Knightsky Estates VAR-13-001CITY OF MERH)IAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
AND
DECISION & ORDER
(j~~E IDR IAN
~J
In the Matter of Variance to Allow aRight-in/Right-out Only Access to SH 20/26 for Knightslry
Estates, Located on the Southwest Corner of Chinden Boulevard and N. Linder Road, by Iron
Mountain Real Estate Inc.
Case No(s). VAR-13-001
For the City Council Hearing Date of: Apri12,16 and 23, 2013 (Findings on May 7, 2013)
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri123, 2013, incorporated by
reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri123, 2013, incorporated by
reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 23, 2013,
incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing
date of Apri123, 2013, incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (LC. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at
Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by
ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of
Meridian, which was adopted April 19, 2011, Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA.
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose
expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). VAR-13-001
-1-
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be
signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the
Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA 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 Apri123, 2013.
D. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, denial of a development
application entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in
writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the
final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will
toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed.
2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian.
When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521, any affected person being a person
who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the
governing board may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order
seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code.
E. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of April 23, 2013
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). VAR-13-001
-2-
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of
2013.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BRAD HOAGLUN VOTED
COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED
MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD
(TIE BREAKER)
VOTED
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
Attest:
Jaycee Holman, City Clerk
Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney.
By:
City Clerk's Office
Dated:
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). VAR-13-001
-3-
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~~ day of ,
2013.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BRAD HOAGLUN VOTED~O~-~
COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED_C~I,~~
COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED
COUNCIL, MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED~~~
MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED
(TIE BREAKER)
Mayor Ta de Weerd
~¢p,~~~n wu~Usr
44 ?
Attest:
$GO
,G
w
City of
ILR ~~..,
` IDAHO
aycee o man, City Clerk ~, SEAL
~
`F~ @
TFR °~the T0.E AS`AE
Copy served upon Applicant, The Plamm~ epartment, Public Works Department and City Attorney.
By: ~ Dated:~'~ -
City Clerk's Office ~ ~„~`
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). VAR-13-001
-3-
EXHIBIT A
STAFF REPORT
Hearing Date:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
April 23, 2013
(Continued from April 2 and 16, 2013)
Mayor and City Council
Bill Parsons, Associate City Planner
(208) 884-5533
VAR-13-001 - Knightslcy Estates Access Variance
~E IDIZ IAN~-
~J
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Iron Mountain Real Estate Inc., is requesting approval of a variance to allow aright-
in/right-out access point to SH 20/26 (Chinden Boulevard). The applicant has submitted a concept
plan depicting the proposed vehicular access point location (see Sections 7, 8 and 9 for further
analysis). NOTE: The proposed concept plan is for illustrative purposes only and does not constitute
approval from the Planning Division.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff finds that the subject property has access to Linder Road, it is not consistent with the draft U.S.
20/26 Access Management Plan, the request for access to a state highway is not consistent with
policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan, and it does not meet the findings criteria required in
the UDC for the City Council to grant a variance (see Exhibit B for the required variance findings).
Staff recommends denial of the subject variance application for the reasons stated herein.
NOTE: ITD recently changed their access spacing policy contained in IDAPA Rule 39, Title 3,
Chapter 42, and the proposed driveway appears to meet the new IDAPA rule for access location. The
itv Council heard this item on April 2. 16 and 23.2013. At the public hearinn. the
ouncil approved the subject VAR request
~_ Summary of City Council Public Hearin:
L In favor: Ken t Brown, Tom Dater, Jeremy~ular, Dnn Knickrehm, Kevin Amar.
Shawn Nick el
11. In onnosition : None
jji, Commenting : Mike Reich (neutrall
jy. Written testi mony: Dave S Inzett
y, Staff oresenti n~ annlication: Bill Parsons
yi: Other staff co mmenting on annlication: Caleb Hood
1L Key Issues of Dis cussion by Council:
1: Providing tra ffic calming t the wec h~undarv he een the commercial nronerty
and the S~ pg halle ge Subdivision.
