Council remands Juniper Muir subdivision for redesign to remove mid‑block Woolley Avenue driveway

The McCall City Council on Sept. 25 voted to remand the Juniper Muir preliminary plat — a proposed five‑lot subdivision within Spring Mountain Ranch — back to the Planning and Zoning Commission with direction to revise the plan so it does not include a mid‑block driveway onto Woolley Avenue.

Councilors said safety and long‑term access were the council’s chief concerns after several residents and staff questioned whether the project’s proposed driveway pattern would create a hazardous vehicle‑pedestrian interaction on a winter‑snowbound segment of Woolley Avenue. The council’s motion directs staff and the applicant to consider a four‑lot configuration or another revision that would eliminate the middle Woolley Avenue driveway and to resubmit under the record‑of‑survey process if applicable.

The subdivision applicants, Richard and Jillian Hill, said they have revised the site plan to consolidate driveway approaches and add building envelopes and proposed CC&Rs requiring driveway turnarounds, resident pathway maintenance, and short‑term‑rental occupancy limits. ‘‘We would propose that homeowners are responsible for clearing the width of their driveway approach to Woolley Avenue to maintain those sight lines,’’ said Jillian Hill, an applicant and prospective resident. The applicants also offered signage and CCR language to discourage backing into Woolley Avenue.

City Planner Meredith Todd told the council the application met applicable dimensional standards for the R4 zone but that council had previously continued the hearing to resolve pedestrian‑safety and access questions. Todd read public comment into the record and summarized concerns about traffic, snow maintenance, wildlife, density and precedent; she recommended the council specify precisely what additional information should be reviewed if it remands the matter.

Crestline Engineers’ project engineer Greg Tankersley reviewed driveway lengths in the plan and described how lot layouts make forward‑facing exits practical: "based on the nature, the location of the building envelopes, and the lengths of the driveway ... these homeowners are going to have some type of turnaround ... where they can back out, turn around, and then access the property going forward," he said, citing driveway lengths of about 120, 370, 130 and 90 feet for Lots 1–4 respectively.

Several neighbors and written commenters urged the council to protect the parcel’s trees and topography and to consider whether the lot is ‘‘buildable’’ at the density proposed. Greg Allen, a written commenter, urged the council to "be an advocate for the community for responsible and sustainable growth that does not destroy our heritage of beauty."

City staff and the city attorney discussed alternatives to private access on Chip Shot Drive, including negotiation with the Chip Shot HOA and, as a last resort, eminent domain. City Attorney Matt Johnson advised that eminent domain is available for public purposes but would be a challenging option tied to showing public benefit.

After extended discussion the council voted to remand the application to planning and zoning with direction that revisions should include the elimination of the mid‑block Woolley Avenue driveway, reconsideration of pedestrian connectivity, and the option to resubmit as a record of survey (a lower‑level review that applies to four or fewer lots). The roll call vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

What’s next: City staff will work with the applicant to prepare revised materials and resubmit the project. The council indicated that if the applicant revises the proposal to four lots it may proceed through the record‑of‑survey process, which is typically handled at the planning and zoning level without another council public hearing.