►
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
B
C
C
E
C
F
F
Well,
hello,
everybody!
It's
wonderful
to
see
so
many
faces
here
live,
and
I
imagine
that
there
are
more
I'm
waiting
to
tune
to
colin's
resume,
but
welcome
we'll,
go
ahead
and
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
we'll
start
with
the
invocation
which
we
observe
by
a
moment
of
silence,
followed
by
the
pledge
of.
F
C
E
F
Thanks,
there's
no
special
business,
so
we
have
the
consent
agenda.
All
items
with
an
asterisk
are
considered
to
be
routine
by
the
council
and
will
be
enacted
by
one
motion.
There's
no
separate
discussion
on
these
items
unless
a
council,
member
or
citizen
so
requests,
in
which
case
the
item
will
be
removed
from
the
consent
agenda
and
considered
in
its
normal
sequence.
F
H
A
H
There
are
two
items
on
the
consent
agenda
to
remove.
I
apologize.
There
was
also
a
subdivision
number
four
rose
street
town
homes
that
we've
been
asked
to
remove
number
four
okay,
and
with
that
I
would
move
approval
of
the
consent
agenda.
With
the
exception
of
the
resolution
and
the
subdivision
that
have
been
removed.
F
G
I
H
H
The
resolution
is
a
resolution
to
approve,
as
to
both
form
and
content,
an
agreement
to
transfer
potential
credits
by
and
between
the
city
of
boise
city,
department
of
parks
and
recreation
and
the
treasure
valley,
canopy
network
authorizing
the
mayor
and
city
clerk
to
execute
an
attest
set
agreement
on
behalf
of
the
city
of
boise
and
establishing
an
effective
date.
This
resolution
approves
creating
green
credits
for
our
tree
canopy.
I'm
sorry,
I'm
trying
to
pull
up
the
exact
wording
here.
I
apologize.
H
So
the
agreement
is
to
transfer
potential
credits
from
our
tree
canopy
to
the
treasure
valley,
canopy
network
and
in
return
we
would
receive
some
payment
based
on
the
value
of
the
green
credits
that
they
create,
based
on
a
variety
of
things
such
as
carbon
dioxide
stored
storm
water,
runoff,
energy
savings,
fish,
habitat
and
air
quality
benefits.
H
The
resident
who
asked
me
to
pull
this
off
had
a
series
of
questions.
So,
if
I
might
I'd
like
to
address
those
questions,
they
were
particularly
about
trees
that
the
city
has
agreed
to
plant
as
part
of
the
city
of
tree
challenge
in
forests
around
idaho,
we
have
a
goal
of
planting
235
000
trees
around
the
state,
and
the
first
question
is
what
size
of
tree
will
be
planted
in
this
case.
If
you
look
at
the.
H
Excuse
me
at
the
city
of
tree
challenge:
you'll
see
that
these
are
seedlings
or
saplings,
not
saplings,
not
big
trees,
but
just
seedlings
the
location.
The
resident
is
asking
where
they'll
be
located
and
whether
or
not
they'll
be
planted
in
areas
subjected
to
logging
or
vegetation
treatments.
H
The
answer
to
that
is,
we
don't
know
exactly
where
they
will
be
planted.
We
know
that
every
year
we
will
look
at
opportunities
and
they
will
be
based
on
reforestation
of
areas
that
have
burned
or
potentially
areas
that
have
been
infested
by
insects
and
those
might
in
fact,
sometimes
be
part
of
partnerships
with
other
nonprofits
in
the
state
for
various
stewardship
agreements.
H
Probably
more
to
the
point.
The
credits
themselves
will
be
all
part
of
will
all
be
based
on
trees
that
are
planted
in
city
parks,
and
if
you
look
through
the
resolution
and
the
accompanying
documents,
you'll
see
a
list
of
the
city
parks
that
those
trees
are
in,
as
well
as
a
list
of
the
kinds
of
trees.
H
Given
all
of
that,
I'm
convinced
that
this
will
be
a
benefit
to
the
city,
both
financially
and
in
terms
of
energy
and
carbon
savings,
and
it
will
also
be
a
benefit
to
the
community
because
of
those
same
things
and
certainly
welcome
any
citizen
who
has
concerns,
as
this
project
goes
forward,
to
review
what
we've
been
doing,
how
we've
been
doing
it
and
make
suggestions
if
they
have
such
for
improvements,
and
with
that
I
would
move
approval
of
resolution
to
99-21.
E
E
The
I
also
reviewed
the
citizens
letter
and
questions,
and
I
guess
the
simplest
takeaway
that
I
saw
was
there
was
concern
that
these
types
of
trading
can
potentially
in
some
situations,
cause
trees
to
be
planted
on
private
lands
or
caused
trees
to
be
planted
on
commercial
timber
property
and
the
citizen
was
concerned
that
that
might
happen
here.
I
don't
see
that
as
a
reason
to
to
say
no
we're
not
going
to
do
it
at
all.
J
I
mean
kind
of
thanks,
madam
mayor.
I
I
think
that
my
concern
was
much
different
than
the
the
citizens
concern
and
my
concern
really
played
more
into
as
we're
pursuing
our
own
carbon
goals.
How
does
selling
credits
to
other
entities
perhaps
end
up
costing
us
more
in
the
long
run
than
keeping
those
credits
internal
to
the
city
and
internal
to
our
goals?
J
D
C
Ord
34-21,
an
ordnance
car
20-000-21,
are
probably
located
at
3153
west
hawthorne
drive
and
4306
west
taft
street
amending
zoning
classifications
of
the
city
of
boise
city
to
change
the
classification
of
real
property,
particularly
described
in
section
1
of
this
ordinance
from
r-1as
single-family
residential
with
sycamore
neighborhood
overlay,
the
csda
single-family
residential
with
sycamore
neighborhood
overlay
and
development
agreement.
Setting
forth
a
reason
statement
in
support
of
such
sound
change
and
provide
an
effective
date.
H
Thank
you,
madam
mayor.
I
think
there
will
be
a
number
of
comments
on
approval,
but
first
I
would
move
that
further
reading
of
ord
3621
be
dispensed
with,
and
the
record
reflect
that
it's
been
read
for
the
third
time
in
full.
Second,.
C
H
F
You
read
it
yes,
correct!
Yes,
so
all
right
now,
it's
time
to.
H
Discuss
thank
you,
madam
mayor.
This
is
the
ordinance
to
repeal
and
replace
our
office
of
police
oversight
with
an
office
of
police
accountability.
I
think
it's
important
for
the
public
to
know
that
there
are
lots
of
reasons
to
do
this.
We
think
it
strengthens
the
office,
and
that
was
the
whole
point
of
it.
The
first
is
independence.
H
This
ordinance
very
clearly
gives
the
office
of
police
accountability
authority
to
independently
investigate
review
and
audit
police
conduct.
The
other
is
access.
It
also
very
clearly
gives
the
office
of
police
accountability
the
power
to
access
any
records
in
the
office
of
internal
investigations
at
the
police
department
or
other
police
records,
and
then
accountability.
This
ordinance
provides
frequent
and
thorough
reports
to
the
mayor
and
council
and
to
the
public
so
that
the
activities
of
the
office
will
be
more
transparent.
H
We
wanted
to
ensure
that
the
office
had
real-time
auditing
rather
than
reviewing
closed
reports
all
the
time
they
have
more
direct
power
to
review
those
reports
in
real
time
as
they
were
happening.
H
We
wanted
a
full-time
director
position
with
investigative
skills
so
that
the
public
knew
that
there
was
a
person
who
was
going
to
be
there
who
they
could
report
to.
They
could
offer
file
complaints
with
and
that
they
could
talk
to
about
police
accountability
at
any
time,
and
we
wanted
some
flexibility.
H
And
so
I
think
that
the
changes
in
this
ordinance
do
that.
The
first
from
first
reading
to
today
there
was
some
minor
changes
made
in
the
language
just
to
clarify
even
more
that
this
office
is
an
independent
office.
H
H
Assuming
that
as
we
move
forward
and
as
we
hire
the
new
director
of
the
office
of
police
accountability,
that
director
will
begin
outreach
to
the
community
and
will
return
to
us
within
six
months,
with
a
review
of
the
ordinance
to
make
sure
that
we
didn't
miss
something
that
needs
to
be
fixed,
but
also
with
conversations
from
the
community
that
inform
us
of
the
policies
and
procedures
that
they'd
like
to
bring
forward
to
make
the
office
even
more
effective.
E
K
I'm
not
going
to
add
too
much
to
what
council
president
clegg
already
said.
I
think
she
hit
the
nail
on
the
head
on
most
of
those
things.
We've
had
a
tremendous
amount
of
folks
reach
out
from
the
community
on
this
and
our
our
ce
department,
our
community,
our
community
engagement
department,
has
done
a
great
job
at
getting
feedback
as
well
kind
of
towards
just
this.
K
Last
week
we
did
have
some
folks
reach
out
with
some
concerns
about
removing
the
the
the
opo
or
the
opa
director's
discretionary
authority
to
do
an
investigation,
I
think,
with
like
council
president
clay
said
a
few
minor
wording
changes.
We
were
able
to
provide
some
clarity
of
what
the
intention
was
there.
With
that
clarity,
I
feel
very
comfortable
approving
this
and
excited
to
see
it
go
forward.
I
think
that
this
is
a
new
new
position,
a
new
department,
and
so
there
will
be
some
changes
along
the
line.
K
I
think
that
those
six
months
and
beyond
opportunities
for
us
to
get
reports
back
to
evaluate
of
the
job,
the
role
and
what's
going
on
here
is
extremely
important,
and
I
think
that
we're
all
committed
to
doing
that.
So
I'm
in
favor
of
this
motion.
I
Madame
thank
you
madame
here
during
our
last
or
just
our
recent
work
session.
I
asked
about
one
of
the
concerns
that
the
public
expressed
when
they
completed
the
survey
about
the
office
of
police
oversight,
slash
accountability
and
one
of
those
was
anonymity,
and
so
I
did
check
with
legal
about
that.
And
yes,
it's
my
understanding
that
people
who
file
complaints
can
do
that
anonymously.
So
hopefully
that
will
alleviate
some
of
those
concerns.
I
I
just
want
folks
to
understand
that
these
ordinances,
they're
they're
alive
they're
living
and
as
we
move
forward
with
the
ordinance
as
council
member
hallie
burton
said,
we
will
be
looking
to
see
how
this
works
and
there
might
be
some
things
that
we
need
to
tweak.
I
For
example,
the
rental
application
fee
ordinance
that
we
passed
a
couple
years
ago,
we're
tweaking
that
a
little
bit
so
that
it
can
work
better
for
our
community.
With
that.
I
just
want
to
thank
anybody
who
has
decided
to
move
forward
and,
despite
the
fear,
has
let
the
city
of
boise
know
that
there
might
be
issues.
I
know
it's
not
easy,
as
is
borne
out
in
the
survey
people.
I
Do
it
even
though
they're
afraid,
even
though
they
may
not
completely
understand
the
process,
and
it
does
take
courage
to
file
a
complaint
even
when
you're
anonymous,
because
I
don't
think
people
people
don't
want
to
do
that.
They
don't
want
to
complain.
People
don't
like
to
complain,
but
in
order
for
us
to
be
the
entity
that
can
best
serve
our
community,
we
do.
We
do
need
to
know
when
there
are
issues,
and
so
with
that,
I
am
happy
to
support
this
ordinance.
J
Madam
mayor,
I
just
want
to
start
by
thanking
staff
and
your
office
for
working
very,
very
hard
with
council
leadership
over
gosh,
it's
been
like
a
year
and
a
half
since
we
really
started
looking
at
this
and
looking
at
how
we
create
an
office
of
police
accountability.
That's
really
responsive
to
our
residents
needs
that
has
a
high
level
of
visibility
in
the
community
that
people
were
asking
for.
J
I
think
a
lot
more
last
summer,
and
you
know
there
was
a
point
where
people
were
asking
well,
where
do
we
file
a
complaint
because
nobody
knew
where
that
office
was
or
how
to
go
through
that
process?
And
so
I
really
hope
that
this
accomplishes
our
goal
of
making
that
clear
to
the
community,
and
I
think
you
know,
like
council
pro
tem
sanchez
said
this
is
a
this-
is
a
living
ordinance
and
one
of
the
questions
that
I
asked
during
our
work
session
was.
J
Are
we
going
to
be
surveying
folks
who
actually
file
complaints
at
the
conclusion
of
their
case
to
make
sure
that
they
were
satisfied
with
the
outcome
satisfied
with
the
service
that
they
received
and
perhaps
to
gain
more
ways
to
make
the
process
better
and
make
policy
changes
to
that?
And
so
I'm
happy
to
support
this.
J
I
appreciate
the
changes
that
have
happened
just
over
the
past
couple
of
weeks
to
make
this
ordinance
even
that
much
better,
and
I
look
forward
to
continuing
to
look
at
this
ordinance,
making
sure
that
it's
serving
its
purpose
and
if
it's
not
making
the
necessary
changes
to
ensure
that
our
community
has
somewhere
to
go
when
they
need
to
file
a
complaint
that
they
feel
safe,
that
they
feel
heard
and
that
they
feel
that
their
concerns
are
real
and
valid
and
serious.
D
Adam
here
yeah,
thank
you
I'll,
be
brief.
I
agree
with
all
the
points
have
been
made
and
I
just
also
want
to
really
thank
your
office.
Your
work
council
leadership's
involvement
in
this
and
all
the
staff
time
that's
gone
into
it.
It's
it's
while
it
is
noted
a
living
kind
of
a
living
document
living
department
as
we
go
forward.
I
I
appreciate
how
the
amount
of
time
that
was
taken
to
ensure
that
we
ended
up
with.
D
I
think
something
really
really
good
and
unique
to
the
needs
of
boise,
and
so
I
want
to
thank
you
for
that.
I
want
to.
I
just
want
to
emphasize
what
I
really
like
about
this
new
department
is,
is
its
independence,
and
I
have
great
comfort
with
the
safeguards
that
have
been
put
in
in
that
regard
with
this
new
department,
and
I
think
that
our
citizens
can
can
have
shared
in
that
confidence
as
well.
Thank
you.
F
All
right,
it
looks
like
there's
no
more
I'll,
just
weigh
in,
I
won't
be
voting,
but
I'm
really
appreciate
the
time
that
was
taken
by
staff
to
get
us
to
this
point
and
the
guidance
and
staff
time
and
support
that
we
got
from
them,
but
also
the
community
that
made
it
clear
a
year
ago
that
they
needed,
as
councilmember
wooding,
said,
to
know
where
to
go
that
they
wanted,
as
you
saw
in
the
survey
earlier
today
in
the
work
session,
to
know
that
there
was
an
accountability
mechanism,
because
that
holds
us
all
where
we
ought
to
be
and
as
we
work
through
learning
from
the
public
what
they
were
looking
for.
F
We
worked
through
this
ordinance.
We
did
want
to
make
sure
and
the
independence
piece
that
was
that
we're
highlighting
tonight.
We
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
director
of
this
office
could
himself
or
herself
request
an
independent
investigation,
that
it
wouldn't
be
prevented
and
by
anybody
from
this
diocese
and
that's
the
independence
that-
and
we
all
believe,
is
really
important
and
was
the
language
was
changed
to
show
that
that
was
our
intent
all
along.
