HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-08-15 Hethe Clark DEVELOPMENT REAL PROPERTY ZONINC
CLARK
WARDLE
T. Hethe Clark
(208)388-3327
hclark@clarkwardle.com
Via electronic mail
August 15, 2024
City of Meridian
Community Development Department
Attn: Bill Parsons, Planning Supervisor, Current Planning Group
33 E. Broadway Ste 102
Meridian, ID 83642
RE: Opposition to Timbercreek Recycling H-2024-0032
Dear Bill:
This firm represents DEVCO LLC, which as you know is very much involved in development of properties
in the area of the above-referenced facility. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the pending
application to expand and remove the time limits on the Timbercreek Recycling project at the corner of
Locust Grove and E. Columbia Roads.
Since the annexation of this area just a few years ago,the entirety of the region has been planned by the
City as residential. The City has been developing accordingly, with massive investments being made not
only by the City (including Discovery Park) but also area property owners.
This proposal is at odds with both the planning and the commitments made in the development
agreement. Rather than continuing with the agreed-upon, orderly termination of the use—a
termination that nearby property owners relied upon in investing in their property—the application is
instead proposing to expand the use and remove all time limitations. This application would remove all
limits on the number of trucks visiting the site and would expand the materials that can be processed.
More importantly, it removes the previous requirement to terminate once a residence is located within
1,000 feet. Instead, the composting activities would be allowed to continue through 2029 regardless of
residential development, with the right to request additional extensions. With regard to recycling, the
use could continue indefinitely so long as not sold to a third-party entity. Even when sold, it could
remain so long as the new owner allows it and that new owner plans to eventually develop (with no
time horizon required). This is a massive loophole that almost certainly means the recycling operations
will continue indefinitely.
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
This application is not only inconsistent with the City's residential planning for the area (and the
resulting development that has occurred), but is also replacing a reasoned and phased close-out of this
use in favor of an open-ended license to continue to operate indefinitely.
Accordingly, my client firmly opposes the request to modify the existing development agreement and
urges the Council to keep the existing agreement in place. Additional information is attached to this
letter. In the meantime,we respectfully ask the Council to reject this application.
Very truly yours,
t1 -
T. Hethe Clark
HC/bdb
Background
The project in question is located in south Meridian, in an area that was part of the City's south
annexation of 1,322 acres just a few years ago. The property is designated Low-Density Residential, with
Medium-Density Residential property planned to the north and a Mixed Use-Community node within a
mile —just to the north at Lake Hazel and Locust Grove. The City's new Discovery Park is very close to
the project, as well — less than a half mile as the crow flies. Dozens of residential development
applications have been approved, filed, or are proceeding in the immediate area.
This development pattern was no accident. The City has planned this area for growth and that plan is
currently taking shape. The City designated this area as Low-Density Residential as far back as the 2002
Meridian Comprehensive Plan, and maintained that designation in two subsequent plan updates.
So where does the Timbercreek Recycling project fit? Before 2015, the Timbercreek Recycling property
was located in Ada County and zoned Rural Urban Transition (RUT). Its operations included a small
livestock, agriculture, and composting business before being annexed with the City's 2016 southern
annexation, at which time it was rezoned as R-4 (low-density residential). It remains R-4.
Timbercreek Recycling's current operations involve recycling and composting activities that are
prohibited in a residential zone; indeed, they are allowed only in Meridian's Light Industrial (I-L) and
Heavy Industrial (I-H) districts. No such zones exist anywhere in the vicinity. The area has never been
planned or zoned for industrial uses; instead, the Timbercreek Recycling operations were allowed to
continue through a negotiated development agreement. Like a non-conforming or grandfathered use,
the development agreements were put in place to limit and wind down operations in favor of the
planned residential development that the City intended would take place all around this site.
Current Restrictions and New Proposal
It is the undersigned's understanding that, upon annexation in 2016,the City of Meridian limited the site
to 40 truckloads a day and was only allowed to recycle wood, grass, leaves, sheetrock, and other
agricultural materials. Timbercreek agreed to cease operations within thirty days of the first residential
home being occupied within 1,000 feet of their operations or if the site was sold to a third party.
In 2018, Timbercreek requested a modification to its development agreement to significantly expand its
operations. The project was very controversial and had significant neighborhood opposition. After much
back and forth between the Council, staff, and the applicant and multiple requests for reconsideration,
it was finally approved nine months later, permitting Timbercreek to expand its small compositing
business into a commercial operation that included not only processing of food and garden waste but
also a dramatic increase in allowed recycling activities. There was also an increase of allowed truck trips
to 56 trips a day.
Although this expansion was allowed, the theme of eventually ending this use continued in the 2018
development agreement. Timbercreek agreed to cease operations within ten years, if the property is
sold to a third party, or within thirty days of the first residential home that is occupied within 1,000 feet
of their operations,whichever came first.
Now, Timbercreek has requested another significant expansion of its operations, including: (i)
permission to recycle all materials and all activities allowed by state law; and (ii) no limit on the number
of daily truckloads to the site.
