►
From YouTube: Boise City Council Evening Session
Description
February 8, 2022
A
D
A
A
A
Without
objection,
I
saw
that
michael
ellis
had
raised
his
hand
on
zoom.
We
really
thank
you
for
your
service
and
thanks
for
coming
this
evening.
You're
welcome
to
say
something
if
you'd.
F
Yep,
like
just
wanted
to
say
it's
an
honor
to
serve
the
city
of
boise.
I
love
living
here
and
love
raising
my
family
here.
So
thank
you
for
reappointing
me
and
I
look
forward
to
serving
on
the
committee
for
another
four
years.
A
Thank
you.
I
love
how
your
little
one
on
cue
acknowledged
their
existence.
A
A
Consent
agenda
all
items
with
an
asterisk
are
considered
to
be
routine
by
the
council
will
be
enacted
by
one
motion.
There'll
be
no
separate
discussion
on
these
items
unless
a
council,
member
or
citizen
so
requests
in
which
kci
and
will
be
removed
from
the
general
order
of
business
and
considered
in
its
normal
sequence.
E
A
G
E
C
H
A
E
G
C
A
A
A
Okay,
so
you
all
will
go
first
and
then
I've
got
a
list
of
folks
that
have
signed
up
to
testify,
and
so,
if
you're
online
we'll
we'll
go
through
the
list
first
and
then,
if
we
haven't
called
you
raise
your
hand
and
then
I
see
helen
is
here
good
to
see
you
anybody
else
in
the
room
wanted
to
testify
on
this,
but
didn't
sign
this
piece
of
paper
alrighty.
Okay,
with
that
crystal
go
ahead,.
B
A
A
B
Madam
mayor
members
of
the
council
item
before
you
is
an
appeal
of
the
planning
and
zoning
commission's
decision
to
approve
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
pud
comprised
of
eight
attached
townhomes
a
cat,
three
hillside
permit
and
variances
to
encroach
street
side
setbacks
on
1.06
acres
in
an
r1c
zone,
an
associated
preliminary
platform
common
and
eight
buildable.
Lots
was
recommended
for
approval
and
is
before
you
tonight
as
well.
B
B
The
proposal
meets
the
density,
height
front
and
rear
setbacks
of
the
zone,
and
each
two
unit
structure
will
utilize
the
standard,
five-foot
interior
setbacks
to
allow
for
the
grading
and
retaining
walls
necessary
to
develop
the
property
through
the
pud.
The
applicant
has
asked
for
waivers,
as
shown
here
included
with
the
proposal
was
a
variance
to
reduce
the
perimeter
street
side
setbacks
on
the
east
and
west.
The
property
is
flanked
on
the
west
by
an
unopened
and
unmaintained
sixth
street
right
of
way
and
on
the
east
by
vacated
right
away.
B
That
contains
a
trail
that
is
maintained
by
the
city
as
part
of
the
boise
trail
system.
In
the
r1c
zone,
the
street
side
setback
is
20
feet
and,
as
these
spaces
are
public
right-of-ways
that
were
originally
allocated
for
streets,
this
setback
is
triggered.
The
applicant
requested
a
five-foot
setback
on
each
side
equal
to
the
typical
non-street
side
setback
of
the
zone.
The
nearest
residences
are
over
80
feet
away
and
will
be
buffered
by
roadways,
right-of-way
and
proposed
landscaping,
as
outlined
in
the
original
project
report.
B
The
appellant
appealed,
the
november
8
2021
decision
from
the
pnc
commission
to
approve
the
pud
variants
and
hillside
development
permits
and
six
parties
of
record
and
the
north
end.
Neighborhood
association
submitted
memos
in
support
of
the
appeal
grounds
against
the
project
have
been
summarized
here.
As
outlined
in
your
memo.
The
planning
team
found
no
evidence
suggesting
the
commission
aired
in
its
decision.
The
planning
team
finds
the
commission's
decision
was
supported
by
substantial
evidence
and
was
not
arbitrary
or
capricious.
B
In
conclusion,
the
planning,
team
and
planning
and
zoning
commission
finds
the
requests
to
be
consistent
with
the
standards
and
criteria
for
approval.
As
such,
the
planning
team
recommends.
Council
deny
the
appeal
and
approve
all
applications
with
conditions
and
then
two
final
notes
before
I
seed
my
time.
First
kane
shaffer
and
jason
taylor
are
standing
by
on
zoom.
If
you
have
any
hillside
questions
and
then
there
may
be
citizens
who
are
not
parties
of
record
to
the
applications
being
appealed
that
may
want
to
testify
on
the
associated
subdivision.
G
Just
one
question
to
start
off
with
crystal
is
this:
in
the
historic
district:
this
is
the
north
end,
it's
outside
of
the
historic
district.
Okay,
thank
you.
H
Crystal
I'm
sorry
that
I
now
see
you
again
so
far
away.
We
had
a
lovely
time
briefly,
while
we
were
in
chambers
together,
but
my
question
is
on
the
6th
street
right
away
that
one
hasn't
been
vacated.
H
B
Sure,
madam
mayor
and
council
member
of
agent,
the
achd
has
confirmed
there
are
no
plans
to
utilize
either
right
of
ways
for
a
roadway
due
to
the
slope
and
topography
and
has
actually
entered
into
a
license
agreement
with
city
parks
for
the
installation
of
ped
and
bike
and
natural
plants,
but
and
parks
have
provided
comments
and
confirmed.
They
have
no
objections
to
the
project.
I
Madam
mayor
council,
member
holly
burton
thank
you
crystal
council
pro
tem
woodings
asked
the
question
whether
it
was
in
the
historic
district
or
not,
and-
and
it's
not
my
question
is,
since
it
does
border
the
historic
district.
I
guess
I'm,
maybe
I'm
making
an
assumption
that
the
historic
district
starts
right
across
the
street.
Is
there
any?
I
I
E
Adam
here,
thank
you.
Thank
you
crystal.
One
of
the
appeal
grounds
is
that
the
massing
is
out
of
character
with
the
neighborhood.
As
I
read
the
record,
one
of
the
reasons
that
this
was
grouped
into
four
buildings
of
two
units
each
was
to
better
match
the
massing.
That's
typical
in
this
neighborhood.
B
Madam
mayor
council,
president
click
that
is
correct.
The
intention
was
to
group
them
together
so
as
to
avoid
their
row
house
look.
E
And
then,
secondly,
the
series
of
driveways
has
also
caused
some
concern.
It
is
quite
steep,
I
assume,
if
this
is,
if
the
appeal
is
denied
tonight-
and
this
goes
forward,
the
applicant
will
have
to
get
a
grading
permit
to
ensure
that
those
driveways
actually
meet
our
grading
standards.
Is
that
also
correct.
E
And
then,
finally,
just
in
response
to
council
member
beijing's
concerns,
I
did
request
that
the
parks
department
share
with
the
planning
department.
The
recently
executed
license
agreement
with
achd
on
the
sixth
street
right
of
way,
and
it
does
indeed
include
the
entire
right-of-way
for
pedestrian
and
bicycle
use.
A
D
Problem.
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
council
members.
Thank
you
for
this
opportunity.
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
appeal.
I've
learned
a
lot
about
city
processes
in
this
process
and
I've
enjoyed
reading
blueprint
boise,
I
didn't
realize
it
was
out
there
and
in
digging
in
deeper
it's
really
it's
really.
It's
really
cool
to
see
that
effort
by
the
city
and
and
what
we're
planning
and
I
get
to
recruit
a
lot
of
people
to
boise.
I've
recruited
a
lot
of
faculty
members
and
I
love
living
here.
D
As
mr
ella
said,
it's
a
wonderful
place
to
live
incredibly
livable
place,
and
I
that's
what
we
tell
people
I've
gotten
to
work
with
clark
krauss
to
be
that
bringing
people
to
boise
and
love
living
here,
love
living
in
the
north
end,
I'm
at
602,
west
alturas,
just
west
of
that
property
across
the
sixth
street
right
away,
so
kind
of
at
the
base
there
and
infill
is
really
important.
Infill
is
a
critical
component.
We've
got
a
complex
housing
situation.
I
know
you
guys
are
dealing
with
that.
D
A
lot
infill
is
really
important
to
that,
and
so
I
think
adding
developing
on
this
piece
of
land
is
a
great
opportunity
if
I
could
get
the
next
slide.
What
my
concern
is-
and
the
reason
I'm
appealing
is
when
I
look
at
this
proposal,
it's
violating
the
zoning
code
26
times
there
are
eight
lots.
Minimum
lot.
Width
is
50
feet.
D
minimum
lot
size
is
violated
eight
times
internal
side.
Setback
is
set
at
five
feet.
That's
set
at
zero
for
each
one
of
these
and
the
street
setback.
That
code
is
asked
to
be
very
the
variance
on
that
twice
on
both
the
west
end
and
the
east
end
so
yeah.
It
depends
how
you
want
to
count,
but
I
look
at
this
as
violating
cone
26
times.
D
I
really
appreciate
all
of
crystal's
help
and
the
and
the
planning
and
development
memo,
and
I
want
to
kind
of
go
into
some
detail
in
what's
in
there
and
kind
of
how
I
look
at
the
situation.
So
if
I
could
have
the
next
slide,
some
alternate,
maybe
alternate
interpretations
or
a
different
way
to
look
at
the
memo
and
what
is
said
there.
D
So,
look
at
street
side
setback
in
your
packet,
page,
827,
828
and
what
it
says
is
as
outlined
in
the
project
report
planning
and
zoning
commission
found.
There
would
be
an
exceptional
circumstance
and
hardship
justifying
the
variance
request
as
the
adjacent
rate
of
waste
are
either
vacated
or
undeveloped.
D
While
both
sides
are
flanked
by
public
right
away,
they
are
currently
unutilized
and
there
are
no
plans
for
either
rights
away
to
be
extended
or
developed
as
public
streets
do
the
topography
of
the
area
I
didn't
actually
realize
there
was
a
discussion
with
the
parks
that
had
gone
as
far
as
it
had
and
that
word
unutilized
irks
me
probably
more
than
it
should
it's,
probably
not
a
logical
or
responsible
response,
but
that
right
away
is
used.
D
It's
used
by
the
robins
and
the
screech
owls
and
the
hummingbirds
and
the
squirrel,
I'm
not
too
worried
about
the
squirrels
and
they'll
be
fine,
but
that
right
away
is
is
utilized.
D
So
that's
I
don't
understand
why
there
would
be
a
hardship
or
an
exceptional
circumstance
just
because
we
haven't
paved
it
and
in
fact,
if
the
chickadees
could
testify
tonight,
they'd
actually
ask
you
to
leave
that
setback
there,
so
they
can
have
their
home.
D
In
addition,
I'll
have
a-
and
this
is
a
little
more
personal
I'll-
have
a
30
feet.
Tall
three
story:
60
feet
wide
concrete
wall
15
feet
closer
to
my
house
in
my
office
window.
If
that's
a,
if
that
variance,
is
granted
looking
at
buildable
area,
the
again
in
your
packet
page,
829
planning
and
development
memo
states,
actual
buildable
area
of
the
site
is
limited
by
the
topography
and
will
already
require
significant
grading
with
the
associated
conditions
of
approval.
D
The
commission
found
that
the
variants
would
not
be
in
conflict
with
blueprint
boise
nor
be
materially
detrimental
to
the
public
health
safety,
buffalo
welfare
or
enduring
injurious
to
the
property.
Improvements
of
other
property
owners
with
the
overall
size
of
the
subject
area
has
sufficient
dimensions
to
accommodate
eight
standard
sized
lots
for
the
r1c
zone.
The
steep
topography
of
the
lot
makes
approximately
0.4
acres
of
the
one
acre
subject:
property
more
difficult
to
develop.
D
So
one
way
I
look
at
that
is
it's
0.6
acres
of
buildable
land
and
that's
where
that
density
is
much
higher
than
what
we
would
typically
allow
on
0.6
acres
again,
a
different
way
of
looking
at
it,
but
that
density
of
using
units
that
massing
is
very
uncharacteristic
for
the
north
end
and
for
the
neighborhood
again,
I
don't
see
how
exceptional
circumstances
or
hardship
applies.
This
lot
is
this
lot.
It
was
that
way
when
the
developer
bought
the
property
a
little
more
detail,
page
831,
co-chairman
shafer
from
the
pnc
commission.
D
D
Be
that
as
it
may,
these
are
brand
new
structures
going
in
and
they're
never
going
to
look
like
structures
that
are
over
100
years
old.
So
that's
just
the
condition
we're
in
in
this
part
of
the
city.
