►
From YouTube: City Council Evening Meeting - 8/18/2020
Description
Please visit the following link for information on how to testify during virtual public hearings:
https://www.cityofboise.org/departments/finance-and-administration/city-clerk/virtual-meetings/
A
A
B
E
B
E
B
2024
all
right
and
mr
betty
is
you're
here.
B
Oh
wonderful,
okay!
Well,
thank
you
tom
for
your
willingness
to
serve
the
electrical
code
board
of
appeals
and
please,
if
you'd
like
to
say
anything,
you
are
welcome
to
now.
F
G
E
B
H
Yeah,
thank
you
for
letting
me
serve
the
city
of
boise
and
hopefully,
in
my
experience
as
a
historic
preservation,
professional
will
be
useful
to
the
city
and
hopefully
can
guide
the
city
in
the
right
direction.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you
thanks.
So
much
for
your
service
take
care
ashley!
Thank
you
good
night,
all
right
and
now
we
have
the
revised
findings
for
the
appeal
of
the
pud
20-4
cody
go
ahead.
I
It
was
all
related
to
an
85
unit
plan
unit
development
on
about
two
and
a
third
acres
located
at
8306
west
state
street
council
did
vote
to
approve
a
rezone
and
denied
an
appeal
and
directed
us
to
return
with
findings
and
conditions
related
to
the
pud.
That
information
was
included
in
your
packet
this
evening
and
we
are
asking
for
approval.
Thank
you.
E
Adam
mayor,
yes,
thank
you
cody.
I
did
review
the
items
that
were
in
our
packet
and
I
agree
that
they
fairly
represent
the
decision
that
we
made
last
week
and
with
that
I
would
move
that
we
approve
the
revised
findings
and
conditions
for
pud
20-4.
J
K
C
B
All
right
next
up,
we
have
resolution
340-20.
This
just
for
background
is
it
feels
like
a
like
the
regular
thing.
Now,
it's
no
longer,
you
know.
L
B
Guess
I
should
say
you
know
the
drill.
This
is
the.
This
is
the
city's
order
that
we
that
reflects
the
central
district
health
order.
So
in
order
to
have
one-
and
we
have
our
order-
reflects
the
new
changes
and
put
forth
by
central
district
health,
including
dropping
social
gathering
sizes
to
10
people.
And
then
it
continues
to
include
our
definition
of
bars,
with
the
exemptions
of
breweries
and
wineries
and
inclusion
of
bike
bars
and
then
has
rules
for
the
airport.
E
Adam
mayor
again,
I've
reviewed
this
resolution
and
I
believe
it
does
represent
those
changes
and
the
extensions
that
we
needed
and
would
move
approval
of
resolution
30
or
340-20
ratifying
the
reissued
public
health,
emergency
order,
2011
for
businesses,
individuals,
airports
bars
and
public
meetings,
enacted
august,
14th,
2020
and
providing
an
effective
date.
Second,.
M
B
Thank
you,
and
now
we
will
move
on
to
the
consent
agenda.
All
items
with
an
asterisk
are
considered
to
be
routine
by
the
council
and
will
be
enacted
by
one
motion.
We
know
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
E
Provides
recognition
of
the
trillion
tree?
Excuse
me
trillion
trillion
tree
pledge.
The
city
of
trees
challenge
continues
to
attract
attention
of
folks
who
are
working
to
improve
climate
change
and
plant
more
trees
around
the
world,
and
we
were
asked
to
pledge
to
this.
This
action
will
allow
us
to
be
the
first
city
to
join
this
movement.
K
E
K
B
D
E
Thank
you,
madam
mayor.
I
move
that
all
rules
of
the
council,
interfering
with
the
immediate
consideration
of
ord
2420,
be
suspended
that
the
portion
of
idaho
code
50-902
requiring
an
ordinance
to
be
read
on
three
different
days
twice
by
title
and
once
by
fall,
be
dispensed
with
and
the
records
show
that
it
has
been
read
for
the
third
time
in
full.
Second,.
G
C
D
Ord-24-20
an
ordinance
entitled
the
annual
appropriation
ordinance
for
the
fiscal
year,
beginning
october
1
2020
appropriating
730
million
four
hundred.
Ninety
two
thousand
seven
hundred
fifty
five
dollars
deemed
necessary
to
defray
all
expenses
and
liabilities
of
the
city
of
boise
city,
idaho,
for
said
fiscal
year,
specifying
the
objects
and
purposes
for
which
set
appropriations
is
made,
repealing
all
ordinances
and
parts
of
ordinances
in
conflict.
With
this
ordinance
authorizing
a
levy
of
a
sufficient
tax
upon
the
taxable
property
providing
for
a
waiver
of
the
reading
rules
and
providing
effective
date.
