Knighthill Center VAR-13-002CITY OF MERIDIAN E IDIAN~--
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ~
AND I D A N 4
DECISION & ORDER
In the Matter of Variance to Allow aRight-in/Right-out Only Access to SH 20/26 for the Knighthill,
Development Located on the Southwest Corner of Chinden Boulevard and N. Linder Road, by
James Wylie
Case No(s). VAR-13-002
For the City Council Hearing Date of: May 28 and June 4, 2013 (Findings on June 18, 2013)
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of June 4, 2013, incorporated by
reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of June 4, 2013, incorporated by
reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of June 4, 2013,
incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing
date of June 4, 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 (I.C. §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-13-002
-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 on the hearing date of June 4, 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 June 4, 2013
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). VAR-13-002
-2-
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~~ day of ,
2013.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BRAD HOAGLUN
COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT CHARLIE ROUNTREE
COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA
COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD
MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD
(TIE BREAKER)
Attest:
Clty
Copy served upon Applicant, The
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
~~
VOTED
f f / / ,/
Mayor Tim de Weerd
C` ,i~;y Li?AU~;,s,,,
l.!
o~,
City of
~ ~ I~~AN#--
"~ acawaio
~~ g~~
~~ ~`i.i.tia ,
`F
r';.
inin ~ _a~ ``` ,Public Works Department and City Attorney.
B - Dated: (~ ° ~ ~ • 13
City ler~C' .affice
,,.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). VAR-l 3-002
-3-
EXHIBIT A
STAFF REPORT
HEARING DATE: June 4, 2013 E IDIAN~
(Continued from May 28, 2013) 1 D A H Q
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Bill Parsons, Associate City Planner
(208) 884-5533
SUBJECT: VAR-13-002 - Knighthill Center Variance
1. SUMMARY DESCRIl'TION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, James Wylie, is requesting approval of a variance to allow aright-in/right-out access
point to SH 20/26. The applicant has submitted a concept plan depicting the proposed access 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 N. Linder Road, N. Gertie Place and W. Everest
Lane. Further, the proposed access 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 Meridian City
Council heard this item on June 4, 2013. At the public hearing; the Council approved the
subject VAR reauest.
g, , umm arv of Ci C ouncil Public Hearing:
L In favor: Renn v Wylie
11: In opposition: None
11L C ommenting: Dave Sz lRett (neutrals Dan ThomlZ.nn, Brian Greber
iY. W ritten testim ony: None
y, , taff presentin g application: Bill Parsons
yi. O ther staff com menting on application: Bill Narv
1L. ICY I ssues of Discu ssion by Council:
~ M itiga inn mea sure fnr the ~pQsed access.
14 I TD's new acc ess management policies.
111: P roviding an a menity within the commercial development.
g, Key Council Chan ges to Staff Recommendation
~ ~,' nnnril nvartn rnvrl etaff~a rPrnmmenriatinn fnr denial_ See Findings attached iri
e Council's motion. it was emphasized that the center median and
eceleration w ould need to be completed prior to the issuance of anv building
3. PROPOSED MOTIONS
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny File Number VAR-13-002
as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 4, 2013, for the following reasons: (you
should state specific reasons for denial.)
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - t -
EXHIBIT A
Continuance
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number VAR-03-
002 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-
13-002, as presented in Staff Report for the hearing date of June 4, 2013, with the following
modifications: (add any proposed modifications).
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location: Southwest corner of W. Chinden Boulevard and N. Linder Road
NE '/a, NE '/4, Section 26, T4N R1 W
b. Owner/Applicant:
James Wylie
1676 N. Clarendon Way
Eagle, Idaho 83616
c. Applicant's Statement/Justification: See applicant's narrative attached in Exhibit A.
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: May 6 and 20, 2013
c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: May 2, 2013
d. Applicant posted notice on site by: May 21, 2013
6. LAND USE
A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: The subject site is vacant commercial land, zoned C-G.
B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: The subject site is located on
the intersection of Linder Road and Chinden Boulevard. There is a mix of office, commercial and
residential uses that are planned for and exist in the area.
1. North: Knight Sky Estates, zoned C-C
2. East: Vacant land, zoned RUT (Ada County)
3. South: Lochsa Falls No. 11, zoned R-4.
4. West: Lochsa Falls No. 12, zoned R-4, C-N, and L-O
C. History of Previous Actions: In 2006, the site was annexed (AZ-06-006) and preliminarily
platted (PP-06-005) with 4 commercial lots and one common lot. A Development Agreement
(instrument #106122368) was approved by City Council on July 5, 2006. The concept plan was
approved with no direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard.
In 2008, the applicant proposed a new concept plan and preliminary plat (5 commercial lots and 1
common lot) which the City Council approved. Concurrently, a development agreement
modification was also approved that removed the previous concept plan and attached a new
concept plan with additional DA provisions. One of proposed DA provisions required the
applicant set aside 100' of right-of way for the future expansion of SH 20/26 and neither concept
plan proposed direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard. The amended DA was never signed and the
applicant elected not to seek a time extension for the plat application; the 2006 development
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 2 -
EXHIBIT A
agreement remains in effect for the subject property.
In 2009, Council denied an access variance to Chinden Boulevard for this property.
D. Access: The subject site has been approved with three separate access points from (2) public
streets and (1) private street; N. Linder Road to the east , N. Gertie Place from the south and W.
Everest Lane to the west. In addition, W. Everest Lane parallels SH 20/26 and connects to N.
Long Lake Way. The N. Long Lake Way and Chinden Boulevard intersection is a signalized
intersection at the half-mile consistent with the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan.
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 use has not
been approved for the subject project. Therefore this requirement does not apply.
b. The nature of the use does not change (for example a residential use to a commercial
use). Because this site has been approved and zoned for approximately 11 D, 000
square foot of commercial development, staff believes the nature of the use will
increase significantly.
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 vacant land to
commercial property with approximately 110,000 square feet of 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.
Staff is not aware of any deeded access to this property. In addition, the site has been
approved for commercial uses, therefore access to SH 20/26 shall be restricted per
the UDC. With the previous approvals (Preliminary Plat, DA, and Concept Plan);
direct lot access was not proposed or approved.
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 20/26 exists at Linder Road, a section line road.
This will most likely be the primary entrance into the site and is located
approximately 600 feet from the intersection.
ii. The half-mile mark between section line roads. These half-mile connecting
streets shall be collector roads.
As mentioned earlier, W. Everest Lane (private street) parallels SH 20/26 and
connects to N. Long Lake Way (designated a collector) which is a signalized
intersection at the half-mile consistent with the UDC. West Everest Lane is
currently stubbed at the western property boundary and a cross access
agreement has been recorded granting this property access.
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 3 -
EXHIBIT A
8. COMPREHENSIVE 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:
• 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. COMPASS has identified this intersection as a high volume intersection. Staff
believes adding an access point to SH2O/26 that close to the intersection may negatively
impact traffic mobility on SH2O/26 and interfere with future roadway expansions planned for
the intersection.
3.03.02E -Encourage and promote the preservation and expansion of Chinden Boulevard
(US 20/26) by ITD.
Because City 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. Further, 70 feet of ROW has been dedicated to ITD along the
frontage of this property.
• 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 SH 20/26. West Everest Lane is currently stubbed at the
western property boundary and a cross access agreement has been recorded granting this
property access. Further, future development has access to N. Linder Road and N. Genie
Place. Staff believes the site is adequately served by the three (3) access points.
9. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis Leading to Staff Recommendation
Staff has provided analysis below regarding the proposed application.
VARIANCE APPLICATION: The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to allow one
right-in/right-out access point to SH 20/26 for a commercial development. The proposed access is
located approximately 725 feet west of the of the Linder/Chinden signalized intersection. For
illustrative purposes, the applicant has submitted a concept plan depicting a neighborhood
commercial development and the proposed Chinden Boulevard access point to the development.
The original concept plan attached as Exhibit A.2 did not have direct lot access to Chinden
Boulevard. Because this new concept plan differs from the previous approvals, the applicant
will have to submit for a new preliminary plat and development agreement modification iJthe
subject variance request is approved by Council.
