Loading...
Lake at Cherry Lane No. 3 VAR (The) (2)• S HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS od Place to Live A G o RONALD R. TOLSMA I CI TY OF MERIDIAN GARY D. MT HS P.E. City Engineer ORROW WALT W. M BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, waste water supt. Planner 8 Zoning Administrator KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief W L JIM JOHNSON . . WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Chairman -Planning 8 Zoning Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: November 29 1994 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/14/94 HEARING DATE: 12/6/94 REQUEST: Variance Request for The Lake at Cherrv Lane No 3 BY: Steiner Development LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Chenv Lane West of Ten Mile .:oad JIM JOHNSON, P2 MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C _MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM 8 FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: ~+ ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 E. IDAHO AVE. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 VARIANCE APPLICATION (RE: Meridian Zoning Ordinance) NAME: S einer Development PHONE 345-9665 (Owner or holder of valid option) ADDRESS: P.O. Box 190472 Boise, ID 83719 GENERAL LOCATION: North of Cherry Lane, West of Ten Mile Road LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: Please see attached. PROOF OF OWNERSHIP OR VALID OPTION: A copy of your property deed or option agreement must be attached. PRESENT ZONE CLASSIFICATION R4 VICINITY SKETCH: A vicinity map at a scale approved by the City showing property lines, streets existing and proposed zoning and such other items as the City may require. SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS: A list of all property owners and addresses within contiguoug to, directly across the street from, and within a 300' radius of the parcel(s) proposed for a Variance must be attached. (This information is available from the County Assessor) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED VARIANCE: Variance to the 80' street front rec~l» cement to allow two street frontages of 56' and,~~4' SIGNATURE: `~~ CITY COUNCIL RECORDS Date Received City Council Hearinu Date Received By Supplemental Information to Variance Application 1. Address of subject property. North of Cherry Lane, West of Ten Mile Road near the intersection of Sea Cove Way and Harbor Point Drive. 2. Name, address and phone number of applicant. Steiner Development P.O. Box 190472 Boise, Idaho 83719 208-345-9665 3. Name, address and phone number of owners of subject property. Steiner Development P.O. Box 190472 Boise, Idaho 83719 208-345-9665 4. Proof of ownership or valid option on the property or a contract interest therein with consent of the titled owner. Please see Attachment A. 5. Legal description of subject property. Please see Attachment B. 6. Present use of subject property. Residential, single family, detached, R4 type development. 7. What is intended to be done on or with the property. Allow a super large 19,000 sq. ft. parcel to be downsized into two buildable lots that will fit with the character of the surrounding development. These lots will exceed the 8,000 sq. ft. minimum in the R-4 zone. The street frontage for this super lot needs to be less than 80 feet in order to have two marketable lots instead of one unmazketable super lot. 8. The district that pertains to the subject property. Zoning district is R4. 9. Vicinity map at a scale approved by the Council showing property lines, egisting streets, proposed district and such other items as may be required. Please see Attachment C. Note the street frontage on lots lb and 17. 10. Schematic building plans which indicate typical elevation and floor plan of any proposed construction. Building plans are not attached because the variance does not apply to a specific building, but to land. The Variance is for street frontage reduction. See Attachment C. 11. A list of the mailing addresses of all property owners (from authentic tag records of Ada County) within three hundred (300) feet of the external boundaries of the land being considered and a listing of the mailing addresses of all property within the area of land being considered. Please see Attachment D. 12. Characteristics of subject property which prevent compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance. The subject property has two lots (16 and 17) on Block 2 which are of an unusually large size with respect to the other lots in the subdivision because of the location and shape of the fairway. Due to the large lot size, it would be impossible to sell this 19,000 sq. ft. super lot. Two lots with reduced street frontage are needed to solve this problem. 13. Minimum requirements of this Ordinance that need to be reduced to permit proposed use. The Ordinance calls for a minimum street frontage of 80 feet. We are requesting that a variance be made to allow a street frontage of 56' for lot 16 and a street frontage of 54' for lot 17. 14. Difficulty or hardship which would result if requirements of this Ordinance were applied to subject property. It would be almost impossible to sell a 19,000 sq. ft. lot given the size of the other lots of the other lots of this subdivision and neighborhood. A reduced street frontage is necessary to meet neighborhood compatibility. • • 15. Unusual or peculiar circumstance which indicate that regulations of this Ordinance should not be strictly complied with. The layout of the Golf Course fairways have to be followed, but the road and fairway configuration causes a 19,000 sq. ft. super lot which is much too big for this urban area. 16. Statement that special conditions and circumstances ezist which are peculiar to the land, structure or buildings involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. The Golf Course layout requires that lots 16 and 17 of Block 2 have street frontage less than 80' because of the location and shape of the fairway. 17. Statement that a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance shall deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under terms of this Ordinance. A literal interpretation of this ordinance would require that the unusually large lot be sold as is. This would not only derive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties, but it would also derive the purchaser of rights commonly enjoyed by other land owners because of a much higher cost of the total land purchased. All other lots of this subdivision will be sold fora "normal (80' x 100')" lot cost as opposed to an inflated lot and loan cost because of the parcel size. 18. Statement that special conditions or circumstances ezist that were not a result of the applicant's action. The Golf Course layout has been required by the City. Fairways created the need for two lots to have reduced street frontages. 19. Statement that granting the variance requested shall not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Steiner Development understands and states that if the Variance is granted, it will not apply to any other land, structures or buildings in the R4 zone. 20. Relationship of the proposed variance to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan encourages development flexibility and neighborhood compatibility. • 21. A fee established by the Council. The base fee is $250.00 plus $1.29 times 58 people $ 74.82 for a total of $324.82 22. The property will be posted one (1) week before hearing stating they have applied for a Conditional Use Permit or Zoning. There must be a signed affidavit that this has been done as part of the application. Please see Affidavit, Attachment E. • • REQUIREMENTS: VARIANCE 1. What is intended to be done on or with the property? Allow a 19,000 sq. ft., irregular shaped lot to be downsized into two smaller, more practical, buildable lots. Each lot will exceed the 8,000 sq. ft minimum R-4 lot size, but one lot must have a 56 foot street frontage and the other lot must have a 54 foot street frontage. The R-4 code requires an 80' street frontage but if we use 80' frontage -then the lot size is 19,000 sq. ft. This is too big and makes it unmarketable, and out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. 2. What special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district? Steiner Development must construct this subdivision around the golf course layout. This requires two lots of unusually large size as compared to other lots within the subdivision. This project qualifies for a smaller lot size allowance. 3. Why will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance deprive you of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance? The ordinance requires 80' street frontage but due to the golf course layout and street pattern, one lot is over 19,000 sq. ft. in size. Homeowners next to a Golf Course will not purchase a 19,000 sq. ft. lot. It would be too expensive and unmarketable. Builders would not buy this size parcel next to a Golf Course either. 4. What special conditions or circumstances exist that were not a result of your actions? The City required golf course master plan and donation of land for golf course. Steiner Development is complying with the City's desires. The street pattern cannot be altered because the streets need to match into existing Golf Course streets. 5. Why will the granting of this Variance not confer on you any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, structures, or building in the same district? This is a peculiar, unforeseen situation because of the golf course and the land donated to the City of Meridian. Therefore these variances would not affect other developments in the R4 zone. ._ __.. .1•,.0. 11N/ It AN A00l/IOI1M TO A fU11C11A•/ ANO !AI / AOn!!M/NT, el AO TII/ ENTIn/ OOCUM[NT, INf.IUOINO ANV AT tAC11MlNIl, f:AeEfllllV, /ffOn! llONelO. N VOV IfAVE ANV OVElTIONl, CON/IIIT VOUe Ar IOrINlV eE/On! lIOf11N0. Thl! le en AOOENOUM Io Ihs Heal Eelele Purcfleee end Sale AgreemerTl end Fler:elpl for Eernell Money Oeled: FEBRUARY 2 19 94 ID M 270211 - noDTlESS: i11E_LAKEJ~LGUEI1R1L11!N~St>dD~VIS10N - _. _- BUYER (S) S1..E]<NGILQ~~-EIOT'~1ENT --- SELLEtI (S) -ICENt_G..JSND_J1A(tY~i~BAnNEY ---- - The underllgnad Perlle! hereby agree ae Iollowe: _1)__RUYER_WIL~PURCIIASE_FROM_SELLEn 46tJ.1Cn~P_HOP_GnIY_pGSC11InED_~S._$ECIIUN_ ~,_-_ __-IOWNSIIIP__3.JIANGELHEST_PARCELd FOR_P_U(1CIIASE_t'nx4E_S)F S9OO,000.00_ __2).__A_550,000.00_nEEUNDADLE_DEP_OS17_HILL9E~.P_UT~N_ESCnOH._LOn_s~OAYS. 10 fIAVE__ TIIE CI1_Y_OF_MEO_IDIAN GIVE_OUYEO APPROVALS SUCtI AS SEHEn, HATER, REUESIGN~ _ _ LAYOUT OF GULF COURSE AND TIIAT TIIE CITY HILL FUND CONSTRUCTION OF CULF Clri1nSE. __ PONCE CITY OF HE_OIOIAN APPROVES ANO ISSUES A LETTER OF SERVICES, nUYER HILL_ PROCEED WITH PUnCFIASE, IF NOT, BUYER HILL H111NIlAH 550,000.00 DEPOSIT NITIIOUi SIGNATURE OF SELLER APPROVAL. ~ _ _3)___Pt1RCIlASE_FniCE_HILLDE_{'AID~N_THO~f'IIONS~ OP_T]<ON_1_N>;L4 OE_1'AID_AS FOLLOWS 5450,000.00. OPTION 2 5450,000.00. OPTION 1 HILL CLOSE 10 DAYS AF1ER CITY _-_ACf.EP_TS_.EINAL_APP1K)VED_P1AT -ONCE~P_IION~. CLOSES.._DE~OSIt_NILt,_flE-_.___., 1MNSFERRER TO_DP1,i0N_~AS~IONIIEEUNDAOLE_REP~SLT_. U('_IiON 2_pEPOSIT 10 DE _ CREDITED TO OPTION 2 PURCHASE PRICE. _ 4) _ _PI IA ;E_2_.ESCRDW _HILL_CLOSEI~EARC(IOH_111E_OATE_TI (E_ F~NAL_SUDO~V ZS IDN___ _-. _...