B
We
have
a
motion
in
three
seconds
council
member
sanchez
here
seconded
it,
so
we'll
go
ahead
and
record
that
one.
Thank
you,
everybody
that
just
jumped
in
any
discussion.
E
B
E
E
E
It
recognizes
that
we
are
in
difficult
times
both
with
covet
19
and
the
various
issues
around
racial
oppression,
and
importantly,
in
my
mind,
it
does
respond
to
the
requests
that
we've
heard
to
address
racial
inequities,
particularly
with
on
our
police
department,
while
one
set
of
constituents
would
like
that
we
do
not
increase
the
police
department
budget
at
all.
Other
constituents
ask
that
we
add
22
positions
to
the
police
department.
E
The
response
of
the
city
council
was
to
ask
all
of
our
departments,
including
the
police
department,
to
address
important
issues
that
are
before
us
within
the
budget.
To
the
extent
they
could,
our
new
police
chief
came
forward
with
a
proposal
that
we
use
the
five
new
positions
that
we
extended
in
this
budget
to
create
a
mental
health,
behavioral
and
mental
health
unit
within
the
police
department.
E
Expanding
the
mental
health
team
that
exists
today
and
providing
coordinating
services.
It's
a
first
step.
It's
not
anything
more
than
that
and
with
the
passing
of
this
budget
tonight,
if
it
passes,
I
look
forward
to
be
able
to
continue
to
work
on
all
of
the
other
things
that
we
will
need
to
do
to
move
this
city
toward
a
more
resilient
and
prospers
future
with
a
police
department
that
responds
to
the
needs
of
the
citizens
in
this
city.
E
That's
going
to
take
a
thorough
investigation
and
I
hope,
a
lot
of
advocacy
and
engagement
on
the
part
of
our
citizens
so
that
we
can
find
a
solution
that
we
can
all
agree
upon.
N
I
think
one
of
the
the
difficult
things
on
city
council
is
that
you
are
usually
forced
to
vote
yes
or
no
on
some
really
complicated
things
that
have
a
lot
of
nuances
and-
and
that's
that's,
certainly
a
challenge.
I
I
think
that
there
are
so
many
great
things
within
this
budget
that
our
council
members
that
our
mayor's
office,
that
the
staff
members
at
the
city
of
boise
and
their
community
members
have
been
fighting
for
that
are,
that
are
absolutely
wonderful,
and
that
includes
our
police
department
as
well.
N
I
think
the
steps
that
were
identified
by
the
police
department
with
the
behavioral
health
response
team
and
these
five
positions
is
meaningful
impactful
and
I
think
that
it
will
will
save
lives
at
the
at
the
previous
budget
hearing.
I
voted
no
for
the
budget
before
that.
I
actually
I
made
a
motion,
or
I
attempted
to
make
a
motion
to
hold
on
approving
additional
funds
until
I
felt
like
we
were
really
able
to
have
that
discussion
and
that
didn't
make
it
to
the
table
and
it
didn't
move
forward
and
that's
okay.
N
I
think
that
we've
got
city
council
members
who
all
agree
that
the
safety
of
our
our
community
members
is
the
number
one
concern
that
they
have
and
I
think
that
they
want
to
make
our
city
a
safer
place
for
everyone.
I
think
we
have
different
ideas
on
how
we
would
like
to
see
that
done,
and
I
think
that
that's
okay
as
well
so
so
I'll
be
voting
no
for
today's
budget.
I
still
think
that
that
conversation
should
and
could
still
happen,
and
I
appreciate
council
member
clay's
willingness
to
continue
to
push
for
that
conversation.
O
Madam
mayor,
I
want
to
echo
everything
that
council
president
craig
said,
and
also
appreciate,
council
member
halliburton's
analysis
of
why
he'll
be
voting
no
on
the
budget.
I
want
to
note
that
this
budget
includes
so
much
community
support
for
boiseans
during
this
very
hard
time.
We're
increasing
funding
for
things
like
support
of
our
home.
Our
citizens
experience
experiencing
homelessness,
we're
really
moving
forward
on
our
housing
for
all
initiatives,
we're
increasing
funding
for
public
transit,
so
that
folks
can
get
around.
O
So
I
really
hope
that
it's
recognized
that
in
this
budget
we
are
doing
many
of
the
things
that
our
citizens
have
asked
us
to
do
in
creating
more
support
for
our
citizens,
who
are
most
in
need
during
this
really
trying
time
and
a
very
much
unknown
recession.
That's
hitting
our
working
class
harder
than
anyone
else.
So
I
appreciate
all
of
the
work
that's
gone
in
from
the
budget
department
from
the
mayor's
office
in
addressing
our
residence
needs
and
I'm
happy
to
support
this
budget.
C
Madam
mayor,
this
teacher,
well,
I
will
be
also
supporting
this
budget
and
I
appreciate
all
the
hard
work
that
has
gone
into
this.
