Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPreserve Meridian/Sally ReynoldsChris Johnson From: Preserve Meridian <smartgrowthformeridian@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2018 11:58 AM To: mayortammy; Anne Little Roberts; Joe Borton; Ty Palmer, Treg Bernt; Genesis Milam; Luke Cavener; City Clerk Subject: Outstanding Conditions for Linder Village Attachments: ACHD LV PPT.pdf Mayor and City Council, Thank you for your service to the city, especially at this busy time of year. I am preparing for the Linder Village hearing next week and saw the updated staff report published Wednesday. The recommendation for approval came with three requirements. While the developer has yet to agree to construct the Live/Work units in Phase 1, the other two requirements are much more pressing: The collector road and the fact that the public has not seen the new plat indicating changes to Bergman. The 12/12/18 staff report states, "Add a requirement for the Applicant to work with Brighton, the adjacent property owner to the east, to finalize an agreement for a collector street connection to N. Fox. Linder Village —AZ, PP, VAR H-2017- 0088 PAGE 2 Run Way (see section 1 in Exhibit B). If an agreement can't be reached, the project should come back before the Commission for further review. ii. Add a requirement for the Applicant to work with ACHD on the collector street intersection with Linder Rd. where the signal is proposed and the firehouse access is located; and traffic calming measures to slow traffic on Bergman Ave (see condition 1. 1 in Exhibit B). iii. Add a requirement for some of the multi -story office live/work units south of Winco to be constructed with the 1" phase of the development (see condition #1. 1cq). e. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: L A letter was received from David Turnbull, Brighton Corporation, confirming Brighton will work with ACHD on the alignment and ROW acquisition to facilitate construction of the east/west collector street from the east property boundary through their property to N. Fox Run Way; however, the purchase price of the ROW is yet to be determined. Therefore, the agreement is not finalized as recommended by the Commission to occur prior to Council hearing the application — the Council should determine if the proiect should be remanded back to the Commission for further review in the absence of a finalized agreement." The most notable item is that the agreement between DMG and Brighton is not finalized. There is a letter of intent; however, many of the details have not even begun to be discussed. P&Z's recommendation to wait to hear the application until the collector road details were finalized was to protect your time as a council and to support your January 2018 findings. It was this exact issue which caused city council to remand the application back to the PZ and it has not been addressed. When the application was resubmitted this fall, the residents assumed the collector road negotiations were complete. At the PZ hearing, we were not surprised, but dismayed, to hear that talks hadn't even begun. At the very least, DMG has had 9 months to begin talks with Brighton about the backage road (per the letter provided to the city and read by Mayor Tammy), but conversations were not started until after the PZ hearing. This collector is a top first priority for all agencies - ITD, ACRD, and the City: " ITD will pursue conversation with the City of Meridian, ACHD and Brighton Corporation to gain a public street connection from Fox Run Way to the Linder Village Commercial Development. " 0 �o H r X U') } O O U L C/) 4- a) N O U)a)cn •� > O '> N U U •� r L U a) WE O — U U)O o U° � C: J i Q a) E O a) E %a) a ,) E am U N N — p U U W— J 0 U Q U a) cn z Q a) CLO V O O OC: O N N O� O O0 Cf) Q O LL -a p a- �/ U) Q U 0 O N p 0 LL 0 0 O O — O O} O O a) a) L �- p O 1 1 L 4- _ Q O O U Q — p C: QN O N a) Z �� (n O L 4 0 4- � Q o C/) %_m Z Q a i 0 U _O p } p a) N } L Q Q O N Cyj r N N U N D 4 � „„aaM woa P41M -AWMT tv p ,I N E. -Ile Ra b-11 All UVL� T Ilk n 41"'i 7? v a a - � yulmw�on .gnu - =ne �earusnYnve xeonic er .