Cherry Lane Development VAR
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
APPLICATION OF CHERRY LANE DEVELOPMENT
FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION ORDINANCE,
FROM THE 70 FOOT LOT FRONTAGE ORDINANCE,
AND FRO!!'I THE STREET LIGHT ORDINANCE
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled, variance request having come on for
consideration on April 1?, 1990, 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 COWlcil having heard and taken oral
and written testimony, the City Council of the City of Meridian
mades 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 April 17, 199~, the first publication of which was fifteen (15)
days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at
the April 17, 1990, hearing; that copies of all notices were
available to newspaper, radio and television stations.
2. That notice of the '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~, 11-2-419 D.,
and 11-9-612 B. 1.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 1 -
City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met.
3. That the requirements for the Pressurized Irrigation
System are contained in Ordinance 5-144~
4. That Section 11-2-410 ~, Zoning Schedule of Bulk and
Coverage Controls, requires that lots zoned R-4 have a minimum
street frontage of 70.00 feet and in cul-de-sac lot that minimum
is measured at the setback line.
5. That the requirement for streetlights is set forth
in Ordinance No.
6. That the Applicant has requested that it be granted
a variance from the Pressurized Irrigiation System Ordinance and
be allowed to defer a portion of the pressurized irrigation require-
ment by installing dry lines at the present time and give the City
time to adopt the necessary standards for construction of the
pressurized system.
7. That the Applicant has additionally requested that
it be allowed to have smaller lot frontages than 70.00 feet on
some of the cul-de-sac lots within a proposed subdivision and in
the Application sets forth those lots which the variance is
requested.
8. That the Applicant has requested a variance from
the steetlight requirements and to substitute in lieu thereof
yard lights to be installed on each residential lot in said sub-
division.
9. That the authority of the Council to grant variances
is set forth in Section 11-9-612 A.l.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 2 -
10. That before the Council can favorably act upon
a variance, there must be Findings of Fact that all of the
requirements set forth Section 11-9-612 A.2. exist.
11. That the property in question is located within
the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho.
12. That the property does have available to it, water
rights in the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. That 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 Council has judged this application
by the guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in
the Zoning and Development Ordinances and upon the record submitted
to it and the things upon which it may take judicial notice.
3. That the Council may take judicial notice of its
own proceedings, those of the commission, governmental statutes,
ordinance~, and policy, and of actual conditions existing within
the city and the state.
4. That the Application for Variance from the Pressurized
Irrigation System Ordinance/does not meet the requirements for a
variance as contained in Sections 11-9-612 of the Development
Ordinance and 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLOSIONS OF LAW - 3 -
5. That it is concluded that the request for variance
from the Pressurized Irrigation Ordinance should be denied.
6. That the request for variance from the 70 Foot Lot
Frontage Ordinance complies with the requirements for variances
set forth in Sections 11-9-612 of the Development Ordinance and
11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance, and it does not appear that
granting that variance wou1d give the applicant an undue advantage
.
over other subdivision developers and that smaller lot frontages
in relation to the size of the lots in the subdivision is not
out of the ordinary in modern day subdivisions.
7. That it is concluded the application should be granted
as it pe~tains to the variance from the lot frontage requirement
of 70.00 fee~, but the minimum lot frontage as measured at the
cord length of the radius of the cul-de-sac shall be no less than
40.00 feet.
8. That the request for variance from the Street Light
Ordinance meets the requirements for variances set forth in Sections
11-9-612 of the Development Ordinance and 11-2-419 of the Zoning
Ordinance, and it does not appear that granting the variance would
give the applicant an undue advantage over other subdivision
developers as such variances have been previously given.
9. That it is concluded that the application should be
granted as it pertains to the var1ance from the Street Light
Ordinance with the provision that the yard lights shall be wired
directly into the electrical bo~ in the residence without separate
switch.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 4 -
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
That City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby
adopt and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL:
COUNCILMAN YERRINGroN
COUNCILMAN GIESLER
COUNCILMAN MYERS
COUNCILMAN TOLSMA
MAYOR KINGSFORD (Tie Breaker)
APPROVED: ~
DISAPPROVED:
. - THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS of law were
prepared by JACK C. RIDDLEMOSER, (jtiDj as Attorney for the City
of Meridian on this application. 00.. Ie..
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 5 -