HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-05-06 Lee Cooper
Charlene Way
From:Chris Johnson
Sent:Monday, May 6, 2024 7:40 AM
To:Charlene Way
Subject:FW: Pebblebrook App - Citizen Feedback - Lee Cooper
For the record.
From: Lee C <coop3seven@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 4, 2024 5:09 PM
To: David Miles <dmiles@meridiancity.org>
Cc: Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org>; Mayor and City Council <MayorandCityCouncil@meridiancity.org>;
Kurt Starman <kstarman@meridiancity.org>; Caleb Hood <chood@meridiancity.org>; Josha Iverson
<jiverson@meridiancity.org>; Bill Nary <bnary@meridiancity.org>
Subject: Re: Pebblebrook App - Citizen Feedback - Lee Cooper
External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments.
Mr. Mayor Simison & Meridian City Council
I appreciate Chief of Staff Dave Miles and City Clerk Chris Johnson for their assistance with my concerns regarding the
Pebblebrook (H-2024-005) infill development. It would be greatly appreciated if you might take a moment for some
additional considerations on the proposed development prior to the upcoming May 7th meeting.
Below are a list of concerns for your consideration as I am opposed to the Pebblebrook infill development as currently
proposed & recommended by P&Z.
1. The “Adopted Future Land Use Map” for the City of Meridian identifies a future park west of Meridian Road
and South of Chinden Road (see screenshot below and LINK to the City’s map). It is my understanding that the
previous land owner, Eileen Scott, offered to donate this land to the city. A park is favorable over the proposed
infill project. Meridian residents and certainly none of the Paramount neighborhood residents were made aware
of the City’s change away from a city park. It would be appreciated if the City could provide clarity on any
Meridian resident opposition to the park. If none exists, please consider a deeper investigation into the change
from the land use map without our notification and input.
1
2. If homes are going to be built on this land, below are requests that I ask you add to the Development
Agreement & Conditions of Approval:
a. The surrounding homes abutting the property may be zoned R-8, however the neighborhoods were
thoughtfully arranged to be different. The density surrounding the proposed infill development is
roughly 2.87 homes per acre with lot sizes ranging from 8,000 sf to 14,810 sf. During the P&Z hearing,
this question came up and the Sr. Planner, P&Z staff, and applicant did not have the surrounding homes
density. It is important that any infill on this site align with the adjacent lot sizes. Please remember that
if the City is not following the Future Land Use map, they have the same power to change the density to
match the adjacent neighborhoods by asking the applicant to go back and make revisions by matching
Paramount homes with backyards matching 1:1. (It may be helpful to look at a satellite image of
Paramount)
b. In the neighborhood meeting, the applicant informed us that “Most homes being sold by \[the\]
developer are single story, so a buyer would have to request a 2-story option.” {LINK} During the P&Z
hearing, staff and the applicant informed us that the home sizes were going to increase in size over what
was previously provided to us and included in the applicant files leading up to the meeting. Please note,
none of the lot sizes increased and staff never questioned the change. Not only is this bad form, but to
go unquestioned by the P&Z staff suggests developers have more influence than concerned citizens.
P&Z did ask if the developer would build single story against the existing homes and the request was
quickly rejected without further discussion. Please restrict the applicant to much smaller homes on small
lots.
c. During the P&Z meeting, the developer was asked about an adjacent property where street access
to Meridian Road could be obtained. The applicant indicated it was not an option. Ironically, at the
neighborhood meeting, I was standing with the applicant when that particular neighbor offered to sell
her home/lot to the developer for direct access to meridian road and she was turned down by the
applicant. The applicant was misleading in the P&Z meeting. This infill development should be required
2
to access Meridian road as opposed to adding over 400 trips a day through existing neighborhoods.
Please require the applicant to go back to the neighbor and work out a deal to provide direct access to
Meridian road.
d. Multiple residents expressed concerns about the additional traffic through neighborhoods. Not only
did the P&Z disrespect our concerns, they laughed at the traffic problems that exist in our community.
