►
From YouTube: Boise City Council - Evening Session
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
A
E
A
A
D
Mayor,
yes,
I
move
approval
of
resolution,
3
264
21.,
a
resolution
ratifying
public
health
emergency
order,
2017a.
F
E
A
And
next
up
the
consent
agenda,
all
items
with
an
asterisk
are
considered
to
be
routine
by
the
council
and
will
be
enacted
by
one
motion.
There
will
be
no
separate
discussion
on
these
items
unless
a
council,
member
or
citizen
still
requests,
in
which
case
the
item
will
be
pulled
from
the
general
order
of
business
and
considered
in
its
normal
sequence.
D
A
A
We
have
a
motion
in
a
second
clerk.
H
A
D
Presented
with
a
removal
of
259.21,
okay.
E
E
D
Mayor
yes,
well
having
been
here
when
we
first
started
making
actions
that
that
began
to
lead
toward
this
climate
action
plan.
This
is
a
culmination
of
a
long
time
coming,
and
you
know
you
look
back
at
the
history
of
the
city
of
boise,
the
20
mile
south
farm
was
purchased
four
decades
ago,
so
that
the
city
could
begin
land
applying
biosolids
from
the
water
renewal
facility
was
the
first
of
its
kind
in
the
state
of
idaho
and
still
remains.
D
I
think,
a
leader
in
that
the
city
went
on
to
take
many
other
actions,
including
declaring
that
any
facilities
built
for
the
city
would
first
strive
for,
and
then
we're
required
to
meet
lead
or
other
energy
efficiency
standards.
D
D
D
Other
council
members
were
also
very
supportive
and
I
am
so
excited
tonight
that
we
get
to
adopt
this
resolution
that
memorializes
the
climate
action
plan
and
begins
the
action
to
do
even
more
for
energy
efficiency
and
climate
resiliency
for
the
city
of
boise,
and
wholeheartedly
support
this
action
plan
and
look
forward
to
the
implementation
steps
that
we'll
begin
to
take.
I
Additional
comments
from
me
much
along
the
lines
of
the
council
president
with
the
added
observation
that
there's
a
real
difference
between
a
bunch
of
words
in
a
government
declaration
about
what
energy
efficiency
should
be
or
what
climate
goals
should
be.
And.
I
Here,
there's
been
a
tremendous
amount
of
work
by
city
staff
in
the
documents
that
are
being
implemented
here,
and
it
goes
a
lot
deeper
than
the
you
know.
The
sort
of
multi-point
highlights
in
the
roadmap
it
is,
it
is
a
detailed
plan
with
attainable
goals.
Some
of
them
will
be
difficult,
involve
a
lot
of
hard
work,
but
they're
attainable
they're
in
order
they're
logical,
and
it
can
be
done,
and
so
that's
why
I'm
excited
to
to
vote
yes
on
this
resolution.
I
It
is
it
it's
not
just
a
declaration
of
of
a
wish
list,
it's
an
actual
plan
that
we
will
begin
to
execute
and
we
will
see
success
in
so
I'm
very
excited
about
that.
C
G
Mayor
one
of
the
things
when
I
came
onto
city
council,
I
think
that
most
impressed
me
in
my
orientation
was
our
public
works
department
and
their
commitment
to
really
moving
us
forward
as
a
city
on
many
environmental
fronts.
And
so
I
think
that
this
is
just
kind
of
the
latest
iteration
of
what
that
is,
which
is
really
I
mean
it's.
G
It
speaks
to
a
department
that
is
completely
dedicated
to
making
sure
that
we
have
a
sustainable
future.
It's
our
very
professional
environmental
staff
and
a
culmination
of
a
lot
of
hard
work
into
a
plan.
That's
going
to
deliver
exactly
what
council
member
beijing
has
just
described
and
the
commitments
that
are
have
a
lot
of
history
and
that
are
ongoing.
That
council
president
clegg
described.
So
it's
very
it's
very
gratifying
to
be
able
to
vote
for
this
and
then
see
the
fruits
of
everyone's
hard
work
for
many
years
to
come.
J
Venomere
I
remember
before
I
was
elected,
I
was
out
in
the
audience
and
you
all
were
hearing
about
a
clean
energy
goal
by
2040
goal
and
during
the
course
of
the
hearing
it
got
down
to
2035..
J
There
was
enough
public
testimony
of
people
saying
that
they
wanted
to
be
part
of
the
effort
to
make
us
confident
that
we
could
actually
decrease
the
amount
of
years
that
we
could
achieve
these
goals
shortly
after
idaho.
Power
made
an
announcement
as
well,
but
it
was
so
impactful
for
me
in
the
audience.
J
Knowing
that
voices
made
a
difference
and
that
with
community
involvement,
we
could
address
these
big
challenges
and
maybe
even
hit
dates
sooner
than
we
were
wanting
to,
and
so
I
think
the
thing
that
I'm
excited
about
this
climate
action
roadmap
is
that
we
have
the
ability
to
hit
some
of
these
goals
sooner.
If
people
jump
in
and
get
on
board-
and
I
see
this
is
a
great
opportunity
for
other
folks-
whether
those
are
organizations
or
individuals
to
say
yes,
we
love
what
you're
doing
and
we
want
to
be
a
part
of
it.
K
Madam
mayor,
thank
you
equally,
I'm
very
excited
about
this.
I
see
this
as
us,
the
city
of
boise,
the
capital
city
of
idaho,
doing
their
part
to
save
the
planet,
and
this
is
a
group
effort
worldwide.
I
would
hope-
and
I
hope
this
sets
a
standard
for
other
cities
to
follow.
I
think
in
many
regards
my
almost
12
years
here,
we've
we've
done
things
at
times
that
have
been
modeled
after
being
achieved
here
and
seeing
success
across
the
state,
and
I
hope
this
does
the
same.
K
F
When
I
was
running
for
city
council
in
2017,
I
had
an
opportunity
to
meet
with
then
council
pro
tem
mclean
and
I
didn't
know
what
the
results
of
my
election
would
be,
but
it
did
provide
me
an
opportunity
to
learn
about
who
helped
to
create
some
of
the
resources
that
we
have
in
our
city
that
many
of
us
take
for
granted,
because
we
don't
know
the
history
behind
it
and
through
that
study
and
research
and
learning
about
my
city,
I
learned
how
important
our
mayor
was
in
protecting
our
open
space.
F
That
would
then
be
made
available
to
me
to
use,
and
that
began
the
work
of
just
recognizing
what
it
takes
to
create
our
city
and
all
that
we
enjoy
in
it,
and
I
began
to
learn
more
and
more
about
conservation
issues,
and
I
did
not
realize
that
one
of
my
personal
heroes,
dolores
huerta,
who
is
often
thought
of
as
an
icon
for
the
united
farm
workers
union.
Some
of
you
may
know
cesar
chavez-
he's
more
commonly
known
as
a
mexican-american
farm
worker
advocate.
F
F
They
were
not
provided
with
potable
water,
a
place
where
they
could
go
relieve
themselves
and
there
was
no
care
taken
in
the
fact
that
that
they
were
sprayed
with
pesticides
and
if,
if
being
sprayed
with
pesticides,
was
harmful
for
a
human
being
working
in
the
fields,
it
certainly
would
be
harmful
for
a
human
being
ingesting
those
foods.
F
And
so
I've
been
able
to
make
all
these
connections
of
how
sometimes,
when
we
think
of
conservation
that
we
think
of
it
in
a
very
narrow
way,
whether
we
think
of
that,
as
as
solar
panels
clean
water.
It's
all
of
those
things
and
for
me,
what
resonates
is
the
fact
that
were
it
not
for
the
efforts
of
cesar
and
dolores
all
those
years
ago.
I
might
not
be
here.
F
In
my
life
there
was
a
lot
of
death
connecting
to
cancer,
and
these
were
friends
of
mine
who
were
my
age
who
died
from
cancer,
and
they
grew
up
working
in
the
fields
of
idaho
and
texas
in
arizona,
and
so
for
me,
these
conservation
efforts.
They
have
a
very
direct
imprint
on
my
life.
I
recognize
what
these
efforts
mean.
F
I
have
friends
who
have
not
seen
55
because
as
children
they
worked
in
the
fields
so,
like
I
said,
I've
had
to
come
to
this
understanding
about
conservation
and
and
energy
use
and
think
of
it
in
very
personal
terms,
about
the
people
that
we're
conserving
as
well
and
that
we're
protecting.
F
So
I
am
very
honored
to
support
this
resolution
and
I
thank
our
mayor
for
her
work
in
this
area
and
I
am
very
honored
to
be
able
to
be
in
support
of.
A
Well,
this
I
call
for
a
vote,
I'd
love
to
say
a
couple
things.
First
off,
you
know
I
was
lucky
enough
to
be
involved
in
the
foothills
levy
efforts
20
years
ago,
but
that
was
made
possible
on
the
shoulders
of
people
like
the
council
president
and
so
many
comment
committee
members
that
had
let
laid
the
stages
laid
the
groundwork
and
had
the
plan
that
we
could
then
act
on,
and
that
was
really
and
truly
possible
because
so
many
boiseans
stood
up
and
said.
A
We
won't
want
to
impact
our
community
because
preserving
our
open
spaces
protecting
our
clean
air,
clean
water,
is
about
the
way
we
live,
the
future
that
we'll
have
and
the
place
that
we
love
and
we
will
be
able
to
accomplish
these
goals
in
this
plan.
In
the
very
same
way,
we
need
citizen
action,
citizen
partnership,
I'm
with
us
to
do
these
things.
There's
simple
things
like
planting
a
tree.
A
And
all
of
this
isn't
just
a
it's,
not
just
an
environmental
or
conservation
issue.
It's
a
people
issue,
it
always
has
been
for
me.
It
always
has
been
for
this
community.
If
we
want
to
thrive
in
the
long
run,
we
have
to
do
everything
we
can
to
set
ourselves
up
for
success,
and
that
means
that
in
these
challenging
times
we
come
up
with
goals
and
a
roadmap
to
make
it
possible
to
meet
with
really
hard
work
and
that
will
affect
our
affordability
from
an
energy
and
water
perspective.
A
The
innovation
that
we
have
to
see
in
this
city
and
in
this
community
and
the
partnerships
that
are
required
to
meet
these
goals,
we'll
create
new
jobs
and
those
jobs
will
be
well-paying
jobs
that
will
be
here
for
our
kids
and
grandkids
that'll,
be
the
foundation
of
a
future
economy,
we'll
see
better
health
outcomes,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
those
that
have
been
most
impacted
by
hotter
days,
health
impacts
of
smoke,
other
climate
impacts,
see
the
benefits
and
that's
where
it
gets
back
to
people
and
pocketbooks
in
terms
of
long-term
savings
and
also
it's
it.
A
It
builds
on
the
legacy
that
we
have
as
a
city
of
preserving
our
open
spaces
and
clean
water
and
river
habitat,
and
so
all
of
that,
together
with
other
action
and
importantly,
partnership
from
the
business
community
that
can
help
us,
innovate
and
create
those
jobs
from
our
residents.
That
can
take
action
and
push
us
to
do
more
and
the
incredible
team
at
public
works.
That
has
worked
so
hard
to
make
this
vision
achievable
by
mapping
out
what
it
is.
A
We
have
to
do
and
and
then
they'll
keep
us
on
task
in
terms
of
getting
it
done
alongside
the
public.
That
will
really
keep
us
on
task
because
they
want
us
to
lead,
because
it's
in
this
leadership
that
our
community
and
our
region
and
our
state,
ultimately
as
leaders
in
this
space,
will
do
best
by
our
people
for
the
future.
A
And
I
really
really
appreciate
the
leadership
and
partnership
of
council
members
that
have
also
made
this
possible,
because
without
sharing
the
values
and
expecting
the
leadership
and
then
asking
for
the
plan,
we
wouldn't
be
where
we're
at
today.
So,
thank
you
all
very
much
and
really
look
forward
to
the
really
hard
but
fun
steps
ahead,
because
in
all
these
challenges
there
are
incredible
opportunities
to
to
benefit
the
lives
of
the
people
that
live
here.
C
A
A
We
are
going
to
move
now
and
thank
you.
Team
at
public
works
the
steve's.
We
are
going
to
move
into
ordinances,
there's
nothing
on
first
reading,
but
we
have
three
on
second
reading.
D
C
An
ordinance
amending
boise
city
code,
geothermal
system
regulations,
10-3-2
to
update
definitions,
amending
boise
city
code,
geothermal
system
regulations
to
remove
reference
to
natural
gas
prices
and
amended
title
10.
