Design Review Minutes 10-10-12 - City of Boise · PDF fileDesign Review Committee ... Design Review for a single-story with mezzanine, ... Sarah Schafer, Josh Wilson, Andrea Tuning,

Design Review Committee

Worksession / Hearing Minutes of October 10, 2012

______________________________________________________________________________

CONSENT AGENDA

DRH12-00227 / Glenn Levie

Location: 916 Park

Design Review for a four-story mixed use building including residential units, live/work

units and retail in an R-OD (Residential Office with Design Review) zone. (This item was

deferred at the September 12, 2012 hearing.)

Applicant present and in agreement with the terms and conditions contained in staff report.

NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY

DRH12-00254 / MMP Design Solutions – Molly Proul

Location: 9176 W. Fairview Avenue

Design Review for a single-story fast food restaurant (Jack-in-the-Box) with 24 hour drive

through in a C-2D (General Commercial with Design Review) zone.

Applicant present and in agreement with the terms and conditions contained in the staff report.

NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY

DRH12-00255 / VanAuker Gowen LLC

Location: 450 E. Gowen Road

Design Review for a single-story with mezzanine, Commercial Tire facility for sales, service,

warehouse and retread in an M-1D (Limited Industrial with Design Review) zone.


NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY

Committee

Members Present

Bruce Taylor, Acting-Chair, James Marsh, Tom Zabala, David

Rudeen, and Nicolas Cota

Staff Members

Present

Sarah Schafer, Josh Wilson, Andrea Tuning, Rob Lockward and

Nicki Heckenlively

http://pdsonline.cityofboise.org/pdsonline/details.aspx?id=DRH12-00227&type=doc

http://gisweb.cityofboise.org/imf/imf.jsp?site=pds_agenda&qlyr=40&qzoom=true&qhlt=true&qry=PARCEL=''


http://gisweb.cityofboise.org/imf/imf.jsp?site=pds_agenda&qlyr=40&qzoom=true&qhlt=true&qry=PARCEL='R3239500030'



Design Review Committee Hearing Minutes: October 10, 2012

Page 2 of 24

DRH12-00258 / Yong in Master Lee’s Taekwondo – Lee Seung

Location: 4728 N. Fan Palm Avenue

Design Review for a single-story martial arts facility on property in an R-1C (Single-Family

Residential) zone. This use is allowed through the conditional use process which required a

design review.


NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN MOVED TO APPROVE DRH12-00227, DRH12-

00254 AND DRH12-00258 ON CONSENT IN ADDITION TO DRH12-00255 WITH THE

AGREEMENT MEMORANDUM DATED OCTOBER 10, 2012.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH SECONDED THE MOTION.

ROLL CALL VOTE 4:0. MOTION CARRIED WITH COMMITTEE MEMBER

RUDEEN RECUSED ON DRH12-00255 AND CHAIRMAN TAYLOR RECUSED ON

DRH12-00227 AND DRH12-00258.

REGULAR HEARING

DRH12-00253 / Jacksons Food Store

Location: 404 S. Roosevelt Street

Design Review for a 3,114 square foot single story convenience store with fuel canopy in a C-

2D (Neighborhood Commercial with Design Review) zone.

ANDREA TUNING: The existing site is located on the corner of Roosevelt and Rose Hill. The

current Jackson Store is proposed to be demolished as well as the two adjacent retail buildings

which front Rose Hill and Jackson Street. Once the three properties are razed the applicant

proposes to construct a 3,114 square foot convenience store with their associated fuel facility.

The applicant proposes three driveways which access the facility. One will be located at the

existing alley. The applicant will widen this approach for access into the site off Roosevelt. A

driveway will be located near the midpoint on Rose Hill with the alley widened on Jackson

Street for additional access to the site. The applicant proposes the building be located adjacent to

the alley. Staff has recommended a number of conditions of approval in regard to landscaping as

well as parking modifications to the site. The applicant has reviewed staff’s report and is in

agreement with all the conditions of approval with the exception of Condition 1.a. Condition

1.a. requires the applicant to relocate the building to front Roosevelt and Rose Hill Streets. Staff

recommended this requirement due to the fact City Council has given staff direction in which

they would like all buildings to interface with the street and create pedestrian orientations. Also

supporting City Council’s direction towards staff is the Boise City Comprehensive Plan which

was recently adopted. This essentially requires buildings to be pedestrian friendly, requires

parking to be located to the side or rear of facilities and requires the buildings to interface and

create the pedestrian connection. There is a current bus stop located on Roosevelt Street just

south of Rose Hill. To accommodate for this staff has recommended the applicant include






Page 3 of 24

sidewalk. Staff would also encourage the building to be located adjacent to the street to create

the pedestrian interface. The applicant has provided staff with a revised drawing dated October

9, 2012 and they have incorporated all of staff’s conditions of approval with exception of

Condition 1.a. The Depot Bench Neighborhood Association also met last week to discuss this

item and a number of individuals discussed the location of the building. Topics ranged from

providing noise protection to the adjacent neighbors to the south, which are all single-family

residential homes as well as the single-family residential home located across the street from

Jackson Street. The applicant is reputing Condition 1.a. Staff recommended this based on the

Boise City Comprehensive Plan policies and goals for the commercial employment areas as well

as City Council’s direction to emphasize on new urbanism design especially in the neighborhood

locations.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: Can you, in your staff recommendations summarize,

absent of moving the building out to the corner of the lot, what staff’s recommendations are for

screening along the alley to those individual residences?

ANDREA TUNING: If you look at the site plan you can see the applicant proposes a 10 foot

landscape buffer located along the alleyway. The applicant proposed a mixture of old evergreens

as well as deciduous trees. The deciduous trees they’ve selected are Class I trees due to the fact

we have some overhead power running along the alleyway in this location. Initially staff’s

recommendation required the applicant to extend the landscape aisle out further and continue

landscaping there to provide some additional protection of the adjacent neighbors. Also, along

Jackson Street the applicant originally proposed a 10 foot landscape buffer. Based on the zone

and the adjacent residential use in the residential zone we required they provide a 20 foot buffer

located along there so we’ll have some increased distance from the parking area to the single-

family dwelling on Jackson Street. Essentially this is what we recommended for the screening.

There is an existing six foot cedar fence that runs along the alley adjacent to the single-family

residential areas which will also provide screening for both noise and light. Also, if you’ll note

in the conditions of approval we have restricted the types of lighting on the property. Everything

should be downward facing drop lighting so we don’t have any light spillage on to those adjacent

properties.

APPLICANT TESTIMONY

DALE BINNING (Applicant’s Architect): This is the revised site plan I submitted yesterday.

This illustrates everything in the site specific conditions with exception of Condition 1.a. We

feel our site plan addresses as many of the Comp Plan items which support this site as it does

what staff is proposing with putting the building up to the corner and the fuel canopy by Jackson

Street. The main reason we did not locate the canopy on Jackson Street was because it is the

primary function which is fuel service. Many customers are credit card only. It is a case of the

canopy being away from the building and vehicle traffic which is well established at this site

because they have an existing store there now. The traffic pattern now becomes a circulation in

turning around Jackson Street into the site and down Rose Hill and into the site if the canopy is

located there. At that location we have residential directly across Rose Hill. We have residential

directly across Jackson Street and you have residential directly across the alley. This is why we

did not locate the canopy there. They have 24-hour operation with a lighted canopy and it would

be a feature in the residential neighborhood that is not there now. It would be a very undesirable

location for this canopy as far traffic circulation onto the site, fuel service and for the residents.


