HomeMy WebLinkAboutDale Sharp Letter 8.13.03
Mayor and Meridian City Council Members
AUO ~ 3 2003
Pity Uf N~eridiait
In August 12, 2003 City of Merdian Council Meeting Mr. Craig Gros indicated we had agreed fi~~t[d Lane
during ACHD meetings but my testimony in ACHD meeting of February 27, 2003 will show no such an agreement. We
listened and discussed the merits of gating Wingate Lane during an informal meeting at ACHD but made no commitment. A
copy of my testimony (see attached hand written copy) shows that no agreement for gate was ear made and that my wife
and i had attended the ACHD meeting on February 27, 2002.
Dale Sharp
Weoheaday, Au9usf 73, 2004 MieAra QOiae: AH$HARP Page: t
c.. ~ u ,~ -
r-_~...r,~ -
- T O C" b G /-d(^ f" ~ 6x C x -11 /+v ~ ~ l~~/.~
~
t/ h` T RJ / 6 !~ C a C' a a'~.~ W i~ __
'T~ ~ G ~LU.L.J~' i.
__ / D ~ h C ~f !J [J E+' _ W l hi 9 .c Te L ~a L+~-
-
~ i ~ r~ u d (,-S L( J'- -
~- r r_s T _.. ~..P.~r~re e-,l' ~ fi E? Pw• (/ RTC
rp
JS C~ .c
z~ ~P O
rr' r c c .o.. ..,.rT U T a c~
~.1 a C. ~ C~ J-,
~: lti 1 aL
~ R~ e~
A /v c~ l f1 a
~ ,~ / T
de i .rt ,.~ f f R~ iJ G~ v- ~ .i`e*~.~• GC A
nr ,sat w! ..~ .~,..+ T.~ G-
CS G e.: r ,r L y m r /4 dr .:t~ eS C 4• ~fy~
fz c .>! e % ~/e• e, _
~ a~ .-.
_
_-_ a f ~. c < C .!, /" rr (^ r f3-(/ Q e-.J I(J A a*. C p ~ _f~~ _
~ y/
_~-C I!• E M /1 L ~~ !~' I J ~ .T.7 I n/ 6 (~ }e / /{%k ~ 1~! ~.~______
G ~" 6 s•(~ Af.( a-C _ _ /!'L Ri..[ % Ai.c~ _LY__ .~ N _f1L-4-~I.l~ .-
1/ jj
_ ~. t^ e. » ..f' ~i~- 7 .~i. .~ n a 7- ilcJ t~J ! -p~i..~ _-----~1 6!%1 --
' - - - - - - - --- --I
_~-' D T - s-C----- - '~
L(~~
T t. ~ ~ n G c_ c a/ i.r .,. c c f O _~) . c~.~isP~ .-
-- Tl~,~/+ ~ ~ _ Sri o ~r ~, E ~ c , 1!-° ~ ,~ _ . ---
-__.--_~ /r 1 •f ti i^,/ i s. ~ 2_y_a ~(/-/t ~.. u w ..! d e~JL i 6.~ .~-.-_-_--__.~
_ i }' ~ r~ ..J ."1"J^- ~.~i c f / tom. / L.~y ' ~`L, 7/ •- N fr r~ k" &_r ~a^ ~.~ c- ._
~ 1
/i
--~-•~ -fl~.lF~-~/! F~ >~ d' -~..t-T's` cf' 7- caT u Tm (1 y ~- •~'i-r'
~---[~
--~~~W yat'u w~:. T_m '~~e~.l~~, ~ a Flo ~l"o- c?i o-..~ -(O -L_a~_i
OCT 09 '02 11:55 FR CITY OF MERIDIRN 208 668 4218 TO P-AND-Z P.01i04
.vr,~w.i.,, moo. yv ~~ a~•~c +u •tiuw YHiS•1 CU25 S4bfb5U k'HLit b'/ y
~.
Commission Meeti g -February 27, 2802
Page 2
Kent Brown, Briggs Engineering. 1800 W. Overland, Boise, representative of the applicant, said the
applicant suppoM1s the proposed vacation in accordance with the staff s recommendations.
For the record, ACHD received a hand writteh letter from Carl Hoffman, 7880 Lake Hazel Rued,
expressing his ~oncerns-
Cammissioner Wynkoop closed the public hearing.
After discussion, the Commission took the following action:
ACTION TAKEN:
Commissioner Peavey-Derr made a motion to approve the vacation and abandonment of a
portion of lake Hazel located In Government Lot 4 of Section 31, Township 3 North, Range 2
Fast, and Section 6, Township 2 North, Range 2 Fist of the Boise Meridian, Ada County,
fdaho and impose additional tees for the vacated right•oNway in the amount of
approximately 532,400 and provide staff wflh a new heal description for the entire Lake
Hasel right-of wpy abutting the applicant's propergi ~approucimarely 50 feet by 1,440 teat!. to
addition, staff rscommentls that tTie vacation be wndltianed on the following: that fauna!
agraemertt Detwaan the Idaho Department of Lands (1DL) and the developer with the
conditions specified by ID! in a letter dated December 13. 2001, being acrounted for in the
agreement and asseeiatad documents. Comrniss"roost Blvens seconded. Motion parried
unanimously.
., Garv Inselman, Plan Review
report
Dale Sharp, 2485 Ulfingate lane, Meridian, expressed his cancems. Mr_ Sharp submitted a copy of
a private road agreement dating back to 1913, and a copy of a letter from their forme- attorney,
Kenneth Kreis, dated October t8, 1995.
Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, Meridian, expressed her concerns. Mrs. Sharp said her husband
put the looks on the Bakes. ~'
Chip Gallagher, 3020 Wingate Lane, Meridian, expressed his concerns.
D'ucie Lee RobeAs, 2855 vYngate Lane, Meridian, expressed her concerns.
AI Dauven, 2020 Wingate t,ane, Meridian, expressed his concerns.
Wirt Edmonds, 2291 N. Chandler Way, Meridian, the developer, said he is willing to pay for the
gate-
After discussion, thB following action was taken:
AC7K]N TAKEN:
Commissioner Huber made a motion to approve Option No. 2, with the amendment to the
staff report indicating a special recommendation to the City of Meridian outlining the
conditions of the security sate that will be installed on the northPsouth alignment and
tndieating that tl1a developer and the homeowners on Wingate Lane have agreed that the
homeowners en Wingate Lane wvili maintain the seetlfiRy liars and the developer has agreed
W pay for the initial cost of the gate, cemmissianer Bivens seconded. Discussion followed.
Motion tattled unaninwusty-
SEP 10 '62 15: 0b l 268 345?650 PRGE.06
RECEI~TEI~
HViil Berg
Meridian City C!eric
33 E. Idaho Acre.
Meridian, Idaho
Dear Wiil Berg:
MAR i 7 2003
City of Meridia8 .
City Clerk Office
Attached are the minutes from the ACRD Commission Meeting -February 27, 2002. Our question is -was the City ofi Meridian
muted to this meeting as i# inwi~ed changing one of the conditions for granting the Packard Estates subdiusion. Prior to this
meeting there was an informal meeting held at ACHO with staff and residents of Wingate Lane in attendance concerning the
private lane.
The paragraph inpart- "The Legal Department oonclutles: "Absent a significant safety concern public streets and public-rights-
of-way should remain open ant! accessible to the public" has been eonfimed by the.City of Meridian police department to be a
.serious hazardous condition. ACRD was welt aware of Section 7208.5.1 and 7208.5.2 Continuation of Streets joining E.
Challis St. crossing Wingate Lane when the original Platt was agreed upon and should be adheired to_ ACND, nor anyone
else, should not be allowed !o make changes to the anginal estat>last~ed conditions.
Sincerely, '~ , ,
4~ &..c._~~~/
Date and tier Sharp
--~,.~r..xao3 Au~fceor9ne:aasMAiP ~:+
F
C..'hilaty RlCbardsOII -
PlamltngReVleW $llpeNISOI '
Right-of--Way & Development
This is in reference to your letter of Februaryl, 2002 regarding Packard Acres #2 and gating of right-of -
way at Wingate Lane and also to offer some comments to the sffiff report.
First we would comment that we should have been advised of this meeting (February 13, 2002) at least
thirty (30) days prior to meeting date to allow us adequate time to prepare for the meeting. We received
notice of this meeting February 6 and a copy of staff report about 4:30 pm on February 8, 2002.
We will not be able to attend this meeting as we have had a death in dte immediate family and will be out of
town for several days to attend services.
The comments and in some instances exhibits to support these comments are as follows, and while not
necessarily in date sequence in which they occurred are
1. In the early 1990's the Ada County Zoning Boazd mled that the Peterson property should be the last new
residence to be allowed on the lane. Ada County Planning and Zoning addressed concerns of Wingate Lane
residents when declaring that no more egress to new homes would be allowed on this private lane while
considering a proposal on property then owned by the Holladays.
2. The developer or the applicants representative ,Paz Tealey has stated on numerous occasions that there
would be no access to Wingate Lane whatsoever from proposed development (exlubit a) . ALso see City of
Meridian memorandum dated September 28, 2000 stating "access to Wingate Lane is specifically
prohibited (exhibit b): See also letter dated March 22, 2000 from R. Craig Grove stating "Gates and
fencing along Wingate Lane will be sufficiently constructed to preclude foot, bicycle and motorized vehicle
access other than emergency vehicles. Also that "Developer, Property Owners along Wingate Lane not
within the proposed subdivision and Governmental Agencies will agree on the type and style of fencing and
gates to be installed " (exhibit c). We would not sign off on fencing since there were known problems with
property boundaries between Peterson's property and development properties to the south (this also affected
ACRD drainage Pond) and also because we were not sure [he gating systems would meet requirements for
emergency vehicle access. Because of numerous instances of violations by other than authorized users of
the gates locks were installed to discourage these trespasses. This still has not entirely discouraged use of
the larger gate as a backhoe accessed Wingate Lane through the gate just a few days ago to do some work
adjacent to drainage pond.
Keith BQd, Meridian City Councilman, told us to call him any time if violations occurred. Prior to
installation offence violations occurred on reguku• basis and Mr. $ird said he called developer but with
limited or no results. The fence and gates have limited the number of violations considerably for the most
part.
3. For the first meeting with ACRD Mr. Sales (ACRD) said we should submit legal opinion relative to
construction of road across Wingate Lane. We questioned the necessity of doing this but did consult an
attorney and gave a copy of his findings to ACRD prior to commencement of the meeting . The ACRD
mentioned they had received an opinion from Developer's attorney but for whatever reason failed to
acknowledge receiving an opinion from our attorney (exhibit d).
4. Mr. Grove assured us that "Any damage caused by our contractors will be repaired immediately'. The
Wingate Road Asociation hs had to repair a lot these damages because ofthe developer's failure to do as
promised. We hired Gary Bushman to haul in necessary sand/gravel and grade the lane to repay
developer's damages. The latest damages have not been repaired and Mr. Butns, Code Enforcement
Officer, employed by City of Meridian was out here recently to inspect the lane and can attest to the fact
lane hs not been repaved.