HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-13-04 Email from Wokersiens
Tara Green
From: Will Berg
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:55 AM
To: Tare Green
Subject: FW: Opposition to Proposed Kingsbridge SubdiVIsion
-----Original Message-----
From: J. Wokersien [mallto:idabama@yahoo.com)
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 2:56 PM
To: gardnerp@me(lCIianclty.erg; bergw@meridianclty.org
Cc: J Wokersien
Subject: Opposition to Proposed Kingsbridge Subdivision
K. Jeff and Virginia Wokersien
3702 S. Selatir PI.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
(208) 362-2077
December 10, 2004
Dear Madam Mayor and City Council Members:
We are writing in opposition to the proposed Kingsbridge Subdivision per the applications filed
by Vision First, LLC (the "Applicant"), scheduled for hearing on December 14th, 2004.
The proposed Klngsbridge Subdivision Is not compatible with the current land use in the
surrounding properties. The surrounding properties are one acre or larger and have a
decidedly rural character. The current rural setting Includes open pastures, narrow roads
without sidewalks, open fencing, and minimal artificial lighting. The area also provides wildlife
habitat that Is Increasingly under pressure from urban development. It is not uncommon to
see foxes, coyotes, waterfowl, pheasants, and even deer In the open pastures in this area.
It Is important to preserve some of the rural character native to Meridian's history. The
Meridian Planning and Zoning Comprehensive Plan Chapter Seven, Section D, Goal I,
Objective C states "Maintain Integrity of housing areas to preserve values and ambiance of
areas". The placement of Kingsbridge Subdivision in the middle of the surrounding rural
properties will negatively impact the rural nature and value of the surrounding properties.
There are already many other higher density subdivisions in the surrounding area including
Tuscany, Thousand Springs, Muir Woods, as well as others.
Additionally the Applicant's proposal lacks transitional acreages and is counter to the Meridian
Comprehensive plan Chapter Seven Section D, Goal I, Objective D, Action 8 which states the
need for transitional densities to buffer the interface between urban and rural densities. When
we purchased our property we were led to believe that all surrounding properties would be
developed within RUT guidelines to preserve the rural nature of adjacent properties. The
Applicant has not contacted the property owners on S. Selatir PI. to discuss our concerns
regarding densities and transitional acreages.
Traffic is another major concern. The additional traffic will further stress an already
overburdened Eagle Rd. Adding traffic to the 1-84 - Eagle Rd. exit will only increase the
12/13/2004
already dangerous condition caused by the long line of cars waiting to exit during commute
times. The Applicant also has a stub road that appears to allow future access to S. Selatir PI.
S. Selatir PI. is a rural, narrow, road with barrow pits and no sidewalks. Allowing access to the
Kingsbridge Subdivision via S. Selatir PI. will create unsafe conditions as the road is not suited
to additional traffic.
FInally, I would like to express frustration regarding notifications of City Council hearings
regarding the application. I have twice attended City Council meetings (Sept. 16 and Oct. 10)
along with numerous adjacent property owners who are opposed to the Applicant's proposal.
We received no notice of the hearings and only learned about them via the Dartmoor
residents. The Applicant has twice failed to submit the necessary documentation denying the
opportunity for public testimony. The lack of communication with adjacent property owners
and the delays further the distrust between the Applicant and adjacent property owners.
We appreciate your consideration and encourage the denial of the current application as was
previously rejected by Meridian Planning and Zoning.
Thank you for your consideration,
K. Jeff and Virginia Wokersien
12/13/2004