Loading...
CC - Applicant Position Statement and Supplemental Submission Letter 11.14FHAWLEY TROXELL: BRIAN L. BALLARD ADMITTED TO PRACTICE LAW IN IDAHO MAIL: BBALLARD®HAWI,EYTROxELL.COM DIRECT DIAL: 208.388.4868 DIRECT FAx: 208.954.5203 www.hawleytroxell.com November 14, 2017 VIA E-MAIL ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS Hawley Troxell Ennis & Hawley LLP 877 Main Street, Suite 1000 P.O. Box 1617 Boise, Idaho 83701-1617 208.344.6000 Mayor Tammy de Weerd mayortammy@meridiancity.org City Council Members citycouncil@meridiancity.org City Clerk - C. Jay Coles cicoles@,meridiancity.org Planning Staff— Sonya Allen and Caleb Hood sallen@meridiancity.org; chood@meridiancity.org City Attorneys - Bill Nary and Ted Baird bnary@meridiancity.org; tbaird@meridiancity.org 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83646 Re: Linder Village Annexation & Zoning; Preliminary Plat; Access Modification ApprovaINAR (to Ordinance 1225 West Chinden Boulevard Meridian, Idaho 83642 File No. H-201.7-0088 UDC 11 -3H -4B.2 re Hwy 20126) Dear Mayor de Weerd, Council Members, City Clerk, Planning Staff and City Attorneys: A de novo public hearing has been scheduled in this matter for November 21, 2017, following a recommendation from the P&Z Commission after a public hearing on October 19, 2017. Based upon Applicant's review of the online recorded video/audio of the P&Z Commission hearing (https:Hdrive.google.com/open?id=OB_InNkwzmJAyUWZ4VXQiclhlROU), and the comments of the P&Z Commissioners made at the conclusion of the hearing, it is anticipated that the reasons for the Commission's recommendation of denial will mirror the "list as stated by the Staff Report" (including traffic, design, connectivity, proximity to residential, and so forth). (See the comments of Madam Chair Rhonda McCarvel and other Commissioners made at the conclusion of the P&Z hearing.) The Staff Report sets forth a recommendation of approval of the Application with respect to Annexation and Zoning (AZ) and Preliminary Plat (PP), as were properly before the Corrlmission, and a recommendation of denial of the Variance (VAR), a matter that did not require action by the Commission, but was presented in the Staff Report, as follows: 42795.0412.14372645.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 2 "In summary, Staff recommends approval of the proposed AZ application with the requirement of a development agreement that includes the provisions listed in Exhibit B; approval of the PP application with the conditions contained in Exhibit B, and denial of the VAR application in accord with the Findings in Exhibit D." Staff Report, Linder Village —,4Z PP, VAR H-2017-0008, October 17, 2017, page 16. (Emphasis added.) Given that the recommendation of the P&Z Commission was based upon the "list as stated by the Staff Report," this letter sets forth how Applicant has positively responded to that list, specifically to the "provisions listed in Exhibit B" and the "conditions contained in Exhibit B", in a manner that supports approval of the Application by the City Council. Although the Variance was not before the P&Z Commission for recommendation, the Variance is before the City Council and this letter also sets forth (i) Applicant's response to the comments made by Staff and the Commission related to the Variance, (ii) Applicant's qualification under of UDC 11-513-4.E (Required Findings) for the Variance, and (iii) Applicant's recommended Decision and Order and Findings. Since the matter before the City Council will be a de novo proceeding, with additional and new evidence presented and permitted, Applicant respectfully submits this letter, setting forth its agreements and disagreements with the Staff Report. New information is included, most importantly the revised Concept, Use Area, Circulation and Open Space Plans and the revised Preliminary Plat (hereinafter referred to, collectively, as the "Plans"), based upon not only what was discussed at the October 19th hearing, but also after Applicant's subsequent follow up meetings with the neighborhood. For your convenience, the revised Plans are included with this letter. The changes and revisions made to the Plans reflect a sincere and good faith attempt by Applicant to address in a positive manner (i) the provisions and conditions of Staff's recommendation of approval, and (ii) the concerns voiced by the neighbors and Commissioners at the P&Z hearing. 1, REVISED DESIGN The first pant of this letter relates to Article VII of the Staff Report, entitled COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS, under the subtitle CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. Discussion points which Applicant views as particularly critical to the Council's consideration of the Application are: • As show in the revised Plans for Linder Village, in direct response to Staffs recommendations, the buildings have been rearranged and detached, so that they are not 42795.0012.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 3 configured in a "strip." The Staff suggested "L" shape reconfigurement has been utilized in some instances, with other building rearranged, detached and/or respaced. The revised Plans show the rear of the WinCo building shifted away 45 degrees, so that the back of the building and its delivery area have been rotated away from both existing (Paramount) and future residential areas. These residential areas are transition buffered in between by a park, a backage road, a roundabout (traffic calming and deflection of cut -through traffic), a walking path, landscaping, and a sound wall. The distance between the WinCo delivery area to the nearest Paramount residence has been increased to over 500 feet (12/ football fields), with the delivery area now on the other side of the WinCo building and facing N. Linder Road. In short, the WinCo store, per the specific recommendation of Staff, has been rotated so that its "loading docks are oriented towards Linder Road to minimize impacts to the nearby residents." See Staff Report, page 8. • The shops closest to Paramount have been reduced in size to better accommodate transition integration, and together with the interspersing expanded park area are now more proportional to and better blend in with adjacent new and existing residential structures. A club house has been added in the middle of the Future Residential Development to serve not only as a community gathering and meeting place, but also as transitional integration and a buffer for the surrounding residential buildings. • It is the position of Applicant that the revised Plans now closely adhere to the conceptual plan set forth in Figure 3-3 of Mined Use Community Concept Diagram Comprehensive Plan and specifically address Staff's command to "break up the strip." See Staff Report, page 10. • The area directly south of WinCo is currently zoned RUT in the county, and designated for MU -C and L/O use in the Comp Plan and the Meridian Future Land Uses Map. Further, as mentioned above, the Paramount residences are buffered and separated from the WinCo building not only by the increased distance away, but also by a street, a park area, the N. Arliss Avenue roundabout, a walking