You
know
if
these
lots
were
in
the
historic
overlay
district
we'd
be
having
a
much
different
conversation.
C
D
D
If
you
look
at
the
city's
land
use
guidance
documents,
we
get
clear
direction
to
protect
the
integrity
and
character
of
existing
neighborhoods,
particularly
city
designated
historic
districts
and
regardless
of
location
blueprint.
Boise
requires
the
development
must
be
compatible
and
respect
respectful
of
the
existing
neighborhood
land
owners
and
their
investments
in
their
properties.
The
proposed
development
is
not
compatible,
nor
does
it
match
the
character
of
the
existing
neighborhood,
okay
and
finally,
the
open
space
and
trail
system.
D
Pud,
that's
boise
city
code,
section
110304,
section
7
for
pud,
says
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
land
development
that
preserves
natural
features,
allows
provision
of
services
and
provides
common,
open
spaces
or
other
amenities
not
found
in
traditional
lot
by
lot.
Development
that
point
four
acres
that
is
left
open
is
steep.
D
D
D
One
of
the
challenges
of
looking
at
at
this
and
looking
at
the
drawings
and
looking
at
the
property
for
me
was
sort
of
understanding.
What
is
this
going
to
look
like?
What
is
this
massing
going
to
look
like,
so
I
drove
around
the
weekend
and
tried
to
take
some
pictures
and
tried
to
come
up
with
a
representation.
D
So
if
I
get
the
next
slide,
this
is
the
corner
of
6th
and
alturus
helen's
house
and
the
greenhouse
is
the
one
that
was
built
10
years
ago
and
then
the
other
one
you're
looking
sort
of
at
that
corner.
The
property
would
be
on
the
left
of
this
picture
on
the
upper
right
corner,
and
so
I
tried
to
find
a
property
that
is
similar
to
these
units,
a
a
building
that
has
two
townhomes
in
it.
That
is
three
stories
high.
D
What
I
found
was
on
the
corner
of
36th
and
hill
road,
what
is
known
as
the
dog
bone?
So
if
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
I
took
a
picture
of
those
townhomes.
D
I
scaled
this
to
match
the
scaling
of
the
picture
below
not
to
at
least
in
a
minus,
not
there's
a
little,
probably
not
perfection
here,
but
these
are
scaled
to
the
same
sort
of
size
range
as
what
is
below
and
that's
what
it
looks
like.
It
looks
like
the
the
same
piece,
a
very
dense
front
in
right
across
the
street
from
the
historic
zone.
D
So
if
I
go
to
the
last
slide,
I
don't
think
the
pud
code
was
created
to
circumvent
zoning
requirements.
I
don't
think
that's
why
it
was
created.
E
D
E
D
A
E
Are
attached?
Okay,
you
do
know
that
our
code
does
allow
attached
duplexes
on
every
single
family.
D
G
And
the
mayor,
I
have
a
question
for
crystal
crystal:
we
we've
established
that
this
is
not
in
the
historic
district.
Will
this
application
be
subject
to
design
review,
or
has
it
already
gone
through
design
review.
B
J
Madam
mayor
members
of
city
council,
ben
semple,
with
rodney
evans
and
partners,
1450
west
bannock
street
boise,
idaho
83706,
appreciate
the
time
to
represent
the
project.
Yup,
that's
the
right
slide.
The
project
is
located.
1702
north
sixth
street
is
comprised
of
seven
parcels,
totaling
1.062
acres
within
the
r1c
zone.
It's
also
in
the
hillside
overlay.
J
The
applications
received
for
a
category
3
hillside
development
permit
planned
unit
development
and
variants
all
received
unanimous
approval
from
the
plan
and
zoning
commission
on
november
8
2021
the
subdivision
application,
which
is
after
the
appeal,
was
also
recommended
unanimously
for
approval.
All
applications
were
supported
and
recommended
for
approval
by
city
of
boise
planning
staff,
as
well
as
by
the
public
works
hillside
review
of
the
preliminary
plans
and
documents
submitted.
J
J
The
next
slide,
please,
when
proposing
this
project,
care
was
taken
to
ensure
compliance
with
zoning
densities,
as
well
as
additional
requirements
and
regulations
applicable
to
the
property
project
is
proposing
a
planned
unit.
Development
which
is
supported
in
code
and
is
recognized
in
the
appellants
letter,
as
this
project
does
provide
an
opportunity
for
land
development
that
preserves
natural
features,
allows
provisions
of
services
and
provides
common,
open
spaces
or
other
amenities
not
found
in
traditional
lot
by
lot
development.
J
J
This
allows
for
the
native
hillside
above
to
have
limited
impact
which
preserves
the
natural
features
and
sets
aside
open
space.
The
open
space
is
also
contained
within
within
a
common
lot,
which
will
have
a
public
access
easement
placed
over
it.
Ensuring
public
access
in
perpetuity
the
owner
actually
intends
to
donate
this
to
the
city
if
it
works
for
the
city,
if
it's
congruent
with
other
pieces
that
could
be
considered
public,
but
regardless
of
that,
it
will
have
a
public
access,
easement
recorded
in
the
ccnr's
hoa
documents.
J
Everything
the
addition
of
a
trail
reconstruction
is
a
benefit
and
amenity
not
only
for
the
proposed
development
but
the
general
public
as
well.
The
pud
was
considered
appropriate
and
consistent
with
boise
city
code,
not
only
due
to
the
standard
approval
criteria,
but
as
it
provides
for
multiple
opportunities
for
amenities
that
are
accessible
by
the
general
public
and
not
only
the
future
residents
of
the
development
you
can
bring
up
the
next
slide.
J
Please,
the
appellant
is
correct
that
the
5th
street
right-of-way
vacation
process
did
require
the
owner
to
maintain
a
20-foot
right-of-way
for
trail
access,
but
did
not
require
them
to
rebuild
or
build
new
trails
through
that
right
of
way
the
develop
the
developer
of
the
project
is
going
to
reconstruct
the
trail
connection
to
be
in
the
common
lot.
That
is
the
now
20
foot
wide
fifth
street
right
of
way.
As
you
can
see
in
the
aerial
photo,
it
does
fall
substantially
on
a
portion
of
the
property.
The
northeast
corner.
J
This
will
additionally
be
extended
across
the
common
public
access
lot
in
order
to
maintain
future
connectivity,
while
the
main
trail
at
the
top
of
the
slope
does
not
fall
on
the
subject
property,
it
is
on
a
separate
owner's
private
property
if
that
property
was
ever
to
redevelop,
there's
a
potential
that
the
trail
that
is
currently
there
could
be
blocked
or
removed
by
constructing
a
secondary
trail
across
the
common
public
access
lot
that
is
associated
with
this
project.
The
trail
connectivity
is
protected,
regardless
of
what
the
adjacent
property
owner
decides
to
do.
J
The
project
developer
had
initially
expressed
desire
to
vacate
a
portion
of
the
6th
street
right
of
way,
as
that
right-of-way
is
currently
unmaintained
by
achd
achd
indicated
that
the
right
of
way
would
not
be
opened
maintained
or
redeveloped
as
a
public
street
due
to
topographic
constraints
and
the
lack
of
connection
to
other
right-of-way.
I
confirmed
this
with
city
boise
public
works
as
well.
J
The
developers
informed
that
the
city
was
interested
in
purchasing
or
developing
that
portion
of
the
sixth
street
right-of-way
as
an
informal
trailhead
for
the
trails
to
the
north.
So
the
developer
made
the
decision
not
to
pursue
that
vacation
as
their
proponents
of
the
trail
system
around
their
property.
Additionally,
the
developer
will
be
redeveloping
drainage
improvements
to
the
5th
street
right-of-way,
as
well
as
upgrading
and
maintaining
landscape
improvements
to
the
6th
street
right-of-way,
to
reinforce
the
trail
head
and
to
clean
up
the
area
that
currently
has
volunteer
trees
and
vegetation.
J
They
have
also
committed
to
extended
extending
detached
sidewalk
across
the
6th
street
right
of
way
connecting
the
proposed
development
sidewalk
to
the
existing
sidewalk
to
the
west.
This
completes
an
uninterrupted
detached
sidewalk
to
the
trail,
access
points
that
will
be
located
within
the
5th
and
6th
street.
Right
of
way,
the
developer
will
be
entering
into
a
license
agreement
with
achd
and
or
the
city
of
boise
for
the
existing
portion
of
the
right-of-way
along
their
western
boundary.
J
The
extent
of
that
license
agreement
is
still
to
be
determined,
but
at
minimum
will
include
cleanup
of
the
existing
right-of-way
area,
installation
of
additional
plant
material,
stormwater
facility
for
public
drainage
participation
in
rebuilding
or
establishing
trail
connections
for
the
public,
including
the
easement
over
the
common
lot.
That
will
be
in
perpetuity
installation
of
additional
detached
sidewalk
across
the
sixth
street
right
of
way
due
to
the
lack
of
true
street
side
frontage
and
that
the
rights
of
way
to
the
east
and
west
are
for
pedestrian
use,
only
the
variance
requested
for
the
reduced
street
side.
J
J
When
you
take
the
8
units
divided
by
the
1.062
acres,
while
the
appellant
states
of
the
project
is
high
density
and
significantly
higher
than
anything
in
the
surrounding
area,
there
are
multiple
projects:
multi-family
duplex
triplex
and
four
plexes
within
the
immediate
area.
Within
half
a
mile
that
approach
15
units
per
acre.
J
Can
you
show
some
of
the
pictures?
So
I
just
want
to
point
out
some
of
the
the
homes
that
are
in
this
area.
This
is
sherman
hollow.
These
homes
are
anywhere
from
35
feet
to
70
feet
wide.
These
ones
were
getting
into
the
north
side
of
sherman,
which
is
the
same
condition
that
we
have
on
our
property.
J
This
is
not
within
the
historic
district,
it's
north
of
the
of
the
sherman
street
right-of-way,
so
these
fall
across
the
street
from
a
historic
district.
They
were
held
to
zero
standards
because
all
they
had
to
do
was
apply
for
a
building.
Permit
sherman
hollow
went
through
some
additional
reviews,
but
the
ones
on
the
north
side
of
sherman
between
fifth
street
and
where
ada
comes
in
no
design
review,
it
was
hillside
and
a
building
permit.
J
Townhomes
will
be
fire
sprinkled
to
help
with
these
requirements,
which
may
allow
for
more
traditional
building
materials.
I'm
gonna
touch
on
lot
coverage
real
fast,
we're
not
in
the
historic
overlay.
So
we're
not.
We
do
not
have
to
comply
with
the
35
lot
coverage,
although
that
requirement
does
not
apply
to
this
development.
J
J
Last
thing
I'll
say
is:
this:
is
a
street
front
rendering
of
the
project?
This
does
not
show
the
detached
sidewalks.
We
didn't
have
time
to
prepare
that
there
will
be
detached
sidewalks.
We've
made
a
lot
of
effort
to
include
street
trees.
If
you
go
to
the
last
slide,
I
think
maybe
the
landscape
plane.
Okay,
thank
you.
I
would
stand
for
questions.
K
E
I
didn't
realize
that
all
right,
sorry
lucy,
I
didn't
realize
I
didn't-
have
my
mac
on
so
my
question
is
walk
me
through
the
variances,
so
I
understand
them
correctly.
I
know
the
two
side
yard
variances,
not
quite
sure.
I
understand
the
front
variances
now
that
we
have
the
detached
sidewalk.
J
E
Thank
you.
Second
question
is:
what
will
the
treatment
be
on
the
western
edge
at
the
edge
of
the?
What
would
be
the
sixth
street
right
of
way?
Will
that
be
a
retaining
wall,
or
will
it
be
sloped
up
to
the
foot
of
the
building
or
how
will
that
work
so.
J
So
the
first
floor
of
these
units
is
actually
completely
buried
other
than
the
front
of
it.
There's
a
portion
of
the
second
floor
that
also
acts
as
a
retaining
wall,
so
the
west
side
will
remain
fairly
close
to
what
it
is.
Now
we
will
need
to
do
some
improvements
to
it
to
clean
up
the
grating
there
and
install
the
roof
drain
collection
system,
as
well
as
both
private
and
public
infiltration
facilities.
J
Here
so
really,
you'll
see
the
top
floor,
a
portion
of
the
second
floor,
the
windows
that
you
can
see
in
this
rendering
between
the
two
trees
there
more
than
likely
will
be
visible
again,
that's
approximately
80
feet
from
the
neighbor
to
the
west,
we're
doing
everything
we
can
to
really
get
these
into
the
hill.