Page 4 of 24

We put the canopy up in the corner by the intersection as close as we could, but we still have a

20 foot setback on Rose Hill Street and a 20 foot building setback on Roosevelt Street. We’ve

positioned the canopy up there for vehicle access. The Bench Commission is across the street

and the irrigation and pump station are across from Rose Hill. It is mostly commercial in this

area with exception of one residence. The canopy would be better received in this location than

it would anywhere else on the site. On the initial application we had new underground tanks

shown. We have determined the existing tanks can remain where they are and be relined and

reutilized. Another big major consideration in a fuel service situation is being able to utilize the

underground tanks. This is the optimum position for fuel delivery to the tanker trucks. Delivery

occurs at this location twice a week in the afternoon and this will continue. This is the primary

function of the facility and we have located the building at that corner for this reason. We did

not locate the store in that location. It would basically turn the store around to where the back of

the store would be facing Roosevelt and what is the east end of the store now would be facing

toward the alley. All the store front windows are turned inward to the site so there would be,

from a security standpoint, no visibility at all from the street. Again, this is a 24-hour operation

and you would not be able to see into the store. This is the main reason we’ve located it there.

The back wall would be the south wall and the east wall would be the back of the store. These

walls have no windows and no lights. They are intended as a buffer in themselves. We’ve put

a10 foot landscape strip along there as far as we can across the alley which is heavily landscaped

so we really couldn’t provide a better buffer than this for the neighborhood and for the store. A

lot of the Comp Plan…it would be difficult to apply it to a convenience store. We still have

items in the Comp Plan that would definitely support our design. The store would be best suited

at that location. We have a really good design for this site which will be much better than we’ve

ever seen in this store.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: The conversation was looking at where the canopy and the

store are located. Is there any design which had the store on the corner of Roosevelt and

Jackson? The building is up against the store and the canopy is where you’d located, but it

seems to maybe belong on the busy corner from the light issue you brought up, but still having

the building on the street side and leave the canopy where it is?

DALE BINNING: Have the building where?

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: Pretty much pushing the building to the corner.

DALE BINNING: It would be a case of orientation toward Rose Hill and a very critical distance

from the pumps to the store. Parking is another thing and the idea of screening the parking from

the streets is hard to make this apply to convenience store parking. There are six parking spaces

under the gas canopy and the other customer parking is intentionally very visible from the street.

This is the function of the building. We didn’t consider that location a good location.

BECKY McKAY (Engineering Solutions / Jacksons Food Store Representative): They retained

us to work with the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) on their access issues and assist them

in this application to revitalize this site. The important thing about this particular site is there is

an existing store on the site. The site is extremely small and there has been a convenience store

(C-Store) for over 30 years. The reason I know this is because when I was in college I bounced a

check getting gas at this store…the only time in my life I bounced a check! It has been there

forever. The aesthetics of the internal circulation…there is no landscaping and as far as any


Page 5 of 24

modernization this site has none. It is totally outdated and antiquated. The opportunity has

arisen to go in and modernize this site. Jacksons have obtained two adjacent very unaesthetic

commercial buildings to the east in order to make this site work. We have an opportunity here to

improve the deficiencies of this C-Store with landscaping, bringing it up to date and

incorporating new architectural design and this is important. We have to balance what we do in

this community and the fact we are able to do this is part of the fact we are wonderful

community. We balance functionality with aesthetics, with transportation, with access and we

do a very fine job. This new site plan will improve the functionality of this site. The C-Store has

an established clientele with the existing neighborhoods that are out there along the Roosevelt

and Rose Hill corridors. The existing commercial buildings, if you calculate as far as what their

square footage is, exceed the footprint of what this new building will be. You demo three

obsolete buildings and bring this up to date. The other thing the Committee should take into

consideration is the geometry of this intersection. This intersection is not your standard four-

way intersection where all the streets come in at a 90 degree angle. As you can see on the aerial

photo at the bottom of their site plan it is at a diagonal. It is skewed so if you can visualize…I

went to the site, sat there and tried to visualize what this site would look like if the building were

shoved right up to the intersection incorporating the new urbanism. It would almost be, from a

visual perspective, an obstruction because of the angle of the intersection. The geometry is not

your standard geometry. It would almost be intrusive and overwhelming visual interest. The

other thing Mr. Binning had to take into consideration was the existing fuel tanks. This is one of

the driving forces. Access and the existing fuel tanks are part of his site design. We want to

maintain those existing tanks and the islands need to be located where the tanks are. In looking

at the site if you were to move the gas canopy and the islands to the east it will be even more

intrusive into that single-family neighborhood. Where the islands are now they do not have a

canopy, but they are out there next to Roosevelt which is a collector next to Rose Hill and an

arterial. In trying to weigh whether you move it to the east or not from a planning perspective up

at the intersection as far as the canopy location this is perfect and it makes sense. In the meeting

with the Central Bench Neighborhood Association they were supportive of this. They thought as

far as from lighting perspective, traffic coming into the site located up at the intersection as far as

the canopy is concerned made more sense. Blue Print Boise has been adopted, but if you look at

the Central Bench and the fact it is designated as compact development it encourages

revitalization of these traffic corridors because it is an older neighborhood. They are spending a

significant amount of money to come in and acquire additional parcels and make this site from a

visual and architectural perspective look even better. Right now it is deficient and there is no

doubt about it. We received a staff report from ACHD late today, but they are supportive of the

approaches as shown. The incorporation of the alley and the approach to Roosevelt Street with

the 46 foot width is supported by ACHD and the reason being is there is an existing accessory

building as you can see on the site plan located just to the south. In order to have a good vision

triangle for traffic to exit onto Roosevelt they need to have a wider approach. The existing

conditions on adjacent properties are dictating that and ACHD is in support of this.

Improvement of the alley makes sense and the alley, in my opinion, interconnects this site with

the existing residential so we can have some type of a good interface and be more neighborhood

commercial. I want to mention the homes on the south side of the alley are all oriented to Grover

Street and they have rear yards up to the alley so it is not your standard North End type of

development where you’re alley loading and the homes may have some orientation to the alley.

It is like it is there, but not utilized. We feel this is a superior design. We agree with staff on

extending the buffer along the alley to minimize the impact on the existing residential

development, but we feel we’ve made some adjustments and have incorporated some of staff’s


Page 6 of 24

suggestions. We feel we’re bringing forth the best site plan we can. We ask that the Committee

support this site plan because this is a unique situation. This revitalization is something we don’t

do often.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: Since you’ve been retained and have been working with

ACHD do you have some idea of what the traffic counts are associated with this project?

BECKY McKAY: The staff report indicated there were 10…ACHD said 10,000 trip per day on

Rose Hill and 6,676 on Roosevelt.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: I’m not worried about the traffic counts on the streets.

My question is have you projected currently how many traffic stops you get at this facility today

and what you’re projecting this to be at the site once completed as shown?

BECKY McKAY: This is an established store and has been a C-Store for so many years they do

have capture traffic and they have a radius as far as the neighborhoods which are associated to

what they bring in. ACHD’s estimate is about 1,628 vehicle trips per day.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: I’m not sure you answered my question.

