HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter from Meuleman Mollerup Attorney
~~
i,. I. ~1;:':1~. ..;;".
_:fJ::Y~( ,:,;
'.""''';''1
'" :1,.~:~I;
I1frJ
Meuleman
Molleru p ,-_:
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Richard W. Mollerup
mollerup@lawidaho.com
September 21,2006
City Council
City of Meridian
33 E. Idaho Avenue
Meridian, ID 83642
RECEIVED
Re: Application No. AZ-06-028, Touchstone Place Subdivision;
Applicant: Horizon Developments, LLC
Our File No. 5811.002
..(....,.L. -'j. ,
....~, " . ' :
City of Meridiaa
City Clerk 0ffiIre
Dear Honorable Council Members:
This firm represents Horizon Developments in connection with Touchstone Place
Subdivision and its applications for annexation to the City of Meridian and preliminary plat
approval scheduled to be heard by the City Council on September 26, 2006. In connection
therewith, I felt it necessary to respond to the letters to the City of Meridian by Pamela D.
Ferry, counsel for the Howell Family Trust.
Horizon Developments is under contract with Clarence Morgan to purchase the
property to be developed as Touchstone Place Subdivision (referred to herein as the
"Morgan Property"). The Howell Family Trust owns or owned adjacent property (referred to
herein as the "Howell Property"). The Howell Property abuts the Morgan Property on the
east boundary line, the south boundary line and a sma!! portion of the west boundary line. I
have enclosed a photocopy of a portion of a record of survey prepared by Gordon
Anderson, the surveyor employed by Howells, showing the potential boundary issues.
In Ms. Ferry's e-mail dated September 11, 2006 to Caleb Hood, Justin Lucas and
Anna Canning, she describes the issues as (i) the previous improper annexation of a
portion of the Howell Property in the Crestwood Annexation to the City of Meridian, and (ii)
Touchstone's [presumably Horizon Developments'] failure to comply with the terms of a
encroachment removal agreement. The first issue referenced by Ms. Ferry is not an issue
that involves Horizon Developments. There are also other property line issues between the
Howell Property and adjoining property to the west; however, those issues do not affect
Horizon Developments or its proposed subdivision. With regard to the boundary issues
960 Broadway Avenue, Suite 500 . Boise, Idaho 83706. 208.342.6066 . Fax: 208.336.9712
www.lawidaho.com
City Council
City of Meridian
September 21,2006
Page 2
between the Howell Property and Morgan Property, the primary issue relates to the
entryway into the Morgan Property, which is described of record as having a width of 85
feet. The westerly fence line of the Howell Property encroaches into that 85 foot section
approximately 10 to 12 feet. That portion is shaded on the attached copy of Gordon
Anderson's survey and referred to herein as the "Disputed Property".
I am unfamiliar with the encroachment removal agreement referred to in Ms. Ferry's
letter. However, there does exist a property line agreement recorded July 30, 1960 which
recognizes the fence lines and the correct boundary lines. However, with regard to the 85
foot entryway into the Morgan Property, that fence line agreement appears to be negated by
a Quitclaim Deed from Thomas Everett Howell and Maxine Howell to Clarence Morgan and
Verna Morgan recorded October 1, 1982, which, by metes and bounds description, deeds
the entire 85 foot entryway to Mr. and Mrs. Morgan. There also appears to be an
agreement between adjoining landowners whereby the Morgans and the Howells agreed to
employ Gordon Anderson to do a lot line adjustment and replace the 1982 Quitclaim Deed
to correct the legal description. However, that agreement was entered into in June of 2005,
significantly after the date of the contract under which Horizon Developments is purchasing
the Howell Property (including the Disputed Property), which is dated December 1, 2004.
Contrary to Ms. Ferry's assertions in her letter, we have had conversations with Ms.
Ferry regarding this issue in which we have repeatedly informed her that we do not intend to
fight over this issue. Horizon Developments is willing to convey the Disputed Property to
the Howells so long as it does not affect its development of the property and subsequent to
the City Council's approval of its applications for annexation and preliminary plat. Please
note that the boundary description of the proposed subdivision before the City Council does
not include the Disputed Property, nor does it include the other potential overlap of the
approximate west 15 feet of the south 41 feet of the Howell Property.
I respectfully request that the City Council act on Horizon Developments'
applications without addressing the concerns in Ms. Ferry's letter for the following two
reasons. First, I believe that property line issues between private parties are not within the
purview of the City Council. Second, and probably most importantly, the proposed
subdivision for the property does not include the Disputed Property.
Finally, I note and wish to inform the Council that I have been informed by Ms. Ferry
that they are in the process of closing, and may have already closed, on a sale of the
Howell Property. I contacted the title company and was informed that the sale of the Howell
Property is based upon the description of the Howell Property currently existing of record
and does not include the Disputed Property. I believe, but have not confirmed, that the sale
is to Crestwood. Notwithstanding the sale, Horizon Developments intends to convey the
Disputed Property to whoever is the owner of the Howell Property subsequent to the
approval of its development without that property.
City Council
City of Meridian
September 21, 2006
Page 3
I apologize that I will be out of town on September 26 and will not be able to attend
the hearing; however, my partner, Mike Baldner, plans to attend in my stead to answer any
questions the Council may have. Also, representatives of Briggs Engineering will be
present to answer any questions regarding the legal descriptions.
RWM:mlh
Enclosure
cc: Anna Canning, Planning Director (660 W. Water Tower Lane)
William Nary, City Attorney
1:\5811.002\CORR\Meridian City Council L01.00C
l
-lIj
~'----
I--
lJJ
<.n
LOT 1
N78'45'39"E:
7.22'
,,:tJ
fi
f}.
2641.02' - SECTION UHf ~ ~
G--------___~--
101.86'
----.~~--~-~-~
208.71'
Cl
..
a
ct;
o
a.
I
Ix
I
1
U/,f;
"C'\I x
'f C)~7~
ID
~I
~~
~i~'~
"'co
b 1 LOT 10
21
<Il,
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
",I
~I"
!flr:;;
Q'crl
t'>/<5
g'''l
tnl
Dffr) LlIIE~
~
,f
G<:(
~ FENCE LINE ffiCl.f
I '""0 AGfIW'ENT
DEED lJNE ~
'!
;;;..
~
g'
~
FENIX UNE ""'"
r960 AGIifE&/fNT
'\
589"28'06"[ 14.68'
LOT 9
3,177
0.07 0
1>,s~,.rr D
P p."pe ~,:l' y
<.0
c:i
:z:
:z:
o
i7J
:>::--....
a <.0
~ 13
lI) 0
--J
Q;;~
~
::0-
ct:
::J
(l)
:z:
'<(
Cl
<0
'"
d
<0
....
._oj
LOT 11
,l<J
10
!fl
....
t'>
g
:<:
LOT 12
LOT 13
LOT 14
N89'42'3fj,-'W
~
<l:
'"
~
'"
~
:i
403.29'
I
I LOT 2
1
I
I
I
I
,
1
I
I
,
I
I
n
IN
RI
C(
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 5
LOT 4
LOT 1