11. Restricting th e access at the west boundary v.
jji: Was adeguat p right-of way~nrecerved to accommodate the decal lane and future
expansion of SH 20/26.
lY. Providing ad
pro
osed acc e uate safety measures (decal lane and center medianl for the
ess point
~_ p
Key Council Cha .
nges to Staff Recommendation
i. The Council overturned Staff s recommendation for denial. See Findinn~s attached
in Exhibit B. In the Council's motion. it was emphasized that the applicant work
with ITD to c onstruct a center median and work with the Spurwin~ Challenge and_and
the Fire Depa rtment on ap.RrQnriate traffic calming along the west boundary.
Knightsky Estates VAR-13-001 PAGE 1
EXHIBIT A
3. PROPOSED MOTIONS
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny File Number VAR-13-001
as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of Apri123, 2013, 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-13-
001 to the hearing date of (date certain) for the following reason(s): (you should state specific
reason(s) for continuance.)
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Number VAR-13-
001 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 23, 2013, for the following reason(s):
(insert basis for approval here). 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 of N. Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard
b. Owner:
Sea 2 Sea
827 E. Riverside Drive
Eagle, ID 83616
c. Applicant:
Iron Mountain Real Estate Inc.
3681 N. Locust Grove Road Suite #100
Meridian, ID 83646
d. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant's narrative for this information.
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application is for variance. A public hearing is required before the City Council on
this matter, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 1 1, Chapter 5.
b. Newspaper notifications published on: March 11 and 25, 2013
c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: March 8, 2013
d. Applicant posted notice on site by: March 16, 2013
6. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): The site is being used for agricultural purposes.
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: The area is rapidly transitioning with urban
development. Residential uses abut the west and north boundary of the development. To the east
and south of the site is developed or vacant commercial property.
Knightsky Estates VAR-13-001 PAGE 2
EXHIBIT A
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Brandt Subdivision; rural residential dwellings, zoned RUT (Ada County)
2. East: Commercial development, zoned C-3 (City of Eagle)
3. South: Vacant commercial property, zoned C-N and C-G
4. West: Spurwing Challenge Subdivision; single-family home sites, zoned R-8
d. History of Previous Actions:
• In 2006, the property, a.k.a. Knightsky Estates, was granted Annexation and Zoning (AZ-06-
005) approval by City Council with R-4, TN-C, and C-C zoning districts. A Development
Agreement (DA) was approved with the annexation (Instrument No. 106122365). A
preliminary plat (PP-06-004) was approved concurrently with annexation of the property for
126 residential lots (24 townhouse lots and 102 detached single-family lots), 7 commercial
lots, and 26 common other lots on 55.83 acres of land. Private streets (PS-06-004) were also
approved in specific locations within the development.
• On February 10, 2009, a development agreement modification (MDA-08-008) was approved
by City Council that tied both commercial, single family residential and townhomes
elevations to the recorded development agreement. The subsequent development agreement
was recorded as instrument #109082037.
In 2011, a portion of the property was rezoned (RZ-11-006) from the TN-C and R-4 zones to
the R-8 and C-C zones. The R-8 portion of the property was sold off and is currently
developing as a 9-hole executive golf course and estate lot subdivision known as the
Spurwing Challenge Subdivision. The R-8 portion of the property was removed from the
original development agreement and subject to a new one (MDA-11-O1 l). The remnant 9.34
acre piece is partially developed and is the subject of the proposed variance application. This
portion of the property is still governed by the previous recorded development agreements
and requires a development agreement modification prior to moving forward with the
development of the property.
7. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
The following UDC section is pertinent to this application (staff analysis in italics):
• 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. The
agricultural use existed on the site with the annexation of the property. Although commercial
zoning is approved for the site, development of the site has not commenced nor is it approved
with the subject application. The submitted concept plan depicts how the property may
redevelop in the future. Therefore this requirement is not applicable.
b. The nature of the use does not change (for example a residential use to a commercial
use). The applicant is proposing a substantial change of use of this site from
agricultural to a mix of neighborhood commercial uses (e.g. retail, office, drive-
through and restaurants).Staff finds the nature of the use is dramatically d~erent
than the current use of the property.
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).
