Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
T & R Construction
CITY OF MERIDIAN 728 Meridian St. Meridian, ID 83642 VARIANCE APPLICATION (RE: Meridian Zoning Ordinance %—,/ 0 NAME: d /-11) Owner or holder of Valid -option) ADDRESS: GENERAL LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: ,Lo' s / V4 P,-&( PHONE kSJO- � Q 30,E 0- PROOF OF OWNERSHIP OR VALID OPTION: A copy of your property deed or option agreement must be attached. PRESENT ZONE CLASSIFICATIONL VICINITY SKETCH: A vicinity map at a scale approved by the Mayor showing property lines, streets existing and proposed zoning and such other items as the Mayor may require. SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS: A list of all property owners and addresses within contiguous to, directly across the street from, and within a 300' radius of the parcel (s) proposed for a Variance must be attached. (This information is available from the County Assessor.) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED VARIANCE: ir:1-1-0 4 0-e-- 2 SIGNATURE:�� CITY COUNCIL RECORDS Date Received/ Cit Council Hearin Date Received d k .orae � 1 II ON 0�, ali LL'CCC{ yE; �.00.{Le *N \ 3 .WALa w o � �b v b • I 3 .00dw 'N i a a - 3 .00.{L0 'N ) -�eoroo{ �1$ js • { 3.0am al IL o �I Amt bl II I _ 1 '•I o I 1 j i 1 I i i r I I I :�,-':;# ...-: iz.+:��x�i • 3?#:•F'wY�,'±ak r_`h_ . ' �^ _.. «:� �T„a�l'� --: �,:riPdts*`kr'���9?':�f '4� �•�r,-��::��°+'.siy-t: amiVldNn 3 -wood - - - - - - --- - /34941 - - is �8-- �. --��� - - ---------- - --- -- - - - - �� 7l0 ( ---- Aw- 40 _ � r n �cn00X0 i NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., on December 20, 1988, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of T & R Construction for a variance at Franklin and Linder Roads (South side) on mots 1 thru 14, Block 31 and Lots 1 thru 9 Block 4 Crestwood Estates #3. The Applicant proposes to construct a 4 foot fence on a 5 foot burm running parallel to Franklin. A more particular legal description is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Meridian and is available upon request. DATED thiszz--Iday of November, 1988. K -WIMANN./CITY CLERK AMBROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Telephone 8884481 • L- l z O V) : i m0 C) 0 W $ '� Z Z��..I�I� Z�Z W gO�F-ZU ' �- V1LL. 0 006 WZo CL —C)Z< Q U Z LLI • LLJ o - O V LLJ ry U Y ro, _ C!�I�m M -M 1.00,LL0 — m \ I _ I N g ODD i I D N '3 .00,&LO 'N �f l01 pN 0��\ 3 .00•tL0 'N tr x9.66 •M_00,LLO s N Ile I $I 3 .00•lLO 'N m .O9 IFI 0 u M X00 LI.O S Im l n o w AM m .00•06 .00,LLO 'S ,00'OSL 3 .00.LL0 'N .09 F \ CN 101 18 I \Q 8 M \ I gl Im � to � \ m I \ .00•o9L \ .00•ofi 3 .00•LLO 'N M .00.lLO S I IF1 CO y o p � h1 101 m � .00•osl I \ (\ CnD 3 .00,LLO 'N . v°ii •00'06 O • p 'M .00.LLO 'S Wiai d Q,1L N 0kz- ` OI U p N I^ .00'09t $ o d L\ n 1 X13 �I W 3 .00,LLO 'N p "' aolol Y W13 $ $I �Iml OJ o GO M g UI$ 00'06 � Q ' m 'M .OD.LLO 'S 3 .00• L.0 'N Z^ � m ` O 1 .00.09& 00 06 3 3 .00,LLO 'N I 'M .00.LLO 'S (91 I \/p5\ I $) .00.0sL I Q� 3 .00,LLO 'N n IF 1 c`LI 00'06 r— 'M .00ALO 'S I 3 .00jLO 'N �g$� '-I-0 191 I IFI No ,019 \ I91 �va� m oDofi moi' ,Op �I Mpg 'M .00,LLO •S I 0—.001 '3 .00.09 0 3 .ao.tl.o 'N 1 .00,ILO 'N `� �G�' I8F'1 t,M © "3oI 1\ 00 o I .ob'Ssl d? 0 f�1jj 0.04— u� h � ,�1 ,sc•ee � 1 r I V 1 9 (C4 ,LZ'CZ, 3 .00•LLO 'N I � ,29'86 'M .0031.0 'S O ISI p s\v a+ zs88 04 ImI• M oo "-- ii'84L 1 v 1 r ISI 0 3 .00,1.1.0 N %M__.00 .019. I ISI � r� � aovc —,00•x ,� Cly Im I o m 00.08 �� \ „0'� M .00.&&.0 'S .00 -Oct I ,0 9 S \ N �O i SI I$ ISI _ \Q $ \ ISI � `n � \ c; I \ mI ,00'041 \ .00'08 3 .00•LLO 'N 'M .00.LL0 'S O CO nl m I S 1,Y) ISI \ I CO ,00.041. \ aD 3 .00.1.1.0 'N W - u°1i ,00'08 O II M p Q$ M .00.1.1.0 5 � 0 LO m `n I' $ .o0'Osl 3 a •d- �\ n 1 013 u>I W 3 .00.11.0 'N H \O I gl� w m i Y 11*bo W13 D I VIS�� 3 161 0 p nb m v0008 0 0l I m \ 3 m M .00.,1.0 s a0 ,00rosL oil i O z Q. ml 3 .00.1.1.0 Z Z C� S In\ O SI z I coIrn O a o I mm \ c ml a I ,00•04t ,00.08 3 3 .00•LLO -N 'M .00.1,0 'S i Im m S \ \ r> I SI m co o co .oo'osL I G` 3 .00,LLO 'N n 00'06 .000,,0 s .00'05L _ m I $ � n I of 3 3 .00,LLO 'N z =)w U Z M O C 07 � m \ "1 � CL N` a l I LL V f�1jj 0.04— u� h � ,�1 ,sc•ee � 1 r I V 1 9 (C4 ,LZ'CZ, 3 .00•LLO 'N I � ,29'86 'M .0031.0 'S O ISI p s\v a+ zs88 04 ImI• M oo "-- ii'84L 1 v 1 r ISI 0 3 .00,1.1.0 N %M__.00 .019. I ISI � r� � aovc —,00•x ,� Cly Im I o m 00.08 �� \ „0'� M .00.&&.0 'S .00 -Oct I ,0 9 S \ N �O i SI I$ ISI _ \Q $ \ ISI � `n � \ c; I \ mI ,00'041 \ .00'08 3 .00•LLO 'N 'M .00.LL0 'S O CO nl m I S 1,Y) ISI \ I CO ,00.041. \ aD 3 .00.1.1.0 'N W - u°1i ,00'08 O II M p Q$ M .00.1.1.0 5 � 0 LO m `n I' $ .o0'Osl 3 a •d- �\ n 1 013 u>I W 3 .00.11.0 'N H \O I gl� w m i Y 11*bo W13 D I VIS�� 3 161 0 p nb m v0008 0 0l I m \ 3 m M .00.,1.0 s a0 ,00rosL oil i O z Q. ml 3 .00.1.1.0 Z Z C� S In\ O SI z I coIrn O a o I mm \ c ml a I ,00•04t ,00.08 3 3 .00•LLO -N 'M .00.1,0 'S i Im m S \ \ r> I SI m co o co .oo'osL I G` 3 .00,LLO 'N n 00'06 .000,,0 s r - .00'05L I $ � n I of 3 .00,LLO 'N � � o ,019 \ "1 � ISI N` Im I r vat o0.0s � L �.�. ,,,� M .00,LLo •s .4Z'o4L 'N 00'09 'N g kn Lt, 3 .00.LLO '3 .00.&LO co O, W IS I !^ N I r - Mayor November 30, 1990 T & R Construction P.O. Box 238 Meridian, Idaho 83652 RE: Crestwood #3 In October of 1988 you advised the Meridian City Council that the landscaping along Franklin Road adjacent to Crestwood #3 would be completed that fall. As of this date it still has not been completed. The City of Meridian is requesting that the landscaping be completed as per your prior committment. Sincerely, pc: Mayor & Council File HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY 16 A Good Place to Live COUNCILMEN OFFICIALS JACK NN, City CITY OF MERIDIAN RONALD R. TOLSMA J. S,TreasurerClerk JANICE GASS, Treasurer NICEGA ROBERRTMYERS ROBERT GIESLER BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO MAX YERRINGTON WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR., Attorney EARL WARD, Waste water Supt. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Chairman Zoning a Planning KENNY BOWERS, Fire Chief Phone 888 4433 JIM JOHNSON BILL GORDON, Police Chief GARY SMITH, City Engineer GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor November 30, 1990 T & R Construction P.O. Box 238 Meridian, Idaho 83652 RE: Crestwood #3 In October of 1988 you advised the Meridian City Council that the landscaping along Franklin Road adjacent to Crestwood #3 would be completed that fall. As of this date it still has not been completed. The City of Meridian is requesting that the landscaping be completed as per your prior committment. Sincerely, pc: Mayor & Council File 0 4i5s I� • JANUARY 3, 198 Regular Meeting of the Meridian City Council called to order by Mayor Grant Kingsford at 7:30 p.m.: Members Present: Ron Tolsma, Bert Myers, Bob Giesler, Walt Morrow: others Present: Kevin Robertson, Bob Jossis, William Hon, K. Beumeler, Tim Hepper, Jim Johnson, Gary Smith, Wayne Crookston, Elaine Schlekeway, Paul Stutzman, Terry Beaver, Laura Connors, Moe Alidjani, The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Giesler to approve the Minutes of the previous Meeting held December 20, 1988 as written: Motion Carried: All Yea: Item #1: Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law on Variance Request by T & R Construction: Mayor Kingsford: Council Members you have had those, are there any questions of the Counselor, if not I would entertain a Motion on those Findings. The Motion was made by Giesler and seconded by Morrow that the City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby adopt and approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions as prepared by the City Attorney: Notion Carried: Roll Call Vote: Morrow, Yea: Giesler, Yea: Myers, Yea: Tolsma, Yea: The Motion was made by Morrow and seconded by Giesler that the Variance Request by T & R Construction be denied: Motion Carried: All Yea: Item #2: Bob Jossis: Approval by Council for Release of Funds & Certification Relating to Department of C7m nerce Grant: Jossis: over two weeks ago we cmpleted the Environmental Assessment which was publically advertised in your Meridian Newspaper Provided copies of the document to the City Hall, Library, Senior Citizens Center and the School District for public review and ecnvents, we also provided letters to a number of agencies about twenty I think, describing the project and advising than of the review period and solicting any oamments they might have. We have received written continents about eight that have been sequently provided to the City and each of the place where the documents are. The public caninent period ended Friday of last week, since that time I received one last Friday and two in todays mail, none of the carments frau the agencies had anything negative to say about the project at all, their findings were that it bad no impact on the environment at all. When the Public Notice was filed the finding of no significant impact was included by the City and the action tonite by the City Council basically certify based upon the public mmlent received that the finding of no significant impact is indeed still valid and authorizing the Mayor to request release of funds for the project. Mayor Kingsford: Any questions of Mr. Jossis, if there are none I would entertain a Motion. The Notion was made by Myers and seconded by Tolsma to approve of the findings of 9 ` . rMl AMBROSE. FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attomsps turd Counselors P.O. Boz 427 Meridian, Idaho 83842 Telephone 88""1 0 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MERIDIAN APPLICATION OF T & R CONSTRUCTION FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE FENCE ORDINANCE AT CRESTWOOD ESTATES # 3 SUBDIVISION FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled variance request having come on for consideration on December 20, 1988, at approximately 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the City Council having heard and taken oral and written testimony, the City Council of the City of Meridian makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of the public hearing on the variance was published for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing for December 20, 1988, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the December 20, 1988 hearing; that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations. 2. That the notice of public hearing is required to be sent to property owners within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the land being considered pursuant to 11-2-416 E AMBROSE. FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. BOX 427 Maddlan, Idaho 83842 Telept"M 8881181 0 and 11-2-419 D of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met. 3. That the Applicant is the owner of much of the subject property and is the developer of Crestwood Estates # 3. That many of the other lots in the subject property have been sold and are now owned by third parties two of whom testified at the hearing. 