►
From YouTube: Ada County P&Z Hearing – March 10, 2022
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
C
D
B
Yeah,
it
was
the
first
two
that
needed
to
be
tabled
under
new
business.
Okay,
do
you
want
to
repeat
the
numbers?
Okay.
A
E
E
The
two
you
had
mentioned,
I'm
sorry,
the
last
three
numbers
have
six
five
three
and
what
was
the
first
one
you'd
mentioned:
two:
zero:
nine,
zero,
nine,
okay.
E
Mr
chairman,
I
remember
that
we
table
item
project
number
two
zero,
two
one
zero
one,
one
four
eight
cumsp
table
that
to
the
april
14
2022
meeting
as
requested
by
the
applicant,
and
also
move
that
we
table
project
number
2021-02852,
zcc
damsp
to
the
may
12
2022
commission
meeting.
Thank.
A
A
Before
we
begin,
I
would
like
to
read
a
prepared
statement
regarding
the
conduct
of
this
meeting.
In
order
for
the
commission
to
con
conduct
the
hearing
in
an
orderly
manner,
the
following
procedures
have
been
established
for
the
hearing
of
individual
applications.
Any
person
wishing
to
testify
should
have
signed
up
online.
If
you
did
not
sign
up
online
or
here
in
the
room,
we
asked
to
use
the
sign
up
sheet
in
the
back
of
the
room.
A
If
you
are
online,
you
can
still
use
the
public
hearing
testimony
registration
form
found
on
the
ada
county
development
services,
public
hearing
information,
page
chairperson,
will
open
the
public
hearing
for
the
applications,
and
each
application
will
be
separately
considered.
Pursuant
to
the
following
process,
planning
staff
will
present
the
application
in
the
form
of
a
staff
report
which
includes
conditions
of
approval.
The
commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
the
staff
to
clarify
their
understanding
of
the
application.
A
The
applicant
will
then
be
given
the
opportunity
to
present
their
proposal
and
respond
to
questions
from
the
commissioners.
Testimony
will
be
taken
in
regard
to
the
application
and
general
comments
pertaining
to
the
application
will
be
heard
by
persons
wishing
to
speak
limited
to
three
minutes
for
each
speaker.
Persons
giving
testimony
will
be
called
to
the
podium
and
should
begin
by
clearly
stating
their
name
and
address
for
the
record.
When
public
testimony
is
concluded,
the
applicant
will
be
given
an
opportunity
for
rebuttal
and
summation
of
their
testimony.
A
The
staff
may
provide
clarification
on
the
information
given
and
answer
additional
questions
from
the
commissioners.
Then,
once
the
public
testimony
is
concluded
and
the
public
hearing
is
closed,
the
commissioners
will
discuss
the
application,
motions
will
be
made
and
the
commissioners
will
vote
on
the
motion
regarding
the
application.
A
A
E
A
F
I
moved
I
move
to
move
item
two
zero.
Two
one,
zero.
Three
one,
two
three
dash
s
dash
pr
to
be
the
first
item
we
discussed
this
evening.
E
A
G
Thank
you,
commissioner,
burch,
and
just
to
clarify
you
did
table
the
first
two
items.
You
moved
two
old
new
business
items
to
old
business
and
you
tabled
those
as
well,
so
that.
G
G
C
G
All
righty,
sorry
about
that
before
you,
we
have
application.
Two
zero,
two
one,
zero
three
one,
two
three
s
dash
p
r:
this
is
for
ackerman
s.
Fold
made
in
fort
is
state
subdivision,
so
this
is
a
preliminary
plat
and
a
private
road
application
to
create
two
five
acre
lots
as
you'll
see
here
in
the
vicinity
map.
This
property
is
located
just
west
of
highway
16
north
of
beacon,
light
road.
G
So
the
intention
of
the
subdivision
is
for
the
western
lot
to
then
be
further
annexed
into
the
city
of
star
as
part
of
a
larger
subdivision.
The
the
eastern
lot
of
this
two
lot
subdivision
will
remain
in
the
county,
with
access
off
of
polar
lane,
property
is
located
at
3605,
north
hollard
lane
or
yeah
lane.
It's
not
a
road
and
consists
of
approximately
10.01
acres.
G
So,
as
I
stated,
there
will
be
two
residential
lots
created
a
private
road
easement
for
west
trident
ridge.
Lane
is
also
going
to
be
provided,
so
both
lots
can
have
the
required
frontage
and
access.
This
will
be
an
easement
that
will
originate
from
polar
lane
where
the
existing
rural
residence
takes
access.
G
G
A
15
lot
subdivision
is
proposed
of
the
western
lot
and
a
road
will
service
the
site
from
the
western
achd
public
roadways.
At
this
time.
The
easter,
the
eastern
5
acre
lot
would
remain
in
the
county
and
would
also
retain
the
rut.
Zoning
the
city
of
star
staff
has
worked
with
ada
county
development
services
and
the
applicant
on
a
path
forward
to
annex.
Only
a
portion
of
this
existing
parcel
allow
the
property
owner
to
keep
all
existing
outbuildings
the
residents
on
county
property
or
in
unincorporated
county.
G
It
was
determined
that
a
subdivision
application
and
this
private
road
must
first
take
place
and
be
approved
with
ada
county
before
the
annexation
takes
place.
I
will
note,
too,
that
the
subdivision
complies
with
chapter
8-6
of
the
ada
county
code,
since
the
proposed
lots
comply
with
the
dimensional
standards
for
the
rut
districts,
the
property
is
within
stars
area,
city
impact
and
their
comprehensive
plan,
as
adopted
by
the
county,
is
applicable.
G
This
subdivision
is
compatible
with
the
adopted
land
use
map
and,
as
the
existing
single
family,
drawing
is
to
remain.
It
will
be
supported
by
the
comp
plan.
Staff
is
recommending
approval
of
this
application
with
conditions
we
did
not
have
any
neighborhood
opposition
nor
agency
comments
in
opposition
and
I'll
stand
for
any
questions.
E
Do
I
have
it
on
my
face
all
day,
I
just
throw
clarification,
the
order
that
things
have
to
be
done,
so
they
have
to
put
that
extra
wide
access
road
in
there
and
then
once
it's
approved,
then
they
can
set
it
up.
G
Chairman
burch,
commissioner
wickstrom,
so
essentially
how
this
is
going
to
work
is
yes,
they
have
to
get
approval
of
the
preliminary
plat
and
a
private
road
application.
The
private
road
will
be
essentially
within
an
easement.
It
will
not
be
constructed,
but
it
will
be
bonded
for
and
then
after
that
goes
through.
The
applicant
will
have
to
come
back
vacate
the
the
private
road
easement
and
then
annex
the
western
law
into
the
city
of
star,
where
they
can
subdivide
it
further.
G
A
F
Hi,
my
name
is
nicholas
cando,
I'm
one
of
the
owners
of
west
being
my
llc.
H
Yes,
good
evening,
antonio
coontanol,
7661,
west,
riverside
garden
city
garden
city,
I'm
the
land,
surveyor
city
field,
engineer
working
on
the
project.
The
project
like
conor
mentioned
is
to
the
ultimate
goal,
is
to
create
to
be
able
to
annex
into
the
city
of
star
and
to
create
15
lots
to
be
able
to
to
be
attached
to
the
crystal
subdivision.
That
was
recently
under
construction.
H
We
met
with
the
city
of
star.
I
see
the
stars
in
favor
of
the
project.
There
is,
you
know,
a
few
things
that
need
to
happens
before
that,
because
this
land
was
plotted
back
in
when
it
was
the
80s.
We
were
unable
to
do
a
single
lot
split,
which
would
have
been.
You
know
a
little
bit
more
at
the
administrative
level
coming
before
you
that,
therefore,
we're
coming
in
with
this
preliminary
plot
and
then
followed
by
the
final
plot.
Like
conor
mentioned,
the
private
road
will
be
bonded
when
we
don't
intend
to
construct
it.
H
E
H
F
H
For
this
portion
of
it
there
is
some
concern
they
came
in
on
the
some
of
the
requirements.
The
city
may
have
there's
a
gentleman
to
the
north
that
has
livestock
as
horses.
So
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
there
is
some
fences
put
up
between
the
two
subdivisions,
so
there
won't
be
much
interaction
between
the
new
owner
or
the
subdued
and
the
horses.
H
That's
pretty
much
the
only
comment
we
received.
There
were
one
two
three
of
the
neighbors
that
came
over
the
other
question
came
in
from
the
neighbor
to
the
west
that
they
owned
a
little
there's
a
one
acre
outlawed
to
the
west,
and
that's
some
concern
because
there
are
some
pigs
out
there
are
concerned.
What's
going
to
happen
if
people
complain
well,
there
is
a
right
to
farm
here
in
idaho,
so
they
you
know
they
risk
big,
the
risk
pig
and
what
we
did.
F
Chairman
bridge,
my
other
question:
did
you
have
an
opportunity
to
review
the
findings
of
fact
and
conclusions
of
law
and,
if
so
is,
do
you
have
any
issues
or
are
you
okay
with
conforming
to
those
well.
H
We
are
okay
with
that.
We
review
that
we
read
them,
we
send
them
to
the
owner
for
the
review
and
they
were
no
no
major
concern
nothing
out
of
the
ordinary
honestly
perfect.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
A
A
B
B
A
A
I
Yes,
chairman,
thank
you
so,
as
I
think,
conor
was
going
to
see
this
up
for
you,
but
you
tabled
this
with
limited
testimony
to
be
received
at
this
hearing
between
the
applicant
and
the
cling
estates,
homeowners,
and
they
have
opted
to
select
the
spokesperson
for
them
and
running
that
by
you
and
our
chair.
That
seemed
to
be
an
efficient
way
to
get
through
this
meeting.
I
E
A
G
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Birch
leon
summed
up
a
lot
of
it,
but
I
will
say
that
yeah.
This
is
application.
Two
zero,
two
one:
zero.
Two,
five,
seven
seven
see
you
msb
msp.
G
This
is
for
the
bukkerts
due
to
wall
sellers,
so
this
application
for
dude
dewalt
was
tabled
at
the
february
19
2022
public
hearing
that
was
tabled
to
allow
the
applicant
and
property
owners
within
neighboring
cling
estate,
sub
time
to
work
out
some
possible
strategies
to
mitigate
impacts
to
the
area
as
a
result
of
the
winery
and
the
club
lodge
or
social
hall
applications
based
upon
the
pnz's
commission's
motion
last
meeting.
Testimony
will
only
be
heard
by
these
folks
staff
is
still
recommending
approval
our
original
approval
with
conditions
of
approval.
A
D
J
Hello
commissioners,
my
name
is
trey
buchert
5446,
highway
16,
along
with
my
wife,
jonna
good,
to
see
everybody
again
going
to
be
a
regular
occurrence.
Last
time
we
were
here,
you
had
asked
us
to
reach
out
to
our
neighbors
and
try
to
get
together
and
come
to
a
resolution
of
some
type
on
this
request
for
an
event
center.
J
So
boy,
we've
john
and
I
went
around
for
a
couple
weeks,
trying
to
figure
out
what
possibly
be
a
good
solution,
and
we
came
up
with
a
way
that
we'd
like
to
present
to
you
and
see
if
it's
something
you
want
to
want
to
take
on.
So
what
what
we
talked
about
was
reverting
back
to
our
original
cup
that
we
operate
under
right
now,
and
in
doing
so,
we
would
make
we
would
not
change
the
cup.
J
What
we
would
make
clarifications
to
exactly
what
an
event
or
daily
or
a
typical
operating
event
would
be
for
our
operation,
so
we
could
operate
within
those
parameters.
Right
now,
there
really
is
no
clear
definition
of
what
we
do
or
what
we
can,
what
we
can
do
out
there,
for
instance,
food
trucks
and
music
and
our
when
we
have
a
wine
club
pickup
parties.
If
we
have
some
type
of
a
an
even
a
fundraiser
event,
those
type
of
things
nothing's
divine
for
us.
J
So
what
we
thought
was
if
we
could
go
back
and
we
could
clarify
exactly
what
it
is
that
we're
able
to
do
with
our
current
cup
without
modifying
the
cup
and
work
within
the
constraints
of
that
that
maybe
we
could
come
to
a
win-win-win
situation
for
all
parties
involved,
and
I
would
say
that
we
haven't
100
percent
come
to
a
final
resolution
with
the
neighbors,
but
we
have
shared
it
with
them,
and
I
think
we
were
very
close.
One
of
the
challenges
was:
how
do
we
do
this
without
having
to
modify
the
old
cup?
J
K
You
know
if
we
think
this
is
a
step
towards
getting
closer
to
closing
this
thing
up
and
not
making
it
a
monthly
occurrence.
Then
I
would
say
if
that's
the
suggestion,
at
least
it's
just
something,
it's
a
suggestion.
I'd
say
we
try
to
move
forward
with
it.
That
way,
if
that's
going
to
get
us
closer.
B
I'm
also
open
to
entertaining
that
idea.
My
only
question
would
be
more
for
staff
from
like
a
procedural
standpoint,
how
that
would
all
work
out
and
if
that's
okay
from
a
process
point
of
view.
Mr.
A
I
I
J
Under
our
current
cup,
we're
allowed
to
have
24
events
of
up
to
50
people.
J
And
that's
the
language
that
is
included
in
it
right
there
and
I'll
just
read
it
quickly.
The
approval
includes
the
use
of
site
for
marketing
promotional
events
included,
but
not
limited
to
winemakers
dinners
club
events.
The
marketing
promotional
events
are
limited
to
no
more
than
24
events
per
year
with
the
maximum
attendance
of
50
percent
or
attendees
per
event.
Other
events,
such
as
weddings,
etc,
are
prohibited.
These
types
of
event
would
require
an
approval
from
a
social
hall
event
center
and
that's
you
know
where
we're
going,
obviously
with
this
social
hall
event
center.
J
So
what
our
proposal
is?
How
do
we
basically
put
on
this
list?
What
is
a
promotional
event
and
a
non-promotional
event
without
getting
outside
of
what
we're
trying
to
do
here
so
specifically
I'll
give
you
one
example
on
here:
winemakers
dinners
was
specifically
called
out
as
a
wine
club
event,
so
we
put
that
over.
J
A
promotional
wine
club
event,
so
we
put
that
in
the
left,
which
would
be
limited
by
our
2450..
However,
things
like
food
trucks
when
we
have
live
music
and
everything
on
the
right
hand,
side
birthday,
parties
right
now
we're
counting
as
an
event.
J
We
we
put
those
over
on
the
right
hand
side
since
they
weren't
specifically
called
out
in
our
cup,
and
what
we're
asking
is
that
we
could
come
to
basically
an
agreement
between
the
parties
here
that
if
we
can
come
up
with
a
list
and
how
to
classify
that
that
we
would
be
given,
on
the
right
hand,
side
an
unlimited
number
of
those
event
or
activities
on
the
right-hand
side
and
the
events
on
the
left-hand
side
would
be
living.
It
limited
to
24
7.
J
in
exchange,
we'd
keep
weddings
and
concerts
off
the
list,
and
we
would
drop
the
request
for
an
event
center
cup.
Now
in
saying
that
we
have
not
gotten
100
buy-in
from
the
neighbors,
but
I
think
we
were
in
the
ballpark
of
something
to
talk
about,
and
they
can
talk
more
about
that
when
they
get
up
there.
So
that
that's
that
proposal-
and
if
this
is
something
that
you
know
we're
not
sure
we
want
to
go
down
the
road
on,
we
can
address
our
proposal
on
the
event
center
side.
