage areas shall ensure that water is retained only during major storm events
for a maximum 24-hour period.
FP -00-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 2
5. Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, pressurized
irrigation system approved and activated, drainage lots constructed, fencing and gates installed,
and road base approved by the Ada County Highway District prior to applying for building
permits. Landscaping shall be installed prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. A letter of
credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all fencing, pathways,
landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final
plat.
6. Applicant shall be responsible to construct a six -foot -high, permanent perimeter fence along
property boundary (and westerly easement line of Wingate Lane), except where the City has
expressly agreed, in writing, that such fencing is not necessary. Fencing is to be in place prior
to applying for building permits.
7. Revise the following notes:
(5.) u adjacent to the exterior subdivision boundary lines.
(7) u Lot 10, Block 5, Lot 1, Block 8, and Lots 32 and 33, Block 2 u
(8) u and Lot 33 Block4u
(12) Access to Wingate Lane is specifically prohibited.
(13) This subdivision is subject to the terms of a development agreement recorded as
Instrument No. , records of Ada County, Idaho.
(14) (Provide a blanket easement to the City of Meridian over Lot 33, Block 2 for the
operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer intercepter.)
(15) Lots 1, 23, 24-26, and 29, Block 9 shall be subject to the terms of the existing
temporary sanitary sewer easements along their western boundary. No permanent
structures, fences, trees, or brush shall be placed within said easements.
8. Remove 20 -foot -wide sanitary sewer easement south of E. Chemise Drive, and reference the
existing easement instrument number north of E. Chemise Drive.
9. Show Wingate Lane on the final plat map as a 20 -foot wide easement, and reference the
existing 15 -foot wide recorded private lane easement. The extra 5 -foot width is required by the
City of Meridian as the minimum width for an emergency access.
10. Widen Lot 33, Block 2, by ten feet to accommodate the South Slough sewer interceptor main.
Provide a blanket easement to the City of Meridian for the extension of the South Slough Sewer
Interceptor (see plat note #14 above). This portion of the sewer trunk line shall be constructed
at the time this subdivision is developed.
11. Revise the reference to the sewer easement along the western side of the subdivision to read:
20 -foot -wide temporary sanitary sewer easement, Instruments Nos. and
(Make sure you reference both easements, Cassell, and PNE/Edmonds)
12. Add an arrow symbol to the plat legend that depicts front of house orientation. Place symbol
on Lot 27, Block 2, toward N. Devlin Way. An arrow is required because less than minimum
FP -00-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 3
street frontage is shown on the other lot side.
13. Provide a ten -foot -wide easement for public utilities, drainage, and irrigation along the southern
boundary of Lot 2, Block 2, and west of 20 -foot -wide easement for Wingate Lane along Lots
17-22, Block 2, and Lot 10, Block 5.
14. Detailed landscaping plans for all common areas, including species, size, quantities, and
locations, and pathway details must be submitted for approval to the Planning & Zoning
Department prior to City Engineer signing Final Plat.
15. Provide detailed fencing and gate plans that also show the proposed location of irrigation
cleanout structures for approval prior to signature on the final plat. Irrigation plans must be
approved by downstream water users. Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to applying for
building permits.
16. Sanitary sewer and water service to this site will be via extensions of the existing mains
installed in adjacent developments. Applicant will be responsible to construct lateral sewer and
water mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate
main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department.
17. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all
street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established
normal groundwater elevation.
18. Sidewalks are to provide a clear five -foot -wide walkway pathway without encroachment of
mailbox structures.
19. Wingate Lane borders the eastern boundary of this subdivision. The easement for this private
roadway needs to be shown along the backs of Lots 17-22, Block 2, and Lot 10, Block 5. The
easement width needs to be increased to 20 feet wide to meet Meridian Fire Department
requirements. All headgate/cleanout structures are to located outside of the 20 -foot -wide
easement and be accessible to water users without requiring entrance onto individual building
lots or climbing over fences.
20. One of the City's requirements in the development agreement conflicts with Ada County
Highway District's requirements. The applicant is not to construct the 20 -foot -wide portion of
E. Challis Street at the east boundary, and is to deposit money to complete construction of E.
Challis Street and remove the gates when (and if) the two five -acre parcels to the south are
developed (when Wingate Lane can be vacated). The City put a condition that a 20 -foot -wide
gate be constructed at the easement line of Wingate Lane that allows emergency fire
department access only (with appropriate signage). ACHD's condition of approval is to install
gates and allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles across the unconstructed portion of E.
Challis Street. The homeowners along Wingate Lane have requested that all access to Wingate
Lane be prohibited. Staff requests the City Council to specifically address this issue and
instruct staff of preferred direction.
FP -00-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 4
21. Another requirement of the development agreement is provide a pathway along the South
Slough, as it is designated as a pathway in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. However,
Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District will not allow a license agreement for a pathway along live
irrigation ditches. Perhaps, instead of designating a pathway, the applicant could pave over the
sewer easement along the slough as a "sewer access road" to satisfy the pathway requirement
and avoid problems with Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District.
22. All damages to Wingate Lane caused by the developer or contractors are to be repaired
immediately. Homeowners along Wingate Lane have reported that damage to the lane
presently exists from construction equipment and work on the irrigation system. No building
permits will be accepted until the repair work is complete. The developers have agreed that no
construction traffic will be allowed to access Wingate Lane.
23. Staff foresees a problem with buyers of Lots 17-22, Block 2, trying to access Wingate Lane if
the easement is part of the platted lots. The developer shall have their attorney draw up a
release of dominant parcel interest in the private lane easement and record it prior to signature
on the final plat. Also provide a recorded copy of deed restriction to prohibit access to Wingate
Lane and forbid gates or removal of permanent fencing on these lots prior to applying for
building permits. Fencing shall be set at the western boundary of the 20 -foot easement for
Wingate Lane.
24. Submit copies of proposed restrictive covenants and deed restrictions for review. This
information was required at the preliminary plat stage; application indicates covenants have not
been submitted.
25. Stafrs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved preliminary plat
does not relieve Applicant of responsibility for compliance. p e
t
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS'
1. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, inrsecting,
crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City
Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage
district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to
the Public Works Department.
2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed
from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used
for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
3. One -hundred -watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated
by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense.
Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants.
FP -00-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Mayor and Council
September 28, 2000
Page 5
4. Submit oFinalp letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the
subdivision and street names. Make any corrections necessary to conform.
5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent.
6. Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 12-5-2.K.
7. If possible, respond in writing to this memorandum by noon on October 3, 2000. Submit
three copies of the revised Final Plat Map to the Public Works Department for compliance
review prior to development plan approval.
FP -00-018
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
** TX CONFIRMATION REPORT **
DATE TIME TO/FROM
29 10/17 14:29 PUBLIC WORKS
30 10/17 14:32 LEGAL DEPARTMENT
31 10/17 14:36 208 888 6854
AS OF OCT 17 '00 14•j9 PAGE.01
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD# STATUS
OF --S 02'17" 008 125 OK
EC --S 03'25" 008 125 OK
EC --S 02'35" 008 125 OK
fti� '
To: Mayor and City Council V1�
��
City of Meridian 0�
33 East Idaho \ ��
Meridian, Idaho 83642
From North Wingate Lane Residem
2445 North Wingate Lane
Meridian, Idaho 83642
)ctober 16, 2000
?�Vu
Re: Statement of expectations for developers of Packard Estates Development, LLC.
The residents of North Wingate Lane feel it is necessary to restate their position
concerning use, access, or development of Wingate Lane by anyone not directly now
living in a residence on the lane. We are supported by previous documents and
proceedings that specifically prohibit any kind of access to North Wingate by others not
presently living on the lane. We are very weary of having to keep such a vigilant watch
on the proceedings for development of the lands that abut North Wingate Lane. We have
made it clear in the past that all traffic of any kind, including pedestrian and bike traffic,
will be prohibited now and in the future from traveling on or across North Wingate Lane.
We expect the compliance of Packard Estates Development, LLC. to the city council for
the construction of permanent gates (for the use of emergency vehicles only ) and fences
to assure this.
The property owners on the lane established this lane as a private lane, July 25, 1913.
Ada County has already ruled that no more houses may be built along North Wingate
Lane that would require entrance and exit directly from the lane.
The residents of the lane pool money to maintain the lane. In the past, great damage
has occurred because of use by construction vehicles that have illegally used the lane to
access the developing areas of Packard Estates Development, LLC. Enforcing
compliance has been difficult. The council has stated that permanent, not wire, fences and
gates were to be constructed along North Wingate Lane before development began. The
wire fences have been lowered whenever someone wanted to use the lane to access or
crossover to the east or west development. Only emergency county access is allowed.
All other accesses, including utility, ACHD, or irrigation, must be done on the
development property and not involve the lane in any way, or at any time.
No gates will be installed to allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles across
North Wingate Lane. This allowance would only invite problems. Sometimes this area is
referred to as the unconstructed portion of E. Challis. It is not. It is part of our
established, permanent private lane.
We greatly appreciate the efforts of Mr. Bruce Freckleton, and Ms. Shari Stiles. They
have been very helpful to explain and interpret the somewhat confusing documents
concerning these proceedings. We also appreciate any other entity that is working to
assure that legal concerns are correctly dealt with on this matter. Please help us put to
rest any further worries concerning our proper right to keep our privates lane
�as�su"ch_
CY
Sincerely,�✓5 ��`C�?iCO.J'�p=---
North Wingate Lane Residents
Attachment Enclosed: //
NOV, -1?' 00(FRI) 14:05 PARKPOIN`Lz�OMMERCL
GM' N. DIscovery Way, Suite 120, Boise, ID. 83713
Phone(208)323-g1sa Fax(208)323-4102
LM
To: Will Berg
Fax 888-4218
Phone:
Re: Packard Acres #2
❑ Urgent ❑ For Review
TEL : 20867281-4,1
P. 001
Fromc Stacy Wirick
Pages: 2 including cover
Date: 11/17/00
CC:
❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply
❑ Please Recycle
Dear Will,
Attached, please find our request to table Packard Acres #2 from the public hearing on November 21,
2000.
Please contact me with any question or concems you may have.
Sincerely,
Stacy Wirick
NOV 17 '00 13:37 2086728201 PAGE.01
IVDU.-17'00(FRI) 14:05 PARKPOINTECOMMERCL TEL:2086728201
P. 002
Packard Estates Development, 'LLC.
6223 N. Discovery Way, #120
Boise, Id. 83713
(208)323-4002
November 17, 2000
Will Berg
Meridian City Clerk
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Id. 83642
Re: Packard Acres #2
Dear Mr_ Berg:
�
C�IVED
NOV 17 2000
CITY OF MEgIDrAN
Please accept this letter as our formal request to have the hearing for Packard Acres #2
tabled from the November 21, 2000 public hearing. The engineer for the project will be
out of town, therefore we feel we will not have the proper representation.
Please have us added to the next available hearing.
Thanking you in advance for your cooperation.
Administrative Assistant to
R. Craig Groves
NOU 17 '00 13:37
2086728201 PAGE.02
G . j C-`/ ` O In c� o , ,tl� 7.A
a 6--T4
L✓ .Cv,s T /c,/ c o'c W' i �� .► �-� L .a w C.J r L
O `� r �/ G ( o ..rT y
4 N A a. %A o !� ( Z� +.0 % B v T j d t t y c G v /i "....X-
V a i C 4b f S'
U f J / J a ti . ['f o ✓ t L.' . �+t .✓-..s' /'� L4% e / ' z c•it - /f C G c 1/ �:
C, .% t_ `�' ✓ / �i La.�j !t, f iJ �F c .l • (�
--� 4– 4 Ja -C � ]
(..tet
j" � �' d} 1 ... i. ✓� H't ,,..t v cr i ..�-Ter L r
A9 Al 1-1 Il-
C -
L `f C. ..yJ
/;u 7- pix l
7 7-4- d
77,o
Q . to a /�
T
T4
G1
LH
i
IN
-s; o
C> I
�1 pA�� ate✓
1 6 �
u
IN
vNTJ
N Cl(
L / -
I'q � IOA — /+-L 0 r I ✓i n w/ C: A J t '+a ,
1 ' ► ra n O �/
r .
�OwAIS /f' v�d✓iC4J
.rte^ k` 7
_
N,A
/�Jr' Ati � � s••• zip
E 4 CC tj-r
N / � 0 La .f J•f�
L
7.
:,.:....
�
V
i
V
'
tr
c N�
C-
'. r
r •N.rCr � 6i.ft•�
�
d
/C I�j 1 N/
.J
l•
a', r
C TEs�
_
N,A
/�Jr' Ati � � s••• zip
E 4 CC tj-r
N / � 0 La .f J•f�
L
7.
:,.:....
n
A/ ,n i 4
C. C ,(i I C L( J
iJ/7L,-Lf6.ej
P T�
orA�S
j -rA /
J
� f J
V
e, r
U � U
Q
d a ft
N
C �
Yl ,
V r .4
O ✓ G i"}� � ct L
G
C r n% C
N A 7-4 o �• Z� �L %— e o T j[ C y c G e 1 /i •v
L J LI f ✓ / J 10 .� C/ u ✓ C.. _s /� r• -L rJ -..s /� l'( I`r 4 ' /� �- f c
`, '7—/7 A UvL_ E .-Z n .` y e t_ y J `ire L --j f ► f �J
�.54so -Cc 7
% O
L7 ,
/?-/-+ y.. ,cam v� o ..✓ �'
"'� 1 / /.r /
C .J c' - -N r r '
C-. �1
7
/Al T �
Y /
/
T C
N 7
Cl—
Z—
/V 6.6, s V v
T-
T
7
FIX � � �� ,, 7<�� /
i me roff ice
MEMORANDUM
RECEIVED
To: William G. Berg, Jr. JAN 18 2001
From: Wm. F. Nichols CITY OF MERIDIAN
Subject: PACKARD A RES NO.2 SUBDIVISION (FP -00-018)
Date: January 18, 2000
Will:
Regarding the above referenced matter, please find attached the original of the
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT for approval by the City Council.
After approval and the appropriate signatures, please serve a copy of the Order upon the
Applicant, with a Certificate of Service in the file, and a copy to Planning and Zoning, Public
Works and the City Attorney.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
msg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\Packard Sub FP1ats\BergFP018mem.wpd
interoffice
MEMORANDUM
RECEIVED
To: William G. Berg,Jr. JAN 19 2001
From: Marlene St. Geor CITY OF MERIDIAN
Subject: Packard Acres No. 2 Subdivision (FP -00-018)
Date: January 18, 2001
Please find attached a new page 4, with signature for the Mayor and
yourself, for the above matter.
As per our discussion, all Preliminary Plats will have the Roll Call
language and all Final Plats will have a signature line for the Mayor and yourself.
If you need anything further, please advise.
Z:\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\BridgeTower AZ017 CUP043 PP017\13erg011801.Mem
Ey/Z:\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\BridgeTower AZ017 CUP043 PP017\Berg01 1801.Mem
2. The final plat upon which there is contained the Certification and signature
of the City Cleric and the City Engineer verifying that the plat meets the City's
requirements shall be signed only at such time as:
a. The Plat dimensions are approved by the City Engineer; and
b. The City Engineer has verified that all off-site improvements are
completed and/or the appropriate letter of credit or cash has been
issued guaranteeing the completion of off-site and required on-site
improvements.
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the
day of , 2001.
ROLL CALL:
COUNCILMAN RON ANDERSON VOTED:
COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD VOTED:
COUNCILWOMAN TAMMY deWEERD VOTED:
COUNCILWOMAN CHERIE McCANDLESS VOTED:
MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED:
Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public Works Department.
Bv:
City Cleric
Dated:
msg/ZAWork\M\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\Packard Sub MatsTPOrderNo2
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL
PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 (FP -00-018) -4
Memorandum
To: Will Berg, Jr. — City Clerk
CC: file
From: Gary Smith
Date: 12/30/99
Re: Packard Subdivision No.2 — Final Plat
RWEIvED
DEC 3 0 1999
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Will: Here is final plat mylar Sheet No.1 and No.2 for this subdivision. I have signed Sheet No.2 in the
appropriate space after review of my file and of the documentation submitted by the developer for the
Letter of Credit. I believe that you have the original Letter of Credit and its support documentation.
If you have any questions, give me a call
Regards,
Gary
1
Packard Estates Development, LLC
6223 North Discovery Way
Suite 120
Boise, ID 83713
Office: 208-323-4002
City of Meridian
C/o Gary D. Smith
Public Works Director
200 E. Carlton
Suite 100
Meridian, ID 83642
RE: Packard Subdivision No. 2 — Fin,,
13FcF,wED
DEC 16 1999
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Dear Gary:
Enclosed is a Letter of Credit from We �" �q $50,001.33
representing 110% of the cost of imps ing the letter of
credit amount. Also, we are enclosin ;ment Fees for
Packard Estates #1 and #2 in the am( /
However, before processing this cher osessment Fee
for common areas when our common aroaa My
understanding is that we paid a Water Assessment Fee at the- time we Paurrv.-.-______nd backflow
preventor when we installed the Urban Pressure Irrigation Pumping Station. Please check this out.
Also, in regards to the temporary construction fencing are you going to require that this fence be installed
prior to issuance of any building permits? We feel that since we own all the adjoining land and since we
are trying to hold a pre -construction meeting to start development on the next phase that we should not be
required to install this fence. Please let me know you thoughts.
Thanks for all of your help and have a happy holiday season.
Sincerely Yours,
Packard Estates Development, LLC
Ry--,
Craig Groves
Managing Member
Cc:
City Clerk,
Bruce Freckleton
y"*or.J-J
~r City of Meridian, Building Department
200 E Cart
Y <� 24 HOUR
ton, Suite 100
INSPECTION LINE Meridian ID 83642
PH 887-2211 / FAX 887-1297
DEC 21 1999
Building Permit CITY OF MERIDIAN Page:1
Permit Number: BP1999-322 Printed: 12/20/1999
Approved:
Applicaft, PACKARD ESTATES DEVELOPMENT Zoning:
6223 N.DISCOVRY WAY, SUITE 120 Addition:
Boise, ID 83713 Block: Lot(s):
Parcel Number: PARC19911 b � Section:
1 PACKAI �� ,�p S Cco.� C-\,—wnship:
MERIDIAN `L" f s^ \- V -S �'�"` � _ Range:
'' Area:
Legal Description: � S g I"` --C-11
PROPERTI l]>- _ P-Ss-e-s�
,�'Sc�3Z
Local Livens � �S
cv�
Fees and Receipts:
Number
FEE1999-1678
RCPT1999-564
Construction Value: $0.00
rice:
-ax:
se:
mount
332.00
_32.00
$5,632.00
Receipts Total: $5,632.00
Structure Use: Start Date: 00/00/0000
Purpose: Water Assessment fee's End Date: 00/00/0000
Floor Areas
Living Space: 0.00 Basement/Storage:
0.00
Garage: 0.00 Porches:
0.00
Decks: 0.00 Other:
0.00
Total Area:
0.00
Site Area: 0.00 Structure Area: 0.00
Percentage of Site:
Impervious Surfaces
House: 0.00 Porch/Walk: 0.00
Garage: 0.00 Other: 0.00
Driveways: 0.00 Total: 0.00
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Application for Water & Sewer Assessment or Reassessment
Important: Complete all items, check all applicable spaces.
1. Location
of
Su ision:Address:
Ck�.rd ",t � 4 Z
Block
Lot:
Building
Proposed Use: See item 6 below (CyNrVAQf\ (VC, ❑ City Sewer
0- Residential ❑ Commercial El industrial ❑ Other ❑ Septic Tank
2. Owner: 7-Lc,,S \-a4-e_S Z)2J-e:o-p&A_a�j LL—,- Phone No 323 - I-{ pOZ
3. Contractor: Phone No.
4. Plumber: Phone No.
5. Architect: Phone No.
6. Residential: Commercial: Industrial:
New Structure Recreational/Amusement Food/Milk Processing
Existing Church/Religious Org. Plating/Metals
Remodel Service Station Warehouse/Storage
Addition Car Wash/Garage Other - Specify
Single -Family Office/Bank/Professional
Two or More Family School/Library
Number of Units Other - Specify Note: Plans shall be furnished
Other - Specify �qW_r ASS CSS for all commercial and
LScc'
Floor Space, Sq. Ft. Industrial Buildings
7. All fees shall be paid to the City of Meridian when building permit is obtained.
8. No Water Meter will be installed prior to approval of all inspections and payment of fees.
9. Inspection required at water meter yoke where plumber makes, connection, at connection of sprinkler system and at location
of backflow prevention device.
10. Person signing application is responsible for notification for inspection, and/or deficient materials or workmanship by sub-
contractors.
11. For Meter Installation call 888-5242.
Signature of Applicant: Address and Phone o.: ate:
For Office uce Only Maie%w Th;c i .,__.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Application for Water & Sewer Assessment or Reassessment
Important: Complete all items, check all applicab
1. Location Su ision:
of ckG,d #
Building Proposed Use: See item 6 below
P§- Residential ❑ Commercial
?. Owner: �.c.. S Vr
3. Contractor:
4. Plumber
5. Architect:
3. Residential:
Comm
New Structure
R
Existing
C
Remodel
S1
Addition
C.
Single -Family
01
Two or More Family
Sc
Number of Units
Ot
Other - Specify k)jCje.r
14S:e.SS
Plating/Metals
Scoff-e-
Warehouse/Storage
Flc
'. All fees shall be paid to the City of Meridian whe
3. No Water Meter will be installed prior to approva
3. Inspection required at water meter yoke where pl
of backflow prevention device.
10. Person signing application is responsible for notif
contractors.
11. For Meter Installation call 888-5242.
signature o pp icant: Tress
=or Office use Onl Below This Line
:Approved Amount Due
Date Permit Fee F
c!R Water Asses:
Number of Cc
' Size of
Meter Approv
Latecomer As
Lawn SprinklE
Backflow Dev
Fire Sprinkler
Backflow Devi
Approved
ewer hook
atecomer Assess
Dtal X$
)tal Due
ate Meter Installed by, Nam
e spaces.
J Address:
Block Lot:
CC7YAMQf\ Fec` LD
❑ City Sewer
❑ Industrial ❑ Other
❑ Septic Tank
Phone No
3Z3 E—( 00
Phone No.
Phone No.
Phone No.
-rcial: Industrial: CI'T'Y OF MERID
3creational/Amusement
Food/Milk Processing
lurch/Religious Org.
Plating/Metals
:rvice Station
Warehouse/Storage
rr Wash/Garage
Other - Specify
Tice/Bank/Professional
hool/Library
her - Specify Note:
Plans shall be furnished
�S
for all commercial and
,or Space, Sq. Ft.
Industrial Buildings
1 building permit is obtained.
I of all inspections and payment of fees.
umber makes connection, �:= connection of sprinkler system and at location
kation for inspection, and/or deficient materials
or workmanship by sub -
and PRone o.:
ate:
Date received by Water De t.
Number of
Approved
)r
S�'b
E uiv. Conn
B.O.A.
Ins ection Comments
ment
3
)nnections6
Dd
sessment
r Connection
ce Connection
Connection
ce Connection
Date
BOA
No. Equiv.
Amount
Inspection Comments
Conn.
+$ _
ty No. Mfg. No. Account No.
nount Paid Co Date oto 199
Size Make
Reading
Packard Estates Development, LLC
6223 North Discovery Way
Suite 120
Boise, ID 83713
Office: 208-323-4002
City of Meridian
C/o Gary D. Smith
Public Works Director
200 E. Carlton
Suite 100
Meridian, ID 83642
RE: Packard Subdivision No. 2 — Final Plat Recording
Dear Gary:
RECEIVED
DEC 1 b i99
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Enclosed is a Letter of Credit from Washington Federal Savings and Loan in the amount of $50,001.33
representing 110% of the cost of improvements yet to be completed as well as the bids backing the letter of
credit amount. Also, we are enclosing a check to the City of Meridian for the Water Assessment Fees for
Packard Estates #1 and #2 in the amount of $5,632.00.
However, before processing this check please explain to me why we are paying a Water Assessment Fee
for common areas when our common areas are watered by the pressure irrigation system. My
understanding is that we paid a Water Assessment Fee at the time we paid for the meter and backflow
preventor when we installed the Urban Pressure Irrigation Pumping Station. Please check this out.
Also, in regards to the temporary construction fencing are you going to require that this fence be installed
prior to issuance of any building permits? We feel that since we own all the adjoining land and since we
are trying to hold a pre -construction meeting to start development on the next phase that we should not be
required to install this fence. Please let me know you thoughts.
Thanks for all of your help and have a happy holiday season.
Sincerely Yours,
Packard Estates Development, LLC
RS1__'
Craig Groves
Managing Member
PACKARD ESTATES DEV LLC 1036
6223 N. DISCOVERY WY. STE. 120
Cc: BOISE, IDAHO 83713 92-7008/3241
City Clerk, �atrl2j�,/99
Bruce Freckleton
91�gto the City Of dean
M
(�rilrr of em $ 5,632.00
Five Thousand Six Hundred Thi T., nr,iiars
Bn1t
o IIfH .ieas o.
s I Washington Federal Savings
® Cole & Ustick Office
3197 N. Cole Road, Boise, ID 83704
1:3 24 7008 Si: 02? 740600 Sus i i
Memorandum
To: Will Berg, Jr. — City Clerk
CC: file
From: Gary Smith
Date: 12/30/99
Re: Packard Subdivision No.2 — Final Plat
RFcF-PvrED
DEC 3 0 1999
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Will: Here is final plat mylar Sheet No.1 and No.2 for this subdivision. I have signed Sheet No.2 in the
appropriate space after review of my file and of the documentation submitted by the developer for the
Letter of Credit. I believe that you have the original Letter of Credit and its support documentation.
If you have any questions, give me a call.
Regards,
Gary
1
Packard Estates Development, LLC
6223 North Discovery Way
Suite 120
Boise, ID 83713
Office: 208-323-4002
City of Meridian
C/o Gary D. Smith
Public Works Director
200 E. Carlton
Suite 100
Meridian, ID 83642
RE: Packard Subdivision No. 2 — Fim
Dear Gary:
Enclosed is a Letter of Credit from W
representing 110% of the cost of imps
credit amount. Also, we are enclosin
Packard Estates #1 and #2 in the amt
0"'Z /L% f�
F.EcElvED
DEC 1 6 1999
CITY OF MERIDIAN
'$50,001.33
ing the letter of
'ment Fees for
However, before processing this chec :sessment Fee
for common areas when our common arae�v ____ My
understanding is that we paid a Water Assessment Fee at the time we-panr-tv, �-._-__nd backflow
preventor when we installed the Urban Pressure Irrigation Pumping Station. Please check this out.
Also, in regards to the temporary construction fencing are you going to require that this fence be installed
prior to issuance of any building permits? We feel that since we own all the adjoining land and since we
are trying to hold a pre -construction meeting to start development on the next phase that we should not be
required to install this fence. Please let me know you thoughts.
Thanks for all of your help and have a happy holiday season.
Sincerely Yours,
Packard Estates Development, LLC
Craig Groves
Managing Member
Cc:
City Clerk,
Bruce Freckleton
City of Meridian, Building Department
�M 24 HOUR 200 E Carlton, Suite 100
f/ PEEC ION L� Meridian ID 83642
4
RCE ,D PH 887-2211 / FAX 887-1297
DEC 2 1 1999
Building Permit CITY OF MERIDIAN Page: 1
Permit Number. BP1999-322 Printed: 12/20/1999
Approved:
Applicant: PACKARD ESTATES DEVELOPMENT Zoning:
6223 N.DISCOVRY WAY, SUITE 120 Addition:
Boise, ID 83713 Block: Lot(s):
Parcel Number: PARC1990 b Section:
1 PACKAI S wnship:
MERIDIAN `R- ' W �'� `G Range:
L Area:
Legal Description:
PROPERTI
s
Local Livens
Fees and Receipts:
Number
FEE1999-1678
RCPT1999-564 j
Receipts Total:
,ice:
'ax:
se:
mount
332.00
_32.00
$5,632.00
$5,632.00
Construction Value: $0.00 Structure Use: Start Date: 00/00/0000
Purpose: Water Assessment fee's End Date: 00/00/0000
Floor Areas
Impervious Surfaces
Living Space:
0.00
Basement/Storage:
0.00
House: 0.00 Porch/Walk: 0.00
Garage:
0.00
Porches:
0.00
Garage: 0.00 Other: 0.00
Decks:
0.00
Other:
0.00
Driveways: 0.00 Total: 0.00
Total Area:
0.00
Site Area:
0.00
Structure Area:
0.00
Percentage of Site:
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Application for Water & Sewer Assessment or
Reassessment
Important: Complete all items, check all applicable spaces.
1. Location
of
Su ision:
C��c✓d #I Z
Address:
Block
Lot:
Building
Proposed Use: See item 6 below (0yAA/\Qf\ reC,_
�- Residential
❑ City Sewer
❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial ❑ Other
❑ Septic Tank
2. Owner:PC,-r- LG,, S VrA4-S �� �o� 2nt Uc Phone No
T I-( OOZ
3. Contractor:
Phone No.
4. Plumber: Phone No.
5. Architect: Phone No.
6. Residential: Commercial: Industrial:
New Structure Recreational/Amusement
Food/Milk Processing
Existing Church/Religious Org.
Plating/Metals
Remodel Service Station
Warehouse/Storage
Addition Car Wash/Garage
Other - Specify
Single -Family Office/Bank/Professional
Two or More Family School/Library
Number of Units Other - Specify Note:
Plans shall be furnished
Other - Specify k�)a4e.r Assess m4.^ -is
for all commercial and
Z Floor Space, Sq. Ft.
Industrial Buildings
7. All fees shall be paid to the City of Meridian when building permit is obtained.
8. No Water Meter will be installed prior to approval of all inspections and payment of fees.
9. Inspection required at water meter yoke where plumber makes connection, at connection of
sprinkler system and at location
of backflow prevention device.
10. Person signing application is responsible for notification for inspection, and/or deficient materials or workmanship by sub-
contractors.
11. For Meter Installation call 888-5242.
ress and Nrnone No.:
Tor Office use Only (Below Thin I inP) Hata rceoivori by Wntcr r)nnt
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Application for Water & Sewer Assessment or Reassessment
1111Nuriant: Uomplete all items, check all applicable spaces.
1. Location Su ision:
of C�Ccfd # o`er` 4 Z Address:
Building Proposed Use: See item 6 below CbyA /\aAeTCLO
;6- Residential ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial ❑ Other
1 Owner: �.G, �Q"e �o iM2r1 t l.l.0 Phone No
3. Contractor:
Dti
4. Flumber:
3. Architect:
J. Residential:
Commercial:
New Structure
Recreational/Amusement
Existing
Church/Religious Org.
Remodel
Service Station
Addition
Car Wash/Garage
Single -Family
Office/Bank/Professional
Two or More Family
School/Library
Number of Units
Other - Specify
Other - Specify kj)q-�e-r
INSS2SS tV A_ S
Ct>w��n.�eM 11 s=
l 1Sco.(��
Size of
Floor Space, Sq. Ft.
Phnno K1 -
Block I Lot:
LJ City Sewer
❑ Septic Tank
—L4C1aZ
Industrial: CITY OF MERID
Food/Milk Processing
Plating/Metals
Warehouse/Storage
Other - Specify
Note: Plans shall be furnished
for all commercial and
Industrial Buildings
I. All fees shall be paid to the City of Meridian when building permit is obtained.
3. No Water Meter will be installed prior to approval of all inspections and payment of fees.
1. Inspection required at water meter yoke where plumber makes connection, a' connection of sprinkler system and at location
of backflow prevention device.
10. Person signing application is responsible for notification for inspection, and/or deficient materials or workmanship by sub-
contractors.
11. For Meter Installation call 888-5242.
signature o pp scant:
ress an one o.: ._.
=or Office use Onl Below This Line
ApprovedAmount
Due
Date received b Water De t.
B -Date
Permit Fee For
Number of Approved
(2_Z -0 -cid
a.2
Water Assessment Sib � (
E uiv. Conn B.O.A. Ins ection Comments
3
Number of Connections �! Z'
S
I
Size of
Meter Approved
Latecomer Assessment
Lawn Sprinkler Connection
Backflow Device Connection
Fire Sprinkler Connection
Backflow Device Connection
Approved Date BOA
By
No. Equiv. Amount Inspection Comments
Conn.
:wer hook-up
itecomer Assess.
�tal
x $ +$
tal Due
S,1o32 ao
�te Meter Installe
by,
y No. Mfg. No.
Account No.
count Paid '5053`0Date lowcid Z99
Size Make__
Reading
Packard Estates Development, LLC
6223 North Discovery Way
Suite 120
Boise, ID 83713
Office: 208-323-4002
City of Meridian
C/o Gary D. Smith
Public Works Director
200 E. Carlton
Suite 100
Meridian, ID 83642
RE: Packard Subdivision No. 2 — Final Plat Recording
Dear Gary:
JIWEMED
U i 'u,�J9S
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Enclosed is a Letter of Credit from Washington Federal Savings and Loan in the amount of $50,001.33
representing 110% of the cost of improvements yet to be completed as well as the bids backing the letter of
credit amount. Also, we are enclosing a check to the City of Meridian for the Water Assessment Fees for
Packard Estates #1 and #2 in the amount of $5,632.00.
However, before processing this check please explain to me why we are paying a Water Assessment Fee
for common areas when our common areas are watered by the pressure irrigation system. My
understanding is that we paid a Water Assessment Fee at the time we paid for the meter and backflow
preventor when we installed the Urban Pressure Irrigation Pumping Station. Please check this out.
Also, in regards to the temporary construction fencing are you going to require that this fence be installed
prior to issuance of any building permits? We feel that since we own all the adjoining land and since we
are trying to hold a pre -construction meeting to start development on the next phase that we should not be
required to install this fence. Please let me know you thoughts.
Thanks for all of your help and have a happy holiday season.
Sincerely Yours,
Packard Estates Development, LLC
Craig Groves
Managing Member
PACKARD ESTATES DEV LLC 1036
6223 N. DISCOVERY WY. STE. 120
Cc: BOISE, IDAHO 83713 92-7008/3241
City Clerk, :43&-1211 r,.Igg
Bruce Freckleton
'P91hrr of City of Pleridi an $ 5,632.00
Five Thousand Six HL+ Thi rt -.y
Oalail, n Mck.
s I Washington Federal Savings
o Cole & Ustick Office
3197 N. Cole Road, Boise, ID 83704
': 3 24 L 7008 5i: 02? 740600 5u' i
l�f
Washington Federal Savings
P.O. Box 1460, Boise, ID 83701-1460
(208)343-1833 • Fax: (208)338-7374
IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT NUMBER 1999-49
To: City of Meridian
33 E. Idaho St.
Meridian ID 83642
Dear Sirs:
December 13, 1999
We hereby establish our irrevocable Letter of Credit in your favor for the
account of PACKARD ESTATES DEVELOPMENT, LLC. up to the aggregate amount of
$50,001.33 available by your drafts drawn at sight on us presented at
WASHINGTON FEDERAL SAVINGS, Main Office, 1001 W. Idaho Street, Boise, Idaho
83701.
Drafts must be accompanied by Beneficiary's signed statement that the
developer has failed to perform or is in default of completion of the street
lights, fencing, pressurized irrigation, retention pond, and landscaping in
PACKARD ESTATES SUBDIVISION #4.
Drafts drawn under this credit must bear the following clause: Drawn under
Washington Federal Savings Letter of Credit Number 1999-49 dated December 13,
1999. The amount of each draft must be endorsed hereon.
Partial drawings are permitted.
We hereby engage with the drawer, endorsers, and holders in due course of
drafts drawn under and in compliance with the terms of this credit, that such
drafts will be duly honored upon presentation to the drawee bank.
This Letter of Credit expires December 13, 2000.
Very truly,
By:
Paula J. verett
Adminis ative Officer
Provisions applicable to the credit:
Unless otherwise expressly stated, this credit is subject to the "Uniform
Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (1983 Revision) International
Chamber of Commerce Brochure No. 400" or by subsequent Uniform Customs and
Practice fixed by subsequent Congresses of the International Chamber of
Commerce.
WITH OFFICES IN WASHINGTON, IDAHO, OREGON, UTAH AND .ARIZONA
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS: 425 PIKE STREET SEATTLE, WA 98101 (106) 624-7910
Packard Estates
0eIe10RMent9 LLC.
R. Craig Groves
Managing Member
December 13, 1999
John Pertyl
Washington Federal Savings & Loans
P.O. Box 4007
Boise, ID. 83711-4007
Re: Letter of Credit for Packard Estates #2
Dear John:
6223 N. Discovery Way, Suite 120
Boise, ID. 83713
Phone (208)323-4188 Fax (208)323-4102
stacy@parkpointe.com
1?,FCE1vED
D E C 1 6 1999
CITY OF MERIDIAN
This letter shall serve as a formal written request to obtain a letter of credit for construction items in
Packard Estates #2.
Enclosed, please find a copy of the City's request for the letter of credit and supporting contractor's
proposals for the items outlined in line #4.
As per the City of Meridians requirements, the letter of credit must be for 110% of the contractors bid.
Therefore, we will need a letter of credit in the total amount of 50,001.33. Attached is a spreadsheet
with the breakdown of said costs.
Should you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to contact me at your
earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
R. Craig Groves
Managing Member
N
U)
R
W
U)
W
Y
0
m
CL
c
U
O
cm
OQ
C:
y
V
C:a)�O
Co
d
L
i4 V
O
O
O
O
ul
_ L a-
O
L
Y
O 0
O
N
t�
O
� n M
Q
C
C
f0
=
=
a)
o
U
N
O
O
L
M
O
O
A L CD
O
R1
H
69
669
69
�
N603�
r
IV� CD
L0
w
C
C
O
ik O
m
0
U
O
cm
OQ
C:
y
V
C:a)�O
Co
d
L
i4 V
d
d
U
y _
aLi
ul
_ L a-
O
L
Y
O 0
O
OCM
D
N r Eo
O
O
C
C
f0
=
=
a)
o
U
N
'Q ami
Q J
d
m
m
=
L
y
vY
R
C-6
0
ca C14L N
C
w
C
C
O
ik O
m
—
E
" m c
a)
m
m
c
w
c
O
E
O
Nca N
w
(0
2-11
O
U
U cn a)
W v
O
c
O
cu
C
C6
=
N
E
0
`—
C
cn Y m
o
E
ami
o_
N
N
C
O
C a7 p
a p
'C
u-
O
r-
O
j
(n
(p
C O
p
O
O
C
a)
LQ
�
00
a.
�
m
3 io
p
O
O
O
O
O N
p
c
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
(D a)
m
m
L- p
N
N
ty/1
N
N
0
C
OQ
U)
v
y
• O
y
d
L
i4 V
w_
j
aLi
V
O
L
Y
O 0
O
C
d
Qa
O
•
C
L
W
=
=
a)
o
U
N
'Q ami
Q J
m
m
=
L
y
R
LL
0
y
w ti y
d
Q
U)
N
Q
N
U
0
C1i
2:1--RI,
u•cv 6 ,LS'72 G�11
,84'BL9Z avow al` va HIUON
.OZ,iC.00 S
___ ,4Z'Eo[l
N
z o
)I- aW m
Y
.�% Ln
C
z 1 w
J 3 m
co
J k z
W o
e
H
r V u-
8 '9r. W N` wn Zvi I I
"boa a EL3
EL
�g
I
c ri � z
F= c
ris
=W a: a: g
z
m
o= U 5
z �dFZ5 u <w
o�
Ja
7
M .4L_S 1 00 S
<a
z
Zz
3^
W
Fa
LL 1-1
O
\ Lu ;.zw
Z
Qi `FW] �Z>Z� oa alb io ¢
< w <a - W¢ Z F F fi z�
HF
Q
z m
z F
azs PM' a � � =z .o
€Z�
r�
Z
Z-Z�
y�np�
oa <c �R Y
B2
a
�J
o
0 O
W W Na v�
ZZS ZW `b m 4 �2
a= �
2�
*5
LAJ
O
zg ¢Qi
o� ucxis <o io: ANN �4
ix � .-W'
~a 3: o< �2 zoy gY
�e
Q(„
o
"
z
a6W W'y am
"6 oO.W 22� >> S� w3 oz w
<W�w � �� �= a„m
l
ta
aW = J� N
�W wF 6� ��5ao N�o Nm �6 �n awe s� Pa
oho
6a�
x
oa z
00 3
<i ®rCS� oh _ O ZU
o �g`b �� € „� "z
me
U .
x� F
o F
u 5, -Mmwc'g ¢ x i
-616
.
s''1. b ndz6 dA aR di
2:1--RI,
u•cv 6 ,LS'72 G�11
,84'BL9Z avow al` va HIUON
.OZ,iC.00 S
___ ,4Z'Eo[l
N
z o
)I- aW m
Y
.�% Ln
C
z 1 w
J 3 m
co
J k z
W o
e
H
r V u-
8 '9r. W N` wn Zvi I I
"boa a EL3
EL
�g
w
N'iM
=W a: a: g
z
n
N
a a S 5 O O
EL_081—
M .4L_S 1 00 S
_o_r
z F 6 N z r a w
a o
_
IZF<i
7 z \
d
3^
W
�
Ca
z
z �o z0 zzz'o
�a�
Ile
W
N�c�io=
tae
B
° I1
w
rIW
C
y
N
opZo--
7
y�
�
I. 3
I
.^f"
A.
yr a/s IaA.M l
--
o l°
a nl
l
ta
Z
- .S UL OO N
(3 .07x.00 N) �Ha� -Idwr9
VAOWM
(.4Z'szsz) I (3 ,W.Moo N)
3
�BZ'6E42.51.00 N
L
N'iM
:CHCI Y:7IH I I�
n
N
p E-0 �BZ'6E
3^
W
V)
O��
NQ
u
'd I
'vii
o n Fu� l iZ
rIW
C
opZo--
7
AE'BSS
3 ,SL,LZoo N
..
�m
4',7 S
/9vau 135'
.DZ
(3 ,LLOO N)
yr a/s IaA.M l
X17 lAkgd
a
..................................................
ta
•• �njjn�ner
SMITTYBUILT SERVICES
Lawrence R. Smith
5251 N. Watersedge Ave.
Boise ID 83703
Bill To
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION
Wirt Edmonds
1966 N. Stoneview
Boise ID 83702
Estimate
Number E101
Date 12/05/99
Job Descrip.
Build chain-link fence
Work Date Terms Agent Job Site P.O. Number
Larry Packard Estates
11y1�1nll
SMITTYBUILT SERVICES
Lawrence R. Smith
5251 N. Watersedge Ave.
Boise ID 83703
Bill To
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION
Wirt Edmonds
1966 N. Stoneview
Boise ID 83702
Estimate
Number E102
Date 12/07/99
Job Descrip.
build perimeter fence on
common area phase 2
Work Date Terms Agent Job Site P.O. Number
Larry Packard Estates
Quantity Description Unit Price Amount
500 MATERIAL & LABOR 9.00 4,500.00
build 3' ceder fence around 500' of common area in
phase 2.
TOTAL $4,500.00
Dec -10-99 01:36P Anvil Fence Co 208 375 6768 P.01
MAILING ADDRESS: III IONI'.: (2W)375-6767
106 E. 46th Place
Boise, Idaho 83714 Fax: (2(1:>)375-6768
,tiirrrr l-`lh!
LOCATED MIKE THOMPSON, PRESIDENT
4640 Chinden Blvd. in
Boise, Idaho 83714 FENCE CO.
Where Quality Counts
PROPOSALTO: Packard Estates Development, LLC DATE December 10 1999
ADDRESS
ATTN: Stacy
CHAIN LINK FENCE SPECS
Fence Style
Mesh 'Gauge
Une Posts
WOOD FENCE SPECS
JOB ADDRESS Eagle 8 Fairview
PHONE: 323-4188 FAX: 323-4102
Height of Fabric Top Rail
lie Wire 9 Gauge
Post Spacing End Posts
Top -Barb Wire
Concrete
Gale Posts
Height of Fabric
Board Size
Fabric Quality
2x4 Rails
44 Posts
Post Spacing
Concrete
Nails Galvanized Ring Shank Air
Quontity: 820' of 6' tall temporary, rental chain link on green "t" posts
with no gates.
• • . . . . Total for above -- $ 1.937.25 Installed . . . . . . .
Rental period to be 90 days. 10% per each additional or partial
month thereafter. Price Includes one trip to Install and one trip
to demo fence.
All changes other than shown on this order or drawing will be charged for at prices agreed upon al'
tirne of change. Owner responsible for property lines, private utilities, repairing sprint -:,air sy!dtenis
damaged during post hole digging, sewer lines, removal of existing obstructions and permit:.. initial
`NOTE: The higher number of chain link gauge, reflects lighter weight materials.
ACCEPTED TermsofPayment Per purchase urder.
oma..,,,, ,L„i �e.,, vri,..., r„.,•
Sales Order i •y 1. r uotatlon void atter thirty (30) days.
Mlke o
THANK YOU! WF. APPRE /ATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO QUOTE YOUR PRO.IFC'T!
r0 sat
Construction
Exca�
kYtlx. , ,. n h& ting, Inc.
�,Y$��POBox 455 • Meridian, Idaho 83680 Office (208) 884-4011 •Fax: (208) 884-5060
f y y
o est�Electri
j
.%Su�t�e�
i w w
'SUBDIVISION #2
�Y 9.98
ESG TION ,OF- W
ORK .
It
, r '`rte s*QTY. ' U/M UNIT TOTAL GRAND
rt5111,
PRICE OF LINE TOTAL
ITEM
Qt
`,'SEWER,
370 LF $15.50 $5,735.00
&, 3
723 LF $8.50 $6,145.50
1rRVTCES $30.00
EA $330.00
O
UT 1 ,
y., . _ ,.,a EA $250.00 $250.00
2 EA
1ES
' "' "• $1,250.00 2 500.00 $13,710.00
WATER' ,
TRE
X LF $14.25
18
11:,.
$15,931.50
302 LF
a;: t $11.00 $3,322.00
r EA $250.00 $1,000.00
EA $430.00 $430.00
EA $750.00 $750.00
3El-
2 EA
$375.00 $750.00
GATE VALVE 5 EA $710.00 $3,550.00
a�
N`GATE,yALVE
4 EA $410.00 $1,640.00
4'. m 9 yYDRANT „' ' r 2 EA $1,000.00 $2,000.00
k0` rD()UBL'ESERVICES . 12 EA
$690.00 $8,280.00
SERVIC
xqt t%' �i� E . 1
t EA $580.00 $580.00
-oFr
ti .. 2 EA $1,400.00 $2,800.00
?RA$1B,1.OW-OFF ..:
- 1 EA $1,200.00 $1,200.00
I Al'
REINSTALL,°2"BLOW-OFF EA $700.00 700.00 $42,933.50
, STORM. DRAIN
LF $18.50
105
r'-F1 S,MZ C:, $1,942.50
;1.213 y. LF $14.00 $2,982.00
tF.�fQ4 A1ON SAND &'GREASE TRAP 1 EA $1,700.00 $1,700.00
+-
r ,
Page I of 2
iQF i � 4
t � -
f
li+XY) r2 4 •
Page 2 of 2
ARD"SUBDIVISION #2 - Continued
�k � y
'} �#
?ESCRIl'TION. OF WORK
120': r -
" LF
$2.10
$252.00
y
QTY'"'
U/M
UNIT
TOTAL
GRAND
4#
n1
PRICE
OF LINE
TOTAL
$250.00
$500.00
1A
29
ITEM
$110.00
r)'UP CHAMBER
100
LF
$7.50
$750.00
EL
1
EA
$500.00
$500.00
Y
}*.
2
EA
$250.00
$500.00
$7,624.50
°:.
$3,500.001150
- 00 IMMI8.50
RESSURE IRRIGATION
294.
LF
$7.50
$2,205.00
Qlp'} Sys
646 „ `
LF
$5.50
$3,553.00
1397
LF
$5,588.00
h� �; �.,• .:.-..
120': r -
" LF
$2.10
$252.00
160 `�•
:" LF
$1.80
$288.00
2,
EA
$250.00
$500.00
1A
29
EA
$110.00
$3,190.00
100
LF
$7.50
$750.00
Y
35 ' Y' -
LF
$5.50
$192.50
S FITTINGS`'
1 "``+
LS
$3,500.001150
- 00 IMMI8.50
TOTAL 8 537 00
h, labor& materials .complete in accordance with the above specifications, for the sum of:
'HUNDRED THIRTY SEVEN & 00/100'' $85M7.00
„9`71
be ag!,ppecjfied ,,All,work to be completed §in a workmanlike manner according to standard
deiatlo�i from :above specifications involving; extra costs, will be executed only upon written
. .
ezrstch rge over and above the estimate ,All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or
ItR�iposal,may be withdrawn by;us if not accepted within 20 days.
:
f �
Acceptance of Proposal
ons`and conditions are satisfactory, and are.hereby accepted. You are authorized to do
ent*lll betmade as,outlined above, and due by the 10th of each month.
yt
,r t;
'4
Signature:'
Signature:
r �
CREEKSIDE SPRINKLER & LANDSCAPE
2536 E. MEADOW WOOD COURT
Meridian, ID 83642
BILL TO
Packard Estates/ John L. Scott
Atte: Stacy Wirick
Invoice
DATE INVOICE #
12/13/1999 527
DEC 01 '99 09:57 FR PUBLIC WORKS 2088871297 TO 3858696
Hr
ROBERT p, CORRIE
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Mayor PUBLIC WORKS J BUILDING DEPARTMENT
GARY D, SMITH, P.E.
Public Works Director
November 15, 1999
Mr_ Pat Tealey, PLS
Teafey's Land Surveying
109 S. 4" Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 -- FINAL PLAT
Dear Pat:
P.02/03
COUNCIL MPMRPRC
CHARLES M. ROUNTRFf
GLENN R, BENTLEY
RON ANDERSON
KEITH BIRD
F&e -Z_ %c ('e +?y ,)
I have reviewed this final plat, submitted for city signatures, and have the following comments:
1. Plat sheet No. 1 needs to show 10 foot wide utility easements in the locations noted on the
attached blueline print. Please revise this plat sheet No.1 accordingly and resubmit.
2. "E. Semite Drive" street name needs to be approved by the Ada County Street Name
Committee, with a copy of their evaluation sheet submitted to me.
3. ` Please submit evidence to me that the pressurized irrigation system has received irrigation
district approval.
4. A Letter of Credit needs to be submitted to me to guarantee installation of all subdivision
improvements not yet completed. These improvements are as follows:
a. l -Street Lights. Please submit Idaho Power Co. distribution system drawing to me for this
subdivision so that streetlights can be accurately located with respect to junction boxes -
Street lights are bonded at $1500 each. (2)
F 3 b. d�Non Combustible Fence: Construct a non-combustible fence along this subdivision's
'' north
bounds
ry. (Approximately 490 lineal feet,
u e,� c, Common Area Delineating Fence: Construct a delineating fence (e.g,; split rail, 3' chain
link, etc.) along the boundaries of the common areas not otherwise fenced so the
adjacent property owners know where the common area boundary is located.
1�Temporary i=ence: this type fencing is to be installed along all subdivision boundaries
except Packard No.1 and the north boundary. (Approximately 820 lineal feet)- Purpose
is to retain construction debris to this phase of the subdivision.
e. ►-Pressure Igigation System: Install a pressurized irrigation system service to each of the
_e platted lots.
approved
Landscaping of Common Areas: Provide landscaping,in accordance with the roved
landscape plan, for all common lot areas.
The Letter of Credit, for an amount of 110% of the cost of the above items, needs to be
substantiated with a copy of a contractor's bid for each of these items,
5. Submit payment of city water assessment fees to the City of Meridian for sprinkling of the
Common areas of this subdivision and for the No.1 subdivision as follows:
200 East Carlton, Suite 100 • Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone (208) 887.2211 • Fax
(208) 887-1297
DEC 01 '99 09:57 FR PUBLIC WORKS 2eeee71297 TO 3850696 P.03iO3
Packard No.1 = 3 ERU @ $704.00 = $2112.00
Packard No.2 = 5 ERU $704.00 = $3520.00
After I have received information addressing the above items I will sign sheet No.2 of the plat
and forward it on to the City Clerk for his signature.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Si jith,
Gary PE
City Engineer
Cc- file, City Clerk, P&Z Admin.
** TOTAL PAGE.03 **
F.FeETvED
OEC 1 6 1999
CITY OF MERIDIAN
BILL OF SALE
FOR PRESSURE URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM
IN PACKARDS SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2
from
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION, INC.
and
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC.
to
NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
12 March 1998
Instrument #98056157
NAMPA & MERID4AN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
1,0A CO.'ITY RcCORDCR
J. DAVID HAYARRO
BOISE, IDAHO
1998 A 10 6 7 2: 03
RECORDED - REQUEST Or
FEE ro OEr UT
90056157
BILL OF SALE
FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That on this day of
1998, Edmonds Construction, Inc. and Pacific Northwest Electric, Inc.,
Idaho corporations, hereinafter referred to as "Seller", for and in consideration of the sum of
TEN AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, to it in
hand paid by NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, hereinafter referred to as
"Buyer", the receipt thereof is hereby acknowledged, and do by these presents Grant,
Bargain, Sell and Convey unto Buyer, and its successors and assigns, an undivided 57%
interest the personal property listed as follows:
All irrigation equipment, including, but not limited to pumps, pipelines, fittings and
valves, constructed or to be constructed, which constitute the pressurized irrigation system
located in Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2, the legal descriptions of which are attached
hereto and made a part hereof.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same to Buyer, and its successors and assigns
forever; and Sellers do covenant and agree to and with Buyer, and its assigns to WARRANT
AND DEFEND the sale of said property, goods and chattels hereby made, unto Buyer and its
successors and assigns, against all and every person and persons whomsoever, lawfully
claiming or to claim the same.
Buyer herein receives the right to full and unhindered operation, maintenance and
control over the personal property described in Exhibit A as if the property was being
conveyed in full herein. Buyer further receives the right to the full capacity of the pumping
facility. Buyer shall receive the full 100% interest in the property described as Exhibit A six
(6) years from the date of this Bill of Sale, unless earlier conveyed to Buyer by Sellers.
BILL OF SALE - PAGE 1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Sellers do hereunto set its hand the day and year first
above written.
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION, INC.,
an Idaho corporation
Lor JWirt Edmonds, President
��
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC.,
an Idaho corporation
By
UWAaalterT.igm , Jr4.
Secretary/Treasurer
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss:
COUNTY OF 6LIkA-"I ))
On this I O day of , 1998, before me, the undersigned, a Notary
Public in and for said State, personally appeared Wirt Edmonds, known to me to be the
president of Edmonds Construction, Inc., the corporation that executed the foregoing
instrument and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal,
the day and year in tWprC 1'l�re��e first above written.
�.•` �,V ACID ''•,.
=Wi �P / V
5z: •�-
* p��.•' Notary Public for o
'••, ST A.�ti.�•• Residing at:
'••••'111•••••••' My commission s: Z.
BELL OF SALE - PAGE 2
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss:
COUNTY OF
On this day of ,A998, before me, the
undersigned, a notary public ' anfor said state, personally appeared Walter T. Sigmont, Jr.
known to me to be the secretary/treasurer of Pacific Northwest Electric, Inc. the corporation
that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such corporation
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.
g. G,14D9•�,
�0
T.4�p�,
� ArjBL1G
�''•.�F OF
fffllfffff�f��'
BILL OF SALE - PAGE 3
Notary Public
Residing at
My commission
;���rll f � f►
r
GJ J, lJ/1JJu .-..,_ ---.. --
TEALEY'S LAND IOC South 41^ Street Boise, Idaho 83702
SURVEYING (208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
Project No.: 1290
Date: April 23, 1996
DESCRIPTION
41'
PROPOSED
PACKARD SMADIVISION No. 1
A parcel of land being a portion of the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4
of Section 5, T.3N., R.lE., B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and
more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at a brass cap marking the Southeast corner of said
Section 5; thence along the Southerly boundary of said Section 5
North 89048153" West 2644.18 feet to an iron pin marking the
South 1/4 corner of said Section 5; thence along the North-South
center of section line of said Section 5
North 00027115" East 1312.52 feet to a brass cap marking the
Southwest corner of the said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of said Section
5, said point also being the INITIAL POINT; thence continuing along
the said North-South center of section line
North 00027115" East 558.39 feet to an iron pin; thence
leaving the said North-South center of section line
South 89444136" East 152.60 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 00015124" West 32.00 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 89044136" East 100.00 feet to an iron pin; thence
North 00015124" East 10.79 feet to an iron pin; thence
North 23053143" East 97.32 feet to an iron pin; thence
North 45015124" East 119.55 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 89044136" East 214.62 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 00015124" West 209.65 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 45015124" West 223.82 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 44°44136" East 150.00 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 45015124" West 34.47 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 44044136" East 163.30 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 00015124" West 97.05 feet to an iron pin on the South
boundary of the said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4; thence along the said
South boundary
North 89044136" West 631.60 feet to the INITIAL POINT.
Said Parcel of Land Contains 7.96 Acres, nor* or less.
Uzi/ l:J/ L:= 1J::!4 GCJG.:iGJClb7b
TEALEY'S LAND
SURVEYING
Project No.: 1290-2
Date: October 16, 1997
109 South 4' Street • Boise, Idaho 83702
(208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
DESCRIPTIO
or
PROPOSED
PACKARD SUBDIVISION No, 2
A parcel of land being a portion of the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4
of Section 5, T.3N., R.1E., B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and
more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at a brass cap marking the Southeast corner of said
Section 5; thence along the Southerly boundary of said Section 5
North 89048153" West 2644.18 feet to an iron pin marking the
South 1/4 corner of said Section 5; thence along the North-South
center of section line of said Section 5
North 00027,115" East 1312.52 feet to a brass cap marking the
Southwest corner of the said NW 1/4"of the SE 1/4 of said Section
5, which point is also the Southwest corner of Packard Subdivision
No. 1; thence continuing along the said North-South center of
section line
North 00027115" East 558.39 feet to an iron pin marking the
Northwest corner of said Packard Subdivision No. 1, which point is
also the INITIAL POINT; thence continuing
North -00027115" East 754.12 feet to an iron pin marking the
center of said Section 5; thence along the North boundary of the
said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4
South 89040120" East 490.66 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 00015124" West 130.37 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 45015124" West 170.39 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 44044136" East 150.00 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 45015124" West 19.21 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 44044136" East 100.00 feet to an 'iron pin; thence
North 45015124" East 44.04 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 66.23122" East 25.78 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 00015124" West 180.73 feet to an iron pin marking the
Northeast corner of said Packard Subdivision No. 1; thence along
the Northerly boundary of said Packard Subdivision No. 1
North 89044136" West 214.62 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 45015124" West 119.55 feet to an iron pin; thence
South.23053'43" West 97.32 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 00015124" West 10.79 feet to an iron pin; thence
North 89044136" West 100.00 feet to an iron pin; thence
continuing
North 00015124" East 32.00 feet to an iron pin; thence
continuing
North 89644136" West 152.60 feet to the INITIAL POINT.
Said parcel of Land contains 8.00 Acres, more or leas.
WARRANTY DEED
(PUMP SITE)
from
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION, INC
and
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC.
to
NAMPA A MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
12 March 1998
Instrument #98056156
F.FcElvED
DEC 1 6 1999
CITY OF MERIDIAN
NAMPA & MERVAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
;%Jrk %-- U1'. 7 111, vi.n ,Li
j.0AVID HAVARRO
DOISE.Ioxio
1998 J� 10 t !
WARRANTY DEED
RECORDEn- RFS AES T O
FEE DEP
98056156
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION, INC. and PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC.
owners of Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2, hereinafter called "Grantors", hereby convey,
grant, bargain, sell and warrant to NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT whose
address is 1503 First Street South, Nampa, Idaho 83651, hereinafter called "Grantee", the
following described premises situated in Ada County, Idaho, to wit:
See attached Exhibit "A".
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said
Grantee and to the Grantee's successors and assigns forever, and the Grantors do hereby
covenant to and with the said Grantee, that the Grantors are the owners in fee simple of said
premises; that they are free from all encumbrances except as above described and that Grantors
will warrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantors has hereunto signed their names this / -�"day
of 1998.
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION, INC.
.•��,E.B.,Cl10*
9
�� �G
B
4W-'monds,
y
President
��, • VB GIC *
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC.
��'•.;� OF ID
By
Walter T. igm t, Jr.
Secretary/Treasurer
WARRANTY DEED - PAGE 1
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss:
COUNTY OF )
On this /�— day of 22�gd 98, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public
in and for said State, personally appeared Wirt Edmonds, known to me to be the president of
Edmonds Construction, Inc., the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument and
acknowledged to me that such corporation 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.
9
� �• NOT ••� .y L - C+�.!�/
„A i G
%LIC : Notary Public for I o
'•••'�pF ID A1�� ������•`, Residing at:
•.,#BAR ... 22% • My commission expires:
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss:
COUNTY OF )
On this � day of 1998, before me, the
undersigned, a notary public in and for said state, personally appeared Walter T. Sigmont, Jr.
known to me to be the secretary/treasurer of Pacific Northwest Electric, Inc. the corporation that
executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such corporation 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. .11�
'9C
O ,%%pTA*k d
* «�
pVB010
WARRANTY DEED - PAGE 2
Notary Pubh
Residing at vfi
My commission
01,-0S _any
EXHIBIT "A"
Lot 2, Block 3, Packards Subdivision No. 1 according to the official plat thereof filed
in Ada County, State of Idaho.
PcF-wED
DEC 1 6 1999
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM
IN PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2
between
NAMPA 8 MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
and
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION, INC.
and
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC.
2 June 1998
Instrument #98054113
AOA COUNTY RECORDER
J. DAVID NAVARRO
BOISE, IDAHO
1998 JN -4 P,,-11 I : C I
,ECQRDED -REQUEST OF
UWA I IV"AN IRRIG lON (STRICT
FEE DEPUT
9805 13
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM
IN PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2
1. DEFINITION. In this Agreement certain words appear which have the following
meaning:
"Owner" or "Owners" mean the owner(s) of the land to which irrigation
water will be distributed by the urban irrigation system that is the subject of this
Agreement.
"Plans" means drawings or diagrams graphically showing the work to be
done.
"Specifications" means the statements describing the materials, dimensions,
and workmanship for the work to be done.
"Agreement" means this written and signed Agreement (contract) the
Owner, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and Settlers Irrigation District have
entered into for the work to be done.
2. STATUTORY AUTHORITY. This Agreement is made under the authority of
Idaho Code § 43-330A.
3. PROPERTY COVERED BY THIS AGREEMENT. This Agreement is intended for
the benefit of those lots in Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2. Neither subdivision have recorded
a final plat. A legal description for Packard Subdivision No. 1 is attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
A legal description of Packard Subdivision No. 2 is attached hereto as Exhibit "B".
Owner intends to record the final plats for Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 from the
appropriate authorities. However, in the event final plat is not recorded, or otherwise not
approved, this Contract shall be null and void. In the event the final plats or legal descriptions
are altered from the legal descriptions attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B", _Ghs Contract
shall be null and void unless an addendum to this Contract is approved by Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District.
4. SEPARATE AGREEMENT AMONG OWNERS. RIGHTS RESERVED. It is
understood and agreed by the parties to this Agreement that the Owner of Packard Subdivision
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 1
Nos. 1 and 2 intends to enter into a separate agreement with the owners of Wingate Place
Subdivision No. 2 and Dove Meadows Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 whereby they will purport to
agree to share costs associated with construction of the pump station. No part of the Owners'
agreement shall be made part of this agreement. It is expressly understood and agreed by the
Owner, Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District and Settlers Irrigation District that Nampa and
Meridian Irrigation District and Settlers Irrigation District shall have no responsibility, duty, or
obligation with regard to the Owner's agreement with these subdivisions to share costs associated
with construction of the pump station. The pump station is to be located in Packard No. 1
Subdivision.
It is understood and agreed by the parties that the capacity of the pumps will be sufficient
for delivery of pressurized water to all the lots in Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2.
It is understood and agreed by Owner and Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District that any
other lands to be served by the pump station, including Wingate Place Subdivision No. 2 and
Dove Meadows Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 , must enter into a separate contract with Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District and/or Settlers Irrigation District. If such separate contracts are not
entered into with Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and/or Settlers Irrigation District within
twelve (12) months from the date of this agreement, this agreement will be null and void. In
addition, if the Owner does not enter into a separate agreement to share the costs associated with
construction of the pump station or if the pump station is not constructed and conveyed to Nampa
& Meridian Irrigation District within twelve (12) months from the date of this agreement, this
agreement will be null and void.
5. PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS. The Owner will provide all labor, materials,
and equipment necessary to do the work described in this Agreement and as stated in the Plans
and Specifications, which constitute a part of this Agreement. This Agreement contains all of
the agreements between Owner, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and Settlers Irrigation
District. Any changes must be in writing on a Change Order form. Should any conflict occur
between the Plans, Specifications, or other documents and this Agreement, this Agreement will
be followed.
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDMSION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 2
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and Settlers Irrigation District are not responsible
for corrections in the work resulting from errors and omissions in Plans and Specifications
provided by the Owner, architects, or others.
6. INSURANCE. Owner will provide a Worker's Compensation insurance policy
for all persons working under his direction and a General Liability Insurance policy with limits
of at least $100,000 for any one occurrence and $1,000,000 total for all occurrences. If Nampa
& Meridian Irrigation District wants proof of insurance from Owner, Owner's insurance
company will provide a certificate of insurance on request. If Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District wants Owner to obtain additional insurance, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must
request it in writing before this Agreement is signed.
At Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's request, Owner will provide at his expense,
"all risk" insurance including theft, vandalism, fire, and Acts of God coverage throughout the
work in an amount equal to the Total Cash Price of the improvements. This insurance will be
provided before Owner begins work. If Owner does not provide this insurance, Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District will have the right to obtain this insurance as Owner's agent and
Owner agrees to reimburse Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District at the time the district
purchases this insurance.
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District will provide proof of insurance to Settlers Irrigation
District upon request by Settlers Irrigation District.
7. PERMITS. Owner is responsible, unless Owner and Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District and Settlers Irrigation District agree otherwise in a separate writing, to pay for
and obtain all necessary permits, surveys, and other documents or approvals that may be required
by the Public Authorities for the performance of the work. Should Owner provide Plans or
Specifications, Owner will also be responsible to make sure that they meet all the regulations and
requirements of the Public Authorities.
8. SITE IDENTIFICATION. At Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's request,
Owner will show Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's representatives the location of all
pipelines, valves, clean-out boxes, dividers and other facilities included in the Project. If Owner
is not certain of their location, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District may require that the lines
be staked before construction commences. If Owner makes an error and identifies the wrong
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 3
locations, Owner will make any necessary changes before Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
approves the completed work.
9. SITE & BUILDING CONDITIONS. Owner is responsible, unless Owner and
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District agree otherwise in a separate writing, to pay for the
removal of all trees, debris, obstructions either above or below ground, and correction of any
unforeseen conditions or defects, that are necessary for completion of the work.
10. ACCESS. Where necessary, Owner will arrange for access through a neighbor's
property so that the owner can do the work. Owner will be responsible for any damage to the
neighbor's property other than acts of negligence by agents or representatives of Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District. If that neighbor withdraws his consent and Owner cannot go
through his property, then Owner is not responsible for any delays or additional costs to finish
the work.
11. DAMAGE TO WORK. As between the Owner, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District, and Settlers Irrigation District, Owner is responsible for any damages caused by Owner,
Acts of God, or others not under the control of either district.
12. UTILITY SERVICE. Owner is responsible for obtaining any utility service for
water, gas, and electricity as needed for Owner to do the work. Neither irrigation district is
responsible for any delays in obtaining utility service or due to interruption of utility service to
the site.
13. START OF WORK TO COMPLETION. Owner will begin the work within
90 days after the date of this Agreement. However, Owner must fust obtain the necessary
insurance and permits. Owner will work through to completion, and shall complete the work
prior to December 31, 1997, subject to delays permitted under this Agreement.
14. WORKMANSHIP. Owner will do the work in a workmanlike manner. Where
additional Plans or Specifications are not provided, Owner will do the work so as to comply with
the local building code. If no local building code applies, Owner will do the work according to
industry standards or common trade practices or manufacturer's specifications. Owner is
responsible for clean-up after his work and will leave the site in broom clean condition.
When Owner finishes any segment of the work, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
has the right to notify Owner in writing of any defects it finds. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 4
District shall not be required to approve and accept the urban irrigation system, and place it in
service, until all defective work has been corrected by the Owner.
15. WORK STOPPAGE. If Owner stops work for seven (7) days or more, except
for delays permitted under this Agreement, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has the right
to give Owner written notice by certified mail of Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's request
that Owner continue the work. If Owner does not continue the work within seven (7) days after
receiving this notice, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, at its option, may complete the work
and Owner agrees to pay Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District the entire cost of completing the
work, plus a reasonable amount to cover Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's administrative
expenses, and all out-of-pocket costs and attorney's fees resulting from arbitration or litigation,
or both.
If Owner stops the work, he will be responsible for protecting the building site, materials
and work performed, unless and until Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District commences work
to complete the Project.
16. MATCHING MATERIALS. Where materials are to be matched, Owner will
make every reasonable effort to do so, but does not guarantee a perfect match.
17. SUBSTITUTIONS. When necessary, Owner has the right to use different
construction procedures or to substitute material of equal quality to the material described in the
Specifications if the results of the work are substantially the same. Owner will provide Nampa
& Meridian Irrigation District with a Change Order for any Changes he will make before he
continues the work.
18. CHANGES. If Owner wants to change any of the work he is to do, he must
request that change from Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District in writing. Owner and Nampa
& Meridian Irrigation District will sign a Change Order form describing the change, if Nampa
& Meridian Irrigation District approves the change. The Change Order will become a part of
this Agreement. Owner also agrees to pay for any changes required by the Public_ Authorities,
or necessary for him to do the work according to the local building code, upon completion of
the Change Order work.
19. INSPECTION, ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER(S) OF LIEN & PAYMENTS.
When Owner claims that any portion of the work is complete and ready for inspection and
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN EMGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 5
approval, he will ask the Public Authority (when required) to inspect and approve the work.
When the Public Authority or Owner, or both, have inspected and approved the work, and
Owner has done the work according to this Contract, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
agrees to accept the work and assume responsibility for operation and maintenance of the urban
irrigation system.
Owner will provide Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District with Owner's Waiver(s) of
Lien and other Waiver(s) of Lien as evidence of Owner's payment for all employees, sub-
contractors and material suppliers listed on a notarized Contractor's Affidavit at the time of
completion of the work. Upon completion Owner will deliver the project to Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District free of liens.
20. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS OF IDAHO CODE § 43-330B. The
following provisions are included in this Agreement as required by Idaho Code § 43-330B.
A. The cost of construction of the irrigation system has been, or shall
be, paid in full by Owner.
B. Any portion of the cost of construction that is not paid upon
completion of construction by the Owner or Owners, or by a third party on their
behalf, shall constitute a lien against the lots in Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and
2, securing payment of the balance of the construction cost and payment of
interest on any deferred installments of the construction cost.
C. There are no annual payments anticipated to be made by each lot
owner on the deferred balance of the construction costs.
D. Any annual installment payments shall be included in the annual
assessments levied by Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District against each lot in
Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2, and the levy and collection of those
installments shall be, as nearly as practicable, in accordance with the assessment,
levy and collection of other assessments levied upon lands in Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District.
E. Any deferred annual installment payments of principal and accrued
interest, if any, may be prepaid in whole or in part at any time without penalty,
but any prepayment of principal shall be not less than one-half of the amount of
the annual installment payment of principal next coming due, but the prepayment
privilege authorized by this subparagraph shall not be applicable where the
construction costs have been financed through a local improvement district.
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 6
F. if the pumping station and pipeline serving the Packard Subdivision
Nos. 1 and 2 also serve other lands, the cost of the pumping station and pipeline
has been apportioned by Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District to all lands which
are planned to be served by the pumping station, so that each acre of irrigable
land to be served by the pumping station will be assessed and required to pay the
same amount.
G. The Owner hereby grants to Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
an easement for the installation, operation, maintenance, repair and replacement
of those portions of the irrigation system located on any portion of Packard
Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2. The location of the easement shall be determined by
the location of the pipelines and other facilities, as finally installed, and the width
of the easement shall be five (5) feet on either side of the centerline of each
pipeline, for a total of ten (10) feet.
21. OWNERSHIP OF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM. The pressurized irrigation
system constructed under this Agreement shall be the property of, and shall be owned by, Nampa
& Meridian Irrigation District.
22. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY NAMPA & MERIDIAN
IRRIGATION DISTRICT; ASSESSMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.
As provided in Idaho Code § 43-330F, the pressurized irrigation system constructed under this
Agreement shall be operated, maintained, repaired and replaced by Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District, and Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District may levy and collect annual assessments
against each lot served by the irrigation system to defray the cost and expense of such operation,
maintenance, repair or replacement. The Board of Directors of Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District shall apportion to each lot in Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 a portion of the cost
of operation, maintenance, repair and replacement of the irrigation system, on the basis of the
ratio between the acreage in that lot and the total acreage in all lots in Packard Subdivision Nos.
1 and 2.
23. LAND IN TWO DISTRICTS. As provided in Idaho Code 43-330G, the land
in Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 is located in both Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and
Settlers Irrigation District. The ownership, management operation, maintenance, repair and
replacement of the pressurized irrigation system shall be the sole responsibility of Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District. Assessments for construction costs, if any, and for costs of
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 7
operation, maintenance, repair and replacement against Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 shall
be levied and collected by Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
The land will be subject to separate assessment by Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
and also by Settlers Irrigation District. The Settlers Irrigation District assessment does not include
any charges for the costs of operation or maintenance of the pressurized irrigation system. The
assessment by Settlers Irrigation District represents the portion of the operation and maintenance
of Settlers Irrigation District which are properly apportioned to the land.
24. SUPPLEMENTAL WATER. NO LIABILITY FOR LACK OF WATER.
Supplemental water (water provided both before and after the regular irrigation season) to this
subdivision may be provided by the City of Meridian. All costs associated with supplemental
water shall be a cost of operation, maintenance, repair or replacement. Each lot will be assessed
for supplemental water regardless of whether or not water is actually used on the lot or the
quantity of water used. The parties hereto acknowledge that irrigation water is not always
reliable. Irrigation water or water from the City of Meridian may not be available due to
drought, harsh weather conditions, governmental actions or other causes. The District shall have
no liability to any lot owner, tenant or others for any damages to, or loss of lawns, landscaping
or the like caused by lack of water.
25. REQUEST TO SETTLERS. The Owner agrees that prior to sale of any lots in
Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2 that they shall submit a written request to Settlers Irrigation
District that all lots located within Settlers Irrigation District be combined for assessment
purposes, pursuant to Idaho Code Section 43-701. In the written request, the owner shall include
the name and mailing address of the person designated to receive notices from Settlers Irrigation
District.
26. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES. Owner, on its own volition, installed and
constructed the pump station with more capacity than was necessary to serve Packard Subdivision
Nos. 1 and 2, Wingate Subdivision No. 2 and Dove Meadows Subdivision No._2. _Due this
excess capacity, the Owner shall be entitled to receive reimbursement from any subsequent
property owner(s) which become part of the pressurized irrigation pump station currently serving
Packard Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2, Wingate Subdivision No. 2 and Dove Meadows Subdivision
No. 2. Such reimbursement shall be in the sum of $100.00 per lot to be paid directly to Owner
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 8
by any subsequent property owner(s) who wish to connect to the existing pump station. Such
payment will be required by any subsequent property owner(s) only to the extent of the current
excess capacity present in the pump station, without enhancement.
The present capacity of the pump station is estimated to be 1,035 gpm or about 115
miners inches of water. Assuming 5/8 miners inches per acre is sufficient, the pump station is
estimated to be able to serve no more than 185 acres. The present number of acres in Packard
Subdivision Nos. 1 and 2, Wingate Subdivision No. 2 and Dove Meadows Subdivision No. 2
is approximately 105 acres. The excess capacity is therefore estimated and agreed to be no more
that 80 additional acres to be served by the pump station. In the event the actual capacity is less
than 80 additional acres, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District reserves the right, at its sole
discretion, to notify Owner that the capacity is less than estimated and that Owner's
reimbursement under this paragraph will be adjusted accordingly.
Reimbursement under this paragraph shall cease and be at an end the earliest of six (6)
years from the date of this agreement or when the present capacity of the system is reached, at
the discretion of Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, without enhancement. Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District shall retain the right to full and unhindered operation, maintenance
and control over the pump station despite the terms of the paragraph. It shall further have the
use of the entire capacity of the pump station. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District shall receive
an undivided fractional interest in the pump station representing its ownership share until the
terms of the paragraph cease. At the end of that time, the entire pump station and capacity shall
automatically revert to Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
The current lands being served by the pump station will pay all costs of operation,
maintenance, repair and replacement assessed by Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District until such
time as additional lands are added. If additional lands are added under this paragrpah, all such
lands served by the pump station will be assessed for operation, maintenance, repair and
replacement.
27. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between
the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement.
28. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be construed under, and governed by,
the laws of the State of Idaho.
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 9
29. BINDING EFFECT. This Agreement shall bind the parties hereto and their
respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
IN WITNES WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto caused their names to be subscribed
this � day of , 1998.
EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION, INC
'% i /
• ice, i
iTid dnoidPresident
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC.
By
Walter T.igmo , Jr.,
Secretary/Treasurer
NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
B
ATTEST:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
By
_ & '4
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS..1 AND 2 - Page 10
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss:
COUNTY OF ADA
On this -�= day of , 1998, before me, the undersigned, a notary
public in and for said state, personally appeared WIRT EDMONDS, known to me to be the
President of Edmonds Construction, Inc., and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed
the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal, the
day and year in this certificate first above 'tten.
#0
NOT
Notary Public fo Stat f Idaho
7 % hr-IC
r- C j �, Residing at , Idaho��Op
1.�, ? * •� My commission expire . — S
00, 4%
ID ASC •0••,•
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss:
COUNTY OF D?UA'�
On this ! ✓� day of , 1998, before me, the undersigned, a notary
public in and for said state, personally appeared WALTER T. SIGMONT, JR., known to me
to be the Secretary/Treasurer of Pacific Northwest Electric, Inc., and acknowledged to me that
the corporation 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.
Notary Public for
Residing at
My commission e
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDMSION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page i l
Idaho
Idaho
-5- �d
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss:
County of Canyon )
On this day of , 1998, before me, a undersigned, a Notary Public
in „ and for skid State, personally appeared and
known to me to be the President and Secretary, respectively, of
NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, the irrigation district that executed the
foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such irrigation district 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.