4. That the property is zoned R-4 Residential and has been developed in that fashion and there are single-family dwellings located in the subdivision. 5. That the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, 11-9-605 J, Fences, limit the maximum height of a fence in a residential district to six (6) feet; that Section 11-9-605 J. 4. also states that walls, latticework and screens shall be considered to be fences. 6. That the Applicant has requested a variance to construct a Four (4) foot fence on top of the berm that is adjacent to Franklin Road; that the top of the berm, i.e., where the proposed fence is to be located is not on the property line of the lots abutting Franklin Road but there is an approximate space of ten feet between the proposed location of the fence and the righ-of-way line of Franklin Road. 7. That the berm is a soil landscaping berm and is adjacent to Franklin Road; that the berm is between 3 feet and 3 feet 8 inches higher than the proposed sidewalk which Applicant proposes to construct next to Franklin Road. AMBROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Ariomeye and Counaelora P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83842 Telephone888401 is 8. That the top of the berm is approximately 5 feet higher than the grade or level ground of Lot 4, Block 3, Crestwood Estates # 3. 9. That the grade level of Crest Wood Drive is apporximately 1 foot 7 inches lower than the grade level of Franklin Road. 10. That there is an existing fence in Crestwood Estates # 1 which also abutts Franklin Road and which is constructed of wood and brick; that this fence was constructed prior to the adoption of the Zoning, Development and Subdivision Ordinances; that the top of the wood portion of the fence is approximately 6 feet in height and the top of the wood portion is about 4 feet 9 inches above the south edge of the pavement of Franklin Road; that the top of the wood portion of this fence is approximately 1 foot 7 inches above the top of the berm. 11. That if a four foot fence were constructed on top of the berm and measuring from the proposed sidewalk adjacent to Franklin Road there would be a total fence height of approximately 7 feet 3 inches to 7 feet 8 inches; that measuring from Crest Wood Drive, at Lot 4 Block 3, the proposed 4 foot addition would make a fence of approximately 9 feet. 12. That the berm was placed there by a prior owner of Crestwood Estates # 3; it is not a natural berm; that the berm has been there approximately seven years; that prior to the placement of the berm the area was level and the approximate same f a® ;s c�Sg .. Y T€`? y Way gFM xrk 2, kr, h ff a—TTs .5;a1 fi yes � W 9 i�u"k dtry F H F t .f t" k,, f a® Mal AMBROSE, FI ZGERALD &CROOKSTON Attuneye mid Counse►oro P.O. Box 427 WL Nato 83842 Telephone 88&4481 grade as the lots in the subdivision. 13. That the topography of the general area is flat and level; that there are no significant slopes or ground variations of natural occurence in the general vicinity. 14. That Franklin Road is designated as a principal arterial street in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 15. That the lots in question which abutt the berm abutt both Franklin Road and Crest Wood Drive and have frontage on both roads. 16. That the Ada County Highway District submitterd comment that found that Applicant was requesting a variance to construct a four foot fence on a five foot berm. 17. That the Applicant and his representative stated that they were asking for an approximate variance of from 8 to 14 inches from the 6 foot maximum fence height; that the berm had been there approximately seven years; that the fence would not create more of a noise problem for an adjacent land owner but would create less noise than a six foot wood fence; that it would cost in excess of $10,000.00 to remove the berm and additional funds to place a 6 foot fence at the location of the existing berm or on the property line; additionally several utilities would have to be relocated that are now in place in the berm; that neither the Applicant nor his representative spcifically addressed the issues of extraordinary hardship, unusual topography, or other physical conditions which were not �I AMBROSF, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Attomeye aid Couneelwe P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 63642 Telephone 688.4461 E A self-inflicted. There was no factual statement, or even represenatation that the enforcement of the fence ordinance would cause a hardship to the Applicant; also, there was no evidence or representation that strict application of the fence ordinance would be unreasonable or impractical. 18. That the base justification presented by the Applicant as justification for the variance was for the safety of small children who do live, or might eventually live, in the homes adjacent to the berm; that there was some testimony that a 4 foot fence was insufficient for the safety of small children and that a 6 foot fence should be constructed. 19. That there was no testimony or evidence presented relating to whether the failure to grant the variance would deprive the Applicant, or the homeowners, of rights or privileges commonly enjoyed by other similar property; nor were there claims or representations that the granting of the variance would not confer on the Applicant or the homeowners any special privilege that is denied by the ordinances to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same zoning district, R-4; there was testimony that if the variance was not allowed the privacy of the lot owners would be reduced since people in vehicles driving along Franklin Road could see into the homes; that this situation is no different than the situation that already exists in Crestwood Estates Subdivision # 1 and exists in other subdivisions in Meridian such as those abutting Cherry Lane. no "h t¢ AMSROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON At[onwYa and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83842 Telephone 88&4487 0 20. That the standard height of fences in residential districts in the City of Meridian for the backyards of homes is six (6) feet normally measured from the ground upon which the fence is located because almost all ground in the City is fairly level; That there does not normally exist in the City of Meridian slopes or ground variations such as are involved in the subject variance request. 21. That two home owners in the subdivision testified in favor of the variance but one indicated that a 6 foot fence would be his preference; that the concern of the two lot owners was for the safety of the children in the subdivision. 22. That there was no testimony given at the hearing in opposition to the application; that the representative for the Applicant did mention the impacts on Mrs. Schlekeway and she had previously objected to the berm and the fence as being a possible cause for increase noise and possible lack of maintenance between the fence and Franklin Road. 23. That the covenants conditions and restrictions for Crestwood Estates Subdivision # 3, submitted for approval by the City Council, state in Article VII, Section 10, as follows: "No fence shall be erected with a height greater than 6 at or behind the front building lime of any residence..." 24. That there is sufficient space between the top of the berm and the existing right-of-way line of Franklin Road to build a six (6) foot fence without a variance from the fence Ordinance; vp'``t'eT�x %'ig ks � ,x AMBROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON AtWnfts end Counselwa P.O. Box 427 Meridian, hMho 83842 Telephone 8M4401 is that such a fence would provide as much protection for the small children in the homes and the subdivision as is provided in any other subdivision in Meridian. CONCLUSIONS 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant to Section 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance and pursuant to 11-9-612 of the Subdivision Ordiance. 3. That the City Council has judged this application by the guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and upon the record submitted to it and the things upon which it may take judicial notice. 4. That the Council may take judicial notice of its own proceedings, those of the Commission, governmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and the State. 5. That while all the provisions of Sections 11-2-419 and 11-9-612 are applicable to the variance, the following specific provisions of those sections are noted as being particularly tom, _s fr +iyy3,. 4 �t i E 1. AMBROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON AtWnfts end Counselwa P.O. Box 427 Meridian, hMho 83842 Telephone 8M4401 is that such a fence would provide as much protection for the small children in the homes and the subdivision as is provided in any other subdivision in Meridian. CONCLUSIONS 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant to Section 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance and pursuant to 11-9-612 of the Subdivision Ordiance. 3. That the City Council has judged this application by the guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and upon the record submitted to it and the things upon which it may take judicial notice. 4. That the Council may take judicial notice of its own proceedings, those of the Commission, governmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and the State. 5. That while all the provisions of Sections 11-2-419 and 11-9-612 are applicable to the variance, the following specific provisions of those sections are noted as being particularly AMBROSE, FITWERALD BCROOKSTON Attomep and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83812 Telephone 8884487 pertinent to the application: 11-2-419 S, Application and Standards for Variances 12. Characteristics of subject property which prevent compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance; 14. Difficulty or hardship which would result if requirements of this Ordinance were applied to subject property; 15. Unusual or pecular circumstances which indicate that regulations of this Ordinance should not be strictly complied with; 16. Statement that special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or buildings involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; 17. Statement that a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance shall deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under terms of this Ordinance; 18. Statement that special conditions or circumstances exist that were not a result of the applicant's action; 19. Statement that granting the variance requested shall not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; 23. A statement of how the granting of the variance would convenience the appplicant and how the applicant would profit therefrom which statement shall also represent whether profit and convenience is the sole reason why the variance is requested. 