Email from Applicant RE Pathway to SouthFrom:Steve Bullock
To:Sonya Allen
Subject:RE: Costco CZC/DR
Date:Tuesday, February 25, 2020 8:58:48 AM
Attachments:image007.png
image013.png
External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments.
Thanks Sonya. Yes we did coordinate with the Gassers on the south pedestrian connection. I
will get you an updated Landscape Plan with that island planted.
Steve
Steve Bullock AICP
Senior Associate
MG2
Direct 206-962-6614
From: Sonya Allen <sallen@meridiancity.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 7:47 AM
To: Steve Bullock <Steve.Bullock@MG2.com>
Subject: FW: Costco CZC/DR
Thanks Steve.
Did you coordinate with the Developer to the south on the location of the pedestrian walkway as
proposed?
There is only one remaining item; see blue highlighted area below. If you’d like and you think it will
get done in the field, I can redline it and issue the CZC, up to you.
From: Steve Bullock <Steve.Bullock@MG2.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 7:36 AM
To: Sonya Allen <sallen@meridiancity.org>
Cc: Willie Mak <Willie.Mak@MG2.com>
Subject: RE: Costco CZC/DR
External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments.
Thanks for bearing with us Sonya. Attached are our responses to your requests below.
Steve
Steve Bullock AICP
Senior Associate
MG2
Direct 206-962-6614
From: Sonya Allen
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 3:01 PM
To: 'steve.bullock@mg2.com' <steve.bullock@mg2.com>
Subject: Costco CZC/DR
Hi Steve,
I’ve reviewed the plans submitted for the CZC/DR application. Please note the following and/or
revise the plans as follows:
The minimum street buffer widths required along Chinden & Ten Mile are 35’ measured from
back of curb; the buffer appears to be the correct width but there is a 25’ call-out (I realize
this is covered under the subdivision plat but the site plan should depict the correct width)
ok[Steve Bullock] Complete
Submit an electronic copy of the photometric report for site lighting & detail of lighting
proposed that complies with the standards in UDC 11-3A-11 (lighting should have an opaque
top to prevent uplighting & the bulb shall not be visible and have a full cutoff shield; light may
not trespass on abutting residential properties) – make any revisions necessary to comply
please send me a detail of the light fixtures to ensure compliance with UDC 11-3A-11; there is
a pole detail on the Photometry sheet but no light fixture detail.[Steve Bullock] We will
provide.[Steve Bullock] Provided
Where internal pedestrian walkways cross through vehicular areas, will the walkways be
scored concrete? If so, depict consistently on plans; if not, state how it complies with UDC 11-
3A-19A.4b. There still appears to be striping for walkways (see attached) – it would be good to
show this on both the site plan & landscape plan to avoid any future issues at the time of C of
O.[Steve Bullock] We were showing the ADA walkways as painted striping because we
wanted to differentiate between the ADA walkways that dead-end at the ADA stalls and the
pedestrian circulation paths that connect with the public circulation system out to the street
front. If you think that the ADA paths need to be the same as the other circulation paths we
will do that. No, it’s fine as-is (You’ve shown the pathway connections out to Chinden & Ten
Mile as scored concrete which meets UDC standards; the ADA walkways can be striped)[Steve
Bullock] Complete
Are pedestrian connections proposed to the residential development to the west and south
and if so, where? A pathway should be provided to south boundary across the landscape
buffer from the sidewalk on the east side of the building.[Steve Bullock] While we are willing
to allow for a connection to the E/W path on our south boundary we don’t know what their
site plan ultimately will be and where a logical place would be to connect to along that
boundary. So, we were intending to connect to the N/S sidewalk on the shared driveway that
their development would ultimately connect to. If we need to run a stub to our south
property line, show us where you want it the preference would be for the sidewalk on the
east side of the Costco Building to stub directly to the south for a direct connection to the
apartments – coordinate w/that developer on specific location please. [Steve Bullock]
Provided Or conversely allow them to install a connection when they develop we would be
okay with that. I don’t see a pathway to the west to the residential development except for
the pathway along Chinden, is that the connection proposed?[Steve Bullock] That is correct.
Our understanding was that was specifically addressed and memorialized in the DA with the
attached exhibit. I think the attached DA exhibit actually addresses both of these connections.
ok[Steve Bullock] Complete
Submit elevations with materials & height called-out for Costco building & fuel canopy
ok[Steve Bullock] Complete
A minimum 25’ wide buffer to residential uses is required along west boundary – the LP
appears to be correct but the site plan (SD101) appears to be below that [Steve Bullock] I
believe our plan is correct on this. ok[Steve Bullock] Complete
Are the buffers to residential uses depicted on this property or on the adjacent residential
properties? They’re required to be on this property per the DA (#5.1.7). Clearly depict/call-out
property lines of site. The 25’ buffer needs to be provided on the commercial property, not
the adjacent residential property as shown along the northern portion of the west
boundary[Steve Bullock] We are providing a 25’ buffer on the western edge of Costco’s
property adjacent to the warehouse and parking lot. During the DA review with the council,
the issue of providing screening for the shared NW driveway of the shopping center was
raised. Brighton, the Gassers and Costco proposed the 25’ landscape easement on the
Brighton property that would be installed by Costco and the Gassers to address the required
landscape buffer. The City Council was supportive of this. I could not find anything that
addressed it in the recorded DA. However, all the site and subdivision drawings have that NW
driveway located on the west property line. If we don’t provide the 25’ landscape buffer on
the Brighton property adjacent to that drive, where do you want us to provide it? It’s fine as-
is – the buffer on the Costco lot is on the C-G zoned property (the portion of the buffer
shown on the adjacent residential property to the north of Costco was originally agreed
upon by the Developers in that location at the time of approval)[Steve Bullock] Complete
Per the previous alternative compliance approval, wheel stops are required in compact spaces
adjacent to perpendicular planter islands – depict or include a note on the plan; and a planter
island (w/landscaping) needs to be added at the end of the parking stalls directly north of the
loading docks (SD101) [Steve Bullock] We will include a note that address our proposal to
widen the planters and use the associated raised curb to provide the required wheel stops.
The planter should have been added. My apologies. It will be added now. This wasn’t
added[Steve Bullock] Provided. Complete Landscape plan needs to be revised to include
landscaping (2 trees and vegetative groundcover) within the island north of the loading
docks.
Where on-street parking is provided or where vehicle circulation is directed in front of
building entries, integrate traffic calming strategies and techniques, such as landscape islands,
bulb outs, and/or detailed crosswalks, to increase safety and enhance the development
character. ok[Steve Bullock] Complete
I only have one of the LP sheets (L1.1) there are references to others; please submit all sheets
ok[Steve Bullock] Complete
If you have any questions, let me know.
Thanks,
Sonya Allen | Associate Planner
City of Meridian | Community Development Dept.
33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: 208-884-5533 | Fax: 208-489-0578
Built for Business, Designed for Living
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law.