Loading...
Alternative Compliance Narrative (1-19-2021)ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tiefenbach FROM: David Blood (Speedy Quick) DATE: January 29, 2021 RE: Application No. CZC, DES A-2020-0135  Pursuant to § 11-5B-5 of Meridian City’s Unified Development Code (“UDC”), the applicant, Speedy Quick (“Applicant”), requests approval of its request for alternative compliance with the landscape buffer requirements of UDC § 11-3B-9, which refers to the buffer dimensions established in UDC Table 11-2B-3. The “Subject Property” is addressed as 2560 S. Meridian Road, in Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and is identified by the Ada County Assessor as tax parcel no. R9071450022. The Subject Property is 1.06 acres, and is zoned L-O by the City of Meridian. Pursuant to UDC Table 11-2B-3, a twenty foot (20’) wide landscape buffer is required from all adjacent residential uses. Additionally, pursuant to UDC 11-3B-8.C.1.b., the perimeter landscape buffer must be planted with trees at intervals of thirty-five feet (35’). The Applicant requests approval of its proposed alternative compliance for the width of the landscape buffer, but can and will comply with the tree planting requirement. The west property line of the Subject Property abuts S. Meridian Road, and the south property line abuts an existing veterinary clinic. The north and east property lines of the Subject Property are adjacent to residential uses, although both the north and east adjacent parcels have special circumstances that reduces the impact of the Applicant’s proposed alternative compliance mechanism on those properties: ▪ The parcel adjacent to the north (105 E. Rosalyn Dr. Meridian; parcel no. R2114050010) is 4.48 acres in size, through which the Kennedy Lateral runs from northwest to southeast, and only has one single-family home located in its northeastern corner, approximately 285’ from the closest point of the Subject Property; and ▪ The parcel adjacent to the east (S. Marlow Way, Meridian; parcel no R5148500030) is designated as a common area parcel within Larkspur No. 5 subdivision, through which the Kennedy Lateral also runs from northwest to southeast, with the closest residential structure being located approximately 95’ from the closest point of the Subject Property. Additionally, the Larkspur No. 5 subdivision’s common area parcel already has an existing six-foot (6’) vinyl fence running along the shared property line between the Subject Property and the Larkspur No. 5 subdivision’s common area parcel. Pursuant to UDC § 11-5B-5.B.2., at least one of several identified conditions must exist to qualify for approval of alternative compliance. In this case, the Subject Property qualifies because it has space limitations (see UDC § 11-5B-5.B.2.b.). Also, safety considerations make alternative compliance desirable (see UDC § 11-5B-5-B.2.c.). Additionally, as mentioned above, the residential properties adjacent to the Subject Property both have characteristics that limit the impact of the Applicant’s proposed alternative compliance mechanism. An application for alternative compliance must include: a. The specific requirements that are proposed to be modified; b. The reasons for the modification; and c. A demonstration of how the alternative means for compliance meets the requirements’ intended purpose. UDC § 11-5B-5.C.3.a.-c. Each of these requirements now is addressed: a. Specific Requirements Proposed for Modification. The specific requirement proposed for modification is the 20’ landscape buffer adjacent to the residentially-designated parcels to the north and east of the Subject Property. As alternative compliance, the Applicant proposes the installation of a 6’ tall vinyl fence along those areas of the property line that don’t already have an existing 6’ tall vinyl fence, which was installed by the adjacent Larkspur No. 5 subdivision on the edge of its common area lot. The proposed fence will match the Larkspur No. 5 subdivision’s existing 6’ vinyl fence. Additionally, the Applicant proposes to plant evergreen trees at 30’ intervals, instead of 35’ intervals, around the exterior landscaping of the Subject Property. b. Reasons for Modification. The proposed alternative compliance is due to the above-identified special circumstances that exist on both of the adjacent parcels that are designated as residential uses, and also due to constraints on the size and use and configuration of the Subject Property. The existing vinyl fence along the eastern border of the adjacent Larkspur No. 5 subdivision’s common area lot would make a 20’ or 25’ landscape buffer seem misplaced, as would the existing barbed wire fence and open lot north of the Subject Property. Additionally, a landscape buffer, absent a fence, would be insufficient to sightscreen the parking and uses located on the Subject Property from adjacent properties that are designated as residential. c. Alternative Compliance Meets the Requirements’ Intended Purpose. The intended purposes of the landscaping requirements contained in the URD include “to promote landscaping... that will improve community livability, preserve the quality of life, and enhance the aesthetic quality, economic viability, and environmental health of the city.” URD. § 11-3B-1.A. Additionally, the URD provides that it seeks to achieve a balance between the right of individuals to develop and maintain their property in a manner they prefer and the rights of city residents to live, work, shop, and recreate in pleasant, healthy, and attractive surroundings.” URD § 11-3B-1.C. The alternative compliance proposed by the Applicant will meet (and exceed) the requirements’ intended purpose by improving livability, preserving the quality of life of the adjacent residentially-designated parcels, and enhancing the aesthetic quality of the city. In particular, the 6’ vinyl fence proposed by the applicant will match the existing vinyl fence on the adjacent common area lot of the Larkspur No. 5 subdivision, which style of fencing is used throughout the adjacent Larkspur No. 5 subdivision. The installation of matching fencing, in addition to sight-screening the parking and use of the Subject Property from the view of the adjacent residentially-designated properties, will create a cohesive neighborhood aesthetic. Together with the Applicant’s proposal to shorten the intervals between coniferous trees along the Subject Property’s shared boundary with the adjacent residentially-designated properties, the proposed alternative compliance proposed by the Applicant achieves the balance that the URD seeks to achieve. Based on the foregoing, the Applicant respectfully requests approval of its proposed alternative compliance. Please contact me with any questions or concern. Sincerely, David Blood, of the Applicant, Speedy Quick Enclosure(s): Landscape Plan