',•••//lvflllffff/
''NM••�'•0- •4
-•1�OTARf ,•
r
u 100.;UB L1 G .f O .�
• lunH•••
�f'
Notary Public for Idaho
Residing at , Idaho
My Commission Expires: / D ZDOO
STATE OF IDAH� )
ss:
COUNTY OF ADA
On this 2A of�ersonaily
1998, before me a undersigned, a notary
public in and for said state,eared Dm 5m,'and
V I cb Keen , known to me to be the President and Secretary -,)respectively, of
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT, the irrigation district that executed the foregoing
instrument, and acknowledged to me that such irrigation district executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and d my official seal, the
day and year in this certificate first above written. /'; ,
Notary X
or I
Residin , Idaho
My commission expires: 4 �
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR URBAN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NOS. 1 AND 2 - Page 12
UJ/ 1J/ 1 JJy a....• ....� LyyJ�Jvvv�v
TLALEY'S LAND 10� South 41" Sh�_t Boise, Jdaho 83702
SURVEYING
EXHIBIT A
Project No.: 1290
Date: April 23, 1996
(208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
DESCRIPTION
PROPOSED
PACKARD SMBDIVISION No. 1
A parcel of land being a portion of the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4
of Section 5, T.3N., R.1E.1 B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and
more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at a brass cap marking the Southeast corner of said
Section 5; thence along the Southerly boundary of said Section 5
North 89048153" West 2644.18 feet to an iron pin marking the
South 1/4 corner of said Section 5; thence along the North-South
center of section line of said Section 5
North 00027115" East 1312.52 feet to a brass cap marking the
Southwest corner of the said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of said Section
5, said point also being the INITIAL POINT; thence continuing along
the said North-South center of section line
North 00027115" East 558.39 feet to an iron
leaving the said North-South center of section line
South 89444136" East 152.60 feet to an iron pin;
South 00015124" West 32.00 feet to an iron pin;
South 89044136" East 100.00 feet to an iron pin;
North 00015124" East 10.79 feet to an iron pin;
North 23053.43" East 97.32 feet to an iron pin;
North 45015'24" East 119.55 feet to an iron pin;
South 89044136" East 214.62 feet to an iron pin;
South 00015124" West 209.65 feet to an iron pin;
South 45015124" West 223.82 feet to an iron pin;
South 44044136" East 150.00 feet to an iron pin;
South 45015124" West 34.47 feet to an iron pin;
South 44044136" East 163.30 feet to an iron pin;
South 00015124" West 97.05 feet to an iron pin
pin; thence
thence
thence
thence
thence
thence
thence
thence
thence
thence
thence
thence
thence
on the
boundary of the said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4; thence along the
South boundary
North 89044136" West 631.60 feet to the INITIAL POIrII'.
South
said
Said Parcel of Land Contsina 7.96 Acres, sore or lass.
TEALEY'S LAND
SURVEYING
109 South 4'Stret. • Boise, Idaho 83702
Project No.: 1290-2 EXHIBIT B
Date: October 16, 1997
(208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
DESCR PTION
or
PROPOSED
PACKARD SUBDIVISION No, 2
A parcel of land being a portion of the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4
of Section 5, T.3N., R.1E., B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and
more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at a brass cap marking the Southeast corner of said
Section 5; thence along the Southerly boundary of said Section 5
North 89048153" West 2644.18 feet to an iron pin marking the
South 1/4 corner of said Section 5; thence along the North-South
center of section line of said Section 5
North 00927115" East 1312.52 feet to a brass cap marking the
Southwest corner of the said NW 1/4"of the SE 1/4 of said Section
5, which point is also the Southwest corner of Packard Subdivision
No. 1; thence continuing along the said North-South center of
section line
North 000271151' East 558.39 feet to an iron pin marking the
Northwest corner of said Packard Subdivision No. 1, which point is
also the INITIAL POINT; thence continuing
North -00027115" East 754.12 feet to an iron pin marking the
center of said Section 5; thence along the North boundary of the
said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4
South 89040120" East 490.66 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 00015124" West 130.37 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 45015124" West 170.39 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 44044136" East 150.00 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 45015124" West 19.21 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 44044136" East 100.00 feet to an Iron pin; thence
North 45015124" East 44.04 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 66023F22" East 25.78 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 00015124" West 180.73 feet to an iron pin marking the
Northeast corner of said Packard Subdivision No. 1; thence along
the Northerly boundary of said Packard Subdivision No. 1
North 89044136" West 214.62 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 45015'2411 West 119.55 feet to an iron pin; thence
South.23053143" West 97.32 feet to an iron pin; thence
South 00015124" West 10.79 feet to an iron pin; thence
North 89044136" West 100.00 feet to an iron pin; thence
continuing
North 00015124" East 32.00 feet to an iron pin; thence
continuing
North 89644'36" West 152.60 feet to the INITIALPOINT.
Said Parcel of Land Contains 8.00 Acres, more or less.
11
M
Cl\
�\ 1 �
�� � (� � ��
r�
`\ 4 t
� � � � � v `,
D
� _ � �. � 4 \
� � �' ti
r � �
� � y' �`� � fig`/ ��
� �: � - �
� .� � � Q
.. �,
g ��
�� � �� �
� � ,,
,. y � ti
� w
P ,. � C"
� � �
r4
� h I
P
�i1
�� r,
s
i�
n
�.
c�
M1 \ /�yyy
\\�,}\ ' q
�\ ( j °u \
} '!, �� iso \\�y -i
�� � � �.
��
�,
�v ��
`�.
«; �;;�
� �� J \ ;�
� � �,
6,
r. ��
�1
�� �
i �
c...
r�
��
Brad Hawkins -Clark
From:
Anna Canning [canninga@meridiancity.org]
Sent:
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:35 PM
To:
hawkinsb@meridiancity.org
Subject:
FW: Helen & Dale Sharp
Follow Up Flag:
Fottow up
Due By:
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:00 AM
Flag Status:
Flagged
FYI. I'm trying to -hunt down the article. I should have it this afternoon:
Anna Borchers Canning
City of Meridian Planning Director
-----Original Message -----
From: Tammy de Weerd [mailto:deweerdt@meridiancity.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 9:29 PM
To: Anna Canning
Subject: Helen & Dale Sharp
I read the guest opinion of the Sharp's in the Valley Times this evening after it was
pointed out to me by Councilman Bird. We all realize that the Sharp's do not have a high
opinion of the City of Meridian, however, we must keep customer service as our front line
response in dealing with them. Will told me that they have been into his office and he
told them they needed to go to your office with their issues. I noted that he should also
give a heads up to you when they come in with their 'issues'
- he said he did. I would like a response to the issues they raise in the paper and would
like you or a staff member to go out to this site and make sure that all conditions of
approval have been met. I would then appreciate a report back in the next day or two.
Tammy de Weerd, Mayor
City of Meridian
www.meridiancity.org
(208) 888-4433 ext. 204
(208) 888-4218 fax
1
FEB 24 '05 13:46 FR CITY OF MERIDIAN
2
'° V P ri g .'riyY '• O C1. N 7 r_? (1i �' � v
N r,
E q d H j
r'2weQ 7 c'°.,C G..� � �'.
-tj Q
I
2- toT y g o
Iv 4
'21 .,y p^ �
B � J. N ('(••• w 'Jn 4ti, F, h O � y � y 1 [4 '� a
E ' g ❑•r' J 3 B n� c•c a
- r o n 2 a N iY E b ro n cno
d
G) Ip p
nG U7
N
c R c �. rn. 0ti R $ E G
yG y o G m ry aa, y t y eb
6 .t, — A, T Q' '� N b S
9 EP
mo 3nc � n�(b
'rv' ri CD f.O N C L 47 ti G C' j i,• '! q 4
5. c 0 r r� r,
rm
79
y VJ no A p• f !n
O S r f4 C, N�� 1- � i A G
7 EL ra
A �' P
208 888 4218 TO P—AND—Z P.02i02
1.2 rL
2i. 'ten
q m> n
p Nryrq 4e^titer „tyo^ i'D
7 Li mm
b fir' � c � "N �' •^ ��' ., �t, � '� ri � y o. Q
o m_ mr rN c'' rti G Q _~J �5 ry '� v' ry a I 1..
r? 4 r; eri 2 r),0 N. "+ N N f n e CJi fl4 N,
mr
,moo cl.a ' v� � G ^ o _j
N O .� • 1 •P' '�' a Y r Ip d G pi
IN
n' Q
cr Gy.4' ' h0
114
In ,2x.. , _,T, 7 ❑ 'T rl ^r cci �'n� v
ry ?Ipy w•7 Gb��d.2 b v
r P_
• . � P' P tin �. .I S v C ig f'1 v' ❑ 6 -_ • i_f• 4
a=
r
i^u c 14
.L O H
= _ _
-45 (� ii �. '9 K' 1 • .G o' C �c•� a b
y: L• 1� C Y G ry G. -s
22.
5 o-
ob I Op Nit
Fe t2
Im
y
;rn^ P p y T
oO cL rn
r. 'c. Y•'
g p=j 1 -.o' a
y
I(-
lCL c X. � c' R1 G n
r u _
.7 6 60 C �
4. V'
F• G IIO N� !Y W bi 2 h n G' G i
.� _ /5 6
1,4
i d t' o v a ry ,,n b 4 T
r
-,• 4 40 N om^• G ' �' �' G '�
01 P M
f' ryi n ' '� • A
F. 0 ': n ML
ID
J =-A. f
** TOTAL PAGE.02 **
To: Mayor de Weerd
From Brad Hawkins -Clark
CC: Anna Canning
Date: February 28, 2005
Re: Helen Sharp's Letter to Editor — Wingate Lane & Packard Acres Subdivision
Mayor,
I interpret Helen Sharp's editorial in the February 21 Valley Time to contain three
specific criticisms of the City:
1. Common Lot: A fence is bisecting a common lot which was platted to be all
open space.
2. Graduated Fence on Wingate Lane: A portion of the graduated fence along
Wingate Lane was reconstructed to remove the taper.
3. Gate Across Wingate Lane: City Council approved a subdivision to allow a
gate to be constructed across Wingate Lane.
Besides these three issues, the rest of her editorial simply regurgitated history which
everyone familiar with this area already knows. Below are my responses to her
criticisms:
Common Lot: The common lot she refers to is in Packard Acres No. 1 at the
southeast comer of Challis and Wingate (Lot 9, Block 5). The lot is 20 feet
wide and is designated as a common lot, owned by the Packard HOA.
However, the lot is not required open space. It was created because it
contains a sewer trunk line and there is a 20 -foot easement in favor of the
City of Meridian to maintain the trunk. The lot is divided by a 6 -foot cedar
fence and the property owners on both sides are using the lot as their side
yards.
Last summer, I asked the Public Works Department if they knew about the
fence across their easement and they did not. The fence appears to have
been built after we inspected the subdivision for CO's. However, Public
Works does not intend to have the fence removed unless they need access
to the sewer. (For more information, please see the attached letter to the
Packard HOA which I wrote for Brad Watson last year.)
2. Graduated Fence: When Packard Acres No. 2 was constructed and Challis
crossed Wingate Lane, the developer constructed a 6 -foot cedar fence on
both sides of Wingate. At the intersection of Challis and Wingate, a 3 -foot
fence was constructed for approximately 18 feet behind the sidewalk and
then tapered up to 6 feet. Last October (2004), the property owner at the
northwest comer of the intersection reconstructed about 5 feet of the fence
(which was their rear yard fence) to remove the taper to give them more
privacy. The fence permit was issued by the Building Department on
10/14/04 (to Meridian Fence Company).
The fence remains 3 feet high for 18 feet and then immediately extends to 6
feet high. MCC 11-20-2 requires a solid fence to remain a maximum of 3
feet in height for at least 20 feet behind the property line (not 18 feet as
constructed). So, the fence is non -conforming (both as originally constructed
and has modified). I am working with Anna and the Building Department to
determine our next steps. (Since a fence permit was pulled and inspected by
the City, it complicates the issue.)
3. Gate Across Wingate Lane: As you well know, the City Council did not
require the developer to construct a gate across Wingate Lane. They did
require the developer to post an $8,000 bond for use by the Wingate Lane
User's Association, if they choose to construct a fence across Wingate
Lane. Since the Sharp's are members of this association, they have the
ability to influence the outcome of this issue. Finally, even if a gate is
constructed, the City did not violate Ada County Ordinance 389 in allowing
the gate because that ordinance only applies to land outside incorporated
city limits. The gate location was specifically chosen to be within Meridian
city limits.
As you can see, the City had no control over #1 or #2 — these changes were made
by property owners after the City signed -off on the subdivisions. Once we were
informed, we researched the topic and are taking action as necessary.
Should the City require correction of these situations? Regarding Item #1, if we
enforce this easement violation, we should be prepared to enforce a host of other
violations in order to be fair across the board. The Public Works Department should
be further consulted, but my understanding of their current thinking is to address
these issues when and if they need access to the sewer. It's the property owner's
responsibility to replace the fence if removed. For Item #2, we are following this up.
For Item #3, 1 don't believe any further action is necessary.
Let me know if you'd like any further information.
0 Page 2
September 25, 2004
Mr. Dave Battalia
Packard Estates Homeowner's Association
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Lot 9, Block 5, Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1
Dear Mr. Battalia,
This letter is in reference to ongoing conversations you've had with Brad
Hawkins -Clark of the Planning & Zoning Department about the subject common
lot in Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1. 1 understand the two property owners
immediately east of this common lot (Lots 1 and 8, Block 5) currently enjoy use of
the lot as part of their improved side yards. I also understand there is a six-foot
cedar fence constructed across the middle of the common lot that runs east -west
for approximately 20 feet.
As stated on the recorded plat for Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1 (Notes No. 7,
8 and 9), this lot is designated as common and non -buildable, is to be maintained
by the Homeowner's Association, and is covered by a City of Meridian sanitary
sewer easement and ACHD drainage easement. There is both a sanitary sewer
line and a stormwater pipe below grade within this lot. While the likelihood of
either the City or ACHD needing to have access to this lot for maintenance
purposes is low, both easements do require the entire lot be free of any
encroachments or obstructions, including fences and trees. It is important that
this access between E. Challis and E. Meadowgrass remain open and
accessible.
I trust this helps to clarify the Public Works' Department position regarding this
common lot.
Brad Watson
City Engineer
,-►
Brad Hawkins -Clark
From: Brad Hawkins -Clark [hawkinsb@meridiancity.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 4:11 PM
To: 'Christy Richardson'
Subject: RE: Wingate Lane
Thanks for checking, Christy. We'll go with the Wingate letters already in the public
record.
Brad
-----Original Message -----
From: Christy Richardson[mailto:Crichardson@achd.ada.id.us]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 3:30 PM
To: hawkinsb@meridiancity.org
Subject: Wingate Lane
Brad,
Legal staff has said "mums the word". If you need any information I would suggest that
you call our attorney, Steve Price at 387-6112.
Sorry, that's all I know!
Christy
1
Page 1 of 1
Brad Hawkins -Clark
From: Brad Hawkins -Clark [hawkinsb c@meridiancity.org]
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 3:12 PM
To: 'Christy Richardson'
Subject: Wingate Lane
Hi Christy,
Are you or your legal office able to confirm that ACHD still has pending litigation with Dale and Helen Sharp
regarding Wingate Lane? If so, does that mean ACHD staff are unable to speak on the issue in a public
meeting? The reason I ask is that the City of Meridian is planning to hold a public hearing to potentially
amend the Packard Acres No. 2 Final Plat condition that states Challis must be gated. But we will no doubt
solicit ACHD's testimony at the hearing. We would like to hold the hearing within the next month. If there's a
"do not speak" order on you, I'm wondering if there's any estimate on when the litigation might be complete?
I was also wondering if ACHD's ordinances require the District Commission to hold a public hearing when
amending your adopted conditions? I seem to recall ACHD held a public meeting at which the Wingate Lane
Association members were invited when you amended the Challis gate condition. Correct?
Thanks!
Brad
10/15/2003
i
Mame:
Phone:___T_Z
CITY OF MER JIAN
RESEARCH REQUEST
Darr:
z Z� Time:
RECEIVED
17a7m03
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CLERK OFFICE
esaitslFiadia�s: --
�, y
REQ O ' SIGNA
of pages:
Date Finished:
Staff providing information:
Time required:
Staff Comments:
RECEIVED
17a7m03
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY CLERK OFFICE
660 E. Watertower Ln.
Suite 202
Meridian, ID 83642
Ph: (208) 884-5533
Fx: (208) 888-6854
To: Sharon — City Clerk's Office From: Brad Hawkins -Clarke
Fax: Pages: 4
Phone:
Date: 10/15/2003
Re: H. Sharp Research Request CC:
❑ Urgent 1 0 For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle
Sharon,
I did a review of the P&Z Department's files on Packard Acres No. 2 and Wingate Lane and
found the attached three e-mails. The 4-28 e-mail is from the developer's rep, Stacy Wirick,
regarding the final plat inspections. The other two e-mails are communications between me
and Christy Richardson at ACRD.
I also have several e-mails (not attached) after the requested 2-11 date regarding Packard
Acres No. 2 that were sent among myself and Marlene St. George, Bill Nichols, Bill Musser
and the Clerk's Office. The two from Bill Nichols include the standard confidentiality clause.
Please let me know if these are exempt from the Public Information Request or if you need
copies of these.
Of course, I also have the 2-24-03 letter I sent to the Sharps summarizing the 2-11 council
meeting as well as several letters the Sharps submitted to the city. But I'm assuming you
have copies of these.
If you'd prefer to meet and go over this information together, let me know.
Brad
June 9, 2003
Mayor Corrie:
33 E. Idaho Ave.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Dear Mayro Corrie
The City of Meridiran Council unanimously agreed at the pre -council meeting February 11, 2003 that ALL conditions for
granting the Packard Estates and Packard Acres sub -division, were to be adherred to. This includes No. 20 of the Final Platt
which reads in part " The applicant is not to construct the 20 -foot -wide portion of E. Challis Street at the east boundary, and is
to deposit money to complete constuctions of E. Challis street and remove the gates when (and if) the two five -acre parcels to
the south are developed (when Wingate Lane can be vacated."
No corrective action has been taken to solve the safety and hazardous conditions created by crossing Wingate Lane (private)
at E, Challis and Meadowgrass.
Another example of government entities not adherring to their commitments.
ncerel�y�_e����
ale and Hel n S
CC: City Council
Brad Hawkins -Clark `
City Clerk
Shirley McKague
Monday, June 09, 2003 America Online: AHSHARP Page: 1
Message
Brad HC
From: Bill Nichols [wfn@whitepeterson.COM]
Page 1 of 1
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 10:57 AM
To: 'Robert Corrie'; Tammy De Weerd; 'birdronaldkeith@msn.com'; 'cgmccandless@msn.com';
'William Nary'
Cc: 'Brad Hawkins -Clark'; Will Berg
Subject: Wingate Lane
Confidentiality Notice: This email message may contain confidential and privileged information exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify us immediately
by replying to this message or telephoning us, and do not review, disclose, copy, or distribute this message.
Thank you.
White Peterson
5700 East Franklin Road, Suite 200
Nampa, Idaho 83687-8402
208.466.9272
Mayor and Council
As you know, Mr. and Mrs. Sharp continue to complain about the condition of Wingate Lane. I will be
meeting with Brad Hawkins Clark and Anna Powell to discuss the City's options. It is my understanding that
staff has investigated this matter and concluded that the developer is in compliance with the terms of the
development agreement and conditions of approval.
After I meet with staff, we will likely present a recommended course of action which can range from informing
the Sharps that the City will do nothing more, to the other extreme of filing a lawsuit against the developer
alleging violation of conditions of approval. We have bounced around in the middle for years, and nothing
seems to have satisfied the Sharps. This issue has consumed more of staffs and your time than it warrants.
One way or another we need to bring it to a conclusion.
Either staff or I will notify you when we think it appropriate for a PreCouncil meeting (most likely in executive
session).
Thank you for your continued patience.
Bill Nichols
5/5/2003
n
Brad Hawkins -Clark
Planning and Zoning Department
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Dear Brad Hawkins -Clark:
�CE
Ij,7),in,
APR 2 9
cnyoi? MF
JPL'AIVNING � ZONIl�TG
To date we have not had a response to our letter of March 10, 2003 nor seen and evidence of enforcing the conditons for
granting Packard Acres sub -division as agreed by Meridian City Council at the February 12, 2003 pre -council meeting. The
conditons are to be adherred to completely.
Will Berg, City of Meridian Clerk, assured me (Helen) he had contacted you by phone and letter regarding the answering of our
questions and concerns in the above mentioned letter.
Immediate action and response are expected. As a govennment entity you have the responsibilty/obligation to enforce these
established conditions as agreed upon by ACH, City of Meridian and developers.
Sincerely,
Dale and Helen Sharp
CC: Mayor Bob Come
City Council
City Clerk
Monday, April 28, 2003 America Online: AHSHARP Page: 1
660 E. Watertower Ln.
Suite 202
Meridian, ID 83642
Ph: (208) 884-5533
Fx: (208) 888-6854
I -MOV
To: Bill Nichols From: Brad Hawkins -Clark
Fax: 466-4405 Pages: 11
Phone: 466-9272 Date: 4/29/2003
Re: Wingate Ln — Sharp's 3-5-03 Letter CC:
❑ Urgent ❑ For Review lhi Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle
M
Could you please review the attached letter? Attached to it are copies of invoices demonstrating (in
their opinion) that Wingate Lane was maintained in good condition prior to the developer of Packard
Acres receiving plat approval. They feel this is adequate evidence to require the developer to
repair/upgrade Wingate and cease building permits.
Can we meet together tomorrow afternoon or Thursday to discuss how to proceed on this matter?
Thanks,
Brad
Will Berg
Meridian City Cierk
33 E. Idaho Ave.
Meridian, Idaho
Dear Will Berg:
RECEIVED
MAR 17 2003
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
Attached are the minutes from the ACRD Commission Meeting - February 27, 2002. Our question is - was the City of Meridian
invited to this meeting as it involved changing one of the conditions for granting the Packard Estates subdivision. Prior to this
meeting there was an informal meeting held at ACRD with staff and residents of Wingate Lane in attendance concerning the
private lane.
The paragraph inpart- "The Legal Department concludes: "Absent a significant safety concern public streets and public -rights-
of-way should remain open and accessible to the public" has been confrimed by the City of Meridian police department to be a
serious hazardous condition. ACRD was well aware of Section 7203.5.1 and 7203.5.2 Continuation of streets joining E.
Challis St. crossing Wingate Lane when the original Platt was agreed upon and should be adherred to_ ACRO, nor anyone
else, should not be allowed to make changes to the orginal established conditions.
Sincerely,
Orale and Helen Sharp
3', 7,c 3
� r. ��P s `hf G
w
Pit
M^-^-LIM WI-rch 17..2M Am Ica Wine: APSMAW Pape: 7
Questions:
Why did ACHD schedule a public meeting to solicit input from the public relative to removal of fencing (gates, etc.) along
Wingate Lane and installation of security gate across Wingate Lane when according to Al Dauven (former resident of Wingate
Lane ) he was told by ACHD staff that the commissionrs were ready to vote prior to scheduled meeting without considering
any input from the public?
Why did Gary Inselman, Christi Richardson (ACHD) state in subject memo "Packard Acres Subdivision Staff Request for
Modification of Previous Commission Action" dated February 13, 2002 that "this gate is the districts only access to the ACHD
storm drain pond constructed in this phase of the development on Lot 15, Block 2" when there is access from Wingate Lane
through gate directly intoi the storm drain pond?
Why did this same memo state "that the developer and the homeowners on Wingate Lanre have agreed that the homeowners
on Wingate Lane will maintain the security gate" to be paid for by the developer when public testimony and discussions prior
to the meeting would not substantiate this statement?
How can developer, ACHD,City of Meridian legally disregard the 1913 Private Road Agreement as well as other statues
dealing with private roads without the consent of the homeowners to abdicate their rights under the agreement?
Information to request:
Tape of the proceedings specific to Wingate Lane during the ACHD meeting of February 27, 2002 as this will confirm
homeowners (at least not all of those that live on the lane) agree to the installation or maintenance of any gate across the
lane.
Copy of agreement (document) signed by residents of Wingate Lane that would specify they are in agreement with the
installation of gate on Wingate and maintenance thereof.
Thursday, October 10, 2002 America Online: AHSHARP Page: 1
OCT 09 '02 1155 FR CITY OF MERIDIAN
206 888 4218 TO P -AND -Z P.02iO4
Ada County Highway District
Planning Review Division
To: ACRD Commissioners
From: Gary Inselman, Christy Richardson
Subject: Packard Acres Subdivision, Staff Request for Modification of Previous Commission Action
Date: February 13, 2002 Regular Agenda
ACRD REVIEW & APPROVAL
On October 18, 1895, the ACHD Commission reviewed and approved the preliminary plat for Packard No. 2
Subdivision. Packard No. 2 Subdivision is platting as Packard Acres Subdivision. A private road, Wingate
Lane. bisects the site. The previous Commission action required the developer dedicate right-of-way but not
construct the streets across Wingate lane. The developer was also required to install two gates, one at
each end of the unconstructed portion of the public streets across Wingate Lane. that would allow passage
of pedestrians and bicycles along the unconstructed section of the street but not automobiles (Exhibit "A").
The developer owns the property that Wingate Lane is constructed upon. The owners of the property at the
south end of the Lane, the Sharps, have a non-exclusive easement to use Wingate Lane but they have no
ownership of tis lane. The parcel directly north of the Sharps (formerly the Reichert parcel) is currently
owned by the developer and will be the subject of a development application in the future as a residential
subdivision (Exhibit "13"). There is a house currently on this parcel that the developer desires to access from
the public streets within Packard Acres No. 1 and cannot because of the fence and gates currently in place_
The Commission meeting minutes reflect that the Commission did not intend for the Reichert parcel to
access the public streets east of Wingate Lane located within the first phase of Packard Acres (Exhibit "C`).
The final plat for Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1 was approved and signed by the Commission on April 4,
2001 and recorded July 26, 2001. This first phase of the development includes two stub streets to the east
side of Wingate Lane, East Challis Street and Fast Meadowgrass Street (Exhibit "D"). The street
improvements have been constructed but not accepted for pubic maintenance. The developer constructed
the gates as required at the end of the public right-of-way along the east side of Wingate Lane. However,
the pedestrian gate at the and of East Challis Street is locked and the latch for the pedestrian gate at East
Meadowgrass Street is too tight to open. The vehicle gate at the end of East Challis Street is locked as well.
This gate is the District's only access to the ACHD storm drain pond constructed in this phase of the
development on Lot 15, Block 2. The developer granted ACRD an easement to access the pond from East
Challis Street across a 20 -foot wide strip of ground that includes the 15 -foot wide Wingate Lane. The
developer has stated that the locks are not his. They are not ACHD locks.
SEF' 10 '02 15:06 1 208 3457650 PAGE.07 /i
OCT 09 102 11:55 FR CITY OF MERIDIAN 208 888 4218 TO P -AND -Z P.01iO4
r-w.nu---�.1 Alts dub (b5u �'NLit t:i y
Commission Meeting — February 27, 2002
Page 2
Kent Brown, Briggs Engineering, 1800 W. Overland, Boise, representative of the applicant, said the
applicant supports the proposed vacation in accordance with the staffs recommendations.
For the record, ACRD received a hand written letter from Carl Hoffman, 7490 Lake Hazel Road,
expressing his concerns.
Commissioner Wynkoop closed the public hearing.
After discussion, the Commission took the following action:
ACTION TAKEN:
Commissioner Peavey -Derr made a motion to approve the vacation and abandonment of a
portion of Lake Hanel located In Government Lot 4 of Section 31, Township 3 North, Range 2
East, and Section 6, Township 2 North, Range 2 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada County,
Idaho and impose additional fees for the vacated right-of-way in the amount of
approximately $32,400 and provide staff with a new legal description for the entire Lake
Hazel right-of-way abutting the applicant's property (approxiimately 60 feet by 1,440 feet). In
addition, staff recommends that the vacation be conditioned on the following: that formal
agreement between the Idaho Department of Lands (IDL) and the developer with the
conditions specified by IDL in a letter dated December 13, 2001, being accounted for in the
agreement and associated documents. Commissioner Blvens seconded. Motion carried
unanimously.
ESTATES NO. 2_(DEFERRED FEBRUARY 13, 20021 — Gary Inse)man, Plan Review
presented the staff report.
Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, Meridian, expressed his concems. Mr_ Sharp submitted a copy of
a private road agreement dating back to 1913, and a copy of a letter from their former attorney,
Kenneth. Kreis, dated October 18, 1995,
Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, Meridian, expressed her concerns. Mrs. Sharp said her husband
put the locks on the gates. �--•
Chip Gallagher, 3020 Wingate Lane, Meridian, expressed his concerns.
Dixie Lee Roberts, 2855 Wingate lane, Meridian, expressed her concerns.
Al Dauven, 2020Wingate lane, Meridian, expressed his concerns.
Wirt Edmonds, 2297 N. Chandler Way, Meridian, the developer, said he is willing to pay for the
gate_
After discussion, the following action was taken:
ACTION TAKEN:
Commissioner Huber made a motion to approve Option No. T, with the amendment to the
staff report indicating a special recommendation to the City of Meridian outlining the
conditions of the security gate that will be installed on the northisouth alignment and
indicating that the developer and the horneownem on Wingate Lane have agreed that the
homeowners on Wingate Lane will maintain the security gate and the developer has agreed
to pay for the initial cost of the gate. Commissioner Givens seconded. Discussion followed.
Motion carried unanimously.
SEP 10 102 15 06 1 209 3457650 PAGE.06
OCT 09 '02 1155 FR CITY OF MERIDIAN
i 1FG WU.1:7f V��yV L'G �•VG 1L-H�.I'7,{J
ACHC POUCY
Section 7203.5 Continuation of Streets
206 Bee 4218 TO P -AND -Z P.03/04
N • 1 Guts 645 fbou F Hbt: t5/ y
7203.5.1 Consideration for Future Development
The street design in a proposed development shall cause no undue hardship to
adjoining property, An adequate and convenient access to adjoining property for use
in future development may be required. If a street ends at the development boundary,
it shall meet the requirements of sub -section 7205, "Non -Continuous Streets".
7203.5.2 Existing Adjacent Development
An existing street, or a street in an approved preliminary plat, which ends at a
boundary of a proposed development shall be extended in that development. The
extension shall include provisions for continuation of storm drainage facilities.
The policy on the continuation of streets requires that the right-of-way for East Challis Street and East
Meadowgrass Street be dedicated to the public and that the streets be constructed.
The ACHD Legal Department has provided a written legal opinion relating to this matter. See attached
Memo (Exhibit "E") The Legal Department concludes; "Absent a significant safety concern, public streets
and public rights-of-way should remain open and accessible to the public".
The Traffic Department has reviewed this matter and concluded that there is no significant safety concern in
opening the two streels in question and extending them across Wingate Lane.
ACHD PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL PROCESS
In November the applicant submitted plans to ACHD's Development Review Division that included the first
phase of the development west of Wingate Lane. The plans are acceptable for public street construction
with the exception of this issue of gating the public right -of -way -
Development Review Division staff have delayed approving the plans and allowing construction to proceed
until this issue is resolved (Exhibit "F").
sTAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting a modification of previous Commission action as it relates to the crossing of Wingate Lane
with the public streets. Staff is concerned about the gating of a public right-of-way. These streets are
necessary for connectivity in the area and *11 not deny the Sharp's access to Wingate lane. Although the
previous Commission action was acceptable to the developer at the time, circumstances have changed. As
stated above, the developer currently owns the Reichert parcel and plans to submit a preliminary plat
application for development of this parcel in the near future, Joint School District No. 2 has constructed and
opened an elementary school within the section. One of the access points for the school is through Packard
Estates Subdivision (Exhibit "D"). Staff believes that the previous decision contradicts District Policy and
creates an impractical situation for residents in the area trying to circulate within this section.
OPTIONS
1. Deny staffs request and uphold the previous Commission action.
2. Approve staffs request. Require that East Challis Street and East Meadowgrass Street be
constructed and dedicated to the public across Wingate Lane. Delete the requirement for the gats.
3. Require the developer revise and resubmit the preliminary plat to delete the public streets crossing e
Wingate Lane. This option would require significant costs to the developer to redesign Packard
Acres No. 1 and to reconstruct the stub streets to provide permanent turnarounds.
SEP 10 102 15:07
1 206 3457650 PAGE.08
OCT 09 '02 1156 FR CITY OF MERIDIAN 208 888 4218 TO P -AND -Z P.04/04
I IkG- I%IV.14f V:J-1V Vir- 1-.4-Vd !L-M11kv trite -1 LV�i J4JfVJV �I"r4'� J
Staff recommends Option 2, the modification of the previous Commission action on Packard No. 2
Subdivision and require East Challis Street and East Meadowgress Street be constructed and dedicated to
the public across Wingate Lane without the gates across the public streets.
NO'nFICATION
Residents along Wingate Lane were notified by mail of the Commission Meeting and staffs
recommendation.
COMMISSION ACTION, FEBRUARY 27.2002
The ACHD Commission acted on this item February 27. 2002, The Commission voted to approve the staff
request and modify the previous Commission action per option 2 as recommended. All other conditions of
approval from the Commission action dated October 18, 1995 are still in effect.
The Commission also made a special recommendation to the City of Meridian as folkrws:
Recommend that the City of Meridian require the developer to install a gate on Wingate Lane north of
Lot 15. Block 2 of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1. The developer and residents along Wingate
Lane have come to an agreement for the installation of the gate by the developer and maintenance of
the gate by the residents.
Attachments:
Exhibit "A' ACHD staff report
Exhibit "B' Wingate Lane map
Exhibit "Cr October 18. 1995 Commission Meeting Minutes
Exhibit 40' Vicinity Map
Exhibit "E' Legal Department Memo
Exhibit "F" Fans Acceptance letter
SEP 10 102 15=07 1 288 345?650 PAGE -09
** TOTAL PAGE.04 **
Christy Richardson
Planning Review Supervisor
Right -of -Way & Development
This is in reference to your letter of Februaryl, 2002 regarding Packard Acres 42 and gating of right -of -
way at Wingate Lane and also to offer some comments to the staff report.
First we would comment that we should have been advised of this meeting (February 13, 2002) at least
thirty (30) days prior to meeting date to allow us adequate time to prepare for the meeting. We received
notice of this meeting February 6 and a copy of staff report about 4:30 pm on February 8, 2002.
We will not be able to attend this meeting as we have had a death in the immediate family and will be out of
town for several days to attend services.
The comments and in some instances exhibits to support these comments are as follows, and while not
necessarily in date sequence in which they occurred are :
1. In the early 1990's the Ada County Zoning Board ruled that the Peterson property should be the last new
residence to be allowed on the lane. Ada County Planning and Zoning addressed concerns of Wingate Lane
residents when declaring that no more egress to new homes would be allowed on this private lane while
considering a proposal on property then owned by the Holladays.
2. The developer or the applicants representative , Pat Tealey has stated on numerous occassions that there
would be no access to Wingate Lane whatsoever from proposed development (exhibit a) . Also see City of
Meridian memorandum dated September 28, 2000 stating "access to Wingate Lane is specifically
prohibited (exhibit b). See also letter dated March 22, 2000 from R. Craig Grove stating "Gates and
fencing along Wingate Lane will be sufficiently constructed to preclude foot, bicycle and motorized vehicle
access other than emergency vehicles. Also that "Developer, Property Owners along Wingate Lane not
within the proposed subdivision and Governmental Agencies will agree on the type and style of fencing and
gates to be installed " (exhibit c). We would not sign off on fencing since there were known problems with
property boundaries between Peterson's property and development properties to the south (this also affected
ACHD drainage Pond) and also because we were not sure the gating systems would meet requirements for
emergency vehicle access. Because of numerous instances of violations by other than authorized users of
the gates locks were installed to discourage these trespasses. This still has not entirely discouraged use of
the larger gate as a backhoe accessed Wingate Lane through the gate just a few days ago to do some work
adjacent to drainage pond.
Keith Bird, Meridian City Councilman, told us to call him any time if violations occurred. Prior to
installation of fence violations occurred on regular basis and Mr. Bird said he called developer but with
limited or no results. The fence and gates have limited the number of violations considerably for the most
part.
3. For the first meeting with ACHD Mr. Sales (ACHD) said we should submit legal opinion relative to
construction of road across Wingate Lane. We questioned the necessity of doing this but did consult an
attorney and gave a copy of his findings to ACHD prior to commencement of the meeting. The ACRD
mentioned they had received an opinion from Developer's attorney but for whatever reason failed to
acknowledge receiving an opinion from our attorney (exhibit d).
4. Mr. Grove assured us that "Any damage caused by our contractors will be repaired immediately'. The
Wingate Road Association has had to repair a lot these damages because of the developer's failure to do as
promised. We hired Gary Rushman to haul in necessary sand/gravel and grade the lane to repair
developer's damages. The latest damages have not been repaired and Mr. Burns, Code Enforcement
Officer, employed by City of Meridian was out here recently to inspect the lane and can attest to the fact
lane has not been repaired.
5. Because of time constraints we are limiting our comment s to above and hope this will explain our
position relative to the scheduled February 13, 2002 meeting.
Sincerely,
V d-.- -Z�
Wingate Lane Road Organization
We spoke with Mr. Gary Inselman of the ADHD; He stated.
1- Our road is not a public road and it never will be. The documents given to us by the
Sharps only state laws for making any new private lane between two public roads, not
for existing private roads encroached upon by new public roads. He said we would
dictate what is to be done with our lane. They do not want it.
2- He stated that Sharps had tried quite aggressively to get him to make Wingate Lane
into a public access road by widening it to 50 feet all the way down, and then
claiming it for the district. This would take out the front yards of at least 5 of us.
This sent mixed messages to them about our desires for the future of this road What
is in the best interest of the most of us?
3- Allowable passage of Wingate is given to everyone living on this lane. A gate would
not pre-empt this passage and is in the best interest of the majority.
4- Only those who contribute monetarily to the maintenance fund of Wingate lane have
a right to contribute input as to its future.
5- A gate is the best possible solution to control usage of Wingate Lane. It will not
cause any more change than the new road extension has to access. Therefore the
plans to construct one should be ASAP.
6- The excessive trespassing on Wingate Lane must be stopped to allow our ability to
maintain it. This can only be done by a remote gate or a complete blockage with a
turnaround.
Craig and Robbie
iV m ti N ,> G L .y v A g, en Orn v n A CC°N vo' VO Co. cr Q� ^ O ,?- > Pi 00 Pi n C .� o0i y v .� O
C v N o u. bo00� zjC X30 o3aoA 0.00 �.`o �e,
o a5 o v 5 ❑ �, aiZ �., u y °h°i¢ 4°' A v� oE•
Z' x E a y o o v°V+= ¢aa0o� vc^c' a'=w0 c�oa o,r, eQw,Cr�`3 o cr
W b0 H 4. v u N L". > .4 C Via' d N .0 .0 CO O vi OL` .0 yr En L z
W - R L qty.' r0 rN. o A O .9 .. 00 •0 OV A O a) p A e'D O d = V °� ..1 O m °04 cD
CC y v ; ``•' N v O y �o D o W 00 �U cU > v �0. 'E 'E CA >��x ��aw
N.> 0 v y 3 3 s C > u �� a`" °'�Q �da�no N v px E� = K. 9 pa. nVc >�� Gci
Z y N N 7 p 3 U vZ .n N V �^ mwwv ° wxao C Ld ac w cap
N 3 C a r6 6� L 0 3 ._ d r °w U vs V E > Ov' c
oa o v.? > y v [ 3 �rw U °`' v Ear °a0.. ca o v �ynxUr ° ° 0 vim" A v
i 3 y C n r.v L C A�C�w v �U U v a c E> y•4 a
> °.v °_> > y A� .. N Co, oci �� c.� yooi�.oa�ix �AU� ea
c 3 c" v aCi b0 v %=. c v ° A:c°° a"'o A ao.:rm RU o°' vccn o00�a0q^^' N 0.cua� f3 d¢
i ° y E `� ; C C 3 v '-"d �� w d °'� ex a.? 0�o 01 a� oo LOOT Fcn
W C 7 E v . v 4.. �.-r U "> r0 >U-oC)a)-d m'�,ODIto c ..o c..,n �,n
L, 8, N y vj w+ +'•' •� 0.07 4 00 O, Z 0.m an a O > oo ! N O� .n LO c... u h O c
.> O ca v p E C's0 F. e _ 4r. v: cc 0.0 �n •fl ..: v a." m "•» '" O -p O a O, y O
W 4 W G'' v N ` .Ni y h . � n ¢ a) O " C > LV O V A > &.moi " a, °1 ..°a. 0. cc) " F u� 0.00 cn ro -- "
IA 1 H 'a N 3 ld i °-�, W O aO n O� 00 "" cV °� h u '9 = �, L " m O C 'II n ',�'� 0.N ''? W O ¢ > •O C O) h
vs p,•. o v '� c„ Urn N y v o 5U.- iw -¢ » y 9 ,c°, °
00
v O 5 O C a -y% v d y v (Dcn 0.:9 en a y w Aix ep°0o�= E °Z04"U Ee, x �aU O�Au v 0
o, '\j
% v tz vn a E 'ion a. LO n � � „' �ooa7>aiSc°v2-11, ° o�Fv
-675 v v C'� C Cr > oc°ud a cO h V on 00
a x¢ ' o c�-ccoov C�.r >rn
r0 L C L N w rLr w v U0.0 a;�'' v' y c "v.m�'°r� v•v°o'°o°':��n >a� v> -•va a;•¢�
` v v v .e 0. u C rn o O N v . _ er o n c, an eM y� -' '" eV . - O r. 00
�y v v N� N ao gao cVa boa v'a, A. ea O%d' :Q -'w C ae, eo
Sao .': o N m ., o q , .. 'n ui a o° v ej 00 c� 0 4
UoAw ° > N vrn �a E �.,,E v 4b °n v 7 v 4
$ O E ro w o y 0... 4 N= v°,•ox vUoo°!e, a.Za a.at0O) Ax On
v E" ti o y v c u � y E� v c °"� 4N v �o On aUNy °� wdoo 0. 3
�J o nir ya; a �..��� �q 9 Cl 0.�^rncv00 0 Manm a�
ro v y m C7 PO O� q cn m o ¢ cV C4 .. `; 0. on at - 00 Z
V U =. i0 a- v 7! �p •�1"i 0p O� 00 0 . c0
N v v x y 0 u ea CJ ^ v a >co •" o f >on^ rnUVZoOoo"X op A"�'r7UU u-• c
u w N N h C A ca 'a eti 'fl v ° -e 4 .. _ m M .r .- u Of ai on .. ti In O I
c, v= H m Z ° c >U 0 v o 0 ocomt-to wLn c.-��� h-0.Z~L- y��xC,
CC 0 N orn. d U v o vv� N^�� d 0. 0 6.N_. >0. 0
u �o c c c y v-'�an�� > o `am t 0.fl �ond�d.'^ °0 Nd cn04 Cr G
^a q I r� S. N v cn '.. 4ey cn en ci N c O c ; w m
u �' "O w td ° Ny E eQu� ° �a7Uo'" y cane N w C Na
v'a v v 17 C u v 00 t� a ° ai> y��o ticnx v► c,UUlz <-0
u y �- ay. u7 C O) > a N �. O O ev'Op-
N F. v "d .v.' f�. �O QC v " y O > r-7 L d cv 4°n 0.0 n y _O ° >
w 0.'.7 N L N 0 fr ; •O N n - r 4u.' 00 co a °i a'v' b�DA..O V .0 `•','d v' o v Vi oo � 1� 't
C C.5 .0 = 3 v¢�n �v p E C Ao Aaiui nao� 4� n
c v ° w, w �'a� ox �3� °c�7a�-x c, .awm m 0 o��oLon' ce�o
,7c," 777,7-7.77,7
•
C
F" u ^� '� �'' "o > S -boo v ;a5c+i .a rv. ay~, A
E .y IL
Z 'y' 0 "r. r. N O> 'C -p O 0 v N !0 C O
OJ c. L m u r.
bo mrO h0 v v 3 u be 10 0 C' y v 0 r '- 'U 'C3 M 0.
O C .� v h 0 k yvp » > C u 7 O C C 2
0. v r�vto o u° C 0 v a .d 9 v
v= v °: 7 o
v . ' v
^� v �o v Jr O N y �+
:o c. N
� u � o
C3.
bO,�
rJv 3w e E 2 u'4 v E 0 �.0 L- m 72W.
ti 3v A° E
y�0" �r0
v 5 L O
°N
M"v°fSN u,y u CL u
v
o E 10 o v k k N E.5A w-
c4
4)u
pLV)"°-0 v o o v °' v vc o b
`�a bo cvo ao
Z ° v o.ui � rumavo .
kC h� JCO 0. emjv.0 0
C C'[ v v p
96 U v 'C
O U E v O L td L O 0 0' 4v. ° v r0 r0 .OJ `" u Fes. Q.
3
CL id c A a x o o u> .E �" .vc E c` v .c v v o m a c 'N >
C o v: v C 3 E N v- o v `� v 1 3 v h 3 a
Gn �41 ca A c° C y a�.5 c y u`~' y v d e-5
O ca ° v v rq C v E v C
W = d0 ° m v °: v ° N " m 0.v :: $ v E co
y<W v r0 v 3 (v! •y v C .o �+ rJ v� •� � y- u 'cj y u R E l�'" d+ v
yl y: ,�V�l Iv. y y �+ '3 .3 r'.°0 O E y0., r O � > u O � yi„.' l°.' L
° 'D u r- E C > k > w C 6 cc ii ° u C..E ` C L v ` .y
v v :° v o y '> W v v o ra re G c v "'L' cc X 6 0 0' v v vp u `C a y �
v `.c $$ u E ., v vv °u C 3.ba
v o v¢ N 2 %
v
en U = >
>
00 0.00 00
A
`�
onto r 00 O
O
0 14,
x
�00V
00 •0
d'
cq
Z o Q
ro Obi
oro 0.n
on
p y Q
a0.
¢
U
U 4�, Un
^
Ur�"�
0 0. •-
ori., m ¢ A 4
M �'
HM, Z
y0o
A -O
an m 4
0 W G.U
•p 7 .. 'C v
904-^ U
wtD
A.�0.ananAOn' wZ
my
^;
r-0 to
d a"o cc=; ori rn
.0"n -a ai
c+coc°i,�d' u 00"co
b
a
00 C4
0
=U2r.rn a�,o=- 10
�>
��u°'yd
C4 .n 00 an >
V.
T q
> �r to �;
'fl ,L x l U ':7 �� N
>
aA
_ A
pan L. ✓�
4 y� N 4¢
bo 0. •0 0 v a o N
•0 o Ln
u Cv a)
v
Abo-�
boc,7
,xCoas a E
°0; c >
00
5°v u ohox°N
C A
NvcAA > xc
>.2U
'fl
.� L N C "o > 0
e �o
C>> x
an c a
�-
.00
cro H
oo
n `"ntivUalyoxr;:
� . ° m pOj-
m
r o ti v v s C v C v -v .`c C ae y .o v .E o o,� 0-0 a
Q 6. D .c L 0 fl C O O 6. v h O Ou 3 Q u V> c v 0 C4 �-00 U R O
Z C F• N o 0 0 30, c c aCL, —U 2.
a`, H - •v v a -p 'C u ,C Oro boy. y � �° 0 C4() �
W O 'O R u' c v •" v N bo o C4 �' 61 > "O
WO. C 0, —. u y R. C 'b R L R6. .O°.. a1 p .9 1C 4 y CV
W O 0 v v v v F E v v IO. C R o C N R R y, y N R on A T!
Z C 3 A v C y R 3 R. C' v' >y cVV V0 =° R m R w vUi = 0 .Oa U to
�, f. w w a; c .i >. o 0
Z
b y v o cua O R C E ti O" ° h vCi C w 0 3 y y'C,
00 o v
0 R f" v y 3 E V �, R O C �'„ •C v c 7 v c L rOn y R 0— c�7 C > Qf a` 4
O ` O v E°` ,LR' ` m y U R '., H e: w v 7! R V v '� .0 ice'. � A ="deo rA a4, LroV v)
d v C! _O R L L 1�'. ' � N u
z "aV C R m "' .. c � w v C> v D bo ba Dara cc 00 R
.0. :+ v y v "' O R N c v '� ,E O N v R L+ v L L d•1 V .G C N
RIn
0 ' ^ �.. 'ad' r �J G°. 'w ''% •� N i°.. v N C. .C: V7 Q U -� 'R
h O w ' u R N R N .+ 3 v R 6, C o b h .+ y O° v O �' N 0 R R 3 ' A Q. .. O00, L
C!
> �bboo °- b N .vc O '-" y E .Y, x r ao y O v v :C y h >> e 0 0 cv w V— c
v, y p •E 3 0 u c 3° m v C[ 0..m .y O >` N y O a o v U .9 co ...
O v>- C v +• w c o u d C ' C c u bOow- v u v v n r3 v v o o
Ia. NupoQV C� c,c'o.�o��v� vc VwU E '0n•0U0°
U ` R C `d L O» C`, v 6J is ; ON R C° s° 'o o o "y C 4 E 7 4 ,n d >R
c 6. u d y� o o v E 3 '0 � o boyo R � c N o . d �o d a:o
v o w R v `� R ^e L 3 ao 5 E CA A
�^ u v'6 Ni C:: N' v u .E N u O v c v L 0 ^° 3 c'd p Ria ¢ p0v. d " en L °��
w v v• 3 v O R c °' v v C L y 7 C O 0 u V R b u a°Oo U ani O
0. ,, v c40 4o uco In oa�0
o c v a �o o ° d o ,; o v c"' o, a n.B ao R
N v - C N °' h - c C Q bn v ,E 0. N a ... bo >: w v a 00 v d m a� U u o V c
w N ro y R ►C^ 3 bo 4, C '� 1j O. u bo V v " y'b Pr 'O > q v> C 4
N "o O R 4., O.Q E x O E'C v L fp 0 O C O. R c C� ;U y Q u v 0 4
v ❑ N O O Ow N m Qi 7 ,aG U d
V i R v v 0 GAJ C it1 p, N
v i4•.LM fd 0 v 0. v ' boy .+ O .0 N O C R G. � R PGS � 0) U ^' rJ p ' A0 00
y u w u u w E v E ectl N u c% v rC- u E v h R
R U �Cy C"' O 1r'. v L v `� C'. u .'Z+ ° v C R 'OC' 7 0 y L O1 bo 14 N� bc04 M O `N bGD r�7
f6 R C N R R Q U y R .E R ° t" LLi r•1 ii iL y7 U > 'N
3 .> v a y -° b° y. A N L y yp O °�' v v o 3 o c R ah�o' yn y �i y �i>cno
v 0n C� V.
�.[•� boit� u'd bo", c C N°4Qd�oiw'�<ci3 'w
0
U :+ N N 0. v E r. F" T p O v u O R' Q .G ° ..0 Q :: V
E o u L u v o E �' YR 0 is n° E C v 3 0 3 c
.,... ;,�� a. ..0„„ '::c:• i"�>;n'�•�r,,i',',`,�''1s`�"�' � .,.:;, "r' Ftr�;^r_durc �,'/�,�r o dpi �r ki ��: f✓. �.1'”. •q,._, rtr� +r�:Y;,7�+r"4rG 8�.1<a-c`�F$i'���X;f:,��,,?; �a'6r"d, ia".� "J �S� r;.*��t.4t!.' ;.53 rs^at ,t.},a rrn..,;. u;,,w�
v c v bow
y ,� •» tG .r •OMA p v L 'yC�+ v v v[
0 6 R N v 4 v y v O+ • 5 q m F. v :1] y O V O.
> c c N u C v
3 v v u o y u o N e 0 4 •E
v° ao. y v y° o>= E� bny o E v
c C y O v p w b R 'J ., v t y v 'O 3 L.
> v a° ?: 3'3O.e° �•� E q u
o
0 3°EugFvvvv° arm °�=.AVRc
E -v Q'v v C'L v o N ��� o v_ u E� v•�^ � v v
vr� vb [ ° E v v v a o
E° E N p Q E " w E H o ti h °
Roy v v u z N Abp J0 v E g g v v 'L v C N v v v
E N'S v a N O au -e c °�-•� � u p q v,c � y R� v u v o
L� p k v x w C R v �� .?; '� 0, v C •C L -p v N
oN" vv 5 c.cuowvuv�`E`[�°cv'
c E v o v "a y •° C h o 0 S 0.v is R c c 5 c
° o v o c c d E N 7
Z y t0. O u0 Al J y cCa +v. cya C' O v R 3 N R v"° O
C N R 0 O w= .4 R O U p bo " C^. ° �O+ O R v E 0 N C
FF v 3 v v Q C 0; .0 'O v bo u .0
v L.O v L O N O R O G v -C O u b0 v y N 'U N O O
C o .> -0 c .Q w '� ' v C" y C E
i p r 0 Cu° O v v u cu h o p C U v 0 R C E 0 v°
W y y G e.yR u u o.v v 3 o R v 0.0 ° .0 v v 5 L[
o o v A c o c 3 0 a R
y 7 c w a N v E v N 0 R u D> v
v v O R v v v u
r o v a F v C y o c+ ° C
'" u v rJ 0
v O is
W E 7 v C i u v cJ`a 'v O o o ui . S A v m 0 E
= G
o vs,4v y41
�as.� v a
Iw.. .t^.' 0. O
L
N .� C.. t! Oi ,L 0 00 7Ei E C 'b ,'. n G u .� ? O DC7 L
,G 0 0 0 O mu 7 F� 'v !-� '� h 3 u 0 bo'o''J N w t'I C •bp
f D r.
(M
,y
nil
N R
o
rn
o 'v
o
d
w C+
"z
u
MC4
w n
c0 00
��
u >
o
00
cm 00 U
e
U00
n Via; .
00 =r' n
c`no ao'n `n
ao
t j
,n U
m
04 o
.,
o¢
otOi vo,0
rnto
C4
�n-00 �
02
QyQ�x
z
UC4rzY
>
U
>-
°ao7 V(M
U aU
a
w o
U 'Q
o
o
m
^,
u
o p•,�
Cm u U 3
x;
b> OD rn
3, 0 p
w° v)
N y u U p
h °0
v �� m
F
a U
In I.
(D e r m,co
a
>'3 u
a
u> oaoo
v U v
aono
° v
x '� 4
,n
`Euto c
�='
Mu
0
v end
xW U
4
�°
> Uo N
a
v
" cQ
�e
c �
m a 3 Eoo
vM 2
. -
ho ND tAoCn
j IG. >
v o w
v v
v v y 0 U
�U u
w aR.
.D
v v 0 v w v'b0 b`O >:S bo - C h oO C v v v CL
o• 0. c z .p`O"
w cLO u 41
c
W U"'
O�W3eU- Cf,Q0.0,J •'LCLN: wCqv�uV$v 'N-Qo xSAy3 C vbuv0 v'.;CN�yo - wyPv. 0 =L4 `o'Cv "R ,•'�uv vSu aoy[. [v vy[ •LChR. CL •p°u[' 'Lv[�3 sv7 ,i.°Q`3CsJ "3v LhC� LLNVv.°o v oO N ° yL.o QJ ca
0.oa0c^_C9aL0',.ZD aLu vC,3 v im uv G y >
m bocr_ u o° ° ° o v °3 4 u .0 -0 d •v o > p00
W c CL. vL O
va c v ci 3E mp 14 r
°
v n o v A .a c C J C u
Z 0 -0O ; N C v O
O [ " I.
bo G v >
[ u pr. o ; L A
C O3 w 0 v sp OW k C_bo O v
C waCO �00
v O[ell
NaN v v °i a0ap n
72 y0v ou v a '0 ¢v�' Go oO fl a
mA j Q. O v boyNp A
.
D
U aoc" o a
�. C bo u 4; y[ v 0 v u a C 0 a ^a0i O a bo
L A GLV a�0 000 o
v O [ QJ O O .t". [ xU. 'S QJ ; s v N OG. w F. 0. C td Q' .: Raoto
a Nw'6oA o s W A N O. vx C N u o 0. o�Q
-p ri C v 3 v LL L v boy 'v m > w Ln C c' ^
v u v- L. v v N F L. 0.N O V. p Q o Q 0.
w vii O �"y. iQ 7cl C •p v v 7 C7 O u A v cd U 04
.: 0 0 0 4 n rn
. Lo C4
% O y C 4 e0 O N C.v $ ld yOr.° u v p, m 0.N C C ap 3 Cj E ao
C O •� (v. ° 4'� v [ v N ^fir o ,� :9 C o v u '[ Gr N U ` G p O o
.0 N A L. p 'b d CJ > u > 1� v L. ee ,o 3 V y v CE• 00 0t1 l� v SFr Ln 'O
u O • v 0.L. 'O bo -.
fd > 3 V +7 a+ N > QJ v » bC v C p N o— LO L U C > .N
O .� QJ w i0 •., v A 3 A N u rJ LV. u �, 'C ° ,�.0 .b o O' c. O >. U Q. w '� ,... 4>
�+ >° 64'7 ° `o' L r C ,� �v+ y jam++ t[6 v ,y > •.�7 L [ a o 3 [ °' �+ ' ci — •v� a0i
CS C "y m 'd 0 QJ .+ C v u S N C q> 'a o QJ QJ c. ev v O > v !7 &.
`d �'� v� �'; 4� v'ea v A u n..� 3� Q0.J"^ >'9 H.. V u � ° aL)V .- 41 oc'�>" Ao
•�N > A vwy +.►. c" rJ6J .EUv [vi h'otatl r> [?, ovCy E =aC x
M v 0.O v boo >,bo Mrn��o -C O v Cv O
a w O p [ Qy�
�620
�?p mu
wO -v•ovm Vo ; v 9 y0 rv ell
rAiaW > o vo v w 3 b0
0 0 . p
w Ov ' to v o
y�fi0 `�niCO
O44
u .o 3 s 3 9
C C O 6+J v L. = v> y H y p[ .4 p b .SC V L: V u q 4ev C G +e
•� y .M .0 u t^ pCC o [ 0 •3 �. r ='G 'v v .-
;4.
p C N p w N w Qui V 3 v bf y
o
bo v o 0
N L, v c0 [ 4r GO C > w p .. W Ln
V F00 14
O 0. w C" v v v U v > O GV o r R or rn
4d 00
0 4j
Ot.Q{V~r.i, �•C yy �tiv� �7 � vVyO bo C .SC "5N�a�NOw C u ° �p
U[v~O
° «+
y
Cr. rqv
0Rv an GP-Vm2onU00
QJ 00 rv C C 010 c.0.i
•'O0"
m. Im. 0 3v�C�o.ru °s�ACQvyJ Z. 4 3�,va° a01
0 A. (na
-6-0 vy K'v COy > �� S ar n a ° a oQ QU >�:, $-Q eo
3�-
a < na�0a
or- c 'g c o ym 4
,20 oy � o
o
a4�
v e o > y •� > •c o: 4. v C v v o p ami c'°„ ELo > e°p'O� < °'
V v a O v O v �' f0 > .ate ~ fp 0.•� O E ao O .. 3o O .r e.e��. U GV
y N m .; O p v p v 4 'L% w C 1. Oj vVi vyi v m itt L°' p4, 0 Q C GA U- �j V L. -W Q.M N ,'i, p
q m E a o -rev o bo Q ed `o N v Qui L` o e Q � QU .n u mv> °�Q� Ao
'0 5 td rn O v C O CbO
'pv, y LO 0.d QEi ' C0 CL.
U w .G H
IUW- 9: v be ty0
Mi�>bo vyL. 'VO�? GEp O-ot`n�J Lbvo °1v0 �..oqa-b_udEo> "�'C°1gg9:No,�3nom ywy�C�doN
oov C 4o "°05a,"N'
V M v r -19 czgm c 0Ln c L
s•�.-0.�^yO`NvM
ooR xbo vao U ° - r. od O O O QU bOn.a
'4QL.py
V p QJ u'L .0 C 0 m
V V vQp0.vvCu a uvx> o-
'
rUA>
M, b p3an
O m v > C > 0-0 yO � A u �°5 u v'[`" Q o v ev • Em
v v9.4,, �oW O - faC uUM- 0top bow
I '6 L. .[ 3 •5[1 3 3 C e
[[ .
4j 7 ' b o'oo w
o O uO
v [eoG[>>ab
o
L� a c
M.d [ai..v[�o r ��LC�o.9v yy�ydlyyfl�o�..Z''t"�Uy
r N w .0 "' u u N v v v DD 'O v p v E m
.. 4 Ln
'rJ 7 0 OO 7 A �o-OC �,� w u
V tCIR
o 4:1
6
P.
t^n .[- , >• - -0A ' �ovv C5 4� u >
O mLv R$bo°nn�C y
byo awma w =q `o
,ti o bn N L °
i
.': v u V v v G v C v c.9 v o :' v mUvi u.= -- o tz LoF
Cd '�"' .�+ C h O� yv+ t>V y V O ❑� d0 0 y C T CSV . C 0 Obi '� s0 'U a0
W y m 3 4 F 'O C aJ C G aJ w -•7 C V• .. ,
an �- y ,.. a, 0.
W V bo 0 L '', ... F. L.' y O c7 y 7! -S N y Z" aD w u d' C 4 �0
W C m C •� a ..�. y y i0 v m m u -� ('" y .O r. o on ao V y blD d to .-. g --
H u u r.. .0 3 p -O .0 v y J v 9 u 1. C to CUA-'�'v' (` m U w000 on w ._ O,
Uu u o C abo u, L v" 0. L= Y u A C m- `r 0mch V 4 7 w m m oo— — to a
W v y y C a 3 '= •�= > v o C °' C bow 4 C to Z oo < 0 Z ;n - ct �w`+ a ^„' a
Z " u u �. O E" 4m, -d ty m C y u -O an 'o—
r
o •--r d
O 5 c 3 uo 0 0 o v M F o o v v 3°m' °a°D, d fl c�v�U Q on
z p X :; O � u' u a as 'C o c c c 7 � a -- v ci a, c' c, a
W v C C .�+ w y v v a „a+ v G .y+ �" a m "a C. C 0.C' w von a' ,�
L Lu tQ > G .v bo v v c v y .y b J u a v m u u bo n d> a y a, 9 n V o e� en to zLn ado a
H v m .y u m •� .0 T7 v C _ C u C 4: >, ?e C r U 3 ;; '`7 an ao °wen .� ,°�' ^ cm v ..
an
R v o°° vn v m v 3 ��� `° u ti o v a ct"vMs-En ca�� ter• a.yflaV 04 ria
u o v u u E m v - p ar, ° ° fs. t C > O m �'C �ao�Ato Stn > dao a^ asW awn,; cn ' Sd
tt. c v w y c w v m° _ c -0 u r q' .r c9v �' a bo d° ao aD o
u w C C Q- C m 'v p a bo y v, C C 4 M y � 0" oD , C t- v ,n m v- •� G O> w ate, o U
q o 7; a >'y u `� h y C rJ u y ��� cd O,> 7> d d A 4tri n LO Utwc,
o a u v m d .. L•ya o� eS u m ,c c d aen o
m 3 v 3 p » O C u y V 0 pp C y .n ewn a 7 C° bo—'� Kay c y a d V to "
� m c u u C u a� u m C -C w v o p bo b y oow r 2 u a v C4 CtO m w .. q = to Q" A-00
G O v tua u u "o .G A s ° o. ti v c (.^ y .5 o b °�,° ,n b> .� a... � O w :: a o- C U tO W
t. c. y � m m m m u a y 0 N a� .,c 'C d 5 -O 0 E m m u a, oo t� to
° m a m L vii v c• 3 O m '� c m ,� a .�. > C 'ar W° �y N U Cl w r C 0 ••� c
4 0 1D .r v m -C O c .,c pup 5 o a C ty0 0 z �6.. an �w O 3 y ��e .R m,•
"O .r. a: t>tt C$ v v y v u 0 C 3 m b v ti° 3 3 v �0nw>�"" o t �°°0i a�,� ~uc ° >en
A y e i D u F. s~ t0 .:' o c '� O m ccl u :? > ° w-- a � > -" y u° K E W u, ai u own
O N X. L O y an ... N v .s{
c` C C$ O C tcd y u v u 4 a 3 -c w w uci w' O^ rn ° O w �w ytn >
°° y u is a' v v v 4 v v u 4 , a,n c y c>: 5 c u n v a, to
•� ym t+`"i ym v v m .0 'J 4 m v C ,C •a p 0 OD •C c 0.- •" en 0
i v y _>^ u � � o v� E c 3 -5 v c °vim os 12. .� «, � 0
-aC C v v v '� O C C F N a rC- ° y O u O v> onQO v ^� GO
bO T Z> C �° ° earn °a u•, E 3 moo"
v a t�pp o ' v o .°>' = `° °' C m c ° a .. -5 > ,g w a, 3 . n > an o
V C> bo C Qr p V V L_ y 'O C aoi tJ G m >, 7 d 0. m L y„ t i m to to to c'Dv L y U E•+ ti t7 to L
m, G > > a, v L C O -eye m. C .+' m a^ 0. V m h E L _ N to V
°.� v y m 0.O u u a y v C m C u w O. C 3 .rd C� m $ o u - t0 = n ' n
uv - oD
t00 3 C O �", .0 ccd 0 ".0.
-_-
4 to 00
' ^ ,.� a, y 4 0, > mav a v o r-
° OW> C u vC O° r a3V u C4
`-
y 3 v cv. a u 3 m 3 a a v bO
bQ u m z a; o ° A ,o, tO
u y ui r.
O bO r u u O C .m0 cv. C c0 d •� vyi C Q" 0. d ti
N p a N a 16" —41 m V ..0 '� em+ V y v y F y� V v an a y .. 0� GV
oe
UQ
•ym e�to Uu$ 0 o o q. > 6710 go
m ^,oo 3 7 v
v m y 60 t -v Oo M-
0 av�Ocis
m -CO°° n
0o4 ,onn a ov v t ° ao
o vo .c o boaD .. 6.
-
8
v v C .o i v C m o t;; C `° °, °' B vai c u m C ~ C4 bo W0O Q oo> c>
M" C C td m v m tq W%Ol
' o q
ami C e[e w o 4 .2 v Z v •r o y = L. s.� v - o, Z a, U� d z 00 0, m o
v v o v v c" v = a v v ° v b e. v " w0D3�(
d co S a e v o v y v .a e° o m v m 0 tca '" u A 00 "0 2 ..— r, I P cn
c > m a' > o ' v v a C 3 .. °D «wi a �' > " u a� a"o t`oo OO
> y o u to v C 3 �, v C p C w v 0 .� " o o d x ", .c. °> rri o, w—
v v va, c dv, E v. c o Q, i ,; gym+ v mL. v > y q �Q q ,on C o d gv ,wn = a
bB y 'TJ' a c: = t a, a, a -Jr •L v bo C 4; ed a �, an of m -� bOV Nen >� d
C c c. A� > 3 h g� `'� u m C m °v' C t`a
G'� o- ° �o v 'a v 3 o v p o 3 v o v v a o �o C L° c+ °C" 'n �°t. >
W 4 ~ L 7 u rJ o v •� >` . '� w u 7 = O. '5 o v -O mb /r aNi p •^�_ K ow
v m4 c v ti q m 3 m a' .p m v w u >' C o to w U" — W -. dS to t°no
o. y p v O O V N >, W v v v o J .0 O y `°' b s an�o °� �- o°04 o`'' va
C C O 4 v " ai v u 33 pn�W
m y 4 0 , c 8 H ca ,; a e 3 to a U !r o to
i m .O vi m 0 'p u ,4; ° u 0 4 u u y 3 0 to
O v y C O u•� C m au, p 3 v v v v c y C is t'a vn u m o V 'A` u> > z u ,, n o bCeq
tun C h '� b y 'p > 6 C •v u o -Jr v "a y m C �> u c> ry A N> S p0.ip
>- > v c m ° L ami 0 c m 4.� ° E o4) r> h —d > °S o �d°0D'et'
W I.. m cu. �"' a' m L° y u �, O O L > c A .,C '--�
h `•c c o m V v y v vo4 UbCa mor U
W O E° v v r.. d Eo u t,$ "d 'C o v 9 .2 u m y h bo `3 b0 R 6 3 m "c 3 sc w w
u
41
0 3w7 tlC�m�o p•y.aw m °vC s •n um vo 4'o
.11
y O a FV t�tovt E C tL 00
"
O u 0.5 'C m I»C v -I(]t -00 O fitCyd
rn_A
c9�
r
en 6.
q u ro p 1 •V > .y v
'4Jlz 4�„ H >. d
m L I"' O L L
c,L,ai
1J C
..
bG .+
�y� v�aa°+a°
m
CvII•E'mroro
O L
y �:�3>e�e
O C..g E
v,^uELLL R�b,
L v O ro
Z ro C L L O m L . E °'
La E. S % m L L .. y
L
N L L u aaJ L w
:3 rE ': >
m 45 c�oba
v
ro E C v 41,N,
O L% 0
a�
W W
> q
v
> .
W •'� �•. L '� ^'' 4 E a 7
�'r
- .- L
u L % L E O
m
.7
'b b K L L
"C
L�
Z h
�Rr
a4 iG
k O
W .0
i v p v ro
v C
>`
c� L -o.
c..E O C
.'% L 4EJ C C C 4Li 4~i % C O L
E
C L •y 1p+r
;
uV
`;
co ID ce� allR
'Q� m'!
an
a cli
W :�
•fl
c ° °.c yw
L
3 3 0.o u o
v
1..
L (y^y
v c v
Fr'1
°�'
L v .� a %
; ro E .E :S E a L u L 60 L
L p _..... O L' bo .G
.'
oll
3y
ro a > °J
v n
o E 3 ^°
v G.� u m :: 3 3 Z R '� v o 3
4J a4 L - �J'
L
C u
E ro
q
_w
°
i u E v p
vs °Ea�c
v g o aroi
9L
ao o
U
e
oo L. to
u c u'
v c
�C�Lcp
ro 3
��'-= ti �.i °.4 o L. v c � 4�•� �
>
v vgHa.ba
3 Co C E
a
-o
;� z
an
a
C L O vi v a a O m
ro O a
m N
ar ro ro c u
.0 ; v ro .y,
o
c
ro O Sy.' V L C
u O
8
C
a ^•
a ch
a.
..
= V
d t
D cL 3 L
OCy
ro bo ILL, y O> LC ii L O L L eCE
E u p, .0
E y e L
C 'b y
L y L m
V
{,. L
.a
L bo
Vi
W .L roy
'D
�x
y
L
p
>
to
dC
�
>�
v
C u w
C
v
u M
>
_avvc
b.4 2 ro 'M L v c v a^
v q
o
bo
U
ro
c
r a)bd
o
0o
`"'
^.!-+
it
>[ v q C v 3 v ^p m v v a
O c
,ULO bv .ov
d0o
,0
.c w
3 •v •e
0.°
CD
c
IV
r
O
0
`O
�,
wc�r
y
t
>>
`°
L °
H
iL
G° g
q
L 1:
w°� o� o o 3 a. $.� c
N y bo
>7Q °
C O
uCAl' >
xbo 'u" O,
y
LL L L c
L
�roO>�NLE
4J.0 bo
m
O Lo
OV
'o "a
XwwNmT%LVa
c b4bvbv
Q r.
Cu 3 u E
v .,
boa ro
°04i
o a
u o
a ,R
L O -a °
J�uo
.
OOC
-
> 00
(MA>Oro
d
m
.^
u
°tiro>
v
O
p
L L
O E L
bo V i�7
0 r.
u L O
C •y co
R
o
°
'�vaflvU°bL>C
cc v i6 '+uGOO-cb�
EEv u L Cy
:L O
wvpnaaJ
"
.W
vLO
'''LucO
•Ey.,c
ro4u
u
C
.•y�ELLi
L 4 L
> a
'C
p
'ro
D
ro
P.
z
R
..yuaNL«cv Ca,
,C33�eCa>°v�r
be C'
L J
0 C
'wJy"
°
'°
O
eJ
OyCvC°uCyr
y.�J
O
Lp;,•,
pv
"J
°
vCkcL.
p v vR
Lo
co
0
o
`aaWoCU,0°_U^J.Rnnaro0
Z
EO
y•
OLLL7aLp°r r
'OOJ
U'L0.roi
L v
u7Lv°
F•LLan
G
v v
m
�^
oo0.�
mdG
ca00n,
gU"°°°
u
5.5 0.
a,a
d
A U
� � u
Eo >
x '� n L O y&• tig n
V
00 U�.0 ccvyyfl000
0u
aow..�bo`C c Z
Ia. 0 CO Q. C, :: er 00
o d OD
;,(Md (M ,� ° V 46a,
wn .CLOD
Os
V R CV C..1 R L -e. ^. an e� ^ 'a
-��
0.00 e)I CV y p,
a�vo o a oa Eo En
d v� °�° wa =^��n v U °'c�
04 C4 M
No >
a
��a
cn
N Ca N pv CCD ^,. �O �3t
�..
M V a O i y �0 fn y
3 .D v'.i o0 ° .D U on M
0 eqU y 1,
� w 4W 3 u "w 3 [n C�cD c
Ozoo 0 Vow�a° O
R
> C bo d b0atOtO3� �W -%�U
O p C L R O) ;�
3>C�7'��jvcia�4
Ct:
bG A 40 >R v ba M R
0D.S o C y U
K >
pV
3� = o� mU
a
m L I"' O L L
c,L,ai
1J C
..
h c o c v 3 3 y v•C A m v v ;•�
S 3 a
O C..g E
v,^uELLL R�b,
L v O ro
C vv»
m 45 c�oba
v
a�
iv c,m
6C�J C G O . v '� E��
'y
s�4c
.7
��+
'
C. E R
m
v C
.'% L 4EJ C C C 4Li 4~i % C O L
E
5�
°'�
tj w C d aro, E-0 3 o a v a�•E
..r a
'fl p LL O % C .�
L� -� 0,)
�•y v E
v
1..
O
O L
L v .� a %
; ro E .E :S E a L u L 60 L
L p _..... O L' bo .G
V
v n
v G.� u m :: 3 3 Z R '� v o 3
4J a4 L - �J'
L
a n.
L CL •y %
4J O L"0 v `� % L L L O M
w E c:
E
w b4 'v ro roc: L J •p .D p ro n L
C ro .0 u
v c
v c
��'-= ti �.i °.4 o L. v c � 4�•� �
>
E'^ � E
w>^ro
pv
r
CO ZO
°:
p
..L
o
b
Lo
.•_aL. Oro
qE CR % auL V bo
v[ x OC
'
L
y4
u roC
O
ro bo ILL, y O> LC ii L O L L eCE
E u p, .0
E y e L
L y L m
V
{,. L
.a
L bo
Vi
u• R L V ro t,� L, vi
R V .%' L u >` L L% L 4 2 4+ L L
f°•
R> O 4
N° V E
L
CLE
c
C
C L •: % R GL C „L ,X r .M
41 4) v•E��
c
°fin
0V
bo
C
_avvc
b.4 2 ro 'M L v c v a^
M
C: L
U
ro
6a
o
y ro
y V .N. ro •.. Q y
^.!-+
it
>[ v q C v 3 v ^p m v v a
O c
cxi.E
d0o
,0
.c w
3 •v •e
3
ti boa u
>
C 'D
IV
r
� u �; ma k= c r. v o% o bo v
O. L z q y > O
0
`O
7 a L u
V y w
y
.....0
O ro L L ;C ro L L L 0 "O ro
^C+ "C 'C 7 t ti 'C u
L L C
'p
0 %
u>
iL
O
L 1:
w°� o� o o 3 a. $.� c
41,
F
3° E
-Ss
� � u
Eo >
x '� n L O y&• tig n
V
00 U�.0 ccvyyfl000
0u
aow..�bo`C c Z
Ia. 0 CO Q. C, :: er 00
o d OD
;,(Md (M ,� ° V 46a,
wn .CLOD
Os
V R CV C..1 R L -e. ^. an e� ^ 'a
-��
0.00 e)I CV y p,
a�vo o a oa Eo En
d v� °�° wa =^��n v U °'c�
04 C4 M
No >
a
��a
cn
N Ca N pv CCD ^,. �O �3t
�..
M V a O i y �0 fn y
3 .D v'.i o0 ° .D U on M
0 eqU y 1,
� w 4W 3 u "w 3 [n C�cD c
Ozoo 0 Vow�a° O
R
> C bo d b0atOtO3� �W -%�U
O p C L R O) ;�
3>C�7'��jvcia�4
Ct:
bG A 40 >R v ba M R
0D.S o C y U
K >
pV
3� = o� mU
a
N
M
Z
0
v
H
aa,
d
a
O
VUl
H
W
i
W
C
c° L v ,[ cv, = 7 Q�j u c: �;, E v >. v v C N
v C •� v C v v p R bo.ti v ,p a~j a ° O .y dvo L L v m v r O O V 00 v
v o o v o -° 0 ti u v; bo = v u a 3 " o �bo M 00 0
° o ry ��° v v E R > v L o on boc 4 ,n�
O W 6 L � ... c. ° v ,�+ v >; ;,� �" fC •q .y 'C 00 Q.- 0.� v v x
E v - 3 y ° v'v o v be E c,7 o c c a+ o a� °' v �' ^ C d� w�, >
E M v v u 0 o� m ;, ° E q° C v. n' °"� ° Q D `° v E c�'v "°' �� U
ava N::aS
o=` ao �a y O v v c -5 ZZ EA. 9 U 0 G >� V 3 L _5 °o wz ha
a'$° a,ow;;oU':3v 5 vv 4:'°-0 0 `°ya3G`^ 9m'a "�
a a 0 bovccvc�vn.to �oQv on °o,; s zEy �� �6 a
330. co.5cvUuoyga N°'�3roa c vv�.cav 00.0s °� '.'o
co v3tioaE, E a3RRv3�0�ea o E ub°E v d"" �d �c .00
3 v w > •� ,� N �.. . �. y ° a ."a Lba •�' . U a' .^ C v '9 rn fd n
41 u
v V w y v' L� �. L v p, v c�a ° o v C^ v�7i C 0p M N 00 p L 44 o O O) C
441 .y v J N J v y 3 ,y C C ,C L O ti v cN �; v O' C an ^ 7 E u 4 .�
W v v 40 >v v c c °Eva`°+ 0° E 3 y N '° R 0 _a E w> a'h
3 i bo m �pp [ 0 U o 3 G H od° box p a; v M' .v v '> �y o v .c o " A U
L -p v°i v C y L ❑ O �+ 3 �} C> A .-:
.c• 0 o E �.5 H �Zo >q� L� „ co
cv..� bo S m 4. be 7 v '�,, .-M 0. V. C y v 1] % v Nry U O a4 m F L y .yv. ,w A U> vv, U �' Z
4 E E q p 3 v" v N ;; 'C1 O Y L7 0 0 .D 1-4 v 0 A k E ED U N z O n N
:+ R A C' v T� v� [ v O a. v O T O o Rs lam • E� 04
5 L V v O .� y .r O '�0 L •� y >. ' �0. cLd y C: C 4 O `'O t% .0 U cn .E E? cV m O
E O v r.
v C O N °'.� N V .0 L v V.Z v 3 t0 �n bo U 4•� v c A o y T� bo'� c c "' oro ed ao
`..vvRt.y0.cUN� �'E'Lv'N�4,0m0NO C o�t0��u xd3.5bDboZ 4)p''�FL.
z�a.r
C v �, E NN bo ° v v v bo A rJ v '� y y •v O"1'. •L' >� L :b m 0o ``. N ►7 .., U L > 0..
