HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report VAR 5/21/10STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: May 26, 2010
(Continued from November 25, 2008,
March 10, 2009, June 6, 2009, October 9,
2009, December 15, 2009 and March 2,
2010)
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Bill Parsons, Associate City Planner
(208) 884-5533
SUBJECT: Meridian and Amity Access Variance
• VAR-08-008
~E IDIZ IAN+~-
~J
This item was scheduled to be heard on November 25, 2008. The applicant requested continuance on
the Variance application until a decision was rendered by ITD.
Staff has updated Exhibit B of the Staff Report to include additional comments from ITD and ACHD
since the publish date of this staff report. The comments from ITD hi~hli~ht the decision of the ITD
Chief Engineer denial of the three access points to Meridian Roam The Applicant subsequently
appealed that decision, which resulted in a hearing examiner recommendation to the Director ofITD
for denial. The appeal is still in process and a final decision may be rendered by the end of June.
ACHD comments reference their review of the traffic study and recommends changes to the
circulation pattern of the parking area. Both documents are available for review in Exhibit B below
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Hawkins Companies, is requesting approval of a variance to UDC 11-3H-4B.2.a,
which prohibits new approaches directly accessing a state highway, to allow three access points to SH
69/Meridian Road for a proposed mixed use development. The applicant believes these access points
are necessary to facilitate efficient traffic movement to/from the proposed development. NOTE: The
transportation agencies have reviewed and commented on the Traffic Impact Study associated with
the site. Analysis for that study can be found in the Meridian and Amity AZ staff report ale #AZ-08-
005) scheduled for the same hearing as this variance application. Staff has attached ACHD TIS
comments below in Exhibit B. Staff did not receive official comments from ITD regarding the TIS but
official comments were provided regarding the variance and are attached in Exhibit B.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff finds that the request for three accesses to a state highway does not meet the findings criteria
required in the UDC in order for the City Council to grant a variance (see Exhibit C for the required
variance findings). Therefore, Staff is recommending denial of the subject Variance (VAR-08-
008) application for the reasons stated herein.
3. PROPOSED MOTIONS
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny File Number VAR-08-008
as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 25, 2008, for the following reasons:
(you should state specific reasons for denial.)
Continuance
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number VAR-
Meridian and Amity VAR-08-008 PAGE 1
08-008 to the hearing date of (date certain) for the following reason(s): (you should state specific
reason(s) for continuance.) OPTIONAL: I further move to direct Staff to prepare Findings and
Conditions of approval for this project, to be considered at the (date certain) public hearing.
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location:
Northwest corner of W. Amity Road and S. Meridian Road
Southeast % of Section 25, Township 3 North, Range 1 West
b. Owners:
Hawkins Companies
855 W. Broad Street, Suite 300
Boise, ID 83702
c. Applicant:
Same as owner
d. Representative:
Same as applicant
Mike Mussell
4495 S. Meridian Road
Meridian, ID 83642
e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County)
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Designation: Mixed-Use Regional
g. Applicant's Statement/Justification (reference submittal material): "Hawkins Companies is
requesting a variance from the City of Meridian Unified Development Code Section 11-3H-3B.2
to allow three access points along Meridian Road. These access points are required to complete
the successful design of a 67 acre mixed use development.
Two right-in/right-out and one right-in/right-out/left-in access points are to be located between
Amity Road and Harris Street. Each will be spaced roughly 660 feet apart along the frontage of
the development with the right-in/right-out/left-in at the quarter mile. The accesses are required to
allow efficient traffic flow and circulation to the site. The traffic study shows the three access
points would have minimal impact on the flow of traffic on Meridian Road and will improve the
function of the Amity Road and Meridian Road intersection in addition to providing critical
access to the development." See applicant's narrative for more information.
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application is for variance approval as determined by City Ordinance. A public
hearing is required before the City Council consistent with Title 11, Chapter 5.
b. Newspaper notifications published on: November 3, 2008 and November 17, 2008
c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: October 31, 2008
d. Applicant posted notice on site by: November 14, 2008 and February 19, 2010
6. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): The subject property is currently being used for agricultural purposes.
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: The surrounding area is primarily agricultural in
nature. However, urban development is transitioning along the South Meridian Corridor.