Chapter
3
for
general
corrections
approving
the
summary
of
the
ordinance
providing
effective
date.
E
A
Thank
you.
We're
going
to
move
into
subdivisions
now.
Is
anybody
here
in
the
room
here
for
any
of
the
subdivisions?
Wait
three
of
you
know
four
of
you
great
all
right.
So
what
we're
going
to
do
is
we'll
go
through
these
and
first
staff
will
give
their
presentation
and
then
I'll
ask
if
council
members
have
questions
for
staff,
because
then
the
applicant
is
able
to
either
respond
to
those
questions.
Let
us
know
if
you
agree
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
staff
report
and
we
can
move
on
from
there
at
this
point.
A
M
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
members
of
the
council.
The
applicant
is
requesting
a
preliminary
platform
residential
subdivision,
comprised
of
nine
buildable
and
one
common
lot:
1.72
acres
located
at
3205,
west,
moore
street
and
r2
zone
at
the
may,
3
planning
and
zoning
commission
hearing
several
neighbors
testified
in
opposition
to
the
project
and
their
concerns
focus
on
traffic
compatibility
issues
and
density.
However,
at
this
hearing
the
commission
unanimously
approved
the
plan
unit
development
and
comprised
of
nine
town
homes
and
several
variances,
the
pod
and
the
variants
were
not
appealed
and
and
are
not
before
the
city
council.
M
The
project
is
a
quarter
mile
of
it
from
a
designated
community
activity
center
located
at
the
intersection
of
state
and
whitewater
park,
and
this
is
the
plymouth
plat.
The
subdivision
layout,
as
noted,
is
comprised
of
nine
billable
one
common
lot.
The
subdivision
design
is
intended
for
townhouse
development
and
the
buildable
lots
are
approximately
one
thousand
one
hundred
and
one
hundred
and
sixty
one
square
feet
in
size
with
reduced
lot
sizes
down
to
twenty
two
feet.
M
The
project
will
take
access
from
a
thirty
foot
wide
section
of
moore
street
and
the
section
right
away
will
be
improved
with
a
twenty
foot.
Wide
access
drive
five
foot
wide
attached
sidewalk
on
the
southwest.
In
addition,
a
five
foot
wide
sidewalk
will
extend
through
the
property
along
the
interior
service
drive.
This
sidewalk
provide
pedestrian
connection
from
whitewater
park
to
moore
street
and
the
associated
neighborhood
access
to
whitewater
park
boulevard
will
be
limited
to
emergency
access.
M
Only
the
project
service
drive
is
stubbed
to
the
east,
anticipating
that
32nd
street
will
be
extended
through
the
adjacent
property
to
whitewater
park
boulevard
in
the
future.
In
conclusion,
the
planning
team
recommends,
or
the
planning
zoning
commission
recommends
that
city
council
approve
the
preliminary
plot.
Thank
you.
D
Sorry
I
thought
I
hit
it,
but
apparently
I
didn't
quite
get
it.
Sorry,
thanks
david.
The
questions
I
have
are
that
this
property
is
adjacent
to
some
property
that
has
existing
entitlements
for
residential
development,
and
I
wondered
about
cross
access
into
that
development.
M
Madam
mayor
council,
member
clay,
the
I
believe,
you're
talking
about
the
development
15
apartment
complex,
we
looked
at
trying
to
get
cross
access
to
them,
but
the
site
design
bends
their
service
drive
right
before
it
hits
the
the
north
corner
of
their
of
their
site
or
just
after
so
it
would
be
difficult
to
get
existing
cross
access
through
there.
I
don't
believe
their
drive
actually
stubs
up
against
the
the
north
west
property
boundary
either.
M
When
I
was
look
reviewing
the
the
the
site
design
it,
I
didn't
see
how
that
was
going
to
work
without
additional
variances
from
them,
because
they
would
have
to
put
their
service
drive
right
against
that
that
north
property
line
right
here
to
get
access
unless
they're
designed
to
change.
From
the
last
time.
I
saw
it
for
the
adjacent
apartments.
D
Thank
you,
so
I
wonder,
would
it
be
advisable
to
add
a
condition
since
that
property
hasn't
developed
yet,
and
it
is
possible
that
it
will
be
redesigned
to
add
a
condition
that
if
cross-access
can
be
achieved
that
that
you
know
that
is
not
required,
because
we
don't
know
if
it
can
be
achieved,
but
that
if
it
can
be
achieved
it,
it
will
be
that
that
we're
asking
this
developer
to
provide
it.
M
Madame
members
of
the
council,
that
is,
that's,
there's,
definitely
a
condition
that
could
be
added
and
would
provide
that
additional
cross-access.
D
Okay
and
then
the
other
question
I
had
was
at
the
northern
edge
of
the
property.
Sorry,
I'm
struggling
with
my
computer
tonight
for
some
reason.
D
The
sidewalk
on
moore
street
is
attached
and
then
there's
trees
behind
the
sidewalk
next
to
the
building,
and
I
know
that
there's
not
a
lot
of
traffic
on
the
end
of
the
street.
I
get
that,
but
you
set
the
stage
for
the
sidewalk
to
be
attached
the
entire
length.
When
you
do
that,
so
I'm
wondering
wondering
why
the
attached
sidewalk
there.
M
Planning
team
considered
providing
maybe
getting
detached
sidewalks
on
this
unsuck
unimproved
section
of
moore
street,
but
it's
only
33
30
feet
wide.
Currently,
it's
not
a
full
full
street
width
and
it's
already
pretty
tight
to
to
get
access
or
to
get
that
type
of
detached
in
there.
At
least
that
was
the
planning
team's
consideration.
When
we
looked
at
that.
D
Okay
again,
is
there
a
possibility
of
a
condition
that,
although
that
this
sidewalk
may
be
attached,
it
will
connect
to
detached
sidewalks
where
that's
possible.
I?
What
I
worry
about
is
that
the
next
development
comes
in
and
says
well,
the
next
door
sidewalk
is
attached,
so
we
can't
do
anything
else,
and
that
happens
to
us
all
the
time,
even
as
we
get
further
south
on
this
roadway,
where
the
right-of-way
is
a
little
bit
wider.
D
M
I
suppose
a
madam
mayor
members
of
the
of
the
council,
I
suppose
you
could
add
a
con.
I
mean
they.
You
could
ask
the
applicant
to
see
if
they
could
accommodate
a
detached
sidewalk.
Although
the
section
of
more
street
does
dead
end
into
crane
creek,
I
don't
anticipating
it
ever
being
extended
per
se,
but
that
the
house,
next
to
next
to
it
theoretically,
could
redevelop.
And
at
that
point
you
know
we
could.
M
You
know
there
might
be
a
potential
for
additional
sidewalks.
I
could
ask
the
applicant
see
if
they
could
adjust
their
design
to
accommodate
a
detached
sidewalk
here
adjacent
to
their
development,
to
facilitate
that.
A
A
O
Okay,
I
just
wanted
to
share
this
short
video
to
help
you
get
a
better
picture
of
the
project,
it's
again:
nine
town
homes
or
three
three
unit
buildings
about
2200
square
feet,
each
with
two
or
three
car
garage
options.
O
I
was
asked
to
keep
it
brief.
So
if
you
have
any
questions,
please
ask
otherwise
I'll
stop
it.
There
and
darret
with
rock
solid
civil,
is
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
utilities.
P
Derrick
kerner
270
north
27th
street
boise,
so
we're
the
rock
solid
as
the
design
engineer
for
this
project
and
just
had
a
few
notes
I'll
keep
it
brief
as
well.
We
don't
have
any
I'll
answer
your
your
questions
as
well.
Councilwoman,
we
don't
have
any
problems
with
the
recommendations
of
planning
and
zoning
and
the
the
conditions
they
had.
They
added
a
condition
about
a
straight
sidewalk
that
is
north
of
those
six
units.
We
have
a
slight
meander
to
it.
They
wanted
it
straight
and
that's
fine
with
us.
P
This
property
is,
oddly
shaped,
it's
an
out
parcel
when
acht
punched
whitewater
park
boulevard
through
there,
so
it
took
the
right
client
with
the
right
vision
and
the
right
product
to
make
this
work,
and
I
think
we've
achieved
that.
I
think
it's
a
good,
a
good
layout
and
hopefully
it's
an
example
of
how
to
do
it
right
fire
department's.
Okay,
with
what
we've
got
going
on
it
is.
It
was
tight.
P
They
were
the
first
first
stop
that
we
had
so
romeo
in
his
shop,
making
sure
that
they
were
okay
with
the
ballers
that
we
have
exiting
out
onto
whitewater
park
boulevard.
We
have
a
full
hammerhead
turnaround
on
where
moore
street
and
this
private
drive
will
connect.
Achd
has
given
us
options
on
how
we
handle
the
moore
street
right
away.
This
is
only
30
feet
wide
there,
so
it
is
a
substandard
right
of
way
and
we
don't
control
the
parcels
on
either
side.
So
we're
not
able
to
get
more.
I
I
do
so.
P
We
plan
on
taking
up
that
whole
space
with
curb
street
another
curb
and
one
det
one
attached
sidewalk
and
that's
what
we
had
room
for.
There
is
attached
sidewalk
all
along
moore
street
and
is
it
32nd.
P
We
were
cared
a
lot
about
parking
wanted
to
make
sure
we
had
enough.
They've
got
options
for
two
and
three
car
garages.
They
we
have
nine
guest
parking
stalls
on
site.
We
didn't
want
parking
to
be
bleeding
out
onto
the
neighbors
moore
street
and
and
32nd
street
and
that
that
mattered
to
the
neighbors.
I
do
believe,
there's
also
no
parking
out
on
whitewater
park
boulevard,
because
that's
a
major
thoroughfare
we've
got
a
large
sewer
easement
that
cuts
in
between
where
the
this
row
of
six
and
where
the
the
three
are,
that
sewer
easement.
P
P
We
can
see
that
our
road
does
go
all
the
way
up
to
our
property
line
and
that's
where
it
will
be,
and
it
would
look
nice
in
a
permanent
configuration
or
punch
through
if
it,
if
that
layout
so
so
fit
that,
because
of
that
sew
reason
there
they're
not
going
to
be
putting
buildings
on
top
of
that
sewer
main.
So
we
are
going
to
be
connected
to
an
open
area
and
that's
why,
as
marlin
suggested,
we
asked
for
that
variance
on
that.
P
That's
a
property
boundary
setback
which
was
supported
by
staff,
we're
okay,
with
recommendations
of
staff
and
planning
and
zoning.
We
wanted
the
drive
isles
up
against
the
neighbor.
You
can
see
that
we're
completely
going
around
one
of
the
neighboring
properties
we
wanted
a
buffer
and
the
drive.
Is
there
that
way?
These
townhomes
aren't
looking
down
into
the
neighbor's
backyard
and
I
think
they
appreciated
that
I
think
cross
a
cross
access.
Easement
is
okay
and
I
touched
on
the
detached
sidewalk.
P
So
that's
all
I
have
do
you
have
any
more
recommendations
or
conditions
for
us.
P
D
Well,
thank
you
for
answering
those
questions.
I
think
you
know
allowing
the
cross
access
will
be
an
important
piece
just
in
case
that
property
does
redesign.
I
understand
the
attached
versus
detached
sidewalks.
I
bring
it
up
every
time
I
can,
because
everywhere
we
can,
we
should
be
asking
for
detached.
D
I
agree
in
this
particular
sense.
It
probably
might
not
be
achievable,
but
in
all
I
guess
you
know
thank
you
for
a
thoughtful
design
that
brings
some
much
needed
housing.
D
D
J
A
quick
comment
yeah.
I
just
wanted
to
thank
the
developer
for
some
of
the
creativity
that
went
into
this
piece.
It
is
a
little
bit
of
a
funky
shaped
lot
and
I
think
it
took
some
creativity
to
make
it
possible.
There's
also
some
really
neat
elements
like
the
permeable
pavers
that
help
with
the
drainage
and
some
other
stuff
that
didn't
necessarily
have
to
happen,
and
so
it's
always
exciting
to
see
people
go
above
and
beyond,
to
make
something
work
in
a
really
really
great
space.
So
thank
you
for
the
hard
work
on
that.
G
A
mayor-
yes,
I
just
want
to
add.
I
have
some
friends
who
live
on
32nd,
just
a
couple
of
houses
down
from
this
piece
of
land
and
whenever
I
go
over
to
their
house,
when
is
somebody
going
to
build
on
that
piece
of
land?
