►
From YouTube: Ada County P&Z Hearing – June 15, 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
The
County
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
meeting
June
15
2023.
We
extend
our
welcome
to
the
people
here
that
are
in
the
room
with
us,
as
well
as
anyone
that
may
be
joining
us
online.
We
will
begin
the
meeting
this
evening
with
a
role
called
the
Commissioners
commissioner
Exton
here,
commissioner
ratslav.
B
C
A
Mr
Wickstrom
commissioner
Scott
here,
commissioner
Colson
here
and
I,
am
commissioner
Burch
and
I'll
be
conducting
the
meeting
this
evening.
Just
as
a
matter
of
procedure
after
the
staff
presents
a
report
for
each
project,
the
applicant
will
have
approximately
15
minutes
to
give
their
presentation,
after
which
the
public
will
have
an
opportunity
to
speak.
Each
member
of
the
public
will
have
three
minutes
for
anything
that
they
wish
to
say
thereafter.
The
applicant
will
have
an
opportunity
for
a
rebuttal
with
that.
A
What
we
would
like
to
do
is
slightly,
with
the
permission
of
the
Commissioners
rearrange
the
new
business,
which
we
would
ask
for
the
second
item
on
the
agenda
with
respect
to
the
contractor's
yard
and
Shop
to
be
moved
to
the
first
item
after
the
new
business
or
after
old
business.
Is
there
any
objection
by
any
of
the
Commissioners
to
rearranging
the
order,
all
right
good?
We
will
do
so
so
the
first
time
item
on
the
agenda
is
unfinished
business.
That
is.
D
Thank
you,
chairman
Birch.
You
are
correct
that
that
item
in
front
of
you.
It
is
just
an
application
for
tonight
for
revised
findings.
The
as
you
recall,
they
went
through
your
process.
You
tabled
the
application
and
then
last
month
you
chose
to
recommend
approval
of
the
application,
even
though
staff
was
recommending
denial.
So
that's
why
we
brought
findings
back
in
front
of
you
tonight.
We
have
revised
them
to
match
your
motion
and
recommendation
and
if
you
have
any
questions,
let
me
know,
but
any.
B
E
Birch,
yes,
I'm
gonna
abstain
from
voting
on
this
motion,
because
I
wasn't
here
at
any
of
the
meetings.
Okay,.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Blitman
all
right.
The
motion
has
been
seconded
by
commissioner
Exton.
Commissioner
reslaff,
would
you
like
to
speak
to
the
motion
or
sure.
B
Just
very
briefly,
the
applicant
has
been
before
us
several
times.
She
has
met
all
our
requests
and
I
am
ready
to
take
a
vote
for
the
approval.
All.
A
A
F
F
F
With
the
new
application,
the
site
won't
include
two
structures:
the
existing
2600
square
foot
structure
and
a
new
building
of
5
000
square
feet.
Seven
standard
parking
spaces
are
proposed
with
two
Ada
parking
spaces
and
there
was
existing
landscaping
and
screening
that
was
approved
with
the
initial
application
and
meets
the
requirements
currently
of
the
Ada
County
code.
We
received
standard
comments
from
responding
agencies
and
no
neighbor
comments
on
this
application
staff
is
recommending
approval
and
I'll
stand
for
any
questions.
Thank.
A
H
A
J
My
name
is
Warren
schweiter.
My
address
is
1716
North
32nd
in
Boise
I.
Don't
have
any
complaints
with
the
findings,
so
the
only
thing
that
we
have
that
I
have
to
do
on
the
site
plan
to
make
it
comply
with
fire
department
is
do
a
turnaround,
but
everything
else
is
fine,
so
yeah.
K
Mr,
chairman
and
you're,
okay,
with
all
the
conditions
of
the
application.
A
A
H
Sure
I
don't
have
a
lot
to
say:
I
mean
it's:
it's
going,
it's
a
Contractor
Yard,
basically
just
re-upping
the
the
requirements
and
stuff
so
I
see
no
problem
with
anything
here.
I
don't
want
to
waste.
Anyone's
time
looks
good.
A
D
Thank
you,
chairman
application.
202300.
D
D
Oh
your
TV's,
not
on
here,
well,
yeah
I!
Guess
you
can
see
it
on
your
yeah.
The
vicinity
map
is
up
here.
The
the
project
in
question
is
going
north
on
Highway
55,
past
Dry,
Creek
Ranch
before
you
get
to
avamor,
so
it's
kind
of
East
to
Highway
55
up
in
the
in
the
foothills.
D
So
this
is
a
preliminary
plot
and
Private
Road
Extension,
as
well
as
a
flood
plain
and
Hillside
development
review
to
create
whiskey,
Ridge
Subdivision.
This
will
consist
of
seven
40
plus
acre
lots.
Property
is
located
off
North
Basin
way
and
North
broken
Horn
Road
and
the
Rural
Preservation
District
contains
286
acres
in
total.
D
So
the
applicant
has
brought
this
before
you
tonight.
This
will
include
an
extension
of
North
Basin
Lane.
So
if
I
go
back
here
on
your
screen,
we
have
North
Basin
way,
which
is
a
public
roadway.
Achd
manages
that
and
then
it
turns
into
a
private
roadway
where
it
enters
into
the
property
currently
and
goes
north,
and
it
currently
terminates
here.
Both
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
extend
that
private
road
throughout
the
property
which
will
provide
the
the
frontage
and
access
for
each
of
the
Lots
proposed
that
will
cul-de-sac
in
that
Northeast
portion
of
the
property.
D
There
is
a
phased
approach
to
this
project.
That's
proposed
so
it'll,
be
two
phases
of
the
first
will
consist
of
four
Lots,
the
second
of
three
lots
and
there's
also,
if
I
go
back
to
the
site
plan,
you'll
notice
broken
Horn
Road,
it
fronts
the
the
property
broken
Horn.
Road,
though,
is
not
a
public
roadway
or
right-of-way.
That's
maintained
by
achd,
it's,
it
is
utilized
for
some
proper
owners
there
that
have
long-term
easements
and
the
water
district
of
Yoli
also
uses
it,
but
is
not
a
is
not
a
public
roadway.
D
L
D
It
was
withdrawn
because
there
was
some
additional
soil
review,
work
that
needed
to
be
done
by
the
applicant
soils,
engineer
or
County
engineer
had
some
further
questions
about
some
potential
Landslide
deposits
and
soils
that
came
up
that
were
potentially
of
concern,
so
they
went
and
did
some
further
testing
dug
some
test
pits
and
they've
brought
the
application
back
in
front
of
you
tonight.
Our
County
engineer
has
deemed
it
to
be
a
suitable
design.
He
has
gone
through
the
review
and
that's
why
they're
allowed
to
move
forward
with
this
application
tonight.
D
The
Lots
will
be
served
by
violia
water,
which
is
coming
from
the
south.
There's
a
water
line
that
will
be
extended
to
the
site.
Each
slot
will
have
water
service.
There
will
be
individual
septic
systems,
though,
for
each
law
the
subdivision
does
comply
with
chapter
8-6
of
the
Ada
County
code,
since
each
lot
will
comply
with
the
dimensional
standards
for
the
RP
districts.
D
So
this
this
subdivision
will
be-
and
you
know,
it'll
be
compatible
with
that
designation
because
it
it
is
just
going
to
be
40,
acre
lots
that
will
allow
for
rangeland
uses
and
other
AG
uses
to
take
place
on
the
property.
Alongside
those
you
know,
residential
Estates,
we
did
have
some
agency
comments.
D
Kind
of
the
key
comments
are
on
the
screen
here
from
the
highway
district
Eagle
fire.
In
our
County
engineer,
the
highway
district
is
requiring
that
the
applicant
do
some
significant
Road
improvements,
even
along
the
public
roadways.
So
this
is
a
map
from
the
highway
district.
So
everything
in
blue
going
back
towards
Stack
Rock,
that's
gonna
all
have
to
be
widened
there.
D
It
there's
some
history
here,
but
that
roadway
essentially
gets
really
narrow,
as
it
goes
up
through
the
Canyons
so
to
meet
the
standards
of
achd,
requiring
that
the
applicant
widen
that
portion
south
of
their
property
as
well.
As
you
know,
the
private
road
going
north
there's
also
going
to
have
to
be
a
turnaround
where
the
public
portion
of
you
know
achd's
right-of-way
ends.
Eagle
fire
did
have
some
requirements
regarding
the
emergency
access
Lane
that
off
of
broken
Horn
Road.
D
So
Eagle
fire
was
requiring
them
to
update
the
plot
to
include
that
which
they
did
and
Eagle
fire
has
no
other
comments
or
concerns,
and
then,
lastly,
the
the
County
engineer
just
required
that
the
applicant
submit
a
drainage
plan.
Zach
Kirk,
our
County
engineer,
is
here
tonight.
If
you
have
questions
for
him,
so
he
can
address
any
of
your
concerns
regarding
the
engineering
slope
stability
that
side
of
things
we
did
have
some
neighbor
comments
that
came
in
after
the
staff
report
was
published,
concerns
regarding
slope
stabilization.
D
You
know
road
maintenance,
traffic,
drainage
and
runoff
emergency
access
of
the
the
folks
that
live
off
of
the
existing
Basin
Lane
there.
It
is
a
private
road.
Currently
they
want
to
ensure
that
the
road
maintenance
agreement
going
forward.
You
know
that
they
agree
to
it,
so
those
those
parties
will
have
to
come
to
an
agreement.
You
know
as
the
private
parties
on
that
road
maintenance
agreement,
and
it
is
a
condition
of
approval
in
in
the
findings
that
we
have
before
you
other
than
that
I
don't
have
anything
else.
Staff
is
recommending
approval.
D
A
M
Thank
you,
chairman
Viola
water.
Where
is
it
first
coming
in
at.
D
M
E
D
Birch,
commissioner
butman,
that
is
correct,
so
no
zone
change
this
is
currently
zone
is
real.
Preservation,
which
allows
for
the
40
acre
minimums
applicant
is,
is
just
subdividing
to
make
their
280
somewhat
acre
parcel
into
7
40
plus
acre
lots.
H
H
I,
just
how
you
said
what
we're
always
going
to
be
widened.
How
much
wider
are
we
talking
from
the
current
road?
I've,
no
I,
don't
know,
I've
never
been
up
there.
N
H
D
Chairman
Birch,
commissioner
Scott,
so
that
that
roadway
and
not
let
me
go
to
the
map
here
again,
it's
it's
kind
of
normal.
You
know
standard
conditions,
paved
20
to
24
feet
wide,
going
north
up,
Basin
way
and
right
about
in
here.
Where
that
blue
line
starts,
it
gets
very
narrow,
I
believe
it's
around
like
13
to
15
feet,
give
or
take
it.
It
is
paved
I
believe
a
little
ways
further,
but
yeah.
D
Essentially
the
highway
district
wants
it
to
be
24
feet
wide
from
that
point,
going
all
the
way
North
and
it
would
be
paved
throughout
the
the
property
where
the
subdivision
is
because
there
are
some
steep
slopes,
and
so
it
is
a
requirement
when
slopes
are
greater
than
I.
Don't
know,
five
percent,
that
the
the
private
road
is
paved
yep.
E
F
D
D
Yeah
chairman
Birch,
commissioner
butman,
so
there's
there's
two
things
that
play
here:
there's
the
public
road
and
a
private
road,
so
achd
manages
the
public
roadway
and
they
govern.
You
know
what's
to
take
place
on
the
public
road
and
so
there's
because
this
private
road
comes
off
of
the
public
road
achd
gets
to
have
a
say
and
what
that
kind
of
the
intersection
is
going
to
look
like
as
well
as
any
impact.
D
That's
there's
going
to
be
on
their
public
roadway
so
because
there's
going
to
be
more
traffic,
more
of
an
impact
fire
access,
all
those
things
there
they
want.
You
know
the
applicant
to
update
their
public
roadway
to
make
it
wider
and
safer
and
then
our
standards
for
the
county.
We
govern
the
private
road,
and
so
we
are
also
requiring
with
you
know,
Eagle
fires
recommendation
that
they
pave
it
throughout
the
site
as
well.
So
there's
just
hopefully
that
answers
your
questions.
There's
public
and
private
roadway
both
need
improvements
and
maintenance.
A
A
K
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
I'm,
going
back
well
I,
think
you
can
answer
without
looking
at
any,
so
the
private
road
doesn't
start
until
it
gets
on
the
applicant's
property
and
then
I
didn't
see
it
in
the
requirements.
But
there
is
going
to
a
requirement
for
a
road
maintenance
agreement,
and
that
would
that
be
just
with
the
seven
people
in
the
development
or
would
include
that
one
house
that
does
share
the
easement
there
on
that
private
road.
D
K
D
Then
Basin
Lane,
the
private
roadway,
begins
and
that's
already
all
constructed
and
in
place
today.
So
Basin
lane
ends
right
in
here,
there's
a
a
little
turnaround
and
Miss
Phillips.
Here
she
has
access
off
of
basin
lane
today,
so
there
are
already
two
parties
that
have
access
off
of
basin,
Lane,
Mr,
Wiley
and
Miss
Phillips
and
so
to
further.
D
You
know
extend
that
private
road.
Those
new
lot
owners
would
have
some
sort
of
say
in
the
maintenance
of
this
private
road
as
well
as
Miss
Phillips,
so
the
the
new
maintenance
agreement.
She
would
have
to
be
a
signer
on
that
because
she
would
have
to
come
to
an
agreement
on
how
this
Rose
to
be
maintained.
Very
good.
Thank
you.
Yeah.
E
When
we're
on
the
roads,
the
West
broken
Horn
Road,
this
is
secondary
access
is
that
a
public
road
or
a
private
road.
D
Chairman
Birch,
commissioner,
that
is
not
a
private
or
a
public
road.
It's
it's
essentially
notified
on
our
on
our
map,
because
historic
roadways,
they
have
names,
and
it's
just
on
the
gis,
but
it
is
not
a
approved
public
or
private
road.
It's
a
long-term
easement!
That's
been
in
place
for
some
of
those
Property
Owners.