�j•+ is C T w b .1. O QJ ui N >
00 • — .C. `,r1 h0 +-` r. r+ E v ... N y > L > C -c
Q u v-5 E 0. V v .° w V p° •�� a' C E° '+� p .. E 5 0 3 3 cv. L O m u w u •o aG a° A V.
0 ,C 'J .0 y 'fl 2 >C •y .O O c0 -° O �? ^y O O v .N, C R -0 y '� •E .v. U Clb— WlH U �n
7 :� v row v T >` 5 `[° v L. 'O > ° L ^ v L4.• b0 •L rw C 'C 0p do O o o O C v 0.� > ' vCi
N v a C N v 7' V v _4 Sao g bQN
pq ° �O 1.. '0. C''7 f. C.' C `N' v N '> v vvi R U y ,G .v+ +:r '�'�...5 UO � 'D � � o > U b0.
C C v F bo ro q d v v v° v c L U v r 3 V c itl c h %t N z 4 C7 �i v
�. '� n •r k�'i C G .0 > b. m N v A 'C
$
(13
A H c
5
n
o
u
s a n u
0.
0
0.-0 v
Q o
N o 4
E v
J
v
0
o
v
0
0
uv
v v
v
r.
v�yo
'o v vy
0E0v
00
-^*4v
o
.6'6
45 45
"j
004j C o
N°
v v
C° d 0..E N
N
° L w
anO
uy
L
v
:ov;i
'O°p�.wOc
Qj
Q
x
L
U L C v E
-Z to
'ov
aC
C
°
v
O w
00 0
en
i
6.
•vO R O
v [
AEA
C 04 oo
(M O
en 41
'aQ�
v
u �
v
:vmOs
crN" C�5
oo°a
hO cv
^irb0
0.'C
boO
°
v
GaMc�.,
=4j
,v
vF
Y�
•.OA
c ' 5 O
y 00vO
�U.
v
°
q
oo
v �n en
M O v
'uNti
L
c
r v
.GN
vDv
UQj
4VJ
/Cvc. "•.pQC.;
yCv uCv
�°C+
wv
O v
— C`eC
Ov h6
.
vL [O
:%[;
Av �y
w'Ov 'Cw w 0
o
Oo
OPanLa �0v
an 'W a
'tcaf
41
vo
ca
D
> b0
CL
3
y
v
e�a
Vro4 „"0Car
v`
wv
iUm�d
h
0
-0
>
m v
v
C
uo>a°A
Eo�
Qj
0
Ctied
aV4;
March 5, 2003
Brad Hawkins - Clark
Interim Planning Director
Planning and s'_oning Department
33 East Idaho
Mendian, Idaho 33642
tet=: tntorcemert of conditions for Packard Acres No. 2 :,'ubdrvsslon
Dear Brad Haw ins - Clark:
Thank you for your letter dated February 24, 2003 which confirms City Council's enforcement of conditions for Packaru
Estates Development, LLC.
We were given thirty minutes at the February 11, 2003 pre -council meeing which did not allow time to address all condtions.
T'ne fencing as stated in No. 6 and No. 15 were not in agreement and therefore ambiguous.
Number twenty in part —"remove the gates when (and if) the two five -acre parcels to the south are developed (when Wingate
Lane can be vacated". ACHD was well aware of the public street (Challis) issue when agreeing to the Platt. The five acres
south of the Packard Acres No. 2 has not been annexed into the city of Meridian and is not apart of the subdivision. ACHD is
not adhering to the Platt as agreed upon and should not be allowed to make changes after building has started.
Interestingly enough Wingate Lane (Private) was graded and graveled February 12, 2003 before pictures were taken regarding
the condidition of the lane as requested by Council member Tammey DeWeerd. There should be photos in file as to the
condition prior to all the construction trucks using the lane (No.22). The repairs have been done at the expense of the
residents in order for the postal and paper deliveries to continue. The attached invoices reflect the expenses incurred as a
result of the development activities. The residents of Wingate Lane can also attest the developer has not complied with
agreed upon condition concerning the repairs to the lane.
Who from Planning inspected and "signed of' on Wingate Lane prior to issuing building permits—No. 22. As a condition, this
should be done the same as the inspection of the fencing.
In the Idaho Law Library is a book "Private Land Use Arragements" S-406 Interface by the servient owner. The Rules and It's
jusifications----The servient owner can do nothing to diminish the use of the easement or make it more inconvenient, costlly or
hazardous to use." A copy of this was given to you Brad. The hazardous condition was confirmed by Captain Bill Musser of
the Meridian Police Department, and can be elimated by enforcing condition No. 20.
As for Councilman Nary, he had not done his home work about Wingate Lane prior to the meeting.
In conclusion, either ail the conditions for granting the Packard Estates Development, LLC be inforced as agreed upon by City
of Meridian, ACHD, developer and all concerned, or why bother to establish conditions and why have the Planning
Department?
Sincerely,
Date and Helen Shafp
V ctc—
CC: Mayor Bob Corrie
Council President-Tammey DeWeerd
City Clerk
We*--,daY, March 05, 2003 America Online: AHSHARP
Page: 1
-SAND- 1915 WALTMAN STREET
�' --
GRAVEL' MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
INC. (208) 331-9222 or 888-1666
Ship To:
Bill To: n/a
ROBERTA THOMPSON n/a
2950 N. WINGATE LANE n/a
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
n/a
Invoice
CUSTOMER
Customer No: I M 5
Invoice No:
1 1
BLADE 570 BLADE RENTAL
BLADE ROAD
Invoice subtotal
Invoice total
200.00
200.00
200.0(
200.0(
MIKE'S SAND & GHA►VEL INC.
i 20667 FRANKLIN ROAD
NAMPA, IDAHO 83687
Mike Mulchayw ._._ _ Office 030-200C
REMIT TO: Iowa Tanklm"nc.
D U DBA Dust Abatement, Inc. LocalPhone#:
P-( PO Box 1217 (208) 365-2930
ABATEMENT Ankeny, IA 50021-0975
2211 Schiller Road • Emmett, Idaho 83617
DATE INVOICE NO.
JOB LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
r
ROBE RTA TH;.C1MFS---M"
2-7-0—:510 W-T-P1j(:-jAT!F
11ERIDIA141 1Fj P'3-642,
10/15/02 ADL`200 4--.50 6AL
W0*1:10*2-7--'f--�
PURCHASE ORDER NO.
Terms: Due upon billing; 11,tz% interest charged on past due accounts. 18%Annual Percentage Rate
--'If check is postmarked after add interest charge of
(ini t Eric e
Q, u -I n t i
i b
4-59 00
T
TWVnTriR. nT 1F T TPON RECEIPT
PLEASE REMIT WITH YELLOW COPY • '*Add Interest if applicable.
c—,4 , c 11" i ?cam
D A1410 -
MIKE'S SAND & urIAVEL INC.
20667 FRANKLIN ROAD
NAMPA, IDAHO 83687
GRA
Mike Mulchay Office 939-2000
Sandy Mulchay Home 467-2329
Customer's
Order No. b a t e Z 20�
Name
ell
Address
ACCTMDSE.
I RETD.
DUAN
PRICE I AMOUNT
Our drivers will make every effort to place material where customer
designates, but -COMPANY" assumes po-leiponsibility for damage
inside curb or property line. Custornbr.agrees to terms of sale and
accepts material as is:,,
Rec'd by
VC)
SE
TOTAL
Our drivers will make every effort to place material where customer
designates, but -COMPANY" assumes po-leiponsibility for damage
inside curb or property line. Custornbr.agrees to terms of sale and
accepts material as is:,,
Rec'd by
- Invoice
-SAND- 1915 WALTMAN STREET
GRAVEL- MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
INC. (208) 331-9222 or 888-1666 Customer No: Q'
Invoice No: 060
7!
ShipTo: DALE SHARP
Bill To: DALE SHARP A/— Y,21 a �/,Z,z v
2445 WINGATE LANE 2445 WINGATE LANE
MERIDIAN, ID 83642 MERIDIAN, ID 83642
1 1 BLADE 570 BLADE RENTAL 120.00 120.00
1 1 WTREN WATER TRUCK RENTAL 100.00 100.00
BLADE AND WATER LANE
Invoice subtotal 220.00
Invoice total 220.00
MIKE'S SAND & GRAVEL INC. .
20667 FRANKLIN ROAD
NAMPA, IDAHO 83687
Mike Mulchay �,i;, 6 U t 3 6 Office 939-2000
Sandy Mulchay Home 467-2329
Customer's D
3 k Order No._
Name
Address
Yn+ \
' 1
x�
1
7�
SOLD YIi CASH
C.O.D. CHARGE ION ACCT RETOE.
PAID OUT
/OEESCRIPTION
PRICE
AMOUNT
�Q�UA
TOTAL
Our drivers will make every effort to place material where customer
designates, but "COMPANY" assumes no responsi ' y for amage
inside curb or property line. Cu er agrees to terms of ale and
accepts material as is.
Recd by
.ui,.F ;. �- :l"•� • . V 4 y •+�1. .i'i F r ;6 .i •• .f t•. '}a .,� _ y< } +♦.
47.
.A ! �•. : [. • ♦'� i _ t - .
• .I. • �' -a '! [ .i • tet. . .. f ..
C /"!E, -� is ? �--
...... .... /,2- 9,9
SAND, 1915 WALTMAN STREET -6
/AGRAm- MERIDIAN, IDAHO 836424'1j
(208) ' 362-9000 or 888.1 C�6.3
Bili To: C
Ship To:
CRCUSTOME
ustomer No:
Invoice No: 000382
BLADE 570 BLADE RENTAL 150.00 160.00
BLADE WORK AT WINGATE
LANE
Invoice subtotal 150.00
Invoice total 150M
MIKE'S SAND & GN A En INC.
206
NAMPA, IDAHO 83687
Office 939-2000
Mike Mulchay Home 467-2329
Sandy Mulchay ,
Customer's Date
Order No
Name
L
c ( r
AririrPSS
effort to place mate—,
Our driver
responsibility for damage
s will make every agrees to terms of sale and
designates, but "COMPA'ne Customeer ages
inside curb or property
accepts material as is.
Recd by
i
evIvo •1.
MIKE'S SAND & GRAVEL INC.
20667 FRANKLIN ROAD
NAMPA, IDAHO 83687
7J
Mike Mulchay Cch4-' Office 939-2000
Sandy Mulchay L/ y" Home 467-2329
Customer's
Order No. - Date�'�— 1g
Name
Address—.
i
r.
SQL,A Y 'CASH
C.O.D. CHARGE 6�NACC T MDSE. PAIDOUT
RETD.
r=
,{—QUAN. J D CRIPTIO PRICE
i
AMOUNT
f /
s
�
-;w 4- EAS
.'LL
NO STATEENT
M BE
SrWF
UNLESS RE b1E87F!!!E)
(j,
` l
TOTAL
Our drivers wiff`make every effort`fo p►ace material where customer
designates, but "COMPANY" assumes no responsibility for damage
inside curb or property line. Customer agrees to terms of sale and
accepts material as is.
Rec'd by
_ w
t roadway
i interfer-
1 circum -
o buy the
prospec-
profit.425
the cost
,f regrad-
evidence
.te courts
es by the
they are
,r is com-
ial court
t -of -way,
`unliqui-
that the
damages
d court's
,it where
;.hat they
d not be
"intelli-
v Dykes,
311 (Fla
Wilhelm,
§4.17 DAMAGES 165
Punitive Damages
A court may award punitive damages for interference with an easement.433
In order to grant punitives, the interference of the servient owner.must involve
"more than momentary thoughtlessness, inadvertence, or error of judgment,"
but rather, "such an entire want of care as to- show conscious indifference to
the rights, welfare, or safety" of the dominant owner.434
Punitives were found appropriate when a servient owner in "heedless and
reckless disregard" of the easement owner's rights "root plowed" the roadway
subject to the easement to make it impassable and threatened to shoot the ease-
ment owner in a dispute over the right.435 Even less egregious behavior can
support the award of punitives. Thus, where the servient owner built an apart-
ment blocking a right-of-way, the court awarded punitives because the servient
owner had actual and constructive notice of the easement and so demonstrated
a "wanton disregard" of the dominant owners' rights .436 Punitives were
rejected, however, when officers of the lessee of a servient parcel ignored a
prior court's order not to obstruct an easement, but there was no finding that
the conduct was malicious.411
4 ee, e.g., Can Am Indus v Firestone Tire & Rubber Co, 631 F Supp 1180 (CD Ill
986), Leclerq v Zaia, 28 Ill App 3d 738, 328 NE2d 910 (1975); MH Siegfried Real
Estate, Inc v Renfrow, 592 SW2d 488 (Mo Ct App 1979), affd in part & revd in part, 633
SW2d 272 (Mo Ct App 1982); Shors v Branch, 221 Mont 390, 720 Ptd 239 (1986):
Langhorst v Riethmiller, 52 Ohio App 2d 137, 368 NE2d 328 (1977); Consolidated
Rail Corp v MASP Equip Corp, 67 NY2d 35, 490 NE2d 514, 499 NYS2d 647 (1986);
Gerstner v Wilhelm, 584 SW2d 955 (Tex Ct App 1979); Crabbe v Verve Assocs, 549
A2d 1045 (Vt 1988).
434 Gerstner v Wilhelm, 584 SW2d 955 (Tex Ct App 1979). Accord Consolidated Rail
Corp v MASP Equip Corp, 67 NY2d 35, 490 NE2d 514, 499 NYS2d 647 (1986);
Crabbe v Verve Assocs, 549 A2d 1045 (Vt 1988).
431 Gerstner v Wilhelm, 584 SW2d 955 (Tex Ct App 1979).
436 Crabbe v Verve Assocs, 549 A2d 1045 (Vt 1988).
437 See Consolidated Rail Corp v MASP Equip Corp, 67 NY2d 35, 490 NE2d 514,
499 NYS2d 647 (1986).
AV
vier, 187
�
'S2d 275
-
rated after
Srabbe v
§4.17 DAMAGES 165
Punitive Damages
A court may award punitive damages for interference with an easement.433
In order to grant punitives, the interference of the servient owner.must involve
"more than momentary thoughtlessness, inadvertence, or error of judgment,"
but rather, "such an entire want of care as to- show conscious indifference to
the rights, welfare, or safety" of the dominant owner.434
Punitives were found appropriate when a servient owner in "heedless and
reckless disregard" of the easement owner's rights "root plowed" the roadway
subject to the easement to make it impassable and threatened to shoot the ease-
ment owner in a dispute over the right.435 Even less egregious behavior can
support the award of punitives. Thus, where the servient owner built an apart-
ment blocking a right-of-way, the court awarded punitives because the servient
owner had actual and constructive notice of the easement and so demonstrated
a "wanton disregard" of the dominant owners' rights .436 Punitives were
rejected, however, when officers of the lessee of a servient parcel ignored a
prior court's order not to obstruct an easement, but there was no finding that
the conduct was malicious.411
4 ee, e.g., Can Am Indus v Firestone Tire & Rubber Co, 631 F Supp 1180 (CD Ill
986), Leclerq v Zaia, 28 Ill App 3d 738, 328 NE2d 910 (1975); MH Siegfried Real
Estate, Inc v Renfrow, 592 SW2d 488 (Mo Ct App 1979), affd in part & revd in part, 633
SW2d 272 (Mo Ct App 1982); Shors v Branch, 221 Mont 390, 720 Ptd 239 (1986):
Langhorst v Riethmiller, 52 Ohio App 2d 137, 368 NE2d 328 (1977); Consolidated
Rail Corp v MASP Equip Corp, 67 NY2d 35, 490 NE2d 514, 499 NYS2d 647 (1986);
Gerstner v Wilhelm, 584 SW2d 955 (Tex Ct App 1979); Crabbe v Verve Assocs, 549
A2d 1045 (Vt 1988).
434 Gerstner v Wilhelm, 584 SW2d 955 (Tex Ct App 1979). Accord Consolidated Rail
Corp v MASP Equip Corp, 67 NY2d 35, 490 NE2d 514, 499 NYS2d 647 (1986);
Crabbe v Verve Assocs, 549 A2d 1045 (Vt 1988).
431 Gerstner v Wilhelm, 584 SW2d 955 (Tex Ct App 1979).
436 Crabbe v Verve Assocs, 549 A2d 1045 (Vt 1988).
437 See Consolidated Rail Corp v MASP Equip Corp, 67 NY2d 35, 490 NE2d 514,
499 NYS2d 647 (1986).
AV
A-,
I-
/."�-ems �w .�.'�c..�/f •_�-•�
MAYOR
Robert D. Corrie
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Tammy deWeerd
William L. M. Nary
Cherie McCandless
Keith Bird
February 24, 2003
Dale and Helen Sharp
2445 N. Wingate Ln.
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Enforcement of Packard Acres No. 2 Subdivision Final Plat Order
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sharp:
The purpose of this letter is to summarize my understanding of the City Council's direction
regarding enforcement of the subject application's conditions, as discussed at the February 11,
2003 Pre -City Council Meeting.
First, I believe there was agreement amongst the Mayor and council members that the developer,
Packard Estates Development, LLC, must adhere to every condition placed upon them. To date,
there have been no special waivers or modifications granted by the City of Meridian to the
adopted Order for Packard Acres No. 2 Final Plat. There is consensus on this issue. It is no
different than any other plat the City of Meridian approves.
Second, of the 32 conditions listed in the Order (dated 1-16-01), it is my understanding that you
believe three of the conditions (items #15, #20 and #22) have not been adequately complied
with. I will address each of these items below:
On Item # 15 (perimeter fencing), based upon Councilman Nary's statements at the
February 11th meeting, staff does not intend to require the developer to construct a fence
on the south side of Challis Lane, on the north boundary of the so-called "Reichert
property" (5 acres). This is because we have an approved fencing plan that shows no
perimeter fence in this location. An approved plan is deemed to be a "written" response,
as allowed for under condition #6 of the same Order.
On Item # 20 (E Challis gates), Mayor Corrie stated (on page 13 of the minutes) that he
believes ACHD should be involved because of the public right-of-way issue. I called
ACHD's Development Services staff after the meeting and was told that on February 27,
2002, the ACHD Commission held a public hearing (at which you both provided
testimony) and at that meeting the Commission reversed their decision of the October 18,
1995 preliminary plat that the gates had to be constructed. Their reversal resulted in the
33 EAST IDAHO - MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-4433 - Fax (208) 887-4813 - City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 - Human Resources Fax (208) 288-1193
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501
CITY OF l�lf..
PARKS & RECREATION
(208 888-3579 - Fax 898-5501
PUBLIC WORKS
IDAHO )/
(208) 898-5500 -Fax 887-1297
y
SCF
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
tiTFR°/
(208)887-2211 - Fax 887-1297
T aha (SINCE
. '' 1903
PLANNING AND ZONING
(208) 884-5533 - Fax 888-6854
Dale and Helen Sharp
2445 N. Wingate Ln.
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Enforcement of Packard Acres No. 2 Subdivision Final Plat Order
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sharp:
The purpose of this letter is to summarize my understanding of the City Council's direction
regarding enforcement of the subject application's conditions, as discussed at the February 11,
2003 Pre -City Council Meeting.
First, I believe there was agreement amongst the Mayor and council members that the developer,
Packard Estates Development, LLC, must adhere to every condition placed upon them. To date,
there have been no special waivers or modifications granted by the City of Meridian to the
adopted Order for Packard Acres No. 2 Final Plat. There is consensus on this issue. It is no
different than any other plat the City of Meridian approves.
Second, of the 32 conditions listed in the Order (dated 1-16-01), it is my understanding that you
believe three of the conditions (items #15, #20 and #22) have not been adequately complied
with. I will address each of these items below:
On Item # 15 (perimeter fencing), based upon Councilman Nary's statements at the
February 11th meeting, staff does not intend to require the developer to construct a fence
on the south side of Challis Lane, on the north boundary of the so-called "Reichert
property" (5 acres). This is because we have an approved fencing plan that shows no
perimeter fence in this location. An approved plan is deemed to be a "written" response,
as allowed for under condition #6 of the same Order.
On Item # 20 (E Challis gates), Mayor Corrie stated (on page 13 of the minutes) that he
believes ACHD should be involved because of the public right-of-way issue. I called
ACHD's Development Services staff after the meeting and was told that on February 27,
2002, the ACHD Commission held a public hearing (at which you both provided
testimony) and at that meeting the Commission reversed their decision of the October 18,
1995 preliminary plat that the gates had to be constructed. Their reversal resulted in the
33 EAST IDAHO - MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-4433 - Fax (208) 887-4813 - City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 - Human Resources Fax (208) 288-1193
gates on E. Challis being removed due to being an obstruction of a public street. To date,
the City of Meridian has not amended its January 16, 2001 Final Plat Order to reflect the
ACHD Commission's action on February 27, 2002. I would refer you to Idaho Code 40-
1310, which states, in part, that highway districts have jurisdiction over all rights-of-way
within highway systems. In my opinion, this decision by the ACHD Commission
supercedes the City's ability to enforce this condition.
On Item # 22 (damages to Wingate Lane), Councilwoman deWeerd asked (on page 12 of
the minutes) that you provide a picture of Wingate Lane in the pre -development
condition so that we can determine if the lane was damaged by the developer or
contractors. You (Helen) asked if an aerial photo was available and said that you did not
have such a photo. The City does not have access to aerial photos or any other evidence
that clearly depict the surface condition of Wingate Lane prior to the approval of Packard
Acres No. 2 Subdivision. The Planning & Zoning Department is fully prepared to enforce
this condition but only after we have the appropriate evidence to support our position.
Finally, Councilman Nary summarized the issues as follows (on page 14 of the minutes): "The
Planning and Zoning Department should determine whether or not there is enough (information)
to go forward and what the process would be to enforce these conditions on the developer. It is
the City's responsibility to do that, so you were correct ... The problem I think that you are
having is that you and Planning and Zoning don't agree as to how far out of compliance they are
and that's not something at least today we can mediate until it's heard by Planning and Zoning
and the Commission and then it comes here."
Therefore, if you would like the Planning Department to pursue any other course of action
beyond what I have stated herein, I would like to request a written letter from you stating your
concerns and/or disagreements with the items I've outlined and any additional evidence
demonstrating a violation of an approved condition. I will then follow-up with the Mayor, City
Council and City Attorney to take the appropriate actions.
Sincerely,
Brad Hawkins -Clark
Interim Planning Director
Cc: Mayor Bob Corrie
City Council
City Clerk
Packard Estates Development, LLC
r -
Dave McKinnon
From:
Stacy Wirick [stacy c@parkpointe.com]
Sent:
Monday, April 28, 2003 9:57 AM
To:
'mckinnod@meridiancity.org'
Subject:
FW: failure notice
Dear Dave:
Please accept this memo as our written assurance that we will have the sewer lift station
at Packard Acres #2 removed from the site no later than June 15, 2003, at which time we
will have the landscaping outlined in the original landscape plan completed.
Should you have any questions regarding this memo or our intent, please do not hesitate to
contact me at 794-7692 mor 323-4188. I appreciate your willingness to work with us on this
matter.
Sincerely,
Stacy Wirick
Property Manager for
Packard Estates Developers, LLC.
Dave I had tried to send this to you on Friday but had written your e-mail address down
wrong. Sorry for the delay. Have a great day. Stacy
-----Original Message -----
From: MAILER-DAEMON@fiberpipe.com [mailto:MAILER-DAEMON@fiberpipe.com]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 4:16 PM
To: stacy@parkpointe.com
Subject: failure notice
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at fiberpipe.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a
permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<McKinnonD@meridiancity.org>:
Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. vpopmail (#5.1.1)
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
Return -Path: <stacy@parkpointe.com>
Received: (qmail 28241 invoked by uid 2006); 25 Apr 2003 22:15:51 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO fiberpipe.net) (172.25.173.12)
by spooll.boidmz.fiberpipe.net with SMTP; 25 Apr 2003 22:15:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 25251 invoked by uid 2005); 25 Apr 2003 22:15:51 -0000
Received: from stacy@parkpointe.com by smtpl with qmail-scanner-0.90
(uvscan: v4.0.50/v4054. . Clean. Processed in 0.319471 secs); 25/04/2003 16:15:50
Received: from mail.parkpointe.com (HELO pprnt.parkpointe.com)
(209.210.58.67)
by smtp2.boidmz.fiberpipe.net with SMTP; 25 Apr 2003 22:15:50 -0000
Received: by PPRNT with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
id <J4GJ7ZL1>; Fri, 25 Apr 2003 16:15:05 -0600
1
Message-ID:<11159E3EALbFD2llB565204C4F4F5020B2915B@PPPL,-,
From: Stacy Wirick <stacy@parkpointe.com>
To: "'McKinnonD@meridiancity.org'" <McKinnonD@meridiancity.org>
Cc: Craig Groves <rcgroves@parkpointe.com>
Subject: Packard Acres #2
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 16:15:04 -0600
MIME -Version: 1.0
X -Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content -Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="---- = NextPart 001 O1C30B78.1F49BODO"
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format,
some or all of this message may not be legible.
------ _=_NextPart_001_01C30B78.1F49BOD0
Content -Type: text/plain
Dear Dave:
Please accept this memo as our written assurance that we will have the sewer lift station
at Packard Acres #2 removed from the site no later than June 15, 2003, at which time we
will have the landscaping outlined in the original landscape plan completed.
Should you have any questions regarding this memo or our intent, please do not hesitate to
contact me at 794-7692 mor 323-4188. I appreciate your willingness to work with us on this
matter. Sincerely,
Stacy Wirick
Property Manager for
Packard Estates Developers, LLC.
-------
=_NextPart_001_O1C30B78.1F49BOD0
Content -Type: text/html
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META HTTP-
EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"> <TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY
style="COLOR: #000000; FONT -FAMILY: "> <DIV><SPAN class=450441022-25042003><FONT
face=Arial size=2>Dear
Dave:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=450441022-25042003><FONT face=Arial size=2>Please accept this
memo as our written assurance that we will have the sewer lift station at
Packard Acres #2 removed from the site no later than June 15, 2003, at which
time we will have the landscaping outlined in the original landscape plan
completed. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=450441022-25042003><FONT face=Arial size=2>Should you have any
questions regarding this memo or our intent, please do not hesitate to contact
me at 794-7692 mor 323-4188.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=450441022-25042003><FONT face=Arial size=2>I appreciate your
willingness to work with us on this matter.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=
450441022-25042003><FONT face=Arial
size=2>Sincerely,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV align=left><FONT face="Lucida Handwriting"><STRONG>Stacy
Wirick</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV align=left><STRONG><FONT face="Lucida Handwriting">Property
Manager <SPAN class=450441022-25042003>for</SPAN></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV align=left><STRONG><FONT face="Lucida Handwriting"><SPAN
class=450441022-25042003>Packard Estates Developers,
LLC.</SPAN></FONT></STRONG></DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
------ = NextPart 001 OIC30B78.1F49BODO--
�, ,.0-..,
�� ��� Tom; � ����
e�l
CN,7-
gat
lZIECIErvq)
AUG 0 8 2000
CITY OF AMRIDMN
PLANNING & ZONING
RECEIVED
SEP 12 2002
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
North Wingate Lane Road Association
Meridian, Idaho 83642
September 10, 2002
To Whom It May Concern:
We, as members of the Wingate Lane Road Association wish to bring to the attention of the Ada County
Highway Commissioners, The City of Meridian and the developers of Packard Estates that our private lane
is being used by workmen and residents of both Chamberlain Estates and Packard Estates as a shortcut.
This is in direct violation of everything we as residents and owners of Wingate Lane have been promised.
It seems that the developers of Packard Estates have forgotten that they are only one entity of ownership on
the lane. The rest of us pay dues to maintain the lane, the developers have not.
The promise of no access has been made in numerous hearings and meetings with the ACRD, Meridian
City Council, and Mr. Edmonds and Mr. Grow of Packard Estates. Mr. Grow and Mr. Edmonds promised
Mrs. Thompson and Mr. Sharp last fall that a fence would be built on both sides of Wingate Lane with no
side -gate access. When the fence was built, three gates were included.
We now find that the lane has been crossed over with a paved street and sidewalks, leaving the lane open to
easy access to anyone who decides to travel on it. We observe that the lane is being accessed both from
Ustick and from the subdivision. Trash is being left by those who have no interest in this area except for a
quick passage. L
We never want nor intend for this lane to be a main thoroughfare. We expect the promises of privacy to be
kept. Please inform us as to how you will do this.
Owners of Wingate Lane Road Association,
'SEP, -12' 02 (THU) 16:26 JW'+K.-L-SCOTT-601 SE
6223 N. Discovery Way, Suite 120, Boise, ID. 83713
Phone (208)323-4188 Fax (208)323-4102
TD-- 83230128
P. 001
10 � 70 �
To: I -C)- a lll�S LiL�� From: Stacy Wirick
Fax: %%% 4 PagesA including cover
Phone: 3 Date:
Re: f-�Uo 1 es' 1� CC.
❑ Urgent O For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle
'red , 0
rn.e &ded, Anae ajd
�pNiclAc'a�bu� ��'r��i,�b dor �Jaa(�a✓Gt� �-es`#a
6XN
Odd14)m `� qk2
Gaud l�al�;- �se 6-iyu�u�
`SEP. -1?' 02 (THU) 16:26 JAL -SCOTT -BOISE TDA• 83230128 P. 002
CREEKSIDE LANDSCAPE & SPRINKLERS
2536 E.1biEADOWWOOD CR.T. M- El IDIAN, ID 65642
A87-1$$4
DATE: Sept. 06, 2002
Proposal Submitted To.
Craig Groves/John L. Scott
Packard Estates L.L.C.
PROPOSAL
JOB # Packard Estates
Work To Be Performed At
Phase #2 Meadows Detention Pond
Lot 1 Block 8
We hereby propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the
completion of,
Installation of Custom Automatic Rainbird Irrigation System, We use
commercial Rainbird materials which are guaranteed for five years. For the
larger areas we use Rainbird T -bird rotors. We will install a Rainbird ESP
Outdoor Automatic timer. We will enclose the valve boxes with % drain rock
to keep the mud and debris out of the valve box. We propose to irrigate the
entire Detention area for the sum of ($1,950). Aprox. 7,000 Sq. Ft.
• Install Sod at .30 Sq. Ft. Premium Cloverdale Bluegrass/Rye blend Turf
Estimated Sq. Ft. 7,000 Sq. Ft for entire detention park ($2,100),
• Grading will be billed out at $50/hr. for bobcat grading, Cat/Dozer work at
$75/hr and hourly labor for Fine Grade raking $28/hr. We propose a Rough
estimate ($350). Estimate 25 yds. of Topsoil at $10/Vds. ($250).
• Landscape per the tree list: 7-2" trees with cut out tree rings and soil aid
($1,715).
• Weed barrier and drain rock in sand filter area ($NA).
All work areas to be kept clean at all times. Irrigation is -guaranteed for One Year.
All material is Guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance
with the drawings and specifications submitted for above work and completed in a substantial
workmanlike manner for the sum of Dollars ($6,365). Included 25 yds. of topsoil.
Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs, will be exerted only upon written orders,
and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate_ All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or
delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by
Workmen's Compensation Insurance and Liability.
Authorized
Signatures.
BSEP. -12' 02 (THU) 16:26 JAL -SCOTT -B01 SE TEl,�83230128 P.003
CR SIDE LANDSCAPE & SPRINKLE,RS
2536 E.1VIEADOWWOOD CRT. MEWDIAN,1D 63642
$$7-Y AA4
PROPOSAL
DATE: Sept. 06, 2002 JOB;* Packard Estates
Proposal Submitted To: Work To Be Performed_ At
Craig Groves/John L. Scott Phase #2 Meadows Detention Pond
Packard Estates L.L.C. Lot 32 Block 2
We hereby propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the
completion of:
• Installation of Custom Automatic Rainbird Irrigation System. We use
commercial Rainbird materials which are guaranteed for five years. For the
larger areas we use Rainbird T -bird rotors. We will install a Rainbird ESP
Outdoor Automatic timer. We will enclose the valve boxes with 3/4 drain rock
to keep the mud and debris out of the valve box. We propose to irrigate the
entire Detention area for the sum of ($2,500). Aprox. 11,500 Sq. Ft.
• Install Sod at .30 Sq. Ft. Premium Cloverdale Bluegrass/Rye blend Turf
Estimated Sq. Ft. 10,000 Sq. Ft for entire detention park ($3,000).
• Grading will be billed out at $50/hr. for bobcat grading, Cat/Dozer work at
$75/hr and hourly labor for Fine Grade raking $28/hr. We propose a Rough
estimate ($750). Estimate 40-50 yds. of Topsoil at $10/Yds. ($450).
• Landscape per the tree list: 13-2" trees with cut out tree rings and soil aid
($3,185).
• 'Weed barrier and drain rock in sand filter area ($400).
All work areas to be kept clean at all times. Irrigation is guaranteed for One Year.
All material is Guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance
with the drawings and specifications submitted for above work and completed in a substantial
workmanlike manner for the sum of Dollars ($10,285). Included 45 yds, of topsoil.
Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs, will be exerted only upon written orders,
and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or
delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by
Workmen's Compensation insurance and Liability.
Authorized
Signatures
-SEP. -1.2' 02(THU) 16:27 JP`4,L-SC0TT-B01SE TE?�83230128 P. 004
CREEKSllDE LANDSCAPE & SPRINKLERS
2536 E. MEADOW WOOD CRT.NEWMAN, ID As642
AA7-1 AA4
PROPOSAL
DATE: Sept. 06, 2002 JOB # Packard Estates
Proposal Submitted To: Work To Be Performed At
Craig Groves/John L. Scott Phase #2 Meadows Detention Pond
Packard Estates L.L.C. Block 10/Lift Station
We hereby propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the
completion of:
Installation of. Custom Automatic Rainbird Irrigation System. We use
commercial Rainbird materials which are guaranteed for five years. For the
larger areas we use Rainbird T -bird rotors. We will install a Rainbird ESP
Outdoor Automatic timer. We will enclose the v'al've boxes with % drain rock
to keep the mud and debris out of the valve box. We propose to irrigate the
entire Detention area for the sum of ($4,450). Aprox. 22,000 Sq. Ft.
• Install Sod at .30 Sq. Ft, Premium Cloverdale Bluegrass/Rye blend Turf
Estimated Sq. Ft. 21,000 Sq. Ft for entire detention park ($6,300).
• Grading will be billed out at $50/hr. for bobcat grading, Cat/Dozer work at
$75/hr and hourly labor for Fine Grade raking $28/hr. We propose a Rough
estimate ($1,100). Estimate 120-150 yds. of Topsoil at $10/Yds. ($1,500).
• Landscape per the tree list. 21-2" trees with cut out tree rings and soil aid
($4,975). 10 4-5' Arborvitae ($720),
• Weed barrier and drain rock in sand filter area ($575).
All work areas to be kept clean at all times. Irrigation is guaranteed for One Year.
All material is Guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance
with the drawings and specifications submitted for above work and completed in a substantial
workmanlike manner for the sum of Dollars(29 , 620 . ) Included 150 yds, of topsoil.
Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs, will be exerted only upon written orders,
and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or
delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire and other necessary insurance_ Our workers are fully covered by
Workmen's Compensation Insurance and Liability.
Authorized
Signatures
-SEP. -1'2' 02(THU) 16:27 JQAX,,L-SCOTT-BOISE
Jar, 03 02 11:39a
TEI,- Z 83230128
TEALEWS LAND 2501 Bogus Basin Road, Boise, Idaho 83702
SURVEYING (208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 885-0696
FAX 'T'PL�SMITTAL
To: Stacy Wirick Date. January 3, 2002
Co_- Jo1n7. L Scott Project No. 1408-2
Fax No. 672-8201
Transmitted By- David Marks
Reference: Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 — Square footage of common areas
Pages transmitted (Including tlus cover sheet) - I
Below are the areas of the conn -ion lots in Packard Acres Su4jiV—m-6tj No. 2 -
Lo � 9
Lot 33, Block 1 C
Lot ock S 6,648 s.F.
Lot 1 Block i0 23.415 s,f,1
Lot 1, Block 11 81 .9. f. -- $'rA
The total square footage for the common Lots is 60,642 square feet.
Respectfully,
:David N. Marks, PE/PLS
Tealey's IlAmd Surveying
P. 005
P_ 1
-SEP. -1'2' 02(THU) 16:27 JO+iA�-,L-SCOTT-BOISE TEJ,- Q83230128 P. 006
City of Meridlial., Building Department
uriglhl/+li 200 E Carlton, Suite 100
ZAlfMCP"IT
������,�.�,PN L#��, Meridian ID 8364?_
PH 887-2211 / FAX 887-1 297
Bl.lilding Permit W Page:1
Permit Number- BP1999-322 Printed_ 12/20/1999
Approved:
Applicant: PACK(ARD ESTATES DEVELOPMENT
6223 N.DISCOVRY WAY, SUITE 120
Boise, ID 83713
Parcel Number: PARC1999-5673
1 PACKARD #1 & 92
MERIDIAN, fD 83642
Legal Description:
PROPERTY OWNER
Zoning:
Addition:
i3lock: Lot(s):
Section:
Township:
Range:
/area:
Voice:
Fax:
Local License: State Llcen:.e:
Fees and Receipts:
Number Descriptlol'r
FEE1999-1878 Water Assesment Fee's
Fees Total:
RCPT1999-564
AWrlount
$ 5,632.00
$ 5,632.00
$5,(332.00
Receipts Total: $;,632.00
Construction Value: $0.00 Structure Use: Start Date- 00/00/0600
Purpose: Water Assessment fee's End Date: 00/00/0000
impervious Surfaces
0.00 Porch/Wallc:
0.00 Other:
0.00 Total:
0.00
0.01)
MOD
Floor Areas
Living Spac=e:
0.00
Basemenustorage:
0.00
House;
Garage:
0.00
Porches:
0.00
Garage:
Decks:
0.00
Other:
0.00
Driveways:
Total Area:
0.00
Site Area:
0.00
Structure Area:
D -DD
p.3rcentage of Site:
impervious Surfaces
0.00 Porch/Wallc:
0.00 Other:
0.00 Total:
0.00
0.01)
MOD
-SEP,'- Y2' 02 (THU) 16 : 27
dq.U�- L -SCOTT -BOISE
TEy:-2,083230128
P. 007
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Application for Water & Sewer Assessment or Reassessment
mportant: Complete all items, check 311 applicable spaces -
Location
Su rsion Addl'oss: Block Lot:
4
i alae .,i # l o
of
Building
ow Cc!y 011 f`�- CJ L-1 City Sewer
Proposed Use: See Item 6 bel� M
Septic Tank
Residential U Commercial LI Industrial EA Other
Q2� -
Owner: 1P,s L -L -r- Phone No.
Phone No.
Contractor:
Plumber: Phone No.
?hone No.
Architect:
Residential: Commercial: Industrial:
_ New Structure Recreational/Amusement _ Food/Milk Proce5sinc7
_— Existing ___ __ Church/Religious Ong_ Plating/Metals
Remodel Service Station Warehouse/Storage
Addition Car wash/Garage Othor - Specify
Single -Family Office/Bank/Professional
Two or Mote Family School/Library
_
Number of Units__ Other - Specify Note: Plans shall be furnished
is Other - Specify %A-ke-4' for all commercial and
Floor Space, Sq. Ft. Industrial Buildings
All fees shall be paid to the City of Meridian whoa building perrTdl is obtained.
3. No Water Meter will thn instnklied prior to approval of all inspections and payment of lees.
I_ inspection required at water meter yoke where plumber makes connection, at connection of sprinkler system and al location
of backflow prevention device.
10_ Person signing application is responsible for notification for inspection, and/or deficient materials or workmanship by sub-
contractors -
1. For Meter Installation call L969-5242.
Signature of Applicant: ress an tune o.: Date -
'or Office use Onl Selow This Line Date received b Water De t.
Approved
Amount Due
Number of
Approved
B - Date
Permit Fee For
Equly- Conn
B.Q.A.
Inspection Comments
tZ--7-,m-cult
Water Assesgment
$
S
Number or Connections _
Size of
Meter Approved
Latecomer Assessment
Lawn Sprinkler Connection
Backflow Device Connection
Fire S rinkler Connection
Backflow Device Connection
Approved
Dale BOA
No. Equiv.
Amount
Inspection Comments
By
Conn.
ewer hook-up
atecomer Assess.
-
_
btal
x $ _+ $ -
olal Due
;t5 4'32 - o0
_
gate Meter Installed _ by, Name
fly No. Mfg. No_ Account No.
mount Paid Date lo`Zrte- o
Size Make________
Reading �,� ---
AN
** TX STATUS REPORT **
DATE TIME TO/FROM
0823 10:42 3234102
--------------------------
AS OF AUG 23 °02 10=42 PAGE.01
PUBLIC WORKS
MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDU STATUS
EC --S 00,38" 001 044 OK
Fax Memo
To: Stacey Wirek, Packard Estates F-23 _q 102-
From.
otFrom: Brad Watson, P.E.
City Engineer
CC: Shari Stiles, File
Pages: 1
Date: 8232002
Re: Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Stag,
In response to your voice mail message yesterday, I did correspond with Shari about the
pathway requirements and conditions for Packard Acres No. 2. The asphalt pathway is
required according to Planning & Zoning with specific reference to Site Specific Staff
Comment Nos. 14 and 21.
Consequently, plans, surety & applicable license agreement with NMID for the pathway will
be required.
Thanks,
X-�
0 Page 1
Frmr the dc* of
Brad Wrdaq P F-
City
Maidiae Public Works Dcpemmm
660 E Was awwet 1-=�. Suite 200
Maidiam Idaho 83642
(208)898-5500
Fax (208)887-1297
w��t+Qrreridinncity-org
SEP.-23'02(MON) 09:57 JOHN -L -SCOTT -BOISE TEL:2083230128 P.004
2536 E. Mf-ADOW WOOD CRT. MERIDIAN, ID 63642
867-1884
PROPOSAL
DATE: Sept. 06, 2002 JOB # Packard Estates
Proposal Submitted To: Work To Be Performed At
Craig Groves/John L. Scott Phase #2 Meadows Detention Pond
Packard Estates L.L.C. Lot l Block 8
We hereby propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the
completion of:
• Installation of Custom Automatic Rainbird Irrigation System. We use
commercial Rainbird materials which are guaranteed for five years. For the
larger areas we use Rainbird T -bird rotors. We will install a Rainbird ESP
Outdoor Automatic timer. We will enclose the valve boxes with 3/4 drain rock
to keep the mud and debris out of the valve box. We propose to irrigate the
entire Detention area for the sum of ($1,950). Aprox. 7,000 Sq. Ft.
• Install Sod at .30 Sq. Ft. Premium Cloverdale Bluegrass/Rye blend Turf
Estimated Sq. Ft. 7,000 Sq, Ft for entire detention park ($2,100).
• Grading will be billed out at $50/hr. for bobcat grading, Cat/Dozer work at
$75/hr and hourly labor for Fine Grade raking $28/hr. We propose a Rough
estimate ($350). Estimate 25 yds. of Topsoil at $10/Yds. ($250).
• Landscape per the tree list: 7-2" trees with cut out tree rings and soil aid
(S1,715).
• Wecd barrier and drain rock in sand filter area ($NA).
All work areas to be kept clean at all times. Irrigation is guaranteed for One Year.
All material is Guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance
with the drawings and specifications submitted for above work and completed in a substantial
worlcman ike manner for the sum of Dollars ($6,365). Included 25 yds. of topsoil.
Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs, will be exerted only upon written orders,
and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or
delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by
Workmen's Compensation insurance and Liability.
Authorized
Signatures
RVIEW APPpO
BY
SE p 2 3 2002
ME8,ZP'
O NG MT
SEP 23 102 10=33 2083230128 PAGE.04
SEP. -23' 02 (MON) 04:57 JOHN -L -SCOTT -BOISE TEL:2083230128 P. 005
'---%1 1-6-1
CREEKSI E LANDSCAPE & SPRINKLERS
2536 E. 1FJ F-ADOSl1 W' GOD, CRT. MERIDIAN, ID 83642
887-1$$4
PROPOSAL
DATE: Sept. 06, 2002 JOB # Packard Estates
Proposal Submitted To: Work To Be Performed At
Craig Groves/John L. Scott Phase 42 Meadows Detention Pond
Packard Estates L.L.C. Lot 32 Block 2
We hereby propose to famish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the
completion of:
Installation of Custom Automatic Rainbird Irrigation System. We use
commercial Rainbird materials which are guaranteed for five years. For the
larger areas we use Rainbird T -bird rotors. We will install a Rainbird ESP
Outdoor Automatic timer. We will enclose the valve boxes with 114 drain rock
to keep the mud and debris out of the valve box. We propose to irrigate the
entire Detention area for the sum of ($2,500). Aprox. 11,500 Sq. Ft.
• Install Sod at .30 Sq. Ft. Premium Cloverdale. Bluegrass/Rye blend Turf
Estimated Sq. Ft. 10,000 Sq. Ft for entire detention park ($3,000).
• Grading will be billed out at $50/hr. for bobcat grading, Cat/Dozer work at
S75/hr and hourly labor for Fine Grade raking $28/hr. We propose a Rough
estimate ($750). Estimate 40-50 yds. of Topsoil at $10/Yds. ($450).
• Landscape per the tree list; 13-2" trees with cut out tree rings and soil aid
($3,185).
• Weed barrier and drain rock in sand filter area ($400).
All work areas to be kept clean at all times. Irrigation is guaranteed for One Year.
All material is Guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance
with the drawings and specifications submitted for above work and completed in a substantial
workmanlike manner for the stun of Dollars ($10,285). Included 45 yds. of topsoil.
Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs, will be exerted only upon written orders,
and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or
delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by
Workmen's Compensation Insurance and Liability.
Authorized
Signatures
ri;: W APPROVAL
S EP 2 3 2007
MEANNING
& ZONING DEPT-
SEP
EFT
SEP 23 '02 10:33 2083230128 PAGE.05
SEP. -2312 XN) 09:57 JOHN -L -SCOTT -BOISE TEL:2083230128 P. 006
CR E.KSIDE LANDSCAPE & SPMKLERS
2536 E. MP�DOW WOOD COT. M1rRIMA , ID 83642
667-166-'r
PROPOSAL
DATE: Sept. 06, 2002 JOB # Packard Estates
Proposal Submitted To; Work To Be Performed At
Craig Groves/John L. Scott Phase 42 Meadows Detention Pond
Packard Estates L.L.C. Block 10/Lift Station
We hereby propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the
completion of:
• Installation of Custom Automatic Rainbird Irrigation System. We use
commercial Rainbird materials which are guaranteed for five years. For the
larger areas we use Rainbird T -bird rotors. We will install a Rainbird ESP
Outdoor Automatic timer. We will enclose the valve boxes with % drain rock
to keep the mud and debris out of the valve box. We propose to irrigate the
entire Detention area for the swn of ($4,450). Aprox. 22,000 Sq. Ft.
• Install Sod at .30 Sq. Ft. Premium Cloverdale Bluegrass/Rye blend Turf
Estimated Sq. Ft. 21,000 Sq. Ft for entire detention park ($6,300).
• Grading will be billed out. at $50/hr. for bobcat grading, Cat/Dozer work at
$75/hr and hourly labor for Fine Grade raking S28/hr. We propose a Rough
estimate ($1,100). Estimate 120-150 yds. of Topsoil at $1ONds. ($1,500).
• Landscape per the tree list: 21-2" trees with cut out tree rings and soil aid
($4,975). 10 4-5' Arborvitae ($720).
• Weed barrier and drain rock in sand filter area ($575).
All work areas to be kept clean at all times. Irrigation is guaranteed for One Year.
All material is Guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance
with the drawings and specifications submitted for above work and completed in a substantial
workmanlike manner for the sum of Dollars (19, 620 . ) Included 150 yds. of topsoil.
Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs, will be exerted only upon written orders,
and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or
delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by
Workmen's Compensation insurance and Liability.
Authorizedt1ty w j pprmaVU
Signatures u.._,.... __
� a 3 zoos
MENDEP
&
MERIDIAN
T
SEP
23 102 10:34 2083230128 PAGE.06
/"N1
/'N
Fax Memo
To: Pat Tealey, PLS, Tealey's Land Surveying (385-0696)
From: Brad Watson, RE
�
City Engineer
CC: File, Stacy Wirick (323-4102)
Pages: 3
Date: 8/5/2002
Re: Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
Following are my initial plat review comments.
Please call Karie in my office or the City Clerk's office if you need a copy of the Order of
Conditional Approval of Final Plat.
From the desk of.. .
Br" Watson, Py—
City
_ —City Engineer
Meridian Public Works Departrn ert
660 E. Watertower Lane, Suite 200
Meridian, Idaho 83642
(208)898-5500
Fax (208)887-1297
-asmb@m-idimcity.org
0 Page 1
3) Our project tracking shows no final approvals for installation of water, sewer,
fencing, pressurized irrigation, landscaping, fencing or streetlights. A letter of
credit for these items must be provided to the City Clerk, substantiated by
copies of contractor's bids, prior to plat signature. Surety for all items must
be 110% of the bid except that streetlights may at $1500 each if they will be
standard type (Site Specific staff comment No. 5).
Please submit all surety items directly to me and I will route the fencing and
landscaping items to Planning & Zoning Department.
4) Detailed landscaping plans for all common areas and pathway details must
be approved by the Planning & Zoning Department prior to plat signature. I
do not yet have confirmation from P&Z that this has be done (Site Specific
staff comment No. 14).
5) Provide revised detailed fencing and gate plans. The irrigation plans have
been approved by the downstream water users (Site Specific staff comment
No. 15).
6) Provide signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline
elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established
normal ground water elevation (Site Specific staff comment No. 17).
7) The final plat conditions require a "release of dominant parcel interest in the
private lane easement" be recorded prior to plat signature. The conditions
h:\subl\packard acres #2.tealeys.final plat.8-5-02.memo.doc
660 E. Watertower Ln., Suite 200 Meridian, Idaho 83642
Public Works (208) 898-5500 Building (208) 887-2211
Fax(208)887-1297
CITY OF MERILIAN
GARY D. SMITH, P.E.
MAYOR
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
PUBLIC WORKS / BUILDING DEPARTMENT ROBERT D. CORRIE
BRAD R. WATSON, P.E.
COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY ENGINEER
KEITH BIRD
TAMMY DE WEERD
CHERIE MCCANDLESS
WILLIAM L.M. NARY
TO:
Pat Tealey, PLS, Tealey's Land Surveying (385-0696)
FROM:
Brad Watson
CC:
File, Shari Stiles
DATE:
8/5/2002
SUBJECT:
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
1 completed a review of the plat and project file and have the following comments:
General Comments
1)
Please provide irrigated common area calculations for computing water
assessment fees for the secondary irrigation connection to the domestic
water system. Payment of these fees is required prior to plat signature (Site
Specific staff comment No. 2).
2)
Compaction tests for any and all filled lots must be submitted (Site Specific
staff comment #3).
3) Our project tracking shows no final approvals for installation of water, sewer,
fencing, pressurized irrigation, landscaping, fencing or streetlights. A letter of
credit for these items must be provided to the City Clerk, substantiated by
copies of contractor's bids, prior to plat signature. Surety for all items must
be 110% of the bid except that streetlights may at $1500 each if they will be
standard type (Site Specific staff comment No. 5).
Please submit all surety items directly to me and I will route the fencing and
landscaping items to Planning & Zoning Department.
4) Detailed landscaping plans for all common areas and pathway details must
be approved by the Planning & Zoning Department prior to plat signature. I
do not yet have confirmation from P&Z that this has be done (Site Specific
staff comment No. 14).
5) Provide revised detailed fencing and gate plans. The irrigation plans have
been approved by the downstream water users (Site Specific staff comment
No. 15).
6) Provide signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline
elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established
normal ground water elevation (Site Specific staff comment No. 17).
7) The final plat conditions require a "release of dominant parcel interest in the
private lane easement" be recorded prior to plat signature. The conditions
h:\subl\packard acres #2.tealeys.final plat.8-5-02.memo.doc
660 E. Watertower Ln., Suite 200 Meridian, Idaho 83642
Public Works (208) 898-5500 Building (208) 887-2211
Fax(208)887-1297
8) also require providing a recorded copy of a deed restriction that prohibits
access to Wingate Lane prior to applying for building permits (Site Specific
staff comment No. 23).
9) Submit copies of the proposed OCR's to the City Attorney's office for review
(Site Specific staff comment No. 24).
Finally, Site Specific staff comment No. 21 requires a pathway along the South Slough.
The language in that condition is vague and I will meet with Planning & Zoning staff to
resolve.
Plat Comments
1) Change year of plat to "2002".
2) Insert instrument numbers for sewer and drainage easements and
development agreement (in plat notes).
I can sign the plat and forward it to the City Clerk for his signature as soon as the above
items are addressed.
hAsubl\packard acres #2.tealeys.final plat.8-5-02.memo.doc
MAYOR
Robert D. Corrie
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Ron Anderson
Keith Bird
Tammy deWeerd
Cherie McCandless
December 20, 2001
HUB OF TREASURE VALL-
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218
Packard Estates Development, LLC
6223 N. Discovery, Ste. 120
Boise, ID 83713
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208)288-2499 • Fax 288-2501
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208)887-2211 • Fax 887-1297
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854
RE: Final Plat Time Extension Approval on Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter is to confirm that the City of Meridian's City Council approved the Final Plat
Time Extension application for the subject property at their 12/18/01 meeting. The Final
Plat must be recorded by January 16, 2003.
Sincerely,
CITY OF MERIDIAN
C�C5
Shari Stiles
Planning Director/Zoning Administrator
cc: Pat Tealey, Tealey's Land Surveying
CITY OF MERIDIAN
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
November 19, 2001
Brad Echeverria
Echeverria Construction, Inc.
Brad Watson, PE
City Engineer
Packard Subdivision No. 2 — Lot Line Adjustment, Lots 12 & 13, Block 5
Enclosed are the following:
These are transmitted:
❑ For Your Information ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ For Your Use
❑ As Requested ® For Action Specified Below
Remarks:
There are two items to address on the drawing: 1) the parcel number and area call -outs on Lot
12 are not shown and 2) the distance the lot line is being moved must be shown.
Please call if you have any questions.
CC: Shari Stiles, File Signed:
660 E. Watertower Lane, Suite 200 Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: (208) 898-5500 Fax. (208) 887-1297
MAYOR
Robert D. Corrie
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Ron Anderson
Keith Bird
Tammy deWeerd
Cherie McCandless
January 17, 2001
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218
Packard Estates Development, L.L.C.
6223 N. Discovery Way, Ste. 120
Boise, ID 83713
RE: Final Plat Approval for Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
To Whom It May Concern:
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854
This letter is to confirm that the City of Meridian's City Council approved with
conditions the Final Plat application for the subject property at their 1/16/01 meeting.
Per Ordinance Title 12-3-8, the Final Plat shall be filed with the County Recorder within
one (1) year after written approval by the Council; otherwise, such approval shall
become null and void, unless prior to said expiration date an extension of time is applied
for by the applicant and granted by the Council. The Council may authorize an extension
of the final plat for a period not to exceed one year from the end of the original one-year
period.
Any request for an extension must be filed with the Zoning Administrator prior to the
lapse of the original one year and must be in writing. (Ord. 456, 9-3-85) The fee for an
extension request is $100.00.
Sincerely,
CITY OF MERIDIAN
C:—S- I
Shari Stiles
Planning Director/Zoning Administrator
cc: Pat Tealey, Tealey's Land Surveying
01/02/2001 10:51 2083850696 TEALEYS LAND SUR�kY
r �
Te. -ley Land Surveying
2501 Bogus Basin Road
Boise, Idako 83702
Phone; 385-0636 Fax; 385-0696
To: Bruce Freckleton & Shari Stiles From: Pat Tealey
Fax: 888-6854 Date: January 2, 2001
Phone: 884-5533 Pages: 4
Re: CC:
PAGE 01
Fax
0 Urgent ❑ For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle
• Comments:
01/02/2001 10:51 2083850696 TEALEYS 11�1L ID SURWY PAGE 02
TEALEY'S LAND 2501 Bogus Basin Rd. • Boise, Idaho 83702
SURVEYING (208) 385-0636
F3 Fax (208) 385-0696
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho Street
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Attn: Bruce Freckleton
Shari Stiles
January 2, 2001
RE: Final Plat Comments — Packard Acres No_ 2
The following is a response to your letter of September 28, 2000 that lists
comments made by the City Engineers & Planning and Zoning Departments. The
numbered responses below correspond to the numbers listed on your letter.
Site Stvecific Comments
Item 1 The applicant will meet terms of the preliminary plat and development
agreement.
Item 2 Water assessment will be paid prior to signature by the City of Meridian
on the fiaaal plat.
Item 3 If needed, compaction test results will be submitted.
Item 4 The design of drain areas takes this into account.
Item 5 These requirements will be in place or submitted prior to City of Meridian
signature on the final plat.
Item 6 Fencing will be constructed in accordance with the fencing plan submitted
to the City of Meridian as part of the preliminary plat application.
Item 7 These items have been assessed on a revised final plat that is attached to
this letter.
Item 8 The 20 foot easement is removed. See attached plan.
01/02/2001 10:51 �2,k838506/ 9` TEALEYS LAND SUNY PAGE 03
Item 9 The applicant does not agree with this requirement and will discuss this
with staff and city council.
Item 10 After discussion with staff, Wingate will remain 15' wide.
Item 1 I The wording will be added to the final plat.
Item 12 We will adjust the width of lot 27, block 2 to meet minimum
requirements.
Item 13 After Discussion wit staff a solution will be worked out with Public
Works.
Item 14 Landscape plans will be submitted.
Item 15 This item was approved by the City of Meridian as part of the irrigation
construction plans submitted and built in 1999 as part of Packard Acres
No. 1.
Item 16 Sewer and water services will be designed in accordance with City of
Meridian requirements.
Item 17 The applicant will supply this certification_
Item 18 Mailboxes will be built outside of the 5 foot sidewalk.
Item 19 Wingate Lazne will remain 15' wide as discussed with staff and the
Meridian Fire Department,
Item 20 After discussion with staff and concurring legal opinions between the
developer and the City of Meridian, the city council will determine the
solution.
Item 21 The developer agrees with staff about an access road.
Item 22 The developer will address this situation with the affected party.
Item 23 A legal opinion will be submitted to the City of Meridian confirming this
and other comments about Wingate Lane.
Item 24 The applicant will submit covenants and restrictions.
Item 25 What does this comment mean?
01/02/2001 10:51
73850669`
General Requirements
TEALEYS LAID SUPSJWY
Item 1 Plans will be submitted for approval.
Item 2 Wells will be removed from domestic service.
Item 3 Specifications will meet City of Meridian requirements.
Item 4 The applicant will submit this letter.
Item 5 Fire hydrants will be placed as required by the City of Meridian.
Item 6 5 foot sidewalks will be provided.
Sincerely,
Patrick A. Tealey
PAGE 04
To: N''a
�dahlo
d City Council
Citerdian
33
MIdaho 83642
'fit f► L c s
� ,- G — v v
October 16, 2000 Il�CE�
DEC 0 6 2000
From: North Wingate Lane Residents
2445 North Wingate Lane
Meridian, Idaho 83642
AC SCS
Re: Statement of expectations for developers of PackardnEstates Development, LLC.
The residents of North Wingate Lane feel it is necessary to restate their position
concerning use, access, or development of Wingate Lane by anyone not directly now
living in a residence on the lane. We are supported by previous documents and
proceedings that specifically prohibit any kind of access to North Wingate by others not
presently living on the lane. We are very weary of having to keep such a vigilant watch
on the proceedings for development of the lands that abut North Wingate Lane. We have
made it clear in the past that all traffic of any kind, including pedestrian and bike traffic,
will be prohibited now and in the future from traveling on or across North Wingate Lane.
We expect the compliance of Packard Estates Development, LLC. to the city council for
the construction of permanent gates (for the use of emergency vehicles only ) and fences
to assure this.
The property owners on the lane established this lane as a private lane, July 25, 1913.
Ada County has already ruled that no more houses may be built along North Wingate
Lane that would require entrance and exit directly from the lane.
The residents of the lane pool money to maintain the lane. In the past, great damage
has occurred because of use by construction vehicles that have illegally used the lane to
access the developing areas of Packard Estates Development, LLC. Enforcing
compliance has been difficult. The council has stated that permanent, not wire, fences and
gates were to be constructed along North Wingate Lane before development began. The
wire fences have been lowered whenever someone wanted to use the lane to access or
crossover to the east or west development. Only emergency county access is allowed.
All other accesses, including utility, ACRD, or irrigation, must be done on the
development property and not involve the lane in any way, or at any time.
No gates will be installed to allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles across
North Wingate Lane. This allowance would only invite problems. Sometimes this area is
referred to as the unconstructed portion of E. Challis. It is not. It is part of our
established, permanent private lane.
We greatly appreciate the efforts of Mr. Bruce Freckleton, and Ms. Shari Stiles. They
have been very helpful to explain and interpret the somewhat confusing documents
concerning these proceedings. We also appreciate any other entity that is working to
assure that legal concerns are correctly dealt with on this matter. Please help us put to
rest any further worries concerning our proper right to keep our private lane as such.
Sincerely,
North Wingate Lane Residents
Attachment Enclosed:
EC A q CLrs J7 -
TJ
l `-T/
i
1
+ y
I e �"� °r
1 Q 6T
I
v
� C
SPA - A -L Or i ✓i -%-. E - J i -11 i..i%T
L Le-
Al
� s•► a ✓� c 4J
2
�
L
e
�
V
Q
�
�
�
V
� Z
i
1
1
Cr
r •NrGP C CAJr)
r
A
v
v
� C
SPA - A -L Or i ✓i -%-. E - J i -11 i..i%T
L Le-
� J
y I
1 n
P
4 s V C
A
AJ Y ��
0to
to
RJ
fr&✓1a<J
TJ
.� fl rr< fJr� - {^'-t U.� r ✓. n.•! � it v : -a< �..IfT�.
r
SEP 2 5 2000
�Cffyeww
,eo.- Y X 4, j,
2j
J7
11
U � t
(rar
�
t '
Jr�s er'
c J -
h a 3�$ Q}.l A, �C, . pnr;,`r � y �- �-• J "T �. .. c s i a i
V " cC LC
C,7-
z - �/ /� sem► /� y O �" Q L. �ry c.� G C ,n cc w17
('l� � L � .6- i `" �.. � /�i 1 w C . 'L � �t ✓moi P c r i y - -� d L � �•. C % � - J- '� ^7 �--
f/
74.
u
T 7- 4 . J i s► .,, / �, -,.� �. r !`—
w ter ,° . J
_
v c ✓-P ` r .vt ivy 6 .,. G W.`C
Cl � � V ^ °
ti✓ ✓
er �t � 7 � C ..� c ..�,•S�
% L ✓ J 4-y 9 / �' '� ��'• cJ ,h � U
l IVIVE
SEP 2 5 2000
September 24, 2000
Dear Sirs,
I have lived at 3045 Wingate Lane for eighteen years and have been an active participant
in most of the hearings that were held concerning Packard Estates I and II. I am now
concerned that the developers be held to the agreed upon terms of those hearings. These
terms include no breeching of the privacy of Wingate Lane, the fencing along our lane
easement and the necessary work to the irrigation system to guarantee the farmers full
access to their water rights and a way to clean out the piping to their properties.
1 understand that final approval for the property that touches Wingate is in the works, and
therefore I urge a review of the hearings to see what was proposed at that time that the
developers should now be held to comply with.
Sincerely,
Billie Jo Premoe
3045 Wingate Lane
Meridian, ID
in T C J A .. „( r G .J c ..✓ C ,O o
A .v..L L✓ v s -7-
f -
r . C[ o C�, C J T rCL
ovT O [Ly Gl` /1.v-.=
cA L4 of 0
C. -
C! o
.q ,v,.L E
12
4L r /� 0 7 C -r • ..r
�= h e ..�
iN
,T ti � 4�•t �' �' o� s .. 'Tl'
//-- r .
'Z L
C1
v •� m .aY' S `A I s � e ..iT L✓ r L L
-
e Q � t •yf
74
.G? /
o .J L •1 �r� N a,
7-4
Al
49
L4 e .J,,
Fle
•x
/ Gi V
�/�hr�,�7l.��J ry .,-�� I N�-�
•.C�/ / I/J /� i ti
D
'� L a 0.5
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: August 5 1997
APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 1
REQUEST: Conditions for Packard Subdivision No. 2 Preliminary Plat
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
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:
OTHER:
COMMENTS
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 2
anyone is here waiting for that one only then I want to let you know about it. We will take
it as we come down the line and the Council can make the recommendation for table at
that point.
ITEM #1: CONDITIONS FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT.-
Corrie:
LAT:
Corrie: Is there a representative from Packard Subdivision No. 2?
Tealey: My name is Pat Tealey I am here representing the developer's of Packard
Subdivision No. 2. We have read through the conditions that were supplied to us in a
letter dated July 24, 1997. And have responded back to staff to address their
comments and agree with all of the conditions placed on the plat. If there are any
questions based on our letter back to them I would be glad to answer them.
Corrie: Council, questions?
Rountree: I have none, other than maybe for Gary. The response to the conditions set
forth by Shari and Bruce for this subdivision have you reviewed those are they
satisfactory?
Smith: Yes they are.
Bentley: I have a question for Mr. Smith, on item 15 on the site specific, I wasn't here for
the discussion of that. Can you tell me we that refers about?
Smith: I believe that was a comment that Shari Stiles brought up concerning the existing
dwelling unit that was occupied by the owner of a portion of this property being platted
by the name of Brown, there is an existing house on Brown property and it is my
understanding from what Shari Stiles has said that there are two dwelling units on that
lot. She has raised the issue of the right for those two dwelling units to be existing on
that lot. That is all I know about it.
Tealey: If I can maybe I could shed a little bit of light on it. The original owners the
Brown's built the residence and then a shop. On the end of the shop they had living
quarters for their daughter. It is essentially a one bedroom built onto the end of a shop
out there. The shop is out there (inaudible). It was approved from what we have been
told it was approved through the County before the City of Meridian annexed it. I
believe Shari is just asking for some direction whether or not this is to make the Council
aware that this is a non -conforming use on this lot. The lot itself I believe is over Y
acre. It is this lot right here, you can see on your preliminary plat this is the residence
and this is shop and then the north end of the shop there is a, they originally built the
place for their daughter to live. It sits on an acre and a half and that is how big the lot
will be when it is platted.
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 3
Bentley: Do you have any plans to do anything with that at this time or is it going to
remain
Tealey: We don't own it. I think Shari was just bringing it up for your attention and
whether or not there was any action that the Council wanted to take on maybe
approving this non -conforming use or somehow enforcing the zoning code or City
ordinance.
Morrow. Follow up Mr. Mayor, did you ever own this particular lot? Was the action
taken prior to your ownership?
Tealey: Again I am just representing the owner and what I have been told by the owner
this action took place, the split was taking place at the real estate closing. In other
words we bought the remainder, the developer bought the remainder of the land and at
that same closing the people that own it now bought that other portion, the acre and a
half.
Morrow So then the split was a one time split under the rules of Ada County because at
that juncture the ground was not within the city limits of the City of Meridian is that
correct?
Tealey: That is correct but I believe that even the zone for the county at the was for a
larger lot than an acre and a half. We are trying to legalize the lot now and making it a
part of the plat so that it would conform to the zone that (inaudible).
Bentley: So we have annexed that as part of this plat.
Tealey: There is a letter from the owners in the packet that went to the City Attorney
agreeing to the annexation and platting.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I have a question for Gary, yesterday or the day before I gave you a
copy of a letter that had been sent to you addressing some issues with respect to this
preliminary plat in terms of Bruce's and Shari's issues. Where those issues addressed
at that time or will they need to be addressed at the final plat stage?
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Councilman Morrow I think that the fencing issue is addressed
and perhaps the type of fencing has not been addressed. But the, let me back up, the
type of fencing had been addressed as a six foot high non-combustible fence perimeter
fence to be installed prior to applying for building permits. Except where the City has
expressly agreed in writing that such fencing is not required. It is my understanding from
the copy of the letters that I saw that the property owners in Carol Subdivision were
requesting a screening fence. The comment in our item 14 under site specific is it
referring to a 6 foot non-combustible fence. A development agreement is required on
this. I believe that the ditch along the East boundary of this subdivision is used by other
than Carol Subdivision lot owners, I can't say that for certain but the ditch would be
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 4
piped. Unless there are open ditches on Carol Subdivision that would need to be
burned the fence would not need to be non-combustible for that reason. Not having
been out to the site Councilman I can't tell you for sure what exists there.
Morrow: In any event I guess my point there is that if there is discrepancy between what
the plat says, between what the conditions of approval say by the time that we get to the
final plat approval those things will have been resolved. I understand that the plat does
call out for some cedar fencing. I want to make sure that the non-combustible areas and
the screen fencing are in fact compatible or at least we would make sure that we solve
that issue with some consistency based on (inaudible) at the final plat time.
Smith: If you are going to approve, I guess if the fence plan is approved as has been
presented tonight where they show chain link fence along part of it and cedar fence
along part of the perimeter is that what you want to hold the applicant to that
requirement?
Morrow. I guess my answer to that would be is I want to make sure it is doable I don't
want to see us approving cedar fence along a ditch that is on the western boundary of
Carol the Eastern boundary of Packard only to find out that it is a situation where the
ditch is maintained by burning it so that we burn up the fence. I understand, I am
sensitive to the fact that the homeowners of Carol Subdivision wish to have a fence that
is screenable. Meaning the cedar fencing but I want to make sure that we don't create
a conflict there that there is not a resolution to.
Smith: So it would be a, then the decision would be make at staff level whatever the
condition is in the field?
Morrow. I think, it has to be at least from my perspective. It seems to me like that ought
to be an issue that the staff can work out the developers and or their representative Mr.
Tealey can work out so that everybody clearly understands what it is we are doing.
Thank you Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Council, you have your conditions on the preliminary plat, what is your pleasure?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the conditions for Packard
Subdivision No. 2 subject to staff and developer's representative resolving the fencing
issues and the location of the types of fencing that are to be put up.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion has been made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the
conditions subject to staff and developer's representative resolving the fence issues,
any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
SU6JIVISION EVALUATIONS ,EET
Proposed Development Name PACKARD SUB. NO. 2
City Meridian
Date Reviewed 09/25/97
Preliminary Stage XXX _
Engineer/Developer Tealev Fnnr anis R.
The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY
STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this
development in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance.
"N. HICKORY WAY"
"E. MEADOWGRASS STREET"
"N. DEVLIN AVENUE" "N. DEVLIN WAY"
"E. LOCHMEADOW STREET"
"N. WINGATE AVENUE"
••nnvv."
The above street name comments have been read and approved
ng agency
representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL oflthe 'signatures
must be secured by the representative or his designee in order for the street names to be
officially approved.
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE, ENCY PRESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES
Ada C
ounty Engineer John Priester
Date
Ada Planning Assoc. Ann Hurley
Date
City of Meridian Representative
Date 1- ZS— S7
Fire District Meridian Representative
Date
NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ada County Engineer at the
time of signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed !!!!
Sub Index Street Index 3N 1E 5
Section
NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS
TR\SUBS\SM_CITY.FRM
OFFS
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. 'BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
MEMORANDUM:
"IN
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
Mayor
To: Mayor and Council
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer
Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator o
COUNCIL MEMBERS
WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M.ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
P & Z COMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
July 24, 1997
Re: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUB. NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS
CONSTRUCTION — Comment Compilation
We have reviewed the July 15, 1997 submittal and offer the following compilation of current
comments as well as relevant previous comments, as conditions of the application. These conditions
shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City
Council:
GENERAL COMMENTS
1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project,
shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped are to be shown on the
Preliminary Plat. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district,
or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public
Works Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this
project.
2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed
from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be used for non-
domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
3. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil
conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with the street development plans.
4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for review by the City
Attorney's Office.
5. Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B.
6. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis
by our computer model.
Packard No2 compUation.doc
Mayor and City Council
July 24, 1997
Page 2
7. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and
street names. Make any necessary corrections to the Preliminary Plat map prior to resubmittal
to the City.
8. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent.
9. Indicate any existing FEMA Flood Plain Boundaries on the Preliminary Plat Map, and/or any
plans to reduce said boundaries.
10. Submit a master street drainage plan, including the method of disposal. Prior to development
plan approval, written confirmation of approval will be required from any affected
irrigation/drainage district.
11. Please respond in writing, to each of the comments contained in this memorandum,
both general and site specific, and submit with copies of the revised Preliminary Plat
Map to the City Clerks Office by 12:00 P.M. on Friday, August 1, 1997.
SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS
1. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer mains to and through this proposed
development. The subdivision designer is to coordinate main sizing and routing with the
Meridian Public Works Department. Sewer manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer
lines on the south and west sides of the centerline. Sewer easements will need to be
dedicated with the development of Phase 1 of Packard Subdivision No. 1 to access the lift
station, with gravel accesses built in accordance with City standards.
2. Water service to this site could be via mains installed in N. Hickory Way as part of Packard
Subdivision No. 1. Applicant will be responsible to construct the water mains to and through
this proposed development. The subdivision designer to coordinate the main sizing and
routing with the Meridian Public Works Department
3. 100 -watt high pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations designated by the
Meridian Public Works Department. All street lights shall be installed, at subdivider's expense.
Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants.
4. Lot 17, Block 2 doesn't meet the minimum 80 foot frontage required in an R-4 zone. Lot 2,
Block 6 doesn't meet the minimum 80 foot frontage, or the minimum lot area of 8,000 square
feet, unless the additional 10 feet of frontage can be gained by the granting of an
encroachment by the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. Lot 16, Block 10 shall have a
limitation on house orientation towards E. Challis Street because the N. Lapis Avenue
frontage is less than the minimum required 80 foot frontage.
Packard No2 compilation.doc
Mayor and City Council
July 24, 1997
Page 3
5. The Preliminary Plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by the Land Surveyor.
6. Provide statements of dedications to the public and/or easements, together with a statement
of location, dimension and purpose of such.
7. Include layout of the pressurized irrigation system, including pumping facilities, on the
Preliminary plat map or irrigation plan. Any proposal for a supplementary connection from
the City's water system to the required pressurized irrigation system will need to be reviewed
closely due to the size of the area to be watered. Applicant shall provide a statement as to the
ownership of, and operation and maintenance, of the pressurized irrigation system. The
developer shall be responsible for payment of assessment fees and meter costs associated with
a single point connection.
8. The width of the pavement around the islands in the "90° Knuckle" corners needs to be
reviewed and approved by the Meridian Fire Dept. and Meridian School Dist. Applicant shall
submit written confirmation of approvals.
9. Would it be feasible to relocate the gravity irrigation pipe shown along the common boundary
with Carol's Subdivision, (12" irrigation line "N'), to the front of the lots in Block 9? Are
there any users of this irrigation line in Carol's Subdivision? By relocating this line, there
would be open access to cleanout boxes along the pipeline.
10. Add note that the minimum house size is to be 1,600 square feet, exclusive of garages, as
represented in public meetings.
11. A six -foot -high, permanent, non-combustible fence shall be installed on the northerly easement
line of the Stokesberry Lateral.
12. The Applicant is to develop a pathway along the South Slough in accordance with the Ada
County Pathway Plan and City requirements. Any relocation of the South Slough will negate
its consideration as a "natural waterway" and will require tiling.
13. Submit detailed landscape plans for all common areas for review and approval.
14. Permanent, six -foot -high, non-combustible perimeter fencing is to be installed prior to
applying for building permits except where the City has expressly agreed in writing that such
fencing is not required.
15. Staff requests direction from Council for action needed, if any, on non -conforming use of Lot
7, Block 2 (two dwelling units on one lot, apparently approved through Ada County).
Packard No2 compilation.doc
Mayor and City Council
July 24, 1997
Page 4
16. Construction of Phase 1 of Packard Subdivision No. 2 may commence only after Hickory
Avenue adjacent to the southerly boundary has been constructed for access.
17. Construction equipment shall not use Wingate Lane for access, and shall not cross Wingate
Lane except on a limited basis for necessary utility construction.
18. A development agreement is to be prepared by the Applicant for review by City staff and
approval of Council prior to final plat approval. The development agreement shall be
recorded prior to signature on the final plat of any phase.
Packard No2 compilation.doc
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: July 15, 1997
APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 1
REQUEST: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
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:
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Meridian City Council
July 15, 1997
Page 2
ITEM #1: TABLED JULY 1, 1997: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
Corrie: Is there a representative from Packard Subdivision here this evening. If you
would like to kind of give us a little background here.
Tealey: I am Pat Tealey, representing the developer Sigmont and Edmonds for
Packard Subdivision No. 2. 1 thought I would start with just a little chronology of what
has happened in the past month so everybody can understand what we have been
going through and what we have been trying to do to solve the problems. On May 27th
we had written a letter to Shari concerning the original comments about the subdivision
that were part of her original 16 comments. This was her letter in November 13, 1995.
We had originally commented but somehow the letter was misplaced by either us or the
staff. We indicated in that letter rather than discuss who did what it was best just to
make the comments and get over that hump. We then had a meeting on Tuesday June
3rd for City Council. The discussion was deferred because comments, staff believed that
the comments had not been answered. The meeting was deferred to June 17th. On
June 17th the staff called I the afternoon and said most likely the meeting would be
cancelled because there was a problem with the annexation, the wrong description had
been used to advertise the annexation in the paper. The annexation was we had
requested was for 35 acres somehow a description was used that comprises only a half
acre of that 35 acre parcel. We then faxed over a copy of the annexation description to
Mr. Crookston the City Attorney and I believe that has been readvertised. That
description again was originally written in 1995 as part of our annexation package. We
met, that night we did meet with the Council and the Council directed the staff to set up
a meeting between us and the staff and the neighbors requested that they could attend.
At that time the Council indicated that the neighbors could be there to observe not to
participate. We called on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of that week and on Friday,
late Friday the staff called and scheduled the meeting for June 26 only givin� us
essentially 3 days to make comments after that meeting. At that meeting on the 26t we
went over our letter, we were sitting at that table right over there. We had the
preliminary plat out, I redlined all the concerns that staff had. We went through every
comment, one by one specifically. I took down any concerns that were noted by staff
and went back to the office to then fix up the drawing to address those. It should be
noted I think in the comment, the comments from the City of Meridian by staff the 17th
article in that original letter is applicant is to address all comments in writing and submit
to the City Clerk. We have addressed those comments in writing, there was never any
mention in the fact that we should modify our preliminary plat. I think that has been a
sticky point between us and interpretation. Hopefully we solved it at that May 27th
meeting. We came out of there with 5 concerns according to the notes that I kept at that
meeting. We wanted some details of the fences, where they were and what they were.