All
the
amount
of
input
that
has
been
received
from
our
citizens
congratulate
you,
madam
mayor,
on
first
official
budget
that
is
going
through,
and
I
think
it's
one
you
should
be
proud
of.
C
It
certainly
has
included
a
lot
of
input
from
all
of
the
council
and
the
public,
and
I
think
it
it
touches
on
so
many
places,
many
that
have
been
mentioned
by
council
members
already
and
moves
this
city
forward
during
a
very
difficult
time,
a
very
challenging
time.
It
provides
property
tax
relief,
you've
identified
many
savings
through
this
great
assistance
of
the
department,
heads
and
I'll
be
supporting
it.
I
also
want
to
recognize
council
member
hallie
burton
for
his
comments
early
when
I
was
on
council
in
my
early
years.
C
I
voted
against
a
few
budgets
until
we
implemented
a
living
wage
for
our
human
in
our
employees
at
the
city
of
boise.
So
I
recognize
when
you
have
a
cause
of
something
that
you
don't
support
a
hundred
percent
or
want
to
see
more
done.
So
I
appreciate
your
thoughts
council,
member
hallie
burton
and
I
I
will
be
supporting
it
and
just
as
a
reminder
to
all
of
you
and
the
public,
I
have
a
prior
commitment
and,
after
this
vote,
we'll
be
signing
off
tonight.
Thank
you.
K
K
Congratulations
are
in
order
to
you
a
lot
of
that
work.
Also
as
a
council
president
and
council
leadership.
I
know
that
I
spent
hours
on
the
phone
with
them
and
hours
on
the
phone
with
your
office.
Sorting
through
these
things,
you
know
what
we
have
in
front
of
us
is
a
budget.
It's
a
document
that
represents
tremendous
amounts
of
work
by
tremendous
numbers
of
people
and
a
lot
of
your
emotional
energy,
intellectual,
energy
and
compromise.
K
It's
not
a
taj
mahal.
It's
a
budget.
I
could
find
1.2
million
dollars
in
there
that
I
would
spend
differently
too,
and
I
could
you
know,
draw
a
hard
line
in
the
sand
and
say
it
must
all
be
spent
exactly
the
way
I
want.
But
the
essence
of
these
things
is
compromise,
and
you
know
I
won't
lose
sight
of
the
fact
that
there
are
tens
and
hundreds
of
millions
of
dollars
of
good
things
for
the
city
of
boise
here
and
I'm
enthusiastic
and
energetic
and
supporting
it.
K
J
J
J
J
J
So
I'm
going
to
be
voting
no
on
the
budget,
because
I
need
to
honor
their
voice
and
I
need
to
highlight
the
fact
that
you
know
we
need
to
put
that
down
in
history
just
the
way
that
my
mayor,
my
council,
leadership,
my
fellow
council
members.
I
know
our
ancestors
are
so
proud
of
us
for
being
here
and
they're,
proud
of
the
work
that
we're
doing,
but
we're
all
going
down
in
history
and
and
what
we
did.
J
J
J
B
All
right,
I
think
everyone
has
made
a
comment
I'll
just
wrap.
I
really
appreciate
all
the
work
of
our
team
here
at
the
city
and
importantly,
the
engagement
that
we
had
from
so
many
residents
throughout
boise
and
then
each
of
you,
council,
members
and
council
leadership.
B
B
The
calls
to
look
deeper
at
mental
health,
supports
addiction,
supports
other
things,
to
build
community,
to
prevent
the
need
for
policing
or
the
need
for
increased
police
presence.
B
President
president,
pro
tem,
I
appreciate
you
calling
out
many
of
the
programs
that
I'm
really
proud
of
as
well.
I
share
I
share
your
support
of
them
because
they're
focused
on
residence
and
the
service
we
can
and
will
provide
to
ensure
that,
through
this
time
and
beyond
we're
more
resilient
than
we
have
been
in
the
past,
and
so
thanks
all
around
and
appreciate
your
comments
tonight.
G
C
B
We
are
going
to
move
on
now
into
new
business
because
there's
no
unfinished
business,
oh
tj,
just
said
goodbye
all
right.
Just
we
have
quite
a
few
items
tonight
and
so
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
this
we'll
start
we're
going
to
take
a
break
if
we
have
to
every
hour
or
so
and
then,
when
we
pick
up
new
items
I'll
start
first
with
checking
to
see
who's
in
the
room
and
turn
and
so
whoever's.
B
Whatever
item
you're
in
the
room
for
we'll,
have
people
here
talk
first
and
then
we'll
move
to
the
virtual
segment
of
things
and
the
clerk
will.