It's
got
to
be
so
awkward
and
so
tough
to
do,
but
at
some
point
we're
gonna
see
something
come
across
our
desk.
That
really
makes
good
on
that
frontage
of
whitewater
park,
boulevard
the
access
to
the
green
belt
and
to
our
beautiful
parks
across
the
street.
G
So
thank
you
for
coming
up
with
a
solution.
I
think
it's
going
to
be
a
really
fantastic
development,
and
I
know
that
I
have
council
member
council
members
up
here
who
appreciate
that
there
are
three
car
garages.
I
Everything,
my
colleagues
just
said,
except
I
think,
probably
the
unsung
hero
of
making
this
fit,
was
probably
the
engineer
so
good
work.
Sir.
F
Madam
mayor,
yes,
thank
you
yay
more
housing
and
at
least
based
on
the
example
you
gave
in
the
graphic.
It
looks
interesting
and
it
looks
like
art.
So
for
that
reason
alone,
I
love
it.
E
A
A
Q
Go
ahead,
madam
mayor
council,
members
before
you
as
a
request
for
preliminary
plat
subdivision
for
16
buildable
and
two
common
lots
at
9362
wichita
street.
This
is
a
five
and
a
half
acre
site
in
the
southwest
near
overland
and
maple.
Grove
wichita
subdivision,
as
proposed,
provides
11
lots
off
the
new
extension
of
wichita
court
and
five
lots
off
of
the
existing
chinkapin
place.
While
the
planning
team
certainly
advocates
for
connectivity,
the
presence
of
five
mile
creek
floodplain
makes
it
difficult
for
vehicular
connections.
Q
We
received
standard
comments
from
commenting
agencies
and
at
the
pnc
hearing
we
did
receive
letters
of
opposition
with
concerns
for
maintaining
the
mature
trees
and
open
space
on
site
and
the
traffic
impacts
for
the
neighborhood.
Q
Q
A
R
8421
south
10
mile
meridian
here
on
behalf
of
schultz
development
after
that
last
hearing,
this
is
kind
of
boring
kind
of
vanilla,
low
density
and
we're
our
hands
are
a
little
tied
on
on
doing
a
beauty
or
anything
because
of
the
airport
overlay.
There's
a
specific
language
that
talks
about
three
units
per
acre
and
that
just
so
happens
to
fit
the
existing
r1b
zone,
dimensional
standards,
so
with
the
with
the
with
the
floodplain
going
through
the
middle
of
it.
R
And
it's
really
the
last
infield
piece
I
think,
on
the
owner
sold
off
the
land
around
it
20
years
ago
for
the
for
the
subdivisions
that
are
out
there.
This
is
the
last
piece
and
our
lots
are
compatible
with
everything
around
us.
So
we
are
going
to
preserve
the
the
floodway
in
a
unmanicured
state,
more
natural,
clean
out
some
of
the
noxious
invasive
stuff
other
than
that,
it's
it's.
R
It's
wet
birds,
ducks
wildlife
and
we're
gonna,
keep
it
natural
not
because
we're
cheap,
just
because
we
think
it's
the
right
thing
to
do
in
that
case
and
preserve
all
the
big
trees
that
we
can
on
that
east
boundary.
Some
are
going
to
go
and
even
some
of
the
big
ones
aren't
healthy,
but
we
like
trees
and
we're
going
to
do
all
we
can
to
keep
the
ones
that
we
can.
R
D
Mayor,
yes,
I
move.
We
approve
wichita,
subdivision
suv,
21-7
boise
city,
preliminary
plat
at
9362,
west
wichita
street.
Second,.
Q
Council
members,
the
next
item
is
a
plat
note
request
to
partially
vacate
a
rear
setback
at
1744
londoner
avenue
in
the
nelson's
river
parkway
subdivision.
The
vacation
is
in
anticipation
for
the
construction
of
a
pool.
The
plot
shows
a
30-foot
setback
for
building
so
with
the
vacation.
The
pool
could
be
installed
at
the
proposed
10
feet
from
the
rear
outside
of
the
utility
irrigation
and
drainage
easement.
Q
D
Any
questions
adam
here-
yes,
not
a
question
about
this
particular
application,
which
I
support,
but
just
a
question
in
general.
I
know
that
this
was
approved
some
time
ago.
I
believe
we
now
have
a
policy
that
we
don't
allow
these
kinds
of
setbacks
to
be
put
in
flats
that
that
are
different
than
what
our
zoning
code
is.
Q
I'm
not
american
council
president,
that
is
correct.
It
is
quite
cumbersome
for
individual
homeowners
to
overcome
these
setbacks
on
the
plats.
So
we
do
not
do
that
practice
anymore.
Great.
Thank
you.
O
S
N
I
reside
at
1744
londoner
in
boise
and
I
think
I
tried
to
state
all
the
reasons
why
we
had
to
infringe
on
that
generous
30-foot
setback,
but
in
I'm
also
architect
with
inside
architects,
and
this
was
probably
one
of
our
easiest
site
analysis
where
all
the
factors
just
made
this
corner
of
her
property,
the
the
best
place
for
the
pool-
and
I
appreciate
that
the
the
staff
and
analyzed
this
and
and
agreed
that
made
the
recommendation
that
this
ought
to
be
vacated
for
this
purpose.
So
any
questions.
D
Madame
here,
yes,
I
move
approval
of
sos
21-11
boise
city
vacation
of
plattnote
at
1744,
south
londoner
avenue.
A
A
All
right
and
then
just
one
other
thing-
I
don't
have
anybody
on
this
sheet
signed
up
testify.
Is
anybody
here
in
the
audience
here
to
testify
on
this
item
all
right?
If
there's
anyone
online
that
wants
to
testify
on
this,
raise
your
little
zoom
hand
and
we'll
work
through
the
list
after
the
staff
and
applicant
present.
B
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
members
of
the
council.
This
item
before
you
is
a
re-zone
of
0.85
acres
at
1833,
south
vanella
street,
from
r1a
single-family
residential
at
2.1
units
per
acre
to
r1bda
single-family
residential
with
development
agreement
at
4.8
units
per
acre.
The
property
is
located
between
vincent
street
and
three
mile
creek
road,
approximately
932
feet
south
of
overland
road.
It
currently
has
one
single
family
residence
and
the
surrounding
area
is
zoned,
r1a
to
the
north,
west
and
east
and
r1bda
to
the
south.
B
B
We
received
standard
agency
comments
and
no
opposition
and,
as
indicated
in
your
packet,
the
applicant's
proposal
complies
with
approval
criteria
for
a
rezone.
As
such,
the
planning
team
and
planning
and
zoning
commission
recommends
approval
of
the
application
with
conditions.
Thank
you
and
I'll
answer.
Any
questions.
A
N
Good
evening,
madame
and
council
members,
this
is
lowell
smith.
We
have
no
additional
comments.
A
A
It's
a
little
better,
but
it's
still
really
tough.
I
don't
know
if
I'm
I'm
looking
at
the
back
of
the
wall
to
our
tech
room,
I
don't
know
if
he
can
raise
the
volume
or,
if
it's
a
matter
of
where
the
speaker
is
for
you,
we
have.
A
E
E
A
A
You,
okay
and
the
final
event
is
car.
21-12
come
back,
and
with
this
I
imagine
then
all
of
you
here
are
to
testify
on
this
wonderful,
and
we
also
have
some
names
on
here,
perhaps
of
people
that
are
that
are
online.
So
what
we'll
do
is
start
with
the
folks
in
the
room
and
then
we'll
work
through
the
names
of
people
that
have
signed
up
in
advance
and
then
anybody
else
that
didn't
sign
up
just
raise
your
hand
and
we'll
be
able
to
call
on
you
that
go
ahead.
Celine.
Q
Q
The
land
use
designation
is
compact,
which
allows
for
a
host
of
zones,
including
open
space,
residential
and
office.
The
site
is
currently
zoned
r1c,
which
allows
a
maximum
of
eight
units.
The
applicant
is
requesting
lod
or
limited
office
with
design
review
and
would
include
a
development
agreement.
The
lo
usually
allows
43.5
units
per
acre,
but
with
the
development
agreement,
the
request
would
facilitate
a
residential
project
for
40
units
or
a
density
of
19.2
units
per
acre.
Q
It
would
also
limit
the
height
to
35
feet
and
the
perimeter
setbacks
would
be
15
feet
which
are
very
similar
and
in
line
with
the
r1c
surrounding
the
area,
while
the
request
to
office
for
residential
use
is
not
typical.
This,
the
specifics
and
limitations
placed
upon
the
site
with
the
da
would
provide
assurances
for
what
would
be
developed
and
also
to
be
clear.
Q
Q
Q
Excuse
me
the
traffic
and
parking
concerns
that
it
would
bring
and
the
scale
of
the
development.
It
is
important
to
note
that
the
difference
here
between
the
allowed
zones
would
be
five
units,
as
mentioned
in
the
report.
The
limitation
of
height
and
setbacks
make
it
consistent
with
the
r1c
and
achd
had
no
objections
to
the
project.
D
D
You
know
the
the
zone
that
was
chosen
because
of
in
in
part
because
of
the
limitations
of
our
existing
zone
is
one
that's
labeled
limited
office,
but
all
of
our
office
zones
allow
residential.
D
My
question
has
to
do
with,
what's
potentially
allowed
with
the
development
agreement
with
a
limited
office
versus
what
might
be
allowed
with
an
r2
and.
D
Some
attempt
by
a
developer,
to
add
accessory
drilling
units
to
what
might
also
already
be
allowed
in
an
r2,
and
you
know
I'm
not
making
any
judgment
one
way
or
the
other,
but
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
where,
where
we
are
in
terms
of
density,
where
we
are
in
terms
of
the
kind
of
product
and
how
it
serves
the
neighborhood
and
how
what
what
might
be
the
zone
that
that
would
maybe
best.
You
know,
thread
that
needle-
and
I
know
that
you
all
probably
had
a
lot
of
discussion
about
that.
So
hopefully
you
can.
Q
Yeah,
madam
mayor
council,
president
on
the
screen
here,
it
shows
you
the
different
zoning
designations
that
could
be
compatible
with
the
area,
so
the
current
zone
of
r1c,
the
proposed
lod,
the
r2,
as
you
mentioned,
as
well
as
the
r1m
for
the
r2,
they
would
be
allowed
up
to
a
maximum
of
30
units,
whereas
the
lo
that
they're
requesting
would
be
40
units
adus
could
be
a
possibility
within
the
r2
or
the
r1m
just
depends
on
the
product
type.
Q
Ultimately,
though,
the
r2,
the
r1m
and
even
the
lo
all
have
very
similar
setbacks
and
height.
The
lo
does
have
a
higher
well,
they
all
have
35
feet.
The
lo
has
a
10
foot
set
back
so
then
that's
why
we
recommended
the
15
foot
setback
just
to
be
compatible
with
the
other
r
zones.
So
I
think,
really,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
is
just
the
density.
That's
before
council
this
evening.
J
Vladimir,
so
celine
there's
the
high
density
that's
listed
further
south
is
that
the
oak
park
oak
park
village,
it's
shown
there
in
yellow
and
then
I
think
that
there's
a
few
other,
a
few
others
in
the
area
hawaii
place
apartments.
Q
Madam
mayor
council,
member
council,
member
haley
burton
I'm
I'm
not
familiar
with
those
areas.
It
looks
like
the
one
that
you're
calling
out
with
the
high
density
zone
c2.
So
it's
a
commercial
zone
for
residential
use.
Q
J
J
Q
It
does,
I
think,
one
good
way
to
look
at
it.
I
there's
two
ways
to
look
at
it:
there,
the
yellow
is
a
permissible
zone,
so
it
is
a
somewhat
predictable
pattern
that
the
comp
plan
does
foresee
certainly
going
to
rezone
to
office
straight
for
residential
use
is
not
typical,
but,
as
president
council
president
mentioned,
our
zoning
code
is
getting
outdated.
We
are
looking
at
trying
to
update
things,
and
this
is
one
way
that
the
applicant
was
able
to
fit
within
the
land
use
and
and
not
max
out
the
lo
density.
I
You,
madam
mayor,
silly,
I'm
looking
at
criteria
three
for
approval,
which
is
the
one
that
we
always
seem
to
fall
back
on.
It's
maintaining
a
predictable
development
pattern
and
preserving
the
compatibility
of
surrounding
zoning
and
development,
and
my
question
is
about
where
to
think
of
those
in
time.
You
may
recall
this
came
up
earlier
with
a
special
exception
issue
a
few
months
ago.
I
So
when
I
look
at
the
zoning
map
and
a
land
use
map
for
this
neighborhood,
and
then
I
look
at
what's
there
am
I
trying
to
maintain
compatibility
with
the
surrounding
built
environment
or
with
the
permissible
uses
in
the
permissible
zones
at
the
other
end
of
the
spectrum?
In
other
words,
am
I
trying
to
keep
it
compatible
with
the
highest
level
of
use
that
might
be
permitted
in
in
this
area
if
it
was
all
developed
to
the
maximum
extent?
Q
Madam
mayor
council,
member
beijing,
that's
a
great
question:
that's
that's
a
million
dollar
question.
I
think
every
site
is
different
and
with
the
way
our
city
is
growing,
to
to
focus
on
compatibility
with
the
current
existing
pattern
of
development
during
our
housing
crisis
could
be
seen
as
an
underutilization
of
the
site.
Q
The
one
thing
I
will
say
about
maintaining
and
preserving
the
zoning
for
the
area.
Certainly
lo
would
stand
out,
but
because
you
have
the
development
agreement
attached,
you
can
essentially
make
it
a
one
use
one.
You
know
a
special
exception
if
you
will
and
come
up
with
your
own
zoning
code
standards
within
this
da.
So
while
on
the
map,
it
might
show
up
purple
and
might
seem
out
of
place
with
that
development
agreement.
It
gives
you
all
the
assurances
of
what
exactly
you'd
like
to
see
developed
here.
I
D
You
one
more
question
celine,
so
could
the
developer
have
achieved
the
same
density
with
an
r1m
or
the
same
number
of
units
on
this
particular
parcel
with
an
r1m,
designation
and
planned
unit
development
application,
rather
than
what
we've
got
before
us.
Q
Madam
mayor
council
president,
the
r1m
would
give
you
total
units
of
35
units
and
what
they're
requesting
is
for
40
units.
Q
Unless
there's
adus,
of
course,
but
the
adus
you
know-
are
deed
restricted
for
owner
occupancy
of
one
unit
at
least
right.
Q
Certainly
another
way
I
was
going
to
say
duplexes,
but
we
would
still
count
that
as
units
yeah.
H
Probably
five
blocks
on
the
other
side
of
vista
just
tried
to
isolate
kind
of
an
oval
area.
The
most
recent
multi-family
development
in
that
area
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge,
was
1986.,
so
it's
been
a
while,
since
anything
happened
there
and
most
of
them
were
back
in
the
70s
and
then,
with
regard
to
the
question
about
adu's
councilwoman,
we
would
have
to
do
a
more
traditional
residence
in
order
to
do
an
adu,
so
we
would
lose
density,
there'd
be
a
net
loss.
I
think
so
to
do
it
that
way.
H
Anyhow,
the
purpose
of
the
hearing
this
evening,
as
you
know,
is
for
rezone
of
the
five
four
parcels
that
are
located
at
2801
west
palouse
from
r1c
to
lodda.
H
My
hope
is
that
we
can
have
a
dialogue
this
evening.
That
seems
to
work
best.
Your
approval,
of
course,
is
requested
and
would
be
gratefully
appreciated.
H
Most
of
the
comments
that
were
provided
by
the
neighbors
have
more
to
do
with
site
layout
and
design
in
the
future
townhomes
to
keep
it
the
topic
at
hand.
I
believe
these
comments
should
be
addressed
with
the
plaid
pud
and
design
review
elements
should
we
receive
our
rezone
where
appropriate.
I
will
weave
into
my
presentation
elements
of
the
public
comments,
but
I
do
want
to
stay
pretty
close
to
the
topic
at
hand.
H
So
the
city
of
boise
issued
a
call
to
action
for
affordable
and
workforce
housing,
and
this
applicant
is
carrying
that
call
to
action
forward
with
a
proposed
townhall
project
facilitated
by
a
rezone
that
would
enhance
available
housing
stock.
It's
really
modest
in
scope
at
two
acres
and
is
designed
appropriately
to
respect
the
surrounding
use.
H
So
that's
kind
of
where
we
are
right.
Now
we
were
really
surprised
by
the
attendance
at
the
pnc
hearing
by
some
members
of
the
community
that
belonged
to
the
ford
boise
facebook
page.
I
went
and
checked
them
out
afterwards.
It
was
pretty
awesome,
we
didn't
invite
them,
I
didn't
even
know
they
existed,
but
this
action
on
their
part
is
one
of
the
things
that
makes
boise
so
great.
H
So,
the
immediate
action
is
a
request
for
rezone,
regardless
as
saline
mentioned,
regardless
of
what
the
lo
zone
allows
in
terms
of
density.
This
proposal
is
specifically
for
a
total
of
40
units
or
about
19
units
per
acre.
H
These
residences
will
be
on
individual
platted
lots
for
individual
ownership.
The
proposal
is
not
in
the
true
sense
of
the
word,
a
multi-family
proposal,
other
than
there's
a
provision
for
amenities,
guest
parking
and
hoa
with
community
responsibilities,
for
maintenance
of
the
common
area
and
building
exteriors
and
a
unified
set
of
rules
for
the
community
as
a
whole.
H
The
site
plan
proposes
86
parking
spaces,
which
includes
the
two-car
garages
that
come
with
each
residence
to
be
transparent,
with
city
staff,
a
site
plan
and
elevations
with
an
intended
bed
and
bath.
Combo
information
was
provided
to
the
city,
though
the
design
review.
Pud.
Excuse
me
through
the
design,
review,
pud
and
plat
process.
The
site
will
be
further
refined.
H
H
H
We
believe
that
the
trip
excuse
me,
the
design
review
process
will
carefully
evaluate
designs
to
assure
that
the
design
of
the
structures
is
appropriate
to
prepare
for
this
hearing.
This
evening
I
looked
at
the
comp
plan
again
the
zoning
ordinance,
the
vista
neighborhood
plan.
I
looked
at
the
staff
report
and
reviewed
comments.
Letters
submitted
by
residents
in
the
neighborhood
I
looked
at
published
recently
published
articles
and
blogs
on
urban
design
and
solutions.
H
H
So
the
underlying
questions
this
evening
to
be
answered
are
the
three
criteria
that
are
required
by
boise
code.
Does
the
proposal
zone
comply
with
the
comp
plan?
Is
it
in
the
best
interest
of
the
city
for
public
convenience
and
general
welfare,
and
does
it
maintain
and
preserve
compatibility
with
the
surrounding
area?
H
H
This
is
an
assemblage
of
parcels
to
provide
a
more
predictable
pattern
of
growth.
It
supports
not
one
but
two
activity:
centers
the
one
at
overland
and
vista
and
the
one
at
target
in
vista.
That
was
a
little
bit
of
a
problem
for
the
pnc
commission.
We
weren't
exactly
sure
why,
but
that's
okay,
I
didn't
want
to
say
stability
does
not
equal,
no
change
or
stasis.
H
H
Preservation
of
neighborhoods
does
not
eliminate
the
need
to
adapt
to
changing
conditions,
of
which
we
have
seen
quite
a
bit
of
consuming
land,
appropriate
for
local,
commercial
and
retail
uses
with
residential
uses,
depletes
the
resource
and
fails
to
meet
one
of
the
action
items
in
the
vista
neighborhood
plan
under
their
land,
use
application,
review
policies,
and
I'm
stating
specifically
it
says
within
600
feet
of
the
overland
road
federal
way
and
vista
avenue.
Corridors
encourage
uses
and
development
densities
which
stimulate
market
activity
to
a
level
where
local
business
reliance
upon
pass-through
vehicle
trips
may
be
reduced.
H
So
that
excuse
me
if
I
made
it
madame,
I
actually
looked
at
the
code
and
it
indicated
oh
30
minutes.
I
thought
I
saw,
but
do
you
need
me
to
stop
or
can
I
finish.
H
So
compatibility
again
is
not
the
same
as
the
same,
and
we
don't
believe
that
the
rezone
will
negatively
impact
the
area.
It
will
change
the
area
on
a
local
level,
but
we
believe
in
a
positive
way.
H
H
There
are
some
extraordinary
costs,
because
there
are
some
old
commercial
buildings,
industrial
buildings
that
will
have
to
be
removed
and
that's
expensive
demo
is
very
expensive.
So
we're
not
insensitive
and
not
oblivious
to
the
concerns
of
the
neighborhood.
There's
some
parking
issues
in
existence
in
the
neighborhood.
Now,
maybe
the
neighborhood
could
get
together
and
solve
some
of
those
problems
collectively,
as
opposed
to
waiting
for
someone
else
to
do
that.
For
them,
we've
got
lots
of
buffer
we've
got
architecturally
designed
elevations.
H
H
H
H
Leaving
commercial
zoned
areas
available
for
commercial
and
retail
development
is
a
good
idea.
It
replaces
an
eyesore
with
an
intentional
community
with
homes
that
are
available
to
purchase
adding
new
homes
frees
up
older
residential
stock.
That
is
more
available,
so
we
believe
it
maintains
compatibility.
Compatibility
is
not
the
same
as
the
same.
So
these
are
row.
Homes
eagles
subdivision
had
1057
lots
in
it,
which
is
to
our
north,
northwest
and
west.
There
are
a
hundred
there's
over
a
thousand
lots
in
that
subdivision.
H
H
I
Same
question
for
you
that
I
had
for
staff,
one
of
the
approval
criteria
is
maintaining
and
preserving
the
compatibility
of
surrounding
zoning
and
development,
and
I
think
I
read
those
as
two
different
things:
compatibility
with
the
zoning
and
compatibility
with
development.
So
staff
gave
an
answer
about
how
to
try
to
interpret
that
and
apply
it
here,
and
I
wonder
what
your
answer
is
specifically
for
the
zone
that
you've
asked
for,
because
I
think,
with
a
little
bit
less
density,
you
can
get
there
with
r2
or
r1m.
H
And
a
mayor
councilman,
I
guess
the
way
I
look
at
it.
Is
this
really
isn't
the
lo
designation?
Is
it's
just
a
tool?
It's
a
calling
something
a
vice
grip,
as
opposed
to
the
brand
name
that
it's
made
out
of.
Like
I
stated
previously,
ello
is
the
only
tool
that's
available
in
the
toolbox
that
boise
city
zoning
code
provides.
So
it's,
in
my
opinion,
a
lot
less
about
what
designation
we're
using,
but
what
is
being
provided
as
a
result
of
the
rezone.
H
So-
and
I
understand
your
question
about
compatibility
again-
I
don't
think
that
compatibility
equals
the
same
and
it's
a
modest
size
site.
We
would
have
five
less
units
if
we
down
zoned
it
r1m.
H
So
it's
not
a
big,
it's
not
a
big
difference
and
given
the
cost
of
land
today
it
each
residence.
The
cost
of
land
now
is
at
least
one
third
of
the
total
price
of
anything.
So
as
that
continues
to
climb
these
smaller
residences
on
smaller
lots
become
the
target
for
people
with
more
modest
income,
and
that's
who
we're
trying
to
provide
housing
for
no.
I
I
The
zone
you've
asked
for
is
the
only
tool
to
get
to
40
units,
but
it's
not
the
only
tool
in
the
toolbox.
R1M
would
get
you
to
35
and
there's
a
better
argument
that
that's
compatible
with
the
existing
zoning
and
development,
and
you
we're
going
to
hear
testimony
later
from
from
many
concerned.
Citizens
who
are
going
to
say
this
particularly
this
last
five
units
is
a
leap
too
far,
because
it's
not
compatible.
Q
H
Well,
I
guess
I'll
return
to
my
original
comment,
which
is
compatibility,
is
not
the
same
as
the
same
and
the
opportunity
to
consolidate
multiple
parcels
and
actually
do
a
project.
That's
designed
and
intended
is
so
rare
that
maximizing
the
potential
the
site,
I
think,
justifies
the
additional
units
if
you're
standing
out
on
the
street
looking
at
the
site-
and
you
don't
know
how
many
units
are
there,
I'm
not
sure
that
you
would
know
the
difference
between
35
and
40..
So
I
hope
that
answers
your
question.
J
Mayor
quick
question
kind
of
related,
I
guess
when
you
were
exploring
this
piece
of
property,
did
you
consider
our
1m
35
units?
Was
that
a
consideration,
and
then
it
was
just
it
wasn't
going
to
be
possible
to
make
that
happen,
or
is
the
goal
to
get
those
additional
five
units
to
add
that
housing
inventory
stock?