In other words non-combustible fences as opposed to 6 foot cedar fences and how they
would relate to the surrounding land uses. The non-combustible chain link fences
against rural uses and the cedar fences against residential uses. That was supplied in
the fence detail plan that was submitted that next Monday. There was then talk about a
Meridian City Council
July 15, 1997
Page 3
turn around in phase one, this wasn't part of the original 17 items, 16 items. However
we agreed that this was needed and it shows up on the plat, the preliminary plat of
revised preliminary plat of Packard No. 2. There was some concern about the lot
configuration in Block 6, the property that is adjacent to the Sharp's and the Reichert's.
We went back and looked over, there is a question about whether or not we could count
the square footage of the Stokesbury Lateral in the calculation of the lot areas. Meridian
City code indicates that minimum lot size shall be determined exclusive of land that is
used for streets, highways, alleys, roads, right of way, irrigation easement unless the
water is conveyed through pipe or tile. We indicated that we were piping this and felt
that we could then use that square footage in the inclusion of the calculation of the
square footage of the lot. This later proved evidently that foot note I the City code is
not, we can't use it. The staff has made an interpretation I believe on two prior
subdivisions that for some reason they won't allow that square footage to be calculated
even if it is piped. We wanted to have some contact and discussion with the City
Council on that item and as a result we didn't agree with what the staff wrote in the
comments. The fourth item that was of concern at that meeting were Gary Smith the
City Engineer wanted us to provide sewer profile. Well that was also not part of the
original letter of the staff. We agreed to do this, it was a short time period to provide this
but Gary agreed to work with us and review those things on Tuesday the day before the
meeting. As I stated before we got the corrected legal description to the City Attorney
for the annexation. We have no idea where the '/2 acre subdivision came from or
excuse me '/2 acre description came from for that annexation. It wasn't checked by the
City of Meridian and when they did do it the day before the meeting they found out that
it was wrong and we have gone and corrected that. Then at our Tuesday July 1St
meeting we were ready to deliver the sewer profiles to Gary Smith at noon and I got a
call from staff at 1:30 that said Gary Smith was sick for the day and that he would not be
able to review the sewer profiles and the meeting would have to be cancelled. I called,
that was called into my office. I then called Shari to confirm this and asked if Gary was
the only one that could review it and we agreed that in fact that he had requested them
and was probably the only one that could review it. So the meeting that night was
cancelled. We then waited for the July 15th meeting however on July 8th after not
hearing anything from staff again I wrote a letter and asked for a response. The letter
essentially said that we had our meeting, we have gone over these items, we
understand that we have addressed. If you have any more comments or discussion on
this please let us know. On Friday at 5:10 after working hours we received a fax from
City staff indicating there were in fact 16 conditions that they were concerned about. We
have been scrambling since then essentially addressing it since Monday trying to
address these 16 items. They are different from the original 16 conditions. They are
legitimate concerns and we feel that we should address them. We addressed them in
writing as requested at the bottom of the letter that the applicant needs to give a written
response to these comments prior to approval of the preliminary plat. We did provide
that in writing to the staff. Again we have modified some of the preliminary plat to take
care of some of the new concerns that have arisen. As I understand it this property is
annexed and zoned. There is a subdivision that will take place on this property.
Whether it be this one or some other one that somebody else might come in with. I think
Meridian City Councii
July 15, 1997
Page 4
we are down to the nitty gritty, there are very few things that are left on this. We are
willing to work with both staff and the surrounding neighbors to make this a good
subdivision for anybody and I believe it is a good subdivision. We have addressed all of
the concerns I believe of staff. There may be some differences between us as far as
interpretation again they asked for it in writing and I gave it in writing. There have been
some modifications to the preliminary plat which were asked for as part of that meeting
that we had. But I believe we are real close to having this thing done. Essentially every
two weeks that this is postponed or deferred it cost our client quite a bit of money. It
wouldn't be bad if it were just two weeks, essentially this has been a period of over two
years. We would like to tonight call an end to discussion on this and make a decision
one way or the other and move on. As I stated we are very close on this, the items that
are of discussion are very minor. I believe that we can come to an agreement tonight.
How would you like me to proceed?
Morrow: I guess from my perspective Mr. Tealey obviously if you have a new set of
requirements that were faxed to you at 5:10 or whatever Friday evening and we just
now within the last 30 to 45 minutes have the response would you please review your
responses from your letter dated as of today the 15 or 16 responses verbally to bring us
back up to speed here?
Tealey: What I will do is I will read the staff comment and then I will read my answer if
there is any discussion I assume it will take place at that time. Item #1 of the July 11th
letter is that "the Stokesbury Lateral easement needs to be designated as a separate lot
even though tiled. Downstream water users need to have ready access to weir
structures at all times and cannot expect to enter back yards of people to get their
irrigation water. As Nampa Meridian Irrigation District also uses the adjacent access
road on a daily basis it is not appropriate to enclose the access road along rear lot
lines." My response is, "the Stokesbury lateral will be designated as a separate lot. We
are piping the lateral and as such its easement area should qualify for square footage
requirements. We will provide access for downstream water users and of course will not
impair Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's access to their ditch. If the City of Meridian
will not use the easement for lot areas the lots will still satisfy frontage and area
requirements. We will obtain a letter from Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for lot
encroachment." What this refers to is a discussion that we had today after learning that
could be a solution to it yesterday was a discussion with Bill Henson of Nampa Meridian
Irrigation District. He had promised us a letter for tonight's meeting but it has not
arrived. I would assume that we could somehow condition the plat that if we can't get
that letter we have to wipe out a lot. I am confident we can get it, he promised it to us.
This would only concern lot 1 of block 6 which is the problem area in front of the Sharp's
and Reichert's, all the other lots will qualify. This is the Stokesbury lateral easement
here it is down as a 40 foot strip, we have designated it as lot 1 and then renumbered all
of the other lots. The lot in question is this one down here this lot 2, as of right now it
has 70 feet of frontage and 7,000 square feet. However according to staff both Shari
and Bruce if we can obtain this letter for the 10 foot they call it an encroachment letter
we can satisfy the frontage requirement and the area requirement. The second item
Meridian City Counci,
July 15, 1997
Page 5
from staff, "The full easement for Stokesbury Lateral has never been depicted on the
plat. Lot 1, block 6 will not meet minimum square footage requirement exclusive of this
easement." Our response to it was Lot 1, block 6 will meet the square footage
requirements per City of Meridian code 2-410 A footnote 8 which is the one that says
you can, you have to exclude those easements unless you pipe them. That is what I
was relying on, however, given the fact that we can get this letter from Nampa Meridian
we don't need to rely upon that part of the code. The third item, "what accommodations
will be made for downstream water users to access clean outs of the ditch?" My answer,
"downstream water users will have direct access or specific easements for access to all
clean outs. This arrangement has been standard practice in other subdivisions such as
Dove Meadows and Packard No. 1. Once the ditch is piped the need for access to the
system will be greatly reduced. See the irrigation plans for easements and access." On
our irrigation plan we have noted that we have ten foot easements for the irrigation
system and there was one irrigation box to Mr. Alleman that was over in the middle of
these lots here on the Dixie Roberts Property. We thought that we could always, he
could work on an agreement with Dixie Roberts to walk back there if there ever was a
problem. None of these boxes are to divert or control water, they are maintenance
boxes. In other words it is nothing that you will have to go to on a daily basis to divert
water to his property. We will however move this box back as far as we could and then
provide a ten foot easement here. We will fence it off for him so he can get out on
Wingate Lane out of his truck walk down that ten foot easement to get to this box if he
so desires. All the other boxes are accessible either street frontage or Wingate Lane's
frontage. The fourth item and is one that may prove to be a sticking
how this is going to come out. "Property owners to the west of Wingate Lane have
furnished a 15 foot wide easement for the private roadway. Meridian Fire Department
needs a minimum access with 20 feet. Properties to the east of Wingate Lane should
provide an additional 5 feet for the road right of way." My answer was, "we do not feel
that we need to dedicate the additional five feet. We have been denied any access or
use of Wingate Lane and feel we do not need to solve their problem." In other words
there is a 15 foot strip for Wingate Lane that comes all the way from Ustick Road to a '/
mile south to the center of the section. No matter what happens in our subdivision even
if we were to give them that additional five feet which we don't feel we have to there
would still be a 15 foot strip for over'/ of that road. Wingate Lane starts here at Ustick,
it is 15 feet down to here, it is 15 feet all the way down here to the center of the section.
There has been 15 feet dedicated by us as part, we own the land that underlies this 15
foot easement and then this 15 foot has been dedicated out of the Reichert and Sharp
Parcel. They need the 20 feet to be able to have emergency access down to the Sharp
and Reichert Parcel. We have provided a road stub out to the Reichert Parcel so that
feel that is their problem to solve. We have been told repeatedly that we
actually they can get there by pavement much faster then coming down this'/ mile. We
will not touch
Wingate Lane, we have been denied access or any use of it even though we own the
land underneath it. I just don't feel that this is an issue that needs to be solved by the
developer. Item #4, "the line shown for fence construction coincide exactly with the
proposed irrigation plan, fences may not be constructed on top of irrigation lines." I
thought that was a very simply explanation, I would assume that the first time we go to
Meridian City Counci,
July 15, 1997
Page 6
drive a post through a pipe we will realize that hey you can't build a fence there. We will
not build the fences on top of the irrigation lines. Number 6, "it has been brought to our
attention that the subdivision boundary as described in the legal description submitted
for annexation does not appear to follow the established and monumented boundary
along the south slough. It was our understanding that this line was established and
monumented when the original parcel was split and that the monuments are still
existing. Please explain the reason for not recognizing and using the existing
monumentation." I believe Mr. Alleman came in and made a comparison between his
legal description and the one we supplied for annexation and saw a difference. That
was the reason for this item. My response was that the property was surveyed from a
legal description supplied by Stuart Title Company and is similar to the adjoining parcel.
The boundaries are identical according to the legal description, there is no conflict here
whatsoever. I explained this to Bruce this afternoon. Seven, although the applicant's
representative stated that there are two accesses to this site only one presently exists.
There is no access from Hickory Avenue at this time as only the first phase of Packard
Subdivision No. 1 has received final plat approval. Construction equipment for phase on
Packard Subdivision No. 2 cannot have primary access across Wingate Lane. My
response was that, "the access to Packard No. 2 will be provided for by Hickory Lane as
part of Phase 2 of Packard No. 1. Right now we are constructing phase 1 of Packard
No. 1 and phase 2 will bring the access road up to this first phase and that will be used
for the access. Further state that the condition should read that the phase 1 of Packard
No. 2 which is this phase right there will not be allowed until Hickory is constructed or
built in conjunction with that first phase. Item #8, house orientation designation needs
to be added to the plat on those lots that do not conform to the minimum frontage
requirements. My comment there was "as requested in your prior letter item #8". On
further review staff had requested and I may have misread the original letter that the lots
she was interested in were lots 1, 3, 4 and 6, block 7, 1 missed the last part of it the etc.
There were about 3 or 4 lots that needed to be corrected and (inaudible). They meet the
frontage requirements and they area requirements. The 9th item, Lot 7, block 2 contains
the non -conforming uses there is more than one building being used as a dwelling unit
on the lot. This separate unit was not built by us it was built by the Brown's the former
owners and as we understand and have been told by the Brown's that is was approved
when it was in the County. It was built by the Brown's so a family member could stay
there. What it is is a shop out in the back, I don't know if you have been out there with a
living unit on the end of it. I also said refer to item 7 of a prior letter that I had written.
Which essentially says that we don't own it, we didn't build it, if there is a conflict with
the City ordinance I would assume that the City would take care of that situation. Item
#10, the Borup property was illegally split by the developer with their full knowledge.
The response to the Brown property will be "legalized" by this subdivision it will be
known as Lot 14, block 9. 1 tem #11, "The City Attorney needs to further explore the
legality of crossing Wingate Lane with public utilities and right of ways. The response is
that "the crossing of Wingate lane should be left to discussion between the respective
lawyers for the Wingate Lane uses and the developer. It seems that the Wingate Lane
users are whining to the City to fight their battles. Wingate Lane users have an
easement for ingress and egress and it is not an exclusive easement." In other words
Meridian City Council
July 15, 1997
Page 7
an exclusive easement would bind that piece of property to only one use and that is the
one stated in the easement. This is not an exclusive easement. And as such does not
preclude other uses which would not interfere with their rights. We have an opinion from
our lawyer, I can submit it to you. Again, this has been the pressing question all along
and I believe that if the adjacent owners wish to pursue this they should use the right
venue and not use the City to create a conflict that would then preclude this subdivision.
Number 12, "proposed phasing sewer easements will have to be dedicated and phased
(inaudible) to access the lift station with gravel accesses built in accordance with City
standards." I said "the access roads for the sewer will be built in accordance with City
standards." This refers to the fact that this lift station down here that was in Packard
No. 1 can be eliminated and moved to the northwest corner of this subdivision. That
was the reason for the sewer profiles and us putting together a sewer plan through the
subdivision. If we have to build this the City will require gravel roads be over the top of
this for access and maintenance. This statement I have agreed to that. Number 13, "the
lift station maintenance agreement and detailed conditions of approval need to be fully
worked out prior to submittal of the final plat on any phase." This condition really
doesn't concern this preliminary plat however I stated "if the lift station agreements are
needed they will be worked out as part of the final plat application." I am saying as
needed because we may well be able to connect that thing to gravity sewer and
eliminate the need for the lift station. If things can be worked out with the adjacent land
owner. Fourteen, "a turn around is needed on the east side of Wingate Lane on East
Challis Street. A turn around will be provided and shown on the revised preliminary plat
I believe if you look at the preliminary plat you can see the 50 foot radius on the original,
I believe it was lot 10. It will be built in accordance to the Ada County Highway District
specifications. Number 15 is fairly lengthy, but it is an important one. It will be the last
one, "the applicant's representative indicates that adequate buffering has been provided
where they believe full development potential of the adjacent properties has occurred."
What I am referring to there is the adjacent development being Carol Subdivision and
the 5 acre lots along Wingate. None of these lots along Wingate will be allowed to be
subdivided any further because of the access problem with Wingate. Unless somehow
this becomes a public road. Many of these lots on the east side of Wingate are built on
illegal parcels. They will not be allowed to subdivide their land or rebuild on there the
way I understand it. Unless this road situation is cured and that means a public road
and we all know that will never happen as discussions have taken place. In the case of
Dixie Roberts property as her only access is Wingate Lane further subdivision will not
be possible and adequate buffering with transitional lots in accordance with the
comprehensive plan as needed. Dixie Roberts property is this parcel right in here. We
have provided buffering here with 14,000 (inaudible) 3 14,000 square foot lots, a 12,800
square foot lot, 11,000 and right over here in the adjacent corner we do have four 8,000
square foot lots which are the minimum lot size in the R-8 zone. We feel we have
buffered her as requested. It also means that because the Sharp's have been vocal in
their opposition to the project the applicant has intentionally provided the smallest lots
adjacent to their property. I was a little upset at this when I first heard it. It seems to be
fairly judgmental and certainly doesn't represent the facts. The applicant when he
submitted this preliminary plat in 1995 had no conversations whatsoever with the
Meridian City Counci,
July 15, 1997
Page 8
Sharp's as a matter of fact I have a copy of the original subdivision has we had
proposed it. At that time we had foolishly thought that we could use Wingate Lane as a
public access and that is why we had the road in this place. And this was before we
even knew who the Sharp's were, had not heard any testimony whatsoever and once
we found out that Wingate Lane could not be used we switched the road over here and
put some lots along their frontage and that was our and that is what is represented here
on this application in 1995. This was before any public hearings, before we had a
chance to talk to the Sharp's or anything. In my comment I say "it was never the
intention to place smaller lots adjacent to the Sharp property to spite them. The plat was
drawn and submitted prior to any testimony by the Sharp's. We resent this implication
by the staff has absolutely no basis. The other part of the comment here is Lot 1, Block
6 cannot meet minimum square footage requirements and the fact that an additional 5
feet of road easement should be provided. Larger lots need to be incorporated at this
location. The comprehensive plan does not differentiate between existing rural
residential lots and existing rural residential lots that may someday be further
developed. My response to the second part of this comment is that "we believe we have
provided the transition from R-8 and R-8 is the surrounding subdivisions, Kearny Place
No. 3, Chateau Meadows Estates East No. 8 and Chamberlain Estates Subdivision."
You will notice that Kearny Place and Chateau Meadows are adjacent to the Sharp
property, these have 7,000 to 7,500 square foot lots adjacent to them. No problem.
Chamberlain Estates comes in adjacent to us which is a total agricultural use with an R-
8 zone no problem. As a matter of fact it is against the Alleman property over here in the
corner, no problem. Yet when we try to do the same thing there is a problem. I then
finish by saying, "I thank you for your attention to this matter, please call at your earliest
convenience." Now I think we have addressed them. In my mind I have, if my
discussion here tonight raises some questions I would be glad to answer them. I am
sure staff has some comments and we would like to proceed from there.
Morrow: Mr. Tealey I have a question with respect to item 15, if memory serves me
correctly when we were dealing with Packard No. 1 in its initial presentation to us at the
City there was some issues with a first concept by which we as a Council suggested
that the buffering would create a transition from Carol Subdivision which are estates.
We required the lots to be larger buffering them and that change was made. I think our
sense of direction was that you were to transition from Carol Subdivision over to
Chamberlain basin subdivision which was R-8 and make an orderly transition between
the two. Does this plat that you propose today continue that same theme that does in
Packard No. 1?
Tealey: Yes I believe it does, we have, I will just quickly go over this. We have 95 lots
on 35 acres, we are getting 2.7 lots per acre in this zone that allows 4 per acre. The
minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet. We have 34 lots that are in the 8,000 to 9,000
square feet which represents approximately 35 percent of it. Fifteen lots in the 9,000 to
10,000 and 46 lots 10,000+ which represents nearly 505 of the project. I believe we
provided that transition.
Meridian City Counc
July 15, 1997
Page 9
Morrow. A follow up question please with respect to those lots sizes and your CC&R's
what are you doing in terms of square footage of those homes?
Tealey: I haven't been part of that discussion I really don't know, you would probably
have to ask the owner and developer.
(Inaudible)
Tealey: The developer has indicated that 1600 square foot minimums.
Morrow: Thank you
Corrie: Thank you Pat, questions from staff?
Morrow: Yes, I would like to hear a response from staff in terms of the issues raised by
Mr. Tealey.
Corrie: Shari, do you want to start or Gary do you want to start?
Stiles: Is there something specifically?
Corrie: I guess I had one if I may Council, on this item #1, using the easement, is there
a possibility that on those lots that they can fence that easement since it is part of their
lot they can fence or it is put in the development that they wouldn't be able to put fences
in that easement area?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council the City has permitted that to be included as part of lots
when the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District does not have an easement existing there.
If it is just like a user ditch where they do not have control of it is and it is included in the
back of the lots. However since they do have an existing 40 foot easement there the
City has required that be fenced outside the lots unless they can obtain an
encroachment agreement with Nampa Meridian and that is what they have indicated
(inaudible).
Rountree: I just ask Shari or Gary are there any of the responses that are not
addressing the issues that you brought up?
Stiles: I guess the only item I still have a question on since I did receive a plan that
showed the fencing and the irrigation the fencing was exactly on the property line as
was all the irrigation piping shown. So I guess if the public works department is satisfied
that they will meet the requirements for access as part of their review of the
development plans that will be up to them to review.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, follow up question for Gary, Gary you were working in terms of
where are we going with this either lift station or gravity flow. When we last met and last
Meridian City Counci,
July 15, 1997
Page 10
discussed this I believe 30 days ago you were working towards a potential solution that
would allow the gravity flow to take place, is that still out there?
Smith: I think the major stumbling block at this point is a request by Vern Alleman that
his property not be annexed by the City without his approval. I haven't received any
kind of confirmation that this is possible. He wants a letter from the City of Meridian so
stating.
Morrow. I think that my preliminary response to that would be is that this Council cannot
make that kind of a deal binding future councils. As you well know from time to time for
sake for fire and police issues we have enclave annexations that clean those things up
and allow those two life safety departments to conduct their jobs as they are supposed
to do it. I would not be willing as a councilman to put either citizens of that area or the
fire and police department in a position where the City in a liability position by virtue of
agreeing to something that doesn't make good sense from our standpoint as a City.
Now the practical matter there is that until the ground was a legitimate enclave and as
you well know, we are due for one of those clean ups now or overdue and will probably
do so within the next few months. It is a substantial amount of time before that
becomes a legitimate enclave that would be susceptible to a if you will a forced
annexation.
Smith: That is his requirements or one of this requirements to submit to an easement for
crossing his property.
Morrow That being the case let's move away from the gravity flow and because that is
not likely to happen and go to the issue of the lift station. It seems to me if memory
serves because we are going back some distance here that the maintenance of that lift
station was to be done by the developer, the owners association. Do I have the right lift
station in mind?
Smith: That is correct.
Morrow The changing of this based on our prior conversation was the reason for the
profile and the sewer because we talked about we had some height issues and some
fall issues that we were trying to get resolved, was that satisfactorily resolved with this
profile?
Smith: The profile that they submitted to me shows that it can gravity at the minimum
grades from the interceptor from the lift station location back to Packard No.
Subdivision. There were some modifications that were made in Packard No. 1 field
changes to raise the grade of some sewers to allow it to gravity flow all the way through.
So from the stand point of requiring the profiles I think we aborted a problem in the
future by not being able to gravity Packard No. 1 to the interceptor. Secondarily the
profile requirement although I have mandated that it me submitted and part of the
preliminary plat submittal it has always been a requirement of a preliminary plat as far
Meridian City Counc,,
July 15, 1997
Page 11
as the ordinance is concerned. It is not a new ordinance requirement it is simply a
requirement that I have required to be done because we have had some problems in
some past subdivisions of sewers fitting the ground.
Morrow: My question is that I don't disagree with your actions there and I don't disagree
with the ordinance.
Smith: That did prove to be a benefit it did prove that Packard No. 1 can gravity all the
way to the interceptor on the south slough.
Morrow: I think that is a wise decision, I think that probably in fairness to the applicant
whether they were notified should have been maybe sooner or not that is a secondary
issue in my mind. What is important here is that we now have confirmation that the
system works and it works fine. We also have confirmation that if it is going to be the lift
station which it appears it will be at this juncture that the development agreement is
such that they maintain it until gravity becomes available. to hook on is that correct?
Smith: That is correct, I have an agreement in my packet tonight for your consideration
for this lift station maintenance agreement so that they can submit their plans onto DEQ
for the extension of the gravity line through Packard no. 2.
Morrow: And that is part of the Department Reports, your department reports?
Smith: Yes
Morrow. I have another follow up question with respect to the and where did the issue in
terms of 15 and 20 feet come from. Apparently, it is my understanding by prior
testimony this has been a lane since the early 1900's. So why do we see an issue here
from the Fire Department that they want 20 feet as opposed to the 15 feet that exists for
that time frame?
Smith: I don't have an answer for that Councilman, I will let Shari
Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council this issue came up when the fire
Marshall and Fire Chief were reviewing the plat to check actually it was the fencing plan
that was submitted because of the gates that were involved whether they would be
adequate for their use. It has always been their requirement that if there was a roadway
that it should have a minimum of 20 feet. The only problem would be if the Sharp's
decided to fence on their side of their property on the easement line there would only be
15 feet there.
Morrow. Does that no describe the rest of that lane though with the exception of this
small parcel. If property owners on each side of the lane decided to fence the lane it
would be 15 feet (End of Tape) property owners have that same option and choose to
fence then it is a 15 foot lane. So my question is that how do we justify trying to take
Meridian City Counc,
July 15, 1997
Page 12
another 5 feet from the other side when they have already dedicated the 15 feet and
from a practical standpoint you can't get there from here is my point.
Stiles: That was just a comment that was brought up by the Fire Department.
Morrow: Thank you Mr. Mayor, those would be my questions for now.
Corrie: Any further discussion by the Council? Hearing none I will entertain a motion for
preliminary for Packard Subdivision No. 2.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor I think what I would like to do as a point of discussion with the rest of
the Councilmen is to move to approve the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2
and I don't want to have that motion talked about subject to staff conditions. At this
juncture it seems to me that we are all over the board with the potential conditions. I
think that what I would like to do is to maybe move to approve the preliminary plat for
Packard Subdivision No. 2 and then see a clean up of exactly what the conditions are at
this point and have the staff present at our next meeting or prior to our next meeting a
write up of what the conditions of approval are. It seems to me that we have an original
sixteen conditions of approval and now we have 16 more. Some of them are valid,
some are not valid. So I think that what I would like to see here is a new menu of
conditions of approval.
Rountree: By new do you mean a new listing?
Morrow: Well a joining of the two lists that we have and eliminate the stuff that has little
or no relevance to this issue before us and get down to the heart of what really the
conditions of approval ought to be. Those are the technical issues in terms of
addressing how this plat is to be constructed.
Rountree: I think that would be a good point to clarify that for everybody.
Corrie: Before we get into discussion is this a motion?
Morrow: No I am discussing my thoughts as to how we go. I don't want to be making a
motion and stumbling all over the place.
Corrie: Comments?
Tolsma: I think Walt is right I think we need to get everything clarified, who is doing
what.
Morrow: That being the case I would move that we approve the preliminary plat for
Packard Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds Construction subject to a new listing of
relevant conditions to the technical issues of this subdivision and that new listing of
those issues to be presented to this Council at our August 5th meeting.
Meridian City Counc.
July 15, 1997
Page 13
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Okay, Council you have heard the motion to approve the preliminary plat for
Packard Subdivision No. 2 subject to the new conditions set forth and brought back to
City Council at the meeting of August 5th, any further discussion? All those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #2: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REZONE OF 9.42
ACRES FROM R-4 TO R-8 BY LORIN SAUNDERS:
Tolsma: Mr. Mayor I have to step down on this I have a conflict.
Corrie: Mr. Tolsma is stepping down for a conflict of interest.
Morrow. Mr. Rountree you thoughts since it is just the two of us?
Rountree: I didn't have any specifics on the findings of fact.
Morrow. I have no problem with them, I move to approve the findings of fact and
conclusions of law as prepared for us by the City Attorney.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the findings of
fact and conclusions of law as adopted by the Council, any further discussion? Roll call
vote
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Absent, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma-
Abstain, Corrie — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, the City Council here by recommends that the property set forth in
the application be approved by the City Council for the zoning amendment requested
under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law including
that the applicant or its successors, interests, assigns, heirs, executors or personal
representatives enter into a development agreement. That the property only be
developed as a planned unit development under the conditional use process. That if
the applicant is not agreeable to these findings of fact and conclusions of law and it not
agreeable with entering into a development agreement and developing the property only
as a planned unit development under the conditional use permit process the application
for the zoning amendment shall be denied.
Project No.: 1408
August 1, 1997
TE. EY'S LAND 109 South 41" Strer'Boise, Idaho 83702
SURVEYING (208) ,85-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho St.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Attn: Shari Stiles
RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT
Dear Shari;
In response to the City's letter dated July 24, 1997 we have the following comments:
The response numbering is in relation to comment numbers of your letter:
GENERAL COMMENTS:
1. Ditches will be piped per City Ordinance 11-9-605.m and as shown on the irrigation plan.
2. Existing wells and septic systems will be removed and replaced with City services.
3. Strata Engineering has been hired to provide seasonal high ground water information.
4. The developer will submit the covenants and restrictions for review.
5. The street section detail on the preliminary plat shows a 5 foot sidewalk as required by the city of
Meridian.
6. No comment.
7. See attached letter.
8. We talked with the city of Meridian's water works superintendent, he indicated that final placement
of fire hydrants will be done as part of final road plans.
9. There are no flood plain boundaries on this project.
10. See attached drainage plan.
SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS:
1. The applicant will construct sewer mains and services in accordance with the City of Meridian
requirements.
2. The applicant will construct water mains and services in accordance with the City of Meridian
requirements.
3. In accordance with the City of Meridian street lights requirements.
4. Lot 17, Block 2 has been adjusted to concern with the 80 foot frontage requirements.
Lot 16, Block 10, has been adjusted to concern with the 80 foot frontage requirements.
Lot 2, Block 6 will meet the minimum frontage and Lot area requirements by the granting of the
encroachment permit from Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (see attached letter).
5. The preliminary plat is signed and stamped.
6. The final plat will dedicate the required easements.
7. See irrigation plan previously submitted.
8. Meridian Fire Department and school district have approved the pavement widths. Their letters will
be sent directly to staff.
9. The applicant prefers not to have irrigation ditches in front yards. There boxes will very seldom if ever
have to be accessed. They will be located on lot lines with appropriate easements.
10. See note on plat.
11. See fencing plan.
12. See note on preliminary plat.
13. Detailed landscape plans will be submitted as part of the final plat application.
14. The applicant will install fencing prior to applying for building permits in accordance with City of
Meridian Requirements.
15. No comment.
16. No comment.
17. No comment.
18. The applicant will enter into a development agreement prior to signature of final plat.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please call at your earliest convenience if you should have
any questions.
7atric
ectfully,
k AIWy
Tealey's Land Surveying
P.L.S. No. 4347
SUBDIVISION EVALUATION SHEET
Proposed Development Name PACKARD SUB NO 2 City MERIDIAN
Date Reviewed 5/04/95 Preliminary Stage XXXXX Final
Engineer/Developer _Tealey's Land Surveying / PNE & Edmonds Contruction
The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY
STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this
development in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance.
The following existing street names shall appear on the plat as:
"N HICKORY WAY"
"E. MEADOWGRASS STREET"
"N DEVLIN AVENUE" "N DEVLIN WAY"
"E. LOCHMEADOW STREET"
"N. WINGATE AVENUE"
The following new streets are in alignment with new streets in proposed subdivisions and
therefore shall be named:
"N. SIMERLY PLACE"
lit:
"E CHANTERELLE DRIVE" Af1ri. IX20 � � `'� T ) QgAri'
Please choose 5 new street names and have them approved by the street name committee
The above street name comments have been read and approved by the following agency
representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures
must be secured by the representative or his designee in order for the street names to be
officially approved.
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTIK, AGENCY
Ada County Engineer
Ada Planning Assoc.
City of Meridian
Meridian Fire District
John Priester
Terri Raynor
Representative
Representative
KSENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES
_ Date
r
Date S
Date�S
i
Date
NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Aha County Engineer at the
time of signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed 1111
Sub Index Street Index / 3N 1 E 05 Section
NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS bfi
JLL 16 '97 12:16PM Nfr' ^DRIDIAN IRR. P.22
1603 PIS STREET SOUTH ice+, DAMO w1=4345
FAX # 2400-M-6=
Dm Tom -
Thrs Jea!2r k to follow up our telelzhmc corkmAim IS July 1997 The went an the
Sok a7y Latmal is 40 few .20 fat fr= the a ta^ each w&y. We 90 4VDw & 10 k'
enaoarhm ent upas 8ppro ' plaQs imd a sy&edhb se aga=aat
If ynu ba w anyfr nfia- q ue-sCions, plaiw fwl fry to contsct Me
S�c�ly,
BW Hmzw, Asst. Waw Supa•'irrttEdent
NAMPA & MERIDIAA" IRRIGA77ONDISTRICT
CC., File
Fa,wd to 343-484
APFi =40TF IRRC-41 E ACRES
RfYER KOW ROWS - 23.=
1= Maw bc*m • 40,000
Kmcm; Aroa Co& 2^%
.hrly iS, 1957
OFFICE � 466-7961 88d
SHOP: Nm -,c 4666-0653
Ted Stm=t
Boise 345-2431
Pic Herrwry Ela:=, Irrc
410,5 Cmhard
, ID 837025
Dm Tom -
Thrs Jea!2r k to follow up our telelzhmc corkmAim IS July 1997 The went an the
Sok a7y Latmal is 40 few .20 fat fr= the a ta^ each w&y. We 90 4VDw & 10 k'
enaoarhm ent upas 8ppro ' plaQs imd a sy&edhb se aga=aat
If ynu ba w anyfr nfia- q ue-sCions, plaiw fwl fry to contsct Me
S�c�ly,
BW Hmzw, Asst. Waw Supa•'irrttEdent
NAMPA & MERIDIAA" IRRIGA77ONDISTRICT
CC., File
Fa,wd to 343-484
APFi =40TF IRRC-41 E ACRES
RfYER KOW ROWS - 23.=
1= Maw bc*m • 40,000
TP""' LEY'S LAND 109 South 4'" Stv ' Boise, Idaho 83702
SURVEYING (208) 3185-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
TRANSMITTAL
Date: August 1, 1997
To: Shari Stiles
City of Meridian
(x) For your action
( ) For your files
Transmitted By: Pat Tealey
Reference: Packard Sub No. 2
Project No.: 1408
Llaa.iva%.0 cum �igllt NULLA Vi unc ionowing pians: preliminary, irrigation, fence and storm exhibit and
a response letter to your comments.
Meridian City Co!!nc!i
August 5 1997
Page 52
Morrow. My motion would be that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings of
fact and conclusions of law for the variance for Haven Cove Subdivision No. 7 by
Meridian Land Development Company. And we also table this issue to our meeting of
August 19 so we can adopt the annexation ordinance.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to direct the City Attorney
to draw up findings of fact and conclusions of law, also to table to the August 19
meeting, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #19: REQUEST FOR HOOK UP TO CITY SEWER FOR 3195 N. LINDER BY
GARY AND MARGARET PALMER:.
Corrie: We have the letter here this is a hook up request for a temporary living quarters
for parents (inaudible). I guess they are not here at this time what is the Council's
pleasure to do in this case?
Rountree: I would just offer my opinion that I would be not particularly favorable for this
application for this purpose, it doesn't appear that there is a hardship being presented to
these folks. Without them being here to represent their case I don't know anymore than
what is in the letter. I don't see any advantage to the City to act on this request at this
point.
Morrow: I guess my position would be is that give them an opportunity at the next
meeting to make their point, to sell us on whether we want to do this or not. If I was
going to do it on the merit of the letter my response would be no we don't need to do
that. But also they need to be represented and make their case. So we could have our
City Clerk notify them that they do in fact need to be present and make a presentation. I
would move to table.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made to table item #19 until the August 19 meeting, all those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #20: PACKARD SUBDIVISION — LIFT STATION MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT:
Corrie: Gary do you want to address that one?
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 53
Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Council members, this lift station was patterned after
the previously approved lift station maintenance agreement for the Whitestone
Subdivision. I took the approved copy that Wayne had looked at for that subdivision and
with one exception managed to get rid of Whitestone. Wayne re -reviewed this and had
some other additions that he is requesting be made. It has been submitted to the
developer's of Packard and they have signed it and sent it back. I don't know that the
requested revisions from Wayne would present a problem for the Packard Developers
but they have agreed to and signed the original submittal.
Morrow: If I may ask a question Mr. Mayor, does that mean that the document that the
development folk sign does not have the revisions that Mr. Crookston suggested?
Smith: No it didn't because I took the previously reviewed and approved addition from
Wayne and just changed the name of the subdivision and sent it out to them.
Morrow: Are these suggestions of any great substance?
Smith: I don't know it is a legal issue I guess and I am not, it doesn't affect the amount
that they are requested to pay it is some concerns that Wayne had as far as how the
transfer may take place between Packard and the homeowners association and if it
doesn't that Packard is responsible for it. I kind of thought that it was already inferred in
the body of the document but I would have to let Wayne discuss that.
Crookston: Gary is correct, I think that there at a minimum needs to be a change in the
agreement to remove the word Whitestone from the document because it is not a
Whitestone agreement it is a Packard Agreement. And I think that there needs to be
something in there that provides that if a homeowners association is not set up and
established then Packard's development company will be the have the obligation to
perform the agreement.
Smith: May I ask a question, does that mean Wayne that we need to go back and revise
the Whitestone Agreement then because it is the same, identical.
Crookston: If they have not set up their homeowners association yet I think we should.
Smith: Because that has been sent out for their signature. They were balking at signing
it originally because of the amount and I revisited that and reduced that based upon
development within the subdivision.
Crookston: If they have set up their homeowners association I don't believe that there
is any necessity to do that. But we don't know in this case, the case that we are dealing
with now we have no idea whether or not that homeowners association will ever be set
up. I imagine that it will be we don't know that.
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 54
Morrow: Well if I may ask the question Mr. Mayor, wasn't the homeowners association
in all subdivisions that we approved a requirement of the approval or de -annexation
takes place, not only the association but dues paying homeowners associations?
Crookston: I don't believe it is set forth that it will be de -annexed if that is not done.
Rountree: Part of the final plat approval is approval of CC&R's and that is a requirement
(inaudible)
Crookston: I am not sure that is a requirement of the approval of the final plat. I don't
think that it is. We generally get them at that time but I don't think it is a requirement, do
you know Gary if we have to approve CC&R's or a homeowners association before the
final plat is approved?
Smith: It is typically required that the Council approve the CC&R's along with the final
plat, now it doesn't always happen but it is typically required.
Crookston: I agree that it is typically required but it is not a requirement of our ordinance
that be done before the plat is approved as I remember it.
Smith: I couldn't speak to that specifically I don't know. Concerning this agreement I
don't think that the Packard developing people will have a problem with this addition.
They haven't had a problem with, they didn't have a problem with the agreement as I
submitted it to them for signature. So I don't think that is going to impact their signing
this agreement with these additions.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I guess if I could, two comments here. One is that I don't like add on
stipulations, conditions after the fact. But in order to move this forward I guess what I
would like to move in a motion would be that we approve the lift station maintenance
agreement, authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest on the condition that
the Packard Development folk sign the new corrected agreement and if there is any
reluctance for them to sign it that they be able to come back before the City Council and
plead their case and we take action based on that.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Okay you heard the motion by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley, is there any
further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #21: LATE COMERS AGREEMENT WITH STOR-MOR SYSTEMS INC. AND
TREASURE VALLEY BAPTIST CHURCH:
** TX CONFIRMATI REPORT **
DATE TIME TO/FROM
11 07/24 16:42 208 385-0696
OFFICIALS
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E.. City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt
SHARI L. STILES. P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. -BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
AS OF JUL 24 '9'r �:43 PAGE.01
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD# STATUS
EC --S 01'20" 004 217 OK
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 88811433 - FAX (206) 88711813
Public Works/Building Depamuent (208) 887.2211
Motor VehicWDrivcrs License (208) 988.4443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
MEMORANDUM: Mayo[
To: Mayor and Council
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to CityEer
Shari ShStiles, P&Z Administrator
SO I 1 ' MB RG
WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M.ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
l a 7 GOb'MISSION
JIM JOHNSON. Chalrman
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
July 24, 1997
Re: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUB. NO, 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS
CONSTRUCTION — Comment Compilation
We have reviewed the July 15, 1997 submittal and offer the following compilation of current
comments as well as relevant previous comments, as conditions of the application. These conditions
shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City
Council:
GENERAL CQMIVIENTS
1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project,
shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped are to be shown on the
Preliminary Plat. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district,
or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public
Works Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this
project.
2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed
from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be used for non-
domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
3. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil
conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with the street development plans.
4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for review by the City
Attorney's Office.
5. Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B.
6. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis
by our computer model.
Pecked Not ..Pd.cuo.Joc
MAYOR
Robert D. Come
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Ron Anderson
Keith Bird
Tammy deWeerd
Cherie McCandless
March 15, 2000
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-4433 - Fax (208) 887-4813
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218
Idaho Power Company
10790 W. Franklin Road
Boise, ID 83709
322-2000 388-2402 *Dena 388-2021 fax 388-6924
388-6532 fax 322-2032
Re: Street Lights for Packard Estates Subdivision #2
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208) 288-2499 - Fax 288-2501
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 887-2211 - Fax 887-1297
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 - Fax 888-6854
The street lights have been installed by the developer in Packard Estates
Subdivision #2. These are 100 watt high-pressure sodium lights on steel poles,
owned by the City of Meridian with a maintenance agreement with Idaho Power.
The four (4) street lights are located at.-
t.Lot
Lot5 Block 5
N. Hickory Way
Lot 8 Block 8
N. Hickory Way
Lot 11 Block 5
E. Nikki Court
Lot 4 Block 8
E. Nikki Court
Please use this letter as your authority to activate these street lights. See
attached map for additional information.
Sincerely
William G. Berg, Jr.
City Clerk
Enclosures
OFFI IA S
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E_, City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P 6 2' Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W- BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. 'BILL' GORDON. Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR., Attorney
NUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
MEMORANDUM: Mayor
To: Will Berg, City Clerk
Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer
From: Harold Hudson, Electrical Inspector
Re: STREET LIGHT ELECTRICAL INSPECTION
Date
211& L Me
WALT W, MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M. ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
P 8 7 r'OMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
BYRON SMITH
T4— s—\
F E 8 2 8 2000
1711TY 0-F
I have inspected and approved the electrical wiring and associated components for
lights in K.1i�� o Se -1 G� �� --_ Street
can now proceed with the activation. Idaho Power Co.
--lee-��
- ZA'�
Harold Hudson, Electrical Inspector
C:\0FF10E\WPWfIAGENERALXELECrNSp. MMO
-10"d
ve0:60 00-vz-qaA
MERIDIAN
24 HOUR
/Ns- p-=CF/ON LINE
887- 1 -155
Elec-Commercial Permit
Permit Number:
ELC2000-53
Applicant
Alloway Electric
Phone:
344/2507
Parcel Number:
PARC2000-246
Address:
PACKARD #2
Addition:
Contractors
Electrician Alloway Electric
Address: 1420 Grove St
BOISE, ID 83702
Fees and Receipts:
Number
FEE2000-4282
Other Fields:
Value:
Description:
Fees Due / Credit Info:
City of Meridian, Building Department
200 E Carlti Suite 100
Meridian ID 83642
PH 887-2211 / FAX 887-1297
Lot(s): Block:
Page 1 of 1
Printed: 2/24/2000
Phone: 344/2507
FAX:
Description Amount
Electrical -Commercial $114.90
Total Fees:__ $114.90
4487
Install 4 ea 100 WATT H.P.S. streetlights — 5/5, 11/5, 4/8, 8/8
X
U
N N n n O N N O N N_.
O
Z
O
U
W
N
nnn nav nn Nlvnn Ncvn r
x
U
Z
K
N ^ o
x
U
W
m
a
O O N O p p 0 0 0 N O p N O p
o d aeon om -nnn
0 0 0 o n n n n n n o n n n o n n
zo
^ ^ ^
z 2 2 z
r
N
Y Y Y y O D u D D U Z 0 u S O D
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 D
I 1 1 1
I 1 1
I I I^ ^
U 3 3 2 Z2 Z ZI Z 3 3 Z 1 1 1 11 1
2 x x Y Y Y Y Y x x Y 2 2 2 Y x x
40'— N. R/W Stokesberry Lateral
27 install 3- 3" conduits; cable to be installed
�wilh Packard Acres H1
4'
0' — S. R/W Stokesberry Lateral
J
3
MAYOR
HUB OF TREASURE U,4LLEY _N
Robert D. Corrie A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY OF MERIDIAN ISI (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501
PUBLIC WORKS
Ron Anderson 33 EAST IDAHO ' 1 BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO(208) 887-2211 - Fax 887-1297
Tammy deWeerd (208) 888-4433 •Fax (208) 3 4813 200® PLANNING AND ZONING
Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218Sr_PDEPARTMENT
ME ,�D1NA8) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854
� ERK OFFICE
TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City
Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall
Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: September 13, 2000
Transmittal Date: August 22, 2000 Hearing Date: September 19, 2000
File No.: FP 00-018
Request: Final Plat approval of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres for
proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2
By: Packard Estates Development, LLC
Location of Property or Project: South of Ustick Road between Locust Grove and
Vintage Lane
Sally Norton, P/Z **
Kent Brown, P/Z **
Thomas Barbeiro, P/Z **
Richard Hatcher, P/Z **
Keith Borup, P/Z **
Robert Corrie, Mayor
Ron Anderson, C/C
Tammy deWeerd, C/C
Keith Bird, C/C
Cherie McCandless, C/C
Water Department
Sewer Department
Sanitary Service (no C/C only)
Building Department
Fire Department
Police Department
City Attorney
City Engineer
City Planner
Gen - 26 PP/FP/PFP - 24 AZ - 27 — no FP
Meridian School District **
Meridian Post Office (FP/PP)
Ada County Highway District
Community Planning Assoc.
Central District Health
Nampa Meridian Irrig. District
Settlers Irrigation District
Idaho Power Co. (FP/PP)
U.S. West (FP/PP)
Intermountain Gas (FP/PP)
Bureau of Reclamation (FP/PP)
Idaho Transportation Department **
Ada County (Annexation)
'-_
CENTRAL
DISTRICT
1HIALTH\�
DEPARTMENT
MAIN OFFICE - 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL. - BOISE, ID 83704-0825 • (208) 375-5211 • FAX 327-8500
o prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment.
98-200
April 6, 1998
David Navarro
Ada County Recorder
650 Main Street
Boise, ID 83702
RE: Packard Subdivision #2.
Dear Mr. Navarro:
RFGErVED
APR 0 8 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Central District Health Department, Environmental Health Division
has reviewed and do approve the final plat on this subdivision for
central water and central sewer facilities. Final approval was
given on April 3, 1998.
No lot size may be reduced without prior approval of the health
authority.
If you have any questions please call.
Sincerely,
Michael H. Reno, E.H.S.
Environmental Health Specialist
CC: Tom Turco, Environmental Health Director
Martin O. Jones, Environmental Health Supervisor
Tom Schmalz, Sr. Environmental Health Specialist
UD
City of Meridian
Ted Sigmont & Wirt Edmonds
Tealey's Land Surveying
Ada / Boise County Office
707 N. Armsrong PI.
Boise, ID 83704
Enviro. Health: 327-7499
Family Planning: 327-7400
Immunizations: 327-7450
Senior Nutrition: 327-7460
WIC: 327-7488
FAX: 327-8500
Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties
Ada -WIC Satellite Office
Elmore County Office
1606 Roberts
520 E. 8th Street N.
Boise, ID 83705
Mountain Home, ID 83647
Ph. 334-3355
Enviro. Health: 587-9225
FAX: 334-33552P
Family Health: 587-4407
WIC: 587-4409
® FAX: 587-3521
Valley County Office
703 N. 1 st Street
P.O. Box 1448
McCall, ID. 83638
Ph. 634-7194
FAX: 634-2174
Project No.: 1408
July 8, 1997
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho St.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Attn: Shari Stiles
TE '--,_ E Y'S LAND 109 south 4w Stred 'Boise, Idaho 83702
S U R V EYING (208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT
Dear Shari;
After our meeting of June 26th which was attended by yourself and Gary Smith we were directed
to supply you with additional information as a result of discussions concerning your original
comments of Nov. 13, 1995, and my letter of May 27, 1997.
The information you requested was supplied to you prior to the scheduled July 1 st meeting.
Unfortunately, as you indicated in our phone conversation, the July 1 st meeting on this issue had to
be tabled, this time as a result of Gary Smith being sick. You said that you would notify the
neighbors about the cancellation of the meeting, however, as I was advised, not only did the
neighbors show up but also Gary Smith showed up. What happened?
In order to ensure that the next scheduled meeting of July 15th proceeds as scheduled please advise
me of any questions/comments that have not been answered or exhibits that are still needed.
I look forward to finally having a meeting where we will have an answer one way or the other as to
the fate of this subdivision.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please call at your earliest convenience if you should
have any questions.
Also, in a related matter, what is the outcome of the time extensions for Packard No. 1. We have
not received any correspondence on those items?
Respectfully,
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's Land Surveying
P.L.S. No. 4347
HECEP D
3.F /, J U L - 7 1997
�-zv � 1 -41 WY 4F MERIDIAN
.--I 0 1
Project No.: 1408
July 15, 1997
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho St.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Attn: Shari Stiles
TE "1.EY'S LAND 109 South 41i Stret'-.'Boise, Idaho 83702
SURVEYING (208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 PRELIMINARY PLAT
Dear Shari;
REcE'vED
J U L 15 1997
CITY OF MERIDIAN
In response to the City's letter dated July 11, 1997 we have the following comments:
1. We do not believe that the Stokesberry Lateral needs to be designated as a separate lot. We are piping
the lateral and as such its easement area will qualify for square footage requirements. We will
provide access for downstream water users and of course will not impair Nampa Meridian Irrigation
Districts access to their ditch.
2. Lot 1, Block 6 will meet square footage requirements per Meridian City code 2-410A, Footnote 8.
3. Downstream water users will have direct access or specific easements for access to all cleanouts.
This arrangement has been standard practice in other subdivisions such as Dove Meadows and
Packard No. 1, once the ditch is piped the need for access to the system will be greatly reduced.
4. We do not feel that we need to dedicate the additional 5'. We have been denied any access or use
of Wingate Lane and do not feel we need to solve their problem.
5. Fences will not be built on top of irrigation lines.
6. The property was surveyed from a legal description which was supplied by Stewart Title
Company and, as I understand, it is similar to the adjoining Allman parcel.
7. Access to Packard No. 2 will be provided for by Hickory Lane as part of Phase 2 of Packard No.
1. The condition should read that Phase I of Packard No. 2 will not be allowed until Hickory Ave
is constructed or built in conjunction with Phase 1 of Packard No. 2.
8. The arrows were added as requested in your prior letter (item No. 8).
9. The separate dwelling unit was not built by us. It was built by the Browns so that a family
member could stay there. As we understand it was approved by Ada County - refer to item No. 7
of prior letter.
10. The Brown parcel will be "legalized" by this subdivision and will be known as Lot 14 Block 9.
11. The crossing of Wingate Lane should be left to discussions between respective lawyers for
Wingate Lane users and the developer. It seems that the Wingate Lane users are wanting to use
the City to fight their battles. The Wingate Lane users have an easement for ingress and egress
and it is not an "exclusive easement" and as such does not preclude other uses which would not
interfere with their rights.
12. Access roads for the sewer will be built in accordance with City Standards.
13. Lift station agreements, if needed, will be worked out as part of the final plat application.
14. A turnaround will be provided and is shown on the revised preliminary plat.
15. It was never the intention to place smaller lots adjacent to the Sharp property to spite them. The
plat was drawn and submitted prior to any testimony by the Sharps. We resent this implication by
staff as it has absolutely no basis.
We believe that we have provided the transaction form R-8 to rural residential as ordinance
requested. Both Kearney Place Subdivision No. 1 & 3, Chateau Meadows No. 8 and Chamberlain
Estates Subdivision have done the same.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please call at your earliest convenience if you should
have any questions.
R pectfully,
t 14�1
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's Land Surveying
P.L.S. No. 4347
OFFICIALS
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKI EL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
MEMORANDUM:
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 - FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
Mayor
To: Mayor and Council
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City En 'neer
Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator
COUNCIL MEMBERS
WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M. ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
P—& Z COMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
BYRON SMITH
July 11, 1997
Re: Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds Construction
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following supplemental comments, as conditions
of the application. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or
deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council.-
The
ouncil:
The Stokesberry Lateral easement needs to be designated as a separate lot, even though tiled.
Downstream water users need to have ready access to the weir structures at all times and
cannot be expected to enter the back yards of people to get their irrigation water. As Nampa -
Meridian Irrigation District also uses the adjacent access road on a daily basis, it is not
appropriate to enclose the access road along rear lot lines.
2. The full easement for the Stokesberry Lateral has never been depicted on the plat. Lot 1,
Block 6, will not meet the minimum square footage requirements exclusive of this easement.
3. What accommodations will be made for downstream water users to access the cleanouts of
the ditches?
4. Property owners to the west of Wingate Lane have furnished a 15 -foot -wide easement for the
private roadway. The Meridian Fire Department needs a minimum access width of 20'.
Properties to the east of Wingate Lane should provide an additional five feet for the roadway
easement.
The lines shown for fence construction coincide exactly with the proposed irrigation plan.
Fences may not be constructed on top of the irrigation line.
6. It has been brought to our attention that the subdivision boundary as described in the legal
description submitted for annexation does not appear to follow the established and
monumented boundary along the South Slough. It is our understanding that this line was
established and monumented when the original parcel was split, and that the monuments are
still existing in the field. Please explain the reason for not recognizing and using the existing
monumentation.
Mayor and City Council
July 11, 1997
Page 2
7. Although the applicant's representative stated that there are two accesses to this site, only one
presently exists. There is no access from Hickory Avenue at this time, as only the first phase
of Packard Subdivision No. 1 has received final plat approval. Construction equipment for
Phase 1 of Packard Subdivision No. 2 cannot have primary access across Wingate Lane.
8. House orientation designations need to be added to the plat on those lots that do not conform
to the minimum frontage requirements.
9. Lot 7, Block 2, contains a non -conforming use as there is more than one building being used
as a dwelling unit on the lot.
10. The Borup property was illegally split by the developer, with their full knowledge.
11. The City Attorney needs to further explore the legality of crossing Wingate Lane with public
utilities and right-of-way.
12. With the proposed phasing, sewer easements will have to be dedicated in Phase 1 to access
the lift station, with gravel accesses built in accordance with City standards.
13. The lift station maintenance agreement and detailed conditions of approval need to be fully
worked out prior to submittal of a final plat on any phase.
14. A turnaround is needed on the east side of Wingate Lane on E. Challis Street.
15. Applicant's representative indicates that adequate buffering has been provided where they
"believe the full development potential of the adjacent properties has occurred." In the case
of Dixie Roberts' property, as her only access is Dixie Lane, further subdividing will not be
possible and adequate buffering with transitional lots, in accordance with the Comprehensive
Plan, is needed. It also seems that, because the Sharps have been vocal in their opposition
to the project, the Applicant has intentionally provided the smallest of lots adjacent to their
property.
As Lot 1, Block 6, cannot meet minimum square footage requirements, and the fact that an
additional five feet of roadway easement for Wingate Lane should be provided, larger lots
need to be incorporated at this location. The Comprehensive Plan does not differentiate
between existing rural residential lots and existing rural residential lots that may someday be
further developed.
16. Applicant needs to give a written response to these comments prior to approval of a
preliminary plat.
Project No.: 1408
July 15, 1997
r
TL .LEY'S LAND
SURVEYING
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho St.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Attn: Shari Stiles
109 South 41" Stre. _ Boise, Idaho 83702
(208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT
Dear Shari;
RECEIVED
J U E. 15 1997
CITY OF MERIDIAN
In response to the City's letter dated July 11, 1997 we have the following comments:
The Stokesberry Lateral will be designated as a separate lot. We are piping the lateral and as such
its easement area should qualify for square footage requirements. We will provide access for
downstream water users and of course will not impair Nampa Meridian Irrigation Districts access to
their ditch. If the City of Meridian will not use the easement for lot areas, the lots will still satisfy
frontage and area requirements. We will obtain a letter from Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for
lot encroachment.
2. Lot 1, Block 6 will meet square footage requirements per Meridian City code 2-410A, Footnote 8.
3. Downstream water users will have direct access or specific easements for access to all cleanouts.
This arrangement has been standard practice in other subdivisions such as Dove Meadows and
Packard No. 1, once the ditch is piped the need for access to the system will be greatly reduced.
See irrigation plan for easements and access.
4. We do not feel that we need to dedicate the additional 5'. We have been denied any access or use
of Wingate Lane and do not feel we need to solve their problem.
5. Fences will not be built on top of irrigation lines.
6. The property was surveyed from a legal description which was supplied by Stewart Title
Company and, as I understand, it is similar to the adjoining Allman parcel. The boundaries are
identical according to legal description.
7. Access to Packard No. 2 will be provided for by Hickory Lane as part of Phase 2 of Packard No.
1. The condition should read that Phase 1 of Packard No. 2 will not be allowed until Hickory Ave
is constructed or built in conjunction with Phase 1 of Packard No. 2.
8. The arrows were added as requested in your prior letter (item No. 8).
9. The separate dwelling unit was not built by us. It was built by the Browns so that a family
member could stay there. As we understand it was approved by Ada County - refer to item No. 7
of prior letter.
10. The Brown parcel will be "legalized" by this subdivision and will be known as Lot 14 Block 9.
11. The crossing of Wingate Lane should be left to discussions between respective lawyers for
Wingate Lane users and the developer. It seems that the Wingate Lane users are wanting to use
the City to fight their battles. The Wingate Lane users have an easement for ingress and egress
and it is not an "exclusive easement" and as such does not preclude other uses which would not
interfere with their rights.
12. Access roads for the sewer will be built in accordance with City Standards.
13. Lift station agreements, if needed, will be worked out as part of the final plat application.
14. A turnaround will be provided and is shown on the revised preliminary plat.
15. It was never the intention to place smaller lots adjacent to the Sharp property to spite them. The
plat was drawn and submitted prior to any testimony by the Sharps. We resent this implication by
staff as it has absolutely no basis.
We believe that we have provided the transaction form R-8 to rural residential as ordinance
requested. Both Kearney Place Subdivision No. 1 & 3, Chateau Meadows No. 8 and Chamberlain
Estates Subdivision have done the same.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please call at your earliest convenience if you should
have any questions.
Respectfully,
)IA lu
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's Land Surveying
P.L.S. No. 4347
GENE YOUNGBERG 2083438598 P.02
Beginning at the North qu&ctsr oorpm• of the NorUlvestgjazt=of SautIm 5
TOWMhiP 3 North, Range 1 East, Bpiss Maridien, Ada County, Id o; therjoB
Weut 335 feet to a Point: thence
South 876.63 feet to a podnt: theme
West 25 feet to a paint, the REAL POW OF P GDRWG,- theme,
South 468.37 feet to a post; thews
East 310 feet to a paint: thence
South 660 feet to the SouH"St a=ier of the Nnrtheaft q mrbar of the
Southeast quarter of the Mrameat qui; tune
East 50 feet to a paints ti>
South 660 feet to a Point: nonce
West 25 meet to the EM CIF EASM4W.
qmrter of w •
West 25 feet to a point; therx�e
of the m
South 275 feet, more cw lam, to the Southeast corner of the N=dvest quartp
of the jioffjft#est quarter. tlleMe _r
op
South 660 feert to ths Southeast conwr of the NortjxmM qtlarber of the
SbuthGaSt quarber of the Norduvest quarter; thence
East 50 feet to a point;■ - •Weet 25 feet to thS EM CF EASMEm
-
i
innT n mann ^ .
rr►rr xnlr►rrnrnr, �
J U L 1 5 1997
;Cyrsthlx AlebFiCh et al
raese.k.a.sss.rsrerse.•• ,¢ C OF ERWIAN
Private toad ae�amrit.
rhia A `.rr1t :►is bay wdo b,r *qct tti+•vre*n the psrtiae hereto as fol]owe• to•4;,tt;
I
Whoreas aro syr:hta Aldorlah 10 ?red A AMP 114*11F.L.Yost, C.F:.Vhn Auker, L.A.W,dsjn, n.A,
r?tr►hla, be'a� 4tRlrra of•':a .*Vesal treats of la•�� sonstitutln+ arv! boriaring ori t'r.•
Oast Iirsl Co. t:ts 1"t h0r sr tete xoelk xoat quartar of Sections ?owwhtp 3 i-ortih or
t2ae� 1 rar1: or Sot+M elerid:any a rx! o : dessrbaa� o; cps Hitt; ArW ■alma! nin j o pr tV.r.a ra .+
alot•� the a&14 i:YA bej-.lnn:L%. the publicFis►•aay !o:vin;: t:sa north lues of *aid
A6otlOD SS, &:V rUnn$Zj ?Oils t ILICU tae 9"d "%t line of tyle raid Rj of tns ws-4 or aAul
i Seo. 5 b+.S-rz t�;a h►3! seattor. 11.no, to Lia ticruth sat oosrxr of thA said M � of ,.aid
r
+ 3oetloa Zj tho t•44 road to to 25 !e04 is +*idth. New t2;ere'Ore we thv ardorAlerlad r:a
hornby &Crw %a and with e84':00er and bind oera•)Ivoa arA our Nucaoarors as ow, " or r•
i noveral treats atu6tinU on the 3"oi half rootion lino, t>b*t wo will. apvn arra r 'giatn a
prtr►'.� rout 351h:ragL :A r:Tth, t}* h& 2f seat 101A Uro *0ret ltutind the sant .;'ho or SQA
acid Mfad, that thA maid road :wall b* tor4rt" ups or all o: the 4''the .at(i tr••:tr
►tl.th oqukl rlyhtA'ss Lo the U96 or thO sem, in ftifrP rherOOf rte Maty rarllritD t9t our
ha Me an -t err im(I our mov Is t his 12t h &Y of Jun$, 1913 .,
Harry. L.Yost
Post It" bra fax transmittal memo of Pages 0.
a
From
Go.
Dept.
Phan* r
F"#QV
x f
•�J
%nix tis. Al-41liah tv r'"4 Adwxs.
H.•J.Itah la
L. A.-*Avi RQr'.
- gub�arl reef in t;t• preearoa and sworn to botoro as by C.K.Van Aetker thloi 13th dry of
Jure 1913.,
Ldwivri St,4in4
HD t ary i'u bli , .
3ubsoritod is r_ P!•asero a arri owern to betnrs ao by Wry aL.YostI bred tdaas r H,d.
Mahla aAd L.AAswison this 901 4W Of MY 1:913.,
i
f F. C. Pfaff 34
0cal)
Notary Nblio.
RIeordod at tbA request of harry Yo,rb at 2:25 pax. -IUIY 25th, 1913 ,Vas 60 ,,
�i2 aea,
Rodarder' . ,
i •kt. �! ;r: y'/ 1���'�;t,i 7z.,.7 .\e�%• 4� 4 �'r mf!�'...:.1 a :}i"`7 �r.•l i)a3�%� w�R�
y
+..,.•
.......... _.... .�In74NnorR 17:x,hnr agt179.
Leh at r7k
Auxaxu......xe•xn.euxxu.mx nn19 nt••
road r.�
private
1 14.vron t.hO part.inm hnrOtO An follow- eo-+rtt•:
b'
:,i• dr nw do b. are
C.X.Vnn A::l:ort G.a.l.+.+iaunt H. A.
1'
pr,oror.,'•+n g;•n:h1a Alm•Sch LY Fren Arfammt Itarry.1'.Voett
hoMerinB ',n q+e
'
e
— e .!or"t"Utin'. •.n,l
tracts Of lay.
��• o+rrn,rm ot•Lho ,nveral
Nahlrt� r n;. orth of
::oction 5 TonmhtP S ►:
.}
:re r. r. rivartnr o"
ox,t ?.lm or t.hO Fact halt of the North +rt .t.e rad
,
'-art Botno Heridiant and bo dualrD+ Ke,• opOnln: arrl manmrt n'i
Awra:o l of *
- ttO rerrh 'in* of Haid
6M l'ub?.Sa ilt;gaay furiain:(
�..
•lore;; the Aa1,1 11114 boCin^in'( at 1 of ,aid
the F', or tno HW•
k
t Outh along thu maid Fa,t line of .•aid
` noation `+ and runnin; A
.aid N7F;t of ,a1A
'
yyys
the half Aoction list to the timlth Bnet eermr of the
:i brirk: ltlorANd Ao
to be L4 foot in .11 At h, NOa t*.ora; OrO ,te the ule4
ianthe m•.1A road e
"wet ion
31 Otrso Ivan rnd OVr ,ucenmAorr on Ownava o
.
"wet
each other and bind
Wt wnrl witheach•
-
IN a •nn Ina
halt •cation lint that We u11). Oprlh•
.p•rnral traote aMrttfnit on the awlrl
tntitutilu Lho pant lire of tt•r+
1
,.:•1%h tfo nr'.f coact ion Si ry ro
rna•I Lith fnot 'n t.
of the •aid traotr
i
prlvatn o.torm
.!tall be f Or�r•hn u,o of a]3 N tho
road !;
•,S
AwtA rrndt t!:nr• the +.aid
1n WitrD its r,peroof no have horru nto •ot our
1
srl'•h ogvnl ..i �ttA •ae to tho uma of Lho aaml t
'•.+Ir
I
or .lune 1913•t
and afrisod ,ur so thin lith rlrY t
P+
tr!d�
Hnrry.I,.Yoat
Aukor
I
•.ed.l;Sa AVlrieh by Frn,l Adamm•
I!. A.tiahla
L.A.(Ogi,on
• r
to bn:roru me by C.K. Van Anker thi n lit" day °
:u9•o rt roA in cy 1'roee rao A. sworn
•a
}:ch+aryl ttnin.
Nbtury 1111bll7.
- (goal) - 11..1..
by Horry.h.YOett Prod AAaaet
r'
it
hmurimd in tyv promam0 aM mworn to bornro m
I!aH?a and L.A.1,aeieon thi,
C.Praff In
9thIay of f1],Y
r:. .
h Notary Public.
,�
Y+" Yomt at s :7l P.m, .iu]y '2",t•ht 141V rno Gorl. t
'*. Itar mlott at. tha requomt of tt,rry
i
(Not a legal transcription) 7/15/97 —
Anr�-rnent by
Cynthia Aldrich et al
Private road agreement.
This Agreement this day made by and between the parties hereto as follows
to -Witt:
Whereas we, Cynthia Aldrich by Fred Adams, Harry D. Yost, C. ,. Van Auker,
L.A. Lewison, H.A.Mahla, beina owner of the -everal tracts of land
constituting and bordering on the east line of the East half of the
North West quarter of Section 5 Township 3 North of Range 1 East of
Boise Meridian, and he desiro,-s of opeiing and maintainina a private
road along the said line beginning at the public Highwav forming the
north line of said section F, and running south along the said East
line of the said E1/2 of the NW1/4 of said Sec. 5 being the half section
line, to the South East corner of the said NW1/4 of said Section 5,
and said road to be 15 foot in width. Now therefore we the undersigned
do hereby agree to and with each other and bind ourselves and our
successors as owners of the several tracts abutting on the said half
section line constituting the east line of the said road, that the
said road, that the said road shall be for the use of all of the
owners of the said tracts with with equal rights as to the use of
the same, in Witness whnrenf -e have hereunto -,et sur hands and
-ffixed our seals +his 12th Aay of June, 1913 ,
carr„ 1. Yost
C. v. Van Aukor
Cynthia Aldrich by Fred Adams
H. J. Mahla
L. A. Lewison
Subscribed in my presence and sworn to before me by C. K. Van Auker
this 13th day of June 1913.,
(Seal )
Edward Stain.
Notary Public.
Subscribed in my presence and sworn to before me by Harry L. Yost,
Fred Adam, H.J. Mahla and L.A. Lewison this 9th day of July 1913.
C.C.Pfuffin
Notary Public
Recorded at the request of Harry Yost at 2:25 p.m. July 25th, 1913
Fee 60¢ Stephen Utter, Recorder
�'� .. ..
.! rT •....•w r r•!.r••p'R:f•S.�►e.+w•`�'.y'•.• PYJ•• �5w1
_, 49gi� •
.=Ing
vww
,rumartt )l.rah�r•y
,,:.,...-.• .....:. _._...:. -...w
.''`�:
0.J L Aldrich at r.l
MNwh/, N)INM N NNNM NN.N I/MNMMMN . '
privata roanvont•
;.
M• ant b�l�•aran t•he Dartio+ h++roto as �o1lo►r+ t. o—►,tt.:•
'•. Thfr A;.-ru��:.ont :t•1- day nµ da
Harry.r.,Yo&tt C.iC.Vr.n A:,I:drr, L.�►.l�►.rir.+nt H.A.
vR,oroe� :�+ •n:hfa Aldrich by Fran Atims,
5; N. rot hoMnring nn the
•.o+
o+ n�mors or•.tf o-nvorwl tract, of ta•t ..ur'titutin::
Wahl&, r . •A;.
moctlon5 Town-MP S Forth of
i1n/l.of r,ha FKr+t hal: of tho itorth :+e r.►• rivartnr o"
o ,,t )r tvot.e ma d
ntn c t
uerictian ,�nl bo I1u,ir6c o,- epontn: att`f maintaf
t•:art :of HAt10 11ric
Rs.r4..6 l
i! Alno or ,airt
t �haay f urinina tho north
P11
&tori; tho &Rill ll.tt<r boginrin-t at LM [
N1rt
the raid F+': of too at •a11t
. ,oath alon1 Thu paid Fant 1f no or
at Ion 5t Rat rennin, • .aid .
tho ratd leg,t or
tho halt taction livor to f•ho Anuth F•e►&t a'rror of
=ua.:i. bai►ti r. a ttcto r, ie.'nJrt e:o
;.Zoo %18
Lr foot In ,ririth. Nor t*.ora: ez+t h
3�tntiun sir thn .^.id road to bo
our ,ucen,•or• N& nvrnare. of rho
With each othor and bird aur&olw+ onsi
o to rnrl
*.orn►,y agro at•ftain a
hal! •nation dirt), thwt ►wo ►ri11 opon an'1 .
tti on tha &girl
•ovnra 1 tructa n►f� . na t a dant 11no aril's .
irt;. h,
.•1lr.hr t*o nrl`..r ,action Sirs► com"tut
pr roa,l litjl foot.,n
of w71 �� tho o.acOr. of tho .atA trrotr
d rondl t:nt• t!:e -aid road ,!:all bd lot•/t•l•n ttno
horru oto "at our
,n "a ono of tho aarrr t in Witco &s vq eiroof ►ro hovo
( s,i•.h oryanl ..i Jttn'as
afrlmiott ::ur sac l& thi+ 12th rivY or dunHt 113•/
anti
Itnrry.lLYo�t
.. .
C.:•:.Can Aukor
•.•r,t•Faw Al•rrich by Frnrt Adam&.
j
i1J•t/ahla .
1.. A. ho►rt n on
by C.K.vwn Aui!er thin. ;3..•. 4wY or
:u9 orf l,oct.in .mY hruse►wo and sworn to bo•'oru no
' Fai►rarrl St-41M
r
�;; •. Nu tory F'ubli � .
��
• (squall H.J..
Harry.Il•Yo&tt prod Adaat t
i
i m d in TV. Proaam a an4 .►corn t o bllrr,ro r-A by
i
:fiw,cri
thin and L. A.ts►tinon 9th • 1ty of July ""3 • r
'±•
t:.e.Nrarrin.
ttotaXyr ['ublio
r Sual)
1 YO-It at 2!:P—"l .m. 1p� dna God.•,
of 1.Rrry
r �'�.
i
ligccrdad at tha requo&t
tr„3.
-nocardar. .
t '
FI
August 30, 1995
J U L 15 1997
Ada County Highway District
attn: Larry Sales
RE: Wingate Lane, easements
Dear Mr. Sales:
have reviewed the private road easement creating what is now called
Wingate Lane, in regard to Packard Subdivision No. 2, and I have also
reviewed the comments from ACHD regarding the conflict between
the private and public roads in the subdivision. It is my legal opinion
that:
1. Since the applicants now own all of the Packard Subdivision No.
2 real property where the private and public roads, and/or utilities,
would cross, the applicants can make temporary alternate methods
of ingress and egress, on a practical basis, without the permission of
any other person or entity.
2. The 1913 ingress and egress easement only refers to the surface
right of travel and does not grant any further rights to subsurface
usages, nor does it grant any rights to block any subsurface usages
which do not interfere with the ingress or egress. Therefore,
applicants may run utilities and the like under the surface of the
easement without the necessity of consent from users of the
easement.
3. So long as the ability of the beneficiaries of the easement to travel
the easement is maintained, the applicants may improve the surface
of the easement area, including, for example, by the addition of
blacktop or other road surfaces.
4. In order to maintain or otherwise use the area of the easement,
applicants may provide temporary alternate methods of granting
ingress and egress to the beneficiaries of the easement. For
example, applicants could provide a temporary road next to the
easement area while resurfacing the easement area or digging utilities
on which the sole beneficiary of the easement to the south of Packard
No. 2 could travel.
Ada County Highway District
Page 2
August 30, 1995
I therefore see absolutely no impediment to the proposals of the applicant for surfacing
and placement of utilities so long as temporary access is provided to the neighbor using
the easement.
e y yours,
Robert L. Aldridge
Attorney at Law
RLA/yw
Meridian City Council
July 1, 1997
Page 8
(Inaudible)
Crookston: It includes three separate pieces of property.
(Inaudible)
Sharp: I am interested in which properties they have got because when you are reading
the descriptions because on that one 22 acres it is the PNE that owns it, there is the
Browns that own it and the Castles and on the other side there is the Borup property the
PNE and also the people that bought that, that couple that bought that house that was
at one time the Borup's. So the way we are. looking, when I went down to check the
titles there actually was more than just the three pieces. So I would like to see a copy
and have it checked with the records the public records to make sure they are all
included in that. According to the facts and findings they have one and they were all to
be included in the annexation.
Corrie: One more opportunity, would anyone like to have the complete ordinance read
at this time? Hearing none.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt Ordinance #764 with the suspension of
rules.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to adopt amended
Ordinance #764 with suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Corrie — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #7: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.
2:
Corrie: I am going to ask the Council with their approval that we table that one until the
next meeting. The reason being that the agenda that was put our Friday did not have
that on the original agenda it was changed on Tuesday and it hasn't had a chance to
have everybody knowing about the change. I think that
Morrow: Were there those of the public that were informed that is was on the agenda for
tonight and so therefore they did not have an opportunity to show up?
Tolsma: Yes
Meridian City Council _
July 1, 1997
Page 9
Corrie: Council, whatever you would like to do.
Rountree: I don't either, but I do have a question, was the meeting held and the issues
resolved?
Stiles: Yes there was a meeting held, I have received some additional information. I
would like to discuss that information at the next meeting.
Corrie: At the next meeting of this meeting Shari?
Stiles: The next meeting.
Corrie: Any further discussion by Council? I will entertain a motion for table to the next
meeting which would be the 15th of July.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we table item #7 until July 15.
Morrow: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Morrow to table item 7 until the
July 15th meeting, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #8: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR REDUCTION OF FRONTAGE AND SIDE STREET SETBACK BY A'a
LLC:
Corrie: Council, you have the findings of fact and conclusions of law on that one, any
discussion or comments?
Morrow: I move that we hereby adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the findings of
fact and conclusions of law as written, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow —Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Entertain a motion for the decision.
Meridian City Council
July 1, 1997
Page 7
Rountree: I just want confirmation from Shari that there are no additional issues with
this property. If we were to pursue and a PUD.
Stiles: I don't have any as far as the rezone.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, that being the case I would move that we instruct the City Attorney
to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Crookston: I just want to reference that this is not a rezone this is an annexation and
zoning.
Corrie: Mr. Morrow you may proceed.
Morrow: The motion would be that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings of
fact and conclusions of law for a request of annexation and zoning of approximately one
acre to R-8 by Larry and Kay Hanson with a Planned Unit Development.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to instruct the City
Attorney to draw up new findings of fact and conclusions of law with a PUD on the
annexation, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? .
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #6: AMENDED ORDINANCE #764 — PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2
ANNEXATION:
Corrie: Gary, did you have time to read this amended ordinance?
Smith: I believe that my assistant Bruce Freckleton reviewed that and said it was okay.
We started a process of sending a legal description to Wayne for inclusion into the
ordinances that is stamped as approved and signed off by Bruce. I think you got that
right Wayne for this ordinance?
Crookston: That is correct but we did not get the legal description until yesterday at
approximately 1:00. But Bruce and I have done that and he has reviewed the legal
description and he says that it is fine.
Corrie: AMENDED ORDINANCE #764, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A
PORTION OF THE NW Y4, SECTION 5, T.3N, R.1 E, B.M. ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the audience that
would like to have Amended Ordinance #764 read in its entirety?
Meridian City Council
July 1, 1997
Page 8
(Inaudible)
Crookston: It includes three separate pieces of property.
(Inaudible)
Sharp: I am interested in which properties they have got because when you are reading
the descriptions because on that one 22 acres it is the PNE that owns it, there is the
Browns that own it and the Castles and on the other side there is the Borup property the
PNE and also the people that bought that, that couple that bought that house that was
at one time the Borup's. So the way we are looking, when I went down to check the
titles there actually was more than just the three pieces. So I would like to see a copy
and have it checked with the records the public records to make sure they are all
included in that. According to the facts and findings they have one and they were all to
be included in the annexation.
Corrie: One more opportunity, would anyone like to have the complete ordinance read
at this time? Hearing none.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt Ordinance #764 with the suspension of
rules.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to adopt amended
Ordinance #764 with suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Corrie — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #7: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.
2:
Corrie: I am going to ask the Council with their approval that we table that one until the
next meeting. The reason being that the agenda that was put our Friday did not have
that on the original agenda it was changed on Tuesday and it hasn't had a chance to
have everybody knowing about the change. I think that
Morrow: Were there those of the public that were informed that is was on the agenda for
tonight and so therefore they did not have an opportunity to show up?
Tolsma: Yes
AMENDED ORDINANCE NO. 764
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 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:
A parcel of land situated in Gov't Lot 3, NWh and the NE4
of Section 5, T. 3N., R. 1E., B.M. , Ada Coupty,, Jdaho;_
more particularly described as follows: J f 1L '_I '
Commencing at the North h corner of said 'Section .5;
thence along the North line of said Section 5L`
North 89044157" -West 335.00 feet to a point; thence along
a line 335.00 feet West of and parallel to the North-
South center of Section line of said Section 5
South 0027132" West 876.63 feet to a point on the
centerline of the South Slough said point being THE POINT
OF BEGINNING; thence continuing
South 0°27132" West 404.43 feet to a point on the North
line of the NE'h SEh NWh of said Section 5; thence along
the North line of the NEk SEh NWk of said Section 5
South 89032,4311 East 335.00 feet to a point on the North-
South center of section line of said Section 5; thence
along the North-South center of section line of said
Section 5
South 0°27132" West 391.14 feet to a point on a line that
lies 935.00 feet North of the East-West center of section
line; thence along a line 935.00 feet North of and
parallel to the East-West center of section line of said
Section 5
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 1
South 89040120" East 569.25 feet to a point; thence along
a line 569.25 feet East of and parallel to the North-
South center of section line
South 0°27132" West 935.00 feet to a point on the East-
West center of section line of said Section 5; thence
along the East-West center of section line of said
Section 5
North 89040120" West 569.25 feet to the center of section
of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of
section line of said Section 5
North 0027132" East 663.07 feet to a point marking the
Southeast corner of the N,� SEk NW 4 of said Section 5;
thence along the South line of the N' SE4 NW4 of said
Section 5
North 89035139" West 995.09 feet to a point marking the
Southwest corner of the Eh NW a SEk NW a of said Section 5;
thence along the West line of the Eh NWh SEk NWk of said
Section 5
North 0026123" East 663.92 feet to the Northwest corner
of the E� NWh SE�r NWh of said Section 5; thence along the
North line of the Eli NWh SES; NW k of said Section 5
South 89032143" East 4.31 feet to a point on a line that
lies 991.00 feet West of the North-South center of
section line of said Section 5; thence along a line
991.00 feet West of and parallel to the North-South
center of section line of said Section 5
North 0027132" East 680.84 feet to a point on the
centerline of the South Slough; thence along the
centerline of the South Slough the following courses and
distances
South 85059'55" East 132.90 feet (Formerly South
86°30126" East 135.83 feet) to a point; thence
South 58005124" East 99.48 feet (Formerly South 58035'55"
East) to a point; thence
South 30047'28" East 189.47 feet (Formerly South
31°17159" East) to a point; thence
South 7555125" East 191.49 feet (Formerly South
76025126" East) to a point; thence
South 86007149" East 154.36 feet (Formerly South
86038120" East) to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 2
Said parcel contains 35.23 acres, more or less.
is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and is zoned R-4
Residential; that the reason for the R-4 zoning is to allow
development for a single family residential subdivision to be known
as Packard Subdivision No. 2; 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; that all
ditches, canals and waterways shall be tiled including those that
are property boundaries or only partially located on the property.