BECKY McKAY: What we utilize as far as traffic perspectives is the Institute of Traffic

Engineers Manual which specifies depending on uses what those uses will generate. From a

private sector or public sector this is what we utilize…the ITE Manual on Traffic Generation. If

your question is what will this store generate in regard to traffic? My opinion is the existing

store already generates traffic. It captures traffic, brings traffic in from a specific radius of the

existing neighborhoods. The transformation of this site into a more modern site and the traffic

generated in addition to what is already there is going to be minimal. These stores take three to

four months to construct and they want to retain the existing store to keep the clientele they have

established so people don’t gravitate to another C-Store and then this becomes their habit. If you

notice the C-Store is located right where the fuel islands are. They anticipate they will go in,

construct the new store while retaining the existing store and keep their clientele. From an

economic standpoint it is imperative they keep this store open. From a transportation perspective

it will generate basically what it is generating today.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: You’re suggesting Jacksons will go to all the trouble to

remodel, build this, buy new real estate and the traffic which will go there will be minimally

increased? This is what you’re saying?

BECKY McKAY: ACHD indicated it will be 179 additional trips per hour based on their staff

report. All you’re doing with this particular site by spending the money to update it and add

parcels is make it easier to get in/out of and make the store more marketable. How many more

trips are they going to capture with this store once the internal circulation improves and once we

have a new modern store is hard to quantify. All we can go off of is the ITE Manual.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: Regarding the tanks, in their present location if the

building did get moved to the “urban corner” would the tanks have to be removed?


Page 7 of 24

BECKY McKAY: That is a question for Jacksons to answer because I don’t know exactly what

the offset from those tanks is with the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)

requirements and so forth.

PUBLIC TESTIMONY

JIM PICKETT (Depot Bench Neighborhood Representative): I would like to thank Jacksons for

proposing to reinvest in our neighborhood. The current store is an important part of our

neighborhood as the consultant mentioned. We’re looking forward to the new store construction,

the consolidation and clean-up of the now empty and unutilized properties on that corner. The

Depot Bench Neighborhood Association (DBNA) held a general meeting as staff mentioned

earlier. Last Tuesday, October 2, 2012, representatives from Jackson’s and Boise City staff

attended. Jacksons presented their proposed plan elevations as shown on the screen. These were

well received by those at the meeting. Those in attendance liked Jacksons proposed location of

the store on the lot and liked that the pumps would stay in their current northwest corner

location. We like this for a variety of reasons, but the main reason was continuity and continuity

of the current site layout. We also like staff’s recommendation of a adding a sidewalk which

Jacksons has done on the west side of the site and increasing the landscape buffer on the east side

of the property. However, I’m here this evening speaking against staff’s recommendation to

move the building to the northwest corner of the site. I’m basing this opposition on the

appropriateness of other elements in the neighborhood, the impact this proposed move would

have on noise and the lighting to the nearby residences, public safety concerns and consistency

with the current site layout. As staff’s detailed report states, this site has residential development

on three sides of the site and in the neighborhood past this intersection it is almost exclusively

residential a half mile each direction down both Rose Hill and Roosevelt. We understand from

the guideline principals of the Comprehensive Plan it calls for moving buildings towards the

street on major arterials. Given the residential nature of the surrounding area I would classify

both these roads…they are two-lane roads with a turn lane in all directions and given this they

are more collectors than they are arterials. The attendees at our meeting felt moving the building

towards the street would cause the building to dominate the corner more than we’d consider for a

largely residential neighborhood. The building, if moved towards that corner, would dwarf

everything around it and it would not be consistent with any other building in the neighborhood.

We’d like the building to blend into the surroundings and not stand out. We understand the

Comprehensive Plan would like to have more pedestrian traffic and it is interesting that the

sidewalk on the west side of the site would dead end into nothingness. There is no sidewalk on

Roosevelt Street on the east side. All the sidewalk is on the west side as is typical. Most of the

bench neighborhoods only have sidewalks on one if at all. It is currently a hard site to access by

foot traffic and having the sidewalk will definitely improve this. The landscape plan Jacksons

proposes and which staff has augmented shields both the building and the parking from view

from the street. This is one of the items in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan

says, “Parking should also include landscaping or other treatments to screen surface parking

from the street, soften the appearance of the surface parking and enhance the overall character

of the development”. Again, if we move this building off to the northwest corner or even the

northeast corner all those elements are lost and then you’d have a large building sitting on the

corner with a larger parking lot and less landscape buffer. The staff report notes noise is a

potential issue due to the fact there are single-family dwellings located directly south of the

development. Staff recommends the applicant reduce the amount of access to the alley. Again,

if we move this building to either one of those corners the alley is going to become a cut-


Page 8 of 24

through. People are going to use this alley as a traffic zone right up against people’s backyards.

By locating the majority of the parking in front of the building on the north side we feel in

addition to the landscape buffer the building itself acts a noise buffer into the residences and their

backyards and to some extent the residences on Jackson Street. Additionally, if the pumps were

located on the east half of the building as staff suggests, there would be no such noise buffer.

Including them on the east side will move site traffic and traffic noise closer to more residences

than the current traffic flow location would have. In addition the building orientation proposed

by Jacksons spills the majority of the light into the intersection away from the residential areas.

If this building were oriented in either one of the corners any spill light from the building would

go…the light from the windows of a typical C-Store would spill into the neighborhoods to either

direction into those backyards. The DBNA members also felt if the store entrance were turned to

the middle of the lot this could pose, as mentioned, a public safety issue since that orientation

would have limited visibility into the store from passersby and police. Finally we like the

Jacksons proposed site because it is consistent with current layout. As noted there has been a C-

Store on this property for a long period of time and the two vacant lots…one was a bow hunter

shop and at one point and time the Trolley Bar was adjacent to that area. The store in front in

between the two was a knick-knack store at one time and then unfortunately it turned into a head

shop for a short period of time. The current orientation Jacksons has proposed is consistent so

neighbors who have either bought property or rent property know what to expect. The canopy is

going to continue to be on the west end of the lot. The residences on the east end of the lot will

have minor impact and the flow out to Jackson Street will be minimal and most of the traffic will

continue to use the north and west entrances as they do now. We feel changing the layout

dramatically would have a more substantial effect on the nearby residences than the current

design. Therefore, based on these facts I ask the Committee to approve the Jacksons design and

their building with the currently proposed location. We feel the store will be a great addition to

our neighborhood and represents the best use our neighborhood could realistically expect for this

site. We would hate to see opportunity for reinvestment on this corner and our neighborhood

lost.

CORY JACKSON (Applicant / Jacksons Food Store): I would like to briefly address the traffic

issue. Our main purpose for remodeling this store is it is the worst looking end of store we

currently operate. It is not very attractive and not a very functional place to work. It is a very

busy location already. It is a neighborhood location and we don’t really anticipate there to be a

significant increase in traffic. We wish this were the case. We remodel a lot of stores and often

times you really don’t see a lot of increase in business. This store primarily services the local

residents and we’d like to offer them a broader product range in terms of food service and

whatnot, but in terms of traffic increase we’re not expecting anything major in terms of traffic.

Primarily it is for image and safety.

LAURA ANDERSON: Our home is located directly north to where the proposed store will be.

Currently one of the main entrances to the store…right now the one on the south side is offset

from where our home is, but with the new proposed store and entrance this will be directly in

front of our house. We have concerns in terms of how this will definitely impact us because

there will be more traffic flow going in and out of the store right in front of us. What we’d like

to request and I see on the map here…it is different than the one in the staff report, but they’ve

increased the east side landscaping. If we could get the landscape buffer increased on the north

side this would help decrease the impact on us with the noise and traffic in and out. I see on the

alley there are bushes. If we could have bushes as well as the tall trees this would make a big


Page 9 of 24

difference. We are concerned about the increased noise and the traffic in and out and with this it

wouldn’t impact us as much.