Knightsky Estates VAR-13-001 PAGE 3
EXHIBIT A
The use on the site will significantly increase from agricultural to approximately
45, 000 square feet of commercial.
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. Although not
constructed, the subdivision (Spurwing Challenge Subdivision) to the west is required
to stub a public local street to this property consistent with the UDC.
b. Public street connections to the state highway shall only be allowed at:
i. The section line road; and
With the approval of the Knightsky Estates Subdivision, ACHD approved a
public street access to Linder Road. The submitted concept plan also depicts an
access to Linder Road.
ii. The half-mile mark between section line roads. These half-mile connecting
streets shall be collector roads.
A public street is planned to stub to the subject property at the west boundary.
The planned roadway connects to an internal street network under construction
with the Spurwing Challenge Subdivision that provides connectivity to Chinden
Boulevard at the half mile.
3. The applicant shall construct a street, generally paralleling the state highway, to
provide future connectivity and access to all properties fronting the state highway
that lie between the applicant's property and the nearest section line road and/or half-
mile collector road. The applicant has submitted a concept plan that depicts a
commercial drive aisle the parallels the state highway and ties into the street network
approved with the Spurwing Challenge Subdivision.
8. COMPREIiENSIVE PLAN
The preservation of the SH 20/26 Corridor is one of the City's top priorities. The U.S. 20/26 Corridor
Preservation Study, (ITD and Compass, ongoing,) identify preferred roadway configurations and
recommend safety improvements to these high-volume and high-speed facilities. The City supports
access management, congestion mitigation improvements and the beautification of the corridor called
for in the study. Further, staff is of the opinion that the following objectives and goals from the
Comprehensive Plan are applicable to the proposed variance request:
Knightsky Estates VAR-13-001 PAGE 4
EXHIBIT A
• 3.03.02G -Consider the adopted COMPASS regional long-range transportation plan in all
land use decisions.
This plan recommends limiting access to the roadways to maintain mobility through the
corridor. The proposed access point could hinder mobility in the area.
• 3.03.02E -Encourage and promote the preservation and expansion of Chinden Boulevard
(US 20/26) by ITD.
Since the ordinance restricts access to SH2O/26, the City envisions limited access along the
Chinden Corridor. Restricting access to this roadway supports the recommendation in the
Corridor Preservation Study.
• 3.03.02N -Reduce the number of access points onto arterial streets by using methods such as
cross access agreements, access management and frontage/backage roads.
The UDC restricts access to the SH2O/26. Once development is proposed for the site, the
applicant will have to construct a backage road/commercial driveway that connects with the
planned street network approved with the Spurwing Challenge Subdivision to the west and
Linder Road to the east.
9. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis Leading to Staff Recommendation
VAR: The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to allow aright-in/right-out access point
to SH 20/26 for a commercial development. The proposed access is located approximately 500
feet west of the of Linder/Chinden signalized intersection. For illustrative purposes, the applicant
has submitted a concept plan depicting a neighborhood commercial development and additional
access points to the development.
UDC 11-3H-4B, regulates the standards for access to SH 20/26. Because the use of the site is
proposed to change from agricultural to a neighborhood commercial development, access is
restricted to the state highway. The owner of the site shall acquire access to a street other than the
state highway. As mentioned above, ACHD approved an access point to Linder Road and the
subdivision currently under construction to the west is required to provide local street access to
the property. The approved street network parallels SH 20/26 and connects to N. Long Lake Way;
a signalized intersection at the half-mile, which is consistent with the UDC and the
Comprehensive Plan. If the property develops with small scale neighborhood commercial
development as shown on the concept plan, staff believes these roadways and the access to Linder
Road should be sufficient to accommodate the amount of future traffic generated by the proposed
development.
The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) has submitted comments on the variance application.
The proposed access point meets the District policies for granting approval of the proposed access
however, the approval has not been granted because the proposed access violates City ordinance.
ITD has not indicated what site improvements or safety measures would be required with the
construction of the access point. A copy of the letter from ITD is attached as Exhibit.A.4.
Although ITD states the proposed access point meets District policy, the City still retains the
authority to restrict access into the site from the state highway.