It
actually
falls
right
about
where
the
existing
cut
line
is
on
that
site.
J
Now
the
owner
also
intends
to
go
out
into
the
sixth
street
right
away
to
install
additional
street
trees,
even
though
it's
not
a
true
street
clean
up
the
weeds.
There
get
some
beneficial
plants
natives
in
there,
working
with
boise
parks
to
to
come
up
with
a
seed
mix,
as
well
as
a
good
plant
list
for
within
that
space.
E
Okay,
one
last
question:
if
I
could
admit
amir
the
pathway
system,
as
I
understand
what
you're
proposing
is
fairly
well
aligned
with
the
path
that
is
along
the
5th
street
right
of
way
today,
that
there
will
be
a
new
pathway
across
the
slope
within
the
common
area
that
will
connect
to
the
6th
street.
And
will
you
then
also
build
the
connection
down
to
the
6th
street
right-of-way,
since
there
is
quite
an
elevation
change
between
those.
J
Madame
mayor
councilmember
clegg,
yes,
so
the
existing
trail
that
falls
within
the
fifth
street
right
away
will
be
realigned
to
be
fully
within
that
public
20-foot
right
of
way,
and
then,
where
you
see
this
in
this
image,
it
cuts
across
and
connects
to
that
main
trail.
J
M
Good
evening,
madam
mayor
councillors,
erican
809,
north
18th
street
north
and
neighborhood
association
planning
and
joining
chair.
This
is
a
difficult
project
for
us,
especially
especially
for
myself
as
an
architect.
M
Nina
has
an
architect
and
a
city
or
a
certified
planner
on
the
board,
and
we've
actually
discussed
it
amongst
the
entire
nina
board
and
gotten
into
consensus
to
ironically
support
the
project,
but
also
support
the
neighbors.
So
we
are
in
support
of
infill
we'd
love
to
see
something
actually
going
into
this,
this
site
that
has
been
sitting
vacant
for
so
long.
M
M
During
the
december
planning
and
zoning
meeting,
the
same
mayors
or
the
same
neighbors,
along
with
the
neighborhood
association,
did
get
up
and
speak
for
well
over
an
hour,
raising
concerns
about
this
project
and
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
pretty
much
went
straight
to
approving
it
without
any
discussion
or
acknowledgement
of
the
neighborhood
concerns
so
fast
forward.
Here
we
are
with
this
appeal.
M
It's
it's
been
made
clear
by
amy
mole
that
the
character
is
not
congruent
with
the
neighborhood
and
possibly
questionable
when
it
comes
to
blueprint.
Boise.
The
pud
process
is
a
tricky
one,
to
say
the
least,
and
we
see
it
used
often
to
produce
developments
like
this.
M
So
it
does
provide
a
much
higher
density
than
what
you
find
in
the
neighborhood
and
it
does
about
historic.
But
it's
not
subject
to
historic
and
blueprint.
Boise
does
say
we
need
to
acknowledge
adjacent
plan
or
adjacent
uses,
and
even
though
it's
not
historic,
it's
completely,
surrounded
by
historic,
excluding
the
residential
lots
up
the
hill,
which
are
effectively
out
of
view
or
out
of
sight
of
this
project.
M
A
couple
quick
little
comparisons,
so
amy
mall
had
brought
up
the
the
duplexes
that
are
up
on
hill
street,
which
is
an
arterial
which
these
are
very
similar
to
there's
also
been
three-story
townhomes
proposed
and
approved
over
in
the
west
end
of
the
west
end,
where
there's
been
an
overlay
zone
specifically
to
densify
that
property
to
identify
that
part
around
some
commercial
zones
or
micro,
commercial
zones.
M
And
think
it
pretty
much
addresses
the
number
of
comments
we
had
in
regard
that
we
just
want
to
be
able
to
see
a
development
there.
But
we
want
to
see
a
development.
That's
been
taken
into
consideration
of
the
actual
neighborhood
in
which
it
is
going
and
listens
to
the
neighbors
concerns
and
looks
at
a
couple
different
ways
to
approach
the
project
to
come
to
the
same
kind
of
product.
G
Yes,
just
a
couple
of
comments
eric,
I
want
to
thank
you
for
detailing
nina's
outreach
strategy
on
this
and
who
you
talk
to,
and
it's
very
thorough,
and
I
really
appreciate
it
also,
I'm
wondering
where's
your
cat,
because
we
really
enjoyed
your
cat
last
time.
They
were
able
to
join
us.
N
Madam
mayor,
yes,
thank
you
yeah.
I
just
want
to
echo
council
pro
tem
woodings
sentiments.
I
really
appreciate
your
efforts
to
find
that
third
way
of
honoring
all
the
parties
involved
really
appreciate
that.
Thank
you.
Eric.
A
L
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity,
my
family
and
I
live
in
the
red,
historic
home
that
was
shown
earlier
directly
across
the
street.
From
this
proposed
development
and
13
years
ago,
we
brought
bought
our
home
there
purposefully
within
the
north
end,
neighborhood
and
specifically
within
the
historic
district
because
of
the
historic
integrity
and
protected
character
of
this
neighborhood
afforded
by
the
city's
pledge
to
minimize
protection
of
historic
and
cult,
to
maximize
protection
of
historic
and
cultural
resources.
L
We
have
remained
confident
in
blueprint,
boise's
commitment
to
assuring
that
boiseans
can
expect
a
predictable
development
pattern
when
making
further
investments
in
our
home
and
to
address
the
earlier
questions
raised
about
historical
impacts.
We
do
not
feel
the
proposed
development
upholds
these
commitments
made
by
the
city,
the
development
in
proposing
four
three-story
modern
style
duplex
units
with
eight
front-facing
garages
at
such
high
density
across
an
entire
block,
fails
to
protect
the
historic
resource
of
our
and
our
neighbor's
homes
and
is
in
no
way
predictable.
L
This
plan
does
not,
as
pledged
by
the
city,
encourage
residential
infill
that
complements
the
scale
and
character
of
the
surrounding
neighborhood,
as
the
buildings
are
wholly
unfitting.
Of
the
character
of
this
neighborhood,
there
is
no
other
multiple
unit,
three-story
housing
in
this
immediate
neighborhood
and
no
duplex
development
with
garages
directly
facing
the
street,
especially
not
eight
of
them.