STAFF REBUTTAL

ANDREA TUNING: It is important to note when we originally received the application we did

think we’d be relocating all the fuel facilities. Since the applicant has new information stating

they are able to reutilize the existing tanks in this particular location staff would be willing to

recommend what Committee Member Marsh eluded to earlier which would be relocating the

building up to Jackson Street all along Rose Hill leaving the canopy where it is proposed. Staff

has examined the site and I’m very familiar with the site as I only live a few blocks away and

utilize the store quite frequently. The residential neighbors are so very close we do want to

protect them from both noise and light spillage. To walk you through some of the photos of the

area, the most important photo we have is actually looking down the alleyway and you can see

how the site interacts with those adjacent residential facilities. You can see how the building

will sit. This would be looking east from Roosevelt Street. I was standing in Roosevelt Street

looking down the alley. You can see the overhead power and the building would actually be

located just beyond the truck along the adjacent alley. You can see there is some mature

vegetation along there and as I stated there is a six foot cedar fence, but as individuals utilize the

convenience store for parking along both the east and west sides of the building as doors slam

there are some noises that occur with individuals utilizing the store and there is some light

spillage so we wanted to protect this. The neighborhood as well as Jacksons have discussed that

the building could provide a viable buffer too. There is merit in this as well. Staff essentially

gets stuck between a rock and a hard place. Yes, we want to see revitalization in the City and we

want to see our older neighborhoods improved, but at the same time we want to take in the

pedestrian friendly orientations especially with a bus stop located in this particular area with

major bus lines running both north/south as well as east/west. There is a number of criteria that

we look at when we exam and make our recommendations to you. We’ll leave that discussion

up to the Committee on how this Comprehensive Plan unfolds and what policies you believe are

going to be applicable to this particular site, but we are required, as staff, to recommend what the

Comprehensive Plan states and this is why you have what is before you as our recommendation.

PUBLIC PORTION CLOSED

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: The light poles are an interesting concept. I can

understand if you’re looking across the alley and can see the C-Store front doors. Typically

there is a lot of glazing and such, but the proposal has two light poles running on the alley and I

know they are a sharp cut-off, but I don’t know that this is necessarily a big argument for moving

the building. It appears having the building on Jackson Street and Rose Hill Street much of

parking could be salvaged having the building on a corner…especially in a traditional pedestrian

neighborhood. It would make the building itself much more pedestrian oriented especially along

Rose Hill. In this type of neighborhood I could see a lot of pedestrian traffic utilizing a

Jackson’s there. By doing this you could keep the fuel canopy where it is, in essence, located.

All argument points associated with utilizing the same tanks…the biggest point brought up by

the neighborhood association which I have concern with is it would potentially cut-through

traffic right there. Otherwise I’d certainly like to see a plan orienting the building toward

Jacksons and Rose Hill. Typically those are blank walls, but there are several examples of this

same kind of architecture in the valley which have interesting architecture facing the streets with


Page 10 of 24

Plazas and display windows and stuff. It could still make a nice pedestrian atmosphere as you

walk down both Jackson Street and Rose Hill.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: While I acknowledge Committee Member Marsh’s

comments I do think the applicant’s design team and the neighborhood association have captured

the reason I felt the plan, as modified by the applicant, leaving the store where it is at and then

providing the additional landscaping and the other items listed in the conditions of approval

make the most sense for the site. Moving the building up into this upper corner expands the

distance by almost double from the fueling island to the building. It means a lot more people

moving back and forth for whatever reason to go the C-Store. I frequent Jackson’s and I know

while people are fueling they are running in to use the restroom facilities or to buy something

really quick so you’ve got people running back and forth across the lot. It is a longer distance for

the operator to maintain control over what is happening out in the yard. There are issues of

security and police security in the evening particularly in the early morning hours when the

operator is alone. We’ve got the back of the building facing the street and it will be harder for

any police patrols to look in and see what is going on. There will be more impact on Jackson

Street with cars exiting out on the Jackson Street exit if the building is moved up into that corner.

As I said, I’m not uncomfortable even though the Comprehensive Plan would want us to put the

building up into one of those corners. The design team and the applicant have done a pretty

good job. Jacksons is a well-run and successful organization here. They are a good corporate

citizen in the area and they are doing a lot to maintain their facilities in top shape at every

location. Doing things like this which appear not to really drive things to the bottom line for

them, but to improve the marketability and appearance of their facilities is laudable. I would be

in favor of approving it as it has been revised by the applicant.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I’m glad to see the neighborhood association represented so we could

hear how they feel about it and this makes it a little easier.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: Has the new plan addressed everything in the

recommendations, but Item 1.a.?

ANDREA TUNING: The applicant’s revised drawing takes into account everything with the

exception of relocating the building to the corner which would be Condition 1.a. They also have

not reduced the widths of the driveways on Rose Hill Street and Roosevelt Street so staff

recommended the applicant utilize 30 foot driveways on each one of those locations. The

applicant is proposing a 46 foot wide driveway on Roosevelt Street and 45 foot wide driveway

for Rose Hill Street, which would be this particular location as well as this particular location.

These are identified as 1.d. and 1.e. One additional comment is ACHD has required the

applicant to construct a seven foot attached sidewalk along Roosevelt or a five foot wide

detached sidewalk so this minor amendment would also need to be made to accommodate for

their requirements.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: So I’m clear, you said, Condition 1d. Reduce the

driveway width on Rose Hill to a maximum of 30 feet so this one has not changed?

ANDREA TUNING: Correct. Condition 1.d. required it to be a maximum of 30 feet and the

applicant is proposing 40 feet.


Page 11 of 24

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: Condition 1.e. on Roosevelt is the same thing only is it 46

feet?

ANDREA TUNING: Correct.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: You also have Condition 1.f. on Jackson Street?

ANDREA TUNING: Correct. I believe they have accommodated for this.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Reducing the driveway with Rose Hill would alleviate the concern the

neighbors across the street had about buffer and landscape.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: I appreciate Committee Member Zabala’s outlook on the

project and I certainly share his view on Jackson’s position in the neighborhood and certainly

appreciate them taking a location like this and putting forth the effort. I’m a bit concerned with

this being a bench location with residential around it because there is absolutely no pedestrian

access to the front of the store. There are some good points as Committee Member Zabala and

the applicant have said in regard to the distance to the front of the store although those could be

solved with the building on the corner as well whether there is parking out in front between the

canopy...you would probably need to slide east, but you look at this particular plan and even

moving the accessible parking to the Rose Hill side and providing an accessible route to the

street and sidewalk…even something like this would be adding changes from the pedestrian

experience. This is my biggest concern. Aesthetically going down the street the building is still

pretty close to the street so I don’t think it’s a huge departure from our Comprehensive Plan.

Typical houses along the street down there are probably a little closer than this, but it doesn’t

seem like it is a big departure from a massing standpoint, but having the opportunity to have the

building on the street from a pedestrian standpoint is missed on this plan.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those are valid points on both sides.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN MOVED TO APPROVE DRH12-00253 BASED ON

THE FACTS AND FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF

REPORT AND STAFF’S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS REMOVING 1.A., AND

ACCEPTING 1.E. AS DRAWN ON THE PLAN SUBMITTED BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON OCTOBER 10, 2012.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: This motion would say they still need to reduce the Rose

Hill curb cut to 30 feet versus what they show as 40 feet on the original plan.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You propose to eliminate 1.a. and 1.e. from the conditions?

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: To modify 1.e. to correspond with the plan submitted

today.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA SECONDED THE MOTION.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: The pedestrian access to the public right-of-way wouldn’t

reduce any parking necessarily.


