PZ - Applicant's Response to Staff Report for May 16th HearingSP NK BUTLER-,
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
T. HETHE CLARK
(208) 388-3327
HCLARK@SPINKBUTLER.COM
Via electronic mail (sleonard@meridiancity.org)
May 15, 2019
Stephanie Leonard
Associate City Planner
City of Meridian
33 E. Broadway Ave.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Re: Three Corners Ranch — Preliminary Plat Application (H-2019-0006)
Comments on Staff Report in Advance of May 16, 2019
SB File No. 21895.12
Dear Stephanie:
This firm represents the applicant for the foregoing development approval. We are in receipt of
the Staff Report for this project and would like to provide comments in advance of the May 16,
2019 hearing.
After having reviewed the Staff Report, we are in agreement with Staff's position and
conditions regarding the use, proposed zoning, and the vast majority of the site-specific
conditions. At this time, there are only two items that we expect to be debated at hearing:
1. The requirement to extend W. Guiness Street to N. Stafford Place; and
2. The requirement to extend a north/south private street to N. Shandee Drive
As further described below, we believe that each of these requirements, while well-intentioned,
are ultimately not required by the UDC or the Comprehensive Plan.
The Planning & Zoning Commission should follow the lead of the ACHD Commission, which
specifically rejected the connection that City Staff is recommending. There is no internal
collector network on this block. The only commercial and recreational uses on this square mile
are cut off from internal vehicular traffic. Meanwhile, the existing local roads are functioning in
a manner acceptable to the existing residents. Given the Applicant's commitment to connect
pedestrian and bicycle traffic, ACHD determined these connections were not worth the risk of
cut -through traffic on local the existing local street network.
MICHAEL T. SPINK JOANN C. BUTLER T. HETHE CLARK GEOFFREY M. WARDLE TARA MARTENS MILLER
251 E FRONT ST • SUITE 200 • PO BOX 639 • BOISE, IDAHO 83701 • 208.388.1000 • FAX 208.388.1001 • SPINKBUTLER.COM
The Applicant's proposal is supported by the Three Corners Subdivision, the Bristol Heights
neighbors who attended our March 25, 2019 meeting, many of the individuals who attended the
March 27, 2019 ACHD Commission meeting, and, ultimately, the ACED Commission. The
ACHD Commission was unequivocal in rejecting what Staff is recommending. We expect that
the neighbors will be equally clear when they testify at the hearing on the 16th. We support the
neighbors in their wish and ask for a recommendation of approval without the connections
recommended by Staff identified above.
Additional commentary on this request is attached. We look forward to further discussion at
hearing.
Very truly yours,
C Q J
T. Hethe Clark
HC/bdb
Background
This infill project is unique. As shown below, there are six stub connections into this property,
rendering it a "pinwheel." The square -mile block, meanwhile, is dominated by local streets and
lacks a collector network (the only collector, Bennington Way, is shown in blue). There is a
robust local roadway network, with connections onto area arterials (shown in yellow).
The square -mile block is almost exclusively residential. There is a park on the southeast with no
internal roadway connections—only pedestrian. Commercial uses on the northeast corner and
Maverik on the southwest have no internal vehicular connections. Ambrose School, located on
the northwest corner, is a regional school with students arriving by vehicle .
While there is no collector network, neighborhood roadways have been functioning and the
residents are content with the status quo. Vienna Woods has five entrances onto McMillan and
one onto Locust Grove, as shown below:
The Bristol Heights neighborhood (immediately to the east of the subject site) has the
Bennington Way collector access onto Chinden and Eagle Road.
The Dunwoody Subdivision (immediately to the west) has its own access onto Locust Grove
Road, while Three Corners Subdivision has a similar approach. The Fuller Ranchettes on
Shandee Drive currently have access directly onto Chinden; however, it is our understanding
that ITD may restrict that access in the future when Chinden is widened.
Cut -Through and Connectivity
One of our primary concerns in connection with our design of this project is to avoid cut -
through traffic. The connection between Dunwoody Court and Barclay Street is proposed to be
gated because, otherwise, that connection would become a de facto collector and cut -through
route from Locust Grove all the way to Eagle Road. Gating these roads is supported by a
majority of the neighbors.'
The solution of gating this infill project has not been the subject of much dispute; instead, the
question has been how many of the six stub streets should connect.
Our initial proposal contained a ring road provided at the urging of Staff. That ring road has
been the topic of much thought and, frankly, much debate and discussion with our neighbors.
Ultimately, the consensus among the Applicant, the neighbors, the ACHD Commission, and, it
appears, City Staff, is that too much connectivity can be too much of a good thing. Everyone
agrees that six connections would be a problem. The question is how many connections would
be appropriate under these unique circumstances.
'This solution has been implemented solely to avoid the hazard a cut -through would create. There is no
exclusionary intent. The Applicant committed as a condition of the ACHD Commission's approval that it
will allow full public pedestrian and bicycle access at all of the stub streets in this project.