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, particularly as stated
in the Conclusions of Law, paragraph 22.
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
project of the requirements of 11-9-605 of the Revised
and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian and other
matters; that the property may be de -annexed if the terms
and conditions of the Development Agreement are not
satisfied.
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.
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 3
f. That the Applicant shall meet 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 Mayor of the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this day of ju te_,
1996.
`Tc � j
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK -- WILLI
APPROVED:
",MAYOR ---ROBERT D. CORRIE
G .'" BERG, JR.
t%jillt1t1111"
t,Of�
SEAL
N'/ �O
J(, tli
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 4
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 Amended Ordinance entitled
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 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. 764, V_ the City Council and Mayor of the City of
Meridian, on the jf day of dam$, 1997, as the same appears in my
office.�TwYy
DATED this �% day of -duas, 1997.
`1rr<<�,tt�rrritrtrrif, Su.QtJ.
OF
City Clerk, City of Me idian
Ada County, Idaho
SEAL7
STATE OF IDAHO,)/���rrisrt"ttr�.rr
ss.
County of Ada, )
On this C -`f day of 3e, 1997,. 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
written,
rttttttrrrrr,,rr�'
♦r�+��G E L
aaTAR
SEAL
0 �
T•it1 •♦
Notary Public for"Idaho
Residing at Meridian, Idaho
My commission expires: el'r
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 5
,
N. tit° 44'5.7 W. 33G. oo
r- #--- iJ. l"4 C
---------------------- Sec . 5 T 314 , t2, I E
-- - - -- --------------
-
J
�M
yP
3p �- +� o
GJ1 A� Pbltrf OF
�-INNtIV�,
E.
49'Lu
�
m
•N
,3
a
N
Q
e't'3243' E. 335.0
flakn
a'35'3q' W. R�6, oqin
I—r--
'!=gL:ll
1
2
i
00
:.
UBD
b '
EE
an
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
Mayor
June 30, 1997
Mr. Wirt Edmonds
Mr. Walter T. Sigmont
Packard Development Co., L.L.C.
3131 E. Lanark St. — Suite C
Meridian, Idaho 83642
RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2
Lift Station Maintenance Agreement
Dear Mr. Edmonds and Mr. Sigmont:
COUNCIL MEMBERS
WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M.ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
P & Z COMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
Attached are two (2) copies of a maintenance agreement, used for another subdivision in
Meridian, containing the most current language acceptable to our City Attorney. Please
review this proposed agreement and if acceptable to you sign both copies and return
them to me for Mayor and Clerk signatures. Thanks.
Sincerely,
Gary D. Smith, P.E.
City Engineer
cc: File
City Clerk
LIFT STATION MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered into this day of '19_, by and between
the City of Meridian hereinafter "Meridian" and Packard Development Company, L.L.C.
hereinafter "Packard".
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, Packard has made application to Meridian to rezone and annex that certain
parcel of real estate to be known as Packard Subdivision, and to develop that subdivision as
more particularly described on its initial application; and,
WHEREAS, Meridian has granted Packard's application subject to all of the terms and
conditions of a Developer's Agreement entered into on 19 ; and,
WHEREAS, one specific condition of the Developer's Agreement requires Packard to
install a sewage lift station in order to properly move sewage from a collection point in the
subdivision to connect to the South Slough Interceptor of the Meridian Sewer System, which
sewage lift station must be monitored and maintained to prevent malfunctions; and,
WHEREAS, Meridian has the capability and the expertise to monitor and maintain this
lift station because it does same with other lift stations at other projects and subdivisions; and
will agree to do the same for Whitstone for a fee equivalent to its costs and expenses; and,
WHEREAS, Packard intends to form a non-profit corporate homeowners association to
be known as Packard Homeowners Association, Inc. (hereinafter the "Association") and that
association will pay Meridian's fees for monitoring, repairing, and maintaining this lift station
after construction by Packard and assignment of this Lift Station Maintenance Agreement
thereto;
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the mutual benefits, the parties agree as
follows:
1. Scope of Meridian's duties: Meridian shall provide the following periodic
maintenance services to the Packard lift station:
A. Daily operations monitoring.
B. Periodic line maintenance in accord with City's normal schedule.
C. Emergency response to telemetry relayed breakdown messages.
D. In the event routine repairs exceeding $100.00 are needed, Meridian shall
notify Packard who shall then make or contract for the repairs at Packard's
separate cost.
E. In the event emergency repairs are necessary, Meridian shall cause those
repairs to be made at Packard's expense. Cost for emergency repairs shall
be based on time and materials in correcting the problem. Time will be at
the rate of $31.50/hour for two (2) personnel or at the then published hourly
rate for services by Meridian wastewater maintenance personnel during regular
hours (8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Monday - Friday) and $49.50/hour (2
employees) for non -regular hours, or at the then published rate for non -
regular hours. A service vehicle rate is charged at $15.00 per hour in
addition to the personnel charge.
NOTE: Emergency repair call -outs require the use of two (2) employees for
safety purposes.
F. These rates are subject to periodic negotiation not more frequently than once
per year or, if the parties agree, the rates may be negotiated by mutual
agreement at any time.
2. Scope of Packard duties:
A. In addition to bearing the cost of installing the sewage lift station, Packard
shall install an alarm system in accord with City Standards which shall cause
a telemetry relayed breakdown signal to be relayed to the Meridian City
Wastewater Department which shall then give rise to the duties in Section 1.
B. Packard shall pay all utility costs incurred in operating the lift station
including water, power and telephone.
C. Packard shall pay to Meridian routine maintenance charges as follows:
• daily lift station monitoring at $340.00/month.
• periodic line cleaning at $135.00 per cleaning as necessary or in
accord with City's normal cleaning schedule.
These rates are subject to periodic negotiation not more frequently than once per
year or if the parties agree the rates may be negotiated by mutual agreement at
any time.
3. Packard shall indemnify and hold Meridian harmless from any and all losses,
claims, actions, judgments for damages or injury to persons or property and losses
and expenses caused by or arising from operations and maintenance of the lift
station and not caused by the negligent conduct of Meridian or its employees.
4. All sums of money due Meridian shall be paid within thirty (30) calendar days of
the date of invoice.
5. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon sixty (60) days written
notice.
4
r►
6. In the event that the sewage collection system serviced by this sewage lift station
can subsequently be connected directly to a gravity sewer line connecting to a main
sewer trunk line making the lift station unnecessary, then the lift station may be
abandoned and all of the equipment shall belong entirely to Packard or its assignee.
7. The duties and rights of Packard may be assigned by Packard to the Association.
Packard Development Co., L.L.C.
Partner Signature
Name
Partner Signature
Name
STATE OF IDAHO, )
ss.
County of Ada, )
On this day of 19 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for the State of Idaho, personally appeared, and
known or identified to me to be the Partners of Packard
Development Co., L.L.C. and who subscribed their names to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that they executed the same for said Packard Development Co., L.L.C..
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal
the day and year fust above written.
SEAL
City of Meridian
Notary Public for Idaho
Residing at
My Commission Expires
3
Meridian City Council
June 17, 1997
Page 3
ITEM #1: TABLED JUNE 3,1997: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY
9.42 ACRES FROM R-4 to R-15 BY LORIN SAUNDERS.-
Morrow: You have in your packets a letter from Mr. Saunders requesting a table until
the July 1 st meeting, is there a discussion or motion to table to the July 1 st meeting?
Rountree: Mr. President I would move that item 1 on our agenda be tabled until our
regularly scheduled meeting July 1St and item 2 as well because it is connected to the
resolve of item #1.
Tolsma: Second
Morrow: Moved and seconded to table Item #1 the request for the rezone of
approximately 9.42 acres from R-4 to R-15 by Lorin Saunders and Item #2 the request
for annexation and zoning of approximately 1 acre to R-15 by Lary and Kay Hanson, all
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #3: TABLED JUNE 3, 1997: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD
SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
Morrow: Some guidance here Counselor, the public hearings are all completed in terms
of this process. What the Council has been waiting for is a resolution of conflict
between staff and the developer's representative with respect to a written response to
questions that the staff has raised. The proper procedure here would be my question is
the proper procedure now is do we simply ask Staff if that resolution has taken place
and we press on or do we have a presentation by Mr. Tealey in terms of those
responses and stand for question. If so is there an opportunity for neighbors or
members of the public to ask questions concerning that?
Crookston: I believe that the proper procedure would be for you and the Council to ask
the staff if they have received their responses. If they have then I would move to the
point of asking Mr. Tealey if he has any comments. If they have not received those then
it is up to the Council as to whether or not they want to proceed further at this time or
whether they want to table it until staff receives their responses.
Morrow: Thank you
Tolsma: Mr. President, being as how we just received these things today and I haven't
had a chance to look at them and I know the other councilmen haven't had a chance to
look at them I am in favor of leaving it lay until the next scheduled meeting. They should
have been in here last Thursday so we would have a chance to look at this thing. That
Meridian City Council
June 17, 1997
Page 4
means we have not had a chance to review it, we (inaudible) to make the decision or
are we going to make the decision ourselves?
Morrow. It is a fair question, comments Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: We did receive the information from Mr. Tealy related to the response of the
comments earlier. I guess I would have a question for staff if those resolve that
particular part of the issue. The other component of this is that we wanted to see a
preliminary plat that reflected the conditions of the findings of fact and conclusions and
the two Councilman on either side have received that but l haven't. For some reason it
wasn't in my box this evening. I might have left it sitting in there somewhere too, but I
don't have it.
Morrow: Mr. Rountree's first question was have you received in writing the response to
the comments requested as you had asked some time ago. And it was Mr. Tealey's
belief if memory serves me that he had submitted answers to those some time ago also.
Stiles: I have received their revised comments, still have been able to find the original
comments in the file. However I would like to note that the previous version was
marked draft was not signed and did not address the items that I talked about. The
latest letter dated May 27, 1997 although they are responses I am not satisfied with
those responses and I think Council needs to review those responses carefully and look
at the revised plat. Because we did just get that plat in your boxes yesterday. We do
have a technical problem with this project as well. The annexation ordinance that was
passed only included one of the lots that were split off. For some reason it does not
include the entire parcel or two parcels for, that were propose to be annexed. So we do
need to have an amended ordinance on the entire property prior to acting on this. I am
still pretty concerned about the accesses and the Wingate lane situation. I think before
we are able to prepare adequate development agreements for this I would like a little
more detail on how that is working out. Also they have that shown on a preliminary plat
exactly where those fences are going to be.
Morrow: Does that answer your question?
Rountree: I had a question about the annexation ordinance, was that a result of the
inadequate property description or do you know?
Stiles: I believe what happened is it has been so long since the original description was
provided and then some additional legal descriptions were provided or warranty deeds
when the parcels that had been split off they gave new notarized consents and had
legal descriptions with them. Well I think that was taken and put in the annexation
ordinance inadvertently. Bruce Freckleton didn't get a chance to review that until today.
The actual ordinance that was prepared.
Meridian City Council
June 17, 1997
Page 5
Morrow: Any further questions? Mr. Crookston then is Ms. Stiles point correct that the
annexation ordinance being flawed action could not proceed on the preliminary plat this
evening anyway?
Crookston: That is correct, if the preliminary plat includes any land that has not annexed
excuse me any land that would not be annexed because it was not included in the
annexation ordinance. I draw the ordinances and the descriptions were taken from the
descriptions that I had.
Morrow. Thank you, your pleasure Council?
Rountree: Well I would have a questions for Mr. Tealy related to the ordinance. Does
that encompass the preliminary plat that we just received or is that less than.
Tealey: We supplied adequate descriptions to the City for the annexation. Whether
inadvertently they were left portions of it were left out I don't know I haven't seen that
ordinance I have no idea what they used for a description. The descriptions we
supplied were adequate.
Rountree: Well my opinion we don't have enough information to act on this this evening.
guess what I would like to see done is that staff, council, and Mr. Tealey get together
and resolve these issues once and for all so we don't continue to keep coming back at
this and maybe he feels that he has done that.
Tealey: Can I make just one comment?
Rountree: If you let me get through here. Which will be real quick. It seems to me
coming back and forth on these issues is not productive for anyone. If we can't reach an
agreement and get a subdivision that we feel comfortable putting together a
development agreement on then possibly as Mr. Tolsma indicated we make a decision
to put an end to this or get it moving forward. Coming back and forth like this in my
opinion is not productive for the neighbors, the developer or us. I would move to table
to our next regularly scheduled meeting July 1St with a meeting that is arbitrated if it has
to be to get these issues resolved. So we get answers, the developer knows what the
questions are with the City and the City what the answers and they are provided so we
can have sufficient information from which to make a decision.
Morrow. Let me ask you this, do you wish at this time to, it seems to me in order to do
that we set up or have one of the staff set up a meeting and have some mandatory
attendance by members of our staff with some instructions from us to be prepared to
come to resolution. Meaning bring all of their information and be prepared to act on that
day certain and that meeting and Mr. Tealey (inaudible) and the folk that he represents
or has in terms of the information that he has be at that same meeting. So (inaudible)
did you wish to put that in the form of a motion?
Meridian City Council
June 17, 1997
Page 6
Rountree: Certainly, I a sense you stated so I won't restate it so I will move that.
Tolsma: Second
Morrow: It has been moved and seconded to table the preliminary plat for Packard
Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds Construction for the final time to July 1. In the
interim there be a mandatory meeting set between members of our staff representative
from PNE/Edmonds to iron out the technical issues and for each to come to the meeting
prepared with the information that has been missing or to resolve the conflict over what
is missing and what isn't missing, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow: Mr. Tealey. Ms. Stiles will notify you of the date and the time of that meeting,
please be prepared with anything that you need to resolve the final issues. In the interim
Mr. Crookston, for our next meeting you will have prepared a corrected annexation
ordinance so that we can correct flaw and proceed forward.
Crookston: As soon as I get the legal description for the corrected
(Inaudible)
Morrow: It will be up to Mr. Tealey to review and respond to the City and if the problem
is within the City then we will find out where it is and resolve it from within the city.
Tealey: The motion is exactly what I was going to ask for, the only communication we
get between the staff and ourselves is at these meetings and we just can't come
together on it because we don't know what the questions are going to be. Thank you for
mandating the meeting.
(Inaudible)
Morrow: Well I think you can certainly be there to observe, it is not a meeting where
there is testimony taken. It is a technical meeting in terms of ironing out the issues such
as legal descriptions and those types of things. Then at our next meeting we will bring it
off the table and then deal with that as a Mayor and a Council at that time.
(Inaudible)
Morrow: It will be a meeting that you cannot participate in but you can observe because
it is not a publicly noticed meeting.
ITEM #4: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST BY WINNIE ARD:
Meridian City Council
June 3, 1997
Page 4
Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that we table items 4
and 5 the two ordinances, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #6: ORDINANCE #764 — PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 ANNEXATION:
Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NW Y4
SECTION 5, T.3N, R.1 E, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone here that would like to have Ordinance #764 read
in its entirety? Hearing none I will entertain a motion from Council.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve Ordinance #764 with suspension of rules.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve of ordinance
#764 with suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow —Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #7: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY
PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION; TABLED MAY 20,1997.-
Corrie:
0,1997:
Corrie: Is there a representative from the Packard Subdivision here tonight?
Morrow: I believe the tabling was a procedural matter so that we could do the
annexation ordinance first.
Rountree: I think that and also so that they would have an opportunity to respond to
comments provided previously and incorporate any comments in the preliminary plat. It
is my understanding we haven't seen either of those.
Corrie: Is that correct staff?
Stiles: Yes
Morrow: You have not seen any of the incorporation of the comments from our last
meetings within the preliminary plat?
Stiles: No, we had requested some changes to the plat and responses to my comments
and I haven't seen any response.
Meridian City Council
June 3, 1997
Page 5
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I am going to ask from Edmonds if he has a response to that.
Corrie: Would you come up here please?
Edmonds: The only thing that I have seen as Pat Tealey sent me a letter I received
yesterday a copy of the one that was in question about the 17 items that Shari wanted
in writing that he had sent to the City clear back in early part of 1996. He sent me a
copy of that and a new copy that he re -answered and sent over. That is the only thing
that I have seen.
Rountree: And you received that yesterday?
Edmonds I received that from Pat Tealey yesterday.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I guess if Mr. Tealey or someone shows up later we can bring this
back off the table. My suggestion would be since we have not received the information
that we were after for the time being we table this until the 17tH
(Inaudible)
Corrie: Council I,
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to table the preliminary plat
of Packard Subdivision No. 2 until the proper to June 17t until the proper credentials
are presented to us and the study by Staff, any further discussion? All those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #8: FINAL PLAT: SPORTSMAN POINTE SUBDIVISION NO. 7, 45 LOTS, SW
CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE AND OVERLAND BY WESTPARK CO. INC.:
Corrie: Is there are representative from Sportsman Pointe here tonight? Council,
comments or discussion, staff?
Rountree: I would have a question for staff, Gary have either you or Shari seen a
response to your letter of the 29th?
Stiles: Yes we have.
Rountree: And is it satisfactory?
Meridian City Council
June 3, 1997
Page 4
Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that we table items 4
and 5 the two ordinances, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #6: ORDINANCE #764 — PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 ANNEXATION
Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NW Y4
SECTION 5, T.3N, R.1 E, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone here that would like to have Ordinance #764 read
in its entirety? Hearing none I will entertain a motion from Council.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve Ordinance #764 with suspension of rules.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve of ordinance
#764 with suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow —Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #7: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY
PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION; TABLED MAY 20,1997-.
Corrie: Is there a representative from the Packard Subdivision here tonight?
Morrow: I believe the tabling was a procedural matter so that we could do the
annexation ordinance first.
Rountree: I think that and also so that they would have an opportunity to respond to
comments provided previously and incorporate any comments in the preliminary plat. It
is my understanding we haven't seen either of those.
Corrie: Is that correct staff?
Stiles: Yes
Morrow: You have not seen any of the incorporation of the comments from our last
meetings within the preliminary plat?
Stiles: No, we had requested some changes to the plat and responses to my comments
and I haven't seen any response.
2101 S. U stick yid.
Meridian, ID 83642
June 24, 1997
Mr. teary 6mith
Meridian City . ngineer
33 E. Idaho Ave,
Aeridian, ID 83642
Ae: Irrigation 4ater across Packard ;12 Subdivision
Dear Sir;
I talked with my ditch rider, Andy Madsen, for Nampa Meridian
Irrization and he indicRted this system to supply my irrigation
should be desiwned for 125 miner inches which is the amount
of water available at this time from our headgate.
This system should be designed to connect with the drainage
system of Ch-imberlain Subdivision.
I have worked with another siphoned system which included a
drainage of the system in the winter. The developer was
required to dig what I terma sump pump down to pure gravel
a.nd thorn install a material which ellows the water to seen
out but prevents silt from entering this sump. This then was
filled with coarse rock with a. valve to drain the system into
this sump.
I request that this or a comparable system be installed on
the Packard #2 Subdivision property next to our property.
If you have any questions or I can be of any assistance,
please contact me.
Sincerely,
Vern Allema.n
888-2895
RECEIVED
JUN 2 4 1997
CITY EMG*4EER
16:50 208-385-0696 TEALEY'S LAND SURVEY PAGE 03
OFFKXMA
LLIAM a BERG, JFL, CRyaork
JAN" L. GAS-, Cny rreasurar
GARY D. Sr ffK P.E., City Engineer
MWOE D STUAFif. Water Works Supt
JOHN L "WC.R(*7., WaM Welter Supt
DENNIS J. SUMMERS. PA is SupL
SHM L UM48, P & Z Ad'ninMfi'a or
PATTY A, WOO KIEL_ DMV Supwoor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Flu Chi&
tor. Tp,I.' GOFWK Poke Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JAR Aftmey
MEMORANDUM
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A GoW Plwo to Live
CITY OF 1VMERIDIAN
33 EAU ' IDAM
MERIDIAN, IDAHO W"2
Plane (208) 868-4433 * PAX (2M 887-813
Public Wm kwUwWug Vap wovr t (208) 887-2711
Mata VaEtiaWPnVM LV== CM M-4"3
GRANT P. UNGSFO"
Mawr
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and Council
FROM: 9F?�L, Planning & Zoning Administrator
DATE: November 13, 1995
tt"a
RCNALD R. TC"MA
MAX YEMNMN
R080M D. COME
WALT W. MOPAM
JW JOHNSON, Chatman
MOE ALa,IAM
JW SHEARER
aHAPILE
TIM HEPPM
SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat for PwJmd Subdivision. No.2 by PNElF.dmoods
Construction
1. The C,omprebensive Plan indicates the meed for a park in this area. With over 75 acres
proposed for annexation in Packard Subdivisions Nos. I and 2, opera space appears
bmdequate to midptr. the impacts of the m6&isioas.
2. The South Slough is designated as a future pathway in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
Construct on sbali be in accordance with the Ada County Paddy Plan and City
requirements. Any relocation of the South Slough will negate its conideration as a
"natural Waterway" and will require riling.
3. Perimeter fencing will be required prior to obtaining building permits. The South Slough
shall be fewed with non-combustible fencing outside of existing/required easement to
accommodate future pathway.
4. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation.
5. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision.
b. No access is available to chis site at this time,
7. I have had reports that apartments have been constructed on Lot 7, Block 2. If this is the
case, the lot does not conform to the R--4 zoning requnvments. In addition, it appem
that this proposed Int has already been split illegally.
8. All corner lots shall have a minimum of 80 feet of frontage. For purposes of Ming
frontage, the lime length plus of the curve length is used. Some lots wW need
arrows indicating the dirmtion the house must face (c.g., Lots 1, 3, 4 and b, Block 7,
etc.).
7 16:50 208-395-0696
Commissaov, Mayor and Council
ember 13, 1995
:2
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEY
PAGE 04
Lot square footages are to.be determined exclusive of irrigation easements. The South
Slough area should be designated as a separate lot to be owned and maintained by the
homeowners associatm.
Phasing -of this project, if applicable, shall be indicated on the preliminary plat.
Easements shall be provided as required by City Ordinance Section 11-9-605_D.
Any changes to existing natural fcatures shan mea the approval of the City of Meridian
and the appropriate public agency prior to any duction activity taking place.
P resswized irrigation is to be supplied to all bots within this subdivision.
14. Buffering of adjacent residential nwal lots is required- Whsle consideration has been
given to some adjacent property owners, the lots in Block 6 do not show this same
consideration.
15. All ditches crossing or abutting this property are to be tiled per City Ordinance unless a
vatitasce is granted. What is proposed for the Stokes" Lateral and other ditches
shown?
lb. Driving lanes at cube -sacs ("knuckles") at north and south ends of N_ Malachite
Avenue, with a 21' width, do not appear to be adequate.
17. Applicant is to address W comments, in wri ft, and submit to the City Clerk's office.
16:50 208-385-0696
June 23, 1995
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
33 East Idaho Street
Meridian Idaho 83642
TEA -EY' S LAND SURVEY
RE: Packard Subdivision #2 - Response to Staff Comments
Dear Mentbecs of the Commission:
On June 22, 1995, during your public hearing regarding the above captioned subdivision
application, you directed the applic aru to address the comments and concerns of the City MO.
Following are our responses to the comments from Ms. Stiles, Meridian Planning and Zoning
Administrator_
2 The original design of Packard Subdivislozn 01 included a five (5) acre park. When that
proposal reached the City Council, the proposal met severe opposition due to the inability
of the city of Meridian to acquire and maintain public parr land. Although the original
proposal Ieft mainteamoe of the park in the hands of the Packard Subdivision
Homeowners Association the city wanted the proposal redesigned without the large park
-
Yhe latest versions of the Packard Subdividons proposal include over an acre and one-half
cf open space far use by the residents ofPackard Subdivision.
6) 3 The developers are wig to worm with the city of Meridian for development off pathway
slang, that portion of the South Slough next to Packard Subdivision. No relocation of this
waterway is proposed.
04 The developers agree with this comment.
05 The developers are in the process of providing a development agreement for this proposal.
49nb&vvjq*#2 -1
A ea 14=
16:50 208-385-0696 TEALEY'S LAND SURVEY PAGE 06
The developers support the Meridian School District's plans for needed facilities. The
developers also recognize that the children living in this subdivision will nut necessarily
attend the nearest neighborhood school. '
(9 7 The developers have an easement from the owner of the land lying between Packard
Subdivision and Dove Meadows Su divisicm (Instrument #94082998). This easement
provides access to the site. This easement terniinmes upon the dedication of a public road
upon the area desert'bed in the easement.
8 Arrows denoting the front lot line will be added to the plat for Lots 1, 3, 4, and 6 Block 7.
09 For those lots where the waterways will not be tiled, the area calculations will exclude the
irrigation easement. however, for those lots where the irrigation easement is tried and
located with the normal setbacks, the area wW not be excluded (§ 2.410 A, Footnote 8,
Meridian City Code).
10 Phase roves will be added to the preliminary plat.
1 I Thee developers agree with this comment -
12 The developers agree with this comment.
13 The developers agree with this comment. A pressurized irrigation system wig be
developed and approved by the appropriate irrigation district and the City Engineer.
Regarding the com nients from the City Engineer's office concerning water pressor, we are
awaiting the results of testing by the City Engineer and the Meridian Water Superintendent.
RespectfuDy,
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's Land Surveying
By:
Ted Hutchinson
€**04 6abdivi%ffl #2
t 14"
-2-
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: June 17 1997
APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 3
REQUEST: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
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:
COMMENTS
�2
,kar
Nt
5y-4'1-rQ49"fvt
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
r
Z1p1 E. USTICIC
Cc ;ff MERIDIAN; !D 83642
cv
oL-e�
RECEIVED
J U N 17 1997
CffY OF ME AN
Project No.: 1408
May 27, 1997
TE. _4-EY'S LAND
SURVEYING
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho St.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Attn: Shari Stiles
RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT COMMENTS
Dear Shari;
109 South 41h Stret. _ Boise, Idaho 83702
(208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
RECE vED
JUN 13 19V
CITY OF NIERIVIA N
After reviewing our files I found the letter we originally sent to you on June 23, 1995 (attached).
However, since so much time has elapsed and the situation has changed I will re -address the
comments as follows; the numbering of the responses refers to the numbering of your comments:
1. The original design of Packard Subdivision #1 included a five (5) acre park. When that proposal
reached the City Council, the proposal met severe opposition due to the inability of the city of
Meridian to acquire and maintain public park land. Although the original proposal left
maintenance of the park in the hands of the Packard Subdivision Homeowners Association, the
city wanted the proposal redesigned without the large park. The latest versions of the Packard
Subdivisions proposal include over 2 acres of open space for use by the residents of Packard
Subdivision.
2. The developers are willing to work with the city of Meridian for development of a pathway along
that portion of the South Slough next to Packard Subdivision. No relocation of this waterway
is proposed.
3. Perimeter fencing will be built in accordance with the Meridian City Ordinance and the findings
of fact for the annexation.
4. A development agreement will be drafted by the developers in accordance with the findings of
facts of the annexation and conditions of the preliminary plat.
5. Sewer and water extensions that are part of the project will serve the new school that is proposed
on the Barnes property which is adjacent to the Northeast corner of Packard No. 1.
6. Access is available from Hickory Avenue thru Packard No. 1 on the South and Chemise Street
on the West. Also Stub street to adjacent properties to the East and South have been provided.
7. The developers do not know of any "apartments" that have reportedly been constructed on Lot
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING 109 SOUTH 4" STREET, BOISE, IDAHO 83702 * (208) 385-0636
PAGE 2
7, Block 2. It seems that if the city knows of a violation they should enforce their ordinance.
The developers purchased the land as it now exists, with separate parcels for the original Brown
and Borup houses. The owners of the original Brown and Borup houses have consented to being
included in this development. Their affidavits are on file with the city attorney.
8. Arrows denoting the front lot line will be added to the plat for Lots 1, 3, 4 and 6 Block 7.
9. For those lots where the waterways will not be tiled, the area calculations will exclude the
irrigation easement. However, for those lots where the irrigation easement is tiled and located
with the normal setbacks, the area will not be excluded (§ 2-410 A, Footnote 8, Meridian City
Code).
10. Phases lines will be added to the preliminary plat (attached).
11. Easements will be provided as required by City ordinance.
12. If any changes to existing natural features are required the developer will get the approval of the
city of Meridian or the appropriate public agency.
13. Pressurized irrigation will be supplied to each lot as part of the system already constructed in
Phase I of Packard No. 1.
14. We have provided buffering to adjacent properties where we believe the full development
potential of the adjacent properties has occurred. It is obvious that the properties adjacent to
Block 6 have not been fully developed and when developed will have the same zoning
requirements.
15. All ditches will be tiled or a variance requested per the city ordinance. This will be further
addressed in the development agreement.
�G;
16. A.C.H.D. and the Meridian City Fire Department have approved these driving QS -widths.
Please call at your earliest convenience if you should have any questions.
Re ectf illy,
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's Land Surveying
P.L.S. No. 4347
05/27/1997 16:50 208-385-0696
TLALETS LAND
SURVEYING
91 LN
Project No.: 1408
May 27, 1997
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho St.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Attn: Shari Stiles
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEY
r.
io9 South 41, StreL $vise, Idaho 83702
(208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
PAGE 01
Ll-�t e-�M-
RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT CON WENTS
Dear Shari;
After reviewing our files I found the letter we originally sent to you on June 23, 1995 (attached).
However, since so much time Inas elapsed and the situation has cbanged I will re -address the
comments as follows; the numbering of the responses refers to the numbering of your comments:.
1. The original design of Packard Subdivision #1 included a five (5) acre park. When that proposal
reached the City Council, the proposal met severe opposition due to the inability of the city of
Meridiani to acquire and maintain public park land. Although the original proposal left
maintenance of the park in the hands of the Packard Subdivision Homeowners Association, the
city wanted the proposal redesigned without the large park. The latest versions of the Packard
Subdivisions proposal include over 2 acres of open space bw use by the residents of Packard
Subdivision.
2. The developers azo willing to work with the city of Meridian for development of pathway along
that portion of the South Slough next to Packard Subdivision. No relocation of this waterway
is proposed-
3.
roposed
3. perimeter fencing will be built in accordance with the Meridian City Ordinance and the findings
of fact for the amexalion.
4. A development agreement will be drafted by the developers in accordance with the findings of
facts of the annexation and conditions of the preliminary plat.
5. Sewer and water extensions that are part of the pmt ect will serve the Dew sclwol that is proposed
on the Barnes property which is adjacent to the Northeast corner of Packard No. 1.
6. Access is available from Hickory Avenue thru Packard No. 1 on the South and Chemise Street
on the West. Also Stub street to adjacent properties to the East and South have been provided.
7. The developers do not know of any "apartments" that have reportedly been constructed on Lot
997 16:50 208-385-0696
I LRLt Y -) Lltil YL ` Ljf','J C i
SLAND SURVEXING109 SOUTH 4- STREET, BOISE, IDAHO 88702 * (20B) 38"0636
PAGE 2
7, Block 2. It seems that if the city knows of a violation they should enforce their ordinance.
The developers purchased the land as it now exists, with separate parcels for the original Brown
and Borup houses. The owners of the original Brown anal Borup houses have consented to being
included in this development. Their affidavits are on file with the city attorney.
8. Arrows denoting the front lot line will be added to the plat for Lots 1, 3,4 and 6 Block 7.
9. For those lots where the waterways will not be tiled, the area calculations will exclude the
iaigation easement. However, for those lots wbex+e the irrigation easement is tiled and bated
with the normal setbacks, the area will not be excluded (§ 2-41 Or A, Footnote 8, Meridian City
Code).
10. Phases lines will be added to the preliminary plat (attached).
11. Easements will be provided as required by City ordinance.
12. If any changes to existing natural features are required the developer will get the approval of the
city of Meridian or the approp.date public agency.
13. Pressurized irrigation will be supplied to each lot as part of the system already constructed in
Phase I of Packard No. 1.
14. We have provided buffering to adjacent, properties where we believe the full development
Potential of the adjacent properties has occurred. It is obvious that the properties adjacent to
Block 6 have not been hilly developed and when developed will have the same zoning
requirements.
15. All ditches will be tiled or a variance requested per the city ordinanm- This will be further
addressed in the development agreement. .
16. A.0 -H D. and the Meridian City Fixe Department have approved these driving land widths.
Please call at your earliest convenience if you should have any questions.
Rewnctfidly,
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's Land Surveying
P.L.S. No. 4347
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.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "BILL- GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
MEMORANDUM
MOM
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
GRANT P. KINGSFORD
Mayor
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and Council
FROM: L. les, Planning & Zoning Administrator
DATE: November 13, 1995
COUNCIL MEMBERS
RONALD R. TOLSMA
MAX YERRINGTON
ROBERT D. CORRIE
WALT W. MORROW
P & Z COMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
MOE ALIDJANI
JIM SHEARER
CHARLIE ROUNTREE
TIM HEPPER
SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds
Construction
1. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in this area. With over 75 acres
proposed for annexation in Packard Subdivisions Nos. 1 and 2, open space appears
inadequate to mitigate the impacts of the subdivisions.
2. The South Slough is designated as a future pathway in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
Construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Pathway Plan and City
requirements. Any relocation of the South Slough will negate its consideration as a
"natural waterway" and will require tiling.
3. Perimeter fencing will be required prior to obtaining building permits. The South Slough
shall be fenced with non-combustible fencing outside of existing/required easement to
accommodate future pathway.
4. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation.
5. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision.
6. No access is available to this site at this time.
7. I have had reports that apartments have been constructed on Lot 7, Block 2. If this is the
case, the lot does not conform to the R-4 zoning requirements. In addition, it appears
that this proposed lot has already been split illegally.
8. All comer lots shall have a minimum of 80 feet of frontage. For purposes of calculating
frontage, the line length plusone-hal f of the curve length is used. Some lots will need
arrows indicating the direction the house must face (e.g., Lots 1, 3, 4 and 6, Block 7,
etc.).
P&Z Commission, Mayor and Council
November 13, 1995
Page 2
9. Lot square footages are to be determined exclusive of irrigation easements. The South
Slough area should be designated as a separate lot to be owned and maintained by the
homeowners association.
10. Phasing -of this protect, if applicable, shall be indicated on the preliminary plat.
11. Easements shall be provided as required by City Ordinance Section 11-9-605.D.
12. Any changes to existing natural features shall meet the approval of the City of Meridian
and the appropriate public agency prior to any construction activity taking place.
13. Pressurized irrigation is to be supplied to all lots within this subdivision.
14. Buffering of adjacent residential rural lots is required. While consideration has been
given to some adjacent property owners, the lots in Block 6 do not show this same
consideration.
15. All ditches crossing or abutting this property are to be tiled per City Ordinance unless a
variance is granted. What is proposed for the Stokesberry Lateral and other ditches
shown?
16. Driving lanes at cul-de-sacs ("knuckles") at north and south ends of N. Malachite
Avenue, with a 21' width, do not appear to be adequate.
17. Applicant is to address all comments, in writing, and submit to the City Clerk's office.
June 23, 1995
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
33 East Idaho Street
Meridian Idaho 83642
RE: Packard Subdivision #2 - Response to Staff Comments
Dear Members of the Commission:
On June 22, 1995, during your public hearing regarding the above captioned subdivision
application, you directed the applicants to address the comments and concerns of the City staff.
Following are our responses to the comments from Ms. Stiles, Meridian Planning and Zoning
Administrator.
02 The original design of Packard Subdivision #1 included a five (5) acre park. When that
proposal reached the City Council, the proposal met severe opposition due to the inability
of the city of Meridian to acquire and maintain public park land. Although the original
proposal left maintenance of the park in the hands of the Packard Subdivision
Homeowners Association, the city wanted the proposal redesigned without the large park.
The latest versions of the Packard Subdivisions proposal include over an acre and one-half
of open space for use by the residents of Packard Subdivision.
.� 3 The developers are will to work with the city of Meridian for development of a pathway
along that portion of the South Slough next to Packard Subdivision. No relocation of this
waterway is proposed.
C�4 The developers agree with this comment.
5 The developers are in the process of providing a development agreement for this proposal.
Packard SubdAision #2
Project 1408 _ ]
06 The developers support the Meridian School District's plans for needed facilities. The
developers also recognize that the children living in this subdivision will not necessarily
attend the nearest neighborhood school.
ip 7 The developers have an easement from the owner of the land lying between Packard
Subdivision and Dove Meadows Subdivision (Instrument #94082998). This easement
provides access to the site. This easement terminates upon the dedication of a public road
upon the area described in the easement.
8 Arrows denoting the front lot line will be added to the plat for Lots 1, 3, 4, and 6 Block 7.
9 For those lots where the waterways will not be tiled, the area calculations will exclude the
irrigation easement. However, for those lots where the irrigation easement is tiled and
located with the normal setbacks, the area will not be excluded (§ 2410 A, Footnote 8,
Meridian City Code).
10 Phase lines will be added to the preliminary plat.
11 The developers agree with this comment.
12 The developers agree with this comment.
13 The developers agree with this comment. A pressurized irrigation system will be
developed and approved by the appropriate irrigation district and the City Engineer.
Regarding the comments from the City Engineer's office concerning water pressure, we are
awaiting the results of testing by the City Engineer and the Meridian Water Superintendent.
Respectfully,
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's Land Surveying
LM
Ted Hutchinson
Packard Subdivision #2
Project 1408 _ 2
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: June 3,1997
APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 7
REQUEST: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT: �.
CITY FIRE DEPT:
Ile
CITY BUILDING DEPT: /
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
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:
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
AT,
2 37
ay ow
'4Z 2-
ALLEMAN
,101 E.
D! AN
CIJf LI(1J7f 10. :J C1 b Irw rY •J LAM W"LY HAGS el
,o T ALETS LAND i o9 south a suer=- Boise, Idaho 83702
SURVEYING (208) 5-0635
Fax (20a) 385-0696
----------,,� ` !7of
Poet=d' Fax NOW 7871
Project No.: 1448 TO ,G. �i'
Co -
May 27, 1997 CoxNvt 0. ."r
1 ` rw-
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho St- d
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Atte: Shari Stiles U'
RE: PRELP&NARY PLAT COMMENTS
Dear Shari;
After reviewing our files I found the letter we originally sent to you on June 23, 1995 (attached).
However, since so much time has elapsed and the situation has cbanged *I will re -address the
comments as follows; the numbering of the responses refers to the numbering of your comments:.
1. The original design of Packard Subdivision #1 included a five (5) acne park. When that proposal
reached the City Council, the proposal met severe opposition due to the inability of the city of
Meridian to acquire and maintain public park land. Although the original proposal left
mainter c e of the park in the hands of the Packard Subdivision Homeowners Association, the
city wanted the proposal redesigned without the large park. The latest versions of the Packard
Subdivisions proposal include over 2 acres of open space :for use by the residemts of Packard
Subdivision
2. The developers are willing to work with the city of Wridiian for development of a pathway along
that portion of the South Slough next to Packard Subdivisions. No relocation of this waterway
is proposed.
3. Perimeter fencing will be built in accordance with the Meridian City Ordinance and the findings
of fact for the annexation.
4. A development agreement will be drafted by the developers in accordance with the findings of
facts of the annexation and conditions of the pmlimb3ary plat.
5. Sewer and water extensions that are part of the project will serve the new school that is proposed
on the Barnes property which is adjacent to the Northeast corner of Packard No. 1.
6. Access is available from Hickory Avenue thru Packard No. 1 on the South and Chemise Stmt
on the West Also Stub street to adjacent properties to the East and South have been provided.
7. The developers do not know of any "apartments" that have rcportedly been conswxted on Lot
TRALEY'S LADM SURVEYING log SOUTH as STREET. BOISE, IaAHO 833702 * (205) 385-0635
PAGE 2
7, Block 2. It seems that if the city knows of a violation they should enforce their ordinance.
The developers purchased the land as it now exists, with separate parcels for the original Brown
and Borup houses. The owners of the original Brown and Borup houses have consented to being
included in this development. Their affidavits are on file with the city attorney.
8 Arrows denoting the front lot line willbe added to the plat for Lots 1, 3,4 and 6 Block 7.
9. For thow lots where the waterways will not be filed, the area calculations will exclude the
irrigation easement. however, for those lots where the irrigation easement is tiled and located
with the normal setbacks, the area will not be excluded (§ 2-41 GA, Footnote S, Meridian City
Code).
10. Phases lines will be added to the preliminary plat (attached).
11. Easements will be provided as required by City ordinance.
12. If any changes to existing natural features are required the developer will get the approval of the
city of Meridian or the appropriate public agency.
13. Pressurized irrigation will be supplied to each lot as part of the system already constructed in
Phase I of Packard No. 1.
14, We have provided buffering to adjacent. properties where we believe the full development
Potential of the adjacent properties has occurred. It is obvious that the properties adjacent to
Block 6 have not been fully developed and when developed will have the same zoning
requirements.
15. All ditches will be tiled or a variance requested per the city ordinance. This will be further
addressed in the developnaml agreement.
16. A.C.11D. and the Meridian City Fire Department have approved these driving land widths.
Please call at your earliest convenience if you should have any questions.
Re fly,
,�
Patrick A. Tealey
TeaWs Land Surveying
P.L.S. No. 4347
MIWAM G. BEIM JR.. Cay Clerk
JANICE L GABS. my'rawam
"W D. SMITH, P.E. CIIy Erglnear
ESUCE Q STUARr. Vftw Wmks SWC
.X" L "W=XrE WAIN waw gum
PENN(8J. SUMMERS. Pwft Supe
WART L STRZO, r & 2 Ad abar
PATTY A. WOLFKIFL DMV Suprnviaor
KENNETH W. BQWERIj� FirmCJflpf
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR, Atfemey
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good P we t otove
Li
CITY OF -M ERIDIAN
33 FAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 183642
Phone (208) SU -4433 • PNC (2W W-4813
Public WMkWZa>lrha=1grulm= (208) 887-2211
P'jax Vahkimlod m tam® (208) US -4"3
MEMORANDUM (WANT R 1014cSFKXW
TO: Pbxnning & Zonmg Comnussion, Mayor and Council
ZFROM: I - es, Planning & Zoning AdministTatT r
DATE: November 13, 1995
RCNAtD R. TaLsw
MAX ` ERAINGM4
ROBERT D. CCRRIE
WAIT VL MORROW
SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 by Pf-WEdmomis
Construction
1. The C0MprehC=ve Plan indicates the need for a park in this area_ With over 75 acres
Proposed for anncxatian in Packard Subdivinow Dios. l and 2, open space app=
14 to mitigzft the impacts of the subdivisions.
2. The South Slough is dempabed as a future pathway in the Meridian Cvmpral=sive Plan.
Construction shall be in accordance with ft Ada County Paltltway Pian and City
xeemenis. Any relocation of the South Slough will negate its consideration as a
"nahaml waterway" and will require tiling.
3. Pet imete~r fencing wffl be regaircd prior to obtauxmg building permits. The South Slough
shall be fenced with non-cumbus" fencing outside of ezi3ftgfregUwW easem= to
accommodate future pathway.
4. A development aV=mwnt is required as a condition of anne cion.
5. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision.
5. No access is available to this site at this time.
7. I have lead reports that aP2= ms have been Constructed on Lot 7, Block 2. If this is cbe
case, the lot does not conform to the 12-4 ==ng req==enm. In addition, it appears
that this pnqoscd lot has ahendy been SpIft inky,
8. All corner las shall have a minimum of 80 feet of frontage. For purposes of ming
frontage, the lime la2gth Plus of the curve length is used. Some lots wW need
arrows ing the direction the hoarse must fou (e.g., Lots 1, 3, 4 and 5, Block 7,
etc..
P&Z Commission, Mayor and Council
November 13, 1995
Page 2
9. Lot square footages are to. be determined exclusive of irrigation easemets. The South
Slough area should be designated as a separate lot to be owned andmaintained by the
homeowners association.
M. Phasing -of this project, if applicable, shall be indicated on theell
pa' minary plat -
11. Easements shall be provided as required by City Ordinance Section 11-9-605.D.
12. Any changes to existing natural features shall meet the approval of the City of Meridian
and the appropriate public agency prior to any construction activity taking Place.
13. Pressurized irrigation is to be supplied to all hots within this subdivision.
14. Buffering of adjacent residenrial rural Intl is req need. While consideration has been
given to some adjacent property Owners, the lots in Block 6 do not show this same
consideration.
15. All ditches crossing or abutting this property are to be riled Per City Ordinance unless a
variance is granted. What is proposed for the Stokesberry Lateral and other ditches
shown?
lb. Driving lanes at cal -de -sacs ("lmuckies") at north and south ends of N. Mblarhite
Avenue, with a 21' width, do not appear t6 be adequate.
17. Applicaut is to address a11 comments, in writing, and submit to the (Sty Clerk's office_
June 23, 1995
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
33 East Idaho Street
Meridian Idaho 83642
Irc:u r -Y
5 LAND Y PAGE 85
RE: Packard Subdivision #2 - Response to Staff Comments
Dear Members of the Commission:
On June 22, 1995, during your public hearing regarding the above captioned sAxfivision
application, you directed the applicants to address the comments and concerns of the City staff
Following are our responses to the comments from Ms. Stiles, Meridian Plaiming and Zoning
Administrator.
2 The original design of Packard Subdivision #1 included a five (5) acre park When that
proposal reached the City Council, the proposal met severe opposition due to the imbil ty
of the city of Meridian to acquire and mai>nain public park land. AWmugb the original
proposal Ieft maintenance ofthe park in the hands of the Packard Subdivision
Homeowners Awocuwoz; the city wasted the proposal redesigned without the large park.
The latest versions of the Pacimrd Subdivisions proposal include over an acre and ont-. half
Cf open space for use by the residents ofJ'aaknrd Subdivision.
03 The developers are will to wank with the city of Meridian for development off pwjrw y
along that portion of the South Slough next to Packard Subdivision No relocation of this
waterway is proposed.
04 The developers agree with this comment.
6) 5 The developers are in the process of providing a development agreement for this proposal.
9WW#2
thea ins ` 1
A- -- cuu-ao:�-uo�o I LALt.Y' S LAND SURNEV
PAGE 86
The developers support the Meridian School District's plans for needed facilities. The
developers also recognize that the children living in this subdivision wdl not necessarily
attend the nearest neighborhood sclmL
(q 7 The developers have an easement fi- m the owner of the land lying between Packard
Subdivision and Dove Meadows Subdivision (Instrument #94082998). This easement
provides access to the site. This easement team fiWes upon the dedication of a public road
upon the area desmbed in the easement.
8 Arrows de coring the front lot line will be added to the plat for Lots 1, 3, 4, and 6 Block 7.
19 For those lots where the waterways will not be tiled, the area calculations will exude the
irrigation esseament. However, fbr those lots where the irrigation easement is tiled and
located with the normal setbacks, the area will not be excluded Q 2-410 A, Footnote 8,
Meridian City Code).
10 Phase fines will be added to the preliminary plat.
11 The developers agree with this comment
12 The developers agree with this comment.
13 Tice developers ages with this comment. A irrigation system wi71 be
developed and approved by the appropriate irrigation district and the City Engineer.
Regarding the comments from the City Engineer's officeConcerning water p�� we are
awaiting the remits of testing by the City Engineer and the Meridian Water- Superintendent.
Rft7ectfuoy,
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's band Surveying
Ted Humbfi n
PadcArd Subdiviam #2
mea 14"
-2-
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 12
Rountree: I make a motion that the Meridian City Council adopts the findings of fact and
conclusions of law as prepared by Planning and Zoning.
Bentley: Second
Morrow. It has been moved and seconded to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions
of law as prepared by Planning and Zoning, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Bentley - Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow: Is there a decision?
Rountree: I move that the Meridian City Council approve the conditional use permit
requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the
conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law and that the property
be required to meet the water, fire, sewer requirements, life safety codes, uniform fire
code, parking, paving and landscaping requirements and all of the ordinances of the
City of Meridian. The conditional use should be subject to review upon notice to the
applicant by the City.
Bentley: Second
Morrow. It has been moved by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Bentley to approve the
decision as read all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #9: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION
AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 35.23 ACRES TO R-4 BY PNE/EDMONDS
CONSTRUCTION:
Morrow: Counsel, question with respect to the findings of fact and conclusions, did we
table, we asked for new findings of fact and conclusions based on new information at
our last public hearing.
Crookston: That is correct.
Morrow. So, I think it is appropriate then that we take action on this and then hear the
continued public hearing on the preliminary plat. Or, if you prefer we can invert the
sequence of these two items and hear the preliminary, the continuation of the
preliminary plat and then step back and either approve or change the findings of fact
and conclusions and then approve the preliminary plat or disapprove the preliminary
plat as you desire.
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 13
Crookston: I don't see that the preliminary plat is on the agenda.
Morrow: It is item #10, it is a continuation of a public hearing from last meeting.
Crookston: That is up to the decision of the Council on how you wish to do that. I would
say that it would be appropriate not to take action on the findings of fact if you are going
to put the plat on before that.
Morrow: Well my point is as an option that the council has is they wish if they are not
totally comfortable with the findings of fact and conclusions or if they wish for further
information concerning the preliminary plat before adopting or modifying the findings of
fact and conclusions. Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: I myself am not comfortable with these findings so I would be in favor of
listening to the plat.
Rountree: I think the continuation of the hearing on the preliminary plat may add some
specificity and clear up some of those issues with the findings.
Tolsma: I have the same comment that Charlie does.
Morrow. is there a motion to reverse the order of agenda items 9 and 10 then?
Rountree: So moved
Bentley: Second
Morrow: It has been moved and seconded to reverse the order of items 9 and 10, all
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow, we will now take up item #10 on the agenda which is a continued public
hearing (End of Tape)
ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM MAY 6, 1997: REQUEST FOR A
PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS
CONSTRUCTION:
Morrow: Mr. Tealy I believe that is you.
Pat Tealey, 109 S. 4th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 13
Crookston: I don't see that the preliminary plat is on the agenda.
Morrow: It is item #10, it is a continuation of a public hearing from last meeting.
Crookston: That is up to the decision of the Council on how you wish to do that. I would
say that it would be appropriate not to take action on the findings of fact if you are going
to put the plat on before that.
Morrow: Well my point is as an option that the council has is they wish if they are not
totally comfortable with the findings of fact and conclusions or if they wish for further
information concerning the preliminary plat before adopting or modifying the findings of
fact and conclusions. Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: I myself am not comfortable with these findings so I would be in favor of
listening to the plat.
Rountree: I think the continuation of the hearing on the preliminary plat may add some
specificity and clear up some of those issues with the findings.
Tolsma: I have the same comment that Charlie does.
Morrow: is there a motion to reverse the order of agenda items 9 and 10 then?
Rountree: So moved
Bentley: Second
Morrow: It has been moved and seconded to reverse the order of items 9 and 10, all
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow, we will now take up item #10 on the agenda which is a continued public
hearing (End of Tape)
ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM MAY 6, 1997: REQUEST FOR A
PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS
CONSTRUCTION:
Morrow: Mr. Tealy I believe that is you.
Pat Tealey, 109 S. 4th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 14
Tealey: I received a copy of the findings of fact before the meeting and read through
them. There appears to be four major points. I will try to limit my comments to those four
major points because evidently there are some questions about the findings or I guess
whether or not they have been addressed or not. The first is the sewer, we have worked
out a plan with the City Engineer, there will be the grade that is recorded by the City the
four tenths grade there will be no three tenths grade as indicated in the last meeting.
We have done this by raising the sewer in Packard No. 1 which is already an approved
subdivision. This will eliminate the lift station at the northwest corner of Packard No. 1
and move it down to the northwest corner of Packard No. 2. This sewer lift station will
then be eliminated with connection to south slough sewer when it is advanced to our
property. This can either be worked out by the City or us with an easement through the
Alleman property. There is no question any more about grades or service ability of the
sewer. Irrigation, we will provide access and maybe, do you want me to stop now and
let the city engineer (Inaudible)
Morrow: We can deal with that at the conclusion of your presentation.
Tealey: Okay, irrigation, we will pipe all irrigation ditches through the property as the
phases of the subdivision occur. We will provide delivery of water in its present delivery
point and capacity to the surrounding properties as it required by City ordinance and
State code. These irrigation ditches will be tiled and constructed during off season time
so as not to disrupt any irrigation water that will be flowing to these lands during the
growing farming season. The fencing of the property was a third issue, the property will
be totally fenced as a result of this subdivision with fences that are consistent with the
farming practices on two sides the Alleman property and I believe the Reichert property
on the south. If there are any other conflicts with Farming practice the appropriate fence
will be up again as stated as the phases of the subdivision are approved. We sort of see
this thing developing in one of two areas. First area being the old Borup parcel
approximately 12 acres if we develop from the south to the north or the Brown property
if we choose to develop from the Chamberlain Estate side. If we do a phase on this
portion of the property this whole 12 acres will be fenced with the first phase. In other
words if we just do a phase down here this whole property will be fenced. If we choose
to start development phase over in here this whole 23 acre parcel will be fenced so as
not to have a conflict with the adjacent farming practice which is along the South slough
here and I believe it is Dixie Robert's property here on Wingate. The other issue is
Wingate Lane itself we propose no access to Wingate Lane whatsoever as part of this
plat. There will be a crossing of Wingate Lane for emergency vehicle purposes only.
The road that does come up to Wingate lane will have ballards put in it so that there will
be no vehicular traffic across Wingate Lane, emergency vehicle access only. If there are
any other questions I would be glad to answer them.
Morrow: Mr. Tolsma? Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: Show me the proposal on Wingate Lane on the plat?
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 15
Tealey: This is Wingate Lane running from north to south, this road here will dead end
at Wingate with Ballards here. This road here will dead end at Wingate Lane with
Ballards here for emergency access vehicular access across here. This plan has been
approved by the Ada County Highway District and the City of Meridian in prior
discussions. There is no access at all from this lot or any of these lots that back up to
Wingate Lane. These will all be Wingate Lane itself will be totally fenced off other than
the emergency vehicle access across this road here.
Rountree: So what you are saying by totally fenced off those lots that are in your
eventual subdivision would not have access to Wingate Lane
Tealey: Absolutely no access to Wingate Lane.
Morrow. Mr. Bentley questions?
Bentley: I have a question on the irrigation, are you going to do that in phases or are
you going to do it all at once?
Tealey: The irrigation will be done in phases as we pipe it through the subdivision
phases. We will not pipe the irrigation through the total 35 acres until the phase gets
there. In other words, Mr. Alleman has access to that ditch and anybody else who may
have access to it we will pipe that ditch through the subdivision as part of the phasing.
We will provide pressure irrigation to our lots through the system that we have now.
Bentley: In the last meeting we had there was discussions on if they have a problem
getting their water that it would be piped.
Tealey: If for some reason we fail to clean the ditches on a regular basis so the delivery
of water is denied to Mr. Alleman the way I understand it is the applicant will be forced
to tile the ditches in their entirety and if he doesn't do that the property be de -annexed.
Bentley: Next, do you have any plans in your plat there for open areas for parks?
Tealey: In this phase of Packard Subdivision we don't have any large open areas for
parks, we provided that in the first phase of Packard No. 1 approximately 5 acres worth.
Morrow: Any further questions or comments Ms. Stiles?
Stiles: I believe you have all my comments in my previous memorandums.
Morrow. Mr. Smith, I think there is a direct question in terms of the sewer issue or an
update on the sewer issue.
Smith: Yes, Mr. President and Council members, David Marks from Tealey Land
Surveying did bring in a plan view of the sewer line for number 2 that would sewer back
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 16
or actually it would sewer through number 2 and also carry the sewage from number to
the northwest corner of number 2 at minimum grades four tenths percent there wouldn't
be anything less than four tenths percent Then the sewage would either be handled by
a lift station or into an extension of the south slough interceptor depending upon
negotiations between the land developer and Vern Alleman. They did have some
revisions to Packard No. 1's development plans that raised the sewer from what was
designed so that this would all work and still maintain the cover that we needed on a
sewer in Packard No. 1. 1 think that pretty well answered my questions on the sewage
or the sewering of these two pieces of property.
Tolsma: I have a question for Gary, by raising the elevation on this and moving the lift
station or doing away with the lift station is this still going to gravity back over to where
the school is going to be built off of Eagle Road there?
Smith: Yes, they showed a sewer line stub to that corner of that property approximately
9 feet deep. I don't know where the school is to be located but it appeared to me that
with the grade of the existing ground out there falling from the east to the west if you
start at the west end at 9 feet deep you should be able to maintain an adequate depth
by the time you get to the east boundary or to Eagle Road. They did not have survey
data, topog data for that piece of ground that 20 acres. But just a feeling, my feeling the
way the land runs in this area that if you are going upgrade with a sewer you should be
alright. Mr. President, I did have another question, I think I heard Pat say that the
Highway District had approved closing off what would be Challis Street at Wingate is
that correct Pat?
Tealey: Yes, we went through that in their meetings that was a solution to the problem.
Smith: Does that create any problem on access to Locust Grove in terms of number of
lots on a single access. Because I think Chamberlain only has on access doesn't it?
Tealey: It filters back down, our map doesn't go far enough. But I think Chamberlain
does have only one access that is correct. The secondary access the emergency
vehicle access would be through this ballard portion of the road.
Smith: That was my only question was I understood the highway district in the past had
a policy of 100 lots on a single access or 1000 trips per day. If they have changed that I
don't know.
Tealey: Their comments were specific to this subdivision with the number of lots that
were shown in Chamberlain Estates also. They approved this total concept, we do
provide access points to go out to Ustick in the future if the Alleman property is ever
developed so it will provide another access from Ustick. The traffic consultant showed
this access as such and the Highway District approved it in our traffic study that was
addressed.
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 17
Smith: Mr. President, Pat that means there will then be a turn around on the east side of
Wingate Lane for that section of Challis is that correct.
Tealey: The turn around essentially is affected by this motion right here. This is only one
lot deep so that they don't require a turn around. This right in here they didn't require a
turn around if they do we will address that as part of our site specific when we get to
submitting the final plat on this portion of Packard No. 2. They did not make specific
comment to a culdesac.
Smith: I think it would be my recommendation that a turn around be provided down
there because it is four lots deep, if they are not going to be able cross Wingate I think
they need to have some way to turn around without backing out 400 feet.
Tealey: The developer wouldn't have any problem with a turn around in that area. This
was not addressed by the Highway District, this is the first time it has come up.
Morrow: Any other questions of staff?
Rountree: Just an indication from staff, apparently we haven't received the minutes or
the action on the part of ACRD?
Stiles: Not that I am aware of.
Rountree: I haven't seen anything.
Stiles: I had one comment, Mr. Tealey indicates he thought he had responded to my
comments earlier I still have not received any response to those comments.
Tealey: Just an answer to one of the questions, there are two access for Chamberlain, I
think if you look on your City maps you can see two access points. Excuse me there
will be one access through Chamberlain and then chamberlains connects to another
road down in Chateau Meadows I believe and it gets out that way
Morrow: While you are there Mr. Tealey would you respond to Mr. Stiles comments
about have you responded to her comments in writing?
Tealey: All of her, I think she had in this, are you referring to item #32 in these findings
of fact? All of those items are addressed on this preliminary plat
Stiles: I don't believe any of these comments have been addressed and I, it said that
you are to submit your response in writing.
Tealey: Those are the comments that I was looking for in the package from 1995 and in
fact this thing is asking us to address it as part of a 75 acre. It was part of the total
package of the 40 acres of Packard NO. 1that have already been approved and such.
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 18
So I assume that all of these have been answered or it will be answered. They certainly
can be answered, there is nothing in there that presents a problem whatsoever.
Stiles: I would like to see this addressed in writing prior to any action being taken. I think
two years is long enough to wait.
Morrow: Final questions of Pat? Thanks Pat, this is a continuation of the public hearing
is there anybody else from the public that would like to offer further testimony? Mr.
Alleman
Vern Alleman, 2101 East Ustick Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Alleman: Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this subdivision. I have a hard time
separating preliminary plat and facts and findings so I will just go through mine as I have
prepared it which is probably covering both. I need to clarify an answer I gave to a
question by Mr. Rountree, he asked me, this was at the last meeting, he asked me if I
favored this subdivision, I tried to look at things from a broad view and that was what my
answer was based on. From a strictly personal view I would prefer that it remain like it
was before the developer purchased it. The following is made to findings of fact and
conclusions of law. Reference is made to item 19, page 12 which reads as follows, "the
construction of irrigation system will occur in the winter", now this is a reply from the
engineer, "so as not to interrupt the delivery of irrigation water. Situations do occur in
which a contractor does not do what he is supposed to or to (inaudible). This is not
specific enough, this allows the developer too many (inaudible) and this couldn't get
done on time. Then there is the question of what is the irrigation season or the
contractor couldn't do it when we needed it done. I request that it specified it must be
started after October 15 and completed before March 15. There is no reason they
cannot start it in the last of October which would be more than adequate time to
complete it well ahead of the dead line. Reference is made to item 32 A page 41 which
reads as follows, " the Meridian Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in
the area of the property." My understanding was that they did away with the five acre
plot on the Packard No. 1 if it is still there I would like to see it. With over 75 acres
annexed or proposed for annexation in Packard No. 1 and Packard No. 2 open space
appears inadequate to mitigate the impacts of both subdivisions. I request that you
address this issue now and I ask you to decide if a park is needed now or in the future.
If you find that there is a need now or in the future for a park please address where and
how land will be provided. I beg you address this question now even if it will be needed
at a later date. I plead with you don't ignore this issue now and then at a later date
come to me and say we didn't take care of this when we should have and now we need
your land to solve our problem. I would like clarification of item 32 D and F on page 21
of the facts and findings. Now my facts and findings are the ones from Planning and
Zoning so if there are new ones I haven't had access to them. Reference is made to
item 33A page 23 which states, "any existing irrigation, drainage, ditches crossing the
property to be included in the proposed project shall be tiled per City ordinance 11-9-
605 M. The ditches to be piped are to be shown on the preliminary plat of the proposed
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 19
subdivision. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation, drainage
district or lateral user association which written conformation of said approval submitted
to the Public Works Department. No variance has been requested for tiling of any of the
ditches crossing the proposed property. I haven't seen anything on the preliminary plat
covering the ditches across the property and request approval of the preliminary plat be
denied until this is shown and the irrigation district and the lateral users approve the
plans. It is my understanding that once this property is annexed it is the obligation of the
developer to maintain the irrigation ditches crossing the property. I wish to compliment
Mr. Morrow for the motion he made pertaining to Packard No. 1 subdivision whereby if
the developer doesn't maintain these ditches he will be required to tile the complete
system immediately. I request this same provision be made applicable to Packard No. 2
subdivision and reference is made to site specific comments and page 26 which
pertains to pressurized irrigation. It is my understanding the water needed for
pressurized irrigation during the off irrigation season will utilize Meridian city water.
Should there be any change from this such as drilling a well it should be cleared with
the Idaho Water Resources agency and we the surrounding private property owners of
private wells should be notified so we can protect our private water. Then in this last
item is in general so it is not pertaining to a specific subdivision, reference item #53
page 31, concerns increased population not paying for the impact need for services and
so forth and thus imposing additional cost for those that have been here prior to all of
this development. I ask that impact fees be implemented on new development to
correct this problem. I stand for any questions that you may have thank you.
Morrow: Questions for Mr. Alleman?
Rountree: Would you repeat the window of time for the construction on irrigation?
Alleman: October 15 to March 15.
Rountree: And that would be a period of time where work on the irrigation system would
be acceptable?
Alleman: Yes, it would need to be started after October 15 and completed prior to March
15.
Bentley: Is October 15 their date certain for shutting the water off this year with the high
water we have?
Alleman: Not necessarily but I think a person can live with the possibility of that late
watering getting by.
Morrow: Any further questions of Mr. Alleman, is there anyone else from the public that
wishes to offer testimony?
Don Brian, 2070 N. Locust Grove, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 20
Brian: As a matter of saving time I would just like to make sure my testimony that I gave
at the previous testimony gets recorded into this meeting which I believe it will ver
batim. As in that same idea I would like to get an answer to my question on the traffic
study. That is my biggest concern on this subdivision since it putting out all the traffic
out to Locust Grove which is the road that I exit on. When I stated at the previous
meeting about the traffic study that was done in the packet that you have the one that I
got and is public record with 10,000 trips per day now and the last traffic study that I
know about was done in 1994. 1 was wondering if there is a new traffic study and if I
can get a copy of the findings on what that traffic study found as far as the amount of
vehicles on Locust Grove and how this is going to affect that. With the construction of
widening Locust Grove not to happen until 2001 1 think it is going to be a major problem
on Locust Grove for the next 4 years. So that is only thing that I would like to take up
your time with tonight.
Tolsma: I think he has a well sounded comment (inaudible)
Brian: Anyone who does up and down Locust Grove Road knows what it is like and if
you can't, like I stated previously if you don't get out before 7:00 in the morning you
might as well have breakfast on the way. Stop at the end of your driveway and finish it
off
Bentley: I want to know what your feelings were on his responses to the fencing of the
irrigation?
Brian: Well I don't feel it is my place to speak on it in regards to this subdivision because
it doesn't affect me directly but I will because I have been affected directly with the
development around me. The fencing has always been a problem and they didn't
require fencing when they developed around me and it was a problem. They need to
fence the whole subdivision at once and not in phases to contain the whole the mess an
the people mostly the people. When you have a situation like Wingate Lane you have a
lot of horses and livestock out there and you are going to have to keep the people they
are going to have to take special steps to keep the people away from these rural areas
because it becomes a petting zoo and that is going to have to be looked at real
seriously to avoid future problems.
Bentley: And the irrigation?
Brian: I think we have the irrigation taken care at the last meeting with their agreement
to be required to tile it if any problems come up down the road.
Morrow: Anybody else from the public that would like to offer further testimony?
Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 21
Sharp: I apologize for my voice but it is something I can't control. I don't know if that is
good or bad, but anyway my big concern right now is the comment "I think" this is what
is going to happen. We are right back to square one we don't have definites. I don't care
what kind of fencing they got and I don't care if they build something designed like the
TajMahai I would not like to see the zone change and I would not like to see the
development because I moved out to the rural area to have just what we have got a
private lane with few houses. The 20 acres is against Wingate Lane would be
developed. What happens to that phase of Wingate Lane as our friend that is at the end
of Wingate Lane has land and he can't build there and it borders against Wingate Land
and Ustick Road and has been told he cannot build there. I am having a little problem
too with they say we have all the problems resolved with the sewer and the water
irrigation. What happens with the flood irrigating and we have water under new houses
because of the run off. Now we know that is a fact we know it has happened because
there has been pending and threatening of lawsuits. Somebody buys a new house and
finds out I have six inches of water under it, who do I go after, the guy that has the run
off water he was there long before they built the house and the subdivision was made.
think it is something that needs to be seriously considered. We have a very high water
table and they say you won't have that much flood irrigating, are you going to stop
people from sprinkling and that is still going to saturate the ground. You will have more
houses watering so are you saying then there isn't going to be as much water used.
You are still going to have to have a (inaudible) and something to handle that water run
off because there is a high water table. We may not have had as much problem when
we had (inaudible) but with the abundance of water we could have a very serious
problem and we have just a spot under our house where we keep a pump and when the
water table is high we do pump water in July and August. What is that going to do to
the subdivision. We can still put dry lines as I mentioned before into these subdivisions
and make sure the people (inaudible) that they have to be well aware of the fact that if
the sewer line is there and the sewer is available they have to hook up. We know that,
that was one of the issues with the meeting that we were here the first of the month, one
young couple is faced with that very problem. I think that because there is not a great
need at this time for housing that they should wait until phase one is done to see how
that goes before we get too involved with phase 2. We are talking about emergency
equipment going across Wingate Lane and only then. I have a letter in my hand that
was addressed to Mr. Floyd Reiterate, a copy sent to us dated January 2, 1996 and I
am not going to read all of it but a paragraph so states, "Since E. Meadowgrass
terminates at your east property line you will have full access to it. The developer is
required to install a barricade at the end of the public street. But it typically does not
extend across the entire width of the street and since the street abuts your property you
may drive around the barricade and use the public street as you would any other
property owner who's land abuts the public right of way. Similarly you can access East
Challis Street by driving north along the Wingate Lane easement only the (inaudible) to
block public usage from Wingate Lane and use that public right of way also. We haven't
been that we are going to put gates on there and once one car goes around a barricade
you can imagine the others are going to bypass that. So this is in black and white from
ACHD and we have a date on that. I think that again is that really needs to be
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 22
addressed. I think we are right back and I think we should consider the staffs
recommendation until we have cold, hard facts and definites on a plan it should be
denied. Thank you
Morrow: Questions for Mrs. Sharp?
Rountree: I know it is your only copy but can you get us a copy of your letter from
ACHD?
Dixie Roberts, 2855 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Roberts: Well my statement stays the same as last time. I still have concerns and
everything 1 think that has been said has been very vague. As far as the irrigation I
think is the biggest thing for me and should this go through I would like to see the whole
thing tiled all at once and at the beginning. Of course the fencing is a concern of mine
because of the animals. They talk about fencing their part but I think it really boils down
to fencing mine also should this go through. Everything I think is very vague and I think
it would ruin our country living there and I am very much opposed to this. That is
basically what I have to say.
Morrow: Is there anyone else from the public that would like to offer testimony?
Al Dauven, 2820 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Dauven: I guess I stand on my statement from the last time and it doesn't seem like
you guys are taking in the animal factor and the amount of houses you are putting in
this area. So I think that I am dead against this I think they should be big lots and they
should probably have a berm hill around them with a fence on top if it. Because that
might discourage little kids from crawling over it. The animal factor has to come into it
some time. If it is not going to come into it then there is something wrong. As far as this
Council goes I don't think that we might be in your impact area but you guys are
negligent to govern in your impact area as well as Ada County is too. When you are
addressed with an ordinance violation nobody will address it. So what happens when
we are outside the City limits and we have these people that are in the City limits
dumping their garbage over the fence. We are in the same situation once again.
Nobody takes responsibility for it. So I think maybe we better back up and look at what
has happened there so far. Browns are operating I don't know what you want to call it a
garage or junk yard or whatever. They broke that property off and sold it. Mr. Alleman
sold that property to his brother so it was already split once. You cannot keep splitting
property without going through zoning. It doesn't fall under the five acre requirement,
neither does the Borup property with the house there. Somebody is going to have to
address this and somebody is going to have to be the governing body. So who is going
to take responsibility. So I think somebody has to step up here pretty quick. If you guys
don't want to take it then throw us back to Ada County. That is all I have to say.
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 23
Morrow: Anyone else from the public that would like to testify?
Floyd Reichert, 2575 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Reichert: I have always been in favor of the subdivision out there around because I
have been out there 30 years and like I say there are a lot of problems with the lane. I
can go ahead like Mr. Dauven did and go on and on but I would like to have them on the
east side of the lane ever show me that they have anything in their deeds or right of
ways from the conception of their property being broke off consistently from the 50's
(inaudible). The right of way we have in front of our place is a road agreement it was
1903/1908 is the east boundary of the property owners on the west side of that lane.
When I bought my place that was on my deed and I would like to see everybody else
show me facts that they instrument number is attached to their property. But on the
request I had from Ada County Highway when the subdivision was coming in yes
would like to have that road abut my property on the east line so I can move my
driveway over from the house and modify it so I can cross the lane and go out onto a
paved street and go to Fairview. I would not like to see that blocked off that I don't have
access to drive around. I own the property to the access the public right of way why
should I be blocked off from it. I have made an agreement with the developer on the
north of my property when they do the fence I can have right of way to get off, I will have
to redo my driveway again to get off on the north side to go out on the other road to
have access to the public road so that it can be fenced so it won't be hindered. If we
don't take into consideration the future you don't have to worry about a park down there.
My piece of property isn't going to be worth nothing so there is going to be open
property down there that the kids can some down and play on it on my five acres
because it isn't going to be any good to me or I can't sell it. If you don't have access for
the future of that community out there that is all I have to say.
Morrow. Questions for Mr. Reichert? Anybody else from the public that would like to
offer testimony?
Billy Jo Premoe, 3045 Wingate, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Premoe: I would also like to go on record again as being opposed the subdivision for
the traffic, for the concern of people coming on our lane. If there is emergency access I
am sure there is going to be filtering down problems with the lane and we are really
concerned about that about the animals on the lane. Also, the lack of planning for a
park, all of these things concern us and our quality of life. First and foremost we all
moved out there with one thing in mind and we are going to lose it if this subdivision
goes through. Thank you.
Morrow: Thank you, anyone else?
Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 24
Sharp: I also oppose this zoning and also the preliminary plat and spelled out by Mr.
Alleman there are certainly quite a few concerns there that I agree with. Also in the
findings of fact that I have I don't have the most recent but it said that provide
pedestrian bicycle access across Wingate Lane and we are opposed to that because
this is a private road and we want to keep it such. These gates that we are talking
about should be adequate enough to restrict any bicycle or foot traffic over Wingate
Lane, there is liability involved here and we certainly don't want to be involved with that.
As far as fencing, it should be entire fencing of the whole project so that we don't have
all of this trash come over from the housing when it is being built. As I have had happen
on the south of me on the Woods and they developed that. As far as the gates are
concerned or the barricades they have barricade on a street that abuts my property the
Nampa Irrigation (inaudible) we have, we finally put a cable across there with a sign up
that said no trespassing. People pay no attention to that, they come across there. They
were coming through with their motorcycles and cars and everything else. We
padlocked a cable across there. On the east side of my property on Nampa Meridian
Irrigation we also need a fence across the road there so Nampa Irrigation road so that if
this is, even with phase one we need that there to keep those people from accessing
that property. Because they don't pay any attention, there is a sign there also. If you
would care to come out and take a look at it, it is plenty visible and they pay no attention
whatsoever. The tiling of ditches, I think that should be done not in phases but all at
once. If they are going to do this development why don't they do the tiling of ditches and
then we don't' have any problems. Who is going to monitor this down the way, just go
ahead and do it. Above all I am opposed to this project.
Morrow: Anyone else from the public that would like to offer testimony? Okay, Mr.
Tealey it is opportunity for response.
Tealey: I guess I stand by the testimony that I just gave you earlier, we have dealt with
the sewer, there is concrete answer to it. We have it there is nothing ambiguous about it
whatsoever. There is nothing ambiguous about the irrigation problem, we have said that
we will pipe this thing in phases and we will clean the ditches. We will only construct
during certain times of the year. If we do not live up to these requirements one of them
being that we keep our ditches clean and the flow of the water to adjacent properties as
it is today then yes we will be subject to a penalty and that penalty will be tiling of all of
the ditches immediately. You have never required that I know of a parcel this large to
tile all the irrigation ditches as a matter of (End of Tape) we are more than willing to
work with these people. I guess I just don't know how much more specific we can get.
The fencing for instance, this project essentially once we fence Wingate Lane is two
parcels, one 12 acre and one 22 acre and we will develop on one side or the other of
Wingate Lane (inaudible). This 12 acre parcel Wingate Lane will be fence, essentially
then we will have this part the eastern parcel and the western parcel. If we choose to
develop here we will immediately fence this entire parcel here and will be self contained
within itself and will be self contained in itself because Wingate Lane will be fenced
here, we will then if we choose to develop here we will fence the entire parcel. If we
choose to develop down in here with Wingate Lane being fenced here we will then finish
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 25
the fencing of this parcel so it will essentially be self contained. Wingate Lane issue, I
don't think these people will ever be satisfied, we have done our best, we have worked
with the Highway District, we have provided them with the traffic studies. We have
repeatedly gone back to them. As a result of this application been taking over the 2 year
period and asking them do you want anymore input, do you stand by your evaluation of
the situation. The answer has been resoundingly yes, never a maybe never do we want
another traffic study. We will not access Wingate Lane, there will be emergency access
across it that we can't stop. I think that is in the best interest of the general public
anybody that lives in Chamberlain Estates at the east end of Chamberlain Estates
would like another outlet, emergency outlet back down towards Hickory and Fairview. I
think that is in the best general interest of the public. I guess you can go on and on
trying to address the numerous issues that they bring out but as soon as we address
them then they will have another issue. I figure it is best to stop right now, if you have
any questions I would be glad to answer.
Tolsma: Is there such a thing as a deed restriction on this property that abuts Wingate
Lane so there would be no access so when you build a fence in there they don't cut a
hole in the fence and decide to put a gate in there to access Wingate Lane.
Tealey: There will be a note on the face of the plat that says no access from any lots in
the subdivision to Wingate Lane. That is one of the requirements of the Highway
District.
Tolsma: Would that be on the deed, the property (inaudible)
Crookston: It could be
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Crookston: It could be, it is just as good to have it in a deed restriction. Any type of
restriction like that is just like a speed limit sign on the highway.
Tolsma: But if they cut a hole in the fence at least (inaudible) something on the deed
that said you couldn't do that or it is on the plat. Maybe (inaudible)
Crookston: The plat will be recorded
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Crookston: That is true, you would have to go through, you would have to have some
means of accessing the recorded document.
Tealey: The plat is a recorded instrument and on that instrument if we restrict the
access to Wingate Lane, you would certainly can enforce it that issue on from that
recorded instrument. There are numerous issues that can be covered in notes on the
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 26
plat such as addressing maintenance of common areas to addressing maintenance of
irrigation ditches and stuff. That seems to work for those issues so why wouldn't it work
in the access to Wingate Lane. Typically like if you have a double frontage situation
where say Ustick Road and you have a road parallel to it the note on the face of the plat
says no access to Locust Grove Road. That is covered all of the time with a note on the
plat. Plus if you wanted a deed restriction it would apply to, there are only about 10 or
12 lots along Wingate Lane actually back up to where that situation can occur.