Page 12 of 24

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: On the north side of the building where the front walk

continues out…if this were to connect across through the planter and the drive still continues

through…is this a demonstrable pedestrian path?

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: I don’t think this would be beneficial…

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Over to the east?

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: To Jackson Street?

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: Yes…either to the north…

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: Or to the north…either way?

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: Yes. In essence it doesn’t really change the plan. It still

has the support of the Neighborhood Association the way it is oriented and it gives some

pedestrian influence to it.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: It gives them a path.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: Right now there is not a discernable path other than you are

walking from the street either across some of the landscaping or in the access aisle to get to the

store. I’ve been to this location as well and it does seem like there would be a fair amount of

foot-traffic frequenting this location and probably more so than if it was located on a more major

thoroughfare. This would be my recommendation and I would certainly support the motion if

some kind of pedestrian pathway was designated on the site plan.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN MOVED TO MODIFY THE MOTION TO

INCLUDE THAT THE APPLICANT SHALL WORK WITH STAFF TO PROVIDE A

PEDESTRIAN LINK FROM THE FRONT OF THE STORE TO JACKSON STREET.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We will make this Condition 1.p.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA SECONDED.

ROLL CALL 4:0. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

DRH12-00257 / Jacksons Food Store

Location: 3110 W. State Street

Design Review for the removal of the existing convenience store and construction of a single-

story convenience store. Existing fuel islands and canopy to remain in a C-2D (General

Commercial with Design Review) zone.

JOSH WILSON: Keeping on a common theme for this evening we’re talking about a new

Jacksons Food Store replacing an older facility which will be removed. This store is at the

corner of 31st Street and State Street in the northwest portion of the city. The applicant has a site

which does front State Street on the south and 31st Street on the east. They have acquired




Page 13 of 24

property which currently contains a couple of residential structures to enlarge the property to the

north all the way to Bella Street and then they are abutted by an alley by the west so they do end

up having public right-of-way on all four sides of the project. This project is similar to the other

one in some respects and different in some regards. They are proposing to remove the existing

store. It is located on the western portion of the property somewhat adjacent to State Street and

immediately adjacent to the alley. Similarly they would like to construct a new store outside of

the location of the current store so they can maintain business through construction. The site

currently contains the residential structures you see outlined on the northern portion of the

property. There is a house along 31st Street and an apartment building along Bella Street they

propose to remove to expand the property all the way so it does front onto Bella Street as well.

One of the main differences on this proposal is the fuel pumps along State Street at the corner of

State Street and 31st Street will remain. This does constrain the location of the building to the

rear of the site and additionally we do have some Ada County Highway District (ACHD) right-

of-way construction which will take place on State Street and 31st Street as part of the 30

th Street

Extension project that needs to be taken into consideration as well. On moving the new building

further to the north into the residential neighborhood staff’s main concerns were the effects on

the residential area to the north and to the northeast. By moving the new structure to the rear

with the service drive and new proposed access to Bella Street in addition to some landscaping

along Bella Street with utilizing both existing accesses to 31st Street it did move a lot of the

commercial activity closer to the neighborhood and our main concern was of effects. As such,

most of the conditions in the staff report do address this and I believe the applicant will want to

discuss those. Additionally we did have some conditions along State Street. After discussions

with the applicant we would like to modify our recommendation along State Street because of

the extenuating circumstances of the ongoing ACHD project and it is not really the applicant’s

initiative to redo the landscape strip along State Street so we’d like to remove the requirement to

widen that landscape strip. I can give you specific condition numbers in a few moments.

Moving on to the rear of the property where the real challenges lie and probably the contention.

As the staff report is written we did condition that the applicant move the building two feet to the

south which would allow them to enlarge the landscape strip along Bella Street while

maintaining the service drive. We do recommend they eliminate the widened access to Bella

Street because there is a public alley which does currently intersect Bella Street and will be

approved and pegged. In speaking with the applicant’s representative this causes some

problems for their proposal. Mainly that the existing store is proposed to remain open so the

moving of the store…so everyone is orientated the south would be left toward State Street… 10

feet to the south poses construction issues as they would like to keep this store operational, but at

the same time we do have concerns about the rear. There are a couple of options we can explore

to give those neighbors to the north that protection while allowing Jacksons to proceed as they

would like to. The applicant, through discussions, did state this service drive in the rear is

mainly for convenience of access off Bella Street. They do not use it for deliveries. It may be

used for some incidental maintenance on the building. Another possibility would be to eliminate

this service drive. Maintain the building in the location it is or they could shift it five feet to the

north to give the new building some more division between the existing building and keep the

restriction on eliminating the new wide access to Bella Street. The portion that is currently drive

aisle would become landscaping to provide the additional buffering to the residents and it would

also accomplish Jacksons goals of keeping the existing store open while the new one is

constructed. An alternative suggestion would be instead of widening the landscape strip a

combination of CMU wall and widened landscaping in dimensions that does work for them

could be used along the north property line to buffer those residents. The access drive is


Page 14 of 24

currently proposed at 23 feet. This could be dropped to 20 feet picking up some room there with

the combination of some thick plantings with the CMU wall which would provide separation for

the neighbors. As I mentioned, we are in agreement with the applicant that the condition for the

widening of the landscape strip along State Street should be eliminated as this is part of the

ACHD Roadway project. This is Condition 1.e. in the staff report and we suggest striking this.

I’ll let the applicant speak to what their preference is on the north boundary with Bella and we

will also hear from some residents about what their main concerns are in terms of impact. It

could have some positive elements for all parties if the access drive is eliminated, which

Jacksons has stated they don’t use for deliveries or service access and they would gain a couple

parking spaces where the drive currently punches through. This could be an upside for them, but

beyond this I’ll let them discuss their views on this and what it would mean to their project.

APPLICANT TESTIMONY

DALE BINNING (Applicant’s Architect): We have several options with the service drive in the

back. This is a key issue and aside from the real issue it is important to keep the existing store

open while we build the new store. More on this site than other sites because we’ll be utilizing

the existing canopy and tanks. The store can remain in operation exactly the way it is today

while we build the new store. The service drive on the back is…I don’t know what else to call

it…it brings to mind big delivery trucks and everything else, but this is not the case. There is

nothing going in and out of this store that doesn’t go in the front door. We have an emergency

exit door on the backside and we have a porch light over that door but that’s all. It is the white

wall of the building and there is no light shining beyond that point. We’ve got the 10 feet of

landscape strip and we’ve tried to do a combined access with the alley. It probably doesn’t have

to be as wide as we have it. We’re trying to get it wide enough where a vehicle could make a

hard right and make a U-turn to get back on Bella. It is only a 12 foot alley so it would be kind

of hard to do. It is a 23 foot service drive now as shown on the drawing. We could certainly live

with a 20 foot access drive. This would be a little bit of a concession, but we could go from 10

feet of landscaping buffer to 13 feet. Also, ACHD has reviewed this. This drawing was done

before the ACHD review. We are in agreement with their requirement to put school sidewalk,

curb and gutter on Bella Street. Their project wraps around the corner and is as the drawing

shows. We’d take off from there and continue the sidewalk. We’ll build out the sidewalk and

build out to the edge of Bella Street for a full build out on this half section of street. This would

all be part of the Jacksons project. Based on the sidewalk and where it will be and the new street

which will be widened out to match the gutter we’ll have another six feet of landscaping there.

Granted it is on the other side of the property line, but it still would act as a buffer. The plan is

also showing deciduous trees. We can redo this with a variety of solid screening with Conifers.

