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