We
don't
have
any
record
in
our
system
that
it
was
approved
as
a
private
road,
I
believe
maybe
Mr
Danielson.
Do
you
have
any
more.
O
So
Mr
chairman
commissioner
bloodman
broken
Horn
Road
actually
is
like
a
historic
toll
road
and
so
historically
it
was
a
toll
road
back.
You
know
100
years
ago
and
basically,
what
that,
what
we
consider
that
road
to
be
is
essentially
an
ease
made,
so
the
zoom
ordinance
went
to
effect
in
1968
and
so
that
road
essentially
predates
the
zoning
ordinance.
And
so
basically
it's
not
a
public
growth,
as
Carter
stated,
it
really
is
just
essentially
an
easement.
B
H
One
question
with
that:
with
that
broken
Horn
Road
then
so
it
it
essentially
doesn't
exist
in
our
world
because
we
can't
at
any
accounting
we
have
oversight
over
public
or
private
roads.
There's.
No,
it's
not
a
private
road.
Achd
has
oversight
of
the
public
roads.
It's
not
a
public
road,
so
it's
not
something
we
could
technically
consider
for
potentially
secondary
access
or
anything
like
that.
D
Chairman
Birch,
commissioner
Scott
no
I,
don't
believe
so
because
that
that
easement
is
on
you
know,
Mr
Wiley's
property,
but
also
on
the
the
neighboring
properties
there.
So
those
folks
would
have
to
have
some
say
in
what
you
decided
on
so
I,
don't
believe
so.
Okay,.
A
N
We
are
presenting
the
seven
lot
subdivision
for
our
here
tonight
and
we've
done
a
lot
of
reports
and
studies
of
which
you
you
have
copies
of
including
the
extensive
soils
reports,
revegetation
slope,
stabilization,
visual
impact,
Wildland,
Wildland,
Hillside,
floodplain
studies,
I
wasn't
intending
to
go
through
each
and
every
one
of
them,
but
I'd
be
happy
to
stand
for
any
questions
that
you
that
you
may
have.
N
Yeah
that
little
jog
out
right
there
is
the
pump
station,
which
is
essentially
servicing
avamor,
and
that
would
be
where
our
connection
would
be.
There's
a
whole
utility
Corridor
going
up,
broken
horn,
that
includes
gas,
electricity,
phone,
cable,
almost
everything
and
then
the
water
line.
N
N
J
E
N
We've
had
two
neighborhood
meetings,
so
the
neighborhood,
the
last
neighborhood
meeting
we
tried
to
address.
N
They
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
were
still
just
going
for
seven
Lots,
not
making
two
acre
subdivision
or
two
acre
Parcels
up
there,
which
is
not
our
intention.
We're
intending
to
comply
with
the
current
zoning
and
then
the
soils,
and
that
was
the
main.
The
main
emphasis.
E
One
more
one
more
question:
if
that's
okay,
you
intend
to
have
ccnrs
that
would
prevent
the
further
subdivision
of
of
those
Parcels
like
down
the
road.
B
B
Mr
Wiley
I
you
use
Atlas,
which
I
truly
appreciate
it,
has
a
lot
of
information
in
here
and
I
went
over
it
very
thoroughly,
but
I
did
notice
that
it
was
only
for
this
particular
time
during
your
construction.
Are
you
gonna
continue
to
use
them
as
you're
developing
your
40
acres?
In
case
you
run
into
any
issues
with
the
soil
or
anything
like
that.
N
Certainly,
they
want
to
do
a
continuous
inspection
of
the
roadway
when
we
get
up
to
building
pads
I,
don't
think
we're
going
to
have
much
of
an
issue
on
building
pads
because
we're
we're
essentially
going
to
be
on
flat
surface
for
unless
somebody
decides
they
want
to
build
on
a
in
a
difficult
situation
or
on
a
slope,
but
most
of
the
building
pads
that
we've
identified
are
relatively
flat.
A
P
Wiley
I
just
wanted
to
confirm
that
you
are
completely
okay
with
all
the
conditions
of
approval
that
have
been
laid
out
for
this
project.
Yes,
I
am
okay.
Thank.
K
Commissioner,
Mr
Bradley
one
last
question,
then
one
of
the
requirements
was
that
applicant
may
be
required
to
make
repairs
to
deteriorated
segments
of
the
road
that,
as
deemed
necessary
by
achd
I'm,
assuming
that's
the
public
part
of
the
road.
Yes,.
N
That'd
be
the
public
part
of
the
road
and
that's
going
to
be
definitely
a
discussion
with
achd
right
now.
The
road
is
drivable,
it's
not
potholing,
it
is,
it
does
have
cracks
in
it.
What
they
are
going
to
require
I'm,
not
exactly
sure
if
anything
at
all,
but
since
we're
going
to
be
up
there
widening
their
section
of
the
of
the
road
we're
going
to
be
having
to
do
some
work.
K
N
Certainly
Paving
would
be
just
about
the
last
thing.
We'd
do
so
any
repairs
or
any
repair
work
for
the
paving
would
be
done
at
that
time.
Yeah
I,
wouldn't
repair.
Anything
now
then
drive
a
bunch
of
trucks
up
there
and
tear
it
up
so
I
would
I
would
assume
that
any
any
road
repair
would
be
done
at
the
end.
Okay,.
K
And
one
last
question,
and
so
your
your
plan
right
now
is
just
to
develop
the
lots
and
then
you're
going
to
sell
those
off
you're
not
involved
at
all
in
the
construction
or
anything
else
on
it.
N
So
my
intention
right
now
is
to
build
initially
three
houses,
one
for
myself
and
one
for
my
two
sons,
Jake
and
Eric,
Wiley
and
and
Marcy
like
she'll,
have
a
lot
to
say
about
our
house.
Certainly,
and
then
we'll
have
one
additional
lot
in
phase
one
that
we
intend
to
sell
to
a
friend
of
ours
and
then
phase
two
would
be
down.
The
road
is
Our
intention.
Do.
N
N
A
A
A
Q
Q
Secondly,
there
are
nine
humps
that
are
affected
by
this
on
that
little
blue
stretch,
so
there's
nine
families
that
are
going
to
have
the
fronts
of
their
property
is
torn
up
and
sage
bush.
That
has
been
there
and
mesquite
trees
that
have
been
there
for
the
20
years.
That
we've
been
there.
That's
another
topic:
you
know.
Thirdly,
when
we
purchased
our
property,
we
purchased
it
from
Don,
Douglas
and
Don
Douglas
owned
the
original
property
and
Shireen
also
purchased
from
Don
Douglas.
Who
is
our
neighbor
up
on
the
hill?
Q
We
were
told
at
that
time
that
the
address
for
the
property
on
the
hilltop
was
a
broken
horn
address.
We
were
told
that,
yes,
there
was
an
easement
on
Basin
way,
but
that
Basin
way
was
never
going
to
go
up
to
the
hilltop,
because
Ada
County
back
when
the
Douglas's
developed
it
told
them
that
that
Hillside
was
too
steep
and
that
the
road
would
never
go
through
that
way.
So
we've
always
thought
okay.
Well,
you
know.
If
they
go
in
fine
I
mean
he
bought
the
property.
Q
He
has
the
right
to
develop
the
property,
but
we
just
would
like
to
see
it
done
safely.
So,
yes,
our
main
concern
is
that
the
location
of
the
test
road
is
right
at
the
bottom
of
where
this
really
steep
slope
is,
and
we've
already
had,
our
neighbor's
Gates
start
to
slide
and
the
gates
in
concrete,
so
the
gates
already
sliding
the
hillside.
You
can
see
the
sand
pockets
on
it
and
I.
Q
Just
don't
I
want
to
believe
that
this
is
all
going
to
be
done
properly,
but
when
Mr
Wiley
came
up
with
the
D7
giant
Caterpillar
tractor,
he
came
up
without
a
permit
and
he
dug
the
road
immediately
with
no
permit.
He
had
to
go
in
and
apply
the
next
day
for
the
permit,
so
with
jarine
myself,
the
rest
of
the
neighbors.
We're
really
concerned
that
he's
going
to
do
it
properly.
Q
A
You
do
any
of
the
Commissioners
have
any
questions:
Ms,
Jordan,
Ms,
ratslide,.
B
Q
Been
reinforced
already
with
concrete
and
Shireen
would
be
her,
but
I
know
she
had
other
things
that
happened
that
she
couldn't
be
here,
but
I
know
she
has
presented
documents
to
you
that
state
that
I
know
it
slid
and
she
had
to
reinforce
it
and
now
she
said
it
was
sliding
again
and
we
actually
did
meet
with
Connor
and
with
Zach
to
look
at
the
gate,
but
she
has
more
documentation
to
show
the
slippage
and
that
entire
Hill,
because
I
mean
I,
can't
even
stipulate
how
steep
this
Hillside
is.
Q
L
I
am
randy
Hurst.
We
live
at
16089
on
North
Basin
way,
so
it's
kind
of
halfway
down
that
blue
line,
we're
on
the
west
side
of
it
and
the
the
roadway,
the
blue
line
and
all
the
way
up
to
miss
Phillips
or
that
she
had
constructed
for
her
access
to
her
place.
L
L
We
have
a
very
steep
pitch
into
a
Gulch
on
our
side
on
the
other
side
is
a
well
that
is
very
close
to
the
boundary
of
where
this
right-of-way
for
the
road
would
be,
and
so
we're
questions
like,
would
that
if
that
well
has
to
be
relocated?
Who
covers
the
cost
of
that
I?
Believe
Mr
Wiley
said
that
he
would
and
I'm
wanting
to
make
sure
that
that
would
be
the
case
on
our
side.
L
It's
a
flood
plan
where
the
neighbor
below
us
has
been
flooded,
although
it's
been
a
long
time
ago,
but
a
couple
nights
ago,
I
wondered
what
was
going
to
happen,
but
it's
such
a
steep
area.
It's
going
to
divert
some
of
that
water.
If
there
is
water
that
comes
down
there
and
it
would
I
think
it
would
put
her
a
little
more
at
risk
unless
there's
good
erosion,
control
or
or
water
flow
control.
L
L
H
L
And
then
the
other
is
is
just
the
concern
for
the
the
map
that
you
see
and
Kathy's
already
said.
This
to
some
extent
is
very
different
from
the
the
road,
the
temporary
that
was
done
for
the
drilling
and
very
much
concerned
and
hope
that
there
will
be
conditions
that
Zach
excuse
me
go.
L
Or
Atlas
would
be
up
there
on
a
regular
basis,
because
Atlas
made
specific
recommendations
that
they'd
be
consulted
in
a
number
of
situations
and
hope
that
that
can
be
a
condition
that
they
will
be
consulted.
A
A
C
C
It
is
my
will
that
he
was
referring
to
and
it
is
literally
feet
from.
We
are
I,
don't
know
how
they're
going
to
be
able
to
expand
this
road.
If
this
is
a
real
issue
for
me,
I
I'm
not
saying
it
can't
be
done.
I'm
I
just
want
to
just
put
my
two
cents
in
here
and
say
it's.
C
It's
really,
eight
a
tricky
situation
also
today,
I
was
out
there
for
an
hour
and
a
half
shoveling
off
after
it
and,
admittedly
unusual
storm,
but
roadside
matter
coming
down
into
the
road
to
clear
that
off.
It
was
kind
of
an
exceptional
thing.
I
cannot
emphasize
enough.
The
instability
and
fragility
of
this
land
and
the
Rises
are
very
steep.
Mr,
Kirk
and
Lindstrom
have
both
been
out.
Thank
you
very
much
for
to
the
to
the
area
to
see
how
how
steep
these
inclines
are,
and
it
you
know
literally,
this
is
sand.
A
B
Mr
amick,
how
many
feet
do
you
estimate
that
your
well
is
from
the
road?
Now,
if
you
can
10
feet
as
big
as
a
desk,
how
far
do
you
think
it
is
I.
L
B
D
R
County
engineer,
6071
North,
Royal
Park,
we
did
meet
on
site,
did
get
pictures
and
locations
of
the
well,
so
one
condition
is
the
drainage
application.
So
when
the
details
come
in
on
the
drainage
application,
I've
noted
the
location
of
that
well
to
make
sure
that
it's
not
going
to
be
an
issue,
and
if
it
is,
would
be
an
issue
we
wouldn't
approve
it
without
some
kind
of
condition
for
replacement
or
moving
the
well.
But
the
goal
would
be
to
make
sure
that
the
widening
is
not
going
to
encroach
on
her
well.
A
H
A
P
R
So
Connor
had
referenced
the
earlier
application,
the
hillside
application,
and
so,
during
that
review
for
the
Geotech,
the
applicant
soils
engineer,
we
reviewed
that
report
and
based
on
what
was
in
that
report,
we
asked
for
more
information,
and
so
the
the
temporary
construction
road
was
so
that
they
could
get
a
drill
rig
back
in
there
and
get
the
information
that
that
soils
engineer
needed
to
provide
what
we
were
asking
for
in
in
addendum
to
their
original
soils
report,
and
so
there's
there's
a
lot
of
information
in
there
regarding
the
soils
and
a
lot
of
that's
will
come
into
play
in
the
drainage
application.
R
The
soils
engineer
has
has
Quantified
the
soils,
the
areas
of
concern.
We
required
that.
Actually,
the
applicant's
engineer
put
those
areas
on
the
preliminary
plaque
and
they'll
also
be
on
the
drainage
application
plans
to
highlight
those
those
issues
and
then
we'll
require
we'll
make
sure
that
the
drainage
plans
show
what
the
geotechnical
engineer
is
requiring
in
terms
of
drainage.
R
R
K
Wextra
Mr
Kurt,
so
how
does
it
work
as
far
as
the
phasing
of
the
permits?
How,
when
you
get
a
permit,
is
it
extend
for
a
mile
in
the
road
or
for
certain
areas
where
there's
maybe
potential
problems,
or
is
it
just
a
permit
that
gives
you
the
whole
the
whole
Road?
It's.