In order to grant a variance, the Council needs to make the following findings:
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;
Knightsky Estates VAR-13-001 PAGE 5
EXHIBIT A
3. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
Staff is of the opinion 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. Both the commercial
property to the south and the residential subdivision to the west of this property have restricted
access at the half-mile mark. Further, the ten (10) acre parcel on the southwest corner of
Linder/Chinden was denied access to Chinden Boulevard. With development of the site, a
backage road/commercial driveway will be required that connects to Linder Road and the
residential subdivision to the west in accord with the UDC.
Since future access can be facilitated from Linder Road, a future commercial driveway and the
road network approved with the Spurwing Challenge Subdivision, staff is of the opinion there are
no site characteristics that create an undue hardship.
Staff is of the opinion granting the subject variance could be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or welfare by increasing the hazards associated with vehicles entering/exiting the site and
merging with traffic travelling at high rates of speed on Chinden Boulevard.
Staff finds that the subject property has access to Linder Road and from the property to the west
and does not need access to SH 20/26; the driveway location is not consistent with the draft U.S.
20/26 Access Management Plan; the request for access to a state highway is not consistent with
policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan; and the proposal does not meet the findings
criteria required in the UDC for the City Council to grant a variance. Staff recommends denial
of the subject variance application for the reasons stated herein. (see Exhibit B for required
variance findings).
8. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity/Zoning Map
2. Conceptual Site Plan Depicting the Proposed Access Point
3. Applicant's Narrative
4. ITD Comments
B. Required Findings from the Unified Development Code
Knightsky Estates VAR-13-001 PAGE 6
EXHIBIT A
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity/Zoning
W 9'r:
a
Exhibit A -1-
EXHIBIT A
Exhibit A -2-
2. Conceptual Site Plan (Proposed Access Point to Chinden Boulevard)
EXHIBIT A
3. Applicant's Narrative
KENT BROWN PLANNING SERVICES
Febetasry 2ti, 2013
Meridian City
P4uueing Depatnaeeat
33 E Broadway Ave
Meridian id x3642
RE: Vaauiaaoe ~9~ t~eu u~3tf-4~.2 b Cirladeu slue (HyNY2~Z6)
near Nlaeming Staff:
Iron Moumain Red Estde lirc. is eogarasting a varWeoe from the City of the Meeidiaa lirdfaero pevelopment
Cade Se:ctiao I1-3H- 4.8.2. We era proposing a Right-MdRi~IR-art aocass poim approxiniamely S00 feet wwt of
I3. [.iaeedar Raad b Chiadrm Blvd (Plarse sae attached dravring). This sccass b t~ahrdar Blvd ie seciairod b
achieve a suocessfiet ooenroercid dcve{uparwt an the rroedravest comer of W. Chinden Blwl and N. Linder Road
(wieich is aarod fa Careuera~cial Uavelaprrent}
Glrereratly there era three Sprrwia; deveiopmartx Spurring Courpry Aub/goM' oaurse, tiaganga, snd Olive
Tree at Spwtawietg, herewl<er eetar+ed b as Spurwng de+elapes~art/s. Spurwirrg devekapnrrots aitmm~dy have ottEy
ores access point b t~fiarden Blvd, and sera microdanagancy seacas as the far wvet aide etthe Ievdopmeat.
Whey the Spurw'sag devraloptna~t is completed the rosin access wig be nrovd b long lake Rod. A1kr ells
eertraioe is dwoged the okt sertaanoe will beoorae a socaed miadmneipency axes. Our proposed access b
t~a§adan Bh+d vwouid pe+uvide (seeaerdary) axes tar enreegesrcy sa~vwaa b eespond b Sparwiug drrdapeAai6~
The proposed axes b Clei<rdan Blvd is also critical far ar davebpmart ~ as eax~orwy ssevicas areas and
far a viable Camrtrorcial Devdopaant at thin site.
The three a7iseriar tar a variance are audiaed below arc! slaw that as approval of tla rogaest k
with p~ taPp~. t~~ no negative on ad~borirag p'roP~9 owteara ht the near
vicinity, and helps b peotxt rite baabh, safety and wdfae tar the residents b the sees.