In 2009, ITD supported the City's ordinance and denied the proposed access point. Since that
time, ITD has taken a different approach. ITD's original denial was based on their previous
mission statement that focused on efficiency and operations of the existing road network. As
other developers have come forward seeking access to state facilities, ITD's administration
encouraged a change in their mission to increase emphasis on economic development. The
applicant was required to submit an economic analysis and a new traffic study to justify the new
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 4 -
EXHIBIT A
approach. Based on those submittals, ITD has approved the applicant's encroachment permit to
access SH 20/26 and ROW reduction. Even though the proposed access and reduced ROW
appear to meet Department policies, ITD has not indicated what site improvements or safety
measures would be required with the construction of the access point.
Staff is concerned that ITD has not considered the Linder/Chinden intersection design into their
approval. The draft access management plan for SH 20/26 Corridor has identified this intersection
as a high volume intersection. Staff believes adding an access point to SH 20/26 that close to the
intersection would impact the traffic mobility on SH 20/26 and interfere with future roadway
expansions planned for the intersection. A copy of the letter from ITD is attached as Exhibit B.
UDC 11-3H-4B, regulates the standards for access to SH 20/26. Because the use of the site is
proposed to change from vacant land to a commercial development, access is restricted from the
state highway; the owner of the site shall acquire access to a street other than the state highway.
As mentioned earlier, Linder Road, Gertie Place and Everest Lane provide opportunities for
access to the subject site. In addition, Everest Lane 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. Staff believes these roadways are sufficient to accommodate the amount of
future traffic generated by the proposed development.
Although ITD has approved the location for an access point, the City still retains the authority to
restrict access to the site from the state highway. Further, the Development Agreement approved
for this property by both the applicant and Council when it annexed, runs with the land and
prohibits access. The basis of the UDC code section is to restrict access to Chinden Boulevard in
order to avoid creating similar access issues that currently impact Eagle Road.
In order 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 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. Recently, Council approved
a variance request north of this property. Physical constraints due to the topography in the area
and the lack of interconnectivity with existing county development, were deciding factors for
granting the approval. In 2009, Council denied the same variance request because the site is
served from two (2) public streets and one private street consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
and the UDC. These access points provide sufficient access to and from the subject property from
the adjacent roadway network. Further, the approved development agreement restricts access to
Chinden Boulevard via the concept plan.
Because future access can be facilitated from the aforementioned roadways, staff is of the opinion
there are no site characteristics that create an undue hardship.
Further, 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. This
intersection is classified as a high volume intersection and adding an access point to SH 20/26
that close to the intersection could impact traffic mobility on SH 20/26 and interfere with future
roadway expansions planned for the intersection. Although ITD has stated they will ensure that
the decal lane will remain intact with the design of the intersection, there are no specific plans for
the intersection design or specified safety measures for the construction of the access.
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 5 -
EXHIBIT A
Because the subject property has multiple accesses, and the driveway location is not consistent
with the draft U.S. 20/26 Access Management Plan, and 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 approval of the
variance.
Based on Staff's analysis above and the Variance Findings, Staff is recommending denial of the
Variance application (see Exhibit C for required variance findings).
10. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. Vicinity/Zoning Map
2. Approved Concept Plan
3. Conceptual Site Plan Depicting Proposed Access to SH 20/26
4. Applicant's Narrative
B. Agency Comments
1. Idaho Department of Transportation
C. Required Findings from the Unified Development Code
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 6 -
EXHIBIT A
]. Vicinity Map
n ~- a ¢ a c_a~.rr. n ~ ~ _ _ ~ ~I / ~ __ _ - -......_ _.. I
T .a- n-~..-.a u n ~r a n y cr n n Tn n rr u n
i ~
~ ~ w'
_~ 4R1~
I
a ~NDT -
m - ~~
R-4 Z I
- _, . "'
i"" ~_ --- ia' RUT
.~
_: ~'
__ _.
c-c SITE
TN-C I
_.. _...~ -CHINDEN -BLVD--____-.--. C_Cj _. ,u-1~ iJ LL-1--L-L W .U.L•_L m S G-IF m.T
~ , . ~,
_~,- ,I ~-O C-N
f ' W EVEREST LN i
1 ~~~ VK ~QLl~DER.-Bd,R DiR I ~(~~~,~ ~~~,.
I .
I 1 ( I •i - i ,,,
- --
~ T.
~,
~'
~ ,~ ~ _ ! . ~ -1- -I~ ~ ,.' ~ RUT
~- i
~"ET~N_I?R ~ ~ ! ~ 1 ~ ' ' ~
~.
r _ _
i 1 ~ ~ ~ i ~
~~ ~~~
TANCiQ~CJ3EEK DR_ ~ i_1 ~, `' j:
_~_
~ ~ ,~ .~, r
~ ~ _~ ~ ~
A ~4 ~\ / 1
~ ~- - ~ ~ ~
_ -r--- T '~. f - J
i
__
!_ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ,> ~ 1M1!r (~LA[~E CREE14 ~~ `1 ~ IAS.A~L~S_
W GLAI~~
'i i _ CREEIK._~T a ~ ~ ~- ~1 ~ ~~, ~~- r ._ I ~ ~ ~ ' -- - - _! MALI BARRYwI~? ~` !
R~ ~~.
_~ f ~; ~ ~ _ j ~ _..
- -
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 6 -
EXHIBIT A
2. Approved Concept Plan
___ .._~w
CHINDEN ELVD.
0
a
0
w
0
z
J
W. EVEREST LANE
Knighthill Center VAR-]3-002 - 7 -
EXHIBIT A
3. Conceptual Site Plan Depicting Proposed Access to SH 20/26
>n~
CHfNDEN BLVD. (US 20/26]
_ _ _ _ 58738'47'E ~~-~.__ 65t.49' _._. _..__...._____________.__._
.. - _. ~ 9 F1 CONOAETf PALM -.._ . ~_ _ . __,_ , __ .. -, .~ _ . .._.. _ --~_.^~.I £I
?0 FRGNT Gf 9U4DI Y.iS^
_..-.,-...._. ~ .i tG .~ I
~'----~~.r.~ _. - ~ t .
....- .~ _.. i
%SCA.PE i C~~_--_~~LANDSCAPE
f _ A t I~
I t , I ~ '~.
Proposed Access Point ~ '=+
I i ;~~~
+ ;I ~
W
Rcrx PA.F,zC~L ~ ~) ~j
RE'NL ' 1.700 SF 4 I I ~' I ~,Yi
0 4,800 5F ~ ` i FI.`-ol C 1P: S:. fl , t z ~ ~ 1~i~ ~~.
5` A i l O N 5 C-SlCli£ I Q
C _APCEL 2 I ~ ~ ,~ J; II '
r,~ a ~7
--- ~ . `'
W t TO IFkO OF I
# _ {I
;~I _ w~ ~Yi dal
E ~
P CFI, ~i ~ ~'
~~~f ~ ~
(PRIVATE) ns rAPonN, snits mrx I i r~ '
REfx ~ 'may ~ LL j
15.800 SF ~ j ~ w
~ ~ ~ ~ Q
ts~"'i L~ i i l j z)
1 C L
Q V7ac SAR£ ~ I
~ ~ so.4oo sF I .v-e' z ~ y ~ ~ i ~ J S
p _ _ al i ~
J { I I
M1~~ M
~ PARCEL 5 a ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ ~
(
,~
~_~ ~.._.._.._.._..__. _.._.._._...~ - '~ ~ I ~ ~ i
_ i
- _ .. _.
~~r---,._.,,_.._r_ t1tN~SCAPE { LAS\DSC.APE I .' 4
~\
s
DEPT SITE PLAN - B 121'3/i2 '~ ~'~
~s.. _ . _-_~-_ -_zs..~~..~.___ _ _. -- _ .--- ~.t~ ----_ --
- - _.- -
- --- - ~-~
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 8 -
EXHIBIT A
4. Applicant's Narrative
James R. Wylie
1676 N. Clarr~ndon Way
Eagle, Idaho 83616
208-9351-1253
City of Meridian 4-25-13
33 L~, Broadway Ave. suite 102
Meridian, Id. 83642
This narrative is prepared with the intent to comply with the City of Meridian's
requirement fiat a variance to the existing development agreemettt dated July S, 24(16 and
recorded July 3I, 2006! NO. 106122368.
We are requesting a variance for the hallowing items:
1. Right-in /Right-out aci.~s onto Chinclen Blvd.
2. Right of way reductiim slang Chindcn I31vd. from 100' to ?0'.
In October of 20121TD revised their criteria for aizcess along state highways. We have
applied for and received approval from I`I'U for aixcss at llrc western most boundary of
our pnaperly. We also have received a letter from t'tU allowing the requested ROW
reduction from 100' to 70' and we have dedicated that ground to the state of Idaho. We
also have provided a tra8lc report including a plan showing the turn lane, a letter from
Chuck Winder a real estate professional as to his opinion of the economic impact of this
project and an economic report that shows the enormous economic pi~tential of a retail
development for this site. Please see attachments.
We have marketed this property without the access and found that it is not a viable retail
project. w#thout the access. Many potential tenants stated that without access they were
not interested in the pix~rty.
We worked with, dedicated. land and provided mianey for the improvement ofthe exi~ng
intersection with the adjoining property comer owners. It is our intention tso develop a
commercial project on this prami»ertt earner but wee fcel that without the requested
variance the project is not viable, The State of Idaho acknowledges that economic impact
is now one of the criteria in consideration of allowing access and the requested variance
complies with the State of Idaho's new access and Right-of Way t~equireaaertts. Two of
the other property corners have access to Chindcn. 't'hese aeccsges arc approved by TI'U
but are in conflict with the City of Meridian's ordinance, it would be putting this property
in a competitive disadvantage not to allow a variance for this prc>party as well. The
attached traffic report shows that safety and traffic flaw arc improved with the proposed
Chinden access.
-,
Th .~~~ cansidcration
t..°.
cs It". Wy -.
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 9 -
EXHIBIT A
B. Agency Comments
1. ITD VARIANCE COMMENTS
WOK#q
aF
r
r
2
h
$rT~M ~~
May I, 2013
IQAlO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMEWT
f?O. Box 8028
Boise, ID 83707.2028
(208) 334.8300
itd.idaho.gov
MS Machelle Hill
Meridian City Clerk°s Offict
33 East Idaho Avenue
Meridian, Idaho 83b42
ETA E~[AIL
Re: t'AIt i3-002 - US 20-26 Access to the 14or~th~rest Coiner of Linder Road and
CLinden Banle~~ard
The Idaho Transportation Department has received a variance request application for a near
private approach to US 20-26 (Chindtn Boulevard) approximately 750-ft west of Linder Road.
ITD has ffie following comments:
1. IT'D had previously denied an approach to US 20-2b far this parcel. The ITD Board
recently (October 1, 2012) changed the approach separation standards- The proposed
approach location and the submitted traffic analysis appeu to meet the newest Idaho
Transportation. Department policies. The policy requires that as approach bt located a
minimum of 750-ft upstream from a signalized intersection (as measured betareen
ctnttrlitbes)_ Tht separation distance mitts the minimum requirements and the
applicant proposed the approach for right-in~right-out operation.
2. ITD has received the approach application, the site plan, the traffic analysis and the
processing fee. The application was casnpkte and the applicant was allocated an
approach at the western property lint, approximately 750-west of Linder Road.
3. The permit requires that the applicant°s design complies with ITD design standards.,
that the design includes an eastboundright-tun lane, and that the approach is restricted
to right-in-righf-out operation. Tht permit is not valid until ITU recrives and appravea
the enginoering drawings and design of ffit approach and the method of restricting left
turns.
ITD made the requirement for the right tun decekratian lane as safety mitigation. Wt have
entry incentive to retain the dectkration lent as traffic vohunes increase and the safety
implications become mart important. ITD has 140 R ofright-of--way abutting that parcel. This
width is sufficient for asix-lane roadway or a four lane divided roadway plus added turn lanes
in each direction- Ono widening occurs, the added cost of consttucting the decekrarion lane
is minor. The key issue is the right-of-way.