J
So
what
we
requested
in
the
letter
that
we
submitted
to
the
commissioners
here
list
last
week
was
basically
what
we
felt
would
be
in
alignment
with
what
was
has
been
presented
or
proposed
to
other
event
centers
in
the
community,
and
that
was
an
unlimited
number
of
events,
including
weddings
and
concerts
up
to
500
people
or
limited
by
the
entities
such
as
itd
central
district
health,
those
type
of
entities,
whatever
restrictions
they
put
on
us
or
by
our
parking.
J
What
we're
willing
to
do
here
on
this
thing
here
because,
like
I
said
our
50
limit
event,
just
it
just
doesn't
work
for
us
we're
looking
over
our
back
every
day.
What
we're
willing
to
do
is
drop
weddings
drop
concerts
and
reduce
our
number
to
250
people
max
or
limited
by
our
parking
and
whatever
entities
put
restrictions
on
us
and
we
get
unlimited
events.
Seven
days
a
week,
ten
to
seven,
just
like
our
current
time
frame,
keep
this
simple
and
move
forward.
J
Well,
we
really,
we
just
don't
want
it.
So,
okay,.
J
J
J
This
is
I
we
realize
this
is
a
difficult
situation.
This
impacts
our
neighbors.
It
impacts
our
business
that
we're
trying
to
operate,
and
you
know
we
want
to
come
to
something
where
we
can
all
work
together.
Bottom
line
is,
like
I've,
told
the
neighbors
we're
going
to
do
our
best
to
be
good
neighbors
and
that's
the
bottom
line,
because
right
now
we
have
the
opportunity
to
drive
everybody's
life
crazy
with
our
current
cup,
and
we
try
not
to
do
that.
So
you
know
that's
that's
where
we're
coming
from
here.
So
all
righty
thank.
C
E
K
J
Well,
pretty
much
be
everything
that
we
have
on
this
list
right
now,
which
would
include
our
wine
club
release.
J
Birthdays
anniversaries,
us
you
know
a
small
wedding
reception
I
put
on
there
if
somebody
comes
up
with
just
a
small
party
mother's
day,
valentine's
day,
offerings
chocolate,
jewelry
that
type
of
stuff
and
announcements
when
we
do
social
media
and
that
type
of
stuff
that
we're
actually
announcing
things
can
music
that
we
play
over
the
amplifier
off
of
the
radio
or
whatever
live
music
food
trucks,
pickup
parties,
which
some
times
will
run
several
days
just
so
we
can
keep
the
numbers
down,
so
we
don't
get
too
crowded
there
like
a
business
meeting
or
a
christmas
party,
would
be
another
example
and
personal
functions.
J
Sometimes
we'll
have
some
friends
come
over
and
hang
out,
and
we
don't
want
to
count
that
we
also
had
that
you
know
like
like
this
last
year.
I
think
it
was
talked
about.
Last
time
we
had
a
dove
hunt
at
our
house
for
one
morning
on
opening
dub
day
and
it
was
kind
of
a
fun
little
event.
Fundraisers
a
small
car
show
something
like
that.
I
know
john,
and
I
talked
a
little
bit
about
that
as
well.
J
M
I
do
have
one
thing:
I'd
like
to
say:
yes,
so
I've
never
really
talked
before.
We've
never
really
divulged.
How
many
club
members
we
had
because
it's
kind
of
personal,
it's
personal
business
information,
but
we
really
have
800
club
members,
you
guys
in
order
to
get
that
many
people
through
to
pick
up
their
wine
on
a
regular
basis.
M
M
When
we
have
that
many
club
members
we're
trying
to
get
through
to
pick
up
their
wine,
and
we
can't
really
do
anything
that
attracts
anybody,
because
that
would
violate
our
our
50
people
rule
so
we're
trying
to
be
good
stewards,
we're
trying
to
to
fit
in
the
parameters.
I'm
here
we're
here,
because
we
want
to
be
compliant
and
we
don't
want
to
be
breaking
the
rules
and
lord
knows
we're
going
to
have
people
watching.
So
that's
what
we're
asking
for
just
something
simple,
something
clean,
just
easy
guys.
J
J
Restricted
by
itd
central
district
help,
whatever
other
fire
department,
what
restrictions
they
put
on.
A
A
G
We're
gonna
have
to
get
give
us
one
sec.
C
J
So
so
so
the
idea
here
was:
we
didn't
think
that
there
would
be
much
opportunity
to
modify
the
existing
cup,
so
we
were
trying
to
work
within
the
constraints
of
it
by
just
just
identifying
exactly
what
it
is
that
our
events
are
that
we
we
need
or
want
to
hold
at
the
winery,
so
we
defined
them
based
on
what
is
an
event
and
what
is
just
normal
operating
activity
at
a
winery.
J
J
Sure
live
music
could
be
a
good
example.
If
we
have
live
music,
I
mean
it's
common,
even
when
we
don't
have
live
music,
that
there
will
be
50
people
that'll
that
might
come
up
and
wander
around
the
property.
So
if
we
have
live
music,
all
of
a
sudden
we're
violating
our
cup,
so
that
would
be
a
good
example.
Maybe
a
food
truck,
a
wine
pickup
party,
you
know.
J
Well,
over
100
people
at
any
given
time
you
know
so,
there's
there's
there's
various
times
that
that
can
happen.
J
You
know
the
problem
with
this
here
is
that
they're,
with
with
going
this
route,
is
we're
reverting
back
to
the
old
cup.
We've
got
reporting
activities
that
are
due
now
now
we're
going
to
have
to
do
more,
counting
and
more
reporting,
and
you
know
we're
going
to
be
looking
over
our
own
backs
more
than
if
we
just
made
it
clean
and
said:
unlimited
250
people,
no
weddings
or
concerts,
just
just
keep
it
clean.
F
First
of
all,
thank
you
for
for
coming
back
here
and
being
here
tonight.
I
appreciate
it
and
and
your
attempt
to
come
up
with
a
creative
solution.
That's
it's!
It's
great!
You
know,
I
think
what
this
really
highlights
is.
Is
you
know
we
really
need
a
legislative
historian
to
see
what
the
what
the
intent
was
with
the
24
events
and
50
was
that
it
was
there's
other.
You
know
it's
so.
F
I
really
like
and
appreciate
this
this
solution,
and
my
question
for
you
is
in
regards
to
the
social
hall
application
that
that
we
have
tonight
you've
expressed
the
restriction
on
occupancy
numbers.
Numbers
are
people
250
per
event.
Was
there
a
number
of
events
per
year
or
would
that
be
year-round?
Yeah.
J
M
N
I
Chairman,
I
chairman,
I
do
have
a
question
addition.
Just
a
procedural
note
that
you
know
before
you
is
a
new
cu,
not
really
a
modification
to
the
old
cu.
So
I
think
from
a
procedural
standpoint,
if
you
were
going
to
go
plan
a
or
plan
b,
I
think
technically
they
would
both
be
a
social
event
center.
I
It's
just
one
would
be
a
much
more
ratcheted
down
version
is
kind
of
how
we
could
get
these
things
plugged
in
and
if
they
ever
wanted
to
expand
beyond
that,
it
would
be
a
modification
to
that
cu
or
a
new
cu
for
the
bigger
social
events
center.
So
I
think
it
gets
to
the
same
end.
It's
just.
We
don't
really
have
a
a
modification
of
the
winery
in
front
of
you
today
we
have
a
new
cu
for
the
events
center.
So
just
keep
that
in
mind.
I
As
you're
considering
plan
a
versus
plan
b
is
that
you
know
there
wasn't
really
a
request
to
step
into
the
old
winery
cu.
However,
I
know
that
we
kind
of
did
that
last
hearing
when
you
were
like
well,
let's
limit
these
promotional
events
down
to
a
certain
number
because
we're
giving
you
know
new
events
and
things
like
that,
so
just
wanted
to
state.
Procedurally,
that's
really
kind
of
what
you're
looking
at
is
a
new
cu,
either
at
one
level
or
another,
but
both
for
an
event
center.
So.
B
I
Yeah
chairman
commissioner,
extend
yes,
it
would
be,
and-
and
I
think
conor
did
a
good
job
of
showing
you
some
of
the
other
conditions
that
we
attach
to
the
the
big
bundle
of
conditions
that
exist
with
the
winery
and
and
the
new
event
center.
It
would
all
be
consolidated
into
one
long
list
so
that
we're
not
asking
the
bukers
and
the
community
to
figure
out
which
cu
is
being
regulated
or
not.
We
wanted
to
bring
all
those
under
under
one
collected
group
of
conditions.
G
Commissioner
burch,
I
just
wanted
to
add
the
beaucrett's
presentation
here,
as
exhibit
number
42.
and
then
mr
hill,
here,
I
believe
he
has
a
presentation
as
well
it'll
be
exhibit
43.
L
G
L
L
L
Because
I
represent
the
homeowners,
we
made
a
plan
because
we
want
to
provide
a
unified
statement,
so
I'm
going
to
stay
on
script,
but
then
there's
some
responses
to
some
of
the
specifics.
We
just
heard
so
johnna
buchert
asks
you
to
treat
dude
dewalt
centers
the
same
way
you
treat
all
event
centers,
there's
just
one
problem:
they're,
not
an
event
center.
They
are
a
winery.
L
The
events
that
are
afforded
wineries
are
intended
to
be
about
wine,
agriculture,
grapes,
the
vineyard
food
pairings,
how
to
taste
barrel,
tastings
tours
of
the
vineyard,
come
stomp,
your
own
grapes,
dinners
with
a
wine
maker
events
were
intended
to
be
about
agriculture
and
wine,
and
they
specifically
to
speak
to
commissioner
roush
what
the
intention
was.
They
specifically
said:
no
weddings.
L
L
We
burned
up
more
than
half
of
those
28
days
with
no
real
communication
between
the
two
parties,
but
we
tried
then,
when
we
finally
got
the
first
response
of
any
content
from
john
a
booker.
It
said
we
want
unlimited
events
and
500
people,
so
their
attempt
at
negotiation
was
doubling
the
ask
of
the
number
of
attendants
now
in
a
moment,
I'll
go
through
the
13
points
that
the
cling
homeowners
came
up
with.
L
L
So
for
the
reason,
the
reason
why
we
crafted
these
13
things
was
because
we
were
responding
to
you
and
the
bookers.
The
bucherts
had
a
couple
of
problems.
Problem
number
one
was
gee.
Diana
sanders
tells
us
when
two
people
show
up
celebrating
a
birthday
that
triggers
the
use
of
one
of
their
precious
24
events.
L
Another
problem
was
they
have
these
wine
club
pickups
four
times
a
year
two
days?
Well
that
two
four
six
that's
eight
days,
chews
up
a
lot,
so
we
sat
down
to
try
to
solve
that.
One
other
thing:
by
applying
for
a
social
hall
status
that
triggered
several
things:
star:
fire
and
itd.
Let's
talk
about
itd
with
itd
applications.
L
L
Nonetheless,
what
itd
has
given
you
for
the
social
hall
status
is
okay,
they
can
have
15
of
these
large
events
only
15.,
and
then
they
defined
what
those
two
kinds
of
things
are.
That
would
count
for
the
15..
The
two
were
set
time.
Events
and
all-day
events.
A
set
time
event
would
be
something
like
a
concert
elton
john
at
7
pm.
L
Now,
in
that
condition,
there
can
be
up
to
42
vehicles
in
an
hour
or
a
total
of
92
people
so
based
upon
itd
their
max
is
92..
Then
there
was
the
all-day
event:
10
a.m
to
10
p.m.
The
circus,
the
shakespearean
festival,
car
show
chili
festival
dances,
whatever
the
limits
there
were,
575
people
or
250
vehicles,
that's
based
upon
itd,
and
it
was
a
limit
of
15
of
those
15
of
1,
0,
14
and
1.
You
get
the
idea,
so
let's
talk
about
what
would
happen.
L
So
if
there
was
a
concert
at
7
o'clock,
they'd
have
to
count
cars
and
count
heads,
but
the
moment
they
got
to
92
people.
It's
done
condition
b,
the
all
day,
event
the
moment
they
got
to
250
vehicles
or
575
heads
they
stopped.
So
let's
say
they
started
at
10
a.m.
By
2
30
they
had
their
250th
car
they'd
have
to
block
entrance.
L
L
We
defined
what
an
event
was
advertised
in
any
way
planned
in
advance
tickets
sold
entrance
fees
charged
live
event
played
outside
of
wine
club
pickups
and
organically
up
to
20.
People
can
show
so
20
people
show
up
and
say
we're
celebrating
a
birthday.
It's
it's
birch's
anniversary
party.
It's
wix,
room's
graduation.
L
L
L
Hvac
buildings
that
are
on
their
plan
number
six.
We
want
to
give
them
four
full
weeks,
20
days
of
wine
pickup
that
don't
count
towards
their
events.
It's
interesting,
my
neighbor
john
fiorino,
said
you
know,
rather
than
trying
to
force
them
into
getting
all
of
their
800
people
through
in
two
days.
Let's
give
them
a
whole
five
days
that
way
they
can
spread
it
out.
So
we
decided
to
say
four
times
a
year.
You
can
have
five
days
for
your
wine
club
pickups.
It
doesn't
count
as
one
of
the
36
now
events.
L
We
asked
for
two
walls,
one
in
front
of
their
existing
patio
and
they
have
an
outdoor
patio
used
to
be
a
basketball
court
for
their
kids
and
usually
there's
50
people
plus
up
there
drinking
wine.
Those
two
patios
need
to
be
screened.
Number
nine.
The
private
residence
may
not
be
used
for
public
weddings,
concerts
or
events.
L
Our
concern
is
the
loophole
of
private
event
to
be
told,
gee
neighbors.
That
was
a
private
event.
Well,
did
you
sell
wine?
If
you
did
it's
not
a
private
event,
number
12,
that
they
amend
their
master
plan
and
they
not
build
the
tasting
room
at
area.
16.
reason
for
that
when
you
gave
them
this
cup,
we
appealed.
We
asked
for
a
250-foot
setback.
L
All
they
did
on
their
master
plan
was
draw
a
line
through
the
circular
patio
at
the
end,
but
that's
still
immediately
behind
john
fiorino's
house
and
mine,
lastly,
that
they
not
apply
for
a
liquor
license,
so
we've
boiled
it
down
to
13..
I
don't
know
the
legal
of
what
it
has
to
be.
We
find
the
social
hall
status
abhorrent
because
it's
unlimited.
L
We
suggest
that
you
add,
delete
or
amend
the
current
cup
now.
We
believe
that
last
time,
sorry,
commissioner
burch
I'm
going
to
pick
on
you
a
little
bit,
but
here
it
goes
so
you
said
at
the
last
pnc
meeting
staff
sends
over
a
report
and
it
may
be
marked
recommended
for
approval,
and
you
said,
and
I'm
not
picking
on
you
I
loved
it.
I
thought
it
was
right.
You
said
our
job
essentially
is
not
to
rubber
stamp.
You
said
our
job
is
to
determine
if
it
ought
to
be
done
or
not.
L
Our
claim
is
that
the
staff,
while
awaiting
all
of
the
facts
and
the
laws
when
it
gets
to
303
d,
that's
a
tough
one,
303
d
is
have
you
adversely
impacted
the
neighbors.
Now,
if
you
lived
at
my
house,
sat
on
my
patio
you'd
know
sort
of
like
that
supreme
court
line.
I
don't.
I
can't
define
pornography,
but
I
know
it
when
I
see
it.
L
I've
experienced
adverse
effects
just
from
their
current
conditional
use
on
behalf
of
the
clings
homeowners.
The
social
hall
status
delivers
severe
painful
and
perpetual
dement
detrimental
adverse
impacts.
We've
already
been
adversely
impacted
by
the
current
cup.
You
asked
us
to
work
with
dude
dewalt,
sellers
and
boy.
We
tried
I
emailed
emailed
called
an
email
the
one
time
there
was
a
face-to-face
meeting
with
myself
and
the
bucharts
johnna
buchert
said
we
don't
trust
you
and
that
pretty
much
ended
that
meeting.
L
L
There
hasn't
been
big
dialogue.
A
lot
of
the
dialogue
has
been
among
the
cleans
homeowners.
Hammering
this
out.
We
came
up
with
a
plan.
You
have
our
13
points,
we
say,
don't
give
them
the
event
hall
status,
and
I
wonder
if
this
would
set
a
precedent
because
you'd
be
taking
an
agricultural
cup
and
merging
it
with
event
hall,
because
they'd
still
be
a
winery.
L
A
A
A
J
Just
a
couple
of
clarifications
here-
and
I
know
that
the
itd
proposal
for
our
entrance
was
maybe
a
little
bit
confusing,
but
just
to
be
clear
that
it
said
that
if
we
exceeded
575
vehicles
in
a
day
it
would
trigger
one
of
our
15
times
a
year.
We
could
do
that
or
if
we
exceeded
42
vehicles
or
92
persons
in
one
hour
it
would
it
would
trigger
one
of
our
15
times
a
year.
They
were
going
to
allow
us
to
do
that
with
just
putting
in
our
right
turn
lane,
so
we
weren't
limited
below
that.
J
We
were
just
triggering
an
event
above
that.
So
I
want
to
make
that
clear.
I
guess
my
my
other
comment-
and
I
know
john-
has
got
to
come
a
couple
comments
here,
but.
J
I
want
to
keep
this
thing
simple.
You
can
see
that
there's
a
a
a
lot
of
I
don't.
I
wouldn't
call
it
confusion,
but
there's
there's
a
lot
being
floating
around
out
here,
just
with
the
discussions
that
are
taking
place
and
boy.
If
we're
tracking
every
little
thing
we're
doing
this,
it's
I'm
just
afraid
it's
not
going
to
get
any
better
than
it
is
right
now
and
that's
why
I'm
really
a
proponent.
M
Well,
I
resent
a
little
bit
that
he
said
that
we
haven't.
I
think
we
sent
three
days
ago,
our
first
list
of
things
to
talk
to
them
about,
so
it
wasn't
like
it
just
showed
up
at
three
o'clock
today
anyway,
there's
some
some
discord
there.
This
is
the
first
time
we've
ever
seen
the
13
point
list
just
for
your
information.
M
Another
thing
I
just
wanted
to
indicate
mr
hill's,
inviting
you
to
his
patio
says
he
lives
next
door.
He
hasn't
moved
in
yet
he
is
not
yet
at
his
residence,
so
he
hasn't
seen
anything
out
here.
That's
been
going
on,
except
for,
if
he's
happened
to
be
there
or
just
he's
taking
from
mr
fiorina's,
what's
what's
going
on
again,
I
would
just
say
yes,
I
want
simple
too
also
when
we
talked
to
both
the
fiorinos
and
mr
hill.
Their
biggest
concern
surprising
enough.
Wasn't
the
music.
M
It
was
the
talking
the
talking
that
people
are
heard
from
you
know
our
patio
and
also
the
winery.
So
it's
not
the
music,
it's
the
talking.
That's
bothering
them
the
most.
That's
that's
what
they
said
that
we
asked.
What
is
your
biggest
issue,
and
it's
the
talking,
so
I'm
not
sure
that
an
amphitheater
is
gonna.
Stop
that
I'm
not
sure
that
music
really
is
the
problem.
It's
the
fact
that
this
is
next
door.
M
We
are
next
door,
we've
been
next
door
for
two
years
almost
in
may,
I'm
not
sure
that
that
an
amphitheater
is
gonna
solve
the
issue.
M
M
This
is
a
winery
not
an
event
center,
but
underhill
gardens
has
approached
us
to
sell
our
wine
they're
going
to
be
able
to
sell
our
wine
and
we're
going
to
have
to
take
a
less
cut
on
our
money
to
sell
our
wine
through
them,
and
yet
we
won't
be
able
to
sell
our
wine
on
our
place.
It
doesn't
seem.
It
doesn't
seem
right
anyway,
just
want
to
leave
with
that.
If
there's
any
more
questions,
we're
here.
K
Did
you
guys
did
you
as
listening
to
that?
What
was
your
take
of
the
15
point?
I
know
you
said
you
didn't
see
the
15
points.
What's
your
take
on
there.
M
It's
complicated,
it
would
be
a
nightmare
for
us
to
try
to
meet
all
those
conditions
and
yeah.
Would
you
want
to
do
that
if
you
were
a
business
owner.
K
J
C
J
There
there
are
some
ideas
on
there,
but
from
a
compliance
standpoint
for
us
to
have
to
track
every
one
of
those
13
items
that
are
on
there.
It
would
be
a
nightmare
for
us
and
just
we're
we're
making
changes,
we're
making
some
improvements
around
the
place,
and
you
know
we've
already-
we've
gone
over
a
lot
of
the
stuff
we've
done
at
the
property
already,
and
we
just
want
to
keep
this
simple
right
now
and
that's
really
where
we
are.
A
We
are
not
taking
any
questions
from
the
public
in
the
normal
course
following
that
portion
of
the
meeting.
We
would
ask
for
a
motion
which
does
not
seem
appropriate
here,
because
I
don't
know
what
the
motion
would
be
at
this
point.
So
I
open
this
up
for
discover.
We
close
now
the
public
portion
of
the
meeting-
and
I
open
the
meeting
up
for
discussion
here
internally
by
the
commissioners.
C
D
C
A
O
A
P
Commissioner,
chair,
here's
here's
my
concern,
I
mean
we're,
asked
we're
getting
stuff
put
in
front
of
us
like
right
now
here
and
then
and
we're
you're
asking
us
to
make
a
decision.
I
think
that's
that's
extremely
tough
for
us
to
you
know
you
guys
talk
about.
You
only
got
it
at
three
o'clock
or
four
o'clock,
whether
that's
true
or
not,
I
mean
we
have
no
way
of
proving
that
I
mean,
and
then
we
get
this
13
point
list.
P
They
say
they
haven't
seen
it
so
we're
getting
this
all
this
stuff
thrown
to
us,
and
you
want
a
decision.
I
mean
that
that
makes
it
makes
it
really
really
hard,
especially
when
we
know
something
else
is
going
to
get
appealed
and
and
then
we
continue
down
the
road
and
we're
back.
Here
again
I
mean
that's.
My
frustrating
thing
on
the
whole
thing
is:
we've.
P
We've
got
all
these
ideas,
I
mean
the
whole
idea
was
was
to
basically
let
you
guys
go,
take
your
time
and
and
meet
each
other
and
and
have
a
civil
conversation
and
and
whether
it
is
28
days
or
whether
you
actually
reached
out
the
very
next
day
and
and
try
to
talk
to
one
another.
I
mean
that
that's
the
problem
is,
is.
P
P
The
frustrating
part
on
the
whole
thing
is
is
we're
up
here
to
you
know
I
guess
save
taxpayer
money
I
mean
by
making
decisions
and
and
all
we're
doing,
is
spinning
our
wheels
and
we
can
only
do
what
we
can
with
what's
in
front
of
us
a
week
later.
You
know
a
week
before
we
get
here.
You
know,
and
so
I
mean
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
at
I'm
a
little
to
me,
I'm
a
little
frustrated
that
there
wasn't
more
interaction
with
the
two
parties.
I
mean
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
at.
K
Chairman
bridge,
I
agree
with
mr
coles
I
was
I
was
out
of
town.
I
was
for
the
last
one,
but
I
was
available
to
watch
everything.
So
I
even
though
I
wasn't
here
physically,
I
am
aware
of
the
full
testimony
from
last
month,
so
I
did
research
that
and
watch
everything
same
deal.
I
as
commissioner
colson.
K
You
know,
I
mean
I
I
get
it
we've
all
I
mean
I,
I
I'm
in
a
field
where
I
deal
with
people
in
have
to
negotiate
with
land
users
and
different
people
as
well,
and
it
really
does
come
down
to
sitting
down
and
coming
to
an
agreement,
and
I
I
think
the
you
know
my
hope
in
seeing
it
back.
You
know
coming
back
this
month
and
me
being
here
was
that
after
watching
last
month
that
we
would
have
some
sort
of
agreement
agreement.
K
I
see
two
options
here
where
we
both
came
up
with
different
and
that's
great,
and
I
appreciate
the
work
that's
been
done
by
both
of
you
to
do
that,
but
it
doesn't
really
mean
anything
if
neither
one
of
them
are
in
agreeance
they're,
just
two
more
opinions-
and
I
guess
part
of
our
job
is
to
look
at
these
new
opinions
and
see
if
these
are
better
than
what
came
from
us
last
month.
So
maybe
we're
a
little
better
off
than
we
were
before
for
that.
But
it's
you
know
and
they've
got
good
ideas.
K
I
think
in
both
of
them,
but
I'm
with
you
know,
commissioner
coulson
we
don't
if
they're,
if
they
can't
come
to
an
agreement,
our
job
is
to
make
some
sort
of
choice
or
decision
here
and
you're
right.
It's
going
to
go
to
the
commissioners
anyways,
but
we
still
have
to
make
a
decision
here
and
I
don't
know
in
my
mind.
It
goes
back
to
you
know,
I'm
always
going
to
lean
towards
landowner,
rights
and
and
what
person
can
do
if
it
falls
within.
K
As
the
you
know,
conor's
point
out
falls
within
the
legal
stimulations
of
the
actual
planning
and
zoning
of
that
area
or
that
land.
That's
where
I'm
going
to
lean
towards.
Unless
I
hear
testimony
that
completely
sways
me
the
other
way,
but
obviously
that
vote,
I
think
again,
is
going
to
get
sent
to
the
commissioners.
So
I
think
that's
where
we're
at.
A
A
A
The
flip
side
of
that
is,
I
also
understand
where
the
neighbors
are
coming
from.
It
will
have
an
adverse
impact
on
them.
As
I
stated
before,
and
as
the
neighbors
have
stated,
it's
obvious
what
the
impact
would
be.
We
have
denied
similar
applications
in
the
past
because
of
this
exact
thing,
and
so
here
we
are
just
exactly
as
you've
pointed
out,
commissioner
brown.
A
We
don't
have
something
that
we
can
say.
Yes,
we
approve
that
or
no
we
don't
approve
it.
That's
going
to
make
people
happy
and
will
keep
it
from
being
appealed
to
the
board
of
county
commissioners,
because
either
way
it
was
going
to
be
appealed
and
they've
already
gone
through
an
appeal
process
once
before
so
they're.
Familiar
with
that
drill.
A
F
You,
chairman,
you've,
all
stated
and
restated
it
perfectly.
I
mean
in
my
mind
it's
it's
trying
to
make
these
two
plans
to
come
together
to
a
resolution
that
makes
sense-
and
I
don't
know
that
that
there
really
is
at
this
point,
that
we've
seen
the
staff
report
and
the
conditions
of
approval
that
they've
provided,
I
think,
make
some
some
fairly
reasonable
restrictions
based
on
itd
and
and
other
agencies
that
that
you
know
we
have
a
just
enacted
the
transportation
action
plan
and
in
which
was
recently
adopted
and
to
take
into
consideration.
F
K
Commissioner
brown
give
me
one
more
comment
and
then
we
can
motion
on
this.
I
I
do
agree,
and
I
I
hope
everyone
understands
we're
not
going
to
make
everybody
happy,
no
matter
what
we
do,
and
this
is
part
of
the
bad
part
about
this
job
and
especially
lately
it
seems,
like
people
are
a
little
more
vocal
about
telling
us
what
they
think
about
us.
K
If
we
don't
choose
their
way-
and
I
hope
everybody
understands
whatever
decision
is
and
however
it
ends
out,
there's
gonna
be
someone
not
happy
and
someone
happy,
that's
just
what
we
deal
with
the
one
of
the
things
that
I
know
we
talk
about.
A
lot
is
adversely
you
know
how
it
adversely
affects
that
to
me
is
such
a
loose.
You
know
my
neighbor's
kid
just
got
a
new,
you
know
trail
bike
and
he
rides
up
and
down
my
street
out
in
the
county
all
the
time.
K
It's
adversely
affects
me
all
the
time,
because
I
hear
it
going
up
and
down
the
street.
What
adversely
affects
you
is:
there's
always
gonna
be
stuff
that
adversely
affects
us.
So
I
think
that
some
of
that
we
have
to
go
back
to
the
the
leaning
towards,
like
the
property
use
of
what
it
can
be.
You
know
we've
had
things
in
front
of
us
before,
where
some
things
were,
people
were
upset
about
a
cell
phone
tower
that
was
actually
going
to
increase
people's
safety.
K
We
had
that
in
front
of
us,
where
somebody
actually
was
against
a
cell
phone
tower
that
was
1500
feet
away
from
them
because
it
adversely
affected
their
view
out
of
their
back
window,
but
it
was
going
to
possibly
save
people's
lives.
By
having
you
know,
ada
county
have
more
research,
you
know
be
able
to
dispatch
from
it.
So
I
know
that
not
everybody's
going
to
be
happy
with
with
any
of
these
decisions,
even
after
it
goes
to
commissioners,
there's
going
to
be
one
side,
that's
not
happy,
so
I
don't
know.
F
Chairman,
yes,
I
got
one
last
comment
and
I
really
do
want
to
reiterate
and
stress
this.
I
do
appreciate
that
that
the
homeowners
getting
together
and
putting
putting
their
efforts
in
and
you
know
putting
together
some
conditions
for
us
to
consider-
and
I
also
appreciate
the
beaucrets
doing
the
same
and-
and
you
know
just
want
to
express
it,
because
I
recognize
that
this
is
not
an
easy
task
for
anybody
to
undergo
let
alone
to
have
to
undergo
consecutive
months
in
a
row
or
you
know
you
know
over
a
couple
of
years.
A
A
D
K
Are
we
able
so
I'd
like
to
motion?
Are
we
able
to
include
the
paper
that
they
submitted
that
the
bucket
submitted
for
their.
I
Chair,
commissioner,
are
you
in
terms
of
conditions
of
approval
or.
C
I
K
A
B
F
I
think
that
there
is
a
difference
in
in
choosing
13
points
over
the
the
table
or
chart
that
sending
the
motion
or
sending
the
item
forward
as
it
is
today,
is
sufficient
enough
and
that
that
that
those
other
conditions
using
conditions
a
lot
that
those
other
exhibits
convolute
the
the
process,
such
to
a
point
that
that
it
becomes
very
self-regulated
and
also
confusing
for
enforcement.
B
G
G
F
F,
the
applicant
and
or
owners
shall
submit
a
new
plan
showing
the
tasting
room
and
associated
paddock
patio
located
a
minimum
of
125
feet
from
the
southern
property
line.
G,
the
applique
indoor
owner
shall
construct
an
additional
two
foot
on
the
six-foot
perm
for
the
area
along
the
new
tasting
facility
in
parentheses,
50
foot
from
the
eastern
edge
of
the
existing
berm.
F
In
parentheses,
from
the
southern
property
line
h,
the
african
indoor
owner
shall
extend
the
existing
six-foot
berm
50-foot
to
the
west
along
the
southern
property
line.
I
the
applicant
and
or
owner,
shall
move
the
production
facility
to
the
north.
A
minimum
of
50
foot
from
the
current
proposed
location.
B
A
So
before
we
take
a
vote,
I
will
just
reiterate
the
comment
that
I've
made
before
what
I
preferred
have
happened
at
this
meeting
was
that
the
parties
would
have
reached
some
agreement.
I
think
each
as
the
commissioners
have
already
stated.
I
think
that
both
sides
have
made
a
concerted
effort
to
try
to
do
something
in
a
positive
way
to
come
to
some
agreement.
A
A
A
A
O
R
Mr
chairman,
commissioners,
this
is
a
conditional
use,
application
for
a
100
foot,
monopole
tower
with
equipment
and
shelters
to
replace
an
existing
silo
facility
tower
in
the
area.
It's
about
a
half
mile
away.
The
power
is
within
the
rural
urban
transition
district,
and
this
is
an
aerial
of
the
site.
R
R
R
R
So
the
key
conditions
of
approval
the
applicant
has
to
have
written
verification
from
the
faa,
the
chief
of
idaho
bureau
of
aeronautics
and
the
marathon
pipeline,
because
it
does
go
through
that
property.
The
applicant
has
to
submit
fencing
materials
to
try
to
help
screen
some
of
the
equipment
that
is
going
to
be
proposed.
They
will
be
required
to
get
a
building
permit
and
they
will
have
to
work
with
our
county
engineer
and
get
a
final
engineering.
E
R
No,
they,
mr
chairman,
commissioner
wickstrom
they're,
not
proposing
to
move
that
the
location
of
an
existing
tower
is
about
three
quarters
of
a
mile.
Don't.
A
I
do
have
a
question,
I'm
quoting
from
the
findings
of
fact,
and
it
says
it
shall
be
the
burden
of
the
applicant
to
demonstrate.
The
proposed
facility
cannot
be
accommodated
on
an
approved
tower
or
structure
within
the
two-mile
search
radius
due
to
one
or
more
of
the
following
reasons:
a
unwillingness
of
a
property
owner
or
tower
facility
owner
to
entertain
shared
use
b.
A
The
planned
equipment
would
exceed
the
structural
capacity
of
the
existing
tower
or
structure,
as
documented
by
a
qualified
and
licensed
professional
engineer,
and
the
existing
tower
facility
structure
cannot
be
reinforced,
modified
or
replaced
to
accommodate,
planned
or
equivalent
equipment
on
a
reasonable
cost
c.
The
planned
equipment
would
cause
radio
interference
with
material,
impacting
the
visibility
or
usability,
I'm
sorry
of
other
existing
or
planned
equipment
at
the
tower
or
structure,
and
the
interference
cannot
be
prevented
at
a
reasonable
cost.
It's
documented
by
a
qualified
licensed
professional
engineer
or
other
professional
qualified
to
provide
a
necessary
document.
A
Then
the
very
next
thing
is:
it
shall
be
the
burden
of
the
applicant
to
demonstrate
that
a
good
faith
effort
has
been
made
to
solicit
the
location
of
the
proposed
tower
on
federal
state,
county
lands,
etcetera,
etcetera
and
again,
it
says
the
commission
finds
the
applicant
has
provided
documentation
for
the
location
of
the
tower.
So
ms
sanders,
what
documentation
did
they
provide
to
satisfy
that
burden
of
proof
that
they
have.
R
Mr
chairman
commissioners,
so
if
we
look
at
where
that
property
is
located,
there
is
no
state
or
federal
land
right
in
that
area,
for
them
to
be
able
to
move
the
location
to
that.
Some
of
the
towers
that
we've
looked
at
in
the
past
have
been
able
to
look
at
properties
that
the
state
or
the
federal
government
own
as
far
as
being
able
to
co-locate
on
another
facility.
R
A
A
E
A
S
I
Chairman,
that's
at
your
discretion,
if
you'd
like
to
allow
them
to
answer
in
advance
or
you
could
have
them
answer
everything
at
the
end.
If
you
hear
additional
testimony
that
prompts
other
questions
that
you
have,
so
it's
it's
really
at
the
commission's
discretion.
A
S
S
The
silo
is
on
property
that
is
being
annexed
into
the
city
of
eagle
and
is
being
subdivided
for
residential
homes,
and
the
silo
is
not
proposed
or
will
not
be
remaining
on
that
on
that
plan.
As
a
result,
verizon
wireless
needs
a
place
to
go
and,
and
that's
what
that's
what
we're
proposing
here
today.
S
You
also
asked
about
state
and
federal
land
and
also
co-locating,
and
that
it's
our
burden
I
didn't
see.
In
the
record,
we
submitted
several
letters
that
we
had
sent
via
certified
mail
to
all
of
the
carriers
all
of
the
wireless
carriers
and
then
also
to
all
of
the
we
we
went
above
and
beyond.
We
didn't
just
send
it
to
the
state
city
and
county
and
federal
government
to
with
those
co-locations
or
those
letters
requesting.
S
Okay,
I
apologize
in
advance
I'm
going
to
go
pretty
quickly
in
part
because
about
seven
days
before
today's
hearing,
despite
knowing
about
this
this
hearing
since
or
this
application
since
last
may-
that
some
of
the
opponents,
a
group
of
the
neighbors,
submitted
an
additional
200
pages
and
we
initially
thought:
let's
do
our
own
document
dump
and
then
realize
this
isn't
your
day
job
and
instead
of
of
doing
that,
we
decided
we'd
speed
through
it
during
our
presentation
here
tonight,
and
hopefully
we
can
get
it
done
in
15
minutes
next
slide
quick
overview,
we're
going
to
do
an
overview
of
the
site
plan,
a
discussion
of
the
need
addressing
some
of
the
concerns
and
rule
out
alternatives,
hit
on
federal
law,
real,
quick
and
then
then
come
to
a
conclusion.
S
Next
slide,
just
a
picture
of
the
site
next
slide.
This
is
a
distance
between
the
silo
site
and
the
proposed
site.
Approximately
3
33
symmetrical
feet
next
slide
a
little
bit
closer
up
view
of
the
site
and
with
the
with
the
least
space
down
in
the
bottom
left-hand
corner.
There
next
slide,
you
can
see
the
50
by
50
leased
compound,
as
well
as
the
12
foot
access
road.
That's
within
a
20
foot,
wide
access
and
utility
easement
from
the
existing
driveway
next
slide.
S
Color-Coded
distance
is
just
showing
you
distances
from
different
things,
from
the
property
line,
pink
33
feet
from
the
the
right
of
way
25
feet
all
the
yellow,
arrows
and
50
feet
for
the
the
green
next
slide
side
view
and
elevation
of
the
100
foot
tall
monopole
tower
I
apologize.
I
have
an
updated
plan
that
includes
a
vinyl
fence
and
I
neglected
to
bring
it
today
and
and
or
tonight
I'd
ask
that
you
make
that
a
condition
of
approval
and
we'll
get
that
in
I'll,
get
it
in
tomorrow.
S
Next
slide.
This
is
a
depiction
of
the
existing
silo
site.
One
of
the
complaints
that
the
neighbors
had
in
their
in
their
200
pages
of
documents
was
that
we
didn't
tell
it.
We
didn't
note
how
high
the
the
silo
is.
The
silo,
the
top
of
it,
is
60
feet
the
what
they
call
the
rad
center
of
the
antennas
is
oh
man,
56
feet.
10
inches
is
that
right,
56
feet,
10
inches.
C
S
So
that
that's
that's
where
the
antennas
are
located
on
that
silo
next
slide
quick
comparison,
I
may
have
gone
a
little
bit
crazy,
crazy
with
photoshop
here
and
I
apologize,
but
it's
mostly
just
to
show
the
this
is
to
scale
the
the
silo
next
to
the
proposed
tower.
One
thing
I
wanted
to
note:
you
can
see
that
the
the
antenna
on
the
existing
location
are
lower
than
the
lowest
than
the
lowest
antenna
on
the
proposed.
S
That's
because
the
tower
sits
25
feet
lower
in
grade
than
the
silo,
which
is
it's
interesting
because
it's
pretty
flat
out
there,
but
it
loses
25
feet
in
in
in
grade.
So
we
had
to
put
the
tower
up
just
a
little
bit
higher
so
that
that
bottom,
one
would
equal
it.
Also.
The
height
of
a
tower
is,
is
also
a
function
of
ada
county
code
that
requires
co-locations.
We
can't
just
do
a
single
user
tower
and
those
need
to
be
separated.
A
minimum
of
10
feet
carriers
like
12
feet.
D
S
Just
a
little
bit
closer
up,
I
want,
I
can
see
better
stephen
kennedy.
Rf
engineer
is
here
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
need
for
this
tower
and
a
little
bit
about
the
the
radio
engineering
and
commissioner
burch.
I
think
he
can
answer
your
question
about
the
high
school
tower.
That's
within
the
two
miles.
T
Mr
chair
commissioners,
stephen
kennedy,
11142
northwest
165th,
drive.
Surprise
arizona,
go
the
next
slide.
Please
so
intermax
networks
is
adding
wireless
isp
antennas
to
the
proposed
tower
intermax.
Is
the
anchor
tenant
verizon's
going
to
be
a
second
tenant?
The
situation
is
with
verizon
it's
a
replacement
site,
so
the
structure
that
has
the
antennas
on
currently
is
going
to
go
away.
T
T
100
agl
monopole
tower
anchor
tent
center.
Max
second
tends
verizon,
there's
been
some
movement
on
some
heights
with
intermax
and
what
intermax
wireless
isp
wants
to
do
next
slide.
T
So,
mr
chair,
if
you
can
see
the
the
proposed
sites
in
the
green
pen,
the
silo
the
existing
silo
was
in
yellow,
pin,
0.63
miles
away.
This
closest
tower
to
this
site
is
1.77
miles
away
down
at
eagle,
high
school.
That
tower
has
verizon
already
on
it.
So,
in
order
for
verizon
to
be
able
to
duplicate
and
have
the
same
amount
of
coverage
in
the
north
side,
it
doesn't
help
to
put
two
sites
at
one
location.
T
There
has
to
be
a
separate
tower
so
because
verizon's
already
eagle
high
school,
that
would
not
work
because
equipment
equipment's
already
there
and
it's
not
providing
service
this
far
north
the
service
is
provided
by
the
silo
site.
The
next
slide,
please,
once
again,
you
can
look
at
the
other
towers
around
there.
3
33
feet
0.62
miles
away
next
slide
coverage
objective
is
the
you
guys
are
building
a
lot
of
houses
out
there.
There's
just
I
drove
by
today.
T
T
T
It
doesn't
seem
like
it
is,
but
it
is
especially
when
you're
working
at
lower
height,
so
that's,
hence
the
need
for
the
100
foot
towers,
we're
trying
to
make
it
one
provide
the
same
or
as
close
the
same
as
we
can
get
because
we're
0.63
miles
away,
but
to
allow
for
multiple
collocators.
So
next
slide.
Please.
T
So
provide
coverage
along
west
beacon,
light
road,
north
palmer
lane
north
linder,
road
inbuilding
coverage
for
existing
subscribers
and
a
whole
lot
of
new
subscribers,
because
there's
a
lot
of
building
out
there,
air
is
growing,
customers
are
used
to
service
and
replacement's,
not
built.
The
coverage
will
be
reduced.
There
will
be
a
gap
in
service
the
silo
site's
going
away.
T
So
this
is
root
metrics.
This
is
a
third-party
drive
testing
firm.
They
accumulate
data.
I
I
did
this
because
it's
it
doesn't
really
mean
anything
because
there's
not
there's
existing
service,
so
I
did
an
area
of
influence
for
the
site
what
it
does
based
on
the
propagation
modeling
and
shows
that
this
is
the
area
where
customers
are
going
to
be
impacted,
you're,
seeing
good
service
there.
Now,
if
the,
when
the
site
goes
away
and
the
proposed
site's
not
built
you're,
going
to
see
a
negative
impact
within
that
area
next
slide,
this
is
open
signal.
T
T
T
And
this
is
the
existing
coverage
of
what
the
current
site
provides
service
for
once
again
0.63
miles
away.
We
would
have
liked
it
a
little
further
west,
but
capability
of
finding
a
site
was
not
possible
next
slide.
Please
I've
got
the
circle
in
the
same
area.
There's
coverage
without
either
sites
we're
going
to
see
a
lot
of
in-building
service
lost
if
both
sites
are
off
air.
The
next
slide,
that's
what
the
new
site's
going
to
be
able
to
provide
and
help.
T
So
once
again,
it's
not
a
one-for-one
duplication,
but
it's
as
close
as
we
can
get
because
we're
kind
of
limited
by
what
land
we
can
get
access
to
next
slide
so
sites
within
2.2
miles
silos
0.63,
the
eagle
high
school,
is
1.77
miles.
I
know
we're
on
time
limit
and
my
compatriot
wanted
to
do
more,
I'm
available
for
questions,
but
this
anything
anybody
has
for
questions.
S
We
can
go
next
slide,
a
couple
advance
a
little
bit
forward
and
we'll
come
back.
Keep
going,
keep
going,
keep
going
right
here.
Concerns
of
those
opposed
concerns
were
that
this
was
not
a
true
replacement.
There
are
better
sites
that
will
affect
property
values,
and
we
should
have
provided
visual
simulations
next.
S
It
is
a
replacement
site,
as
we
noted
there
is,
it
is
going
away.
They
had.
They
had
misquoted
a
piece
from
our
application
to
say
that
it
wasn't
replacement
that
there
isn't
a
verizon
going
antenna
going
on
this,
and
that's
not
the
case.
There
is
a
verizon
antenna
going
on
this
next
slide,
and
this
is
just
proof.
This
is
their
co-location.
Application
for
verizon
go
ahead
and
next
slide.
So
this
is,
there
are
no
other
site
options.
S
This
is
the
only
viable
site
candidate.
What
makes
a
viable
site
it's
got
to
be
located
within
the
search
ring.
It's
got
to
provide
the
service
that's
going
away.
It
must
include
50
by
50
area,
that's
reasonably
flat
in
this
case.
It's
pretty
easy
to
do
that
out.
There
there's
a
lot
of
flat
flat
spaces
must
have
reasonable
access,
utilities
must
be
nearby
and
it
must
be
leasable
that
last
one
is
often
the
hardest
one.
Let's
go
to
the
next
slide.
S
Here's
a
list
of
the
people
of
the
owners
of
property
within
the
search
area
contacted
all
some
via
letter,
some
via
telephone
either.
No
response
not
interested
in
a
couple
cases.
Don't
ever
call
us
again
and
the
last
one
was
the
one
that
was
the
only
one
that
said
that
it
was.
They
would
be
willing
to
do
it.
The
mccarthy's
next
slide
again,
the
only
viable
site,
canada,
we
exhausted
the
other
sites.
S
S
This
just
shows
the
grouping
in
yellow
are
the
candidate
sites,
the
green
that's
towards
the
east.
End
of
that
is
the
chosen
or
the
only
viable
site
you
can
see
where
idaho
power
is
it's
further
east
locating
on
the
idaho
power
site,
doesn't
work
for
the
coverage
that
this
that
they
need
to
achieve.
S
More
than
that,
though,
idaho
power
doesn't
lease
space
on
their
substations
to
cell
tower,
since
911
they've
really
tightened
up
security
on
those
and
and
they're
very
limited
on
who
can
go
on
those
and
cell
tower
employees
are
not
among
them
next
slide.
S
The
opposition
claims
an
effect
on
property
values
and
and
from
a
for
a
rational
person,
you
look
at
it.
You
think:
okay,
it's
going
to
affect
property
values
and,
and
I'm
in
that
same
boat.
I
can
tell
you,
though,
that
there
is
the
studies
that
I've
seen
and
and
credible
studies
by
companies
like
valbridge
property
management
associates
who
are
a
nationwide
appraisal
company.
S
They
have
determined
that
it's
negligible
and
that
in
even
more
importantly,
it-
and
this
is
pretty
obvious,
but
any
impact
that
happens
as
a
result
of
a
cell
tower
lessens
the
further
you
get
away
from
that
cell
tower
and
I'm
going
to
come
back
to
that
in
just
a
minute.
The
opposition's
evidence-
that's
in
their
memorandum,
there's
three
studies:
they're
between
18
and
37
years
old,
a
hud
reference
guide
that
expired
in
2012
and
is
irrelevant
here,
because
there's
no
homes
within
the
fall
area
quote
unquote,
fall
area
and
then
a
2012
internet
article.
S
We
got
a
lot
of
got
a
lot
of
experience
with
these,
and
I
can
tell
you
that
those
that
what
they
submitted
violated
the
idaho
real
estate,
appraisers
act,
there's
only
a
couple
of
exceptions
for
non-certified
are
uncertified
and
unlicensed
appraisers
to
conduct
market
value,
reviews
of
property,
and
one
of
them
is
for
a
broker's
price
opinion,
but
they
have
to
include
nine
different
elements,
and
each
of
these
letters
that
are
in
the
packet
only
included
one
element
of
the
nine
and
omitted
some
of
the
most
important
ones
like
that.
S
This
isn't
an
appraisal,
and
if
you
want
an
appraisal,
you
gotta
get
one
from
somebody,
who's
certified
or
licensed.
Next,
I
also
wanted
to
mention
they
also
included
a
they
included,
a
an
appraisal
that
was
done
in
2019,
and
I
wanted
to
tell
you
a
little
bit
about
that
appraisal.
The
appraisal
found
that
there
was
going
to
be
a
10
knock
on
the
the
value
of
the
property
that
was
in
that
appraisal,
because
it
was
going
to
be
next
to
a
cell
tower.
S
The
cell,
the
cell
tower
in
question,
was
one
that
I
was
here
on
in
front
of
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
and
you
approved
it.
It
goes
up
to
the
board
of
commissioners,
they
reverse
and
deny,
and
my
clients
forced
to
to
sue
in
federal
court
to
to
to
get
their
cell
tower
built
in
an
effective
prohibition
of
service
claim,
eight
months
after
it
started,
I
get
a
call
from
ada
county's
council
and
he
says
you're
right.
S
S
S
S
The
facts
are
from
the
valve
bridge
property
advisors,
2018
study.
They
did
four
major
markets
negligible
to
no
effect
on
home,
sale,
values
within
the
quarter
mile
radius
and
then
an
aida
county,
assessor's
email
from
2018,
stating
that,
while
the
overall,
if
that,
while
becomes
very
emotional
for
owners
when
they're
installed,
the
overall
effect
in
the
market
is
very
minimal.
In
fact,
we
have
not
been
able
to
find
any
measurable
adjustment
in
the
market
next
slide.
S
And
again,
from
the
valbridge
market,
studies,
no
measurable
effect,
no
negative
impact
and
then
in
one
market
less
than
one
percent
in
both
increasing
and
decreasing
home
price
indications.
As
I
mentioned
a
minute
ago,
one
of
the
studies
that's
quoted
by
the
by
the
opponents
in
their
200
pages
is
one
that's
from
2004.,
and
if
you
look
deeper
into
that
that
study,
what
it
says
is
homes
that
are
immediately
adjacent
to
a
cell
tower.
Yeah
there's
a
little
bit
of
a
hit.
It's
about
two
percent.
S
You
mentioned
our
commissioner
chairman
burke,
you
mentioned
what
is
undo
I'd
argue
that
two
percent's
not
undo,
but
we
don't
even
need
to
do
that
in
this
case,
because
there's
not
another
home
within
the
area
of
this
cell
tower,
the
nearest
home
is
over
400
feet
away
other
than
the
home,
that's
owned
by
the
people
who
own
the
property
on
which
the
cell
tower
is
going
to
be
going.
S
Next,
they
complained
that
we
didn't
submit
photo
simulations.
This
is
a
this
is
a
photo
simulation.
It
wasn't
because
of
their
complaint.
I
apologize
for
being
petty
and
not
giving
him
credit,
but
it
was
because
I
went.
S
That's
the
direction
that
they're
facing
that
the
person
that
the
view
is
from
you
can
see
the
cell
tower
on
the
right
and
if
you'll
go
to
the
next
slide,
it's
a
more
a
bigger
picture
of
that
a
little
bit
bigger.
You
can
see
the
cell
tower
there
looking
down
sides
looking
south
from
the
corner
of
the
land
or
is
it
lanewood
lanewood?
Thank
you
and
flickr
next
slide.
S
Another
direction.
This
one
looking
north
from
across
a
beacon
light
at
where
the
cell
tower
is,
and
you
can
see
it's
a
it's
a
forced
perspective.
The
cell
tower
is
significantly
taller
than
those
power
lines,
but
because
of
where
the
power
lines
are
they're
closer
to
you,
it
doesn't
appear
as
obtrusive
next
slide,
just
a
bigger
blown
up
version
of
that
next
slide.
S
I
wanted
to
do
to
show
mr
kennedy's
comparison.
I
wanted
to
put
them
side
by
side.
You
could
so
you
could
see
it
on
the
left.
Coverages
that
exist
today,
with
the
silo
site
still
active
and
on
the
right
after
the
silo
site
is
removed,
but
before
the
proposed
site
you
can
see,
coverage
is
greatly
diminished
next
slide.
S
Here
it
is
on.
The
left
is
the
coverage
after
the
silo
removed
without
the
proposed
site
and
then
on
the
right,
it's
without
silo
site,
but
with
our
proposed
site,
it's
where
the
replacement's
complete.
You
can
see
that
it
resupplies
that
coverage
next
slide.
S
Any
denial
must
be
supported
by
substantial
evidence
and
can't
deny
if
denial
would
have
the
effect
of
prohibiting
the
provision
of
personal
wireless
services
in
this
area,
and
that's
what
we
went
to
court
on
was
that
last
one.
It's
called
an
effective
prohibition
claim
and
in
an
effective
prohibition
claim,
if,
if
the
applicant
us,
if
we're
able
to
prove
that,
there's
a
substantial
or
significant
gap
in
coverage
which
there
will
be
after
that
silo
comes
down
and
that
this
is
the
least
intrusive
means
of
filling
that
gap.
S
Then
we
have
a
presumption
that
we're
entitled
to
this
to
the
to
the
cup
to
build
this
tower
and
then
it's
up
to
everybody
else.
Opponents
to
to
provide
evidence
against
it,
but
their
their.
The
standard
that
they
have
to
meet
is
that
they
have
to
have
substantial,
which
is
a
legal
standard
that
they
have
to
meet
next
slide.
S
S
Actually,
it's
not
this
one
I'll
tell
you
I'll.
Just
tell
you
about
it
in
the
objections
from
the
the
group
of
neighbors
that
submitted
their
objections,
they
used
the
they
used
eagles
eagles.
No
excuse
me,
they
used
ada
county's
comprehensive
plan
instead
of
the
city
of
eagles,
the.
S
Unincorporated
ada
county
within
eagles
area
city
impact
within
that
area
of
city
impact,
pursuant
to
the
agreement
between
ada
county
and
the
city
of
eagle,
it's
eagles
comprehensive
plan
that
applies
and
ada
county
zoning
code,
and
it's
not
just
their
current
eagles
current
comprehensive
plan.
It's
their
2005,
comprehensive
plan
that
applies
so
they
they
cited
to
the
wrong
comprehensive
plan
to
find
that
it
didn't.
That's
also
what
the
city
of
eagle
did,
except
that
it
wasn't
the
wrong
comprehensive
plan.
It
was
the
wrong
zoning
ordinance
and
I'll.
Tell
you
what
I
mean
by
that.
S
They
recommend
denial.
They
ask
you
to
deny
this
and
the
reason
why
they
recommend
denial
is
that
they
applied
eagle
city
code,
even
though
this
is
outside
of
eagle
city
limits.
They
applied
their
own
code
if
it
did
apply
in
that
area,
which
is
why
they
reached
the
conclusion
they
did.
If
they'd
applied
the
correct
one
ate
a
county
code,
it
wouldn't
have
been
that
result
and
I'll
also
know
during
that
discussion
with
the
city
council.
They
did
that
at
both
planning
and
zoning
and
city
council
during
the
city
council.
S
F
F
Is
what's
the
trade-offs
here
in
the
sense
that
the
the
old
tower
was,
I
think,
60
foot
tall
and
then
you
know,
you
explained
the
whole
difference
in
elevation.
What
considerations
did
you
have
in
determining
the
height
outside
of
coverage
and
then
also
this?
I
guess
they're
called
stealth
towers,
yeah.
F
A
silo
or
a
tree,
I
myself,
have
lived
in
eagle
and
see
the
stealth
salt
tree
and
it
sticks
out
like
a
sore
thumb,
but
I
I
do
think
that
it
can
be
more
appeasing,
so
is.
Is
there
any
consideration
for
those
why
you
didn't
go
with
another
silo
or
another?
Any
other
type
of
you
know.
I'm
sure
you've
got
hundreds
of
different
types
of
stealth
towers
that
you
could
could
install.
S
Yes,
there
are
obviously
most
of
those
not
most
a
lot
of
those
stick
out
like
a
sore
thumb
like
if
we
were
to
put
a
saguaro
cactus
next
to
beacon
light
road,
just
wouldn't
work,
we
did
consider
a
what
they
call
a
monopine
tree
and
if,
if
that's
what
it
takes
for
for
the
commission
to
approve
our
application
tonight,
we'd
be
amenable
to
a
mono,
a
monopine.
S
Frankly,
the
reason
why
we
didn't
do
a
monopine
in
the
first
place
is
that
they
are
bulkier
and
they
obscure
more
of
a
view
than
a
than
a
a
traditional
monopole
cell
tower.
The
fact
that
we
we
squeeze
close
to
the
I
think
squeeze
is
a
word
squeezed
close
to
a
the
existing
power
lines.
We
thought
that
it
would
be
less
intrusive
to
to
use
a
a
mono
monopole
design
than
a
monopine.
S
S
We
should
have
put
that
20
feet.
It
should
be
20
feet
instead,
instead
of
just
10
recognizing
that
that
people,
don't
like
cell
towers
nearby
them
and
for
whatever
reason,
110
foot
cell
tower,
seems
a
lot
worse
when
you
say
it
than
just
a
100
foot
cell
tower,
and
so
we
opted
to
go
with
the
the
very
minimum
that
we
could
do.
S
We
I
live
in
eagle.
We
recognize
people,
don't
love
cell
towers
near
nearby
their
homes.
We
we
don't,
do
it
to
stick
it
to
anybody.
We
do
it
because
people
like
to
have
reliable
cell
coverage
despite
not
liking
the
the
infrastructure
to
have
it
there,
but
having
to
live
in
that
in
that
area.
I
don't.
I
don't
want
to
bump
into
somebody
at
the
at
the
store
and
not
have
known
that.
I
that
we
did
everything
we
could
to
get
it
as
low
as
possible.
E
Mr
just
can
you
briefly
describe
the
different
levels
of
service
you
have
there's
in
building
auto
and
on
street.
E
T
So
let
me
go
back
to
the
correct
page.
Give
me
a
song
please
so
green
is
in
building,
so
rf
propagates
and
things
absorb
the
energy.
So
for
me
to
have
a
transmitter
on
the
side
of
the
wall
on
the
other
side
of
the
wall,
it
takes
more
energy
or
it.
The
wall
is
more
lost
for
that
more
path,
loss
for
that
or
more
insertion
building
loss.
T
So
the
loss
to
provide
service
in
an
area
that's
surrounded
by
buildings,
to
provide
that
to
95
probability
for
a
portable
is,
is
that
level
so
it
will
be
able
to
provide
service
if
it's
showing
green,
it
can
be
able
to
provide
service
indoors
with
a
95
probability
in
vehicle
windows,
steel,
you
don't
have
as
much
insertion
loss
or
loss
getting
the
energy
from
the
outside
into
the
inside
of
the
car.
So
the
area
expands
larger
because
it
takes
less
to
make
the
link
okay,
the
up
and
down
leg.
Then
you
get
open
field.
E
That's
kind
of
what
I
was
thinking
about.
I
just
want
to
clarify
so
on
the
on
the
one
chart.
The
one
thing,
that's
a
little
surprising
on
chart
two
and
three
you
he
had
a
side
by
side
of
the
three
of
them.
I
got
it.
It
was
on
page
52
and
three
of
the
not
not
on
it's.
S
E
Great
so
when,
with
the
new
tower
most
of
the
coverage
seems
to
extend
north,
where,
where
there
really
aren't
a
lot
of
people,
the
amount
of
coverage
that
goes
to
the
west,
it
it
fills
in
a
little
bit,
but
you
saw
if
you
went
out
there
today,
you
saw
the
construction
that's
going
on
out
there.
E
T
So
the
the
the
verizon
engineer
on
his
colo
application
had
some
different
directions
that
he
would
put
the
antennas,
which
would
put
more
of
the
energy
to
the
west
and
to
the
east
to
try
to
kind
of
duplicate
what
the
existing
site
but
provide
some
more
service
to
the
north
and
south.
So
he
can
rotate
the
azimuths
of
the
antennas
and
kind
of
get
a
better
fix.
T
T
It
is
so
it
I
think
the
verizon
engineer
is
probably
going
to
end
up
doing
a
little
bit
with
sectors,
maybe
having
one
sector
a
little
bit
more
south
and
then
having
two
two
more
east
and
west
on
the
north
side.
So
he
may
have
an
azimuth
of.
T
Where
nobody
lives-
and
that
was
the
that
was
the
hard
thing
that
when
my
compatriot
showed
you
all
of
the
locations
that
the
landowners
we
talked,
it
was
farther
to
the
west
right.
So
we
were
trying
to
duplicate
the
coverage
from
the
existing
site
as
much
as
possible.
Well,
no
landowners
were
interested
farther
to
the
west
that
still
had
close
enough
to
provide
service
down
into
where
all
the
construction
is
being
built.
So
0.63
miles,
it
doesn't
sound
like
a
lot,
but
you
can
see
here
it.
It
makes
an
impact.
T
E
E
T
There
was
a
lot
a
lot
of
new
and
I
think
the
area
where
the
towers
the
silos
being
removed
is
going
to
be
residential.
So
it's
just
getting
larger
and
larger.
E
And
there
was
no
way
to
the
developer.
There
would
have
a
tower
built
along
the
edge
say,
close
to
beacon
light.
That's.
S
Like
you
anymore,
that's
exactly
right
and
once
it's
annexed
into
the
city
of
eagle
their
code,
their
zoning
code
would
apply,
and
in
this
and
in
this
case
they're,
because
their
zoning
code
would
apply.
It
prohibits
towers
in
that
in
that
zone.
Okay,.
E
S
Yeah
it
does
and
the
the
where
that
one
is,
though
I
mean
it's
a
little
bit
out
in
the
open,
but
it's
not
out
in
the
open,
like
this
side
is
so
I
mean
this
this
in
this
location.
Next
to
the
power
lines
in
that
we
just
opted
to
do
the
the
monopole
again,
if
it
that
that's
what
it
takes
to
get
a
an
approval
would
be
willing
to
do
that.
S
E
That's
it,
mr
chairman,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
C
S
S
Yes,
they
they
did
have
a
lease
for
that
silo,
but
I
don't
know
my
understanding
is
that
they're
parting
ways
amicably?
I
believe
that
it
was
upon
expiration
of
that
lease.
I
think
that
I
think
it
had
expired
a
little
while
ago
and
that
they've
just
been
kind
of
nursing
it
along
waiting
for
development.
A
T
So
if,
as
I
showed
in
the
charts,
if
the
if
the
silo
goes
away
the
amount
of
coverage,
the
amount
of
inbuilding
coverage
reduces
significantly
it's
mostly
in
vehicle
and
open
field,
that's
including
the
propagation
provided
by
the
site
at
eagle,
high
school,
so
eagle,
high
school
really
doesn't
help
duplicate
the
coverage.
It
doesn't
create
more.
It
covers
its
area
and
this
site
to
the
north.
Doesn't
so
if
it's
taller,
if.
S
T
Well,
it
gets
into
two
places
one:
it
will
not
provide
the
same
level
of
coverage,
your
inbuilding
penetration,
even
if
it's
150
foot
or
200
foot
for
that
area,
because
it's
two
miles
away.
There's
there's
things
in
the
way.
The
second
part
of
it
is
the
capacity
the
throughput
the
amount
of
customers
that
ride
on
this
tower.
At
the
eagle
high
school,
the
farther
away
you
get
from
a
site,
the
less
the
lower
the
throughput
is
so
as
as
I'm
a
mobile
traveling
away
from
the
site.
T
I
can't
hear
it
as
well:
it's
I'm
going
to
get
on
the
edge
and
I'm
not
going
to
get
as
good
a
throughput,
because
I'm
on
the
cell
edge,
so
you
can
say,
hey,
let's
build
a
bigger
tower
and
it'll
we'll
turn
it
up
and
let
it
go.
It's
not
going
to
provide
the
service
as
well
as
one
that's
in
among
where
the
customers
are
an
old
mentor.
Mine
said
you
know,
steve
I've
been
doing
this
33
years
and
he
told
me
30
years
ago
he
said,
put
the
site
where
the
people
are.
A
A
S
Excellent
question
chairman,
and
I
can
tell
you
it's
my
fault:
this
was
the
first
application
that
I
did
solo
and
when
I
looked
at
ada
county
code
it
it
required
only
two
things
to
be
in
the
lease
it
required
there
to
be:
an
identification
of
the
property,
actually
three
things:
identification
of
property
ownership
and
the
lessee's
name,
and
then
a
commitment
to
remove
the
tower
upon
completion
upon
when
it's
no
longer
used.
A
So
within
the
area
that
you're
trying
to
cover
by
this
tower,
there
would
have
been
a
number
of
locations
that
would
have
worked.
Obviously
the
next
door
location
would
have
worked,
and
so
I
curious
how
you
landed
on
the
mccarthy's
property
as
opposed
to
somebody's
property
right
next
to
it.
Somebody's
property
two
blocks
away
from
it.
Any
of
those
areas
out
there
would
have
worked
just
as
well.
Are
we
talking
about
a
question
of
money
or,
what's
the
what's
the
issue,
why
the
mccarthy's
property,
as
opposed
to
somebody
else's
property?
That's
within
the
same
area!
A
S
S
I
know
that
it
was
because
they
had
contacted.
You
saw
the
chart
that
I
put
up
and
again
it
was
really
briefly.
I
was
cruising
through
them,
but
what
they
did
is
they've
tried.
They
started
at
the
silo
site
and
looked
at
pulled
ownership,
information
and
just
moved
east
and
the
mccarthy's
are
the
second
furthest
east.
S
I
think
I
the
way
I
read
that
in
talking
with
the
the
site
acquisition
team
for
for
intermax
was
that
they
were
the
second
to
last
ones
contacted.
S
I
do
know
that
they
were
the
only
ones
that
that
were
willing
landlords,
the
only
ones
of
anyone
involved,
the
other,
and
this
comes
from
the
mccarthy's
themselves.
In
speaking
with
them,
their
property
is
just
over
five
acres
and
in
their
current
zone,
and
it
have
to
be
confirmed.
I
don't
have
it
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
in
their
current
zone
they
can't
subdivide
below
that
size,
and
so
this
was
the
only
only
way
that
they
could
stay
on
their
prop
again
coming
from
the
car.
S
These
stay
on
their
property
and
and
have
their
property,
make
some
money
for
them
is
my
understanding,
the
other
property
owners.
At
least
I
don't
know
if
all
of
them
were
this
way,
but
a
a
lot
of
the
other
property
owners
are
on
larger
parcels
of
land.
That
can
be
subdivided
and,
in
fact,
are
being
subdivided.
E
Commissioner,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Just
one
quick,
one
beacon
light
is
more
than
likely
going
to
be
expanded,
you're
from
eagle.
You
know
that
there's
more
and
more
and
more
traffic,
and
I
think
the
plan
originally
was
for
that
to
become
a
four-lane
road
at
some
point.
Is
that
going
to
be
a
problem.
S
No
we're
far
enough
back
from
the
right-of-way
that
it
shouldn't
be
a
problem.
I
know
that
the
the
transportation
planning,
so
I
had
another
site
that
I
was-
I
think
it
was
here
I
was
here
on
last
month.
It
was
over
at
the
corner
of
there's
a
monger
and
floating
feather,
and
on
that
site
we
did
have
to
move
it
back,
because
the
transportation
plan
that
star
the
city
of
star
had
adopted
called
for
floating
feather
to
be
extended
through.
S
A
C
O
C
A
N
My
name
is
andrew
campanelli,
I'm
an
attorney.
My
address
is
1757
merrick
avenue,
suite
204
merrick
new
york.
I
do
handle
federal
litigation
on
the
telecommunications
act
and
cell
tower
cases
across
the
entire
united
states.
I've
done
so
for
three
decades.
I
respectfully
request
under
the
circumstances.
I
can't
address
all
of
the
defects
in
the
application.
In
three
minutes,
I
respectfully
submit
request
six
I'll,
keep
it
brief,
but
at
least
I
can
touch
on
the
most
important
points.
I
believe
there
have
been
some
missed
statements
of
law
and
I
want
to
address
those.
I
Chairman
three
minutes
is
the
standard
for
public
testimony.
They
always
have
the
option
to
write
in
testimony.
We
probably
should
be
pausing.
I
guess,
as
we
have
this
discussion
just
to
give
them
as
much
time
as
possible,
but.
A
N
Thank
you,
okay.
For
starters,
gentlemen,
I've
seen
hundreds
if
not
thousands,
of
verizon
applications
across
the
entire
united
states.
The
first
problem
of
this
application
is
this
applicant
has
provided
you
with
zero
data
for
the
coverage
in
your
area.
Since
1996
local
governments
have
used
the
general
authority
preserved
to
them
by
the
telecommunications
act
to
enforce
smart
planning
provisions.
What
does
that
mean?
N
They
adopt
and
apply
their
codes
to
accomplish
several
objectives,
one
of
which
is
to
allow
companies
like
verizon
to
saturate
the
town
with
coverage,
but
at
the
same
time,
minimize
the
number
of
towers
you
need
to
provide
that
coverage
towards
that
end.
They
require
applicants
to
provide
drive
test
data,
because,
if,
and
only
if
you
get
that
data,
are
you
able
to
ascertain
where
gaps
and
service
are?
N
This
company
has
not
provided
with
you
any
hard
data,
meaning
drive
test
data
because
they
don't
have
any
they
provided.
Can
data
from
a
third
party,
which
means
nothing.
If
you
look
at
chart
number
one,
you
have
no
way
of
knowing
what
data
was
used
to
make
that
chart.
You
have
no
way
of
knowing
what
that's
supposed
to
represent
is
that
3g
coverage
4g
coverage?
What
is
the
frequency
you
don't
know
if
it's
verizon
or
sprint
or
anybody
else?
I
don't
know
of
any
sophisticated
government
anywhere
in
the
united
states.
N
That'll
accept
this
chart
part
one
as
actual
coverage
number
one
number
two
one
of
the
commissioners
pointed
to
a
very
made
a
very
important
point
on
the
last
case,
talking
about
cell
towers
under
your
code
in
determining
whether
or
not
you
should
grant
or
deny
the
conditional
use
permit
application
you're
supposed
to
weigh
the
benefit
to
the
community
versus
the
adverse
impacts
on
the
neighbors.
N
This
applicant
has
not
given
you
the
data
you
need
to
ascertain
if
and
whether
there
will
be
any
benefit
to
the
community,
because
you
don't
know
what
will
be
covered
by
this
tower.
With
respect
to
the
commissioner's
question
as
to
whether
or
not
verizon
had
the
right
to
stay
on
the
silo,
I
will
tell
you
I've
seen
hundreds
if
not
thousands
of
horizon
leases.
I
would
bet
money
that
verizon
has
the
right
to
stay
there
and
the
reason
is
the
standard
leases
for
50
years.
N
Verizon
signs
the
lease
where
they
get
five
years
and
they
have
the
right
for
nine
or
ten
five
year.
Renewals,
so
verizon
probably
has
the
right
to
be
there,
but
they
won't
show
you
the
lease,
because
they
don't
want
you
to
see
that
with
respect
to
an
allegation
that
the
brokers,
letters
attached
to
the
memorandum
and
opposition
don't
have
value
according
to
federal
courts.
N
N
A
O
Commission,
I
I
this
is
brad
bentley.
I
I
registered
to
speak
and
so
did
mr
campanelli,
so
that
should
be
six
minutes,
because
I
I
gave
him
my
time.
Unfortunately,
I'm
sitting
at
lax
right
now
and
I'm
unable
to
to
speak
without
a
lot
of
background
noise.
So
I
respect
if
you
could
give
him
my
three
minutes.
O
C
A
O
Okay,
brad
bentley,
4176,
west
morgan,
creek,
eagle,
idaho.
What
I
wanted
to
support
what
mr
campanelli
said
and
that
we're
not
getting
any
real
data.
O
I
think
you
guys
also
saw
clearly
you're
only
adding
green
in
an
area
which
is
absolutely
rural,
including
blm
land,
likes
to
also
point
out
that
you
know,
there's
no
comparison
to
what
is
existing
to
what's
being
proposed
from
this
verizon
to
a
hundred
foot
poles,
finding
supporting
every
single
carrier
which
could
not
get
more
obnoxious
than
what
has
been
presented
and
that
there
is
locations
that
are
better
as
you
move
to
the
west,
where
there
is
much
more
higher
density
being
planned
down
beacon-like.
O
Those
are
the
main
things.
I
also
want
to
add
to
the
record
as
well.
As
you
know,
I'm
sure
they
know
exactly
what
the
lease
willing
to
share
that
verizon
has
because
it's
cheaper
to
put
up
a
big
tower
in
this
existing
location.
I'd
also
like
to
add,
I
recently
you
know,
invested
over
four
million
dollars
right
there
in
beacon
light
lanewood.
That
is
the
entrance
to
a
subdivision
called
heartland
ranch.
O
You
can
see
it
online,
it's
partly
heartlandrancheagle.com
in
which
we're
putting
in
you
know
nice
brand
new,
multi-million
dollar
homes
and
it's
part
of
a
rural
area,
as
you
guys
have
indicated,
and
many
of
my
neighbors
are
there
in
which
this
will
be
front
and
center,
not
only
to
the
subdivision,
but
as
the
front
porch
of
jordan
miller,
who
will
speak,
it
will
be
the
only
thing
coming
out
of
the
backyard
from
leslie
decker
and
so
wanted
to
submit
that,
in
addition
to
all
the
very
valid
points
that
andrew
made
they've
not
done
their
homework,
this
is
a
lazy
submission
to
monetize
things
and
not
provide
alternatives
that
are
in
the
best
interest
of
our
infrastructure
and
eagle.
A
O
Against
the
application
entirely,
but
if
I
I
guess
the
worst
worst
case
would
be
only
60
foot
tall
and
completely
disguised.
I
am
familiar
with
the
one
that
was
done
down
the
way.
I
still
think
there's
better
places
to
put
the
pool.
I
think
it's
not
adding
coverage.
So
I
question
you
know
why
it's
being
added,
as
you
guys
pointed
out,
the
green
coverage
between
the
two
slides
is
entirely
rural
they're,
not
adding
any
coverage
where
there's
any
meaningful
density.
O
So
I
think
they
went
with
like
they
said
the
first
applicant.
That
didn't
say
yes
and
they
even
said
nothing
is
better
than
something
but
they've
not
picked
the
ideal
location
and
I'm
not
in
favor
of
just
popping
them
up
where
people
say.
Yes,
when
they're
not
really
adding
coverage
where
there's
density.
F
A
D
My
name
is
jordan
miller.
I
live
at
5600
west
beacon,
light
road,
I'd
love
to
point
out
that
in
the
renderings
that
were
presented
here
today,
conveniently
the
view
from
my
front.
Porch
was
left
off
of
the
list.
If
you
stood
there,
the
monopole
would
be
absolutely
egregious.
So
it
would
be
a
horrible
mistake
to
not
point
that
out
that
those
were
a
little
bit
misleading.
D
So
is
you
know
a
statement
was
made
it's
better
to
have
something
than
nothing
at
all
and
verizon
wireless
needs
something
needs
somewhere
to
go,
but
it's
such
a
marginal
improvement
really
worth
it
and
taking
this
further,
how
many
people
in
this
area
even
work
with
verizon?
We
can
prove
that
verizon
wireless
has
copious
amounts
of
data.
I
suggest
that
an
exacting
analysis
is
conducted
to
determine
the
tangible
number
of
individuals
who
will
benefit
from
this
cell
phone
tower
and
its
coverage
vice
those
who
are
vehemently
opposed
to
its
erection.
D
So
if
my
voice
carries
it
within
it,
a
tone
of
frustration,
it's
really
because
hundreds
of
tightly
packed
homes
have
already
overtaken
our
views
to
the
oahu's,
to
the
south,
to
our
north
and
to
our
west.
You
guys
already
have
zoned
out
a
ton
of
new
homes
for
higher
density
housing
and
what
used
to
be
a
serene
expansive
rural
environment
is
really
now
a
hellscape
of
construction,
semi
trucks
and
former
californians,
who
don't
respect
private
property.
D
So
it's
possible
that
there's
this
notion
that
the
progress
of
development
has
been
successfully
balanced
with
the
needs
of
native
idahoans
in
the
eagle
area,
but
I
have
to
assure
you
that
it
has
not.
Eagle
is
unrecognizable
for
third
generation
families
like
ours
who
wish
simply
to
grow
food
and
raise
animals
in
peace.
It's
almost
intolerable.
D
We
sit
on
a
property,
that's
been
in
our
family
for
over
50
years,
and
all
we
want
in
this
world
is
to
pass
it
on
to
our
children
to
give
them
some
semblance
of
a
natural
rural
environment
in
which
they
can
grow
up,
and
when
I
look
at
the
prospect
of
a
5g
tower
being
just
off
of
my
front
porch
monopolizing,
the
landscape.
That
is
truly
our
last
source
of
respite.
D
I
am
overwhelmed
with
disappointment
and
when
I
learned
that
said
tower
is
a
completely
redundant
and
superfluous
investment
opportunity
that
benefits
only
a
tower
company's
quick
grab
for
cash.
I
get
a
little
angry,
so
the
tower
really
doesn't
need
to
be
built.
I
would
advise
you
to
look
into
the
data
to
confirm
whether
or
not
they
have
an
extension
opportunity
on
the
existing
lease.
You
have
a
very
clear
easy
decision
to
make.
One
is
going
to
benefit
the
long-standing
residents
of
eagle,
idaho.
D
D
A
A
D
A
U
U
U
Thank
you
for
the
assistance
with
the
projector.
I
believe
this
is
somewhat
representative
of
what
miss
miller's
view
from
her
house
looking
towards
the
east
would
be.
This
is
the
entrance
to
heartland
ranch
subdivision,
utilizes
lanewood,
where
it
joins,
beacon
light.
The
subdivision
itself
is
directly
to
the
north
of
the
mccarthy's
property.