They are also attempting to circumvent the planned and orderly termination of these activities. Rather
than adhering to the previously agreed-to termination conditions, instead there is now proposed a two-
phase termination plan: one for composting and one for recycling. Both are significant departures from
the previous agreement to terminate the uses in the short term:
With regard to composting only, the request is now to remove any requirement to terminate
based on the existence of a residential home within 1,000 feet; instead, the request is to be able to
operate through 2029 regardless of residential development, with an extension mechanism built in that
could allow the composting activities to continue beyond that timeframe.
With regard to recycling only, all time limits and conditions are removed. The use could
remain indefinitely so long as it is not sold to a third-party entity. Even when sold to a third-party entity,
if the new owner plans to eventually develop (with no time horizon required), the recycling use can
remain so long as that new owner permits it. This is not an insignificant loophole.
The Proposed DA Modification Removes All Meaningful Limitations
on an Industrial Use Intended and Planned to be Phased Out
This use has been and remains inconsistent with the City's planning and approval of residential
properties in this area. Rather than phasing out an inconsistent use (as has been the plan since
annexation), the proposed DA modification instead entrenches the recycling use and removes all short-
term limitations on the composting use. Rather than phasing out in an orderly fashion, the use is
instead allowed to operate without any limit on volume of trucks and for the indefinite future.
While many of these factors have been pointed out by the many interested parties (and staff) who have
opposed this project's expansion, we believe it is worth noting the following:
First, heavy industrial use surrounded by miles of residential homes is incompatible for obvious
reasons that do not need to be restated here. Timbercreek Recycling is the only industrial use in the
middle of miles of residential.The city's nearest industrial zone is located almost five miles away;
Second, and on a related note, the City has informed property owners that this area is planned
residential. It is currently developing accordingly. Indeed, millions of dollars in investment have gone
into developing this area. The City has approved the residential developments near both Pinnacle and
Hadler in recent years. The Summerlin neighborhood development was submitted in June, and more
residential developments will be submitted shortly. Property owners rely on City planning to know and
understand how an area will develop—this industrial use in the middle of an area planned residential is
wholly inconsistent with City planning and creates an arbitrary and chaotic situation out of an otherwise
orderly planning process;
Third, it is not only private property owners, residents, and developers who rely on the City's
planning. The City itself has invested significant resources in this area, including with the City's new
regional park— Discovery Park. The requested expansion of this industrial use would be less than a mile
from the City's newest major park investment;
Fourth, the City approved a prior expansion of this use over significant opposition. The only
comfort offered to those property owners was the commitment to end the use in an orderly fashion.
Existing residents and people buying homes in the area are counting on this isolated industrial use to
cease operations in accordance with prior commitments and the existing development agreement;
Fifth, given the inconsistency between this use and the planned (and coming) residential uses,
allowing this industrial use to continue next to residences will result in numerous quality-of-life
complaints, causing difficulty not only for those residents but for City staff that will inevitably be forced
to respond to such complaints; and
Finally, the application begs a number of follow-up questions. For example, the application
suggests a significant expansion in the use. Such an investment would be difficult to amortize over a
five-year period, suggesting the real intent is: (i) to seek the extension on composting activities
described in Section 6.14.1 (putting Council back, once again, into this same uncomfortable position);
and (ii)to continue the recycling activities indefinitely, as would be permitted under new Section 6.15.
In other words, the DA modification that has been requested shows that Timbercreek has no plans to
wind down operations. To the contrary, they are expanding again, with accompanying investment in
newly approved activities. They aren't going to make that investment for only five years and then cease
operations; instead, the economics suggest they will be back before Council to ask for yet another
extension.
Conclusion
Staff's comments in its July 17, 2018 report on the prior development agreement request continue to be
applicable to this new request. As Council is aware, Staff strongly recommended denial of that
application, stating:
The existing and proposed use is inconsistent with these [residential] designations and
wouldn't have been allowed to operate in the R-4 zoning district in the City if it hadn't
been operating in the County when the City annexed the property and allowed the use to
continue under the parameters contained in the DA.
Expanding the use to a more intense industrial use is prohibited and should not be
allowed through a modification to the DA or through other means. Further, staff would
not recommend an amendment to the FLUM as the use is only intended to be an interim
use until residential uses develop on the property in the future. An amendment to allow
Industrial use of the property would negatively impact existing and future planned and
entitled adjacent residential properties. The proposed septic system is not allowed in the
City.
Staff is concerned that if the proposed industrial use is allowed to expand under a DA
amendment, that it would become a liability to the City...
The primary purpose of zoning is to segregate uses that are incompatible and prevent
new development from interfering with existing uses and/or to preserve the "character"
of a community. The proposed use would create just that, an incompatible use adjacent
to existing and future low density residential properties and impact the rural
residential/agricultural character of this area.
(July 17, 2018 Staff Report, at 4). This same reasoning continues to apply.
This applicant knew the risks and rewards when the property was annexed into the city and zoned
residential, a significant boon to the value of the property. In the meantime, they asked to have it both
ways by getting permission to operate their industrial use despite the zoning placed on the property.
This was allowed for a defined and limited period of time. It is unfair to the City and to the area
property owners to allow this pattern to continue. The City should uphold the planning and require the
orderly phase-out of an industrial use in a residentially planned area in accordance with the contractual
development agreement requirements.