Loading...
Interwest Development Corporation VAR AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON AUorneys end Counselors P.O. 80><427 Meridian, Idallo 83642 relephone B88-4461 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN APPLICATION OF INTERWEST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE STREET LIGHT ORDINANCE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled variance request having come on for consideration on March 6~ 1990, at approximately 7:30 olclock p.m. on said date, at the ~1eridian 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 . T hat not ice 0 f the pub 1 i c h ear i n 9 0 nth e v a ria nee vJ a s published for two consecutive "leeks prior to the scheduled hearing for March 6, 1990, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the March 6, 1990, 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., 11-2-419 D., and 11-9-612 B. 1.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met. AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTO N Altomaye and Counselors P,O, Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83642 rolephono 868-4461 3. That Ordinance 11-9-606 B 13s Street Lighting, requires that street lights be installed as a public improvement by every developer of a subdivision. 4. That the Applicant has requested that it be granted a variance from the above street lighting requirement and be allowed to have installed on each lot a front yard light on a pole or a house light operated by a photo electric cell and which 1 ight would have a minimum wattage of 60 wattss in Chateau Meadows East Subdivision. 5. The property in question is the NH 1/4 and the SW 1/4 of Section 5, T. 3N., R. IE., Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. 6. That the property is zoned R-8 Residential; that the covenants and restrictions, and the annexation ordinance, however, limit homes to single-family dwellings and no duplexes or multi-family dwellings may be constructed in the subdivision. 7. That the covenants and restrictions for the subdivision require that each home have a photo-sensitive yard light or house light installed such that the front yard area between the house and the front property line is illuminated. The 1 ight is to be designed to automatically switch on at sunset and off at sunrise with a minimum bulb power of 60 watts. 8. That Section 11-9-606 B. 13. b., provides that in the event the street lighting ordinance of 11-9-606 B. 13. a., is waived that the subdivider and the lot owner shall be responsible for insuring that there is a yard light installed in the front yard of each house, controlled by a photo electric cell, and shall be wired directly to the residence's electrical breaker AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Allorneys and Counselors P.O, Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83642 relepho~e eaB-446' panel and comply with the National Electrical Code. 9. That East Chateau Drive is designed as a collector street by Ada County Highway District and by the City's Transportation Plan; that no houses are allowed to front East Chateau Drive, and likely will be fenced and thus front yard lights would not illuminate East Chateau Drive. 10. That there were no public comment submitted in opposition to the variance at the public hearing. 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 11-9-612 of the Development Ordinances. 3. That the City Council has judged this application by the guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the Zoning 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 the following provisions of Section 11-9-612, Variances, of the Development Ordinance is noted which is pertinent to the Application: AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O, Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83642 ralephone 1lBB..\461 11-9-612 A. 1. PURPOSE The Council, as a result of unique 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 hardship results from the strict compliance with specific provisions or requirements of the Ordinance or that application of such provision or requirement is impracticable. 6. That the specific requirements regarding a variance that must be evidenced and found by the City Council are a follo\'Is: 11-9-612 A. 2, FINDINGS No variance shall be favorably acted upon by the Council unless there is a finding, as a result of a publ ic hearing, that all of the following exist: a. That there are such special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the s t r i c tap p 1 i cat ion 0 f 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 topography, 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 Ordinance; AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83642 "elephone 868-4461 c. That the granting of the specified variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the property is situated; d. That such variance ~vill 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. 7. That there does appear to be a benefit or profit~ economic gain or convenience to the Applicant in that street lights would be more costly to the developer, however, the 1 ighting ordinance provides for a possible waiver of that ordinance in the R-4 zone. 8. That the subdivision is technically not zoned R-4 but it will be developed as an R-4 subdivision and it is concluded that the waiver provisions of the street lighting ordinance shall apply to the subdivision. 9. That it is concluded that street lights are a safety device and measure for pedestrians and vehicles and are a measure which helps prevent crime; that although there are provisions for wavier of street lights in R-4 subdivisions that the waiver is not automatic and safety factors must be weighed heavily rJhen considering a waiver. 10. That it is concluded that due to safety factors~ the waiver and variance of the street light ordinance should not be granted along East Chateau Drive and that street lights shall be placed along East Chateau Drive, including at North Locust Grove AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Allornays and Counselors P.O, Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83642 relaphonc l3S!I-4461 Road~ as required by 11-9-606 B. 13. a.~ that the variance should be granted for other parts of the subdivision. 11. That regarding Section 11-9-612 A. 2. it is specifically concluded as follows: a. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would clearly be unreasonable in that waivers are allowed under the street light ordinance in R-4 subdivision. b. That strict compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the owner, subdivider or developer as a result of factors not self-inflicted. c. That the granting of the spec- ified variance would not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the property is situated. d. That such variance would not have the effect of altering the interest and purpose of this Ordinance and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, or the legislative intent and purpose of Idaho Code 67-6530 through 67-6532. 12. That it is concluded the Application should be granted as it pertains to the subdivision except along East Chateau Drive and provided the Applicant meets the other Ordinances of the City of Meridian, specifically 11-9-606. B. 13. b., and that the 1 ights are yard 1 ights and not house 1 ights, since the 11-9-606 B. 13. b. allows a waiver onl y if yard 1 ights are used; that the waiver does not apply to house lights; that it is concluded that AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Tolophone 888-4461 the covenants and restrictions should be amended to coincide with the provisions of this variance. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby adopt and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN YERRINGTON COUNCILMAN GIESLER COUNCILMAN MYERS COUNCILMAN TOLSMA MAYOR KINGSFORD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED (ijp@ VOTED ~ VOTED~ VOTED ~ VOTED APPROVED: ~. DISAPPROVED: