Opinion ID: 2509052
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Ada County Code

Text: The district court determined that the Fuhrmans failed to produce evidence to show that the HOD, as applied to their property, is unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious and failed to identify any material changes to the HOD that would have affected any issues in this case. The district court determined that the HOD applied to the Fuhrmans' property because it contained a 15% or greater slope. The district court also concluded that the UBC provisions adopted by Ada County specifically authorized an injunction against the Fuhrmans to restrain and correct violations. The Fuhrmans argue the HOD does not apply to their property because their activities do not qualify as development. Fuhrmans argue that Patlovich stated in his affidavit that the HOD is applicable when development is undertaken on property containing a slope in excess of 15%. Ada County Code § 8-1A-1 defines development as any change in the use, character, or appearance of land that creates an additional demand and need for public facilities. The Fuhrmans contend that their filling activities were not a development because it did not involve actual construction of a building on the property. However, it is undisputed the Fuhrmans intended to use the fill as support for a road, and such improvement of the land would constitute development. Additionally, the Fuhrmans disregard the actual language of the HOD, which does not mention development. The section entitled Applicability, states that the regulations of [HOD 8-3H-1, the Hill Overlay District] shall apply to any grading, filling, clearing, or excavation of any kind where either of the following is present: 1. Slopes that exceed fifteen percent (15%) .... (emphasis added) HOD 8-3H-2(B). The Fuhrmans do not argue that the slope is less than a 15% grade; therefore, the HOD would apply to the Fuhrmans' property. As a result, the Fuhrmans must apply for a grading permit under Chapter 33 and include an engineering plan which meets the requirements of the HOD. Consequently, we uphold the decision of the district court, including the decision to grant an injunction.