F
But
to
make
that
clear,
and
then
importantly
too,
you
know
this
is,
as
council
member
sanchez
said,
a
living
a
living
ordinance
and
so,
as
we
hire
a
director
now
for
this
new
office
of
police
accountability,
and
we
expect
that
person
to
go
out
to
pick
up
the
work
that
we
heard
from
maria
today.
The
survey
on
what
the
residents
wanted,
but
to
drill
deeper,
to
make
sure
that
they're
helping
us
create
an
office
of
police
accountability,
that's
responsive
to
the
expectations
and
needs
of
the
community,
and
that
delivers
the
information
that
everybody
deserves.
F
When
it's
sought
after
I
mean
that
ultimately
allows
helps
us
come
up
with
the
right
policies
and
procedures
moving
forward,
not
only
for
the
office
but
through
those
investigations
that
it
does,
and
so
now
that
we're
at
this
point
six
months
from
now,
we'll
have
a
checkup.
But
I
fully
expect
that
we'll
see
from
a
director
of
proposed
policies
procedures
and
how
they
will
be
accountable
to
the
public
in
terms
of
closing
investigations
and
sharing
reports,
as
well
as
policy
recommendations.
G
E
H
Just
to
be
clear,
since
we
didn't
have
a
motion
on
this
part,
I
would
move
that
we
asked
the
new
director
of
the
office
of
the
police
accountability
to
return
to
us
within
six
months
of
that
person's
hire
with
a
report
on
the
ordinance
on
the
partnering
that
they've
done
with
the
community
and
on
policies
and
procedures.
I
F
F
L
L
Hi,
thank
you.
I'm
kathleen
watkins
deputy
director
of
finance
at
the
boise
airport,
the
last
several
years.
The
airport
seen
large
year-over-year
increases
in
passenger
traffic
and
in
2019
we
ran
out
of
capacity.
Could.
F
You
know
it's
also
been
just
a
little
finicky
tonight,
so
talk
into
it
again,
but
it
might
be
that
we
have
to
ch
is
just.
L
Better
yeah,
oh
there
we
go.
I
can
even
hear
myself,
okay,
so
kathleen
watkins,
deputy
director
of
finance
for
the
boise
airport.
For
the
last
several
years,
the
airport's
seen
large
year-over-year
increases
in
passenger
traffic
and
in
2019
we
ran
out
of
capacity
and
are
closed
in
terminal
parking.
L
This
required
us
to
shuttle
passengers
to
our
remote
economy
lot
and
the
airport
prior
to
the
pandemic
was
prepared
preparing
to
construct
parking
garages
to
handle
the
increase
in
passenger
passenger
traffic
that
we're
seeing
then,
when
with
the
pandemic
started,
we
of
course
slowed
down
the
construction
and
took
a
halt
to
see
what
was
going
to
happen.
But
recently
the
air
traffic
has
come
back
very
strong.
L
L
L
L
The
second
bond
is
a
five
level
employee
parking
facility
that
will
be
located
to
the
northwest
of
the
current
parking
garage
within
walking
distance
of
the
terminal
to
be
used
for
airport
employees,
but
also
concessionaire
employees,
airline
employees,
etc.
L
And
that's
going
to
also
be
five
level
employee
garage,
it's
approximately
233,
000
square
feet,
703
stalls,
the
terms
of
that
bond
are
not
to
exceed
30
years
and
22
million.
All
bonds
from
the
boise
airport
are
paid
from
existing
general
airport
revenues.
No
tax
taxpayer
dollars
are
used
since
it's
for
private
use.
The
employee
parking
garage
falls
under
the
tax,
equity
and
fiscal
responsibility
act,
and
that
act
requires
that
the
employee
that
that
employee
parking
garage
be
open
for
public
comment
before
the
council
approves
the
ordinance
or
adopts
ordinance.
L
J
Madame
thank
you
so
much
for
your
presentation.
I
just
have
a
question
about
the
kind
of
timing,
so
I
remember
pre
pandemic.
We
were
getting
ready
to
build
an
employee
parking
garage
like
you
guys
were
pretty
ready.
Had
we
just
not
quite
gotten
to
the
point
where
we
were
ready
to
approve
a
bond
or
what
kind
of
happened
with
that.
L
So
we
had
some
funds
in
a
reserve
that
the
airlines
had
been
setting
aside
for
a
number
of
years.
We
still
have
that
reserve,
but
we're
holding
that
to
help
the
airlines
stabilize
their
rates.
We
decided
to
bond
it
instead
and
but
it
was
just
ready
to
go.
We
were
had
almost
approved
the
rfp
and
literally
days
before
we
realized
what
was
happening
with
a
pandemic
and
we
stopped
so
that's
where
we
are
on
now.
L
H
Admiral
not
so
much
a
question,
but
a
comment
as
the
liaison
to
the
airport
commission.
The
commission
made
the
choice
not
to
go
forward
with
this
barrage
earlier
because
of
the
downturn
due
to
covid,
but
the
original
conversation
was
that
this
might
get
put
off
for
two
or
three
years.
I'm
happy
to
see
it
back
as
soon
as
it
is,
and
I
think
we
have
a
real
opportunity
to
get
these
bonds
sold
at
a
rate
that
will
help
us
over
the
long
term
on
debt
service
and
and
get
these
garages
built.
F
H
H
Well
with
that,
then,
madam
mayor,
I
moved
that
all
rules
of
the
council,
interfering
with
the
immediate
consideration
of
ord
3621,
be
be
suspended,
that
the
portions
of
idaho
code,
50
902,
required
an
ordinance
to
be
read
on
three
different
days
twice
by
title
and
once
in
full,
be
dispensed
with
and
that
the
records
show
it
has
been
read
for
the
third
time
in
full.
I
I
G
H
E
H
E
F
All
right
before
we
jump
into
this
one,
I
know
this
is
unusual
because
it's
an
early
break
but
we're
going
to
take
a
quick
break,
no
more
than
five
minutes
and
then
we'll
go
ahead
and
start
with.
F
A
Okay,
I
guess
somebody
would
need
to
oh,
I
don't
have
the
power
to.
A
A
The
annexation
itself
is
requested
in
anticipation
of
a
largely
industrial
development.
The
industrial
park
has
the
potential
for
nearly
one
million
square
feet
of
usable
space,
and
then
the
commercial
zoning
is
intended
to
provide
accessory
uses
or
accessory
space
to
support
the
park.
A
A
Today,
no
public
agency
has
expressed
opposition
to
the
annexation
they've.
Also
given,
given
no
indication
that
the
property
could
not
be
appropriately
served
again,
it
is
surrounded
on
three
sides
by
previously
annexed
lands
and
incorporating
the
site
will
not
require
significant
expansion
and
service
area
for
the
provider.
However,
there
is
one
significant
exception:
it
is
outside
the
one
and
a
half
mile
distance
preferred
by
the
the
fire
department
that
was
noted
in
your
in
your
report.
A
Fire
acknowledged,
though,
that
the
area
is
already
they
are,
are
already
serving
lands
beyond
the
subject
property,
but
with
that
they
did
recommend
that
the
applicant
dedicate
a
two
to
four
acre
site
for
construction
of
a
new
station
further.
They
suggested
this
occur
before
any
development.
Beyond
that
first
phase
of
the
project
proceed
that
has
been
included
as
a
condition
in
the
development
agreement,
and
I
believe
the
applicant
agrees
to
that
requirement
and
can
speak
to
that
this
evening.
A
A
Finally
included
in
the
packet
was
a
preliminary
analysis
by
our
own
department
of
finance
and
administration
that
concluded
revenues
would
exceed
the
costs
associated
with
serving
this
area
again.
A
phasing
plan
included
in
the
development
agreement
provides
the
city
and
other
agencies
the
opportunity
to
revisit
and
impose
additional
conditions
on
sub
subsequent
phases
in
this
project.
A
E
Cody
declare
to
clarify
boise
fire
is
presently
serving
this
area.