� Y ^77 N Deco W¢Aui� �'����•• Nfleoo�05 Avp NPeEo�tls Ave f f, I a 3` )� i � 1iJ _ 4 OPAL w \ \\ » \\f\ Rip 7. I '.I �r � _ 'GN �13C❑NF •N — 'CIH H3GN1-1 'N o � U CO 4- o U) W (1) oc- r +- o V a () 'ct CO C) ct ct O ct �o ct �, • o ct p cn ct � U1 4--J 4-J Ct U "I:� U U 4--J4-J ;_4bA U c V) t+_4 ct O cn �r---o U� ,—, , � • ,__, rte—+ � cJ + U O4 -J 4--J u M a� �4..j U U Ct ct ct ct 4-j ct ct 4-1 s--� a? � �' pr --- 4 a� o ITD Letter, July 28, 2017, p3 "In coordination and discussion with ACHD, commuters and local residents alike would likely be best served by a signalized access on Linder Road, with an east -west access road to the existing signal at Fox Run Way. City Staff, ACHD Staff and ITD Staff have been in communications with the property owner to the east (Brighton) about a collector -type roadway being constructed through their property to connect to Fox Run Way. While all of the details have not been worked out, Brighton has indicated support and Staff believes this option is best for the overall transportation network. " Staff Report, dated Oct 19, 2017, p7 Staff Report, dated Nov 21, 2017, p9 Staff Report dated Jan 12, 2018, p9 "ACHD is not supportive of the proposed signalized intersection at Bergman Way and Chinden Boulevard. The original traffic impact study noted that a signal is not warranted at this intersection if access to Fox Run Way is available, and is not warranted with the first phase of the development. ITD is planning to pursue conversations with the adjacent property owner to obtain a public street connection between Fox Run Way and the Linder Village development site. " ACHD Report dated Nov 20, 2017, p2 Over the last 18 months, DMG has demonstrated a lack of transparency in their dealings with the city and the community. Please do not approve this application without all the details of the collector road being finalized. If DMG/Brighton ultimately cannot reach a fully executed agreement on the collector road, then a light at Bergman will need to be considered. This change alters the site plan and would require further commentary from ITD and ACHD (however, I will note that the traffic studies submitted by the applicant to ACHD already conveniently included the scenario for a light at Bergman). Finalizing that collector road was one of your main concerns in January. You also asked the developer to work with the neighbors, but no effort was made to reach out to us or incorporate any of the suggestions we gave (except those made on the public record). While we didn't really expect the latter to happen, we did expect the collector to be finalized. Paramount residents still have two concerns - the delivery hours of WinCo and Bergman accessing the commercial site in PHASE ONE of the development. Instead of flooding your inboxes with emails, we are gathering signatures on both petitions and will present those on Monday to the city. BERGMAN CALMING MEASURES At the PZ hearing, all the PZ Commissioners agreed that Bergman needed calming measures. The applicant, as usual, only agreed to make changes if ACHD required it as a condition of approval: " Chairman McCarvel, Commissioner Fitzgerald, I can't tell you that you would be -- we would be willing to put a jog in that road, but certainly, to the extent that traffic calming devices of some type would be appropriate and that ACHD would require as a condition of approval, sure." Nov 15th PZ minutes, p109. At the ACHD hearing, a jog in the road was required to be put it, but the public has yet to see the new plat. The other traffic -calming measures (bulb -outs, traffic circles, changed stop signs, road dips) were only encouraged to be "explored." The ACHD report even stated that crosswalks WOULD NOT need to be constructed in Phase 1 (despite the fact that they want Bergman to go through to the collector and they believe residents will flock to that corner). ACHD did not mandate that the crosswalks be installed in Phase one. To be honest, ACHD is going to require whatever they want to require. Despite extremely advanced notice and promises that the hearing would be at 6pm to accommodate the public, the hearing was scheduled for noon. We wrote letters and asked that the time be moved, but to no avail. President Baker obviously did not understand the application at all and made several erroneous statements. After all the public testimony, there was zero discussion and Commissioner Goldthorpe (who had publicly stated two weeks PRIOR to the hearing that this application had already been heard and approved) read directly from the Linder Village website page and moved to approve it. After that, there was some discussion, but very minimal about how to word the motion. I understand that it is in ACHD's best interest to route traffic through narrow residential streets to alleviate traffic flow on Linder and Chinden, although with the planned improvements those roads are suppose to function wonderfully. Anytime you can make a rule to benefit yourself, there is a temptation to do so and they have taken that opportunity. At the hearing, they downplayed the amount of "cut -through traffic" that they think will go through Paramount, limiting it to 750 cars/day. If it's so negligible certainly it would have even less of an impact on an arterial street than a residential one? The two arguments are mutually exclusive. Per Eric Exline on December 11th, there are 575 children