The Vaeiaaee Ball s-et pat a t1~q or sPeelai parlvYegc toil i, not etbserrise aNawei h the dioict.
Grarantly dre:ae sre bode Frill, and lti~t-iJRigMc-oat access Pointy ~aaing aloes Chinda- Bk! (t~It+Y202f}.
Our raqueaeod axes point is aoooptahie b ffl) under dte'v saw gerideliers foe saxes.
The Vaeiaace sdMvw ssr saaacdae hasuWip bamss oldie eiNruetesislks ettlas sMs.
The closest exlstirag seaarcbry aooaa b our developeaeat is the Spuawianj davalopsnseq, which is
approxirartaely 1?00 heat west of this propeety. To deny this eras ba a restive ~ en our prapasd
tacrurra+aial devebpment and the Spwrwing developerraat„ especidly rite t':hailaye poetinn.
The vasrlasee sbala not be dNrbeeaW b riser l besdda, safey' sad welters.
This rid1K-in and riglk-out acoass an Chindae Bh~d provides Five sad other auagdwy aavioa~ erg inprovad
acasa b this oomroartcid davdopaoart, and a sooondsry aooes b the Sparwing devdopneaM. CI'D bas given
preliminary approval (see attached beta) of drs lii~-idRiglrt-out, paring Maidlsn CiRy'a s~ppeoval
8161 E. Sprirpwood Dr • itAsaridian, kidro 93642 • Tel.: 209-071.6842
M ooe-cbtsian the economic beeeelits of dav~eloQing dtna ooeattiencial property Rr outv~gir owing this
undeveloped witiwut atxeas b W. C3tindde Blvd. 1 am asking thm • right-ia and right-out access b W. Qaindat
Blvd be gaued for this property. Thank you far y~ ooreideratian.
S'
Kart Pianrra~
Exhibit A -3-
EXHIBIT A
4. ITD Comments
-aAH~ tbAliO TRANSPORTATION QEPARTMIsNT
P.d. Box 8028 208
* * Boise> fD 83707-2028 t itd9datto.go~v
~~ ~
$ 4~
l~Troa Rrr
February 4, 2013
Bill Parsons
Meridian Planning
33 East. Idaho Avenue
Meridian,. Idaho 83642
~`IA EMAIL
Re: US ZO-26 Access to the I~Iorth~rest Comer of Linder Road and Chinden Bankvard
The Idaho Transportation Bepartsnent has mewed an encroachment application for a new
private street approach to US 20-26 (Chinden Boulevard) approximately 500-R west of Linder
Road.. The proposed site plan is attached.
FTD has received the application, the site plan, a traffic analysis and the processing fee. The
application is still incomplete because we bout not received a copy of the deed, showing that
the applicant controls the subject property. The app&cant is kon Moumain Real Estate Inc.
The ITD Board recently changed the approach separation standards. The proposed location
and the submitted traffic analysis appear to meet the newest Idaho Transportation Department
policies. The separation distance surpasses the minimo~un requirements and the. applicant
proposed the approach forright-ia/right-out operation. TTD has not. processed the application
because the proposed approach ~~iolates City of Meridian policy.
If you have any questions, you may contact Matt Ward at 3348341 or me at 334-8377.
Sincerely,
~~µk
Dave Szplett
Developrtyent Services Manager
dave_szplett~!itd_daho_srov
CC: Kent Brawn
Exhibit A -5-
EXHIBIT A
B: 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 11-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 20/26 is prohibited, per UDC 11-3H-4B 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-wav is in place to mitieate the proposed access point. Based on
the documentation from ITD and public testimony presented at the public hearing. Council
finds grantin t~quested variance to allow right-in/right-out access to SH 20/26 does
not ar~pecial privilege that is not otherwise allowed for properties adiacent to a state
highway.
TTY
B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site;
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 adiacent residential subdivision. Therefore, Council
finds that there i~ an undue hardship that would prevent the applicant from
developing the site in accord with UDC 11-3H-4B.
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 20/26 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 su port the prosed access oint.
^~ *'~° '~~~-'~~~•°-~ rth r ITD has stated that the necessary right-of--wav 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/ri~ht-out ac
Exhibit B -1-