A
Madam
mayor
council,
member
beijing,
that's
correct
if
you
see
the
light,
the
light
blue
and
that
looks
horrible
on
the
screen.
The
light
blue
is
the
the
area
requested
for
annexation
and
the
light.
The
light,
brown
or
shade
of
yellow
that
surrounds
the
site
on
three
sides
is
already
city
limits.
Annex
lands
that
they
are
serving.
E
A
A
Madam
mayor
council,
member
agent,
that's
correct
and
acquire
a
site
for
a
future
fire
station.
Thank.
E
H
A
Madam
madame
mayor
council
member
clay,
there
was
an
additional
condition
in
the
development
agreement
that
requires
you
know
beyond
the
the
first
phase
of
this
project
would
have
access
to
existing
right-of-way.
Any
future
phases
would
require
dedicate
dedication
or
planning
of
right-of-way,
and
so
another
condition
recommended
for
the
development
agreement.
A
Is
the
pr
preliminary
plat
be
approved
that
you
would
see
for
anything
beyond
that
first
phase,
and
that
with
that,
it
goes
on
to
say
that
it
shown
crude
road
layout
and
illustrating
how
the
project
relates
to
the
anticipated
collector
arterial,
roadway
road
network,
pedestrian
facilities
be
included,
so
we
anticipate
the
intent
of
that.
Is
that
we
see
it
before
you
know
the
road
network
has
extended
beyond.
What's
there
today.
A
A
A
Madam
mayor
councilmember,
craig,
that's
that's
a
good
question
the
I
suppose
we
need
to
look
at
modifying
the
the
agreement
modifying
the
development
agreement
and
adjusting
those
boundaries
slightly.
If
that.
H
F
M
Okay,
madam
mayor
council,
members,
jeffrey
wardle,
I
am
counsel
for
the
applicant.
It
is
nice
to
be
here
with
you
in
person.
I
think
this
is
the
first
time
in
18
months
that
I've
I've
gotten
to
be
here
with
you,
although
we've
done
quite
a
few
other
things
as
cody
indicated,
this
is
an
application
that
we
have
brought
forward
for
an
annexation
of
120
acres
and
as
cody
discussed,
and
what
I'm
going
to
do
tonight
is.
M
It
is
always
nice
when
you
come
forward
with
an
application.
That
is
exactly
what
the
comprehensive
plan
comes
from.
There
is
no
creativity
required
here.
You
did
that
work
10
years
ago
with
blueprint
boise
and
we're
pleased
to
be
in
a
position
to
implement
the
planning
that
you
have
done
and
work
with
our
development
partners
on
this
site.
M
So,
as
cody
indicated,
this
is
an
annexation
request
related
to
the
120
acres
that
are
located
essentially
due
east
of
the
intersection
of
lake
hazel
and
the
orchard
extension
at
planning
and
zoning.
A
question
came
up
about
about
this
site
and,
as
cody
had
indicated,
you
know
why
is
it
120
acres
and
what
about
that
northwest
corner?
Well
to
start,
it
is
bounded
by
the
city
of
boise
on
three
sides.
M
It
is
in
the
airport
planning
area,
it
has
a
land
use
designation
for
industrial
and
we
are
proposing
m1b
and
c1,
and
I
appreciate
council
member
clegg's
concern
because
I
too
do
not
like
having
to
jump
through
those
hoops,
and
I
think
we
have
the
ability
to
be
flexible
and
get
there
and
I'll
explain
in
a
moment.
The
question
has
been
posed.
Why
are
we
not?
What
is
the?
What
is
the
deal
with
that
northwest
40
acres
bva
and
its
development
partners
have
actually
acquired
this
property?
M
Yeah,
it's
it's
cutting
out.
It's
a
it's
520
acres
total
that
are
part
of
the
acquisition,
but,
as
you
know,
there
is
a
compost
facility
that
is
located
immediately
adjacent
to
orchard.
The
seller
is
still
resolving
issues
related
to
that
compost
facility
with
the
tenant.
So
we
have
not
yet
acquired
that
40
acres.
M
However,
along
the
northern
boundary
that
is
contemplated
as
a
collector
roadway
that
is
identified
there
in
the
dark.
We
have
the
ability
to
work
through
that
and
we
will
be
incorporating
that
40
acres
in
the
future.
M
Now
we're
not
as
concerned
about
that
40
acres,
because
that
40
acres
is
immediately
adjacent
to
industrially
zoned
property
in
syringa
valley.
So
we
think
it
gives
flexibility
that
that's
not
the
place
that
we
have
to
to
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
and
concern
and
will
come
in
at
an
appropriate
time
in
the
future,
as
cody
had
showed
you
in
the
context
map.
There
is
also
an
additional
320
acres
to
the
south
of
this
immediately
to
the
south,
which
will
facilitate
the
future
extension
of
lake
hazel.
M
M
So
blueprint
boise
contemplated
this
area
as
being
appropriate
for
your
industrial
expansion
due
to
the
impact
of
the
airport.
It
is
within
airport
area
of
influence,
a
which
imposes
certain
limitations
on
development,
not
as
not
as
onerous
as
those
in
b
and
c,
but
it
is
an
appropriate
use
and
the
goal
encourages
industrial
and
airport
related
development
south
of
the
third
runway,
and
in
conjunction
with
the
extension
of
orchard
and
lake
hazel.
M
Additionally,
it
is
contemplated
that
there
needs
to
be
accessory
retail
and
commercial
services
and
because
of
syringa
valley
to
the
west,
it's
important
to
provide
that
buffer
and
we
contemplate
that
the
appropriate
buffer
to
the
residentially
zoned
areas
is
going
to
be
that
mixture
of
accessory
service,
commercial
flex,
light
industrial
space
like
and
and
and
those
types
of
uses
that
you
see
at
boise
research
center
and
some
of
the
others
that
that
is
a
good
transition
to
the
the
heavier
utilization
and
heavier
industrial
uses
to
the
east.
M
M
This
is
what
we
have
now,
but
it's
about
identifying
where
those
arterials
go
and
implementing
the
plan
that
you
all
adopted
10
plus
years
ago
for
the
southwest
to
facilitate
the
extension
of
lake
hazel
road
to
the
east
and
the
property
owner
immediately
to
the
east
of
us
is
the
department
of
lands
and
they
have
been
engaged.
In
the
conversations
I
I
wouldn't
say,
the
department
of
lands
thinks
about
transportation,
the
same
way
that
other
property
owners
do,
but
they
have
been
at
the
table.
M
That
alignment
helps
facilitate,
moving
the
heavier
traffic
of
residences
to
the
west
and
industrial
and
commercial
uses
to
the
east
of
orchard.
So
we
think
that
this
is
totally
consistent
with
what
you
contemplated
in
blueprint
boise
for
the
industrial
use
south
of
the
airport.
It
is
the
type
of
of
light
manufacturing,
warehousing
multi-tenant
industrial
space.
That's
why
we've
asked
for
m1
as
opposed
to
a
more
intensive
use.
That
is
what
we
contemplate,
because
we
recognize
that
the
more
intensive
uses
are
more
appropriate
to
the
east.
M
Now,
in
going
back
and
looking
at
this,
it
is
important
to
note
that
this
this
was
a
policy
decision
that
was
made
when
blueprint
boise
was
adopted
nearly
11
years
ago
that
you
took
a
hard
look
at
the
southwest
of
the
airport
and
how
best
to
address
that-
and
I
think,
coupled
with
the
transportation
planning
the
airport
planning,
that
you've
done
the
visioning
for
what
is
the
future
role
of
the
third
runway.
M
Its
expansion
for
service
for
for
fire
for
military
for
the
other
uses,
make
it
a
site
and
an
area
that
we
have
to
be
sensitive
to
that.
And
so
we
agree,
and
we
think
that
the
industrial
designation
is
appropriate
and
what
we're
bringing
in
with
this
first
120
acre
phase
is
consistent
with
that
now.
