HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter from Bob & Lesa Becker
Bob and Lesa L. Becker
3421 S. Selatir Place
Meridian, ID 83642
RECEIVED
OCT 1 2 2004
October 9, 2004
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
HE: Kingsbridge Snbdivision proposed development on deed restricted open space and
density incompatible with existing nse/Comprehensive Plan
Dear Mayor De Weerd and City Council Members:
We are writing to support the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision to deny the
Kingsbridge Subdivision developer's request to "rezone from RUT to R-4" and "reduce minimum
lot size" since it is not compatible with existing use in the area. Your Comprehensive Plan
indicates: "Existing land use development patterns provides a basis for future land use decisions"
(Chapter VII, pg. 85). The proposed development is surrounded by 1-5+ acre homes ranging in
value from approximately $350,000 to $750,000.
We were never approached by the developer to discuss the proposed development even though
the Comprehensive Plan states: "It is important for citizens of the area to determine how they
want development to occur in order to preserve the City's character...." (Chapter VII, pg. 85).
The developer has not planned for transition lots adjacent to our 5-acre estate ranches to the east
of the development. They have actually clustered some of the highest density lots along our
property line. The Plan for appropriate uses within rural areas requires "new urban density
subdivisions... which abut...Iow density residential...to provide landscaped screening or
transitional densities with larger, more compatible lot sizes to buffer the interface between urban
level densities and rural residential densities (Goal I, Objective D, pg. 103).
To allow up to four homes per acre in this area would significantly reduce the property values of
the surrounding homes and destroy the area's character.
The developer has also drawn a road on the eastern edge of the property, which appears to allow
for future access from this development to South Selatir Place. Selatir Place, a narrow rural road
with no sidewalks, was designed to access several 5+ acre estate lots. Not only would allowing
this high density development traffic to access South Selatir Place create an unsafe condition, it is
restricted by an agreement dated September 10, 1993 and filed with the Ada County Recorder
which states: "The Developer shall extend South Selatir Place as a dead-end cul-de-sac within the
interior of the residential lots ofthe development, with no reservation of a right-of-way easement
over the residential lots for future extension of the street to other properties."
Finally, the lot proposed for the Kingsbridge Subdivision is deed restricted as "open space" for at
least 15 years. As a result, we agree with the Planning and Zoning Commission that there are
serious legal issues related to this proposed development.
As native Idahoans, and long-time Meridian residents, we are proud of the quality lifestyle we
have developed in this area. We respectfully request that you affirm the Planning and Zoning
Commission's decision and ask you to deny this development because it does not comply with
the Comprehensive Plan, it attempts to gain future access to a road that has restricted access and it
is in violation of the 15-year restricted deed.
Thank you for your consideration,
~ß~
d'S tL i? (h..-..
Bob and Lesa Becker
~ ... ~~'-'5.uuu5v u"""'" ","vu
~uõv < v< ~
Jessica Johnson
From: Steve Siddoway (siddowaS@meridiancìty.orgl
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 9:54 AM
To: 'Tara Green'; 'Jessica Johnson'
Subject: FW: Kingsbridge Subdivision
Importance: High
Sensitivity: Confidential
--------------
Steve Siddoway
Principal Planner
Meridian Planning & Zoning
660 E. Watertower Lane, Suite 202
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone 208.884.5533
Fax 208.888.6854
----Original Message----
From: Bob Becker (mallto:BBecker@bcidaho.com]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 20047:40 AM
To: Steve Slddoway (E-mail)
Subject: FW: Kingsbl'idge Subdivision
Importance: High
Sensitivity: Confidential
Steve, I do want you to make the emait below part of the record in this case. Thanks.
Bob Becker
--original Message-
F"'m: Bob Bedœr
Sent: Wednesday, Sepb!mber 15, 20041:42 PM
TO1 'siddowas@meridlancity.org'
Subject: Kingsbr1dge Subdivision
~: High
s...-a,: Confidential
Steve,
My wife and I own a 5+ acre ranch estate lot in the Bridlewood Subdivision on Selatir Place adjacent to the east
side of the proposed Kingsbridge Subdivision. We just received a copy of your Staff Report dated September 13,
which does not give us adequate time to review and respond to it before the Hearing on September 16.
Nevertheless, we have quickly identified several concemsldeficiencies in the report that I want to bring to your
attention. There will likely be more once we have had a chance to review it in more detail.
9/17/2004
~ .. . L~u5""'u"õv uuu...u~vu
LU_~VL~
1. Your report does not address the serious concern in our letter and in the letters of other property owners on
Selatir Place regarding the proposed east side stub street that is clearly intended to connect with Selatir Place.
2. Your report does not address the lack of large transition IcIs adjacent to our large estate IcIs on the east side.
3. Contrary to your representation, the developers have not met with all adjacent property owners. The
developers have never met with Bridlewood property owners. You should have indicated this In your report.
4. You stale the proposal is in the best interests of the City of Meridian, but you provide no justification/support
for your conclusion.
5. You stale approval should be conditioned upon approval ofthe Dartmoor property owners. What about
Bridlewood property owners? We have a vested interest too.
6. It appears you are not requiring fencing along the entire east side. This will allow nuisance access to canal
right-of-way property and to ditches on our property that provide irrigation water to our pasture. Moreover, many
Bridlewood properties adjacent to the east side,lncluding our property, have electrified fences. Therefore, for
safety reasons and to control nuisance access, you should require fencing along the entire east side.
7. You state there will be no adverse impact on surrounding property values, but again, you provide no
justificatlonlsupport for your conclusion.
As I stated, these are deficiencies that jumped out after a first pass through your report. Bridlewood property
owners have retained an attorney, who will most certainly raise other issues and reasons why the proposal should
be rejected.
Thank you.
Bob Becker
Sr. Assoc. General Counsel
Blue Cross of Idaho
Phone: 208-331-7223
Fax: 208-331-7320
Emall: bbeckerCíi2bcidaho.com <mailto:bbeckerCíi2bcidaho.com>
Confidentiality Notice:
This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that
is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under
applicable law. If you have received this communication in error,
please do not distribute, and delete the original message. Please
notify the sender, Bob Becker, at BBecker@bcidabo. com.
Thank you for your compliance.
Message Sent on:
07:39:59 Fri 17 Sep 2004
9/1712004