path, landscaping and a sound wall. • There are neighborhood connectivity points at N. Arliss Avenue, Bergman Avenue and West Director Avenue, and a future access for the planned MUC property located south of the new backage road. On the east boundary of Linder Village, there is potential connectivity at two future roadway/connection points to the Brighton -owned property adjacent to Linder Village and Fox Run Way. There is a roundabout at the N. Arliss Avenue extension with the connecting backage road shifted north, so that an entire line of proportional residential housing backs to Paramount, to serve as a transitional integration buffer, together with a park and walking path in between — all of which combine to lessen impact upon the Paramount residences. The design of the N. Arliss Avenue roundabout, a traffic calming and anti -cut -through feature, is specifically responsive to neighborhood comments, and is intentionally angled away from Paramount to allow for the placement of the buffering row of complimentary residences with interspersing park and walking path. 42795.0012.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 4 The entirety of Linder Village is now conceptually displayed, with Future Residential Development and Future Development areas sketched in. Walking paths have been added, in particular through the central plaza and park area, leading to and from the residential areas to the south to the specialty retail areas to the north and the club house area in between, with direct pedestrian neighborhood connectivity at the N. Arliss Avenue roundabout. Your attention is particularly directed to the revised Circulation Plan, included herewith, wherein the increased connectivity and circulation is graphically emphasized. • East -west connecting roads and drives are now shown. An east -west backage road is located to the north, connecting Linder Road to the common boundary line of the Brighton -owned development to the east. A "Future Cross Access Connection Point to Adjacent Parcel" is shown on the Plans for this northern connecting road, to be utilized if an access casement may be granted in the future by Brighton (something to which Applicant has always been open and receptive). There is an east -west backage road running along the southern boundary of Linder Village, connecting Linder Road to W. Director Street to the east, with three street connectivity points along the way. There is also a connecting drive running from the mid -Linder Road access point through the middle of Linder Village to the main drive and easterly beyond to the Future Office/Retail Development Area. • With a respectful acknowledgement of the aspirations of Staff regarding a preference for some type of east -west collector roadway to and from the existing signal at Fox Run Way, that option is simply not currently available, and the obtaining of same is not a reasonable development condition. The fact is that as of the date of the first ITD recommendation letter dated February 24, 2017, included as an exhibit hereto, and continuing through the date of this letter, that option has not yet been agreed to by the property owner to the east, with nothing of current record indicating any change in that position. The second ITD letter dated July 28, 2017, also an exhibit hereto, acknowledges this: "ITD will pursue conversation with the City of Meridian, ACRD and Brighton Corporation to gain a public street connection from Fox Run Way to the Linder Village Commercial Development." See ITD Letter dated July 28, 2017, page 1. • This Fox Run Way connectivity impasse is not specifically mentioned in the Staff Report and it may have been overlooked that the legal right of the property owner to the east to not share the signalized access at Fox Run Way is one of the reasons causing the current dilemma.1 Neither ITD nor the City of Meridian can require or force connectivity to the signalized access at Fox Run Way, and neither can Applicant. It is the position of Applicant that the burden of overcoming a hardship created by the non -access resulting from the adoption of UDC Article H after the signalized access at Fox Run Way was approved should not be imposed upon i Another reason, as more fully discussed below, is that access at the half mile mark between Meridian Road and Linder Road is also not available. 42795.0012.14372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 5 Applicant. City Council, as it has in granting other variances to state highways, should recognize the hardship created and should support ITD's decision with regard to the appropriate access points on Chinden Boulevard. More specific information and further discussion of the Variance, with recommended findings, is provided in Part Il, below, and your attention is kindly directed thereto. Suffice it to say that Applicant has always been open and receptive to some type of east - west collector roadway to and from the exiting signal at Fox Run Way, but despite what Applicant views as sincere efforts by all parties, an agreement on same has not yet been reached. • Public and quasi -public areas (club house, esplanade areas, plaza areas, and park areas) are shown in excess of the Staff suggested minimum of 3.27 acres. Not to be overlooked in the calculation of public and quasi -public areas that have been provided in the development of Linder Village should be the donation of by Applicant in 2008, in response to a request from the City of Meridian and the Meridian Fire Department, of a sidewalk and signal easement for the fire station across Linder Road, which easement area is within land that is a part of Linder Village. Accordingly, there is ample public and quasi -public uses proposed to support an increase in maximum building footprints as would be in compliance with the Comp Plan. * The revised Plans do not show an ADA bus stop on the site. Communications with VRT to date have been positive and cooperative, but as of yet, no VRT plan or need for same has been expressed. If that need arises in the future, a note of Applicant's commitment to work with VRT regarding location and details, and of Applicant's willingness to provide same, can be made, perhaps in the Development Agreement anticipated in this matter. i The Staff Reports says that "[i]f the WinCo is turned so that the rear of the structure and loading docks face N. Linder Road as recommended, the hours or operation will not be restricted unless the use abuts a residential use or district as set forth in UDC 11-213-3A.4." The revised Plans specifically orient the WinCo structure and loading docks towards Linder Road, as recommended, and, as discussed above, it is anticipated that the WinCo use will not abut a residential use or district, but will abut an east -west street in between, with a connectivity access point to the non-residential land to the south, and with landscaping, a walking path and other non-residential uses on the other side of the street. II. CHINDEN BOULEVARD ACCESS The next part of this letter relates to the various references made in the Staff Report regarding the Variance required pursuant to UDC 11-311-413.2. To clarify, UDC 11-311-411.2 provides, in pertinent part, that: "If an applicant proposes a change or increase in intensity of use... [n]o new approaches directly accessing a state highway shall be allowed." Chinden Boulevard is, of course, a state highway, malting UDC 11 -3H -4B.2 applicable. However, UDC 11-3H-3 also provides that: "The decision making body may consider and apply modifications to the standards of this article upon specific recommendation of the Idaho transportation department." And UDC 427 95.0012.