The
first
issue
I
want
to
talk
about
came
up
at
planning
and
zoning
were
concerns
about
water.
M
We
recognize
and
and
and
don't
discount
the
concerns
of
the
owned
property
owners
in
the
county
up
on
holly
lynn
that
they
express
concerns
about
their
wells.
Well
because
of
the
nature
of
the
industrial
use
that
we're
proposing.
We
have
been
in
discussions
with
suez
for
well
over
a
year
on
how
to
facilitate
this.
M
This
also
facilitates
meeting
the
pressure
requirements
and
other
things
by
bringing
that
service
from
the
east.
So
there's
there
are
other
industrial
users
out
there
off
of
pleasant
valley
that
have
been
in
conversations,
but
I
would
just
point
your
your
selves
to
the
the
blue
and
green
at
the
top
that
those
are
the
improvements
which
will
be
16-inch,
extensions
and
12-inch
extensions.
M
That
will
then
connect
to
the
water
that
has
been
brought
through
lake
hazel
and
we
think
it
improves
operations
and
it
minimizes
some
of
the
concerns
that
you've
heard
about
about
wells,
especially
wells
on
holy
land,
because
this
is
this
phase
is
not
being
served
by
that
transportation.
M
M
We
also
recognize
that,
with
the
southwest
boise
transportation
study,
which
really
kicked
off
that
lake
hazel
connection,
that
it
was
identified
that
making
that
connection
not
only
of
lake
hazel
to
orchard,
but
then
orchard
to
pleasant
valley
was
integral
to
making
the
transportation
flow.
We
have
done
that
this
was
contemplated.
M
H
G
H
Yes,
so
jeff,
you
indicated
that
you've
done
a
lot
of
thinking
about
the
road
alignment.
I
guess
is
it
because
of
that
that
you're
confident
that
you've
got
the
alignment
in
the
place
that
will
need
it
or
is
there
a
way
to
accommodate
whatever
zoning
would
be
north
and
south
of
it,
depending
on
where
it
gets
aligned.
M
As
we
talk
about
phase
one
phase,
one
is
really
that
eastern
80
acres,
okay,
okay,
so
we
know
that
we're
going
to
have
to
come
from
the
intersection
of
loca
of
lake
hazel
and
orchard,
and
we're
going
to
have
to
make
that
extension
across
some
at
some
point
there.
But
we
know
that
we're
going
to
have
to
get
from
point
a
to
point
b
as
we've
worked
with
achd.
M
The
the
biggest
concern
for
the
initial
alignment
isn't
necessarily
this
segment,
it's
the
segments
as
you
travel
to
the
east
and
how
far
south
you
take
them,
because
this
really
is
the
alignment,
because
you're
not
going
to
come
straight
across
the
department
of
lands.
I
am
sensitive
because
I
don't
want
to
have
to
come
back
and
and
rezone
little
pieces,
but
the
nice
thing
that
we're
we're
talking
about
here
is.
M
We
will
be
back
in
front
of
you
because,
as
cody
indicated
as
we
come
in
with
a
preliminary
plat
and
as
we
as
we
come
forward,
those
other
things
we're
going
to
have
to
clean
that
up
and
so
realistically
phase.
One
is
the
eastern
120
acres,
because
that's
what
we
need
for
that
use,
and
so
we
we
know
that
you
have.
We
have
achd
jurisdictional
right-of-way
claim
across
the
north
there,
which
is
that
dark
line.
M
We
know
that
lake
hazel
has
to
come
across,
so
those
two
points
are
fixed
and
then,
when
we
talk
about
the
ultimate
alignment,
those
are
conversations
that
we'll
continue
to
have
with
department
of
lands
with
achd
with
your
staff,
because
that's
the
critical
part
for
the
part
below,
because
the
intention
obviously
is
that
lake
hazel
will
be
a
mobility
arterial
with
limited
points
of
access.
And
so
that's
why,
as
part
of
our
conversations
with
achd,
it's
recognized
that
you
know
coming
over
to
that.
M
Southern
boundary
is
where
you're
going
to
have
that
that
mid
mile,
that
mid
block
connection,
and
so
I'm
I'm
comfortable
for
what
we're
trying
to
do
that
we
get
there.
I'm
also
comfortable,
madame
mayor
and
council
president
clegg,
that,
as
we
come
back
with
phase
two
phase,
two
likely
becomes
2a
and
2b,
which
is
the
incorporation
of
the
40
acres
in
the
northwest
corner
and
then
an
additional
80
acres
to
the
south.
M
In
light
of
house
bill
389,
we
worked
very
closely
to
come
up
with
a
size
of
application
that
doesn't
adversely
affect
your
budget
that
addresses
the
immediate
service
needs,
as
with
the
fire
department
and
we're
having
those
conversations
and
we're
amenable
to
that.
So
I
feel
pretty
comfortable
with
that,
because
this
isn't
a
situation
where
we're
going
to
get
caught
with
and
have
to
come
back
and
do
an
application
we'll
be
able
to
couple
that
either
with
the
preliminary
plat
or
with
or
with
the
annexation,
for
the
the
property
immediately
to
the
south.
H
Thank
you,
madam
mayor,
follow
up
if
I
could
just
a
little
bit
about
the
timing
of
your
phasing,
and
this
has
to
do
with
the
fire
service,
if
we
end
up
with
a
fire
site,
how
many,
how
long
before
you'll
be
building
enough
that
we'll
be
able
to
collect
enough
revenue
to
do
something
with
that.
M
Well,
madam
mayor
councilmember,
clegg
council,
president
clint,
the
the
the
reality
is
that
we
have
an
80
acre
industrial
user
who
we're
looking
to
address
initially,
so
the
first
phase
is
going
to
be
substantial.
I
think,
from
your
staff's
evaluation.
It
contemplated
a
two
to
three
year,
build
out
because
of
what
we
own.
M
We
have
the
ability
to
work
with
fire
to
identify
the
appropriate
location,
because,
in
our
mind,
the
appropriate
location
for
the
fire
is
for
the
four
acre
fireside
two
to
four
acre
fire
site
is
probably
on
orchard,
and
it
may
be
a
little
bit
farther
south
in
recognition
of
the
future
growth
of
syringa
valley
and
the
future
property
that
we
have
there.
So
we
have
the
ability
to
do
that,
but
obviously
we
will
also
be
paying
impact
fees,
public
safety,
impact
fees
immediately
in
phase
one.
G
F
F
H
F
M
Matter,
mayor,
jeff
wardle,
you
have
my
address,
I
guess
if
you
have
any
concerns
about
fire
raised
by
whatever
late
correspondence,
we
would
want
to
be
able
to
answer
that,
but
we've
been
hyper
sensitive
to
it
because
from
the
very
beginning,
if
we're
going
to
have
industrial
users,
we
have
to
meet
their
needs,
and
so
that's
why
we've
had
the
discussion
with
staff.
Tom
peterson
has
a
meeting
scheduled
with
romeo
gervais
next
week,
and
you
know
we're
ready,
willing
and
able
to
proceed
that
way.
G
H
H
Madam
mayor,
yes,
many
of
the
council
members
know
and
and
community
members
that
this
is
an
area
that
I've
long
worked
to,
ensure
that
we
did
get
the
right
kind
of
development
that
industrial
development
around
the
airport,
with
the
ability
to
help
with
the
infrastructure
needs
out.
There
is,
in
fact,
what
is
called
for
in
blueprint
boise
and
I'm
just
excited
to
see
this
moving
forward.
Madam.
J
Mayor,
I
agree
with
council
president.
What
additionally
made
me
really
happy
about
this
was
I
think
that
we
have
so
many
areas
of
the
city
where
there's
a
lot
of
residential
development
and
there's
not
many
employment
opportunities
nearby.