So
if
for
those
of
you
listening
in
virtually
raise
your
your
little
virtual
hand
and
the
clerk
will
tee
you
up
and
let
me
know
who
to
call
and
so
we'll
start
in
person,
then
we'll
move
to
those
of
you.
Who've
joined
us
by
phone
or
by
zoom
all
right
cody
go
ahead.
First
up,
we've
got
the
suv
19-75.
I
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
members
of
council.
This
is
a
request
for
preliminary
plat
approval
of
a
residential
subdivision
with
11
11
buildable
lots
on
just
under
two
and
a
half
acres.
The
site
is
located
on
cloverdale
road
about
halfway
between
mcmillan
and
eustic
in
west
boise,
in
an
r1c
or
single-family
residential
zone.
I
Each
of
the
lots
in
the
subdivision
will
be
occupied
by
a
detached
single-family
home.
All
of
the
lots
meet
the
dimensional
standards
of
the
underlying
zone
in
terms
of
connectivity,
given
the
offsets
of
other
streets,
public
street
connection
really
isn't
feasible
in
this
location,
however,
we
did
recommend
and
I
believe
the
applicant
agreed
to
a
pedestrian
connection
extending
from
the
end
of
ginger
creek
drive
out
to
cloverdale
road,
the
applicant
agreed
to
that
and
to
provide
a
cross-access
agreement
to
the
property
to
the
north.
I
In
the
event
it
were
to
redevelop
in
a
similar
lotting
pattern
attached
sidewalk
is
provided
or
extended
through
the
cul-de-sac
that
connects
back
to
the
neighborhood
to
the
east,
and
then
the
commission,
as
noted
in
your
packet,
did
hear
this
item
back
in
july
and
without
opposition
they
did
recommend
approval.
That
evening.
We
are
recommending
you
do
the
same
and
approve
the
subdivision
this
evening.
Thank
you.
N
You
got
the
mayor,
it's
jimmy
hi
cody.
I
I
couldn't
quite
gather
what
you
said
about
the
pedestrian
path
on
whether
that
was
was
approved
or
was
going
to
happen
or,
if
that's
still
in
question,.
I
D
M
E
Madam
mayor
just
confirm
what
councilmember
hallie
burton
asked,
and
that
is
that
the
condition
two
with
the
pedestrian
pathway
between
lots,
seven
and
eight-
is
something
your
your
clients
have
have
said.
Yes
to.
M
P
I
B
Right
and
it
was
dean
briggs
that
was
just
speaking,
mr
briggs,
were
you
representing
the
entire
applicant
pool.
M
B
Okay,
thank
you,
and
then
we
have
a
neighborhood
association
is
west
valley
is
jim
sidkowski
here.
B
All
right
and
then
it
looks
like
potentially
john
taylor
or
andrea
crichton
from
the
public.
D
G
Q
I
was
looking
at
the
plot
map
and
it
concerned
me
that
the
lots,
9,
10
and
13
were
a
little
narrow
to
match
the
subdivisions
that
are
around
it
and
question
why
that
was
the
other
thing
that
I
had
a
question
for
was:
is
there
an
easement
on
the
east
side
of
the
plat
going
from
ginger
creek
road
over
to
the
corner
northeast
corner?
Q
I
don't
see
an
easement
mark
there.
There
is
a
drainage,
ditch
that
drains
all
of
that
area
and
the
subdivision
and
needs
to
make
sure
that
that
stays
open
and
is
drained.
So
I
don't.
I
don't
see
that
easement
on
here
and
then
the
easement
over
on
the
north
side,
there's
a
12,
15
and
17
foot
easement.
I
believe-
and
I
was
wondering
if
the
fence
would
I
understand,
there's
to
be
a
fancy
rected
around
the
property.
B
E
I
Madam
mayor
council,
member
clay,
they're
they're,
the
easement
would
be
content
continuous
from
the
the
corner
there
at
ginger,
creek
drive
up
to
the
northern
property
line
and
then
along
that
northern
property
line
for
the
the
tiled
drainage
easement
in
terms
of
the
fen
in
terms
of
the
fence.
It's
unclear
at
this
time,
but
generally
that
would
be
on
the
north,
on
the
on
the
property
line
on
the
north
side
of
of
that
easement,
okay
and
then
just
I
guess.
E
Q
You
and
video
er
on
audio.
Q
R
So
I
just
I've
spoken
with
a
few
of
the
neighbors.
We
we
kind
of
found
out
about
this
meeting
a
little
last
minute,
so
unfortunately
they
weren't
all
able
to
be,
but
some
of
their
concerns
I
just
kind
of
wanted
to
relay.
As
far
as
how
these
narrow
lots
would
look
in
the
middle
of
an
existing
neighborhood
that
that
was
their.
R
That
and
traffic,
of
course,
were
their
main
concerns,
because
at
first
we
were
told
that
the
lots
were
going
to
be
bigger,
and
so
they
would
fit
in
with
the
neighborhood
a
little
bit
better.