The problem is systemic, ACHD and ITD can only react when cities like ours continue rapid growth
without supporting the infrastructure to properly catch up. Traffic continually gets worse with each
development approval and the same staff have the opportunity to be part of the solution. It is our duty
as residents and City of Meridian representatives to raise the bar and better facilitate thoughtful and
balanced growth of the city. Please do not approve this development without further traffic circulation
improvements in North Meridian.
e. The applicant and P&Z staff both warned the group of opposing citizens that something worse
could be built on this land. Not only was this offensive but they are the ones in power. Both the
applicant and P&Z failed to acknowledge that within the Paramount subdivision there is a responsible
blend of homes and apartments with even more density coming from the 2023 approval by the City for
Sagarra (H-2022-0027) project at Orchard Park (formally Linder Village). Please note this is less than
1,500 feet from the proposed infill site. We don’t need to be reprimanded for being concerned. We
don’t need more density. We don’t need to burden our schools. Please, remember we have to live with
this decision forever and we are already supporting more living style varieties than adjacent
neighborhoods to the north, west, south and east. Please have the applicant reduce the density.
f. The P&Z staff mocked the concerns with overcrowding at the local schools by indicating that
schools will always be overcrowded. This is offensive. My wife serves children with special needs in our
schools and sees firsthand the effects of uncontrolled growth and lack of concern for the schools
expressed by the P&Z staff. We are losing good teachers all the time and the City's approvals and
mentality towards the schools owns part of the blame. Please protect our teachers. Please protect our
children. Please start being concerned about the impact of growth on the schools and require
developers to support the schools.
g. The applicant indicated their design aligns with the Paramount neighborhood. However, the design
lacks the landscape strip between the roadway and the sidewalk. The design lacks street trees. The
design lacks sufficiently wide roadways to properly accommodate street parking and navigating the
development. Please have the applicant adjust the site design to match Paramount, of which they want
to be a part.
h. It is unfortunate that P&Z considered the proposed 101 trees as sufficient. For 54 homes, “amenity
spaces” and “open space” to only have 101 trees is irresponsible. There are large beautiful trees that will
be removed. There should be street trees/shade trees in the landscape strip, multiple trees (minimum 2)
in each front yard like is found throughout Paramount and all rear yard landscaping should be
completed by the developer prior to the City’s Certificate of Occupancy for each home. Please make this
a condition of any approval.
I sincerely appreciate your time and consideration of the concerns above regarding the Pebblebrook application (H-
2024-005). It is my hope that together we can continue to make Meridian a wonderful and desirable place to live and
grow as we provide CARE to our community.
Sincerely,
Lee Cooper
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 8:53 AM David Miles <dmiles@meridiancity.org> wrote:
3
Chris,
I spoke with Lee Cooper who is a Meridian resident who called our office. Lee shared his concerns and frustrations
regarding the Pebblebrook subdivision application. Because we spoke about the open application and process Council
is required to follow, I shared with him that I would inform the Clerk for the record’s purpose, and Lee is copied on this
email.
Lee's general concerns are related to density of project (and generally in the area), his understanding that a park was
offered from the owner to the City (and this was not considered during the hearing), and that he felt P/Z was dismissive
th
of the public hearing feedback that residents did not want the project. The P/Z hearing was on the 18, and I believe
th
that the Council hearing date is set for May 7.
Please add this to the project record as appropriate. I did let Lee know that due to the application being active and
open, that Council and Mayor cannot engage discussions, except for on the public record and he understood that.
Dave
Dave Miles | Chief of Staff
City of Meridian | Mayor’s Office
33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 489-0532|Fax: (208) 884-8119
Built for Business, Designed for Living
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law
4
Chris Johnson
From:Robert Simison
Sent:Monday, May 6, 2024 12:34 PM
To:Lee C; David Miles
Cc:Chris Johnson; Mayor and City Council; Kurt Starman; Caleb Hood; Josha Iverson; Bill
Nary
Subject:RE: Pebblebrook App - Citizen Feedback - Lee Cooper
Mr. Cooper,
Thank you for your email. As this is an open application, myself and City Council are not able to comment outside the
public record. I know your email and this response will be included in the hearing folder for the application.
Respectfully,
Mayor Robert Simison
City of Meridian
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law.
From: Lee C <coop3seven@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 4, 2024 5:09 PM
To: David Miles <dmiles@meridiancity.org>
Cc: Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org>; Mayor and City Council <MayorandCityCouncil@meridiancity.org>;
Kurt Starman <kstarman@meridiancity.org>; Caleb Hood <chood@meridiancity.org>; Josha Iverson
<jiverson@meridiancity.org>; Bill Nary <bnary@meridiancity.org>
Subject: Re: Pebblebrook App - Citizen Feedback - Lee Cooper
External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments.
Mr. Mayor Simison & Meridian City Council
I appreciate Chief of Staff Dave Miles and City Clerk Chris Johnson for their assistance with my concerns regarding the
Pebblebrook (H-2024-005) infill development. It would be greatly appreciated if you might take a moment for some
additional considerations on the proposed development prior to the upcoming May 7th meeting.
Below are a list of concerns for your consideration as I am opposed to the Pebblebrook infill development as currently
proposed & recommended by P&Z.
1. The “Adopted Future Land Use Map” for the City of Meridian identifies a future park west of Meridian Road
and South of Chinden Road (see screenshot below and LINK to the City’s map). It is my understanding that the
previous land owner, Eileen Scott, offered to donate this land to the city. A park is favorable over the proposed
infill project. Meridian residents and certainly none of the Paramount neighborhood residents were made aware
of the City’s change away from a city park. It would be appreciated if the City could provide clarity on any
Meridian resident opposition to the park. If none exists, please consider a deeper investigation into the change
from the land use map without our notification and input.
1
2. If homes are going to be built on this land, below are requests that I ask you add to the Development
Agreement & Conditions of Approval:
a. The surrounding homes abutting the property may be zoned R-8, however the neighborhoods were
thoughtfully arranged to be different. The density surrounding the proposed infill development is
roughly 2.87 homes per acre with lot sizes ranging from 8,000 sf to 14,810 sf. During the P&Z hearing,
this question came up and the Sr. Planner, P&Z staff, and applicant did not have the surrounding homes
density. It is important that any infill on this site align with the adjacent lot sizes. Please remember that
if the City is not following the Future Land Use map, they have the same power to change the density to
match the adjacent neighborhoods by asking the applicant to go back and make revisions by matching
Paramount homes with backyards matching 1:1. (It may be helpful to look at a satellite image of
Paramount)
b. In the neighborhood meeting, the applicant informed us that “Most homes being sold by \[the\]
developer are single story, so a buyer would have to request a 2-story option.” {LINK} During the P&Z
hearing, staff and the applicant informed us that the home sizes were going to increase in size over what
was previously provided to us and included in the applicant files leading up to the meeting. Please note,
none of the lot sizes increased and staff never questioned the change. Not only is this bad form, but to
go unquestioned by the P&Z staff suggests developers have more influence than concerned citizens.
P&Z did ask if the developer would build single story against the existing homes and the request was
quickly rejected without further discussion. Please restrict the applicant to much smaller homes on small
lots.
c. During the P&Z meeting, the developer was asked about an adjacent property where street access
to Meridian Road could be obtained. The applicant indicated it was not an option. Ironically, at the
neighborhood meeting, I was standing with the applicant when that particular neighbor offered to sell
her home/lot to the developer for direct access to meridian road and she was turned down by the
applicant. The applicant was misleading in the P&Z meeting. This infill development should be required
2
to access Meridian road as opposed to adding over 400 trips a day through existing neighborhoods.