11-6-612 VARRIANCES 1. Purpose - The Council, as a result of unique ka h § r R t IE ti ",'� rV.i=zsk Pin .. AMBROM FITZGERALD 6 CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83842 Telephone s86448t circumstances (such as topographic - physical limitations or a planned unit development), may grant variances from the provisions of this Ordinance on a finding that undue hardhip results from the strict compliance with specific provisions or requirments of the Ordinance or that application of such provision or requirement is impracticable. 2. Findings - No variance shall be favorably acted upon by the Council unless there is a finding, as a result of a public hearing, that all of the following exist: a. That there are such special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would clearly be impracticable or unreasonable; in such cases, the subdivider shall first state his reasons in writing as to the specific provision or requirement involved; b. That the strict compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the subdivider because of unusual topograghy, other physical conditions or other such conditions which are not self-inflicted, or that these conditions would result in inhibiting the achievement of the objectives of this Ordiancne; c. That the granting of the specific variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area in whcih the property is situated; d. That such variance will not violate the provisions of the Idaho Code; and e. That such variance will not have the effect of nullifying the interest and purpose of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Development Plan. 6. That other specific provions of the Zoning and Development Ordinances are to be noted as follow: 11-2-403 B Definitions: Hardship - An unusual situation on the part of an individual property owner which will not permit him to � xs X =1 AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys and counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83842 Tehrphone8884481 0 11 enjoy the full utilization of his property as is enjoyed by others in the community. A hardship can only exist when it is not self-created. Grade, Established - The curb -line, grade at the lot lines as approved by the Ada County Highway District Engineer or appropriate agency. Lot, Through - A lot other than a corner lot having frontage on two (2) parallel or approximately parallel streets. On a through lot, both street lines shall be deemed front lot lines. Section 11-9-605 J. FENCES, is incorporated herein as if set forth in full but the following specific provisions are specifically noted: 9. Subject to other restrictions contained in this Section, "Fences", the maximum fence heights in each zoning district shall be as follows: a. R-41 R-8, R-15, R-40 & L-0 6.0 feet Also, the following partial provisons from the fence ordiance are noted: 1. In subsection 2 the measurement is made from the grade. 2. In subsection 4 walls, laticework and screens shall be considered to be fences. 3. In subsection 6.b. the measurement is made from the crown of the street. 7. That it is concluded that the soil landscaping berm is a screen as contemplated under 11-9-605 J. 4. and that both the berm and the proposed four (4) foot fence consititute a "fence" under the fencing Ordinance. 8. That in order to place a four (4) foot fence on top of AMBWMF- MWEP" BCROOXWON Attwnsys grid Coiauslors P.O. Box 427 Mwkft ,Idaho t3B42 TahthOM 8B&4481 0 a. That there are no special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions of the fence ordinance would clearly be impracticable or unreasonable; b. That the strict compliance with the requirments of the ordinance would not result in extrordinary hardship to the Applicant because of unusual topography, other physical condiditons or other such conditions which were not self-inflicted C. That there was insufficient evidence presented to the Council as to -the whether the granting of the variance would not be detremental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area and therefore no spcific finding is made thereon; there was some comment that a fence on top of the berm would create less noise than a solid 6 foot wood fence but no specific evidence was presented. d. That the granting of the variance would not violate the Idaho Code. e. That no specific finding is made regarding whether the granting of the variance would nullify the interest and purpose of the ordinance however it is noted that the council has denied requests in the past to exceed the height limitations of the fence ordinance and has enforced the six foot limitation when fences have exceeded that height in the residential areas and the granting of the variance would be allowing a use or privilege not �a k �s� r AMBWMF- MWEP" BCROOXWON Attwnsys grid Coiauslors P.O. Box 427 Mwkft ,Idaho t3B42 TahthOM 8B&4481 0 a. That there are no special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions of the fence ordinance would clearly be impracticable or unreasonable; b. That the strict compliance with the requirments of the ordinance would not result in extrordinary hardship to the Applicant because of unusual topography, other physical condiditons or other such conditions which were not self-inflicted C. That there was insufficient evidence presented to the Council as to -the whether the granting of the variance would not be detremental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area and therefore no spcific finding is made thereon; there was some comment that a fence on top of the berm would create less noise than a solid 6 foot wood fence but no specific evidence was presented. d. That the granting of the variance would not violate the Idaho Code. e. That no specific finding is made regarding whether the granting of the variance would nullify the interest and purpose of the ordinance however it is noted that the council has denied requests in the past to exceed the height limitations of the fence ordinance and has enforced the six foot limitation when fences have exceeded that height in the residential areas and the granting of the variance would be allowing a use or privilege not k �s� �, AMBROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 127 Meddlan, Idaho 83812 Telephonesm"al 0 allowed to other developers and homeowners in other R-4 subdivisions. 13. That it is concluded that while it would be costly to remove or lower the berm or to relocate the utilities that it was not shown that such would be a hardship on the Applicant. 14. That it was not shown that the deniel of the variance would deprive either the Applicant or the lot owners of rights or privileges commonly enjoyed by persons, homes, or land similarly situated. 15. That it is concluded that the granting of the variance would convey to the Applicant and to the homeowners a special privilege that is not available to other land and homeowners owning property in similar R-4 districts in the City of Meridian. This is the case since no other residential subdivision in the City has been allowed to have fences greater than six feet and the granting of the variance would allow a total fence height in excess of seven feet and possibly greater depending on where the measurement was taken. 16. That it is concluded that if there is any hardship suffered by the Applicant it has been the result of the Applicant's own actions or failures to act. 17. That it is spcifically concluded that the Applicant has not met the requirements of the provisions controlling the granting of a variance and the findings required to grant a variance can not be made. 0 0 18. That it is concluded that the safety of the small children in the subdivision is of greatest concern to this Council and it is hoped that the Applicant and the home owners can come to a satisfactory resolution of this fence situation. That it is hoped that such a resolution would be either the removal of the berm and the placement of a six foot fence in its place or the placement of a six foot fence on the property line of the lots and the Franklin Road right-of-way line. That such a resolution would be preferable to this Council but no requirement can be made as to such as it it not an issue before this Council in this variance request. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby adopt and approve these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL: CouncilmanMorrow Voted Councilman Giesler Voted Councilman Myers Voted Councilman Tolsma Voted MayorRingsford (TieBreaker) Voted APPROVED: �R DISAPPROVED: .. AMBROSE. FiTZGERALD 8 CROOKSTON Attmneyeand Cow Wore P.O. Box 127 Meradian, Idaho 83812 Telepiwne 8884181 p#DNX p�4' a ✓"E 1 R� t^ i .s ;Css r:k zr si7 4 dw, f 9 d '.4 � ., =� {p 4 t ^f¢ Wyk 4 E fi4'E74' �p{5'�T`': A..^b _. '#',. " r .+w$ 1� fi$.*fi� 3 6 YY;� y �� .». £# y ` �Y+ Ak' S3 1 KS' $ }f SF" ,y k ��41 t F r2 a PA � r Rh 1 3 e 9 v s`. 3 , s ay n't s S-. r� ± K ,. Yk x Yk ..k„ x7Y i ;.' 4A $ r �5„! •'� E`" {-� zs wl '� "�4 �'C!A Fl`• Yr4;y5 T #"#y3r.f $ @ .;.�fS �J'" �C{lrc ys 4y✓3'� '*w F - • " 4 .4 2� i qk; ' kKt .mom M "{ y l'' -t'" m' ( k 3) ij .� )$ k a� -3 Vo F4 Y S S J.. I-CO t3.OVP . .;. �fi , , :.: x s....s �� d`e'r .. � , a _ i"z2 ., .:t,v �4�5. ;$�, 0 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 20, 1988 Regular Meeting of the Meridian City Council called to order by Mayor Grant Kingsford at 7:30 p.m.: Members Present: Ron Tolsma,Bert Myers, Bob Giesler, Walt Morrow: others Present: Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Paul Stutzman, Moe Alidjani, Rob Prindle, Cheryl Prindle, Twayne Walker, Diana Jackson, K. Buemeler, Lyman Belnap, Elaine Schlekeway, Chase Mart The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Giesler to approve the minutes of the previous meeting held December 6, 1988 as written: Notion Carried: All Yea: Item #1: Public Hearing: Variance Request by T & R Construction on Fence at Crestwood #3 Subdivision: Mayor Kingsford: At this time I will open the Public Hearing, is there anyone in the audience who wishes to testify on this request? Twayne Walker, T&R construction, Walker was sworn by the City Attorney: Walker: First off, I would like to pass out some material prepared by Hubble Engineering, (On File with these Minutes)We would like to illustrate to you the fence and what it really does look like compared to the road out front and how high we really are, Lyman Belnap our Attorney is here to speak to you also, if there are any questions I can't answer. In that packet we have an illustration showing what the fence looks like, there is also a letter frau Hubble Engineering and. ACHD saying there is no problem with the fence being where it is at, the drawing from Hubble Engineering show a difference of 1' 3/8" this is what we are asking for, this is according to their calculations and that varies anywhere from 8" to 14", so that is what we are requesting a variance for is to add an additional foot to the fence. Lyman Belnap, 6903 Kingsdale Drive, Boise, Belnap was sworn by the City Attorney: Belnap: This is an