Meridian and Amity VAR-08-008 PAGE 2
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Agricultural land and Meridian Heights Subdivision; zoned RUT and R6 (Ada County)
2. East: Valley Storage, zoned RUT (Ada County)
3. South: Rural Residences and Agricultural land, zoned RR (Ada County)
4. West: Rural Residences and Agricultural land, zoned RUT (Ada County)
d. History of Previous Actions: In 2006, a large (northern) portion of this site was proposed for
annexation and preliminary plat approval for a residential development (Sagewood Subdivision
AZ-08-058 and PP-06-057) but the applicant withdrew the applications prior to City Council
action. On September 23, 2008 City Council approved CPA-08-004 for this site changing a
portion of this site (40 acres) from Medium-Density Residential to Mixed Use-Regional.
f. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): Currently the
subject site has seven (7) deeded access points to Meridian Road. At this time, the applicant is
proposing three access points (two right-in/right-out and one right-in/right-out, left-in only).
7. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
The following UDC section is pertinent to this application:
• UDC 11-3H-4B: Access to State Highway 69, State Highway 55, and State Highway 20-26:
1. Use of existing approaches shall be allowed to continue provided that all of the following
conditions are met:
a. The existing use is lawful and properly permitted effective September 15, 2005. A majority of
the site is being used for agricultural purposes. However, there is an existing commercial
building which is slated to become part of the proposed mixed use development. Staff' is
unaware of the history of this building and when it was constructed. This site currently takes
access from Meridian Road. NOTE: ITD has informed staff this site has seven deeded
access points to Meridian Road
b. The nature of the use does not change (for example a residential use to a commercial
use). The applicant is proposing to change the use of this site from agricultural to
intense residential/office%ommercial.
c. The intensity of the use does not increase (for example an increase in the number of
residential dwelling units or an increase in the square footage of commercial space).
The intensity of the use on the site will increase significantly from agricultural to
commercial property with approximately 500, 000 square feet of residential, office
and retail uses.
2. If an applicant proposes a change or increase in intensity of use, the owner shall develop
or otherwise acquire access to a street other than the state highway. The use of the
existing approach shall cease and the approach shall be abandoned and removed.
a. No new approaches directly accessing a state highway shall be allowed.
Because new and higher intense uses are proposed for the property, the use of the
existing approaches shall cease and the approaches shall be removed.
b. Public street connections to the state highway shall only be allowed at:
i. The section line road; and
A public street connection to SH 69 exists at Amity Road, a section line road.
ii. The half-mile mark between section line roads. These half-mile connecting
streets shall be collector roads.
Meridian and Amity VAR-08-008 PAGE 3
Harris Street, currently classified as a collector road, exists north of this site on
the west side of SH 69 at the half-mile mark between section line roads. This
roadway is planned as a signalized intersection and will provide northern access
to the proposed mixed use development. In addition, a backage road is proposed
along the western boundary and will parallel HWY 69 and extend from Harris
Street to Amity Road.
8. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis Leading to Staff Recommendation
Staff has provided analysis below regarding the proposed application.
VARIANCE APPLICATION:
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow three accesses (two right-in/right-out and one
right-in/right-out/left-in) to SH 69/Meridian Road for a mixed use development. Per UDC 11-3H-
4B, when the nature of the use changes, the existing approaches shall discontinue. Because the
use of the site is proposed to change from agricultural to a proposed intense mixed-use
development, accesses are no longer allowed to be taken from the state highway; the owner of the
site shall develop or otherwise acquire access to a street other than the state highway and the
existing approaches shall cease. In this case, the applicant has options to facilitate access from
other roadways. As mentioned earlier, Harris Street and Amity Road provide opportunities for
future access to the subject site with a proposed collector/backage road that parallels Hwy
69/Meridian Road and completes the connection between Amity Road and Harris Street. Staff
believes this roadway and future access points along the aforementioned roadways are sufficient
enough to accommodate the amount of future traffic generated by the proposed development.
ACHD and ITD have commented on the TIS (attached in Exhibit B) and have concluded the
proposed development would function without access to Meridian Road.
In addition, ITD has commented on the subject variance application and agrees that additional
access points to HWY 69/Meridian Road will be detrimental to the traffic flow on Meridian Road
and will not improve the functionality of the roadway serving the subject site. All three agencies
(City Staff, ACHD &ITD) support limiting accesses to Meridian Road thus hoping to avoid
creating similar access issues that currently impact Eagle Road.
To grant a variance, the Council needs to make the following findings:
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;
3. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
Staff believes that granting a variance would allow a right or special privilege that is not
otherwise allowed for properties that are adjacent to a state highway. Staff finds that granting the
subject variance would be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare and that the potential
for accidents would increase significantly with vehicles slowing down to turn into the site and
exiting the site and merging with traffic travelling at high rates of speed on the highway. The
Meridian Fire Department and the Meridian Police Department have major concerns with the
access points to Meridian Road and believes the proposed access points would increase traffic
hazards in the area (comments attached in Exhibit B). Staff realizes access is important to the
success of marketing the site, but it does not relieve an undue hardship for developing the site. As
mentioned earlier, ACHD (formal comments attached in Exhibit B) and ITD (no formal
comments) have commented on the applicant's TIS and believe the site can function without the
Meridian and Amity VAR-08-008 PAGE 4
accesses to Meridian Road. Therefore, Staff is recommending denial of the Variance
application (see Exhibit C for required variance findings).