U
It's
a
40
acre
subdivision,
consisting
mainly
of
five
acre
lots
as
mr
bentley
described.
These
are
large
homes
that
were
the
owners
and
the
target
audience
for
these
homes
are
as
it's
advertised
by
my
client,
that
this
is
premium.
Five
acre
lots
with
a
long
view
and
the
ability
to
enjoy
country
living
in
the
eagle
foothills.
U
That's
what
I
believe
that
most
people
that
live
in
this
area
of
eagle
are
looking
for
the
rural
nature
of
this
particular
part
of
ada
county.
Well,
there
is
expansion
with
regard
to
developments
to
the
south
and
to
the
west
as
you
go
north.
If
you
go
far
enough,
you're
on
blm
ground,
primarily
between
beacon
light
north,
you
run
into
large
lots
where
the
aesthetic
values
are
important
to
one
the
homeowners
that
live
there
and
to
the
value
of
the
lots
themselves.
U
I
guess
what
I'm
really
here
to
talk
about
is
property
values
and
the
adverse
impact
at
this
particular
tower
in
this
particular
location
will
have
on
my
client's
property.
Within
the
information
that
was
submitted
by
mr
bentley,
it's
clear
that
this
tower
will
have
an
impact
on
those
property
values.
U
U
Additional
delay
will
result
in
them
in
this
matter,
essentially
being
taken
out
of
your
hands,
as
it
will
be
considered
to
be
that
this
application
will
not
be
addressed
within
a
reasonable
time
under
the
telecommunications
act,
and
it
would
give
the
applicant
the
opportunity
to
go
to
federal
court
and
essentially
push
this
forward
without
the
opportunity
for
you,
as
commission
members,
to
hear
both
the
testimony
that
was
presented
tonight
and
review.
The
information
that
was
submitted
in
opposition
to
this
application.
E
A
S
And
I
am
going
to
be
really
quick
this
time,
as
opposed
to
the
last
one,
mr
campanelli
did
submit
written
materials.
In
fact
he
drafted
or
compiled
it
over
150
pages
of
the
200
pages
that
were
submitted
by
the
by
the
other
by
the
opponents.
Also,
he
misstated
the
standard
for
granting
a
cp.
S
It's
not
necessarily
a
weighing
that
may
be
the
function,
but
in
his
materials,
along
with
mistaking
the
applicable
comprehensive
plan
and
misstating
the
the
what
he
put
in
his
materials
was
the
new
york
standard,
which
is
where
he
practices
law
the
new
york
standard
for
what
is
required
for
a
cell
tower.
S
S
The
mccarthy's
have
a
property
right
and
it's
a
property
right
that
they
leased
to
intermax
towers
and
it's
a
property
right
that
deserves
to
be
protected.
This
is
a
conditional
use.
It's
a
policy
matter
that
they're
trying
that
the
opponents
are
trying
to
make
this
they're
trying
to
turn
it
into
you.
Shouldn't
have
cell
towers
in
this
area
as
a
matter
of
policy,
and
that's
not
what
the
code
says.
The
policy
has
already
been
decided
by
the
board
of
commissioners.
The
policy
is
that
this
is
a
conditional
use.
S
It's
an
allowed
use
with
a
conditional
use
permit
and
if
we
meet
the
standards
for
conditional
use,
permit
we're
entitled
to
a
conditional
use
permit.
Mr
speicher
mentioned
the
the
million
dollar
homes
that
are
going
in
around
here.
S
That
was
one
of
the
topics
that
came
up
at
the
neighborhood
meeting
and,
and
frankly,
was
a
little
bit
shocking
that
that
they
were
several
neighbors
were
upset
that
we
would
put
a
cell
tower
next
to
their
their
million
dollar
homes
and
and
this
it
was
the
second
time
I'd
had
that
that
experience
in
a
neighborhood
meeting.
The
last
thing
is
the
shot
clock
at
least
one
of
the
deferrals.
S
S
P
So
is
verizon
the
only
one
that's
going
to
be
on
this
tower.
The
way
I
look
at
the
draw
I
mean
go
ahead.
Can
you
confirm
that
sure.
S
Chairman
burch
and
commissioner
colson
as
of
right
now,
verizon
is
the
only
one
that
has
a
signed
co-location
application
with
the
tower
company.
The
tower
company's
sister
company
called
intermax
networks.
Not
intermax
tower
is
the
anchor
tenant
is
the
the
initial
tenant
and
it
will
be
at
the
at
the
lowest
height
on
the
tower.
It
provides
wireless
internet
service
broadband
and
then
there
are
two
other
locations
on
this
tower
for
co-location
and
that's
because
a
ada
county
requires
it
and
and
also
b
putting
them
on.
S
This
tower
means
that
they're
not
on
a
we're,
not
adding
another
tower
to
service.
Then.
P
S
P
Okay,
and
did
you
by
chance
measure
the
power
the.
I
see
the
heavy
duty
power
poles
actually
on
this
here
and
they're.
Do
you
know
the
height
of
those
by
chance.
P
B
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion
based
upon
the
findings
of
fact,
conclusions
of
law
contained
herein
in
the
testimony
from
the
public
hearing.
I
move
to
approve
project
202102816.
B
K
A
Motion
that
has
been
made
and
seconded
by
commissioner
brown
is
that
correct.
Thank
you,
discussion
with
respect
to
the
motion.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Again,
it's
a
it's
a
nimby
question,
if
not
in
my
backyard,
but
I
would
I'd
like
to
suggest
that
maybe
we
seriously
considered
having
this
a
camouflage
tower,
a
monopine
is
what
you
call
it.
I
did
go
by
and
look
at
the
one
on
big
sky
and
it.
I
don't
think
this
is
as
tall
as
this
one,
but
it
sure
makes
a
big
difference
as
you're
driving
down
the
street
and
you
can
see
it
from
a
far
away
as
you're
driving
down
beacon
light.
E
But
as
you
get
to
it,
it's
acceptable.
It
yeah,
because
here
further
down
beacon,
light,
there's
a
lot
of
trees
along
the
road
and
but
right
where
this
tower
is,
there's
nothing
and
you
come
up
on
it
boom
there.
It
is
so
it
helped
to
dampen
that
a
little
bit
the
location
to
be
nice
if
it
was
further
west,
because
they'd
get
some
coverage
out
there,
but
as
far
as
a
low
density
area,
the
distance
from
other
properties,
you
can't
get
much
better
than
that,
and
I
get.
E
E
I
was
a
real
estate,
appraiser
certified
state
appraiser
for
30
years,
and
some
things
are
going
to
have
some
effect,
but
I
think
at
that
distance,
unless
somebody
can
come
up
with
comparable
match
sales,
to
show
that
there
is
an
effect
you're
guessing
and
we've
not
been
presented
with
that.
The
one
appraisal
doesn't
have
enough
information
to
show
how
they
came
to
their
conclusion.
E
So
anybody,
as
far
as
the
effect
upon
tower
the
towers,
have
upon
value-
it's
not
been
clearly
shown
with
appraisals
and
using
proper
information.
So
I'm
I
would
agree,
support
this.
I
would
like
to
see
a
camouflage
tower
and
then
the
applicant
has
suggested
that
that's
what
it
takes,
then
they
would
do
that
appreciate.
They
do
have
some
extra
setbacks
from
the
road.
E
In
this
side,
there's
no
way
a
tower
is
going
to
go
in
without
having
some
kind
of
a
negative
effect
on
somebody
and
we're
sorry
for
that,
and
that's
you
know
for
mr
miller
that
you're
you're
going
to
have
seven
houses
up
the
road
with
probably
40
trips
a
day
coming
extra
traffic
coming
down
your
your
way
as
it
is,
so
I'm
sorry
you're
going
to
get
a
double
whammy
there,
but
it's
it's!
It's
going
to
help
provide
coverage
for
all
those
residents
that
are
being
built
in
that
area.
B
Braxton,
please,
I
would
be
open
to
amending
my
motion
to
add
another
condition
to
have
it
as
a
monopine
or
some
other
form
of
disguised
tower.
My
only
concern-
and
this
is
just
maybe
a
me
thing-
I
just
feel
like
a
monopine-
would
probably
stick
out
a
lot
more
like
a
sore
thumb.
B
B
E
B
C
K
Honestly
think
in
this,
in
this
format,
just
looking
at
this
I
mean:
do
you
know
how
many
years
it
takes
a
pine
tree
to
grow
a
hundred
feet?
I
mean
it's
we're
talking
about
generations
before
that
it
actually
blends
in.
You
know
we're
talking
about
putting
it
right
next
to
some
major
power
poles
that
actually,
I
would
agree
with
the
applicants
that
this
actually
blends
in
better
than
that.
K
So
I
I
mean
I
stick
with
the
monopole
just
because
I
in
my
own
preference,
in
my
own
opinion,
I
would
rather
it
blend
in
with
these
power
poles
that
are
all
around
it,
I'm
not
to
mention
that
there's
probably
zero
to
zero
chances
that
there's
gonna
be
a
hundred
foot
pine
tree
anywhere
near
that
road,
and
you
know
it
won't
grow.
So
it's
not
it's
not
like
it's
going
to
blend
in.
K
K
I
just
asked,
as
I
I'm
already
going,
but
you
know
we're
we're
dealing
with
like
say
I
respect
everybody's
time
and
and
testimony
and-
and
you
know
everyone's
got
an
opinion
about
this
for
sure
and
you're
never
gonna.
I've
said
this
before
never
make
everybody
happy.
We
always
make
someone
upset,
but
you
know
the
fact
is,
as
I
can
tell
you
from
my
own
personal
experience
being
in
the
industry,
we
are
getting
into
a
situation
now
where
home
values
are
actually
decreased
by
not
having
cell
phone
or
or
internet
service.
K
I've
dealt
with
it
personally.
If
you
are
in
a
certain
area
or
subdivision
where
you
don't
have
those
amenities,
your
property
value,
it
is
hard
to
sell
a
house
in
those
areas
and
I
think
we'll
only
continue
to
see
that.
So
I
think,
as
far
as
property
value
goes,
you
know
we'd
all
love
for
everywhere
around
us
to
be
completely
open
for
the
rest
of
time,
but
that's
just
not
going
to
happen.
Unfortunately,.
A
F
So
the
only
times
that
you're
not
connected
to
the
internet
are
the
times
when
you're
in
the
car
and
you're
out
in
your
backyard,
which,
by
their
maps,
seem
to
have
sufficient
coverage.
So
I
do.
I
do
have
some
reservations
about
what
is
the
true
necessity
of
of
this
of
this
application.
F
You
know
the
other
alternative
is
if
it
is
a
true
necessity,
do
we
want
shorter
towers
more
frequently
or
a
taller
tall,
a
taller
tower?
That's
spread.
You
know
that
that
impacts
fewer
in
the
immediate
but
and
maybe
even
a
little
bit
more
significantly.
F
So
those
are
my
my
concerns
and
my
reservations.
You
know
just
and
I'm
not
accusing
either
side
of
misleading
or
or
misrepresenting
information.
It's
just
the
data
can
be
presented
in
multiple
ways
to
to
show
a
certain
outcome.
F
I
do
excuse
me.
I
do
think
a
shorter
tower
would
have
less
less
of
an
impact.
I
don't
I
don't
know
that
it
would
be
providing
you
know
the
benefits.
I
think
that's
something
that
the
companies
would
have
to
take
into
account,
but
I
think
that
it
would
be
better
for
the
community
in
the
sense
that
you
know
if
we
do
have
72
foot
as
a
max
elevation
on
the
top
of
this,
then
it's
it's
no
more.
F
It's
it
is
hard
I
I
can
certainly
sympathize
with
with
growing
up
in
an
area,
and
you
know
I
live
about
five
miles
from
where
I
grew
up
in
the
first
20
years
of
my
life,
and
it
is
hard
to
see,
see
things
change,
but
at
the
same
time
it's
happening
in
in,
and
you
know,
we've
got
to
find
a
way
to
to
properly
mitigate
it,
to
make
sure
that
that
we
can
still
preserve
those
values,
those
those
views
that
that
we
want
to
for
for
future
generations.
K
Let's
just
say
one:
the
one
thing
about
the
coverage
thing
that
I
think
I
caught
they
brushed
on
a
little
bit
from
the
engineering
is
that
if
any
of
us
have
ever
been
to
a
boise
state
game
or
a
concert
anywhere
where
there's
a
concentration
of
phones
being
used,
your
phone
is
adversely
affected
by
how
many
people
are
on
the
tower.
At
that
time,.
C
K
Not
you
know
taking
it
back,
saying
well,
there's
coverage
if
we
take
this
one
down
you're,
also
adding
at
the
enormous
amount
of
people
to
the
one
tower,
that's
going
to
slow
down
all
the
service
for
everybody
on
that
tower
by
not
putting
another
tower
in
even
if
it's
not
needed
right
now,
it's
we
know
it's
going
to
be
needed.
Eventually,
I
mean
there's
people
in
the
room
that
are
building
more
houses
in
that
area.
K
So
I
think
that's
one
of
them
and
I
only
imagine
how
much
cell
service
is
being
used
at
the
eagle
high
school
tower
at
any
given
time.
I
imagine
it's
ridiculous
so
that
to
ask
that
tower
to
do
more
might
be
a
little
excessive.
So
I
think
in
the
coverage
thing,
maybe
looking
at
what
the
coverage
is,
we
got
to
keep
in
mind
too.
K
A
The
representation
has
been
made
that
verizon
needs
this
tower.
So
do
we
have
the
authority
to
say
that
if
we
approved
it,
that
only
verizon
would
be
able
to
be
allowed
on
that
tower,
because
otherwise
it
could
be
used
as
a
commercial
enterprise
by
verizon
to
put
up
other
things
on
the
tower
for
other
different
purposes.
I
Yeah,
chairman
burch,
I
think
that
would
be
complicated
by
our
ordinance,
which
does
as
mentioned
by
the
applicant,
and
I
think,
diana
included
in
her
staff
report.
Our
ordinance
requires
that
a
tower
be
built
to
accommodate
multiple
carriers,
so
it
would
have
to.
I
mean
that
would
be
like
almost
a
variance
of
a
to
a
certain
extent
to
limit
it
to
a
single
carrier.
A
I
I
I
mean
it's
a
cell
tower,
so
I
think
it
would
have
to
be.
You
know
carriers,
so
in
that
industry
we
can't
just
throw
anything
up.
On
top
of
the
tower
I
mean
outside
of
a
cell.
Maybe
I'm
missing
your
question.
I
apologize
no.
I
German,
I
believe,
that's
typically
how
it
works.
I
mean
the
the
owner
of
the
pole
dictates
the
type
of
equipment
they're
allowed
to
put
up
there,
and
it's
I'm
sure
it's
not
just
open
to
everything,
but
yeah.
Each
carrier
has
their
own
equipment
that
they
get
access
to
the
tower
to
replace
update
things
like
that.
K
Commissioner,
I
think
I
understand
a
little
bit
about
it,
the
so
the
poll
is
actually
owned
by
the
a
separate
company
and
verizon's
in
second
place
on
that.
So
so
verizon
is
one
of
the
carriers
being
leased
spaced
by
the
the
mother
company
that
owns
the
inter
I
apologize.
I
missed
the
name
on
it,
but
the
inner
something
power
but
anyways,
and
then
what
they're
doing
is
they
leave?
They
have
to
allow
for
more
space
to
get
more,
you
know,
and
they
from
my
understanding
I
think
it's
already
built
for
that.
F
Thank
you
chairman.
I
do
think
that
there
there
should
be
a
height
restriction
on
this.
I
you
know,
I
understand
that
you
know
it's
a
further
east
and
the
carrier
and
yadda
yadda.