Because there is no internal collector network, we believe the risk of cut -through traffic is
significant. ACHD Staff agreed that turning local roads into de facto collectors could be a
significant problem here. As stated by ACHD Staff:
The perimeter road will add 1/2 mile of new public roadway for maintenance by ACHD with little
public benefit.... Because this square mile was developed without a collector network, ACHD
staff is concerned about east -west cut -through traffic.
The question before ACHD Staff was whether the public roadway on the northern boundary of
the project (W. Guiness Dr.) should connect in three locations, or if N. Stafford Drive should
remain disconnected (as requested by the neighbors) but still include pedestrian facilities, as
shown below:
Y i Y • x�
I It
I
11 I I I
``\ M tl tl Y I •
Y
Y V
IL
THREE CORNERS RANCH SUBDIVISION
MERIDIAN, ID
We cannot emphasize enough that the ACHD Commission considered and specifically rejected
a connection at N. Stafford Drive.2
'- Meridian City staff was invited to attend and provide comment at the ACHD Commission meeting.
They did not attend, but we understand their position was provided to the ACHD Commission.
♦• l tat u
,,. _-.i �.. Nin'°. �� 9'.-3r. •.'F.
FM
. ,r k . 1 ��. � i. ic•c,L �'• �: - : '� � � ,ber'o4 a �/�' ` � :✓i �
_ s ' ' li�yl t °3- ' :.// i« i Rtwr�-�' ' -f °f-• � - K � . ��h
t •_a �_�.- "j 1 � r �..,•'~J ��—..j � lr ' .�- . r :.�"kjc+Tad`��•b% - si'fSZ��✓i
•`. � a��. _ ,.. � r IIS ` •��
E .nom s ...,- 1 C r �` - -- Si . v r • '•q � , `� t
fr" +.5j,�� ° I ..rai'i. , Mc3n LG�'a�a'i 3 r•"F.• � �1. � >
� ed n t S Lu. r �.. L ..l "� ♦� sC t� � +c
,� 1 sjr , °Dt J ~ .$4. '• � I .�„`"r a` �sa+�,a3r '4
L f i ^� •�dn: t:tT
tr3 � r�°i c17t3liF� 7 Isr,l:: g„ _ ,y a
' V�QV 4•D
• � ; t a5A1eA•aaX� ti •.` &'Tel• i
...w L
QVml rE—
..,.w . `ice �` : n ��itt'u'`!li • ..'�.. !��— ,�� \.�i -. _ .•..: ��1 j r .. � Lne � ���
This connection creates the de facto collector that we are trying to avoid, on roads that weren't
designed for it. We do not want to be the developer that puts that cut -through in place.
Discussion of Conditions
The Applicant is requesting a recommendation of approval that is consistent with both the
ACHD Commission's action on this project and the overwhelming desire of the neighborhood.
Condition 3.c requires extension of W. Guiness St. to the east to connect with N. Stafford Place.
For the reasons described above, this is not the desired outcome of the ACHD Commission or
the neighbors. We ask that you remove this condition.
Condition 3.d requires a north/south private street connection that aligns with N. Shandee
Drive in order to break up the block face. There is also the requirement of a new gate at least
fifty feet back from the entrance at W. Guiness Street. It appears that the basis for this
requirement is to reduce block length; however, staff is not considering the explicit exceptions
in Section 11 -6C -3.F. That section states that the block length in residential districts is limited to
750'.3 However, there are several exceptions. For example, Section 11-6C-3.F.3.a and .b allow
up to 1,200 feet if pedestrian connections are provided or site conditions present a constraint.
Section 11-6C-3.F.3.d specifically contemplates a 90 -degree turn as breaking up a block face and
contemplates additional pedestrian connections along with such treatment.
The connection to Shandee Drive breaks up the block face with a 90 -degree turn, a scenario
specifically contemplated in the UDC. A pedestrian connection is provided in Lot 11 of Block 1,
which means the block face qualifies under the UDC exclusions. Even if this weren't the case,
there are certainly constraints that would justify a longer block length given the pinwheel effect
and the limited benefit provided by these connections. Meanwhile, the lots in question actually
front onto E. Commander Lane and the Applicant is in agreement with the requirement of a
common space strip along W. Guiness Street. As a result, Condition 3.d is unnecessary and we
ask that it be deleted.
Conclusion
These issues are critical to the neighborhood and the Applicant. Based on our discussions with
neighbors, we believe the neighborhood will attend the upcoming hearings at the City of
Meridian and support this proposal. The Applicant is one of those neighbors, as the developer
lives in this neighborhood—on the triangular parcel on the northwest side of this property.
The best outcome in this case is to adopt the proposal that was approved by the ACHD
Commission. We respectfully request that P&Z recommend approval of this project, with the
deletion of Staff conditions 3.c and 3.d.
3 UDC 11 -6C -3.F.1.