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of this application based on the facts and
findings provided in staff report.
8. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity/Zoning Map
2. Conceptual Site Plan Depicting Proposed Access Points
3. Applicant's Narrative
B. Agency Comments
1. Idaho Department of Transportation and Chief Engineer Comments
2. Ada County Highway District
3. TIS Comments and Updated TIS Comments from ACRD
4. Meridian Police Department
5. Meridian Fire Department
C. Required Findings from the Unified Development Code
Meridian and Amity VAR-08-008 PAGE 5
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity/Zoning
Rl R-4 ` 1 i~-r~r ~~ .. CrG R-4 -_~
f _ W VICTORY.. RD - ~ '`~ L-O E VICTORY RD . '.
-~ -
I P
OSP ~ __ 3, ~°"~ ~~ C-N TN-]
pR ~ i
~ R~O~ a . ~ TN-C
,;,"
W BLUE QOWNS ST a .~ Q
0
R6
~' J "' RUT R-8
7~ `
Z i '
SITE E RUMPEL LN
~~ ~~
..~.
a
,~
RUT ~r ~ ',
y~~>
_- ----
'~`'~
i
~~~
~ ~`_
W AMITY RD
~ E AMITY RD
.:...-.......E ~._~ ~
^
^
_1
~,
°.. ~ .
a '.-'-'- .~~
~ ~ RR ~ ~~
Exhibit A - 1
2. Conceptual Site Plan (Proposed Access Points to Meridian Road)
~,
~~° ~~~~
~= ,, .~ _- ~ ~ , ~:~ °-~ ~~~~~ Access #1
J
~1 ~ ~_ ;±{
e~
~ rte. L! _~f ~ (~+h-?fMr~«Oittt~#+m{I ~ rl;~~~~ r
~ j~ `~; ~~~a ~ y ~f~tru~at+,J~ ,+flo*~Hr~f+t~, [n;;irr-„r-...
~ ~~'~ r Y ~ ~~ ~ ~ l- ~~~~ w- ~E.;.,,,,..~ i. ~--~ ! Access #2
_ .~.
'~ ~ ~-~ - ~ ~ 9n~, ` 1 ~~ ~ orr-~,-rc~*r-~ r ,
~ ,~ ~,,_ ;~, ~ r,_ua~:u ~ ~~ ~_ ~~ ~
_ ~ -
I ~ ~~
x
_ ,,
__ ~~~
i ~ ~ ~ j,
- __ _ - ~ _ ~ a~~~~.~ nt~~ ~ l Access
.~ - F
~,~
_-.
s~ ~~ ~ n ~t ~Rl
Backage Road ~ ~-~- _ ~-''~,"`~`~~;'"`~"~``'~
Amity oa
LL r.
- _. a ~~~~,v tx~ a ~,~~ilS,l - ..,.. ~ i
_..._ -
-- °--
- - - -- - - -- -:..-r=~.. ~ -
Harris Street
~-~~
Exhibit A - 2
3. Applicant's Narrative
September Is, Zoos
City of Meridian
Road Access Variance
Meridian/Artrity/Harris Road
b7 +/- Acres
Specific Details of the Change Requested:
Hawkins Companies is requesting a variance from the City of Meridian Uniform
Development Cade Section i l -3H-4.B.2 to allow three access points along Meridian
Road.
These access points to Meridian Road are required to complete the successful design of a
67 acre mixed use development. We have submitted a comprehensive plan amendment,
annexation and zoning request as part of the development plan of four parcels at the
northwest corner of Meridian and Amity Roads for a mixed use development.
We are proposing three access points on Meridian Road {Highway 69). Two right-in/
right- out and aright-in/ right-out/ left-in to be located between Amity Road and Harris
Street. Each will be spaced roughly 660 feet apart along the frontage of the development
with the right-in/ right-out/ left-in at the quarter mile point. The accesses are required to
allow the efficient traffic flow and circulation to the site. As indicated in the Traffic
Impact Analysis completed by ICittelson and Associates, titled South Meridian Center,
dated August 2008, submitted to the city on Aug 28, 2008 shows that the three requested
access points would have minimal impact on the flow of Meridian Road and will improve
the function of the Amity Road & Meridian Road intersection in addition to providing
critical access to the development.
Additionally, we have added a backage road along the western property line to increase
the connectivity of the site for future neighbors to the west. However, this does not
reduce the need for the access points on Meridian Road.
