ALT ApplicationECEIVE
MAY 2 3 2018
EIDIAN I -- Planning Division
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
STAFF USE ONLY:
Project name: 0)? -017c/ C�IY �y C�• c�� /4��. o�ic•-ices
File number(s):
Assigned Planner: t 66L,v6 t, 1 AA -flaw- Related files:
Type of Review Requested (check all that apply)
❑ Accessory Use (check only 1)
❑ Final Plat Modification
❑ Daycare
❑ Landscape Plan Modification
❑ Home Occupation
❑ Preliminary Plat
❑ Home Occupation/Instructiori for 7 or more
❑ Private Street
❑ Administrative Design Review
❑ Property Boundary Adjustment
9 Alternative Compliance
❑ Rezone
❑ Annexation and Zoning
❑ Short Plat
❑ Certificate of Zoning Compliance
❑ Time Extension (check only 1)
❑ City Council Review
❑ Director
❑ Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
❑ Commission
❑ Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment
❑ UDC Text Amendment
❑ Conditional Use Permit
❑ Vacation (check only 1)
❑ Conditional Use Modification (check only 1)
❑ Director
❑ Director
❑ Commission
❑ Commission
❑ Variance
❑ Development Agreement Modification
❑ Other
❑ Final Plat
Applicant Information
Applicant name: 3&R X,e18,L_13/-,,i%1 i� ��� Phone:
Applicant address: )-�-7 s9//P 2 S�.iil > 2 Email: nin3le
City: State: :1-o Zip:$'3 6!�z V
Applicant's interest in property
Owner name:
❑ Own ❑ Rent ❑ Optioned 9 Other Gr/v H/,Y-- ;1E
Owner address: Email:
City: State: _
Agent/Contact name (e.g., architect, engineer, developer, representative):
Firm name:
Agent address:
Email:
Phone:
Zip: _
Phone:
City: State: Zip:
Primary contact is: ❑ Applicant ❑ Owner ❑ Agent/Contact
Subject Property Information
Location/street address: ,3 9 15 F 6;R,%,, --,L e:� Township, range, section:
Assessor's parcel number(s): Total acreage: Zoning district:
Community Development ■ Planning Division ■ 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Ste. 102 Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: 208-884-5533 Fax: 208-888-6854 www.meridiancity.org/planning
-1 Rev: (2/2/2018217/2018)
Project/subdivision name:
General description of proposed project/request:
Proposed zoning district(s):
Acres of each zone proposed:
Type of use proposed (check all that apply):
❑ Residential ❑ Office ❑ Commercial ❑ Employment ❑ Industrial ❑ Other
Who will own & maintain the pressurized irrigation system in this development?
Which irrigation district does this property lie within?
Primary irrigation source:
Secondary:
Square footage of landscaped areas to be irrigated (if primary or secondary point of connection is City water):
Residential Project Summary (if applicable)
Number of residential units:
Number of common lots:
Number of building lots:
Number of other lots:
Proposed number of dwelling units (for multi -family developments only):
1 bedroom:
2-3 bedrooms:
Minimum square footage of structure (excl. garage):
Minimum property size (s.f):
Gross density (Per UDC 11-1A-1):
Acreage of qualified open space:
4 or more bedrooms:
Maximum building height: _
Average property size (s.f.):
Net density (Per UDC 11-lA-1):
Percentage of qualified open space:
Type and calculations of qualified open space provided in acres (Per UDC 11 -3G -3B):
Amenities provided with this development (if applicable):
Type of dwelling(s) proposed: ❑ Single-family Detached ❑ Single-family Attached ❑ Townhouse
❑ Duplex ❑ Multi -family ❑ Vertically Integrated ❑ Other
Non-residential Project Summary (if applicable)
Number of building lots:
Gross floor area proposed:
Hours of operation (days and hours):
Total number of parking spaces provided:
Common lots: Other lots:
Existing (if applicable):
Building height:
Number of compact spaces provided:
Authorization
Print applicant name: T&M Zn d&L e2?A/
Applicant signature: flz�;-' Date: �� Z/!r
Community Development ■ Planning Division ■ 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Ste. 102 Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: 208-884-5533 Fax: 208-888-6854 www.meridiancitv.org/planning
-2- Rev: (2/7/2018)
To Whom It May Concern
I am writing this to seek an alternative compliance for a fence install at 3495 E. Girdner Drive in
Meridian, The Village at Sutherland Farm.
I'll start by saying this fence accidentally got installed by our field agents (Me) when our original
landscape plan came through. It's been installed for a little over 5 months. We now have new home
owners living in the home that this decision will impact.
The oddly shaped lot along with the R8 designation (10' house setback) is what created a short space
from the SE corner of the home to the sidewalk. To keep the 10' required setback for a fence, would
have left about 1' between the home and the fence. We installed it the way it is trying give potential
home owners a nice usable fenced side yard that encloses their man door into the garage as well.
The East side of the lot that helped create this scenario, also helps in my argument that there is not any
vision obstruction by the location of the fence. I have included a couple of pictures of the street view of
the fence. This Fence does not obstruct a view at a street corner.
I have also included a Google Earth photo of the property before our portion was developed. The fence
that was there prior extended far beyond the 10' setback, and farther than the current fence. I would
argue that if the prior fence was in that location for 10 plus years with no incident and no complaints of
vision obstruction, then the new fence, farther back from the sidewalk most certainly does not obstruct.
This paragraph is not intended to ruffle feathers, more so to demonstrate that an alternative compliance
for 3495 E Girdner Drive is a reasonable request. It will take into account the best use of space for some
new home owners while not impeding the lives of neighbors. While driving around Sutherland Farm
subdivision, I found 3 other fences closer to the sidewalk than 10';
2942 Nephrite- 8', 305 Sterri-8',378 E Mackay -4:
It is easy to see several landscaping corners that are far more obstructive in vison and far outside city
code. I did not print these pictures but most certainly can if needed. Google Earth is also a good place to
see these. With these various non compliant properties, I'm not sure why ours is getting singled out.
The corner where East Mackay turns North, corner of Beamer Ct, and S Bay Star Way are a couple.
I'll wrap up by saying that neither I personally nor Berkeley Building Company really have a dog in this
fight. We are only trying to help our new home owners muddle through the process and hopefully help
them keep the yard they currently have.
Respectfully,
Tom Krochmal
I'; —
H-
11
r
.1
W R
• e
.44