We do this all the time at the stores where they are up against residential like this. It creates an

almost immediate screen at least six foot high. This would be our solution to this and we have

no problem with widening the sidewalk to 13 feet which would take care of the service drive

issue. We’re also making full improvements on the alley. I don’t know if it is visible in the

drawing, but from State Street on in and then also on State Street coming into the site and all the

way across the alley is all going to be paved and improved with the Jacksons project. This is all

part of our project so we’re taking care of this whole block.

BECKY McKay (Engineering Solutions / Jackson Food Store Representative): I wanted to add

to Dale’s comments since I’ve been dealing with the Highway District. ACHD has approved the

approaches. We show a 54 foot existing approach on State Street and they’ve asked us to reduce


Page 15 of 24

this to 40 feet. ACHD, with their 30th

street project, is closing the approach at this intersection.

They will be reducing some of the landscaping and will be making changes to the corner at the

intersection of 31st Street and State Street. We show 50 feet on the first approach as you enter or

go south on 31st Street. ACHD has asked this be reduced to 40 ft. They’ve agreed to the 34 feet

for the second approach to 31st Street and they also concur with an approach to Bella. One of the

things we discussed is the existing alley is gravel and to the west of us is Oasis Repair and Sales.

They sell used Subaru’s and they work on them. Their site is completely oriented to Bella Street

for commercial purposes. They park these cars all along Bella on the south side in order to

repair them. It was ACHD who asked us to improve the alley by paving it and bringing it up to

standards. As far as what we have to work with our approach would include the alley width for a

total combined approach of 40 feet. They are almost like one approach. In talking with Dale one

of the things which came to mind as far as increasing the width on the landscaping adjoining

Bella is we could reduce the drive aisle on the north side from 23 feet to 20 feet and add the three

feet to the 10 feet, four inches, landscape this with Conifers and then reduce the combined width

of the alley and the approach to Bella to 30 feet whereas it is shown as 34 feet. This is very

similar to the Rose Hill/Roosevelt site in the fact it was an extremely small compact old store

and completely outdated. They have acquired an additional parcel to the north to expand this site

to try to improve circulation, pedestrian access, minimize the impact on the transportation

network by getting rid of the approach right at the intersection and improving the aesthetics by

building a new and modern store. Directly to the east of us is a bar, the Fireside Inn. Directly

south of that is Senior Solutions. There is commercial to the east and west. We do have single-

family residential on the north side of Bella and then two single-families dwellings just south of

the intersection at Bella with older single-families along Bella. We ask the Committee to take

into consideration this is an update to a site. We are retaining the tanks on this site. It does have

an existing fuel island which will be retained which is a site constraint. We ask the Committee

to look at the conditions. We’re in agreement with everything with exception of Condition 1.a.

Staff has eliminated Condition e. and we ask that the Committee change Condition c.

PUBLIC TESTIMONY

DAVID SCHMIDT: I would speak in favor of removing the access driveway off Bella. I would

also speak in favor of a wall to buffer my neighbor on Bella as well as my house. While not

facing Bella I do have quite the view of what will be across the street from Bella. I would also

like for the Committee to consider moving the dumpster location which is at the corner of Bella

and 31st Street to the south side of the Jacksons store. I would like this done because this

dumpster is emptied at 4:20 a.m. I don’t know if any of you have had the misfortune of being

asleep when an empty dumpster is slammed onto the ground, but it is very loud and it happens

already at the Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) which is off State also.

EVELYN HANSEN: I’m in the house right across the street on Bella. I would like to propose

the access on Bella be eliminated due to the fact there is so much traffic all the time. It would be

better to have it on the more public streets of State and 31st Street. It would keep a lot of theft

down because there is a bunch of riffraff in the area due to the bar. It would keep things a lot

more quite for the police officers and everybody. I put up with a lot of noise from this store.

The store is going to be a long ways from the gas pumps. It seems like it will be a mile…or a

long ways. The store needs to be put toward State Street a little more. I don’t want the access on

Bella. Oasis Auto sells their cars on State Street not Bella. The cars are set out front on State

Street for Oasis Auto.


Page 16 of 24

CORY JACKSON (Applicant / Jackson Food Store): I would like to comment on a few things

mentioned. In terms of the location being too far from the pumps we couldn’t agree more. We

would like them to be closer, but the problem is we would like to build this store and keep the

other store open while we’re doing it. The Bella access…there is already an alley there so the

alley isn’t going anywhere. We could certainly, as Becky already mentioned, make this a little

bit smaller. We don’t feel this access will get used much to be honest with you. The issue is

when we’re remodeling these stores…these two stores we’ve talked about tonight both perform

well and they will make less money after we do the bulk of these projects for probably five

years. We’re restricting access already and we’re losing our access on the corner and access is

how we survive. We’re taking a fairly significant risk. There is always risk in business, but both

of these projects are risky and I guarantee they will be less profitable as a function of this. Our

business is changing. We sell a lot less cigarettes and it doesn’t take a big store to sell cigarettes

and make money doing it, but this business is changing and six to eight years from now

hopefully these stores…they are going to be different than what they are today. This is a long-

term play for us in what we’re doing. In terms of the dumpster I don’t know where we could put

this. It was mentioned we could move it to the south. I don’t know if this is a good option

either. They are well built trash enclosures and it will be surrounded by landscaping so I don’t

know that you’ll even really see it when the landscaping is put in.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do you know the hours they pick-up the trash?

CORY JACKSON: I don’t know to be honest. I know a lot of times it is during the day. I don’t

even know if we can request…

AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Voiced in unison 3:30 a.m. to 4:00 a.m.

CORY JACKSON: There is a big house and apartment there so is it our dumpster being picked

up?

EVELYN HANSEN: Yes, sir.

CORY JACKSON: I don’t know how those schedules are done to be honest with you and I

don’t know if we can request a different time.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: When we talk about this we’re going to end up in the

same spot we did with the other project with how we’ll connect this to the urban fabric. Again,

this is on a pavement island and there is an opportunity because the sidewalk is being stretched

around on Bella to connect this building up with Bella so there will probably be some discussion

about this. The second thing I keep hearing is you may or may not need…you don’t really

need…there is not much traffic on this section of ground between the building and Bella. From

my perspective there will be a discussion about if this driveway even needs to exist or can we

eliminate it, change the landscaping and let you situate the building even five feet north instead

of south and eliminate the backside of the building. Before we have that discussion, is this going

to be a show-stopper for you?

CORY JACKSON: The alley is still going to be there. You won’t reduce any customer trips

there so what is the purpose?


Page 17 of 24

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: In this scenario traffic is flowing along the backside of the

building and in the scenario I’m describing the traffic will not go there.

CORY JACKSON: True, but the alley is still there.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: Correct. Now we’ve got this and the alley and the

building sits on a pavement island. If it is a show stopper we need to know.

CORY JACKSON: I can say this and nobody is probably going to believe me, but we really do

not expect this to get used very much. The point of why do we want it? A lot of it has to do with

down the road. When State Street gets done they’re going to build a median right down the

middle of State Street. This is when we think we’re going to need the access to Bella because if

you’re going into town on State Street the option may be to come in on the backside

potentially…we’re just not sure how the site is going to work and I would welcome anyone to

spend the amount of money we’re looking to spend on this location while crossing our fingers to

make sure people can get there and shop. It is a great store now. It doesn’t look very good, but

it is profitable and we will be going backwards as a result of this project and how much risk do

you want to take? We feel like we’re already taking a significant amount of risk in order to

move this project forward. We’re trying to minimize it to the extent we can.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: Thank you.