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 6 11-513-4 allows requests for a Variance for the placement and/or number of access points to state highways. The procedure followed by the City of Meridian is to recognize that ITD may make recommendations but to also require a Variance, which, pursuant to UDC 11-5B-4, requires the Council to make findings that: (1) the variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district; (2) the variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; and (3) the variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. • Staff correctly noted in its Staff Report that the Variance request does not require action from the Commission, as the City Council is the sole decision making body for the Variance, and no recommendation of the Commission is required. However, the Staff Report sets forth comments and recommendations directly relevant to the Variance; the Staff Report lays out Staff s recommendation of denial of the Variance and its rationale therefor; discussion was had about access to Chinden Boulevard throughout the public hearing; and specifically related comments were made by Commissioners, after the hearing was closed to public comment, indicating that access to Chinden was a part of the basis for the Commission's ultimate recommendation - all of which combine to suggest a confusion that requires clarification. * For ease of reference, included with this letter are the two letters from the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD), the first dated February 24,2017, and the second dated July 28, 2017. The Staff Report refers to these letters as "comments on this application" which are "included in the project file," but the letters are not attached and only Staff's summary appears. It is the position of Applicant that reference to these ITD letters as only "comments on this application" fails to recognize the importance of the ITD letters. The ITD letters are more than mere comments on the application, but are in fact, collectively, the "specific recommendation" of ITD under UDC 11-31-1-3 that access to Chinden should be allowed and permitted, which is critical in a consideration of whether or not to grant a Variance. Indeed, in the Hightower, Knightsky and Knighthill VAR applications mentioned below, the recommendation of ITD is a specifically cited basis for the City Council making the required finding that granting the requested variance to allow access to Chinden Boulevard did not grant a special privilege that was not otherwise allowed for properties adjacent to a state highway. • The Staff Report also has some other areas that, respectfully, require clarification: (i) On page 6 of the Staff Report, it is set forth that: "The City received a letter from ITD earlier this year, supporting the applicant's proposal. Since the initial support letter was composed, a key "anchor" tenant has apparently backed -out and ITD is re -analyzing the impacts of this project." This refers to the withdrawal of Costco from the project, but overlooks that ITD sent two letters, the second of which clarifies that ITD had completed its re -analysis and continues with its 42795.0012.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 7 recommendation of allowing access to Chinden Boulevard. No further analysis by ITD is required. (ii) On page 7 of the Staff Report, Staff sets forth its preference for an east -west access road to the existing signal at Fox Run Way, and that City Staff, ACRD Staff and ITD Staff have been in communications with property owner to the cast, and that the property owner "has indicated support." Respectfully, Applicant disagrees. As previously presented to Staff and the P&Z Commission in Applicant's letter, dated October 19, 2017, submitted in supplementation of its Application (which is in the file and should be reviewed), at the meeting held prior to ITD's letter of February 24, 2017, the property owner to the east, as was the owner's right to do, did not agree to allow access to the existing signal at Fox Run Way, and to Applicant's knowledge, the owner's position has not changed, as further evidenced by ITD's comment in its second letter, dated July 28, 2017, as quoted below, that ITD would continue to pursue conversations to gain such access. To be clear then, the property owner to the east has never indicated to Applicant any support of shared access to the signal at Fox Run Way. ITD has not communicated to Applicant that it has had any success in its further pursuit. Moreover, if shared access might ever be gained in the future, the language of the second ITD letter covers that possibility: "Please find below ITD's modifications to our letter dated 2/24/2017 describing the department's position on your proposed accesses for the Linder Village Commercial Development. Site Access B (Bergman Way) • This access will be permitted as temporary full signalized access to remain in place until the construction of a CFI at the intersection of LIS 20/26 and Linder Road. The temporary signal will not be installed until the signal warrants are met based on traffic generation of the completed development. • The signal will convert to a right -in, right -out, left -in movement with the implementation of the CFI at the intersection of LIS 20/26 and Linder Road given that a connection has been provided to Fox Run Way and a signal has been allowed on Linder Road at Site Access E. • Traffic calming measures to discourage cut through traffic on Bergman Way must be coordinated with the City of Eagle before the full access signal can be pact into service. These measures may be considered for inclusion as part of the STAR agreement. 42795.0012.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 8 ITD will pursue conversation with the City of Meridian, ACHD and Brighton Corporation to gain a public street connection from Fox Rein Way to the Linder Village Commercial Development. " It must be noted that prior to the issuance of the ITD letters there were two precipitating factors in ITD's making of the recommendation that it did. First, as mentioned above, the necessary access easement across the property to the east could not be obtained from its owner. Second, the access point allowable under UDC 11 -3H -4.B.2, at the half mile mark, was not an option. In discussions with ITD as to whether the access to Chinden Boulevard should be moved to or also located at the half mile mark (instead of, in combination with, or in addition to the signalized access at Fox Run Way), ACHD (with control of the Fox Run Way signalized intersection) made it clear that such was not an option, due to safety and off -set concerns. Meaning, that if a shared access could not be obtained at Fox Run Way, the alternative was not at the half mile mark, whether through any kind of shared relocation or as a separate access, and ACHD would not agree to same. Accordingly, the ITD letters demonstrate that: (1) connectivity to the Fox Run Way signal is not currently an option; (2) the owner of the Fox Run Way signal is not currently supportive of a connectivity to Fox Run Way; (3) any kind of location at the half mile mark is not possible; (4) ITT) is still pursuing conversation to gain the shared access at Fox Run Way; and (5) when the future continuous flow intersection (CFI) is constructed at the intersection of Chinden Boulevard and Linder Road the signal will convert to a three-way signal (right in, right -out, left -in movement only) if connectivity to Fox Run Way has been achieved and a signalized access is allowed on Linder Road in a specified location. It is respectfully submitted that the recommendation of ITD to permit and allow access now to Chinden Boulevard adequately and intelligently covers what happens if and when connectivity to Fox Run Way might be gained in the future. a At the P&Z Commission hearing, after the hearing was closed to public comment, the Commissioners expressed confusion as to why the Fox Run Way option was not being pursued. Commissioner Fitzgerald voiced concern about an additional light at Bergman and mentioned "a discussion about a frontage road that needs to connect there instead of having another light at Bergman." Commissioner Perreault said, "I'd like to see more information on what's going to happen with the residential on the east side and with the staffs recommendation that there would be a through street all the way over to Fox Run." Commissioner Perreault then added, "I would be in support of the WinCo itself if it was closer to the road, farther away from all the residences and there was more addressing a road, yeah, and even the traffic of going all the way through to Fox Run..." Had the ITD letters of recommendation been recognized by the Commissioners, or had further explanation of the shared access impasse been allowed, it is Applicant's carefully considered 42796.0012.10372605. 5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 9 position, there being no criticism intended to give offense, that the comments of the Commissioners made and the confusion about why ITD was recommending access to Chinden Boulevard may have been avoided. Certainly, the 1TD letters of recommendation, particularly in that they set forth that "safety and mobility" are maintained, are a most important item for consideration in the Council's deliberations regarding the Variance. • As a concluding point in this discussion, as mentioned above, Applicant submitted for consideration at the P&Z Commission hearing Applicant's letter, dated October 19, 2017, in supplementation of its Application. This letter, at pages 6 and 7 specifically sets forth why Applicant, despite sincere efforts exerted, cannot provide a collector connection to Fox Run Way: "Following years of working closely with ITD and the City of Meridian to maintain mobility and provide for increased capacity and safety on Chinden Boulevard, the Applicant received approval from ITD for two (2) access points, pursuant to letters from ITD dated February 24, 2017, and July 28, 2017, both of which are on file as exhibits to the revised Application, dated September 15, 2017. Based on these ITD letters, and for other good reasons set forth below, the Applicant has requested a modificationlvariance to UDC 11 -3H -4B.2 to allow access via Chinden Boulevard (SH2O126). Specifically, the Applicant is proposing one (1) access relocation and one (1) new access point to Chinden Boulevard (SH2O126), as follows: Site Access A (right in -right -out only), a relocation to approximately 450 fl. west of Bergman Way; and Site Access B (signalized), at the intersection at Bergman Way. Pursuant to a meeting between ITIS, the Applicant, the City of Meridian, WinCo and Costco on February 13, 2017, and a follow itp meeting between ITD and the Applicant on July 12, 2017, ITD gave its approval for both Site Access A and Site Access B, per the letters referenced above. ITD, in its February 24, 2017 letter, specifically setforth that if the Applicant was in agreement with the conditions set forth in the letter (Applicant was and continues to be in agreement with same) then the Traffic Impact Study submitted by the Applicant was "acceptable from a state highway access, safety and mobility standpoint. " ITD, in its July 28, 2017 letter, specifically noted that the Applicant's plan was "an effective plan to maintain safety and mobility. " Lest there be any further confusion, it should be noted that at the first meetin with ITD, the owner of Fox Run was present at that meeting and a shared access 42795.0012.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 10 at the Fox Run si nal was requested by ITD of the owner. The owners eciacall declined the request. That alternative exhausted, and the Fox Run access having already been obtained by that owner at less than the half mile marks the access at the Bergman intersection was approved. Circumstances not the fault of the Applicant combined to cause a need create an access at Bergman that could be approved and was approved by ITD, in particular from a safety and mobility standpoint. " (Emphasis and footnote added.) III. EXAMPLES OF PREVIOUS ACCESS APPROVALS AND VARIANCES Review of the City of Meridian online records shows that there are many instances of other allowed State Highway access. Applicant suggests that the following projects provide relevant guidance and precedential value: • PARAMOUNT (AZ -03-005, PP-03-004,CUP-03-008)(2003): The Paramount Chinden Boulevard access is one of the reasons why the Variance as requested by Applicant should be granted. Paramount was apparently approved with conditions, one of which was that the Paramount vehicular approach off of Chinden Boulevard had to be aligned with the existing public street, N. Fox Run Avenue, on the north side of Chinden Boulevard, for purposes of meeting safety related off -set requirements, with the warning that if the Paramount approach was not re -aligned with the existing public roadway across Chinden Boulevard, the intersection would never be considered for a traffic light. Meridian Planning Staff made a specific finding in its revised Staff Report that "the collector street on the south side of Chinden Blvd .... will need to be re -aligned with the public street to the north in order to be serviced with a traffic light in the future." See Revised Staff Report, dated April 17, 2003. In 2005, Article H of the UDC was adopted, and a provision thereof, UDC 11-3H-3, restricts access to Chinden Boulevard, essentially disallowing new approaches directly accessing Chinden and allowing public street connections only at the section line and the half mile mark between section line roads. Given that the signalized access at Fox Run Way Avenue is not at the half mile mark, but is closer to the nearest section line road (N. Meridian Road), and given that the Paramount signalized access has no condition attached to it that requires a sharing of that signalized access, there are imposed characteristics with hardship consequences, perhaps unintended, but certainly created by nothing other than the 2005 ordinance. 2 To be clear, the signalized access at Fox Run Way is not at the half mile mark between section line roads as currently required by UDC 11 -3H -4.A.2; it is at less than the half mile mark as measured from Meridian Road, and is at more that the half mile mark as measured from N. Linder Road. 42795.0012.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 11 Enforcement of the 2005 ordinance has the potential to give Paramount an unintended monopoly of access (signalized or not) to Chinden Boulevard between Linder Road and N. Meridian Road, because the only other permitted location for new access to Chindcn (at the half mile mark between Linder Road and Meridian Road) is too close to the Fox Run Way intersection and is not acceptable to ACHD, thereby meaning that (i) the separate parcel of property at the northeast side of the half mile mark (approximately 5 acres and currently owned by C.C.P.D, Inc.) has the potential to be land locked entirely, (ii) the Linder Village property (exclusive of the C.C.P.D parcel which it does not yet own), has the potential to be landlocked from Chinden Boulevard because it does not touch on the half mile mark), and (iii) even if the C.C.P.D parcel is combined with the balance of the Linder Village property, the combined property at the half mile mark would still not be able to access Chinden at the half mile mark, because it would still be too close to the Paramount signalized access and would still not be acceptable to ACHD. In hindsight, again with no intention of a criticism intended to give offense, had a condition been attached to the approval of the Paramount access that required a future sharing at Fox Run Way, the hardship consequences that have resulted might have been avoided. Unfortunately, such a condition was not imposed, it cannot be imposed either now or retroactively, and a request by ITD for shared access did not meet with success. The solution is to grant now a Variance under UDC 11-5B-4, supported by the well reasoned recommendation of ITD that recognizes that the access plan proposed maintains "safety and mobility" with conditions imposed that anticipate a future change in circumstances. s MERIDIAN TOWN CENTER (VAR -07-017)(2008): Decision and Order: "The Applicant's Variance request is hereby approved by the City with the clarification that the Council supports ITD's eventual decision with regard to appropriate access points." The City Council approved the Variance over Staffs recommendation of denial, and made these findings: A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: The City Council finds that granting the requested variance for access points to SH 55/Eagle Road would not grant a right or special privilege to the applicant that is not otherwise allowed as there are several access points to the state highway that were previously approved on adjacentproperties. (Emphasis added.) B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; 42795.0012'.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 12 The City Council finds that granting the requested variance for access points to SH 551 Eagle Road would relieve an undue hardship because of the mix of uses proposed on the site. (Emphasis added.) C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. The City Council finds that granting approval of the variance as requested for access points to SH 55/Eagle Road would not be detrimental to the public hearth, safety, and welfare. (Emphasis added.) • HIGHTOWER (AZ-06-0031PP-06-003/CUP-06-0041VAR-06-004/PS-06-006)(2006): Decision and Order: "The applicant's request for a variance to UDC 11-3-11-4.213 for allowance of an access point to Chinden Road (US 20126) is hereby granted". Staff recommended approval of the Variance, and the City Council made these findings: A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: Section 11-31-1-3 of the UDC does state that the City Council may consider and apply modifications to the standards of Article H upon specific recommendation of the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). In a letter dated February 13, 2006, the ITD states: "Direct access from this development to US -20/26 will be allowed as established by the Access Management Plan developed by the City of Meridian and ITD. Access will be allowed to US -20/26 via N. Saguaro Hills Way." The letter also states that "the applicant should be made aware that in conjunction with said Access Management Plan, the long term future of Jericho Road may be restricted to Right-in/Right-out or closed." City Council finds that because of this recommendation from ITD, the granting of this variance will not grant a right or privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district. (Emphasis added.) B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; City Council finds there are physical characteristics of the site which demand access points be constructed that are more unique or different than other properties along Chinden Road (US 20/26). As stated above, the future of Jericho Road is uncertain, and access to Chinden Road at Jericho Road may either be restricted or closed entirely in the future. If access to Chinden Road were not 42795.0012,10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 13 granted, it is possible that in the future the access to this development may be eliminated if Jericho Road was the only access point. C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. City Council finds that granting the access point to Chinden Road (US 20/26) has the potential of increasing traffic conflicts due to the increased number of vehicles that will need to merge with existing traffic. However, the proposed alignment of N. Saguaro Hills Way is preferred to the existing alignment of Jericho Road, because it lines up with an existing access on the north side of Chinden Road, Castlebury Avenue. City Council finds that the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare and has the potential of increasing the safety and efficiency of traffic movement along Chinden Road (US 20/26). (Emphasis added.) • KNIGHTSKY ESTATES -VAR-13-001(2013): Decision and Order: "Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for variance is hereby approved for the hearing date of April 23, 2013." The City Council approved the VAR over Staff's recommendation of denial, and made these findings: A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: Direct access to State Highway 20/26 is prohibited, per UDC 11-3H-413 and the Comprehensive Plan. However, the Council may consider and apply modifications to these standards upon recommendation from the Idaho Transportation Department. ITD has stated that the necessary right-of-way is in place to mitigate the proposed access point. Based on the documentation from ITD and public testimony presented at the public hearing, Council finds granting the requested variance to allow right-inlright-out access to SH 201/26 does not grant a special privilege that is not otherwise allowed for properties adjacent to a state highway. (Emphasis added.) B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; 42795.0612.