The three criteria for granting a variance are outlined below and show that an approval of
this request is consistent with prior approvals, provides no negative impacts and helps to
protect the health, safety and welfare in Meridian.
The variance shalt not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed
in the district.
There are roughly eleven. full and two right-in/ right-out access points existing along
Meridian Road from I-84 south to Amity Road. Our requested access points will serve to
provide ingress/egress for our site just as the existing access points to the north do for
their respective developments. Our site has seven (7) deeded access points, this variance
request is for three {3) as depicted on the site p}an.
Exhibit A- 3 -
The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site.
This site is l/2 mile in length along Meridian Road with. a residential street along the
north boundary and arterial. road to the south. To deny access for the 'lz mile length of
Meridian Road would have several negative impacts.
Without the access points on Meridian Road, the Amity Road access point #2 (see Traffic
Impact Analysis) will fait. If however, the access points are approved traffic will have
multiple options and the impacts will be able to be spread throughout. the arterial corridor.
In short, without the ability to have multiple points to turn into and out of the site traffic
will be forced to the periphery and create significant congestion, harming Meridian Road,
adjacent residents and the businesses and residents on the site.
The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
The allowance of the access points will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare. As shown the Traffic Impact Analysis the addition of the access points will
improve the operation of the Amity and Meridian Road intersection. The points will not
create a significant negative impact on Meridian Road. The access points will reduce the
amount of traffic to the residential neighborhood to the north.
Neighborhood comments
Our conversations with neighbors were positive, there was some concern with regards to
the traffic generated on Harris. By and large, the residents were happy that we designed
the development with only one primary access point on Harris Street, along with three
access points on Meridian Road. We made it clear to the residents that the access points
on Meridian would require a variance and in turn the residents echoed their support.
This variance request will provide direct, positive results consistent with the established
Goals and Polices of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
2
Exhibit A- 4 -
B. Agency Comments
1. ITD VARIANCE COMMENTS AND ITD CHIEF ENGINEER COMMENTS
New ITD comments from Chief Engineer.
1D~Np
~ «
r+a~
May 19, 2009
tOANO TRANEPORTATtON DE-ARTMENT
Po. box 7,29 R E C E I V E b I~~) 33a-t~oao
Boise la asTOT-11~s
Mai ~ n ,~f , Ird kfeno.9ov
DIA7 rao ,y
~rvt8lpH t>F NIW IWAYB
Mr. John Ringert, P.E.
Kittelson 8 Associates, Inc.
101 S Capdol Blvd, Suite 301
Raise, ID 83702
RE: Appeal of District Denial -- Application # 03-09-181
Dear Mr. Ringert:
bcc: CE
ACE (O)
HOSE
TSE
LEGAL
DE-3
DTE-3
_ District 3 (Pam Golden)
~HOSTTt3=(Hotlar~
The Office of Highway Operations and Safety (OHOS) met with ITD District and Ada County Highway
District to discuss your request for a change in access on State Highway 69. The merits of your request
were discussed at length and recommendations were given to me in regard to your request. Based upon
those recommendations and my own review of the appeal package, your appeal and requested accesses
era listed below have been denied for the following reasons:
• Proposed Approach 30-foot Commercial Sta. 334+00 (RT-INKY-Out)
• Proposed Approach 40-foot Commercial Sta. 340+12 (RT•INRT-OutlLsit -In)
• Proposed Approach 30-foot Commercial Sta. 34T+00 (RT-INKY-Out)
1. IDAPA 39.03.42 -Rules Governing Highway Right-of-Way Encroachments on State
Rights-of-way' identifies that "Traffic Movements into and out of a business should be
designed, whenever possible, to utilize existing ktcal roads.' Your development has
proposed three (3) accesses to Amity Road, one to Harris Street and s badcage road
which connects Harris Street and Amity Rosd.
2. The addition of high volume commercial accesses, has the potential to create
interference with or hazard to the free movement of normal highway traffic by
irrtroducing more conflicts between the traffic movements. Your TIS, dated August
2008, indicates the proposed development will function with no access to 5H-89 (Kung
Road).
3. Ada County Highway District has indicated their willingness to allow additional access to
serve your development off of Amity Road and to the signalization o1 your proposed
access No. 3 (Backage Road) H no access were granted by ITD. The signalized
access on Amity Road would serve to enhance accaess to the development by patrons
and emergency responders.
4. TYPE IV access was implemented with the moat recent SH-89 project to maintain the
integrity of 5H-69 (Kuna Road).
5. Existing access is present at Harris Street to conned to the development and may be
signalized as it meets ITD standards for a signalized approach.
