►
From YouTube: Ada County P&Z Hearing -- May 11, 2023
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).
A
23-
and
this
is
the
time
and
place
of
the
Ada
County
Planning
and
Zoning
Commission
meeting-
we
extend
our
welcome
to
those
persons
who
are
here
in
person,
as
well
as
in
the
oven
that
may
be
joining
us
online,
we'll
begin
with
a
roll
call
of
the
Commissioners.
We
excuse,
commissioner
Chad
Scott,
who
had
a
pre-planned
absence.
Commissioner
Exton
here.
B
A
So
just
by
way
of
introduction,
I've
only
have
a
few
matters
today,
so
we
will
have
when
applicants
come
up.
They'll
have
15
minutes
to
give
their
presentation
there
that
follows
the
staff
initially
giving
a
review
of
the
project
after
the
15-minute
presentation
by
the
applicant,
then
there
will
be
questions
that
can
be
asked
and
the
public
will
have
an
opportunity
to
speak
five
minutes
each.
We
can
ask
them.
Questions
staff
will
then
have
another
opportunity
to
address
any
questions.
A
C
Thank
you,
chairman
Commissioners.
So,
as
you
recall,
this
project
was
approved
and
tabled
at
the
last
hearing
on
April
13th
for
to
reflect
revised
findings
or
to
prepare
revised
findings
reflecting
your
decision
to
approve
the
project,
just
a
quick
orientation
to
the
project.
Again,
this
is
at
Five
Mile
and
Lake
Hazel
north
of
McDonald's
East
of
the
Walgreens
there
at
the
corner.
C
So
in
conclusion,
yes,
staff
has
prepared
findings
reflecting
your
recommendation
to
the
board
to
approve
the
project.
We
would
like
to
specify
a
couple
of
the
conditions
listed
here.
Most
importantly,
I
think
is
a
the
current
set
of
findings
that
were
on
our
website.
Note
also
depicting
a
12-foot
path,
and
we
really
just
wanted
to
pick
the
16
foot,
Public
Access
easement,
to
give
Boise
or
whoever's
going
to
build
this
pathway
in
the
future
flexibility.
C
Beyond
that,
there's
updated
condition
for
off-street
loading
spaces
and,
let's
see
a
lighting
plan,
as
well
as
an
update
to
the
site
plan
reflecting
violia
water
for
the
water
utilities.
So
those
are
just
some
conditions
that
Brent
really
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
guys
understood
and
I'll
stand
for
any
questions.
Any.
A
C
Correct
yeah
you
have
unless
I
mean
when
the
applicant
is
here.
If
they
wanted
to
oppose
any
of
the
conditions
for
the
approval,
you're
ready
to
grant
them,
they
could
do
that
and
then
you
could
technically
close
it
and
deliberate
and
make
a
motion
but
yeah.
It's
at
your
call.
I
I
I've
spoken
we've
spoken
to
the
applicant.
They
seem
fine
with
these
conditions,
particularly
the
adjustment
to
number
a
here.
Where,
again,
we
just
want
to
focus
on
the
public
access
easement
and
not
the
pathway
that
will
be
constructed
in
the
future.
Okay.
D
E
A
E
Yeah
sure
I
mean
you
know
we
did
table
it
from
the
last
meeting
because
we
all
were
we
all
voted
to
approve
it
and
I
do
think
it
is
smart
on
the
staff's
side
of
things
to
kind
of
focus
more
on
the
way
the
easement
is
structured
rather
than
the
pathway.
Specifically
that
way,
there's
that
flexibility,
so
I
do
appreciate
that.
A
D
Thank
you
chairman
Burch,
yes,
application
before
you
is
2023.00273-cu
MSP
applicant
is
Jill
Cypress.
D
If
you
recall
you
guys
tabled
this
one
last
month,
as
there
was
a
noticing
error,
we
went
through
that
process
re-noticed,
and
so
it's
before
you
tonight.
The
property
here
that
we're
going
to
be
speaking
on
is
just
south
of
the
city
of
Boise's
City
Limits.
It's
near
the
corner
of
Maple
Grove
and
victory
road,
so
it's
kind
of
Southwest
Boise
area.
D
D
The
property
owner
proposes
to
add
a
daycare
center
to
the
portion
of
the
existing
residential
use
of
the
single-family
dwelling
and
operate
that
daycare
center.
Within
that
dwelling,
the
applicant
refers
to
the
use
in
their
DHL
letter
as
I
quote
preschool
and
that
will
accept
children
between
the
ages
of
three
and
six
years
old.
D
A
maximum
of
24
children
are
proposed
at
any
given
time
and
three
employees
will
be
working
during
the
largest
shift.
Hours
of
operation
will
be
Monday
through
Friday
from
7
A.M
to
4
pm
and
then,
if
I
go.
So
this
is
the
site
plan
here
that
I'm
showing
this
was
originally
received
by
us
in
February
and
updated
just
recently
on
May
9th,
they
updated
the
plan
to
include
that
purple
Square
there
and
I'll
get
back
to
that.
D
But
for
our
purposes,
this
new
site
plan
that
we
received
will
be
exhibit
number
37.,
and
so
this
is
the
the
floor
plan
or
sketch
the
floor
plan
of
the
house.
It
shows
here
that
of
the
existing
3230
square
feet,
which
includes
the
dwelling
in
the
garage
of
the
applicant,
proposes
to
use
1239
square
feet
for
the
daycare
itself.
A
building
permit
will
be
required
to
change
the
use
of
that
structure
to
commercial.
D
The
applicant
if
I
go
back.
Here,
has
also
indicated
that
children
will
have
access
to
19,
620
square
feet
of
fence
play
area
on
the
property,
and
that's
that
purple
outline
portion
there
will
be
a
three
parking
spaces
provided
and
the
applicant
will
be
required
to
provide
a
paved
Ada
parking
space
with
access
to
the
daycare
center.
D
The
property
is
located
within
Boise's
area
of
City
Impact,
and
so
it's
their
comp
plan
and
their
future
land
use
map
that
we're
looking
at
when
making
decisions,
and
so
it's
specifically
noted
on
Boise's
future
land
use
map
that
this
area
is
for
large
Lots,
which
is
primarily
intended
for
detached
single-family
homes.
So,
as
a
proposed
daycare
center
will
provide
an
essential
service
that
will
support
their
surrounding
residential
neighbors.
It
is
compatible
with
the
adopted
future
land
use
map.
D
At
this
time
we
did
not
receive
any
opposition
from
any
agencies,
but
we
did
have
some
neighbor
opposition
specific
to
those
folks
in
the
Harvey
Burnett
acre
subdivision.
They
noted
that
this
daycare
center
would
be
in
violation
of
the
ccnrs.
They
have
a
compromise
that
I
can
let
them
speak
on,
but
essentially
they
would
like
to
move
the
boundaries
of
what's
being
proposed
to
strictly
a
0.87
acre
square
on
the
eastern
part
of
the
property.
D
These
are
some
Key
conditions
that
are
added
in
the
draft
findings
effects,
as
I
noted
they'll
have
to
get
a
commercial
building
permit.
The
outdoor
play
area
does
have
to
be
completely
fenced
with
a
minimum.
Six
foot
tall
barrier
there's
going
to
be
a
fire
inspection,
health
inspection
are
required
and
then
any
modifications
that
would
take
place
to
the
site
plan,
whether
that
be
Landscaping
parking,
the
actual
operation
area
or
play
area
of
the
daycare
center.
Any
expansion.
D
Those
would
all
require
a
new
master
site
plan
to
be
submitted
at
the
least
and
if
it
meets,
if
it
exceeds
20
percent
increase,
it
would
require
a
new
conditional
use
permit
moving
forward.
And,
lastly,
here
we
just
have
a
condition
about
there
being
only
up
to
24
clients
or
children
available
or
allowed
for
the
daycare
center
staff
is
recommending.
Approval
and
I
will
stand
for
any
questions.
Thank.
A
F
D
F
Two
one
we'll
both
look
for
it.
Maybe
we
can
catch
you
back
after
the
applicant
speaks
okay.
D
A
G
G
G
My
husband
also
grew
up
on
an
acre
of
land
in
Eastern,
Idaho
and
so
for
us
to
be
able
to
buy
not
only
acreage,
but
Acres
that
had
belonged
to
my
family
was
just
a
wonderful
thing
for
us.
We
really
wanted
to
raise
our
own
kids
on
acreage
so
that
they
could
learn
how
to
work
hard
and
play
hard
and
raise
animals
and
and
farm
and
and
all
the
things
that
come
with
growing
up
on
an
acre,
because
we
both
enjoyed
that
so
much
I
love
that
I
get
to
raise.
G
My
four
young
kids
there
preschool
is
a
vitally
important
component
in
Early
Education,
with
more
and
more
parents
needing
to
enter
the
workforce.
Preschool
plays
a
vital
part
in
the
care
and
teaching
of
young
children.
I've
had
a
dream
for
many
years
to
incorporate
all
the
things.
I
love
about
my
life
into
a
small
preschool,
so
that
I
can
share
with
our
community
that
Joys
and
the
joys
of
gardening
and
farm
animals
and
having
acreage
to
play
if
I
was
all
I've,
also
always
been
an
entrepreneur
at
heart
and
starting
a
preschool
checks.
G
G
I'm
hoping
that
in
obtaining
the
conditional
use
permit
tonight
that
I
will
simultaneously
achieve
the
first
step
in
my
Big
Dreams
and
also
continue
to
be
a
good
neighbor.
I
would
also
like
to
add
that
none
of
the
other
neighbors
in
the
radius
have
expressed
any
concerns
at
all,
and
also
the
neighbors
who
are
here
to
give
their
testimony
tonight
do
not
fall
within
that
radius.
A
A
G
City
requires
a
county
requires
two
I
would
like
to
have
three
just
it
would
make
me
feel
better
if
someone's
helping
with
a
bathroom
accident
or
something
I
would
like
to
have
a
third
person.
So
probably
three,
okay,.
A
A
So
I'm
going
to
raise
this
with
the
commission.
Normally
we
would
allow
three
minutes
each
for
people
that
are
opposed,
but
I
have
a
sheet
in
front
of
me.
That
shows
that
number
of
individuals
want
to
give
their
time
to
one
person
so
I'm.
Looking
at
Mr
lets
and
I'm
presuming,
we
have
the
latitude
to
do
that
if
we
wish,
but
we
don't
have
to
do
that.
A
So
I
turned
to
the
commission
and
ask
for
their
input
on
whether
or
not
they
agree.
We
have
looks
like
one
two,
three
individuals
that
are
asking
to
give
their
time
to
Mr
Allen
hertzfeld,
and
so,
if
you
gave
all
three
plus
his
time
that
would
be
12
minutes
so
I'm
looking
to
see
whether
or
not
yes
or
no
Commissioners.
You
want
to
comment
one
way
there,
commissioner
Coulson
looks
like
you're
thinking
something
so
I.
H
Don't
know
I,
don't
know,
okay,
all
right,
I,
don't
know,
I.
Think
12
minutes
for
one
person
is
a
long
time
I'd
like
to
see
it
split
up
to
maybe
two
people,
if
possible,
because
the
person
that
is
requesting
the
approval
only
got
three
minutes
and
gets
three
minutes
at
the
end.
I
think
that
would
kind
of
make
it
more
fair.
E
However,
if
the
commission
would
like
to
allow
that
tonight,
I
would
just
prefer
that
we
have
the
people
who
would
like
to
waive
their
time
come
up
and
say
their
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
just
state
that
they
are
waiving
the
right
to
testify
publicly
on
this
and
giving
their
time
to
the
whoever
is
going
to
have
the
more
time.
Just
that
way.
For
the
record
and
everything
as
well.
F
I
think
that
it's
it's
pretty
straightforward,
you
can
kind
of
imagine
what
the
the
objections
are
going
to
be.
Then
they'll
have
their
three
minutes
if
they
need
to
run
over
an
extra
minute
or
so
to
make
their
points.
I.
Think
three
minutes
should
be
plenty
plenty
time
to
make
concise
objections
to
the
to
this
application
and
again,
if
it
runs
over
and
they're
kind
of
getting
wrapping
it
up,
then
yeah
we'll
extend
them
another
30
seconds
a
minute
or
so.
A
So
I'm
going
to
make
a
Command
Decision
here
then
so
I
agree
with
commissioner
axtrin
that
each
of
the
people
that
want
to
give
up
their
time
should
come
forward
State
their
name
and
address.
If
they
wish
to
do
that,
then
I
would
like
to
see
the
total
testimony
of
the
one
individual
who's
given
the
time
to
be
limited
to
six
minutes,
which
would
be
double
the
time
that
they
would
ordinarily
have.
B
I
J
A
K
A
group
letter
opposes
this
application
and
it
opposes
the
application
because
if
granted,
the
daycare
center
will
constitute
a
violation
of
ccnr
which
prohibits
businesses
on
the
property
of
within
the
subdivision.
The
ccnr
dates
back
to
1959.
K
This
is
a
semi-rural
residential
subdivision
that
is
comprised
of
19
Lots
on
either
side
of
Burnett
Drive,
as
you
can
see
from.
What's
on
the
large
earlier
aerial
map
in
front
of
you,
there
and
they're
all
rectangular
lots
of
about
two
acres,
except
for
the
applicant
slot.
The
applicant
slot,
which
is
in
outlined
in
red.
There
is
an
L-shaped
lot
that
would,
if
you
drew
a
line
on
the
Eastern
red
line
which
goes
halfway
and
and
go
and
else
to
the
east.
K
If
you
continued
that
all
the
way
down
to
the
north
line
of
the
South
Line
there,
you
would
have
two
portions
of
the
parcel
one,
a
two
acre
rectangle
that
borders
Burnett
Drive
and
then
a
0.87
acre
rectangle,
a
smaller
rectangle
which
borders
Maple,
Grove
I,
call
that
to
your
attention,
because
the
the
homeowners
tried
to
come
up
with
a
compromise
that
they
thought
would
be
a
win-win
situation.
K
That
would,
on
the
one
hand,
allow
the
daycare
center
to
operate
as
as
they'd
like
and,
on
the
other
hand,
would
would
present
a
situation
where
the
homeowners
would
be
comfortable
that
if
there
were
a
problem
requiring
enforcement
of
that
ccnr
in
the
future,
if
someone
else
came
in
with
another
request
for
a
commercial
entity
that
we
would
not
be
significantly
prejudiced,
because
what
we'd
have
here
is
a
a
portion
of
that
parcel.
K
A
two
acre
parcel,
just
like
all
the
other
Parcels
in
the
subdivision,
on
which
there
would
be
no
commercial
activity
that
that
rectangle
would
be
resid,
wouldn't
be
left
residential
and
that
would
contemplate
a
revised
Master
site
plan
which
would
fence
off
that
rectangle
that
that
two
acre
rectangle
and
would
oh.
Thank
you
this.
This
is
the
the
master.
K
The
revised
Master
site
plan,
drawing
that
was
submitted
by
the
applicant
I
guess
a
week
ago,
and
the
Aryan
purple
shows
where
the
play
area
would
be
for
the
the
daycare
operation,
which
is
west
of
the
house
that
that
is
on.
Has
the
address
of
Maple,
Grove
and
you'll.
See
that
there's
a
pasture
to
the
east
I.
Don't
know
how
big
it
is.
K
It
looks
to
me
like
it's
about
a
half
acre
or
so,
but
the
compromise
solution
that
that
we're
we're
asking
for
would
would
have
the
play
area
move
to
the
pasture
and
and
then
there
would
be
a
wreck.
You
could
draw
that
red
line
across
to
the
to
the
north.
There
and
you'd
have
a
two
acre
portion
that
would
be
residential
I.
I
would
note
for
the
record
that
apparently,
this
daycare
center
has
been
operating
for
several
years,
so
it's
not
as
if
this
is
an
application
for
a
new
daycare
center.
K
It's
a
Montessori
daycare
center
and
it's
it's
been
around
for
a
while
the
I
guess.
Finally,
what
I'd?
What
I'd
ask
is
that
in
the
event
the
commission
decides
to
approve
the
application
and
regardless
of
whether
there
is
a
revised
Master
site
plan,
accommodating
the
suggested
compromise
solution,
we
would
request.
K
I
would
request,
on
behalf
of
the
signatory
subdivision,
homeowners,
that
the
commission
include
an
additional
condition
in
the
terms
of
approval
section
of
the
conditions
of
approval.
In
the
commission's
findings
of
fact,
conclusions
of
law
and
and
Order
and
I'd
like
to
read
for
you
in
the
record
the
condition
that
we
would
like
to
see
added,
which
will
give
the
the
homeowners
in
the
subdivision
I
hope
a
little
bit
more
comfort
that
the
operations
of
the
daycare
center
will
will
not
expand
Beyond.
C
K
The
the
it's
just
one
line
and
the
condition
that
we're
asking
for
is
this.
The
applicant
shall
comply
with
the
master
site
plan
received
February
10
2023
as
augmented
May,
9th
2023,
and
by
the
way
the
augmentation
is
what
you're.
Looking
at
on
the
screen.
That
is,
the
augmentation
that
was
filed
on
May,
2nd
2023.
K
A
For
questions
so
yeah
Mr
Criswell,
please,
the
Commissioners
have
questions
for
Mr
herself,
Mr,
chairman
Birch,
commissioner
Exton.
So.
E
Just
to
make
sure
I'm
understanding
your
request
with
the
master
site
plan
correctly
and
I'll
also
ask
the
applicants
to
make
sure
we're
all
on
the
same
page,
no
pun
intended.
So
if
this
is
how
the
daycare
operation
pans
out
you're
completely
fine
with
that,
is
that
correct
this.
K
Meaning
the
drawing
that's
on
the
screen
now.
B
K
We
we
would
withdraw
our
opposition
if
they
agreed
to
the
compromise
that
we're
suggesting
which
would
have
the
play
area
moved
from
the
purple
area
there
to
the
pasture
in
the
East.
Thank
you,
Connor.
Okay,.
E
K
L
Yeah
with
you
and
the
other
people
that
you're
representing,
can
we
get
up
the
map
of
the
where
it
shows
who
was
to
be
notified
and
I
mean,
sir,
if
you
could
kind
of
tell
us
where
you
and
the
three
people
that
you're
speaking
on
behalf
kind
of
live
in
regards
to
that.
D
Commissioner,
Birch
or
chairman
Birch,
commissioner
Coulson
I,
can't
I,
don't
have
it
on
a
slideshow.
But
if
you
go
into
the
staff
report
there
will
be
a
radius
notice
buffer,
I.
L
A
K
There
are
13
signatories,
all
of
whom
live
on
West
Burnett
yeah
within
the
subdivision,
within.
F
Mr,
chairman
Mr
Instagram,
just
you
were
you
had
your
arrow
and
you
were
going
across
yeah.
Were
you
wanting
to
take
that
Arrow
all
the
way
to
the
other
side?
Yeah
there
you
go.
B
K
When,
when
Connor
did
that
it,
it
divided
the
plot
into
a
long
rectangle,
which
is
approximately
two
acres
and
a
small
rectangle
which
is
0.87
Acres
the
whole.
The
whole
lot
is
2.87
Acres,
no.
F
D
A
D
Thanks
chairman
Birch
I,
just
wanted
to
add
I
did
add
the
site
plan
that
was
submitted
on
May
9th,
as
that
exhibit
37.
But
I
would
also
like
to
add
my
staff
presentation
with
all
these
slides,
as
exhibit
number
38
to
the
record.
I
G
Fair
enough
I
had
met
with
these
folks
last
week
about
this
same
situation.
G
I
I
am
still
struggling
to
understand
the
modification
that
they're
asking
for
and
how
that
will
positively
affect
them,
because
I
am
not
allowed
to
subdivide
my
property
at
this
time,
and
so
I
would
not
be
able
to
draw
the
line
where
they're
asking
and
say
this
is
only
for
commercial,
and
this
is
only
for
residential,
because.
G
What
they're
concerned
about,
and
also
the
the
proposed
area
for
the
playground
now
I
have
have
a
significant
amount
of
money
invested
there
and
trees,
and
things
like
that
and
it'll
be
super
cost
prohibitive
for
me
to
move
that
to
the
front
of
the
acre
and
also
I
would
feel
much
more
uncomfortable
having
preschoolers
playing
there
by
the
big
road.
G
Even
though
obviously
we'd
have
a
fence,
it
doesn't
make
me
comfortable
to
have
just
thousands
of
people
driving
by
and
looking
at
preschoolers
as
they
go
by
I
just
feel
uncomfortable
with
that
and
so
I
guess,
my
biggest
wonder
is
what
is
the
shape
of
what
I'm
proposing
to
do?
G
G
F
You
thank
you
Mr
chairman,
I'm,
really
I'm
stuck
on
something
not
can
even
involved
in
the
that's
a
lot
of
size
and
shape.
What
not,
but
so
you've
got.
My
concern
is
the
parking
on
it.
So
you'll
have
you:
have
three
employees
you'll
be
there
and
not
consider
and
not
considered
an
employee
and
then
you'll
also
your
husband
or
there
could
be
other
people
who
will
be
stopping
in
where
all
these
cars
going
to
go
because
you're
going
to
use
your
garage
as
part
of
the
daycare
center.
F
What
my
concern
would
just
be
that
evenly
you
you've
got
limited
space
for
parking
and
it
turns
into
you're
parking
on
the
street
or
in
the
driveway.
There's
just
problems
with
that
and
that's
a
my
only
concern
right
now
sure.
G
That
makes
sense
for
the
record.
My
husband
is
really
upset
about
losing
our
garage,
but
we
have
just
there's
actually
an
entry
right.
There
I
can't
point
to
it
up
here,
to
show
you
but
there's
a
you.
G
Can
you
can
see
next
to
my
circle,
driveway
just
to
the
north
there's
another
sort
of
driveway,
looking
thing
yep
right
there
that
there's
a
gate
right
there,
that's
always
open,
usually,
and
so
my
family
parks
there
all
the
time
and
then
we
just
walk
up
into
the
house
and
that
it
doesn't
bother
us
so.
G
A
Any
other
questions
for
the
applicant.
Thank
you
very
much
and
we
already
were
told
that
there's
no
one
else
in
the
audience.
The
two
wishes
to
testify
so
we're
now
ready
to
close
the
public
portion
of
the
meeting.
With
respect
to
this
project
and
open
the
floor
up
to
the
Commissioners,
we
would
like
to
have
a
motion
one
way
or
the
other
after
which
we'll
discuss
it
so
I'm.
Looking
for
a
motion.
A
E
Would
love
to
one
of
the
big
things
with
us?
You
know
being
the
p,
z,
commission
and
part
of
the
county?
Is
it's
not
within
our
purview
to
enforce
or
consider
ccnrs
when
it
comes
to
decisions
like
this,
because
that
is
A,
Private
Matter,
so
I
would
encourage
you
know
both
private
parties
to
settle
that
outside
of
you
know
this
meeting
in
a
manner
that
is
appropriate,
so
considering
the
fact
that
in
this
instance
we
don't
consider
ccnrs
I
see
no
issue
with
this
land
use,
it's
very
minimal
impact.
E
All
of
that
and
again
it
seems
like
a
very
thought,
well
thought
through
plan
and
I
agree
with
the
the
playground
being
in
that
bottom
corner.
You
know
that
is
very
far
away
from
both
roads.
I
totally
get
why
the
applicant
would
want.
You
know
the
preschoolers
to
be
not
be
playing
next
to
a
road,
and
it
seems
like
there
is
a
lot
of
effort
involved
with
having
you
know
that
privacy
fence-
all
of
that,
so
I
think
it
will
be
kind
of
tucked
away
so
to
speak.
L
I
agree,
I,
agree,
100
I,
like
the
site
plan
and
the
reason
I
like
the
site
plan,
is
exactly
for
that
for
the
safety
of
those
the
children
and
the
other
thing
I
like
about
it
is
that
the
access
is
off
of
a
main
artillery
Maple
Grove
versus
coming
in
through
a
subdivision.
I,
don't
see
any
issue
whatsoever
on
how
the
lock
configuration
is.
L
That
was
basically
designed
that
way,
and
that's
that's
how
it's,
how
it's
been
designed
other
than
that
I
think
it's
I,
think
it's
a
great
thing
and
I
think
we
do
need
more
people
that
are
willing
to
help
out
children
and
I.
Think
it's
fantastic.
A
L
A
D
202300-225-Cc-Da
V
MSP
is
before
you
right
now.
Applicant
is
urban
Solutions.
If
you
recall,
you
heard
this
application
last
month,
I'm
going
to
do
a
very
brief
overview,
but
this
is
a
zoning
ordinance
map,
Amendment
development
agreement
to
rezone
the
subject,
property
from
the
rut
District
to
the
community,
commercial
C2
district
and
then
a
variance
to
request
relief
from
the
setbacks
and
then
a
master
site
plan,
ultimately
to
allow
for
the
property
to
be
used
as
a
self-service
storage
facility
ability.
D
So
this
is
a
that
that
initial
site
plan
that
was
submitted
back
with
the
you
know
original
submission,
so
it
was
tabled
because
you,
as
a
planning
zoning
commission,
requested
that
the
applicant
provide
an
updated
site
plan
that
addresses
concerns
regarding
access
to
the
site
and
then,
in
addition,
you
wanted
to
see
a
detailed
Landscaping
plan
for
your
review,
so
I
have
attached
those
here.
This
is
was
submitted
a
couple
weeks
ago
by
the
applicant.
D
You
can
see
the
new
entrance
that's
outlined
here
with
the
red
arrow,
so
they
moved
that
used
to
be
up
here.
They
moved
it
to
the
South
and
then
they
also
alongside
that
move.
The
office
and
the
parking
area
from
that
was
closer
to
that
old
entrance
down
here
to
the
South
and
then
in
addition,
there
was
a
it's.
The
Landscaping
plans
larger
than
this
than
just
the
Sheep.
D
This
was
the
the
cover
page,
that
kind
of
shows
the
property
as
a
whole
and
their
proposed
Landscaping
along
Chinden,
and
then
also
down
that
future
collector
roadway
and
a
few
trees
within
near
the
office.
So
that's
what's
been
provided.
Staff,
as
you
recall,
is
still
recommending
denial.
Our
recommendation
is
still
on
the
board
for
denial
and,
as
you
recall
too,
the
variance
is
not
included
in
your
recommendation
because
that's
a
matter
that
has
to
be
approved
or
denied
by
the
board.
A
I,
just
my
where,
by
way
of
clarification,
we
did
not
ask
staff
to
come
back
and
revise
their
finding
of
denial,
but
this
is
not
really
a
second
slap
at
the
applicant
is
basically,
we
said,
denial
the
first
time
the
reasons
we
denied
it,
the
first
time
or
recommended
denial
have
not
changed,
and
so
it's
not
something
new.
That
is
added
to
the
reason
for
the
recommendation
for
denial.
It's
just
the
same
reason
as
before.
Is
that
correct.
D
Chairman
chairman
virtue,
you
are
correct.
Yes,
so
our
recommendation
of
denial
is
based
on
what
was
originally
submitted
and
then
yeah
we're
not
changing
our
recommendation
and
at
the
last
hearing
you
were
deciding
whether
or
not
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
or
deny
or
table,
and
ultimately
you
landed
on
tabling
with
these
new
updated
materials,
and
so
that's
those
have
been
provided
to
you.
D
So
with
our
recommendation
of
denial,
if
you
you
chose
to
change
that
and
go
with
an
approval,
it
would
require
one
more
table,
so
we
can
revise
the
findings
and
add
conditions
of
approval,
because,
as
of
right
now,
there
are
no,
you
know
proposed
conditions,
because
we
are
recommending
denial,
understood.
A
M
The
application
before
you
today
is
an
eight
acre
parcel
located
on
Highway
2026,
just
west
of
the
highway
16
expansion
slide.
Three,
please,
the
mixed
use:
interchange
overlay,
surrounds
the
highway
2026
and
Highway
16
intersection
area.
It
favors
low
traffic
proposals,
mixed-use
light
industrial
commercial.
The
parcel
is
abutted
to
the
South
by
medium
density,
residential
slide.
Four,
please.
M
This
exhibit
comes
from
the
Idaho
Transportation
department's
website
and
it
regard
it
is
specifically
regarding
the
highway
16
expansion.
It
shows
the
relationship
of
the
parcel
tonight
under
application
in
relationship
to
the
fewer
the
future
Highway
build
out.
It
is
currently
underway
side.
Five,
please,
you
just
saw
this.
The
site
plan
is
in
compliance
with
the
connectivity
needs
we're
allowing
for
future
circulation.
There
is
a
partial
build
out
of
a
collector
Road
along
the
western
perimeter.
M
M
We
do
look
forward
to
our
eventual
rezone
into
the
city
of
Meridian
when
the
time
comes.
With
that
I'll
stand
for
questions,
I'm
sure
there
are
a
few.
A
E
M
Chairman
Birch,
commissioner
Exton,
we
did
not.
We
meet
with
the
city
Meridian
between
last
month,
and
this
month
we
had
met
with
them
twice.
This
process
started
with
a
conference
call
with
Leon.
About
a
year
ago,
we
did
have
two
staff
meetings
with
city
of
Meridian
and
I.
Believe
a
conference
call
and
a
meeting
with
County
staff.
M
M
Well,
this
would
be
my
first
so
not
to
be
too
heavy
with
it.
We
would
pivot
and
Meridian
did
mention
that
they
had
comments
and
feedback
for
us
of
which
we
do
not
have
anything
specific
other
than
the
letter
that
was
submitted
by
them.
M
Nothing
was
measurable
or
quantitative
about
that
letter.
Every
other
agency
that
provided
letters
and
commentary
for
us
we
have
been
in
compliance
with
those
items
we
did
discuss
highest
and
best
use
at
length
at
the
last
hearing.
M
The
the
belief
that
we
have,
and
that
hasn't
changed
is
that
the
city
of
Meridian
simply
doesn't
like
the
application
we
would
probably
pivot.
I
would
certainly
have
no
issue
meeting
with
the
city
of
Meridian.
Again
we
don't
see
that
not
happening.
Obviously
we
are
in
their
long-term,
comprehensive
plan.
M
We
understand
that
County
staff
are
also
kind
of
in
the
middle
of
this.
That
was
a
fairly
contentious
letter
that
was
sent
by
the
city
staff
as
well.
So
we
do.
We
do
understand
that
that
the
county
is
the
messenger
of
that
letter.
D
Chairman
Birch
I,
don't
believe
so
the
updated
site
plan
and
the
Landscaping
plan
I
have
those
in
the
the
memo
I
sent
to
you
with
exhibits
already.
You
know,
I
provided
my
presentation
that
I
did
last
month,
as
did
Miss
Hart,
so
I
don't
think
we
have
any
other
exhibits
to
add.
We
should
be
good
to
move
forward
all.
M
A
A
F
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
I,
think
some
of
the
same
things
that
we
talked
about
last
time.
It
just
it's
a
much
cleaner
application,
this
time
with
the
the
movable
of
the
the
entrance
off
the
main
Highway,
the
inclusion
of
the
the
landscape
plan.
This
is
a
I
was
thinking
about
this
after
we
met
last
month
that
this
is
a
high
visibility.
F
My
my
thought
was
that
it
helps
to
serve
as
a
buffer
for
those
residential
areas
that
are
going
to
be
built
south
of
that
project,
and
it's
going
to
be
it's
in
a
busy
area
with
the
with
the
highway
and
two
highways
right
there
going
through
there's
going
to
be
a
lot
of
noise
and
I
I
think
this
is
like
it's
not
the
highest
and
best
use.
F
There
are
certainly
other
uses
that
could
generate
more
tax
revenue,
employment,
everything
else,
but
this
use
fits
in
that
area
as
far
as
low
volume
of
traffic,
not
a
big
water
user
waste
producer
and
for
right
now,
I
think
it
see
it
fits
in
there.
L
Not
really
I
mean
that
pretty
much
hit
it
right
on
and
and
what
I
was
thinking
I
think
it's
a
I
think
it's
a
good
spot
and
I
think
it
can
be
used
exactly
like
with
all
the
highways
and
everything
else
like
that.
I
love
the
idea
of
of
the
buffer,
because
that
is
kind
of
what
a
lot
of
these
developments
are
trying
to
do.
H
E
All
right,
I
would
like
to
Echo
everything,
and
commissioner
Retzloff
also
just
said
I'm
in
one
thing.
That
I
would
personally
like
to
see
as
this
ms4
to
the
full
board,
because
technical
question
time,
it
will
end
up
being
a
recommendation
to
the
board
of
County
Commissioners
correct
in
that
window.
Between
accepting
of
a
revised
findings
and
the
full
board
meeting,
I
would
like
to
see
the
applicant
meet
with
Meridian
or
at
least
attempt
to
meet
with
Meridian
just
to
see
if
things
have
changed.
You
know,
with
this
revised
site
plan
the
visuals.
A
A
That
is
a
recommendation,
correct.
Okay,
all
right!
So
thank
you.
My
only
comment
on
this
is
I
really
haven't
changed
my
view
from
a
month
ago,
where
we
would
love
to
be
able
anytime,
a
municipality
that
has
something
within
their
area
of
influence,
feels
strongly
about
it
to
say
sure
we'll
go
along
with
that,
but
but
it
has
to
make
sense
and-
and
we
also
have
independent
Authority
with
respect
to
members
of
this
Commission
on
behalf
of
Ada
County
highest
and
best
use.
As
we
talked
about
last
time,
it's
a
fuzzy
term.
A
C
It
was,
it
was
a
heavy
agenda
yesterday
we
could
have
several
items
table,
though
so
that
sort
of
helped,
but
so
I'll
just
walk
you
through.
C
Those
first
was
a
subdivision
and
vacation
of
a
plot
note
for
that
project
out
on
Victory
and
McDermott
that
you
made
a
recommendation
of
approval
for
as
I've
spoken
in
the
past
they've
kind
of
got
tripped
up
by
the
health
district
and
some
they're
taking
a
new
look
at
it
and
making
sure
that
the
project
will
work
so
that's
been
tabled
as
they
applicant
continues
to
work
through
that,
and
so
we
have
yet
to
bring
that
to
the
board
feel
free
to
stop
me
if
you
have
any
questions
along
the
way.
C
Next
item
was
the
Industrial
base,
District
text,
amendment
that
you
all
recommended
approval
for
that
was
tabled
for
a
month
at
the
request
of
the
city
of
Boise.
They
just
want
to
better
understand
what
our
intent
for
that
text.
Amendment
is
and
make
sure
it
doesn't
negatively
impact
them
in
any
way
or
areas
outside
of
their
City
of
Impact.
So
we
will
hear
that
one
in
June
as
well.
C
We
had
a
very
unconditional
use
in
the
master
site
plan
for
a
self-service
storage
facility
that
was
also
tabled
to
June,
that
was
on
Stewart
Road
and
then
finally,
to
the
items
that
were
heard.
So
we
had
a
comp
plan,
Amendment
zoning
ordinance,
Amendment
and
a
zone
change
associated
with
the
city
of
kuna,
comprehensive
plan
and
future
land
use
map
that
was
adopted
into
their
area
of
City
Impact
agreement
with
us.
It
also
updates
the
land
use
map.
C
C
The
board
ultimately
approved
that,
and
so
again
we
only
have
one
comp
plan
to
reference
for
kuna
now,
which
is
a
nice
nice
thing
for
planning
staff
and
for
the
general
public.
It's
a
little
confusing,
sometimes
which
part
of
Cuna
you're
in
or
the
ACI
area
you're
in
and
what
com
plan
prevails.
C
C
We
had
a
modification
to
a
Master
site
plan
and
a
development
agreement
for
the
McDonald's
at
Five,
Mile
and
Lake
Hazel.
You
saw
a
project
just
right
next
door
to
that
tonight.
This
is
the
one
just
south.
They
were
updating
the
master
site
plan
and
the
da
to
remove
a
condition
requiring
a
type
of
sidewalk
that
achd,
initially
wasn't
going
to
build,
come
to
find
out.
C
They
actually
are
going
to
build
it,
but
through
all
that
we
actually
got
an
easement
for
a
public
pathway
that
will
connect
to
the
other
project
that
you
guys
waited
on
today.
So
kind
of
some
great
stuff
came
out
of
that,
even
though,
ultimately,
the
application
kind
of
became
unnecessary.