observation, it has been about five years since I was before this Council, your building has dramatically improved, I congradulate you: I have been asked to represent T&R Construction and the Home Owners who have purchased homes in Crestwood #3 Subdivision, all of them believed that the burn that had been there as near as I can determine approximately seven years, was going to be a burn fence combination that would adequately protect the families living in the subdivision and enhance the ascetics of that area along Franklin Road, now because the total height of the barrier exceeds the Ordinance, they have had to seek a Variance from this Council, you have the engineering report and I think we are going to differ a little bit , I was just glancing back through your minutes of November 15, 1988 where it looks like it depends on where you take the measurement whether it is the street inside the subdivision or from Franklin Road as to how much fence would be allowed on top of the burns and cane within or without the Ordinance. Taking the measurements from the position that our engineer did,. we are talking about an average of one foot 318 inch in excess of what the ordinance would allow by allowing a four foot fence along this bins. In my opinion four feet is not enough but that is all the contractor is trying to do, I do not know if I would want my children contained by a four foot fence along Franklin Road, I can not seem to find out in the Ordinances as to where MERIDIAN CITY ODUNCIL • • DECE20ER 20, 1988 PAGE # 2 you set the pin to start measureing the six foot , whether it has to be fran the street within the subdivision itself or like in this case where you are bordering a major throughfare, where you have to use judgement in starting to make the measurement because you are not trying to protect anyone from an interior street but from Franklin Road, ACRID has made their deteanination that there is no sight hazard from Franklin Road, which I think is critical because Mrs. Schlekeway has all the right in the world to preserve the value of her property and I understand has raised the issue before this Council that by putting in this bum fence combination it will obstruct her view or the view of future development, people who would,purchase lots on her ground in the future and adversely impact the value of her ground. I had T & R take sone pictures, so those who have not driven by, I will hand these to you, (Pictures on File) 1 & 2 are taken standing on top of the burns, 3 on top of the burn shooting across the street to Mrs. Schlekeway's property, 4 looking out of the access of the subdivision, 5 is a shot from the edge of Franklin facing the burn, the next two pictures give an idea of what the burn would look like when developed, it is my understanding that there are covenants and restrictions that require that it be maintained, that,it is not going to be the weed patch I have read about in earlier minutes, the next two pictures are a little bit of concern as I was again reviewing the November minutes, they relate to the prior development, I read in the minutes that the rest of the fence is a six foot fence, according to our measurements and of course these were just taken from the base to the top not from any point in a road, the brick part is slightly in excess of eight foot the wood part that is sho m in those last two pictures is approximately six foot three inches, It is our position to this Council and the Mayor that the burn as it now exists with a four foot fence is going to be shorter than the existing fence if you consider that three hundred feet of brick that runs along there as part of the fencing of the earlier subdivision and in our opinion far more attractive. I can not minimize Mrs. Schlekeways concern about noise but it just seems illogical to me that a combination of a landscaped soil burn with a four foot fence would create more noise than what already exists there, just the opposite. I do not have to be a sound engineer or anyone on this Council to realize that it will not create noise more than a,solid fence would, actually it would be less. I understand also that there are probably two reasons not just the impact on it might have on a neighbors property but as I read in the minutes there has been comment made about the conduct of T&R in obtaining building permits and I do not know all the particulars, all I can do is ask my client, but it is that wane old syndrome, you can take a situation and you can take a six inch brush or you can take a smaller brush to paint the stroke and to follow the problem, it is my understand- ing that when they were developing the home here that one of the partners thought one had got the building permit, the other thought the other had got the permit, they had some of their footing in when it dawned on then that neither one did, they asked the secretary to go down and get the permit and that even fell through. I understand the second had to do with starting the fence on this burn, I understand they had to pay double the building fee in order to build the Beehive hones facility as a result of that oversight.I do not know if there has been any type of penalty assessed, I guess you have not assessed a building permit on the fence because you have not allowed it. It is our position that there is no developer in this valley without sin, these gentle- men are not intentiomalaydnMeridian to try and defraud this Council or to slip by because practices maybe more home town or in any way reflecting on their part to try and beat the system. They, came to Meridian because they thought the projects they were doing was a good community to do these in and they are willing to pay their fair share. I do not think it is proper for this Council to decide the value of whether or not this bum fence combination should be allowed as a variance based on the fact that my clients have stumbled twice on a building permit and I can not be to fine about how personally I feel that would be improper. The final thing that I would like to say, I know we are talking about values , the bottom line is bucks, if we are talking about ascetics, I think what they are proposing enhances the project in the community. MERIDIAN CITY COtRX31, DECEMBER 20, 1988 PAGE # 3 r U If it canes right down to it if it is a matter of how much economically would the neighbors property be affected verus how much for sure this property would be affected as best I could determine my clients would be facing at least $10,000.00 - in reexcavation to remove the burn they did not put in there, all of the ,utilities run through the burn, they would have to be replaced, at an estimated cost of 4 to 5 thousand and of course new fencing would have to be aquired because they purchased four foot fencing. Again you might say tough luck developer, you moved without checking with us or reading the Ordinance, I think the developer acted in good faith in taking a look at the burn and deciding that in order to protect those who are buying their homes four foot was reasonable, and I think they acted in good faith - in coming to this Council and seeking a Variance. The bottom line is if you deny it, the homeowners who purchased in that subdivision relying upon that kind of protection are not going to get it. I read in the minutes the possibility of putting the fence on the Franklin side of the burn, when each one of the tennants goes to put his property line fence and zips over the burn, he is going to be in violation and have to be before this Council. So we respectfully request that you grant the Variance, taken from the Franklin side we are talking about an average one foot 3/8 inch Variance and we are talking as near as I can detect a more attractive and actually a more ascetically beautiful fence than what exists and block less. Mayor Kingsford: Is there anyone else from the Public who wishes to offer testimony? Diana Jackson, Homeowner in Crestwood #3, Jackson was sworn by the City Attorney: Jackson: I think that all of us when we first purchased our property knew that there VMS a five foot or a large burse and that there was going to be a four foot fence on the burns, I know part of it is a misunderstanding on all parts but that was our under- standing.we would like to see that a_least a four foot fence is put in because that will protect our children and pets and it will give us the privacy we need for our back yards. anything shorter won't keep anything out or in. I would really like for you to consider the fact that anything shorter than a four foot fence would not protect our children. That is what is important to us. Having a six foot fence on the Franklin side of the burn►, sure it will keep our children in but when we go up over the bum we will not be able to have a six foot fence. Chase Mart, 1491 W. Crestwood, Mart was sworn by the City Attorney: Mart: In my mind as far as I see it, we are not talking about the City issue here as to whether the fence is persay within the ordinances of the City, I think we all ought to step back a moment and think of the lives of a young child that perhaps, lets say a four or five year old child, who can scale a four foot fence much easier than a six foot fence, I would assume that if one of the residents that live on that side of the road had a child that did scale the fence and did get out on Franklin and was struck by a automobile, I am sure you are all aware of certain liabilities there are same big liabilities that may cane up. in particular lawsuits that you know. the City Council was resistive to put a fence for whatever reason. I am a strong believer that we need to do what is right here and not punish perhaps the homeowners because perhaps T &R Construction did something to dissatisfy the City Council. I myself as a resident here would be extremely dispondent and put out to feel that I was punished as a homeowner -here, spent a lot of money for a hame, planned to live here for a while and I am going to be punished for sameone elses actions. I think from a layman point of view assuming that T&R will provide the services they have shown here obviously it will make a nicer looking community for all of us to live in. Again to reiterate the issue here is the safety of children, not the ordinance. Mayor Kingsford: One question, as you started off it sounded to me as if you were under the illusion that they are asking for a six foot fence on the burn? xs� 8 " �x xx a" MERIDIAN CITY COtRX31, DECEMBER 20, 1988 PAGE # 3 r U If it canes right down to it if it is a matter of how much economically would the neighbors property be affected verus how much for sure this property would be affected as best I could determine my clients would be facing at least $10,000.00 - in reexcavation to remove the burn they did not put in there, all of the ,utilities run through the burn, they would have to be replaced, at an estimated cost of 4 to 5 thousand and of course new fencing would have to be aquired because they purchased four foot fencing. Again