J
E
Adam
mayor,
I'm
in
agreement
with
everything
that
said,
I'm
gonna
take
a
quick
crack
at
this
fire
issue
because
we
did
get
some
late
testimony
on
it
and
the
thrust
of
the
testimony
was
by
annexing
this
property.
Without
having
fire
service
in
place,
we
will
be
putting
everyone's
lives
and
property
at
higher
risk,
as
well
as
the
men
and
women
you
are
in
charge
of
well.
Of
course,
the
boise
fire
department
is
already
serving
this
area,
and
this
development
allows
us
to
fund
and
build
the
fire
infrastructure
that
it's
going
to
need.
E
So
I'm
sensitive
to
the
concern
and
I'm
sensitive
to
the
testimony
from
this
person,
particularly
because
there
was
a
mayoral
administration
20
years
ago,
that
put
us
in
a
real
situation
with
this
property
and
poor
planning
and
poor
infrastructure
fees
sufficient
to
support
the
promises
that
are
made
to
the
community.
So
I
take
this
concern
seriously,
but
this
is
what
is
going
to
allow
us
to
provide
the
fire
service.
This
community
needs
their
impact,
so
I'll
be
supporting
the
motion.
F
F
While
we
looked
at
the
impacts
waiting
to
see
what
would
be
brought
to
the
legislature,
but
also
afterwards
with
the
analysis
and
because,
as
you've
seen
in
communities
around
this
valley,
there
are
true
impacts
to
the
legislation
that
did
come
out
of
the
state
house
with
regard
to
their
ability
to
allow
development
annex
and
provide
for
the
services
that
they
need
to
provide
for
and
so
in
working
together,
pausing.
And
while
we
were
waiting
to
see
what
happened
but
then
really
doing
the
analysis
that
was
necessary.
F
A
This
this
item
is
an
appeal
of
the
plan,
a
planning
and
zoning
commission
denial
to
a
waiver
of
a
subdivision
ordinance.
That
waiver
was
to
allow
the
creation
of
double
fronted
lots
or
a
double
fronted
lot
with
vehicular
access
to
each
frontage.
That
request,
as
you
saw
on
the
record,
was
denied
by
the
planning
zoning
commission
in
may.
A
A
Now
the
applicant
received
approval
to
consolidate
the
parcels
administratively
earlier
this
year
that
consolidation
again
created
a
double-fronted
lot,
which
are
generally
prohibited.
The
exception,
though,
is
when
there
are
unusual
circumstances
or
topography
exist
to
allow
it.
The
property
is
certainly
unique
in
that
regard,
and
again
the
consolidation
was
was
granted,
but
it
did
include
very
specific
conditions
that
limited
vehicular
access
to
one
to
one
street
frontage,
and
that
was
based
on
the
very
specific
development
standards
you
can
see
on
this,
hopefully
on
the
screen.
A
If
I
can
share
it,
sorry,
so,
after
after
receiving
approval,
the
applicant
indicated
a
desire
that
they
wanted
to
maintain
two
existing
access
points,
one
one
on
the
front
on
one
on
circle
way
on
the
south
and
another
along
horizon
drive
to
the
north.
A
They
also
wanted
to
add
a
third
access
point
on
the
western
side
of
the
a
property,
because
that
arrangement
is
is
prohibited
by
by
code.
They
did
request
that
waiver
from
the
subdivision
ordinance
as
detailed
in
your
packet.
The
commission
did
deny
the
request
they
found.
The
waiver
could
potentially
result
in
safety
concerns.
A
They
also
found
it
to
be
inconsistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
that
does
aim
to
reduce
driveway
approaches
and
that
that
that
standard
is
for
both
aesthetic
and
and
environmental
reasons.
And
again
so
the
applicant
has
appealed
the
decision
this
evening.
They've
provided
three
grounds
and
I'd
like
to
just
briefly
touch
on
each
first.
They
believe
that
the
three
driveway
approaches
are
required
to
prevent
a
hardship
they
would
like
to
have
parking
access
from
each
each
level
of
the
property
again.
A
A
A
They
suggest
the
fact
that
achd
granted
approval
justifies
the
design,
and
it
is
true
that
achd
did
approve
the
new
access
point
that
combined
that
driveway,
combined
with
two
access
points
that
are
already
in
existence
from
our
perspective
and
the
commissions
does
create
a
potential
for
conflict.
A
As
you
can
see
in
the
in
the
picture
shown
here,
the
vegetate
combination
of
vegetation
and
slope
certainly
do
create
some
challenges
from
a
visibility
perspective.
A
Now
that
might
be
remedied
with
removal
of
vegetation,
but
we're
certainly
not
a
proponent
of
that
to
justify
the
waiver-
that's
that
was
before
the
commission,
the
final
ground,
the
appellant
suggests
the
power
line
and
topography
of
the
site
preclude
the
use
of
a
single
access.
This
is
a
hillside
lot
and
if
you
can
see
faintly
on
the
faintly
on
the
screen,
power
lines
do
cross
the
parcel
again
in
the
general
alignment
of
the
the
original
underlying
lot
line.
A
So
with
that,
we,
the
commission
had
difficulty
seeing
we're
seeing
where
there
was
justification
for
the
waiver,
and
we
don't
see
an
error
in
this
regard.
I
believe
I
touched
on
each
of
the
grounds.
Briefly.
A
We
want
to
acknowledge.
There
doesn't
appear
to
be
any
public
opposition
to
this
request.
In
fact,
in
your
packet
were
only
only
letters
of
support,
but
there
are
clear
code
provisions
precluding
access
under
this
arrangement
and
the
commission
didn't
find
justification
to
waive
those
requirements.
So
with
that,
we
are
recommending
denial
of
the
the
appeal
this
evening.
Thank
you.
H
Madam
mayor,
yes,
a
couple
of
questions.
First
cody,
you
indicated
that
the
applicant
purposely
combined
these
lots
and
perhaps
created
their
own
problem
by
doing
that,.
H
H
I've
visited
it
many
times
and
the
roadway
in
question
really
functions
as
a
lane.
There's
only
five
lots
on
it.
It
has
very
little
traffic.
It
doesn't
go
anywhere
else,
so
no
one
else
uses
it
except
the
people
who
live
there
or
are
visiting
there,
and
so
my
question
is
whether
or
not
this
this
policy
was
written.
I
think
for
two
more
equal.
If
you
will
equal
use
roadways,
I
wondered
if
any
of
that
factored
into
the
discussions
you
guys
had.
A
Madame
madame
mayor
councilmember
clegg,
I
guess
from
my
perspective
I
agree.
I
think
that
the
code
language
was
probably
written
for
a
situation
where
maybe
you
have
a
collector
arterial
and
then
a
local
street
and
was
to
preclude
that
the
language
itself
is
written
fairly,
black
and
white,
but
you're.
You
know
it
doesn't
make
a
distinct
distinction
in
the
code,
but
you're
right.
It
could
be
found
that
there's
it's
fairly
unique
and
these
are
very
low,
low
traffic
volume,
local
streets,
so
that
didn't
come
up
a
whole
lot
before,
but
certainly
valid.
H
And
then
the
second
question
is
you
surmise
that
there
might
be
a
different
solution,
and
maybe
is
it?
Is
it
out
of
school
to
talk
about
what
that
different
solution
might
be
tonight.
A
Oh
madame,
madam
mayor
council,
member
clay,
certainly
I
think
that
you
could
the
the
two
access
points
you
know
two
of
the
access
points,
perhaps
not
on
opposite
kind
of
the
opposite.
Frontages
would
would
simply
be
allowed.
You
know,
so
I
think
if
the
applicant
were
willing
to
choose
there,
the
decision,
the
decision
kind
of
goes
away.
It's
really
these.
These
two
access
points
that
are
on
the
opposite,
frontages
that
become
that
become
the
issue.