__ _ IMPROVEMENTS ARE ACCEPTED 8Y 111E CITY OF HERIDIAN ON PHASE 1. _ ___ _ 5)_RIRf!R_ACICNfrill.F.IN:F.317U2SNF._SP.LLEILI3_PART.LCIPAtING_iN.~A _I t111_E7LCItANCI:.AND___ _-~ACRBIiS_TO_Pitt.1.LC(H1CF.RAtP._1N_SAi11_FJ[CIIANCF_AT_NO_COST__O0._F.EPP.NSP._TO_I111TIiR _-_. --- _6).._T11E_LANO_AREA_DESIGNATEO._AS_GOLF COI111SF_PnOPER1Y__iO..Rf:_DONAiEO ltl..lilf-_CI1Y.. _ _ CITY Of NERIOIAN, HILLDE A TAX CREDIT TO 111E SELLER. ____, _._____._._.. ,7_)...IN..1NE_ EYENT_T11AT~11EJ1UYE11_T10ES_NOLEXEnC.iSE_DrtiONS_ EITnEn_nNE_.on_ T~10 _nl_L___ ___ENGINEERING_DOCUMENTS_HILLDECOME_T11F PJIOPERT.Y_I)r T11E_SELLER_AT_ND_CDSi _ The heroin agreement, upon 119 execullon by bosh perile~, Is made y~.' _ ~~ 9UYE11 I DA1 ED: BUYEFl of Ills eloremenlloned Agroemenl. r 7 A 3 e i 8 Ie I I 1~ r~ 1~ Is ,e n le 19 ~o 21 ~~ ?/ ?'S :e n s/ ?9 ae ;11 ~~ a~ 7A 7S se aT ~A ~~ IU 11 13 SEl_LEIi 11 `' L«..~.~. v DATED: _~~ ~~~ - Is TIME: ~ ' J U O A.M. (~P.M.I tIME: ~` _ ll A.M. J~ -'M. IA iM. Nw.n I. prMM.A end dN.IIwIM M' IhA M~ Ceun1T Ar.eN~llon d nEAIRNW~ . rhy hw~w h~. Mwn d~.l/~.d Mr end N pmM+d a,lr M v.• Df .~.1 •.InN /7 pplwnMnd. Ae.a.M bT IM I,I./,p MN F,f1.N Conw~nlnn wM v~ d.e ~~~~~. el aw N.IMnd An~l.~lnn el nfAllUnS• v,. AT .rn mhwr p..~m~ M I! p,~.l.len.e A CeCI+bN M. Cwnh M,e,~rM M AU1~01•! BROKER'S COPY ,,.~ ...a.......... INI ,~ r' .j ! '' ;' • ~ , '; - .. !y ~~;. i ~ it 1 t! .11 ~;. ~~«~w' REAL STATE URCIIASE ANO SAI,Q A(if1EEMENT AND RECEI UR EAt1NEST MTi .t v ! TIN. 1! A 1E0A1.lY OINUINO CONTnAC 1, n!r '`I! ffllln! OOCUMQII, IINaUO1N0 111! OEHlnAI rn•"'!O rnOVIBIOIH ON 1N1 REVEDe! e1DR. Af10 AN1 ATTACIIM[NTe, CAnlpVll T, M! .TONING. M YOU ItAV! ANY OUelIIONe, CONlI' )Vn AT10n~//f1l YwSlFOn! NIOMNfI. ~ . 1. IMPORTANT-AOENCYOISCLOSURE.f•1 j~1 N...pr.«w«NNN.,M,IwedN,pwMINNbryNNpr.,«Mnd_al,l[I~._~rrttr•1L_,... 1 MdN»pgwM wdM-q wlm NM twM11 Np..rIwIM~IIUIfIJ]17~r~•-• .EKh p«IT .1pA•q N,N dacurmwd CMrlNmnl:-!•,, v•"An,hvlpt•r•wm li epentT wee prevMM b IdnlAww N Mee YeneecMln. EKh pMlt b NAe bMMeCNen INe Ned MN ImdwlelM^N MN cadets. d NM epene f dletbeuw h ~ • ' • T, 7: bully rwcrr:vdl 1 (~ ~~ 2 7 8 211. STEINE(1 OEVELOPHENT--"ISF • "NM+ _EE8f1UAFi`LZ IN.9A. h; "leer; :;"rff ~ 11~'. wnf"'~f~i'~1'1'.C ' "~ 8 YISA,w.M. ~ . ,1:r • ~,w- ~wi~ ,wrw w1..Nwrrw. rr-1•rw„w.w.'-d-r.,: rnYM MEIIIDIAR c«.,IyM AI)lf _. ,NMNN,IwpwNr.IwN.,N»d..•_EGAC OESC(IIPTI[IR )fll_IICIIt_U- IA full AND CDAIrIE IE LEOAI OE SCnIr IN)N MV9f DE INSEn lFD On AITACIIED rnron 10 E%ECl1I NJN OY SEII En. B1ryM hMwlry MrMrrrhee bohN to -reerl evwr Id. "lo"ch"" Mnr cd•wcl IwOd de.crNrhrr d he perrA.M N rnevwMwhM wI MN Mme d elpArq, a b eo1rN:1 NN Noe dewrrMrNrrl MrevewNlY MdMM N wrrrmwMN M NrrwwpNlw I 2. EARNEST MONEY, ^ el Nrpt~( hnn~1~(d Ne we wrnwN men e•rd . r N hs. ech ed d SO-~ Mww.i ( 'lU.. u~~~ wT eeeyrl elry r»wNdp Itr IevhlencM hy: QCeeh UrNeonN Chwee UGehNN CI»eN fble OW t]rr _ - MI fmmN Mnr»y N M drpeeN«I M huN eecMwd rrrrr exwMMw:e M ^. pN1Ne wM ehM M MM by OLNINq nrnhr Rwe••p DrwLM _ (hl•wr ____. r... IM bw1e1M d me perNee herNe, erld _ (nrn•wl l fhwM /w>fA n» CrrrNdNely w.eclwM bM•re cpry d NAe epeemeM Mwl N /eeperNArM hM MN deeNq, lel N M nrwMMrre hove bem mel htr MryM, Blrlrer NN 9MM "pee NNI me erneN mrMf (Nee aNM rwpeN Nee, w»I wrry wort Mry«'e emMl N»e 1•w rwNwrlwd rw Il.ryr M 1111 ev«w 111ryM M SeMr H 1,f1QRf wmN. MN «IN dN M IiglwnNMge. b.ylMwl NNM terWd irry its pwrMN "pew Mud ~~~~.fi TMw Crwnnrvry e1rM prorhM NMe prrNCy wne mwenwwwry rwpMl nl conNdln».i erwl MN 'chrehq ep«r.~ la pit INneedMn ehd M M • Irrq Mrm eeaew / c•reeclNr/ N Nrvdvwd. NrMr d» eKr•rw hnhlN •MA M ^~, ~. TOTAI FVR I gs~~p~ I Is~IIN~iIIIfIDIIED~IUIiSANII:DOLLT.11115------_ .-------- --~--- - - _..._ oouAns 1t ~Q 1!VlL~~~ reyebN ee laxewe: ' IN f Ceeh decal, Y+eMIrMq .Noce EMMN hMwNf ICbehq emu rw erNMl4m^p (b) f BwlMlee d NN plNdlwn pke IM.Lr. rwM Nlehrlyd) ` ~. FINANCING. IhN eprww.rANe«•MrgerwlprllM NVy«eewe•e Ar MeewYq Nr»weeq; Oflu.OVA,IJc«w, QNIA,IJfrN 1A.OMwwrrwhrrNw•hMgbwM.l CTow»• (cal U TIE W i1NANCNIO. hrdNee kren MNnee ee nMed .bare for w pNIM d _Yweu N _% pr enwrn. (N f I V1 a VA bn N eagle, rwMl NN wppMeNAe p+mhrrne On me r"uts". eMw hNed 1 MryN eMM pep na mMe Ilwln pdMe pAN r1plnNMn In ~ eq. SNwr b NeT wrdJr me d«:e1Md pohde necruery ti mlMr N drlwM whore dw.CrMwrd Nr»nchq bU Md M ..cent pekde. Arty rwdueMan b pnNee NNM M1M eonw M NN hNMNI M MN: Ullvrwr ^SwM« t.l DMrMA frNNny. rol U A99VMrIMN. thryer b A93l1AJE Nld O wNl M t]wNl MM be relNMed b.ImMT Ir en Ex1911N() lOA1119) d wpryerYr»Iwly f _ wl no mMe m.n,% wlNl mMw1Ay peym«Ae d .gwe.InNl.l f f MYAwMno f lp 1:l 1 O f Cl 1 I Id. wpeemwM ^ rMee ~] rN»e nM rerNrhe leMer b NMeee AeMNi INbINI f. 1yIM d ben alrfN eMN cool f let weh ben er euumplleM «NIIM Nnq (>) benNMp deYe NIK eeNer'e eeeepunee el IhN .ereengnl. M can epprMul N re1NIMM lrldwr errylli • Nnerlclrlp enev, pwldeee ~~~ I Uh .'~" w .I ~ N ~~ UrT~tIN3 8. SELLER'S RIGIIT TO CONTINUE TO MARKET TFIE PREMISES ANO ACCEPT OTIIER OFFERS. tl+e Nprewm«N po.•Mee br NN Sde. a lrwrllMN b mwr-N me pNdeee erN eeewpl ether eNNe MAlleel b nrryrr'• /Ip1A M wrwM M rwrlwr.e MM Inerw.Nq cddNq..r.Ne. Arry vNMer M rwnwwrM d Nry cnnNnper•!y we eel Nrm ti rnrepwph Ae cad M • weMr r nmard d eM eorMNlpwlwiee ti rerepeph Ie. (M-O CbN^e d an M NNM. NNM wNh Ulwwl wrWN m rNweod M NAe eardNp«nf 8uyr werrMAe mN MerNrMe horde neerlM b .Mee ..M M wMehM end met Dlryr'e ehNly b eMeM NrMrreNq N nM eawANonM Iwum •.N ayY~~lo~pp(J~(Kpp yi 161t70mN HoerAyl t,_(UlUtj{UIII]JC - p tIN9 AnnEEMENI IS SVIIJECT 10 3eMr'e dots b EMWwM b mrhN MN peril»e MMI eaeepl OMrer o11Me ee eMwdNeA NI rNepeph eS, 9wNer eINM here NN r1~e M CdNNrrN M oNwr N» hNNn pets.". tar eeN end M Meets eNNe IrwM each IIwN N ewNl cenlNrperrJee hwve Mwn wwlvM a IemmM IrY DrryN. lhe1M swMr rec.l.e AMehN eceMUhN eMN b pdr.Mee, eMr eMM pM &ryr eMe1dM dwye wrNlen rdNke d rrh oN«. M me went NN OufN MrNe net wwM a /worm" me conlNgeru:lee M wwnhq ..xlr-n eN eN dMMer dwye rrMMl .bare, NNn Nee ApeemwM ehM M NI•nNMIM wM wM dwpeene rNrrrnwd b Orry« Nre e•MrNee Nrc.rrMl le dNw rl IermlwNlen M M.e wW me Drryer dw.e wwM M t"ort"e Mrw errwrgMreNe, NN MryN whM MerwM M prd.e•w N» prwrMewe rw•ewr NN Nrr»Inhq M•me Mr1 Crww/drrre M Nue wpeM•»M wMwwhel«Idhq MM NN Nrme d me Ne» MIN miry M mre M Nn MvMwbN. NMlre NMN M eoneMNwd plven an me eMnM M eNMr pMennN dwev«y M nMke b me Brry« a IMN rwpreewMwlM p IrrO eNNnder deye bMO«Nq NN dW d mMMrrp evMerreed by eNNNewNlrl d MN peewnMN en IM envwMpe eduwNArlp Mw'1• rrMNe M noMCwe MrM bw ewnl M MM irldreeeee efrMwl erl MAe wpwem«II. I. ITEMS SFECIFICALLY INCI.UOEO IN TIIIS SALE IN fIU/vA Nnrrreingh wMgle ""W"ore aen rew.,e wMN:.._~NE.__.__- _ 8. ITEMS SFECIFICALLY EXCLUDED IN TIIIS SALE: 9. COSTS FA1D 6Y: Cef1e ti eAMMn N Nose Nwled bwlnw "wry M Nlc/wrM M Ihrywr cane $wMM. IHwwwe nmNwAee wpwM h«eNl, n prwvhlwe Ny M» M r«F*M IIY NrwMr. BIwN ehM Mrrdrw» 9wMri rweene eeeawd M bwn ee«wNUMn ^ Vee [_] NN rMGMeri E^INwNd Cowrege iMN rdlry IeaueelM. AdIMIpIN prenAlrM pehl by _ .See nrn .Man NvNee ehM. N rwrprweNe Try lerlrler M eNlerw.e NNed MreN, MN bNOw cmN wrM M pW M hldleelM, CeNe Appreud Lean Will p+'4AwMM. Cad. MpM. l Cider GII-e•~er~ fee ~IreN Iq w reldBT Meumpl. InMpeeL fepMe (11.(Illnd ry,e eK•lee ~I,(~ --nt- - Durln _ wA -7Ut- ~ ~ _ slLlen tNllllayn -1t -'JtJt- 7t ~)t- Cml d 1«rder p cvrM rwpwYe tail M eeaeA f It 1/ iF~ Ip 1~ ;j , N-. >I 7 rn ' t/ . >'I ~', fi .11 1! 77 i+ 7~ to IU 11 :.. :t ' X11 .~ ', e1 l e1J '•~ S !~ u ,. 1+ u M M f•1 Yi M . Aa AA !1 ', I D. CLOSING. (7n w ^9 Nrryer Mal e.er \Me dwl»•N weh NN drNhp eewnry N hruM «M InNn.neNS nwcw•eery M «frryAN. ewr nle IM rl.rhq NM «rM INf w ws Nler NMn ~~c ` a'M~~NUI~w. M 11. POSSESSION.nlryerehMM«V«wdbpmeierbnen K]dmNq ^aNMr fA 'Cbrhrp' rNMN lire JMe rr v.hklr N rhrclnrwMe Me eMrr readAM M eQeplM b f en eww» rp«d MN IM .wN pracwMM «e wNAbN M SwNM I a.M Mwl wNM eNw.an...» - I n M~(~•w we • NeeN IeMe, -AreN Mil reelrvM, MMN, ells«dlrMree M . e.nAn«I Mw/ 1dNnwe .hMN M Mo »IwA Ae d 7~ I U`~ ~~ l1F ~~Sl flb 1 • . MryM drM pry IM hnl In IMA, MndrA M M de1M MN N~AI« el SMM i w.p«wM Ji 12. ACCEFT/1NCE.Ary«idl«NmMM n/11+e1Mw.eeepl«reed9eN«en«hwhr•e ltnN O'ebd n+r-+I/Ad __ _ __ 1•/ e SMhM dl»e MA eaelA tAt Npreemrd whin ele Nine •ptcJeAd, eM MNNe EMIMN MorMy ehM M /ehrwlwA b Illl fill rwl dwr11MN >l 1~, TIME IS OF TIIF, ESSENCEu ~OF TNIS AGREEMENT. u.wrgApwrw:y_PAllb_Pt?luLE RP_AL22 he sr swtNgA AOKJ'[1TN1L_IlfAl_[Y.___.hNSe_1~UU .. ._ N ~NLDJ'IRHE>; hh s• ~~qq*~ Ae 4e-, oy er:~llfYir`~ IIKL"Il 7(iIl-__ /~ x erry«• BrgriAMeee --.-_ f1 Blrywl; Ihryer i rhrN: neeNlwrr~e d».»•• ~_ (] See NllNC a en umle . e• Nlt~c s olmler O er NI Yi On NAe enle, VWw lr«wlry Merrevw erd eocryA MN ew W IMm M M» •Irore epernM rw1 epee b entry MA M NM Mane Moved nn NM Nwd M M» Sher. 1! YW a AMIh "KCtn-lr/wlM Q.IKM N h W CNpT d hM MpNrMMM .IprMd Try MMh pMMeM. ~ ' ~~ ~ ~ ~~ / A 1 sMM•..~~r%Y _ s.MMi Addr...: ~-7~1I~(LVK.`,- rMw.~ n.. B~'s~u~. ?Ivar. 3.~3_Qdf_~yAi w...r _ .fir. ~,/ SMwr• - __. __ DwM_~.=~~7 ~ CM /_"I~X>~C~Y SIMw.~~~N•S73 H-~ sawn .ALL: A IrIN cMT M MN .lowed M Dwle CnY- -__41n1w ~rrMM Net EoMwhiq me hA ~ele Mewl deeerlplMn M me premNee, N hN why rwcwHwA en n+e ~~_. 19~ Dlrywr__ ___ $IDI- / 11110 1 At1E SIIAI I. AI..^./f ('f)11^.111111E f11 Itlf A1711Ff A/f 11' ~F~Jl lf- r'A1111FS tb~__ AI FAl;llflf t14 Cf I. lIRV AAI ~~ ~'. ~~~I1~IT , ,~ ~~ t CUMMI I MEN f F~ I I I LE INSURdNCE ~ -~,;' `, ;• SCHEDULE C ~~ I,` ~ ~ 1 ~~ , - Fite Number: P128537 Legal Description of The Lake at Cherry Lane #3 'he land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: E :; PARCEL "A" A PARCEL OF l1~ND LYING IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE-MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER O` THE SAID SECTION 3; T>-IENCE NORTH 88 55'29" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1321.64 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SA SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3 TO A POINT MARKING TIDE SOUTI-IEAST CORNER OF TI IE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE NORTH o 26'04" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 269.70 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY Or- TI IE SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3 TO AN IRON PIN, Al_SO Sl11D POINT BEING THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 0 26'04" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 1053.70 FEET ALONG THE SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER O THE SAID SOUTHWEQST QUARTE OF THE NORTHE OIT QUARTER OFF SECTIO~I NORTHEAST CORNER O 3; THENCE NORTH 89 02'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1321.04 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF OUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST OUARTOER OF SECTION 3E NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID S THENCE NORTH 89 18'58" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 301.80 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF TH SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 3 TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 0 30' 18" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1040.55 FEET ALONG A LINE EASTERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY BOUNDARTION 3 TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF A CEQR AFINFIRR GATION NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SEC DITCH; THENCE NORTH 88 