HomeMy WebLinkAboutTree Farm Subdivision Formal Request for Reconsideration - 3/6/17March 3, 2017
To: Mayor Tammy de Weerd
Meridian City Council
33 E. Broadway Avenue
Meridian, ID. 83642
From: Michial and Susan Fillman
6550 N Lonicera Way
Meridian, ID 83646
Re: Tree Farm Subdivision/ MPP16-00331 H-2016-0128
P*,E.,'CETVED
Ci d
CLERKS OFFICE
This is a rezone and preliminary plat application to allow for the development of a 176 lot subdivision
consisting of 161 building lots and 15 common lots on 61.64 acres. The site is located at 4740 W.
Chinden Boulevard in Meridian, ID.
As residents of SpurWing Greens in Meridian, we submit this request to you for reconsideration of the
approval for the above rezoning application as per Idaho Code 67-6535 (local land use planning act).
There are deficiencies and omissions in the information provided for the approval of the Tree Farm
Subdivision that we wish to bring to your attention.
(1) There was inadequate notice provided to the residents of SpurWing Greens. While the letter
of the law may have been followed with respect to the mailings received by the owners of 28 properties,
the signage posted was poorly placed and thus did not provide the hearing notice required. All were
placed on streets or stubbed streets not used by the residents (for example, on Black Cat Road).
Additionally, as you will recall we received an unusual amount of snow and not only did it obscure the
notices, it certainly inhibited the residents from venturing out so they might accidentally see them. Streets
were impassable. We were unaware of the hearings regarding this application.
(2) The residents of SpurWing Greens have relied on information from ACHD regarding the
maximum number of allowable daily trips through our single entry, that exceeding the maximum
would trigger an automatic requirement for the extension of Black Cat Road. We personally
attended the November 2 meeting the developer held in an obscure location, in a room too small, with
insufficient materials to hand out, and poor visual aids to demonstrate their plans. The residents voiced
their concerns that Black Cat Road would need to be improved to handle construction vehicles and the
additional daily trips from the new homes as their community sells out. Residents were clear on the
expectation that ACHD would require the extension of Black Cat if the average daily trips through Tree
Farm Way at Chinden exceeded the maximum allowed for a community with a single access/exit. We
asked for the results of their own traffic study and the speaker told us that he did not know the answer.
We personally followed up twice by email on this question and had no response. ACHD has been clear
that traffic surveys would be taken and that exceeding the threshold of 3000 trips per day would trigger
extension of Black Cat. The developer indicated they had no intention of paying for that. As residents of
this community, we have relied on the word of ACHD staff and feel a bit betrayed by our own local
government.
(3) As mentioned, on two occasions, we attempted to reach the "contact" person listed in the
notice we received about the November 2 meeting. We received no response. An email address
was listed in the meeting notice for questions about the project. We asked to have the email forwarded
to the appropriate person if necessary. The emails were ignored. Now that we've seen how this project
was fast -tracked to approval following the November 2 meeting, we believe there was a lack of good faith
on the part of the developer. Why give us contact information for questions and then never respond?
(4) In reviewing the approval for the project, it has been mentioned that there was no holdback
required (to be put into a trust) from the developer to contribute toward a future traffic signal for
Black Cat at Chinden. Since their development will contribute heavily to that traffic, shouldn't
this be part of their financial burden?
(5) The traffic entering and leaving SpurWing Greens at the single point of entry has been a
continuing issue as the homes continue to sell (quickly we might add) and traffic backups have
become a daily problem. Emergency vehicles might find access quite difficult. Backups on
Chinden would surely create a problem for emergency vehicles trying to enter the development, and for
residents trying to evacuate should the situation arise. Since we already exceed the maximum 3000 trips
per day for a single entry, and traffic already backs up to block other streets off at the collector (Tree
Farm Way), access for emergency vehicles entering or leaving the community could be problematic.
Should there be a bad accident at that intersection with only one lane coming in, there would be an even
greater and potentially disastrous problem.