B
You
mayor
and
council
members
for
having
us
here
and
sharing
your
time
on
what
might
appear
to
be
a
pretty
small
issue,
but
compared
to
your
agenda,
it
seems
pretty
small
but
certainly
not
trivial,
to
us
very
important
to
us.
The
planning
and
zoning
commission
concluded
that
two
driveways
are
not
warranted
because
both
limited
mobility,
access
to
our
home
and
request
to
garage
access
can
be
achieved
from
a
single
driveway.
B
However,
these
two
objectives
cannot
be
met
by
one
driveway,
due
to
the
power
line
easement
and
the
topography
of
the
property,
as
communicated
by
our
architect.
His
work,
this
kathy
sewell
in
a
report.
The
garage
can
only
be
built
where
clearance
to
the
power
line
is
provided.
It
cannot
be
built
up
on
horizon,
as
the
council
member
concluded.
B
This
location
that
we
plan
to
to
build
the
garage
on
what
west
circle
way
is
is
the
location
that
provides
the
clearance
to
the
power
line.
However,
this
location
has
a
steep
incline
that
pro
precludes
limited
mobility
access.
B
B
These
driveways
would
not
pose
a
public
safety
risk
they
meet
or
exceed
all
achd
requirements.
Hcad
has
approved
both
of
these
driveways.
The
horizon
drive
driveway
does
not
pose
a
public
safety
risk
as
incorrectly
concluded
by
staff.
In
fact,
the
achd
requirements
for
sightline
distance
are
far
exceeded
due
to
our
driveway
being
on
the
outside.
B
B
The
furthermore,
the
achd
requirements
for
site
for
distance
from
the
intersection
is
also
met.
They
approved
that,
while
in
general,
we
see
that
tight
road
returns
could
pose
a
risk.
Clearly
they
do
not
hit
this
property
because
we're
on
the
outside
of
the
turn,
not
the
inside
of
the
turn.
B
B
We
get
it,
however,
the
traffic
flow
along
our
property
does
not
pose
this
risk.
The
traffic
would
not
cross
both
of
our
existing
and
our
planned
driveways.
The
horizon
drive
traffic
continues
on
to
a
feral.
There's
no
need
there's
no
desire
for
them
to
turn
on
the
west
circle
way.
Likewise,
our
five
neighbors
on
west
circle
way
do
not
turn
and
go
up
horizon
drive.
They
turn
left
and
go
down.
Oh
feral.
B
If
this
was
a
public
safety
risk,
then
achd
would
have
already
concluded
that
and
would
not
have
supported
our
plan.
B
B
This
waiver
request
seems
to
the
debate,
seems
to
center
around
what
a
hardship
is,
and
we
were
referred
to
the
code
for
variance
approval,
which
provides
really
little
guidance.
It
reads
something
into
the
effect
hardship
associated
with
the
property
itself.
Well,
when
we
maintain
that
there
is,
in
fact,
a
hardship
associated
with
the
property
in
the
way
of
the
combined
power
line,
easement
and
the
topography
the
steep
climb
from
the
only
access
from
which
the
garage
can
be
built
and
adequate
off-street
parking
as
possible,
and
a
very
limited
setback
on
another
entry.
B
B
The
recent
survey
shows
them
on
the
street
right
of
way.
There
isn't
sufficient
space
on
our
property
to
make
improvement
to
these
steps
or
to
construct
a
ramp.
In
fact,
this
portion
of
west
circle
way
is
steeper
than
the
maximum
gradient
allowed
by
code
for
a
limited
mobility
ramp.
A
one
in
six
slope
it'd
be
wonderful.
If
I
could
move
the
house,
but
I
can't
that
that
that
the
the
house
was
built
before
the
code
even
existed,
most
likely
and
unfortunately,
there's
very
limited
setback
on
that
side,
and
so
there's
no
improvement.
B
B
There
is
no
cut.
We
appreciate
that
access
from
properties
to
streets
should
be
minimized.
We
get
it
again.
In
fact,
the
way
I
read
the
blue
point,
boise
use
of
common
driveways
and
other
design.
Innovations
should
be
used
in
foothills
developments
to
reduce
the
quantity
of
curb
cuts
on
roadways
in
the
foothills
and
reduce
the
area
of
impervious
surface
in
developments.
B
Clearly,
a
common
driveway
for
this
single
residence
with
a
single
garage
does
not
apply
design
innovation.
We
have
proposed
to
planning
and
zoning
staff
that
we
plan
to
convert
the
existing
gravel
driveway
from
horizon
drive
to
one
using
pervious
concrete,
we'll
seek
approval,
achd
and
the
hillside
drainage
personnel.
Pending
your
approval,
please
consider
the
facts
and
specifics
of
this
property
in
weighing
your
decision
side,
in
light
of
this
being
a
consolidation
of
two
properties
that
have
functioned
safely
with
multiple
access
points,
perhaps
since
the
origin
of
the
home
in
1953..
B
B
We
shall
make
improvements
wisely
with
safety
in
mind,
but
the
improvements
cannot
be
accomplished
by
one
driveway
due
to
the
power
line
easement
and
the
topography.
We,
our
architect
and
our
neighbors
have
spent
considerable
effort
and
have
demonstrated
that
the
public
welfare
will
be
protected
while
the
property
is
improved.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
your
attention
are
there
any
questions.
G
K
K
And
then
there's
the
third
one
that
you're
asking
for
as
well,
but
really
you're.
Just
asking
for
two.
B
Let
me
correct
this:
there
are
currently
three
access
points.
There's
one
off
horizon
the
gravel
driveway
that
we
wish
to
retain
and
do
pervious
material
there's
the
carport.
That
is
an
access
from
the
opposite
side
of
the
lot
and
then
there's
a
third
there's,
an
upper
carport
that
gains
us
access
to
the
upper
part
of
our
house.
There
are
currently
three.
B
K
And
what
I
guess
I'm
having
a
hard
time
understanding,
I
understand
what
you
just
said
there
so
you're
wishing
to
go
from
three
to
two,
but
there's
still
three
proposed
sites
on
there,
so
which
are
the
two
that
you're
actually
wanting
to
get
sure,
and
I
don't
know
why.
I'm
not
understanding
this,
but.
B
B
B
B
It's
not
proposed.
That's
the
unsightly
carport
that
we
wish
to
eliminate
by
building
the
garage
here.
H
And
american,
I
I
just
want
to
clarify
at
the
planning
and
zoning
hearing,
were
you
asking
for
all
three?
Yes,.
B
We
were,
I,
I
feel
we
were.
H
So
now
you've
concluded
that
the
lower
carport
or
the
upper
carport,
sorry,
I'm
a
little
backwards,
would
be
removed
and.
B
Yes,
access
closed
yeah
we've
in
since
then
found
better
use
for
that
area,
and
we
can
close
it.
J
Madam
mayor,
yes,
okay,
so
my
question
is
regarding
the
garage
and
shop
access,
so
you
have
a
potential
approach
from
horizon
drive
and
then
the
grade
going
down
is
too
sweet
to
provide
safe
access
to
the
garage,
correct.
G
J
Okay,
so
I
I
understand
the
hardship
there
and
I
understand
you
know
why
you're
doing
that,
I
actually
used
to
live
right
down
the
street
from
this.
So
I
know
this
whole
street
very
well,
we
always
admired
it,
and
so
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
is
why
another
driveway
circle
way
is
that
for
parking.
Is
that
for
or
yeah
the
one
that's
proposed
for.
B
B
B
H
J
Madam
mayor,
I
think
I
have
a
question
for
cody
too
cody,
where
the
applicant
has
is
now
saying
that
they
do
not
want
the
access
from
that
other
frontage
kind
of
the
opposite
frontage
from
horizon
is
that
is,
I
mean,
is
this
appeal
kind
of
moot
at
this
point?
Can
they
legally
take
access
from
horizon
and
that
garage
access
without
having
a
variance.
A
F
E
F
F
F
B
Basically,
it's
simply
a
parking
spot
for
people
with
limited
mobility.
