HomeMy WebLinkAboutKathi Baumgartner Response Letter to Applicant's March 31st Letter - 4.31
Machelle Hill
From:Kathi Baumgartner <kbaumgartner@cradlepoint.com>
Sent:Monday, April 03, 2017 3:44 PM
To:clerk
Subject:East Ridge Estates - H-2016-0137
Dear Mayor de Weerd and Members of City Council
We own the property to the West of the proposed East Ridge Estates subdivision. Mr. Conger has erroneously stated in
his letter to City Council dated March 31, 2017 that “the property to the West is designated as medium to high density
and will be developed up to 15 units per acre”. Mr. Conger has no control over if or how our property will be developed
in the future. The basis of his argument has no merit since the property: (i) is not owned by Mr. Conger; (ii) has not been
annexed by the City of Meridian; and (iii) is currently zoned as RUT. His conjecture regarding how we might develop our
property in the future is irrelevant and does not release him of his obligation to provide “transitional densities with
larger, more comparable lots sizes to buffer the interface between urban level densities and rural residential densities”
in accordance with section 3.05.02F of the Comprehensive Plan he quotes.
Mr. Conger has also indicated in his letter that “the total gross density of his proposed development is 2.85 residences
per acre and is consistent with Meridian’s Low Density Residential land use designation”. The only way he is able to
accomplish such a percentage is by incorporating very large lots on the Northeast and Southwest corners of the property
which are currently not able to be developed due to their inaccessibility. Because those lots are not able to be
developed initially, he has manipulated the total density calculations for the proposed development by artificially
inflating the size of those unaccessible lots and using those number to achieve what at first glance appears to be a low
density development. A more realistic comparison is to compare the actual lot sizes with those of the adjacent
developments.
Myself and the neighboring homeowners urge City Council to look more closely at this proposed development and
compare the lot sizes against the lot sizes of the existing adjacent property to fairly evaluate the impact of having lots
that average 7,000 sq. ft. immediate ly adjacent to lots that average 25,000 sq ft to the South and 85,000 sq ft to the
East. By seeking a step up to R8 zoning on this parcel of land, the developer is able to pack as small as 6,000 sq ft lots
next to existing homes on ½ acres, 1 acres, 2 acres, 5 acres and 10 acres. The proposed development is completely
inconsistent with the existing homes and the existing rural community and creates an awkward and abrupt boundary
rather than transitioning into the existing neighborhoods. The developer’s speculation regarding future development on
the property to the West of this proposed development is irrelevant and offensive.
Additionally, Mr. Conger states that “Lake Hazel Road is planned as a 7 lane arterial and a major east-west
transportation corridor”. However, as you will see by ACHD’s own 2016 – 35 Map (Exhibit A) below that Lake Hazel Road
is only planned for 2 to 3 lanes West of Cloverdale. In fact, ACHD’s Capital Improvements and 5 Year Work Plan specifies
that the intersection of Eagle Road and Lake Hazel road is not even scheduled to have a traffic signal until 2021 to 2025.
Mr. Conger has asked the City Council to completely disregard the existing homeowners and states in his letter to the
Council, “we cannot look at what is here today, [but] we must look at what is planned for the entire area for the
future”. I would ask that City Council consider both and manage the growth South of Meridian in a thoughtful and
strategic manner as is set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The South Rim is too valuable to the City of Meridian, to
allow this development to proceed as planned. We encourage City Council to preserve the continuity with existing
homes along the South Rim in a manner that is similar to the managed development along the North Rim with larger lots
of ½ acre to 1 acre within ¼ mile of the Rim. By doing so, the City Council will have maximized the value of the South
Rim property to ensure the strength of our community well into the future.
2
Thank you for your careful and thoughtful consideration regarding this pivotal decision.
Best regards,
Don and Kathi Baumgartner
Exhibit A – ACHD 2016-35 Map