Tolsma: The other thing on the ballards they are using for emergency access several
subdivisions in Boise now have what they call a fire gate it is a swinging gate that the
fire department has the key for it only. Some of them are running on the ditch rider
roads that they are put a gate across there that goes to the ground up, 42 inches tall
that if the fire trucks carry the key if they need emergency access to the ambulance they
have a key to gain through that access rather than the ballards which seems to be right
around because the motorcycles go up and down the ditch banks where there are
ballards. But where there is a gate across there, there are no motorcycles that go up
and down the ditch bank.
Tealey: A gate would be fine if that works and it works for the City of Meridian it works
for us.
Tolsma: There are several developments in Boise that have went to those fire gates and
the fire department likes them better than trying to get posts out of the ground or
something like this to get through because it is better for them easier to gain access
through. That is just a statement.
Tealey: If the City of Meridian fire department would rather have those than the ballards
then that is what we will install.
Tolsma: Most of the ballards if they are a break away ballard they are touch and go to
run a truck up against one of those things to try and break the thing off and get through
it. Anyone in a four wheel drive will be able to the same thing. If they are a gate at least
they are going to damage something (inaudible) that is something that you might check.
I know they have done a lot in Boise for the irrigation district and fire department both.
Tealey: If there is a better way than ballards and it is approved by the Meridian fire
district and the ambulance service and emergency medical we will definitely look at that.
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Rountree: The last time you were here you indicated there had been a traffic study
done, ACHD had indicated that no additional traffic study was necessary because of the
date of the previous traffic study. Am I remembering correctly or did you say something
different?
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 27
Tealey: I think the traffic study was referring to was updated in mid -year 1995 1 have a
copy of that here if you want to look at it. It addresses the connection with Chamberlain
Estates and Locust Grove Road.
Rountree: Specificity in terms of construction timing of irrigation if that were added to the
findings you indicated you would work within whatever time period is non -irrigation if
specified October 15 to March 15.
Tealey: Correct, that is my understanding and the developer's understanding also.
Morrow. That being the case I will close the public hearing, Council your pleasure?
Rountree: Vern had a question.
Morrow: Okay, Vern please come forward I will re -open the public hearing.
Crookston: You need a motion to re -open it.
Rountree: So moved
Tolsma: Second
Morrow. It has been moved and seconded to reopen the public hearing all those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Alleman: Can I ask a question of the staff, Shari in regards to the comment that is
pertaining to the parks, you state that there is no provision for park area, is there in
Subdivision No. 1 or in that area? I was under the impression that the park for number
one the five acre had been done away with, is it still there?
Stiles: The 5 acre park they originally proposed is no longer there, they do have some
small pocket parks and some pedestrian pathways. I am not sure what the total acreage
of that is. As far as 5 acres in one spot there is not one.
Morrow: Now I will close the public hearing. What is your pleasure.
Rountree: Well I think the appropriate thing to do would be to go back to the findings of
fact and conclusions on the annexation and take action on it. That will drive what
happens with the preliminary plat. So I move that we go back to item 9.
Tolsma: Second
Morrow: Moved and seconded we go back to item 9, all those in favor? Opposed?
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 29
issues Ms. Stiles has an issue with response or written response to her conditions
(inaudible)
Rountree: That was a condition on the findings of fact and conclusions of law as it
relates to annexation. The same comment for comments on the plat. One and the
same.
Stiles: It does, that is one of them comments it is included in the findings. I don't know
how you will address any response we might get.
Crookston: I thought that your comment referred to the platting and not the annexation
and zoning.
Stiles: It was both.
Rountree: Help me find that comment.
Morrow: He is looking for your in the findings of fact and conclusions he is looking for
your comment requesting written responses to your comments.
Stiles: Page 24, item Q, the comments that are indicated my comments apparently it
references the preliminary plat. There are items in there that do deal with the
annexation.
Rountree: The findings do indicate that any questions you do have will be responded to.
Stiles: What page is that on?
Rountree: That is page 24, it says the applicant is to address all the foregoing
comments in writing. That was one of your comments that is included in the findings of
fact and that needs to be done or that needs to be done as part of the findings of fact,
depending on what happens to them.
Morrow: Technically speaking if they are adopted then that response has to (inaudible)
what is your pleasure?
Rountree: Mr. President, I would move that the City Council of the City of Meridian
hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law and the
amendments.
Morrow: It has been moved and seconded the City Council of the City of Meridian
hereby adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law and approve them as amended,
roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma —Yea
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 30
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow: Is there a motion on the decision?
Rountree: Mr. President I move that the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby
decides that the property set forth in the application be approved for annexation and
zoning under the conditions set forth in these amended findings of fact and conclusions
of law and revised including that the applicant or its successors and interests, assigns,
heirs, executors or personal representatives enter into a development agreement that if
the applicant is not agreeable with these amended findings of fact and conclusions of
law and are not agreeable with entering into a development agreement that the property
should not be annexed.
Tolsma: Second
Morrow: It has been moved and seconded for the decision as read by Mr. Rountree, all
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow. Item nine has been taken care so now item 10 is the preliminary plat. Is there
a motion, now that we have done item 9 we need a motion to direct the City Attorney to
prepare an annexation ordinance.
Tolsma: So moved
Rountree: Second
Morrow: It has been moved and seconded to instruct the City Attorney to prepare an
annexation ordinance, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow. Now item 10 on the agenda is the preliminary, what action do you wish to
take?
Rountree: Mr. President, I would move that we table action on the preliminary plat until
such time as we have the annexation ordinance and the applicant has addressed in
writing the comments of City staff and had an opportunity to review the findings of fact
and make appropriate modifications to the plat.
Tolsma: Second
Morrow: It has been moved and seconded by Mr. Rountree and Mr. Tolsma to table the
preliminary plat pending the adoption of the annexation ordinance and response by the
Meridian City Council
May 20, 1997
Page 31
applicant in writing to staff conditions and response by the applicant to the recently
adopted amended findings of fact and conclusions, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Bentley: I move we take a ten minute break.
Rountree: Second
Morrow: It has been moved and seconded to take a ten minute recess.
TEN MINUTE RECESS
ITEM #11: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TWO BUILDINGS
WITH DRIVE UP WINDOWS BY R.T. NAHAS:
Morrow: I believe that is you Mr. Knopp.
Knopp: My name is Larry Knopp, the project consists of two buildings, two separate
buildings on a lot out here at a commercial subdivision off of Meridian Road, 1St Street.
What we are proposing are two approximately 4,000 square foot buildings with
appropriate parking, landscaping that meets or exceeds the City of Meridian's
ordinance. The one building will have an optional or the flexibility of having a drive up
window facility located on the east and west ends to get some flexibility for the leasing
of this facility. It is not for a restaurant, the facility, the drive up window would be used
for a facility similar to an espresso coffee fast service not a restaurant service. The
buildings are constructed of stucco, brick, store front, glazing, flat roofs with parapets
continuous on all four sides so that there is no visibility of roofs or roof top units and
fabric awnings at the windows.
Morrow. Questions for Mr. Knopp?
Rountree: have you read the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by
Planning and Zoning and if you so do you have any items you would like to discuss?
Knopp: I have read them and I have no questions or no problems with them.
Morrow: Ms. Stiles do you have any questions for Mr. Knopp? What is your desire?
Rountree: Mr. President, I would move that the City of Meridian City Council adopts the
findings and approves the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by
Planning and Zoning.
Tolsma: Second
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: May 20 1997
APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 10
REQUEST:PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM MAY 6 1997 - REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
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:
COMMENTS
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
JAMES E. BRUCE, President
SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President
SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretary
Floyd F. Reichert
2575 Wingate Lane
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Packard Subdivision No. 2
Dear Mr. Reichert:
"66i ec6
January 2, 1996
This is in response to your letter of November 27, 1995 requesting clarification of your access to
the public road(s) that may be constructed and dedicated to the public through the platting of
Packard Subdivision.
There are two public streets that are proposed to be located near your property. One runs east
and west approximately 20 -feet north of your north property line (called E. Challis Street on the
preliminary plat) and the other also runs east and west, stubbing to your east property line
approximately 180 -feet south of your north property line (called E. Meadowgrass Street on the
preliminary plat). The Commissionwas specific in their concern that the "public" be prevented
from using Wingate Lane by gating/blocking E. Challis Street on both sides of the Wingate Lane
easement so that use of Wingate Lane by you and the Sharps would not be interfered with until
other situations develop with regard to your properties.
Since E. Meadowgrass Street terminates at your east property line, you will have full access to it.
The developer is required to install a barricade at the end of the public street, but it typically does
not extend across the entire width of the street and since the street abuts your property, you may
drive around the barricade and use the public street as could any other property own=r whose
land abuts the public right-of-way. Similarly, you could access E. Challis Street by driving north
along the Wingate Lane easement, opening the gate required by the Commission to block public
usage from Wingate Lane, and use that public right-of-way also.
The enclosed copies of part of the preliminary plat show the proposed streets in question.
Sincerely,
rry S e
Development Services Supervisor
cc: Chron
Project File
Traffic Services
Gary D. Smith, P.E., City Engineer
Tealey's Land Surveying, Inc.
Mr. & Mrs. Dale Sharp - 2445 N. Wingate
Lane. Meridian. ID 83642
ada county highway district
318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714-6499 • Phone (208) 345-7680
r �
�
ce
Oil
rn IA) •,,0f1%:
� `3bb�
I-
S.b+n�c !�''
IOk�38�� ;rl�i
�
4514 A P
00
-
.R
-
1
in 2 A 3
in i j
a
�
°I,Ef3'7
a
3 W.
41,
, �.
� r
�. l � �,-..;.�_ �'
. _ s�s9T of w71��
_ 6.
} '11,739 • S
f
9131s
3
( 98i1s
,
9131.9
lit,
r �
�
Oil
4514 A P
00
-
.R
-
1
in 2 A 3
in i j
a
9,-731 a
°I,Ef3'7
3 W.
41,
, �.
� r
�. l � �,-..;.�_ �'
. _ s�s9T of w71��
_ 6.
} '11,739 • S
12083
11,624 6 -
L.LS'.
..? '.� -
'.' •.iv'C)`�'.. ^'
A.e✓././ \1.-.•_`� .:L41c �E.,l.....
_,'" -
MATCH
MATCH UNE
SHEET . f
ilbo
CL
-
_
it
..GS :1 '14Mt —
Z8' } ?4'
7%. 22
i3g s d a 9406 s mjs s
' to -'-x • w � �. � 22'
1�
2c
d:t
X -.042
a .84!36 s
a 61.0 t r7 '� 20 --
low.
6 14.0
2 '24-
21.
wr
SAM
Za
t iT .......s
I� .110,6'38 «:. �'63 :b�'S3 s' D93!!s?�, a 3 _ 4 � „ _ � • . " -
n �, ' �a13• �"�. A �;} '9,539 s
813 s 3338 8,338 s ' ��;
4,g33 ;
• I
53'
At
3rd .
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 25
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to continue the public
hearing to May 20 on the request for a conditional use permit on item #7, all those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
FIVE MINUTE BREAK
ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF
APPROXIMATELY 35.23 ACRES TO R-4 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
Corrie: I will now open the public hearing and invite a representative from Edmonds
construction to come forward.
Pat Tealey, 109 S. 4th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Tealey: I don't know where you want me to start on this one, whether it just be the
annexation that we are going to listen to right now. Are you going to separate these?
This application was originally made in 1995, almost 2 '/ years ago and we have been
going through this process for some 2 '/years and finally we have gotten to City
Council. Planning and Zoning on March 11th voted unanimously to prepare findings of
fact and conclusions of law to support an annexation of this property. The property in
question is adjacent to and abutting the present city limits of the City of Meridian. The
property which is subject to this application is within the area of impact to the City of
Meridian and the entire parcel is also included in the Meridian urban service planning
area. The property is designated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as single family
residential. All services can be provided to this parcel as a condition of this annexation.
We are requesting an R-4 zone which is consistent with the zone in the immediate area.
Are there any questions about the annexation I would be glad to answer them.
Corrie: Council, any questions? Anyone else from the public that would like to issue
testimony at this time?
Vern Alleman, 2101 East Ustick, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Alleman: I don't know which one I am supposed to be testifying under, so I guess I can
go ahead and give it anyway. As a matter of clarification, the plat shows the irrigation
district is Settlers Irrigation District. How can this be when Nampa Meridian delivers this
water and bills the irrigation taxes. I am concerned about my irrigation which comes
through the Packard No. 2 property according to plat dated April 1997. 1 don't find the
map showing where this would cross the Packard property nor any of the specifications
such as size of pipe, grade, placement of manholes and so forth. I specifically request
that as a condition of approval of the plat that this information be shown and a specific
time be mandated between October 15 and March 15 as a time for construction of the
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 26
irrigation system to our property. I went through this with another development where
the system was not completed on time and my crops suffered because of the lack of
irrigation. Another experience I had with the development was where the developer
was to install the system with specific requirements. They tried to cover the system
before we had a chance to inspect it and if we had not been on top of this it would have
been installed improperly. Because of this I specifically request that myself and Nampa
Meridian plus the City Engineer examine and approve this installation during installation.
Undoubtedly you will remember the problems that were created with water on the
property around Don Bryan's and the Fred Meyer property which I understand is due to
improper installation. As you know livestock and children are not compatible so
therefore I also feel that, wait I will go back. It is my understanding that my irrigation
system should be shown for future reference in case there is a question of easement.
Without this I request a recorded easement so that there won't be problems if it is
necessary to assess property if there is difficulty with the irrigation system. As you
know there is, livestock and children are not compatible. I also specifically request the
installation of a six foot high chain link fence on the north side of Packard No. 2 and the
south side of our property so as that to keep children and dogs from crossing over to
our property where we have livestock. Also, that there be a fence between Packard and
our property to the west which I understand is a requirement of the City. That is my
testimony, do you have any questions?
Rountree: Mr. Alleman, a lot of your concerns are probably more appropriate for the
plat. Do you have any particular issues with the annexation of this parcel into the City of
Meridian?
Alleman: Well, as long as they meet the requirements I guess I don't.
Corrie: Anyone else that would like to issue testimony on the annexation and zoning?
Dale Sharp, 4445 Wingate Lane, Meridian was sworn by the City Attorney.
Sharp: I also would like to have the developer state here as to what is going to happen
as Mr. Morrow pointed out we need this on record so that as time goes on we tend to
forget or intentionally forget what is going to happen. I would also like to read a
statement from our attorney as far as the private road so there is no question about that.
They are going to, they say they are going to provide service across that private Road
called Wingate Lane. That is an agreement, it has been in effect since 1913. As such
that private road will maintain a private road. The Ada County Highway District has
made some statements that they really have no legal right to do. Which affects this
private road. I would like to read this. In reference to the issue as to whether or not the
private road should be construed as a public road it appears evident that there is no
statutory basis pursuant to Idaho Code Section 40-202 and relevant Idaho case law
including Cox vs. Cox 84 Idaho 513373 p 2"d, 929, 1962, to support the idea that the
proposed crossroad being proposed to be built across the private road would in any way
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 27
satisfy the test for being a public road so that unless the County of Highway District
undertook some affirmative action to declare the road a public and or record some as a
public road in compliance with such statutes. Your private road (inaudible) based upon
the facts as represented to me it appears that there is no satisfaction of statutory or
criteria to declare the private road a public road in any respect of the current I just want
to point this out, that in case they cross with the utilities or sewer or whatever that there
is no access with pedestrians or bicyclists or any other unauthorized people. There is a
question of liability here and with all of that additional traffic. So we would request that
this Wingate Lane protected from this traffic and so forth. And that there be no public
road across it. And such, we need fences and as far as that goes we need a gate
across the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District road there. That can be done, I have
talked to Bill Henson from Nampa Meridian and they said they would be willing to work
with the developer to do that. There is some question on that with the Planning and
Zoning but I have checked it out. So we also unfortunately when we are talking about
zoning of Packard Subdivision No. 2 the Brown, this gets back to Packard Subdivision
No. 1 because Packard Subdivision No. 1 was approved that they would have a lift
station. Now they are saying we are going to move that lift station over to this property
by the Brown's. So this in effect might make Packard Subdivision No. 1 null and void
because you don't have a lift station there anymore. So you can't separate these. The
irrigation that we have, 1 have a ditch that goes down on the side of my property that
feeds in behind the subdivision to the west of me and then services people over in
Locust Grove. I also have a lateral that goes on the east side of my property that goes
down through the Brown, past Reichert's and Brown's subdivision and services
Alleman. So we need these, we need to have this stated that they will tile that and take
care of that in accordance as Mr. Alleman pointed out. As far as having construction
workers or equipment on Wingate Lane we don't want that to happen. That is a private
lane and it is collectively agreed on by those land owners that it will remain a private
lane. If there is sewer that crosses that private lane or any utilities we don't want be
impeded to getting to Ustick to our homes by any means or services. Mail service or
(inaudible) if that is going to be done it has to be done so that we are not
inconvenienced. Then also I mentioned here that there is a lot of livestock out there and
we do need these fences, we need the barriers that would prevent refuse and people
from getting onto our property which this does happen. Right now people throw their
grass clippings over the fence onto my property. They have taken rocks, they have
dumped their cement trucks over there when they were building and I just don't
appreciate that at all. So, when we, I am emotional about this and I do object to the
zoning of Packard Subdivision No. 2. 1 don't think we need it, I think there is plenty of
houses available and this growth, so called growth I don't think it is good for our
services that you are providing now. Our schools are overly impacted as it is. Our traffic
on Locust Grove, they are not going to do anything about that and that is a mess. It is
going to put more traffic out onto Locust Grove and as far as the sewer system or the lift
station as Mr. Smith pointed out in the Planning and Zoning meeting last time that if they
put a lift station in there they can't develop the whole subdivision because it won't
service. So I think we need to get our ducks in a row here and state exactly what is
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 28
going to be done and not this changing of every time we come there is a change and
there are so many questions, legal questions and everything else that I am opposed to
it?
Corrie: Thank you Mr. Sharp, any questions? Anyone else from the public that would
like to testify at this time?
Dixie Roberts, 2855 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Roberts: I also have all of these concerns the restroom have voiced. Mainly the
irrigation my concern. The land is worthless without and I don't want it changed. I don't
want the pump system put in. This is set up for the irrigation that I have now which is the
regular flow irrigation. Also the Lane is up concern to me . It is a private lane, we have
maintained it, we have put money in, all of us, on the lane for the maintenance of it to
take care of it. We don't want other people accessing into the lane. Also there is
concern of children, I have livestock also. My land is closer would be closer to the
subdivision. There is concern there for their safety. One other item, my son tried to buy
an acre or less than 5 acres from me to build and then the developer comes in and sells
his different areas, right adjacent to me and less than 5 acres. I don't know how that
happen we were, they would not less us do it. Planning and zoning, so I am opposed
this .
Al Dauven, 2820 N. Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney..
Dauven: Well I kind of live kitty corner from this property and he stated it is all R-4 out
there. I don't know how it can be R-4 on the east and north sides of this property they
are 5 acre properties. It will go from R-4 on the south and west side of it but when you
divide that property up you had better make the lots a little bit bigger wen it comes to
the 5 acre parcel or else don't annex it. I think you are biting off more than it is worth.
You are going to put a bunch of lower income houses in there with a lot of kids. We
have horses at our place and I will not responsibility. I will bring my attorney and he
says that if you guys approve it without certain conditions and stuff that we agree to that
you are putting this City at jeopardy to those lawsuits. Because the south slough goes
through my property and you guys aren't providing for parks in that area. You don't have
one in a four mile square out there. So let's say they are putting 95 houses on this 35
acres many kids are they going to put in an R-4 residential zone. We have five acres
sitting there with a nice stream running through it. We have 5 to 8 horses running
around out there in that 5 acres, you can put three or four kids out there and I am not
going to be responsible. You don't know what a horse is going to do, you don't know
what any animal is going to do. They could just as well charge that kid and trample
them right over or do anything. This is something that this board has to take into
consideration and they have to think about it. If they are putting a subdivision right along
side that isn't R-4. I will agree with you we are in your impact zone area whatever and
sooner or later I know the slough carries the sewer line and somebody has got to come
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 29
and talk to us which everybody kind of neglects to do when you get drawn into one of
these things. You guys have got a nice green path drawn right across my property
which I don't agree with. Have you ever talked to me about it, you have no right to put
that on that map. You haven't bought that property, I haven't agreed to nothing. So,
these things you better start straightening out with this Council. Your P & Z is nothing
but a joke, I mean you have guys on there going to sleep when you are stating stuff and
they just ignore the facts. These are things that have to be considered into this. Sure
there is R-4 housing like I said you have a subdivision, you got all of the (inaudible) sure
that is R-4 and they abutted basically vacant land that was just being farmed, there was
no livestock on it so there was no question there. But now you are abutting people's
land that have livestock. So does the City want to be responsible for putting a jillion
houses up against something that has livestock in there. I am kind of in agreement with
the rest of them. I don't see how they could have sold off the Brown house from that 35
acres when it is only like '/2 acre. How did they sell off the Borup house which is less
than '/ acre off the 12 acres. These are things that have to be addressed and
everybody runs and hides from them. They sure won't let me split no land off my
property. It would be probably (inaudible). These things have to be taken care of and
there has to be some consideration for us people that lived there for a long time. They
are impacting my life, they are impacting me I am not impacting them. They are making
a profit by impacting me. So it should be done the way that people want it done. You
can't put little stray lots around 5 acre parcels and build a bunch of $80,000 to $90,000
houses and put 4 or 5 kids in them. Those 4 or 5 kids aren't watched very well and they
are running all over and they are all over everybody's property and they are down in the
slough. We already had an instance here earlier this year that the canal ditch rider was
telling me about and it was a good thing the father was there. A little three year old just
about drown in the ditch right of way right above us where we get our water. If the dad
wouldn't have been there and been right on top of it he would have drown. Things like
that you don't hear about because they don't get in the newspaper because nobody has
called because the dad took care of it all. One instance is too much, I guess is what I
am saying. I am a Meridian businessman so I like the impact. It provides business for
me and revenue and stuff but 1 want it done according to Hoyle. That is about all I have
to say about it.
Corrie: Anybody else?
Billy Jo Premoe, 3045 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Premoe: I would just like to go on record as being opposed to this as well. Our quality
of life will change if this subdivision is approved. We have lived out there for 14 years
and we are probably one of the newcomers on the block. We really appreciate the way
of life we have and when we bought on a private lane we were assured that there would
be no more building on it. That everything is agricultural around and I know things are
changing. The majority of us that are out there would like to keep it the way it is and
would beg your consideration of our needs.
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 30
Corrie: Anyone else that would like to issue testimony on this at this time?
Mark Peterson, 2700 Wingate, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Peterson: I too want to go on record as opposing the subdivision. We are going to be
adjacent on two sides to the new subdivision. We too have livestock and we just seem
to have enough buffer zone I guess between that kind of density of housing and kids
and livestock that we do. I want to emphasize if it does go through that they cannot
have access to the lane where they plan on abutting the road into our Wingate Lane. It
is very easy to put in a simple little barricade and we all know how easy it is to take the
kids bicycle or walk right around something like that and go ride down the lane. I am not
sure that they have shown us the proper kind of barricade that they are going to use in
that area. That is all I have to say.
Corrie: Anyone else?
Don Brian, 2070 N. Locust Grove Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Brian: Good evening Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, I have two concerns with this
development actually. My number one concern is what directly affects me and it is
traffic. Mr. Sharp hit on it a little bit about what a mess Locust Grove Road is. If I don't
leave my house before 7:00 in the morning I can't get out on the street, it is just bumper
to bumper all day long. Going through, in your packet you have the Ada County District
traffic study or the results from what they did on the findings when this first went through
dated October 1995 when it went to Commission. They have they determined that this
subdivision would generate about 950 additional trips per day of vehicles down Locust
Grove Road. At that time the traffic count on Locust Grove Road they have on your
sheet that was made January 1994 and that was over 3 years ago when that was done.
They had a traffic count of 2794 and as of October 2, 1996 which is 6 months ago or
more, the vehicles per day on Locust Grove was 10,026 so there is a substantial
difference and what they have looked as far as a study for this development and what is
really there. I guess my question would be is there a new traffic study out and if so
where is all of the new information and how do they or you get the information to digest
so you make a prudent decision on this. I know your argument is that you don't have
anything to do with roads it is up to Ada County Highway to keep up with our growth.
But, in checking with Ada County, the projected construction date of Locust Grove
widening is 2001. So, here we are building all these new subdivisions and dumping all
of this traffic out on the road and making it a mess and there is nothing going to be done
until 2001. If it doesn't get bumped anymore. Obviously everything gets bumped but it
paints a pretty bad picture. I just wanted to point that out and see if there were any other
studies done as far as traffic congestion and what they have come up with and how that
would affect the new plat that we are going through three years later. My second
concern is the same concern that all of the folks on Wingate Lane have that is fencing
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 31
and livestock. I have been here before talking to you guys about this. But we need to
take a real serious look at the separation of rural, agricultural land with livestock and the
residential land that is coming into the valley. I have first hand experience with that with
my horses, all of these people on Wingate Lane are horse people and there is going to
have to be a separation between the people and the horses that they can't go through,
climb over, go under. It is a problem because like what was stated before children and
horses and adults, I have problems with adults. They all think that I have the first petting
zoo behind Fred Meyers. I had to put up signs and fences and I had people make
special trips down there to take pictures of them, they had never seen horses before.
That is fine but it is like a magnet. They come from Fred Meyer and they make the loop
by the horses and then down to Locust Grove. In your approval of the plat or annexation
or whatever we need to look at a good separation between those animals. Something
that is going to work, and I think a fence, a solid fence that they can't go through or get
over is the best way to do that. As far as the water concerns, I think you all know where
I stand on that so I won't go into that. Any questions? Thank you
Floyd Reichert, 2575 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Reichert: I would like to go on record as probably the only one on the lane that is in
favor of the annexation into the City and building the houses. My property is adjoined to
the east by the old Kirkpatrick property and Brown's on the north side. Everybody's
concerns could probably be met like I say with the irrigation being .tiled, ditches being
tiled, I could probably go into a lot of history on the lane. I came home from Vietnam in
1968 1 bought my property and there were only four houses on the lane. I had a very
difficult time getting a building permit due to the easement. I finally had to go to Frank
Church our Senator and got my building permit. Since then on the and I was given a
deed with a private road easement on it, 15 feet that bordered the east side. But all the
houses that these people are concerned about they have gone down and approved
everybody else out there but now they are denying the people that have in my opinion
the access to the lane. But my concern out there isn't the children I have sold off my
livestock, haven't had any for years. I have a problem with the neighbors livestock
getting out and ripping up my flower beds and yard and everything that they don't keep
them in. I could go on and on about that but I really think if you look at the community's
interest of a whole I think this is a well worth project to take part of that congested traffic
off of the Fairview, Eagle Road, Locust Grove because it is a mess getting down the
lane. Trying to get out on the road that 15 feet the ingress and egress is a problem and
always has been. But the traffic on Ustick is so bad now it will only get worse. It should
be for the access or an easement through that mile section to eliminate some of that
traffic going through the session instead of over it. As far as the utilities, we have power
and telephone and everything comes down it and for some of the houses out there they
have come down Wingate Lane and buried natural gas line down there so there is
public utilities that lay in the right of way of Wingate Lane. That is all I have to say if you
have any questions.
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 32
Corrie: Any further testimony at this time?
Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Sharp: Mayor and Councilman going along with something that was brought up quite
conclusively was the ordinances and thanks to Mr. Morrow we should abide by them.
We have been told that there is a buffer zone and this buffer zone is where we are living
on Wingate Lane between Ada County and Meridian. As a resident on Wingate Lane I
would like to see that continue so therefore I am opposing this zone change. Going
along with ordinances Mrs. Kirkpatrick had asked and her husband, to cut off one acre
and their little house because it was becoming too much to take care of. The 12 acres
which now has been including with the 20 acres, 12 on one side of the lane and 22
approximately on the other side of the lane. So the properties are not together, they are
separated by this private lane. Kirkpatrick's were not allowed to cut off because of this
buffer zone so they could not do as they chose and had to sell it all. I realize that
comprehensive plans are created and every time something is rezoned it is changed.
My question to you then is why would a few people be allowed to change at the
expense of those that don't want it. Does anyone pursue the possibility of asking the
people in the area are they interested in changing or would they like it the way they are.
On the corner of this property or section there is a big farm, next to that is a church. At
the opposite corner of that on Locust Grove and Ustick there are 20 acres that are farm
land and this gentleman does not propose to sell or have it developed. We have five
acres and we have been there since 1968 with the idea that you cannot break it off. On
the property where Edmonds (inaudible) and Castle now own the 22 acres and that is
on record there has been a break off since Mr. Alleman bought it from Mr. Cooper. It is
something that if we have an ordinance do we abide by it or do we have the person who
has the loudest voice being a developer get what he wants. We are talking about lift
stations and I see on your agenda tonight you are going to have to do some approving
of bidding or that they are on your agenda. Why would the City of Meridian if we are
gong to (Inaudible) want to put in lift stations. Did they ask the developers whether or
not there was going to be sewer accessible to this property. And why not make them
wait. Other people have had to wait to get what they want to do what they want but
developers can go in and dot ask they just choose to do. I am having a little problem
with that. We are talking about growth and we all know that we are getting tremendous
growth not only in Meridian but the entire valley. I think here again we could use it with
a little bit more planning. I think that just to develop for the sake of developing is not the
answer either. As far as fencing in animals you know when you are living out in the
country as much as you want to fence in an animal they do at times get out. And not
always going where you want them to go. I don't know if you gentlemen here have
seen them but I had submitted some pictures of our lane and the area showing you just
what it is. I think it is kind of nice to have something different rather than one mass mess
of houses. In talking to the realtors we have an abundance of houses right now. Not
only vacancies of those have already been built an the new owner ones that they are
trying to sell but that does not include that that are already on the block to be built. That
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 33
was over 600 houses that are vacant at this time. So at this point in time I am saying
there is no demand for housing. I am saying in time maybe there will be and maybe at
that time we would be willing to say okay fine take our five acres and let's develop it. I
don't see it at this time. We don't abide other things either, we have a manhole that is
supposed to be five feet from the property is on the property line. Who's is going to
check these things that they are taken care of. The don't. I think another thing who is
responsible for notifying potential buyers that they are on a lift station meaning that they
are going to have a monthly or quarterly charge on that. And if the sewer should come
through and hopefully it will a lift station as we are told is a temporary set up. They will
then have to connect as the young couple that were here should they try to sell they
would have to hook up, they ware within 300 feet. Speaking of 300 feet, does that
mean I will have to hook up t the sewer my property or our property right there at the
end of Wingate Lane and we could be within that jurisdiction also. So I am looking out
for my interests naturally. We have been there since 1968 when they had all of these so
called ordinances and somehow someone calls along and a whim changes them.
Nobody is asked, nobody cares it is let's go for it. So I am saying please at least
(inaudible) City Engineer. He tried to tell Planning and Zoning they didn't have
everything ready for the sewer and they didn't, but it was passed onto you guys with the
idea of pick that up and decide what needs to be done. Thank you, by the way Mr. and
Mrs. Premoe tried to build 20 by 40 shop on their property and were told they couldn't
because they haven't got five acres. That is not because they are annexed either, they
have less than 5 acres and they are not all 5 there we have to admit to that. We as a
private lane are supposed to have four houses on the lane and we all know there are
many more than that. But if a developer can rezone and build why can't they build a
shop on their property. Thank you
Corrie: Anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony? Are there some
questions that you would like to answer at this time.
Tealey: I guess the sensitive issue is as you can tell here Wingate Lane. We propose
no access to Wingate Lane whatsoever from this subdivision. We own the lane, the
developers owns the ground underneath Wingate lane and these people have an
easement for access. They don't, so there is no break in the land between the Brown
and the Borup property. I don't know exactly how to go through this but I guess I can
start by each person that offered testimony. We will have a development agreement that
states many of the concerns that people have such as fence and irrigation issues. We
will fence the entire property as part of the subdivision. As the phases are approved and
built we will provide for irrigation delivery to each parcel that is serviced through the
ditch that goes through our property. We will pipe it and we will provide an easement for
that pipe in the plat that we record on each phase. Wingate Lane will remain private,
there is as I stated no access from this subdivision to Wingate. There was some
mention of the Ada County Highway District traffic study. We conferred with them just
two months ago. What they told us is we don't need a new traffic study, they have some
updated figures. These figures that were supplied as part of our traffic study did not
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 34
change. They had some updated traffic figures and that the level of service for
surrounding roads of Eagle and Locust Grove will not suffer as part of this as part of
their studies. These are not our studies they are their studies. So of this commuter
traffic or course will be converted. From going onto Locust Grove through the building of
Hickory which is a collector road that will end out in the middle of the subdivision. Again
I am getting into the subdivision issues. I don't know if you want me to address them
now or wait until the subdivision comes up. Which do you prefer?
Corrie: I was going to say if you have it as testimony go ahead and address and we will
take it as part of the (inaudible).
Tealey: Mr. Alleman alluded to the irrigation and the problems that he has had with
developers in the past. Again will sign a development agreement guaranteeing him
access to his irrigation and we will provide easements through the plats as we build
them. The construction time table we have already agreed to that in the findings of fact
for the annexation provides for that concern. (End of Tape) Some of the problems that
are happening with Locust Grove and Ustick and surrounding roads each of these lots
that will be built on will provide impact fees to actually construct improvements on these
roads to improve the traffic. I guess other than that, if you have any questions which I
am sure you do I would be glad to answer them. There may be some other things that
come up as part of it.
Corrie: Council, any questions at this time? Questions of staff?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I have questions with in terms of Gary, a letter from you to Pat
Tealey dated April 9, 1997. It talked about issues with respect and I am quoting here, "if
there are plans to move the lift station in Packard No. 1 to a site in the proposed
Packard No. 2, as Ted Sigmont mentioned to me this morning, then things need to
move very quickly as there is a Pre -construction meeting for Packard No. 1 scheduled
for tomorrow which includes the construction of the lift site. Also, Shari Stiles indicated
that Packard No. 2 parcels of the property within the boundaries of the proposed
Packard No. 2 subdivision (inaudible) have the proposals annexed into the city as part
of the Packard No. 2 annexation and zoning request. I guess my issue is you bring us
up for your part bring us up to speed on the sewer issues and the lift station issues and
all of that as it relates to this subdivision.
Smith: On April the 25th I believe it was I received some prints from Tealey's Land
Surveying, their engineer David Marks and on the prints he outlined the revised location
of a lift station to the northwest corner of Packard Subdivision No. 2 from the northwest
corner of Packard No. 1. This would necessitate the installation of some 8 inch
diameter line from the northwest corner of Packard No. 1 to that point. The sewage
then from No. 1 and the proposed No. 2 and the proposed elementary school site to the
east of Packard No. 1 would flow to the northwest corner of the proposed Packard No. 2
and be pumped into Chamberlain Estates Subdivision which would then gravity flow into
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 35
the south slough that has been built. That is what they called option 2, the option 1 that
shows on that plan is to cross Vern Alleman's property with a gravity sewer interceptor
line which is an extension of the south slough. The developer's have been in
conversation with the Mr. Alleman over the past several years concerning an easement.
Mr. Alleman has offered to them to discuss the easement subject to I think about 19
different conditions. Which he outlined to them in written form and I received a copy of
those conditions from Mr. Tealey for my file. At this point Mr. Alleman has not
consented to an easement for a gravity sewer line. However, I have talked to Mr.
Alleman as late as yesterday and I don't think that there is an insurmountable situation
with getting an easement across his property and eliminating the lift station. However,
there are two proposals on the table for sewering the property. Now part of that sewer
line, the gravity sewer line to the lift station in the northwest corner of the proposed no. 2
Packard Subdivision is less than the minimum grade for an 8 inch sewer line. There is
about 1500 feet of line that would be at 3/10 percent slope. Mr. Marks from Tealey's
land surveying said this grade could be increased by raising the elevation of the sewer
line in Packard No. 1. 1 don't know to what extend but there is apparently an option to
increase the grade of that sewer. I don't think it is a significant problem, he has
estimated the velocities in that those lengths of 3/10 percent sewer at about 1 '/ feet
per second which is slightly less than the 2 feet per second minimum that we looked for
in an 8 inch line. But, it looks like we are going to be faced with something less than
4/10 percent even if the lift station isn't there. Those details need to be worked out
however. The one positive point of the lift station being relocated from Packard No. 1 to
Packard No. 2 is that they will be pumping into the service area for the south slough. In
Packard No. 1 they were pumping into another service area that isn't the drainage area
for the subdivision. So it does put the sewage in the south slough drainage basin. I
think that is about the most current information on the sewage system.
Morrow. So at this point it is safe to say we don't how the sewage is going to be handled
is that correct?
Smith: Well, it is not a detailed resolution, but I think there are two alternatives on the
board both of which are doable. One would require the agreement of an adjacent
property owner for an easement. I don't think that is an insurmountable situation but
again it resolves itself down to negotiations between the developer and Mr. Alleman.
The other is the installation of a lift station and again that is from an engineering
standpoint it is possible. Now I haven't seen any detailed details of what happens in
Packard No. 1 as opposed to what has been approved and what is under construction
at this point. I am assuming that they are able to tie onto what is being built in Packard
No. 1 and extend it to the north and west to get the northwest corner of proposed
subdivision No. 2.
Morrow. Thank you, Shari, you comments with respect to the authorization by the two
parcel owners?
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 36
Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council, we have received some notarized
consents from those property owners since the last meeting. I don't know if you have
those in your packet but we did receive them and have those in our files.
Morrow. So that issue has been resolved, how about written response to, your letter of
November 13, 1995. Did you receive written response to those 17 issues that you
raised at that point in time? I guess the other thing is that is long enough to go maybe
we didn't have a policy in place at the time that we needed written responses.
Stiles: I guess I would use your response earlier, if it was before (inaudible)
Tealey: We did provide her with response to those 17. If you want (inaudible)
Corrie: Gary, I had one question, I am still a little confused here, the lift station in option
1 they would be permanent lift stations in option 1 or temporary?
Smith: No sir they would be an interim lift station correct.
Morrow: If it is okay with you, I would like to see him present your map of the lift station
(inaudible).
Tealey: I apologize for the audience not being able to see this but I am sure they have
all looked at this plat many times and it is fairly easy to understand. Right now down ins
this area is Packard No. 1, it has a lift station in this, an approved temporary lift station
right now in this position. This is Packard No. 2 if this Packard No. 2 is approved and
annexed and the preliminary plat approved we will move the lift station from here down
to here. This right in here is the south slough. This over here is the last manhole on the
south slough. This is Mr. Alleman's ground, there is 230 feet in here between this
manhole and our ground. If we were to get an easement which is our option number 1
across here we would just gravity flow this sewer into the south slough and do away
with all of the lift stations. If we can't come to agreement with Mr. Alleman we propose
moving this lift station to here and being temporary until either Mr. Alleman sells his land
or develops it himself or the City gains some type of easement to where the south
slough sewer interceptor can be built. At that time this lift station will be eliminated and
this system flows to the gravity sewer for the south slough interceptor. This 40 acres as
stated is Packard No. 1, over here to the east is the new elementary school that will be
serviced by the sewer through this subdivision and eventually get into the south slough.
Are there any questions?
Morrow: I have one, the sewer issue with respect to velocity that Mr. Smith raised, your
solution to that. Are you in fact raising the elevation of the sewer in Packard No. 1 ?
Tealey: We can still do that, we haven't started construction on the sewer yet. We have
had a pre -construction meeting. When we first proposed Packard No. 1 we kept the
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 37
sewer so that we had an ample cover of what would be over in the southeast comer.
We can raise that a little bit in order to give us the sewer flows and velocities that will be
needed to get into the south slough. As Mr. Smith stated our velocity is in the 8 inch
sewer are just a little under what are needed to make it flow. It will flow but not at the
velocity, there will be more maintenance involved in it then a sewer line at 4/10 percent.
We can alleviate that problem by bring the sewer up in Packard No. 1. As I stated we
are waiting to start that construction until we see if we have a project here on this parcel
of ground. The sewer in Packard No. 1 was not only for us but it was for the school
district that we kept it up as low as we could.
Morrow: Let me ask you this if it is raised to facilitate the gravity slough does that
include the school district being able (inaudible).
Tealey: No, all it does is possible remove the little bit of safety margin that you would
typically have. Some flexibility in where the school was placed on the site or how height
it was or how much fill was put on the site for the school.
Bentley: I have a question for Gary, is flow of Packard No. 1 and 2 into the south slough
the desirable area of where we want it to go to?
Smith: Councilman Bentley yes it is, that is where it is supposed to flow the south
slough.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council I am unable to find in my packet any response to any of
my comments that I made November 13, 1995.
Sharp: (Inaudible)
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, a question for Mr. Tealey, I don't remember hearing it but have
you and your clients reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by
the Planning and Zoning Commission? They are pretty extensive and there are a lot of
conditions are you in general agreement with those.
Tealey: Yes, I will find, like I said there is a lot of paperwork in the file. I have seen my
comments back to her, I will provide them to her. I know we have addressed them, I
know we addressed Mr. Freckleton's comments and they should be in that same
general area.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I have a question for the counselor, is there any testimony or
substantial testimony change that would merit new findings?
Crookston: I think that there is in relationship to the sewer particularly and then with
regard to some of the comments made about Wingate Lane.
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 38
Corrie: Any further comment then? I will close the public hearing at this point.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I feel we have had significant changes in these findings of fact and
some issues that aren't totally covered as Councilman Morrow and the attorney have
spoken out against. I am uncomfortable with the ones we have, I would like to make a
motion for the attorney to prepare new findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Morrow. Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Morrow that we have the City
Attorney prepare new findings of fact and conclusions of law, discussion?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I guess just a point of clarification for me where those differences
appear in the findings.
Bentley: I don't feel that the Wingate Lane the private lane has been properly
addressed. The issue of fencing needs to be addressed and the changes in the lift
station still need to be addressed.
Morrow: I am in concurrence with that. I think that in my notes the private lane, the
fencing and the irrigation and particularly the sequencing of the fencing and those types
of things have not been adequately addressed. I think the testimony tonight by the
overwhelming majority of the public is in respect to the buffering or the isolation of the
two uses that are not compatible. Historically the Council has been very adamant about
having non-combustible continuous fencing in place prior to any development efforts the
full length of the border between agricultural uses and residential uses. I think those
issues are not adequately addressed in these findings of fact and conclusions. I think
we need to address those items to bring some sense of consistency to the actions that
we have taken in the past. Most recently with respect to Kachina Estates and the
Goldsmith Salmon Rapids. So I think that is a policy that has evolved because of
problems that we have had in the City in the past between agricultural and residential
uses. It could easily be that within a short period of time all of those properties get sold
for residential uses. In the interim those folk have some right to assurance that the
residential usage is not going to negatively impact the livestock issues. It is real easy for
construction debris to kill an animal and that (inaudible). So those were the issues that I
take exception with the current findings and I think tonight's testimony reflects a very
well founded concern about those issues.
Rountree: Just a question in my mind how the sewer would be addressed given the
options that we have, address both?
Morrow: I think we have to, I think we have to have on record that there are only two
acceptable solutions and in fairness to the developer and his team they need to know
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 39
those acceptable solutions are. Our City staff needs to know what parameters they
have to it in. Then they can take it from there and work at the solution.
Tolsma: I have a question also, (inaudible) is it up to us to decide how they cross
Wingate Lane or who crosses Wingate Lane or if Wingate Lane is a private lane
(inaudible)
Crookston: I hope that it doesn't go to court but it is up to the developer to decide how to
do that. It also has to be in agreement what is best for the City's sewer system. So
there are some issues there that still need to be worked out.
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Corrie: Any further discussion, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #9: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
Corrie: I will open the public hearing, we are going to end up tabling it.
Tealey: It is best we have it at the May 20tH meeting.
Crookston: You are going to table this and continue it to May 20tn?
Corrie: Well we have a public hearing scheduled we still have to have the public hearing
and then we can table it and continue the public hearing. Anyone else from the public?
Vern Alleman, 2070 E. Ustick Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Alleman: In regards to the plat, I still haven't gotten an answer in regards to Nampa
Meridian or Settlers Irrigation District. Also, I would like to ask Mr. Tealey where in the
findings of fact it addresses the irrigation scheduling time for construction. I would like to
find out what page that is on?
(Inaudible)
Bentley: The meeting will be continued.
Corrie: We will do the same thing as we are doing now and you will get another shot at
it and the questions will have to be answered again.
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 39
those acceptable solutions are. Our City staff needs to know what parameters they
have to it in. Then they can take it from there and work at the solution.
Tolsma: I have a question also, (inaudible) is it up to us to decide how they cross
Wingate Lane or who crosses Wingate Lane or if Wingate Lane is a private lane
(inaudible)
Crookston: I hope that it doesn't go to court but it is up to the developer to decide how to
do that. It also has to be in agreement what is best for the City's sewer system. So
there are some issues there that still need to be worked out.
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Corrie: Any further discussion, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #9: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
Corrie: I will open the public hearing, we are going to end up tabling it.
Tealey: It is best we have it at the May 20th meeting.
Crookston: You are going to table this and continue it to May 20tn?
Corrie: Well we have a public hearing scheduled we still have to have the public hearing
and then we can table it and continue the public hearing. Anyone else from the public?
Vern Alleman, 2070 E. Ustick Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Alleman: In regards to the plat, I still haven't gotten an answer in regards to Nampa
Meridian or Settlers Irrigation District. Also, I would like to ask Mr. Tealey where in the
findings of fact it addresses the irrigation scheduling time for construction. I would like to
find out what page that is on?
(Inaudible)
Bentley: The meeting will be continued.
Corrie: We will do the same thing as we are doing now and you will get another shot at
it and the questions will have to be answered again.
Meridian City Council
May 6, 1997
Page 40
Alleman: I thought that is the way it was going to be on Saunders and they didn't open it
up for the public.
Corrie: This one will be.
Alleman: Thank you
Corrie: It is a continued public hearing so you will want to be here in two weeks to give
testimony. Is there anybody else who would like to issue testimony at this time
(inaudible). Council I will entertain a motion
Morrow: So moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to continue the public
hearing on item #9 the preliminary plat, any further discussion? All those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #10: PNEJEDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: DISCUSSION OF PACKARD NO. 1
SUBDIVISION CONDITION OF APPROVAL ITEM 3:
Corrie: I think this is a discussion about tiling all ditches prior to any phasing done.
Tealey: Yes, the staff felt since it was brought up at the meeting.by someone from the
public that wanted all of the ditches surrounding Packard No. 1 to be tiled before as part
of our first phase that it should be made a condition. Evidently there was some
confusion or a misstatement certainly that a representative of the developer that said
yes we will tile all ditches as part of this first phase What we want to do is the all the
ditches as each phase is constructed as a standard practice of any subdivision. In other
words, where the ditch borders our property we will pipe it and that is the way we
designed it. For some reason it got entered into as Item #3 that we should pipe all the
ditches around all the 40 acres as part of the first phase. Maybe Shari can shed some
light on that, she evidentially picked that out of the public testimony on Packard No. 1
approval is that correct Shari?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, it was my recollection that an indication had been made
at the public hearings that was no problem. But I am unable to find anything in the
minutes that says that whether it was Ted turning to the developer and them nodding
their head. I don't know what it was but that was always my belief is that they had
agreed to that so that was why that was in my comment was that they should tile all the
ditches and then when the plat was approved it was approved with all staff conditions.
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: May 6 1997
APPLICANT: PNEIEDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 8&9
REQUEST: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 35.23 ACRES TO R-4
WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2
(PLEASE REFER TO THE FILE FOR A COMPLETE ACCOUNT OF MINUTES)
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
COMMENTS
MINUTES FROM 3-11-97 P & Z
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
"REVIEWED"
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS V
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
�U
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER: i Jv
V
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
V
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:`
Y "
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Meridian Planning & Zoe _ . ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 13
Johnson: Recommendation?
MacCoy: The recommendation, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
recommends that the property set forth in the application be approved by the City
Council for the zoning amendment requested under the conditions set forth in these
findings of fact and conclusions of law including that the applicant or his successor,
interest, assigns, heirs, executors, or personal representatives enter into a
development agreement and that the property only be developed under the conditional
use process. That if the applicant is not agreeable with these findings of fact and
conclusions of law and is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement
and developing the property only under the conditional use process the application for
the zoning amendment should be denied.
Manning: Second
Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we pass a recommendation onto the City as
stated, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF
APPROXIMATELY 35.23 ACRES TO R-4 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
Johnson: This has been before us some time ago, I personally have a conflict of
interest, it is adjacent to my residence so I am going to step down. We are in receipt of
numerous letters from adjoining property owners. Most of which are either opposed or
unfavorably disposed towards the application. There is one letter in favor of the
application as stated. At this time I will step down and turn the conduct of the meeting
over to Commissioner MacCoy who needs to open the public hearing.
MacCoy: Is the applicant or his representative here, I will open the public hearing.
Pat Tealy, 109 S. 4th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Tealy: What I have given you is a reduced exhibit of what we have here on the poster,
it should give you some idea of the location of the people that most likely will testify
tonight and their proximity to Packard No. 2. We are here tonight to request
annexation, rezone and approval of the preliminary plat with a development agreement.
The development agreement will tie the developer to certain items that we will discuss
and agree to tonight. These items being for instance fencing of the subdivision,
requirement of pressurized irrigation, sewer and water services. While that is not the
entirety of the development agreement it will assure the neighbors in the area that we
will develop in a responsible manner. All of the utilities are available to this site. We
Meridian Planning & Zc,...,ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 14
have approved or in the past you have approved Packard Subdivision No. 1 which is a
40 acre site to the southeast of this subdivision. It joins the road system that is
proposed for this Packard Subdivision No. 2. It also allows the connection for the
sewer to the south slough extension that is planned by the City of Meridian. Water,
power and gas are also available to this site along with telephone, cable and other
utilities. We had a neighborhood meeting last night at which we had a fairly good
response to. There were quite a few neighbors that showed, we talked about some of
the problems that people have had with it and some of the misconceptions that possibly
have been portrayed in the past. We hope some of these will come out tonight so that
we can satisfy the City of Meridian that we are in fact doing this in a responsible
manner. There are several questions that were part of the original review of packard
Subdivision No. 2. First was connection to a road system. Since we have submitted the
application which was in September of 1995 Dove Meadows subdivision has become
complete. We now have a connection to a public road system on the south. This will be
further enhanced by Packard Subdivision No. 1 which will being the road system to our
south boundary. Chamberlain Estates in that period has also been improved and we
have a road connection to the west which will get us out onto Locust Grove Road. We
have proposed buffering from adjacent subdivisions by, bordering for example the
Carol Subdivision and the adjacent acreage with larger lots. The R-4 zone that we are
requesting has a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet. We have over 50% of these
lots above 10,000 square feet and there is approximately 48% between 10,000 and
8,000 square feet, 8,000 being the minimum. We are buffering the adjacent
subdivision with larger lots as can be seen on the preliminary plat. If you wish to go
over these things, I assume that you will ask me questions when I am done talking
here. I will try and keep it short so that we can move on with this. When Packard
Subdivision No. 1 was developed and approved and the developers then had an
opportunity to buy the Brown property or the Borup property which consisted of 22
acres. They saw this as a natural progression of Packard No. 1 and natural
progression of development in that section. Then the Brown property became available
and the actual solution to the sewer problem then became evident. We would take the
lift station that is a portion of Packard No. 1 and eliminate it and actually get the sewer
into a gravity situation along the South Slough. This is one of the main issues that
probably will be approached tonight. One of the other main issues being Wingate Lane.
Wingate Lane has been a subject of a lot discussion it was the prime point of
discussion last night at the neighborhood meeting. We have assured the neighbors that
we will have no access whatsoever onto Wingate Lane as is seen by the preliminary
plat. There are, let me go to the exhibit here, Wingate Lane is in this, is shown on the
map in this area right here. They are fronted by these owners who have access to this
private lane along with two five acre lots down here that are owned by Reichert and
Sharp. This road system that we anticipate right now will have two gates across the
public road system that we have in this area right here you will be able to have
pedestrian and bicycle access and some type of emergency access through break
away ballards that will allow (inaudible) if anything were to happen on either side and
the only access in through here would be break away bollards. These are specifically
Meridian Planning & Z(-- -Ag Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 15
designed for these purposes. Just to go over the sewer issue graphically we have a lift
station that has been approved for Packard No. 1 down on this area. It is at the north
connection of Packard No. 1 to Packard No. 2. We will propose moving this into
Packard No. 2 as part of the solution to the sewer to get the sewer out of this area
because we had a problem with gaining access to the south slough sewer over the past
year we tried to negotiate with the land owner but it just didn't work. This right here that
you see in red that you also see on the drawing is the south slough sewer. It is an 18
inch sewer that is proposed to go along the south slough. We will make this
connection here at the northwest corner of subdivision. This lift station down here at
Packard No. 1 not only serves Packard No. 1 subdivision it also serves the elementary
school that is planned for out here on Eagle Road. That is one of the reasons that it
was able to be built because we provided sewer up in here and they didn't have to wait
for this (inaudible) So that is one of the benefits of us bringing the sewer and the water
to this area. There has also been some question about irrigation, we will provide
pressurized irrigation to each lot in this subdivision. We have entered into an
agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District who will own the system. We are
presently right now building a system in Packard No. 1 which will accommodate the
Dove Meadows Subdivision, Wingate Subdivision, Packard No. 1 and Packard No. 2.
This is being done at the cost of some $85,000 by the developer who will provide the
piping system, the pumps and the pump house and then turn it over to Nampa Meridian
Irrigation District who will own and operate it. That is a just a short overview, if you
have any questions (End of Tape)
Borup: (Inaudible) I might mention to the applicant and especially to the public, since
last month and for the last several months things have changed as far as our comfort
zone with what has happened in the past. We have received packets of minutes of the
meetings, all the submittals, the last week we have been going over those. We have
gone through about 6 hours of catch up on this application. I feel a lot more comfortable
knowing what has transpired in the past, the requirements from ACHD and the City and
everyone else. I think we are all up to date on the thing now which makes it a lot easier
on our part.
Tealy: Just to add, if you did read those you can see there is quite a long progression
of let's stop and get more information and then we got to this point and more
information. We got to the point where sewer was the issue and we have solved that
issue. That is where at the last meeting we pretty much thought we had the solution to
the problem, but with all of the new commissioners on here it was very prudent that you
get it reviewed so if you do approve it you can do it at a comfort level.
Borup: Just to make one other comment, I know the items that you had mentioned
would be completed were all items some of them specified by ACHD. Your solution on
Wingate Lane was their recommendation, written recommendation and I believe the
same thing on sewer was what was worked out with the City Engineer isn't that correct?
Meridian Planning & Zo,- ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 16
Tealy: That is correct.
MacCoy: Just one comment from myself, since I am in the position of one side and then
the other. As Keith has already mentioned we have spent a lot of time on this thing
which I do appreciate. I want you to understand that I know it has been a long drawn
out process and sometimes go slow is a way to do things like this. I was going back
through some of this material and every commissioner up here has changed since you
started all of this. So thanks for the time for that. If there is nothing else, are you going
to sit down. Just for the record and the public here, as you will look at this map or you
have already heard our applicant state the Name of Borup, Keith didn't get up to leave
for conflict. I asked him for the record would you please explain the name situation
here?
Borup: I think that name had come up with apparently some property that a Borup had
owned, I am not even sure of how many acres it was here, was that about 10 acres or
somewhere in that range. Whatever it was it was a tract they owned, I didn't even know
anything about it until last month's meeting I was talking to one of the neighbors or
someone around the area and asked if I was related. Going back it looked like maybe
through my great grandfather there was a relationship. Also the property is not owned
by Borup at this point anyway. So I don't feel like there is any conflict there and I
wouldn't think that anyone else would either.
MacCoy: Through working with our Counsel we felt it would be best to go on record
with that. Anybody from the public that would like to make a statement now?
Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Sharp: I expect you have this letter, we would like to have those issues in writing that
they address those issues in writing and also address the issue of why they sold off
part of that split to those properties. I think this is not legal, if it is not then why do we
proceed with this. Also, I had a question as to they have all the small lots you might
say over, in front or our property, most of them anyway. The minimum lot is I think 4 of
them, 8,000 square feet and they are protecting the Carol Subdivision with the larger
lots. I think we ought to have a level playing field there if we are going to do this thing.
And they say it is difficult to do, well I don't think it is difficult at all. If you take 4 of those
lots at 32,000 and divide by 3 you would come up with 10,600 and if you take 3 of the
lots over by Carol Subdivision, there are a couple of them with 15,500 and 11,700. If
you divide by 4 you would come up with about 10,600 that would kind of even this thing
out and not give the appearance of stacking the deck against us. I just don't think it is
necessary I think we have been out there before Carol Subdivision was ever in there.
In fact if we hadn't been there you would probably have 300 mobile homes out there
because that was their original was to put 300 mobile homes in there. Like I say we
have been out there and I do object to this subdivision. Our educational system is going
Meridian Planning & Z(,...ng Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 17
to unduly impacted. Our traffic is going to be impacted, our crime rate is going to go up
and all of our services are going to be impacted. So that is what I object to.
Fitzgerald: Mr. Sharp, I have one question, you referred to a letter, what letter were you
referring to?
Sharp: We brought it over for the Commissioners.
Fitzgerald: That is the letter dated March 8, 1997?
Sharp: Yes
MacCoy: Is there anyone else that would like to make a statement?
Vern Alleman, 2101 East Ustick, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Alleman: I have some concerns about Packard No.2, at the present time irrigation
water for our property comes through the land proposed for Packard No. 2. 1
understand the City requires these ditches to be tiled, I am concerned that this tiling be
done between October 15th and March 15th off season for irrigation so as not to
interfere with my crops. I am also concerned about the size of the pipe for this,
placement of the main manholes. Also grade of pipe and inspection for the same. I also
request that the easement for this be recorded so as to avoid conflicts should be
necessary to repair or maintain this in the future. I am also concerned about the
location of the system across Packard No. 2 subdivision to our property. As a matter of
information there has not been any agreement made for the sewer crossing our
property to Packard No. 2.
MacCoy: Thank you
Borup: I have a question, is that under Nampa Meridian Irrigation District?
Alleman: Yes
Borup: Don't they usually regulate the irrigation as far as specifications?
Alleman: No that is my private ditch you might say or it would have been anybody along
there once it left Nampa Meridian's canal there. Their delivery point is, therefore it
becomes our concern from there on from our head gate. Our head gate is up east of
the South of Wingate Lane.
Borup: And it is the responsibility of any land owner to, then you are saying they can do
anything on their property as far as relocating as long as the water is delivered at the
beginning of your property.
Meridian Planning & Zoe.., Ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 18
Alleman: I am not saying they can I wanted to see what they, I know where it is now.
Borup: Isn't that what it normally is that the water still needs to be provided to your
property the same as it was before.
Alleman: Oh yes, it has to be delivered
Borup: And I think that is the same thing that Nampa Meridian is going to make sure
that is required. Then just clarification on your comment on the sewer crossing your
property, they have got no plans or designs for that to happen at this point.
Alleman: We have discussed it and we haven't reached an agreement.
Borup: Well they have gone another way.
Alleman: That is fine
Borup: Thank you
MacCoy: Anyone else?
Albert Dauven, 2820 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney
Dauven: I am kind of concerned like Vern is with the irrigation water. Ours comes quite
a ways further east than his does and then comes all the way almost to the Borup
property there and then comes up the regional house. Anyway, Nampa Meridian says
they have no laws, they can do nothing for us. This has to be decided right from the get
go, we have to have it in writing. Because there is no agency that governs this. You
can go right down Ustick and hit every farmer down there that has been impacted by a
subdivision along Ustick Road and they will tell you that the have been inconvenienced
by the contractors. So to protect ourselves we need to have this done.
Borup: I am not sure what it is you want done.
Dauven: I want it in writing that the water is going to be delivered to us that they are
not going to go out there and tear our ditch out and six months later they put it back in.
We have got to protect ourselves. That is what everybody has told us up and down
there that has been impacted by a subdivision. You have got to get it in writing, you
have to have it notarized, you have got to have some way to make them do it. It might
not be them it might be the contractor they hire and he might not just get the job done.
Borup: You are talking about an uninterrupted flow of water
Meridian Planning & Zr,, ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 19
Dauven: Right, in the summer time, during the irrigation season which is April 15 to the
end of August is usually when the water season actually starts. As far as these gates
going across Wingate Lane we went over this time and time again, we do not want the
kids out of the subdivision in our animals. I live right on the south slough and that
slough is the biggest attraction for little kids that you have ever seen in your life. I
mean we can chase them out of there probably three times a week that come out of
Carol Subdivision. That is quite a distance if you get to looking at it from the road into
Carol Subdivision to my property. But they are in there all of the time. We have said
this that we didn't want any foot traffic or bicycle traffic, because we have it right now
along the half mile deal, the Nampa Meridian east west road right there behind Sharp's.
Now the kids ride their motorcycles likely split up and down that, they have had
snowmobiles out there. They dump all of their trash over it, over the fence, that people
put all of their clippings, rocks. If you want to see it for yourself just go out there and
drive down that dirt road. And you can see what they have thrown over their fences. I
want to protected from that. I want to see a berm built with a fence built on top of it.
Borup: A berm between where?
Dauven: Between Packard No. 2 or the Brown property and Wingate Lane. And
probably Dixie's property and Peterson's property. Or else, if Wingate Lane is
impacted by a road and it is decided to put a road through there then maybe we ought
to have a dead zone from the center line over I don't know what it would be, it would
probably be 30 feet because they would probably make it a main road through there in
the future. So each side would have to give up 30 feet so maybe there should be a
dead zone from the center property line over the 30 feet so they can't do that. If you
understand what I mean. The road right now is dedicated 15 feet off the west side
property. If the City or whoever is going to be in jurisdiction of it one of these days they
might want to as people sell their property the 5 acres that is in there they might want to
put a big road through there or a main road. So we have to take those kinds of things
into consideration too.
Borup: You are suggesting a right of way dedication for future roads you are saying?
Dauven: Well it is something to that effect. I don't know how it would impact the
neighbors or what it would do, but I think we have to think about the future, we can't
just think about right now. If you build all of those houses right next, let's say 15 feet
there where the road is at now. You back it up against there and what are we going to
do, if they want to put a road through there if they are going to have a school up
through there it is going to be something to kind of think about. Maybe we are not
making the right decisions right now that we need to maybe (inaudible) to set that back.
Another thing is if we take the 15 foot off the back of those lots they are all along
Wingate Lane there that cuts them down, if you want to measure them that is going to
cut them down to almost 8,000 feet.
Meridian Planning & Zo. .,ig Commission _
March 11, 1997
Page 20
Borup: Well not on this plat, these lots are (inaudible)
Dauven: Yes but they lose 15 feet because of road dedication there that was done in
1903 or 1913. See the property line is actually (inaudible)
Borup: So you are saying the whole road is on their property?
Dauven: Right because our for fathers kind of give it away the people that owned the
land on the west dedicated it to the people that lived along the lane. So they proposed
15 feet from that property line to the west.
Borup: Even if 25 feet was dedicated which would be a 50 foot right of way if half was
taken from each that would still leave those lots 84 by 105. So they are well
(inaudible).
Dauven: I was just saying that it does size them down when you take into all the
considerations and everything. You have to take quite a bit of thought into that. I
would just like to say that we wouldn't like to see the kids, we have horses and horses
like that are unpredictable. And you don't know what they are going to do and kids love
to go and pet horses. We went through an unfortunate circumstance this last year with
two horses and one killed the other one. So, they were both tame horses, you just
don't know what an animal is going to do when it is that big and powerful and that is the
same with a cow. You might go out there everyday and pet that cow and one day it
comes out there and puts its head down and shoves you into next year. So that is
about all I have to say, you are putting agricultural with public and I don't think a six
foot fence is quite adequate. Because if you put horses up close to that 6 foot fence
and they throw their clippings over there they are going to compact a horse and kill it.
Lots of people that live in the City don't understand that. They think it is grass and they
can eat it. That is just some things that need to be addressed that I think they just get
passed by quite a bit. I am a business owner in Meridian, I do pay taxes in this town. I
am not an outsider per say. I am not against this subdivision development but I want it
done right for what we have got there. That is about all I have to say.
MacCoy: Thank you very much
Don Bryan, 2070 North Locust Grove Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney
Bryan: There are a lot of new faces here since the last time I was here. So I will
introduce myself as a property owner on Locust Grove which was affected and
impacted by a multitude of subdivisions around the whole area, the whole section
between Locust Grove, Fairview and Eagle Road. I had a history of fighting water
problems and the way the developers develop and some of the problems we have run
into and we have managed to work out and both the pros and cons of these
developments. That is why 1 am here tonight to get some of these things in writing and
Meridian Planning & Zo. ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 21
a lot of things that I have learned from my mistakes is I didn't get things in writing and it
was my fault, tough luck for me. I don't want to see anybody or myself go through that
again. So there are a few items that I would like to bring to your attention over here.
Mr. Dauven had a lot of them, I will start by kind of following up on his that agricultural
and residential separation needs to be looked at. I think the ordinance requires fencing
but I have dealt with the developer. I live between I am right behind the Fred Meyer on
Fairview. I work with the developer and he put up a chain link fence along my property
line but that doesn't keep the kids away from the horses. I am in the process now of
putting up signs telling them to stay away both on Locust Grove and in the vacant lot
next door seems to be a magnet for everybody, kids and parents alike and dogs and it
is a problem. I don't know what the solution would be but it needs to be taken a serious
look at. The reason I am putting up signs is to get rid of my liability as far as somebody
getting bitten or hurt or anything that is going to happen out there. Another item that
needs to be addressed is the pressurized irrigation that they are putting in on this new
development, the reason I am here is because Packard No. 2 connects with Packard
No. 1. Packard No. 1 my lateral coming off the main ditch canal comes along the two
sides of Packard No. 1 and down to me. Since all of this project is tied together then I
am wanting the developer if he is here tonight to put on public record stating what his
plans are and maintain those ditches until they get developed or while they are getting
developed. Right now in Packard No. 1 the ditches are just choke full of weeds they
haven't been taken care of in two years. It used to be farm land and the man that used
to farm that particular piece ran a ditcher through there and burned it off every year and
we had plenty of the good water supply. I don't know what they plan on doing in the
next 30 days to get that cleaned out and get taken care of. Or what they are going to
do with regards to the pressurized irrigation, what they are installing, what they are
putting in and how it will affect me and how it will affect the other property owners.
They hire the people to design the systems and they go ahead and put them all in and
then say six months down the road I don't get any water who do I go talk to? I had
nothing to do with the design it was Nampa Meridian that takes it over after the
developer designs it, I am kind of in the dark on this and I am sure (inaudible) because
they have to supply water to all of these people. But I would kind of like to see what is
going on or be part of the process as far as what they are doing. I also have a problem
with the traffic flow, initially, I question how these tie together number 2 and number 1
because they are proposing running a lot of the traffic on the Ada County traffic study.
They said most of the traffic will be going since they are connected will be going out
Fairview which was nice for me living on Locust Grove, Locust Grove is so busy now
you can't even get out there during the peak hours. According to the Ada County
Highway District traffic study that you have in your packet it states that with the
development of this project, this Packard No. 2 you are going to put 950 more vehicles
per day on Locust Grove Road. I question whether we can handle that until Locust
Grove gets improved. It is slated to be improved in 1998 which will be more like the
year 2000 before they even widen it enough to handle the traffic. So I think that needs
to take a serious look at. I believe that is all I have, do you have any questions?
Meridian Planning & Zoe ... ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 22
Borup: You said your ditch, the water delivery to your property goes through Packard
No. 1?
Bryan: It goes through Packard No. 1 and then from that point on it, where it comes
down on the south side of Packard it abuts the church and the Packard property and
then it is buried from that point to me.
Borup: So Packard No. 2 does not affect your ditch?
Bryan: No
Borup: Did you, I assume then that you were here testifying when Packard No. 1 was
approved?
Bryan: Yes and I got put in the public record that the developer will probably argue this
point but the way I read the findings I have in the public record that he is to the that
ditch that affects me before he starts development. If you like I can read that to you, I
have it with me. He contested it at the time of the approval but the way I read the
approval (inaudible)
Borup: Thank you
MacCoy: Thank you very much.
Marc Peterson, 2700 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Peterson: I just wanted to reiterate some of the concerns that have already been
brought up like with the irrigation. They mentioned tonight about where the road in their
subdivision is going to cross Wingate lane there and have gates so that they cannot
have access onto Wingate Lane. But they said that there would still be pedestrian and
bicycle traffic across there which I do not agree with. My property is only about 100
feet from where that gate would be and we do have horses and livestock there. We
have electric fences there and I don't want kids and stuff going up and down the lane. I
am also concerned with the lot size again they increased the lot sizes around Carol
Subdivision and down one side but not directly across from my property right there. I
believe that both for the reason of possibly widening the road in the future and a buffer
zone from the livestock and what not I like the idea of a berm and a fence there. In
particular concern, I only saw the new plot last night that they are planning on doing.
They have, I was the last one approved by Ada County to be have access to Wingate
Lane. When I did that I had to have a minimum of a five acre parcel. I built my house
and now according to their deal it looks like they are trying to squeeze one more house
in between me and my neighbor now. It looks to me to be a land locked lot because it
shouldn't have access to Wingate Lane and they don't really have access to their
streets in their subdivision. So I really don't believe that should be a buildable lot.
Meridian Planning & Zo. ... ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 23
Borup: Which lot are you referring to?
Peterson: (Inaudible) this is different than what they showed me last night. They
showed me that this lot right here was going to be divided in two and that this was
going to be another lot here. Because this lot here has access to the street and they
cannot get out onto Wingate that would make that an unbuildable lot unless they snuck
a little driveway down one side there.
Borup: That is lot 14, Block 9, on the plat that I have anyway.
Peterson: For the right price I might consider making an offer on the lot.
Borup: This seems to indicate that there is an existing house on that lot is that true?
Peterson: They are planning on putting a lot between that house and my property.
They are planning on splitting that lot again according (inaudible) Anyway those are my
concerns, any questions?
MacCoy: Thank you, anyone else from the public that would like to make a statement at
this time?
Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Sharp: Commissioners I thank you for your time. I think I have more questions than
anything. One being I can't believe that they would ask you to pass on this when we
find right of way that we have some conflicts in the plat that you have got and what we
have got here. I have talked to Boise Planning and Zoning last week and if anybody
goes down there and it is all public record you will find that there was no more building
on Wingate Lane which means you cannot use Wingate Lane to get off and on the
property. We are also told that this is a buffer zone between Boise and Meridian and I
for one naturally am favored because I live on Wingate Lane and at time it was
supposed to be five acres. We were told too that you couldn't divide off the property if
you bought after a given year in 1968 and it has been proven by title check and that too
is public record that the property that once was Borup's has now been sold to a young
couple. Which means it hasn't been zoned, it hasn't been changed but there is a
break. On the property that Brown's owned that is also on Wingate Lane where there
are (inaudible) there are three owners there and that course transpired before the cut
off and before you were allowed to supposedly legally cut off property. There are three
that own that, they are the developers, Brown's and the (inaudible). The thing, my
problem too is this is not only a zoning but it is supposed to be planning. I would like to
see some serious planning done in this area. I would like to ask each one of you if you
have any idea really where this Wingate Lane is?
Meridian Planning & Zo, .., ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 24
Borup: Yes I do
Sharp: It is a small'/ mile lane, and there were pictures presented before on this lane
when we were here doing this before and one of the questions of course was the
benefits that Meridian might get from this so called zoning. We certainly don't need that
many new houses right now. Contacting Realtors who have got over 500 that are now
available that is not including those that are being contracted to be built and those that
are in the process of being built because of the new subdivisions. Why would they
want to build when we are supposed to be progressive a subdivision with a lift station. I
am sure that if anybody is aware of what happens with a lift station the City of Meridian
would have the good honor or taking care of it and the question is for how long. The
sewer, if this is the impact area and we are told that it is clear to McMillan it is a big
impact area why are we so concerned about how long it is going to take to get the
sewer there. If they are saying that we are going to have a grade school there why
wouldn't they try as fast as possible to get sewer in that area as opposed to going to
some of the more outlying areas when this is so close to City of Meridian. I think that
the idea of a lift station that has been moved which changes, plat one they have
changed what they were supposed to be doing there and they moved it over to plat 2. 1
questioned that being a valid argument as far as continuing the development to plat
one. As far as you probably can't see it, our property of course is at the end of the lane
and we do abut against the subdivision with a fence and told that people do not throw
gravel, they do not throw grass clippings and I will let you come over in the middle of
the summer and help us move the grass clippings and also when they empty their
cement barrels that they don't know what to do with. It gets on our property that is
private property. We also have been told that manholes are supposed to be five feet
from the property lines. If you will come out and measure ours it right on the property
line. The one that goes into the street that is stubbed onto our property. Again I would
request that we use a little bit of foresight and not always hindsight. We realize the
development is going to be and I am for it but let's do it with some serious planning.
don't think at this point that all of the issues have been addressed clearly and
completely enough that they could really ask you to act on it and I agree it should be
done in black and white so that you have everything concrete and you know just exactly
what you are zoning and what you are planning to do with that zoning. Thank you
MacCoy: Thank you very much.
Dixie Roberts, 2855 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Roberts: First of all I want to thank you very much for letting us voice our opinions on
this. I really oppose the growth out there, we all moved out there for country living. The
developers want to come in and change it and ruin it for us so to speak. Then they
leave and we are left with a mess. My son tried to buy an acre out there from me so he
could build on it and they said the zoning was that he could not. He had to own five
acres and they have sold off and acre and a % and since he tried to do this. So I guess
Meridian Planning & Zo. Ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 25
some people can sell some acreage off and some can't, I don't understand that. My
concern is most of all the irrigation because my land is worthless without it. I don't want
a pump, I want it just the way it is now because the way the land lies that is the way it
should be irrigated. Another thing with growth comes children and I do love children
but if they get in my property and the cows somebody is going to get hurt. I work and I
can't protect them. Of course our lane, I am real concerned about that and the traffic
even though they say it can't be used I think there is a lot of concern there.
MacCoy: Thank you very much
Craig Thompson, 2950 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Thompson: I don't live adjacent to where the property is going to be developed. I am
concerned with what will happen in the future. There should be some kind of a blending
effect there. I can't say how you can make it look good when you have 5 acre plots and
they are right up against where you have 8,000 to 10,000 square foot lots. That
bothers me. Another thing is by our property we live by the slough that goes down
through there and we have a flume. A concern of mine is children getting in there and
playing. How can we possibly prevent that if there is some kind of excess to that. Also,
they mentioned dumping grasses over the fence and other things, that bothers me. It
seems like every time we come in here we think some certain things have taken place,
we come here and the some changes have taken place. The map for example, what we
received last night, there are certain places where houses are going to be built where is
it here? Why isn't it on the map that we received and why is it different now. I would
like to see this be up front, we have been playing games with this for about 3 to 4
years. At first we were approached by the contractors, they were rude to us and
threatened us and made statements that were contrary to what is true. We checked
things out. I would like to come into a meeting once here where things were said that
were true. Where things were consistent. So we would know as an association of what
was going to take place. That has never happened and that bothers me. Again, I think
there are too many questions here right now. I think that the contractors, they should
again respond to some of the questions that we have, they are different than what we
talked about and what we were shown last night. That is all I have, thank you.
MacCoy: Anybody else?
Sharp: Helen Sharp, I am sorry that I didn't bring this up before because I think it is
very important. One of the big issues here for those of us that have gone before Ada
County Highway and trying to settle crossing a private lane with joining two pieces of
property that are divided by a private lane. I was told last week that Ada County
Highway has absolutely no jurisdiction and I quote over a private lane unless a deed of
warranty is granted that has not been done. So my question is right back to the original
how can they get from one piece of property to the other crossing a private lane with
the sewer and water if the Ada County Highway District says they too have no problem
Meridian Planning & Zo, ..,ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 26
or cannot have jurisdiction. I realize that has been addressed because we have been to
the meetings, numerous meetings to that too. They don't have any jurisdiction over that.
I think this is something else that really needs to be addressed and maybe a precedent
set. We had contacted an attorney on this issue for our argument but they didn't have
one on their argument when the (inaudible) attorney for Ada County Highway District.
He said and I quote "I see no reason why we can't cross a private lane" I am sure that I
couldn't go across a public road with a private one just because I thought I should be
able to do that. But I think it is something that should be addressed very seriously. That
you can find out by contacting Ada County offices.
Borup: Mrs. Sharp, just some clarification, at this point, the road is not crossing a
private lane so I don't believe that is at issue.
Sharp: The road isn't but the sewer lines are going to have to cross.
Borup: That was my question, you made a statement that a sewer line can't, I was
confused on your statement on the sewer line.
Sharp: When we had gone to meetings, one of the issues of course connecting the two
properties with water and sewer. Of course Ada County Highway got involved with that
and they
Borup: The two properties are already contiguous.
Sharp: I understand (inaudible)
Borup: They already adjoin each other, it is not crossing a separate property, the two
properties (inaudible)
Sharp: But the private lane is in between.
Borup: The lane is one their property yes.
Sharp: The private lane is an entity of its own because of the contract that was drawn
up in 1913. It is a dedicated private lane. So the question is could anybody just do
what they want to cross that private lane. I am saying this is something that needs to be
addressed.
Borup: As far as the sewer you are saying?
Sharp: Anything, we are also told of course they can't go down Wingate Lane there can
be no more access to it. If you want to go down to Ada County Planning and Zoning
they have got on every one of their maps no more building permits on Wingate Lane.
So if they have got a piece of property where they would have to go down Wingate
Meridian Planning & Zoe „.Ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 27
Lane at this point no they cannot do that. So I agree with them I think that the plats and
drawings should be more concrete before they even ask you to consider acting on it.
MacCoy: Gary, do you have any comment on that? Okay,
Dan Wood, 13141 West Blue Bonnet Court, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Wood: I would just like to make a couple of comments in favor of this project. The City's
comprehensive plan calls, the comprehensive plan as was impact states that they want
residential houses in this area. So I mean that is what they are doing. They are also
exceeding the surrounding subdivisions which are all zoned at R-8 they are going with
larger lots which are R-4 zoning. All of their lots are exceeding the minimum standards
of 8,000 to 10,0000 and 12,0000. They are doing everything they can to help these
neighbors. At this point they have got their rights too, they own the ground as long as
they abide by the rules of the City, the County and the State then they should be able
to do as long as they meet the requirements. I understand all of these people's
concerns but these guys have their rights.
MacCoy: Thank you
Alleman: My name is Vern Alleman, I too, I didn't put it in my but I have livestock that
adjoins this property on the north. Therefore I am concerned about the proper fence to
defend problems with children and livestock. So I think that should be addressed.
Thank you
MacCoy: Is there anyone here that would like to make a statement? I am going to ask
the applicant, do you want to take the podium?
Tealy: Pat Tealy, the applicant's representative (inaudible) with the City of Meridian
that we hope will ensure some of the concerns that the adjoining neighbors have.