I've
broke
I've
crushed
a
hip
already
yeah,
so
my
wife
is
well
aware,
with
all
the
band-aids
in
the
house
that
the
possibility
of
another
injury
is.
It
needs
us
to
consider
level
access
to
our
homes.
Quite
simply,.
H
Madam
mayor,
a
question
for
cody:
that's
procedural!
Potentially
it
doesn't
look
like
we're.
Gonna
have
any
other
testimony.
I
I
think
you
answered
this,
but
we
would
still
have
to
uphold
the
appeal
in
order
to
find
two
two
sides
right.
A
Think
there
certainly
are,
we
would
suggest
there
is
perhaps
unique
circumstances
hardship
there.
In
that
scenario,.
K
Then
mayor,
I
guess,
question
for
cody
and
then
for
the
applicant
they're
they're
related,
and
it
may
not
matter
at
this
point
with
what's
been
brought
up,
but
had
they
just
used
the
existing
driveways
that
were
there
would
they
have
had
to
have
gotten
rid
of
one
of
those
based
off
the
city
code
or
if
they
would
have
just
used
the
existing
driveways
would
those
be
have
been
grandfathered
in.
A
Madam
mayor
council,
member
hallie
burton
if
they
would
have
used
the
existing
driveways
as
as
the
two
original
parcels
that
we
started
with
no,
but
the
act
of
consolidating
them
kind
of
put
them
in
this.
This
situation.
K
B
B
In
so
doing
and
and
the
requirement
to
build
a
garage
with
clearance,
the
power
lines,
this
plan
was
our
only
only
recourse.
K
K
B
It
does
aesthetically,
we
had
to
move
the
driveway
aesthetically
right
now.
The
carport
is
low
enough
that
and
small
enough
that
we
still
have
a
front
yard
and
you
still
have
you're
not
looking
at
a
big
garage.
If
we
were
to
retain
that
location
and
build
the
garage
there,
and
certainly
that
was
a
consideration
very
early.
The
garage
would
be
that
much
higher
and
bigger
and
the
front
of
the
house
would
be
staring
at
the
back
end
of
the
garage.
B
F
F
All
right
well
with
that,
then,
is
there
anything
more.
You
want
to
say.
B
Our
architect
pursued
the
idea
that.
I
B
Were
on
a
corner,
a
lot
actually
a
dual
corner
a
lot
and
we
could
did
not
get
any
you
respect
cody.
We
did
not
get
any
attention
or
any
alternative
guidance
on
what
a
another
solution
would
be
in
in.
In
the
view
of
corner
lots.
B
We've
tried-
and
we
spent
quite
a
bit
of
time
and
honestly
money
with
our
architect
in
putting
various
plans
together
and-
and
we
truly
believe
this
is
the
one
that
makes
entire
sense.
E
I
do
have
a
question
either
for
cody
or
for
the
fine
folks
behind
me
and
that
this
is
this
is
different
than
what
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
reviewed,
because
aspects
of
the
plan
have
changed
a
little
bit,
we're
down
to
two
et
cetera,
and
so
I
I'm
just
having
a
hard
time
figuring
out
how
to
apply
the
appeal
standards
to
that
we're
reviewing
a
proposal,
that's
different
than
the
record
we're
reviewing,
and
I
don't
like
how
do
we
do
this.
F
H
Well,
madam
mayor
with
that,
I
will
give
this
a
shot
and
then
explain
myself.
H
If
I
get
a
second,
I
would
move
that
we
uphold
the
appeal
on
sos
21-8
for
donald
and
denise
sweep
at
214
circle
way
partially
by
granting
two
driveway
accesses,
one
from
horizon
drive
and
one
from
circle
drive
on
the
west
side
of
the
lot
as
depicted
in
the
drawings,
based
on
the
fact
that
there
is
a
hardship
due
to
both
topography
and
an
existing
power
line
to
be
able
to
have
both
an
accessible
access
point
and
a
garage
access
point.
Second,.
H
Madam
mayor,
so
I'm
saying
partially
uphold
the
appeal
partially
because
the
the
original
ruling
was
based
on
the
three
access
points
and
not
on
the
two
and
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
apparently
did
not
consider
just
having
the
two
access
points,
as
I've
read
the
record
or
if
they
did
concluded
that
they
weren't
able
to
move
from
three
to
two.
H
I
think
the
three
access
points
would
have
been
excessive,
but
I
think
the
two
given
the
topography,
the
power
line,
the
mobility
accessibility
issues
due
to
the
topography
and
the
current
location
of
the
existing
home.
All
point
to
this
as
a
a
good
solution,
without
finding
error
in
the
planning
and
zoning
commissions.
F
Already
looks
like
there's:
none.
K
The
amount
of
me
or
I
guess
there
maybe
is
a
little
discussion.
I
apologize
so
some
clarification
from
council
president
clegg.
We
are
upholding
the
appeal
and
then
we
are
granting.
H
Thank
you.
The
decision
of
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
was
to
allow
only
one
access
point
and
the
request
before
planning
and
zoning
was
for
three
access
points,
so
we're
upholding
the
appeal
and
partially
changing
the
decision
of
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
from
one
access
point
to
two.
G
K
And
I
guess
I'm
not
I'm
confident
that
we're
doing
it
the
right
way
and
that
maybe
I
just
don't
understand
what
we're
doing
what
I
maybe
I'm
struggling
with
a
little
bit
in
my
head,
is
that
I
think
when
you,
when
you
spoke,
you
used
the
term
hardship
and
that
they
were
experiencing
a
hardship
from
my
point
of
view
with
the
three
existing
driveways
that
were
available
and
the
options
that
were
there.
K
Maybe
there
was
an
opportunity
for
that
to
be
for
a
different
design
to
have
taken
place,
and
so
in
my
head,
I'm
not
necessarily
comfortable
with
saying
that
there
truly
was
a
hardship
and
that
that
was
an
error
from
the
commission.
I
don't
think
that
you're
saying
that
either
I'm
saying
that
we're
looking
at
this,
I
guess
what
I'm
understanding
is
that
we're
looking
this
as
a
whole
different
thing
than
what
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
saw
and
if
that's
what
we're
saying,
then
I'm
comfortable
with
that
going
forward.
H
Thank
you,
madam
mayor.
I
get
if
I
could
respond
to
that.
To
me.
The
hardship
is
not
that
they
could
have
had
three
access
points
by
not
moving
any
of
them
and
that
we're
only
allowing
two.
The
hardship
is
the
location
of
the
power
line
and
the
location
of
the
existing
residents
and
the
ability
to
visit
that
existing
residence
if
you're
accessible.
K
E
Else's,
I
appreciate
the
effort
towards
the
solution
and
I
guess
the
way
that
I
think
about
it
is
first.
Did
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
make
an
error
with
what
it
had
in
front
of
it,
and
I
don't
think
it
did
so
then.
The
next
question
is
what
to
do
with
the
changed
plan,
and
I
I
think
I
understand
the
council
president's
motion
and
reasoning,
but
I
still
have
concerns
about
two
primary
access
points.
E
On
those
slopes
like
like,
apparently,
three
quarters
of
the
council,
I
used
to
live
on
this
street
too,
and
that
stretch
of
horizon
drive
is
nasty.
I
live
there
in
the
snowpocalypse
and
it
is
no
joke
right.
It
is
12
or
14
on
an
off-camber
slope
and
a
turn
and
the
plenty
of
zoning
commission
considered
this
and
they
rejected
it
as
a
as
a
safety
concern,
and
so
when
I
go
back
and
look
with
the
revised
plan
at
what
planning
and
zoning
considered,
I
still
don't
see
an
error
there.
E
So
you
know
we
keep,
we
say,
uphold
the
appeal,
I
think
we
mean
grant
the
appeal
and
I
would
uphold
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
decision
here.