LM 210221 CoM Alternative Compliance 120154
February 22, 2021
TLG Project No. 120085
Alan Tiefenbach via email: atiefenbach@meridiancity.org
Current Associate Planner
Community Development Department
City of Meridian
33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102
Meridian, ID 83642
RE: Request for Alternative Compliance
Scentsy Warehouse No. 4 | 2499 E. Pine Ave., Meridian, ID
Dear Mr. Tiefenbach:
This letter requests approval for alternative compliance for the Hickory Warehouse project relative to the
requirements of UDC 11-3A-19 “Structure and Site Design Standards”.
Background:
The Applicant has submitted materials for Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval for the Scentsy
Warehouse No. 4 project, a building to be constructed on a 11.747-ac parcel at 2499 E. Pine Ave. The
parcel is zoned “C-G”. The building will contain predominantly warehouse space but also provides open
office space accessed from public-facing building entries on the north façade. The truck loading dock area
of the building is oriented on the southern façade which faces E. Commercial Street (a private street) so
the building mass screens the docks from the adjacent public streets (E. Pine Ave to the north and the
future extension of S. Machine Ave. to the west).
To serve the open office and future photo/video studio uses in the north portion of the building, passenger
vehicle parking is proposed near these building entries and along the east perimeter of the property.
Reducing the amount of parking on the north (public street side) of the building and relocating this parking
to the south or east would cause it to be impractically far away from the office areas of the building, where
most people arriving to the building will enter.
Standards:
Per UDC 11-3A-19 “Structure and Site Design Standards”, for properties greater than 2-ac in size, no more
than fifty percent (50%) of the total off street parking area for the site shall be located between building
facades and abutting streets.
Alternative Compliance can be considered if “2) strict adherence to such standards would create
inconsistency in the design objectives of the proposed development”, in which case the Director may
consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions in section 11-5B-5.
Page 2 of 2
Per UDC 11-5B-5, the Alternative Compliance provisions provide for alternative means to meet the
intended purposes of certain design regulations when compliance is not feasible or the alternative means
are superior to what is required. The Director’s approval of alternative compliance is appropriate when
the overall design proposed by the Applicant meets or exceeds the requirements and is not detrimental
to public health, safety, and welfare.
UDC 11-5B-5 also requires that requests for Alternative Compliance be predicated on conditions where
“Safety considerations make alternative compliance desirable.”
Request for Alternative Compliance:
We request the Director’s approval of Alternative Compliance regarding the requirements of UDC 11-3A-
19, specifically to permit the Scentsy Warehouse No. 4 to locate more than fifty percent (50%) of the total
off street parking between the building facades and E. Pine Ave. Specifically, the project proposes 242
total off-street vehicle spaces with 201 (83%) located between the building and street. We encourage the
Director to approve this request on the basis of three factors:
1. The proposed building orientation is appropriate by locating the truck docks on the south, away
from the public streets. This provides opportunities on the street side for office space, enhances
wayfinding, greatly improves the architectural appeal from the public street, and allows for
greater landscaping.
2. The passenger vehicle parking areas are properly located to be convenient to the office areas of
the building where most visitors are expected to enter the building. Redistributing parking to the
south or east edges of the site so that no more than 50% of the parking is along the streets would
require placing 80 of the 201 vehicles much farther from the building entries.
3. The placement of passenger vehicle parking away from the truck loading is safer. Co-locating
parking with truck traffic increases the likelihood of collisions between vehicles. Further, parking
too near truck areas can result in pedestrians traversing truck areas when walking from their
vehicles to the building. As proposed, the orientation of truck and passenger vehicle parking in
separate areas enhances safety.
The proposed project design, as described in the context of these three factors, is superior to what is
required by UDC 11-3A-19, and is not detrimental to public health, safety or welfare.
Thank you for your attention to this application. Should you have questions, please don’t hesitate to
contact me via email (jason@thelandgroupinc.com) or phone at 208-803-1930.
Sincerely,
Jason Densmer, PE, Principal
The Land Group, Inc.