ages K -5th grade who walk in this square mile everyday. And it's not just to and from school. It is to friends' houses, church, scouts, extracurricular activities such as sports, music lessons, art classes, etc ... We also have just as many, if not more middle schoolers and high schoolers that use these paths. Due to the close proximity of Paramount, Heritage, and Rocky, EVERY child K-12 in this square mile is in a walk zone. We also have a 55+ community and many adults who enjoy walking/biking together or with their families. ACHD acknowledged at the hearing that Paramount already has had its fair share of traffic issues with the high schoolers speeding and driving recklessly through the neighborhood. So, why are they compounding the issues? I submit to you that this is your opportunity to stand up for the residents. This is not something we take issue with the developer on, but with ACHD. I understand that you work with this agency quite often, but in this application, their decision is detrimental to the public safety of our residents and the safe walking paths to schools for our children. Public safety should not be endangered for the sake of convenience. This is your chance to advise ACHD to reconsider Bergman as a through road (or at the very least not a through path in PHASE ONE, which will just screamed to be used because nothing around it will be developed). I spoke with the ACHD planner after the hearing and they would take your recommendation under advisement before being the last ones to sign off on the plat. Who knows, they may change something or they may not, but this is the one and only opportunity for anyone to prevent this dangerous recommendation from becoming a permanent reality, and that responsibility falls on you. (I attached a powerpoint file that shows several commercial areas with residential homes behind them that DO NOT connect. In fact, in one case, they walled off the stub street. Furthermore, if anyone says they need emergency access, I'd like to point out that there are SIX access points to the development and in other areas of Meridian there are houses more than a half mile in from a major street where emergency vehicles must drive to get there. If access is really an issue, they could design the collector road to split off in a Y, where the cars entering the site from Linder going Eastbound could veer off onto a ONE WAY road that goes into the residential section of Linder Village). OTHER CONCERNS Besides that, the staff report still does not address the large footprint of the additional buildings in the eastern portion of the site, or the fact that according to the Comp Plan and the FLUM, residential acreage is SIGNIFICANTLY under the recommended amount. While I am not necessarily in favor of more residential on this corner, because our schools are already overcrowded and it is an intersection of a state highway and a major arterial road, I do not think less residential should equal more big box stores, especially in a MU -C designated area. The two large strip areas are broken up by a plaza (which will NOT be constructed until phase 2), but they are still strip malls. While not much can be done about the WinCo side, the eastern portion past the plaza could be such a great community gathering area with smaller shops, restaurants, etc .... Even if there was a larger footprint store, it could stand alone (see suggestions presented by Joe Marshall at the PZ hearing). But it's not our job, or your job, as residents to design alternative concept plans that would fit MU -C designation. Look at what Meridian says is a mixed use community design and then look at everything EAST of Winco. Pretend WinCo is its own service area, or "node" as Developer McKinney labelled it. We would still like to see the REST of the development be mixed use community. 3 Even Commissioner Hansen in the ACHD hearing asked the applicant what they were doing to decrease the number of car trips to the area and encourage walking/biking. The applicant basically said, "Well, we have that plaza." To which Hansen replied that all the rest of the buildings mimic Winco facing out to the street and it would make more sense to face the people who they were serving. Since ACHD does not have written minutes, you can see the exchange on the video from marker 1:42:26 to 1:48:26 here. Commissioner Hansen said there are many design teams in town who could do that. Personally, I don't know why this applicant hasn't. The applicant himself said this is a full-scale grocery store, so of course people are going to drive here, which still begs the question as to why we need a full-scale grocer on this corner when we have Wal- Mart, Fred Meyer, Target, Albertsons, and soon Costco all under two miles from our