you might say tough luck developer, you moved without checking with us or reading the Ordinance, I think the developer acted in good faith in taking a look at the burn and deciding that in order to protect those who are buying their homes four foot was reasonable, and I think they acted in good faith - in coming to this Council and seeking a Variance. The bottom line is if you deny it, the homeowners who purchased in that subdivision relying upon that kind of protection are not going to get it. I read in the minutes the possibility of putting the fence on the Franklin side of the burn, when each one of the tennants goes to put his property line fence and zips over the burn, he is going to be in violation and have to be before this Council. So we respectfully request that you grant the Variance, taken from the Franklin side we are talking about an average one foot 3/8 inch Variance and we are talking as near as I can detect a more attractive and actually a more ascetically beautiful fence than what exists and block less. Mayor Kingsford: Is there anyone else from the Public who wishes to offer testimony? Diana Jackson, Homeowner in Crestwood #3, Jackson was sworn by the City Attorney: Jackson: I think that all of us when we first purchased our property knew that there VMS a five foot or a large burse and that there was going to be a four foot fence on the burns, I know part of it is a misunderstanding on all parts but that was our under- standing.we would like to see that a_least a four foot fence is put in because that will protect our children and pets and it will give us the privacy we need for our back yards. anything shorter won't keep anything out or in. I would really like for you to consider the fact that anything shorter than a four foot fence would not protect our children. That is what is important to us. Having a six foot fence on the Franklin side of the burn►, sure it will keep our children in but when we go up over the bum we will not be able to have a six foot fence. Chase Mart, 1491 W. Crestwood, Mart was sworn by the City Attorney: Mart: In my mind as far as I see it, we are not talking about the City issue here as to whether the fence is persay within the ordinances of the City, I think we all ought to step back a moment and think of the lives of a young child that perhaps, lets say a four or five year old child, who can scale a four foot fence much easier than a six foot fence, I would assume that if one of the residents that live on that side of the road had a child that did scale the fence and did get out on Franklin and was struck by a automobile, I am sure you are all aware of certain liabilities there are same big liabilities that may cane up. in particular lawsuits that you know. the City Council was resistive to put a fence for whatever reason. I am a strong believer that we need to do what is right here and not punish perhaps the homeowners because perhaps T &R Construction did something to dissatisfy the City Council. I myself as a resident here would be extremely dispondent and put out to feel that I was punished as a homeowner -here, spent a lot of money for a hame, planned to live here for a while and I am going to be punished for sameone elses actions. I think from a layman point of view assuming that T&R will provide the services they have shown here obviously it will make a nicer looking community for all of us to live in. Again to reiterate the issue here is the safety of children, not the ordinance. Mayor Kingsford: One question, as you started off it sounded to me as if you were under the illusion that they are asking for a six foot fence on the burn? • 0 MERIDIAN CITY ODUNCIL DECKER 20, 1988 PAGE # 5 Morrow: Then fran the inside that would make the overall 815" to 9' is that correct? City Engineer: Yes. Morrow: It sews to me that one of the great things about the construction industry is that your days pay is based upon your days work and that if you make a mistake you fix it at your own time and at your own expense and everybody from a first day apprentice to a thirty year journeyman understands those principles, in this case none of the citizens of Meridian, Mrs. Schlekeway nor the homeowners of the subdivis- ion made the mistakes in terms of the burns, the mistakes were made by the developer contractors not doing their groundwork, not checking out where they were at, not getting the Delp from the City,none of these people are at fault, in answer to Mr. Marts point about children and a four foot fence those points are valid, children are entitled to be protected by a four foot, five foot or six foot fences but not at the expense of the rest of the community, it seems to me that the people that ought to be correcting the situation here are the ones who made the mistake in the first place, not us as a City, not the residents of the subdivision, not the Schlekeways nor the rest of the citizens of the City of Meridian based on that I think I would move for a recommendation of denial of the Variance and that any burro or fence that is going to be construct, be constructed within the current City Codes, Building Codes and the restrictive covenants of Crestwood Subdivision. Mayor Kingsford: I think under State Code we would require Findings of Fact & Conclus- i_ons Law drawn by the Attorney before we could act on this request. Giesler: Who is going to take care of the landscaping along Franklin Road? Walker: The Aaneowners Association. Giesler: I have a question for Mr. Mart, do I understand you correctly, are you in favor of the Variance or are you in favor of the six foot fend? Mart: My first preference is that number I am in favor of a six foot fence, if that is not achievable under any means then I am in favor of a four foot fence. Giesler: We can achieve it by putting it on the property line, which I feel is probably the way it should be done. I think if we are going to achieve a six foot high fence which I feel is very match in need, sure 3 or 4 years old that four foot fence is very adequate but we are talking five and six or older when we are still concerned about the highway, yes there is no doubt in my mind when you are talking about liability there somebody is going to be libel and that could very much happen, itee me feel yes we need the six foot high fence and the only way to achieve that is put the fence on the property line and then the necessary thing done with the burn to make that work.I think this would be my recommendation. I have some real problems with the Variance. Myers: Where is the property line you are talking about, is that between the burin and Franklin Road? Giesler: Yes: Mayor Kingsford: I have a question, Mr. Walker, what utilities are in that burn? Walker: Telphone and cable. Mayor Kingsford: Any other questions or comments? We have a Motion on the floor which I think is out of order. MERIDIAN CITY QQUNCIL DEER 20, 1988 PAGE #6 Morrow: I withdraw the Notion: The Notion was made by Morrow and seconded by Tolsma to instruct the City Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on the Variance Request by T & R Construction: Notion Carried: All Yea: Item #2: Appoint neva member to the Planning & Zoning Commission: Mayor Kingsford: At this time I would Like to naninate Mr. Tim Hepper to fill the vacancy left by Walt Morrow moving on to the City Council, Mr. Hepper has agreed to that appointment, this would be for a six year term as Mr. Morrow's terns is up. Myers: What is Mr. Hepper's background? Mayor Kingsford: Mr. Hopper has been in the building trade, is a Meridian High School graduate in the sixties, has been in the building trade for well even going back into his teenage years. He has lived in the area all these years and I think would represent that aspect of the industry very well. The Notion was made by Morrow and seconded by Tolsma to approve the appointment of Mr. Tim Hepper to fill the vacancy on the Planning & Zoning Commission: Motion Carried: All Yea: Department Repasts: City Engineer: We discovered a problem in Cherry Lane Subdivision at one of the townhouse units where we had been reading the wrong meter for the wrong unit. These units are awned by Mr. Kunkel and Mr. Reed, this has resulted in an overcharge to Mr. Kunkel of approximately $900.00 and an undercharge to Mr. Reed of the same amount. Mayor Kingsford met with Mr. Kunkel today to discuss the situation. Mayor Kingsford: I told him that I did not have a problem as Mayor to look at refunding the last year, to go back in preceding years I thought we should have Council approval. I told him that I felt there was sere obligation on his part, I think that we are wrong, but those are large bills for a man & his wife gone most of the time and that he should have brought this to our attention, he agreed in part to that, it would be my suggestion that we go ahead and refund most of that, it would be my suggestion that we pay him back $850.00. The total amount of overpayment is $907.00: Myers: What is the possibilty of Reed paying his share? Mayor Kingsford: The situation over there is that the one side is being rented and orginally when they first went in there was the same person in there and actually his bill was less than Mr. Kunkels, since that time Mr. Reed has rented the unit and there has been more people in the family, I think I have to agree with What Mr. Morrow said today when I visited with him, it is the cost of doing business, we errored. I think we have a real problem is asking a person who rents property and recoups utility bills fran those people that we made an error and would you please go back and try to recoup frau the renters you have had. The Council mealbers concurred with the Mayors comments. The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers to refund Mr. Kunkel $850.00: Motion Carried: all Yea: MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 15,1988 Regular Meeting of the Meridian City Council called to order by Mayor Grant Kingsford at 7:30 p.m.: Members Present: Ron Tblsma, Bert Myers, Bob Giesler, Walt Morrow: others Present: Scott Esplin, James Miller, Richard Allison, Dan Mabe, Susan Quarnstron, Jim Johnson, K. Beumeler, Diana Jackson, Paul Stutzman, Gary Smith, Moe Alidjani, Jesse Wilson, Charles Liggett, Jim Matlock, Joan PriOst, Wayne Crookston, Mrs. Schlekeway The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Tblsma to approve the Minutes of the previous Meeting held November 1, 1988 as written: Motion Carried: All Yea: Mayor Kingsford: We will vary from the published Agenda tonite as Mr. Dan Mabe of the Meridian School District is here to advise the Council and the Audience present tonite on the upcoming Bond Election for the School District. Dan Mabe: The School District is planning a Bond Levy in the amount of $6,860,000 to be held on December 13, 1988, the polls will be open all day, voting will be at the various Schools. Mr. Mabe went on to explain how the monies from the Bonds would be used, talked about the growth factor in the District and the future needs. He