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: