►
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
Well,
hello,
everybody
thank
you
for
spending.
Your
Valentine's
Day
with
us
welcome
we'll,
go
ahead
and
get
started
with
the
invocation
which
we
observed
by
a
Moment
of
Silence,
followed
by
the
Pledge
of
Allegiance.
C
D
B
D
D
A
Thanks
next
up
under
special
business
is
Corbin
harp
here
all
right.
Well,
let
us
know
if
you're
online,
we
have
a
reappointment
of
Mr
harp
to
the
development
impact
fee
advisory
committee
for
a
four-year
term.
A
I
really
appreciate
the
service
of
all
boys
unions
on
our
various
commissions
and
then
someone
willing
to
re-up
for
another
term.
So
thank
you,
Corbin
and
with
that
this
is
before
you.
E
Into
this
yeah,
just
real
quick
I
would
note
that
I
think
that
there
might
be
a
couple
of
other
positions
available
on
that
commission
as
well
or
committee
as
well
and
I.
Think
one
of
them
might
be
a
youth
position.
So
for
folks
who
might
be
looking
to
engage
I
think
there
may
be
one
or
more
positions
available
there.
G
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
members
of
the
council.
You
may
recognize
this
item
from
the
January
31st
city
council
hearing
this
is
the
rezone
car
22-00019
for
the
property
located
at
916
Sherwood
Street
in
the
lust
Street
neighborhood.
The
council,
at
this
hearing,
denied
the
rezone
request
and
requested
the
planning
team
return.
Revised
findings
before
the
council
tonight
is
revised.
It's
a
revived
findings,
summarizing
the
reasons
for
the
decision
to
deny
the
application.
If
the
council
agrees
with
the
new
reason
statement,
then
a
motion
to
approve
would
be
needed.
Thank
you.
H
Had
a
mayor
since
I
made
the
motion,
I
I
have
read
the
revised
findings
from
staff
on
car
22-19
and
agree
that
it
represents
the
discussion
that
was
had
at
the
city
council
that
night
and
fairly
describes
why
the
application
was
turned
down
with
that
I'd
move
that
we
approve
the
revised
findings.
D
A
All
right
we'll
move
into
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
general
order
of
business
and
considered
in
its
normal
sequence.
E
And
mayor,
we
have
a
request
to
remove
resolution
85-23
from
the
consent
agenda
agenda
for
separate
consideration.
I
believe
it's
item
number
eight.
B
B
H
Yes,
Madam
mayor
a
couple
of
things:
I
think
maybe
some
other
council
members
will
also
want
to
note
that
second
resolution
on
the
agenda
tonight
79-23
is
the
collective
labor
agreement
between
the
city
of
Boise
and
the
police
officers.
I
just
want
to
thank
everyone
involved
for
coming
to
the
table
reasonably
and
finding
a
good
solution
to
the
issues
that
we
had
to
work
through.
I
think
that
this
will
be
a
really
great
Labor
agreement.
H
I'd
also
like
to
note
that
resolution
8923
is
a
unique
use
of
open
space
and
clean
water
funds
to
do
a
partnership
to
do
a
Stairway
from
Crescent
Rim
down
to
Ann
Morrison
Park
in
partnership
with
CCDC.
This
has
been
a
connection.
That's
long
been
needed
up
to
the
bench
and
really
excited
that
that
this
has
been
proposed
to
us
for
approval.
C
Yeah
further
to
the
second
resolution
on
the
labor
negotiation
with
the
police,
Union
I'm
told
it
was
a
rigorous
and
professional
negotiation
that
worked
through
a
lot
of
things
and
I
just
wanted
to
take
a
brief
opportunity
to
to
point
out
that
it
being
a
police
officer
in
a
capital
city
in
a
state
like
Idaho,
is
really
hard
work
and
the
contract
was
obviously
about
pay
and
benefits,
and
those
are
very
important.
But
I
know
that
that's
not
what
motivates
our
officers
it's
being
part
of
a
community,
it's
service.
C
Those
are
very
Noble
things,
and
so
I
wanted
to
take
an
opportunity
to
thank
the
men
and
women
in
the
police
department
for
continuing
to
be
such
wonderful
representatives
of
our
city
and
to
work
so
hard
in
this
public
service
job
and
again,
to
thank
the
negotiating
team
for
bringing
us
to
a
conclusion.
I'm
I'm
happy
to
be
voting
to
finalize
this
contract
shortly.
A
Right
well,
I
won't
be
voting
by
two
want
to
thank
the
negotiating
team,
both
from
the
management
side
and
from
the
union
side
for
getting
working
through
this
and
thank
the
men
and
women
of
the
police
department.
This
is
this.
A
Contract
brings
what
I
think
is
really
important
wage
increases
that
are
long
overdue,
as
well
as
the
tools
that
we
need
to
train
new
officers
so
that
we
can
get
more
officers
into
our
neighborhoods
and
focused
on
the
crimes
that
our
residents
you
know,
want
us
to
focus
on,
such
as
property
crimes
and
other
things.
By
also
allowing
for
incentive
pay
for
detectives
in
other
positions,
so
appreciate
the
service
that
our
department
provides.
A
The
importance
I
would
put
on
the
The
Importance
that
I
would
put
on
the
need
for
everyone
in
this
community
to
feel
safe
and
then
the
path
that
this
contract
allows
us
to
continue
along
to
meet
those
goals
of
safety,
while
compensating
folks
fairly
and
increasing
the
ranks
as
we
need
to
with.
D
D
E
And
then
mayor,
I
move
approval
of
resolution
85-23.
Second.
E
Yeah
just
quick
discussion:
we
had
a
Community
member
reach
out
with
some
concerns
about
this
item,
thinking
that
it
had
something
to
do
with
our
zoning
code
read
write
and
it
really
doesn't
have
anything
to
do
with
the
zoning
code
rewrite
as
much
as
it
has
to
creating
action
items
that
will
help
us
Implement
our
blueprint,
Boise
plan,
so
I
think
it's
a
really
great
thing
for
us
to
approve
and
if
I
made
the
motion.
D
B
D
F
Ord-10-23.
An
ordinance
amending
Boise
city
code
titles,
5,
chapter
12,
section
35
to
amend
control,
valve
location
requirements,
amending
title
V
chapter
12,
section
37
to
amend
floor
control,
assemblies
amending
title
V,
chapter
12,
section
1661
to
amend
requirements
for
firefighter
air
replenishing
systems
and
providing
an
effective
date.
F
Annex
lands
and
territory
be
recorded
with
the
Ada
County
recorder
and
filed
with
the
Ada
County
Assessor
and
the
Idaho
State
Tax
Commission,
as
required
by
law
and
providing
an
effective
date
ord-8-23
an
ordinance
amending
Title,
IX
chapter
2
development
impact
fee,
section,
712b
and
13
of
Boise
city
code.
This
amendment
updates
the
attribution
of
certain
local
park
impact
fees,
development
impact
fees
per
service,
unit
assessment
and
payment
of
development
impact
fees
and
providing
an
effective
date
of
April
10th
2023.
E
C
D
A
D
F
Providing
the
copies
of
this
ordinance
shall
be
filed
at
the
Ada
County
auditor,
the
Ada
County
Treasurer,
the
Ada
County
Assessor,
the
Ada
County
recorder
and
the
Idaho
State
Tax
Commission.
Providing
that
a
copy
of
said
legal
description
and
map
of
said
Annex
lands
and
territory
be
recorded.
The
Ada
County
recorder
and
filed
with
the
Ada
County
Assessor
and
Idaho
State
Tax
Commission,
as
required
by
law
in
providing
an
effective
date.
D
D
G
The
soldier
property
is
approximately
10
acres
in
size
and
comprised
of
two
Lots
located
at
2700
South
Beverly
Street
and
2711
South
Fry
Street
within
an
m1d
Zone,
and,
as
you
can
see
from
the
aerial
photograph,
the
property
is
located
within
an
industrial
neighborhood
near
the
airport.
The
1972
city
council
approved
this.
The
Suburban
land
tracks
unit
number
one
subdivision
with
plotted
10-foot
wide
public
utility
and
draining
easements
along
the
interior
property
lines.
In
addition,
the
subdivision
included,
building
setbacks
and
lot
coverage
restrictions
as
plot
nodes.
G
The
applicant
intends
to
consolidate
Lots,
5
and
6
block
2
of
this
subdivision
to
construct
a
large
industrial
building
which
will
be
situated
over
the
top
of
the
easements
located
between
the
Lots
it'll,
also
exceed
the
setbacks
and
lot
coverage.
Restrictions
noted
on
the
plat
as
such,
the
easement
and
pot
notes
will
be
required
to
be
vacated.
G
The
law
coverage
requirements
were
included
with
the
original
plot
note,
since
the
site
is
within
the
airport,
Zone
H,
which
is
the
airport
noise
transition
zone
and
is
intended
to
restrict
non-compatible
land
uses
from
around
the
airport.
However,
stating
these
restrictions
and
building
setbacks
on
a
plot,
node
is
not
required,
since
these
standards
can
change
over
time.
Furthermore,
Boise
Airport
submitted
a
letter
supporting
the
requested
vacation
of
the
plot
notes.
In
summary,
letters
of
relinquishment
from
all
utility
companies
servicing
the
vicinity
and
the
airport
have
been
received.
G
I
We're
in
agreement
the
airport
has
this
property
and
they're
doing
land
leases
to
put
that
warehouse
that
he's
talking
about
and
all
the
utility
companies
have
agreed
to
the
vacation.
So.
A
E
B
D
A
J
The
subdivision
plot
recorded
in
2007
designates
lot
13
block
2
as
a
common
lot,
which
is
to
be
owned
and
maintained
by
the
HOA
additional
plot
notes.
Reference
easements
within
lot,
13
block
2
is
shown
on
this
slide.
The
applicant
request
to
partially
vacate
plot
notes,
1
2
and
10,
and
the
associated
easements
on
the
property
to
allow
the
easternmost
portion
of
the
site
to
be
sold
to
the
adjacent
property
owner
to
the
east.
All
easement
holders
have
provided
letters
of
approval
on
the
vacation.
J
Requests
will
only
affect
the
portion
of
the
lot
that
is
to
be
sold.
The
remainder
of
the
lot
will
remain
as
common
open
space
to
be
maintained
by
the
HOA.
The
existing
10-foot
wide
Public,
Utilities
drainage,
irrigation
and
streetlight
easement
along
rhyolite
way
is
to
be
maintained,
as
it
is
actively
used
by
the
easement
holders.
A
E
And
Mary
yes,
I
move
approval
of
SOS
22-19
request
to
vacate
a
public
utilities,
drainage,
irrigation
and
street
light
easement
at
2711,
East,
Royal
lightway.
Second,.
A
You
and
now
we'll
move
into
the
regular.
Thank
you,
sir
Regular
public
hearing
portion
of
the
evening.
Cr
22-34
welcome.
Jesse
we've
got
Jesse
Lyle
for
the
city,
pivot,
North
architecture.
Great
hi
is
here.
We
don't
expect
the
downtown
neighborhood
association
to
be
here.
You
are
no
okay,
Dave
the
downtown
neighborhood
association.
A
Oh
sure,
the
next
application,
okay
is
and
then,
if,
if
you've
signed
up
for
this
one
already,
I
will
call
you
and
if
you
are
here
to
testify,
but
you
didn't
sign
up.
That's
okay,
once
I've
called
through
people
just
come
on
up
and
you
can
give
your
testimony
and
then
I'll
just
ask
you
to
write
your
name
and
address
on
the
piece
of
paper
and
we'll
also
check
in
online
to
see
if
anybody's
there
with
that
go
ahead.
Jesse.
K
The
applicant
is
requesting
to
rezone
four
Parcels
that
contain
a
total
of
16,
naturally
occurring
affordable
units.
The
applicants
proposing
to
rezone
deconstruct
approximately
130
residential
units
with
approximately
1
000
square
feet
of
commercial
space.
The
properties
are
located
in
the
Pioneer
neighborhood
District
of
the
River
Street
master
plan
and
our
adjacent
to
two
Transit
routes.
Number
four
is
number
five.
With
the
nearest
Stop
approximately
350
feet
to
the
northwest.
K
K
The
proposed
development
agreement
includes
a
provision
to
provide
at
least
13
units
to
reserve
for
tenants
making
100
of
the
area.
Median
income
are
below
with
a
contingency
of
the
applicant
obtained
funding
from
CCDC
through
the
river
and
Myrtle
urban
renewal
District,
which
closes
in
2025.
Additionally.
The
applicant
must
provide
for
some
commercial
space
on
one
of
the
project
corners
and
it
will
incorporate
sustainability
techniques.
K
Public
comment
was
received
with
questions
concerning
the
tenant
assistance
package,
particularly
wanting
clarification
on
what
resources
we
be
provided
and
if
financial
assistance
would
be
provided
as
in
the
right
and
Barry
Zone.
The
applicant
is
not
proposing
any
financial
assistance
at
this
time
and
in
conclusion,
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
recommended
approval
and
I
will
take
stand
for
any
questions.
D
E
K
E
That
great
and
just
one
more
question,
madamir
I,
don't
believe
with
C5
that
we
do
any
sort
of
housing
board,
bonus,
ordinances,
related
to
affordable
housing,
parking
or
or
hype,
because
I
think
the
Height's
unlimited
and
the
density
for
housing.
It's
unlimited
is
that
correct,
Madam.
D
L
Madam
mayor
members
of
the
council,
I'm
Ian,
McLaughlin
nope,
you
can
just
lift
it.
Some.
Thank
you.
Thanks
Madam
Madam
mayor
members
of
the
council,
I'm
Ian
McLaughlin
I'm,
with
pivot
North,
Architects
I,
don't
know
if
I
need
to
State
my
address,
but
116
South
6th,
Street,
Boise
Idaho
I
have
Dean
who
I
will
hand
over
for
a
brief
introduction.
M
Looking
forward
to
bringing
this
project
to
fruition
in
the
near
future,
I
think
it's
very
important
to
point
out
the
timeline
associated
with
this
project
as
the
funding
structure
to
help
support
the
housing
elements
or,
what's
in
the
development
agreement
for
our
affordable
housing
elements
of
this
project
is
directly
tied
to
a
funding
source
associated
with
CCDC
ccdc's
district
will
expire
and
those
funds
will
be
removed
or
unable
to
support
the
project.
M
So,
ultimately,
our
reason
coming
for
rezone
for
this
property
is
to
allow
those
funding
structures
to
support
the
project
to
allow
those
housing
elements
to
be
included.
We
understand
if
success,
if
unsuccessful,
to
move
forward,
the
property
owner
would
then
hold
and
wait
for
the
future
zoning
to
then
go
into
place
and
then
put
the
provided
project
into
fruition.
At
that
point,
without
those
additional
housing
units
which
are,
we
believe,
supportive
for
the
neighborhood
I,
think
it's
important
to
note.
M
Currently,
there
are
12
units
being
used
on
this
property
right
now
in
working
with
the
city.
The
minimum
amount
of
units
that
would
be
built
into
the
larger
project
is
13
or
10
of
the
total
units.
We
have
approximately
130
units
currently,
but
if
the
project
became
bigger,
the
percentage
of
of
units
at
or
below,
100
Ami
would
also
grow.
M
With
the
total
project
size,
we
have
been
in
touch
with
one
at
least
one
of
the
residents
I
think
they
actually
sent
an
email
into
the
city
as
part
of
one
of
the
public
comments
to
help
provide
some
assistance
in
finding
them
a
new
location.
The
timing
of
this
does
allow
for
that.
If
we
are
successful
with
the
rezoning
tonight,
will
allow
us
enough
time
to
then
work
with
all
of
the
residents
to
find
them
a
new
place
to
live
before
the
project
actually
commences.
L
Thank
you,
Dean
I'm,
going
to
gloss
through
some
of
the
contextual
information,
since
Jesse
did
a
pretty
good
job
of
covering
it.
As
she
said,
the
Project's
on
River
Street,
it's
Boxed
In
by
11th
and
Ash
I'm,
currently
zoned
roddd,
and
we're
looking
to
rezone
it
to
a
c5dd.
As
you
can
see,
right
across
the
street
from
11
11th
Street
is
the
C5
DD
Zone.
L
This
is
a
snapshot
of
the
proposed
zoning
code
rewrite
so,
as
you
can
see
that
whole
area
is
being
proposed
for
MX-5,
which
is
the
equivalent
of
what
C5
is
currently
so,
as
Dean
kind
of
pointed
out.
You
know
we're
looking
to
rezone
this
to
move
forward
with
this
project
at
this
time
and
not
have
to
wait
for
the
rezone.
L
L
L
This
area
is
interesting
because
there's
a
diverse
range
of
existing
housing,
so
we
have
everything
from
market
rate
across
the
alley
to
Workforce
housing
and
affordable
senior
living
across
of
Ash
Street
and
then
a
variety
of
other
housing
within
that
area.
So
we
feel,
like
this
project
fits
well
with
that
context
and
would
help
provide
additional
housing
and
additional
diverse
range.
L
L
So
the
proposed
project,
this
closely
mirrors
what
Jesse
has
had
shown.
There
are
some
slight
revisions.
We
have
two
levels
of
parking:
one
half
story
below
and
half
story
up
ground
floor
is
raised
two
feet
off
of
the
the
flood
plain,
so
you
can
see
along
River
Street.
We
have
activated
the
street
front
with
Lobby
leasing,
amenity
Fitness.
L
We
have
ground
floor
units
with
built-in
Stoops
and
patios,
and
then
we
have
that
commercial
space
on
11th
and
river,
which
we
feel
like
is
kind
of
the
most
effective
area.
Next
to
the
11th
Street
Bikeway
improvements
moving
up
the
building
on
the
second
or
sorry.
Third,
through
fifth
floor
plans,
we
have
a
range
of
Studio,
One
beds,
two
beds
and
then
at
the
top
floor
we
have
a
resident
amenity
space
facing
kind
of
North
Northwest.
L
So
you
get
views
of
downtown
and
the
river,
and
here
are
some
preliminary
kind
of
3D
images
showing
we're
working
on
the
massing,
we're
working
on
Administration,
breaking
up
the
volume
of
the
building
incorporating
high
quality
materials.
You
know
brick
metal
panel
stucco
as
well
in
another
view
from
11th
Street
looking
towards
Ash
and
then
I've
included
some
project
information
stats.
If
we
want
to
dive
deeper
into
that,
but
just
to
kind
of
summarize
again
we're
looking
to
rezone
from
roddd
to
C5.
L
This
would
be
to
allow
for
the
increase
in
height
that
comes
with
that
we're
only
proposing
a
project
up
to
75
feet
and
then
we're
looking
to
increase
the
allowable
density
as
well
to
accommodate
those
130
units.
We
feel
this
project
would
promote
a
walkable,
neighborhood
Transit
oriented
neighborhood.
L
It
would
help
provide
a
more
diverse
range
of
housing
for
that
neighborhood
and
contribute
to
the
long-term
sustainability
of
that
neighborhood.
Thank
you.
I'll
stand
for
any
questions.
E
First
of
all,
very
great,
looking
building
really
great
spot
to
have
a
lot
more
density
and
I.
Guess
maybe
that's
that's
my
question:
was
there
something
that
limited
you
to
this
many
units,
or
did
you
explore
going
even
denser
even
higher,
give
you
more
spots
in
that
area.
L
There's
a
there's
a
number
of
things:
one
is
constructability
so
to
do.
What's
you
know,
considered
a
five
over
one
Podium
you're
limited
in
to
five
stories
over
over
one
story
of
concrete,
so
that
had
some
limiting
factors
to
it.
The
additional
one
was
parking.
L
We
are
trying
to
get
as
close
to
possible
to
one
per
one,
I
think
we're
at
about
0.92
stalls
per
unit.
While
that
is
not
required.
L
E
E
And
those
are
going
to
be
restricted
to
100
or
below
Ami,
correct
and
then
I
guess.
My
question
there
is
like:
is
it
just
100
Ami
then
or
or
is
there
like
an
effort?
Is
there
any
other
ways
to
to
go
lower
than
that.
M
Yes,
there's
always
an
effort
to
provide
for
that's
a
ceiling,
so
we
can't
go
above
that,
but
we
can
always
go
below
that.
H
Madam
mayor,
how
big
are
the
units
today
they're
naturally
occurring
affordable
units?
How
many
bedrooms.
M
H
M
H
I
I
realize
that
have
you
have
you
looked
at
it
yet?
Have
you
decided
what
what
ones
your?
What
sizes
you're
going
to
have
for
those
no.
M
A
Thank
you
all
right.
We
will
now
hear
from
the
public
Truman
Bishop,
hey
you
come
on
up.
Is
anybody
else
here
for
this
one
just
raise
your
hand
great.
So
if
you'll
just
make
your
way
over
after
Mr
Bishop
speaks
just
calling
up,
I
won't
call
on
you
again
and
then
you
can
write
your
names
down
after
hi.
O
N
N
It
is
a
wonderful
location
and
I'm
opposed
because
it
means
I'm
going
to
have
to
move
now,
maybe
one
of
their
other
properties
that
they've
changed
here,
have
an
opening
for
me.
I'm,
not
sure
that'd
be
great.
If
I
could
just
show
the
rule
across
the
alley,
I
would
love
to
do
that.
The
first
thing
I
want
to
talk
about
is
parking.
N
River
and
Ash
opened
up
with
less
parking
places
than
units
approved
and
right
away.
The
entire
neighborhood
ran
out
of
parking.
That's
before
the
place
across
the
alley.
With
its
48
units,
less
parking
than
units
approved
has
opened
up
and
before
this
place,
that's
even
bigger
than
all
those
combined
less
parking
than
available.
N
It's
going
to
have
to
be
walkable
because
no
one's
going
to
be
able
to
park
there,
which
brings
me
to
the
next
thing,
River
and
11.,
that
corner
that
I've
lived
on
for
so
long.
It's
a
busy
corner.
It's
only
gotten
busier.
Since
the
Simplot
headquarters
has
opened
up,
you
guys
have
included
a
raised
parking
or
bicycle
raised,
bicycle
stuff,
going
on
and
then
the
parallel
parking
which
is
made
11th
a
skinnier
Road
for
actually
driving
on
and
so
that
corner
turned
in
from
River
Street
onto
11th
is
going
to
be
even
tighter.
N
That's
going
to
be
especially
difficult
for
all
the
semi
trucks
that
pull
into
that
corner
for
the
warehouse
located
right
across
the
street.
They
pull
in
around
four
o'clock
in
the
morning.
They
go
down
about
four
o'clock
in
the
afternoon
days
that
they're
open.
This
is
sharing
the
exact
same
space
that
the
giant
bicycle
project
along
11th
is
going
on
with
now
on
that
side
of
the
street.
N
With
the
warehouse
there's
not
really
the
raised
parking
I,
don't
know
if
you're
going
to
do
parking
lanes
for
the
bicycles
and
to
separate
the
semi
trucks
from
the
bicycles,
just
a
a
white
line.
I
hope
that
works
out.
That's
one
of
my
main
concerns
River
and
11th
very,
very
busy.
It's
going
to
need
a
light.
You
know
it
I
know
it.
We
all
know
it.
It's
going
to
need
a
light
now.
N
I
understand
the
city's
not
in
charge
of
the
roads,
but
down
the
State
House
right
now,
they're
arguing
about
getting
their
own
roads
around
their
building
to
be
part
of
their
own
State
organization.
Maybe
the
cities
and
municipalities
in
Ada
County
might
want
to
jump
in
on
that
bill
to
see
if
cities
over
a
certain
population
could
be
in
charge
of
their
roads,
I
don't
know
if
they
would
be
involved
in
wanting
to
get
involved
in
City
politics
like
that
with
just
a
few
cities.
I,
don't
know
if
that's
affected
anybody
here
recently
or
not.
A
Hey,
sir
I,
imagine
that's
something
that
we
would
like
to
hear
about
because
there
is
a
rule
related
to
that,
but
you're
at
time.
That's
a
different
topic,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
stop
there.
A
Encourage
you
to
send
that
in
that
that
you
just
touched
on
into
the
clerk,
because
there's
a
process
to
look
at
that.
Thank.
Q
K
Q
I
understand
the
importance
of
development
and
proper
City
Planning.
My
partner,
Maddie
and
I
have
been
living
in
one
of
the
16
units
which
will
be
torn
down
for
this
project.
As
far
as
I
can
tell.
These
are
solid
building
structures
and
homes
to
a
community
I've
grown
to
love.
The
proposed
130
units
will
provide
much
needed
housing
for
many
families
in
Boise.
My
partner
Maddie,
who
works
for
catch
a
resource
for
people
experiencing
homelessness
in
Idaho,
has
reviewed
the
affordability
requirement
with
me
and
agrees.
Q
Our
current
rent
is
eleven
hundred
dollars
and
includes
900
square
feet.
Two
bedrooms
parking
water,
a
fireplace
and
obviously
the
prime
River
Street
location.
The
100
Ami
proposed
agreement
leads
to
Apartments
of
approximately
fifteen
hundred
and
thirty
one
dollars
being
considered,
affordable,
rent
for
a
person.
One
person.
This
does
not
include
water,
electricity
and
parking,
which
is
a
hundred
fifty
dollars
or
more
most
likely.
I
urge
the
city
council
to
reconsider
the
proposal
to
provide
more
affordable
housing
for
future
tenants.
H
R
Q
There
we
go
I
would
ask
for
oh
okay,
where
am
I
at
okay.
I
have
no
doubt
this
is
an
expensive
Endeavor
for
River
Street
be
LLC,
but
with
some
simple
math
and
reasoning.
This
is
very
profitable
Endeavor
for
them,
especially
if
the
building
is
built
well
and
the
location
draws
tenants
which
it
will
I
would
ask
for
16
units,
at
least
provided
at
60
Ami
to
better
match
the
current
demographic
and
rent
of
our
Apartments.
Q
My
concern
is
that
this
project,
as
it
stands,
would
financially
push
out
and
displace
current
members
of
the
downtown
Boise
community.
As
for
the
tenant
package
agreement,
no
current
residents
have
been
contacted
as
far
as
I
know.
The
only
information
we
received
is
payment
and
management
changes
left
on
the
door
or
Vehicles.
The
most
recent
note
stating
we
have
to
move
our
vehicles,
ASAP
for
construction
storage
and
no
other
details.
All
I'm
asking
for
is
open
and
clear
communication
and
reasonable
owners.
Q
To
me.
This
means
discussing
the
tenant
packages
with
us
when
you
say
you
have
and
guaranteeing
our
deposit
refunds,
since
the
buildings
will
be
demolished
as
long
as
we
clean
our
stuff
out,
more
affordable
apartments
and
reasonable
management
is
all
I
am
asking
for.
We
are
asking
for
thank
you
for
your
time.
E
Vladimir
maybe
question
for
you
here.
First
of
all,
thanks
for
coming
down
really
love
your
neighborhood
and
I
spend
quite
a
bit
of
time
there
you
asked
for
16,
affordable
units
and
I
think
that
maybe
at
the
beginning,
you
brought
up
that
you
had
cited
somewhere
about
an
affordability
Clause
that
required
that
do.
Q
Q
E
Let
me
follow
up
with
that.
I
think.
Maybe
at
the
very
beginning,
you
said
something
that
you
had
seen
a
requirement,
and
maybe
it
was
with
your
work
at
catch.
That
would
require
a
certain
amount
of
affordable
housing
and
I'm
wondering
if,
if
you
have
that
noted
or
was
that
just
more
of
a
not
a
like
a
in
code
point,
but
just
what
you
thought
was
a
need
in
the
community.
Q
I
think
it
just
is
a
way
to
replace
the
current
housing
that
is
there
and,
like
you
had
stated
earlier,
it's
affordable
based
on
our
old.
You
know,
owner
who
you
know
was
charging
around
1100
per
unit.
Some
were
less,
some
were
slightly
more
after.
We
moved
in
perfect.
A
H
H
I
do
have
a
quick
question.
The
development
agreement
only
specifies
a
number
of
units.
Was
there
any
discussion
about
a
number
of
bedrooms.
K
Madam
mayor
council
members,
we
had
not
gotten
into
the
details
of
the
number
of
bedrooms,
but
for
per
ccdc's
structure
that
they
use
for
this
type
of
funding.
It
does
require
a
mix
of
units.
K
Mountain
America
council
members
I
do
not
know
off
the
top
of
my
head.
What
that
was
I
just
know
that
there
was
an
affordability
clause
and
also
a
financial
assistance
package,
hard
and
council
member
Kelly
Burton
I.
Believe
to
your
point
about
what
the
last
person
was
speaking
to
would
be.
The
development
agreement
is
where
the
13
units
came
from.
A
But
question
those
the
13
units
in
that
D.A
came
from
the
CCDC
agreement:
CCDC
agreement,
not
staff
seeking
to
have
no
net
loss
in
affordable
housing,
correct.
K
E
And
Mary
I
might
get
around
to
that
question
later,
but
a
different
question.
Well,
my
brain
thinks
about
the
other
one.
So
the
the
relocation
package,
maybe
the
council
member
clay,
was
referring
to
with
ridden
bot,
wasn't
actually
a
requirement.
That
was
something
that
they
volunteered
to
do.
I
believe
we
don't
have
anything
that
would
require
a
developer
to
do
any
sort
of
relocation
package
or
am
I
incorrect
in
that.
K
E
And
then
metamera,
one
more,
maybe
one
more
question:
If
This
Were
to
be
Zone,
a
c
for,
and
they
received
the
housing
bonus
ordinances
that
includes
an
expedited
process.
I
still
don't
think
that
that
would
have
gotten
them
to
126
units
it
might
have
been
almost
half
of
that
is
that
correct
for
C4
I
think
it's
like
43
units
per
acre.
E
K
Madame
mayor
council
members,
so
with
the
housing
bonus
ordinance,
there
is
some
flexibility
on
density,
but
with
a
C4
by
itself.
That
would
not
allow
for
the
number
of
units
to
post
great.
H
More
the
relocation
package
is
designated
as
non-cash,
but
we
don't
have
any
other
details
about
what
that
would
include.
Have
you
had
any
further
discussions
with
a
developer
about
that.
H
Okay
and
matamir,
the
City
re
code
rewrite
and
rezone
is
scheduled
to
go
through
later
this
year.
If
that
were
to
happen,
they
could
build.
This
building
by
right
is.
A
I'd
ask
the
applicant
to
address
that
question
and
explain
again.
Why
you're
wanting
to
do
this
in
advance
of
the
rewrite
and
because
there's
a
that'll
be
part
of
your
rebuttal
and
because
there
they
could
wait.
But
he
stated
the
reason
they've
chosen
not
to
anything
further
for
staff.
E
Member
I
guess
I
could
use
maybe
some
more
explanation:
I,
don't
know
what
our
no
net
less
loss
policy
means
and
I.
Don't
from
my
knowledge
there's
there
would
be
nothing
that
we
could
do
to
require
them
to
have
16,
affordable
units.
I.
Don't
think
that,
there's
anything
that
we
have
in
our
code
or
policy
that
would
allow
us
to
do
that,
but
maybe
I'm
wrong
with
a
no
let
no
net
loss
policy,
I'm,
not
sure.
K
K
Madam
mayor
council
members,
the
way
the
D.A
is
currently
written,
it
would
be
10
of
the
units
or
13
whatever
is
greater
for
a
period
of
four
years
as
long
as
they
can
get.
The
funding
from
CCDC.
M
About
a
mayor
council
members,
thank
you
again.
I
just
want
to
address
some
of
the
comments
that
we
did
here
from
some
of
the
residents
parking
is
always
of
a
concern
and
we're
trying
to
find
solutions
to
betterment
the
neighborhood
to
allow
for
parking,
including
collaboration
with
the
large
parking
that
is
across
the
street
from
this
property.
M
Ashen
river
is
actually
a
one-to-one
ratio
for
unit
and
parking
and
the
parking
that
we're
doing
across
the
street.
So
we
continue
those
conversations
kudos
to
catch.
We
are
working
with
catch
right
now
on
two
other
projects
and
the
services
they
provide
and
allowing
us
to
work
with
them,
and
thank
you
for
all
your
efforts
that
you
do
there
we
have
reached
out.
We
have
been
in
communication
with
one
of
the
residents
this
far.
M
The
hope
is
that,
after
this
that
we
can
really
engage
with
the
residents
to
move
forward,
but
it
really
depends
on
how
we
proceed
this
evening.
The
question
in
regards
to
timeline
the
timeline
really
is
associated
with
you
know
the
the
conditions
with
CCDC.
So
if
the
district
expires,
the
funding
that
would
not
be
available
to
support
this,
the
number
of
units
is
tied
back
directly
to
the
funding
that
would
be
provided
from
CCDC.
We
set
that
Benchmark
at
13
or
the
percentage.
It's
the
same
conversation
that
we've
had
with
CCDC
foreign.
C
Quick
question
on
a
small
point
from
the
testimony
which
is
since
you're
tearing
the
buildings
down
you're,
probably
at
least
prepared
to
agree
that
these
tenants
will
get
their
damages
deposits
back.
That.
M
Would
not
be
of
issue?
Yes,
no,
a
great
example.
Thank
you
and
again,
I
think
in
regards
to
communication.
We
are
here
representing
the
ownership
group,
we're
not
the
management
company,
but
I
will
Echo
that
your
concerns
about
communication
are
valid
and
I'll
make
sure
that
they
start
to
reach
out
to
you
and,
depending
on
what
happens
this
evening,
then
we'll
start
engaging
in
the
process
about
assistance
for
relocation.
H
It's
one
more
I
didn't
catch
you
before
you
sat
down,
I
guess:
I
am
concerned
right
now.
There's
32
bedrooms
in
naturally
occurring
affordable
housing,
13
units
that
could
be
Studios
or
one
bedrooms
seems
like
a
not
not
the
kind
of
replacement
we'd
like
to
see
I
realized
that
CCDC
is
assisting
with
this.
M
Are
you
looking
for
me
to
respond
to
that
request?
Yeah
I,
I
can't
I
can't
support
it
at
this
time,
not
looking
at
the
complete
Financial
impacts
when
you're.
In
the
analysis
we
used
a
generalized
rental
income
and
the
loss
of
rent
income
associated
with
market
rate
to
100
or
below
100
Ami,
and
that's
where
we
came
up
with
the
13
generalized
units.
So
that's
why
we
talked
about
the
spread
of
units
throughout
the
entire
project.
So
it's
not
one
specific
okay.
C
I
think
it
complies
with
certainly
all
of
our
comprehensive
planning
requirements
on
the
affordable
units
issue.
C
It's
best
to
replace
what
we
have
with
something
new
that
serves
the
same
purpose,
but
in
less
than
a
year.
The
developer
can
come
back
and
do
this
as
a
matter
of
right
under
the
new
zoning
code
without
any
affordable
units,
and
so
we're
getting
something
here.
We're
getting
some
help
from
CCDC
they're
trying
to
move
fast
to
seize
that
opportunity
to
at
least
move
things
in
the
right
direction.
And
so
that's
why
I'm
supported
with
the
application
without
any
further
Amendment.
E
E
This
developer
has
done
everything
right
that
I
can
see.
According
to
code,
I
wish
that
we
were
getting
16
units.
I
know
some
of
the
families
who
live
in
these
units.
Some
of
them
have
gotten
bicycles
through
the
nonprofit
that
I
work
for-
and
this
is
a
really
really
important
area
of
our
city
and
having
a
really
diverse
population
and
housing
type-
is
really
really
important.
So
my
strong
encouragement
for
you
is
that
I
don't
know.
E
I
think
that
that's
something
that
everybody
would
like
to
see
at
least
up
here
and
so
I
would
encourage
you
to
look
into
seeing
how
you
could
get
even
more
units
in
that
area.
Since
you
are
exceeding
the
parking
requirements
and
trying
to
figure
out
how
there
might
be
more
units,
we
could
put
it
in
there
at
that
affordability
price
and
then
strongly
encourage.
You,
like
you,
said
to
talk
with
the
management
company
to
make
sure
that
we
are
communicating
with
everybody
the
best
that
we
can
I
think
they
deserve.
That.
H
At
America,
like
council,
member
Holly,
burtoning
and
council
member
bage
and
I
think
that
this
application
provides
more
than
we
will
get
nine
months
from
now.
I
think
that
ccdc's
assistance
is
something
that
we
should
try
to
ensure
does
happen.
H
So
I
will
be
encouraging
them
to
work
with
the
developer,
to
ensure
that
these
aren't
all
Studio
units
that
they're
some
of
them
are
real
units
and
that
that
assistance
make
sure
that
that
happens.
In
the
meantime,
it
is
pretty
exciting
to
get
this
many
more
units
in
a
in
a
neighborhood
where
we
have
asked
for
them,
or
it's
well
situated
for
them
and
like
council
member
Holly,
Burton
I
encourage
you
to
look
at
every
way.
H
E
Men,
mayor
I,
do
have
one
more
comment:
our
council
president
Hollywood,
isn't
here
tonight
she's
taking
a
much
deserved
vacation,
but
she
also
serves
on
CCDC
and
I,
think
it
would
be
worth
bringing
up
with
CCDC
about
the
100
Ami
versus
80
Ami
and
like
really
what
those
those
goals
are
there
and
during
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission,
there
was
a
lot
of
discussion
about
the
intersection
of
11th
and
River
Street
and
what
a
future
connection
with
the
rest
of
our
11th,
Street
Bikeway,
would
look
like
and
so
I
think
we'll
be
looking
for
CCDC
to
make
sure
that
we
do
and
address
that
right
with
the
development
of
this
building.
D
D
A
We
will
I,
think
we're
gonna
go
ahead
and
take
a
break
and
then
we'll
come
back
and
do
this
one,
hopefully
without
a
break
from
start
to
finish,
we'll
be
back.
A
A
A
A
We
are
so
lucky,
so
you'll
speak
as
the
appellant.
Then
we'll
have
the
applicant,
and
then
you
can
speak
as
a
neighborhood
association
on
the
merits
of
the
other
things.
Please
don't
spend
another
12
minutes
or
whatever
we're
giving
you
on
the
appeal.
But
it's
your
opportunity
to
address
because
we're
talking
about
all
three
things
here
tonight
at
once:
the
Pud,
the
car
and
the
SUV.
A
So
that's
why
it's
up
for
you
for
you
to
decide
because
the
appellant,
if
you're
going
first,
you
should
talk
about
the
appeal
first,
but
I
just
say
this,
because
this
is
a
unique
situation.
Where
I
will
let
you
come
up
as
Dave
Kangas
and
then
as
the
neighborhood
association,
because
it's
not
just
an
appeal
tonight
and
then
the.
A
A
What
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
do
is
after
I've
called
through
the
list,
come
sit
in
the
front
row
and
we'll
just
go
one
at
a
time
and
then
after
you
speak
well,
the
next
person
speaking
you
can
sign
your
name
and
then
we'll
check
to
see
if
anybody's
online
and
then
we'll
go
backwards
for
rebuttal
the
applicant
and
then
the
appellant.
Okay,
all
good
Tim
welcome.
O
O
Of
course,
we've
been
talking
about
Victory
on
the
bench
for
the
last
several
months,
related
to
a
separate
development
that
came
to
council
about
30
days
ago,
and
then
this
one-
and
these
are
very
important
properties
that
have
been
a
farm
previously-
is
now
transitioning
to
other
things
and
and
and
there's
been
a
lot
of
discussion
about
how
the
impact
of
this
development
on
on
the
neighborhood.
O
Of
course,
in
this
part
of
the
city,
and
last
time
we
were
in
front
of
Council
on
development
on
the
street,
we
talked
a
lot
about
Victory
itself
and
bike
and
pedestrian
improvements
and
safety
measures
on
Victory
and
so
forth,
which
is
good,
and
we
there's
been
a
lot
of
coordination
between
the
staff
and
the
two
developers
as
it
relates
to
how
these
developments
will
come
together
in
a
design
and
and
what
what
they
will
contribute
to
the
community
when
they're
built.
These
will
be
a
long
time
in
coming.
O
O
That
was
a
dramatic
change
in
terms
of
the
quality
of
this
and
and
there's
been
so
much
effort
by
the
neighborhood
and
and
all
the
meetings
with
the
neighborhood
and
the
developer,
and
the
neighborhood
concerns
around
the
lots
of
details
that
are
very
important.
And
so
anyway,
I
just
wanted
to
acknowledge
the
effort.
That's
gone
into
what
you
have
before
you
tonight
from
all
parties
sides
and
and
acknowledge
the
the
ultimately.
O
S
S
S
Approximately
a
quarter
mile
from
the
site
is
the
bus.
Stop
at
visten
Canal,
which
is
served
by
VRT
Route
3
to
the
Northwest
is
a
mix
of
hotel
and
medical
office.
Commercial
uses
to
the
Northeast,
a
single
family
residential
neighborhood,
directly
adjacent
to
the
site
on
the
East
is
existing
residential
neighborhood
and
to
the
west
of
seasons
on
the
bench.
A
development
project
which
will
be
anticipated
with
similar
density
beyond
the
New
York
Canal
to
the
South,
is
the
sunrise
Rim
residential
neighborhood.
S
The
site
has
a
mixed-use
designation,
which
is
intended
to
promote
a
more
compact,
pedestrian
and
Transit
oriented
pattern
of
development.
The
applicant
request
to
rezone
the
site
to
R3,
which
allows
for
a
maximum
of
43.5
units
per
acre.
The
proposed
project
would
come
in
at
a
total
density
of
just
over
20
units
per
acre.
S
S
Due
to
the
specific
use
and
location
of
this
property,
a
development
agreement
was
included
with
the
application.
The
da
ties,
the
rezone
to
the
conceptual
plan
submitted
limits,
the
height
to
the
requested
height
exception,
specifies
pathway,
locations
and
requirements
for
Community
amenities
Additionally.
The
applicant
has
offered
25
multi-family
units
to
be
deed,
restricted
at
affordable
of
100
Ami.
S
S
The
site
provides
a
mix
of
housing
types
with
single-family
homes,
town
homes
and
apartments
that
are
mix
of
bedroom
counts.
Additionally,
there
are
commercial
amenities
included.
Access
to
the
site
includes
three
points
from
West
Victory
Road.
The
proposed
internal
streets
provide
connectivity
to
existing
substrates
on
the
East
and
plan
streets
towards
the
West
north
south
and
East-West
boulevards
include
significant
median
Landscaping,
providing
for
attractive
and
safe
passages
for
both
pedestrian
and
cyclists.
S
The
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
properly
found
that
the
applicable
conditional
use
permit
criteria
were
satisfied
and
the
case
to
support
the
height
exception
was
deemed
complete
with
the
project.
Variant
standards
in
this
case
are
not
applicable.
Nor
did
the
applicant
request
a
variance
so
for
the
height
exception.
It
is
reviewed
as
a
request
to
deviate
from
the
development
standards
of
the
Zone
District,
which
are
reviewed
through
a
cup.
S
The
applicant
is
requesting
a
height
exception
to
allow
the
multi-family
mixed-use
building
to
be
built
over
the
45-foot
height
limit
in
the
R3
Zone.
The
tallest
portion
of
the
structure
is
approximately
30
percent
of
the
building's
footprint
and
would
reach
a
maximum
height
of
68
feet
for
five
stories.
The
remaining
70
percent
of
the
building
footprint
would
reach
57
feet
in
height
for
four
stories.
S
The
nearest
single
family
home
is
450
feet
away,
North
across
West
Victory
Road,
the
sunrise
Rim
neighborhood,
which
is
to
the
South,
has
574
feet
from
the
four-story
section
and
over
652
feet
from
the
five-story
section.
Foreign
exception
also
allows
for
a
mix
of
commercial
uses
on
the
ground
floor
with
Street
activation
and
concentration
of
density.
Above
during
the
Planning
and
Zoning
hearing,
Commissioners
pointed
to
the
significant
distances
between
the
tallest
portions
of
the
building
and
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
S
As
well
as
the
intervening
landscape,
the
transitioning
building
Heights
throughout
the
project
and
the
minimal
view
impacts
as
reason
that
the
height
is
compatible
with
surrounding
uses
and
noted
that
the
height
created
an
opportunity
for
housing,
diversity
and
a
unique
design.
While
there
is
no
right
to
a
view
shed
under
Idaho
law
or
city
ordinance.
The
applicant
did
present
view
studies
at
the
hearing
to
demonstrate
that
the
impact
of
the
view
from
the
sunrise
room
would
be
very
minimal.
S
Dna
also
contests
that
they
have
not
been
included
in
the
planning
and
design
process
related
to
this
project.
Based
on
the
units
the
uses
in
bedroom
count,
a
total
of
1
224
parking
spaces
would
be
required
for
the
entire
project.
In
total,
the
applicant
is
proposing
1
369
Vehicles
spaces
on
site,
which
would
exceed
the
minimum
requirement.
S
S
Revised
Street
sections
have
been
submitted
and
included
in
your
packet,
which
have
received
achd
fire
and
planning
approval
to
allow
slight
deviations
in
public
Street
standards
to
allow
internal
public
streets
for
the
project.
Additionally,
the
Victory
Road
Site
improvements
have
also
been
agreed
upon
by
all
parties
and
agencies.
S
Foreign
I
would
also
note
that
the
applicant
has
demonstrated
ongoing
engagement
with
the
Vista
neighborhood
association
since
project
submittal.
There
have
been
three
neighborhood
meetings
prior
to
the
submittal
of
March
2022
and
a
fourth
neighborhood
meeting
was
held
in
September
of
2022
before
the
revised,
updated
plans
were
submitted
to
the
planning
department.
S
S
H
I
guess
I'll
get
this
question
on
the
books
now
I
I
think
I
know
the
answer
about
it.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
in
the
record.
Some
of
the
roadways
in
the
development
are
being
proposed
for
public
and
some
for
private.
What's
the
difference
between
those.
S
Madam
mayor
council,
member
Clegg,
so
we
worked
with
achd
to
get
as
many
public
Street
connections
as
we
could
internal
to
the
site.
The
idea
here
is
to
provide
clear
access
for
public
to
be
able
to
go
through
the
site
and
connect
to
the
existing
neighborhood
on
both
the
East
and
the
West.
S
The
the
areas
that
are
designated
private
are
for
Alley
loaded
products
as
well
as
for
boulevards.
That
did
not
quite
meet
the
public
Street
standard
of
achd.
T
A
T
A
T
B
T
Madame
mayor
city
council,
my
name
is
Dave
Kangas
I
reside
at
1715,
West,
Canal,
Street
and
I'm
speaking
here
tonight
on
behalf
of
the
Vista
neighborhood
association,
so
this
project
obviously
has
a
ton
of
impact
on
our
neighborhood
and
we've
been
working
on
this
for
over
a
year.
I
believe
our
first
communication
was
in
December,
with
the
developer
to
where
we
exchanged
emails,
I
even
sent
some
videos
of
the
property.
T
T
First
one
was
like
I
think
it
was
third
one.
First
one
was
like
54.
Then
we
had
34
and
42s
roughly
in
there
at
the
neighborhood
meetings
and
besides
traffic
it
was
height.
That
was
the
big
issue.
It
wasn't
arguing
and
screaming
about
how
many
units
there
were.
It
was
dealing
with
the
heights
and
the
size
of
the
development.
T
Now
once
they
submitted
in
the
summer
and
got
rejected
and
redesigned,
they
came
back
out
with
more
units
and
68
feet.
Instead
of
40
.5
feet,
they
had
at
the
last
March
meeting
I
believe
is
550
apartments
and
when
they
came
back
out
at
the
end
of
summer,
it
was
616..
T
Now,
when
we
talked
about
the
interior
streets
at
the
first
here
in
pnz,
hearing
achd
in
the
city
of
Boise
really
hadn't
come
together
on
anything
because
dealing
with
the
streets.
They
hadn't
agreed
on
the
south
side
of
Victory
on
what
it
was
going
to
look
like
a
CHD
wanted
did
not
want
parking
on
Victory.
We
wanted
the
multimodal
pathway
and
the
detached
sidewalks
the
interior
streets.
T
They
had
not
agreed
to
the
city,
wanted
all
public
streets,
achd,
said,
didn't
agree
with
the
street
design
and
we
objected
to
the
large
amount
of
parking
on
public
streets.
We
didn't
feel
like
this.
A
project
like
this
should
be
having
its
parking
requirement
met
by
using
public
streets
and
I
would
believe.
Their
number
is
300
parking
places
on
public
streets,
and
we
have
a
big
concern
about.
That
is
how
many
of
them
are
actually
going
to
be
on
Victory.
T
Now,
while
he,
the
developers
providing
a
lot
of
two-car
garages,
they
have
very
reduced
rear
setbacks
on
those
rear
car
garages.
So
if
you've
ever
tried
to
get
two
cars
into
an
alley
load
garage,
you
really
can't,
unless
you
spend
about
four
minutes,
doing
a
six
point
turn
to
get
in
next
to
the
car.
So
realistically
a
lot
there's
going
to
end
up
being
a
lot
of
parking,
so
that
was
the
huge
issues
is
achd
in
the
city
of
Boise.
T
Just
had
not
come
to
terms
on
what
the
streets
were
look
like
and
because
they
had
not
come
to
terms.
We
didn't
know
what
the
streets
would
outcome
would
be.
We
didn't
know
what
the
wits
were
parking.
Anything
like
that
now
I
have
been
told
that
they
have
ironed
them
out.
I
know
they've
agreed
to
what
victory
will
look
like
and
I
understand.
They
have
come
to
some
accommodation.
T
It
looks
like
half
the
streets
are
public
and
half
the
streets
are
private,
but
there's
still
300
parking
spots
within
the
pub
on
public
streets
within
the
development.
Now
we've
all
been
through
the
traffic
mitigation.
We
know.
What's
going
on
with
that,
when
I
went
through
and
watched
the
work
session
with
Karen
Gallagher
talking
about
the
five-year
work
plan,
there
is
a
couple
things
that
really
cut
me
off.
Guard
I
didn't
have
time
to
submit
it,
but
I
printed
off
three
of
the
screenshots
that
really
caught
my
eye
and
concerned
my
favorite
coffee.
T
T
T
We
have
four
in
that
specific
area.
Is
that
what
we're
looking
at
you
know,
15
years
to
get
the
two
railroad
crossings
done
dealing
with
the
traffic
of
ten
thousand
units
without
some
kind
of
timeline,
some
kind
of
condition
promise
that
is
attached
to
this
application?
How
can
anybody
support
it?
How
long
do
are
we
supposed
to
deal
with
those
Crossings
when
you
look
down
below
87
current
projects?
50
are
programmed
37
submitted.
T
T
T
So
when
it
comes
to
that,
we
can't
support
this
I
mean
that's
a
major
issue.
We've
agreed
to
the
traffic
mitigation,
a
lot
of
the
street
Design's
been
worked
out,
but
this
that's
a
no-go.
We
got
to
have
something
and
I,
don't
know
how
to
do
that.
That's
something
that
I
have
to
hand
off
to
you
to
figure
out,
but
you've
seen
the
streets.
You've
seen
the
issues
and
I
really
can't
think
that
it
would
move
forward
like
this.
T
Now,
if
you
think
about
10
000
vehicle
trips
a
day
on
Victory,
how
can
we
even
suggest
or
think
that
those
homes
aren't
going
to
be
adversely
affected
by
this
development?
And
then
you
add
Heights?
T
We
feel
that
the
decision
was
arbitrary,
capricious
abusive
discretion
and
was
made
without
support
and
substantial
facts.
Basically,
the
explanation
to
a
grant
the
height
exception
was
very
arbitrary.
There
is,
you
know,
verticality
was
used,
it's
going
to
be
a
nicer
design.
T
T
There
was
discussion
about
having
the
height
exception,
adversely
affecting
the
views
of
them
up
there,
but
as
that's
not
that
big
a
deal
we'll
just
you
know
we're
getting
better
design
and
when
you
look
at
the
code
and
the
way
the
law
is
supposed
to
be
written,
there's
supposed
to
be
specific
hardlines,
it's
not
wishy-washy,
I
I
wasn't
going
to
say
it,
but
I
had
to
as
while
I
was
going
through.
This
a
life
coach
had
published
a
book
called
strength
of
the
Oak
and
strength
of
the
willow,
navigating
a
complex
world
and
I'm.
T
You
know
the
oak
is
strong.
It's
always
been
a
symbol
of
strife,
the
willow
blows
in
the
wind.
It
changes
it
falls
and
breaks
apart
on
its
own
growth
and
there's
a
lot
of
simple
analogies
there.
If
you
think
about
it,
the
willow
doesn't
really
stand
for
anything,
but
the
oak
does
now.
When
we
start
looking
persuading
twisting
finding
Oak
ways
to
pass
these
variances
and
exceptions,
what
does
a
code
mean.
T
T
T
T
T
T
Excuse
me,
the
use
will
adversely
affect
other
property
in
the
vicinity.
Again,
there
is
a
lot
of
discussion
by
Planning
and
Zoning,
but
they
were
trading
off
this
for
that
it's
okay,
but
the
guideline
is
supposed
to
be:
does
this
adversely
affect
neighboring
properties?
Yes
or
no?
Not?
Well!
That's!
Okay,
because
we're
getting
this,
you
cannot
say
the
sunrise.
Rim
property
owners
have
lived
there
for
a
long
time.
Most
of
them
have
been.
There
grew
up
in
those
homes
not
most
of
them,
but
some
grew
up
in
the
homes.
T
T
T
T
T
T
Basically,
in
the
discussion
about
the
height
and
whether
they're
guaranteed
a
view
or
not
or
who
gets
the
view,
it
was
mentioned
that
yeah
go
high,
so
those
guys
can
have
the
views.
We
don't
care
about
the
sunrise,
Rim
people.
We
want
the
new
properties
to
have
the
views
that
were
some
of
the
comments,
and
that
was
in
the
discussion.
T
With
this
height
exception,
they've
added
56
units
to
get
views.
Obviously
those
views
will
be
premium
rents,
that's
what
that's
the
way
things
go,
they've
also
filled
in.
They
have
8
000
square
feet
of
flex
and
commercial
space
down
below
that
I
thought
it
was
a
20-foot
ceiling,
but
I
think
I'm
wrong
on
that.
T
The
subdivision
needs
some
kind
of
conditions
to
deal
with
the
railroad
crossings
and
I.
Don't
know
I,
don't
know
how
to
do
that.
I,
don't
know
where
to
go
with
that,
because
there
is
I,
don't
think
anybody
can
deny
the
issues
there
and
the
timing
and
I
showed
you
the
funding
issues.
T
I
could
read
off
a
lot
of
conversation
that
went
on
between
the
Commissioners
during
a
time
to
kind
of
tie
in
with
all
this,
but
I.
You
know
if
I,
don't
think
that'll
guide
my
argument
any
further,
so
we
feel
that
the
decision,
the
appeal
or
excuse
me,
the
height
exception
was
made-
is
arbitrary
and
really
wasn't
basis
of
fact,
and
there
are
plenty
of
issues
that
I
just
went
through
when
they're
granting
the
cup
and
the
subdivision.
Well,
we
need
to
do
something.
E
Man,
Amir
I've
got
a
question.
I
should
be
more
patient
and
let
somebody
else
do
it
I'm,
always
kind
of
ready
to
go
so
great
to
see
you
thanks
for
coming
down,
I
appreciate
the
points
that
you
brought
up
and
I
appreciate
you
seeing
some
of
the
concerns
here
that
might
come
up
later
and
happy
to
talk
about
that.
I
broke
eye
contact
with
you.
E
While
you
were
talking
to
kind
of
look
up
some
of
the
last
minutes,
because
I
thought
that
I
had
read
something
there
to
figure
out
where
they
had
addressed
it
in
the
planning.
Zoning
commission,
meeting
and
I
think
I
found
the
spot.
That
I
was
looking
for
because
I
kind
of
had
the
same
point
of
view
that
you
did
I
was
trying
to
figure
out.
E
Why
that
the
height
exemption
was
granted
and
with
some
questioning
from
commissioner
Gillespie
staff
came
back
and
said,
we
support
the
request
for
the
height
exemption
a
to
achieve
the
vertical
mixed
use,
the
density
that
we're
looking
for,
as
well
as
the
offer
for
the
deed
restrictions
of
the
units.
By
going
to
that
height,
they
are
able
to
provide
25
units
at
the
deed
restrictions.
T
They
did
add
in
the
the
affordability,
but
is
only
100
Ami,
so
the
neighborhood
association
really
wasn't
really
didn't
see
that
as
a
negotiating
point.
But
that
was
that
when
they're
talking
about
the
verticality
and
the
design
and
density
really
wasn't
a
need
because,
let's
face
it,
you're
dealing
with
40
some
odd
Acres,
they
can
there's
a
lot
to
work
with
there.
Yep.
E
E
I
forget
what
the
number
was,
but
it
was
like
600
feet
from
one
area
like
400
from
another,
but
that
was
one
of
the
other
points
that
was
brought
up
was
that
because
of
the
distance,
this
height
being
placed
in
the
center
of
the
complex
being
so
far
from
the
neighbors
that
it
didn't
actually
have
that
effect
of
such
a
massing
being
right
next
to
a
different,
different
type
of
zone.
So
just
I
guess
your
response
to
that.
Well,.
T
I'm
I'm
sure
it
would
help
versus
having
him
in
your
face,
but
they're
still,
that
is
the
again
when
you
look
from
where
Sunrise
Rim
is
at
or
even
from
the
Canal
bank,
you
don't
see
any
bumps,
it's
level,
you
see,
Treetops,
you
don't
see.
Building
sticking
up
and
this
property
has
been
60,
Acres
of
farmland
and
trees
and
Wildlife
for
60
70
years,
and
a
lot
of
the
people
have
lived
up.
There
lived
up
there
for
a
long
time.
T
So
when
you
see
that
bump
sticking
up
it's
still
a
bump
and
while
the
sunrise
Rim
people,
you
know
it
does
affect
some
of
their
views.
I
can't
say
how
much
because
we
don't
have
the
building
to
look
at,
but
it's
also
just
as
bad
with
the
people
down
on
Victory.
They
get
a
look
out
at
their
front
door
every
day.
You
know
another
issue.
C
Better
man,
Dave,
one
of
the
things
that
you
you
talked
about
was
the
adverse
well.
Let
me
back
up
so
the
height
exception
here
is
all
tied
to
the
conditional
use.
Permit
it's
not
a
variance
right
and
then
you'd
walk
through
the
conditional
use
test
and
I
wanted
to
dig
in
to
to
what
your
argument
was
like
as
to
the
adverse
impact
to
other
properties
from
the
height,
because
we,
you
discussed
the
view
and
the
bump,
but
I
think
we
would
agree
that.
That's
not
a
property
interest
that
we
usually
protect.
C
T
H
I
won't
ask
about
tonight
because
my
fellow
council
members
have
you
objected
to
on
Street
using
on-street
parking
and
I
guess
I'm
curious.
Would
you
rather
have
surface
parking
lots
and
more
asphalt,
I'm
thinking
of
neighborhoods,
where
the
on-street
parking
is
heavily
used
and
they're,
typically,
the
most
sought
after
neighborhoods
in
the
city?
So
tell
me
what
it
is
about
on-street
parking
that
bothers
you.
T
Know
well,
part
of
that
boils
down
to
also
the
project
on
Victory
and
targy,
where
they
had
tried
to
use
on
street
parking
as
part
of
their
requirement,
and
that
was
a
flat
no
from
that
got
deferred.
That
was
a
flattened
oath
through
pnz
and
in
our
experience,
which
is
this
is
a
huge
project.
We've
never
dealt
with
anything
this
big
it
just
it
didn't
seem
right
and
while
we
appreciate
parking
on
Victory,
there
is
a
concern
that,
with
the
parking
requirements
on
public
streets,
how
many
of
those
are
in
that
I
guess?
T
H
T
You,
but
in
this
subdivision,
not
not
so
much,
maybe
on
Victory,
but
that's
also
why
we
did
the
raised
crosswatch.
Thank
you.
One
point
that
I
just
if
I
can
back
up
a
second
the
entrances
on
to
Victory
with
the
amount
of
traffic
and
with
parking,
we
would
like
to
see
some
kind
of
no
parking
like
two.
T
A
V
Madam
mayor
council
members,
my
name
is
Alex
Drexel
Madras
is
334
South
Sequoia,
Salt,
Lake,
City
Utah
I
have
a
couple
of
brief
comments
before
we
get
into
the
details
of
the
application.
First
I
want
to
thank
Delaney,
Tim
and
staff,
the
rest
of
the
staff
in
the
city
of
Boise
for
their
hard
work
and
quick
responsiveness
throughout
this
process
and
and
challenging
us
to
bring
the
best
project
forward
for
a
truly
unique
and
special
opportunity.
Second,
I
want
to
briefly
introduce
the
team
behind
the
development
I'm.
V
The
development
director
for
lane
construction
Leighton
has
had
a
presence
in
Boise
since
the
early
1990s
and
our
company,
just
yesterday
celebrated
its
70th
Anniversary,
we're
working
on
behalf
of
of
well
Tower
Inc
to
identify,
deliver
and
design
what
we
call
Wellness
housing
across
the
greater
Treasure
Valley,
along
with
our
trusted,
Consultants,
Kimberly,
horn
and
dpz.
V
Well,
Tara
is
a
national
leader
in
the
health
and
wellness
space
and
a
long-term
holder
in
all
their
assets.
Because
of
this
discerns
of
the
community
of
great
importance
to
us.
As
we've
has
been
noted
a
few
times,
we
had
a
series
of
four
neighborhood
meetings
dating
back
to
March
of
last
year
and
nearby
Hawthorne
Elementary
School
in
the
gymnasium.
At
the
request
of
the
city,
we
extended
the
the
noticing
radio
set
to
a
thousand
feet
and
notified
nearly
1200
residents.
V
Each
time
we
worked
with
the
community
to
listen
and
address
many
of
their
concerns
and
evolve
the
site
plans
together.
We
recognize
the
community
concerns,
could
become
issues
for
our
own
residents
and
have
worked
hard
to
design
a
project
that
fulfills
the
city's
plans
for
this
property
and
elevates
the
quality
of
life
for
the
entire
community.
In
the
process.
We
appreciate
the
the
thoughtful
feedback
and
look
forward
to
Growing
together.
A
common
motto
within
our
team
is
what
is
good
for
the
community
is
good
for
well
Tower
Leighton.
Thank
you,
foreign.
W
Our
three
zoning
that
we're
requesting
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
designation
of
mixed
use,
which
supports
high
density
residential
along
corridors
with
access
to
Transit.
It
is
one
of
the
allowed
zones
based
on
the
mixed-use
designation,
based
on
the
city's
matrix.
It's
consistent
with
the
surrounding
zoning
as
well.
We've
got
R3.
Zoning
to
the
Northwest
r3da
was
just
approved
immediately
to
our
West,
and
then
the
R1
C
surrounds
the
east
side
of
this,
where
the
project
has
appropriately
aligned
a
single-family
residential
and
town
homes
to
transition
from
those
uses.
W
You
can
see
that
better
here
in
the
development
plan,
the
the
entire
layout
has
been
carefully
designed
to
take
into
account
both
feedback
from
the
neighbors
and
the
city
staff
and
to
provide
that
housing
and
variety
and
compact
walkable
neighborhood.
That's
called
for
in
your
comprehensive
plan
and
the
uses
have
been
arranged
to
transition
the
height
and
density
away
from
those
existing
uses,
single-family
detached
homes
and
a
variety
of
two
three
and
four
bedroom
styles
that
are
shown
in
the
blue
shades
are
arranged
on
the
Eastern
portion
of
the
site.
W
These
are
all
exist,
adjacent
to
existing
single-family
homes.
The
town
homes
are
shown
in
the
purple
Shades.
These
provide
further
transition
and
include
a
variety
of
two
and
three
bedroom
styles
and
then
the
apartment
shown
in
pink
include
Studio
one
bedroom,
two
bedroom
units.
They
are
centrally
arranged
along
the
western
border
adjacent
to
the
planned
multi-family
season
seasons
on
the
bench
project,
at
the
request
of
both
staff
and
the
neighbors.
W
The
streets
are
laid
out
in
a
grid-like
pattern,
with
pedestrian
friendly
streetscapes,
including
internal
boulevards,
with
Island
landscaping
and
bike
Lanes
to
provide
a
network
of
low
stress,
hiking
and
biking.
It
was
important
to
the
city
that
we
connect
to
the
existing
stub
roads
to
the
east,
which
we
have
done.
The
streets
are
designed
through
our
site
to
funnel
traffic
up
and
away
from
the
existing
neighborhood
to
our
East
as
Delaney
described.
The
developer.
W
862
spaces
are
required
after
applicable,
reductions
are
applied
to
the
project
for
the
podium
parking
and
the
one
for
one
allowed
for
public
street
parking
compared
to
those
862
spaces
required.
We
provide
10
93
on-site,
not
using
the
public
streets,
so
there's
plenty
of
parking
within
the
borders
of
the
development.
Whether
you
count.
The
public
street
parking
or
not
vistapoint
amenities
include
the
Pavilion
space,
a
dog
park,
playground,
Clubhouse
pool
Terrace,
community
garden
and
multi-use
Pathways,
plus,
of
course,
the
commercial
and
co-working
space
as
amenities.
W
The
site
includes
10
acres
of
open
space,
including
six
acres
of
publicly
accessible
Green
Space,
as
Tim
was
noting
at
the
outset.
The
development
is
really
tailored
towards
providing
public,
Green
Space
and
designed
around
it
and
the
slide.
You
can
also
see
that
the
apartments
enjoy
internal
Courtyards
with
private
Green
Space
as
well.
For
those
residents.
W
The
highlight
of
these
public
areas
is
the
multi-use
pathway
along
the
New
York
Canal
continuing
along
to
serve
the
project
to
the
West
plus,
a
new
north-south
pathway
that
runs
along
our
western
border
to
connect
to
Victory
and
all
the
site
contains
a
total
of
1.2
miles
of
off-street
paths
for
pedestrians
and
bikers
I'm,
going
to
run
through
a
few
renderings.
So
you
can
get
a
sense
of
what
the
development
will
live,
how
it
will
live
and
what.
R
W
W
A
few
Transportation
points
I
want
to
highlight
a
traffic
study
was
completed
for
this
project
and
was
approved
by
achd.
The
study
included
trips
from
seasons
on
the
bench
next
door
and
Vista
Apartments
at
Vista
and
Canal.
The
study
found
with
the
redesign
of
this
development
that
it
full
build
out
in
all
of
those
projects.
All
roads
will
operate
at
acceptable
levels
of
service,
except
for
a
segment
of
Victory
between
the
site
and
Canal
Street,
which
was
19
Vehicles
over
planning
thresholds
in
the
PM
peak
hour.
W
The
vistapoint
developer
is
also
required
to
install
three
raised
crosswalks
on
Victory
Road
along
the
frontage,
contribute
14
640
to
a
road
trust
deposit
for
future
speed
bumps
along
Columbus
and
Canal
re-stripe.
The
left
lane
from
left
turn
lane
from
Canal
onto
Vista,
to
extend
the
storage
capacity
there
and
install
a
multi-use
pathway
along
the
Victory
Road
Frontage
achd
has
agreed
to
that
multi-use
pathway
in
lieu
of
the
on-street
bike
lane
and
detached
sidewalks.
W
W
Achg
also
has
a
number
of
improvements
planned
in
the
area,
including
pedestrian
improvements
along
Malad
between
Annette
Street
and
Federal
Way,
which
includes
the
railroad
crossing.
This
design
is
already
funded.
It
is
in
the
five-year
work
plan
it
is
at
the
it
is
funded
for
this
year,
2023..
Also
in
the
five-year
work
plan,
the
right-of-way
is
funded
for
2024.,
as
achd
testified
in
the
work
session.
They
plan
to
construct
the
very
following
year
in
2025.
W
W
Along
with
the
rezone
and
subdivision
before
you
tonight
is
the
neighborhood
association's
appeal
of
the
Pud
objecting
to
the
building
height
under
city
code.
The
city
council
must
give
due
consideration
to
the
commission's
decision
and
may
find
error
only
based
on
the
specified
grounds.
In
your
code.
The
appeal
filed
by
the
neighbor
Association
did
not
identify
any
errors
made
by
the
Commission
in
their
approval
of
the
Pud
and
as
described
in
our
written
submittals
and
in
the
project
staff
report.
Responding
to
them
no
error
occurred.
W
The
decision
complied
with
applicable
laws
and
procedures
was
not
arbitrary
and
capricious
and
was
supported
by
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
and
though
the
appellant
May
disagree
with
the
outcome,
the
pnz
did
carefully
consider
the
proposal
based
on
the
Pud
standards.
They
issued
a
well-reasoned
decision
and
that
included
the
height
exception.
W
With
the
Pud.
The
commission
approved
a
height
exception
over
the
R3
zones,
45
feet
to
accommodate
buildings
that
are
up
to
68
feet.
But,
of
course
that's
just
with
the
impertinence
is
the
buildings
themselves
and
the
true
impact
of
them
with
the
the
roof
line
is
at
60
feet
and
the
parapet
is
at
63
and
a
half
feet
for
the
tallest
interior
portion
of
the
multi-family
building.
W
The
height
exception
is
appropriate
and
necessary
to
accommodate
the
podium
parking
to
minimize
surface
parking.
Also,
it
accommodates
the
ground
floor,
commercial
space
that
was
requested
by
planning
staff
and
Neighbors,
which,
as
Mr
Kangas
noted,
does
have
a
taller
ceiling
at
16
feet
versus
11
feet
for
residential.
W
The
proposed
density
here
is
approximately
20
units
per
acre,
which
is
well
within
the
levels
allowed
and
encouraged
with
the
mixed
use.
Future
land
use
map
designation
near
Transit.
The
height
allows
that
density
to
be
vertically
concentrated
in
the
apartments
enabling
a
mix
of
housing
types
throughout
the
rest
of
the
site
and
horizontal
transition
through
single-family
homes
to
the
surrounding
uses.
W
W
W
The
four-story
portion
is
that
distance
and
the
five-story
portion
is
652
feet.
The
applicant
also
conducted
a
view
study,
which
was
part
of
the
evidence
presented
to
the
Commission
in
support
of
their
decision.
The
sunrise
Rim
neighbors
are
not
only
set
back
hundreds
of
feet.
They
are
also
47
feet
at
the
lowest
point
in
elevation
above
the
site
and
ranges
up
from
there
using
a
drone
at
a
conservative,
50-foot
elevation.
The
applicant
conducted
this
view
study
to
demonstrate
view,
impacts
from
three
different
points
along
Sunrise
rim,.
W
W
This
is
the
view
from
point
B
here,
especially
along
the
south
side,
The
Green,
Space
and
Landscaping
improvements
along
the
canal
will
soften
this
appearance,
as
that
is
significant,
open
space
area
and
here's
the
view
from
point
C.
In
all
of
these
perspectives,
the
impact
and
the
foreground
is
minimal
and
the
Foothills
views
remain.
W
All
of
this
evidence
was
before
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
discussed
at
length
in
the
hearings.
Neighbors
had
the
opportunity
to
present
their
evidence
as
well,
which
they
did
in
testimony
and
based
on
all
of
this
evidence.
After
deliberation,
the
commission
determined
the
proposed
Building
height
to
be
compatible
and
appropriate,
and
no
error
was
made
in
that
decision.
W
W
Madame
mayor
all
right,
verb
agent,
I
think
that
this
this
Council
appropriately
does
look
at
height
and
often
do
look
at
transition.
You
know
the
view
per
se
isn't
protected.
It
was
a
legal
right,
but
it
is
appropriate
to
look
at
height
when
considering
compatibility
and
that's
why
this
site
is
so
carefully
designed
to
provide
the
adjacent
uses
with
that
transition.
C
Thanks
I
guess
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
if
I
should
be
thinking
about
this
in
terms
of
adverse
impact
to
nearby
property
or
if
I
should
be
thinking
about
it.
In
terms
of
compatibility,
because
we
heard
that
you
know
certain
people
feel
that
they
will
be
their
property
right
will
somehow
be
adversely
impacted
by
a
change
in
the
view
which
might
be
true
might
not.
But
then
we
also
heard
that
this
is
not
compatible,
because
the
height
is
so
different
from
what
you'd
see.
If
you
took.
C
W
Madam
mayor
council
member
of
agent
I
think
it's
appropriate
to
consider
it
in
both
and
I
think
they
they're
trying
to
argue
it
in
both
they're.
Both
PUD
criteria,
they're
both
considered
appropriately
considered
by
the
commission
and
I-
think
we've
provided
appointed
to
the
evidence
in
the
record.
That
shows
that
it
is
both
compatible
and
does
not
create
an
adverse
impact.
Okay,.
B
H
Plan
with
an
impressive
number
of
trees,
many
of
which
are
class
two
and
class,
three,
the
height
of
which
should
at
least
the
class
threes
and
some
of
the
class
twos
will
be
higher
than
this
building
is.
That
is
that
right.
W
Sorry
yeah,
but
but
yes,
they
certainly
will
provide
significant
screening.
It
was
discussed
by
the
commission
as
they
thought
about
what
is
going
to
be
softening.
The
The
View
Landscaping
was
certainly
part
of
it
and.
H
And
I
asked
that
I
I
know
many
people
on
the
rim
today
overlooking
some
of
our
larger
Parks
Legacy
parks
that
have
full-grown
trees
typically
see
mostly
tree
cut
cover.
They
don't
see
much
else
frankly
up
the
park,
and
it
looks
to
me
like
this
Landscaping
plan
will
will
help
it.
You
know
won't
fully
achieve
that,
but
we'll
achieve
that
to
a
great
degree
from
what
I'm
seeing.
E
P
E
Purposely
went
last
that
time,
so
I
waited
waited.
My
turn
this
time
around.
One
of
the
requests
from
the
neighborhood
association
I
think
was
just
right.
There
at
the
end,
was
trying
to
make
sure
that
there
was
Clear
Sight
lines
site
triangles.
Turning
in
off
Victory
Road
I
didn't
really
notice
it.
W
W
This
is
the
design
that
was
presented
and
approved
by
both
if
they're,
if
that,
if
there
is
any
concern
with
encroachment
into
a
view
triangle,
we
have
no
objection
to
pulling
that
back
and
pulling
back
the
the
on-street
parking
around
those
those
access
points.
Yeah.
E
I'm
sure
achd
has
some
preferences
like
if
those
are
the
exact
spots
for
those
types
of
bulb
outs
that
would
push
the
vehicles
a
little
bit
further
back,
I'm,
not
sure
if
they
do
or
not,
but
I
know
that
they've
got
requirements
for
the
site
triangle
and
trying
to
make
sure
that
we
leave
those
open,
I
think
is
really
important,
especially
since
you're
doing
all
the
work
for
those
race
crosswalks,
which
I
think
are
something
that
we
want
to
see
more
and
more
often
I.
Think
we'll
really
make
a
big
impact.
A
R
Hi
hi
Tammy
zokin,
2016,
West,
Sunrise,
REM
Road,
the
record
of
public
comment.
Testimony
and
planning,
and
zoning
commission
deliberations
contain
substantial
evidence
that
the
adverse
impacts
this
project
will
have
on
present
in
future
residents
in
the
central
bench
planning
area.
With
all
due
respect
to
staff
the
commission
and
this
Council,
the
law
has
been
misapplied.
R
These
errors
are
detailed
in
my
written
comments.
In
summary,
first,
the
commission
applied
the
wrong
criteria
in
approving
and
recommending
approval.
The
commission
recognized
adverse
impacts
on
traffic
and
property
in
the
vicinity
of
the
project,
but
said
these
adverse
effects
were
not
Material.
Material
adverse
effect
is
not
the
standard.
The
commission
recognized
the
incompatibility
of
the
project
with
the
neighborhood
but
said
that
compatibility
could
be
traded
off
for
a
design
they
liked
compatibility.
Traded
for
design
is
not
the
standard.
Second,
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
shows
the
required
criteria
have
not
been
met.
R
The
project
will
have
adverse
impacts
on
and
be
incompatible
with,
the
established,
neighborhood
character
and
livability
of
the
central
bench
planning
area,
especially
existing
nearby
neighborhoods.
There's
no
evidence
in
the
record
that
a
68
foot
height
exception,
which
is
more
than
50
percent
taller
than
the
45
feet.
Allowed
by
code,
is
compatible
with
the
established
neighborhood
character.
R
The
project
does
not
promote
public
health,
safety
and
general
welfare
of
present
in
future
residents.
It
does
not
offer
or
encourage
affordable
housing,
affordable
and
fair
housing
or
stimulate
or
provide
for
Economic
Opportunity,
except
for
the
applicant.
It
is
not
compatible
with
and
will
unduly
burden
the
existing
Road
and
pedestrian
infrastructure.
R
The
existing
condition
of
lack
of
safe
pedestrian,
cyclist
connectivity
will
be
greatly
worsened
by
the
additional
thousands
of
anticipated
trips
per
day
and
there's
no
evidence
in
the
record
that
the
City
previously
identified
and
implemented
targeted
improvements
to
sidewalks
bike
lanes
and
other
infrastructure
to
accommodate
additional
density
in
the
vicinity.
This
project
will
prejudice
a
Prejudice,
substantial
rights
by
adversely
affecting
property,
values
and
enjoyment
of
properties
in
the
vicinity.
R
It's
not
about
the
right
to
a
view
shed
it's
about
the
right
to
what
someone
has
invested
in
property
and
it's
assessed
value
which
is
based
on
the
current
views.
Additionally,
it's
about
enjoyment
of
properties
in
the
vicinity.
Those
are
things
the
Idaho
Supreme
Court
have
recognized
as
substantial
interest
that
can
be
prejudiced
by
projects
like
this
one,
especially
when
not
based
on
code
and
existing
laws
based
on
the
evidence
currently
in
the
record,
the
approval
of
the
project
would
violate.
R
Y
Welcome
thank
you,
madam
mayor
and
Council.
The
difference
between
the
two
projects
that
are
going
on
on
the
Vista
neighborhood
down
there.
As
the
seasons
followed
what
they
said,
we're
going
to
do
and
went
below
the
height
level
of
the
canal,
and
this
project
is
not
and
I
want
you
to
also
think
about.
Not
one
unit
is
going
to
be
below
100
percent
Ami.
Y
Y
This
is
the
first
project
that
the
Vista
neighborhood
association
has
appealed,
I
believe
so
it's
very
important
to
our
our
neighborhood.
We
are
known
as
the
city
of
trees.
The
average
height
of
the
tree
in
the
United
States
is
45
feet,
which
is
currently
allowed
height
of
buildings
by
codeine
Boise.
If
you
allow
68
feet,
you'll
be
setting
precedence
and
ruining
the
Boise's
established
mature
trees.
Y
We
have
had
four
neighborhood
meetings
with
the
Vista
Point
developer.
They
specifically
stated
that
what
they
would
not
build
above
the
height
of
the
canal,
in
each
of
these
meetings,
they
stated
they
wanted
to
be
a
good
neighbor
and
it
was
a
concern
to
the
neighborhood
that
it
was
a
concern
to
the
developer.
Y
They
told
the
neighborhood
that
they
designed
their
buildings
to
match
the
highest
part
of
Sunrise
Rim
neighborhood
with
the
highest
buildings
in
their
plan,
and
they
would
not
block
or
go
above
the
canal
now,
without
any
neighborhood
meeting
and
feedback,
they
have
worked
with
planning
and
zoning
and
want
to
go
to
68
feet.
The
highest
building
I
could
find
on
the
Boise
bench
is
the
Boise
Depot.
It
is
77
feet.
Y
The
city
has
protected
Rim
View
lots
and
has
not
allowed
a
very
developers
to
reach
these
Heights
above
these
canals
in
in
our
in
our
rims.
As
an
example,
across
from
the
proposed
project
on
West
Sunrise
Rim,
the
apartments
below
were
not
allowed
to
build
above
the
height
of
the
canal,
in
the
Boise
Depot
area,
the
anniversary
end
and
other
multi-story
hotels
and
apartments
below
were
not
allowed
to
build
higher
than
the
Crescent
Rim
View
Lots.
Y
Above
the
most
current
development
called
The
Verve
on
protest
Avenue
and
this
city
council
protected
the
view
from
the
Mesa
Vista
area
and
went
as
far
as
requiring
underground
parking
to
remove
a
level
of
height
made
the
developer,
install
a
green
roof
to
minimize
the
glare
and
remove
air
conditioning
units
on
the
tops
of
the
building
to
lower
the
noise,
and
that
is
only
for
175
Apartments.
Y
Y
We
get
to
talk
to
our
mayor
at
the
our
meetings
in
the
Vista
neighbors
Association
and
the
police
chief,
the
old
police
chief
stated
that
one
of
the
problems
in
the
big
city
is
massing.
People
in
one
area,
without
these
people
have
an
identity
to
the
area
that
causes
more
crime.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
You
can
submit
that
if
you
want
so
that
it
goes
into
the
record.
Well,
okay,
great
thanks,
Linda
Claiborne
and
then
Alice
great
three
minutes.
Yeah.
Z
Okay,
wait
welcome
hi,
my
name
is
Linda
Claiborne
I'm,
a
Boise
native
and
my
dad
is
Dick
claybornek.
You
know
him.
He
sat
on
the
council
for
16
years
in
Nampa,
so
my
dad
always
said.
If
you're
going
to
come
to
me
with
a
complaint,
you
better
come
with
a
solution,
so
I
have
to
second
what
Alan
said
that
we
went
to
these
meetings
and
we
feel
a
little
misrepresented
that
they
said
it
was.
They
were
going
to
work
in
unison
with
the
community.
Z
They
wanted
to
be
positive,
they
wanted
to
be
good
neighbors
and
now
all
of
a
sudden
they're
going
68
feet
tall.
We
didn't
even
know
anything
about
that.
There's
no
need
you
know,
I
think
it
was
Mr
Halliburton.
You
talked
about
standing
on
code,
which
is
45
feet
and
someone
else
mentioned.
You
know
that
they're
concerned
about
density.
Z
Z
Density
should
be
an
issue,
but
if
they,
but
the
solution
would
be,
they
could
lower
the
ceiling
from
16
feet
to
12
feet
in
the
commercial
they
could
lower
the
11
feet
to
10
feet
and
they'd
still
get
their
density
by
having
another
floor
lower
to
have
more
Apartments.
Another
solution
is
that
they
could
be
also
asked
to
do
underground
parking,
just
like
the
other
apartment
places
did
that
were
over
on
protest.
Hill
I
also
believe
that
our
neighborhoods
are
old,
they're
quaint
and
we
have
a
big
city,
small
town,
atmosphere
and
I
love.
Z
It
here
and
I
was
born
here
well
down
on
Victory
and
on
Canal,
where
Mr
Kangas
lives.
Those
homes
are
old,
the
people
have
been
there
since
they
were
built
and
people
walk
in
the
streets.
There
are
no
sidewalks,
it's
an
Old,
Country
Road
used
to
be
out
of
City
Limits.
That's
when
I
bought
this
house,
sorry
I
get
so
emotional
anyway.
Z
The
kids
play
in
the
streets
now
they're
gonna
walk
in
the
streets.
People
are
going
to
be
parked
on
the
streets.
College.
Kids,
teenagers
they're
going
to
be
zipping
down
those
streets,
they
already
ZIP
down
the
streets
and
there
is
a
train
that
uses
that
railroad
track
every
single
day
and
there
are
no
Crossings.
Those
kids
are
going
to
be
blaring
across
there
there's
going
to
be
accidents,
and
it's
only
in
The,
Five-Year
Plan
to
work
on
the
railroad
and
the
Malad
and
Federal
Way.
Z
That's
way
down
by
federal,
that's
way
down
by
Fred
Meyers,
that's
not
near
where
the
apartments
are
going
in
Vista
is
the
problem
two-lane
road
already
busy
traffic
impact
is
terrible.
I
really
think
they
need
to
double
the
wide
on
Victory
double
the
road.
If
they're
going
to
do
that,
have
underground
parking
and
lower
the
ceiling,
so
they
can
have
their
density,
but
it's
an
eyesore
to
see
a
68-foot
building
when
we
all
paid
for
our
properties.
Z
We
paid
premium
prices
to
have
this
View
and
when
those
trees
get
big,
we're
not
even
going
to
see
the
Foothills
that
she's
talking
about
we're
going
to
see
their
trees
and
the
noise.
Nobody
talked
about
the
noise
or
the
or
the
net
or
the
New
York
Canal,
the
right-of-way.
That's
going
to
become
the
walking
path,
everybody's
going
to
want
to
walk
up
there
and
they're
going
to
want
us
there
and
it's
illegal
and
it's
so
anyway,
I.
Just
please,
please
I
oppose
it!
Thank
you.
Henry.
E
Stand
for
questions,
it
might
not
be
be
the
right
person
to
argue
against
walking
along
the
canal
because
I'm
all
for
it.
But
that's
not
my
question.
So
one
of
the
things
is
there's
a
loud
density.
That's
in
this
particular
area
and
one
of
the
things
that
the
applicant
said
is
that,
rather
than
putting
three-story
homes
along
the
streets
on
Victory,
that
would
be
a
large
mass
scene
and
would
potentially
block
some
people's
views.
E
Z
E
Z
P
P
There
was
a
valid
reason
for
the
council
and
the
the
city
to
put
in
the
height
restriction
in
the
first
place
throughout
residential
areas,
and
it's
people
need
that
people
need
to
be
able
to
see
the
sky.
They
need
to
not
be
able
to
look
at
just
buildings.
We
don't
live
downtown
with
high-rise
apartments
and
I.
Think
the
if
you
drive
throughout
Boise,
you
see
lots
of
two-story
apartment
buildings.
You
see
some
three-story
they're,
not
too
bad
the
frankly
the
drawings
that
she
showed
us
were
appalling,
in
my
opinion.
P
So
if
you
drive
through
Boise
you'll,
see
two
and
three
story:
apartment
buildings
and
that's
fine,
but
to
just
give
a
height
exemption
with
no
really
need
for
it.
That's
what
I'm
I'm
really
upset
about
that.
Thank.
A
AA
Of
paper
sure
I'm,
Ann,
coats
and
I
also
live
at
1900
Sunrise
Sunrise
rim
and
I
would
like
to
talk
about
the
the
massing
model
that
we
saw.
We
saw
a
view
study
perspective
with
a
massing
model
there
and
I
I
see
that
the
designers
stated
that
that
would
not
obscure
the
view.
AA
The
view
corridors
from
the
sunrise
rim-
and
it
seems
to
me
that
that
really
would
we
actually
live
there
right
now
and
seeing
that
massing
model
just
made
me
understand
very
clearly
how
the
the
current
view
of
the
downtown
area
is
going
to
be
completely
obscured
all
of
the
lights.
The
Christmas
tree
that
that
is
at
the
Capitol
building
and
all
that
stuff
is
going
to
be
completely
obscured
and
I.
Think
that
that's
something
that
is
definitely
a
an
adverse
impact
on
the
sunrise,
Rim
properties
in
terms
of
property
values.
AA
Clearly
it's
gonna.
It's
gonna
reduce
the
property
values
because
of
that
lat
that
that
loss
of
you
and
it
seems
to
me,
like
it's-
a
direct
transfer
of
property
value
to
the
penthouse
owners
who
are
going
to
be
in
that
apartment,
complex,
so,
and
so
so
I
don't
see,
I,
don't
see
the
benefit
of
taking
that
property
value
from
the
sunrise,
Rim
properties
and
giving
it
to
this
new
developer.
I
think
that
that's
a
definite
adverse
impact
and
I
would
definitely
oppose
that.
AA
I
also
think
that
the
I
I
actually
am
a
designer
myself
and
I.
Don't
think
that
the
I
don't
think
that
the
idea
of
stepping
a
mass
up
mitigates
the
mass
I
think
that
actually
contrarily
I
think
it
actually
makes
that
mass
bigger
in
perspective
and
if
all
of
those
buildings
are
the
same
height,
I
think
that
that
allows
people
to
sort
of
build
that
into
their
Consciousness.
AA
AB
Hi
I'm
Emilia
Harps
I
live
at
3481,
South
Annette
Avenue,
it's
right
off
of
Victory
Street,
so
I
grew
up
there
in
the
victory
area.
Just
you
know
a
little
kid
riding
my
bike
playing
around
and
I
mean
when
I
think
about
that
field.
That
you
know
will
soon
no
longer
be
there.
Some
kind
of
disheartening
I
mean
change,
always
happens
and
I
know
that
it's
going
to
happen,
but
just
such
a
big
step,
you
know
just
going
straight
from
the
field
to
68
feet
in
the
air.
AB
You
know
I
feel
like
it'll,
really
smother
the
the
houses
that
are
already
there.
You
know
all
the
traffic
that
it's
gonna
bring
I
just
I,
don't
know
I'm
against
the
height
exception.
I
think
that
the
standard
45
feet
would
be
perfectly
reasonable.
AC
AD
Hello
Madame
mayor
members
of
the
council.
My
name
is
Drew
Becker
I
live
at
1107,
South
Lincoln
I'm,
a
Boise
State
senior
and
a
community
organizer
I've
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
the
neighborhood
I
have
friends
and
I
have
family
that
live
along
Sunrise
rim
and
on
Victory
and
I
agree
with
all
of
the
testifiers
who
spoke
before
me
and
so
as
not
to
speak
platitudes
I'll.
Take
a
little
bit
of
a
different
angle.
I
urge
you
to
oppose
this
Venture
in
favor
of
more
affordable
and
Equitable
housing.
AD
The
number
of
homeless
in
Boise
has
doubled.
In
the
past
two
and
a
half
years
on
the
short
drive
I
I
took
to
arrive
here.
I
saw
a
number
of
new
apartments
and
condos
being
built.
There
was
clearly
no
shortage
of
new
apartments
being
built,
but
there
is
a
shortage
of
affordable
apartments
being
built,
provide
affordable
and
rent
controlled
housing.
This
lot
can
be
utilized
to
house
these
people.
Why
are
we
not
allowing
that?
AD
They
are
your
constituents,
your
community
members,
your
neighbors
and
like
our
friends
each
night
when,
when
we
go
home
and
get
into
bed,
there
is
somebody
cold
and
hungry
sleeping
less
than
a
mile
away
from
us
on
the
street.
I
want
you
to
think
about
the
hundreds
of
people
who
could
benefit
from
affordable
or
public
housing
built
on
this
land
and
I.
Want
you
to
recognize
the
abject
and
braved
violence
of
poverty
that
doesn't
have
to
be
there
and
I.
Want
you
to
recognize
all
of
the
opportunities
that
you
have
to
minimize
this
violence.
AD
This
land
is
incredible.
It's
near
the
amenities
of
downtown
near
the
airport,
near
University,
near
elementary
schools
near
a
middle
school,
near
parks,
and
this
land
could
be
used
to
give
some
of
our
community
members
our
neighbors,
our
friends,
more
dignified
and
decent
lives.
There
is
a
unilateral
and
decisive
power
that
you
guys
have
to
allow
for
homes
for
these
people
to
be
built.
Take
that
opportunity.
Solidarity
forever
and
I
stand
open
for
questions.
If
there
are
any.
X
Madame
mayor
and
the
members
of
the
council,
my
name
is
Alton
Dean
I
live
at
3481
South
Annette
Avenue,
with
Emilio
Harps
I'm,
a
Boise
native,
a
group
born
and
raised
here
and
I
am
opposed
to
the
height
exception
and
just
a
few
other
things
about
this
proposal,
mainly
the
height
exception,
as
many
other
people
have
testified.
X
There
does
not
seem
to
be
any
reason
that
there
needs
to
be
an
exception,
and
I
have
personally
taken
a
few
walks
around
the
canal
as
woes,
probably
to
the
woes
of
those
who
live
on
Sunrise
Rome,
but
I
I've
taken
a
look
at
the
view.
It's
a
beautiful
view.
Even
from
down
below
you
can
see
the
twinkling
City
Lights
from
downtown
and
a
big
68
feet
story.
Building
there
would
completely
block
that
being
kind
of
an
it
would
stand
out
completely
in
our
kind
of
suburb
areas.
X
Another
thing
problem
that
I
think
this
hasn't
been
properly
addressed
is
the
amount
of
traffic
that
would
increase
with
900,
more
or
almost
900
more
units.
Victory
is
a
small,
two-way
Road
there's
not
a
lot
of
parking
on
the
size.
There's
no
sidewalks
and
I
I
don't
see
a
very
clear
way
that
they're
going
to
address
it.
I
saw
the
walkways,
which
I
do
think
it
needs
it's
kind
of
a
dangerous
road.
People
do
speed
on
it,
but
the
amount
of
traffic
that's
going
to
be
there
I.
X
Just
there's
going
to
be
so
many
more
cars.
It's
going
to
be
difficult
to
turn.
I
live
off
Virginia
and
Kurt
kind
of
mentioned
that
people
parking
on
the
sideways
I'm,
not
really
able
to
see
when
I'm,
turning,
which
seems
very
dangerous,
especially
when
there's
going
to
be
more
cars
there.
So
I
would
just
ask
you
to
reconsider
the
proposal
and
the
height
limit
exception
for
the
better
of
everyone
in
the
neighborhood.
Thank
you.
U
Hi
I'm
Corey,
Bays
I
live
on
1614,
West,
Victory
Road
and
everyone's
kind
of
been
talking
about
the
view
upon
Sunrise
room
and
like
with
what
you
said,
I
kind
of
want
to
like
bring
that
into
a
different
direction,
with
what
Mr
badgent
said
with
like
how
it
would
affect
the
housing
and
like
everything
else.
Besides
the
view
having
more
height
and
would
cause
more
density,
which
would
make
the
traffic
a
lot
worse
and
there's
already
like
decently.
Bad
traffic
and
people
speed
on
the
road.
AC
Members
of
the
council,
my
name
is
Julie
holdey
I
live
on
Nez
per
Street
in
the
VNA
area.
I'll.
Try
to
get
my
thoughts
going
here
together.
Why
should
this
proposed
change?
Bother
Boise
and
the
VNA
residents
at
least
three
outcomes
other
than
the
additional
developer
profit
will
come
from
these
changes
first,
as
developers
build
large,
dense
projects
with
additional
floors
that
you
allow
for
more
population
growth
and
population
density.
AC
Obviously
increasing
the
stress
for
your
Society
second,
as
population
density
increases,
so
does
the
traffic
with
resultant
increases
in
driving
time
on
local
streets
and
freeways.
There
is
increased
danger.
Third
infrastructure
will
be
significantly
impacted
by
more
people
residing
and
commuting
between
the
proposed
development
and
the
bench
residential
area.
AC
The
traffic
will
be
substantial
to
say
nothing
of
the
social
impact
of
the
increased
population
density.
The
pros
proposed
changes
to
the
height
limitations
opposed
by
the
VNA.
AC
Clearly,
if
the
developers
are
to
build
large
buildings,
dense
population
centers
will
impact
existing
single-family,
neighborhoods
I
believe
what
I
heard
somebody
asked
Deborah
why
the
HUD
exception
was
lifted
up
to
68,
feet
and
I.
Think
her
answer
was
the
height
exception.
Went
to
68
feet
to
give
us
a
height
exception
to
68
feet
didn't
seem
to
have
a
very
clear
answer
for
that
question,
but
these
things,
the
population
growth,
the
traffic,
the
the
excess
density-
are
things
that
will
happen.
AC
Those
are
facts
that
you
can
count
on:
it's
not
somebody's
opinion
or
feeling,
and
that's
a
good
enough
reason
to
say
no,
because
this
is
a
residential
neighborhood.
The
zoning
code
and
your
comprehensive
plan
are
your
loss.
It's
it's!
Not
the
proposed
map
that
everybody
talks
about,
that's
something
that
people
maybe
looked
at
and
think
we
can
get
there,
but
you
can't
get
there
by
taking
advantage
of
one
neighborhood
over
another.
AC
This
is
the
question
of
the
of
the
abuse
of
discretion.
I
think
that,
having
the
privilege
of
sitting
down
with
a
director
who
obviously
is
employees
and
and
whatnot,
are
inclined
to
needing
to
follow
his
instruction
and
not
giving
that
privilege
to
the
neighborhood
is
kind
of
slight
abuse.
AC
A
AE
Hello,
not
a
Mayors
members
of
the
council.
My
name
is
Tate
Sawyer
I
live
at
3481
South
on
that
Avenue
with
Alden
and
Emilio.
So
I
am
a
Boise
native
I've
lived
here.
My
whole
life
I
grew
up
here
and
I.
Think
having
something
this
very
tall
mass
that
will
be
in
this
neighborhood
will
just
kind
of
ruin.
AE
The
views
for
everyone
it'll
create
a
lot
of
danger
with
the
density
to
increase
the
traffic,
much
like
with
the
railroad
crossing
that
needs
to
be
dealt
with
very
quickly,
even
if
the
apartments
are
going
in
place.
I
think
the
opportunities
that
land
could
have
is
just
a
large
potential
like
with
the
homeless
population
such
as
Drew,
said,
or
something
like
a
community
garden
to
help
with
people
who
can't
afford
groceries
every
week.
I
just
think
they're,
so
much
better.
AE
That
could
be
done
and
I
don't
see
any
reason
that
the
height
increase
should
be
there
for
just
belittling
the
other
houses
and
ruining
the
views
for
people
like
my
house
or
the
Sunset
View,
and
pretty
much
everything
like
that.
A
AF
Madam
mayor
members
of
the
council,
my
name
is
Maxwell.
Knight
I
was
born
in
Boise.
I,
have
friends
on
that
street
family
on
that
street
people
who
I've
been
around
most
of
my
life
and
I
think
there
was
mention
of
how
it
impacts
property
value,
but
there's
a
lot
more
to
it
than
that
as
well.
I
think
it's
important
not
to
dismiss
the
value
of
just
the
view
itself,
I
like
to
go
on
walks
and
sometimes
walking
down
that
road.
I
just
enjoy
look
being
able
to
look
at
it
and
enjoy
the
view.
AF
It's
also
really
important
to
note
the
street
access
as
well
there's
that
street,
but
it
also
I
think
will
congest
like
the
end
of
the
street
that
have
busier
streets
with
it
and
like
I,
feel
like
they're,
already
a
little
off
on
how
it
works
and
I
feel
like
it'll.
Make
those
busier
as
well
so
I
think
it's
important
to
probably
not
do
the
height
increase.
F
A
AG
Yeah,
my
name
is
Bruce
mastorovich
I
live
at
450,
West,
Grove,
Street,
I,
think
this
is
a
good
project.
I
think
subsidizing
housing
isn't
the
only
path
to
affordability.
I
think
you
talk
about
who
can
actually
get
the
subsidies
and
that's
you
know,
people
that
are
making
below
a
certain
amount
of
people
that
are
making
110
120
or
130
media
income,
we're
still
not
Wealthy
by
any
means,
and
the
only
way
you
get
housing
they
can
afford
is
just
supply
and
demand.
AG
I
think
it's
a
good
place
for
density,
I.
Think,
as
people
have
said,
it's
close
to
downtown
it's
close
to
BSU,
it's
close
to
Micron.
You
could
bike
to
any
of
those
places.
This
is
going
in
a
vacant
lot,
so
it's
not
displacing
anyone
I.
Think
there's
a
lot
to
like
about
this.
I
thought
the
drawings
they
had
looked
really
nice
too.
That's
it.
AH
Tanya
hi,
my
name
is
Tanya
eusebi
I
live
at
2110,
West
Sunrise
rim.
They
do
oppose
the
Heights
and
the
you
know
I
did
submit
some
written
testimony,
but
I
would
like
to
comment
on
some
of
the
previous
discussions.
AH
One
none
of
the
Drone
studies
actually
came
straight
out
from
the
main
views.
They
came
from
the
corner
edges
and
then
one
was
a
little
bit
in
the
center,
but
not
really
in
the
center
to
really
demonstrate
what
that
what
those
views
are
actually
going
to
be
like
so
I
have
a
hard
time.
You
know
you
know
thinking
about
how
far
away
they
might
be
from.
You
know
whether
it's
from
Sunrise
rim
or
from
victory
the
the
buildings
on
the
fit.
AH
You
know
somebody
said
that
the
buildings
on
the
fifth
floor
were
to
accommodate
parking
so
that,
but
they
didn't
talk
about
whether
or
not
they
could
have
done
underground
parking.
I
know
that
there's
been
other
subdivisions
being
built
up
where
they've
built
underground,
so
I
think
that
that
would
be
important.
AH
Next,
you
know,
there's
been
discussion
about.
The
views
are
not
protected,
but
the
views
you
know
in
that
the
apartments
on
the
fifth
floor
are
going
to
get
views,
but
they're,
not
the
ones
paying
property
tax
apartments
aren't
paying
the
property
tax
sure
they're
paying,
for
you
know
to
live
in
those
in
those
areas,
but
we're
paying
property
tax.
So
the
adverse
impact
for
you
know
those
on
Sunrise
Rim
is
the
prop
the
value
of
the
property.
AH
You
know
we
don't
get
number
you
know,
take
away
part
of
the
view
and
then
all
the
mechanics
that
are
on
top
of
the
build
buildings
and
then,
if
you're
down
on
Sunrise
or
some
of
the
or
excuse
me
on
Victory
or
some
of
the
side
streets-
and
you
know
what
are
they
going
to
be
looking
into
they're
going
to
be
looking
into
these
these
giant
buildings
and
some
of
them
again
I
just
think
that
we
shouldn't
approve
the
variance,
or
rather
the
height
exception,
to
the
65
feet.
H
H
Yes,
I
want
to
clarify
something
about
the
height
I.
Think
I
saw
a
diagram
early
that
the
58
feet
will
be
the
top
of
elevator
shafts,
and
also
wonder
what,
if
anything,
we've
talked
about
on
the
roof
finishes.
S
Yes,
madame
mayor
members
of
the
council,
that
is
correct.
The
maximum
height
of
68
feet
includes
the
very
highest
point
with
any
prudenances
on
the
roof
for
the
majority
of
the
highest
portion
of
the
building,
I
believe
it's
63
and
a
half
feet
to
the
building
and
roofline
and
I
can
pull
up
an
elevation.
That's
helpful
to
look
at
as
well.
H
Okay,
thank
you
and.
H
Other
part
of
the
question
would
be
I
was
trying
to
look
on
here
for
the
diagram.
What
are
the
various
ceiling
Heights
within
the
stories.
S
E
Mad
Mary
question
for
staff,
so
I
know
that
we've
got
I
think
that
one
of
the
reasons
for
allowing
hire
was
the
solatus
to
get
25
units
deed,
restricted
to
100
area
medium
income
or
below.
Is
that
correct?.
E
And
do
we
know
how
long
that
lasts
what
the
term
is.
E
I'll
follow
up
with
that
and
then
one
more
one
more
question.
So
we
had
some
folks
that
came
in
testified
today
and,
and
one
of
the
things
that
they
I
think
encouraged
us
to
look
at
was
rent
control,
which
I,
don't
believe
the
state
of
law.
The
state
law
allows
us
to
do
rent
control,
but
we
do
have
some
ways
to
incentivize,
affordable
housing,
but
there
was
a
conversation
in
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
that
I
think
said
that
this
particular
development
doesn't
qualify
for
our
housing
bonus
ordinance,
and
why
is
that?
Madam.
S
Mayor
council
members,
the
housing
bonus
ordinance
is
restricted
to
areas
within
a
certain
distance
of
either
a
regional
Activity,
Center
or
Community
Activity
Center,
so
I
believe
they're
just
outside
of
that
radius
Additionally,
you
have
to
be
in
a
specific
Zone
District
to
qualify.
So
in
this
case
I
don't
think
they
met
the
criteria
to
qualify
for
the
housing
bonus
ordinance.
So
we
really
didn't
have
a
tool
in
place
to
request
that
and.
E
If
they
would
have
qualified
for
the
housing
board
bonus
ordinance,
that
would
have
been
something
that
they
would
have
to
have
opted
to.
It
wouldn't
have
been
something
that
we
would
have
been
able
to
require
them
to
do.
S
Madame
mayor
members
of
the
council,
that
is
correct.
It
is
an
incentive,
so
if
they
wanted
to
apply
to
the
housing
bonus
ordinance,
some
of
the
incentives
they
would
get
would
be
height,
increase
no
maximum
density,
but
they
would
have
to
do
specific
deed
restrictions
based
on
the
number
of
units
and.
E
Some
last
question
here:
sorry,
so
I
guess
what
ended
up
happening,
then.
Is
it
even
though
we
didn't
have
a
housing,
they
didn't
call
for
a
housing
bonus,
ordinance.
They
still
volunteered
to
do
something
similar
in
getting
a
little
bit
of
extra
height
by
getting
25
units
at
that
100
Ami,
Workforce,
housing,
Madam.
H
Er
so
at
43
and
a
half
Acres,
almost
44
Acres,
if
they
maximize
the
height
across
the
the
development,
rather
than
doing
a
variety
of
heights
by
my
calculations,
they
could
have
over
1800
units.
Is
that
am
I?
That
seems
like
a
lot,
but
but
it
looks
like
what
the
right
calculation
is.
S
Madam
mayor
council
members:
yes,
the
at
the
current
proposal,
they're
just
over
20
units
per
acre
at
the
zone
that
they're
requesting
it
can
go
up
to
43
and
a
half.
Of
course,
they
would
have
to
meet
all
the
criteria
for
Road
improvements
and
site
improvements,
but
if
it
was
designed
with
a
lower
height,
they
could
have
spread
the
density
out.
However,
with
this
proposal
it
concentrated
that
density
to
one
location
and
gave
us
more
variety
in
housing:
diversity,
as
well
as
transition
wow.
A
All
right,
we
are
going
to
go
now
to
rebuttals,
we'll
start
with
the
applicant
Deb
Nelson
and
then
we'll
finish
with
Dave
Kangas.
The
appellant.
W
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
members
of
the
council,
I
want
to
ask
you
to
focus
on
the
rezone
as
a
separate
decision
than
the
Pud,
because
I
think
there
were
some
testimony.
Most
of
the
testimony
was
about
hype,
so
I'll
definitely
respond
to
that.
But
there
was
some
testimony
just
about
lower
the
density
overall
and
suggesting
that
you
could
accomplish
that
by
reducing
the
height
and
so
I
think
it's
appropriate
to
take
these.
W
They
are
separate
applications
they've
come
up
to
in
separate
ways
so
on
on
the
rezone,
where
we're
asking
for
R3
that
is
appropriate
for
this
site,
based
on
your
comprehensive
plan,
and
it
is
compatible
based
on
the
future
land
use
map.