also advised about some iters the School Districts in the State were going to approach the Legislature with. (Bond Levy Voter Information Pamplet on File with Minutes) Item #1: Fence & Burn at Crestwood. #3: Mayor Kingsford: Councilman Giesler, would you advise the Council on the activity since the last meeting. Giesler: This sheet I passed out is sone measurements and remarks the City Engineer had for me, when we tabled this at the last meeting, I was concerned about where the location of the curb and the height on Franklin Road, we were trying to come up with a measurement to go by, I had overlooked an ordinance, I feel that was brought to my attention by the City Attorney, it does state in there that the point of measurement would cone from, it does speak in there as the crown of the highway, it doesn't necessary mean which highway but I think we have always gone by, since we are talking about Crestwood #3 Subdivision, I think we have to go by the street running in front of the hones, if that is the case, the burn from that point of measurement would be approximately 8" below what is allowed the six foot, they could do what ever they wanted to with another 8" on top of the burn. I don't think the burn is a real problem, they could either use'the burn or a six foot fence, it would be my recoTnendation that they go by the Ordinance, I don't think we can do anything other than that, I think either one could be used but not over the six foot. The only other thing the developer could do would be go through the necessary process of a Variance. Morrow: The six foot is now currently five foot , four inches above the cram of the. highway, of Franklin Road, to the top of the Burn? Giesler: No, we are talking about from Crestwood Way in the Subdivision. The way I interpret the Ordinance we have to use the street in the Subdivision. .-vers: If you go to Franklin Road, then you are 3112" to 31911, is that right? MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL • NOVEMM 15, 1988 PAGE # 2 Giesler: Yes, there is not a lot of difference, this would make about 1'7" difference. Mayor Kingsford: In any event that would only be a 2' fence. Tolsma: How does that compare with the fence in the other phase? Giesler: That is a six foot fence. Tolsma: We talked about putting a fence on the Franklin side of the burn at one time, that is supposed to be a ccumon area in there? Giesler: That would be up to the developer to do. Mayor Kingsford: The property line does go on the Franklin side far enough that the fence could be on the Franklin side of the burro? Giesler: Yes, there would be room to do that. They could enclose the burn if they wanted to, the only problem is if they are going to keep their fences six feet high then they would be in violation when they went up over the burn. Mayor Kingsford: So it is your re=meendation that the Council stay with the ordinance, unless it is their desire to apply for a Variance? Giesler: That would be my recomendation. Myers: The question I have is you are saying that the way the Ordinance reads, that the six foot fence is from the crown of the road not from the place you are going to build the fence on, in other words the backyard where they would build the fence, excluding the burro it would not be measured from there but from the craven of the streets is that correct? Giesler: Legally, I think it goes from the crown of the road the way it is interpreted. Myers: There is the possibility the road would be lower than the house. Giesler: There is no doubt about it. I think there is a possibility you could be off a few inches, if you wanted to get technical i am sure there are a lot of fences in violation but just by a few inches.notfeet. Tolsma: Another problem is that burns was not to be there to begin with. Giesler: well, I have not gone back in the minutes on this, it was before my time on the Council, but as I understand it the burn was basically not supposed to be there it was to be stockpiled there until they moved it at a later date when the property was ftXtlwdeveloped. I don't think the burn is the problem, it could be used as the fence if that is what they wanted to do but we cannot build on top of the burn. Morrow: If I could say something here, I don't want to give anybody false hopes in terms of Variance, I don't think I would personally be in favor for a Variance on top of that particular berm, it seem to me in this situation the builders and developers are the ones here who have ei.�ther not bothered to take the time to find out what the rules are or they have knowingly ignored the rules in terns of putting the fence on top of the bum, it seem to me that based on some of the imput that we have here it is almost a situation of the homeowners of Crestwood versus the City of Meridian or versus Mrs. Scblekeway and I don't think that is the case, it seems to me that the mistake that was made here was made by the builders and developers and it is also my MERIDIAN CITY COLMM • NOVEMBER 15, 1388 PAGE #3 understanding that in the past they have had some problem with taking the time or the courtesy to notify the building departr t in terms of making such minimum inspections as footing & foundations, so there is a track record here of not doing things as best as they can be done and being in that business myself, I know that in Meridian it has been the policy of this admirr7tration and past adminstrations to keep things as simple as possible, so the cost is az a minimum to our citizens and so that we can have a reasonable degree of success in our lives. It seem to me here that maybe some of the energies are a little misdirected and being from that building community, one of the reasons we keep things simple here in Meridian is so we do not have the horrendous bureaucracies like they have in Boise. Those bureacracies are created by these kind of situations with everybody wanting to fudge a little bit. So it seems to me that the people with young families are entitled to have wood fences or any kind of fence to keep those cbildren off of Franklin Road and with that in mind it seems the proper thing to do here for the builders and developers to put the bum where it belongs, put the fencing where it belongs so it protects the residents children and so that it protects Mrs. Schlekeway's rights and that we ought to press on from that standpoint. Everybody is free to ask for a Variance but I think in terms of me personally, I would be inclined to vote against it. Mayor Kingsford: Any other ccmtments, if not I would entertain a Motion. The Motion was made by Morrow and seconded by Myers that we accept Councilman GieslerIs recommendation to stay with the Ordinances as suggested. Notion Carried: All Yea: City Attorney: One comment, as I understand the Notion that is in no way a ruling in advance of a request for a Variance, they still have the right to request a Variance, there is no guarantee that it would be granted but they still have the right to approach and petition the Council for a Variance. Mayor Kingsford: That is correct, they have not done that as yet. Item #2: Public Hearing: Annexation & zoning Request, W/Conditional Use Permit by Seventh Day Adventist Church: Mayor Kingsford: Mr. Allison would you like to cone forward and be sworn: Allison, 1040 Fast Pine, Allison was sworn by the City Attorney: Allison: We are here tonite asking annexation & zoning of approximately 4.75 acres at the NE corner of Cherry Lane & Ten Mile. We are further requesting this be split into two parcels, the principal reason for the split is the Church requires only three acres of land and the owners would prefer not to sell a portion of an irrigated parcel but to sell the entire parcel. Therefore the Church asked me and I agreed to purchase the retaining property. We have reviewed the comments from the various departments, further research has been done with regards to a couple items, that were not specifically addressed, namely the sewer issue, I will comment on what the City Engineer has told me and if he wants to further correct that he may, my under- standing was that he met with Mike Nelson from Ben -Fran Savings out of Portland, Oregon and with Paul Whitewho_ is the developers representative with regards to Cherry Iane Village and they did not believe it was in their interest at the present time to provide the easement necessary to extend the sewer service over to Ten Mile Road. So at the present time it is my understanding we cannot make sewer available to the property. We are also requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the benefit of the Church. That wm1d be to enable then to build the Church on the front three acres. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCII, NOVEMBER 1, 1988 Regular Meeting of the Meridian City Council called to order by Mayor Grant Kingsford at 7:30 p.m.: Members Present: Ron Tolsma, Bert Myers, Bob Giesler: others Present: Moe Alidjani, Walt Morrow, Gary Smith, Kent Hauck, Eric Hauck, Rob Prindle, Don Campbell, K. Beuneler, Ann Peterson, Wayne Crookston, Gene Strough, Elaine Schlekeway: The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers to approve the minutes of the previous Meeting held October 18, 1988 as written: Notion Carried: All Yea: Mayor Kingsford: The first thing this evening which will vary from the Agenda is I would like to make a recommendation for the Council's approval of an appointment to fill the vacancy on the Council. For the Council's information I met last week with the five individuals who had expressed an interest in this vacancy, first off I would say publically that I am very pleased and proud to be a manbP.r of a City that has people that are interested in that nunber and all of them I would say extremely qualified, highly qualified individuals, after spending probably four hours with those individuals, a tough decision, I have decided on a ncmination for the vacant seat on the Council, I will present that name to you at this time, Walt Morrow, who is currently Chairman ,Than of the Planning & Zoning. The Motion was made by Giesler and seconded by Tolsma. to approve the Mayor's recommendation that Walt Morrow be appointed to fill the vacancy on the Council created by the resignation of Bill Brewer, this term will be until the next election. Motion Carried: All Yea: Mayor Kingsford: Mr. Morrow would you come forward and be sworn by the City Clerk: Mr. Morrow was sworn by the City Clerk: Mayor Kingsford: I might say that in addition to all the candidates being extremely qualified, I did receive both written correspondence and telephone calls and personal supports for each of the candidates, not just a few but several for each of them again I am very pleased and proud to be in a community that has that kind of interest in the Council. Welcome aboard Mr. Morrow: Mayor Kingsford: The next item is that the Council mmbers need to decide upon a Council President, Mr. Brewer having vacated that position. The Notion was made by Myers and seconded by Giesler to nominate