Irrigation seems to be a problem and certainly we have to deliver the same quantity to
the same place that it now exists. In other words Mr. Alleman, Mr. Dauven and Mr.
Peterson will all get water delivered to them where they have it delivered now and in
the same quantity. If they feel that they need an agency to review our irrigation plans w
we will gladly accept any review by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District whether or not
they have jurisdiction over these ditches or not or the City of Meridian whichever you
choose we will do it correctly. We won't provide pressurized irrigation to them but we
will provide them with the water that they now have. Wingate Lane
Borup: Mr. Tealy, while you are still on that subject, do you have a comment on the
interrupting water flow, is that something, have you talked with the applicant on it if they
feel that they can construct the new lines without disrupting water service?
Meridian Planning & zo, .., Ig Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 28
Tealy: It is their intention not to disrupt water service, there is no doubt about that.
Typically this is done in an off season situation, we will build it during the winter to
market it during the summer. There are always situations I agree where a contractor
may not do what he wants, what we want him to do or in a timely manner. If there is
anything we can do to assure him of that we will enter into any agreement that they
would like. We will not interrupt their water.
Borup: Is that the plan at this time the schedule would be, I realize that phase 2 and
phase 1 are just going, or Packard No. 1 is just getting going and this is two. So it looks
like at this point the schedule would work that it would be planned for construction
during the off water season?
Tealy: Nampa Meridian will not allow us to mess with their ditches which are their
delivery points where they get the water during the water season so we have respected
that same (inaudible)
Borup: So that should not be a problem of interrupting.
Tealy: Wingate Lane seems to touch off more than its share of concern. I am sure that
if I lived there I would share the same concern that they have. We do not plan to
access Wingate lane in any way. There was some talk last night I agree at the meeting
of an additional lot along Wingate Lane. That is no longer planned, that is not part of
this plan, it never was because as you see that lot 14, Block 9 is all one lot. We do not
plan an additional lot on that.
(Inaudible)
Tealy: I can assure them that will not be a lot, there will not be any building on it
whatsoever.
Borup: Doesn't lot 14 have a house on it?
Tealy: Lot 14 as an existing house on it.
Borup: Is that the lot that they are referring to talking about possibly being split?
Tealy: Yes right now the lot that the person that owns Lot 14 doesn't own all of the lot
14 that is represented on this plat. They are either going to sell it to him as part of the
subdivision or it will have to be part of lot 14, it will not be another lot, I can't say it any
more plainly. There will not be another lot.
Borup: And maybe for information that is the way the plat is drawn so that the plat
would have to be changed and resubmitted for that configuration to change.
Meridian Planning & Zoe ..ng Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 29
Tealy: That is correct, Wingate Lane getting back to that. We do not plan or the
Highway District doesn't plan that I know of in my conversations with them of improving
Wingate Lane. That is going to stay the way it is. There was a gentleman up here Mr.
Dauven questioning or not whether we should grant some additional right of way to
plan for the future of an improved Wingate Lane. We certainly have learned in this
process that Wingate Lane is not going to be messed with, that is all there is to it, it is a
private lane. I can show you on the drawing where we have planned for an exit out to,
originally we had planned for Wingate to be an access to the subdivision. We had this
road was actually over in this position and we were going to improve Wingate Lane
with curb, gutter and sidewalk and put the sewer and water in. We got so much
opposition to it that we totally abandoned any effort to deal with Wingate Lane. We
even had a plan at one time that showed (inaudible) we had discussions with bringing
this culdesac (inaudible) so that Wingate Lane would have a good access to Ustick
Road, right now it is a pretty dangerous intersection. It is just a 15 foot dirt road that
comes out (inaudible) right on Ustick. We were offering (inaudible). Right now our
plans are to dead end an access road into the Alleman property. If the Alleman
property ever develops in the future this road will then go out to Ustick Road so that we
have a main connection with Ustick and can longer mess with Ustick at all. (Inaudible)
Mr. Bryan brought up the fact that Packard No. 1 has sort of been on hold for 2 years.
Well it has been on hold for two years and not farmed because of this ongoing process
with Packard No. 2. 1 assure him right now that we will clean the ditches and we will
start the construction of Packard No. 1 within a short time period. We are just waiting
for this approval to know the ultimate plan for the location of the lift station. I guess
other than that, we did hold a neighborhood meeting, just about all of the people that
testified were not there. There was Mr. Dauven was there, Mr. Peterson was there and
that is it ( Inaudible) I don't remember him. So there are three of these, a lot of these
questions could have been answered and maybe we wouldn't have had such a conflict
here at the meeting. If there are any questions I would be happy to answer them.
Borup: I had a number of them, but I think we answered them as far as the plat we have
the proper plat at this point. Any comment on the sewer crossing Wingate?
Tealy: Their easement is for a private road, the developers own the land that underlies
this easement. We cannot interrupt their use of that easement in any way. It does not
preclude in any way the construction of utilities. If it is a legal issue it will be settled, if
they get a lawyer to sue us again we will get a lawyer to defend it. I don't know if that is
a good solution to it but if that is where it has to end up we believe we have the right to
cross that easement with utilities.
MacCoy: Anything else? Thank you very much, are there any other questions?
Sharp: Yes I would just like to address why we weren't at the meeting. I think we have
gone up and down this road and heard so many stories before on what they are going
to do and this change and so forth that we wanted to have it before Council here the
Meridian Planning & Zoe ong Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 30
Commissioners on record of what they are going to do, so it could be understood.
Also, on the Nampa Meridian Irrigation easement there we want a gate there because
right now we get people going back and forth across our property there and with their
snowmobiles and motorcycles and just walking and they throw their grass clippings and
even with signs there that say no trespassing for Nampa Meridian Irrigation business
only. They go over the cable and they pull it up and go under it. So I want that on my
southeast corner of my property there so we don't have access there, people out of the
subdivision. If they get there then they can go right down Wingate Lane and cause
more problems and we don't need more foot traffic and bicycle people going across on
Wingate Lane. It is a private lane and who is going to be responsible. Are you going to
put it on us or are you guys, if you allow this are you going to be responsible, the City?
Fitzgerald: I am sorry could you identify yourself?
Sharp: Dale Sharp
Borup: Your comment on the gate, that is access to an irrigation ditch on your
property?
Sharp: They have, Nampa Meridian uses it or their, it is their Stokesbury lateral.
Borup: And that goes through your property and it is the maintenance road that you are
referring to, the Nampa Meridian maintenance road.
Sharp: Right, all we need is something to discourage that traffic on there. I do have
livestock also and the people get on there and they throw rocks and they throw their
trash out in my pasture and I don't need that. If we can get the gate there I think it will
stop a lot of that.
Borup: There have been a lot of comments on grass and I just feel like making an off
the record editorial comment, a good solution I have seen happen in the past when
someone throws garbage and grass is just go pick it up and throw it back. That usually
solves the problem. I have been in that situation before, or talk to the individual. I do
have one more question of the applicant and Tealy might be able to answer. That was
pertaining to the gate for the maintenance road for Nampa Meridian. Is there any
discussion at all with Nampa Meridian do they want a gate there is that something they
would like on their property or maintenance road?
Tealy: That is nothing we have discussed with Nampa Meridian, typically that was
something that was just brought up tonight. We can certainly talk to Nampa Meridian
but whether they would want a gate on their road they would just have to get out and
unlock every time they go down the maintenance road. That can be more trouble for
them than they want.
Meridian Planning & Zoe „ng Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 31
Borup: That is what I was noticing, other subdivisions they have not usually gated them
and I think that was by their choice.
Tealy: If it is something that Nampa Meridian wants then we would put a gate there.
Borup: Thank you.
MacCoy: Entertain a motion? Since there is no other person from the public that would
like to speak we will close the public hearing at this time.
Borup: Mr. Commissioner, I would move that instruct the City Attorney to prepare
findings of fact and conclusions of law on this application.
Manning: Second
MacCoy: It has been stated and seconded, vote
Borup: I think for discussion I think some emphasis on their irrigation seems to be a big
concern of the neighbors, I think that is something we would want to consider in the
findings.
MacCoy: All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
TEN MINUTE BREAK
ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
MacCoy: I will open the public hearing and do you want to make a statement?
Pat Tealy, 109 S. 4h Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Tealy: As I said I understand we had a little bit of procedural mess up. We thought that
this preliminary plat was included with the annexation and rezone. I just ask that you
enter the public testimony from the prior item into the record. Thank you
MacCoy: Is there anybody from the public that would like to make a statement at this
time? Your earlier statements will be carried forward, you are not required to come
back up here if you don't feel like it.
Meridian Planning & Zoe „ng Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 32
Borup: I do have a question for the applicant then. This is, (inaudible) it looks like on
here that there were between the two properties 3 existing residences, is that correct, 2
in the Brown property and 1 on Lot 14.
Tealy: There is only one on each property. The original Brown residence and the
original Borup residence. They will be made parts of the lots in the subdivision. In
other words they will be a lot in the finished subdivision.
Borup: The plat refers to, it is all one lot on lot 7, is the house that is on the Brown
property. Does the applicant presently own both of those properties then?
Tealy: I believe they were sold to, I don't know their names
Borup: But they are not the deeded owners at this point of those two properties?
Tealy: No they are not, those people will be included in the signature on the plat.
Borup: That was my next question. Then I guess we are to assume that they are
participating.
Tealy: Yes, there was a statement gathered from each one of them prior to the sale of
those lot that indicated their concurrence with the plat and their signature on the plat.
Borup: I didn't find that in our packets, do you know was that forwarded to the City or
not?
Tealy: Truthfully I have never seen them myself, that is what the developer tells me. If
you need those statements I am sure they can supply them. But in order for the plat to
be recorded they would have to be a record owner of the property and sign the back of
the plat.
Borup: That is something, you say that is something the County (inaudible).
Tealy: The County engineer will assure that fact.
Borup: Thank you that is all I have.
MacCoy: Are there any other statements to be made? I will close the public hearing on
the preliminary plat for the Packard Subdivision No. 2 (inaudible).
Borup: Commissioner MacCoy I would since this point we do not have findings and
conclusions I would move that we table any action on the preliminary plat until after we
reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Meridian Planning & Zo, :ng Commission
March 11, 1997
Page 33
Manning: Second
Borup: Table that to our next scheduled meeting which is April 15.
MacCoy: All those in favor? Opposed?
Borup: I correct that to April 8, table it to April 8.
MacCoy: Is everybody in favor of that now?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF
APPROX. 4.26 ACRES TO L-0 BY A'a LLC:
Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or the applicant's
representative to address the Commission.
Roger Smith, 870 N. Linder Road, Suite B, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Smith: This project is as discussed a proposal to annex and rezone to limited office
the corner of, the southwest corner of Franklin and Eagle Roads. This is primarily for
the purpose shown, the three professional office buildings that will be nestled up in the
corner. This project meets with the City's comprehensive plan to have this general
area basically rezoned to commercial and mixed use. We have received the City's
requirements for annexation and zoning and also for the conditional use which we are
in concurrence with and have addressed with a letter in writing to the City. We feel that
this would be an excellent use for this parcel of ground compared to other possible
uses for the commercial and mixed use zone. The plan is to have very high quality
construction for these buildings basically a split face masonry with glass block and
some tinted glass on the exterior structures and an extensive amount of landscaping to
both help screen the project from the adjacent residential uses and to buffer noise from
both major thoroughfares which this project abuts. The buildings are planned to follow
the existing topography and basically blend in with the existing terrain. If you want to
look at the elevation that we have now or when we address the conditional use but I
can pass this around. The view that is shown there is what the view will be from the
corner of Franklin and Eagle. The buildings that are shown the one, in the northeast
corner is planned to be basically two stories that are above ground to hide some of the
parking we have designed to have the parking underneath that main building for some
of the use there. There will be elevators that are going to be in the corners in the
parking area along with enclosures for trash so that we keep those out of the exterior of
the buildings. The two lower buildings will be 2 stories each with basically a daylight
basement concept. The lower floor will be completely below grade of the uphill side of
the structure. Walkways are planned in the berms and as shown in the area adjacent
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.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
GRANT P. KINGSFORD
Mayor
R
RONALD R. TOLSMA
MAX YERRINGTON
ROBERT D. CORRIE
WALT W. MORROW
P & Z COMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
MOE ALIDJANI
JIM SHEARER
CHARLIE ROUNTREE
TIM HEPPER
MEMORANDUM: July 11, 1995
UPDATED: NOVEMBER 13, 1995
To: Mayor, City Council and Planning & Zoning
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer
Re: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 - Revision received Sept. 21, 1995
(Annexation/Zoning and Preliminary Plat - By PNE/Edmonds Const.)
I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and
consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process:
GENERAL COMMENTS
1 • Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project,
shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped are to be shown on
the Preliminary Plat. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage
district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted
to the Public Works Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any
ditches crossing this project.
2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be
removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be
used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
3. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface
soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with the street development plans.
4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for our review.
5. Provide 5 foot wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B.
6. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic
analysis by our computer model.
7. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision
and street names. Make any necessary corrections to the Preliminary Plat map prior to
resubmittal to the City.
C:\WPWINOD\GENERAL\PACKARD2.P&Z
Mayor, Council and P&Z
November 13, 1995 Update
Page 2
8. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works
Superintendent.
9. Indicate any existing FEMA Flood Plain Boundaries on the Preliminary Plat Map, and/or
any plans to reduce said boundaries.
10. Submit a master street drainage plan, including the method of disposal & approval from
the affected irrigation/drainage district.
11. Respond in writing, to each of the comments contained in this memorandum, and
submit with copies of the revised Preliminary Plat Map to the City Clerks Office
SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS
1. The legal description submitted with this application and Preliminary Plat appear to meet
the annexation criteria of the City of Meridian and Idaho State Tax Commission.
2. Sanitary Sewer service to this site shall be via an extension of the South Slough Sewer
Interceptor. At this time the South Slough Interceptor is at Locust Grove Rd.,
approximately 1800 feet west of this proposed development. The interceptor line would
need to cross the length of the proposed "Chamberlain Estates" parcel and one that is
owned by Vern Allemen. Without the extended interceptor line, this proposed development
is not serviceable with our municipal system. Applicant will be responsible to construct
the sewer mains to and through this proposed development. The subdivision designer is
to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Meridian Public Works Department. Sewer
manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of the
centerline. This Preliminary Plat submittal does not show how the proposed
development will be served. Until that sewer line routing is proposed, this
development should not be considered.
3. Water service to this site could be via mains installed in N. Hickory Way as part of the
first phase of the "Dove Meadows" project, however the approved Preliminary Plat of
"Dove Meadows" has expired beyond the one year time frame established in City
Ordinance for completing the second phase. This leaves a gap of approximately 300 feet
between the existing water main and property that this developer controls, (Packard
Subdivision No. 1) Applicant will be responsible to construct the water mains to and
through this proposed development. The subdivision designer to coordinate the main sizing
and routing with the Meridian Public Works Department. This Preliminary Plat
submittal does not show how the proposed development will be served. Until that
water line routing is proposed, this development should not be considered.
C:\WPA K60\GENERAL\PACKARD2.P&Z
Mayor, Council and P&Z
November 13, 1995 Update
Page 3
4. Subdivision designer to coordinate E. Carnelian street stub alignment into the proposed
"Chamberlain Estates" with Hubble Engineering, Inc.
5. Revise the Preliminary Plat Map to show all adjacent land use and existing zoning of
properties surrounding the proposed development, including existing or approved proposed
streets and lots, revise the Preliminary Plat to include all proposed and existing utilities
including pressurized irrigation, with proposed source, and addressing all other comments
contained herein. Resubmit the Preliminary Plat with the revisions.
6. Submit a master street grading and drainage plan including method of disposal & approval
from the affected irrigation/drainage district.
7. 100 watt high pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations designated by the
Meridian Public Works Department. All street lights shall be installed, at subdivider's
expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants.
8. The minimum street frontage for Lot 17, Block 2 shall be eighty (80) feet, measured at the
arc for the curved portion, per City Ordinance.
9. Lots 1 & 6, Block 7 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards N. Hickory Way,
Lots 3 & 4, Block 7 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards N. Malachite
Ave., Lot 5, Block 6 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards E. Meadowgrass
Street and Lot 7, Block 10 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards N. Devlin
Way. Please indicate this with an arrow on the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat Maps.
10. Provide a 50 foot radius paved temp. turn around at the westerly end of E. Quartz St.
11. The Preliminary Plat map contour lines need to be labeled and tied to an established
Benchmark.
12. The Preliminary Plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by the Design Engineer
or Land Surveyor.
13. Provide statements of dedications to the public and/or easements, together with a statement
of location, dimension and purpose of such.
14. Any proposal for a supplementary connection from the City's water system to the
pressurized irrigation system being proposed will need to be reviewed closely due to the
size of the area to be watered. Applicant shall provide a statement as to the ownership of
and operation and maintenance for the pressurized irrigation system.
C: \WPWIN60\GENERALTACKARDI P&Z
Mayor, Council and P&Z
November 13, 1995 Update
Page 4
15. Revise the Preliminary Plat map to show the extension of N. Wingate Ave. across the
Reichert Property. Provisions shall be made in the design to accommodate access from this
extension to the Sharp parcel.
16. The width of the pavement in the "90' Knuckle" turn outs need to be reviewed and
approved by the Meridian Fire Dept. and Meridian School Dist.
17. Please refer to the attached correspondence between Larry Sale, Ada County
Highway District and Gary Smith, P.E., Meridian City Engineer.
C: \ W PWIN60\GENERAL\PACKARD2. P&Z
JAMES E. BRUCE. President
SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President
SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretory
Gary D. Smith, P. E., City Engineer
33 E.Idaho
Meridian, ID 83642 FAX: (208) 887-4813
Re: Packard Subdivision No. 2
Dear Gary:
October 2, 1995
RECEIVED
0 C T 0 2 1995
MERIDIAN
CITY ENGINEER
The Highway District Commission is having considerable discussion with regard to this
application, particularly the crossing of the Wingate Lane private road easement with public road
and right-of-way. There are two primary reasons that District staff is supporting the proposed
crossing of Wingate Lane:
the need for connectivity through this square mile, and
the need for sanitary sewer to be within a public right-of-way.
It is my understanding that the City requires sanitary sewer to be placed in a public right-of-way,
or within a planned public right-of-way that can reasonably be expected to be constructed in a
short period of time.
The Commission has deferred action on the application until October 18, 1995 and directed staff
to learn the City's requirement with regard to the placement of sanitary sewer and the need for
the approval of Packard No. 2 at this time. The applicant has stated that Packard No. 2 approval
is necessary so the City will not allow the extension of sanitary sewer Iines through the
intervening property unless the future street locations have been identified through the approval
of a preliminary plat, at the least.
Will you please provide me with written explanation of the City's policies in this area,
particularly as they apply to Packard Subdivision No. 2 and/or attend the Commission meeting of
October 18 1995 (12:00 Noon) to answer the Commission's questions.
ervisor
cc: Chron. Project File Traffic Services
ada county highway district
318 East 37th • Boise. Idaho 83714-6499 • Phone (208) 345-7680
OCT 02 195 17:13 208 345 7650 PAGE.01
OFFICIALS
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
COUNCIL MEMBERS
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
A Good Place to Live
RONALD R. TOLSMA
JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E.. City Engineer
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MAX YERRINGTON
D. CORRIE
WALT W
MORROW
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt
33 EAST IDAHO
P & 2 COMMISSION
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI S. STILES. P & Z Adm.
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 8874813
MOE ALIDJANI
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
JIM SHEARER
W.L. "BILL' GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
CHARLIE ROUNTREE
TIM HEPPER
GRANT P. MNGSFORD
Mayor
October 12, 1995
Mr. Larry Sale
Ada County Highway District
318 E. 37th St.
Boise, Idaho 83714-6499
RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2
Preliminary Plat
Dear Larry:
I am submitting the following comments in accordance with your letter request dated October 2,
1995.
Packard Subdivision No. 1 Mn No. 2 will sewer to the north into what could be an extension of
the South Slough Sewer Interceptor, which now ends at Locust Grove Road approximately 1700
feet west of the Packard Subdivision No. 2 west boundary.
The sewage from the proposed Packard No. 1 Subdivision will accumulate at its northwest corner
in an "interim" lift station and be pumped to the south into an existing sewer line. The residents in
the Packard No. 1 Subdivision will be responsible for the associated operation and maintenance
costs for this lift station.
The City of Meridian does maintain a policy requiring a publicly owned sanitary sewer line to be
placed within a public right of way or a subdivision "common lot" area. In the past we have
allowed sewer lines to be constructed across the open ground of an approved preliminary plat.
The construction of a sewer line in this situation requires a permanent easement to the City of
Meridian and construction of a 14 foot wide "all-weather" gravel access road over the line to
allow year -a -round city personnel access for maintenance. A concern we have with this
procedure is that approval of a preliminary plat is valid for only one year unless an extension is
requested by the applicant. Once a sewer line is constructed across open ground following a
proposed street alignment, the street alignment becomes more than proposed unless the applicant
agrees to move the sewer line or create common lot areas over the sewer line.
i
A portion of the July 11, 1995 City of Meridian Public Works Department review comments to
my Mayor, City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission for the preliminary plat submittal
of Packard Subdivision No. 2 addressed the need for the applicant to submit a plan showing how
this subdivision would be served by city sewer. To date this plan has not been submitted and this
department will not support approval of the preliminary plat until such plan is submitted and
approved. With the uncertainty of a plan and timing to construct an extension of the sanitary
sewer interceptor line it is apparent the realization of this proposed subdivision will not occur in
the short period of time.
I hope these comments address your questions. I can be in attendance at your October 18
Commission meeting if needed.
Sincerely,
Gary D. Smith, PE
City Engineer
cc: File
r ^
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
A Good Place to Live
RONALD R. TOLSMA
JAN ICE L. GASH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
OF MERIDIAN
MAX YERRINGTONCITY
. ROW
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
WATT
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, waste Water Supt.
33 EAST IDAHO
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
P & Z COMMISSION
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
MOE ALIDJANI
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
JIM SHEARER
W.L. "BILLGORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G.. CROOKSROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
CHARLIE ROUNTREE
TIM HEPPER
GRANT P. KINGSFORD
MEMORANDUM
Mayor
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and Council
FROM: ;YZL:i1es, Planning & Zoning Administrator
DATE: November 13, 1995
SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds
Construction
1. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in this area. With over 75 acres
proposed for annexation in Packard Subdivisions Nos. 1 and 2, open space appears
inadequate to mitigate the impacts of the subdivisions.
2. The South Slough is designated as a future pathway in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
Construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Pathway Plan and City
requirements. Any relocation of the South Slough will negate its consideration as a
"natural waterway" and will require tiling.
3. Perimeter fencing will be required prior to obtaining building permits. The South Slough
shall be fenced with non-combustible fencing outside of existing/required easement to
accommodate future pathway.
4. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation.
5. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision.
6. No access is available to this site at this time.
7. I have had reports that apartments have been constructed on Lot 7, Block 2. If this is the
case, the lot does not conform to the R-4 zoning requirements. In addition, it appears
that this proposed lot has already been split illegally.
8. All corner lots shall have a minimum of 80 feet of frontage. For purposes of calculating
frontage, the line length plus one-half of the curve length is used. Some lots will need
arrows indicating the direction the house must face (e.g., Lots 1, 3, 4 and 6, Block 7,
etc.).
-ft.,
n
P&Z Commission, Mayor and Council
November 13, 1995
Page 2
9. Lot square footages are to be determined exclusive of irrigation easements. The South
Slough area should be designated as a separate lot to be owned and maintained by the
homeowners association.
10. Phasing of this project, if applicable, shall be indicated on the preliminary plat.
11. Easements shall be provided as required by City Ordinance Section 11-9-605.D.
12. Any changes to existing natural features shall meet the approval of the City of Meridian
and the appropriate public agency prior to any construction activity taking place.
13. Pressurized irrigation is to be supplied to all lots within this subdivision.
14. Buffering of adjacent residential rural lots is required. While consideration has been
given to some adjacent property owners, the lots in Block 6 do not show this same
consideration.
15. All ditches crossing or abutting this property are to be tiled per City Ordinance unless a
variance is granted. What is proposed for the Stokesberry Lateral and other ditches
shown?
16. Driving lanes at cul-de-sacs ("knuckles") at north and south ends of N. Malachite
Avenue, with a 21' width, do not appear to be adequate.
17. Applicant is to address all comments, in writing, and submit to the City Clerk's office.
CCU-&
JAMES E. BRUCE, President
SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President
SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretary
TO: Pacific Northwest Electric/Edmonds' Construction
3131 E Lanark, Suite C
Meridian, ID 83642
FROM: Karen Gallagher, Coordinator
Development Services Divisi
CEIVED
OCT 2 5 1995
17'Y Of MERtUJ�
October 20, 1995
SUBJECT: Packard No. 2 Wingate Lane s/o Ustick Road- PRELIMINARY PLAT
On October 18, 1995, the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District (hereafter called
"District") took action on the Preliminary Plat as stated on the attached staff report.
In order that the Final Plat may be considered by the District for acceptance, the Developer shall
cause the following applicable standard conditions to be satisfied prior to District certification
and endorsement:
Drainage plans shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the
District.
2. If public street improvements are reduired: Prior to any construction within the
existing or proposed public right-of-way, the following shall be submitted and
subject to review and approval by the District:
a. Three complete sets of detailed street construction drawings prepared by
an Idaho Registered Professional Engineer, together with payment of plan
review fee.
b. Execute and Inspection Agreement between the Developer and the District
together with initial payment deposit for inspection and/or testing services.
Complete all street improvements to the satisfaction of the District, or
execute Surety Agreement between the Developer and the District to
guarantee the completion of construction of all street improvements.
ada county highway district
318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714-6499 • Phone (208) 345-7680
r.
October 20, 1995
Page 2
3. Furnish copy of Final Plat showing street names as approved by the Local
Government Agency having such authority together with payment of fee charged
for the manufacturing and installation of all street signs, as required.
4. If Public Rights -of -Way Trust Find deposit is required, make deposit to the
District in the form of cash or cashier's check for the amount specified by the
District.
5. Furnish easements, agreements, and all other datum or documents as required by
the District.
6. Furnish Final Plat drawings for District acceptance, certifications, and
endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement. The final plat
must contain the signed endorsement of the Owner's and Land Surveyor's
certification.
7. Approval of the plat is valid for one year. An extension of one year will be
considered by the Commission if requested within 15 -days prior to the expiration
date.
Please contact me at 345-7680, should you have any questions.
KG
cc: Development Services
Chron
John Edney
Chuck Rinaldi
Tealey's Land Surveying
City Of Meridian
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
Development Services Division
Preliminary Report
Preliminary Plat - Packard No. 2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Wingate Lane s/o Ustick Road, City of Meridian
Packard No. 2 is a 95 -lot residential subdivision on 35.23 -acres. The site is located south of Ustick
Road approximately 1/4 -mile east of Locust Grove Road, north of Packard Subdivision No. 1. This
development is estimated to generate 950 additional vehicle trips per day.
Roads impacted by development:
Locust Grove Road - Minor arterial with bike lane designation
- Traffic count 2,794 on 1-18-94
Ustick Road - Minor arterial with bike route designation
- Traffic count 1,791 on 8-18-92
WPD
ACHD Commission Date - October 18, 1995 - 12:00 p.m.
,r..
Facts and Findings:
A. General Information
RT - Existing zoning
R-4 - Requested zoning upon annexation
95 - Lots
35.2 - Acres
265 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ)
West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone
Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District
Locust Grove Road
Minor arterial with bike lane designation
Traffic count 2,794 on 1-18-94
No Frontage
Ustick Road
Minor arterial with bike route designation
Traffic count 1,791 on 8-18-92
No frontage
B. This subdivision proposes to plat and construct a public street across an existing private road,
Wingate Lane. Wingate Lane is a narrow gravel road providing access to Ustick Road for 12-
13 homes (two of which have been incorporated into this proposed development). Several
residents are opposed to improving Wingate Lane to public road standards and/or having a
public road cross the private road. District legal staff has advised DS staff that there is no
statute prohibiting the crossing of a private road with a public road, however the authorized
users of the private road have rights that will be prior to the public road. For example, those
rights would probably preclude the closure of that private road without the permission of the
authorized users. The developer has submitted an opinion from an attorney stating that a public
roadway can be built across the private easement and utilities can be constructed across the
private easement so long as the use of the private easement is not unreasonably blocked.
District legal staff has reviewed the opinion and generally concurs with its contents.
C. The site plan proposes 5 stub streets, none of which connect to existing streets.
1. The Hickory Way stub (to the south) will connect to Packard Subdivision No. l when that
subdivision is constructed (also being developed by this applicant).
2. The Devlin Avenue stub (to the south) will eventually connect to Kearney Place
Subdivision when Kearney Place Subdivision and the intervening property are developed.
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 2
,_�
3. The Carnelian Street stub (to the west) will connect to Chamberlain Estates Subdivision
No. l when that approved subdivision has been constructed.
4. The Quartz Street stub (to the west) will eventually connect to Chamberlain Estates
Subdivision No.2 when Chamberlain is constructed and when the intervening property is
developed.
5. The Devlin Way stub (to the north) will eventually connect to Ustick Road as a residential
collector when the intervening farm has been developed. Lot access will be restricted as per
District policy.
D. Packard Subdivision No. 1 abuts the southern boundary of the proposed subdivision. Packard
Subdivision No. 1 connects to Fairview Avenue via Hickory Way, a 41 -foot back-to-back
collector street. With the development of the 95 lots in Packard No.2 and other approved
development. Hickory Way will carry 7,000 vpd at Fairview Avenue. When Packard No. 2 is
constructed with its only street connection through Packard No. 1, a section of Hickory Way
will temporarily have 12 -lots with direct access and/or front -on housing and 1,500 vpd and
another section will have 2 -lots with direct access and 1,900 vpd. This situation will last until
other properties are developed and an additional collector street connection can be constructed
out to Eagle Road, one-quarter mile east of Packard No. 1 Subdivision. District policy states
that the ADT on local streets will typically be less than 1,000 but may reach 2,000 is some
situations. Although the 1,500 to 1,900 vpd on Hickory Way will be temporarily high volumes,
they will decrease when new residential collector street connections are made to Eagle Road
and Ustick Road. However, there is no way to forecast how long this temporary arrangement
will remain.
E. Chamberlain Estates Subdivision No.I has 99 -lots. All roads within Chamberlain Estates No. l
are local streets. The traffic study states that Cougar Creek Road will reach 1,000 vpd at Locust
Grove Road and Chateau Drive will reach 2,600 vpd with the development of Packard No.2.
F. It is difficult for staff to anticipate which street connections will be constructed first. The
applicant has direct control over the scheduling of construction for Packard No. 1, but as stated
above, no more than 400 additional vehicle trips should be routed to Hickory Way.
Chamberlain Estates No. l is the only other parcel that has received preliminary plat approval
(and has applied for a time extension) and can be expected to develop in the near future;
however, this possible street connection would be of insignificant value because the trip
destination point for the majority of vehicles in this area is to the southeast, to Boise,
encouraging use of Hickory Way.
G. This application was heard by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on June 22,
1995, and was tabled until September 12, 1995, to receive a response from the District.
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 3
Site Specific Requirements:
Provide documentation to the District that the authorized users of the private road have
subordinated their rights to use the road to the Highway District to the extent that public roads
and utilities may cross the easement for the private road, or an opinion from a practicing
attorney that such crossings can legally occur.
2. Construct all internal streets to a 37 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot sidewalk
(Meridian width requirement) within a 50 -foot right-of-way.
3. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shall be constructed with median islands, maintaining a
minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb. Coordinate with District Traffic Services
Division.
4. All landscaped medians shall be separate platted lots owned and maintained by a homeowners
association.
5. Maintain a minimum radius of 100 -feet on all curves having other than 90 -degree angles of
deflection.
6. E. Challis Street (as depicted on the drawing on file dated September 15, 1995) shall be
dedicated but not constructed across Wingate Lane until the two properties south of the street
crossing are developed and construction has been approved by the Ada County Highway
District Commission. The developer shall deposit the cost of constructing E. Challis Street
across Wingate Lane and removing the gates required below to the Public Rights -of -Way Trust
Fund.
7. Provide and install two gates, one at each end of the unconstructed portion of E. Challis Street
across Wingate Lane, that will allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles along the
unconstructed section of the street but not automobiles.
Construct a 14 -foot wide all weather road along the route of the sanitary sewer line in all
unplatted areas of the proposed subdivision, including the portion of E. Challis Street across
Wingate Lane.
9. Provide legal and physical means of access from the Reichert parcel to the public street system.
Standard Requirements:
A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein
shall be made in writing to the Development Services Supervisor. The request shall
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 4
specifically identify each requirement to be reconsidered and include a written explanation of
why such a requirement would result in a substantial hardship or inequity.
Requests received prior to the date scheduled for Commission action shall be rescheduled for
discussion with the Commission on the next available meeting agenda.
2. A request for an appeal of the Commission's action shall be made in writing to the
Development Services Supervisor within 15 calendar days of the action and shall include a
minimum fee of $110.00. The appeal will be scheduled to be heard by the Commission within
20 calendar days after receipt. The request for appeal shall specifically identify each
requirement to be reconsidered and include a written explanation of why such a requirement
would result in a substantial hardship or inequity.
A right-of-way permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction
within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit
pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for
details.
4. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACHD prior to
issuance of building permit (or other required permits). The proposed drainage system shall
retain all storm water on-site and shall conform to the requirements of the City of Meridian.
Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot
owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees,
fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and
their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable).
Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways
are not being shared with the adjacent property.
6. Construct pedestrian ramps on the corner of all street intersection in compliance with Idaho
Code, Section 40-1335.
Dedicate a 20'x 20' right-of-way triangle (or appropriate curve to keep street improvements
within the public right-of-way) at all intersections abutting and/or within the development prior
to issuance of building permit (or other required permits).
Continue existing irrigation and drainage systems across parcel.
9. Continue borrow ditch drainage abutting parcel (culvert may be required).
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 5
10. Provide written approval from the appropriate irrigation/drainage district authorizing storm
runoff into their system.
11. If street improvements are proposed, locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and
drainage ditches and appurtenances, etc.) outside of the public right-of-way, as may be required
by the District. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained from the appropriate entity.
12. Locate proposed sign(s) out of the public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision sight -triangle
of all street and driveway intersections.
13. Install a stop sign on every unsignalized approach of a project street to an intersection involving
a collector or arterial as the cross -street. The stop sign shall be installed when the project street
is first accessible to the motoring public.
14. The developer is required to install street name signs at the locations approved by the Ada
County Highway District. Purchase street name signs, sign poles, and mounting hardware from
ACHD's Traffic Operations Department or an approved outside supplier. The District will not
manufacture street signs until a copy of the recorded plat showing the recording data has been
provided to Development Services staff.
15. Provide a clear vision sight triangle at all street intersections. Within this triangle no
obstruction higher than 36 -inches above the top of pavement will be allowed, including
landscaping, berms, fences, walls or shrubs. The triangle shall be defined by the long leg
measured down the centerline of any collector 350 -feet; and the short leg measured down the
centerline from the collector street curb line 20 -feet. Provide notes on the plat and street
construction plans of these restrictions.
16. Submit three sets of street construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action.
17. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by
ACHD.
18. All public streets and drainage systems shall be designed and constructed in conformance with
District standards and policies.
19. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations
presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or
Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215.
20. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit
(or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes.
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 6
21. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable
requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy.
Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services
Division at 345-7662.
Submitted by:
Development Services Staff
Date of Commission Approval:
OrT 18 1995
Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation
Page 7
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L STILES, P 6 Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. BILL' GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR., Attorney
April 9, 1997
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Mr. Pat Tealey, PLS
Tealey's Land Surveying
109 S. 4th St.
Boise, Idaho 83702
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Driver; License (208) 8884443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
Mayor
RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2
PRELIMINARY PLAT
COUNCIL MEMBERS
WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R.TOLSMA
CHARLES M. ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
P P. Z COMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
TIM HEPPER
JIM SHEARER
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
The Meridian City Planning & Zoning, at their regularly scheduled meeting of April 8,
1997, recommended to the Meridian City Council that this plat be approved. I raised
questions at that meeting as to how this subdivision was to be sewered, since at this
point the only thing that has happened is some testimony at the public hearings and
some conversations between you and me. I would suggest that a proposal, shown on
the preliminary plat, be submitted prior to the City Council meeting at which this plat
will be heard. I have spoken by telephone with Ted Sigmont this morning and related
the above suggestion to him. I cannot support this preliminary plat at the Council
meeting unless I have a proposal in hand that can be approved and used as a basis
for development of the final plat and development plans. If there are plans to move
the lift station in Packard No. l to a site in the proposed Packard No.2, as Ted Sigmont
mentioned to me this morning, then things need to move very quickly as there is a pre -
construction meeting for Packard No. l scheduled for tomorrow, which includes the
construction of the lift station.
Also, Shari Stiles mentioned to me that the present owners, other than PNE, of two
parcels of property within the boundaries of the proposed Packard No.2 subdivision,
have not submitted authorizations to her to have their parcels annexed into the city as
a part of the Packard No.2 annexation and zoning request. I would suggest that you
talk to her ahead of this Council meeting to resolve this matter.
The Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, as approved by the Planning & Zoning
Commission last night, are available for your review and I would suggest that you
obtain a copy of that document and review it thoroughly so that you are aware of
conditions of approval of the preliminary plat as recommended for approval by the
Commission.
I have spoken with Martha this afternoon and have set a meeting at my office with you
for this Friday, April 11, 1997, at 11:15 A.M. to discuss the Packard Subdivision.
Sincerely,
Gary D. Smith, PE
City Engineer
cc: File
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. 'BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
February 13, 1997
r.
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
Motor vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
Mr. Pat Tealey, PLS
Tealey's Land Surveying
109 S. 4th St.
Boise, Idaho 83702
ROBERT D. CORRIE
Mayor
RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. I
Final Plat
Dear Pat:
CO it cru MEMBERS
WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M.ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
P & Z COMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
TIM HEPPER
JIM SHEARER
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
As you and I have recently discussed, I don't have any particular problem with you
locating a temporary sewage lift station in the proposed Packard No. 2 Subdivision and
pumping into the gravity sewer line system in the Chamberlain Estates Subdivision.
This location is much more palatable to me by putting the Packard Subdivision sewage
into the designated drainage basin, which contains the South Slough sewer interceptor.
It will, of course, be necessary for your sewerage system design plans to reflect this
revision. You will need to include details for construction of an "all-weather" graveled
access road above the sewer lines and to the lift station site. As you outlined in the
most recent Planning and Zoning Commission developed ehe gau. �there
theywill
are not sewerahlcs by
in
Packard No. 2 Subdivision that cannot b provisions will need to be made at the
gravity, to the lift station location. Additionally, p
pressure line discharge manhole to protect downstream concrete materials from the
destructive effects of the hydrogen -sulfide gas released from pumping of sewage.
The Packard Subdivision developer has returned a
agreement, which I have not yet reviewed. It is my
of an agreement we have in place for another
subdivision.
Si erely,
Gary D. Smith, PE
City Engineer
cc: File
Mayor
Council
Planning & Zoning
proposed lift station maintenance
understanding that he used a copy
subdivision as a model for this
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC (P.N.E.)/EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING
A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, SECTION 5
TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST,
BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled annexation and zoning application having
come on for public hearing on March 11, 1997, at the hour of 7:00
o'clock p.m., the Applicant appearing through its representative,
Pat Tealey, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of
Meridian having duly considered the evidence and the matter makes
the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The notice of public hearing on the application for
annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks
prior to said public hearing scheduled for March 11, 1997, the
first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said
hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the March 11, 1997,
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. The property included in the application for annexation
and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The property is
approximately 35.23 acres in size.
3 The property is presently zoned by Ada County as RT,
Rural Transitional, and is vacant land. The Applicant requests the
property be zoned (R-4), Low Density Residential District. The
Applicant has requested the annexation and this zoning, and the
application is not at the request of the City of Meridian.
4. The property is of agricultural use with two single
family dwellings and outbuildings. The Applicant intends to
develop a single-family residential subdivision known as Packard
Subdivision No. 2.
5. The property is north of Fairview Avenue and west of
Eagle Road, and borders existing subdivision developments,
Chamberlain Estates, Chateau Meadows, Kearney Place and Carol's
Subdivision. There exist a few small agricultural parcels ranging
in size from three to five acres to the north and to the east of
the property.
6. This application has been the subject of previous public
hearings the first of which was on June 22, 1995. In addition,
written comment of the public was received and made a part of the
record of the previous public hearings on this application. The
written comment of the public submitted and made part of the record
of the previous public hearings previously held on this application
include the following:
(a) A letter dated June 20, 1995 from W. R. Johnson and
Virginia L. Johnson, which letter is incorporated herein
as if set forth in full;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
(b) A letter dated June 21, 1995 from residents of Wingate
Lane, Meridian, Idaho, which letter is incorporated
herein as if set forth in full;
(c) An undated letter from Vern Alleman received by the City
of Meridian on June 22, 1995, which letter is
incorporated herein as if set forth; and
(d) A letter dated November 12, 1995 from residents of
Wingate Lane, Meridian, Idaho, which letter is
incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
7. The Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, testified
substantially as follows at the March 11, 1997 public hearing on
this application. The Applicant requests annexation and zoning of
the property in conjunction with approval of a preliminary plat
with a development agreement for the development of the property as
a residential subdivision. The development agreement will bind the
Applicant to certain items, which include fencing of the
subdivision, pressurized irrigation, and sewer and water services.
Although these foregoing items are not all the items to be
addressed by the development agreement, the development agreement
will assure the neighbors in the .area that the Applicant will
develop the property in a responsible manner.
8. The Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, further
testified substantially as follows at the March 11, 1997 public
hearing on this application. All of the utilities are available to
the property, to-wit: water, electricity, gas, telephone, cable and
other utilities. The road system of Packard Subdivision No. 1
joins the road system of the proposed development of this property,
which permits the connection of the sewer to the south slough
extension which is planned by the City of Meridian.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
9. The Applicant had a neighborhood meeting on March 10,
1997 at which quite a few neighbors attended. There were
discussions concerning the problems which had been voiced
previously about the proposed development and some of the
misconceptions which have been portrayed in the past.
10. The roadway system has been an issue and an expressed
concern. Since the time the application was submitted, Dove
Meadows Subdivision has been completed, which permits the
connection of the proposed development to a public road system to
the south. This access will be further enhanced by the development
of Packard Subdivision No. 1, which will bring the public road
system to the property's south boundary. Chamberlain Estates has
also been improved, which provides a connection to the public road
system to the west.
11. The Applicant has proposed buffering from adjacent
subdivisions with larger lots. The R-4 zone imposes a minimum lot
size of 8,000 square feet. Over 50% of the lots of the proposed
development are approximately 10,000 square feet. Approximately
48% of the lots are between 10,000 and 8,000 square feet in size
with 8,000 square feet being the minimum size.
12. After Packard Subdivision No. 1 was approved, the
Applicant had an opportunity to purchase the Borup property which
consists of 22 acres. The Applicant perceived the Borup property
as a natural progression of Packard Subdivision No. 1, and the
natural progression of development in the area. Thereafter, the
Applicant had the opportunity to purchase the Brown property, which
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
provided a solution to providing sewer service to the property.
The Applicant will eliminate the lift station which is part of
Packard Subdivision No. 1 and design the sewer for gravity flow
along the South Slough.
13. Another issue has been the use of Wingate Lane, which was
a prime point of discussion at the March 10, 1997 neighborhood
meeting. The Applicant has assured the neighbors that the road
system of the proposed development of the property will not provide
access to Wingate Lane. The road system of the proposed
development will have two gates across the public road system,
which will provide pedestrian and bicycle access. The two gates
will also provide emergency access through break away bollards,
which are specifically designed for such emergency access to either
side of the area.
14. There has also been questions about irrigation. The
Applicant will provide pressurized irrigation to each lot of the
proposed development. The Applicant has entered into an agreement
with the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District who will own the
system. The Applicant is presently constructing a pressurized
irrigation system in Packard Subdivision No. 1 which will
accommodate the Dove Meadows Subdivision, Wingate Subdivision,
Packard Subdivision No. 1 and the proposed Packard Subdivision No.
2. At the cost of $85,000.00, the Applicant will provide the
piping system, the pumps and the pump house. The system will be
turned over to the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District who will
own and operate it.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
15. In response to questions from Commissioner Borup, the
Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, responded affirmatively
that the solutions to the issue concerning access to the Wingate
Lane and the sewer service to the property were respectively based
upon the recommendations of Ada County Highway District and of the
City of Meridian's City Engineer.
16. The residents of Wingate Lane submitted a letter dated
March 8, 1997 concerning this application, and the concerns and
issues of such residents. This letter is incorporated herein as if
set forth in full.
17. There was testimony at the hearing objecting to the
application which was principally as follows:
a. Dale Sharp testified substantially as follows. Mr.
Sharp referred to the letter dated March 8, 1997
submitted by the residents of Wingate Lane and expressed
the desire to have the Applicant address in writing the
issues stated in the letter. Mr. Sharp questioned the
sale of parts of the property, and whether the split of
such parts of the property were legal. Mr. Sharp further
testified that most of the lots which front his property
are smaller lots. He believes the minimum lot size for
the R-4 District is 8,000 square feet. The lots which
border Carol Subdivision are larger lots, and he believes
the lots which border his property should also be larger
lots. He stated that the Applicant has indicated that
increasing the lot size is difficult to do, but he does
not think it would be difficult. The residents along
Wingate Lane have been in the area for a long time; he
believes longer than Carol Subdivision was developed. He
objects to this proposed subdivision development on the
property. It will unduly impact the educational system,
impact traffic, the crime rate will increase, and their
services will be impacted.
b. Vern Alleman testified substantially as follows. At
the present time, irrigation water for his property comes
through the property. He understands the City requires
the tiling of the ditches through the property. He is
concerned about the time period in which the ditches
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
through the property will be tiled. He desires that the
ditches be tiled during the period of October 15th and
March 15th; the irrigation off-season so as not to
interfere with his crops. He is also concerned about the
location of the irrigation ditches across the property,
the size and grade of the pipe used to tile the ditches
through the property and the placement of manholes. He
requests that the location of or easement for the ditches
through the property be recorded to avoid future problems
and conflicts. He added as a matter of information that
there is no agreement to allow the sewer to cross his
property. In response to a question of Commissioner
Borup, Mr. Alleman stated that the ditch crossing the
property is the users' private ditch for delivery of
irrigation water from the canal of Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District. After the water passes the delivery
point from the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's
canal or the head gate, the delivery of the irrigation
water becomes the problem of the users. The head gate is
located east of the south part of Wingate Lane. In
response to Commissioner Borup's clarification concerning
an agreement for the sewer to cross Mr. Alleman's
property, Mr. Alleman stated that it was fine that the
Applicant had developed plans for the sewer so it would
not have to cross his property.
c. Albert Dauven testified substantially as follows.
He shares the concerns expressed by Vern Alleman
concerning the delivery of irrigation water. The
irrigation water to his property comes further east than
Mr. Alleman's water. His irrigation water comes from
almost that portion of the property which was the Borup
property. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has said
that it can do nothing for the users to assure the
delivery of the water through the ditches. The issue for
the delivery of the water needs to be decided from the
start of the process, since no agency governs the issue.
One can ask the farmers along Ustick Road about the
impact caused by contractors, and they would state that
they have been inconvenienced by the contractors. So for
protection, the issue of the delivery of water needs to
be addressed. In response to questions of Commissioner
Borup, Mr Dauven stated that he wanted in writing that
the irrigation water will be delivered to the farmers in
the area, that the Applicant is not going to destroy the
ditches across the property and replace six months later.
Mr. Dauven is speaking to the interruption of the flow of
water during the irrigation season. With regard to
access to Wingate Lane, he does not want children from
the property entering the area where animals are
pastured. He lives on the south slough and the animals
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
create an attraction for kids. He has chased from his
pastures kids from the Carol Subdivision probably three
times a week. The animals are unpredictable. He does
not want foot or bicycle traffic. They already have
enough traffic, including persons riding motorcycles and
snowmobiles in this area. People dump their trash, grass
clippings and rocks over the bordering fence. He wants
to be protected from these things, through the
construction of a berm between the subdivision
development on the property and Wingate Lane with a fence
on top of the berm. Mr. Dauven further stated that if it
is decided to put a road through on Wingate Lane, then
maybe there should be an area or dead zone from the
center line for no development ,to anticipate this
roadway. He is not against the subdivision development,
but he wants to see the development completed correctly.
d. Don Bryan testified substantially as follows. He is
a property owner on Locust Grove whom has been affected
and impacted by a multitude of subdivisions in the area
between Locust Grove, Fairview and Eagle Road. He has
had a history of fighting water problems and the way
developers develop. Some of the problems into which he
has faced have managed to work out, both the pros and the
cons of these developments. Because of the problems he
has faced in the past, he desires to have addressed in
this development to avoid problems for himself and other
neighbors. The separation between agricultural areas and
residential areas needs to be examined. He lives behind
Fred Meyer on Fairview. He worked with the developer of
that property. The developer erected a chain link fence
along his property line; however, this fence does not
keep the kids away from his horses. He is in the process
of posting his property with signs advising people to
stay out. The vacant lot next to his property is a
magnet for children, parents and dogs, and this creates
a real problem. He does not know what the solution may
be, but the problem needs to be examined. The issue of
pressurized irrigation which the Applicant is putting
into the development needs to be examined. The proposed
development of this property connects with Packard
Subdivision No. 1. The lateral ditches to my property
from the main ditch runs along the two sides of Packard
Subdivision No. 1. He wants the developer to state his
plans for the ditches and to maintain the ditches until
the property is developed. He does not know how the
pressurized irrigation which the Applicant is installing
will effect him or other property owners with regard to
the delivery of irrigation water. He also has a concern
about the flow of traffic. The traffic will apparently
flow to Fairview which is beneficial to him as he lives
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
ti.
on Locust Grove. Locust Grove is so busy he cannot
access the road during peak hours. According to the Ada
County Highway District traffic study, the development of
the property will increase the traffic on Locust Grove by
950 vehicles per day. He questions whether Locust Grove
can handle that amount of traffic until it is improved.
Locust Grove is to be improved in 1998, but the
improvements will probably not occur until the year 2000.
In response to a question from Commissioner Borup, Mr.
Bryan stated that the irrigation ditch which delivers
water to his property is not affected by the proposed
development of the property.
e. Marc Peterson testified substantially as follows.
With reference to the gates and pedestrian and bicycle
access to Wingate Lane from the property, he does not
agree with such access. His property is approximately
100 feet from the proposed location of the gates. He has
horses and livestock on his property. He has electric
fences along his property. He does not want people going
up and down Wingate Lane. He is also concerned about the
size of the lots. The Applicant has increased the lot
sizes around Carol Subdivision, but have not increased
the size of the lots directly across from his property.
He believes that the size of the lots along Carol
Subdivision and his property should be increased for the
reason of future widening of the road and a buffer zone
from the livestock. He likes the idea of a berm and
fence between the property and his property. Of
particular concern is that he saw the proposed
subdivision plat for the first time on March 10, 1997.
He was the last property owner to be approved by Ada
County to have access on Wingate Lane. To have the
access, he had to have a minimum five acre parcel of
property. It appears that the Applicant is attempting to
squeeze one more house in between his house and his
neighbor's house. It appears to him that this Lot 14,
Block 9 is land locked because it should not have access
to Wingate Lane and it does not have access to the
streets in the proposed subdivision. So he does not
believe that Lot 14, Block 9 should be a buildable lot.
He understands that the Applicant plans to split the lot
to put a lot in between the existing house on the lot and
his house.
f. Helen Sharp testified substantially as follows. She
cannot believe this development can be approved when
there is a conflict between the proposed subdivision plat
presented at this hearing and the one shown to the
neighbors at the March 10, 1997 neighborhood meeting.
She has spoken with Boise Planning and Zoning and there
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
a� l
is to be no more building on Wingate Lane, which means
that one cannot use Wingate Lane as a means of access to
the property. She is also advised that the area is a
buffer zone between Boise and Meridian. She was also
advised that one cannot divide the property if purchased
after 1968. The Borup portion of the property has been
sold to a young couple, which means it has not been zoned
but there is a break. Her concern is that the process is
not only zoning, but also planning. She would like to
see some planning done in this area. Wingate Lane is a
small one-half mile lane. Pictures have been presented
previously of Wingate Lane, and the question is what
benefit will the City of Meridian receive from this type
of zoning. Meridian does not need many new houses right
now. Realtors she has contacted say there are over 500
houses available, which does not include those houses
which are to be built in new subdivisions. Her property
abuts the property. A fence exists between her property
and the property, over which people dump their grass
clippings and other material. She requests that
foresight be used rather than hindsight. She realizes
that development is going to occur, but the development
should be accomplished with planning. She does think
that all of the issues have been addressed at this point.
g. Dixie Roberts testified substantially as follows.
She opposes the growth in the area in which the property
is located. She moved out to the area for country
living. The developers want to come and develop the
area, and ruin it, so to speak, for the residents in the
area. Her son tried to buy an acre from her to build on
it. But, because of the zoning he could not build on the
one acre parcel to be purchased from her. He was
required to own five acres. One and a quarter acre have
been sold since her son's attempt to purchase the one
acre. Her primary concern is the availability of
irrigation water, because her property is worthless
without the water. She does not want a pump to irrigate
her property, but wants to be able to irrigate her
property the way she presently irrigates. The lay of the
land allows for the irrigation of the property without a
pump, and this is how the land should be irrigated.
Another issue is the number of children which will come
with the development. She loves children. However, if
the children enter upon her property where she has cows,
the children may be injured. Although there is to be no
access to Wingate Lane from the property, she is
concerned about the traffic on Wingate Lane created by
the proposed development of the property.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
h. Craig Thompson testified substantially as follows.
He does not live adjacent to the property, but is
concerned with what will happen in the future. The
development should provide some type of blending effect.
He does not know how to make the area look nice when
there are five acre parcels of land next to a subdivision
development with 8,000 to 10,000 square feet lots. He
has a concern of children playing in the south slough.
He questions how safety can be promoted with the number
of people in the area. He questions why the proposed
plat presented at the hearing is different from the one
he saw previously. It bothers him that he is told one
thing but finds the contrary to be true or that things
are different. He thinks there are too many questions
right now. The Applicant should respond to the questions
and concerns presented.
i. Helen Sharp further testified substantially as
follows. A big issue is the crossing of Wingate Lane
with the sewer line. In response to a question of
clarification by Commissioner Borup, Helen Sharp stated
that Wingate Lane is a dedicated private lane pursuant to
a 1913 contract. She questions how the sewer line can
cross this private lane.
J. Vern Alleman further testified substantially as
follows. He has livestock on his property. He desires
a proper fence be constructed to protect against children
entering the area in which livestock are pastured.
18. Dan Wood testified in favor of the application. Mr. Wood
testified substantially as follows. The City of Meridian's
Comprehensive Plan provides for this area to be residential. The
applicant proposing to development this into a residential area.
The size of the lots in the proposed development of the property
are larger than the lots of surrounding subdivisions. The proposed
lot sizes meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the R-4
District. The Applicant is doing everything it can to help the
neighbors. However, the Applicant, as the owner of the property,
has rights. If it follows the requirements of the City of
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
Meridian, Ada County and the state of Idaho, it should be able to
develop the property as it desires.
19. The Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, responded to
the comments from the public substantially as follows. With regard
to irrigation water, the Applicant must see that the same quantity
of water is delivered to the same place. Those neighboring land
owners will receive the same quantity of water at the same
location. If these land owners desire an agency review of the
Applicant's irrigation plans, the Applicant will gladly accept such
review by the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, whether it has
jurisdiction, or the City of Meridian. The Applicant will not
provide pressurized irrigation to the neighboring land owners, but
will provide the irrigation water each is to receive. The
Applicant does not intend to disrupt the delivery of irrigation
water. The construction of the irrigation system will occur in the
winter so as not to interrupt the delivery of the irrigation water.
Situations do occur in which a contractor does not do what it is
suppose to do or complete the work timely; however, the Applicant
will do whatever it can, including entering into an agreement, to
assure that the delivery of irrigation water is not disrupted.
With regard to Wingate Lane, the Applicant does not plan to access
Wingate Lane in any way. An additional lot along Wingate Lane was
discussed at the March 10, 1997 neighborhood meeting, but that
additional lot is no longer part of the plan. Lot 14, Block 9 is
one lot, and the Applicant does not plan to split it to create
another lot. There exists a house on Lot 14, Block 9, but the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
owner of the house does not own the entire area of this lot
represented on the proposed subdivision plat. In response to a
question of Commissioner Borup, Mr. Tealey stated that it is
correct that if the configuration of Lot 14 is changed, the
proposed plat of the subdivision will have to change and be
resubmitted for review. The Applicant does not plan and the Ada
County Highway District does not plan, based upon his conversations
with it, to improve Wingate Lane. It is to remain as it is.
Initially, the Applicant planned to make Wingate Lane an access to
the property and to improve Wingate Lane by constructing curbs,
gutters and sidewalks and install water and sewer lines. However,
the Applicant was presented with so much opposition that it
abandoned its attempts to improve it. The Applicant's present
plans are to dead end an access road at the Alleman property, so
that in the event the Alleman property is developed the road can be
extended to Ustick Road. With regard to the development of Packard
Subdivision No. 1, the Applicant is waiting for the approval of
this application so it knows the plan for the location of the lift
station. With regard to the sewer line crossing Wingate Lane,
although the Applicant owns the property over which the easement
exists for Wingate Lane, the Applicant cannot disrupt the use of
the easement. However, the Applicant maintains that the easement
for Wingate Lane does not preclude the installation of utilities
through the area of the easement. The Applicant believes it has
the right to cross Wingate Lane with utilities.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
20. Mr. Sharp further testified that he would like to see a
gate constructed to discourage people entering upon the Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District's maintenance road for the Stokesberry
Lateral and his property. He would like to discourage traffic
there, and a gate would stop people from entering the area.
21. In response the Applicant's representative stated that
the Applicant had not discussed such issue with the Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District; however, if it wanted a gate at the
location the Applicant would construct a gate there.
22. Richard A. Scarr submitted a letter dated March 10, 1997
concerning this application, and his concerns and desired
requirements for the development of the property. This letter is
incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
23. R.W. and Mary Lee Peckenschneider submitted a letter
dated March 10, 1997 concerning this application, and their
concerns and desired requirements for the development of the
property. This letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in
full.
24. Floyd F. Reichert submitted a letter dated March 10, 1997
concerning this application, and his and his wife's support of the
application and their desired requirements for the development of
the property. This letter is incorporated herein as if set forth
in full.
25. U.S. West submitted comments and may hereafter submit
comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set
forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Its
submitted comments included that it requests a ten feet easement
along front and rear property lines, and a five feet easement along
all side lot lines.
26. Idaho Power submitted comments and may hereafter submit
comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set
forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be
incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Its
submitted comments included that it requires a permanent ten feet
wide easement along all lots adjacent to a road right-of-way
dedicated to public or private use.
27. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted
comments and may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments
are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments
hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in
full when submitted. Its submitted comments included the
following. Its Finch Lateral courses through the north portion of
the property. The right-of-way of the Finch Lateral is 80 feet: 40
feet from the center each way. Its Stokesberry Lateral courses
through the south portion of the property. The right-of-way of the
Stokesberry Lateral is 40 feet: 20 feet from the center each way.
The Applicant must contact it for approval before any encroachment
or change of right-of-way occurs. It requires that a Land Use
Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to
final platting. All laterals and waste ways must be protected.
Municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District must review drainage plans. It is recommended that
irrigation water be made available to all developments within this
District.
28. The Central District Health Department submitted comments
and may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are
incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments
hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in
full when submitted. Its submitted comments included the
following. After written approval from the appropriate entities
are submitted, it can approve this proposal for central sewage and
central water. Plans for central sewage and central water must be
submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health &
Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. Street runoff is not
to create a mosquito breeding problem. It recommends that the
first one half inch of storm water be pretreated through a grassy
swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to
groundwater and surface water quality. The engineers and
architects involved with the design of the project should obtain
current best management practices for storm water disposal and
design a storm water management system that is preventing
groundwater and surface water degradation.
29. Joint School District No. 2 submitted comments and may
hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated
herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when
submitted.
30. The Meridian Fire Department submitted comments and may
hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated
herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter
submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when
submitted. Its submitted comments included that open spaces will
need to be kept clear of trash and weeds, and whether there will be
only one way in and out to E. Quartz St., N. Simerly Pl. and N.
Devlin Way.
31. The Ada County Highway District submitted comments and
may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are
incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments
hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in
full when submitted. Its submitted comments included the
following:
a. The Applicant provide documentation to the District
that the authorized users of the private road have
subordinated their rights to use the road to the Highway
District to the extent that public roads and utilities
may cross the easement for the private road, or an
opinion from a practicing attorney that such crossings
can legally occur;
b. The Applicant construct all internal streets to a 37
feet back-to-back street section with 5 feet sidewalks
within a 50 feet right-of-way;
C. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shall be
constructed with median islands, maintaining a minimum
travel width of 21 feet to the back of the curb;
d. All landscaped medians shall be separate platted
lots owned and maintained by a homeowners association;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
e. A minimum radius of 100 feet be maintained on all
curves having other than a 90 degree angle of deflection;
f. E. Challis Street, as depicted on the drawing on
file dated September 15, 1995, shall be dedicated but not
constructed across Wingate Lane until the two properties
south of the street crossing are developed and
construction has been approved by the Ada County Highway
District Commission. The Applicant shall deposit the
cost of construction of E. Challis Street across Wingate
Lane and the cost of removal of the gates required in
item g., immediately hereinbelow, to the Public Rights -
of -Way Trust Fund;
g. Provide and install two gates, one at each end of
the unconstructed portion of E. Challis Street across
Wingate Lane, which will allow the passage of pedestrians
and bicycles, but not automobiles, along the
unconstructed section of said street;
h. The Applicant construct a 14 feet wide all weather
road along the route of sanitary sewer line in all
unplatted areas of the proposed subdivision, including
the portion of E. Challis Street across Wingate Lane;
i. The Applicant provide a legal and physical means of
access from the Reichert parcel of property to the public
street system;
j. A request for modification, variance or waiver of
any requirement or policy outlined in the Ada County
Highway Districts submitted comments or comments
submitted hereafter shall be made in writing to the
Development Services Supervisor;
k. A right-of-way permit must be obtained from the Ada
County Highway District for any street or utility
construction within the public right-of-way. Utility
cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement
damage;
1. The Applicant shall submit site drainage plans and
calculations for review and appropriate action by the Ada
County Highway District prior to issuance of building
permits or other required permits. The proposed drainage
system shall retain all storm water on-site and shall
conform to the requirements of the City of Meridian;
M. Public street drainage facilities shall be located
in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a
homeowners association set aside specifically for that
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds or
other valuable amenities placed in said easement.
Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted
on the plat when applicable;
n. The Applicant shall locate driveway curb cuts a
minimum of 5 feet from the side lot property lines when
driveways are not being shared with the adjacent
property;
o. The Applicant construct pedestrian ramps on the
corner of all street intersections in compliance with
Idaho Code Section 40-1335;
p. The Applicant dedicate a 20 feet by 20 feet right-
of-way triangle, or an appropriate curve to keep street
improvements within the public right-of-way, at all
intersections abutting and/or within the development
prior to issuance of building permits or other required
permits;
q. The Applicant continue existing irrigation and
drainage systems across the parcel of property;
r. The Applicant continue the borrow ditch drainage
abutting the parcel of property and culverts may be
required;
S. The Applicant provide written approval from the
appropriate irrigation/drainage district authorizing
storm runoff into their system;
t. If street improvements are proposed, the Applicant
locate obstructions; such as utility facilities,
irrigation and drainage ditches and appurtenances;
outside of the public right-of-way, as may be required by
the Ada County Highway District. The Applicant shall
obtain authorization for relocations from the appropriate
entity;
U. The Applicant locate proposed sign(s) out of the
public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision triangle
of all street and driveway intersections;
V. The Applicant install a stop sign on every
unsignalized approach of a project street to an
intersection involving a collector or arterial as a
cross -street. The stop sign shall be installed when the
project street is first accessible to the motoring
public;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
W. The Applicant is required to install street name
signs at the locations approved by the Ada County Highway
District. The Applicant shall purchase street name
signs, sign poles and mounting hardware from the Ada
County Highway District's Traffic Operation Department or
an approved outside supplier. The District will not
manufacture street signs until a copy of the recorded
plat showing the recording data has been provided to
Development Services staff;
X. The Applicant shall cause to be provided a clear
vision sight triangle at all street intersections.
Within this triangle, no obstructions higher than 36
inches above the top of the pavement will be allowed,
including landscaping, berms, fences, walls or shrubs.
The triangle shall be defined by the long leg measured
down the centerline of any collector 350 feet and the
short leg measured down the centerline from the collector
street curb line 20 feet. The Applicant shall provide
notes on the plat and street construction of these
restrictions;
Y- The Applicant shall submit three sets of street
construction plans to the Ada County Highway District for
review and appropriate action;
Z. The Applicant shall provide design data for proposed
access to public streets for review and appropriate
action by the Ada County Highway District;
aa. All public streets and drainage systems shall be
designed and constructed in conformance with the Ada
County Highway District's standards and policies;
bb. Specifications, land surveys, reports,
drawings, plans, design information and calculations
presented to Ada County Highway District shall be sealed,
signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or
Professional Land Surveyor in compliance with Idaho Code
Section 54-1215;
CC. The Applicant shall submit revised plans for staff
approval which incorporates any required design changes
prior to issuance of building permits or other required
permits; and
dd. The construction, use and property development shall
be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the
Ada County Highway District prior to District approval
for occupancy.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20.
P.N.E./EDMONDS, CONSTRUCTION
32. The Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles,
submitted comments and may hereafter submit comments. Her
submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full
and such comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein
as if set forth in full when submitted. Her submitted comments
included the following:
a. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan indicates the need
for a park in the area of the property. With over 75
acres annexed or proposed for annexation in Packard
Subdivision No. 1 and Packard Subdivision No. 2, open
space appears inadequate to mitigate the impacts of the
both subdivisions;
b. The South Slough is designated as a future pathway
in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Construction shall
be in accordance with the Ada County Pathway Plan and the
City of Meridian's requirements. Any relocation of the
South Slough will negate its consideration as a "natural
waterway" and will require tiling;
C. Perimeter fencing shall be required prior to
obtaining building permits. The South Slough shall be
fenced with non-combustible fencing outside of
existing/required easement to accommodate future
pathways;
d. A development agreement is required as a condition
of annexation;
e. [At the time these comments are made,] no school
capacity is available to serve this subdivision;
f. No access is available to the property [at the time
these comments are made];
g. She has had reports that apartments have been
constructed on Lot 7, Block 2. In the event these
reports are accurate, this lot does not conform to the R-
4 District zoning requirements. Additionally, it would
appear that this proposed lot has already been split
illegally;
h. All corner lots shall have a minimum of 80 feet of
frontage. For purposes of calculating frontage, the line
length plus one-half of the curve length is used. Some
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
lots of the proposed subdivision; such as Lots, 1, 3, 4
and 6, Block 7; will need arrows indicating the direction
the house must face;
i. Lot square footages are to be determined exclusive
of irrigation easements. The South Slough area should be
designated as a separate lot to be owned and maintained
by the homeowners association;
j. Phasing of the development of the project, if
applicable, shall be indicated on the preliminary plat;
k. Easements shall be provided as required by City
Ordinance Section 11-9-605 D.;
1. Any changes to existing natural features shall meet
the approval of the City of Meridian and the appropriate
public agency prior to any construction activity taking
place;
M. Pressurized irrigation is to be supplied to all lots
within the proposed subdivision;
n. Buffering of adjacent residential rural lots is
required. While consideration has been given to some
adjacent property owners, the lots in Block 6 do not show
the same consideration;
o. All ditches crossing or abutting the property are to
be tiled per City Ordinance unless a variance is granted;
p. Driving lanes at culdesacs, "knuckles," at the north
and the south ends of N. Malachite Avenue, with a 21 feet
width, do not appear to be adequate; and
q. Applicant is to address all of the foregoing
comments, in writing, and submit such response to the
City of Meridian's Clerk's office.
33. The Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton,
submitted general and site specific comments and he or the City
Engineer may hereafter submit general and site specific comments.
The submitted general and site specific comments of the Assistant
to the City Engineers are incorporated herein as if set forth in
full and such general and site specific comments hereafter
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
submitted by the Assistant to the City Engineer or the City
Engineer shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when
submitted. The general and site specific comments submitted by the
Assistant to the City Engineer included the following:
General Comments:
a. Any existing irrigation/ drainage ditches crossing
the property to be included in the proposed project shall
be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605 M. The ditches to
be piped are to be shown on the preliminary plat of the
proposed subdivision. Plans will need to be approved by
the appropriate irrigation/drainage district or lateral
users association, with written confirmation of said
approval submitted to the Public Works Department. No
variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches
crossing the proposed project;
b. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
within this project will have to be removed from their
domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517.
Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation;
C. The Applicant shall determine the seasonal high
groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the
subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil
scientist with the street development plans;
d. The Applicant shall submit a copy of proposed
restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for the
City of Meridian's review;
e. The Applicant shall provide 5 feet sidewalks in
accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606 B.;
f. Water service to the proposed development is
contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic
analysis by the City of Meridian's compute model;
g. The Applicant shall submit a letter of approval from
the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the
subdivision and street names. The Applicant shall make
any necessary corrections to the preliminary plat map
prior to resubmittal to the City of Meridian;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 23.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
h. The Applicant is to coordinate fire hydrant
placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works
Superintendent;
i. The Applicant shall indicate any existing FEMA Flood
Plain Boundaries on the preliminary plat map, and/or any
plans to reduce said boundaries;
j. The Applicant shall submit a master street drainage
plan, including the method of disposal and approval from
the affected irrigation/drainage district; and
k. The Applicant is to respond, in writing, to all of
the comments of the Assistant to the City Engineer, and
submit the responses with copies of the revised
preliminary plat map to the City of Meridian's Clerk's
office.
Site Specific Comments:
a. The legal description submitted with the application
and the preliminary plat appears to meet the annexation
criteria of the City of Meridian and Idaho State Tax
Commission;
b. Sanitary sewer service to the property shall be via
an extension of the South Slough Sewer Interceptor. [As
of the date these comments are made], the South Slough
Interceptor is at Locust Grove Road, approximately 1,800
feet west of the proposed development. The interceptor
line would need to cross the length of the proposed
"Chamberlain Estates" parcel and parcel owned by Vern
Alleman. Without the extended interceptor line, the
proposed development is not serviceable with the City of
Meridian's municipal system. The Applicant will be
responsible to construct the sewer mains to and through
the proposed development. The subdivision designer is to
coordinate main sizing and routing with the Meridian
Public Works Department. Sewer manholes are to be
provided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west
sides of the centerline. [At the time these comments are
made,] the preliminary plat submitted does not show how
the proposed development will be served. Until the sewer
line routing is proposed, this development should not be
considered;
C. Water service to this property could be via mains
installed in N. Hickory Way as part of the first phase of
the "Dove Meadows" project; however, [at the time these
comments are made,] the approved preliminary plat of
"Dove Meadows" [had] expired beyond the one year time
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
frame established by the City of Meridian's ordinances
for completing the second phase. This leaves a gap of
approximately 300 feet between the existing water main
and property that the Applicant controls (Packard
Subdivision No. 1). The Applicant shall be responsible
to construct the water mains to and through the proposed
development. The subdivision designer is to coordinate
the main sizing and routing with the Meridian Public
Works Department. [At the time these comments are made, ]
the preliminary plat submitted does not show how the
proposed development will be served. Until the water
line routing is proposed, this development should not be
considered;
d. The subdivision designer is to coordinate E.
Carnelian street stub alignment into the proposed
"Chamberlain Estates" with Hubble Engineering, Inc.;
e. The Applicant is to revise the preliminary plat map
to show all adjacent land use and existing zoning of
properties surrounding the proposed development,
including existing or approved proposed streets and lots,
and to include all proposed and existing utilities
including pressurized irrigation, with proposed source,
and addressing all other comments of the Assistant to the
City Engineer. The Applicant is to resubmit the
preliminary plat with said revisions;
f. The Applicant is to submit a master street grading
and drainage plan including the method of disposal and
the approval from the affected irrigation/drainage
district;
g. One hundred watt high pressure sodium street lights
will be required at locations designated by the Meridian
Public Works Department. All street lights shall be
installed at the Applicant's expense. Typical locations
of the street lights are at street intersections and/or
fire hydrants;
h. The minimum street frontage for Lot 17, Block 2
shall be eighty feet, measured at the arc for the curved
portion per City of Meridian ordinance;
i. Lots 1 and 6, Block 7 shall have a limitation on
house orientation towards N. Hickory Way. Lots 3 and 4,
Block 7 shall have a limitation on house orientation
towards N. Malachite Ave. Lot 5, Block 6 shall have a
limitation on house orientation towards E. Meadowgrass
Street. Lot 7, Block 10 shall have a limitation on house
orientation towards N. Devlin. The Applicant is to
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
indicate said house orientations on the preliminary plat
and final plat maps;
j. The Applicant is to provide a 50 feet radius paved
temporary turn around at the westerly end of Quartz St.;
k. The preliminary plat map contour lines need to be
labeled and tied to an established benchmark;
1. The preliminary plat map needs to be stamped, signed
and dated by the design engineer or land surveyor;
M. The Applicant is to provide statements of
dedications to the public and/or easements, together with
a statement of location, dimension and purpose of the
dedication or easements;
n. Any proposal for a supplementary connection from the
City of Meridian's water system to pressurized irrigation
system being proposed will need to be reviewed closely
due to the size of the area to be watered. The Applicant
shall provide a statement as to the ownership of, and
operation and maintenance for the pressurized irrigation
system;
o. The Applicant is to revise the preliminary plat map
to show the extension of N. Wingate Ave. across the
Reichert property. The Applicant shall make provisions
in the design to accommodate access from this extension
to the Sharp parcel;
p. The width of the pavement in the "90 degree Knuckle"
turn outs need to be reviewed and approved by the
Meridian Fire Department and Meridian Joint School
District No. 2; and
q. The correspondence between Larry Sale of the Ada
County Highway District and Gary Smith, P.E., Meridian
City Engineer, respectively dated October 2, 1995 and
October 12, 1995 are incorporated herein as if set forth
in full.
34. The Applicant's represenative, Ted Hutchinson of Tealey's
Land Surveying, responded to the general and site specific comments
of the Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, by letter
dated December 12, 1995. The responses contained in said letter of
December 12, 1995 are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 26.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
35. There were no other comments by the public regarding this
application.
36. The property is adjacent and abutting the present city
limits of the City of Meridian.
37. The Applicant is the owner of the majority of the
property which is the subject of this application. Robert Cassell
and Willa J. Cassell are the record owners of a portion of the
property which is the subject of this application. Robert Cassell
and Willa J. Cassell have consented to this application of the
Applicant, have consented to be bound by the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law approved and adopted for this application, have
consented to be bound by the ordinance annexing their property into
the City of Meridian, if annexed, and have agreed to pay any and
all applicable fees associated with the annexation of the property.
Robert E. Coburn and Michelle L. Chesworth are the record owners of
a portion of the property which is the subject of this application.
Robert E. Coburn and Michelle L. Chesworth have consented to this
application of the Applicant, have consented to be bound by the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law approved and adopted for
this application, have consented to be bound by the ordinance
annexing their property into the City of Meridian, if annexed, and
have agreed to pay any and all applicable fees associated with the
annexation of the property.
38. The property which is the subject of this application is
within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 27.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
39. The entire parcel of the property is included within the
Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning
Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
40. The property is in an area designated on the Generalized
Use Map of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a single family
residential area. In the Comprehensive Plan property inside the
Urban Service Planning Area may be developed at greater densities
than one dwelling unit per acre.
41. In the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under LAND USE, Rural
Areas, Section 6.3 provides that land in agricultural activity
should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services can
be provided. See COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 29.
42. The City of Meridian has, and is, experiencing a
Population increase. There exist pressures on land previously used
for agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision
lots.
43. The property can be physically serviced with City of
Meridian water and sewer if the Applicant extends the lines, and
constructs and installs the necessary equipment and facilities.
44. The R-4, Low Density Residential District is described in
the Zoning and Development Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3 as follows:
R-4 Low Density Residential District: Only single-
family dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional
uses shall be permitted except for Planned Residential
Development and public schools. The purpose of the (r-4)
District is to permit the establishment of low density
single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas
where predominately residential development has, or is
likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of
the City, and to protect the integrity of residential
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 28.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non-
residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a
maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre and requires
connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer System of the
City of Meridian.
45. Pursuant to the Zoning and Development Ordinance, 11-2-
411 D 1., all new single-family detached housing in the (R-4) Low
Density Residential District shall be constructed to contain at
least 1,400 square feet of living space of which the garage is not
included in determining the square footage of living space.
46. The following pertinent statement is made in the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan under LAND USE, "2. RESIDENTIAL POLICIES 2.1U
Support a variety of residential categories (urban, rural, single-
family, multi -family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments,
condominiums etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a
range of affordable housing opportunities." COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 23.
47. The following pertinent statement is made in the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan under LAND USE, RURAL AREAS, section 6.3 c.:
Within the Urban Service Planning Area development may
occur in densities as low as 3 dwellings units per acre
if physical connection is made to existing City of
Meridian water and sewer service and the property is
platted and subdivided in accordance with Ada County
Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances Policy. Development
density below three dwelling units per acre may be
allowed by conditional use permit if a cost/benefit
analysis indicates positive impacts to the City of
Meridian.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 29.
48. The following pertinent statement is made in the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan under LAND USE, RURAL AREAS, section 6.4 c.:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 29.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
Residential development is allowed in the rural areas
provided that said development does not exceed the Rural
Residential Agricultural density, unless it is inside the
Urban Service Planning Area and City sewer and water is
provided, when Low, Medium and High density residential
may be considered. All residential development must also
comply with the other appropriate sections of this plan.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 30.
49. The following pertinent statements are made in the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan under HOUSING, Housing Policies:
1.1 The City of Meridian intends to provide for a wide
diversity of housing types (single-family, modular,
mobile homes and multi -family arrangements) andchoices
between ownership and rental dwelling units for all
income groups in a variety of locations suitable for
residential development.
1.3 An open housing market for all persons, regardless
of race, sex, age, religion or ethnic background, shall
be encouraged.
1.4 The development of housing for all income groups
close to employment and shopping centers should be
encouraged.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 67.
50. The City of Meridian has experienced an influx in its
population which influx is reasonably anticipated to continue. The
property borders upon city limits of the City of Meridian, and
economic conditions are making the continuation of farming in the
area difficult.