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 10 -
EXHIBIT A
A passible class section from the US 20-26 Cotridor Plan looks like this:
Figure 9. East Sepmsnt. Ultimate Build-0urt Grass Section (Meridian Road to Eagle Road)
14p' Right-af-Way
la ~ ~a
_ _ -r __
i
i
•: ~ -e e
.._ _.c . .._.__ __ - ___ _ _ _~
~~ ~~~ ~~ YYeet~aur~d US Y~J26 Eostbnund tJS 20/26 ~~~
ITD has not yet assigned fl~ndng ro widen US 20-26 from hvo-lams to four Lames,. but there is
sufficient right-af--way width to widen the roadway to four lanes, to add bicyck lanes, and add
sidewalks. while still retaining. the right turn deceleration lanes for each travel direction.
R,Fe have not dtsfgned this roadw ay expansion pmject so I cannot guarantee the specific design
and camstructian. I can only rtport that we need the deceleration Lase for mitigation and havoc
rvery incentive and sufficient right-of--way width to maintain that specific mitigation.
ff you have any questions.. you may contact Matt Ward at 3348341 or me at 3348377.
Sincerely,.
~i
Dave Szplett
Development Setvices Manages
dave.szplett~itd.idaha.t=ov
cc: Bill Parsons
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 11 -
EXHIBIT A
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 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:
In 2009, Council did not grant a right or special privilege and denied the same variance
request because the site is served from two (2) public streets and one private street
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the UDC, direct access to State Highway
20/26 is prohibited, per UDC 11-3H-4B and the approved development agreement restricts
access to Chinden Boulevard via the concept plan. However. Council may consider and
amply modifications to these standards upon recommendation from the Idaho
Transportation Department ITD has granted approval of the proposed access point
consistent with their new access manavement policies. ITD has stated that the necessary
right-of-wav is in place to mitigate the proposed access point. Based on the documentation
from ITD and public testimony presented at the public hearing Council finds vrantinv the
requested variance to allow right-in/rivht-out access to SH 20/26 does not Brant a special
privile e that is not otherwise allowed for properties adiacent to a state hivhwav The two
(21 adiacent developments (NWC and NECI were vranted access to SH 20/26 by ITD.
B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site;
Council finds that there are ~e undue hardships that would prevent the applicant from
developing the site by restricting access to SH 20/26. The applicant has options to facilitate
access to/from other roadways. As mentioned above, Linder Road, Gertie Place and W.
Everest Lane provide opportunities for future access to the subject site. ~+°~ ~~ °~ ~''°
~.*,,..° +r°~r:° ,.° °...,*°a i.-, *,,° ,. oa a°..°'°..-~°°* The Council finds that Everest Lane
(private streetl is not adequate enou h~pport the future commercial traffic veneration
due to the desivn of the roadway thus the access constructed to ITD's standards would help
disperse commercial traffic throuvh the area.
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.
,~~ °,.~:,,...C~~.,rmT-F:rc r+rh o-v.~. ..aa:.. ° .•.~ ~„ Ci7 '2n/7~ ~1....* ..1„~° +,. sL.°
ima~i~ccr=HH-=akE3}a•ra~ucrrncTa-ctrc•~ c--rrr'cn~ni
r•~e~mar-~ions~lannAC~~~I~i-x~~sec~i n ~+~,,.,, i, rrrr~ ~,., s~°~°a +i.°., ..:» ° °
~PTa° .' '^ ~~Tdi•1.1--F°... .,+.,,.~ Fj':+~ ~t,° ,~+°«~°,.s:,..~ +1.° °
^~ *'~° °°°°~~. ITD has stated that the necessary right-of--wav is in place to mitigate the
proposed access point ITD staff testified at the public hearing that the approval of the
access was predicated on the applicant constructinv a center median and a deceleration lane
to mitigate the safety concerns.
Knighthill Center VAR-13-002 - 12 -