Loading...
Max Boesiger VAR AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counsolora P.O. Box 427 MerIdian, Idaho 83642 ralaphoM 8813-4461 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN APPLICATION OF MAX BOESIGER, INC. FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION ORDINANCE AND FROM THE 70 FOOT LOT FRONTAGE ORDINANCE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled variance request having come on for consideration on March 20, 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 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 publ ished for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing for March 20, 1990, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the March 20, 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., FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 1 v/ 11-2-419 D't and 11-9-612 B. l.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met. 3. That Ordinance 5-144t PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION SYSTEMt requires that every owner or developer of a residentially zoned lott parcel or piece of land upon which a residential unit iSt or will bet constructedt shall constructt install, or connect to a pressurized irrigation system and that in the case of residential subdivision developments the pressurized irrigation system shall be installed at the same time as the domestic water system. 4. That Section 11-2-410 A, ZONING SCHEDULE OF BULK AND COVERAGE CONTROLSt requires that lots zoned R-4 have a minimum street frontage of 70.00 feet and in cul-de-sac lot that minimum is determined at the setback line. 5. That the Appl icant has requested that it be granted a variance from the above two requirements and to be allowed to defer a portion of the pressurized irrigation requirements by installing Udry lines" at the present time but to defer installation of the ability to provide water either through wells or connection to Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District water sources until the Applicant's fourth phase of the development is commenced, which would not be until after approximately 85 to 90 AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON lots have been developed; the Applicant has additionally requested that it be allowed to have smaller lot frontages than 70 feet on some of the cul-de-sac lots within the proposed subdivision and in the application sets forth those lots for Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 427 MeridIan, Idaho 83642 relaphono 888-446' FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 2 AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83642 rolephono 888-4461 which the variance is requested. 6. The property in question is the N 1/2 and the NE 1/4 of Section 11 T. 3N., R. 1W., Boise Meridian. Ada County, Idaho. 7. That the property is zoned R-4 Residential. 8. That Section 5-144, Pressurized Irrigation Systems, authorizes the City Engineer to establish standards for pressurized irrigation system; that at the present time those standards have not been developed but those standards should be forthcoming soon. 9. That one of the reasons put forth by the Applicant for delaying implementation of the entire pressurized irrigation system was to afford the City time and an opportunity to develop standards for the irrigation systems; that the Applicant also stated that it would be beneficial for it to wait to install the water source part of the system until there were 85 to 100 users of the system and that the Appl icant's proposed source of the water was at the southeast corner of the proposed subdivision which is some distance from the initial phases of the development; that the Applicant further stated that it had no objection to the idea of the pressurized irrigation system and that is why it was willing to install the IIdry linesll at the present time but wanted to defer the actual abi 1 Hy to provide the water until additional phases had been developed. 10. That the Section 11-9-606 C., GUARANTEE OF COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS. provides that the City shall insure that publ ic improvements are installed and requires that the City obtain FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 3 AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys aod Counselor. P,O. Box 427 MllJldlan, Idaho 63642 relephone B98,4461 financial guarantees for performance of the development requirements and provides that a number of methods can be utilized to meet those financial obligations. 11. That the requirement for pressurized irrigation systems is relatively new; that one subdivision has, however, been approved after the ordinance requiring pressurized systems was effective and is in the process of installing such a system, including the providing of the water to the lots. 12. That the Applicant did testify that he could install smaller shalloltl wells to connect a pressurized system to each phase of the development. 13. That the Applicant set forth as reasons for the lot frontage variance that the lots were larger than many subdivisions have and that they range in depth from 102 to 157 feet and testified that the culdesac lots in phase one of the development would meet the 70.0 foot minimum lot frontage at the setback line and that if the variance was not granted a few lots would be lost. 14. That the property does have available to it water rights in the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. 15. That there was no public comment or testimony submitted in opposition to the variances 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 FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 4 AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P,O, Box 427 MerIdIan, Idaho 83M2 Telephone 8884461 been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property \'/ithin 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 and pursuant to Section 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. 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 \J/hich 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 are noted which are per tin en t tot h e A p p 1 i cat ion and \'1 h i c h are a 1 mo s t the sam e as provisions in Section 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance: 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 appl ication of such provision or requirement is impracticable. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 5 AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Allornays and CounSl'llors p ,0, B01< 427 Meridian, Idaho ll3ll42 "elophone asa.4461 6. That the specific requirements regarding a variance that must be evidenced and found by the City Council are as follows, and those found in Section 11-2-419 C. are similar: 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 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 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; 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 will not violate the provisions of the Idaho Code; and e. That such variance will not FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 6 AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Atlornoy. and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 63642 relephone eaa-4461 have the effect of nullifying the interest and purpose of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Development Plan. 7. That if the variance regarding the pressurized irrigation system were granted to the extent requested by the Applicant there does appear to be a benefit or profit, economic gain or convenience, to the Applicant over and above what a previous developer was required to perform, and what future developers will be required to perform as required under the ordinance and that could give the Applicant an undue advantage. 8. That regarding the variance request as it pertains to the minimum lot frontage requirement it does not appear that granting that variance would 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. 9. That regarding Section 11-9-612 A. 2. regarding the variance for minimum lot frontages 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 the lots are larger than in many subdivisions. b. That strict compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the ovJner, subdivider or developer as a result of factors not self-inflicted. c. That the granting of the specified variance would not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 7 AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 83642 relephone 888-4461 to other property in the area in which the property is situated. d. That such varlance 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. 10. That regarding Section 11-9-612 A. 2. regarding the variance from the pressurized irrigation system requirement it is specifically concluded as follows: a. That there are no special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would clearly be unreasonable. The subdivision has ~'Jater rights, is a residential subdivision. is being developed after the effective date of the pressurized irrigation ordinance, and one other subdivision has been required to install all of the irrigation system and future subdivisions will be required to meet the terms of the ordinance. b. That strict compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance would not result in extraordinary hardship to the owner, subdivider or developer as a result of factors not self-inflicted. c. That the granting of the specified variance would be detrimental to the public1s welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the property is situated, in that the ordinance for pressurized irrigation was passed so that residential lot owners could take advantage of irrigation water that they \tJere already paying for and yet not receiving. That the granting of the requested variance would delay the eventual individual lot owners from receiving water that they will be paying for. d. That granting the variance would have the effect of altering the interest and purpose of this Ordinance but not of the Comprehensive Plan, or the legislative intent and purpose of Idaho Code 67-6530 through 67- 6532. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 8 AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 427 Meridian, Idaho 63642 Telephone 888-4461 12. That it is concluded the Application should be granted as it pertains to the variance from the lot frontage requirement of 70.00 feet but the minimum lot frontage as measured at the chord length of the radius of the culdesac shall be no less than 40.00 feet. That it is concl uded that the Appl ication should not be granted as it pertains to the variance from the pressurized irrigation system, however, the Applicant shall not be required to install more than IIdry linesll until the City Engineer has prepared standards for pressurized irrigation systems. 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-P VOTED* VOTED ~j~ VOTED t4~ << VOTED APPROVED :oU!1 v):b- DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 9