You
know,
but
I
I
still
think
that
we
owe
it
to
to
make
sure
it
stays
compatible
with
with
what's
existing
and
isn't
is
going
to
be.
You
know
compatible
with
with
this.
The
surrounding
the
surrounding
area.
F
You
know,
like
commissioner
brown
stated
a
100
foot
tall
pine,
whatever
it
might
be
is
is
not
going
to
be,
is,
is
quite
large
and
has
survived
many
generations.
So
I
do
think
that
this
this
application
does
need
a
height
restriction
and
that
the
camouflage
are
disguising
the
facility
that
we
we
should
seriously
consider
that.
K
But
keep
in
mind
I
mean,
I
think
one
of
these
actually
kind
of
helps
and
some
one
of
it
kind
of
doesn't,
but
by
the
depiction
of
this
photo,
it
kind
of
looks
like
it's
double
the
the
height
of
the
pole.
When
you
look
at
next
to
a
you
know
by
their
own
drone
footage
they're
at
72
feet
with
just
a
normal
power
pole
that
we
all
drive
by
every
day,
you're
you're,
adding
you
know
20.
You
know
so
they're
going
up
to
100
feet
so
you're.
K
You
know
adding
28
feet
that
from
that,
so
it's
like,
I
don't
know
we're
already
looking
at
power
poles
at
72
feet.
Is
it
really
that
much
of
a
difference
to
get
it
up
a
little
higher
and
I
think
it's
sometimes
something
down
lower-
is
going
to
be
look
worse
at
your
eye
level
than
it
is?
Even
if
you
raise
it
up
a
little
bit.
P
So
now
you
got
another
eyesore
in
another
location
and
and
to
me
I
I
for
28
feet
just
being
in
the
construction
business.
It's
it's
not
a
ton
when
you're
looking
up
in
the
air.
You
know.
B
Yeah
just
kind
of
echo
that
that
would
be
my
concern
with
lowering
it
is.
We
would
actually
make
it
make
more
towers
in
the
long
run,
because
we'd
have
to
take
probably
two
of
the
drums
off.
So
then
we're
actually
eliminating
all
the
carriers,
except
for
intermax's
sister
company
in
verizon,
and
not
everyone
has
verizon.
B
So
I
would
actually
prefer
for
it
to
be
at
100
and
have
the
more
variety
to
actually
serve
more
people
with
different
carriers,
rather
than
you
know
something
that's
only
exclusive
to
verizon,
because
then,
if
you're
in
that
area,
you
don't
have
verizon
it
kind
of
sucks
to
be
you
until
there's
another
tower.
That's
separate
as
another
eyesore.
B
A
R
R
The
city
of
meridian
is
requesting
a
25-foot
temporary
construction,
easement
and
permanent
sewer
easement
along
this
southern
border,
and
you
can
see
the
25
foot
that
they're
requesting
and
meridian
and
the
neighbor
to
the
the
west
have
both
requested
that.
So
we
did
at
that
as
a
condition
of
approval.
B
Miss
sanders,
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
can
clarify
looking
at
the
application
in
the
late
exhibits.
There
definitely
seems
to
be
this
theme
of
the
hoa
being
concerned.
You
know
with
the
lean
and
also
the
ccrs.
Can
you
clarify
our
role
as
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
in
regards
to
hoa
enforcement
of
these
things?
Mr.
R
Chairman
commissioner,
exxon,
we
do,
the
county
does
not
regulate
ccnr's
or
a
homeowners
association.
They
have
their
own
jurisdiction,
their
own
processes,
so
we
don't
get
involved
in
their
process.
If
there's
a
lien
on
the
property,
that's
for
the
owner
to
take
care
of
the
county
would
not
put
that
as
a
condition
of
approval.
B
And
then
just
to
like
further
clarify
and
not
to
sound
too,
I
don't
need
to
sound
blunt,
but
I
don't
know
any
other
way
to
toward
this,
but
essentially,
if
this
does
get
approved,
all
we
can
do
as
planning
and
zoning
commission
is
just
say.
R
Mr
chairman,
commissioner,
basically
you're
going
to
be
making
a
recommendation
to
the
board.
C
R
B
B
A
Q
My
name
is
dean,
briggs,
briggs
engineering,
599,
west
state
street
garden
city,
idaho,
we're
representing
the
potential
owners.
As
you
noted,
the
property
is
under
a
lien,
and
this
is
hopefully
going
to
satisfy
place.
By
buying
the
property
it
will
satisfy
the
lien.
C
Q
Q
There
was
a
paula
conley
sent
in
an
email
addressing
four
items
and
each
of
those
items
have
been
reviewed
by
the
owner
or
the
developer,
and
they
are
in
concurrent
with
those
the
developer
is
in
attendance
at
your
location.
So
if
you
have
any
questions
for
them,
they
can
address
those
at
those.
At
that
time.
Q
They
have
similar
concerns
I'll
go
through
those
real
quick
one
is
an
issue
about
traffic,
as
you
can
see
by
the
application
map
that
this
property
is
very
close
to
the
public
right
away
and
would
really
only
affect
this
lot
and
the
opposite
law
across
the
street.
Q
They
have
a
concern
about
continuity
of
the
area,
and
this
developer
has
the
ambition
to
put
his
house
there
and
not
develop
this
in
any
further
condition.
Nor
does
he.
A
Any
questions
for
the
applicant
by
the
commission,
commissioner,.
E
A
A
Q
E
Q
A
A
A
E
B
C
F
I
think
that
the
developer
wanting
to
live
on
site
they'll
be
a
pretty
good
neighbor.
So
in
support
of
this,
this
project.
E
Mr
miss
chairs,
this
is
as
you're
reading
through
this,
that
they
sort
of
get
lost
in
the
weeds.
Really
quick.
Is
there
something
we're
missing
and
it
really
isn't.
It
seems
to
be
pretty
straightforward
and
for
some
reason
they
start
going
through
all
the
materials
and
the
concerns
that
the
existing
homeowners
has.
It
has
something
that's
beyond
us
and
it's
easy
to
wander
off
start
chasing
shiny
objects.
E
I
guess,
but
so
I
guess,
as
long
as
everybody
feels
that
we
there's
not
something
we're
missing
on
this,
that's
there's
a
snake
in
the
grass
we
don't
see,
but
otherwise
they
don't
see
any
problems
that
there's
going
to
be
something
that
maybe
they
have
to
deal
with
later.
But
that's
not
something
for
us
to
be
concerned
with
at
this
time.
B
Pseudo
red
flag
or
snake
in
the
grass
that
I
saw
were
those
concerns
about
the
hoa
you
know,
but
since
a
that's
not
something
that
we
can
govern
or
control,
but
also
it
seems,
like
all
those
concerns
have
already
been
ironed
out
and
worked
out
prior
to
me.
There's
no
more
issues
with
this
and
it
does
seem
very
straightforward
as
well.
A
A
What
our
action
here
tonight
will
not
affect
that
and
beyond
that,
the
ability
to
foreclose
on
the
property
or
sue
to
collect
on
the
amount
of
fees
that
have
not
been
paid
is
also
within
the
ability
of
management
of
the
homeowners
association
to
do
so
if
they
wish
to
go
out
and
hire
a
legal
counsel
to
pursue
that.
So
that's
also
not
something
that
impacts
us.
A
C
A
A
K
A
C
I
Yes,
thank
you,
chairman
yeah,
so,
all
approvals
last
night,
even
some
when
staff
was
recommending
denial,
so
they
like
to
say
yes
at
the
board
and
that's
what
we
had
last
night
as
well.
I
thought
mike
has
turned
away
up.
We
had
a
two
lot
final
plat
out
on
black
cat
road
that
was
approved.
I
There
was
a
variance
request
for
an
accessory
structure
in
the
boise
area
off
of
mclaughlin
that
was
approved.
Also,
a
temporary
living
quarters
appeal
staff
would
recommend
the
denial
and
the
board
overturn
that
and
allow
them
to
have
a
temporary
living
quarters
on
their
property.
Same
same
property.
I
Let's
see,
we
had
a
variance
for
an
accessory
structure
or
an
accessory
used
for
a
secondary
dwelling
to
exceed
the
900
square
feet.
That's
in
the
eagle
area
that
was
ultimately
approved
by
the
board
had
a
gentleman
vacate,
an
easement
off
of
dunwoody
court,
which
I
think
is
in
the
boise
area,
but
I
might
be
getting
that
wrong.
I
That
was
also
approved
to
allow
for
a
1200
square
foot
accessory
structure
and
then
finally,
I
don't
know
if
any
of
the
commission
was
around
the
last
time.
This
one
came
through
or
the
first
time,
but
there
was
a
time
extension
for
conditional
use
in
private
road
in
what
is
known
as
the
hammer
flats
area.
It's
for
a
commercial
writing
arena
originally
approved
in
2017.
So
I
think
that
predates
everybody
right.
I
Okay,
anyways,
a
lot
of
discussion
around
that,
but,
ultimately
that
that
time
extension
was
approved
as
well
and
so
I'll
stand
for
any
questions.
F
Two
questions:
the
first
one,
the
variances,
the
ordinance
amendment
that
we
passed
was
that
was
did
that
affect
those
because
those
you
said
were
accessory
use
and
yeah.
I
F
I
I
These
are
all
things
like
secondary
dwellings
that
are
going
to
be
bigger
than
900
square
feet.
We
were
always
caught
in
the
game
of
old
buildings
that
popped
up
magically
in
in
a
setback
area,
and
then
they
come
in
to
us
for
a
building
permit
for
something
else
like
well.
You
can't
do
that
until
you
fix.
C
I
F
And
I
had
one
one
other
question:
maybe
it's
more
of
a
comment
or
a
concern?
I
don't
know
I
just
these
winery
applications.
It
seems
like
we
really
need
updated
amendments
for
it,
because
it's
is
becoming
a
huge
problem,
an
issue
for
us
to
try
and
resolve
up
here,
especially
when
we've
got
you
know,
adverse
parties
I
mean
is
the
county.
I
don't.
I
don't
know
if
I
want
to
say
the
m
word
or
not,
but
I'll
say
the
m
word
moratorium
on
on
certain
applications
until
we
can
get
those
I
mean.
I
You
know
I
mean
that
is
always
an
option
that
was
a
board
decision
to
go
that
route.
Funny
enough,
we
haven't
had
a
lot
of
them
come
through
versus
our
our
neighbor
to
the
west
canyon
county.
I
mean
they've
got
tons,
we're
still
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
accommodate
wineries
over
here.
I
There's
a
lot
of
discussion
as
to
how
we,
how
we
do
that
better,
I
think
an
application
you
saw
tonight
is
really
asking
for
better
definition
as
to
what
an
event
is,
and
that
sort
of
thing
I
you
know
the
board
is
likely
going
to
see
the
one
that
you
know.
I
don't
want
to
make
predictions,
but
just
the
way
the
way
things
are
going.
I
would
assume
they're
going
to
see
that
in
a
couple
of
months
and
they'll
probably
have
that
discussion,
they
have
asked
staff
to
take
a
closer
look.
I
We've
met
with
the
idaho
wine
commission,
who
was
actually
a
part
of
the
last
kind
of
rewrite
of
that
section
of
our
code,
but
yeah
we
we're
getting
caught
in
that
area
where
a
winery
turns
into
an
event
center
and
there's
this
gray
area
where
it's
like
all
right.
We,
you
know
like
honestly
for
a
lot
of
these
winery
operators
as
you've
heard.
It's
the
only
way
to
make
their
business
viable.
I
mean
just
simply
growing
grapes
and
crushing
and
bottling
like
you're
just
burning
money
in
your
front
yard.
I
I
We've
been
directed
to
look
at
it
in
our
current
code
rewrite,
but
I
feel
like
it's
a
bigger
effort
even
than
that,
like
just
with
what
we've
seen
in
the
last
six
months
like
there
are
some
things
that
really
need
to
get
hammered
out.
Flushed
out,
and
so
rather
than
a
moratorium,
I
think
we'll
just
be
directed
to
do
an
updated
ordinance.
Oh.
F
I
And
we're
just
you
know,
we're
seeing
this
this
hot
area
of
the
eagle
foothills
where
it's
like.
I
want
to
live
here,
but
also
wow.
It
happens
to
be
a
great
place
to
grow
grapes
and
could
support
that
whole
industry
and
change
in
that
area.
So
those
two
things
just
are
bumping
heads
a
lot
right
now.
I
And
that's
that's
what
we're
yeah
and
so
you've
got
that
going
on
and
it's
it's
an
interesting
one.
There's.
E
Those
first
couple
years,
where
they're
not
producing
it,
takes
three
to
five
years
for
the
frames
to
get
going,
the
other
one,
those
we're
gonna,
see
more
cell
towers.
It
seems,
but
so
tonight
could
we
have
just
said.
You
know
this
isn't
the
place
for
it
find
another
place.
I
Yeah
I
mean
you
gotta
make
any
decision
like
that,
based
on
the
findings
associated
with
with
the
conditional.
You
know,
particularly
the
conditional
use,
permit
findings
to
say
this.
This
is
going
to
you
know
it
doesn't.
Jive
with
comp
plan,
doesn't
work
with
the
development
code.
It's
going
to
negatively
impact
adjacent
properties.
You
know
you've
got
to
make
those
findings
and
what
happens
is
you
know?
I
In
my
opinion,
this
type
of
technology
is
becoming
essentially
critical
infrastructure
to
the
point
where
the
fcc
is,
you
know,
dragging
their
feet
on
regulating,
and
so,
if
it
doesn't
go
there,
it's
going
to
go
a
couple
properties
somewhere
else,
and
you
know
it's
just
there's
kind
of
like
this
real
momentum
to
allow
these
in
our
community.
But
I
yeah
it's
it's
a
tough
one
for
you.
I
recognize
each
one
of
these
just.
K
It's
it's
bailing,
water
out
of
your
boat
and
throwing
it
in
that
guy
yeah
I
mean
it's
just
it's
gonna
happen
over
and
over
and
over,
and
it's
just
like
that.
You
know
that's
the
thing
that
we
all
have
to
swallow
at
some
point
and
realize
that
the
buck
is
gonna,
stop
somewhere
there.
You
could
move
this
to
murphy
and
there's
going
to
be
somebody
like
murphy
that
doesn't
want
a
cell
tower
and
murphy.
You
know,
like
I
mean
there's
nowhere,
you
can
you
know,
and
then
you
know
I
don't
know,
that's
that's
the.
I
Point
against
where
it's
my
argument
for
critical
infrastructure,
I
mean,
if
it's
a
sewer
line
project,
no
one
gets
to
come
in
and
say
don't
put
that
sewer
line.
Here
I
mean
it's
a
lot
harder
to
say
no
to
a
sewer
line
or
a
water
line,
and-
and
I
I
would
argue
you
know-
obviously
we
live
and
die
by
these
little
things
in
our
hands.
I
I
mean,
and
you
can
do
a
lot
with
them,
but
they
are
still,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
a
way
to
communicate
and
stay
in
touch
and
in
need
of
emergencies.
So
I
mean,
I
don't
think
they're
at
the
level
of
being
able
to
flush
your
toilet,
but
they
are
pretty
important
to
a
lot
of
people
and
I,
I
think
they're
moving
to
that,
like
utility
infrastructure
kind
of
level
that.
I
I
K
A
C
I
I
I
It's
the
definitions
and
procedures
which
we've
really
made
minimal
changes
to,
but
it
is
the
final
module
that
we
want
to
get
in
front
of
everybody,
so
we'll
be
sending
out
that
request
again,
a
webex
meeting
is
going
to
be
fine
if
you
can
carve
out
an
hour-ish
two
weeks
from
now.
That
would
be
really
appreciated.
So.