23'34" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 264.94 FEET ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE OF A CERTAIN IRRIGATION DITCH TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 86 50'21" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 61.76 FEET ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE OF A CERTAIN IRRIGATION DITCH TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 82 39'35" WESTA PO NTAMARKOING THE PO NT OF ENDING OFD HEE SA DLCENOTERL NE OF A IRRIGATION DITCH TO CERTAIN IRRIGATION DITCH; THENCE NORTH 89 18'58" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 15.17 FEET ALONG A LINE SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORT1-1WEST QUARTER OF SECTION 3; TO A POINT ON THE SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 3; THENCE SOUTH 0 30' 18" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 283.36 FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 3 TO A POINT MARKING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF TF1E NORTI-IEAST QUARTER OF THE SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 3; THENCE SOUTH 0 30'11" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 407.93 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF TF~E SAID WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTI.IWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 3 TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF EIGHT MILE LATERAL; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE OF EIGHT MILE LATERAL TF-IE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: SOUTH 68 54'11" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 276.46 FEET TO A POINS OD CURVE~HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT 59.46 FEET, OF 34 04'10", A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, TANGENTS OF 30.64 FEET AND A LONG CHORD OF 58.59 FEET BEARING SOUTH 51 52'06" EAST TO A POINT OF TANGENT; THENCE LEGAL CONTINUED ~. ~ ;, ,,! ,~° . ..~r.l~• N,',;~i,~,r L E F. ~r it u~; ;~~,p I`lii~ll,> .~. .;~.! ~. i'. i' i.!' . !; i, ~~~~ ~ ~. j . ~.~-~~ i , '3 ~~;; ~:,~ ~~~ P,,,,,, ATra~r~~T s ~ Zia SOUTH 34 50'01" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 292.99 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE - SOUTH 89 48'41" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 147.34 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 35 00'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 109.03 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE "~ORTFI 51 45'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 580.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE FORTH 0 29'44" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 335.18 FEET TO A POINT ON TFIE NURTI 1ERLY BUUNDARY OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3; THENCE SOUTH 89 25'06" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 254.51 FEET ALONG THE SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 3 TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 25 00'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 64.19 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 75 59'31" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 70.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 40 00'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 75 30'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 190.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 68 00'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 265.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 77 30'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 170.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 12 00'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2©0.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTI~ 17 00'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 175.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 44 00'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 90.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 50 30'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 114.35 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTI WWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF BLOCK 9 OF CHERRY LANE VILLAGE NO.2 SUBDIVISION, AS FILED FOR RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, BOISE, IDAHO IN BOOK 46 OF PLATS AT PAGES 3791 AND 3792; THENCE NORTH 65 50'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 244.67 FEET ALONG THE SAID NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF BLOCK 9 OF CHERRY LANE VILLAGE NO. 2 SUBDIVISION TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 22 15'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 110.00 FEET ALONG THE SAID NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF BLOCK 9 OF CHERRY LANE VILLAGE NO.2 SUBDIVISION TO A POINT MARKING THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 24 OF THE SAID BLOCK 9 OF CHERRY LANE VILLAGE NO. 2 SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 67 45'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 15.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SAID LOT 24 OF BLOCK 9 OF CHERRY LANE VILLAGE NO. 2 SUBDIVISION TO A POINT; THENCE FORTH 22 15'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET ALONG THE EXTENDED NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY AND THE NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT 3 OF BLOCK 10 OF THE SAID CHEIII~Y U1NE VILLAGE NO. 2 SUBDIVISION TO A POINT MARKING THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF TI IE fiAlCl . LOT 3 OF BLOCK 10 OF CHERRY LANE VILLAGE NO. 2 SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 67 45'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 240.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF 11~IF SAID BLOCK 10 OF CHERRY LANE VILLAGE NO. 2 SUBDIVISION TO A POINT MARL<ING THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF THE SAID BLOCK 10 OF CHERRY LANE VILLAGE N0. 2 SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTH 22 15'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 151.78 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 71 11'51" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 270.18 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 0 26'04" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 87.02 FEET ALONG A LINE WESTERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3, TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 89 33'56" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 74.59 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 0 26'04" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 202.46 FEET ALONG A LINE WESTERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE SAID EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3 TO A POINT; THENCE SOUTH 89 33'56" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 94.59 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN THE PLAT OF THE LAKE OF CI IERRY LANE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, FILED IN BOOK 52 OF PLATS, PAGES 4569 AND 4570, RECORDS OF AOA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN THE PLAT OF THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 2, ACCORDING TO THE. PLAT THEREOF, FILED IN BOOK 54 OF PLATS„ PAGES 4882 AND 4883, RECORDS OF ADA COUNTY, IDAHO. LEGAL CONTINUED t ' I;' . ~~~ - ., ,1 ,: s ~; . ~ . °'; ,'.~,1 •~i .NYr. ~: ' i 1 .: i' i~ .;, i Z • . i. ~.~ :: . ~ ~, ~:~ ~:. . ~ ~~. . ' (!.. . ~ i r~,,, ~y~ ?~ ~ I ~j'i ~~,~E., ,'j,,r,~ ~!i'~ °~~ j~,~~ , 1; ; ,. ~~ r, "i i'; I~ •i~~~ . ~i~r ~ ;h , i,~, i.' ~~; j. , i . -:1 ''' ` . ~' T ,'f`}} ~' I S`~ 1 r `I' P128537, ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~; ~ ; ; ~ ~ ~i ''I n . ~ I, ; ~ :. , PARCEL B ALL OF THAT PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY WHICH LIES IN THE SOUTI WWEST ; QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST OF ' , ; 901SE MERIDIAN, IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO: ~ ~. ~ C~ A PARCEL OF LAND IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SECTION CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 2, 3, 10 AND t 1, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTF-1, RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN; WHICH IS ALSO THE INTERSECTION OF CHERRY LANE AND TEN ; ; , MILE ROAD; ` {'~ ~~ :1 THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 19'11" EAST A DISTANCE OF 2643.15 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY ,.I . BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 3, WHICH IS ALSO THE CENTERLINE OF TEN MILE ROAD, TO A POINT ; ~ . BEING THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SAID SECTIONS 2 AND 3; TI-IENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 55'29" WEST A DISTANCE OF 1051.00 FEET ALONG TFIE IJORTI IEIiLY BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID SECTION 3, TO A POINT; SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREE 19'11" WEST A DISTANCE OF 208.75 FEET ALONG A LINE WESTERLY OF nt•Iti ± PARALLEL WITH THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID SECTION 3, TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 16'49" WEST A DISTANCE OF 181.64 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 05 DEGREES 22'49" WEST A DISTANCE OF 187.83 FEET, TO A POINT, THENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 55'29" A DISTANCE OF 90.42 FEET ALONG A LINE SOUTFIERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID SECTION 3, TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREE 26'04" EAST A DISTANCE OF 87.02 FEET ALONG A LINE WESTERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3, TO A POINT; i ':., ~,~ ~~ , ' + ,:~~ THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 33'56" WEST A DISTANCE OF 7A.59 FEET, TO A POINT; , ;",., ,; , :: ,.., THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREE 26'04" EAST A DISTANCE OF 202.46 FEET ALONG A LINE WESTERLY OF , ; ' i : ~ ~ r,, r., r. AND PARALLEL WITH THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAS'~ ~ ~ r, ' ; QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3, TO A POINT; ' ~' J ;~'{.; ~I '' `°' `t''' ~~~' THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 33'56" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 94.59 FEET TO A POINT ON THE ~~~'Y~>`IL~ ~ :~ ..~ ;~ ~,;r,;: ;'.; ~,',~, BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTHWEST OUnRTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION ~f ; ,"s ~ 1,1~ ; ~~~± ti ' 7; ,I~~+'f ~, ,. ~ <,; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 26'04" WEST A DISTANCE OF 269.70 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINK ~t~ ~}~ ~`, ,~ .,, , SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3 TO A POINT BEING THE, ~ , "a :~'I~,.`' ' ' ,~ ' ~' SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST OUARTEIi OF SEC:'fitJl~ Vii; ` ; .i ,, ~~! ,~I THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 55'29" EAST A DISTANCE OF 270.64 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY ;.. ; ., ;. , ' BOUNDARY OF 7HE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. i I { i,~ ~,~ 1 . , I , r ~.'; ~ END OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION !' ` d ' ~~ ~II•~ :~t. i .I~.~;~; v ~, i',::;~. + (i~~14 ~It'~ ~11''I~~~~+ :~11I •~ . ~~.. aJ,l,~rii: ,p aI ~'~;~ II'd'''I~'' 1`• ~i'1 ... 