(6) Rock Harbor Church has acquired over 20 acres within the community and hopes to begin
construction on their new church in February 2018. This will create additional construction traffic in
the short term and heavy traffic upon completion. They anticipate two Sunday services generating 275
vehicles per service. That will create an additional strain on the single entrance into SpurWing Greens
and exacerbate any issues with emergency vehicles entering or leaving. Traffic will back up on Chinden
in both directions, Tree Farm Way and Tree Haven before and after church services.
(7) By not adhering to ACHD policy with regard to the 3000 daily trips for our single entrance,
we are concerned that approval of this development without requiring the extension of Black
Cat will impact our property values. With many other developments available, buyers may be turned
off by the congestion in SpurWing Greens and choose to buy elsewhere, which means we will have to
reduce our prices in order to sell our homes. We believe this to be an unfair burden on the hundreds of
families who chose to live in this Meridian community. We rely on local government to protect our
interests as well as the interests of developers.
The residents in SpurWing Greens are not opposed to the construction of the new homes in Tree Farm
Subdivision. The extension of Black Cat is what we seek. It is my hope that the Meridian City Council will
agree that these deficiencies warrant a new public hearing and that the voices of the residents of
SpurWing Greens will be heard.
Thank you for your consideration.
Michial F. Fillman
Susan J. Fillman
Development Services Department
Project/File: Tree Farm Subdivision/ MPP16-0033/ H-2016-0128
This is a rezone and preliminary plat application to allow for the development of a
176 lot subdivision consisting of 161 building lots and 15 common lots on 61.64
acres. The site is located at 4740 W. Chinden Boulevard in Meridian, ID.
Lead Agency: City of Meridian
Site address: 4740 W. Chinden Boulevard
Commission
Hearing: January 25, 2016
Regular Agenda
Commission
Approval: January 25, 2017
Applicant: Mark Tate
M3 Companies, LLC
1087 W. River Street, STE 310
Boise, ID 83702
Representative: Kristi Watkins
JUB Engineers, Inc.
250 S. Beechwood Avenue, STE 201
Boise, ID 83709
Staff Contact: Mindy Wallace, AICP
Phone: 387-6178
E-mail: mwallacegachdidaho.org
A. Findings of Fact
1. Description of Application: The applicant is requesting approval of a rezone and preliminary
plat application to allow for the development of a 176 lot subdivision consisting of 161 building lots
and 15 common lots on 61.64 acres.
The City of Meridian's Future Land Use Map calls for medium and low density residential
development on this site.
2. Description of Adiacent Surroundina Area:
Direction
Land Use
Zonin
North
Rural urban transitional Ada Count
RUT
South
Single family residential
R-15
East
Single family residential
R-8
West
Single family residential
R-8
I I-E-Ri iAN CITY CODE
1-7.10: PROCEDURE FOR REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION,-
A,
ECONSIDERATION,A, .Pursuant to Idaho Code 67-6535 (local land use planning act) regarding a request for
consideration of a city council land use decision the following procedure must be strictly
followed:
1. whormav be anv apps cantiorr affected persndings of facts, on. asudcfln of �aw, decision, and order i�e.a apelf � ,
'
i. may vry.:..v K5
pia
reconsideration of the final decision of the city council,
2. Such request must be in writing and filed with the city clerk within fourteen (14) days of the final
appr€rv.—L
3. The request must identify specific deficiencies in the decision for which reconsideration is sought,
4. If the request is property filed and meets the requirement of ideniiNina sDecific _defictenclec, in III -
Land use decision, the city council shall schedule the matter to be heard at a reguiariy scheduled
-eetinq of the city council.
6.o _ a ;;i-l+i be provided to appellant when the request will be scheduled to be considered,
6. No additional evidence or testimonv will be allowed at the city council me-"ny
�. the city council meeiina, the council shall consider the written request and may affirm, reverse, or
mn
-,s, i=.� decision, after compliance with the applicable procedural standards.
8. if necessary, the council may aired a new public hearing and alt the procedures and notices that aro
necessary will be done prior fo a new pubiic nearinn
g. A written decision shall be provided to the appellant within sixty (euj days of The request. (Ord. Ib -
164 -65, 4-26-2016)
0�
61
k
((( q 6'