Z - 2nd Request for Reconsideration of Denial - Denied 9-13 DEVELOPMENT REAL PROPERTY ZONINC
CLARK
WARDLE
JOSHUA J.LEONARD
208.388.3868
JLEONARD@CLARKWARDLE.COM
RECEIVED
August 23, 2022
AUG 232022
CITY OFC>6fmQ.1M i
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
t 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
ciarkwardle.com Boise ID 83701
CLARK
WARDLE
8.3868
RIECEIVIvr% JOSHUA J.LEONARD
RKWAR LE.COM
JLEONARD@CLARKWARD LE.COM
AUG 2 2 2022
CITY OF CuJ �
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
t 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
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
z 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:
5_ The Property is not located in an area that the City has prioritized for near-term.growth_
6_ s�enl!ces,
e roposed annexation and residential subdi3Osion would place additional burdens on City
including,but not limited to,public safety services_
7_ The proposed annexation and residential subdivision would place additional burdens on
local ro ads_
[Original] Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Final Decision, and Order, dated June 21, 2022,
in Case No. H-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:
F5 �fheperty is contiguous to land to the east(`Brundage Estates"),which serves as a point
iguity for the Applicant's proposed annexation.The City approved a prelimiaaiy plat
ndage Estates in 2016,but a final plat has not yet been recorded`leading the City
l to find that annexation of additional land to the west ofBrundage 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. H-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
twenty-three (23) Development Agreements that were approved by the City Council on January
26, 2022, for the South Meridian Annexation:
L -
-�
s Amity lif-,
0715
oil
-r
XG
I J�
1 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:
✓ 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,
01A�
Joshua J. Leonard
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, C�WER\IDIAN --
FINAL DECISION,AND ORDERI D A H O
Date of Order: August 9, 2022
Case No.: H-2021-0070 (Burnside Ridge Estates)
Applicant: Kimberly-Horn and Associates, Inc.
In the Matter of. Request for(1) annexation& zoning of 121.29 acres of land from RUT in
Ada County to the R-2 (11.76 acres) and R-4 (109.53) zoning districts and
(2) a preliminary plat consisting of 299 total lots (275 single-family
residential lots and 24 common lots) on 119.31 acres of land.
Pursuant to testimony and evidence received regarding this matter at the public hearing before the
Meridian City Council on June 7, 2022, as to this matter, the City Council enters the following
findings of fact, conclusions of law, final decision, and order.
A. Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that:
I. The facts pertaining to the 121.29 acres of land ("the Property"), the Applicant's request,
and the process are set forth in the staff report for Case No. H-2021-0070, which is fully
incorporated herein by reference.
2. The Property is not located within the incorporated area of the City of Meridian.
3. The Applicant is requesting annexation of the Property in order to develop a residential
subdivision.
4. The proposed annexation is a Category A annexation under Idaho Code section 50-
222(3)(a).
5. The Property is contiguous to land to the east ("Brundage Estates"), which serves as a point
of contiguity for the Applicant's proposed annexation. The City approved a preliminary plat
for Brundage Estates in 2016, but a final plat has not yet been recorded, leading the City
Council to find that annexation of additional land to the west of Brundage Estates is not a
logical expansion of the city limits at this time.
6. The proposed annexation and residential subdivision would result in approximately 157
school-age children, which would adversely impact the West Ada School District's ability to
deliver educational services,particularly at Victory Middle School,which is currently
operating at 99.6 percent of full capacity, and will be operating at 100 percent of full
capacity upon completion of other residential subdivisions previously approved for
development in the relevant attendance area. To meet the need for additional school
capacity, the West Ada School District states that it may need to transport students to
alternate schools, adjust school attendance areas, or add portable classrooms at existing
schools.
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER
Case No.H-2021-0070(Burnside Ridge Estates) Page 1
7. Based on the foregoing, the proposed annexation is not in the best interest of the City of
Meridian.
B. Conclusions of law. The City Council concludes that:
I. The City Council takes judicial notice of Idaho Code section 50-222, which governs
annexations by cities.
2. The City Council takes judicial notice of the Local Land Use Planning Act("LLUPA"),
codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code.
3. The City Council takes judicial notice of the Unified Development Code of the City of
Meridian(UDC), all current zoning maps, the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan,
previous land use decisions, and all minutes and maps concerning the priority of growth in
the City of Meridian's area of city impact.
4. In order to grant an annexation and rezone, the City Council must make certain findings as
delineated in UDC section I I-5B-3, including a finding that the proposed annexation is in
the best interest of the City of Meridian. UDC § 11-513-3(E)(5).
5. Because the City Council found that the proposed annexation is not in the best interest of the
City of Meridian, the requirements set forth in UDC section 11-5B-3 have not been satisfied,
and the proposed annexation shall not proceed.
6. A city's decision to deny a Category A annexation is not subject to judicial review under
Idaho Code section 50-222(6). Black Labrador Investing, LLC v. Kuna City Council, 147
Idaho 92, 97, 205 P.3d 1228, 1233 (2009).
7. The purpose of the UDC is to "[c]arry out the policies of the comprehensive plan by
classifying and regulating the uses of property and structures within the incorporated
areas of the City of Meridian[.]"UDC § 11-1-2(B) (emphasis added). Because the
Property is not located within the incorporated area of the City of Meridian, and because the
proposed annexation shall not proceed, the City Council is precluded from granting the
Applicant's request for a preliminary plat.
8. Pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6503, the City of Meridian has properly exercised the
powers conferred by LLUPA.
C. Order. Pursuant to the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, the City Council hereby
denies Applicant's request for annexation and zoning of the Property. Further,because the
Property is not located within the incorporated area of the City of Meridian, the City Council
hereby denies Applicant's request for a preliminary plat.
D. Final decision. Upon approval by majority vote of the City Council, this is a final decision of
the governing body of the City of Meridian.
E. Judicial review. Pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-652 1(1)(d), if this final decision concerns a
matter enumerated in Idaho Code section 67-6521(1)(a), an affected person aggrieved by this
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER
Case No.H-2021-0070(Burnside Ridge Estates) Page 2
final decision may, within twenty-eight (28) days after all remedies have been exhausted,
including requesting reconsideration of this final decision as provided by Meridian City
Code section 1-7-10, seek judicial review of this final decision as provided by Chapter 52,
Title 67, Idaho Code. This notice is provided as a courtesy; the City of Meridian does not
admit by this notice that this decision is subject to judicial review under LLUPA.
F. Notice of right to regulatory takings analysis. Pursuant to Idaho Code sections 67-652 1(1)(d)
and 67-8003, an owner of private property that is the subject of a final decision may submit a
written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory takings analysis.
IT IS SO ORDERED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, on this 9th day of
August, 2022.
Robert E. Simiso -9- 022
Mayor
By Brad Hoaglun, Council President
Attest:
S�L�eSEA].Chris John n 8-9- 2
City Clerk
FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,FINAL DECISION,AND ORDER
Case No.H-2021-0070(Burnside Ridge Estates) Page 3