51. With regard to this application, Planning and Zoning
Administrator, Shari Stiles, made specific comments concerning the
need of parks in the area of the property, the lack of capacity in
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 30.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
the area schools and that the annexation should be conditioned upon
a development agreement.
52. In 1992, the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to
the Local Planning Act, which included amending Idaho Code Section
67-6513. Section 67-6513 provides in part:
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 proposed subdivision.
53. The City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in
its population, and the impact such increase has upon its ability
to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks
and recreation services to its current residents and to those
moving into the City of Meridian. The City of Meridian is further
concerned about the impact and burden placed upon the schools of
Meridian School District No. 2 resulting from the influx of its
population. The City of Meridian knows the increase in population
does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the costs of
providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, and
parks and recreation services. The City of Meridian further knows
the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to
provide for school services to current and future students.
54. Pursuant to the instruction, guidance and direction of
the Idaho State Legislature, the City of Meridian may impose either
a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which,
if possible, would be retroactive to apply to all residential lots
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 31.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
in the City because of the imperilment to the health, welfare and
safety of its citizens.
55. Section 11-9-605 C of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance provides, "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the
middle of the long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain
convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping
area; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (10')
wide."
56. Section 11-9-605 G of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance provides in part:
Planting strips . . . shall conform to the following:
1. Planting Strips - 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;.. . . .
57. Section 11-9-605 H of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance provides in part:
Public sites and open spaces shall conform to the
following:
1. Natural Features - 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;
58. Section 11-9-605 K of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance provides:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 32.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
The extent and location of lands designed for linear open
space corridors should be determined largely by natural
features and, to a 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;
3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and
natural values, especially waterways, drainageways
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.
Subdivision plats or development plans shall show the
location of any lineal open space corridors.
59. Section 11-9-605 L of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance provides:
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 automobiles) can be provided throughout the City
Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council
shall consider the Bicvcle-Pedestrian Design Manual for
Ada County (as prepared by Ada county [sic] Highway
District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway
provisions within developments.
60. Section 11-9-605 M of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance provides in part:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 33.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of
natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying
adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or
laterals touch either or both sides of the area being
subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed with tiling or
other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to
said ditch, lateral or canal.
61. 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 OF LAW
1. All the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act
and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met;
including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300
feet of the external boundaries of the Applicants' property.
2. The City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant
to Idaho Code Section 50-222 and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised
and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The exercise of
the City's annexation authority is a legislative function.
3. The Planning and Zoning commission has judged this
annexation and zoning application under Idaho Code Section 50-222,
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, Meridian City Ordinances,
Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted
to it and things of which it may take judicial notice.
4. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing
requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the
Ordinances of the City of Meridian.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 34.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
5. The Commission may take judicial notice of government
ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within
the City and State.
6. 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. The annexation application has been initiated by the
Applicant, and is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian.
8. Since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative
function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the
annexation of land. See Burt vs. The Citv of Idaho Falls, 105
Idaho 65, 665 P2d. 1075 (1983).
9. The development of the annexed land, if annexed, shall
meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian
including, but not limited to: Section 11-9-616 which pertains to
development time schedules and requirements; Section 11-9-605 M,
which pertains to the piping of ditches; and Section 11-9-606 B
14., which pertains to pressurized irrigation systems.
10. The development of the property shall be subject to and
controlled by the Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of
Meridian.
11. Section 11-2-417 D of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance provides 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
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 35.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
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.
It is concluded, however, that it is more appropriate to enter into
a development agreement for the development of the property, and
therefore as a condition of annexation a development agreement must
be entered into prior to development of the property or issuance of
final plat approval.
12. As a condition of annexation and the zoning of (R-4) Low
Density Residential District, the Applicant shall enter into a
development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D.
The development agreement shall address, but not limited to, the
following matters:
a. Inclusion into the development the requirements of
11-9-605;
b. Payment by the Applicant, or if required, any
successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors
or personal representatives, of any impact,
development, or transfer fee, adopted by the City;
C. Addressing the property access linkage, screening,
buffering, transitional land uses and traffic
study;
d. An impact fee, or fees for fire, police, emergency
health care, water, sewer, and parks and recreation
services as determined by the City;
e. Appropriate berming and landscaping;
f. Submission and approval of any required plats;
9. Submission and approval of individual building,
drainage, lighting, parking, and other
developmental plans of the property;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 36.
P.N.E./EDMONDS, CONSTRUCTION
h. Harmonizing and integrating the site
with the surrounding residential development rovements and
other development;
i. Addressing and complying with the present comments
of and the comments hereafter made by the Planning
and Zoning Administrator;
j. Addressing and complying with the present general
and site specific comments of and the comments
hereafter made by the City Engineer and the
Assistant to the City Engineer;
k. Addressing and complying with the comments and
requirements of the Ada County Highway District;
1. Addressing and complying with the comments and
requirements of other governmental agencies
submitting comments;
M. The sewer and water requirements;
n. Traffic plans and access into and out of any
development; and
o. Any other items or matters deemed necessary by the
City Staff, including design review of all
development, and conditional use processing.
13. As the property is in an area marked as a single family
residential area, the annexation and zoning application is in
conformance with the Rural Area policies.
14. The development of the property as an (R-4) Low Density
Residential District, as requested by the Applicant, would be
compatible to the development in the surrounding area.
15. It is therefore concluded that the annexing and zoning of
the property is in the best interest of the City of Meridian, and
it is concluded that the annexation shall be conditioned upon
meeting the requirements of these Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law and if they are not met the land may be de-annexed.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 37.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
16. The requirements of the Meridian City Engineer, Meridian
Planning and Zoning Administrator, Ada County Highway District,
Central District Health Department, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District and other governmental agencies shall be met and addressed
in a development agreement.
17. 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.
18. Pressurized irrigation shall be installed and
constructed, and if not so done the property shall be subject to
de-annexation.
19. The Applicant shall be required to connect the property
to Meridian water and sewer, extend the water and sewer lines to
serve the property, and resolve how the water and sewer mains will
serve the property, all of which shall be at the Applicant's, or
its successor's, or successors' cost and expense. Said water and
sewer requirements shall be performed on or before the time that
the Applicant or its successor, or successors desire to use the
property or place a user on the property.
20. These conditions shall run with the land and bind the
Applicant and its successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors
or personal representatives.
21. With compliance of the conditions and requirements
contained herein, the annexation and zoning of the property as (R-
4) Low Density Residential District would be in the best interest
of the City of Meridian.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 38.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
22. If these conditions of approval are not met, the property
shall not be annexed or if already annexed, it shall be de -annexed.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian
hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONER BORUP
COMMISSIONER OSLUND
COMMISSIONER MACCOY
COMMISSIONER MANNING
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER)
VOTED
VOTED �--
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 39.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the
property set forth in the application be approved by the City
Council for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in
these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, including that the
Applicant or its successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors
or personal representatives enter into a development agreement;
that if the Applicant is not agreeable with these Findings of Fact
and Conclusions of Law and are not agreeable with entering into a
development agreement, the property should not be annexed.
MOTION:
APPROVED: DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 40.
P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION
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.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI S. STILES, P A Z Adm.
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 8884433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
GRANT P. KINGSFORD
Mayor
COUNCIL MEMBERS
RONALD R. TOLSMA
MAX YERRINGTON
ROBERT D. CORRIE
WALT W. MORROW
P & Z COMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
MOE ALIDJANI
JIM SHEARER
CHARLIE ROUNTREE
TIM HEPPER
TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 13, 1995
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95
REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No 2
BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road, East of Locust
Grove Road
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
_WALT MORROW, C/C
_MAX YERRINGTON, C/C
WATER DEPARTMENT
_SEWER DEPARTMENT
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FIRE DEPARTMENT
_POLICE DEPARTMENT
_CITY ATTORNEY
_CITY ENGINEER
_CITY PLANNER
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
CITY FILES /
OTHER: Jr' ( `-
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:
CD PC A) S 02 ,q s ice, : JL, /V i_ W ,, �
8e_ r C4ege�>1 7Tr4,5ti 4-
L CL ri, r O by l vl /3 Z- CU w e— t v ,,4 44
r dv C) A�_ f Z .SIfJ
e
RECEIVED
MAY 3 -0 1995
C11,14 ul- MLhAmi-
June 2, 1995
JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.2
911 MERIDIAN STREET • MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 • PHONE(208)888-6701
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Re: Packard Subdivision No. 2
Dear Councilmen:
I have reviewed the application for Packard Subdivision No. 2
and find that it includes approximately 95 homes at a median
value of $115,000. We also find that this subdivision is located
in census tract 103.11 and in the attendance zone for Chief
Joseph Elementary, Meridian Middle School and Eagle High School.
The School District may be required to transport elementary
students from this subdivision to Ridgewood Elementary or
another school that may have capacity, due to overcrowding at
Chief Joseph Elementary.
Using the above information we can predict that these homes, when
completed, will house 32 elementary aged children, 23 middle
school aged children, and 22 senior high aged students. At the
present time Chief Joseph Elementary is at 119% of capacity.
The Meridian School District is not opposed to growth in our
district, however this subdivision will cause increased over-
crowding in all three schools. There is little opportunity to
shift attendance boundaries since the surrounding schools are
also well over capacity. Before we could support this
subdivision, we would need land dedicated to the district or at
least made available at a minimum price for a school site in this
area. The site would need water and sewer services available.
In addition we would need to pass another bond issue for the
construction of schools.
The cost per student for newly constructed schools, excluding
site purchase price and offsite improvements, exceeds $5,000
per elementary student and $10,000 per middle or high school
student.
S=RINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS
Bob L. Haley
DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT
Dan Mabe, Finance & Administration
ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT
gym_
iy�%1
Christine Donnell, Personnel & Instruction
DIRECTORS
Sheryl Belknap, Elementary
Jim Carberry, Secondary
Doug Rutan, Special Services
JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.2
911 MERIDIAN STREET • MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 • PHONE(208)888-6701
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Re: Packard Subdivision No. 2
Dear Councilmen:
I have reviewed the application for Packard Subdivision No. 2
and find that it includes approximately 95 homes at a median
value of $115,000. We also find that this subdivision is located
in census tract 103.11 and in the attendance zone for Chief
Joseph Elementary, Meridian Middle School and Eagle High School.
The School District may be required to transport elementary
students from this subdivision to Ridgewood Elementary or
another school that may have capacity, due to overcrowding at
Chief Joseph Elementary.
Using the above information we can predict that these homes, when
completed, will house 32 elementary aged children, 23 middle
school aged children, and 22 senior high aged students. At the
present time Chief Joseph Elementary is at 119% of capacity.
The Meridian School District is not opposed to growth in our
district, however this subdivision will cause increased over-
crowding in all three schools. There is little opportunity to
shift attendance boundaries since the surrounding schools are
also well over capacity. Before we could support this
subdivision, we would need land dedicated to the district or at
least made available at a minimum price for a school site in this
area. The site would need water and sewer services available.
In addition we would need to pass another bond issue for the
construction of schools.
The cost per student for newly constructed schools, excluding
site purchase price and offsite improvements, exceeds $5,000
per elementary student and $10,000 per middle or high school
student.
We are in a difficult position and need your help in dealing with
the impact of growth on schools.
Sincerely,
Dan Mabe
Deputy Superintendent
DM: gr
SUL.JIVISION EVALUATION `, BEET
Proposed Development Name PACKARD SUB NO. 2 City MERIDIAN 33
Date Reviewed 6/01/95 Preliminary Stage XXXXX Final
Engineer/Developer Tealey's Land Surveying / PNE & Edmonds Contruction
The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY
STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this
development in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance.
The following existing street names shall appear on the plat as:
"N. HICKORY WAY"
"E. MEADOWGRASS STREET"
"N,. DEVLIN AVENUE" "N. DEVLIN WAY"
"E. LOCHMEADOW STREET"
"N. WINGATE AVENUE"
The following new streets are in alignment with new streets in proposed subdivisions and
therefore shall be named:
SIMERLY PLACE"
"E. CHALLIS STREET"
"E. CARNELIAN STREET"
"N. LAPIS AVENUE"
"MALACHITE" is reserved for another subdivision and cannot be used unless it is in
alignment."TOURMALINE" is a duplication and cannot be used
"QUARTZ" is too close to QUARTZITE and therefore cannot be used.
The above street name comments have been read and approved
by the following agency
representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE.
ALL of the signatures
must be secured by the representative or his designee in order for the street names to be
officially approved.
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE, N Y REPRES NTATIVES
OR DESIGNEES
Ada County Engineer John Priester
Date
Ada Planning Assoc. Terri Raynor
Date
City of Meridian Representative
ate FS"
Meridian Fire District Representative
ate cY
NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ad
County Engineer at the
time of signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed !!!!
Sub Index Street Index 3N 1 E 05 Section
NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS
N
I
-L -
1
�5
1
♦ a
1
♦ i 1�
/J
A ._
30
ADA PLANNP;� AU -N.
AUG 12 94 29
3'
0
LE
Q
BoGK
25
24
/ 12
22
10
21
9
O s
21 Ic
8 5of
W
18 P
J
a
I' 10 l
� �•'n 16 � II
12
14 I 13
`.b UNLAiFaAL
! r
Q8a
►��•
♦ars♦
37
-
39 38
32 24
#Ai g AUa
MLX. A
QW
ao
=-D*t
RA
i a a�
�
0
26
3 •3
a
29
27
24.22
8
E -Oc�ml
DOz
f 9
8
9
10
a ;2
1 i3
�a
�
\
3
'15
ib�
♦ al . of al al •
• a► � a► a► A N
a 5
6
la
3
i2
E.
KATELYN
DR.
ie
1�
i
W3.j
x
a
If2
Z
g
13
Q1
2
A
>
6
9
.z
o
C
5
�0
��
2 \�
(71)
E�CHATEEASU—DDR.
/
1 1In/ L
C 6,k
/J
A ._
30
ADA PLANNP;� AU -N.
AUG 12 94 29
3'
0
LE
Q
BoGK
25
24
/ 12
22
10
21
9
O s
21 Ic
8 5of
W
18 P
J
a
I' 10 l
� �•'n 16 � II
12
14 I 13
`.b UNLAiFaAL
! r
Q8a
'CENTRAL CEN'tKAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
•• DISTRICT Environmental Health pDivision, 'It' HEALTH� � Return to:
°�.� ❑Boise
DEPARTMENT
'...� ❑Eagle
❑
Rezone # Garden city
r'y • -
a—'��.�ad Meridian
al Use #
❑ Kuna
CP7liminary / final /Short Plat /�i'Fc ��r�r/isia.0 /�G • a— ❑ ACZ
❑ I. We have No 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. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and
water availability.
8. 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
9. 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 "FI—eentral water
0
Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem.
Stormwater disposal systems shall be reviewed by relative to: ❑ Waste Disposal ❑ Injection Well rules.
❑ Groundwater Protection
This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other
considerations indicate approval.
If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage
Regulations.
❑ 14. 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
�A IS .Date:
Reviewed By:
Review Sheet
CDHD 10/91 rcb, rev. 1/95
CCENTRAL .-� •-.
•® DISTRICT
HEALTH
DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE • 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL • BOISE, ID. 83704*25 • (208) 375.5211 • FAX: 327.8500
To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
We recommend that the first one half inch of stormwater be pretreated through a grassy swale
prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality.
The engineers and architects involved with the design of this project should obtain current best
management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that
is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. Manuals that could be used for
guidance are:
1) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND, State of
Washington Department of Ecology, February 19892
2) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND
SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT
3) CALIFORNIA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE HANDBOOK
Prepared by Camp Dresser and McKee, Larry Walker Assoc., Uribe and Assoc.,
Resources Planning Assoc., for the Stormwater Quality Task Force
4) URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL
Volume 3, Best Management Practices
Stormwater Quality
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado
Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties
Ada /boas Courtly Office
WIC Boise . Mender+
Elmore county Ofke
am" County Office
707 R Armstrong PI.
1606 Robert St.
520 E. 8th Street N.
of Enwiwriedd HeoBh
8m. 0. 83704-0825
Boise. ID. 83705
Mountain Home. ID.
190 S. On Sfre:,t E.
Envro. Heaft 327-7499
Ph. 334.3355
83647 Ph. 581.4407
Mountain Home, ID.
Fainly Plorvmq. 327.1400
324 Meridian Rd.
83641 Ph. 587.9225
Irrvnun¢atim 321.1450
Meridian, ID. 83642
Nutrition: 317.7460
Ph. 888-6525
G)
'NIC: 27.7488
Vabey Courtly Office
P.O. Box 1448
Mccal. 0.83638
Ph. 634.7194
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 13, 1995
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95
REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2
BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road. East of Locust
Grove Road
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
_WALT MORROW, C/C
_MAX YERRINGTON, C/C
_WATER DEPARTMENT
_SEWER DEPARTMENT
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FIRE DEPARTMENT
POLICE DEPARTMENT
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
CITY FILES
OTHER:
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:
_CITY ATTORNEY —
_CITY ENGINEER
_CITY PLANNER 1� �-
t_Qp
,e .
J 1
U�f
0
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
COUNCIL MEMBERS
OFFICIALS
RONALD R. TOLSMA
WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk
A Good Place to Live
MAX YERRINGTON
JANICE
GITH,P.E.ity
OOR IEW
ROBERT D. MORROW
WALT W. MORROW
RYD. Engiurerneer
GARY D. SMITH, P.. City Engineer
CITY ®F MERIDIAN
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
P & Z COMMISSION
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
33 EAST IDAHO
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
MOE ALIDJANI
Adm.
SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Ad.
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
JIM SHEARER
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Firedm Chief
W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
Phone 208 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
( )
n
r 0MV
CHARLIE R PPER E
TIM HEPPER
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
((�� D
GRANT P. KINGSFORD
3 1 MAY 1995
Mayor
NAMPA & MERIDIAN
IRRIGATION DISTRICT
TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 13, 1995
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95
REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2
BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road. East of Locust
Grove Road
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
_WALT MORROW, C/C
_MAX YERRINGTON, C/C
_WATER DEPARTMENT
_SEWER DEPARTMENT
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FIRE DEPARTMENT
POLICE DEPARTMENT
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
CITY FILES
OTHER:
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:
_CITY ATTORNEY —
_CITY ENGINEER
_CITY PLANNER 1� �-
t_Qp
,e .
J 1
U�f
0
7 June 1995
ffl
111
/ /
/ ! I
Tealey's Land Surveying
109 South 4th Street
Boise, ID 83702
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395
FAX # 208-888-6201
Phones: Area Code 208
OFFICE: Nampa
466-7861
Boise
343-1884
SHOP: Nampa
466-0663
Boise
345-2431
RE: Land Use Change Application for Packard Subdivision #2
Dear Tealey's:
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
P.N.E./Edmonds Construction
,-City of Meridian
enc.
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000
BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000
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.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm.
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (108) 887.4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
GRANT P. KINGSFORD
Mayor
COUNCIL MEMBERS
RONALD R. TOLSMA
MAX YERRINGTON
ROBERT D. CORRIE
WALT W. MORROW
P & ZCOMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
MOE ALIDJANi
JIM SHEARER
CHARLIE ROUNTREE
TIM HEPPER
TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 13, 1995
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95
REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2
BY:PNE/Edmonds Construction
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road, East of Locust
Grove Road
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
_WALT MORROW, C/C
_MAX YERRINGTON, C/C
_WATER DEPART IAENT
_SEWER DEPARTMENT
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FIRE DEPARTMENT
_POLICE DEPARTMENT
_CITY ATTORNEY
_CITY ENGINEER
_CITY PLANNER
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PREUM & FINAL PLAT)
CITY FILES
OTHER:
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: TOUCIA, c< r_ ,;
71,
J U N 0 1 1995
G11'Y Of MthImA,
..k r
JUN 12 '95 06:10PM IPCO BOISE OPERATIONS
OFFICIALS
WILLIAM G. BERG. Jr.. City Cleric
JANICE L OAKS, City Treaowor
GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Enalnear
BRUCE D. STUART, Water works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, wa7ta Water Supl.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks SUFI.
SHARI S. STILES, P a Z Adm.
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W. L "BILL" GORDON. Pollee Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
NUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
P.1/1
COUNCIL ME B RS
RONALD R. TOLSMA
MAX YERRINGTON
CITY OF MERIDIAN IE ALTW. MORROW WW
ALT W.
P L Z COM ISSION
33 EAST IDAHO JIM JOHNSON. Chairman
DJANI
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 JIM SHEARER '������ ��.. JIM SHEARER
Phonc (208) 8884433 • FAX (208) 8874813 CN TIM NARLIE E PERREE
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 J U N 13 4n 1395
GRAM' P. KINGSFORD
Mayor i+. i 1/ d M L ti I v I res
TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: ,dune 13, 1995
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95
REQUEST: AnnexationlZoning/Preliminary Plant for Packard Subdivision No 2
BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road._Ea�st of Locust
Grove Road -
th
a
1 JOHNSON, P/Z
)E ALIDJANI, P/Z
1 SHEARER, P/Z
ARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z
IHEPPER,P/Z
ANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR
NALD TOLSMA, C/C
B CORRIE, C/C
LT MORROW, C/C
X YERRINGTON. C/C
ITER DEPARTMENT
BER DEPARTMENT
&DING DEPARTMENT
tE DEPARTMENT
LICE DEPARTMENT
rY ATTORNEY
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
CITY FILES
OTHER:
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:
We require a permanent 10 -foot wide public utilities
easement along all lots adjacent to a road right-of-way
dedicated to public or private use.
Tim Adams &.0es
Idaho Power
322-2047
JUN 12 '95 1e:09 PAGE.01
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.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI S. STILES, P 3 Z Adm.
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W. L "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
GRANT P. KINGSFORD
Mayor
COUNCIL MEMBERS
RONALD R. TOLSMA
MAX YERRINGTON
ROBERT D. CORRIE
WALT W. MORROW
P 6 Z COMMISSION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
MOE ALIDJANI
JIM SHEARER
CHARLIE ROUNTREE
TIM HEPPER
TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to
Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 13, 1995
TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95
REQUEST:_ Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No 2
BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction
LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road, East of Locust
Grove Road
JIM JOHNSON, P2
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
WALT MORROW, C/C
MAX YERRINGTON, C/C
WATER DEPARTMENT
SEWER DEPARTMENT
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FIRE DEPARTMENT
POLICE DEPARTMENT
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ENGINEER
CITY PLANNER
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT)
CITY FILES
OTHER:
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:
U S WEST REQUEST A I O' EASEMENT ALONG
FRONT AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. AND A 5'
EASEMENT ALONG ALL SIDE LOT LINES.
THANK YOU
AJ. CARLSON
-
11), N 0 1 1935
- T, 4LETS LAND
SURVEYING
May 22, 1995
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
33 E. Idaho St.
Meridian Id 83642
109 South 41" Str Boise, Idaho 83702
RE: Annexation Request - Packard Subdivision 42
Dear Members of the Commission:
(208) 385-0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
This application by Pacific Northwest Electric (P.N.E.)/ Edmond's Construction is seeking
annexation of 35.23 acres. Located in the northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North,
Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the parcel adjoins the city limits along its
western boundary. Currently zoned RT (Rural Transition) under Ada County regulations, we are
asking that the site be annexed into the city with a zoning designation of R4.
The site consists of two (2) parcels. Part of the site, previously owned by Bill and Joy Brown,
was submitted for annexation in September of 1994. That application was tabled until a
development proposal was submitted. Since September of 1994, P.N.E./ Edmond's Construction
have purchased additional land. The total annexation package is 35.23 acres.
Presently, both parcels are in limited agricultural uses. Each parcel contains a single-family
dwelling and outbuildings. The dwellings will be incorporated into the subdivision proposal that
accompanies this annexation request. It is the intention of the applicant to development a single-
family residential subdivision on these parcels.
Under the jurisdiction of Ada County, the parcels are presently zoned RT (Rural Transition). This
county designation limits the amount of development until urban services and other urban -type
development extends to the parcel. Urban services and urban development have extended to the
western boundary of these properties. The applicant seeks an R4 zoning designation for these
parcels upon annexation.
Much of the area surrounding the site has already developed. Chamberlain Estates, Chateau
Meadows, Kearney Place and Carol's Subdivision are next to the site. Except Carol's Subdivision
which is zoned R1, all of the surrounding subdivisions are zoned R-8. There are a few smaller
agricultural parcels lying north and east of the site Those parcels range is size from three to five
Padcard Subdivision #2 - Acmexx6on
Projea 1408
-1-
acres. Each has a single-family dwelling. Annexing and zoning this parcel to R4 is compatible
with the existing and planned development in the area. With an R4 zoning designation,
development of the site will provide a transition between those subdivisions that are zoned R-8
and the larger lot development east of the site.
The site is close to the center of Meridian. Annexation of this site provides an orderly, logical
extension of the city limit. Following the annexation is the extension of sewer services.
Development will be a consistent extension of the Packard Subdivision #1. Development of the
site for residential purposes is consistent with the goals of the Meridian Comprehensive. The
Comprehensive Plan Map shows this area as designated for single-family residential development.
In summary, the parcel is contiguous to the current city limits. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan
designates the area for residential development. Our proposal is consistent with the development
pattern in the area and provides the transition between R-8 development and larger lots in the
area. Extension of the South Slough sewer -trunk will progress with the development of the site.
This proposal meets the requirements for annexation in both the Meridian City Code and the
Idaho Code. We ask that the Commission make positive findings of fact and recommend
approval of this application to the City Council.
Respectfully,
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealey's Land Surveying
!7rr,-v��,
Ted Hutchinson
Packard SuMvisim #2 - Aimexatim
Projed 1408
-2-
lo.l
October 17, 1995
Ada County Highway District Commission
318 East 37th Street
Boise Idaho 83714
RE: Packard Subdivision #2
Dear Members of the Commission:
This letter is to provide a chronology of proposed Packard Subdivision 42. The development
application for this project has been in the works for over one and one-half years. Hopefully, this
information will clarify the issues of concern and will get our proposal back on track.
In the Spring of 1994, Pacific Northwest Electric and Edmonds' Construction (P.N.E./Edmonds)
purchased approximately forty acres of land (the Packard property). It lays about one-quarter mile
north of Fairview Avenue in Section 5 of Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian,
Ada County, Idaho. This forty -acre parcel abuts the northern edge of Dove Meadows Subdivisions.
It is also directly north of the Capitol Christian Center and east o Wingate Place Subdivision.
The forty acres seemed perfect for subdivision. Primary access would be along North Hickory
Avenue from Fairview Avenue with a secondary access from Wingate Place Subdivision. After
discussion with Ada County Highway District staff, additional stub -streets for future development
established to the north and to the east. This site adjoins the city limits of the city of Meridian on two
sides. As stated above, it seemed the perfect and logical place for a new subdivision. Other
residential subdivisions are on three sides.
As P.N.E./Edmonds began the process for development of this forty -acre parcel, their attention was
drawn to another parcel in the area. The Browns owned 22.66 acres laying northwest of the Packard
property. The Brown property adjoins the city limits of Meridian and is next to existing or proposed
residential subdivisions. One problem exists with the Brown property. The problem is access. Until
Chamberlain Estates Subdivision is completed, the Brown parcel is landlocked. However, once
Chamberlain Estates (phases 1 and 2) are completed, two roads will provide access to the Brown
property. P.N.E./Edmonds' attention was drawn to the Brown parcel because of the proposed
location of the South Slough sewer trunk line. The city of Meridian designated the South Slough as
location for sewer extension into the northern portion of Section 5. By purchasing the Brown
property, extension of the sewer from Chamberlain Estates through the Brown property then
Pad.ard subdivision *2
Proj ,A 1408 - 1 -
southward to the Borup and Packard properties is possible. Once this extension is made, a temporary
sewer lift -station for Packard Subdivision will be eliminated.
P.N.E./Edmonds did not want to rely solely on the development of Chamberlain Estates for their
access. P.N.E./Edmonds purchased fourteen acres from Borup. The Borup property adjoined the
northern property line of the Packard property and the southeastern boundary of the Brown property.
In controlling these three properties, P.N.E./Edmonds were assured of street access from the
Packard property.
Development applications for the Brown, Borup, and Packard properties were not submitted
simultaneously because P.N.E./Edmonds did not purchase the Borup property until after the Packard
property applications were already submitted. An annexation request for the Brown property had
been submitted at nearly the same time as the development application for the Packard property.
However, the city of Meridian delayed any action on the annexation request until a development
application (subdivision proposal) was submitted for concurrent review. The city of Meridian wanted
the additional information to see how the South Slough sewer trunk -line was going to be extended.
Without approval of the development on the Brown and Borup properties, the South Slough sewer
trunk -line cannot extend into the northern portion of Section 5.
During the early stages of land acquisition and examination of development options, P.N.E./Edmonds
visited with Highway District staff. Several discussions took place concerning location of connecting
streets, possible connection of the northern end of the development to Ustick Road, and general
traffic issues. All proposed roadway locations on the Packard, Borup, and Brown properties were
laid out after discussions with Highway District staff. Because the development entailed more than
one hundred lots, a traffic study was required by staff. Dobie Engineering prepared a traffic study
for the Packard property. This study was updated to include the Borup and Brown properties.
It was during visits with Highway District staff that the issue of Wingate Lane arose. Wingate Lane
is a privately owned and maintained access way for approximately twelve dwellings. The lane extends
south from Ustick Road, along the western edge of the center section line of Section 5. In 1913,
several property owners recorded an easement agreement for access. Each land owner holds fee
simple ownership of their land subject to the ingress -egress agreement.
Because Wingate Lane is a private lane, a few dwellings may be allowed under the provisions of the
Ada County Zoning Ordinance. The lane currently serves more dwellings than permitted under Ada
County Code. Section 8-13-3 of the Ada County Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum of four
dwelling on an approved private street. More dwellings are allowed if the private street is
constructed to the standards of the Ada County Highway District. Ada County Development
Services (the planning and zoning department for Ada County) will not issue further development
permits along the lane. The Brown property is one property having access onto Wingate Lane. The
Borup property also takes access, however, it was not included in the original 1913 agreement.
Pa&ard subdivision 172
ProjW 1408 - 2 -
When P.N.E./Edmonds met with Highway District staff, discussion naturally turned to Wingate Lane
as a possible location for a collector street to serve the north half of Section 5. District staff
recognized that Wingate Lane was privately owned and that the District would not participate in any
condemnation proceedings for acquisition of the lane. District staff did, however, ask
P.N.E./Edmonds to see what they could do about obtaining access to Ustick Road along Wingate
Lane. P.N.E./Edmonds were told that if access was not possible, the District would make other
considerations for the traffic issues.
After their discussion with District staff, P.N.E./Edmonds began contacting property owners along
Wingate Lane. Ted Sigmont from P.N.E. and Wirt Edmonds from Edmonds Construction met
individually with some owners and together with others. These informal meetings were to find out
if they (P.N.E./Edmonds) could buy portions, or all, of the properties along Wingate Lane. Some
property owners expressed an interest (for the right price); others were not interested. One property
owner delayed meeting with P.N.E./Edmonds until P.N.E./Edmonds figured out that the owner was
simply not interested in selling the land. P.N.E./Edmonds set up four meetings over a couple of
months with that land owner. Each time, the owner would cancel the meeting for "two more weeks."
Clearly, the Wingate Lane property owners were not interested in selling or improving the lane.
When they attended public hearings before the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and
Meridian City Council, the owners expressed severe opposition. At each of the several meetings, the
property owners expressed a great deal of opposition to any development that would allow traffic
onto Wingate Lane.
P.N.E./Edmonds met with District stag. They explained that options of using or improving Wingate
Lane was not possible. Lot and street layouts for the development of the Brown and Borup
properties were completed without using Wingate Lane. A design with a single public road crossing
Wingate Lane has been proposed. A public road crossing would not deprive the Wingate Lane
easement holders of their right to use the lane.
On September 18, 1995, a representative of P.N.E./Edmonds met with several Wingate Lane property
owners. This meeting was at the request of P.N.E./Edmonds in hopes that a solution could be found
to the issue of Wingate Lane. The meeting lasted over an hour and the P.N.E./Edmonds
representative asked the property owners for a list of concerns and acceptable solutions to the
Wingate Lane problem. On September 27, 1995, the property owners provided the following list.
1 We are requesting a gate be installed at the south entrwice of Wingate Lwie. This
gate must be of sufficient quality to discourage outside automobile acid foot traffic.
Also gate on south side of street crossing Wingate Lane.
2 Details of the irrigation system need to be established. Hoii, rill the current land
augers receive their irrigation Nater both during construction and When the system
is pressurized?
3 The site plans need to include brumes (sic) along Dixie Roberts property and also
along Petersofi's property.
Packard Subdivision #2
Project 1408 _ 3
4 We would like to review a copy of the covenants for the development on Winrgate
(sic) Lane. Issues to be addressed in the covenants are homeowners duniping over
their fence and onto Wingate Lane and hm�ing gates that access Wingate Lane.
S Berms and fence along east side of Sharps property including gate across
Nampa Meridian access road.
6 Tile lateral ditch east side of Sharps property.
We are considering these issues and will respond to their concerns.
It is important to examine the location of the proposed development in relation to the properties that
may be affected by the development. Of the twelve properties along Wingate Lane, one is the Brown
property, one is the Borup property, both owned by P.N.E./Edmonds. One property owner, Reichert,
favors the development plans. Eight of the properties are north of the Borup property. This leaves
one property, Sharp's, south of any development of the Brown and Borup properties. Of those
expressing a preference, those property owners north of the Borup property would prefer to have a
cul-de-sac on Wingate Lane at the north end of the Borup property. However, this would cut off the
Sharps' access to the Wingate Lane easement. P.N.E./Edmonds are trying to find and to provide an
acceptable solution to this issue.
It seems the harder P.N.E./Edmonds look for a solution, the harder the process becomes. What
should have been a simple development has become convoluted. All of the pre -application planning
and meeting with District staff have been for little or no progress. Directed by District staff to find
a way to use Wingate Lane, P.N.E./Edmonds tried to purchase land along Wingate Lane for access
to Ustick Road. This effort met severe resistance. Without access to Wingate Lane,
P.N.E./Edmonds put together a logical development proposal systematically providing future access
to adjoining properties based upon advice and comments from District staff
P.N.E./Edmonds recognized the landlocked predicament of the Brown and Borup properties when
they purchased them. However, they also recognized that development proposals were in process
that would provide access to the properties. P.N.E./Edmonds also recognized that they could provide
a continuation of their Packard Subdivision proposal onto the Brown and Borup properties. This
continuation would provide connection and continuity of public streets through Section 5. The
planning of those street connections was done with District staff in the early stages of the
development proposal. Interconnection to existing and proposed developments has been planned for
these properties.
This is not leapfrog development. It is next to existing and proposed developments and contiguous
to the corporate limits of the city of Meridian. Concurrent application for annexation into the City
is part of the development application being considered by the City. The traffic engineering studies
completed for these projects show that the proposed street system can accommodate the traffic that
will be generated by this proposal. That study was based upon the street interconnection of the
existing development plan.
Packard Subdi%ision 42
Projw 1408 - 4 -
We cannot emphasize enough that in an attempt to eliminate problems and to avoid delays, we
worked closely with District staff. From street -stub locations to street widths, District staff was
consulted. Every attempt has been made to use the advice given by District staff, including attempts
to obtain right of way along Wingate Lane.
This has been a long, frustrating process. Several times, the project has been redesigned to
accommodate additional comments and concerns of District staff, neighboring property owners, and
the city of Meridian. The proposal now before the Commission is the end -product of the planning
process thus far. Street interconnection is there. Provision of future street interconnection is there.
Good land -use planning and traffic planning is there. We cannot understand the difficulties now
encountered. We believe all the answers have been provided to the Commission supporting the
approval of this development as proposed. We have looked for other options, but no logical ones
exist.
We do not have the solutions for the concerns of the neighboring property owners. They do not want
traffic from this development using Wingate Lane. We agree with their position. The property
owners have the right to use the Wingate Lane easement. We are not proposing to cut off that
access, only to cross the access with a public street. Most of the property owners would prefer to
see a cul-de-sac on Wingate Lane at the north end of the Borup property. The Sharps want to
continue using Wingate Lane as they have done since 1968. This creates the additional problem of
finding a satisfactory solution for all parties. One solution is to provide a cul-de-sac at the north end
of the Borup property with a gate for use by the Sharps. This will not completely satisfy the Sharps.
They are opposed to all development in the area. But, this will satisfy most of the property owners
along the lane. Covenants and restrictions will be placed on the development of the Brown and
Borup properties to prevent use or access to Wingate Lane. With the interconnection of public
streets, we believe the Sharps and anyone visiting them will prefer the improved streets over the
unimproved lane.
As an important note of interest, on October 3, 1995, P.N.E./Edmonds met u-ith a representative of
the Meridian School District and with Jon Barnes regarding locating an elementary school on thirteen
acres owned by Mr. Barnes. The site is next to the northeast corner of the Packard property.
P.N.E./Edmonds have agreed to provide a pathway and easement for extension of sewer to the site
through Packard Subdivision. It is important to the city of Meridian, and now to the Meridian School
District, that the South Slough sewer trunk -line is extended. Extension of this line depends upon
approval of the subdivision proposal on the Brown and Borup properties -- Packard Subdivision 42.
This has been an overview of the process we have been involved in for the development of these
properties. Common sense and good planning have been used to provide a quality development plan
that provides a logical extension of development in the area. Normally, the issues raised by the
neighboring property owners are not perceived as so complicated. But, for some reason, here, they
appear to have become enormously convoluted. Really, they are not.
Packard subdivision u2
Project 1408 — 5 —
We are seeking your advice for resolution to this endless review. Thank you for taking time to
consider this letter.
Respectfully,
Walter T. Sigmont
Pacific Northwest Electric
Attachment
WTS/WE/th
Wirt Edmonds
Edmonds Construction
Packard Subdivision #2
Project 1408 _ 6
.--- - V_�
I MML-r- i J JU![VC I I I'lu
TEALEY'S LAND
SE .IVEYING
Gary Smith, City Engineer
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho Street
Meridian, Idaho 83642
RE: Packard Subdivision #2
Comment Sheet
Dear Mr. Smith:
109 South 491 Street Boise, Idaho 83702
(208),' 0636
Fax (208) 385-0696
December 12, 1995 RECEIVED
0 E C 1 2 1995
CITY OF MERIDIAN
This letter is in response to Bruce Freckleton's comments on Packard Subdivision 42. I will
outline my response according to the outline Bruce used,
GENERAL COMMENTS
1. As required by City Ordinance, irrigation and drainage ditches will be tiled. This will be
done under the approval of Settlers Irrigation District. Any work involving the irrigation
ditches and drainage ditches will have written approval for the work before beginning the
work.
2. No existing domestic well(s) on this site will be used for other than irrigation purposes.
Domestic water service will be from the city of Meridian.
3. Test -holes were dug on the site in August. Presently, monitoring of the test -holes is
ongoing.
4. A copy of the proposed restrictive covenants will be forwarded to your office when they
are ready.
5. As required by City Ordinance, sidewalks within the development will be at least five feet
(5') wide (see street cross-section on preliminmy plat).
6. Water service lines, size and location, were discussed with the Water Works Department.
7. A copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee review is attached.
8. Fire hydrant location was discussed with the Water Works Department.
9. There is no FEMA Flood Plain boundary within this development.
DEC 12 '95 14=02 PAGE.02
14:10 ItHLtY'S SUKVtY1NU
10. Work is continuing within this office regarding the street drainage_ Drainage will be
retained on-site. Drainage method and location will be approved by the appropriate public
agency.
11. Copies of the revised preliminary plat were delivered to your office on December 11,
1993.
SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS
1. The site is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the city of Meridian.
2. Regarding the extension of sewer, the developers understand that wet line sewer service is
required for this development. They also understand that unless they can provide the wet
line sewer in a location and manner that meets with your approval, it is not possible to
record the final plat for this development. Sewer plans for this development were laid out
using the preliminary plat design of Chamberlain Estates Subdivision 92 and the extension
of the South Slough Sewer Trunk -line. Given approval of the Chamberlain Estates #2
project by the city of Meridian, the basic assumption is that the extension of the South
Slough Sewer Trunk -line will happen. Extension of this line through the Alleman property
has been worked out (verbal agreement at this time) with Mr. Alleman. The revised plans
provided your office show how the sewer trunk -line will be extended to, and through, this
property.
3. The revised plans provided your office show the extension of water service lines to this
project from their existing end in Dove Meadows Subdivision #1 through Packard
Subdivision #1 and into this project.
The developers understand that this project appears to have more than its share of perceived
problems. However, given that this project is at the preliminary plat stage, there are ways for the
city of Meridian to address the issues. We know that this is the stage in the development where
the City has its greatest say regarding the requirements under which development occurs. This is
the time for the City to review the proposal and to decide whether the proposal meets the
Comprehensive Plan for the City. The City must also decide whether the proposal complies with
the existing zoning requirements.
The process, at this point, allows the City the opportunity to place specific requirements upon the
developers and the development. Not all of those requirements will be met at the preliminary
stage; but, they will be met at the final stage. If, for some reason, a requirement is not met, the
City has the authority to withhold approval of the final plat and to withhold the City Engineer's
endorsement. This is the method by which the City assures completion of their requirements.
But, at this stage in the process, the developer simply needs to know the specific requirements
that will lead to obtaining the City's approval of the final plat. The City`s approval of a
preliminary plat is contingent upon compliance with those specific requirements. For example, the
City requires wet line sewer for all developments. This does not necessarily mean that to submit a
preliminary plat for review and approval that wet line sewer must presently be in place at the site.
This simply means that in order for the development to go on through to final plat, those sewer
lines must be in place before the City is asked to sign the final plat. This is the same with any
DEC 12 '95 14:02 PAr,F A�
LCI, -1G 177J 14. lu 1 LHLtY' S !:DUKVtY 1NU
I1. U4
other condition or requirement that the City places on the preliminary development plan. If the
City wants a pathway, landscape strip, park, sidewalk, paved street, streetlight, or any other of a
host of improvements, those improvements are not required before the preliminary plat is
considered. Rather, it is up to the City at the preliminary plat stage to decide whether a proposal
is appropriate given the circumstances. If decided that the development is appropriate, then a list
of conditions of approval is provided to ensure that the development is completed in a fashion
acceptable to the City. That list includes such items as wet line sewer, water service, landscaping,
sidewalks, and so on.
It is then up to the developer to comply with those requirements and to meet those conditions
before submitting the final plat for approval. If for some reason the developer is unable to meet
those conditions, the project dies. If the developer finds out that it is too costly to extend a
service, the project dies.
At the preliminary plat phase, the City should decide if a development proposal complies with
their Comprehensive Plan. If the proposal complies, the City should then provide a list of items
required for that development. This list is, in essence, the map that guides the developer to the
end -product, a final plat approval.
This pontificating should be directed at the decision -makers, the Planning and Zoning Commission
and the City Council. But, they turn to you for your expertise and guidance in the matters of
infrastructure provision. It is the time between approval of the preliminary plat and the approval
of the final plat that developer provides those improvements to the satisfaction of the City. At the
preliminary plat stage, we are asking for your list of conditions that will make it possible for a
project to go. If for any reason, those conditions cannot be met, the project will not make it to
the final plat stage. If a final plat is submitted for approval without having met those conditions,
the City should not sign the final plat. In fact, the City is under no obligation to do so.
The city of Meridian is the only development agency requiring resolution of these issues before
the preliminary plat is approved. We are not asking that you delete any of your conditions or
requirements, just that you place them in the proper order of consideration. We have presented
our proposal, give us your list of requirements to be met. Those will be completed before the
final plat is submitted for your signature.
Thank you for taking time to consider this information. I understand the development process
from both sides of the counter, public review agency and private sector consultant. I am trying to
Put the city of Meridian's process into perspective.
Respectfully,
Patrick A. Tealey
Tealeys Land S;Z�
'
B6�
Ted Hutchinson
DEC 12 '95 14:03
DEC -12-1995 14:11 TERLEY'S SURVEYING
SUBDIVISION EVALUATION SHEET
WR
RECEIVED
0 E C 12 1995
CITY OF MERIDIAt,
Proposed Development Name PACKARD SUIS NO, 2 City MERIDIAN
Date Reviewed 5/04/95 Preliminary Stage XXXX Final
Engineer/Developer _Tealey's Land Surveying / PNE & Edmonds Contruction
The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY
STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this
development in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance.
The folio win4 existing street names shall aporar on the plat as:
"N HICKORY WAY"
"E MEADOWGRASS STREET"
"N. DEVLIN AVENUE" "N DEVLIN WAY"
"E HMEADOW STREET"
"N. WINGATE AVENUE"
The folio wino new streets are in alignment with new streets in proposed subdivisions and
therefore shall be named:
"N SIMERLY PLACE"
Please choose 5 new street names and have them approved by the street name committee.
The above street name comments have been read and approved by the followin a enc
representatives of the ADA COUNTY
must be secured by the representativ
officially approved.
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COW
Ada County Engineer
Ada Planning Assoc.
City of Meridian
Meridian Fire District
9 9 y
STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures
i or his designee in order for the street names to be
John Priester
Terri Raynor
Representa
Representative
�ESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES
Date
Date S '
Dat",
at, 9 S
i
Date
NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Aba County Engineer at the
time of signing the "final plat`, otherwise the plat will not be signed 1111
Sub Index Street Index 3N 1 E Q5 Section
NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKSfes` y
17 -
TOTAL P.05
DEC 12 '95 14:03 PAGE.05
JUN -19-1996 14:04
M
TERLEY'S SURUEYiNG F.02
j.OAVID WNAP 0
Robert l.. Aldridge, Chartered
Attorney at Law
1209 North Eighth Street
Boise, Idaho 83702-4297
Telephone: (208) 336-9880
Fax: (208) 335-9882
Attorney for PNE/Edmonds
BOISE ID
'96 JUN 5 flM T4
I0 56-
FEE -Q� 0 E GAY
RECO DR EG t7 THc" REC ES F
AMENDED GRANT OF TEMPORARY EASEMENT
David Leader and Mary Leader, husband and wife, and Capital Christian Center, Inc., an
Idaho corporation (formerly known as Capitol Christian Center, Inc.), for good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby
grant unto Edmonds Construction, Inc., and Pacific Northwest Electric, Inc., a temporary
easement for ingress and egress upon any portion of the road described on Exhibit "A"
attached hereto lying in the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5,
Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. Said easement is
granted by each party as to their respective portions of ownership in the road described
on Exhibit "A".
This temporary easement shall terminate automatically without further action by any party,
upon the dedication of the public road more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and incorporated by this reference.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto subscribed their names to this
Amended Grant of Temporary Easement,
DATED April 12, '1996.
.r•
David LeaderMary ea-
•
CAPITAL CHRISTIAN CENTER, INC.
//
Kenne G. Wilde, President
,RY EASEMENT
Page 1
JUN 19 '96 14:05 PAGE.02
JUN -19-1996 14:04 TERLEY'S SURVEYING F.03
STATE OF IDAHO )
)
COUNTY OF ADA )
J On the .,t�day of June. 1996, befor�;me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for
said State, personally appeared David Leader and Mary Leader, known to me to be the
persons whose names are subscribed to the within and foregoing instrument and
acknowledged to me that they executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I gave hereunto affixed my official seal the day and year first
above v+R&am
er4� .a. sg
'0,C)"'Akr
�r %cl
4
STATE OF IDAHO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF ADA )
Residing at 10Z,44
Commission expires
On this June , 1996, before me, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally
appeared Kenneth G. Wilde, known or identified to me to be the President of Capital
Christian Center, Inc., and to be the person whose name is attached to the foregoing
instrument and acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto placed my official hand and seal the day and
year in this Certificate first above written.
tw�r
NotaiVPublic f r d ho
Residing at
o Commission expires
'T of fir►
AMENDED GRANT OF TEMPORARY EASEMENT Page 2
JUN 19 '96 14:05 PAGE.03
JUN -19-1996 14:05 TEALEY'S SURUEYING
P.04
.TEALETS LAND io9 South 4 -street tio,se. ►aano aj/uz
SURVEYING r 3a5 -M36
Fox (208) 385-0696
jest No. 1165-2
a: December 6, 1995
•y.rIt
�� a1• ► ��
A 60 foot wide ingress-wgroas easement situated in the sw 1/4
of the SE 1/4 and the SE 1/4 or the SW 1/4 of section 5, T. 3N. ,
R.1E., B.K., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the boundaries of which
are located 30 goat right of and 30 feet left of the following
described centerline:
Commencing at an iron pin marking the Northwest corner of Lot
10 Ot Block 1 of Dove Meadows Subdivision No. 1, as on file in Book
65 of Plats at Pages 6662 through 6664 in the office of the Ada
County Recorder, Boise, Idaho, which point is also on the Easterly
right--•of-vay boundary of North Hickory Avenue; thence along the
Northerly boundary of said Dove Meadows Subdivision No. 1
South 83610.5711 wast 33.50 feat to an iron pin on a curve on
the. centerline Of said North hickory Avenue which point is the
QZ 1iNZ1 ; thence leaving the said Northerly boundary and
running Northeastsrly 7.53 feet along the arc of a curve to the
right having a radius of 175.00 feet, a central angle of 2.27154"
and a long chord which bears
North 18058031" East 7.53 feet to a point oz tangent; thence
North 20612'28" East 280.66 feet to a point on the North
boundary of the said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, which point bears south
89044046" East 31.92 feet from the Northwest corner of the said SW
1/4 of the SE 1/4, said point also being the ZgZNT or SND uo of the
said 60 toot wide ingrass-egress easement.
05/31/86 08:05 TZ/R1 NO. 0726 P02
TOTAL P.03
TOTAL P.04
JUN 19 '96 14:06 PAGE.04
Lc� 1C -177J 14; ulj I LHLtY' S SUKVtY 11YU
�'- b1
TEALEY's LAND SURVEYING
109 SOUTH 4TH STREET
BOISE, IDAHO 83702
(208) 385-0636
FAX: (208) 385-0696
LJ ransmittal
to: I Gary Smith - City )Engineer
f= 1 887-4813
from: Ted Hutchinson
date: I December 12, 1995
re: Packard Subdivision #2
pages: [includes cover sheet] r5
NOTES: see following
DEC 12 '95 14:01 onr1r,
JUN -19-1996 14:04 TEALEY'S SURVEYING P.01
FAX COVER SHEET
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING
109 SOUTH 4 th STREET
BOISE, IDAHO 83702
REc,EsvF-0
J U N 19 1996
CITY OF MERIDIAN
TO: Shari Stiles
COMPANY: City of Meridian
FAX #: 887-4813
DATE: 6/19/96
TIME SENT:_ 2:05 pm
NO. OF PAGES SENT (INCLUDING TRANSMITTAL): 4
REMARKS: Enclosed is the easement from Dove Meadows to Packard
Subdivision
IF YOU DID NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES INDICATED ABOVE, PLEASE
CALL. (208) 385-0636 FAX #(208) 385-0696
Project No_: 1290
JUN 19 '96 14:05 PAGE.01
RECEIVED
APR - 8 1997
CMOFMERN Meridian, Idaho 8:3642
April 8, 1997
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
33 East:: Idaho AVe.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
President Johnson .and Fellow Connissionors,
deference is made to Para. raPh 5 on pmge2. Findings
of eact Packard #2. As +a matter of information I
would like to state my wife and I own approximately
20 acres which I farm and which land joins the north
side and west side of proposed Packard Sub ff2.
S�'.ncerely,
Vern Alleman
21U1. r:. Ustick .ltd. �. 4
tieridian, Idaho 0642
JUiN 2 2 isa
Chairman and nembers
City Planning and /,oning Commission..��61- ME�jl
SY name is Vern Alleman, k4y wife and I own land adjoining the north
and west side of proposed Packard r2. We have owned and farmed this land.
for 25 years. I presently fares this anu additional lana . I farmed the
-brown property until this year.
We have two sons who are involved in various farming activities with us.
It is my intention to continue to operate as we do now.
Because of the development around us, it is important to be involved in
the planning process. It is in this context that 1 make reference to
developing our property.
This being the case I have concerns about this development.
Irrigation for our property is routed through the proposed subdivision.
I request any change in this system be of a size to accommodate the
present supply* any changes in this system must be done well ahead of
the irrigation season* also, where trlis system crosses the proposed
subdivision there has to be provision for maintenance and use of same
which requires right of way and access with roan holes, etc. Presently
there is provision to the south and west of our property for drainage
of live water when necessary, while this is not on the proposed
subdivision, it is important this remain.
1 am concerned about the sewer whictl will need to cross our property.
The location of the sewer is very important, It must be located so that
it will properly serve our property if need be in the future. This
requires engineering and planning and legal documents. `The timing of
construction ana method must be done to conform to my farming operations,
bpon completion it must be put back in shape for present farming and
without manholes, etc. 'There is proposed a street exiting the proposed
subdivision on the west and entering our property on tree east. There
must not be any streets across our property for traffic or for sewer
servicing until such time as our property is developed.
I am concerned about the cost and fees pertaining to the sewer as it
affects our property.
As with the sewer, the location, etc. of streets need to be such that
they will properly work with our property should it be developed.
ppa •e 2
tai y Planning and boning
1 understand there is a bike path proposed, along and through our
property to which T am opposed. This is not conducive or compatible
to our farming due to problems with people using same and problems
they create.
We have livestock and our neighbors have livestock. Three of our neighbors
have :had a bull on their property in the last year which presents the
possibility of real danger to people using this path. 1 am concerned
about the liability when there are problems along such pathwagys. Are
those who mandate these pathways liable for problems that occur as a
result of them being there?
we will not agree to any pathway across our property.
1 am concerned about fencing between our property and proposed subdivision,
kencing must be done prior to development for our protection as weal as
protection of the people in the subuivision.
There is also the concern about traffic problems, school needs, fire and
police needs and parks. It is acknowledged there is a real need for at
least park sites and 1 feel the time to address this is now. There
is the problem of acquiring and maintaining these. & possible solution
is impact fees. in the planning process it is important that sites for
these be provided.. 1 think these need to be of a size to accoauodate
sports activities.
Unce again 1 express my concern that you address and solve this problem
now and not come back after the fact and say you need our land because
you did not act prudently now.
Thank you,
Vern Alleman
W
.E0
JUN 2 2 1995
June 21, 1995 CITY Of HERNIA'
To: Meridian Planning and Zoning
From: Residents of Wingate Lane
Meridian, Idaho
The following issues have been raised by members of the Wingate
Road Maintenance Fund as concerns that we would like to have
considered by this body when reviewing the Packard Subdivision
zoning proposal.
Wingate Lane has served the residents of the adjoining properties
since the 1920s when an easement was given to the Sharp property.
Maintenance and right of ways have always functioned for the land
owners of those properties. In 1990, Ada County Zoning Board
ruled that the Peterson property should be the last one to be
allowed access on the lane for a new residence.
We oppose any development that would change the status of our
rural setting and impact the traffic on our road. We therefore
propose that these properties be denied use of our lane other
than for the existing homes on Wingate Lane.
We would find it less objectionable if the Brown property could
be accessed from the west and the Borup from the South without
crossing Wingate Lane. We would also like to see the lane's
privacy insured with fencing and berms to delineate residential
from agricultural areas.
If the two properties connect on Wingate Lane the following
issues become concerns for lane landowners:
1. The sharp residence has always had access to Ustick. Would
this access be maintained?
2. If the access to Ustick is maintained for Sharps, what would
be the liability of the property owners if someone without
access rights was involved in an accident while on the lane.
3. How could we control use of the lane if it were left open to a
public street? Human nature being what it is, people would
use the short cut for northbound access (gravel or no gravel).
4. How would we keep subdivision occupants out of pastures and
ditches?
5. How would this development impact irrigation water from the
south?
6. Does the current plan have access to Ustick, Locust Grove or
Eagle Road? How does this fit into the Master Plan for this
area?
7. We are also concerned that schools are full in this area.
8. Will these properties require the city to be saddled with
another high-priced sewer lift station?
9. What about the high water table of the area?
Thank you for listening to the concerns of Wingate landowners as
presented at this time.
U 0_�
__J ' , - y Yr� w 4 *J/ wT L _% %.
Q27d0 /I/ C�„► u�c ,L,,,
I
RECEIVED
November 12 , 19 9 5 N 0 V 13 1995
CITY OF MERIli1A1
WINGATE LANE RESIDENCES WOULD LIKE THE FOLLOWING ISSUES
ADDRESSED FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF A SUBDIVISION ALONG
WINGATE LANE:
1. Inst.allat.ion of a gate on the. ea.Lt and west. side -f
Wingate lane be completed prior to the start of the
subdivision. The gate will be of sufficient qualitv to
discourage outside automobile and foot traffic.
When the two remaining five acre parcels on the south end of
Wingate lane are developed, Wingate Lane will be qated at
the North end of the road. Those two parcels will use public
roads for access. Wingate Lane will dead end prior to the
start of those two developed properties.
'. Details of the irrigation system need to be
established. How will the cnirrent land owner_- rec:ei=Te t.lseir
irrigation water both during construction and vhen the
system is pressurized?
3. The site plans need to include brumes along Dixie
Roberts property and also along Peterson's property.
4. Ve would like to review a copy of the covenants for the
development on Wingate Lane. Issues to be addressed in the
covenants are homeowners dumping over their fence and onto
Wingate Lane and having gates t.1iat. .ac:ces= Wingate Lane.
S. Access by Wingate Lane residents will not be impeded
by work on the sever across the lane and other construction
activities.
h. Construction vehicles will not use Wingate. Lane dura iq
the development of the subdivision.
To: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 6/20/95
Re: Packard Sub No. 2, PNE/Edmunds Application
Gentlemen:
We are residents living immediately adjacent to this proposed project. We compliment the
developer for providing larger size lots in that portion of their plan that abuts our property.
However, we have the following concerns and suggestions for your consideration:
1. Redesign the easterly portion to prevent Wingate Lane from being used by just anyone.
This is a private lane and should be reserved for those residents already living there.
Installation of a limited use barrier/gate at the developers expense might be an answer.
2. Erection of a fence between the subdivision and Carol Sub to the east to prevent
construction debris from blowing onto our property.
3. Complete hydrology studies now being considered and recommended by the City's
Public Works Dept. There are numerous shallow wells in our area ( ours is 88') and
nearby city residents to the west in already established subdivisions are on record as
complaining about poor water pressure. This application should be denied or at the
very least be tabled until the City of Meridian is certain no adverse effect on the water
quality and supply will result from this development.
There has been no effort on the part of the developer to contact residents adjacent to this planned
subdivision to explain their full intentions. This is a policy suggested for all developers in the
county and in the City.
Therefore, we request that you deny or table the application for Packard Sub No. 2 for the
reasons stated. There is nothing in it for the City of Meridian except more strain on an already
stressed infrastructure.
Since ely, `
son & Virgini . Johnso
1083 N. Justin Place
Meridian, Id 83642
1 MHLC T " 5 SUMVt T i M,7
\h 0N1A3AtlI1B Q/Y ,31r3j 'uN Ni11.In1uMf1S W(ry.7ra
T4 au t�sd .t;�rwwsTQ:ta
n
ddZW
s
ri
� 't Y 4 O � } N
�Y u 11=u .` .�; rQ] •9y ¢ VW� _1 a •j�c '
v � al
�l21i
111n.'�IV Wllteu qz.eV
, r
N I
I I,. •N
_ ` � ') x " "r � tr� /� �j1Ik—� , p Tp •� '7'� I -i-�'j', 1
•1 _- {.I 4 •4: •'':. `(s j ' 'VIN "�C p .S �' ri?
y i // •\ ' • any3A
IV
�1 I � y • � it � 1 �f. I � •\) �`S•i, I x ��7 "F16 �!-�.lf+��.aP�T'i�7
2-4 • � s. I \ � _ .i !�+�1 - v n t I 1+' p �. Y . ii •� � rs _a = .I i
I J✓ � '" c1..aY = i:a Y . fs p .� .Yn � � p V
�' ,v •a � � - sk
Imo. .ten.. •c_ I
y g• �_ • • q -fro. , b a s SY �1 ��. Y .s �� w»���� 1 a
� •�iFi d �•e ^�.�1 1, ►r.�iox:.oN
f171
C
w .� .y i' •t 4 ,� �Tlc Y 1 i \;-re \`r� ..�- s `w
',•+t -
I+ —•�- 'i � � I u � x
OCT 27 '95 10:47
TOTAL P.02
PAnF AD
02/09/1994 12:50 2088871680 B PAGE 02
1059 Justin Place
Meridian, ID 83642
March 10, 1997
Anna Doty
Meridian city Hall
33 E. Idaho St.
Meridian, ID 83642
p&CEiVED
MAR 1 0 1997
(QTY OF MERIDIAN
Re: PNE/Edmonds Construction proposed annexing, zoning and
preliminary plat hearing scheduled for March 11, 1997.
Dear Ms. Doty,
Since I cannot be at the meeting, I wish to have this letter
entered into testimony.
I insist that the developer be required to provide perimeter
fencing of the solid, six feet high type around the entire
project. Also the open ditch(es) that cross or border the
project will have to be tiled and covered.
Further, I feel that specific limits on the times that noise- and
dust -making machinery are allowed to be in operation should be
made part of the approval, if granted.
Si ely,
nis Hrockwa
MAR 10 '97 08:20 2088871680 PAGE.02
02/09/1994 12:50 2088871680 B
Avery
juicy fax.
N
U
PI
Date: '7- ap �� pages to follow: / --
/L��i'�i'�
From:
Comments: �,,¢Ie ow&
Dee eroakway, FAX 2"487-1680
K you do not receive all of these pages, please call 208-887-1390.
PAGE 01
MAR 10 '97 08:19 2086871680 PAGE.01
Mar -10-97 09:33A Dr Doom ZO8 887 3666 P_01
1131 JUSTIN PLACE
MERIDIAN, OHO 83642-5717
AAS
�.. )0�-97
l� .ma c �v� �s_ Qt ., c ► 'L �; s,i/ 1 —14, w
t��-t%�� ..�::u ��,�C.. �"✓a ..fin.. a.P��-r�c..�
2.
r
cell . .... A A n eAr4,e�,
�a�.�. �-�e.a.� a•�"�..v ,.k.a.�v,�-...�1� cu-a�-t.�"c�l uth.�n .�
t-2,CA 1� C7�t7LAV-I, ckl�-"f-j ZA-.k
UC4, -
V I..
MAR 10 '97 09:3e 208 687 3666 PAGE. 01
ADMITTED TO PRACTICE
IDAHO
LAW OFFICE
OF
TEXAS KENNETH O. KREIS
ILLINOIS PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
P.O. BOX 4811
BOISE, IDAHO 83711
Helen and Dale Sharp
2445 Wingate Lane
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sharp:
6901 EMERALD, SUITE 207
BOISE, IDAHO 83704-8660
October 18, 1995
TEL: (208) 322-5530
FAX: (208) 322-5540
RECEIVED
Irv131995
Of Of mtli otv'
RE: Review of Private Road Agreement
Dated June 13, 1913
I have had the opportunity to review the Private Road Agreement identified as Instrument
Number 49375 dated June 13, 1913 concerning that certain private road bordering your property
situated in Meridian, Idaho and legally described in the attached true and correct copy of said
Private Road Agreement. Upon review of said document, and after conducting some research
at the Idaho State Law Library, I have made an assessment as to the validity of said Agreement
and the legal ramifications of construction of a road across the private road herein for the
purposes of building and expanding a subdivision utilizing said crossroad.
Initially, I would indicate the Private Road Agreement on its face appears to be a valid
legal contract binding all the parties who executed said Agreement. The legal question arises
as to the binding effect of said Agreement on successors in interest inasmuch as this Agreement
was executed over 80 years ago. The Agreement lacks a clause in which the parties agree to
bind themselves, their successors and assigns so that it has an inherent weakness in reference
to the failure to include such a provision in the Agreement when drafted in 1913. However,
even acknowledging such limitation, it appears that the practical effect of the Agreement, the
continuing consistent interpretation placed upon the Private Road Agreement by the parties and
their successors in interest and the continued use of said road by the parties bordering said road
would likely signify that all parties to the Agreement and their successors in interest effectively
recognize the existence of an easement by necessity for use of the private road even assuming
that the court were to declare the Private Road Agreement not binding or enforceable against
any current lot owner bordering said private road.
In essence, an easement by necessity arises wherein part of a tract is conveyed as a result
of a severance of a portion of the tract, and the part conveyed or retained is deprived of legal
access to a public road. The proof of an easement by necessity requires a unity of ownership
Helen and Dale Sharp
October 18, 1995
Page 2
prior to division of the land, a necessity for the easement at the time of the severance and a great
present necessity to continue the easement therein. It appears from my understanding of the
facts that all of these elements are satisfied by the situation involving the private road in question
so that even if the Private Road Agreement was not enforceable, you would have the legal right
to enforce an easement by necessity and/or other alternative easement rights in court.
The establishment of a crossroad which effectively divides your private road by actions
of one of the adjacent property owners for purposes of developing the Packard Subdivision
would conceivably constitute a violation of the easement and entitle you to seek injunctive relief
in court inasmuch as such action would greatly overburden the existing easement and would also
violate the intent of the Private Road Agreement in any respect.
In reference to the issue as to whether or not the private road could be construed as a
public road, it appears evident that there is no statutory basis pursuant to Idaho Code Section
40-202, and relevant Idaho case law, including Cox v. Cox 84 Idaho 513,373 P2nd 929 (1962),
to support the idea that the proposed crossroad to be built across the private road would in any
way satisfy the test for being a public road so that unless the County or Highway District
undertook some affirmative action to declare the road a public road and/or record same as a
public road in compliance with said statute, your private road would remain a private road and
you would retain the right to enforce same in court. Based upon the facts as represented to me,
it appears that there is no satisfaction of statutory criteria to declare the private road a public
road in any respect under the current factual situation.
As such, it appears that you would have valid legal grounds upon which to bring a legal
action against the developer or any other adjacent land owner who attempts to build a road
crossing your existing private road for purposes of building a subdivision which would
significantly expand the use and/or interference with your easement and/or Private Road
Agreement. Furthermore, I believe that you would have a very good chance of prevailing in
court and obtaining injunctive relief against said developer or parties.
I hope that this brief assessment assists you in your review and consideration of this
matter and the course of action that you intend to take herein.
Sincerely,
Kenneth O. Kreis
KOK/tb
MAR
March 8, 1997
To: Meridian Planning and Zoning
From: Residents of Wingate Lane
Meridian, Idaho
The following issues have been raised by residents who reside on Wingate Road as
concerns that we would like to have considered when reviewing the Packard Subdivision
zoning proposal at your meeting on March 11 m.
Wingate Lane has served the residents of the adjoining properties since July 9,1913 when
a private road agreement, Instrument Number 49375, was subscribed and signed before a
notary public. This document established an easement for the Sharp property and has
continued to provide right of ways for the homeowners living on the lane.
In 1990, Ada County Zoning Board ruled that the Peterson property should be the last
new residence to be allowed access on the lane. Ada County Planning and Zoning
addressed concerns of Wingate Lane residents when declaring that no more egress to new
homes would be allowed due to heavy traffic on a private lane while considering a
proposed home site on property owned by the Holladays. That lot was ruled to have
access only off Ustick, not Wingate Lane.
We question if the selling off of the two existing homes and their respective lots on the
Brown and Kirkpatrick properties were legal. Isn't that illegal subdividing when no
subdivision has been approved.
Since 1994, we have opposed any development that would change the status of our rural
setting and impact the traffic on our road. We have attended endless Planning and
Zoning and Ada County Highway meetings to defend our land and our rural way of life.
We now resubmit our proposal that the properties of Packard Subdivision be denied any
use of our lane and ask for denial of annexation of this property.
Should Packard Subdivision be approved, we would like to have our privacy insured by
the following requirements:
1. Berms and fencing around the subdivision.
2. A gate across the Nampa -Meridian Easement,
3. Any work on irrigation laterals be completed in the irrigation off-season (October -
April). Irrigation rights will be maintained and not interrupted for homeowners of
Wingate Lane.
4. Gates wherever public roads stub up to Wingate Lane to be erected immediately upon
the commencement of work on the subdivision. These gates will be of sufficient
quality to discourage outside automobile and foot traffic.
5. No access on Wingate Lane for construction workers and/or their equipment.
6. Access for residents will not be impeded by work on sewer or other construction.
7. We would like assurance that covenants of Packard Subdivision will prohibit the
dumping of refuse and grass clippings over their fences onto Wingate Lane.
2 L"
';7
ADMITTED TO PRACTICE LAW OFFICE TEL: (208) 322-5530
IDAHO OF FAX: (208) 322-5540
TEXAS KENNETH O. KREIS
ILLINOIS PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
P.O. BOX 4811
BOISE, IDAHO 83711
6901 EMERALD, SUITE 207
BOISE, IDAHO 83704-8660
October 18, 1995
Helen and Dale Sharp
2445 Wingate Lane
Meridian, Idaho 83642
RE: Review of Private Road Agreement
Dated June 13, 1913
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sharp:
I have had the opportunity to review the Private Road Agreement identified as Instrument
Number 49375 dated June 13, 1913 concerning that certain private road bordering your property
situated in Meridian, Idaho and legally described in the attached true and correct copy of said
Private Road Agreement. Upon review of said document, and after conducting some research
at the Idaho State Law Library, I have made an assessment as to the validity of said Agreement
and the legal ramifications of construction of a road across the private road herein for the
purposes of building and expanding a subdivision utilizing said crossroad.
Initially, I would indicate the Private Road Agreement on its face appears to be a valid
legal contract binding all the parties who executed said Agreement. The legal question arises
as to the binding effect of said Agreement on successors in interest inasmuch as this Agreement
was executed over 80 years ago. The Agreement lacks a clause in which the parties agree to
bind themselves, their successors and assigns so that it has an inherent weakness in reference
to the failure to include such a provision in the Agreement when drafted in 1913. However,
even acknowledging such limitation, it appears that the practical effect of the Agreement, the
continuing consistent interpretation placed upon the Private Road Agreement by the parties and
their successors in interest and the continued use of said road by the parties bordering said road
would likely signify that all parties to the Agreement and their successors in interest effectively
recognize the existence of an easement by necessity for use of the private road even as umin
that the court were to declare the Private Road Agreement not binding or enforceable against
any current lot owner bordering said private road.
In essence, an easement by necessity arises wherein part of a tract is conveyed as a result
of a severance of a portion of the tract, and the part conveyed or retained is deprived of legal
access to a public road. The proof of an easement by necessity requires a unity of ownership
Helen and Dale Sharp
October 18, 1995
Page 2
prior to division of the land, a necessity for the easement at the time of the severance and a great
present necessity to continue the easement therein. It appears from my understanding of the
facts that all of these elements are satisfied by the situation involving the private road in question
so that even if the Private Road Agreement was not enforceable, you would have the legal right
to enforce an easement by necessity and/or other alternative easement rights in court.
The establishment of a crossroad which effectively divides your private road by actions
of one of the adjacent property owners for purposes of developing the Packard Subdivision
would conceivably constitute a violation of the easement and entitle you to seek injunctive relief
in court inasmuch as such action would greatly overburden the existing easement and would also
violate the intent of the Private Road A#reement in any respect.
In reference to the issue as to whether or not the private road could be construed as a
public road, it appears evident that there is no statutory basis pursuant to Idaho Code Section
40-202, and relevant Idaho case law, including Cox v. Cox 84 Idaho 513,373 P2nd 929 (1962),
to support the idea that the proposed crossroad to be built across the private road would in any
way satisfy the test for being a public road so that unless the County or Highway District
undertook some affirmative action to declare the road a public road and/or record same as a
public road in compliance with said statute, your private road would remain a private road and
you would retain the right to enforce same in court. Based upon the facts as represented to me,
it appears that there is no satisfaction of statutory criteria to declare the private road a public
road in any respect under the current factual situation.
As such, it appears that you would have valid legal grounds upon which to bring a legal
action against the developer or any other adjacent land owner who attempts to build a road
crossing your existing private road for purposes of building a subdivision which would
significantly expand the use and/or interference with your easement and/or Private Road
Agreement. Furthermore, I believe that you would have a very good chance of prevailing in
court and obtaining injunctive relief against said developer or parties.
I hope that this brief assessment assists you in your review and consideration of this
matter and the course of action that you intend to take herein.
Sincerely,
(0.
Kenneth O. Kreis
KOK/tb
M
pockY�e...�w•�ewRf Lnl•w.'1M .-...t..ry T!•rtT1=.....�y.�.._..�.r ,.
t;30
� � _ V Or..�...„�.6,WbO..i >iJLSY daG ... .,.... ..-�.LtyY:1_.. � ._.moi+•:..L-l_.�.... ..
InstrumorA Nur•:ber 49875.
!•A;•."anont h;+ i
'Cynthia Aldrich et a1
vr�rreKrrererrreer&egave
Private road a.�reeront.
This ASL-.cnt :►im bar and.{ b�kL aryl b1t.ween the parties hereto AS rollofar t.o—tjtt;
Whereas vo Syr:hia Alarich by ?red Arians, Iiarry.L.Yost, C.F:.Ven Auker, L.A.iAsaiean, h.A.
Nahla, b9'-n� ot4l0rs of•%1 a several tracts of lane+ •;onstitutin;; anal bovieriny )n tre
oast lint o, the FAst halt )f the North 'Wort quartor of roction 5 Towmhlp 3 Yorth of
RarQo 1 Fast of Boi cl uerid.ani enrl b3 ciosirbas-.o; opentn, and maintainini G privpre res.c+
alor.- the said ling baain.^.=cY a' the public lil ►- ray f onning too north line of maid
meotion S, a.:V runnin; sous i alonj the said Fant line or the said F- of the NW -4 of saki
Sao. 5 beirc the half &eotior. lino, to ;.:ye South -:sat corror of the said IrFF of said
ioction 5, the mp.id road to to 15 'eot in ;ridth. Now t:ero: ore we the urrlermittnarl r:o
i
horeby &Zreo %n anri with each other and bind ours•31ves and our mucensmors as owm” of tro
several traota abuttin;; on the sairi halt section .lino, that wo will open Fn1 r..tntairf a
priva*." roaA 151,h feet :n ..1,1th, the 'half sectior lire corotitutind tho east ino of ti,.n
s -.1d rood, that the ,airi roar{ shall be for/t1,6 ame of all of the 0ti4mrs of the sairl tro-:ts
with equkl ri:itm'as to the use of tho same, in •11itrp • r1-rnreof we have hornynto -tot our
hands and afri:oed our sec is thio 12th day of .lune, 1913.,
Harry.L.Yost
C.f.Van Auker
%rnt•hip. Alirich b; Frnd Ada:rs.
H.-J.Uahla
I.. A.:,exison
i qub*cr11*d in z:V Frosence and sworn to bn"oru me by C.K.Van Auker thin 13th day or
June 1913.0
Edwarri ;its in,
(seal) Notary Publi,.
1 ,
Subsori bad in presenia aM mwornto bor oro me by Farry.I,.Yost, Fred Aslan H.J.
f l!ahla and L.A.lAwison thin 9th day of July 1;1-13.,
• R. C. Pf arr le .
(Seal)
tlotary Public.
Racordod at thm request of Harry Yomt at 2:25 p.m. .Tiny 25t.h, 1913 Fye 601..,
March 10, 1997
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Meridian
RE: Packard Subdivision #2
Public Hearing Hearing March 11, 1997
To Whom It May Concern:
I Floyd F. Reichert, reside at 2575 Wingate N. Lane, would like to go on record that I
and my wife Kathy are in favor of the development of the Brown and Borup properties
into Packard Subdivision #2.
We would like the developers to fence the perimeters of the development before
construction is started. Also irrigation water (supply and waste) from Nampa Meridian
Irrigation District be tiled 100% back to the lateral.
We would ask that the public street running east and west adjoining our property line
to the east (called E. Meadowgrass street on the preliminary plat) be developed
100% to the property line with us being able to access the public right of way without
disruption.
Also the pubic street running east and west to the north of our property line (called E.
Challis Street on the preliminary plat) adjoining ours with two (2) access. One being N.
Devlin Ave on preliminary plat and the other at the northeast corner of our property
where Wingate Lane crosses E. Challis with a 50' or approved width that Ada County
Highway District will accept in the future. With these two accesses developed 100% to
the property line with us being able to access the public right of way without
disruption.
We would like the developer to install curb and sidewalk on the east side of Wingate
Lane between E. Challis and E. Meadowgrass.
We ask for these considerations of the developers to protect the value of our property
and home and also to provide future development of our property with the
communities best interest with access roads for smooth flowing traffic through the
adjoining subdivisions.
We will not be in town on the date of this meeting but are very much concerned and
would like an opportunity to hear others testimony and express our concerns.
Thank -you for our consideration.
Floy F. Rei ert
WOW-,
W
fD
�f.•'�ry
�`
L iC 1 ,�
1m"2
1 9b65
9�6�
IOM:
i^
1551t-
12,
4f
Zvi
r
_
30
1
�
1
�Id14RP „_
r
t
eracr
1
- --- Vie.'``'<:
�
OY !4` �_ •�s.
..
,.� fi {s 1
I ,• U� ,
12, 93 • 373P�4 >
P k24 s. ,
f AM&
ism
i
' =.MATCH
LINE 'SHEET .!
..=
From (208) 887-1561
Anna Doty
Meridian City Hall
33 E. Idaho St.
Meridian, ID 83642
to 8874813 at 03/11/97 12:03a Pg 001/00'
March 10, 1997
Scarr's
MAN1107 Justin Place
Meridian, ID 83642
Ph: (208)887-0933 .9 y o
RE: PNEJEdmonds Construction Application for annexation, zoning change, and
Preliminary
Plat approval for Packard Subdivision No. 2
Dear Ms. Doty;
I wish to offer the following as testimony for the public hearing to be held March 11, 1997.
I have three concerns about the approval the Packard Subdivision No. 2. First, there is
the irrigation ditch that parallels the my adjoining property line. This ditch has been
problem in past years, primarily due to lack of maintenance. I request the provisions be
stipulated for it s enclosure. Second, I request that a stipulation be included which will
require that a solid six to eight foot high privacy fence be constructed around the perimeter
of the subdivision prior to completion of the first dwelling. Finally, I request that
stipulations be included that restrict exterior building, grading, paving, and landscaping
activities to the hours between 8:OOam and 6:OOpm, Monday through Saturday ( no work
on Sunday).
Sincerly;
Richard A. Scarr
MAR 11 '97 00:10 C208)887-1561 PAGE.01
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: February 11 1997
APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:__.L& & 2
REQUEST: ANNEXATION20NING/PRELIMINAR(PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
COMMENTS
cl d
f -r -L- �4 /11
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
Id -
it
^^K A
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
VE RN ALI - EMAN,
PH
WIERUJIftiN, !D kMQ