DAVID ERBLAND: I live about 150 yards from this project. My street is going to be closed

off and I haven’t heard any talk about the Rose Street Expansion or any of that remodel. That

will be a five-lane highway right across the street from this store. This is probably why they are

so excited about remodeling. 31st Street will be three lanes of traffic and my street, Hazel Street,

will be shut down right there. There will be a lot of traffic and I haven’t heard any talk about this

new construction and the patterns of traffic and how it will affect the store. Nothing on this

diagram shows any of this. Jacksons doesn’t own the streets or anything, but I’m sure they are

aware of everything happening in this area and this is probably why they want to remodel. Hazel

Street is not on this map, but it is right there at 31st and it will be shut down. 31

st Street will be

three lanes and no parking. This will be major. They are not very certain about this landscaping

on the front and it shows an existing fire hydrant in dotted lines. They didn’t talk about what

will happen with that. It is surprising they haven’t mentioned any of this new highway

construction or street changes that will be right next to the store. This will have a major impact

on this store and I would assume this is why they are remodeling because of all the new traffic.

Earlier they said, Ada County has the say on all this landscaping and what will happen in the

front so this handout is no good for this. Ada County is taking care of that. By my way of

thinking the entrance on 31st Street is going to be very difficult after this new construction of the

Rose Street Expansion.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL

BECKY McKAY: I would like to answer some of the questions. As far as the 30th

Street project

the landscape plan you see does reflect what ACHD has planned for this intersection. In fact,

they sent their drawings to us and Mr. Binning utilized those to develop his site plan. We’re not

talking about the State Street improvements because that is an Ada County Highway District

project moving forward. We’ve already signed a right of entry to ACHD for them to make these


Page 18 of 24

improvements as proposed on the 30th

Street Extension Plan. We don’t have any control over

those. What we do have control over is trying to add additional area to this site to make this site

function properly, improve it and update it. I did bring an aerial photo which reflects what is out

there. I would like to note 31st Street is designated by ACHD as a local commercial street

whereas State Street is a principal arterial. I would like to submit this into the record. It shows

the existing canopy and fuel islands which will be retained. The tanks are located adjoining

State Street. The existing store is small and the assessor doesn’t fit very well with the aerial

photo of the alley, which is right over here. We have to force them to fit. This Oasis Repair and

Sales and you can see all of their Subaru’s out front. They have all of these cars parked along

Bella. The existing structure here is a single level multi-family dwelling which looks like it

should be condemned. This is a single-family dwelling. The Jacksons site will be expanded out

to Bella. I sat out here on Bella for quite a while. There is a Chevron over here and within the

time I sat there, there were a couple of trips that came down. Directly to the north there is a 60’s

mobile home with the single-family dwelling further north and then a shed adjacent to it. The

single-family dwellings adjoining Bella are over by Oasis Repair and Sales. This gives you an

idea of what is out there.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We’ll label this as Exhibit 1.

BECKY McKAY: We’ve worked closely with ACHD because of the complexity of this site

with the new project. We believe it is a significant improvement over what is out there now

where it is just a lot of asphalt and an old building. They are spending a significant amount of

money and it is a large investment to bring this site up to date. The enclosure can’t be moved as

Cory indicated. What we can do is screen it and heavily vegetate it. We’d like to reduce the

drive aisle behind the building because it is secondary and minimizes the approach. It provides

access and the alley is not going to go away. People can still come through there…it is public.

We ask that the Committee consider the site constraints and what we’re trying to accomplish

with this site plan.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: The gentleman mentioned 31st Street is going to have

three lanes of traffic…is that a turn lane?

BECKY McKAY: Yes. ACHD did indicate they have a turn lane there.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: With regard to the alley onto Bella you mentioned ACHD

in their recommendations for approval approved the alley width plus the proposed curb cut for a

combined width of 30 feet?

BECKY MCKAY: I believe they approved 34 feet of combined width and we’re saying we will

reduce this to 30 feet.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: Onto Bella?

BECKY MCKAY: Yes, this would be onto Bella. That would be a combined width of the alley

because this is a substandard alley in width. The existing alley right-of-way is 12 feet. We’re

adding to and making it more standardized.


Page 19 of 24

EVELYN HANSEN: If the new State Street Expansion is going in it will be one-way three

lanes…well what is going to happen is people who live in the residential area will use the back

way through the alley. There are already so many cars and so much traffic you need a stop light

at 31st and Bella. There are a lot of people who run the stop sign. No access onto Bella is the

best way unless you want to put stop lights up because there is a lot of traffic.

STAFF REBUTTAL

JOSH WILSON: All of the issues have been highlighted well, but one thing to keep in mind is

the reason the 20 foot number was in the staff report. The increase in the buffer along Bella is

the required minimum in the Boise City Landscape Ordinance for the planting of Conifers along

a street buffer. If this increases the 13 feet on the applicant’s property then there would need to

be another seven between there and the sidewalk. I don’t know if we have this so the planting of

Conifers without greatly increasing the landscape buffer back there will be a little problematic. I

do agree there are limited locations for dumpsters on this property. Public Works has clearance

standards of 50 feet clear from front doors and no overhead obstructions. The place where the

applicant has placed the dumpster is about the only one that does work. With the Bella access

staff feels pretty strongly the appropriate places for access are the more commercial and heavily

used streets such as 31st and State. Increasing the alley cut a little bit would be beneficial to

turning movements on the alley, but again this is outside of the right-of-way. The alley is 12 feet

and that’s a little bit narrow for alleys in the city, but it does function. We certainly don’t want

to increase or promote a lot of additional traffic onto Bella Street because we do feel strongly

about limiting that.

PUBLIC PORTION CLOSED

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: I’m perplexed by the service aisle on the back. They say it

won’t be used very much and there is an alley on the west side you could utilize and it will not

be vacated. The reasons for having it…I’m perplexed by this. One of the concerns I have on

some of the heavy evergreen planting or the screened walls is the safety standpoint. Having tall

CMU type screen walls can provide places for people to hide behind as well. The same thing

with some of the heavy evergreen plantings when they are possibly that deep. I don’t know if

Committee Member Taylor has thoughts on either one of these two things.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It is a valid safety point.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: As for the dumpster it doesn’t appear you could keep it

anywhere along Bella. This is the only place where it looks like it would be accessible…not any

better than the other. I understand the applicants concerns with the unknown future and keeping

his options open for any access across Bella and looking at it at this point rather asking for it

later which would be awfully difficult. You do need to consider the residential neighbors to the

north with the existing residential multi-family to the south. This is obviously a step up in the

area, but moves the multi-family to a commercial zone so the appropriate amount of screening

etc. should be considered.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: I would also suspect as the neighborhood continues to

evolve just as this site is evolving the property to the north is doing the same where the existing

trailer house will probably find another use in some residential format possibly at that location.


Page 20 of 24

With the Fireside Tavern there and the activities those generate from time-to-time with a 24 hour

C-Store all kinds of things can happen at different times of the day and night and Committee

Member Marsh’s concerns about creating the area to the north of the building where somebody

could go and do whatever back there to pedestrians passing by or other things is certainly

possible so we have to be a little careful of how we choose to screen the backside of the building.

It is the back of the house and there is only an exit door out of there and nothing related to the

use of the building that will take the operator out the back door other than an emergency or a

short cut to the dumpster. Creating a screen out there to aesthetically improve the look of the

building from across the street is appropriate, but how densely it is done and how well it is done

are two different things other than providing a solid wall there.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Both. The access from Bella is eliminated and the other is not going to

be done. The need for the screening…

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: The sidewalk…bringing it around on Bella is a nice thing.