Mr. Tolsma to serve as Council President: Notion Carried: All Yea: Item #1: Fence & Burm at Crestwood #3: Tabled at last Meeting: Mayor Kingsford: At the last meeting I assigned Councilman Giesler to look into this and if he would update the Council at this time. MERIDIAN CITY CM CIL NONVW4 R 1, 1988 PAGE # 2 Giesler: I ask the City Engineer to take some measurements out there for us, we are concerned right now of where Ada County is going to be requiring the curb be put along Franklin Road, the developer is required to install this within a two year period from April 1, of this year, we would like to have another measurement to go by using the curb height. we need to know how much difference that is from the property itself. Their Engineer is obtaining those figures and getting them to us and as of yet we have not received them, I would expect we .would have those within the next few days, at that time I think we could go ahead and finish this thing up and be able to make a presentation, I thougPub we would have that ready tonite but this other measurement could be very important. So with that if no one has a problem with it, I would ask that it be tabled again until the next meeting. Councilman Morrow: I'have a question, how come the design on the outside is not the same as the other phases one & two, why is it different? I am not familiar as to how it got to be a buns in the first place. Giesler: The burn was put in before my tune, from what I can came up with the burn basically was not going to be there originally, in the original plan, the dirt was piled there when tbey were doing the necessary developing, the streets & utilities, that the burn would be removed when the project was completed for development, it was not, they did cut it dam a foot or foot and one-half, at this point the figures we have it is five feet, one inch above the property, therefore actually the burn is in accordance with the Ordinance, there is no problem with the burn, we do have a problem putting the fence on top of the bum. Morrow: When the Crestwood concept was approved originally was there sane means of continuity in teras of how Franklin Road was to be done the rest of it, did we approve stipulations that said the rest of it was going to be like the first phase? Mayor Kingsford: As far as I know, that was never approved and neither was the burn approved. I think there was sane assumption that made would be carried forward but reviewing the minutes, no. The burn was never approved, to support what Mr. Giesler said the Bunn was just excavation, all of which has not been removed. It is like many other project, we have had multiple owners throucth the development. The Motion was made by Giesler and seconded by Tolsma to table this item until the next meeting: Motion Carried: All Yea: Item #2: Request by Cherry lane Baptist Church, Temporary Building for Classroom: Mayor Kingsford: Which one of you gentlemen wish to speak to this request, would you cone forward and state your name? Dan Campbell, Pastor of the Cherry Lane Baptist Church, we are requesting that we be able to put a temporary structure back behind our Church, we submitted a drawing, I assume you gentlemen have all had a chance to look at it, it would be for the purpose of providing extra roams for Sunday School Classes, we are growing, we are outgrowing our present structure, in order to provide the financial base to be able to build addition space that would seat somewhere between 300 & 350 people next year we need the Sunday School space, we are requesting that we be able to place a temporary structure behind our church and it will be out of the site of anyone driving by. Mayor Kingsford: You are asking for a period of twelve months? nmbiAN CITY axicm OCTOBER 181 1988 PAGE # 3 i Jossis: As part of the Nahas development , no. This would depend on what the property owners wanted to do with their property. Mayor Kingsford: Is there anyone else who would like to offer testimony? There was no response, the Public Hearing was closed. The Notion was made by Tblsma and seconded by Myers to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as prepared for the Planning & Zoning Commission: Notion Carried: loll Call Vote: Giesler, Yea: Myers, Yea: Tblsma, Yea: The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Giesler to approve the Conditional Use Permit as requested in the Application by Nahas & Sinm: Motion Carried: All Yea: Itan #2: Public Hearing: Amendments to the Zoning & Development Ordinance: Mayor Kingsford: At this time I will open the Public Hearing, is there anyone in the audience who wishes to testify on these amendments? There was no response, the Public Hearing was closed. The Notion was made by Giesler and seconded by Myers to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as prepared for the Planning & Zoning Commission: Motion Carried: Roll Call Vote: Giesler, Yea: Myers, Yea: Tblsma, Yea: The Notion was made by Myers and seconded by Tolsma to have the City Attorney prepare an Ordinance to reflect the changes to the Zoning & Development Ordinance. Motion Carried: All Yea: Item #3: Ery Olen: APA, Update on Transportation Plan: Olen: One of the responsibilities of Ada Planning is transportation planning in Ada County, the last time the transportation plan was approved was in 1982 and a lot of changes have occurred since that time, what we are planning now is to update the transportation plan, look at what changes have occurred and make the appropriate update. Olen described the process that would be followed and asked that the Mayor and Council appoint a Committee to work with them on updating the Transportation Plan. Mayor Kingsford: I have a list of people who I want to talk to about serving on that Committee and as soon as I have contacted than and if they agree I will forward that list to you, I would like to ask Councilman Tblsma to head that up from the Council, is that alright with you Councilman Tolsma? Councilman Tolsma agreed to a be the representative from the Council: Item #5: T & R Construction:. Fence on top of burn at Crestwood #3: Twrayne Walker was present to dicuss this Matter: Walker: I guess we were supposed to have a Permit to build this fence. Mayor Kingsford: Well, there is more than that involved, the Ordinance does not allow anything higher than a four foot fence, we view that from ground level not burn level MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 18, 1988 PAGE # 4 so there is a problem there number 1 and ,#'2. there was no permit applied for. Walker: We were trying to keep along with the same fence height that there is at Crestwood #2, we wanted to make it high enough to keep the children in, we felt four feet was the height to keep the children in. It is lower than the other side, the brick fencing, the wood fencing it is within a foot or so of the fencing that is on #2, we did not feel we were really out of place. We sold those homes in there with the fence being provided for then. Mayor Kingsford: Crestwood #2, that was approved before I was involved with the City, but at least five years ago, Mrs. Schleckeway was in and concerns about the bum, it was higher, there mere weeds, there was dust and specifically there was a lot nf noise that reverberates off that bum, the noise is pretty loud. She has been in at least a couple of times and had concerns about that and I can certainly appreciate those concerns. As I stated earlier our Ordinance does state that it cannot be higher than four feet and to have taken that view from ground level. I think it needs to be one or the other, you can have a four foot bum or a four foot fence. Walker: A 4 X fence would not provide , the reason the Bunn was put there in the first place was for privacy and also break up the noise frau Franklin Road. A four foot fence would not provide any of this. After the burn is landscaped with trees it should help break the noise that revererbate frau the burn. A four foot fence would not do much as far as keeping the children in. Ewen though the fence is only four feet on top of the bum, it would be harder for the children to get out. Giesler: Did I understand you right, that it is only about a foot higher than the fence on the other side? Walker: It is lower than the brick fence but about a foot higher than the other fence, in fact I haven't measured it but I wouldn't imagine it was any higher. Giesler: Now we are talking about along the highway, I have to disagree with you on that, I think the burn is as high as the fence. I think with the four feet on top of the burro it would be four to five feet higher than the other fence. Mayor Kingsford: I do have a note from some people that I know live in there, Connie & Jeff Dalling, and they are requesting a fence, I will pass this down for the Council Members to look at. Elaine Schledwway: I live at 1200 West Franklin and own 33 acres of property fronting on Franklin, I am here to voice my disapproval of what is taking place across the road from the front of my property, this is the fourth time I have spoken to the City regarding thie project across the road, I have put up with tall banks of dirt, covered with noxious weeds, excessive noise due to this high bank of dirt , I have always felt sooner or later the bank of dirt would be removed which it should be, it has also cut off our view to the south completely and scHme in a westerly direction. This bank of dirt was never proposed in the orginal plans for the project which I accepted. It is just a cheap way for a contractor to dispose of dirt from his excavation. At the last meeting I attmded regarding this project, they said they were going to leave a small burns covered with grass and mowed regularly and that I would like it, what I see I do not like, it is a tall bank of dirt, quite steep, approximately six feet high and to add further insult to injury, they are putting a fence on top of it is not sodded. I have a business building I rent out and the renters are upset about what is happen- ing across the road. The frontage of my property goes the entire length of this project across the road. We paid more for this property thirty five years ago because it fronts on the highway and I am hoping when the time comes for me to sell it will retain the proper value that it should have. MERIDIAN CITY CWNCIL OCTOBER 18, 1988 PAGE 4 5 Mayor Kingsford: I guess, though they have not asked for it specifically they are ask- ing for a Variance, yea, nay or something on the issue because it does violate the City Ordinance. Walker: I think one problem is, we have not had the time to finish what we are plann- ing on doing, I do not think the problem is the fence, it is because things have not been canpleted, as far as degrading or making the other side of the road less valued, s that is not the purpose here at all, purpose here is to provide hones, if there is view that is lost here, you are going to be looking into peoples backyards. These homes need the privacy and a *, t.fence is not going to