The
density-
that's
expected
here:
it's
because
it's
adjacent
within
one
quarter,
mile
to
a
Transit,
stop
it's
an
area
that
the
comprehensive
plan
has
called
for
placing
density,
and
that's
why
R3
is
an
appropriate
Zone.
W
We
could
have
made
the
case
for
a
more
dense,
Zone
based
on
the
same
criteria,
but
instead
we
have
selected
the
R3
zone
for
this
site
and
that's
appropriate
and
So
within
that
zone.
If
you
agree
with
that
analysis
that
this
this
is
appropriate
based
on
your
comprehensive
plan
and
those
Street
and
Transit
factors,
then
it
comes
to
the
question
of
design
and
would
you
allow
and
councilmember
Clegg?
You
are
correct.
It
would
be.
You
know,
over
1900
units
that
would
be
allowed
here.
W
Based
on
that
density,
then
you
get
to
design
where
you're
looking
at
things
like
compatibility,
adverse
impacts,
you're
looking
at
traffic
impacts.
That's
why
we
did
present
a
lot
of
evidence
and
the
commission
considered
a
lot
of
evidence
about
transportation
and
also
looking
at
the
design,
and
that
transition
is
appropriate
to
look
at
adjoining
neighborhoods
Ms
Oaken
said
trade-off
for
design
is
not
the
standard
well,
but
actually
it
is
in
your
PUD
criteria.
You
are
asked
to
evaluate
compliance
with
a
comprehensive
plan.
W
Your
comprehensive
plan
talks
about
things
like
transition
talks
about
providing
a
mix
of
housing
and
in
order
to
get
that
housing
diversity
here
and
to
be
compliant
with
the
future
land
use
map
and
working
with
the
design
team.
It
made
more
sense
to
vertically
concentrate
that
rather
than
having
that
flat
across
which
would
have
been
appropriate
within
R3,
but
maybe
not
the
best
design
and
maybe
not
the
best
view
from
the
streetscape
I
find
it
interesting
too.
That
you've
heard
some
commentary
from
the
sunrise
Rim
neighborhood
that
they're
okay,
with
that
flat
design.
W
If
it's
higher
you
know
the
three-story
across
the
board,
is
fine
with
them.
Well
they're
above
it.
So
it
doesn't
impact
them
in
the
same
way,
they're
not
impacted
on
the
streetscape
or
like
the
residents
to
the
east
or
across
Victory
are
impacted
by
that
they
benefit
from
that
transition.
What
the
sunrise
REM
neighborhood
benefits
from
is
that
significant
distance
and
council
member
Clegg,
you
asked
about
the
the
height
and
yes,
it's
68
feet
to
the
impertinances,
it's
63
and
a
half
feet
to
the
parapet.
W
It's
60
feet
to
the
roof
line
at
652
feet
from
the
closest
residence
on
Sunrise
Rim,
so
a
significant
distance.
The
roof
treatment
isn't
isn't
valuable
to
them
at
that
distance
and
at
that
height,
because
it's
a
comparable
height
to
them
and
it's
so
far
away
and
so
that
roof
treatment
isn't
needed.
Also,
you
know
there's
comments
about
the
Viewpoint
that
Central
Viewpoint
was
the
most
impacted
house,
because
it
was
directly
90
degrees
from
the
center
of
the
highest
building.
W
And
if
you
remember
that
that
highest
point
is
also
only
40
percent,
we're
talking
a
small
footprint
of
this
vertical
integration
and
even
at
that
most
impacted
point
that
we
measured
from
that
Viewpoint
B,
the
Foothills
views
are
preserved
and
it's
minimally
into
their
the
lower
View.
And
why
shouldn't
we
create
views
for
new
residents?
So,
yes,
there
will
be
some
new
views
that
are
created
there
for
new
Boise
residents
for
renters
that
will
enjoy
that
as
well.
W
That'll
also
get
to
take
advantage
of
that
that
they
will
also
benefit
from
having
more
supply
of
needed
housing
and
an
appropriate
that's
in
an
area,
that's
appropriate,
because
it's
well
served
close
to
amenities
and
everyone
will
get
the
same
benefit
of
the
public
spaces,
whether
you
are
a
resident
there
or
you
are
a
neighbor
you
will
get
to
enjoy
this
community.
That's
been
designed
a
final
quick
note
in
answer
to
your
question
about
trees.
W
T
As
far
as
the
overall
layout
goes,
I
don't
have
the
copies
of
the
three
different
plans
that
we
had
when
we
went
through
the
first
three
meetings.
But
you
know
the
density
varied
from
800
to
850.
T
They
had
three
podiums
two
podiums,
so
the
point
I'm
trying
to
make
there
is
is
they'd
always
tried
to.
They
always
had
planned
on
a
mixed-use
development
and
they'd
always
planned
on
45
feet.
So
that's
kind
of
what
we
had
based
everything
on
and
at
some
point
they
decided
to
go
with
a
different
design
and
I.
T
Don't
know
how
many
units
are
on
that
fifth
story,
but
to
come
back
and
say:
well,
we
can
just
go
flat
all
out
and
do
40
units
across
the
whole
thing,
because
then
there
would
have
really
been
we'd
be
here
for
a
couple
days.
Probably
so
it's
it's
really
just
been
that
height
issue
and
as
far
as
the
you
know,
subdivision
goes.
T
You've
heard
a
lot
of
testimony
just
on
the
impact
of
having
that
many
people
there,
and
that's
just
for
me.
It's
just
really
hard
to
imagine
with
you
know,
over
3
000
new
residents
between
the
two
developments
and
how
that's
going
to
impact
not
just
living
right
there,
but
living
in
the
area.
You
know
shopping,
doing
everything
around
there.
That's
a
big
change,
but
the
again
the
railroad
crossings.
You
know
it's.
T
We've
got
a
lot
of
that's
a
big
issue
because,
with
that
amount
of
traffic
we've
already
talked
about,
you
know,
we've
covered
well
with
the
sidewalks
and
the
traffic
mitigation.
So
I
really
don't
have,
can
think
of
much
more
to
add
to
it.
F
E
Foreign
I'll
make
the
first
motion
to
a
move
that
we
denied
the
appeal
for
the
rezone.
E
Madam
mayor
so
I
tried
to
ask
a
lot
of
questions
tonight
and
I
really
appreciate.
D
E
Fellow
council
members
asking
questions
as
well.
A
lot
of
the
questions
I
think
were
asked
also
at
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
and
trying
to
make
sure
that
we're
getting
you
know
consistent
and
correct
answers
and
trying
to
understand
the
reasoning
behind
it
and
going
through
I
going
through
both
the
minutes
going
through
this
question
here.
I,
don't
see
a
mistake
that
they
made
by
law,
they'd
be
an
arbitrary
or
capricious,
and
so
I
just
don't
see
any
grounds
that
we
would
have
to
overturn
overturn
that
decision.
So
that's
why
I'm
into
motion.
A
H
Admir
I
I
seconded,
but
I
was
wanted
to
clarify
that
as
well.
Typically,
we
either
approve
or
don't
approve
the
rezone
first,
because
it
becomes
the
basis
for
whether
or
not
the
Pud
or
the
subdivision
is
allowed,
and
so
the
rezone
was
not
appealed
it.
It
was
a
recommendation
to
us.
C
Madame
mayor
I'll
be
supporting
the
motion,
mostly
because
the
comprehensive
plan
calls
out
exactly
this
type
of
proposed
use
for
the
Zone
in
exactly
this
area,
and
that's
that's
really
the
heart
of
the
issue.
This
this
Zone
does
comply
with
what
the
comprehensive
plan
is
asking
for
right
here.
So
it's
it's
supported
and
the
recommendation
seems
correct.
H
Admir
I
would
just
second
that
those
comments,
those
were
the
comments.
I
was
going
to
bank
yeah.
E
A
All
right
clerk:
will
you
call
the
role
for
the
motion
to
approve
the
rezone
agent.
D
A
C
Matter
mayor,
just
briefly
on
the
the
height
issue-
and
you
know,
the
word
that
gets
used
is
views.
It's
a
there's,
some
sort
of
nebulous
concept
there
and
it's
not
like
a
property
right,
but
there's
something
like
important
about
being
able
to
walk
down
a
street
and
have
something
to
look
at
that's
appealing
and
I,
get
it
and
I'm
really
I'm
struggling
with
what
I
called
what
bucket
to
put
this
in,
especially
under
the
conditional
use
standard.
C
None
of
it
seems
to
fit
very
well,
but
but
it's
an
important
issue
and
it
is
kind
of
nebulous
here.
C
We
have
a
record
from
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
where
they
talked
about
this
exact
thing
and
they
deliberated
about
it
and
they
had
people
Engineers
measuring
distances.
They
had
the
massing
models,
they
talked
about
all
of
the
same
things,
and
so
they
saw
substantial
evidence
either
way
for
both
arguments
so
that
the
decision
wasn't
made
without
substantial
evidence.
C
It's
not
arbitrary
or
capricious
or
made
on
a
whim
because
they
talked
about
it
for
so
long
and
it
doesn't
seem
to
conflict
with
any
law.
It's
not
illegal
and
so
I
think
our
job
on
that
issue,
even
though
it's
challenging
and
can
be
seen
in
different
ways,
is
to
affirm
the
Planning
and
Zoning
Commission.
H
Got
a
mirror:
I
actually
did
have
a
few
more
comments
on
on
the
Pud
I
appreciate
council,
member
of
agent's
description
of
of
what
our
job
is
here
and
I
think
you
know,
puds
are
a
bit
nebulous
on
purpose,
because
the
the
purpose
of
a
PUD
is
to
take
what
otherwise
could
be
a
pretty
vanilla,
cookie
cutter
blend
something
and
make
it
something
different
in
this
case
it
it
does
quite
a
bit
different,
including
height
in
the
middle
and
a
lot
of
variety
around
the
edges.
H
Again,
our
job
is
to
understand
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
fully
explore
that.
Did
they
fully
dig
into
whether
or
not
those.
H
E
In
manometer
on
the
third
one,
I
move
that
we
approve
subdivision:
22-27,
Vision
Point
subdivision
on
2017
West,
Victory
Road.
Second,
we.
E
Mayor
I
know
that
we've
discussed
all
these
things.
You
know
quite
a
bit
already.
We've
covered
a
lot
of
ground
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
I
brought
up
this
point.
E
If
I
was
looking
over
a
big
field
and
I
could
decide
that
I
would
be
able
to
look
over
this
field
forever
and
not
see
anything.
I
would
say
that
would
be
a
pretty
great
View
and
this
would
be
a
really
nice
field
to
look
at.
But
one
of
the
things
that
we
know
that's
going
to
happen
is
that
this
area
is
going
to
be
developed
and
we
get
to
decide
what
it's
going
to
look
like
underneath
and
if
I'm
in
that
same
spot
and
I
get
to
decide.
E
Do
I
want
to
see
a
handful
of
single
family
housing.
That's
going
to
be
more
expensive
than
what
people
would
be
able
to
afford
than
this
many
units,
if
I'm,
looking
down
at
just
a
handful
of
housing,
that's
taking
up
the
majority
of
the
land
without
any
access
to
public
space
whatsoever
or
a
subdivision
that
has
almost
10
acres
of
public
space
built
into
it.
E
Then
I
do
see
a
lot
of
wins
here.
It
doesn't
surprise
me
that
people
have
a
hard
time.
You
know,
with
this
amount
of
change,
going
from
a
bare
piece
of
land
I'm,
like
one
of
you,
brought
up
to
something
this
radically
different.
E
But
if
we
were
to
look
and
say
should
we
try
to
get
as
many
people
on
this
piece
of
land
as
we
can
in
a
way
that
accommodates
all
the
things
there
in
city
code
and
creates
open
space
and
walking
paths
and
has
some
aspect
of
affordability
that
we
actually
can't
require?
Then
I
think
that
this
is
a
really
really
good
subdivision.
The
last
thing
I
want
to
say
is
I
really
do
appreciate
everybody
who
testified
tonight,
folks,
who
lived
in
the
neighborhood
folks
who
are
getting
involved.
E
I
really
appreciate
the
the
younger
folks
coming
down,
don't
be
offended
by
younger
folks.
I
mean
anybody,
39
years
old
or
younger,
as
younger
folks
isn't
very
common
for
us
to
have
coming
in
here,
and
it
makes
a
big
difference,
and
we
appreciate
appreciate
you
all
coming
in
and
it
is
nice
to
know
what
you
think
and
what
you
want
to
see
in
your
neighborhoods
and
it
does
guide
decisions
going
forward.
So
I
appreciate
you
all
coming
down.
H
I
had
a
mirror.
The
only
thing
I'd
like
to
add
to
that
is
that,
along
with
this
subdivision,
when
we
considered
the
one
adjacent
to
the
West,
we
did
work
hard
with
achd
to
determine
what
improvements
could
be
made
to
the
transportation
system,
because
clearly
this
is
a
neighborhood
that
hasn't
had
any
improvements
for
a
very
long
time
in
when
things
of
this
magnitude
get
built.
You
deserve
to
have
some
improvements
made
so
that
the
neighborhood
doesn't
have
to
suffer
negative
consequences.
H
More
traffic
is
going
to
be
there,
but
in
the
face
of
that
traffic,
there's
going
to
be
some
significant
improvements
on
Victory
with
a
10-foot
multi-use
path
with
a
tree
lawn
that
will
protect
that
multi-use
path,
while
the
railroad
crossing
on
Victory
isn't
fully
funded.
Yet
the
railroad
crossing
on
Malad
is
it
is
going
to
get
built
in
2024,
and
you
can
rest
assured
that
this
Council
we'll
continue
to
work
with
hhd
to
ensure
that
the.
H
Crossing
on
Victory
also
gets
built
in
a
timely
manner
because
it's
necessary,
with
this
kind
of
development,
to
have
those
kinds
of
improvements,
so
I'm,
confident
that
the
site
will
be
able
to
handle
the
additional
people
that
will
be
coming
here.
Because
of
those
improvements.
A
I
I'm
here
to
convene
a
meeting
I
just
want
to
thank
everybody
for
coming
tonight
for
the
neighborhood
for
the
work
that
you've
done
on
this,
the
other
one
and
also
with
us
to
address
some
of
the
transportation
needs
that
we're
trying
to
address
with
achd,
and
while
it's
in
a
five-year
work
plan,
it
is
happening
before
five
years.
I.
A
It's
it's
in
that
five-year
work
plan,
but
because
the
neighborhood
has
brought
up
some
of
the
issues
we
had
that
discussion
with
achd
after
the
neighboring
application
and
I
want
to
welcome
everybody
to
come
down
here.
For
the
first
time
in
I'm,
just
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
Jimmy
says
everybody
under
39
I'd
say
everybody
under
I,
don't
know
like
mid
late.
40S
is
Young
at
this
point.
The
there
were.
There
were
many
years
when
I
would
be
down
here,
testifying
or
serving
on
committees.
A
In
my
20s,
I
meant
it
was
rare
that
there
were
I
would
say
the
next
generation
of
adults
in
our
community
that
were
participating,
so
I
really
appreciate
that
emul
came
down
and
that
you
care
enough
about
the
community.
That
is
your
home
now,
regardless
of
whether
you
were
born
here
like
our
kids,
were
or
chose
this
place
for
school
or
any
other
time.
You're
always
welcome,
and
so
I
want
to
thank
you
for
being
here
and
with
that
we're
gonna
have
the
clerk,
call
the
role
and
then
we'll
adjourn.