So
I
know
some
of
the
neighbors
are
concerned
about
that
along,
like
I
said,
with
the
traffic,
another
concern
was
all
the
trees
along
the
north
side.
There's
a
lot
of
beautiful,
mature
trees.
I
just
didn't
know
how
many
of
those
they
were
planning
on
saving.
R
I
do
know
I've.
I've
heard
a
few
commercials
about
treasure,
the
valley's
air,
and
so
it
would
definitely
be
in
the
best
interest
to
keep
as
many
of
those
mature
trees
as
possible.
So
I
just
didn't
know
the
plans
on
that.
S
E
I
think
he's
talking
about.
I
could
talk
okay,
sure
adam.
Thank
you.
I
I
think
what
you're
talking
about
is
that
we
always
get
a
preliminary
plan
issues,
as
some
of
which
have
come
up
tonight
are
daylighted
that
plat
changes
just
a
little
bit
to
respond
to
those
issues,
so
it
will
be
substantially
the
same,
but
there
may
be
some
minor
changes
to
respond
to
the
questions
and
issues
that
arose
tonight.
S
Okay,
thank
you
for
that
clarification,
council
president
and
any
other
concern.
I
know
the
neighbors
are
concerned
that
we
really
do
not
want
to
see
the
neighborhood
go
to
tiny
houses.
I
know
that
the
infill
is
important
in
in
the
city
this
this
time
and
there's
quite
a
few
over
on
you,
stick
and
familiar
with
some
area
over
by
the
airport
area.
S
E
Mayor,
could
I
just
clarify
one
thing
with
cody:
yes,
this
is
an
r1c
zone
as
I'm
looking
at
the
plat,
the
smallest
of
the
lots
or
the
average
of
the
lot
seems
to
be
0.2
acres
a
little
bit
above
that
there
are
some
surrounding
lots
that
are
actually
smaller
than
that.
I
Madam
mayor
councilmember
clegg,
yeah,
the
minimum
lot
size
in
the
r1c
zone
is
5
000
square
feet
and
most
of
these
are
kind
of
in
that
six
to
seven
thousand
square
foot
range
in
terms
of
size
of
homes.
We
don't
we
don't
know,
they'll
be
required
to
meet
the
five
foot
side,
15
foot
rear
and
then
20
and
15
foot
front
so
very
comparable
to
some
of
the
other
homes
in
the
neighborhood.
Thank
you.
E
E
K
I
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
members
of
council.
This
is
a
request
for
preliminary
and
final
plot
approval
of
a
subdivision
with
four
billable
lots
on
roughly
one
and
a
half
acres.
The
site
is
generally
located
between
warm
springs,
avenue
and
park
center
in
harris
ranch
or
just
east
of
the
fire
station
out
there.
A
lot
one
in
the
subdivision
is
intended
to
support
live
work
units,
while
the
vision
for
the
other
three
is
multifamily
residential
each
will
require
design
review
approval
prior
to
any
any
construction.
I
These
uses
are
allowed
by
the
harris
ranch
specific
plan,
and
the
layout
is
consistent
with
the
specific
plan
block
prototypes
real.
I
we
realized
that
the
treatment
of
warm
springs
avenue
has
been
the
subject
of
recent
hearings
or
projects
out
there.
This
site
does
not
abut
warm
springs,
has
frontage
on
wise
way
and
parole.
Both
will
be
improved
with
a
manner
consistent
with
the
specific
plan.
This
includes
detached
sidewalks
and
street
trees,
as
indicated
in
your
packet.
I
T
How
are
you
I'm
doing
great
heath,
clark,
251
east
front
street
in
boise
representing
the
applicant?
T
This
is
a
very
straightforward
application,
as
you
can
see
from
what
from
cody's
presentation.
It
is
a
combined
final
and
plat.
Excuse
me
final
and
preliminary
flat
application.
It
does
meet
all
of
the
block
prototypes
and
it
is
fully
in
conformance
with
spo1,
so
it
is
a
straightforward
application.
T
I
do
want
to
say
you
know
a
nice
thank
you
to
cody
and
saline
and
nicolette
for
all
the
work
that
they've
been
doing
with
us
at
harris
ranch
and,
in
particular,
in
connection
with
the
conversations
that
we've
been
having
with
bvna
about
working
through
some
of
the
questions
that
they've
had
about
warm
springs.
T
L
B
For
now,
thanks
heath
are
either
john
mooney
or
gary
veesey
from
the
barber
valley,
neighborhood
association.
Here.
U
Hi
john
rooney
7153,
east
highland
valley,
road,
on
behalf
of
the
barber
valley,
neighborhood
association,
madam
mayor
council,
members
yeah,
as
he
said,
we're
obviously
supportive
of
this,
as
you
noticed
in
our
documentation
to
planning
and
zoning.