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 14 The applicant has options to access the site to/from other roadways. However, the Council finds granting the access provides additional ways for the commercial traffic to disperse from the development and limits impact on the future local street in the adjacent residential subdivision. Therefore, Council finds that there is an undue hardship that would prevent the applicant from developing the site in accord with UDC II -3H -4B. (Emphasis added.) C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. The Council finds that allowing right-in/right-out access to SH 20126 will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and/or welfare if the applicant complies with all of the ITD` s requirements for granting approval of the access permit. If public safety becomes a concern, ITD may re-evaluate the proposed access. Both the Police Department and Fire Department support the prosed access point. Further, ITD has stated that the necessary right-of-way is in place to mitigate the proposed access point. Council's motion included the applicant coordinate with ITD to construct a center median to ensure the approved access point functions as a right-in/right-out access. (Emphasis added.) • KNIGHTHILL CENTER — VAR -13-002 (2013); Decision and Order: "Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: L The applicant's request for variance is hereby approved for the hearing date of June 4, 2013." The City Council approved the VAR over Staff s recommendation of denial, and made these Findings: A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: In 2009, Council did not grant a right or special privilege and denied the same variance request because the site is served from two (2) public streets and one private street consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the UDC, direct access to State Highway 20/26 is prohibited, per UDC 11-311-48 and the approved development agreement restricts access to Chinden Boulevard via the concept plan. However Council may consider and apply modifications to these standards upon recommendation from the Idaho Transportation Department. ITD has granted approval of the proposed access point consistent with their new access management policies. ITD has stated that the necessary right -of --way is in place to 42795.0012.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 15 mitigate the proposed access point. Based on the documentation from ITD and public testimony presented at the public hearing, Council finds granting the requested variance to allow right-inlright-out access to SH 20126 does not grant a special privilege that is not otherwise allowed for properties adjacent to a state highway. The two (2) adjacent developments (NWC and NEC) were granted access to SH 20126 by ITD. (Emphasis added.) B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; Council finds that there are undue hardships that would prevent the applicant from developing the site by restricting access to SH 20126. The applicant has options to facilitate access to/from other roadways. As mentioned above, Linder Road, Gertie Place and W. Everest Lane provide opportunities for future access to the subject site. The Council finds that Everest Lane (private street) is not adequate enough to support commercial traffic generation due to the design of the roadway thus the access constructed to ITD's standards would help disperse commercial traffic through the area. (Emphasis added.) C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. The Council finds that allowing right-in/right-out access to SH 20126 will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and/or welfare. ITD has stated that the necessary right-of-way is in place to mitigate the proposed access point. ITD staff testified at the public hearing that the approval of the access was predicated on the applicant constructing a center median and a deceleration lane to mitigate the safety concerns. (Emphasis added.) IV. RECOMMENDED DECISION AND ORDER AND FINDINGS Based upon (i) previous Approvals, Decisions, Orders and Findings for similarly situated projects as outlined in Part III of this letter, (ii) the ITD letters of recommendation, and (iii) the position of Applicant as set forth in in this letter, in particular in Part H, Applicant respectfully submits that the Decision and Order in this matter be as follows: The Applicant's Variance request is hereby approved by the City with the clamcation that the Council supports ITD's recommendation set forth in its letters of February 24, 2017 and July 28, 2017 with regard to appropriate access points. Further, Applicant respectfully submits that the Findings set forth in Paragraph 3 of Exhibit D (Required Findings from Unified Development Code) to the Staff Report be amended as follows: 42795.009 2.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 16 3. VARIANCE: The City Council shall apply the standards listed in Idaho Code 67-6516 and all the findings listed in Section 11 -5B -4.E of the UDC to review the variance request. In order to grant a variance, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district; Staff finds gr-anfing the proposed accesses �Aa Ghiiiden Beialevard would gfant -a right or speeiEd privilege as the UDC speeffically pfahib4s aeoess via the state kighway uniless othe e ed #ffatfgh a of anee UDC 11-311-3 provides that the City Council may consider and apply modifications_ to the standards of Article H upon specific recommendation of the Idaho Transportation Department ITD . In letters dated February 24 2017 and July 28 2017 ITD recommended the proposed access points, subject to conditions set forth in the letters, noting that the proposed access (i) presents an "effective plan to maintain safety and mobility" to Idaho's motorists on US 20/26 and (ii) provides Linder Village with "suitable access in the near and long term". The City Council finds that because of this recommendation from ITD, and because as there are several access points to state highways previously approved on other properties adjacent to a state highway, the granting of this variance will not grant a right or privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district, b. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; and ship that granting avanan would r -el e-ve; Towey The City Council finds that (i) this site does have a lot of frontage on SH 2O-26 as the site is 2,640 feet wide (frontage on SH 2O-26) x 1,290 feet deep (frontage on Linder) which would make sole access to the site via Linder and the (3) existing residential stub streets difficult and inefficient; (ii) granting the accesses provides additional ways for the commercial traffic to disperse from the development and limits impact on the existing local street in the adjacent Paramount residential subdivision; and (iii? because of the mix of uses proposed on the site and because there are physical characteristics of the site which demand access points be constructed in the proposed locations (connection to Chinden at the half mile as required by UDC 11-H is not practical due to patterns of development, the location of the existing non -shared signalized access aligned with Fox Run Way, and the ro osed location of the signalized access for Linder Village is better aligned with Bergman 42795.0012.10372605.5 Mayor and City City Council November 14, 2017 Page 17 Way), granting the requested variance would relieve an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site. C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. aR existing two lane highway, would likely be dett4mepAal to publie safe� with tfaffie slowing devffi to teffi 44a the s4e and pulling aut of the site at a slow rate ef speed merging into traffir. at a high rate of speed. However, if the higipway i widened ie 4 lanes as intended t1ff ough the 7 shouldn'ts program, Staff finds theproposed accesses if the apprapr-iate improvements a nstf,,,,te as de4efm led by ATL. The Ci Council finds that the proposed signalized access alignment with Bergman Way together with all satisfaction of the other conditions imposed by ITD installation of deceleration lanes, access channelization, clear site distance, specified lane configurations, interconnection of signals, additional and dedicated turn lanes, and so forth, as more particularly set forth in the aforementioned ITD letterswill maintain and improve safety and mobility along Chinden Road (US 201261 and therefore, the City Council also finds that the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare and has the potential of increasing the safety and efficiency of traffic movement along Chinden Road CUS 20/26 . - V. REQUESTED ACTION Applicant respectfully requests that City Council (i) approve the proposed Annexation -Zoning (AZ) Application; (ii) approve the Preliminary Plat (PP) Application; and (iii) grant the Variance (VAR) in accordance with the proposed Decision and Order and Findings set forth in Part IV of this letter. Sincerely, cc: Client (via email) �� , N `�.PILO, 42795.0012.10372605.5 r IF MIMI 4 _ c -i--l-I -HE-JA L i J W r �z Vr1 ITHII I' I, I n POJ IIIL . cj a CL _i —LL°— .- ojW --- rLU y� --- �IJI�IrIIII Lf�lll�ff„if�fll,ll� D lLl Q � - - I I LLL=1T1 I ! E� xiwiinbs .u�T"rnir L1.. �.- j Iw— t 0 I Hi -0 tu I� O HIIOIIIIIII 0 PINY - G' I, ISI I Q-11101 —fa iiniLLJJ T � Lai, III h. WIN QZ $ J � Elf W rW -n� V D— z 0 C) Vr1 ITHII I' I, I n POJ IIIL . F +IIQlf+� WI+I --- UIII—rUl, IIT y� --- �IJI�IrIIII Lf�lll�ff„if�fll,ll� lLl Q � 01'itYW11 K w W�W w LLL=1T1 I ! E� xiwiinbs .u�T"rnir L1.. �.- j Iw— t 0 I Hi -0 tu I� O HIIOIIIIIII 0 PINY - G' I, ISI I Q-11101 —fa iiniLLJJ T � Lai, III h. WIN QZ $ J � Elf W rW -n� V D— z 0 C) z + Q W LULU. W a s a r� , Win. - _. __.. �O LL O LU > E wL iLOU Ri ILL LU w i� as - ,OII, Uj o of X L� W r� 5- �s' ofo s� u� w — Q Z w w [If E !f D ° W J 1 IIIA E z CO O� z 0L o " Q i I PP co a rf U) II I Q W € ew�v >wM 'I n ! ? C) a w - ! �1���l�, a� co O m ' A1TwiT1J3d5 £Tn3�as <! -- �� Q ILL o-H+II�IHHif Q+I Ot %ii �.�,1 JU wwz ell W� LCL), LOU jw CL 3 z ILL, C o � ora LII dwssna ww �mF moa ws� I Asa z I, UW LU U OZ� (E H (30 u 22 ~w W�o RM P �Mtl.n'1111 �,��Iflllllfll _ _ r ¢ z Lry_ a p z 0FO FO OWui z � � N z_NwwS ~xZsin UQ G �� wlurli1+1ti9uii It119i+floost,Nrr1t. 11111!1111111!'���1191[I�Illlillllliltlllllfi _-1 aLL0 u7 w �- a< 4unlnu111uSF _j -E O ��.�+nuuuunuuullanrnl�u— 011 tt LL P O Dov r ¢ z a p z 0FO FO OWui z � � N z_NwwS ~xZsin UQ G �� wlurli1+1ti9uii It119i+floost,Nrr1t. 11111!1111111!'���1191[I�Illlillllliltlllllfi _ ai -_= tLno c ^ �ul}gu��,tiyrul+ 7� ��Lill{17ra Ik1t14rr�}I� _ �. ��.�+nuuuunuuullanrnl�u— uxeaau — rwiax .: rmaes _ .�t-ru3as �: �611�It1911H If �i WLH umaws .u?roies f/ Ch'+Iw _ - p--N--pt}}-Fb HR l lil ! F /,l Y Al 5 -'J L k��111111111111111111III 11H1111111111111111111111i1114 11111111111111111 Hill 1111 = I SIN3WINOO ©HOV bad S1N3W3AO'ddINl HTINII ai eain r _ u uuulullululnunlnlnuuenlnu� 0 CO �- v U) W ry U Q acs 00 LL. m LO N O C O N N cr3 a - N .O O L— a- cu a - (u Q U) ^- W CL a '�6HS"J s xoaiox eavxmnaxa —"¢ m OHdQI `11VIQIlISIAi QdOH IMINI`I QNd QIIBA3'I[lOH NZQ[1IH3 399 OSVIIIA lGPUII a 1UAHp IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT P.O. Box 8028 (208) 334-8300 't * Boise, ID 83707-2028 � itd.idaho.gov m � w '0 Q. �9r4T14N July 28, 2017 John F. Ringert, P.E. (for DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC) Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 101 South Capitol Boulevard, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 VIA EMAIL RE: Linder Village Commercial Development — 7/12/2017 Discussion Follow-up Dear Mr. Ringert, The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) wants to thank you, DMG Real Estate Partners and Chuck Winder for meeting with us on 7/12/2017 to discuss long-term access off of US 20/26 (Chinden Blvd) for the Linder Village Commercial Development. ITD also received your letter dated 7/18/2017 that provides a comparison of the development's original trip generations including Costco to an alternate proposed land use. We agree that the small change in trip generations will not significantly impact the recommendations in the TIS. Please find below ITD's modifications to our letter dated 2/24/2017 describing the department's position on your proposed accesses for the Linder Village Commercial Development. Site Access B (Bergman Way) • This access will be permitted as temporary full signalized access to remain in place until the construction of a CFI at the intersection of US 20/26 and Linder Road. • The temporary signal will not be installed until the signal warrants are met based on traffic generation of the completed development. • The signal will convert to a right -in, right -out, left -in movement with the implementation of the CFI at the intersection of US 20/26 and Linder Road given that a connection has been provided to Fox Run Way and a signal has been allowed on Linder Road at Site Access E. • Traffic calming measures to discourage cut through traffic on Bergman Way must be coordinated with the City of Eagle before the full access signal can be put into service. These measures may be considered for inclusion as part of the STAR agreement. ITD will pursue conversation with the City of Meridian, ACHD and Brighton Corporation to gain a public street connection from Fox Run Way to the Linder Village Commercial Development. Thank you again for your time. The department believes this is an effective plan to maintain safety and mobility Idaho's motorists on US 20/26 as well as provide your development suitable access in the near and long term. Please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached by phone at (208) 334-8340 or email at erika.bowen@itd.idaho.gov. Sincerely, Erika R. Bowen, P.E. District 3 Traffic Engineer Cc: Amy Revis — ITD Mindy Wallace — ACHD Caleb Hood — City of Meridian Nichol Baird —City of Eagle David Turnbull — Brighton Corporation %DAHp IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT * P.O. Box 8028 (208) 334-8300 Boise, ID 83707-2028 F itd,idaho.gov � z r1otl ID m w () P February 24, 2017 John F. Ringert, P.E. (for DMG Real Estate Partners, LLC) Kittelson & Associates, Inc, 101 South Capitol Boulevard, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 VIA EMAIL RE: Linder Village