do that. There has to be some kind of boundty there. Myers: What is your time schedule for landscaping the burn? Walker: We plan on doing it yet this fall, it depends on how fast the project develops we do have to make the improvements on the road within two years. There was additional discussion on this. Mayor Kingsford: I can see ficin the standpoint of your project, it would be nice to have that closed off but I think there is sane obligation to the people who are across the road to protect their rights as well. I am not against the fence to keep the kids in but you still have to protect those across the street. Diana Lynn Jackson: I am one of the homeowners in the area, I am the mother of four children and one of them is a two year old and if I am not out in. the backyard with her I can not let her out there, she will go over the burn, we have bikers that go by and they can look inside our bedroom window, we do want privacy and protection for our children. Giesler: There is no doubt about it what is happening out there is a big improvement 4 the hones and every thing look nice, I think for this to work for everybody, we definately have to have the fence, the burn is not going to do it, I would maybe like us to work out a solution with Mr. Walker, so it works for him and everyone concerned whether the burn comes dawn more and then put the fence up, what the plan is going to be I do not have an answer to that but maybe we table this and getout there and look that situation over and see what would work. The privacy I think we are going to end up with a problem there of being able to create enough privacy for everyone. There was more discussion: Mayor Kingsford: If the burn was taken out, you could put up a six foot fence, if you leave it there and the bum is six feet and you put four on top you have ten. Mrs. Schlekeway: I think the problem is the burns, I am not against a six foot fence if it was a ground level, but I don't want a conplete wall up in front of my prop- erty, which consists of a burn plus a fence. Mayor Kingsford: Since I heard a volunteer on this, Councilman Giesler, I would sugg- est get with the City Engineer and Mr. Walker and include Mrs. Schtekeway and lets reach -same kind of agreement before the next meeting that is acceptable. The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Tolsma to table this item until the next Council Meeting: Motion Carried: All Yea: HUBBLE ENGINEERING • • 8590 Fairview Ave., Suite F, Boise, Idaho 83704 (208) 322-8992 Z° SURVEro i LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL i November 7, 1988 Mr. Twayne Walker T & R Construction 1406 S. First Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dear Twayne, Attached is a cross section sketch which depicts the existing situation along the South side of Franklin Road at Crestwood Estates No. 3 in Meridian, Idaho. This information was gathered from field survey data collected on November 2, 1988 while setting proposed C & G Grades along Franklin Road and Crestwood Estates Subdivision No. 3 roadway development plans dated June 15, 1988 by our firm. The proposed fence location is per my telephone conversation with you on November 4, 1988. If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Todd R. Waite, L.S. HUBBLE ENGINEERING, INC. TRW/mlr wp:13_11-7-88 Enclosure r � w5 `n a $ q j. ,r t yy 4 I W111, �a$ �7 k tS'e{ . b •t a4xa �Z 1 � 7imK 41 �x i L u r INV kT� �'Y{ ���, n 1' ! � .t .},� rY' k} �s L,�Ss°' °t si 4.R�. �.aav,• � �+ f 'I -AL -NN' s E) -,,* j 8590 Fairview Ave., Suite F, Boise, Idaho 83704 property l lne: --� 'I W. Franklin Rd, -4 I I Pavement S�� I—Ex'sti.q97 Proposed? Proposed CAG S�►V 0 (208) 322-8992 F Proposed Fence i--Fxisfinj Oma4d 3'-30 Varies Crestwood Estates 3/ TYPICAL: SECTION West Franklin Rd; (Crestwood Estates) t 0 Z O H V W N B • o ADA CCONTY HIGHWAY DI&RICT GLENN J. RHODES, PRESIDENT CHARLES L. WINDER, VICE PRESIDENT DWIGHT V. BOARD, SECRETARY Mr. Twanyne Walker T & R Construction 1226 W. Crestwood Meridian ID 83642 Re: CRESTWOOD ESTATES #3 FENCING VARIANCE REQUEST December 7, 1988 318 E. 37TH STREET BOISE, IDAHO 83714 PHONE 345.7680 Enclosed is the District's review of the referenced variance request which will be approved by the District's Commission on December 8, 1988, with "conditions. Franklin Road has 40 -feet of right-of-way south of the section line with the street improvements 24.5 feet off centerline. Diagram provided by the engineer indicates the fence and berm will be located 9 -feet from the south right-of-way of Franklin road, and well outside of the right-of-way, and will not create a sight hazard if it is not placed in the clear sight vision triangle at street intersections. If you should have any questions, please call me at 345-7662. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Jon D. Thompson Development Services JDT/ev cc: Development Services Chron AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER x ar H • -� iia !%''RWe`'.y4 � ,i% yy, d x • o ADA CCONTY HIGHWAY DI&RICT GLENN J. RHODES, PRESIDENT CHARLES L. WINDER, VICE PRESIDENT DWIGHT V. BOARD, SECRETARY Mr. Twanyne Walker T & R Construction 1226 W. Crestwood Meridian ID 83642 Re: CRESTWOOD ESTATES #3 FENCING VARIANCE REQUEST December 7, 1988 318 E. 37TH STREET BOISE, IDAHO 83714 PHONE 345.7680 Enclosed is the District's review of the referenced variance request which will be approved by the District's Commission on December 8, 1988, with "conditions. Franklin Road has 40 -feet of right-of-way south of the section line with the street improvements 24.5 feet off centerline. Diagram provided by the engineer indicates the fence and berm will be located 9 -feet from the south right-of-way of Franklin road, and well outside of the right-of-way, and will not create a sight hazard if it is not placed in the clear sight vision triangle at street intersections. If you should have any questions, please call me at 345-7662. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Jon D. Thompson Development Services JDT/ev cc: Development Services Chron AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER r�r s� Q � i 1~ WIM ON 11 IN !%''RWe`'.y4 � ,i% yy, Q � i 1~ WIM ON 11 IN !%''RWe`'.y4 � ,i% yy, x ADA COUNTY HIGHWA* DISTRICT 318 EAST 37TH i°3TREET BOISE, IDAHO 83714 Inter -Department Correspondence To: Ada County Highway District Commission Date: December 5, 1988 ; From: Development Services y xlt. Subject MERIDIAN VARIANCE FRANKLIN E/0 LINDER FENCE (T & R Construction, 888-2288) a' '• FACTS & FINDINGS: 71 1. T & R Construction requests a variance to construct a 4 -foot high fence on a 5 -foot high berm along the side of Franklin Road. & . 2. Franklin Road has 65 -feet of right-of-way (80 -feet -is required) and is g= improved with 24 -feet of paving. The additional right-of-way, requirement will be acquired from the opposite side of the street. pNq. � STANDARD REQUIREMENTS: Q � 1. Locate the fence out of the public right-of-way and out of the clear vision sight triangle at all intersections and driveways.�� a ` 2. Any work within ACRD right-of-way requires a permit. For information regarding the requirements to obtain a permit, please contact Quality Control at 345-7667. CU, DR, -or PDC file number required. ri _ POLICY IMPLICATIONS: 1. Requirements are made to Meridian Planning & Zoning as condition for ,�x� ccmpliance.ULM � SIGNATURE OF STAFF SUBMITTING: ON- RIX Jahn R. Stoller, P.E. 0 u0X001�'iKiIi I'kiA" 1 • ATTACHED IS ONLY COMMENT RECEIVED ON VARIANCE REQUEST BY T & R CONSTRUCTION: V� illlll�l rt N a in-t'� � � �' spa' rt � � � w i%• ,rt< r^,, � w � a � � �' � v? H rt rt0 F+ ro A la+• W W 3 00 Im OW Z l a° w m Fxr- m p� Bob N ii'� `� .o W .c rt O a _rt H rt m r w °ro wm w n mnrt R tn� ro Fa•�w �' � � rt N• W O Fro+a N Rrt K w ~ .. nnN C� 09 ro F�2 f'r �H F+ v 0 a. N 57, f+ O A:. py V� illlll�l rt N a in-t'� � � �' spa' rt � � � w i%• ,rt< r^,, � w � a � � �' � v? H rt rt0 F+ ro A la+• W W 3 00 Im OW Z l a° w m Fxr- m p� Bob N ii'� `� .o W .c rt O a _rt H rt m r w °ro wm w n mnrt R tn� ro Fa•�w �' � � rt N• W O Fro+a N Rrt K w ~ .. nnN C� 09 ro F�2 f'r �H F+ v 0 a. N N H tj N S g C) OD 00 OD 00 OD N H N x f+ O py K � N H tj N S g C) OD 00 OD 00 OD N H N x ADA couNKY HIGHWA DIS ITRICT 318 EAST 37TH STREET BOISE, IDAHO 83714 Inter -Department Correspondence To: Ada County Highway District Commission Date: December 5, 1988 From: Development Services Subject: MERIDIAN VARIANCE FRANKLIN E/0 LINDER FENCE (T & R Construction, 888-2288) FACTS & FINDINGS: 1. T & R Construction requests a variance to construct a 4 -foot high fence on a 5 -foot high berm along the side of Franklin Road. 2. Franklin Road has 65 -feet of right-of-way (80 -feet is required), and is improved with 24 -feet of paving. The additional right-of-way requirement will be acquired from the opposite side of the street. STANDARD REQUIREMENTS: 1. Locate the fence out of the public right-of-way and out of the clear vision sight triangle at all intersections and driveways. 2. Any work within ACHD right-of-way requires a permit. For information regarding the requirements to obtain a permit, please contact Quality Control at 345-7667. CU, DR, or PDC file number required. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: 1. Requirements are made to Meridian Planning & Zoning as condition for compliance. SIGNATURE OF STAFF SUBMITTING: John R. Stollen, P.E. FRANKLIN/ZTR.DEC �S 7 NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., on December 20, 1988, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of T & R Construction for a variance at Franklin and Linder Roads (South side) on Lots 1 thru 14, Block 3, and Lots 1 thru 9 Block 4 Crestwood Estates #3. The Applicant proposes to construct a 4 foot fence on a 5 foot burm running parallel to Franklin. A more particular legal description is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Meridian and is available upon request. \\ DATED thisZg i h da AMBROSE, ITZOERALD CROOKSTON Romp and vovnselors 1.0. Box 427 Adlan,Idaho 83942 Rhona 8@8.1481 f IIS N•4 kN r; I NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., on December 20, 1988, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of T & R Construction for a variance at Franklin and Linder Roads (South side) on Lots 1 thru 14, Block 3, and Lots 1 thru 9 Block 4 Crestwood Estates #3. The Applicant proposes to construct a 4 foot fence on a 5 foot burm running parallel to Franklin. A more particular legal description is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Meridian and is available upon request. \\ DATED thisZg i h da AMBROSE, ITZOERALD CROOKSTON Romp and vovnselors 1.0. Box 427 Adlan,Idaho 83942 Rhona 8@8.1481 ''RFS?✓�._ .`e _ _'��:a�.- �•� _ �1 _ 1 I AM&Lo -4 p I an I Z ®•nS. I 1 I c• v. b • "_ � a aat�o w � l - WWI 3 ,OgttA 'tl . Mf _f a 1�. y 4 o AOO6t 2 O a oats• � - �, . At wi n �) co ,® Aj� 1 AOLGt s , , • 1 i M&W 'tt •I sews a o , a meso �- 3 AR,► I�inA A►S7t - 7 p0,tt0 71 Vk I JLt—s 1 — A I i as , rndNn Y y :ci -9- ame -'J" . -im Fql 221