Exhibit B- 1 -
6. The requested accesses could not be allowed without placing restrictions on the highway
via a raised median, which woub have adverse efbcta on other commercial enterprises in
the area.
7. The allowance of new approaches or the upgrade of existing approaches to a higher use
on 5ti-69 (Kung Road) is against tTD's Access Policy for the TYPE IV access control
which has teen placed on SH-69.
In accordance with IDAPA Rule 39.03.42 the applicant may request further appeal by submitting
written notice of his intent to appeal to the Legal Section of the Idaho Transportation Department
within 30 days of the receipt of this letter of denial.
Idaho Transportation Department
Legal Section, Attn: Karl Vogt
P.O. Box 7129
Boise, ID 83707-1129
Sincerely
Tom E. Cole, LSIPE
Chief Engineer
cc: Yuri Mereazczak
101 S Capitol Btvd, Suite 301
Boise, ID 83702
Exhibit B- 2 -
.~
'~$ arrow ~ e
November 14, 2008
City of Meridian
Planning Department
660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 202
M+:ridian, Idaho 83642
FAX 888-6854
DE
AnF c
TE
~,a ~
mac, _ ~
Re: Location; NW Comer ot` W. Amity Road and S. Meridian Road
Route: SH 69 MP 7.2
llama: Hawkins Companies
File No. VAR 08-008
Bearing pate; November 25, 2008
[)ear Zoning Administrator,
Thank you for the opportunity to commerst on this notice.
Meridian Road (SH-69) is a Type CV highway. The intersection of Amity Road and SH-69 is currently
signalized, and we understand ACRD is working with developers in the area for signalization of the Hams
Street and SH-69 intersection.
Much growth is antieipated in the south Meridian and Kura areas, which will lead to increased traffic
volumes on SH-69. Approval of a variance to allow multiple commercial accesses along the highway
frontage will increase the potential for wnflicts on the state highway attributable to fuming movements
and/or increased trips. There are several examples in the Treasure Valley, including Eagle Road (SH-55j
where high intensity uses fronting a state highway have reduced ITD's ability to balance access, safety and
mobility.
High intensity commercial development, such as what is proposal by the applicant, could create multiple
high speed conflict points because of the high volumes of fuming movements associated with traffic
entering and exiting the site. According to the 2004 AASHTO Crreen Book, "the number of crashes is
disproportionately higher at driveways than at other intersections." The Transportation Research Board's
access Management Manual, dated 2003, indicates 47% of driveway related crashes are the "left-in"
movement, which is proposed by the applicant at the '.4 mile laration. The Access Marwgemertt .~Llanual also
indicates, °'Drivers make more mistakes and are more likely to have collisions when they are presented with
the complex driving situations ur~reatod by numerous conflicts. Conversely, simplifying the driving task
oantributes to improved traffic operations and fewer collisions."
We have reviewed the August 2{108 traffic impact study (TISj for the South Meridian Certter, prepared by
Kittleson and Associates. The TiS dues not support the need for multiple access points along SH 69.
Allowing additional aec~s points on SH 69 does not appear to increase the operational aspects of the
intersections on SH 69 at Amity or Harris Street, as reporttxl on Page 1 of the Applicant's narrative. The
IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
P.p. Box t302H
Boise. ID 63707-2428
Exhibit B- 3 -
trrty of Menciran Gonurg Admtnrstrator
Name: Hawkins Companies
Case No. CPA VAR 08-0(}8
Hearing Date: November 25, 2008
November 14, 2008
Page 2 of 2
increase in operational efficiency at these intersections appears to come from an increased number of lanes for
the east west traffic movements.
Appendix G of the TIS contains Year 2103 background traffic conditions for the weekday PM Peak hour with
no improvements to the intersection. According to the infomaation presented, there would be an average of 45
wehicles in both the through and right turn lanes. Assuming 2S feet per vehicle, there would be a queue of
approximately 1125 feet from the intersection. Appendix H contains Year 21 U3 backgound traffic conditions
for the weekday PM Peak hour with improvements to the intersection. According to the information
presented, there will be an average of 36 vehicles in both the through and right turn lanes, or a queue length of
9(}0 feet. Both scenarios indicate the southernmost I f8 mile access location would be blacked during the PM
peak hour.
We respectfully disagree with the applicant's presentation of potential negative impacts presented on page 2 of
the narrative. ACH1~ indicated in their letter offletc-ber 7, 2008 to I{ittelson & Associates that signalization of
the `/. mile access (i.e. the backage road} on Amity may be considered if no access to Highway 69 is granted.
Although we have not reviewed any analysis of this access scenario, we suspect that a sigrralixed access to the
development at this location would improve the operation of Amity Access tit. lastly, the site will be
bordered by public roads on all sides, providing several options for ingresslegmss via Harris, Amity and the
backage road. This scenario is what 17'D and the City of Meridian have been wcxking towards on other
corridors.
