Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC - Public Testimony: David Turnbull - 1.111 C.Jay Coles From:Brian McClure Sent:Thursday, January 11, 2018 7:13 AM To:C.Jay Coles Subject:FW: North Rim / South Rim Comments C.Jay, Here are some comments for the Comp Plan amendment. Thanks Brian McClure bmcclure@meridiancity.org From: Brian McClure Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 7:12 AM To: 'David Turnbull'; Caleb Hood Cc: Jon Wardle; Mike Wardle Subject: RE: North Rim / South Rim Comments Mr. Turnbull , Your comments have been received. Thank you for taking the time to provide them. Brian McClure bmcclure@meridiancity.org From: David Turnbull [ mailto:dturnbull@brightoncorp.com ] Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 5:32 AM To: Caleb Hood; Brian McClure Cc: Jon Wardle; Mike Wardle Subject: North Rim / South Rim Comments Caleb and Brian: Thank you for hosting the meeting on the north rim and south rim proposal. My comments are as follows: Although I understand the sentiment and reasoning of some who are behind this proposal, I do not believe this proposal is an appropriate reaction for the following reasons: • One of a city’s prime functions is to provide urban services in an urban environment. • The cost of those services, as stated by Warren, has a break-even density of approximately 3 units / acre. 2 • The market demand for ½ and 1 acre lots should be driven by the market and will be heavily influenced by factors other than an arbitrary distance from a geographical feature like a north and south rim. • We base our land plans on a variety of factors, including topography, easements, waterways, existing and future road systems, regional pathways, future school, park, church and other public or quasi-public needs. Including an arbitrary requirement to consider someone else’s view shed or similar provisions is impractical and burdensome. • I do not believe it is appropriate for a city to place a special restriction on another person’s property for the benefit of a third party. Why would the city place a burden on some of our long-time property owners, the farmers of this community, for the benefit of someone who more recently moved in the community. • A mayor and city council should rarely, if ever, place constraints upon itself that would take away discretion in land use matters. Such a rule will be broken more than it is kept and the administrative burden on the city staff is surely not worth it. Mayors and city councils are elected to make decisions that make sense for the city and all of its stakeholders. It seems that this proposal was initiated with the denial of a particular project. I don’t know all of the factors that went into that decision but it seems like the mayor and council exercised their discretion In more practical terms, the North Rim and South Rim areas provide two excellent case studies: North Rim: About all that is left to develop of the North Rim area is the property below the rim and our property, which is bounded by some estate properties on the rim to the north, Old Pollard Road and an approved business park abutting Highway 16 to the west, Highway 20/26 (Chinden) to the south. The property to the east has or will soon submit its development plan. Our property is already designated for higher intensity uses, as it should be. There are no view corridors to consider on our property or the property below. In essence, the text regarding the North Rim might as well be eliminated. South Rim: I’ll provide just one small example of the trouble or contradiction this blanket amendment includes. We are currently submitting the preliminary plat for the Turf Farm property on the NE corner of Eagle and Lake Hazel Roads, as part of our Century Farm community. This amendment suggests that a large share of this property should be designated as ½ - 1 acre lots and consider view sheds. However, staff is directing us, on our current application, to increase the density of our original proposal as a goal of the comprehensive plan in this Lake Hazel transportation corridor. We are complying with the latter because it makes more sense than 3 the former. I seriously doubt that the Mayor, Council or Staff want to wrestle with these sorts of conflicts all the way along the south rim area. Hence, I will be encouraging the Mayor and Council to reject this proposal. Thank you, David David Turnbull Brighton Corporation | www.brightoncorp.com 12601 W. Explorer, Suite 200 | Boise, Idaho 83713 Office 208.378.4000