H
Madam
mayor
councilman,
if
you
look
at
the
vicinity
of
this
site,
it
has
a
very
heavy
load
of
skinny
houses
and
the
density
between
those
substantial
groups.
There's
one
that's
12
to
the
south
and
west
of
us
by
maybe
half
a
block.
H
The
the
density
that
we're
asking
for
is
essentially
in
the
neighborhood
already
again.
The
difference
between
a
run
of
skinny
homes
and
a
planned
development
is
that
the
skinny
homes
aren't
governed
by
hoas.
They
don't
have
unified,
exterior
maintenance
requirements,
they
don't
they
don't
have
someone
taking
care
of
the
landscaping
that
kind
of
thing.
So
we
did
look
at
r1m.
H
I
did
a
project
on
longmont
that
had
an
r1m
zone
and
I
normally
I
don't
like
to
bring
up
economics,
but
this
site
has
got
some
serious
demo
work,
that's
going
to
have
to
be
done
and
it's
not
a
very
attractive
site.
I
mean
it's
actually
quite
unattractive
and
in
order
for
the
developer
builder
community
to
step
forward
and
try
to
help
the
city
implement
their
objectives,
you
have
to
be
able
to
pencil
things.
H
It's
not
the
lower
densities
and
it's
not
the
extremely
high
density.
So
we
tailored
it
with
the
development
agreement
request
to
make
it
consistent
with
the
neighborhood
to
the
best
of
our
ability.
D
E
D
Yes,
thank
you
so,
along
the
lines
of
some
of
my
questions
earlier
thinking
about
ways
to
achieve
the
things
you
talked
about:
the
affordable
housing,
the
kind
of
density
that
will
support
residential
or
retail,
uses
the
ability
to
design
this
in
a
way
that
makes
it
compatible
and
also
ensures
that
it
will
be
taken
care
of
the
part
that
seems
missing
to
me
and
maybe
part
of
what.
L
D
How
do
you
achieve
this
density
in
a
way
that
might
be
more
acceptable,
more
more
incompatible?
I
agree
with
your
compatibility
is
not
the
same
but
acceptable,
as
this
seems
like
more
of
what
I
already
see
around
my
neighborhood
or
what
I
desire
for
my
neighborhood
and
not
just
a
another
townhome
development
where
everything's
the
same.
H
Understood,
madam
mayor
councilwoman,
I'm
not
exactly
sure
how
to
answer
that.
Of
course,
when
you,
when
your
architect
has
to
design
a
multiple
set
of
floor
plans
and
elevations,
then
then
the
cost
goes
up
and
with
workforce
housing
that
missing
middle,
it
becomes
a
real
small
hole
that
you're
trying
to
thread.
So
I
understand
that
some
of
that
can
be
done
through
the
design
review
process
and
the
changes
in
materials
and
color,
which
adds
a
more
complex
view
and.
H
I'm
not
sure
I
I'm
not
sure
I
know
how
to
answer
your
question.
I
do
understand
what
you're
asking
for.
I
think
that,
probably,
with
the
exception
of
the
run
of
units
that
will
be
immediately
adjacent
to
palouse,
the
rest
of
them
won't
even
really
be
visible
and
they'll
be
ex.
Everyone
will
see
the
fronts
of
the
buildings
instead
of
the
backs
of
the
buildings
which
we
did
to
make
the
separation
as
far
as
possible
from
property
lines.
H
If
you
have
some
suggestions
on
how
to
do
that,
that
would
enable
us
to
keep
the
project
in
play.
We
would
welcome
them
absolutely.
D
Adam
follow
up,
if
I
might
so
a
couple
of
more
technical
questions.
As
I
look
at
the
potential
layout
and
site
plan,
I
see
some
things
that
I
mean
I
I
believe
I
understand
what
you're
trying
to
do,
but
you
have
sidewalks,
I'm
assuming
or
maybe
they're
just
aprons
along
the
backs
of
the
garages,
and
yet
you
have
a
26
foot
service
lane
which
ends
up
being
36
foot
from
back
of
garage
to
back
of
garage,
and
it
seems
like
that's
enough
that
could
be
reduced
and
in
reducing
it
you
could
increase
the
green
space.
D
I
see
you
treating
the
back
of
the
property
as
if
it's
front
yards
facing
on
the
backyards,
rather
than
those
back
the
ones
to
the
south,
maybe
treating
them
as
garage
loaded
with
the
backyard
being
the
backyard
and
allowing
backyards
to
back
onto
each
other,
which
might
make
it
more
compatible
with
such
a
small
site
having
having
sidewalks
across
each
of
the.
H
Mayor
councilwoman,
those
are
three
great
ideas,
yeah
that
we
would
be
happy
to
implement,
so
what
we
were
trying
to
do.
Of
course,
this
is
was
all
conceptual,
but
we
didn't
want
to
just
show
up
with
a
rezone
application.
H
We
thought
that
it
was
incumbent
on
us
to
at
least
provide
you
with
some
idea
of
what
was
being
looked
at
in
terms
of
the
development
plan,
so
reducing
that
dry
vial
would
be
great.
The
fire
department
requires
26
feet
so
as
long
as
we're
keeping
ramon
or
romeo
gervais
happy
we're
good.
With
that
doing,
the
backyard
to
backyard
is
a
fine
idea.
H
We
rotated
the
buildings
thinking
that
we
would
be
making
it
better
for
the
neighbors,
but
if
you
think
that
spinning
those
back
around
and
doing
backyard
to
backyard
is
a
better
idea,
absolutely
no
problem
with
that
and
then
modifying
the
sidewalk
and
pedestrian
circulation.
It's
another
great
idea,
we'd
be
happy
to
look
at
that
and
and
so
that
a
pud
and
design
review
process
these
in
this
information
can
be
included
in
the
development
agreement.
H
If
you
like,
and
we'll
we'll
reapproach
the
site
design
and
implement
those
ideas,
I
don't
think
there's
any
problem
with
any
of
that.
We'd
be
happy
to
go
along
with
it.
You
kind
of
work
in
the
dark
when
you
propose
something
like
that,
and
you
think
you
know
what
might
make
people
happy
so
you
do
it
and
it's
not
always
the
right
idea.
So,
thanks
for
the
right
ideas,
thank
you.
A
L
A
Okay,
we'll
go
ahead
and
pick
up
where
we
left
off,
which,
in
advance
of
the
nate
of
residence
speaking,
we
have
a
statement
that
will
be
read.
The
neighborhood
association
was
not
able
to
attend
tonight,
so
they
provided
staff
with
a
letter
if
I'm
correct,
slain
that
you're
reading
on
their
behalf.
Yes,
madam
mayor,
great,
that's
correct,
and
if
you'll
just
also
include
you
probably
already
are
then
the
neighborhood
association
name
or
any
contact
information.
Q
Yeah,
I
believe
they
just
signed
it
as
board
of
directors,
just
a
neighborhood
association,
so
the
vista
vista
neighborhood
association
would
like
to
officially
oppose
the
proposed
development
has
proposed.
We
feel
this
development
is
incompatible
for
our
neighborhood.
Due
to
the
following
reasons.
Q
This
proposed
up
zone
would
be
from
r1c
8
units
per
acre
to
lod
43.5
units
per
acre.
This
is
a
large
jump
in
density
in
an
area
surrounded
by
the
r1c
zone.
There
is
no
precedent
for
this
amount
of
density.
In
our
neighborhood
number
two,
the
zoning
code
states,
the
lod
is
a
zone
intended
to
accommodate
office
space
in
locations
that
are
served
by
primary
roadways,
but
that
are
inappropriate
for
commercial
development
because
of
the
approximate
proximity
to
residential
uses.
Q
None
of
the
above
mentioned
is
applicable
in
the
case
of
the
proposed
units
on
palouse
street.
The
proposed
development
is
not
adjacent
to
an
artillery,
roadway
or
adjacent
to
medium
or
high
density.
Housing
number
three
has
designed
the
units
do
not
fit
the
design
aesthetic
of
the
established
neighborhood.
Q
There
are
no
other
row
homes
or
three-story
dwellings
in
the
surrounding
vicinity.
Number
four.
As
designed,
we
feel
there
is
inadequate
parking.
We
feel
seven
visitor
spots
for
43
units
is
not
reasonable.
Additionally,
one
ada
parking
spot
is
not
sufficient
and,
lastly,
number
five
with
proposed
density
of
this
magnitude,
we
would
expect
more
green
space
and
or
amenities
as
designed.
There
is
no
open
space,
very
limited,
green
space,
no
designated
pet
area
and
no
playground
or
pool.
We
feel
this
is
insufficient
for
the
proposed
40
units.
Q
The
vista
neighborhood
association
does
not
support
upzoning,
the
property
or
sorry.
It
does
support
upzoning
the
property
to
r2
14.5
units
per
acre.
This
would
allow
a
total
of
32
units
with
the
above
mentioned
amenities.
We
feel
this
option
is
more
in
line
with
our
established
neighborhood.
Thank
you
sincerely.
The
board
of
directors,
vista
neighborhood
association.
A
S
S
Okay,
madame
mayor
and
members
of
the
city
council,
first
of
all,
my
name
is
sue
shepherdson
and,
along
with
my
husband
mark,
we
have
lived
at
2702
palouse
for
45
years.
S
I
have
lived
in
boise
my
whole
life.
I
appreciate
you
guys
and
and
what
you
do
for
this
city.
S
S
S
S
The
traffic
impact
on
pollution,
abs
would
be
severe
and
possibly
unsafe,
as
ab
street
doesn't
even
have
sidewalks.
We
do
not
have
any
problem
with
new
housing
being
built
on
this
property
that
complies
with
the
current
r1
zoning.
We
need
to
have
more
affordable
housing,
but
not
apartments
that
will
be
owned
by
investors
instead
of
individual
home
owners.
S
T
Madam
mayor
members
of
city
council,
I'm
mark
shepherdson
and
I
reside
at
2702
west
palooza.
I've
been
there
for
45
years
sure,
sorry,
first
day
anyway,
I'm
opposed
to
the
to
the
jump
in
zoning.
I
could
support
r2
zoning
as
proposed
by
planning
and
zoning
for
that
area,
with
a
reduced
density
from
40
down
to
30
units.
T
Look,
you
look
at
the
area
and
it's
a
small
area
and
it's
internal
to
a
neighborhood
and
it's
surrounded
by
houses,
all
blue
street
up
and
down
this
blues,
or
just
single
family
homes
and
older
homes.
In
fact,
what
on
this
piece
of
property
there's
going
to
be
three
homes
that
have
to
be
demolished?
They've,
been
there
they're
pretty
nice
homes
with
this
plan
which
will
change
the
look
of
the
neighborhood,
but
you're
going
to
have
change.
T
Blue
street,
like
they
say,
is,
is
500
feet
to
vista
street,
but
there's
no
stop
light
on
flush
and
vista
down
on
canelo
street,
where
we
showed
the
all
the
homes
and
apartments
there's
there's
a
stoplight
on
canal
and
vista
for
people
to
get
in
out
of
canelo
street
and
get
in
and
out
of
that
area
and
there's
a
lot
of
those
types
of
three-story
apartments
down
there
on
blue
street.
I
know
from
vista,
I
think,
going
east
or
west
on
vista.
I
don't
know
of
anything
like
this
there.
T
So
it's
to
me,
40
units
in
there
35
feet
tall
on
on
the
face
of
vista
street,
is
pretty
incompatible
to
the
neighborhood
it.
It
just
doesn't
fit
that
many.
I
just
think
it'd
be
overbuilt,
regardless
of
the
fact.
If
there's
a
lot
of
demolition
to
do
on
that
side
or
not,
I
don't
think
that
should
be
a
consideration
for
how
it
should
be
zoned.
T
I
think
the
consideration
be
zoned
for
what
we
can
do
to
improve
density,
but
also
how
it's
going
to
impact
our
neighborhood
and
our
homes
in
that
area,
and
I
think
this
40
40
units
in
there
will
have
quite
a
bit
of
negative
impact
with
with
almost
overbuilt
people
on
top
of
people
and
parking
and
cars.
I
mean
just
to
me
it
just
it's.
Just
a
little
overwhelming.
T
L
U
U
So,
madame
mayor
and
distinguished
council
members,
families
moved
to
boise
because
it's
a
place
to
live
where
streets
are
safe
for
children
to
walk
to
school
and
where
they
have
a
space
to
breathe
and
a
space
to
call
home.
The
existing
zoning
of
this
neighborhood
allows
us
to
still
be
possible
even
with
an
r2.
It
would
allow
it
to
be
possible.