We respectfully request that the City examine the variance request closely before taking action.
If you hawe any questions please call me at 334-8377.
Sincerely,
~,_~_ _.
Pam Golden, P.E.
Development & Access Management Engineer
Exhibit B- 4 -
3. ACRD TIS COMMENTS ANA UPDATED TIS COMMENTS
New ACHD comments.
February 13. 2009
~•R' `r~s ~g
CHD ~~`
~on~..,vlx`crl~n ~s^~ct
Kittelson & Associates
Attn John Ringert
101 S. Capital Boulevard. STE 301
Boise, !D 83702
Subject. South Meridian Center TIS Comments
Carol A. McKee, President
Sherry R. Huber, Vice President
Rebecca W. Arnold, 2"" Vice President
}ohn S. Franden, Commissioner
Sarah M. Baker, Commissioner
r ~~
r'`EB 13 2C;iy
Cit~+ of Meridiars
P1aRntrtq t:)epar#ment
District staff has reviewed the Response to ACHD's South Meridian Center TIS Comments dated
December 3, 2008. The District does not agree with all of the responses/comments provided by the
applicant's engineer. To further clarify the District's position on these items the following comments are
provided.
Comment's made under item number 3, the phasing plan state that "the proposed
backage%ollector road will be constructed along the western property line as part of Phase
1. This proposed road is not planned to connect with Harris Street under Phase 1. The
northern connection would be provided under full build-orrt of the development plan. "
ACRD will require the extension of the backage/collector roadway between Amity Road and Harris
Street with the first phase of the development. The phasing analysis should be revised accordingly.
• Comment's made under item number 4, state "It is our understanding that the right-in/right-
out driveway with the proposed westbound right-turn deceleration lane meet ACHD design
standards according to the current ACHD policy, This proposed driveway was discussed
with ACRD on October i6 and defennined that it was acceptable. However, the site plan
will be reviewed and if possible, modified to provide a better connection between this
roadway and the internal roadways that serve the entire site instead of just the pad.
The first right-in/right-out driveway on Amity Road was discussed during the meeting on October 16,
2008, however, the driveway was not approved at that time. Staff did say that the driveway could be
considered if the site was redesigned and the driveway were to tie into a circulation system. such as a
ring road,. and not just serve a single pad site. Staff has reviewed the revised site plan. The revisions do
not address staff concerns regarding the driveway therefore the first right-in/right-out driveway on Amity
Road will not be allowed unless the site plan is redesigned (see attached).
Because the first right-in/right-out driveway on Amity Road is not allowed at this time the applicant's
engineer Should analyze Access Scenario # 1 without the first right-in/right-out driveway on Amity Road
and submit the analysis for review by staff.
Ada County Highway District • 3775 Adams Street • Garden City, ID • 83714 • PH 208-387-6100 • FX 345-7650 • www.achd.ada.id.us
Exhibit B- 5 -
General Comments
ACHD is aware that the applicant has appealed District 3 decisions to deny access to SH-69 to ITD's
Office of Highway Operations and Safety. ACHD is supportive of District 3's decision to deny the access
on ko SH-89 and would like to reiterate the District's position on access to the site
If access to SH-69 is granted than:
• The amount and type of access on to SH-69 will directly impact the amount and type of access
granted on ACHD Roadways (Amity and Harris). Access on ACRD roadways will be based on what
is needed to serve the site in addition to the access on to the state highway, versus what is desired
by the applicant.
• The District will no longer consider the intersection of Amity Road and the backage/collector
roadway as a possible signal location.
If no access is granted to SH-69 than:
• Access on ACRD roadway will be determined based on what is needed to serve the site, versus
what is desired by the applicant.
• The first right-in/right-out driveway on Amity Road may be considered if the site was redesigned
and the driveway were to tie into a circulation system, such as a ring road.
• A signal may be considered at the backage/collector road if it meets signal warrants and benefits
the system as a whole.
ACRD may ask for additional information or additional analysis once ITD have made on final decision on
access to SH-69.
ff you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 208-387-6178.
Sincerely..