We
are
concerned
about
the
connectivity
issues
that
come
up
with
this
application,
although
it's
not
adjacent
to
warm
springs.
U
Obviously,
that's
where
that's
where
the
residents
will
go
to
the
point
we
really
want
to
make
is
that
the
specific
plan
is
is
great,
but
we
really
think
that
the
city
needs
to
look
at
this,
maybe
in
the
comp
plan
amendment
for
when
sp03
starts
moving
along
because
there
aren't
any
folks
living
out
there
yet,
but
there
will
be,
and
in
the
case
of
sp01
and
spo2,
you've
got
an
engaged
citizenry
that
understands
those
specific
plans.
U
U
So,
as
cody
mentioned,
we've
been
having
these
discussions
about
warm
springs
and
what
that
should
eventually
look
like
as
harris
ranch
builds
out,
but
we
had
to
kind
of
raise
our
our
issues
regarding
that
through
preliminary
plats
for
parcels
adjacent
to
warm
springs,
because
that's
really
the
only
venue
we
had
in
the
public
process,
so
we're
not
obviously
in
opposition
to
this
we
support
it
and
I
don't
want
to
belabor
it
just
as
he
said,
but
we
do.
U
We
would
like
you
to
think
about
how
this
is
going
to
work
for
future
civic
plans
and
how
the
process
is
tough
to
follow
for
residents
that
are
moving
into
a
new
area
that
you
know
it's
not
necessarily
something
that
they
can
change
easily.
So
when
we
raise
issues
in
this
case,
how
are
bicyclists
going
to
get
from
the
wise
way
subdivision
over
to
the
green
belt?
This
is
the
wrong
time
to
handle
it
because
it's
already
water
under
the
bridge.
B
All
right,
great
thanks
so
much
okay,
any
further
questions
for
staff
or
the
applicant
right
with
that,
I'm
going
to
close
the
public
hearing.
Madam
mayor.
E
I
move
that
we
approve
wise
ways
subdivision
as
sub
20-20,
boise
city,
preliminary
and
final
plat.
Second,.
B
V
You,
madam
mayor
members
of
council,
in
2016
a
special
exception,
was
approved
by
the
city
council
to
allow
a
landscape
business
to
operate
in
an
r1c
zone
with
the
approval
city
council
attached
conditions
to
reduce
the
impacts
of
the
adjacent
neighborhood.
These
included
screening
the
site
with
a
solid
fence
and
to
ensure
that
the
business
would
opera
or
would
be
seasonal
in
nature
and
would
not
operate
during
the
winter
time
or
the
winter
months
before
you
would.
Tonight
is
a
modification
of
a
previously
of
that
a
previously
proved
special
exception
for
landscape
business.
V
On
two
acres,
the
modification
includes
adjusting
the
site
design
to
allow
a
mobile
office
building
or
office
structure
and
to
change
a
condition
of
approval
that
would
allow
for
a
vinyl
fence
on
site
instead
of
the
the
wood
that
was
specified
within
the
original
original
report
and
to
allow
for
the
business
to
operate
during
the
winter
months.
As
you
can
see
from
the
vicinity
map,
the
property
is
located
within
the
within
a
residential
neighborhood.
At
tonight's
hearing,
you'll
likely
hear
testimony
from
a
neighbor
regarding
complaints
associated
with
the
landscape
business.
V
This
site
plan
shows
the
location
of
the
mobile
office
structure
on
the
property.
The
applicant
is
always
intended
for
an
office
building
be
located
on
site
and
initially
this
office
area
was
to
be
in
within
one
of
the
existing
buildings.
However,
that
was
not
feasible
and
the
applicant
moved
the
mobile
structure
onto
the
site.
The
building
is
situated
where
covered
parking
was
was
supposed
to
be
located
as
such,
this
area
was
always
intended
to
have
a
structure
on
it.
In
addition,
the
vinyl
fence
is
similar
and
consistent
with
other
fencing
within
the
neighborhood.
V
The
third
request
was
to
allow
for
the
business
to
operate
year
round.
This
condition
was
added
by
the
city
council
back
in
2016,
since
the
applicant
initially
stated,
the
business
was
seasonal
in
nature.
This
fact
was
also
used,
as
the
exceptional
circumstance,
to
justify
the
special
exception
at
that
time.
In
addition,
a
condition
will,
in
addition,
this
condition
would
reduce
the
impacts
on
the
of
the
business
on
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
I'd
also
like
to
note
that
the
character
the
neighborhood
is
changing
and
that
south
end
of
shields
is
being
is
being
redeveloped
with
residential
subdivisions.
V
These
residential
developments
and
future
residential
developments
are
not
consistent
with
an
intensification
of
the
of
the
landscape
business
which
essentially
to
allow
to
operate
year
round.
The
vicinity
map
here
shows
some
of
the
redevelopment
that
was
a
that
has
been
approved
within
the
neighborhood,
and
I
would
like
to
note
that,
since
the
application
was
initially
submitted,
the
applicant
has
agreed
to
drop
this
specific
condition
to
request
a
change
in
that
seasonal
nature.
V
So,
in
conclusion,
the
planning
team
recommends
and
and
planning
a
zoning
commission
recommended
approval
of
the
requested
change
of
the
condition
of
approval
to
allow
for
the
vinyl
offense
and
to
adjust
the
site
plan
to
allow
for
the
mobile
office
building
on
site,
since
they
comply
with
the
required
findings,
as
per
code
for
special
exceptions,
and
to
deny
that,
in
the
initial
request,
to
remove
the
the
condition
that
limited
this
to
a
seasonal
nature.
Thank
you.
L
E
Excuse
me
I'm
so
sorry,
my
memory
is
that
the
condition
to
require
a
wooden
fence
had
more
to
do
with
blending
into
the
neighborhood
than
it
did
with
the
fence
type
product
type
and
that
the
untextured
plain
vinyl
fence
is
simply
not
what
what
is
otherwise
in
that
neighborhood.
V
Madam
mayor
members
of
council,
the
there
was
no
initial
talk
about
the
type
of
vinyl
fence
to
basically
to
allow
for
a
particular
grain
on
site
or
to
allow
it
to
blend
in
and
be
more
consistent
with
a
wood
fence,
the
reason
being
that
the
fence
was
was
already
built.
They
they
built
a
vinyl
fence,
even
though
the
conditions
said
wood,
so
it's
already
in
place,
and
so
we
didn't
really
have
any
additional
conversation
as
to
changing
it
out.
At
that
point,.
E
V
V
K
L
K
Go
ahead
david,
do
you
have
a
question?
I
I
it
was
the
council
president's
question
a
moment
ago.
If
I'm
understanding
correctly,
there
was
a
condition
for
a
wooden
fence.
They
built
a
vinyl
fence
they're
here
now
asking
to
have
that
condition
released
so
that
the
vinyl
fence
they
built
can
be
allowed
to
stand.
Is
that
timeline
correct
or
not
correct?.
V
Mata
mayor
members
of
the
council,
I
reviewed
the
the
original
city
council
hearing
back
from
2016
on
this
and
based
on
my
my
recollection
and
what
I
actually
viewed
the
I
think
the
condition
was
to
screen
it.
I
don't,
I
don't
believe
there
was
a
specific
indication
of
product
type
at
that
time.
V
I
I
I
think
the
the
wood
fence
was
an
addition
that
I
added
added
in
when
I
came
back
with
revised
findings
which
the
council
approved
for
wood
fence.
I.
K
K
P
W
Dave
mosher,
thank
you
as
well,
as
dave
pointed
out,
we're
here
to
ask
to
keep
our
vinyl
fence
that
we
have
in
place.
W
We
have
landscape
screening,
we're
20
foot
back,
set
off
of
the
property
line,
landscape
and
irrigation
in
front
that
we
maintain
weekly
and
also
asked
to
keep
our
temporary
office
trailer
there
to
keep
our
keys
in
and
a
time
clock
for
our
crews.
W
I
say
we
move
forward
and
if
we
need
to
rebuke
the
letter,
we've
submitted
a
rebuttal.
We
had
all
four
to
six
hours
to
do
so
today,
but
we
did
some
nonetheless,
I'm
not
sure
if
you're
in
receipt
of
that,
but
should
something
come
up
with
that.
We're
happy
to
take
our
small
amount
of
time
to
repeat
it.
Great.
B
Yeah,
and
also
just
so,
you
know
that
the
end
you'll
have
rebuttal
time.
So
if
it
comes
up-
and
you
want
to
take
that
time,
then
you
can
too
all
right.
Thank
you.
We,
the
neighborhood
association
of
record,
is
the
northwest
neighborhood
association.
Richard
llewellyn
is
listed
here.
Are
you
with
us
richard.
D
B
X
X
Madam
mayor
members
of
council
markle's
in
10473
west
shields
avenue
on
behalf
of
randall
lakers
and
the
residents
of
shields
avenue.
The
civil
injustice
taking
place
at
the
applicant's
location
is
simply
appalling,
as
we
have
gone
through
our
discovery
process,
the
neighbors
of
randall
lakers
subdivision,
and
especially
the
residents
of
west
shields
avenue,
have
become
very
disenchanted
with
our
new
neighbors
gingrich
site
and
underground.
X
X
The
most
obvious
violation
is
them
working
all
year
round:
six,
sometimes
seven
days
a
week
and
all
hours
of
the
day.