U
There
simply
isn't
the
infrastructure
to
allow
this
area
of
the
bench
to
support
the
rezoning
to
lo.
Nor
is
it
prudent
to
do
so.
Three
zoning,
if
approved,
would
allow
for
43.5
per
units
per
acre.
I
am
we're
well
we're
well
aware
of
the
building
proposal,
but
rezoning
would
allow
carte
blanc
to
the
developers
to
increase
the
size
of
this
project
as
they
see
fit.
U
The
neighborhood
has
an
infrastructure
to
support
the
current
r1
zoning.
If
rezoned
to
lo,
there
would
be
a
significant
increase
in
traffic
on
a
non-primary
roadway,
not
to
mention
that
both
abs
and
blue
streets
have
areas
of
unimproved
pedestrian
walkways
I.e,
there
are
no
sidewalks
rezoning
would
create
a
public
safety
issue
due
to
the
increase
of
traffic
for
pedestrians
and
school
children
alike,
walking
down
abs
and
blue
street.
Additionally,
the
project
of
the
size
doesn't
fit
with
the
existing
neighborhood
on
palouse
street,
from
columbus
to
roosevelt
street.
There
are
no
infills
or
town
homes.
U
U
These
are
my
neighbors
to
the
right
and
left
of
me.
The
white
house
is
the
shepherd
sense,
and
the
the
to
to
the
other
side
of
me
is
my
other
neighbor
john
who's.
Not
here.
These
are
older,
well-maintained
homes.
With
large
setbacks,
there
are
no
other
infills
or
town
homes.
U
This
is
the
view
from
the
front
of
my
property
across
to
the
proposed
rezoning
project.
Note
the
current
property
setbacks
on
that
with
those
three
houses
there
isn't
an
infill
or
apartment
complex
in
sight,.
U
U
And
that
would
be
the
approximate
size
of
the
units
that
are
proposed,
not
at
all
fitting
with
the
current
neighborhood.
If
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
please
I
lived
in
this
home
for
nine
years.
Exactly
today
when
looking
for
a
home,
I
didn't
want
to
live
in
a
town
house
and
I
certainly
didn't
want
to
live
across
from
one.
I
wanted
a
small
home
with
a
space
to
call
my
own.
I
want
that
same
for
others.
U
U
U
It's
not
the
duty
of
the
city
of
boise
to
ensure
that
investors
and
developers
make
money.
It
is
the
duty
rather
to
look
out
for
the
future
of
boise
and
those
that
call
boise
home.
I
would
also
like
to
mention
that
the
vista
neighborhood
association
is
opposed
to
this
rezoning.
It
was
unanimously
rejected
by
the
planning
and
zoning
commission.
U
A
Okay-
and
I
confirmed
that
the
the
other
resident
the
woman
in
the
back
in
the
room
is
not
testifying
on
this
great.
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
was
still
the
case
and
now
we'll
see.
I
know
that
dave
kangas
is
online,
but
first
I
had.
I
have
a
list
dave.
I
guess
you're
probably
listening.
Natasha
was
on
that
list.
Molly
mcdonald
was
first
on
the
list,
so
we'll
start
with
molly.
If
she's
here.
A
Okay,
so
dave
you're
next
on
the
list.
Welcome
dave.
V
A
V
C
V
Sorry
about
that,
I
I
had
represented
the
neighborhood
association
with
planning
and
the
planning
and
zoning
hearing,
but
I
resigned
in
between
and
I
had
requested
to
represent
the
neighborhood
association
on
this
hearing,
but
that
was
denied
by
the
board.
V
I
admittedly
oppose
this
rezone
because
it
just
doesn't
fit
it's
an
island
of
r1c
in
a
unique
part
of
the
neighborhood
that
we
should
really
hold
out
for
something
special
that
when
you
look
at
the
development
you
can
go,
wow,
that's
cool,
they
put
some
work
into
it,
they
got
creative
and
they
created
something.
Special
that'll
enhance
the
neighborhood.
V
We
there
is
a
similar
project
on
canal
of
24,
three-story
town
homes
that
promote
affordable,
single-family
living,
but
all
of
those
units
are
being
sold
by
building,
not
a
single
one
will
come
up
for
sale
and
looking
at
the
design
of
this
and
the
request
by
the
developer
for
seven
six
plexes,
I
have
a
feeling
this
product
will
be
sold
before
they
even
break
ground.
V
V
It
seems
that
staff
and
the
developer
key
on
skinny
homes,
which,
thanks
to
design
review
standards,
skinny
homes,
are
gorgeous
homes.
They
vary.
They
look
different
they're,
not
a
wall
of
identical
homes
that
you
look
at,
that
you
might
get
confused
coming
home
at
two
in
the
morning,
which
one
is
yours.
V
These
people
have
poured
their
heart
and
soul
into
these
homes
surrounding
the
neighborhood.
They
look
great
with
everybody
moving
here
to
the
valley
with
the
demand
people
are
putting
money
into
neighborhoods
like
this.
This
kind
of
development
will
cause
people
across
the
street
and
surrounding
it
to
move,
because
that's
not
what
they
bought
into.
V
V
Okay,
that
really
it
just
doesn't
fit.
The
neighborhood
is
nice,
and
upcoming
people
have
poured
their
heart
and
soul
into
it.
Palouse
shoshone,
lemhi,
the
whole
neighborhood
is
improving.
This
will
this
be
a
back
step,
say
no,
have
the
developer
go
back
to
the
drawing
board
and
come
up
with
something
creative
with
character.
W
All
right,
hello,
my
name
is
jennifer
barnett
1951
south
ab
street
in
boise
tonight,
I'm
asking
the
mayor
and
city
council
to
deny
tradewind's
proposed
rezone
to
lo
or
limited
office
on
west
coast.
This
zoning
is
unprecedented
in
this
neighborhood.
It
is
apparent
that
profit
is
driving
this
developer's
appeal
after
they
were
unanimously
denied
by
planning
and
zoning
and
after
being
adamantly
opposed
by
the
vista
neighborhood
association.
W
W
This
rezone
and
development
lacks
long-term
planning
and
regard
for
the
people
living
in
the
surrounding
homes
by
adding
overwhelming
density
under
the
pretense
of
more
affordable
housing
availability
for
new
renters
and
first-time
homeowners
looking
to
buy
in
boise,
based
on
their
proposed
square
footage.
These
units
will
not
be
affordable
by
definition,
while
changes
needed
in
boise's
housing
availability.
W
In
this
case,
the
rezone
and
planned
development
does
not
fit
the
city's
definition
of
predictable
development
in
the
comp
plan,
it
is
not
compatible
with
the
existing
neighborhood
in
design
or
in
density.
This
development
offers
no
connectivity
to
other
areas
and
does
not
fit
in
with
the
exterior
look
or
character
of
the
surrounding
homes,
all
zoned
r1c.
W
These
are
not
arterial
roads
here.
This
is
not
vista
or
overland
that
might
but
better
support
a
development
like
this
with
mixoni.
These
are
residential
side
streets
lined
with
well-maintained
single-family
homes,
west
palouse
and
south
abs
simply
cannot
support
the
type
of
congestion
that
an
added
160,
plus
car
trips
coming
and
going
into
the
same
entrance
and
exit
every
day
would
bring.
There
is
not
adequate
infrastructure
on
these
streets.
There
is
no
existing
crosswalks
or
stoplights
anywhere
near
this
property
to
safely
manage
the
increased
traffic.
This
rezone
would
bring.
W
There
are
not
even
existing
sidewalks
for
pedestrians
to
safely
walk
along
portions
of
these
roads,
leaving
children
living
in
the
neighborhood
who
are
not
provided
city
busing
to
school
good
morning
because
of
the
one
mile
proximity
to
whitney
elementary
to
walk
or
ride
their
bikes
around
cars
parked
on
these
streets.
This
issue
would
be
made
worse
by
approving
this
rezone,
going
against
the
city's
safe
routes
to
school
program.
A
A
C
C
X
X
Am
I
unmuted
now?
Yes,
we
can
hear
you
now.
Okay,
I
first
want
to
ask:
I
didn't
testify
at
the
planning
and
zoning,
so
am
I
eligible
to
speak
here
tonight.
A
X
Okay,
all
right,
my
name
is
julie
hawley.
I
live
at
3707,
nez
perce
in
boise,
idaho,
in
the
vista
neighborhood
association
area.
Can
you
see
me.
A
X
All
right,
so
I
wish
I
had
a
better
understanding
of
the
tricks
of
the
trade
for
development,
but
I
will
say
what
I
will
say
on
the
application
previous
to
this
one,
which
was
car
21,
triple
zero
11
for
18
33
vanell,
your
planner
said
they
cannot
support
variance
requirements
to
perimeter
setbacks,
as
this
is
new
construction
that
they
would
have
to
demonstrate
hardships
or
unique
circumstances.
X
This
is
a
reason
on
on
the
planning
and
zoning
hearing
transcripts,
page
3
line
7,
it
says
development
agreement
to
which
proposal
is
tied
is
for
19.2
places
per
acre
and
then
continuing
on
page
3
line
17.
It
says
there
is
no
planned
unit
development
before
you
tonight.
X
There's
been
a
lot
of
talk
about
the
property
and
what
the
buildings
may
or
may
not
look
like,
but
why
are
we
taking
up
a
rezone
time
to
talk
about
some,
possibly
foregone
conclusion
that
it
is
been
rezoned?
It
has
not
on
page
four
of
line
on
page
four
line.
Twelve
of
that
same
document,
pnz
says:
while
planning
is
generally
non-supported
by
ovaries
zoning
and
they
go
on
to
say
some
other
things,
but
planning
usually
doesn't
do
re-zones
now.
I
I
also
have
some
documents.
X
I
don't
know
if
I'm
going
to
have
time
to
share
them
with
you
and
I'm
a
little
awkward
at
this.
But
there
was
a
planning
and
development
services
pre-application
conference
in
this
in
this
packet,
and
it
is
not
for
the
address
we're
talking
about.
It
is
for
2836
lamb,
high,
a
a
parcel
of
0.49
acres,
and
then
this
has
evolved
to
be
a
a
different
conversation
about
two
something
acres
and
what
might
be
built
on
it.
But
we
haven't
even
gotten
past
whether
you
can
rezone
it
or
not.
X
Zoning
is
there
to
protect
the
neighborhoods.
As
far
as
compatibility
goes.
This
plan
that
we
shouldn't
even
talk
about
is
not
compatible
to
maintain
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
would
be
to
build
eight
buildings
of
the
r1c
designation
and
make
it
beautiful
everybody
would
say
yeah.
Let's
absolutely
do
that,
I
don't
think
you'd
have
any
objections
and
you
wouldn't
have
to
do
what
I'm
saying
as
a
spot
reason.
X
One
of
them
was
sold
for
489
thousand
dollars
and
one
for
781
thousand
dollars.
I
have
those
deeds
here.
I
wish
I
could
show
them
to
you,
I'm
just
not
as
prepared
as
I
need
to
be,
maybe
right
here.
X
A
I'm
sorry
you
didn't
hear
me
about
a
minute
a
minute
ago.
You
have
gone
over
your
time
and
I
just
needed
you
to
wrap
up
with
your
final
sentence.
X
X
I
I
take
it
from
your
last
comment
that
part
of
your
concern
is
that
when
these
you
know
when
the
development
is
actually
built,
it
won't
be
affordable,
and
that
was
a
concern
that
I
think
the
first
person
testified
to
today,
and
so
my
question
to
you
is:
if
this
developer
made
a
voluntary
commitment
to
keep
a
certain
number
of
the
units,
affordable,
say,
five
percent
or
whatever
it
is.
Is
that
something
that
would
change
your
thinking
on
this
issue?.
X
X
X
A
Great
we're
actually,
the
applicant
does
have
a
rebuttal,
then,
after
that
we'll
check
on
questions
for
staff
and
then
close.
The
hearing.
Y
Good,
madame
era
and
council
members,
steve
martinez,
9165,
west
state
street
boise,
idaho
83714-
I
just
would
like
to
I
do
appreciate
all
the
comments
both
on
the
for
and
again
side
of
this.
I
appreciate,
I
think
we,
as
a
developer
builder
in
the
valley,
are
trying
to
solve
a
an
issue.
I
think
affordability
is
an
issue
where
we
put
certain
housing
stock
is
an
issue,
the
zoning,
the
layout
one
of
the
things
I
think,
we're
in
very
unprecedented
times,
with
affordability
across
the
whole
valley
report.
