2019-07-16 Mark and Elizabeth Miller1
Charlene Way
From:Bill Parsons
Sent:Tuesday, July 16, 2019 1:57 PM
To:Chris Johnson; Charlene Way
Cc:markandelizabethmiller@msn.com
Subject:FW: Three 3 Rivers Ranch Conditions of Approval Violations
Chris,
Below is public testimony for the Three Corners Ranch development. Please include this in tonight’s Council packet.
Thank you,
Bill Parsons, AICP | Planning Supervisor
City of Meridian | Community Development Dept.
33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: 208-884-5533 | Fax: 208-489-0571
Built for Business, Designed for Living
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law.
From: MARK AND ELIZABETH MILLER <markandelizabethmiller@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 1:37 PM
To: Bill Parsons <bparsons@meridiancity.org>
Subject: Fwd: Three 3 Rivers Ranch Conditions of Approval Violations
July 16, 2019
To: Meridian City Council
I am writing to oppose the Three Rivers Ranch proposal to the Council at this meeting which is a continuance of
the previous meeting in which irrigation and safety issues were to be addressed.
1. Unmet condition of approval set by the planning and zoning commission to: “Meet with Mr. Miller” to
discuss and work out the irrigation issues on his property. This condition of approval has been essentially
2
ignored as if meeting this condition isn’t even a consideration of this developer. The intent of the Planning and
Zoning Commission was CLEAR: to work out a solution to assure access to irrigation water that was adequate
for Mr. Miller’s current irrigation pump and system and property. Instead the developer sent a representative
from his company to inform me (Mark Miller) that they were moving the irrigation ditch off of my property
(thus requiring incursion and work on my private property) to 15 feet away from my property and then leaving
me a 2 inch opening into which I would be required to redesign my irrigation system. I informed them that this
was not acceptable as they were required by Idaho law to return my system to functioning. That didn’t seem to
matter and this conversation was witnessed by Mr. Dean and then Ben Tippets of the Karnes lateral board was
also a witness that Mr. Dean confirmed that they asserted they were NOT going to hook up my irrigation system
nor provide that it was functional. THEY HAVE THEREFORE NOT MET THE CONDITION OF
APPROVAL SET FORTH BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING commission. (The planning and zoning
conditions are on record at Meridian city planning and zoning video archive for May 16, motion is at time
3:04:45 on recording ). In fact, they have ignored it, and even after issues with irrigation came up at City
Council they have intentionally not had any communication with me at all regarding this issue. They apparently
felt that discussing with Karne’s lateral was their only desire, even though that DOES NOT MEET THE
CONDITION OF APPROVAL voted on and set by the Planning and Zoning commission. It appears that they
have decided to redesign their plans (which according to their latest letter is still not complete) with the
irrigation pipe and its final structure and still have refused to meet with me to even show me their new plan and
I have never seen the newest plan that will directly affect my property and the functionality of my current
irrigation system. Please do NOT approve their development until this issue with me and irrigation regarding
my adjacent property is worked out in writing between me and the developer and an appropriate written
agreement is made. They are intent on modifying my access to water and to modify my personal property
without my permission or agreement. If the city council approves their development my rights will be ignored
now and in the future by this developer without a written agreement that requires compliance between myself
and the developer.
In addition their latest letter to city council notes in item 8 in their most recent submission titled “Addendum B
Questions and Answers” that they still intend on leaving me an opening that “I will have to plum into”. This
will require a redesign of my irrigation system and costs which they are lega lly bound to provide to return me to
functionality. I need to be able to see their final irrigation plan and make a written agreement before Meridian
City Council considers approving their development
2. Unmet condition of approval: The planning and zoning commission required the movement of the private
gate along Dunwoody to be moved back by the angled part of Mr. Dean’s current driveway. This was an
3
explicit requirement for approval set forth in their meeting. This was not “optional” or as the developer’s
representative said to me directly, “It’s just a recommendation, not a requirement”. After this conversation
with the developers representative, Marcel Lopez, I contacted Bill Parsons via phone who confirmed to me that
it was NOT a recommendation- rather it WAS A REQUIREMENT of the planning and zoning commission. It
appears that the developer plans on “temporarily” placing the gate in the moved location WITHOUT a
reasonable turnaround design as was the very reason Planning and Zoning required them to move it back:
because there was room to design a turnaround. The developer now appears to plan to reconsider where where
the gate goes in the future and change it after Council approval and move it back to its problem location at
“final plat” and thus avoid the conditions of approval it does not like. Please hold the developer to the
requirements already set forth and provide a gate with an adequate turnaround for cars.
3. No permanent irrigation easement has been granted to the four homeowners of Dunwoody once the
developer finishes his plan of putting the irrigation access behind locked gates. Access has been through the
access road for all owners for the last 30 years. Please do not approve until written agreement and granting of
irrigation easement is completed. Karnes also requireA they provide this access to all four property
owners. Note that in their “Addendum B Questions and Answers” item 3 they are only planning on giving the
gate code to the ditchrider and the mailman and trash collectors, even though the ditch rider confirms they must
agree to give the gate code to us to access the irrigation boxes.
4. The ACHD required the developer to put forth a detailed plan of sidewalks, locations and landscaping and
gate location, position and architecture. This they still have not provided nor put forth for review by any
agency. The developer seems to believe that he can simply ignore requirements or provide them at such a late
moment that it leaves no time for anyone to review them. The specific detailed landscaping plan required by
ACHD still does not exist.
5. No final plan has ever been provided to the public to review even AFTER the planning and zoning
commission required relocation of roads and another access road to the north through 3 Corners subdivision. It
appears that the developer simply desires to slide as much by the Council as possible in anticipation that there
are so many discrepancies that some will be entirely overlooked. Please do NOT overlook the small issues of
non-compliance as it appears to be a habitual response of this particular developer.
6. Requirement of City Council to meet with Homeowners of Dunwoody subdivision and work out some
element of compromise to enhance the safety of Dunwoody. As the council probably already knows, the
4
developer did meet with the homeowners of Dunwoody, without any intent whatever to cooperate and work on
a mutual solution to the problem. The developer (as he has done in EVERY meeting so far with homeowners of
Dunwoody) refuses to listen and even collaborate in any way with the homeowners. It is either his way or the
highway, with attempts at threats with additional verbal close face to face intimidation in what most would
consider bullying.
Please do not approve their subdivision proposal until after requirements have been met FULLY. There is also
an issue of future land use be bloxking the back 4 acres of Dunwoody without providing a stub road and
provision for development. I and other homeowners believe firmly that this developer will not meet any
requirements that he has avoided or not met during the approval process.
Sincerely
Mark Miller
1906 E Dunwoody Court
Meridian, ID. 83646