homes. Commissioner Cassinelli hit the nail on the head with his comments: "I think the -- the functionality, it's an Eagle, but across the street you have Fred Meyer. A mile down the road we are to have Costco. So, we are going to have a functionality there. This is an opportunity to have much more in this -- in this area. I want this to go through. I still think it's a long way off is my personal opinion. I think if you look around -- look around the country, you can look, there is probably hundreds of developments that have the wow factor, have the cool factor. This is a lot more than what we first saw, I will give it that, but I look at it, there is still a whole lot of pavement smack dab in the middle of this. I think where Winco is at now is -- I think it's good. I think with that park down there I think it's far enough away from the residences that I don't think it's going to be an issue with -- with -- with the moving of the -- of the loading docks, the plaza, and all that. I think -- I think that's a good add, but it -- it's a good step, but to me it -- I look at this and it looks like -- it looks like something on Eagle Road and it looks like where -- where Dick's and Kohl's is with a little plaza in the middle. That is my opinion of it. That's -- that's -- that's -- you know, when I look at it, I see still a strip mall and, again, there is -- it doesn't have to be The Village. But there is some other cool lifestyle centers where you get a lot more walkability in them than what you have here and I'm not just talking walkability being -- going from point A to point B, but you're walking through the stores, you're walking through the areas with the -- with the shops. I think -- I just think probably the last -- this is one of the last few large parcels like this. It's a gateway into Meridian and I think a lot more can be done with it. It is different, but when I look at it I just don't see it's that much different than what we saw the first time around. So, I would like to see, in addition to the other comments -- I mean the -- the -- the collector road going out to Fox Run, that's a -- that's a half, too, I think and we have to do -- there has got to be some mitigation on the traffic going down into Paramount, but I think that -- I think this project could -- can be great and we are sitting at good and why settle for good when we can have great." I know that we are all tired of this application - even my kids are :). I would like to see this squared away and be able to start shopping there soon. If the developer had been more transparent and accommodating over the last year and a half and there were only a few minor outstanding items, I'd say, sure, approve it with conditions. But, the carrot for the applicant is annexation, so please don't award it until at very least the major requirements are met (and I'd like to point out that even these "major" requirements for this developer have been waived and are quite minimal according to the comp plan.) My recommendation is to continue the hearing and not schedule it to come before city council until the collector road is FINALIZED or the deal is dead. If you are likely to go that route, please let us know. It is a lot of work to get the word out to the community and be organized so we can participate in the public process. Due to the holidays, this meeting is poorly timed for many of our residents, but I understand that the public cannot ask for a continuance of a public hearing, so we are ready to come next Tuesday. To summarize: • Please do not approve annexation, even with conditions until the collector road is finalized. • Please do not allow Bergman to connect to the collector road. If you do, please not during Phase One. If you do, please OUTLINE IN SPECIFIC detail in the DA agreement what traffic calming measures the city expects. • Please limit WinCo delivery hours or require them to enclose the area like Target on Eagle did. • Please require Lot 16 to be built in Phase 1. • Please, even if you don't hold them accountable, express disappointment at the fact that the rest of the development does not look like a mixed use community area. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns, Sally Reynolds P.S. I took a lot of time and thought to write this email and if you muscled your way through the entire thing, it would be nice to get a personal note back from you. I understand you cannot comment on the application, but if you could give some indication that you read it, that would be appreciated. Also, I have unanimous approval from the Paramount HOA Advisory Board and the green light from David Turnbull to speak on Paramount's behalf for 10 minutes. Please let me know if you need an official letter from Brighton stating that. Thank you.