1,~t I a ~,I ~~~ ~'~s'~ , 5,' >11,, 1~ N ;r,. I..a E ~I, ~. ~j„L' 1 :..1 II 11 1~ I ~,'N I t' ~ r ''11: I11~+i1 li . . 'I r ' ). ~; ;i I. i;' . • 1, ~~~: ,' ~ 1 ".1 •~ 4 ~I ~' . ., • ~ ;~ r~~ jj ;~ _ ~ ~ w ii /!ft / ~ i I I ~: ~~ d~a~ ~ ~ ~i a ~ ~ 11 III = ~ Z ~ 1 I~~• ~ i i ~ ~ ~ I' I / I 1 1 1 I ! I ~ 1 I -~ W ~ n~ ---- ~ ~---- ; ~• ~ .----' 1 r---- ~ ~ ~ x ------, ~t-- - ; ~ tt ~~! . , ~~ ~~~ i 111 ~ / ~ 1 ''• '~,• ~ ~•- :•, ,~ ~ _j :.---"~ f ~ ~ psi ___ _ 1 ~y - 1 ~ 3 ~`.+~ ~ 1 I 1 111 / 1 ~ .~- 1 1 1 ~ ! y 1 1 / ~--- 1 .~ ~ ` - ~ _~ ~~ 1 \ 1 ~ ~ 1/ 1 ~ _ f ~. 1 ~ 1 1 ~1 ~ ~ / 1 I ~ ~~ ---. ~ ~, ~ _ _ ~ ,- 9 i ~ ' ` ~ `[.~.~ ~. 1 ~ L~~ ~ .A ' ' •' ~~7 1 '•-~ ~ / ~ -iii ~~<=_ _ ~ ~~~.` , i ~r ~. •~ » s ' ~' ~ ~- ~ / ~ I ~ • ~ r, e ~ ' ~ a • e ~ ~ ~ s ~. / • ! • +} ~ 1~ ~ ' ~, ~, ~ •~ ~ ~ i• - , . (1 .' • ~ ~ _. a .~ . 5 c ~ e..... . ,~ I r ..' 1 ~! ;( ~>a ~ ;:~ ~i;'I Vii' ;•-1 i s R;'~;~pili'I r ~ ~ ~; ~ 'eta ~y a i~1,P ~.'1i 1. ~ rI1 ~i . }~! '' 111j ~ ~~. ,III ji ~~!Iti~• .I~~ ~- ~ •~ 7r ,11 ? ,~ ,~~:.. ,1 ~,; ;, t;fir,• ~i ~ he,CY :,~ ~ c i ~5rr~~~ ~ ~ : ~I~ ,,. ` S ;r 4. `I t::: ir:~~'~.y~~k~,~,,;, ~ ~ ~ ' only. ~(hc `~~ ~~ ~~li , ',,I '~ liability to i ~~' ~Irr~i~ ~ ,'~I~•' ~,, ~ ~:~,; r (I ti #~~ l r ~~, 1 i iii '~~ ~; i a (~ 91,1 ~~ i ~ 11 ~~' ,• ~ - I , .,` ( ~t j~~j`I ty;l ~ ~~ i ~! t i h t' ~~ H 9 , 1 ~.1 r~: !I!..~ ~ - i .,. 1 ` •» ~i, .`,"_ M/ II 1101 .1 ^' t: o Y t': ° 1 w .- I ,~~ fl~~~"~'~ 17 .,V T,'•~, 1 • ~ .. .., ~~~ rI'•I~l, " r 1• •y~ IYI Ie ~ •rl l,M~ ~I w .. ~.~ x771 1"v I+~~. 111 ~ 1w $d• I A11 ~. ~•'t l~1I aloe ~ . laY1e ~3pq•••~:wnlal~rlnwCnycr• • w.ll I+a 1:µ'1"p 11;7•x91 M Hasa a wu ~ 01 M)s C.ww1I . v•.UI /V ~. Ic lar (oc~llicx- ~upn;uru Company tlssumos nc- rari~clionx. :I:R rin.E cr~al~nri~ j ul nth Cuinly ~-~ ~. ~I l l I I 1 - I I I i I .J/ ~ w y ` _~h ~ ~y , L,AKe. ~tT ~•' G1fl~c1~Y L.ArE (~ No. ~ ~ , . • '1 1 - ~ wN•U ^ 1101 II' ~ I • I ~`r •in 1- • ~~. ~~ ,~1~ + Y J ~<''~:~'. i!t a~ 1 • \~ 1• ~ 101 ~ ~ %~• • !. 7 •,~ ~:* f ~ 1 .:. J~ \ \ 7.w` _~ I Iw • t • ~ 4 ~ a~2~'7i1 ~_ ;~ ' ~ r I ' 4, `.. ~ I w Y~ • ( 11 ; • ' r~••,~, ` ,tip 1. ( w ~, ~J~l w // J~ l +\, ~: Cif 1,.• F I •'~~ ~ ... ` f ~ •~ ~l 1f j•i ~ ~ w r • • ••,~ ~ •s ~ r. ~,.~+±•"l~j • ~ fit` ' ~ •2 .~~1 ti~I.~•• _)~I 71 r~-•~ I • s r ~ • • ~~ ~~ 1 Z~.~M~ ~ r l s I ~ .;:14•. '• `~ '` , tr'S ~ 1 yl~ ~ ~( • 5 ii ~ ~~~11 I..~ I I~•'i ~1~~5Y 1.. ,= 7;~ir :1 f~S~~ tltl~i I" fl ~,~~i I N ~~Ih y °~~ ? ~i~ ~+~ tl rt rr~~-~ ~il4 t !~1 r: :,7 ;c~ it •• , i~'~~~~ .~ . G~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ . ~; . P.~ ~ o ~ j ~ ~ s •. ~ ~ ~ i ~ 1 ~:~~ amok ~1 ~' ~ rn 2-~-~«-~+c ~ i I ~~ i i I ~'z ~ a~~ • ~ s,yy 1 1 YM~v N~'17r ~iY1 • 2 I) 1 1 ~~ ;, ~~ . ~~~ ~~ ~ +1 / s Y c C:tt 1 W ! 1 ( 1 1 ~~~ ~ t11 ___~ ~ __ , i ` r__ ~ -~- ~ ~~~ a 1 ' r__•_ , ~ ~~ i~ ~ +, 1 Z ~ ; ___~___rt 1 / ~, ~ 1 r 7 ~ ~J~ ~^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ,. ~ -' : ~' _ i o ~ - s / iii i ; : • ., ~ ~!Y .. , II ,'. ; ~ ~t ~ 0 I ` ~' ' '' ' ` ~1 ~ •I / ~ •• ~ j ~ • ~ r - ..• . . • ~ • i i~ ~~ / i i ~ . Y' .~ , 1 , ' 't •~ ~ ` 1 -`~'~~~ II • FYI I •~ •» ! 1 ....1 .. / ~ ~ , • ! ,. o ~ ~ , . / 0 5, / ! / • ~. / • / • / / I a /~ ~ 1 • ( ~ / • ( ~ ! / Sa _~ _ _ i •E^ 1 : ~ '~ / ~~~ _RECORD OWNER AFFIDAVIT VARIANCE REQUEST AFFIDAVIT POSTING AFFIDAVIT I, Doug Campbell, a principal of Steiner Development, do hereby certify that Steiner Development is the record owner of the land described as the "Lake at Cherry Lane #3 Subdivision" in an application for Variance being submitted to the City of Meridian for consideration. I further state that I hereby officially request a variance of said property by the City of Meridian, Idaho. In addition, I hereby state and certify that the subject property will be posted one week before the public hearing stating that the above-mentioned applications with the City of Meridian have been made. Dated this By: Doug STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) of ~-' ~'~a i3 ~~ , 1994 ON THIS day of , 19 ,before me a notary public in and for said State, personally appeared known to me to be the persons whose nam a e subscr' ed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that ~_ executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. My Notary Commission Expires , 19 9~ My '~ioiary iio~id Expires /~ ~~ _ , 19-~ ,. Residing at ,Idaho ~ ~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 17 1995 APPLICANT: STEINER DEVELOPMENT ITEM NUMBER; 8 REQUEST; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE, FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO 3 PREFER TO JANUARY 3 1995 PACKET) AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ME=RIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN tRRiGAT10N; SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: COMMENTS ;~iG ~~ ~~ P ~~ ~~ q/ J ~Ppf ~~~r~J.¢ OTHER: BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL APPLICATION OF STEINER DEVELOPMENT FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE R-4 STREET FRONTAGE_ REQUIREMENT OF 80 FEET FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled variance request having come on for consideration on December 6, 1994, 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 plat for Carnelian Subdivision was published for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing for December 6, 1994, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the December 6, 1994, hearing; that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations. 2. That 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. l.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met. 3. That Ordinance 11-2-410 A, Zoning Schedule of Bulk and Coverage Controls, requires that the street frontage in the R-4 Residential District be Eighty (80) feet; that the property is • zoned R-4 Residential. 4. That the Applicant has requested to be granted a variance from the above street frontage requirement; that the Applicant has taken a lot of approximately 19,000.00 square foot lot and split it into two lots, one with street frontage of 56 feet and the other with 54 feet; that both lots would meet the minimum square footagre requirements of R-4 lots of 8,000 square feet. 5. The entire property in question is described in the subdivision application and is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 6. That the Applicant is the property owner. 7. That no people appeared at the hearing objecting to the variance application; that the Meridian Fire Department commented that the variance was fine with it. 8. That the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, commented that the variance request was unclear; that a 19,000 square foot lot does not exist; she recommended that the configurtion shown on the Final Plat be accepted in accordance with the conditions of that approval and that a variance of the frontage, for lots 16 and 17 of Block 2, only, be granted. 9. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the City Council were given and followed. 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 of the proposed subdivision 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 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance and 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 Subdivision and Development 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 Planning and Zoning Commission, governmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and the State. 5. That the following provision of Section 11-9-612 A. 1., of the Zoning Ordinance is noted which is pertinent to the Application: 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 as follows: 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 public 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 have the effect of nullifying the interest and purpose of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 7. That there does appear to be a specific benefit or profit, economic gain or convenience to the Applicant in that there was only one lot and now the Applicant would have two lots; that the Applicant could have initially platted the property as now requested and requested a variance at that time or platted it such that all lots would have 80 foot street frontages; that the remaining in the proposed subdivision lots do have 80 foot frontages; that it would be in the best interest of the City to grant the variance. 8. 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 the R-4 street frontage Ordinance would clearly be unreasonable in that the two new lots do meet the minimum 8, 000 square feet of frontage required in the R-4 District and only lack the required street frontage of 80 feet. b. That strict compliance with the requirements of the street frontage Ordinance would not result in extraordinary hardship to the applicant as a result of factors not self-inflicted, but it does make reasonable sense to grant the variance where the minimum requirements of the R-4 District are met except for the 80 foot street frontage requirement. c. That the granting of a 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 the variance would not have the effect of altering the interests and purposes of the street frontage requirement or the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 9. That it is concluded the Application for a variance should be granted. 10. The City has in the past granted similar variances as requested by the Applicant but has also denied such variances; each application must stand on its own merits and the granting of one variance is not a precedent for granting others. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby approve these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN MORROW VOTED COUNCILMAN YERRINGTON VOTED COUNCILMAN CORRIE VOTED COUNCILMAN TOLSMA VOTED MAYOR KINGSFORD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DECISION That it is decided the variance from the R-4 street frontage requirement of eighty (80) feet is hereby granted for lots 16 and 17. APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 14, 1995 Page 4 Bradbury: I might point out that you will probably recall that when we were here last time there was a question raised by the representative from the Ada County Highway District which is I think in part what caused the matter to be tabled. Since that time the developers representative has met with the Highway District and they have apparently come to an agreement as is reflected on the plat that you have before you now. What that did in essence it also reduced the number of proposed R-4 lots down from 1 think it was a proposed 54 down to 50. It reduced the lots along that most northerly tier. It pulled that street back and connected it into the adjacent subdivision. Johnson: Thank you very much. This requires findings of facts and conclusions of law. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact on this. Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on the request for annexation and zoning for the Lake at Cherry Lane Subdivision No. 5 and 6, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: TABLED FEBRUARY 14, 1995: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE SUBDIVISION NO. 5 AND 6 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: Johnson: We really can't do much on this can we Wayne until we get the annexation and zoning? Crookston: That is correct. Once you approve of the annexation then the Commission can act on the plat. Alidjani: So do you suggest that we table the plat until the next meeting until the findings are prepared? Crookston: You can take any testimony that wants to be presented, if somebody wants to present some testimony, you can do that. Then I would recommend that you table it until you act on the findings for the annexation. Johnson: We have had the public hearing, is there anything you want to add on the plat at this point? Anyone have any questions or comments? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 14, 1995 Page 5 Shearer: I would assume that we would want to hold this and get the corrections back for the next meeting at what time we have. Johnson: Is that a motion? State your motion. Shearer: I request that this be tabled and brought back before the Commission at the next meeting when we, after the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Alidjani: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second, all those in favor of Mr. Shearer's motion? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF R-8, R-15 AND L-0 FOR 180.9 ACRES BY GEM PARK II PARTNERSHIP: Johnson: You have the findings of facts and conclusions of law before you, are there any corrections, deletions or discussion regarding these findings of facts? What is your pleasure, we need a motion on the findings. Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make a motion the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law. Shearer: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission adopt and approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as presented, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Absent, Shearer -Yea, Alidjani -Yea: MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Any decision or recommendation you wish to pass onto the City Council at this time? Alidjani: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they deny the annexation and zoning as stated above for the property described for the reasons • BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 & 6 - STEINER DEVELOPMENT ANNEXATION AND ZONING SE 1/4 NE 1/4 SECTION 3, T.3N., R.1W. MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having first come on for consideration on January 10, 1995, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East. Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Applicant having requested that the matter be tabled at various times and the final hearing being held on March 14, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony, and the Applicant appearing through attorney Steve Bradbury, spokesperson for Steiner Development, and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT A. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for January 10, 1995, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the January 10, 1995, hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio and television stations. That FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Paqe l THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 T this annexation and zoning request was then tabled until February 14, 1995 and tabled again until March 10, 1995. B. That the property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein; that the property is 40.18 acres in size; that the property is on the west side of Ten Mile Road between Ustick and Cherry Lane; that the adjacent property to the east is part of the Cherry Lane Subdivision; that the entire 40.18 acres is not being developed at the same time. C. The Applicant is not the owner of record of the property, but the owner of record William E . Teeter, has consented to the annexation and zoning application and the Applicant has an option to purchase the property. D. That the property is presently zoned R-T (Rural Transitional) in Ada County. E. That on November 9, 1994, at a Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, but not a public hearing, the Applicant presented a concept plan for development, which is incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that on the concept drawing there was a list of things that would be included in the development; comments were made that the development would be high value detached and high value attached house; that there would be 20 acres of R-4 and 20 acres of R-15; that there would be elderly garden one level homes with gated, high security clusters with liberal common area and private roads to the Garden homes and to FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Pac1e 2 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 & 6 town houses; that there would be restrictions on children living there; it would be for people of 55 years and older; that the homes would be of high quality; that they were donating a fire station and that they were working on a school site; that there would be 20 acres in phase one. F. That at the January 10, 1995, public hearing the Applicant's representative, Steve Bradbury, stated the request is to have some of the land zoned R-4 Residential and some R-15 Residential; the representative had two concept drawings that showed a portion being developed at this time to R-4 Residential with a total of 54 residential lots and a portion being developed at this time to R-15 Residential on about 11 acres with a total of 30 residential lots to be develop~'into single family attached and detached mixed dwellings such as patio homes similar to those in River Run Development in Boise; the R-15 would have 5,000 square foot minimum size lots; it was stated that the concept is to have smaller parcels with extensive landscaping and common facilities and areas; that the center portion would have a club house with a recreation center and a swimming pool; that there is a 6.5 acre parcel to the north that also would be R-15 and it was stated that it would be about the same as the previously mentioned R-15 area and it was the intent to come back with a conditional use permit or a planned unit development, but that it was the desire to hold off on the specific design; it was stated that there would be a significant amount of landscaping improvements included in the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 3 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 • ! first phase of the project carried over to the second phase - about $180,000.00 worth of landscaping; that there would be a block wall behind the 20 foot landscaping area on Ten Mile Road; the wall would vary between six feet with wrought iron on the top of it down to four feet with a foot of wrought iron on top; the main thoroughfare would have center dividers; the representative stated that the idea is to do a really nice higher end well done project; that they would have tight covenants; that it would be a project similar in aesthetics to Island Woods Subdivision in Eagle or the River Run in Boise; that pressurized irrigation would be installed; he stated that all of the City Engineer's conditions were acceptable; he additionally stated that perhaps the Application could be approved and simply have the R-15 approved with the designation that it would be conditioned upon approval of a specific site plan; that the Developer would dedicate to the Meridian Fire Department a 160 X 160 square parcel of ground free of charge; the representative also stated that the first phase would be south of the road and the second phase would be the north half of the property. ~'~ bi« l~~<<Y,h J That at the January 10, 1995, there was no specific discussion that the development would be for people of 55 years and older, about garden or patio homes, or the items that were included on the concept drawing submitted to the Commission on November 9, 1994; that Mr. Bradbury, in response to a question from Mr. Hepper, stated "Yes" to the question that the land on both sides of the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Paste 4 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 road as you come in (along Teter Boulevard) would be developed later and brought before the Commission, and stated, "Yes, that is right, both of those areas that are easterly of the areas that have lots drawn on them would be submitted. The design for those areas would be submitted in a separate application under either the conditional use provision or the planned unit development provision of your code."; that the property was not shown to be developed in north and south halves but in east and west halves. G. That from the legal descriptions presented to show which land is desired to be zoned R-4 and that which is requested to be zoned R-15, it would appear that approximately two-thirds of the total 40 acres is being requested to be zoned R-15 and one-third R- 4; that at the meeting on the 9th of November, 1994, it was stated that the two zones would be about 20 acres each; that at the January 10, 1995, public hearing the Applicant's representative, Steve Bradbury, stated the request was to have some of the land zoned R-4 Residential and some R-15 Residential; he did not state the specific amount of land to be zoned in each district; the Applicant did submit a preliminary plat application that the Commission had full opportunity to inspect as part of the application for the annexation and zoning, but the Applicant did not submit a separate drawing showing how much land was specifically included in each zone. H. That at the public hearing on January 10, 1995, J. R. Petty testified and questioned whether there was a limitation on age, was there a recreation area for children, that he was FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 5 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 concerned with the high density and not having a recreation area; there were no other people to testify other other than the Applicant's representative to testify at the March 14, 1995, public hearing. I. That Gary Smith, City Engineer, and Bruce Freckleton Assistant to the City Engineer, submitted comments for the January 10, 1995, hearing and comments from Bruce Freckleton and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, were submitted comments for the March 14, 1995, hearing, and they are both incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that some of their comments were that the local streets need to be 50 feet wide with 37 feet between the backs of curbs and include 5 foot sidewalks; that the high seasonal ground water needed to be established; that existing ditches crossing the property need to be tiled; that cul-de-sacs shall not be longer than 450 feet; that water service is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis; that sidewalks, to meet City ordinance, must be constructed; that the R-15 Planned Residential Area shall be submitted under the Conditional Use Permit process; that any duplex will be required to be submitted and approval of a variance is required or they must be included as part of a Planned Unit Development under the conditional use process; that Phase 2 will require submittal and approval under the Conditional Use Permit process; that block some lengths exceed 1,000 feet; that a 20 foot landscape easement should be platted as a separate maintenance lot for maintenance by the home owners FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 6 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 association; that perimeter fencing is required prior to obtaining building permits; and that a development agreement is required as a condition of annexation, which shall be approved and executed prior to or concurrent with the final plat approval. J. That the Meridian School District commented that it still needed a school site designated in this section. K. That the Meridian Police and Fire Departments, Ada County Highway District, Central District Health Department, the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, City Planning Director, Idaho Power, did submit comments and such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. L. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. M. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian and the parcel is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. N. That the property is shown on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as being in a Single Family Residential area. O. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use, Rural Areas, Section 6.3, it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services can be provided. P. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 7 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 • increase which is likely to continue; that there are pressures on land previously used for agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots. Q. That the property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer via mains currently installed in Ten Mile Road. R. That the R-4 and R-15 Residential Districts are described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3 and 5 as follows: (R-4) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The purpose of the (R-4) District is to permit the establishment of low density single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas where predominantly residential development has, or is likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan or the City, and to protect the integrity of residential areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non- residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a maximum of four ( 4 ) dwellings units per acre and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. ,~R-15) Medium High Density Residential District - The purpose of the (R-15) District is to permit the establishment of medium-high density single-family attached and multi-family dwellings at a density not exceeding fifteen (15) dwelling units per acre. All such districts must have direct access to a transportation arterial or collector, abut or have direct access to a park or open space corridor, and be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. The predominant housing types in this district will be patio homes, zero lot line single-family dwellings, town houses, apartment buildings and condominiums; that the R-4 zoning district requires a minimum of 1,400 square feet to be included in houses in that zone and houses of 1,301 square feet are required in the R-15 zone. S. That Section 11-2-411 B states as follows: "All new residential housing developments in the City of Meridian shall be designed to insure compatibility with adjacent existing and/or proposed developments." FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Paq_e 8 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 & 6 T. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Residential Policies, 2.1U states as follows: "Support a variety of residential categories (urban, rural, single-family, multi-family, town houses, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities." U. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.3 c., it states as follows: "Within the Urban Service Planning Area development may occur in densities as low as 3 dwellings per acre if physical connection is made to existing City of Meridian water and sewer service and the property is platted and subdivided . ,~ V. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.4, it states as follows: "Residential development is allowed in the rural area provided that said development does not exceed the Rural Residential Agricultural density, unless it is inside the Urban Service Planning Area and City sewer and water is provided, then Low, Medium and High density residential may be considered.. All residential development must also comply with the other appropriate sections of this plan." W. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Housing, Housing Policies, at page 66, states as follows: "1.1 The City of Meridian intends to provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes, multi-family, town houses arrangements), ." "1.3 An open housing market for all persons, regardless of race, sex, age, religion or ethnic background." "1.4 The development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers should be encouraged." X. That in prior requests for annexation and zoning in this area the previous Zoning Administrator commented that annexation could be conditioned on a development agreement including an impact FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 9 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 • fee to help acquire a future school or park sites to serve the area and that annexations should be subject to impact fees for park, police, and fire services as determined by the City and designated in an approved development agreement; that such comment is equally applicable to this Application. Y. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its. impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in population does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for school services to current and future students. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 10 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 i • Z. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all residential lots in the City because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. AA. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (10'). wide." AB. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." AC. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" AD. That Section 11-9-605 R states as follows: "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi- improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 11 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 & 6 • • 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value, especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." AE. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the Bicycle-Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments. AF. That Section 11-9-605 M, PIPING OF DITCHES, reads in part as follows: Tiling of irrigation ditches, laterals or canals. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing, or lying adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or laterals touch either or both sides of the area being subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed with tiling or other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to said ditch, lateral or canal. The City may waive this requirement for covering such ditch, lateral or canal if it finds that the public purpose requiring such will not be served in the individual case. Any covering program involving the distribution system of any irrigation district shall have the prior approval of that affected irrigation district. No subdivision plat shall be approved where the subdivision is arbitrarily or artificially laid out to avoid being adjacent to any waterway, irrigation ditch, lateral or canal to which it would otherwise be naturally adjacent or which it would otherwise naturally include. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 12 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 • AG. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the City Council were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS A. 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. B. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of the City's annexation authority is a Legislative function. C. That the City Council has judged this annexation and zoning application by the provisions contained in Section 50-222, Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances, the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. D. That all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been complied with. E. That the City Council may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 13 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 & 6 F. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. G. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant and not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. H. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The Citv of Idaho Falls. 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). I. That the development of annexed land must meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements, Section 11-9-605 M., which pertains to the tiling of ditches and water ways, and Section 11-9-606 B 14, which pertains to pressurized irrigation; that the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer; that the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinances; that, as a condition of annexation the Applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address the inclusion into the subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G., H 2, R, L and M; that the development agreement shall, as a condition of annexation, require that the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, pay, when required, any FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 14 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 & 6 i.. • • development fee or transfer fee adopted by the City; that there shall be no issuance of building permits until the requirements of this paragraph are met or, if necessary, the property shall be subject to de-annexation and loss of City services, if the requirements of this paragraph are not met. The development agreement shall also address the landscaping and maintenance thereof, by a mandatory home owners association rather than the individual lot owners. The Applicant shall adopt Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions as a condition of annexation and they shall require a mandatory homeowners association which can assess dues and fees. J. That the development of the Applicant's property would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. K. That the requirements of the Meridian City Engineer, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, Meridian Fire Department, Idaho Power, the comments of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Director, and these Findings and Conclusion, shall be met and addressed in a development Agreement. L. That all ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled the property shall be subject to de-annexation; that the Applicant shall be required to install a pressurized irrigation system, and if not so done the property shall be subject to de-annexation. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Pa e 1 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 • M. That the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land; that the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinances. N. It is concluded that the Applicant has changed the development plan from what was presented to the Commission on November 9, 1995, to what was presented on March 14, 1995; that development of the R-4 portion of the property is satisfactory since that is the type of development that has been done in the a~ area in past and is being done now Cherry Lane Village and in The Lake at Cherry Lane 3 and 4; that the property desired to be zoned R-15 that what was initially proposed to the Commission on November 9, 1994, appeared to be more acceptable to the Commission than that presented on March 14, 1995; additionally the Applicant stated that the R-15 housing was to be a minimum of 1,200 square feet, and yet the minimum square foot requirement in the R-15 District under 11- 5ih~1~ fitrn,/~ 2-411 D 2. is 1,301 square feet; there also was no specific mention of many of the items mention at the November 9, 1994, meeting; that the Applicant showed platted lots for some of the land that he desired to be zoned R-15 but did not submit a plat showing individual lots for much of the land that he desired to be zoned R-15; his representative did state that the entire concept could be approved with those parcels not broken down into individual lots being conditioned on a conditional use or a planned FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page 16 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 & 6 unit development procedure. O. That it is concluded that the property requested to be annexed and zoned R-4 should be annexed and zoned R-4; that it is concluded that the property requested to be annexed and zoned R-15 should not be annexed at this time; that some plans for the R-15 were shown but not for the entire parcel that is being requested to be zoned R-15; that the Commission would like to know specific development plans of the R-15 area prior to annexation because if the property is annexed R-15, with either a conditional use or a planned unit development condition, the property may only have to meet the R-15 requirements even though the Commission and City Council deem that it would be more appropriate to have more restrictions than allowed in the R-15 District; if those additional restrictions are made as a condition of .annexation they are more enforceable. P. That it is concluded that the Applicant shall be required to meet the comments of the City Engineer, Gary Smith, Bruce Freckleton Assistant to the City Engineer, Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, the Meridian Police and Fire Departments, Ada County Highway District, Central District Health Department, the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, and Idaho Power. Q. That proper and adequate access to the property is available and will have to be maintained; that the minimum house size of 1,400 square feet in the R-4 District must be met. R. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind FINDINGS OF FACT AND_CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Paqe 17 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 & 6 i ~ • • the applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns. S. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning of R-4 Residential would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian and the denial of the annexation of the land requested to be R-15 would also be in the best of the City of Meridian. T. That if these conditions of approval are not met the property shall not be annexed or shall be subject to de-annexation, if it has been annexed. APPROVAL OF FINDINt~B OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER BEPPER COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) MOTION: 1 ~ APPROVED:, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 & 6 VOTED ~~ ~~~~ VOTED , n - VOTED . ~~ ~..~ VOTED VOTED DISAPPROVED: Page 18 i- • • RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that the property requested to be zoned R-4 be annexed and so zoned and that the property requested to be zoned R-15 not be annexed; it is additionally recommended that the Applicant, as to the property to be zoned R-4, meet the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, specifically including the adoption of a home owners association with mandatory dues, that the Applicant and owners are specifically required to the all ditches, canals and waterways and install a pressurized irrigation system as conditions of annexation, and that the Applicant meet all of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, specifically including the development time requirements, and enter into the required development agreement, and that if the conditions are not met that the property not be annexed, or if these conditions are not met that the land be de-annexed. MOTION: APPROVED:r~ DISAPPROVED: L.% FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Pam 9 THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 & 6 ~,. F M . C~~p~( BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL APPLICATION OF STEINER DEVELOPMENT FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE R-4 STREET FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT OF 80 FEET FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled variance request having come on for consideration on December 6, 1994, 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 plat for Carnelian Subdivision was published for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing for December 6, 1994, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the December 6, 1994, hearing; that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations. 2. That 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. l.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met. 3. That Ordinance 11-2-410 A, Zoning Schedule of Bulk and Coverage Controls, requires that the street frontage in the R-4 Residential District be Eighty (80) feet; that the property is ~ r x *~ • • zoned R-4 Residential. 4. That the Applicant has requested to be granted a variance from the above street frontage requirement; that the Applicant has taken a lot of approximately 19,000.00 square foot lot and split it into two lots, one with street frontage of 56 feet and the other with 54 feet; that both lots would meet the minimum square footagre requirements of R-4 lots of 8,000 square feet. 5. The entire property in question is described in the subdivision application and is incorporated herein as if set forth in full . 6. That the Applicant is the property owner. 7. That no people appeared at the hearing objecting to the variance application; that the Meridian Fire Department commented that the variance was fine with it. 8. That the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, commented that the variance request was unclear; that a 19,000 square foot lot does not exist; she recommended that the configurtion shown on the Final Plat be accepted in accordance with the conditions of that approval and .that a variance of the frontage, for lots 16 and 17 of Block 2, only, be granted. 9. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the City Council were given and followed. 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 of the proposed subdivision to owners of property within 300 feet of the external ' f + ' • • boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant to Section 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance and 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 Subdivision and Development 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 Planning and Zoning Commission, governmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and the State. 5. That the following provision of Section 11-9-612 A. 1., of the Zoning Ordinance is noted which is pertinent to the Application: 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 as follows: 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 public 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 have the effect of nullifying the interest and purpose of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 7. That there does appear to be a specific benefit or profit, economic gain or convenience to the Applicant in that there was only one lot and now the Applicant would have two lots; that the Applicant could have initially platted the property as now requested and requested a variance at that time or platted it such that all lots would have 80 foot street frontages; that the remaining in the proposed subdivision lots do have 80 foot frontages; that it would be in the best interest of the City to grant the variance. 8. 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 the R-4 street frontage Ordinance would clearly be unreasonable in that the two new lots do meet the minimum 8, 000 square feet of frontage required in the R-4 District and only lack the required street frontage of 80 feet. ,~ , ~ . • b. That strict compliance with the requirements of the street frontage Ordinance would not result in extraordinary hardship to the applicant as a result of factors not self-inflicted, but it does make reasonable sense to grant the variance where the .minimum requirements of the R-4 District are met except for the 80 foot street frontage requirement. c. That the granting of a 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 the variance would not have the effect of altering the interests and purposes of the street frontage requirement or the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 9. That it is concluded the Application for a variance should be granted. 10. The City has in the past granted similar variances as requested by the Applicant but has also denied such variances; each application must stand on its own merits and the granting of one variance is not a precedent for granting others. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby approve these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN MORROW VOTED COUNCILMAN YERRINGTON VOTED COUNCILMAN CORRIE VOTED `~ COUNCILMAN TOLSMA VOTED ~ MAYOR KINGSFORD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DECISION That it is decided the variance from the R-4 street frontage requirement of eighty (80) feet is hereby granted for lots 16 and 17. ~. ~~ • ~~~ APPROVED: C~ DISAPPROVED: ~~ N ~~ t ' ~ a ' V~ v > rt ~~ ~ m . a~ ~'° (D 00 ~ ~j ~ N tea ~. O O r 0 ~~ O \ L F~ • CD /~ ly+ rn N 04 i ~~ ~r • O ~~ t-t- ~yt""1` V ~f r 0 ~• r-+ • v ICI r• ~• d C e~~P 0 0 00 v:~1-.> %'~<-~ Y~ !~ ~-+ • C~ ~. w 0 r~ r 0 c~ \ L r ~• O (~\] s • • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 6 1994 APPLICANT; STEINER DEVELOPMENT ITEM NUMBER; 24 REQUEST; PUBLIC HEARING• REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE AGENC,~ CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT:. CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION; SETTLERS IRRIGATION: COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS "REVIEWED" SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS IDAHO POWER: lit~'a~~ ~~'r' US WEST: ..~ INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: / 1 UREAU OF CLAMATIO yy" `~~ ~~ ~/~ ~~ % B RE N. ,ir , - ` /' r,~ OTHER: ~"~ fib/ • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk City Treasurer JANICE L GASS CITY ©F MERIDIAN MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE . , GARY 0. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supl. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, waste water Supt. Planner a Zoning Administrator KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 JIM JOHNSON W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Chairman -Planning 8 Zoning Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. K[NGSFORD Mayor TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: November 29, 1994 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/14/94 HEARING DATE: 12/6/94 REQUEST: Variance Request for The Lake at Cherry Lane No 3 BY: Steiner Development - LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Cherry Lane West of Ten Mile Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MOE ALIDJANI, P2 JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P2 GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C!C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RE MATION(PRE M & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES v ~~~ OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: i=~ ~ ~ 1 6 p~: ",.-r p, ~~r CITY ®F h45~~~=°= ' • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY • COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA WILLIAMG.BERG,JR.,CityClerk City Treasurer GASS JANICE L CITY ©F MERIDIAN MAXYERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE , . GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, waste water Supt. planner 8 Zoning Administrator KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief IDAHO 83642 MERIDIAN W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief Att R , Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887813 JIM JOHNSON Chairman • Planning 8 Zoning orney ., WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, J Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: November 29 1994 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/14/94 HEARING DATE: 12/6/94 REQUEST: Variance Request for The Lake at Cheny Lane No 3 BY: Steiner Development LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Cherry Lane, West of Ten Mile Road JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P2 TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C -WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY -CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLA ~,+~_, F_..,. w_..,. ,- ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ~~.;~..~:~~ ~' .~=~• ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH ~ (~ ~~ 2 Z i~~~ NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT C~`~ ~' ~r T~'itit~ifiliraf`a IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES // I ~--_ ~ ~, OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: ~ r + 1 wcJ r/R~ ~~ ~ • S~INTENDENT OF SCHOOLS ob L. Haley DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT COQ EXCEL` Dan Mabe, Finance 8~ Administration E` ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT Z~ Christine Donnell, Personnel & Instruction ~~~\~~~ 1 rn DIRECTORS ~` Sheryl Belknap, Elementary Jim Carberry, Secondary Doug Rutan, Special Services JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT N0.2 911 MERIDIANSTREET • MERIDIAN,IDAH083642 • PHONE(208)888-6701 Novem er , Z Q ~~ City of Meridian 33 East Idaho NOY 2 5 1994 Meridian, Idaho 833642 CITY C3F ~~I~~A~; Re: The Lake at Cherry Lane No. 3 Subdivision Dear Councilman: I have reviewed the application for The Lake at Cherry Lane No. 3 Subdivision and find that it includes approximately 52 homes at a median value of $135,000. We also find that this subdivision is located in census tract 103.10 and in the attendance zone for Linder Elementary, Meridian Middle School and Eagle High School. Using the above information we can predict that these homes, when completed, will house 15 elementary aged children, 12 middle school aged children, and 15 senior high aged students. At the present time Linder Elementary is at 129 of capacity. The Meridian School District is not opposed to growth in our district, however this subdivision will cause increased over- crowding in all three schools. There is little opportunity to shift attendance boundaries since the surrounding schools are also well over capacity. Before we could support this subdivision, we would need land dedicated to the district or at least made available. In addition we would need to pass another bond issue for the construction of schools. The cost per student for newly constructed schools, excluding site purchase price and offsite improvements, exceeds $5,000 per elementary student and $10,000 per middle or high school student. We are in a difficult position and need your help in dealing with the impact of growth on schools. Sincerely, ~~~ an Mabe Deputy Superintendent DM:gr CENTRAL REVIEW SHEET ~~~~~~,~ s,,~~_~ •• DISTRICT Environmental Health Division Return to: ''It H SALT H N O V 2 9 1994 ^ Boise DEPARTMENT ^ Eagle C11"'~ lli tdcY:i•yuar,~r Rezone # ^ Garden city Meridian Conditional Use # ^ Kuna Preliminary /Final /Short Plat ACZ V~2li4ricc- . Tf C ~'~e~ /h G~-rt~ L~~ ~/a • 3 S~~di~ .~ ^ I. We have Objections to this Proposal. ^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ^ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type. of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ^ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ^ 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of ^ high seasonal ground water ^ solid lava from original grade ^ 6. We can Approve this Proposal for individual sewage disposal to be located above solid lava layers: ^ 2 feet ^ 4 feet ^ 7. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: ^ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water well ^ interim sewage ^ central water ^ individual sewage ^ individual water ^ 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: ^ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water ^ sewage dry lines ^ central water ^ 9. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ^ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ^ I I. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ^ 12. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ^ food establishment ^ swimming pools or spas ^ child care center ^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store 13. ~/~ f1~+/E N o A~/ ~G7~rti'/,j' Date: II / ~s / Reviewed By: ''~ cDND 10!91 rcb, rer. I I/93 jll !. OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk JAN~fCE L. GASS, City Treasurer GAF}Y D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR.. Attorney • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY • COUNCIL MEMBERS A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA CITY ©F MERIDIAN I WALTW M ORROW 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES R ~ Pla IDAHO 83642 MERIDIAN ~ nner & Zoning Administrator , ~ ~ ~ Phone 208) 888433 ~ FAX (208) 8871813 MAMA ~ _. 2211 A & /Af!',-~fq~~ 1"; 87 JIM JOHNSON haiim~RlPlanning 8 Zoning I _II ; - ~,~ Public Works/Building Department (208) 8 ' .. ,T GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor a~~ 7 7 N O V ]y c .~ TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVE~OPM~'Y'`'~~~JECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian City Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: November 29 1994 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/14/94 HEARING DATE: 12/6/94 REQUEST: Variance Request for The Lake at Cherrv Lane No 3 BY: Steiner Development LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Cheny Lane, West of Ten Mile Road r ~ . . ,. JIM JOHNSON, P2 MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT~~~ Q 2 ~Di~4 ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION (j'~ .~ '~~" tc~~c.hi-~it~-'~~ CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM 8 FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has no comment on the variance request for The Lake at Cherry Lane No. 3. Nampa & Meridian Irrig~*i on 1)i Srr; r•r • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY • OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROfT, Waste Water Supt. KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council ~=~v`.c.~-~- FROM: Shari L. Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: December 2, 1994 ~~~1 ~(io. a N COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAk YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner 8 Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman -Planning 8 Zoning SUBJECT: Variance Request -Frontage Less Than 80' for Lake at Cherry Lane No. 3 This variance request is unclear. The application speaks to a 19,000 "super lot" that does not exist. All of the maps submitted with the application are of the preliminary plat. As the Final Plat was approved in July, I would recommend that the configuration shown on the Final Plat be accepted in accordance with the conditions of that approval and that a variance of the frontage, for Lots 16 and 17 of Block 2 only, be granted. G.) i-~ ~ r V ~ ~ .rr..~i `./ ~ • ~--~ h+-1 i ~~~ysA pp ~ •--i! V, 0 ~ O M O ~ ~ O C~ ....~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~~ ~' ~ _ ~ ,, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o \ -J I O _ •~- O ~ C~ 00 a ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° >~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °~ ~ . ~., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ u~ \ ~ N A~\\ W v1 `` \v V1 ~' 3 • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 20.1994 APPLICANT: STEINER DEVELOPMENT ITEM NUMBER; 21 REQUEST; APPEAL DECISION ON THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0.3 A NCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION; SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: C~ APPEAL APPLICATION FORM Appeal Decision of: Zoning Administrator Applicant: Steiner Development, Inc. Address: P.O. Box 190472 Boise, Idaho 83719 Phone Number: 345-9665 • ly 1. 6 crrv ~~ ~r~~~~~~ NATURE OF APPEAL: Steiner Development appeals the decision of the Meridian Zoning Administrator to return the Final Plat of The Lakes at Cherry Lane No. 3 to the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission for Preliminary Plat approval processing as a result of a misunderstanding in the City's final plat processing procedure which resulted in two more residential lots than originally approved by the Meridian City Council. Two lots were gained as a result of reducing lot widths as allowed in the Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance from approximately 90 feet to the allowed 80 foot minimum. The lot widths were reduced to remain competitive with other developments in the vicinity. Steiner Development regrets any misunderstanding and would like to present to the City Council a revised Final Plat for approval. Utilities have already been installed to service all of the lots including the two additional lots. Steiner Development does not believe that the addition of two lots is a substantial change requiring new preliminary plat approval because all lots meet the dimensional standards of the R-4 Zone (except those for which a variance has been sought) and the configuration of the subdivision is unchanged. Steiner Development would experience a sever hardship if we have to begin the process all over again. Accordingly, Steiner Development respectfully requests that we be allowed to resubmit our Fin .Plat to the City Council for final plat approval.//,~~ Doug Campbell Steiner Development Fee: 10 00