Again, the sidewalk on the east side of the building could be extended through to Bella Street if

we wanted to provide some minimal pedestrian access that wasn’t through the landscape area or

across the parking lot.

COMMITTEE MEMBER COTA: I would like to bring up the issue of the dumpster. Obviously

this is an issue with a lot of the neighbors and I wondered if there is a possibility of moving the

dumpster to the west side of the building. There is alleyway and plenty of open area there for a

dump truck to go in if they are able to move it. This would make it accessible, but still out of the

way from the neighbors.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Are you thinking the front side or the exit?

COMMITTEE MEMBER COTA: On the backside. Maybe just take it into consideration as an

option.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: You’re going to need 50 feet.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: The 50 foot clearance part is tough with residences across

Bella…short of putting it on the side of the store I’m not crazy about either. I’m sure the

applicant isn’t either. The more I think about the service drive having a little bit of open

space…maybe if we can dress up the building a little bit and since we’re not getting more

landscaping if they reduced it to a 20 foot drive aisle along the back with three more feet of

landscaping and trimmed up the access at the alley as suggested it does allow a spot even though

we know most of the stuff is going through the front doors, but if they could have less

(inaudible) out of the way a little bit we’d have some service on the back that is not right in front

of the store.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Are you proposing it would not be through access?

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: It seems like it would be somewhat of an awkward turning

motion to get to the front of the store by turning out the alley across the back and we enter on the

service drive and then getting around to the front. It is a concession to the neighbors to the north

and we may want to consider extending the rock wainscot along the north elevation because this


Page 21 of 24

is the only elevation that doesn’t have…kind of turning the back of store from the neighbors and

at least extend some architectural element around the perimeter of the building. This is a cost

consideration for the applicant. If ACHD and everybody is alright with the service drive along

the back and we can extend the landscaping three feet deeper it could be addressed with staff to

provide some visual screening to the neighbors to be sufficient. I really don’t see another spot

for the trash enclosure. They will run into some clearance problems if they try to move it to the

alleyway.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don’t know if it is possible to limit when they take the trash…

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: It would be worth a phone call.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Have we done this before?

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: I don’t know if it is possible, but it is worth a phone call

in consideration to the neighbors to the north. See if the trash people have a little early morning

conscience.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Are the minds coming together or not?

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: Whether the service aisle is or is not on the back of the

building it needs to be consistent with the pedestrian pathway to Bella Street and is still a route

suggestion at this time.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: Staff’s suggestion is to increase the landscape to 20 feet

and if the building stays where it is what does this make the route for the drive aisle?

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: Just to reduce the drive aisle to 20 feet increasing the

landscape by three feet.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They propose to add three feet to the landscape.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: It is 23 feet now and there is 10 feet, four inches of

landscaping from the property line in so it would reduce it to 13 feet…no less.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: This doesn’t sound right for some reason. Site Specific

Condition 1.b. says, increase to 20 feet planted. If it is 20 feet then this is why you wanted to

move the building five feet to the north…I see.

JOSH WILSON: Keeping the building where it is and increasing the buffer to 20 feet both can’t

happen. The applicant stated they felt wrapping the cultured stone around the building would be

appropriate and are willing to do so. Another thought was within the landscape buffer along

Bella they would berm it up with some shrubs and appropriate deciduous trees so it is creating a

buffer, but not just a wall of Conifers and grass, but to create separation with some berming and

shrubs and deciduous trees.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: What is the minimum distance this drive aisle could be

without rendering it useless?


Page 22 of 24

JOSH WILSON: Our minimum standard for two-way traffic is 20 feet. This is also the

minimum for fire access. Anything less than 20 feet then fire can’t get back there. I’m not sure

they would need to because it looks like on this site they could reach all the parts of the building

just fine with their 150 feet (hoses) and it would be restricted to a one-way if it were any less

than 20 feet.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: It sounds like we agree if the driveway is twenty feet the

landscape onsite would be 13 feet, four inches or something like this and then there is another six

feet of offsite landscape strip for 19…the sidewalk to the curb.

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA: Something like that.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It is enough if they’re not using the Conifers.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN MOVED TO APPROVE DRH12-00257 BASED ON

THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSION AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF

REPORT WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS:

CONDITION 1.A. SHALL BE ELIMINATED.

CONDITION 1.C. SHALL BE MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE 30 FOOT

REFERENCE EXPRESSED BY ACHD.

ADD CONDITION 1.G. CULTURED STONE BASE SHALL BE ADDED TO THE

NORTH ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING.

ADD CONDITION 1.H. APPLICANT SHALL ADD A SIDEWALK

CONNECTION FROM THE BELLA STREET SIDEWALK CONNECTING TO

THE EAST SIDEWALK IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING.

CONDITION 1.B. SHALL BE MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE DRIVE AISLE

WIDTH SHALL BE CONTAINED IN 20 FEET WITH THE REMAINED TO BE

A LANDSCAPE BUFFER BETWEEN THERE AND BELLA.

CONDITION 1.E. SHALL BE ELIMINATED.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH SECONDED THE MOTION.

JOSH WILSON: The landscapes along Bella are increased to 13 feet. Would the Committee

like to see some berming on this?

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It’s a good idea to eliminate the Conifers and do a soft berm with the

trees.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN MOVED TO MODIFY THE DESCRIPTION OF

CONDITION 1.B. TO DESCRIBE THE LANDSCAPING AS A BERM WITH THE

APPROPRIATE LANDSCAPING BASED ON STAFF’S RECOMMENDATIONS.


Page 23 of 24

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: The only thing I’m concerned about is the drive aisle and

as shown it is probably only 20 feet behind the building and because you have service equipment

and a fire zone on the back of the building?

CORY JACKSON: I think you are referencing some of the boxes on the other side of the

building. There really isn’t any service equipment. There is utility with the power, a ladder and

roof drains. Our plan is to install bollards down the side about 18 inches from the building to

prevent cars from running into the building and the wainscot. It will end up being less than 20

feet. It is not going to be very wide.

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do we need to modify the width?

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN: What are we looking for? Do we want 20 feet from those

bollards to the berm?

CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The drive aisle needs to be 20 feet so from the bollards to the curb?

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH: What it is now…as it is on the plan or it is going to go to a

one-way drive aisle? I don’t know that we can have gas near the bollards in the service drive.

JOSH WILSON: We’d want 20 feet clear and then the remainder is landscaping so whatever it

ends up being. If they take 18 inches out of that then I’ll take 18 inches out of the landscaping

because we need the 20 feet clear.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN MOVED TO AMEND CONDITION 1.B. TO

REFLECT 20 FEET CLEAR.

COMMITTEE MEMBER MARSH SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION.

ROLL CALL VOTE 4:0.

MINUTES

September 12, 2012

COMMITTEE MEMBER ZABALA MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF

SEPTEMBER 12, 2012.

COMMITTEE MEMBER RUDEEN SECONDED THE MOTION.

ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED WITH COMMITTEE MEMBER TAYLOR

RECUSED.

Meeting adjourned.


Page 24 of 24

__________________________________________

Bruce Taylor, Acting-Chairman

Boise City Design Review Committee

__________________________________________

Date

Documents

Design Review Minutes 10-10-12 - City of Boise · PDF fileDesign Review Committee ... Design Review for a single-story with mezzanine, ... Sarah Schafer, Josh Wilson, Andrea Tuning,