L
Let
me
be
clear,
as
the
others
have
said,
we
are
supportive
of
the
overall
idea
of
smart,
infill
and
boise,
but
the
proposed
development
fails
to
uphold
the
commitments
made
by
the
city
to
protect
residents
and
does
not
adhere
to
actual
code,
as
noted
by
amy,
mall
and
others.
The
project
relies
on
numerous
variances
and
waivers
to
circumvent
policies
that
were
thoughtfully
put
in
place
to
protect
boise
residents
from
proposals
such
as
this.
L
Just
because
the
site
that
was
purchased
is
limited
by
topography
to
have
a
fraction
of
buildable
footage
out
of
its
acre
footprint
does
not
mean
the
city
has
to
grant
variances
and
waivers
to
allow
a
building
density
appropriate
only
to
a
full
acre.
The
developer
was
aware
of
that
limitation
when
purchasing
the
property.
L
Finally,
we
cannot
imagine
a
worse
pedestrian
bike
and
vehicle
hazard
area,
a
more
dangerous
situation
than
poising
eight
homes,
each
with
numerous
cars
driving
off
of
and
backing
out
onto
alturas,
almost
60
times
a
day
into
this
very
busy
pedestrian,
skateboard
and
bike
corridor.
We
simply
don't
see
how
this
development
can
occur
in
a
way
that
meets
any
need
to
protect
pedestrian
and
bicycle
safety.
L
Ultimately,
the
city
council
has
a
real
opportunity
here,
as
eric
noted,
an
opportunity
to
show
that
it
is
truly
listening
to
residents
concerns
and,
most
importantly,
adhering
to
its
own
policies
to
protect
residents
and
their
communities
rather
than
deferring
to
what
is
best
for
a
developer.
Luckily,
you
have
options
here.
You
have
thoughtful
code
to
rely
on
and
adhere
to.
You
have
the
power
to
deny
this
proposal
until
it
meets
your
own
requirements,
and
we
respectfully
ask
that
you
choose
to
do
so.
O
My
name
is
katie
fight,
1006,
north
5th
street
boise.
Idaho.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity
to
provide
some
comments
in
relation
to
this
appeal.
First,
I
believe
the
developer
tonight
said
that
they
were
basically
cleaning
up
what
was
on
the
site,
they're,
actually
digging
into
the
very
steep
hill,
a
considerable
amount.
O
O
O
O
Here
too,
we
have
the
hill,
in
the
background
is
much
steeper
than
is
represented
in
this
image,
and
this,
in
the
previous
illustration
appear
to
have
been
taken
from
a
drone
hovering
somewhere
above
eight
80s
or
above
the
houses
on
altura
street.
So
once
again,
we
do
not
have
the
images
of
what
the
pedestrians,
the
bikers
and
the
neighbors
are
actually
going
to
see
right
across
from
their
homes.
Next
slide.
O
O
Okay,
this
is
taken
from
the
trail
that
was
shown
in
one
of
the
images
the
developers
showed
of
the
project.
Looking
down
onto
you
can
see
the
red
house
in
the
very
center.
In
the
background.
O
O
Okay,
that's
another
picture
from
the
hill
up
above
looking
down
across
altura
street.
Once
again,
you
can
see
that
the
steepness
of
this.
O
P
A
Make
sure
he's
a
party
of
record?
Yes
I'll,
do
that
for
you?
Yes,
you
can
deliver
them
to
the
council
president
and
then,
when
you're
reading
your
remarks
at
the
beginning.
Will
you
please
just
read
your
name
and
to
the
microphone?
Thank
you
and
I'll.
Ask
you
just
to
pull
up
the
mic
a
little
bit
so
that
everybody
at
home
can
hear
you.
P
My
name
is
keith
mason.
I
live
at
1702,
north
7th
street
and
looking
at
that
first
picture
that
I
provided
the
scale
representation
of
the
of
the
the
house,
the
houses
that
will
go
there,
that
I
call
them
double
houses
because
they're
under
one
roof.
P
I
have
one
of
the
documents
there,
between
1702
or
6th
1702,
north
eighth
1702,
north
ninth
century,
to
our
tenth
1702,
north
11th
and
1702
1702,
north
12th,
and
list
their
prospective
dates
of
build
and
their
square
footage.
You
see
they
they
pale
in
comparison
to
the
what
is
proposed
for
1702,
north
sixth,
by
a
substantial
margin.
P
The
even
though
the
signal
family,
the
residential
code,
allows
for
town
houses
to
be
put
on
this
property
is
the
size
which,
I
think
is
is
should
be
noted.
P
And
also
there
is
a
goal
too,
of
the
planning
and
zoning
housing
report
is
to
preserve
the
historic
scale
and
traditional
character
of
the
north
end
through
redevelopment
infill,
like
others
before
me.
I
don't
challenge
the
infield
should
go
in
those
lots
there.
They
are
they've
been
empty
for
a
long
long
time,
but
they
could
be
large
single-family
homes
with
instead
of
town
homes,
instead
of
double
homes
closer
in
scale
to
what
is
on
the
in
in
the
general
area.
L
K
K
K
The
site
characteristics
of
the
proposal
site
do
not
mean
that
we
disregard
the
principles
laid
out
in
blueprint
boise.
The
applicant's
proposal
is
a
square
peg
in
a
round
hole,
as
evidenced
by
its
lack
of
compliance
with
blueprint,
boise
achd
requirements
for
driveway
setbacks
from
intersections
and
the
need
for
endless
variances
and
waivers
to
wiggle
it
through
the
city's
planning
and
zoning
requirements.
K
In
addition
to
safety,
I'm
very
concerned
about
the
impact
of
the
proposed
development
on
the
integrity
and
character
of
the
city
designated
north
end
historic
district.
Existing
homeowners
have
relied
on
the
historic
district
protections
when
contemplating
investments
in
our
home.
We
have
all
invested
blood,
sweat,
tears
and
lots
and
lots
of
money
in
our
homes
and,
by
extension,
in
our
neighborhood,
for
instance,
our
home
did
not
have
a
foundation
or
footings
when
we
bought
it.
I
know
the
council
is
well
aware
of
the
costs
associated
with
putting
a
foundation
under
a
house.
K
We
were
new
to
idaho
and
idaho
wages
and
it
was
a
difficult
decision
to
invest
that
kind
of
money
in
a
house
located
within
a
block
of
five
abandoned
houses.