Y
After
report
after
report
keeps
coming
out
and
it's
all
a
negative
side
of
things,
and
so
we
really
are
trying
to
work
together
with
all
of
the
stakeholders
to
come
up
with
a
product
that
is
going
to
work
in
this
for
everyone
and
part
of
the
problem
that
we
have.
When
we
first
looked
at
this
property,
we
actually
had
the
density
a
lot
higher
and
we
started
laying
it
out.
We
started
putting
dry
vials
in
and
fire
access,
and
how
do
we
get
to
certain
parts
and
pieces?
Y
We
haven't
finalized
that
I
want
people
to
know
that
I
think
there's
been
a
lot
of
concern
of
layout
and
you
know
open
space
and
garage
space
and
drive
isles.
Those
things
will
be
ironed
out
and
you
guys
will
all
have
an
opportunity
to
weigh
in
on
that,
but
we
have
to
get
the
ball
rolling
with
the
zoning.
Y
The
ello
part
of
this
really
was
the
tool
in
which
we
could
use
in
going
and
buying.
So
many
parcels
we've
done
a
ton
of
skinny
homes
in
the
valley,
specifically
in
boise,
and
I
kind
of
would
disagree
with
mr
kangas
statement
that
those
are
good
looking
homes
there
are
sev.
Y
I've
worked
with
several
staff
here
at
the
city
on
all
the
issues
associated
with
those
and
we've
tried
to
make
the
ones
that
we've
provided
to
the
city,
something
that
we
can
be
proud
of,
that
we
can
put
our
name
on
that.
Don't
that
aren't
an
eyesore
five
years,
ten
years
twenty
years
from
now
that
we're
not
stacking
five
bedrooms
in
each
unit
and
just
trying
to
get
bedroom
counts,
and
so
I
would
just
like
to
state
both
for
the
neighbors.
Y
Obviously,
for
this
group
here
you
know
this
is
our
41st
year
building
we
are
born
and
raised
in
this
valley.
We
have
a
vested
interest
in
the
the
name
and
reputation
of
the
product
that
we
put
in
this
valley,
and
so
we
aren't
here-
and
I
appreciated
the
comments
about
the
economics
of
the
project.
Y
But
that
is
a
side
note,
and
I
don't
want
anybody
thinking
that
economics
is
the
sole
driver
of
why
we're
asking
for
a
rezone,
because
that
is
not
a
deciding
factor
for
you
guys
to
be
looking
at,
so
I
am
kind
of
rambling
on
I
just
want
like
I
said
I
want
to
let
everybody
know
that
we
still
have
time
in
this
process
to
iron
out
the
details,
love
the
comments.
I
think
those
are
things
that
we
want
to
take.
I've
met
with
several
neighbors.
Y
I
want
to
take
those
comments
and
implement
them
into
the
project.
Again,
we
take
great
pride
in
our
name
and
our
reputation,
and
it's
kind
of
been
insinuated
that
it's
you
know
the
profit
is
driving
this
and
we're
just
not
driven
by
that.
That
is
something
that
obviously,
as
a
business,
we
want
to
be
profitable,
but
I
think
our
name
and
reputation
would
say
otherwise.
So
anyway,
I
will
stand
for
questions.
D
Y
L
D
Thanks
steve
thanks
for
your
testimony
so
question
when
you
started
this
process,
I
doubt
that
our
affordability,
incentive
ordinance
was
in
place,
and
I
wonder
if
you
thought
about
using
it.
I
think
part
of
part
of
the
concerns
we
heard
tonight,
despite
the
fact
that
at
least
one
person
said,
affordability
wouldn't
make
a
difference,
is
about
affordability
and
wondered
if
you'd
thought
about
trying
somehow
to
make
affordability
a
part
of
this
project
and
and
in
the
case
of
our
incentive
ordinance,
you
could
probably
use
an
r2
and
get
to
the
40
units.
Y
So
councilwoman
and
madam
mayor,
I
have
talked
to
andrea
tuning
at
great
length,
even
as
we
were
talking
about
the
affordable
housing
discussions
way
before
it
was
implemented.
The
problem
is,
it's
not
an
allowed
use
in
the
r2
zone,
so
she-
and
I
talked
about
that
and
you
are
not
allowed
to
up
zone
in
an
r2.
I
I
thought
the
same
thing.
Y
I
called
her
and
talked
to
her
after
p
and
z,
and
I
said
oh,
my
gosh,
please
help
me,
you
know
this
is
let's
talk
about
how
we
can
make
this
project
viable,
and
so
I
did
look
into
that.
I
thought
it
was
a
great
opportunity
to
be
able
to
use
that
new
ordinance.
I
talked
to
her
months
in
advance
of
instituting
the
ordinance
of
trying
to
find
a
way.
So
it's
the
long
island.
D
I
appreciate
you
reminding
me
that
we
we
did
take
the
r2
out
of
it
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
but
but
recognizing
that
we
were
probably
going
to
lose
some
some
projects
as
a
result.
So
I
guess
then
you
know
to
follow
up
on
that.
Is
there
any
other
tool
that
you
thought
of
to
ensure
that
some
of
these
units
would
remain
affordable.
Y
Yeah
councilwoman
and
madam
mayor,
we
actually
so
part
of
this
project
does
front
onto
lemhi
and
we
looked
at
product
types,
I'm
going
to
tell
you
this
there's
a
struggle
with
direction,
and
I
I
don't
want
to
put
anybody
on
the
spot
tonight,
but
I
think
direction
from
the
city
has
been
a
struggle
for
us.
As
we've
sat
down
with
the
city,
I
feel
like
we've
been
given
some
direction
and
when
we
come
back,
I
feel
like
it's
we're,
given
almost
the
opposite
direction.
I
think
we've
got
a
lot
of
tiptoeing
on
this.
Y
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
un
we're
just
trying
we're
trying
to
get
a
solid
answer
from
the
city
on
what
direction
we
should
head
with
this,
and
I
think
this
our
struggle
is.
We've
we've
been
given
a
lot
of
like,
I
said,
a
lot
of
different
direction
on
this,
and
people
have
changed
and
seats
have
changed
and
anyway
it
has
been
a
little
struggle
there.
So.
Y
D
Y
D
Adamira
yes,
process
questions,
so
this
is
a
re-zone.
It's
a
recommendation
from
the
planning
and
zoning
commission.
It's
not
a
decision.
D
So
this
really
is
the
decision
I
mean
this
is
the
first
time
it's
actually
a
decision,
just
wondering
if
there's
any
possibility
that
further
discussion
about
some
of
the
items
that
came
up
tonight
before
a
decision
was
made,
might
might
be
fruitful
in
finding
some
assurance
that
people
would
feel
better
about
the
the
solution,
and
I
yeah
I
don't
know
if
you
can
answer
that,
but
but
just
trying
to
trying
to
figure
out
you
know
what
what.
L
Q
Madam
mayor
council,
president
clegg,
you
can
certainly
defer
this
evening
and
provide
the
applicant
feedback
for
some
redesigns
for
that
specific
site
plan
that
would
be
associated
with
the
development
agreement.
Q
You
can
add
conditions
tonight
or
you
could
if
there
is
an
agreement
amongst
the
council,
you
could
deny
tonight
with
that
feedback
and
showing
support
with
a
different
zoning
district
follow
up.
If
I.
D
Might
bless
you
so
either
way
it's
it's
our
job
to
give
further
direction
unless
we're
willing
to
approve
it,
as
is.
K
Madam
mayor
yeah
saline
so
I
just
as
I
understand
that
we
can't
approve
a
lower
density
zoning
and
that
that
that
they're
not
pursuing.
Q
Madam
mayor
council
member
thompson,
that's
for
legal,
I'm
looking
over
at
legal!
I
don't!
I
don't
think
you
can.
A
I
would
I
would
suggest,
rather
than
asking
legal
from
the
bench
that
if
there
are
questions
related
to
this,
then
looking
at
a
deferral,
while
that
could
be
ascertained
would
be
more
prudent.
We
we
try
not
to
have
our
attorney
weigh
in
on
legal
matters
on
the
public
record.
Those
are
attorney-client
conversations
vladimir.
J
Yeah
celine
I've
got
a
question
here
and
it's
really
just
about
the
definition
of
of
ello.
So
when
I'm
reading
it
exactly,
it
does,
and
somebody
brought
this
up
earlier-
a
zone
intended
to
accommodate
office
space
in
locations
that
are
served
by
primary
roadways,
but
are
inappropriate
for
commercial
development
because
of
the
proximity
to
residential
uses.
The
zone
conditionally
allows
up
to
43.5
units
per
acre
at
a
maximum
of
45
feet
of
height.
Q
Madam
mayor
council,
member
holly
burton
we
we
do
not
usually
rezone
to
office
for
residential
use.
I
will
say,
however,
many
of
our
office
zones
we've
been
seeing
is
with
planned
unit
developments
conditional
use
permits,
which
usually
don't
come
before
the
council.
Q
They
usually
go
to
planning
and
zoning
commission
and,
in
fact,
the
same
night
that
this
was
heard
by
planning
and
zoning
commission.
There
was
an
lozone
property
on
overland
that
was
approved
with
a
pud
for
multi-family,
where
I
I
believe
that
was
town
homes.
Actually,
overland
is
an
arterial,
so
definitely
different
area
where
this
is
certainly
more
internal
to
the
neighborhood.
J
Metamer
follow-up,
so
just
to
make
sure
that
I'm
understanding
that
correctly,
it's
not
uncommon
if
something's
already
zoned
lo
for
us
to
incorporate
residential
use
into
it.
But
it
is
relatively
uncommon
for
us
to
rezone
something
to
lo
and
then
incorporate
residential
use
into
it.
Is
that
correct.
Q
Yes,
that
is
correct.
I
would
say,
though,
that
our
our
code
is
dated
and
we
are
in
the
process
of
updating
it
and
so
we're
still
working
in
the
combines
of
of
the
development
code.
It's
just
not
maybe
as
predictable
as
you
would
have
seen
it.
You
know
10
20
years
ago.
D
Q
As
it
can
as
a
conditional
use
within
the
zone
and
that's
what
would
be
required
of
the
applicant
if
this
rezone
was
approved
tonight,
there
would
be
a
plan
unit
development
required
and
if
they
couldn't
meet
the
dimensional
standards,
then
they
would
ask
for
waivers
in
that
plan
unit
development
and
if
they
want
to
subdivide
it,
then
a
subdivision
as
well.
Q
And
I
will
note
council
president
clegg,
you
mentioned
the
activity
or
the
affordable
housing
bonus
earlier,
that
is
allowed
in
the
lo
zone,
but
not
in
r2.
D
Q
Council
president
clegg,
that
is,
that
was
the
point,
is
to
incentivize
more
housing,
and
you
know
on
you
know,
have
unlimited
density
parking
reductions
increase
to
height.
We
would
essentially
be
capping
all
of
that
with
a
development
agreement
attached,
but
I
did
want
to
just
make
that
aware.
Make
you
aware
that
that
that
bonus
is
allowed
in
the
yellow
zone.
D
Vladimir,
I'm
not
sure
I'm
ready
to
make
a
motion
yet,
but
I
would
like
to
make
some
comments.
I
you
know
we're
arguing
tonight
over
five
units.
Essentially,
you
could
get
35
units
with
an
r1m
which
is
a
residential
zone
allowed
in
this
land
use
designation.
D
And
you
know
a
lot
of
here.
What
we
hear
tonight
is
that
it
will
be
out
of
step
with
what
exists
in
the
neighborhood
today
and
because
of
that
it
would
be
undesirable.
D
On
the
other
hand,
this
is
an
area,
that's
zoned
residential,
says,
compact,
residential
and
we're
attempting
to
use
a
zone
that
isn't,
while
residential
is
permissible,
that
isn't
designed
for
residential
in
part,
we're
trying
to
do
that,
because
our
zoning
code
frankly
is
deplorably
out
of
date
and
needs
updated,
and
we
don't
have
a
zone
that
that
offers
what
we
might
like
to
see
in
this
area.
D
On
the
third
hand,
we
have
a
development
that,
while
each
of
the
buildings
may
be
very
nice,
doesn't
do
much
to
nod
to
the
neighborhood
in
terms
of
say,
stepping
down
the
front
yards
of
the
very
front
buildings
or
making
some
accommodation
to
show
the
neighborhood
that
it's
not
just
all
the
same
building.