Mindy Wallace
Planning Review Supervisor
Right-of-Way & Development Services
CC Hawkins Company -Lance Evens
City of Meridian -Pete Freidman
ITD -Pam Golden
Ada County Highway District • 3775 Adams Street • Garden Gty, ID • 83714 • PH 208-387-6100 • FX 345-7650 • www.achd.ada.id.us
Exhibit B- 6 -
Possible ring road shown in red
South Me++Aen Cert~r
rte,.. x,t,A
-,~ - ~'
a
HARRIS rgpRlS
^' SS v< A^ SS v'
~p~,
_- _.._ _
n -
is ~~/" ~'~ c ~ '1, E 3 r 3 +. A' '~ \~
MERE IAN
ACCfSS M:
C
2
S
G
I ~
MERCDIAN
MERIpiAN
ACCESS v~
.~ AMPY 4,-C'c5 v3 I'Y RuA'v AMT AM7~~
t SA KAGE Rpq,,: A"CUSS e2 ACC .,S v+
dd -E~ _o.. ~~
~i
.~
~I .- __.___. _._.___.
1
rnuruseo SfTE PLAN
MERIDIAN, IOAMO
LI KIT? E L SON $ A S SOC lA TES. IfVC.
I` Pn~tSPS]PtATIDti [,+GNEER•~ P~ANNnKa
v~ _:.~_:
Ada County Highway District • 3775 Adams Street • Garden City, IO • 83714 • PH 208-387-6100 • FX 345J650 • www.achd.ada.ld.us
Exhibit B- 7 -
C D
Go mr..~~crl ~o ~-xn^xcc
October 7, 2008 RECEIVE
Kittelson & Associates
Attn John Ringert City of Meridian
101 S Capital Boulevard. STE 301 Plannirts; f)ep~xrtniel;i
Boise. ID 83702
Subject South Meridian Center TIS Comments
Carol A. McKee, President
Sheny R. Huber, Vice President
Dave &vens, 2n0 Vice President
]ohn 5. Franden, Commissioner
Rebecca W. Amdd, Commissioner
Sent Via E-mail
The Ada County Highway district staff has completed a review of the submitted traffic impact study
(TIS) for the proposed South Meridian Center development. Below are the
commentslrecommendations provided by District Traffic Services and Planning Review staff.
1. The South Meridian Transportation Plan has not been finalized or adopted by the
ACRD Commission. The improvements at the Amity/SH-69 intersection and any
other improvements listed as part of the plan should not be assumed to be in place
or constructed by the District. If improvements are needed to serve this development
for the intersection (Amity/SH-69) to function adequately, this development should be
responsible for the improvements.
The Transportation and Land Use Integration Plan (TLIP) has not been finalized or
adopted by ACRD Commission. References to consistency with TLIP should be
removed from the TIS. One particular item of concern is the recommendation for a
collector roadway at the Y. mile on SH-69 (Meridian Road}. A collector roadway at
the '/, mile does not meet District policy, and has not been recommended by ACRD
staff. Although it was shown on a draft working map for TLIP it is not a
recommendation of ACRD. Additionally, SH-69 (Meridian Road) is under the
jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). Current ITD policy allows
access on to SH-69 at the '/~ mile. The District would not recommend a roadway
alignment or intersection location on a state highway that is inconsistent with ITD
policy. Current ACRD policy recommends and allows collector roadways to be
located at the '/: mile. The District will not support a collector roadway at the quarter
mile unless needed for traffic purposes for the benefit of the system as a whole.
3. A phasing analysis will need to be submitted to ACHD which outlines at what phases
the traffic improvements are needed to serve this development.
4. The 151 access (right-in/right-out) on Amity Road will not be allowed. The driveway
location will not meet design standards with the proposed lane configuration and
appears to only serve one small pad site and has little benefit to the rest of the
development.
Ada County Highway District • 3775 Adams Street + Garden Ci[y, ID • 83714 • PH 208-387-6100 • FX 345-7650 • www.achd.ada.id.us
Exhibit B- 8 -
5. A signal will not be allowed at the proposed 2~ access location. If ACRD is to
consider a traffic signal, the site plan should be redrawn to send more traffic to the
3rtl Amity Road access at the '/. mile. A signal may be considered at the 3`d Amity
Road access if it meets signal warrants and benefits the system as a whole. A signal
at the '/, mile on Amity may be considered if access is restricted to Hwy 69 in
accordance with the Meridian Unified Development Code and ITD access policy. If a
signal is determined to meet warrants and is approved at this location all costs
associated with the signal would be at the developer's expense.
6. The site plan appears to be poorly laid out. Traffic circulation interior to the site will
be difficult and force people to use the drive aisle directly in front of the buildings,
thereby causing conflicts with pedestrians walking to the store fronts. The applicant
and the City should consider an interior private ring road to improve circulation within
the site.
7 District staff is supportive of Access Scenario # 1. It appears that this Scenario
would work with some minor adjustments. The applicant's engineer should analyze
Access Scenario # 1 without the first right-in/right-out driveway on Amity Road and
submit the analysis for review by staff.