R
Really
up
to
the
applicant
for
the
drainage
application
is
really
getting
to
the
details
of
the
construction,
so
if
they
want
to
construct
the
first
phase
in
the
past
on
other
applications,
we've
reviewed
and
approved
just
that
phase,
and
then
we
can
do
a
second
phase.
Sometimes
they
want
to
do
both
at
one
time
or
all
the
phases
at
one
time,
and
if
all
the
details
are
on
the
plan,
then
we
can.
We
can
do
that
as
well.
Okay,.
M
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Birch
thank
you
for
being
here.
I
do
have
a
couple
of
questions
on
this,
so
just
on
clarify
clarification.
M
Any
Private
Road
normally
has
an
easement
through
all
these
properties
or
have
has
its
own
easement,
so
I'm
safe
to
assume
that
most
of
the
time
that
that
well
or
whatnot
is
outside
of
that
easement,
and
these
guys
on
widening
the
road
can
only
work
most
of
the
time
with
inside
that
easement
to
build
this
24-foot
road.
Is
that
correct.
M
M
Perfect,
okay,
I
do
have
a
couple
other
questions
here,
so
with
it
being
a
private
road,
I
mean
I've
dealt
with
this
and
a
couple
other
things
there's
sometimes
different.
Specs
on
private
roads,
like
sometimes
you
guys,
are
requiring
you
know,
a
private
road
could
be
as
easy
as
a
gravel
road
and
be
in
your
approval
and
be
okay.
M
Are
we
going
as
far
as
achd
specs
that
this
is
going
to
be
built
to
for
this
application?
How?
How
far
is
that
typically
going
to
go
with
this
being
such
a
more
of
a
concern
that
people
are
having
with
erosion
and
everything
else
like
that,
I
mean
how
steep
it
is.
It
doesn't
really
matter.
I
mean
anything's
doable.
R
Yeah
we
do,
we
do
have
our
own
standards,
but
I.
Think
in
this
case,
they'll
be
pretty
close
to
an
achd
standard,
but
we
have
different
triggers
for
when
Pavements
required,
based
on
slopes
curb
and
gutter.
Even
if
it's
a
borrow,
ditch,
there's
recommendations
from
the
soils
engineer
on
what
needs
to
be
done.
So
we
look
at
velocities
if
it's
a
ditch
on
a
steep
spot
and
there's
going
to
be
erosion
will
require
they
put
Rock
and
check
dams,
and
so
we
we
look
to
the
same
standards
as
achd
in
their
drainage.
M
Okay
well,
and
to
also
get
to
so
hopefully
some
some
of
these
Neighbors
at
ease
is
there
will
be
inspections
all
the
way
compaction
text
tests
all
the
way,
all
the
way
through
the
whole
process.
I
would
assume
that's
right,
that'll,
be
required
and
required
to
be
recorded
and
everything
else
correct.
R
Correct
so
the
county
Engineers
there's
two
of
us
will
do
inspections.
Then
the
applicants
engineer
also
will
have
a
sign
off.
They
have
to
provide
a
substantial
completion
letter
which
says
the
construction
was
done
in
substantial
completion
with
the
plans
that
were
approved
so
between
myself
and
the
soils
engineer,
and
the
engineer
of
record
usually
is
how
we
cover
a
project.
Thank.
E
Burger,
yes,
one
of
the
people
that
testified
tonight
mentioned
that
a
fence
had
been
sliding
is.
Is
that
something
that
you
observed
when
you
were
on
the
property.
R
So
we
did
meet
up
there
looked
at
at
the
gate
and
I
did
walk
up
above
the
gate.
I
looked
at
the
slope
around
that
area.
I
didn't
see
what
you
would
typically
see
for
some
mass
movement
didn't
see
any
tension
cracks
along
the
top
looked
on
the
bottom.
It
sounds
like
there's.
A
fitting
that
had
somehow
broken
or
or
moved
is
what
somebody
said,
but
I
did
make
a
note
and
I'll
go
back.
K
Which
one
of
you
can
answer
this,
and
so
when,
when
that
private
road
section
in
the
easement
is
widened,
will
they
have
to
cut
make
a
cut
that
will
go
outside
of
the
easement?
Do
you
believe
doing
that?
There's
a
little
finger
that
comes
down
where
the
beginning
of
the
private
road
starts
and
that'll
have
to
be
widen
and
it
looks
like
there's,
probably
a
steep
Hillside
there
I
think
that
was
one
of
the
concerns
and
does
does
the
cut
in
the
road
have
to
stay
within
that
easement.
K
R
A
E
Keep
thinking
of
questions
so
the
one
of
the
comments
that
was
made
was
about
the
road
that
was
put
in
to
do
the
test
holes
and
is
was
that
road
put
in
the
place
and
the
test
holes
were
the
future
road
is
going
to
be,
or
is
that
someplace
different?
R
Yeah,
so
the
the
test
holes
are
chosen
by
the
soils
engineer
that
does
the
report
and
they
do
their
best
to
represent
what
they
feel
like
the
soils
would
be
for
the
whole
site
and
then
they
make
construction
recommendations
based
on
on
what
they
find
in
those
test
pits,
and
that's
that's
really
what
they
do
now.
The
the
condition
or
the
caveat
in
the
report
is,
if
you
find
something
different
when
you're
constructing
then
what's
in
the
report,
then
they've
got
recommendations
for
that.
R
So
the
comment
about
putting
in
the
road
to
get
the
test
bits
and
not
getting
20
30
feet
up
the
hill.
It
is
true
because
they
they
couldn't
can't
get
a
drill,
rig
up
that
high
to
dig
a
test
pit.
But
my
assumption
is:
if
the
soils
engineer
needed
a
tespa
in
that
location
specifically,
then
they
would
have
put
that
in
their
report.
H
I
have
kind
of
a
follow-up
question
to
that,
so
in
general,
like
just
to
understand,
if,
because
because
of
the
the
grades
and
things
like
that,
if
they
do
I
want
to
clarify
if
they
do
come
across
some
situations
that
are
oh,
this
isn't
what
we
originally
found
in
the
reporting,
isn't
what
we
originally
discovered
in
the
testing.
There
is
a
kind
of
a
firewall
there
that
they
need
to
come
back
and
report.
That
is
that
what
I
heard
correctly
I
just
want
to
make
make
sure
that's
something
that
was
clear.
D
A
E
D
Chairman
Birch,
commissioner
Blutman,
you
know
I
I,
can't
that's.
We
weigh
on
what
Eagle
fire
district
provides
us
all.
I
can
say.
Is
they
wanted?
Another
access
point
to
the
development
the
applicant
provided
that
on
the
plat
and
they
appease
the
fire
district
and
the
fire
district
can
move
forward
and
approve
the
design.
So
anything
beyond
that
I
I,
don't
really
know
the
ins
and
outs
of
the
30
houses
or
you
know
what
not
for
in
each
fire
district
probably
has
different
standards
that
they
follow.
So,
unfortunately,
I
cannot
speak
to
that.
Okay,.
E
D
Chairman
Bush
commissioner
butman
for
anybody
to
drill.
Well,
they
would
have
to
get
approval
from
the
Idaho
Department
of
Water
Resources
and
obtain
a
well
permit.
There
would
be
obviously
testing
that
would
be
done
and
a
whole
permit
process.
You
know
Wells
are
they
do
not
go
through
our
office?
That's
that's
through
Idaho
Department
of
Water
Resources.
D
Potentially
you
could,
you
know,
put
some
sort
of
condition
in
place,
but
yeah
at
this
time
each
slot
will
be
serviced
by
violi
water.
We
have
had
situations
where
folks
will
be
serviced
by
you
know,
say
violi
water.
Then
they
have
like
an
irrigation
well
or
something
else
like
that.
That
would
be
outside
the
bounds
of
our
our
approval
process.
E
D
D
D
Condition
number
four:
in
the
in
the
draft
findings
of
fact,
it
says
that
the
applicant
and
or
owner
shall
submit
a
copy
of
the
recorded
maintenance
agreement
that
details,
ongoing
maintenance
activities,
maintenance
responsibilities
and
financial
responsibilities
for
the
private
roadway.
Essentially,
what
that's
getting
at
is
it's
up
to
Mr,
Wiley
and
Miss
Phillips
to
come
to
an
agreement
on
what
that
maintenance
agreement
is
going
to
be.
You
know,
as
as
the
county
and
as
Zach
Kirk
Hill
provide
some
guidance
there
and
maybe
what
should
should
or
shouldn't
be
in
that
agreement.
D
D
So
that's
the
first
part
and
then
the
second
part,
if
she's
talking
about
base
and
way
based
in
ways
the
public
portion
of
that
road
system,
and
so
that
would
fully
be
covered
with
the
achd
and
condition
number
14
team,
just
states
that
the
applicant
and
or
owner
shall
comply
with
achd
site,
specific
and
standard
conditions
of
approval,
so
that
should
address
anything
on
the
public
roadway.
Thank.
A
D
Chairman
Birch,
yes,
I,
don't
did
the
applicant
get
a
chance
for
rebuttal.
We.
N
N
It's
a
55
or
50
foot,
wide
piece
of
private
property
that
we
own
that'll
be
servicing
our
property
Ms
Phillips
as
an
easement
to
cross
our
property
for
her
driveway,
and
it
is
conceivable
because
broken
horn
continues,
past
our
property
into
avamor's
property,
and
so
a
secondary
access
is
conceivable
from
our
property
to
the
north,
going
south,
where
you're
saying
that
it's
not
a!
What
were
you
calling
it?
A
it's,
not
a
recorded,
easement
or
anything,
but
going
north
there's
it's
actually
in
better
shape
than
it
is
going
south.
N
So
there
could
be
a
secondary
access
going
that
way
for
the
fire
department
and
we
intend
to
comply
in
the
construction
with
the
road.
We
intend
to
comply
with
the
recommendations
and
requirements
from
the
county
and
from
the
soils
engineer,
and
the
structural
or
the
civil
engineer
in
the
construction
of
the
road
I
believe
that
Atlas
has
required
or
requested,
if
not
continuous
inspection,
but
a
lot
of
inspection
on
the
roadway,
while
the
construction
is
being
done,
so
they
can
analyze
the
soils
as
they
are
exposed.
N
So
we
don't
want
to
put
in
an
inordinate
amount
of
money
to
build
a
road
and
then
have
it
fail.
No,
that's
all
I
have
unless
you
have
any
more
questions.
Any.
A
N
Right
now,
miss
Phillips
is
maintaining
the
road,
the
paid
section
of
the
private
road,
we're
going
to
widen
that
and
then
we're
going
to
put
seven
Lots,
potentially
four
initially
in
Phase
One
Lots,
and
then
we
will
actually
have
a
lot
more
roadway
to
maintain
than
just
that
leg.
Coming
down
I'm
certain
we
can
come
to
an
agreement
with
Miss
Phillips
to
maintain
the
section
of
road
that
she
currently
is
utilizing,
which
will
be
improved
heard.
The
One
requirement
that
she
has
asked
for
me
is
that
we
don't
spray
weeds.
N
A
A
K
Extra,
but
when,
when
you
start
building,
though
you're
going
to
take
over
the
maintenance
of
that
section,
that
right
now,
Mrs
Phillip
Miss
Phillips
provides
the
means
for
right.
K
I
know
that's
good,
so
when
that's
widened,
will
you
it's
a
55
foot
strip
right
there,
but
well
you
need
to
cut
make
a
cut
that
will
actually
extend
onto
her
property.
Or
can
you
stay
within
your
portion
of
the
on.
N
A
B
Yes,
I
just
have
one
quick
question:
how
long
do
you
anticipate
the
first
phase
to
be
completed?
That
would
be
the
roadway
and
the
first
phase
right.
How
long
do
you
think
that's
going
to
take
you.
N
This
has
been
such
a
lengthy
process
that
I
wasn't
fully
prepared
for
initially
what
our
next
phase
will
be.
If,
if
we,
if
you
give
us
approval,
is
to
then
draw
the
plans,
then
after
the
plans
are
done,
get
bids
figure
out
the
costs
and
before
we
get
into
construction,
I
do
not
want
to
begin
Construction
in
November.
N
So
if
we
cannot
complete
the
roadway
construction
prior
to
Winter
hitting
we
won't
start,
we'd
start
the
following
some
Syrian.
So
that's
it's
going
to
be
a
determination.
N
How
fast
we
can
get
plans
done,
how
fast
we
can
get
them
approved
and
then
how
long
the
contractor
is
going
to
take
to
go
to
work
or
to
to
do
the
work
and
I'll
have
to
review
with
the
award
contractor
awarded
what
they
think
if
they
think
it's
two
months
or
if
they
think
it's
one
month
or
six
months
or
whatnot,
so
that'll
be
the
determining
Factor.
E
N
So
that
is
the
well
and
I,
don't
know
exactly
where
it
sits
in
relation
to
achd's
right
away.
So
achd
has
a
has
a
right-of-way
there.
I
don't
know
if
achd's
right
away
is
50
feet,
60
feet,
70,
feet
or
whatnot,
but
we
will
try
and
do
our
best
to
avoid
that.
Well,
I,
don't
want
to
have
to
come
to
a
a
problem
with
somebody's
well,
so
if
the
road
and
right
where
the
well
is
I,
don't
know
exactly
how
wide
that
roadway
is
the
existing
roadway.
I
know.
N
A
Further
questions:
Mr
Wiley.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you
all
right.
We're
now
ready
to
close
the
public
testimony
portion
of
the
meeting
with
respect
to
this
project
and
open
up
the
floor
to
the
Commissioners,
we're
looking
for
emotion
in
favor,
of
or
against
the
project
which
my
understanding
is
commissioner
or
Mr
Lindstrom.
This
is
a
motion
to
either
recommend
or
not
recommend
to
the
board
of
County
Commissioners
correct,
correct.
Thank
you,
okay,
so
I'm
looking
for
a
motion
one
way
or
the
other.
A
H
202-300644-S-Dash
FPS
dash
HD,
Dash
PR,
subject
to
the
conditions
of
approval
attached
and
all
the
information
from
the
parental
layer
pod
that
we've
received
today.
Thank.
A
H
So
a
couple
things
I
I,
like
the
the
viola
water
thing
is,
is
something
that
I
I
do
appreciate
much
like
some
of
the
concerns
that
that
not
drilling
a
bunch
of
Wells
out
there
is
significant
as
well
as
that.
This
isn't
a
rezone
that
it's
going
to
fall
within
the
the
intent
of
the
land.
Currently,
what
is
being
used?
I
also
really
appreciate
and
Trust
the
engineers
Judgment
of
both
the
private
Engineers
information,
as
well
as
the
County
engineer
and
I
appreciate
him
being
here,
giving
us
information.
H
So
with
with
that
information,
the
constant
inspections
that
are
going
to
be
conducted
throughout
and
maintained,
it's
not
going
to
just
be.
We
looked
at
it
good
to
go,
but
I
really
appreciate
that
there's
going
to
be
some
monitoring
from
the
county
from
the
applicant
and
their
his
engineer
and
then
just
finally,
one
last
thing
is
he's
putting
his
family
out
there.
So
it's
it's
not
like
he's
just
a
developer
building
and
throwing
it
up
there
and
then
leaving
and
making
a
buck.
H
Yeah
he's
going
to
make
some
money
off
this,
but
he's
building
homes
for
his
family.
So
he
has
a
vested
interest
outside
of
the
profit
of
maintaining
and
keeping
this
roadways.
All
of
the
the
area
he's
living
up
there
among
his
neighbors,
but
also
the
safety
of
his
own
family
with
regard
to
this
stuff.
So
I
I
appreciate
that
side
of
it
too,
that
there
is
more
of
a
personal
investment
here
than
just
a
standard
developer,
that
is
a
big
developer
coming
in
building
and
then
moving
out.
So
that's
all
I
have.
A
M
I
think
he
took
all
the
wind
out
of
my
sails
there.
So
I
really
don't
have
much
more
than
you
know.
I
I
appreciate
the
inspection
process
and
and
with
the
80
County
Engineers
on
these
roads
and
stuff
like
that,
because
they
will
make
sure
it's
done
right
and
so
I
hope
that
gives
the
homeowners
concerns
on
that.
There's
not
really
going
to
be
too
much
of
a
concern,
and
you
know
it
is
I,
think
it's
I
think
it's
great.
So
that's
all
I
got.
E
But
I
think
those
are
good
questions
for
people
to
know
the
answers
to.
In
addition,
the
well
location
and
the
fire
questions
are
the
fire
37
homes
versus
30.
those
questions
weren't.
We
didn't
have
the
information
to
answer
them
here
and
so
I'm,
assuming
in
the
period
of
time
between
now
and
when
it
goes
to
the
County
Commissioners.
Those
questions
will
be
will
be
answered.
A
K
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
yeah,
just
I
think
that
it
all
seems
to
come
down
a
little
stretch
of
road.
That's
from
the
private
road
down
to
the
Stack
Rock
Road
that
just
the
things
that
are
have
to
be
done
there
and
and
the
concerns
about
why
you
need
that.
But
there
seems
to
be
a
lot
of
protections
built
in
here.
There's
going
to
be
a
road
maintenance
agreement,
there's
going
to
be
flood
plain
permits,
there's
a
fire
protection
plan,
that's
been
submitted
and
the
applicant
is
on
the
hook
to
make
repairs
to
the
public.
K
Road
of
achd
requires
that
of
them,
and
there's
going
to
be
there's
a
big
inconvenience
for
those
those
seven
homeowners
that
are
going
to
be
or
nine
that
are
along
that
stretcher.
Road,
that's
going
to
be
widened,
but
hopefully,
when
that's
done,
you'll
have
a
better
road
and
it
is
as
it
would
be,
an
improvement.
K
It's
it's
seven
homes,
it's
not
going
to
be
a
lot
of
traffic
and
I
do
agree
that
the
applicant
does
have
a
a
dog
in
his
fight
and
he's
got
an
interest
he's
not
just
building
it
and
then
leaving,
and
so
he's
really
he's
counting
on
things
to
be
done
well
and
and
to
serve
that
area
for
for
quite
some
time,
and
so
I
would
agree
with
the
approval
on
this
application.
Thank.
A
N
O
O
O
O
The
future
land
use
map
of
the
acorn
comprehensive
plan
designates
the
site
as
World
residential,
which
is
primarily
attended
for
detached
single-family
homes
on
large
Lots.
The
proposed
rezone
to
the
rural
residential
district
is
in
conformance
with
the
future
land
use
designation
for
the
site
in
goal.
2.3
of
a
county
comprehensive
plan
which
calls
for
providing
opportunities
of
limited
residential
development
and
unincorporate
areas
outside
areas
of
City
Impact.
O
O
In
the
1990s
Charing
Cross
Associates
had
significant
land
Holdings
in
the
Boise
fat
Hills
along
Bogus
Basin
Road
during
the
1990s
chairing
cross
Associates
did
a
limited
number
of
one
acre
splits
to
split
applications
to
create
smaller
one
to
four
acre
home
sites,
known
as
the
Bogus
Basin
home
sites
in
the
1990s.
The
eight
County
zoning
ordinance
have
provision
where
our
cultural
non-buildable
Parcels
could
be
created.
O
It
should
be
noted
that
lot,
one
which
is
adjacent
to
the
subject
property,
which
is
three
right
here.
So
this
is
lot
one
lot.
One
or
excuse
me
parcel
one
shown
on
the
record
survey,
which
was
a
billable
lot,
has
been
acquired
by
the
city
of
Boise
to
be
used
as
part
of
the
ridge
to
Rivers
trail
system
and
will
not
have
a
resonance
on
that
particular
parcel.
O
The
app
can't
stay
in
their
detail
there
that
there's
no
net
increase
in
billable
Lots.
As
a
result
of
this
rezone,
hence
the
same
number
of
homes
anticipate
to
be
built
in
the
Bogus
Basin
home
sites
would
essentially
remain
the
same.
Neighboring
property
owners
have
expressed
opposition
to
the
rezone.
One
of
the
neighbors
stated
that
there
are
approximately
10
or
so
homes
in
Associated
properties
on
Bogus,
Basin
Road
that
are
part
of
the
development
called
Bogus
Basin
home
sites,
which
are
subject
to
CC
and
ours.
O
This
neighbor
is
of
the
opinion
that
the
reason
would
violate
the
terms
of
their
CC
and
Ours.
It
should
be
noted
that
88
County
does
not
enforce
CC
and
ours.
Ccnrs
are
our
Private
Matter
between
the
individual,
private
property
owners,
and
so
that
would
need
to
be
resolved
amongst
the
property
owners.
Other
neighbors
have
expressed
concerns
at
the
rezone
would
set
a
precedent
in
the
area,
giving
other
properties
the
opportunity
to
rezone
to
the
rural
residential
district.
O
None
of
the
agencies
have
responded,
have
raised
raised.
Any
objections
to
the
rezone
staff
finds
that
this
application
applies
with
a
county
code
and
recommends
approval
to
the
commission
as
set
down.
The
proposed
finds
the
fact
and
conclusions
of
law.
It
should
be
no
because
this
application
is
a
rezone
that
the
commission
will
be
making
a
recommendation
this
evening
and
that
then
their
recommendation
will
go
to
the
board
where
the
board
would
make
the
final
decision
on
whether
or
not
to
approve
of
the
rezone.
A
E
I'll
ask
a
question
and
then
come
back
to
me:
can
you
go
back
one
slide
on
your
presentation.
Go
back
one
more
slide,
so
that
second
thing.
The
second
bullet
that
says
rezone
would
set
a
precedent
for
others
to
rezone
to
rural
residential.
Can
you
explain
what
the
agency
response
is
to
that
public
concern.
O
So
so
kind
of
I
think
what
the
neighbors
are
concerned
about.
So
the
neighbors
from
my
reading.
The
letters
is
that
they
don't
want
really
additional
homes
up
on.
You
know
near
them
in
on
Bogus
Basin
Road,
they
kind
of
want
to
have
it
remain
kind
of,
as
is,
and
so
what
they're,
what
the
neighbors
are
concerned
about
with
the
they're.
O
Probably
right
now
is
currently
zoned
Rural
Preservation,
which
World
preservation
has
a
minimum
parcel
size
of
40
acres
and
then
those
one
acre
splits
that
had
occurred
back
in
the
90s,
those
fall
underway
is
called
a
rural
resonance
and
so
in
the
RP
District
right
in
the
currently
the
current
zoning
District
current
Zone
ordinance
with
our
p
district,
allows
for
what's
called
a
farm
development
right.
So
if
somebody
has
a
40
acre
parcel,
they
could
essentially
split
off
a
one
to
two
and
a
half
acre
parcel
through
the
farm
development
right
process.
O
Back
in
the
1990s
there
was
a
similar
process.
It
was
called
kind
of
a
one
acre
split,
and
that
process
is
is
actually.
It
was
a
little
bit
more
looser
back
in
the
90s,
because
you
know
if
you
had
40
acres
or,
if
you
like,
say
let's
say
120
Acres,
they
could
essentially
take
and
create
three
little
Parcels.
Add
them
120
Acres.
Today
they
would
only
be
able
to
do
one
and
so
I
think
what
the
neighbors
are
are
concerned
about
is
okay,
if
there's
other
property
owners
in
the
vicinity.
O
You
know
they
would
maybe
see
this
with
the
with
the
the
property
of
the
current
property
owner
for
this
application
doing
it,
then
it
would
maybe
encourage
other
property
owners
to
say
well.
Maybe
I
should
rezone
to
rural
residential
so
that
they
could
further
divide
their
40
acre
parcel
into
let's
say:
4
10
acre,
you
know
lots,
and
so
that's
just
a
kind
of
a
concern
of
the
neighbors
in
terms
of
kind
of
an
agency
perspective.
O
On
that
you
know
if
somebody
was
to
do
a
rezone
in
the
future,
you
know
they
would
have
to
go
through
the
public
hearing
process,
just
like
the
current
property
owner
of
the
applicant,
and
we
would
you
know,
transmit
to
other
agencies
and
we
would
transmit
to
neighboring
Property
Owners
as
well,
and
so
you
know,
I
really
wouldn't
be
able
to
speak
for
other
agencies
if
how
that
would
affect
other
agencies,
views
on
potential
rezones
to
the
Royal
residential
district,
but
I
think
each
application
would
need
to
be
judged
on
its
own
matter.
P
Just
to
kind
of
reconfirm
the
lot
as
it
is
right
now
is
technically
non-conforming
and
then
with
the
rezone.
It
then
would
be
conforming
to
current
code
standards.
P
K
O
That
is
as
part
of
the
one
acre,
Supply
and
and
the
40
acre
Parcels.
So
if
I
go
back
to
like
this
right
here,
so
basically
technically
you
know
this
record
survey
had
seven
Parcels
on
it.
O
Basically,
four
of
the
parcels
would
be
able
to
be
buildable,
so
the
only
ones
that
based
on
the
on
this
right
here,
would
be
so
parcel
three
parcel
five
and
parcel
seven.
Those
would
be
the
three
Parcels
out
of
the
seven
that
would
not
be
able
to
be
built
on
currently.
Okay.
P
I
do
have
one
more
follow-up
question
in
the
application
packet,
and
this
might
also
be
better
for
the
applicant,
so
I
will
probably
re-ask
it
then
as
well,
but
it
looked
like
the
applicant
at
one
point
at
least
mentioned
the
idea
of
kind
of
taking
Lot
2
and
like
turning
at
90
degrees,
shape
wise
and
doing
a
lot
adjustment
and
then
also
members
of
the
public
mentioned.
Oh,
there
would
be
two
homes
instead
of
one
just
to
clarify.
If
that
was
going
to
happen
in
the
future.
A
E
O
With
the
appropriate
boundary
adjustments,
you
know
you're
not
creating
additional
Lots.
So
you,
if
you
do
a
property
battery
just
between
two
Parcels
or
two
lots,
the
remaining
of
it
would
be.
You
know
two
Parcels
or
two
lots,
and
so
so
they
as
I
mentioned
before
they
would
have
to
apply
for
an
application
and
there's
specific
standards
that
we
would
look
at
for
the
property
boundary.
Just
one
of
those
standards
is
that
you're
not
able
to
increase
the
number
of
parcels
with
the
property
bound
Readjustment.
E
O
Mr
chairman
commissioner
blumen,
essentially
you
would
only
if,
if
this
did
get
approved
to
to
rezone
to
the
Royal
residential
district
and
then
the
property
owner
was
able
to
resolve
the
ccnr
issue,
you
know,
essentially
you
would.
You
would
have
one
additional
property
that
would
be
buildable,
because
Parcels,
five
and
seven
wouldn't
be
available
and
technically
a
parcel
one,
because
that
is
was
bought
by
the
city
of
Boise
for
open
space.
O
You
know
that
you
know
technically
I
guess
you
could
have
a
you
know
it
could
be
eligible
for
a
building
permit,
but
with
the
city
owning
it
for
open
space,
it's
highly
unlikely.
You
would
ever
see
a
home
on
that
on
that
parcel.
Just
because
you
know
it's
now
part
of
the
ridge,
Rivers
trail
system
and
so
I
would
highly
doubt
that
a
house
would
ever
be
bolt
on
parcel
one.
O
And
back
in
Mr
chairman
been
back
in
the
1990s,
there
was
a
provision
where
you
could
create
kind
of
a
non-conforming
agricultural
non-buildable
parcel,
and
so
when
they
did
these
one
acre
splits
for
some
reason
they
decide
to
kind
of
create
a
you
know,
a
little
area
that
maybe
let's
say
you
know.
O
Let's
say
it
looks
like
parcel
4
and
parcel
five
are
probably
under
the
same
ownership,
so
probably
parcel
4
would
be
kind
of
where
someone
would
build
their
home
and
then
parcel
five
would
have
been
the
area
that
you
know
the
that
parcel
4
could
then
have
horses
or
you
know,
keep
horses
on
or
just
have
that
as
open,
and
so
when
they
did,
the
the
one
acre
splits
you
know,
I,
you
know,
I,
don't
know
the
rationale
of
of
the
you
know
original
cheering
cross,
Property
Owners.
O
You
know
what
their
thoughts
were
exactly
when
they
created
those
I
think
it
was
just
kind
of
maybe
leftover
land
that
you
know
it
wasn't
based
on
the
the
micro
spike
it
you
they
wouldn't
have
been
able
to
make
it
buildable.
You
know
with
the
dimensional
standards
at
the
time.
For
the
RP
district,
and
so
they
just
designate
that
as
an
agricultural
non-buildable
parcel.
A
Other
questions
so
Mr
Danielson
I
have
a
couple
of
questions
just
by
way
of
clarification
of
what
you
had
said
about
the
ccnr's.
So
many
of
the
objections
referred
to
the
ccnr's
and
so
I
just
want
to
explain
how
I
think
that
the
ccnr's
play
into
this
matter
and
see
whether
or
not
I'm
off
base
or
not.
So
when
we
say
that
the
commission
here
does
not
consider
the
ccnrs.
A
What
we're
saying
effectively
is
the
ccnrs
are
A
Private
Matter
between
private
parties,
they've
entered
into
an
agreement
and
ccnrs
can
cover
a
lot
of
ground,
including,
for
example,
how
large
a
house
you
have
to
build
on
the
property
whether
or
not
you
can
put
a
manufactured
home
on
there.
How
often
you
have
to
mow
the
grass
how
many
animals
you
can
have
on
the
property.
All
of
those
things
that
we
as
a
commission
do
not
weigh
in
on,
and
so
that
doesn't
mean
that
the
ccnrs
are
meaningless.
A
It
means
we
will
not
consider
the
ccnrs
and
so
any
discussion
about
well
the
ccnrs
prohibit
this
or
that
are
not
relevant
to
us,
but
that
does
not
mean
that
they
are
not
relevant
period
because
to
enforce
those
ccnrs.
Just
like
you
would.
If
somebody
put
a
manufactured
home
up
on
the
property,
when
the
ccnr
is
prohibited,
it
you've
got
legal
recourse,
but
it
is
recourse
based
on
a
violation
of
one
private
party
of
ccnrs
that
affect
them.
So
ultimately,
recourse
may
be
through
the
courts.
O
A
G
G
It's
not
amendable
to
agricultural
use,
as
Brent
explained.
Initially,
an
agricultural
use
restriction
was
put
on
this
requiring
it
to
be
agricultural.
It
doesn't
have
a
burn
off
like
other
code.
Provisions
today
do
back
in
the
90s.
It
wasn't
maybe
drafted
with
that
foresight
in
mind
and
it's
never
been
farmed.
It's
never
been
developed,
it's
still
in
its
natural
condition
and
importantly
for
deny
it's
outside
the
area
of
City
Impact.
So
we
are
dealing
strictly
with
Ada
County,
comprehensive
plan
and
Ada
County
ordinances.
G
G
So
we've
had
ample
opportunities
to
talk
and
we
are
committed
to
continue
those
conversations,
albeit
those
matters,
are
to
be
addressed
properly
outside
of
this
forum
tonight,
as
this
body
lacks
the
authority
to
adjudicate
those
ccnrs
next
slide,
please,
you
can
kind
of
see
here.
A
layout
of
this
limited
residential
Corridor.
The
property
highlighted
in
yellow
is
obviously
the
one
we
wanted
to
rezone.
G
G
G
G
G
Pertaining
to
the
comprehensive
plan,
as
this
body
well
knows,
case,
laws
established
that
it
cannot
be
ignored
in
tonight's
decision,
so
we
have
to
get
the
square
shoulders
and
look
at
what
it
What
policies
it
states.
The
comprehensive
plan
was
totally
revamped.
The
one
that's
currently
in
place
back
in
2016,
including
importantly,
the
future
land
use
map
and,
as
you
can
see
here
at
that
time,
the
county
plan
for
this
area
to
be
rural
residential.
G
So
any
precedent
that
may
be
set
here
is
actually
policy
of
this
government.
The
Ada
County
Government
next
slide.
Please,
on
the
comprehensive
plan
goal
2.3
under
the
coordinated
Grill
section
is
applicable
here
tonight.
I
would
note
that
it
for
this
area.
It
is
outside
of
acis,
which
is
area
of
City
Impact
and
it
reads
providing
opportunities
for
a
limited
residential
and
non-resident
residential
development
in
an
area
outside
of
the
acis.
That's
a
squarely
tonight
and
what
we're
proposing
here
is
limited
residential
development.
G
G
This
is
a
map
pulled
from
County's
GIS.
It
shows
what
existing
land
uses
are
in
place.
The
star,
obviously
marking
the
current
property
you'll
know
what
the
coloration
that
this
Corridor
of
Bogus
Basin
Road
is
residential
for
those
who've,
maybe
traveled
up
there
for
skiing
or
summer
activities.
You'll
know
that
there
are
plenty
of
homes
up
there,
but
they
are
spread
out
and
it
kind
of
has
a
rural
style
and
Rule
character
to
it.
Next
slide,
please
here.
This
is
the
future
land
use.
G
You'll
note
it
is
Rule
residential,
so
we
have
it
currently
as
a
residential
Corridor,
but
there's
a
lot
of
this
RP
zoning.
That's
making
these
plots.
Non-Conforming
RR,
makes
perfect
sense
because
it
provides
an
Avenue
for
these
properties
to
become
conforming
next
slide.
Please
so,
there's
two
prongs:
the
comprehensive
plan
and
also
the
actual
zoning
code
and,
as
you
understand
comprehensive
plan,
is
the
policy
setting.
G
G
So
I
want
to
note
here
that
RR
is
totally
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
You
have
a
plenty
of
large
Lots
here.
Homes
are
widely
spaced
out.
The
nearest
home
we've
marked
here
to
a
possible
building
site
on
the
property
is
about
1200
feet
and
notably
just
like
the
zoning
code
said.
Rr
is
not
to
allow
excessive
expansion
of
Public
Services.
There
will
be
no
expansion
of
Public
Services
here
as
they'll
be
well
and
septic
next
slide.
Please.
G
You've
read
in
the
packet
perhaps
about
the
neighbor's
concern
regarding
open
space,
the
rule
character
and
Rule
style
of
this
neighborhood
open
space
is
a
important
concern
to
our
client
as
well.
That's
why
they
bought
the
property.
The
real
character
and
lifestyle
will
be
preserved,
with
an
approval
of
tonight's
free
zone
application,
as
Brent
noted.
If
you
remember,
he
had
that
record
or
survey
up
with
lot
one
that's
owned
by
Boise
City,
it's
a
trail
system.
G
That's
what's
highlighted
here
in
yellow
and
initially,
if
you,
if
you
go
back
time,
travel
to
the
1990s,
there
was
a
certain
number
of
buildable
Lots.
One
of
those
was
taken
away
by
Boise
City
buying
that
parcel.
So
there
was
a
net
decrease
in
what
would
be
a
buildable
from
what
was
originally
envisioned
here.
This
lot
that
we
would
be
rezoning
just
puts
it
right
back
to
where
the
original
intent
was
to
begin
with.
G
So
there's
no
net
increase
of
buildable
lots
and
similarly
there
won't
be
any
net
increase
in
residential
traffic
from
what
was
originally
envisioned
in
the
record
or
survey,
because
we're
right
back
to
that
Baseline
again
and
I
would
note
here
that,
by
virtue
of
going
to
RR,
it
has
baked
into
it
inherent
parameters
and
protections
to
preserve
rural
lifestyle
and
Rural
character
and
I.
Share
that
to
try
to
assuage
some
of
the
concerns
from
Neighbors
and
others.
Who've
made
comments
of
concern.
G
As
the
staff
report
noted,
there
are
no
objections
from
any
agency.
Senior
Community
Regional
planner.
The
request
is
compatible
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
No
objection
for
the
building.
Official.
Importantly,
the
fire
marshal
said
that
they
approve
the
application
with
no
further
comment.
I
bring
that
to
your
attention.
One
of
the
neighbors
had
raised
a
concern
about
concern
of
fire
access
and
those
who
have
the
best
sense
of
what
would
be
accessible
for
fire
have
said.
G
There's
no
further
comment
needed
here.
So
I
share
that
again
to
try
to
assuage
any
of
those
concerns.
Cdh
and
the
County
engineer.
Both
have
no
objections
and
staff
has
recommended
approval
next
slide.
Please
there
were
some
concerns
raised
in
the
letters,
the
comments
that
were
given
about
a
2006
letter.
You
know
the
inference
from
that
reading.
The
neighbor's
comment
is
if
it
was
denied
at
that
time
shouldn't
it
be
denied
again
now.
Well,
let's
compare
the
two
real
fast.
G
So
in
the
2006
staff
letter,
the
the
planner
was
advising
the
applicant
of
what
they
could
do
a
path
forward
to
make
the
lot
buildable.
Ultimately,
that
applicant
was
unsuccessful
for
various
reasons.
However,
the
path
that
was
prescribed
was
to
get
it
rezoned
to
our
art.
For
obvious
reasons,
RR
would
have
met
the
minimal
lot
size
and
it's
an
available
Zone.
Similarly,
in
tonight's
staff
report,
17
or
so
years
later,
we
have
here
a
recommendation
with
the
rezone
to
rule
residential.
The
property
will
be
a
conforming
parcel
and
thus
could
be
a
buildable
parcel.
G
G
I
want
to
say
that
reiterate
again,
that
this
is
just
a
rezone
application,
we're
not
applying
for
a
subdivision
and
that
the
lot
sizes
of
the
Neighbors
in
this
Corridor
the
areas
called
Bogus
Basin
home
sites
that
stretch
of
homes
by
sheer
size
of
lots.
Only
a
few
Lots,
actually
Eclipse
10
acres
and
would
be
eligible
for
RR
zoning.
G
So
this
notion
that
there
might
be
maybe
a
flood
gate
of
just
development
rolling
through
this
area,
everyone's
owning
the
RR.
They
have
to
get
over
the
the
criteria
that
we're
getting
over
tonight.
They
got
to
meet
those
minimum
lot
size
standards
and
only
a
few
Lots
actually
do,
and
one
of
them
is
owned
by
Boise
city
and
will
likely
have
no
building
ever
put
onto
it
and
again.
That
is
to
try
to
assuage
some
of
the
concerns
that
have
been
raised
next
slide.
G
Please,
there
was
reference
here
about
I,
think
commissary
mentioned
about
the
orientation
of
the
Lots.
What
we
share
here
is
kind
of
a
conceptual
evaluation.
Again,
this
is
still
we're
still
evaluating
the
options
tonight
is
really
step,
one
get
it
rezoned
we've
had
preliminary
discussions
with
staff
about
potentially
doing
it.
This
way
we're
not
here
with
the
building
permit
or
anything,
but
for
your
benefit
that
you
can
kind
of
see
what's
happening
here.
G
G
The
crosshatch
bigger
parcel
does
not
what
would
be
proposed
and
bear
with
me
here.
There's
a
few
moving
Parts
I
think
the
images
will
help
you
we'll
go
left
to
right
so
going
to
the
middle
picture.
What
we
would
do
is
take
that
3.9
acres
conceptually
and
shift
it
up.
You
would
then
have
the
remaining
10.92
Acres.
So
the
parcel
sizes-
don't
change
it's
just
how
they're
configured
and
the
far
right
one
is
where
I
want
to
keep
your
attention,
because
the
area
that's
in
white
right
there,
that
is
an
area
that
would
be
buildable.
G
The
lay
of
the
land
is
a
lot
more
amenable
to
it
and
we're
here
to
actually
tonight.
You
know
we're
willing
to
keep
working
with
staff
absolutely,
but
we're
willing
to
commit
as
a
condition
even
that
any
buildable
portion
will
remain
in
that
white
area.
So
what
that
means
is
the
open
space,
that's
kind
of
been
a
big
concern,
has
actually
preserved
we're
willing
to
commit
to
keep
that
10.92
Acres
of
area
as
non-buildable,
and
it
would
be
as
it
currently
is
right
now.
G
What
would
happen,
though,
is
it
would
create
another
parcel
that
creates
a
buffer
for
our
clients
to
the
Boise
Park
system,
which,
over
time,
as
anticipated,
with
its
growth
and
popularity,
to
become
more
busy.
So
this
is
a
good
use
of,
and
they
own
both
parcels
and
they're,
exercising
their
rights
as
Property
Owners,
to
put
it
to
its
best
and
beneficial
use.
G
Next
slide,
please
and
just
to
wrap
things
up
here.
You
know
if
the
intent
really
has
been
all
along
since
the
90s
to
preserve
this
configuration
as
open
space.
We
can
accomplish
this
with
the
rezone
tonight.
G
The
county
has
already
spoken
about
what
this
should
be.
It
should
be
RR
and
we're
just
catching
up
with
the
comprehensive
plan
from
2016.
we're
about
eight
years
or
seven
years
behind,
but
we're
catching
up
to
it
now,
and
this
rezone
tonight
would
take
this
property
out
of
limbo
and
put
it
into
a
conforming
status.
E
Thank
you
for
coming
here
tonight.
Would
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
if
you
go
back
in
your
slides
to
the
slides
that
talked
about
the
2006
2007.
G
E
One
yeah
there's
a
comment
there
that
says
the
property
needs
to
be
annexed
into
a
fire
district,
so
in
between
2006
and
2023.
Has
that
happened?
Yes,.
E
Fencing
Wildlife
migration
Trails
access.
You
know
that
kind
of
those
kinds
of
questions
sure.
G
Chairman
and
commissioner
bleitman,
this
doesn't
have
a
great
deal
of
detail
or
it's
just
a
rezone
application,
there's
no
building
plans
or
anything
of
that
nature,
but
I
can
assure
you
that
the
applicant
is
willing
to
work
with
staff
on
any
concerns
along
those
lines.
Definitely,
thank
you.
A
A
S
Good
evening
and
thank
you
for
this
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
all
I
appreciate
it.
My
name
is
David
Ralston
I
live
with
my
wife
Alicia
at
10
300
North
Bogus,
Basin
Road,
which
is
just
a
little
ways
down
the
hill
from
Mr
Mrs
rising's
property.
S
In
fact,
I
welcome
them
as
Neighbors
and
I
want
to
be
a
good
neighbor
to
them.
However,
as
an
impact
neighbor
by
what
they
and
their
attorney
are
proposing
to
be,
direct
I'm
really
strongly
opposed
to
it
and
I'd
like
to
share
with
you
some
thoughts.
Why,
to
my
way
of
thinking
being
a
good
neighbor
means
being
a
good
neighbor,
and
that
includes
abiding
by
the
rules
established
by
our
ccnrs
and
forgive
me
for
talking
about
for
just
a
moment.
The
risings
were
given
those
ccnrs
when
they
bought
their
land
as
a
condition
of
ownership.
S
The
same
that
all
of
us
that
live
there
signed
up
to
ccnrs
are
very
clear
about
no
subdividing
and
that
the
land
they
purchased
had
one
and
only
one
building
pad
the
reason
they're
seeking
this
resulting
is
to
monetize
a
second
building
pad.
Excuse
me
something
they
communicated
in
a
letter
to
all
the
neighbors
up.
There
explicitly
said
so
before
I
make
you
mad
talking
about
ccnoirs
I
understand
that
Ada
County
has
no
role
in
enforcing
them.
S
S
Excuse
me
this
effort
was
presented
to
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
and
ultimately,
that
rezoning
was
denied.
This
begs
the
question
and
I
think
it's
an
important
question.
What
has
materially
changed
from
then
to
now
that
would
cause
the
commission
to
Grant
this
rezoni
in
2023,
when
the
land
in
question
is
proposed,
an
actual
use
have
not
changed
at
all
in
the
interim.
S
A
final
thought
on
ccnrs,
if
I
may.
The
word
covenant
has
modern
legal
definitions
and
applications,
but
its
root,
State
back
to
the
Old
Testament
and
means
an
agreement
or
a
sacred
promise
proposal
before
you
to
rezone.
This
land
breaks
that
promise
and
while
they
may
offer
a
legally
compliant
application
10
seconds
just
because
they
offer
a
legally
compliant
application,
it
doesn't
mean
because
it's
legal
doesn't
mean
it's
necessarily
right.
S
My
wife
and
I,
and
all
the
neighbors
I've
spoken
with
about
this
or
are
strongly
opposed
to
this
rezoning
request
and
respectfully
I
would
urge
you
to
deny
the
application.
For
the
reasons
I'll
mentioned
in
detail
to
my
letter
to
you
on
the
25th.
Thank
you
for
considering
these
comments
and
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
T
Hello.
Everyone.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
appreciate
your
time
tonight.
Tyler
Morton
9971,
North,
Bogus,
Basin
Road,
my
wife,
Cassie
and
I
just
moved
up
there
back
in
August,
the
newest
homeowners.
Up
in
that
subdivision.
T
You
know
it's
it's.
My
third
house
here
in
the
Treasure
Valley
and
I
just
can't
seem
to
escape
developers
trying
to
change
the
rules
late
stage,
development
to
maximize
Roi.
It's
been
a
problem
in
meridian's,
been
a
problem
in
South
Boise.
Apparently
it's
a
problem
here
with
even
just
10
12
Lots
in
Bogus
Basin
Road.
So
it's
rather
frustrating
so
understand
it's
a
very
common
theme.
T
One
of
the
concerns
is
precedent.
I
think
the
discussion
was
around.
Well,
it's
going
to
set
a
precedent
for
folks
requesting
to
rezone
for
Resident,
rural
residential.
It
sets
a
precedent
for
rezoning,
not
for
any
particular
area.
You
know
there's
plenty
of
other
classifications
that
you
can
make
arguments.
You
know
Bogus,
Basin,
wonderful,
non-profit,
ski
resort.
We
need
some
Town
Homes
closer
to
the
base,
so
folks
can
have
a
second
home
closer
to
our
ski
resort,
leading
to
more
dense
populations.
T
So
it
sets
a
precedent
for
a
slippery
slope
of
request
that
would
create
a
different
environment
than
the
neighborhood
or
the
subdivision
was
originally
intended
for
the
zoning
code.
Again,
it's
like
my
neighbor
David,
not
a
lawyer,
not
as
familiar
as
all
of
you
on
on
the
history.
The
rules,
the
zoning
code
is
under
a
notable
revamp
right
now,
I
think
Boise
devs
covered
it
really.
Well.
T
This
code
reads
emphasizing
that
the
code
is
additive
to
other
regulations
or
ccnrs,
so
trying
to
Leverage
The
comprehensive
plan
or
current
zoning
long-term
Direction
to
interfere
with
set
ccnrs
on
a
mature
subdivision,
because
this
will
be
one
of
the
very
last
houses
built
is
extremely
inappropriate
but
again
to
David's
points
as
well,
really
appreciate
it.
If
you
can
consider
denying
this
just
looking
at
the
context
of
the
situation,
the
first
meeting
that
we
had
did
not
mention
rezoning.
T
A
Are
there
any
questions
for
Mr
Morton,
so
Mr,
Morton
I
have
a
couple
of
questions
and
I
do
want
to
be
fair
to
those
that
have
raised
objections.
So
I'm
curious.
How
you
respond
to
the
comment
made
by
the
applicant
that
with
Ada
County
having
taken
one
of
these
lots,
that
the
net
number
of
homes
remains
unchanged.
A
The
net
number
of
that's
right
because
there
could
have
been
a
home
built
on
the
40
acres
that
Ada
County
took
that
Ada
County
is
not
now
going
to
build
a
home
on,
and
so
when
the
applicant
splits
their
lot
and
has
one
lot
of
almost
four
acres,
which
is
almost
the
same
size
as
the
other
Bogus
Basin
home
sites
and
another
one
of
almost
11
acres.
I'm
just
curious.
A
T
For
the
purpose
of
preserving
open
space,
so
it
goes
directly
against
what
the
city
took
that
action
for
right.
So
it
it's
it's
one
where
we
could
look
at
it
as
a
net
amount
of
building
plots
at
a
given
snapshot
in
time.
It's
net
to
that
amount,
but
you
know
what's
to
say
that
this
particular
plot,
you
know
working
the
rules
in
a
way
that
makes
it
so
they
can
add
another
building
site.
Not
not
the
right
terminology
build
another
house.
Why
is
that?
F
A
A
U
I
live
at
10,
300,
Bogus,
Basin
Road,
with
my
husband,
David
and
actually
I
wasn't
planning
on
speaking
tonight,
but
based
on
what
I
feel
is
some
misinformation,
perhaps
given
to
the
county,
as
well
as
the
argument
presented
by
I'm.
Sorry,
what's
your
last
name,
Mr
Wardle,
brother,
Rudder,
Mr,
Rudder
I,
think
it's
important
to
clarify
and
I'd
like
to
start
with
chairman
Birch,
because
you
had
a
great
question
about
this
land.
That's
not
now
going
to
have
a
home
on
it.
U
Well
that
lot,
which
was
bought
by
the
city
of
Boise
and
designated
as
open
space,
Mr
and
Mrs
Rising,
actually
really
had
a
strong
argument
against
the
city
when
the
city
wanted
to
put
part
of
their
Trailhead
on
that
lot.
U
So
the
city
was
doing
you
know
a
nice
park
on
the
Hawkins
property,
actually
I'm
the
one
responsible
helping
get
that
land
to
the
city
and
this
lot
they
were
going
to
use
as
part
of
that,
based
on
some
of
the
pressure
they
received
from
Neighbors
and
specifically
Mr
Mrs
Rising.
They
said
we
won't
do
anything
on
that
lot,
we'll
just
do
on
the
Hawkins
reserve
and
so
literally
they've
used
that
lot
for
a
standing
area,
and
then
nothing
will
happen
there.
U
So
I
think
it's
important
to
look
at
that
to
understand
possibly
a
bit
of
a
conflict
of
interest
and
now
using
that
as
hey,
there's
now
not
going
to
be
a
home
there
now.
So
let's
have
one
extra
home
I
think
that's
disappointing
to
even
bring
that
into
the
argument.
U
Frankly,
but
I
understand
your
question,
it
was
a
good
one
because
you
don't
know
the
background
from
above
that
that
lot
I
think
it's
important
to
go
back.
You
mentioned
charring
cross
and
actually
I,
know
the
developer
and
did
some
work
with
them.
U
Don't
know
if
I
would
call
it
that,
but
agricultural
Lots
in
order
to
get
these
Lots
split
up
and
so
agricultural
Lots,
NRC,
cnrs
and
I
know
that
that's
not
your
job
to
police,
those
or
investigate
those
but
I
do
know
you
give
consideration
to
them.
Is
that
agricultural
lot
shall
mean
and
refer
to
any
separately
described
plot
of
land
included
in
the
description
attached
here
too,
which
has
been
designated
as
not
buildable
by
Ada
County,
in
which
no
improvements
may
be
constructed,
except
permitted
by
the
provisions
of
Ada
County
zoning
ordinance.
U
There
are
more
than
those
Parcels
along
Bugis
Basin
Road,
which
this
resulting
would
affect.
In
fact,
in
our
in
our
Bogus
Basin
home
site
development,
there's
a
230
acre
parcel
and
if
you
think
the
person
who
owns
that
238
parcel
is
not
going
to
see
this
precedence
being
set
and
think
well,
I
thought
I
could
only
have
one
buildable
lot
on
that.
U
I
think
this
really
does
set
a
precedence
and
I
would
ask
you
to
at
best
pause
this
to
get
better
information
or
to
consider
not
approving
it.
Thank
you
any.
A
V
Good
evening,
everyone,
thank
you
so
much
for
the
time
my
name
is
Cassie
Lowe
and
I
am
at
9971
North
Bogus,
Basin,
Road
Boise
I
wanted
to
bring
up
a
point
that
was
made
that
in
the
future,
planning
that
the
it
has
been
designated
in
the
future
as
rural
residential,
and
this
is
aligning
with
that
future
planning.
However,
that
directly
conflicts
with
the
Hawkins
preserve
that
was
just
set
up
just
north
of
this
property.
V
That's
a
proposal
tonight
that
is
a
large
large
property
that
is
a
preserve
now
that
the
Boise
I
believe
Boise
city
has
set
up.
It
is
a
trail
system
that
is
open
space,
so
I
believe
that
this
rural
residential
future
proposal
is
indirectly
conflict
with
what
Boise
city
had
just
done
in
that
area.
V
I
also
want
to
bring
up
the
point
that,
as
my
fellow
neighbor
just
brought
up,
we
have
one
resident
that
has
a
200
plus
acre,
which
means
that
if
it
was
moved
to
rural
residential,
that
would
add
20
potential
Lots
up
Bogus
Basin
Road,
also
there's
a
neighbor
just
to
the
west
of
us
that
has
a
40
acre
lot.
That
would
allow
to
be
divided
into
four
plots,
so
just
in
that
adding
14
additional
lots
of
Bogus
Basin
Road.
If
this
precedent
was
set.
F
I
Mr
chairman
Commissioners
David
Morrison
10515,
North,
Bogus,
Basin,
Road,
I'm
own,
the
house,
just
south
of
the
the
risings
that
was
shown
in
some
of
the
pictures.
I
We
have
talked
about
ccnr's,
not
applicable
here,
but
the
reason
that
I
believe
that
they're
requesting
the
rezoning
is
to
skirt
the
ccnrs
to
then
build
a
a
second
house
on
that
that
on
the
property
that
was
identified
so
again,
we've
talked
about
precedence
and-
and
there
certainly
is
a
a
concern
for
larger
developments
in
in
the
Boise
Foothills
and
I
realize
this
kind
of
ironic
having
just
built
the
house
there
in
2019
and
then
shutting
the
door
and
saying
not
my
backyard
right.
I
W
W
Why
are
we
upset
that
we
currently
have
fewer
houses
there
than
intended
potentially
originally,
it
is
a
very
beautiful
area
if
you've
ever
been
and
as
some
of
the
neighbors
have
mentioned
just
up
the
road,
maybe
not
even
a
mile.
They
recently
built
that
Hawkins
very
nice
parking
lot
for
the
trailhead.
There's
a
lot
of
traffic
on
that
road
as
it
is
and
I'm
sure
all
the
neighbors
could
attest,
even
at
the
bottom,
we're
slowly
starting
to
see
more
and
more
over
the
years.
W
Encroachment
up
the
foothills
I
understand
that
slippery
slope
is
a
fallacy,
but
we're
watching
it
in
real
time,
even
over
the
last
five
years,
or
so
there
have
been
what
15
or
so
lots
on
the
first
mile
or
so
Bose
Basin
Road.
So
just
as
a
concerned,
citizen
I
would
urge
you
to
deny
this.
Do
you
have
any
questions
for
me.
A
I
A
P
O
H
O
So
the
Hawkins
preserve
is
part
of
the
ridge,
Rivers
trail
system,
and
so
the
original
trail
system
was
actually
a
partnership.
So
it's
a
partnership
with
the
city
of
Boise,
a
county
I,
think
the
U.S
forest
Service
and
possibly
the
Bureau
of
Land
Management,
and
so
those
are
our
basically
nnts.
You
know
to
kind
of
create
a
basically
trail
system
going
from
the
boys
River
up
into
the
foothills,
and
so
basically
the
Hawkins
preserve
is
really
just
kind
of
some
new
trails
that
are
in
the
the
Boise
Hills
essentially,
and
so
so.
O
O
Notion,
Mr
chairman
commissioner
Scott.
It
wouldn't
be
in
violation.
You
know,
of
of
anything
that
the
city
did
with
the
the
Hawkins
you
know
preserve.
You
know.
Obviously
the
regulations
of
the
city
you
know
in
terms
of
the
open
space
would
only
be
applicable
to
the
property
that's
owned
by
the
city
or,
if
there's
a
trail,
easement
across
some
other
private
property
owners
land,
then
there's
maybe
regulations.
You
know
that
the
sea
would
have
and
more
or
less
the
richest
Rivers
you
know
would
have
on
that
particular
Trail.
That's
within
an
easement.
K
Mr
dad
I,
don't
know
if
you
can
answer,
but
so
the
future
land
designation
plan
is
to
extend
the
zoning
of
rural
residential.
You
know
is
that
is
that
how
it
is
it?
Is
it
going
to
be
as
a
lot
of
the
land
up
there
to
be
rezoned
rural
residential,
or
is
that
something
it'll
have
to
be
done
on
a
case-by-case
basis
by
the
owners.
O
Mr
chairman
a
commissioner
Wickstrom.
Basically
what
that
future
land
use
map
you
know
shows
so
I
believe
the
reason
why
it
probably
shows
as
rural
residential
is
because
we
already
have
a
lot
of
these
residents
already,
that
living
up
on
Bogus,
Basin
Road,
and
so
it
probably
reflects
what's
already
there.
So
the
neighborhood
itself
is,
for
the
most
part,
real
residential.
Currently,
just
with
those
you
know,
one
acre
or
two
acre
home
sites
up
along
the
road.
O
So
that's
what
real
residential
looks
like
is
kind
of
what
it
looks
like
you
know
currently
today,
and
so
with
the
future
land
use
map
with
the
real
residential
future
land
use
map.
O
If
somebody
wanted
to
to
ReSound
the
property,
you
know
resonate
to
the
roller
Center
rule
residential
district,
which
is
a
minimum
lot
size
of
10
acres
would
be
compatible
with
that
future
land
use
because
it's
still,
you
know,
kind
of
rule
in
appearance,
and
so
so
that's
kind
of
you
know
what
you
would
be
able
to
do
so,
there's
nothing
that
would
force
people
you
know
or
Force.
The
the
kind
of
you
know
force
people
to
rezone
to
role
residential.
O
If
somebody
wanted
to
reason
to
rural
residential
they'd
have
to
do
it
on
a
case-by-case
basis
and
then
the
on
that
case-by-case
basis,
the
plans
are
in
commission
and
then
the
board
of
County
commissions
would
have
to
look
at
the
merits
of
each
of
those
rezone
applications
to
decide.
You
know
if
rezoning
to
the
rural
residential
district
would
be
appropriate
in
that
sense,
and
then
one
thing
just
to
to
kind
of
clarify
in
the
area
outside
the
area
of
impact,
for
a
reason
to
like
a
res.
O
The
smallest
reason
that
you
can
do
and
be
still
be
on
individual
septic
and
well
for
residential
is
the
role
resident
rural
residential
district,
which
is
the
minimum
lot
size
of
10
acres.
K
So
that
zoning
would
be
available
to
everybody
who
is,
has
a
hundred
foot
of
Road
access
or
Road
easement
or
Road
connection
and
and
10
acres
minimum,
so
it's
not
setting
a
precedent
was
not
really
doing
that
because
it's
something
that
is
currently
available
to
those
who
meet
those
criteria,
I
believe
so.
Yes,
okay,
sorry,
that's
the
end
day
here!
Okay,
thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you.
Mr
chairman.
E
O
So
essentially,
let
me
can
I
share
my
screen
here.
O
O
This
is
Mr
for
Miss
Mr,
ryer's
presentation.
You
know
so
kind
of
oops.
L
O
So
this
is,
you
know,
Rural
Preservation,
so
is
Rule
preservation,
pretty
much.
You
know
to
the
county
line
to
almost
you
know
close
to
the
Sea
limits
of
Boise,
so
that
would
be
for
the
most
part,
A
World
preservation
and
then,
as
we
get
closer
to
carright
road,
then
we
have
some
areas
that
are
zoned
rural,
residential,
near
car,
right,
Ranch
and
then
obviously
kind
of
in
the
rest
of
the
Dry
Creek
Valley.
That's
going
to
be
zoned
role,
rural
residential
as
well.
E
But
there's
along
that
road
to
Bogus
Basin,
like
from
the
pictures
that
we
saw
there's
a
lot
of
home
sites
that
are
less
than
10
acres,
that.
O
Is
correct
so
Mr
chairman,
commissioner
bloodman
when
those
home
sites
were
created,
they
were
created
through
like
a
one,
acre
split,
and
so
what
that
one
acre
split
did
is.
Basically,
if
you
had
40
acres,
you
could
take
off
a
one
to
two
and
a
half
acre
parcel,
and
so
what
happened
was
you
know,
chair
and
cross?
You
know
took
advantage
of
that
and
create
a
lot
of
these.
You
know
home
sites,
so
the
home
sites
themselves
are
zoned
RP,
but
they
really
they
fit
under.
O
What's
the
definition
called
a
rural
resonance
and
the
rural
residence
can
be
either
in
the
RR
District
or
in
the
RP
District,
and
so
basically,
when
they're
you
know
so,
basically
what
they
did
is
they
kind
of
got
a
little
bit
of
a
bonus?
E
One
of
the
comments
that
was
made
was
regarding
the
2006
and
2007
zoning
application
and
the
there
were
comments
that
that
application
went
all
the
way
to
the
zoning
to
the
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
and
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
denied
the
application
for
rezone,
and
the
other
comment
was
that
that
didn't
ever
get
presented
to
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
as
a
rezone
application.
O
Some
Mr
chairman
commission
development.
There
was
an
application
I've
now
my
mind:
it's
either
2006
2007
or
maybe
in
2000
I
think
it
was
2006
or
2007
that
was
made
and
that
application,
you
know,
did
get
denied
and
so
obviously,
with
you
know
with
an
application.
Obviously
an
applicant
you
know
has
a
right
to
make
an
application.
So
even
if
a
previous
application
had
been
denied
that
doesn't
fully,
you
know
say
you
know
for
40
years
forward,
we're
never
gonna,
you
know
they
can't
somebody
can't
apply.
O
You
know
for
the
application,
and
so
you
know
the
applicant
has
a
right
to
come
and
make
an
application
and
present
that
to
you
in
the
board,
just
as
the
obviously
the
neighbors
have
a
right
to
come
here
to
the
public
hearing
and
express
their
concerns
regarding
the
application.
E
O
E
One
more
question:
there
was
mention
of
a
200
acre
parcel
that
is
in
the
same
general
area
and
and
so
I
wondered.
If
you
had
any
comments
about
that.
O
I
I
really
do
I
mean
obviously
they
the
applicant.
You
know
that
owns
the
turn,
the
property
owner.
That
was
the
Turner
and
some
Acres
I
mean
they.
Could
you
know
they
have
the
right
to
make
an
application
to
rezone
the
property
if
they
would
like
to
you
know-
or
even
you
know
today,
as
you
saw
with
the
whiskey
Ridge,
you
know
subdivision
application.
You
know
they
could
also
do
a
subdivision
and
create
40
acre
lots.
H
O
Mr
chairman,
commissioner
Scott,
it's
a
little
bit
different,
so
back
in
the
1990s,
it
was
called
the
one
acre,
split
and
and
some
of
the
provisions
I've
changed
today.
So
the
application
type
that
we
have
now
is
called
a
farm
development
right.
O
So
at
the
farm
development
right
for
you
to
do
a
farm
development
right,
the
property
has
to
be
zoned,
Rural
Preservation
and
you
have
to
have
at
least
40
acres
and
then,
even
if
you
let's
say
you
have
one
partial,
that's
400
Acres
you
just
get
the
one
farm
development
right
parcel
back
in
the
90s,
with
one
acre
splits.
You
know.
If
you
had
over,
you
know
hundreds
of
Acres,
you
could
do
theoretically
more
than
just
one
pro.
You
know
one
acre
split
that
was
created.
O
O
I
I,
fortunately
I
mean
I,
knew
knew
that
was
denied,
but
I
can't.
Unfortunately,
I
forgot
the
rationale
why
that
it
was
tonight
so.
P
O
Some
of
it's
the
same
and
some
of
it's
different,
so
we
have
different
comprehensive
clients.
So
the
comprehensive
plan
that
we
use
now
was
adopted
around
2016-2017
and
so
I
know
it
was
a
different,
comprehensive
plan
than
would
have
been
in
place
in
in
2006
and
2007,
and
one
of
the
major
findings
for
a
a
rezone
is
at
the
Zone.
O
Rezone
has
to
comply
with
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
then
there
have
been
some
minor
changes
to
the
zoning
ordinance
since
2006
2007.,
most
of
the
ordinance
itself
is
probably
fairly
similar
to
what
it
was
in
2006
2007,
though
there
may
be
some
slightly
different
Provisions
or
things
have
been
rewarded
a
little
bit,
but
overall,
it's
pretty
much
this
similar,
very
similar
ordinance.
You
know
that
we
have
today
that
we
had
in
2006
2007..
Thank
you.
M
O
M
O
O
O
So
I
was
able
to
first
find
I'll
share
my
screen
real
quick
that
the
zoning
Maps
I'm
able
to
bring
off
that
interactive
zoning
map.
O
So
this
is
right
here
is
the
the
zoning
map,
so
so,
as
I
mentioned
before,
this
kind
map
shows
it.
So
the
area
surrounding
it
is
zoned
RP.
So
this
purple
is
the
RP
Zone
and
then
this
red
right
here
is
the
subject
property
and
if
we
go
further
to
the
West,
that's
kind
of
where
you
get
closer
to
Korea
Ranch.
That's
where
you
see
more
of
the
RP
district
and
then
also
the
plant
Community
District.
O
So
this
is
the
Aki
feature
of
land
use
maps,
so
the
yellow
right
here
is
what's
designated
as
rural
residential,
so
you
can
kind
of
see
it's
for
the
most
part
is
kind
of
a
long
Bogus
Basin
Road
here.
So
these
are
all
probably
resulting
from
the
one
acre
splits
that
the
sharing
cross
Associates
did
in
the
past,
so
you
can
kind
of
see
kind
of
of
where
they're
at
and
then.
M
A
G
Thank
you
for
all
the
comments
and
questions
both
from
the
commission
and
the
neighbors
I'll
try
to
go
through
them
briefly,
just
kind
of
March
through
we've
hit
on
the
negative
precedents
there.
There
is
no
presence.
The
commissioner
wickstrom's
point
because
it's
already
been
spoken
for
the
county
has
already
designated
this
as
RR
and
the
2006
first
2023
application
has
come
up
a
question
about
that.
G
G
Presently
here
there
was
a
question
about
ccnrs
and
giving
those
some
weight
or
consideration
here
and
just
want
to
note
that
those
are
not
subject
to
the
public
vetting
process
that
this
is
there's
no
public
due
process
in
making
those
private
covenants
and
agreements,
and
that's
why
we
disregard
them.
In
this
setting,
and
as
I
mentioned
in
my
presentation,
many
of
the
homes
are
quite
lower
elevation
and
do
not
pass
this
home
on
a
normal
daily
basis.
G
Perhaps
going
up
the
Bogus
Basin
would
be
an
instance,
but
this
property
really
has
no
daily
impact,
as
it
would
be
a
home.
That's
maybe
lower
elevation
and
we're
not
lot
splitting
here.
It's
the
same
number
of
lots.
That
point
was
raised.
I
just
don't
want
that
to
stick
in
anyone's
mind
that
we're
splitting
a
lot
again
we're
willing
to
commit
to
keep
that
open
space
of
10.92.
G
We
believe
that
that
is
a
workable
solution
and
willing
to
accommodate
that
there
was
a
comment
about
the
230
acre
parcel
I
want
to
direct
your
attention
to
the
staff
report.
It's
191
Pages
some
light
reading,
but
Mr
ralston's
comments
attached.
The
ccnrs
and
they'll
see
sonars
contained
at
the
end
legal
descriptions
and
these
ones
are
unique
in
that
they
actually
provide
a
visual
depiction
to
Aid
the
reader
to
know
what's
going
on
here
and
if
you
go
through
and
I'll,
you
know
it's
about
page
143
and
onward.
G
You'll
see
that
all
the
parcels
are
accounted
for,
there
is
no
parcel
that
is
greater
than
41
Acres
they're,
all
under
41
Acres,
the
biggest
one
is
40
and
change,
and
then
it
gets
smaller
from
there.
There
are
no
legal
descriptions
that
Envision
or
have
a
230
acre
parcel,
so
that
notion
just
is
factually
incorrect
and
again
there's
no
Floodgate,
that's
coming
through.
Because
of
this.
G
There
is
a
point
about
some
misinformation:
some
history
of
the
ccnrs
again
I,
don't
want
to
use
too
much
time
on
that
we're
willing
to
continue
that
sidebar
conversation,
but
for
purposes
of
tonight.
Suffice
it
to
say
that
the
ccnrs
have
come
under
question.
There's
a
lot
of
convoluted
events
that
have
happened
in
their
enforcement
or
not
and
I'll
just
leave
it
at
that.
But
we
just
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
abundantly
clear
that
there's
no
misinformation
intended
tonight
by
anything
that
we've
presented
whatsoever.
G
G
G
And
again
we
just
want
to
reiterate
that
as
putting
this
property
to
its
full
and
best
use,
the
path
has
been
laid
forward
by
the
county
and
we're
falling
within
those
sidebars
we're
just
right
in
the
middle
of
it,
and
because
of
that,
we
would
request
that
this
application
for
a
simple
rezone
be
granted,
and
this
would
help
provide
the
necessary
buffer
that
our
clients,
the
applicants,
desire,
there's
a
lot
more
traffic,
as
was
noted
and
they're,
taking
precautionary
measures
to
ensure
that
their
lots
are
adequately
protected
and
buffered.
G
A
A
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Excellent.
A
motion
has
been
made.
Is
there
a
second
I'll
second,
commissioner,
wrestler
seconded
commissioner
Exton?
Would
you
like
to
speak
in
favor
of
your
motion?
Sure.
P
P
You
know
it
is
in
complete
compliance
to
what
is
being
rezoned
to.
Additionally,
if,
outside
of
the
weird,
you
know,
AG
rider,
that's
attached
to
the
parcel
that
doesn't
have
a
burn
off
period.
If
this
was
a
conforming
piece
of
land,
they
could
build
a
single
house
on
it
anyway.