Please require the applicant to go back to the neighbor and work out a deal to provide direct access to
Meridian road.
d. Multiple residents expressed concerns about the additional traffic through neighborhoods. Not only
did the P&Z disrespect our concerns, they laughed at the traffic problems that exist in our community.
The problem is systemic, ACHD and ITD can only react when cities like ours continue rapid growth
without supporting the infrastructure to properly catch up. Traffic continually gets worse with each
development approval and the same staff have the opportunity to be part of the solution. It is our duty
as residents and City of Meridian representatives to raise the bar and better facilitate thoughtful and
balanced growth of the city. Please do not approve this development without further traffic circulation
improvements in North Meridian.
e. The applicant and P&Z staff both warned the group of opposing citizens that something worse
could be built on this land. Not only was this offensive but they are the ones in power. Both the
applicant and P&Z failed to acknowledge that within the Paramount subdivision there is a responsible
blend of homes and apartments with even more density coming from the 2023 approval by the City for
Sagarra (H-2022-0027) project at Orchard Park (formally Linder Village). Please note this is less than
1,500 feet from the proposed infill site. We don’t need to be reprimanded for being concerned. We
don’t need more density. We don’t need to burden our schools. Please, remember we have to live with
this decision forever and we are already supporting more living style varieties than adjacent
neighborhoods to the north, west, south and east. Please have the applicant reduce the density.
f. The P&Z staff mocked the concerns with overcrowding at the local schools by indicating that
schools will always be overcrowded. This is offensive. My wife serves children with special needs in our
schools and sees firsthand the effects of uncontrolled growth and lack of concern for the schools
expressed by the P&Z staff. We are losing good teachers all the time and the City's approvals and
mentality towards the schools owns part of the blame. Please protect our teachers. Please protect our
children. Please start being concerned about the impact of growth on the schools and require
developers to support the schools.
g. The applicant indicated their design aligns with the Paramount neighborhood. However, the design
lacks the landscape strip between the roadway and the sidewalk. The design lacks street trees. The
design lacks sufficiently wide roadways to properly accommodate street parking and navigating the
development. Please have the applicant adjust the site design to match Paramount, of which they want
to be a part.
h. It is unfortunate that P&Z considered the proposed 101 trees as sufficient. For 54 homes, “amenity
spaces” and “open space” to only have 101 trees is irresponsible. There are large beautiful trees that will
be removed. There should be street trees/shade trees in the landscape strip, multiple trees (minimum 2)
in each front yard like is found throughout Paramount and all rear yard landscaping should be
completed by the developer prior to the City’s Certificate of Occupancy for each home. Please make this
a condition of any approval.
I sincerely appreciate your time and consideration of the concerns above regarding the Pebblebrook application (H-
2024-005). It is my hope that together we can continue to make Meridian a wonderful and desirable place to live and
grow as we provide CARE to our community.
Sincerely,
Lee Cooper
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 8:53 AM David Miles <dmiles@meridiancity.org> wrote:
3
Chris,
I spoke with Lee Cooper who is a Meridian resident who called our office. Lee shared his concerns and frustrations
regarding the Pebblebrook subdivision application. Because we spoke about the open application and process Council
is required to follow, I shared with him that I would inform the Clerk for the record’s purpose, and Lee is copied on this
email.
Lee's general concerns are related to density of project (and generally in the area), his understanding that a park was
offered from the owner to the City (and this was not considered during the hearing), and that he felt P/Z was dismissive
th
of the public hearing feedback that residents did not want the project. The P/Z hearing was on the 18, and I believe
th
that the Council hearing date is set for May 7.
Please add this to the project record as appropriate. I did let Lee know that due to the application being active and
open, that Council and Mayor cannot engage discussions, except for on the public record and he understood that.
Dave
Dave Miles | Chief of Staff
City of Meridian | Mayor’s Office
33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 489-0532|Fax: (208) 884-8119
Built for Business, Designed for Living
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law
4