8 Staff questions what the queuing on the site will be like if there is no access to SH-
69. The submitted traffic impact study only provided a queuing analysis for the
Preferred Access Scenario. The applicant's engineer should analyze and submit a
queuing analysis for all 4 of the Access Scenarios identified in the submitted traffic
impact study for review by District staff.
9. The developers of the Cavanaugh Subdivision were required to provide the District
with a road trust deposit for the cost of '/2 of a signal at the SH-69/Harris Street
intersection. At this time it appears that the Cavanaugh development is on hold;
therefore the road trust deposit has not been submitted to ACHD- If the signal is
warranted by this development and allowed by ITD, it will be required to be installed
with the development.
10. The'/, mile collector roadway should connect to Harris Street.
11. It is unclear which roadway interior roadways are proposed to be public and which
are proposed to be private.
12 The functional classifications given in Table 1 are incorrect for the following
roadways:
a. Victory Road -Minor Arterial
b. Lake Hazel Road -Principal Arterial
c. Linder Road -Minor Arterial
d. Locust Grove Road -Minor Arterial
13. Spreadsheets for the internal trip capture calculations were not included as part of
the submitted traffic impact study. Please submit the spreadsheet for review by
District staff.
If you have any questions. please feel free to contact me at 208-387-6178.
Sincerely,
Mindy Wallace
Planning Review Supervisor
Right-of-Way & Development Services
CC: Hawkins Company -Lance Evens
City of Meridian
COMPASS
ITD
Exhibit B- 9 -
E-MAIL FROM ITD REGARDING TIS
Bill-
I'm not going to get to sit at my desk this afternoon, so I will send you an e
mail from my phone instead and follow up with a formal letter if needed.
ITD is in receipt of the ACHD comments regarding this proposed development. We
agree with and support the comments from ACHD.
Thanks-
Pam
4. MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
Bill,
We have significant concerns with the requested access of this project out onto Highway 69 /Meridian
Road. From the Police Department, we would like to see no access points onto the 55 miles per hour
Highway 69 and all future interior access either directed towards Amity Road to the north or Harris Street to
the South. Access onto Amity allows drivers to cross Meridian Road at a signalized intersection. Access
onto Harris allows them to exit and enter through an already established location further back from the
intersection of Amity Road.
Further access points directly onto Highway 69 would be an increased roadway hazard for the other drivers
on Highway 69 that can be avoided through careful design and planning of this project. Even a normally
minor accident at low speeds can turn into a very serious and deadly accident at 55 miles per hour on
Highway 69.
Please add this comment for the Police Department to the variance application
Thank you,
G t. ,john A. O~r>erton
Community Services Division
Meridian Police Department
1401 E Watertower St.
Meridian, ID 83642
1-208-846-7300
overtoni (c~meridiancity.
5. MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT
Bill Parsons
Planner
We also have significant concerns with the requested access into this project from State Highway 69 /
Meridian Rd. The major concern is the requested left in from North bound Meridian Rd. This Highway
has heavy traffic traveling at 55 mph. We have some very serious accidents on this stretch of highway
when drivers have misjudged the speed of an approaching vehicle and attempted to cross on coming traffic.
Exhibit B- 10 -
Please add this comment for the Fire Department to the variance application.
Thank you,
Joseph P. Silva
Deputy Chief/ Fire Prevention
Meridian Fire Department
j silva(a),meridiancity.org
33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, ID 83642
(208) 888-1234 Office
(208)895-0390 Fax
Exhibit B- 11 -
C: Required Findings from the Unified Development Code (Variance)
The City Council shall apply the standards listed in Idaho Code 67-6516 and all the
findings listed in Section ll-SB-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:
Direct access to State Highway 69 is prohibited, per UDC 11-3H-4B. Staff finds that if the
City Council grants the requested variance to allow three accesses to Meridian Road, a
special privilege will be granted to the subject applicant that would not otherwise be
allowed for properties adjacent to a state highway.
B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site;
In this case, the applicant has options to facilitate access to/from other roadways. As
mentioned earlier, Harris Street and Amity Road provide opportunities for future access to
the subject site with a proposed collector/backage road that parallels Hwy 69/Meridian
Road and completes the connection between Amity Road and Harris Street. Staff believes
this roadway and future access points along the aforementioned roadways are sufficient
enough to accommodate the amount of future traffic generated by the proposed
development. Therefore, Staff finds that there are no undue hardships that would prevent
the applicant from developing the site restricting access to HWY 69/Meridian Road.
C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
Staff finds that allowing three accesses to State Highway 69 will be detrimental to the
public health, safety, and/or welfare by increasing the potential for accidents with vehicles
slowing down to turn into the site and exiting the site and merging with traffic travelling at
high rates of speed on the highway.
Exhibit C- 1 -