P
So
realistically,
with
the
current
zoning,
that
is
right
now
they
can
still
do
a
house,
so
we're
just
making
it
again
more
legally
sound
to
build
the
single
house.
You
know
the
property,
boundary
adjustment
and
building
two
lots
and
you
know
kind
of
Shifting,
the
shapes
and
stuff.
All
that
would
be
a
separate
application.
That's
a
whole
separate
conversation
to
have
same
thing
with
buildings,
and
you
know
to
push
back
a
little
bit
on
the
notion
that
this
would
open
a
precedent
for
other
properties
in
the
area.
This
doesn't
set
a
precedent
for
anything.
P
You
know
again,
the
net
impact
of
this
whole
area
isn't
really
changing
from
the
initial
intent
and
again
this
isn't
like
some
tiny
little
parcel
either.
This
is
completely
compliant
with
the
zoning
code
that
they're
wanting
to
switch
to.
B
I
just
agree
with
commissioner
Exton
I
think
after
looking
at
the
future
comp
plan
for
Ada
County
in
that
area,
that
this
is
currently
the
correct
decision
at
this
time
and
so
I
would
recommend
approval
as
well.
Thank.
E
I'll
make
a
comment:
we
we
have
the
ccnr's
come
up
in
front
of
us
a
lot
and
from
a
personal
perspective
it.
E
It
really
bothers
me
that
people
will
enter
into
their
contracts
and
then
come
here
and
want
us
to
be
the
people
to
to
solve
it,
and
so
I
I
hope
that
the
parties
can
can
get
together
and
and
figure
it
out
and
and
think
about
what
contracts
were
signed
and
what
agreements
were
made
and
and
come
to
solutions
that
are
based
upon
and
honoring
those
those
original
contracts
and
not
not
relying
on
people
like
you're
planning
and
zoning
Commissioners
to
be
the
authority
on
contract
language
I
mean
we
we,
but
it
does
bother
me
that
that
there's
a
perception
that
that
those
weren't
followed
and
the
parties
need
need
to
work
that
out
and
so
I
would
encourage
the
parties
to
look
at
that
sooner
versus
later,
because
this
really
isn't
the
right
venue
to
be
working
out.
M
Yeah
I'm
I'm
for
this
as
well
and
and
there's
a
couple
reasons
why
one
it's
fitting
in
the
comprehensive
plan
of
what
what
the
people
above
us
or
the
elected
officials
or
whatever,
have
decided
what
that
comp
plan
is
for
Ada
County.
M
So
as
far
as
us
voting
for
this
and
we're
recommending
it
up
to
the
elected
officials
to
weigh
in
on
I
think
that
we're
doing
our
due
diligence
and
I
just
want
to
really
go
on
the
record
and
say
this
isn't
set
in
precedence
and
I
I
actually
like
how
they,
even
though
it
doesn't
matter
I
like
how
they
looked
at
switching
the
Lots
around
to
help
keep
them
in
mind
of
keeping
that
area
as
preserved.
M
To
me
it
to
me,
it
tells
me
that
they
are
taking
some
of
this
into
consideration
on
on
what
they
originally
may
have
for.
Some
reason
wanted
that
lot
to
be
open,
open
space
and
then
I,
look
at
I,
look
at
yeah,
Boise
City.
Buying
that
lot,
you
know
is,
is
a
big
is
a
big
game
changer
in
my
opinion,
because
it
is
that
that
subdivision
was
designed
for
seven
houses
or
whatever
it
may
be.
M
Seven
Lots
and
they're
not
going
to
put
a
they're
not
going
to
put
a
house
on
that,
and
so
it
really
hasn't
changed
anything
as
far
as
the
impact
on
the
subdivision,
in
my
opinion
other
than
that
I.
That's,
that's
all
I
got.
H
A
question
so
just
I
I'm,
also
in
favor
of
this,
because
when
you
look
at
the
future
land
use
designation,
you
have
gold
2.3
of
the
comp
plan,
it's
providing
for
opportunities
for
limited
residential
development
in
unincorporated
areas
outside
of
the
area
of
City
Impact.
This
is
exactly
that
definition
and
I
com.
I
completely
agree
that
when
you
look
at
this,
this
is
we're
looking
at
just
a
reason.
H
This
isn't
approving
the
subdivision,
we're
not
approving
anything,
but
a
rezone,
and
the
elected
officials
in
the
Board
of
Commissioners
have
approved
that
comp
plan
for
future
use.
Like
commissioner
Coulson
said
so,
we're
falling
in
line
with
their
guidance
as
people.
They
were
the
ones
that
got
voted
in
to
the
seats
and
so
something
to
go
with
that.
H
When
we
look
at
the
previous
denial,
there
are
some
differences.
The
fire
district
was
a
big
one
that
changed.
They
are
now
within
a
fire
district.
They
weren't
back
then,
and
so
now,
with
them
being
in
that
fire
district,
for
instance,
with
an
I
think
it's
whatever
North,
Boise
or
whatever
I
can't
remember
what
the
title
was,
but
that
plays
a
part
into
it.
H
I
think
we
would
look
at
it
in
its
individual
State
and
take
the
the
necessary
hour
or
plus
and
listen
to
the
comments
and
and
look
at
it
individually.
So
I
think
that
the
final
thing
I'll
say
is
on
if
the
Precedence
were
something
that
we
needed
to
rely
on
the
first
guy
to
say
this
is
my
10
000
Acres
don't
build
on
it.
H
We
would
never
be
able
to
build
anything
further
because
then
setting
a
precedence
that
we're
always
growing
and
always
growing
so
I
think
that
I
think
this
is
an
appropriate
use
of
the
land
and
the
like
commissioner
Coulson.
He
took
the
win
out
of
my
sales.
This
time,
like
the
elected
officials,
made
the
choice
on
the
comp
plan
and
we
have
to
operate
within
that.
U
E
Just
wanted
to
tell
everybody
thank
you
for
coming
tonight
and
and
expressing
your
comments
in
the
polite
and
respectful
and
and
neighborly
way.
I
mean
it.
We
can
have
differences
of
opinion,
but
we
don't
need
to
treat
each
other
poorly
and
I
really
appreciate
everybody
coming
tonight
and
and
presenting
their
opinion
in
a
way
that
is
respectful.
A
I
just
have
a
few
thoughts
and-
and
if
the
commission
members
of
the
commission
disagree
with
me,
would
invite
them
to
to
weigh
in
and
with
respect
to
some
of
the
things
that
the
other
Commissioners
have
said,
commissioner
Scott
is
right:
we
are
not
bound
by
precedent.
The
very
next
meeting
could
have
something
similar
and
we
would
look
at
it
as
a
matter
of
first
impression
and
decide
it
differently
and
especially
something
that
happened
17
years
ago.
A
A
lot
has
changed
in
this
Valley
in
17
years,
and
so
whatever
the
facts
were,
then,
even
if
they
were
on
all
fours
with
the
facts
today,
based
on
changes
over
the
past
17
years,
it
could
be
decided
differently.
Also,
as
commissioner
Coulson
has
said,
we
are
not
the
final
decision
makers
here.
It
now
moves
up,
even
if
we
approve
this
to
an
elected
body.
The
board
of
County
Commissioners
you'll
have
an
opportunity
to
say
your
piece
before
that
board
when
they
weigh
in
on
this.
A
The
other
thing
that
came
up
was
discussions
about
the
ccnrs.
The
ccnrs
are
still
in
force,
they're
still
applicable.
Now
what
that
may
mean
is,
if
you
feel
strongly
enough
about
it,
you
may
have
to
lawyer
up
and
and
pay
legal
counsel
to
fight
the
battle
for
you.
If
you
can't
work
it
out,
but
they
still
are
there.
We
have
not
done
anything
about
the
ccnrs,
we're
simply
saying
as
far
as
this.
A
As
far
as
this
commission
is
concerned,
the
Planning
and
Zoning
Commission
we
would,
if
we
approve
this,
approve
what
is
being
proposed,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that
you
can't
fight
this
by
going
through
the
ccnr
is
the
same
way
as
if
they
wanted
to
do
anything
else
in
violation
of
those
ccnrs
and
then
finally,
I
also
agree
with
what
others
have
said,
commissioner
Exton
and
others.
This
does
not
change
the
fundamental
character
of
this
neighborhood.
This
is
going
to
be
a
home.
A
That's
put
on
the
property
you're
going
to
have
two
part
you're
going
to
have
two
different
home
sites
here,
one
of
which
is
going
to
be
on
almost
four
acres,
which
is
similar
to
what
some
of
the
other
Bogus
Basin
home
sites
are
and
the
other
one's
going
to
be
almost
11
acres.
So
one
home
is
going
to
be
added,
it's
probably
going
to
be
a
nice
home,
given
what
else
is
up
there?
It's
not
like
that.
They're
wanting
to
put
in
heaven
forbid
an
event
center.
A
E
A
B
A
Also
say
I
and
the
opposed,
please
say,
nay,
all
right.
It
carries.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thanks
to
everyone
that
came,
we
appreciate
it
all
right.
This
concludes
the
public
portion
of
our
meeting
or
the
portion
of
our
meeting.
That's
for
projects
I'm.
Sorry.
The
next
agenda
item
is
the
minutes
that
we
have
from
May
11
2023,
so
I'm.
Looking
for
a
motion
to
approve
those
minutes.
B
A
B
H
A
O
I
can
Mr
chairman
and
Commissioners,
so
first
I
am
on
the
agenda
for
the
board.
Steering
last
night
was
Project
number
2022-01624,
estas
vac,
and
this
is
an
application
for
a
subdivision
consisting
of
two
buildable
lots
and
two
common
lots
and
the
vacation
of
a
platinum
regarding
lot.
Nine
block,
one
of
Ulta
view
subdivision
at
the
northeast
corner
of
Victory
McDermott
Road.
The
planning
zoning
commission
had
recommended
a
previous
project
to
the
board
and
then
kind
of
after
you
had
made
your
major
recommendations.
O
Central
District
Health
brought
up
a
couple
of
things,
and
so
the
applicant
had
requested
for
the
board
to
table
this
application
to
the
boards
July
12th
public
hearing
as
the
applicants
working
with
Central
District
Health
work
out
a
couple
of
things,
so
this
will
be
heard
in
front
of
the
board
after
July
hearing
and
then
the
next
I'm
on
the
agenda
was
Project
number.
O
O
So,
therefore,
the
variance
wasn't
needed
and
then
the
next
application
we
had
was
Project
number
2023.0006,
v-cu,
Dash
MSP,
and
this
was
an
application
for
conditional
use
and
master
site
plan
for
an
outdoor,
only
self-service
storage
facility
at
8166
South
Stewart
Road,
along
with
the
variance
to
allow
the
facility
to
be
within
100
feet
of
a
residentially
zoned
property
and
for
the
facility
to
take
French
and
access
from
a
local
Street,
rather
than
an
arterial.
Street
staff
had
recommended
denial
of
the
variance,
but
the
board
ended
up
approving
the
variance
as
the
facility
itself.
O
You
know
the
the
Lava
Rock
was
really
kind
of
the
facility
was
a
good
use
to
put
on
that
lava
rock
since
you'd
just
be
parking
boats
and
RVs
on
on
the
Lava
Rock
and
then
the
property.
That's
that's
the
residentially
zone
property.
That's
next
door
to
is
actually
owned
by
the
applicant's
mother-in-law,
and
so
the
Mother-in-law
you
know,
wasn't
against
the
project,
and
so
the
board
ended
up
approving
that
variance
application
along
with
a
conditional
use,
a
Master
site
plan,
and
then
the
next
project
that
we
had
on
the
agenda
was
Project
number.
O
2023.005020A-
and
this
was
the
zoning
oriented
text
Amendment-
that's
amending
portions
of
article
8-2d
of
a
county
code
which
is
the
industrial
base
districts
Oracle.
The
Amendments
focused
on
classify
clarifying
various
sections
of
the
zoning
ordinance
to
allow
for
industrial
based
districts
and
uses
to
be
located
outside
of
areas
of
City
impact
on
a
limited
basis,
and
these
amendments
sync
up
the
zoning
ordinance
with
implementation
of
the
a
county,
comprehensive
plan.
O
2023.00186-Vac
and
this
project
was
for
preliminary
plot
for
two
lot
subdivision
and
a
vacation
of
a
public
utility
drainage
and
irrigation
easement
for
properties
located
at
11052,
West,
Russell,
Road
and
3976
South
Genesee
Street
in
Southwest
Boise.
The
properties
are
zoned
a
low
density
residential
and
contains
0.96
Acres.
You
had
heard
this
project
at
your
April
public
hearing
and
you
had
recommended
approval
of
this
project
to
the
board.
The
properties
consisted
of
a
wall
lot
in
Five,
Mile,
Estates,
West,
subdivision
number
three
and
a
residential
lot
in
Five
Mile
states.
O
O
Commercial
District,
along
with
the
master
site
plan
for
a
phase
commercial
development.
With
the
first
phase
consisting
of
the
construction
of
a
7400
square
foot.
Retail
building,
the
property
is
located
at
60,
80,
South,
Five,
Mile
Road
near
the
intersection
of
Lake
Hazel
and
Five
Mile
Road.
You
had
heard
this
application
at
your
April
public
hearing
and
had
recommended
approval
of
the
application
to
the
board.
O
Up
to
this
centralized
sewer
system,
you
had
voted
to
recommend
approval
of
this
application
to
the
board,
as
you
considered
the
development
of
the
site
to
be
infield
development
and
as
the
size
in
close
proximity
to
other
commercial
developments
and
at
the
site,
you
found
that
the
site
was
more
compatible
to
commercial
rather
than
remaining
as
a
single
family
residence.
O
In
addition
to
the
applicant,
we
had
two
people
test
in
favor
of
the
application
in
the
board
vote
to
approve
the
application,
based
on
the
same
reasons
that
you
had
listed
in
your
recommendation
at
the
April
public
hearing,
and
that
was
the
end
of
that
was
the
board's
hearing.
Do
you
have
any
questions.