D
D
I
We
have
a
project
here,
that's
right
on
the
edge
in
a
lot
of
ways,
it's
right
on
the
edge
of
the
permitted
density,
it's
right
on
the
edge
of
the
zone,
that's
being
asked
for
it's
stretching
to
accomplish
some
goals
and
we
have
a
developer
who's
indicated
a
real
openness
to
modifying
and
adjusting
the
design
as
they
get
closer
in
that
process
and
so
to
the
council
president's
point.
It
almost
feels
like
a
not
quite
baked
cake,
the
objections
that
we
heard
from
people
testifying
our
concerns.
Well,
the
overwhelming
concern
is
density
period.
I
There
are
two,
you
know
this
is
too
much
for
this
space
and
then
these
ancillary
concerns
about
whether
investors
will
hold
the
property.
Some
people
felt
it
was
ugly.
I
think
that's
an
eye
of
the
beholder
thing,
and
then
affordability
was
a
third
and
so
given
that
we
have
what
feels
like
an
edge
case
here,
and
we
have
uncertainty
about
what
the
final
cake
is
actually
going
to
look
like
it's
very
difficult
to
justify.
I
I
understand
the
process
can
bounce
back
and
forth,
and
but
what
I
wonder
if,
rather
than
going
all
the
way
back
to
the
drawing
board,
rather
than
denying
the
application
outright
and
then
essentially
leaving
this
property
undeveloped
in
any
way
for
some
amount
of
time,
which
is
contrary
to
all
of
our
goals,
if
there's
a
way
that
we
can
defer
our
decision
for
some
period
of
time,
whatever
works
with
the
schedule,
I
don't
know
if
it's
30
days
or
60
or
whatever
fits
in
order
to
have
some
discussions
with
the
developer
or
at
least
get
more
certainty
from
the
developer
about
what
the
deliverables
are.
I
That,
although
what
is
going
to
be
put
here,
may
not
make
everybody
happy,
it
is
at
least
consistent
with
the
pattern
of
development
in
some
clearly
articulable
ways
that
you
can
point
to
in
the
project.
You're
planning
to
build
that
way,
it'll
be
less
of
a
moving
target
and
it'll
be
a
little
bit
less
fear-inducing,
frankly
among
people
who
can't
quite
picture
what's
going
to
land
there.
So
that's
kind
of
my
my
thinking
and
my
thought
is
there
a
way
for
us
to
gain
more
certainty
about?
K
Madame
mayor
yeah,
I
I
think
I
disagree
with
my
colleagues
a
little
I.
I
do
not
think
that
this
project
at
this
zoning
gives
the
neighbors
the
level
of
predictability
that
they
should
exist.
They
should
expect-
and
it
gives
me
concern
that
if
we
approve
this
zoning
here,
then
of
course
it
opens
up
the
the
box
to
do
it
everywhere,
because
then
we've
set
the
standard.
K
I
think
the
density
does
not
match
the
surrounding
area.
I
don't
think
it's
combat
compatible
in
any
way.
I
think
we
have
a
very,
very
good
working.
K
Developer,
though-
and
I
think
that
this
should
come
back-
I
would,
I
would
think
at
r2,
but
I
think
r1m
would
be
possible
if
there
was
some
cleanup
quite
a
bit
of
cleanup.
I
I
just
do
not
believe
that
this
gives
the
neighbors
any
sense
of
reliability
and
predictability
in
what
they
should
expect
from
our
city,
and
so
I
there's
no
way
I'll
support
this
zoning,
regardless
of
what
the
project
looks
like.
J
Madame
air,
so
I'm
not
lined
up
with
anybody
at
this
point,
and
I'm
gonna
explain
my
reasoning
here
and
I
want
to
do
it
in
a
way.
That's
really
really
transparent.
I'm
not
opposed
to
the
density
of
this
project.
J
I
understand
why
people
are
and
living
in
a
place
for
45
years.
This
is
a
big
change
and
I
completely
understand
that
100
percent
I've
been
in
three
meetings
today
about
affordable
housing.
One
had
to
do
with
homelessness,
one
that
had
to
do
with
housing
for
refugees
and
one
that
had
to
do
with
housing
for
non-profit
workers,
and
so
I
know
that
the
inventory
is
needed
and
I
don't
think
that
it's
necessarily
a
bad
place
for
that
inventory.
J
That's
there
and
the
way
that
it's
interpreted
and
there's
no
way
as
a
member
of
this
community,
as
and
as
a
neighbor
that
I
could
read
that
zone
and
really
truly
believe
that
that
was
predictable.
Again,
like
there's
a
there's,
there's
an
r1m,
that's
35
units!
You
know
the
the
density,
isn't
really
the
thing
for
me
here,
because
I'm
fine
with
the
density
it.
J
But
it
is
unpredictable
to
me
if
we
look
at
it
as
an
ello
and
that's
kind
of
a
period
for
me,
and
so
I
don't
think
I
can
be
supportive
of
a
of
a
rezone
or
a
deferral
just
because
I
don't
feel
like
that's
a
path
forward
and
I
do
feel
comfortable
making
a
motion
if
needed.
But
I
would
love
to
hear
other
thoughts
as
well.
F
F
And
then,
after
I
lost
my
home
to
foreclosure
in
the
last
recession,
I
moved
into
a
cute
little
house
like
yours,
that
you
showed
off
of
brockton
and
I
lived
across
the
street
from
I
think
it
was
four
or
five
staggered
tall
skinny
houses,
but
I
think
they're
a
little
bit
more
like
the
product
that
that
you're
building
and
there
were
no
sidewalks,
very
narrow
road,
and
I
have
never
lived
anywhere
with
more
police
activity.
In
the
five
months
that
I
lived
on
broxen
and
I
broke
my
lease.
F
Just
recently
had
a
chat
with
a
friend
who
grew
up
in
mountain
home
met
a
new
family
who
just
moved
to
the
area
and
they
said
where'd,
you
move
from
cuna
why'd,
you
move
from
cuna
it's
too
expensive,
and
so
for
that
reason
I'm
very
torn
too
we
we
need
more
housing,
we
need
it
to
be
affordable,
but
I
also
know
what
happens
when
we
don't
design
our
neighborhoods
in
a
way
that
people
feel
some
ownership
over
them,
and
I
am
a
renter
just
want
to
reiterate
that.
F
F
But
I
agree
with
most
of
my
colleagues
that
I
don't
think
we're
here,
we're
we're
yet
there,
and
that
is
why
we
are
working
on
updating
our
zoning
code,
because
you
know
we're
trying
to
force
cinderella's
foot
into
a
shoe
that
doesn't
really
fit
yet.
So
that's
where
I'm
at
madam
mayor.
G
I'm
actually
ready
to
make
a
motion,
and
I
have
some
reasoning
for
that.
So
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
make
a
motion
and
move
that
we
deny
car
21-12,
which
was
a
rezone
of
approximately
2.23
acres
from
r1c
to
l-o-d-d-a.
T
G
Yes,
thank
you,
and
I
you
know,
like
all
of
my
colleagues,
we
recognize
that
we
need
more
housing
in
boise.
G
G
G
And
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
on
a
comment
that
was
made
earlier,
that
if
we
re-zone
this,
it
just
gives
the
developer
carte
blanche
to
do
whatever
they
want.
This
was
actually
a
rezone
that
had
a
development
agreement
and
design
review.
Those
are
two
more
steps
that
this
project
would
have
had
to
have
gone
through
in
order
to
gain
approval,
so
there
would
have
been
no
carte
blanche.
I
was
not
concerned
about
that
at
all
at
all,
but
I
think
in
addition
and
council,
pro
tem
sanchez
brought
this
up
as
well.
G
This
is
a
lot
of
the
reason
why
we're
rewriting
our
zoning
code
and
our
new
zoning
code
will
be
more
form-based,
and
I
think
that
that
will
really
help
a
lot
of
these
situations.
It'll
create
better
expectations
around
what
we
want
to
see
in
neighborhoods,
as
far
as
the
form
of
buildings
not
necessarily
related
to
residential
density,
but
just
what
we
want
our
neighborhoods
to
look
like
and
feel
like,
so
that
we
can
have
some
predictability
there.
G
N
Q
I
Zoned
l-o-d-d-a,
with
a
development
agreement
limiting
it
to
eight
units
per
acre,
would
effectively
be
r1c
in
many
ways
and
so
to
me,
the
label
or
the
word
on
the
zoning
doesn't
matter.
It's
what's
going
to
be
built
there
and
what
that
about
development
agreement
is
going
to
say,
and
so
it
wasn't
a
hard
stop
for
me.
The
hard
the
the
place
where
I'd
get
to
a
hard
stop
is
a
clear
picture
of
what's
going
in
here,
and
this
is
my
argument
for
deferral.
I
I
think
we
have
a
developer
who's
willing
to
work
with
us
and
who's
willing
to
more
clearly
articulate
what
it's
going
to
look
like
and
feel
like
to
be
on
that
street
or
in
that
development,
and
that
when
we're
talking
about
continuity
or
predictability
or
consistency,
you
know
that's
what
counts.
It's
not
the
words
in
the
zoning
code,
it's
what
we
build,
what
people
buy
and
where
people
live,
and
so
my
argument
for
deferral,
I
think
recognized
your
concerns
that
we
can't
tell
what's
coming
here.
I
D
Madame
yes,
thank
you
because
I'd
have
to
say,
I'm
not
ready
to
support
a
denial
either
and
that's
not
because
I
think
that
this
project
is
ready
to
go
as
is,
but
for
many
of
the
reasons
council
member
of
agent
just
spoke
about,
but
I
think
more
importantly,
for
me,
this
is
an
opportunity
to
really
give
direction
to
the
developer,
and
I
appreciate
the
motion
but
didn't
hear
a
lot
of
direction
in
that
motion
other
than
to
come
back
with
less
density.
D
And
for
me
the
density
really
isn't
the
issue.
The
issue.
As
I
see
it,
is,
as
you
said,
eight
unit
townhome
fronting
on
this
street
without
a
break
without
a
height
transition
with
a
setback.
That's
not
consistent
with
the
rest
of
the
houses
on
the
street
frontage,
a
development
that
proposes
five
buildings
that
are
substantially
the
same
without
any
modulation
or
design
characteristic
differences
is
something
that
is
inconsistent
in
many
ways
with
single-family
neighborhoods
and
the
the
design
eclectic
design
that
most
at
least
older
single-family
neighborhoods
have.
D
D
All
of
those
things
contribute,
I
think,
to
the
things
that
council
member
sanchez
was
talking
about,
which
is
a
lack
of
ownership,
whether
you
own
the
product
or
not,
a
lack
of
ownership
over
where
you
live
in
the
neighborhood.
You
live
in
in
the
way
that
you're
willing
to
act
around
your
neighborhoods
because
of
that
feeling
of
ownership,
and
so
for
me,
the
those
issues
are
the
things
that
I'd
like
to
see.
The
developer
work
on
developer
already
indicated
a
desire
to
figure
out
a
way
toward
affordability.
D
I'd
be
very
excited
if
something
came
back
to
us
that
had
an
affordable
component
to
it,
and
so,
for
all
those
reasons,
I
continue
to
believe
that
that
a
deferral
with
direction
might
be
a
better
course
that
would
get
us
there
quicker
to
some
housing
that
we
desperately
need.
J
Mad
marriage,
just
quick
comment:
I
appreciate
everything
that
everyone
said
and
the
way
that
people
interpret
things
in
different
ways
and
while
I
do
support
the
density
in
this
area,
council
member
woody
said
something
probably
better
than
I
did,
and
it
was
really
had
to
do
with
the
allowed
use
in
the
area
and
that's
really
what
I'm
trying
to
get
at.
J
I
just
don't
think
that
that
myself
or
our
neighbors
would
interpret
that
as
predictable
and
again
I
don't.
I
don't.
I
disagree
with
the
actual
density
part
of
it.
I
think
that
it
works,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
that
I'm
not
behaving
in
an
unpredictable
way
when
I'm
approving
a
development,
you
know
for
our
citizens,
and
so
I
would
be
looking
for
a
proposal
to
come
back
that
fit
with
an
allowed
use
in
that
area
that
was
specifically
speaking
to
residential
and
not
office.
G
Adam
mayer,
I'm
going
to
just
comment
briefly.
I
think
that
the
council
president,
maybe
articulated
more
directly
the
things
I
was
trying
to
get
at
in
an
indirect
way
when
I
was
providing
indirect
direction,
so
I
apologize
for
for
not
being
straightforward,
but,
yes,
I
am
worried
about
the
massing
of
an
eight
unit,
townhome
fronting
a
street,
that's
single-family
residences.
Otherwise
I
think
that
the
setbacks
need
to
be
more
consistent.