When
acht
decided,
they
were
going
to
build
what
they
told
us
they
weren't
going
to
build
and
wouldn't
allow
the
developer
to
build
so
kind
of
a
cat
chasing
its
tail.
On
that
one.
C
One
was
the
traffic
signal
at
Highway,
55
and
Dry
Creek
Ranch,
that
was
unanimously
approved
by
the
board,
and
so
all
that
does
is
basically
opens
the
door
for
Boise
Hunter
homes
to
go
work
out
with
ITV
and
achd
that
traffic
signal
they,
as
you
were
aware
that
they
did
essentially
approve
in
in
concept,
A
traffic
signal
that
there's
a
lot
more
work
that
those
two
groups
have
to
to
do
to
get
the
traffic
signal
in.
C
But
all
agencies
have
basically
again
cleared
the
paths
for
that
to
be
something
that
Boise
Idaho
homes
can
go
get
done,
and
then
there
was
a
zoning
ordinance
Amendment
associated
with
that
School
site
in
Dry,
Creek
Ranch
that
was
initiated
by
our
legal
team.
Who
thought
we
needed
to
also
update
our
zoning
ordinance
to
allow
for
the
the
site
to
be
used
by
a
charter
school.
In
the
event,
that's
what
ultimately
happens
so
kind
of
a
cleanup
item
and
then
finally,
well
we
had
three
more
sorry.
C
We
had
a
variance
in
a
property
boundary
adjustment
for
a
property
off
of
kind
of
in
the
Far
West
part
of
the
the
county.
Somebody
wanted
to
create
a
lot
smaller
than
what
the
the
zoning
allows
for
the
purposes
of
preserving
a
homestead
site
and
separating
off
a
large
agricultural
piece
of
land
which
actually
is
being
actively
farmed.
Staff
was
recommended
Denial
on
the
board,
decided
to
go
against
that
and
recommend
approval,
so
they
well
yeah.
We
approved
that
one,
and
then
there
was
a
variance
for
a
unique
situation.
C
Someone
had
purchased
a
illegally
subdivided
lot
in
the
70s,
couldn't
build
anything
on
it
and
then
about
a
year
and
a
half
ago
they
started
putting
some
Conex
boxes
on
it,
for
personal
storage
that
isn't
allowed
by
code,
and
so
they
sought
a
variance
to
one
make
the
lot
buildable
and
allow
those
Conex
boxes
to
actually
be
anchored
to
the
ground
according
to
the
building
code
and
then
also
to
in
this
case,
allow
an
accessory
use
without
a
primary
use,
and
so
we
were
recommending
denial.
The
board
ultimately
decided
to
approve
that
one
as
well.
C
It's
a
large
18,
acre
piece
of
property.
That's
kind
of
the
last
three
phases
of
winners,
Run
subdivision,
which
is
a
development
that
started
in
the
early
2000s
kind
of
went
away
during
the
Great
Recession
rebounded
and
has
built
most
of
the
housing.
And
now
they
have
this
kind
of
big
piece
left
over
for
its
own
commercial
and
residential.
C
The
time
extension
is
only
to
allow
the
preliminary
plant
to
remain
active,
which
is
really
important,
because
Boise,
sewer
or
Boise's
sewer
policy
doesn't
allow
sewered
properties
in
unincorporated
County
if
they
weren't
previously
entitled
prior
to
their
sewer
policy
of
2012..
So
it's
very
complex.
There
were
a
lot
of
folks
there
who
were
opposed
to
a
project.
That's
coming
down
the
road
after
the
time
extension.
If
it's
ultimately
granted
some
interesting
Nuance
of
that
one
is
they
made
their
extension
request
after
the
entitlement
technically
expired.
C
So
that
was
something
that
the
board
had
to
work
through.
They
have
not
made
a
decision
on
that
one.
They
heard
all
testimony
close
the
hearing
and
tabled
and
are
seeking
some
input
from
the
legal
team
and
will
make
a
decision
on
May
30th.
So
those
are
the
projects
that
we
had
last
night.
Any
questions.
C
No
remans
lately
the
one
you
dodged,
a
bullet
with
the
last
remand,
yeah
and
June,
isn't
looking
too
busy
for
us
right
now.
I,
don't
think
we'll
need
a
backup
hearing.
C
We
are
considering
use
of
a
backup
Hearing
in
July
for
the
zoning
code
update
because
it's
such
a
big
item
and
we
kind
of
want
to
give
it
its
own
time.
We
might
use
that
backup
Hearing
in
July,
but
I'll
keep
you
posted
and
let
you
know
if
that's
a
hearing
date
that
we'll
we'll
need
out
of
you
so
I
know
that's
in
your
summer
break
time
and
so
I
hate
to
do
that
to
you.
C
C
C
That
was
the
item
that
was
going
to
come
back
to
you
that
was
remanded.
They
withdrew
their
application
and
so
they're
going
they've
indicated
to
us
that
they're
going
to
retool
it
and
come
back
so
you'll
hear
that
project
again
in
a
slightly
different
way.
I
mean
there
will
be
some
things
added
to
it.
I
don't
know
if
it's
at
July
at
this
point
I
mean
we're
possibly
July,
but
it
could
be
August
as
well
or
you
know,
actually,
whenever
they
submit,
they
haven't,
told
us
when
exactly
they're
going
to
submit.