The
historic
district
designation
was
a
signal
from
our
neighbors
and
the
city
that
our
investment
would
not
be
lost
to
incompatible
development.
K
K
No
no
amount
of
sledgehammering
on
this
square
peg
of
an
application
will
make
it
fit
onto
the
site
or
complement
the
character
of
our
neighborhood
historic
or
not.
Any
reasonable
person
would
conclude
that
it
will
destroy
the
integrity
and
character
of
our
corner
of
the
north
end
historic
district
and
will
surely
lead
to
future
developments
seeping
into
the
district
proper.
I
respectfully
ask
that
the
council
utilize
the
guidance
and
authorities
in
blueprint,
boise
and
other
city
documents
to
deny
this
application
and
to
tell
the
applicant
to
come
back
with
a
new
proposal.
A
Q
A
Q
Can
hear
you
that's
good,
I
discovered
when
I
became
a
panelist.
I
couldn't
have
my
testimony
on
the
window,
but
now
I
found
it.
Okay,
madame
mayor
members
of
the
city
council,
my
name
is
marlene
strong.
I
live
at
1619
north
fifth
street
on
the
corner
of
alturas
directly
across
the
street
from
the
proposed
development.
Q
The
buildable
portion
of
the
lot
is
equivalent
to
about
three
of
my
own
standard
lot:
eight
units
with
four
bedrooms:
each
is
32
bedrooms.
If
the
developer
had
proposed
to
build
an
apartment,
building
with
32
studio
apartments
or
even
16
two-bedroom
apartments
on
three
standard
lots,
I
doubt
that
planning
and
zoning
would
have
deemed
it
in
character
with
the
neighborhood.
Q
We
are
asked
to
believe
that
the
inhabitants
of
these
32
bedrooms
will
only
increase
car
trips
on
alturas
by
59
trips
a
day
planning
and
zoning
has
said
that
there
is
no
alternative
to
eight
front-facing
garages
emptying
onto
a
narrow
street,
because
there
is
no
alley
well.
If
the
developer
had
not
elected
to
put
eight
huge
houses
on
six-tenths
of
an
acre,
there
may
have
been
a
way
to
designate
an
alley
with
a
mid-block
entrance.
Q
As
immediate
neighbors,
we
are
told
we
should
be
grateful
for
the
common
lot.
That
is
really
just
the
unbuildable
part
of
the
developer's
property,
leaving
the
backside
of
these
houses.
Undeveloped
does
not
improve
the
informal
trails
that
exist
on
the
hillside.
In
fact,
it
will
require
the
construction
of
a
new
trail,
because
the
houses
will
cover
existing
trails.
Q
Madam
mayor
and
members
of
the
city
council,
I
respectfully
ask
that
you
uphold
the
appeal
presented
by
the
neighbors
of
the
proposed
development
and
require
planning
and
zoning
to
require
the
developer,
propose
a
project,
that's
an
asset
to
the
neighborhood
that
complies
with
existing
code,
blue
boise
with
a
north
end
neighborhood
plan
and
is
an
asset
to
the
neighborhood,
rather
than
being
totally
out
of
character
with
it.
Thank
you.
A
A
Have
nobody
else
online
anybody
else
here?
Okay,
I'm
gonna,
get
this
order
correct
this
time,
any
further
questions
for
crystal
before
we
head
to
rebuttals
and
then
you
go
first.
A
I
Yeah
just
a
couple
of
questions,
and
I
apologize
if
these
kind
of
got
asked
already
and
I
miss
them-
they're
not
asking
for
a
variance
on
height.
So
there
is
a
like
a
single
house,
or
a
couple
of
houses
could
be
built
that
are
just
as
tall
as
this
development.
Is
that
correct.
I
And
then
my
understanding
was
that
it
didn't
seem
possible
in
almost
any
way
for
there
to
be
an
alley
that
would
go
behind,
and
so
the
garage
is
facing
the
front
sort
of
no
matter
unless,
unless
maybe
there
was
one
one
garage
from
the
side
and
just
one
smaller
house
built
on
the
really
large
lot,
it
seems
like
the
only
option
is
to
have
the
garages
come
off
the
front
because
of
the
topography,
or
at
least
that
was
my
understanding
in
the
in
the
reading.
Is
that
correct.
I
Great
and
then
I
guess
my
final
question
is
just
that,
so
we've
got
eight
units
that
are
potentially
here
and
it
could
potentially
be
fewer
units.
It
could
be
six
that
would
have
the
exact
same
mass,
but
just
slightly
smaller
variances
on
the
side,
and
that
would
be
something
that
would
be
able
to
be
approved
with
no
variance
is
that
correct.
I
Yeah,
I
probably
didn't
ask
that
very
well.
I
guess
my
question
is:
is
that
I
think
one
of
the
concerns
that
I'm
hearing
from
the
neighbors,
which
is
certainly
a
valid
concern,
is
the
mass
of
actually
what's
being
proposed,
and
what
I'm
kind
of
getting
from
the
application
and
from
the
requirements
is
that
the
mass
could
be
almost
exactly
the
same.
I
Just
with
a
slightly
without
the
variances
on
the
side,
the
massing
would
still
be
relatively
significant
and
that
the
variances
that
we're
giving
here
isn't
actually
increasing
the
overall
mass
of
what
would
be
allowed.
B
J
Adam
are
members
of
city
council,
ben
semple,
so
yeah
to
respond
to
a
little
bit
of
of
the
the
comments
from
neighbors
they're
you're
correct,
there's,
no
ability
to
build
an
alley.
There's
no
access
available
to
the
alley
confirmed
with
public
works
that
they
would
find
it
very
problematic
to
get
a
road
north
of
alturus
to
access
any
homes.
J
J
I
understand
the
concern
about
the
impact
of
the
historic
district.
We
are
constantly
looking
at
materials
and
finishes
as
a
way
to
help
this
be
more
cohesive,
with
the
historic
district,
it's
difficult
when
we
look
at
we
requirements,
firewise
requirements
and
what
that
allows
us
to
do
or
prohibits
us
from
doing.
J
You
know
we
look
at
density
in
the
area.
We
are
under
the
density
of
other
projects
that
might
not
be
right
around
the
corner,
but
you
know
I.
I
did
look
at
a
couple
different
homes
that
were
within
two
or
three
blocks
of
here
and
found
a
few
of
them
that
living
space
is
north
of
4
000
square
feet.