Commercial Development—Transportation Impact Study Review Dear Mr. Ringert, The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) wants to thank you, DMG Real Estate Partners, and representatives from Costco and Winco along with the Mayor of Meridian for meeting with us on February 13, 2017 to discuss the proposed signalized approach at LIS 20/26 (Chinden Blvd) and Bergman Way as analyzed in your Transportation Impact Study (TIS) for the Linder Village Commercial Development. Please find 1TD's position below on the findings and recommendations of the TIS as well as the discussion that occurred at the February 131x' meeting. • ITD accepts the revised site plan submitted on October 27, 2016 relocating the Site Access A (right -in -right out only) approach to approximately 450ft west of Bergman Way which places it near the end of ITD's conceptual design of a future continuous flow intersection (CFI) slip lane. o The access will require an eastbound deceleration lane that meets ITD's design standards. o Channelization in the access or on Chinden Blvd is required to restrict left turns. o Remove existing on-site trees and large weeds to the west of the access to provide adequate site distance. • ITD accepts the revised site plan submitted on October 27, 2016 showing the development's building locations adjusted outside of the projects area of the CFI. • ITD will allow a signalized intersection at Bergman Way (Site Access B). o Whether the signalized intersection is a full access or a three quarter access will need to be determined in consultation with ACHD and City of Eagle. Impacts on adjacent streets and traffic patterns will need to be evaluated for a final determination. o Lane configurations on Chinden Blvd at Bergman Way headed westbound will include a dedicated right turn lane, two thru lanes and two dedicated left turn lanes. 1DAWQ IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT PO. Box 8028 Boise, ID 83707-2028 (2 ltd ldaho. 00 itd.idaho.gav z�A�9rarroN o Lane configurations on Chinden Blvd at Bergman Way headed eastbound will include two thru lanes and a dedicated right turn lane. o Lane configurations on Bergman Way headed northbound will include two left turn lanes and a dedicated right turn lane. o The new signal at Bergman Way must be interconnected with the signals at Linder Rd, Meridian Road and Fox Run Ave. • Chinden Blvd will be widened to a five lane section between Linder Rd and Meridian Road as proposed in the TIS. o Widening to include approximately 1700 feet of construction east of Meridian Road to taper the pavement back to a three lane section. o Install conduit with fiber optics the entire length of the widening. • ITD requires the following improvements be made at the Chinden Blvd / Linder Rd intersection. o Construct an additional eastbound left turn lane with appropriate storage length to accommodate the forecasted 265 weekday PM peak hour turns. Eastbound lane configurations on Chinden Blvd will include two thru lanes, two left turn lanes and a dedicated right turn lane. o Construct an additional westbound left turn lane with appropriate storage length to accommodate the forecasted weekday PM 280 peak hour turns. Westbound lane configurations on Chinden Blvd will include two thru lanes, two left turn lanes and a dedicated right turn lane. o Identify and implement necessary signal modifications for materials and equipment. Any modifications to ACRD facilities will require review and approval; and the applicant will be responsible for all costs. • ITD requires the following improvements be made at the Chinden Blvd / Meridian Rd intersection. o Construct a dedicated eastbound right turn lane designed to ITD's standards. o Construct an additional northbound left turn lane with appropriate storage length to accommodate the forecasted 440 Saturday midday peak hour turns. o Identify and implement necessary signal modifications for materials and equipment. Any modifications to ACHD facilities will require review and approval; and the applicant will be responsible for all costs. 1DANO IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT * P.O. Box 8028 (208) 334-6300 Boise, ID 83707-2028 itd.idaho.gov � h D w .o �h � QP ArRrJON OF + The Linder Village Commercial Development will enter into a STARS agreement with ITD to implement additional improvements to Chinden Blvd to extend the four lane section from the termination of improvements required by the TIS to the termination of ITD's proposed project between Eagle Rd and Locust Grove. ITD reserves the right during the STARS agreement negotiations to request additional improvements. * The Linder Village Commercial Development will provide cross access for the triangular parcel located on the northeast corner of the development. ITD would like to state that US 20/26 and its corridor is a vital east -west commuter route in this region. The department appreciates the economic opportunities the Linder Village Development brings to the city of Meridian, but must balance that with maintaining mobility along the corridor. The TIS identified but did not include in its analysis a future residential development (the site plan shows approximately 60 houses) on the parcel's southeast corner. An additional TIS will be required before this portion of the proposed development may be implemented. If the applicant is in agreement with addressing the items as outlined above then this TIS is acceptable from a state highway access, safety and mobility standpoint. You may proceed with stamped engineered drawings of your proposed access and safety improvements. Final approval of the accesses is determined once all documentation has been provided and the permit is signed. Maintaining safety and mobility for Idaho's motorists is of the utmost importance to ITD. Please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached by phone at (208) 334-8340 or email at erika.bowen @itd.ida ho.gov. Sincerely, Le &,, Erika R. Bowen, P.E. District 3 Traffic Engineer 1 Charlene Way From:C.Jay Coles Sent:Tuesday, November 14, 2017 4:36 PM To:Charlene Way Subject:FW: Linder Village- File No. H-2017-0088 [IWOV-IMANAGE.FID657957] Attachments:10398731_1_November 14, 2017 Position Statement and Supplemental Submission Letter.PDF Please place the attached in the public record. From: Durann Parra [ mailto:DParra@hawleytroxell.com ] Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 4:31 PM To: C.Jay Coles Subject: FW: Linder Village- File No. H-2017-0088 [IWOV-IMANAGE.FID657957] Please see attached. It was inadvertently sent to the incorrect email address. From: Durann Parra Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 4:26 PM To: 'mayortammy@meridiancity.org'; 'citycouncil@meridiancity.org'; 'cjcoles@citymeridian.org'; 'sallen@meridianci ty.org'; 'chood@meridiancity.org'; 'bnary@meridiancity.org'; 'tbaird@meridiancity.org' Subject: FW: Linder Village- File No. H-2017-0088 [IWOV-IMANAGE.FID657957] Please see attached letter from Brian L. Ballard regarding Linder Village - Position Statement and Supplemental Submission. Thank you, DURANN PARRA Legal Administrative Assistant direct 208.388.4870 email dparra@hawleytroxell.com HAWLEY TROXELL Attorneys and Counselors