HomeMy WebLinkAboutBarbara Berlat - 8.211
C.Jay Coles
From:Barbara Berlat <bberlat@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 21, 2017 8:49 AM
To:C.Jay Coles; Machelle Hill; clerk; Sonya Allen
Subject:Sky Mesa East File H-2017-0068
I unconditionally object to/oppose:
1. The “step up” zoning requests included in this application.
a. This application contradicts the City’s Future Land Use Map.
b. This application requests numerous steps up—and two steps up from R-2 to R-8—which is not
allowed in the comprehensive plan: “…the density can only be changed one “step.” (page 21)
c. The City has approved too many/numerous R-8 developments in this section of town.
d. ACHD does not have right-of-way to widen Eagle Rd between Amity and Taconic. The
roadways cannot support the scale of this development.
e. ACHD’s 5-year plan does not offer traffic relief to this part of South Meridian.
f. The comprehensive plan states that Council “can” approved step ups—but does not state it must
or should, especially when annexation is required.
2. The proposed setbacks and small lots do not reflect the neighborhoods’ established semi-rural/estate character.
3. Any and all approval of step ups that do not comply with the City’s Future Land Use Map.
4. Approval of any R-8 zoning in an area zoned low density. R-8 developments abound in the area, just across
Amity and Eagle.
5. Approval of a variance for two streets providing entry to 39 R-8 patio homes 210’ from the intersection of
Taconic and Eagle when the ACHD standard is 330’ and the neighborhood has loudly voiced its concern for
safety. Even with the directional medians requiring right only traffic, the variance will create a bottleneck that
will very likely impact Southbound traffic on Eagle Road and unnecessarily reduce the safety of the intersection
of Eagle and Taconic. The 330’ standard was established to ensure public safety – why take the risk when the
applicant can simply modify its design to comply with code?
a. There is no supporting rationale for this approval other than profit for the developer.
b. Sky Mesa's plan does not offer a clear north-south connector.
c. This intersection is critically important for emergency response to hundreds of homes in Sky
Mesa and Blackrock.
d. It is our access route to Hillsdale Elementary School and the future YMCA.
e. Public safety should be our primary objective.
f. This 120’ variance represents a critical margin of public safety.
g. Traffic could conceivably stack up on Eagle Road
6. Proposed lots adjacent to Blackrock
a. Lots must be redesigned for appropriate transition to adjoining ½ and 1-acre lots since
slope will now be a common lot.
b. Homes set a clear precedent of appropriate transition in its first phase of Sky Mesa with
½+ acre lots adjoining Blackrock.
2
c. There are no height restrictions proposed for this phase of Sky Mesa that will protect the
views and privacy of neighbors above. This was a condition in the plat for the first phase
of Sky Mesa.
I support:
1. Staff’s recommendation that the slope adjacent to Blackrock be designated common area.
I request:
1. The slope be designated as non-buildable on the plat AND the CCRs.
2. The slope be planted with erosion controlling vegetation and the HOA clearly charged with its
irrigation, maintenance and erosion control in the development agreement (DA) and CCRs.
3. Height restrictions for lots along the slope be included in the DA and CCRs to protect the privacy of
Blackrock homeowners.
4. The increased number of parking spaces be added without sacrificing adjacent park and green space.
5. Connectivity to the Pathway Network Map be required in the DA.
Comments
The City’s comprehensive plan clearly directs and values appropriate transitions between density
zones, recognizing the identities of existing neighborhoods and enhancing the unique characteristics
of each.
3
This application requests annexation of 54.01 acres and rezoning for 98.35 acres—a substantial and permanent
addition to our community.
The Mayor and City Council have the public trust and responsibility to approve development that enhances
livability for all current and future residents, and adheres to the City’s Plan Vision and Plan Structure (page 4,
Comprehensive Plan):
1) Considers existing and surrounding uses in a manner that encourages compatible patterns, character, and
appearances. (LDR.1, Future Land Use Designation)
2) Integrates the concerns and expressions of the community as a guide to Council about how residents would like
this neighborhood to grow and develop. (Chapter 1, page 1, City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan)
3) Embraces the key community values of “managing growth to achieve high-quality development,” and
“enhances Meridian’s quality of life for all current and future residents.” (Chapter 1, page 3, City of Meridian
Comprehensive Plan)
Barbara Berlat
Blackrock resident