These
are
single
family
townhomes
that
will
be
2500
square
feet
of
living
space
plus
a
two-car
garage.
J
We
are
doing
everything
we
can
to
help
it
again
be
cohesive
with
the
neighborhood,
knowing
that
it's
not
in
the
historic
district,
but
we
are
not
asking
for
a
height
exception,
we're
under
the
35
feet,
that's
allowable
and
we're
within
the
density
of
the
the
allowed
density
of
this
zone.
So
with
that,
I
would
stand
for
more
questions.
E
Ben
I
do
have
a
question
existing
on
the
lot
today.
I
assume
as
leftovers
from
houses
that
might
have
been
there
at
some
point
in
the
past
or
a
couple
of
stairways.
E
Could
you
tell
us,
will
the
driveways
be
below
the
level
of
the
bottom
of
those
stairways
or
about
at
that
level,
I'm
trying
to
get
a
sense
of
the
scale
and
sure.
J
J
If
we
take
the
25
feet
about
to
get
back
to
those
driveways
from
the
back
of
sidewalk,
I
would
say
we're
about
three
feet
above
max,
maybe
two
and
a
half
feet
above
the
back
of
sidewalk.
Currently
the
the
lot
pad.
That's
there
right
now
is
about
five
to
six
feet
depending
on
where
you
are
so.
The
the
lower
level
will
be
like
any
other
driveway
that
you
see
around
these
areas
in
the
foothills.
Yet
they
are
uphill
of
other
homes,
but
that
is
kind
of
the
nature
of
this
area.
Okay,
so.
A
So
I
just
have
a
clarifying
question
because
you
said
three
feet
and
then
or
three
and
a
half
and
five
feet
is
the
five
feet
that
current,
where
the
steps
go
up
and
then
it
flattens
out
and
the
these
the
driveways
would
end
at
three
feet
so
below
where
those
steps
flatten
out.
Are
you
saying,
above
that
madame.
P
D
Madam
mayor
council
members,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
appeal,
and
this
is
a
development
that
maximizes
the
profit
for
the
developer
and
and
we
live
in
a
capitalistic
society,
and
I
understand
that
right
and
when
I
sold
a
house
in
the
north
bend,
I
tried
to
maximize
what
I
sold
it
for
that's
why
zoning
codes
exist.
D
D
D
E
Madame
one
last
question
kind
of
thinking
about
amy's
comments,
recent
or
most
recent
comments.
E
Not
a
mirror,
yes,
I
think
I'm
going
to
start
with
a
motion.
If
I
get
a
a
second
I'll
explain
my
motion.
Okay,
I
move
to
deny
the
appeal
of
pud
2140,
cf,
h21,
121
and
cva
21
44.
E
E
E
By
massing
these
buildings
into
four
buildings
with
two
units
each,
it
creates
a
very
similar
condition
as
four
lots
with
duplexes.
E
E
E
What
I
do
see
here
is
an
opportunity
for
at
least
eight
more
families
to
live
in
this
neighborhood.
I
think
it's
a
great
place
to
live,
and
I
think
those
families
will
thrive
there.
E
I
think
the
public
access
and
the
promise
of
easement
provides
some
public
benefit
and,
overall,
while
it
may
not
be
the
development,
I
would
do
if,
if
I
were
doing
this
development
myself,
it's
not
one
that
I
can
find
doesn't
meet
the
standards
that
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
applied
to
it.
G
G
What's
that
kind
of
thinking
about
what
what
would
have
been
there
in
the
past,
always
knowing
that
someone
would
build
something
there
at
some
point
in
the
future
and
always
wondering
when
is
somebody
going
to
build
something
here?
And
so
here
we
are,
and
I
think
that
as
council
member
clay
said
just
because
this
isn't
what
I
would
build,
there
doesn't
mean
that
it's
not
a
really
great
opportunity
for
an
intel
development.
G
G
They
made
sure
that
they
were
considering
all
of
the
evidence
in
their
approvals,
and
I
can't
find
any
error
in
any
of
their
deliberations.
And
so
that's
why
I'm
supporting
the
denial
of
the
appeal.
A
H
Arguments
were
about
sort
of
facty
stuff,
whether
the
planning
of
zoning
commission
construed
the
facts
correctly,
and
I
agree
that
there's
no
error
there.
The
other
argument
was
that
the
variance
process
is
being
used
to
prevent
enforcement
of
zoning
and
that's
an
argument
that
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
applied
applied
like
the
wrong
law
deviated
from
the
legal
process,
and
I
don't
I
just
want
to
put
in
the
record
on
a
motion
that
I
don't
agree
with
that
argument,
because
the
varying
process
is
part
of
the
code
too.
I
I
don't
have
a
tremendous
amount
to
add
here
I'll,
be
supporting
the
motion
as
well.
I
don't
find
any
error
in
the
decision
that
planning
and
zoning
made.
I
do
understand
the
concerns
of
the
of
the
neighbors.
It
is
a
beautiful
area
over
there
and
it
is
great
to
be
able
to
look
straight
across
and
see
empty
foothill
space
right
there.
I
mean
people
have
community
gardens
right
outside.
I
You
know
their
front
yards
there,
so
I
I
absolutely
get
it
and
I
understand
I
also
live
in
an
area
where
a
similar
development
like
this
just
took
place,
but
instead
of
it
being
eight
different
units,
it
was
one
gigantic.
I
Almost
4
000
square
foot
unit,
a
few
of
them
and
I
walk
by
it
all
the
time,
and
I
just
think
how
sad
it
is
that
there
aren't
more
families
who
have
the
ability
to
live,
that
close
to
an
incredible
neighborhood,
the
foothills
and
house
rats
old,
incredible
garden
that
she
has
up
there
in
the
natural
area
that
I
think
council
president
clegg
actually
has
probably
been
to
more
than
100
times,
and
so
I
think
that
folks
are
are
real.
I
Familiar
with
this
area,
and
they
understand
the
value
that
it
has,
and
I
do
think
that
there
is
value
in
in
making
a
spot
where
multiple
families
can
live,
and
so
I
think
it's
it's
tough,
but
I
think
what
could
be
in
there
may
not
necessarily
even
be
a
better
option.
A
N
E
Bear
thank
you
all
yeah.
There
is
also
a
subdivision
associated
with
this
application,
so
I
would
also
move
that
alturas
heights
sub
21
41
boise
city,
preliminary
platt
at
1702
north
sixth
street,
be
approved.