HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ - Applicant Letter Request of Reconsideration 8-23 . •
�
EDEVELOPMENT REAL PROPERTY ZONINC
JOSHUAJ. LEONARD
208.388 .3868
J LEO NARD@CLARKWARDLE.COM
CEIVUrN
August 23 , 2022 AUG 232022
CITYOFCN D1u;►J-
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
Sent by personal service to,
Mayor and City Council
c/o City Clerk
33 E. Broadway Ave. , Suite 104
Meridian, Idaho 83642
With copies sent via hand-delivery to.
City Attorney' s Office and Community Development Department
33 E. Broadway Ave. , Suite 306 33 E. Broadway Ave. , Suite 102
Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642
Re: Second Request for Reconsideration) -- H-2021-0070.
Dear Mayor and Council,
As the Applicant, Linder Holdings , LLC , led by Dave Young, has worked on Burnside (Jackson)
Ridge over the past three years , it has been apparent that the City Council members and Planning
Staff of the City of Meridian are dedicated to maintaining a high standard for Meridian growth and
projects . We appreciate their work and dedication. In particular, Sonya and Joe have helped and
counseled us as we prepared a compatible, upscale neighborhood design. Our goal from the
beginning has been to achieve a higher standard for single-family residential development in the
City of Meridian, with a focus on preserving our local agricultural heritage and history. We also
spent two years diligently listening to our neighbors and working with them to resolve their
concerns . Ultimately, our project enjoyed overwhelming support from its neighbors—in fact, we
are not aware of any testimony, at either Planning and Zoning or the City Council, that was
opposed to our Burnside (Jackson) Ridge project. We also resolved the Planning and Zoning
i
I
1 The City Council ' s August 9, 2022, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law modified its findings from its
original June 21 , 2022, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The City ' s legal department has taken the
position that we need to ask for reconsideration of modified decisions in order to preserve appeal rights . Therefore,
we submit this request for reconsideration.
T. Hethe Clark Geoffrey M. Wardle Joshua J. Leonard Preston B. Rutter T: 208. 388 . 1000 251 E Front St, Suite 310
F: 208 . 388 . 1001 PO Box 639
clarkwardle.com Boise ID 83701
. •
WARDLE:]
RIE C E r V E JOSHUA LEONAR8
D RKWAR LE.COM
JLEONARD@CLARKWARDLE.COM
AUG 2 2 2022
CITY OF C mrr ,x,
August 23 , 2022 CITY CLERKS OFFICE
Sent by personal service to:
Mayor and City Council
c/o City Clerk
33 E. Broadway Ave. , Suite 104
Meridian, Idaho 83642
With copies sent via hand-delivery to:
City Attorney' s Office and Community Development Department
33 E. Broadway Ave. , Suite 306 33 E. Broadway Ave. , Suite 102
Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642
Re : Second Request for Reconsideration ' - - H - 2021 - 0070 .
Dear Mayor and Council,
As the Applicant, Linder Holdings , LLC , led by Dave Young, has worked on Burnside (Jackson)
Ridge over the past three years , it has been apparent that the City Council members and Planning
Staff of the City of Meridian are dedicated to maintaining a high standard for Meridian growth and
projects . We appreciate their work and dedication. In particular, Sonya and Joe have helped and
counseled us as we prepared a compatible, upscale neighborhood design. Our goal from the
beginning has been to achieve a higher standard for single-family residential development in the
City of Meridian, with a focus on preserving our local agricultural heritage and history. We also
spent two years diligently listening to our neighbors and working with them to resolve their
concerns . Ultimately, our project enjoyed overwhelming support from its neighbors—in fact, we
are not aware of any testimony, at either Planning and Zoning or the City Council , that was
opposed to our Burnside (Jackson) Ridge project. We also resolved the Planning and Zoning
1 The City Council ' s August 9, 2022, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law modified its findings from its
original June 21 , 2022, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The City' s legal department has taken the
position that we need to ask for reconsideration of modified decisions in order to preserve appeal rights . Therefore,
we submit this request for reconsideration.
I
T. Hethe Clark Geoffrey M. Wardle Joshua 1, Leonard Preston B. Rutter T: 208 . 388. 1000 251 E Front St, Suite 310
F: 208 . 388 . 1001 PO Box 639
clarkwordle.com Boise ID 83701
Memorandum
Page 2 of 5
Commission ' s concerns , and we were pleased that the P&Z commission unanimously
recommended approval of our project .
We pursued this project because we were following the City ' s lead . In the summer of 2019 , the
City invested significant resources to construct new water and sewer lines to serve the area in
which our project is located . Additionally, a new fire station was constructed nearby to provide
fire protection service . The contiguity of previously annexed land (the Brundage Estates
subdivision) , the project ' s compliance with the Comprehensive Plan , and the City ' s considerable
investments in infrastructure and services in this area conclusively demonstrate that annexation of
this property is :
. . . reasonably necessary to assure the orderly development of [the City of Meridian]
in order to allow efficient and economically viable provision of tax- supported and
fee- supported municipal services , to enable the orderly development of private
lands which benefit from the cost-effective availability of municipal services in
urbanizing areas and to equitably allocate the costs of public services in
management of development on the urban fringe .
Idaho Code § 50- 222 . ( 1 ) .
Burnside (Jackson) Ridge also complies with the City ' s required findings for annexation under the
City of Meridian ' s Unified Development Code (see Unified Development Code § 11 - 5B - 3 . E) :
• it "complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan" (E. 1 ) ;
• it "complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose
statement" (E . 2 ) ,
• it is not "materially detrimental to the public health , safety, and welfare" (E . 3 ) ;
• it does not "result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political
subdivision providing public services within the city including, but not limited to , school
districts " (E . 4) ; and
• it "is in the best interest of city" (E . 5 ) .
Burnside (Jackson) Ridge achieves the annexation policy established by the Idaho Legislature and
complies with the required findings for annexation found in the City of Meridian ' s Unified
Development Code (see Unified Development Code § 11 - 5B - 3 . E) , and it has overwhelming
a This project is required to come before the City precisely because it is contiguous , per the City ' s area of impact
agreement with Ada County . Ada County Code § 9-4-4 . C .
Memorandum
Page 3 of 5
support from our neighbors . Additionally, it received an extremely positive staff recommendation
and a unanimous recommendation of approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission .
With all evidence indicating a likely approval , we were taken aback when the City Council denied
our project. We were also confused by the reasons for the City ' s denial . Originally, the reasons
given by the City Council for its denial of our project included the following :
S _ The Property is not located in an area that the City has prioritized for near-term growth.
6_ The proposed annexation and residential subdivision would place additional burdens on City
services, including, but not limited to, public safety services.
7. The proposed annexation and residential subdivision would place additional burdens on
local roads_
[ Original] Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law , Final Decision, and Order, dated June 21 , 2022 ,
in Case No . 1-1-2021 -0070 . These rationales created an impossible and unenforceable standard for
the City and were appropriately reconsidered .
After reconsidering its decision "for the limited purpose of clarifying the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law concerning adverse impacts on public services" (oral Motion to Reconsider
at the July 26 , 2022 Regular City Council Meeting) , however, the City Council ' s revised reasons
for denying our project were significantly different—all three of the above reasons had been
deleted , with the following reason substituted in their place :
F5Theoperty is contiguous to land to the east ("Brundage Estates"), which serves as a point
kpity for the Applicant's proposed annexation. The City approved a preliminary plat
ndage Estates in 2016. but a final plat has not yret been recorded` leading the City
l to find that annexation of additional land to the west of Brundage Estates is not a
expansion of the city limits at this time.
[Revised] Findings of Fact , Conclusions of Law , Final Decision , and Order, dated August 9 , 2022 ,
in Case No . 1-1-2021 -0070 .
Denying our project because a final plat has not been recorded for the Brundage Estates
subdivision (our project ' s point of contiguity to the City) is similarly flawed . It imposes a standard
not found in Idaho Code or the City ' s Unified Development Code and , to our knowledge , has never
before imposed on an annexation application . In fact, in 2016, the same parcels of real property
that comprise the Brundage Estates subdivision were used by the City as the sole "point of
contiguity" to annex 1 ,322. 14 acres of real property in what was called the "South Meridian
Annexation" (see Case No. 2015 -0019) . The southernmost portion of the Brundage Estates
Memorandum
Page 4 of 5
properties can be seen in the following image, which was taken from Exhibit A to each of the
P g g
twenty-three (23 ) Development Agreements that were approved by the City Council on January
26 , 2022, for the South Meridian Annexation.
;. T . 7 r,
i E r
I ' � fj�%r/fir• / ` '• � � „fir rr-%,/ -
- - -•may--�*�� 0.� r / + Ol
e Off
form
� ■ L / • /rrr r/
I
The Brundage Estates property is a valid annexation path—both in 2016 and today. Yet, the
[Revised] Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law , Final Decision, and Order, dated August 9 , 2022 ,
posit that because Brundage Estates—a wholly unrelated development that was annexed by the
City in 2016 has not recorded its final plat, "the annexation of [Jackson Ridge Estates ] . . . is not
a logical expansion of city limits . " The development status of an unrelated, neighboring
development Brundage Estates—is not a standard upon which the City may decide an annexation
request; rather, it is the annexation status of the Brundage Estates property that matters .
Memorandum
Page 5 of 5
Also , the City' s revised reason for denial (that "annexation of additional land to the west of
Brundage Estates is not a logical expansion of the city limits at this time") misstates the applicable
standards , stated above.
By denying Jackson Ridges Estates , even though all services are available, the Council is acting
arbitrarily. The record before you shows that fire station #6 is in the immediate vicinity ( 1 .4 miles
away) , the City' s police department can respond within critical response times , the dry line sewer
and water lines are directly adjacent and readily accessible, and the traffic impact study' s few
proposed needs will easily be met.
It doesn ' t have to be this way. The Council can still do the right thing . An abundance of evidence
in the record demonstrates that each of the actual standards for annexation under UDC § 11 -5B -
3 (E) are met, allowing you to find that.
9
✓ Jackson Ridge Estates does comply with Meridian ' s Comprehensive Plan;
✓ It complies with Meridian' s R- 2 and R-4 zoning districts ;
✓ It is not materially detrimental to the public ' s health, safety, and welfare ;
✓ It would not result in an adverse impact upon political subdivisions ; and
✓ Annexing Jackson Ridge Estates is in the best interest of the City of Meridian.
After great time and effort by City staff, the Mayor, the Council, , and Dave and his team, the
matter, it seems , ultimately comes down to a policy choice : whether this is in the "best interest of
Meridian . " All involved have read the Council ' s policy choice in its August 9 , 2022 , Findings ,
which is why we wish to convey our genuine disappointment.
Dave and his team, therefore, respectfully request that the Council reconsider its prior policy
choice and find that annexing Jackson Ridge Estates is in fact in the best interests of our City. The
record overwhelmingly supports such a finding, which, if adopted, would put the Council on far
more defensible grounds . To not act on this request, the Council would be applying an annexation
standard that does not exist in the Unified Development Code to deny a truly magnificent addition
to its community. That certainly cannot be in the City' s best interest.
Very truly ours ,
Joshua J . Leonard