Just
today
we
had
crews
coming
and
going
10
53
a.m,
2
p.m
and
3
35
p.m.
That
is
all
I
saw
from
our
entrance.
You
got
double
interested
on
shields
avenue
tom
hartman
code,
compliance
officer
told
us
he
wasn't
able
to
tell
if
they
were
and
when
they
were
working.
X
Nice
capital
improvement
for
out
of
compliance
business
in
a
residential,
neighborhood
condition
of
approval,
f
states,
all
site
improvements
shall
be
made
prior
to
2017
season
of
business
condition,
d
states.
The
applicant
shall
install
the
wood
fence.
The
applicant
said
he
did
not
understand.
What
is
it
to
understand?
X
You
would
surely
think
somebody
in
the
landscaping
business
would
understand
that
vinyl
is
one
of
the
most
uneco-friendly
fencing
materials,
a
fence
built
with
metal
post
in
a
concrete
footing
with
untreated
cedar
panels,
will
last
for
more
than
a
lifetime
and
is
much
more
pleasant
to
look
at.
It
certainly
doesn't
have
the
glare
of
the
petroleum-made
vinyl
as
it
is
today.
X
B
Minute,
we've
got
to
limit
it
to
three
or
I've
got
to
open
up
to
everybody
for
as
long
as
they
want
to
I'm
sorry,
sir.
E
Thank
you.
So
I
just
want
to
be
clear.
You
understand
that
the
applicant
is
no
longer
asking
to
work
year-round.
P
G
X
X
B
Y
Y
I
am
a
renter
from
the
gang
riches
and
live
at
the
other
end
of
the
street,
and
I
just
wanted
to
voice
my
opinion
about
some
of
the
complaints.
Mr
olsen
has
my
experience
with
him.
He
has
I've
had
to
call
the
police
on
him,
he's
threatened
myself
and
my
daughter
in
a
vehicle
and
pulled
a
weapon
on
us
in
the
middle
of
the
night.
Y
While
we
were
driving
home
and
I
like
I
said
I
live
at
the
other
end
of
the
street-
it's
a
residential,
it's
my
spot
where
my
house
is,
and
because
of
that
happening
they
have
had
to
park
some
of
their
vehicles,
there's
because
I
live
there
alone,
so
I
just
wanted
that
to
be
known
and
also
that
he
doesn't
reflect
my
opinion
about
about
everybody
on
the
street.
B
Strauss
welcome,
please
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
then
you've
got
three
minutes.
A
A
Daily
I
mean
and,
to
be
honest,
we've
not
seen
anything
late
at
night,
even
mr
olsen's
own
times
that
he
just
gave
in
his
example,
are
normal
daily
working
hours,
10
a.m,
3
p.m.
Those
are
normal
daily
working
hours
and
even
if
he
were
to
work
365
days
a
year
that
wouldn't
matter
to
us,
you
know
I
mean
that's
more.
A
This
is
more
agreeable
to
us
than
apartments
being
built
in
in
that
area
or
dense
housing,
as
is
what's
being
built
down
the
street
there
further,
as
you
can
see
on
the
diagram,
the
windy
court
and
the
other
two
that
are
going
in
there,
we've
been
here
30
years
and.
A
You
know
mr
olsen
does
not
speak
for
us
on
the
other
side
of
the
canal,
either
our
next
door,
neighbor
next
to
us
at
10332,
is
also
here
with
me.
I
don't
know
if
she
wants
to
speak
or
not,
but
she's
here.
A
I'd
like
to
also
add
that
all
of
this
has
already
been
approved
by
z
and
the
vinyl
fence
issue
had
been
already
addressed
at
the
at
two
different
meetings
actually
with
pnz.
So.
F
D
B
E
W
W
G
G
E
I
would
move
that
on
cop
20-8,
at
10,
201
and
10
257
shields
avenue
that
the
city
council
approved
the
modification
of
the
cup
for
to
allow
placement
of
a
mobile
office
building
and
allow
vinyl
fencing
in
place
of
wood,
fencing
on
the
street
frontage
and
deny
the
request
to
allow
the
business
to
operate
year
round.
E
O
Madam
mayor,
yes
go
ahead,
thank
you
everything
that
council
president
just
said,
especially
the
bit
about
asking
for
forgiveness.
Sometimes
these
applications
come
to
us
and
it's
like
you,
I
mean
really.
We
would
like
people
to
be
complying
with
their
conditions
and
not
coming
to
us
afterward,
but
again,
planning
and
zoning
did
a
great
job
deliberating
on
this.
One
came
to
a
really
good
decision,
and
so
I'm
happy
to
support.
G
K
I
want
to
amplify
my
shared
point
of
view
on
the
conditions
right.
We
apply
conditions
because
they
mean
them
and
it's
a
condition
in
the
sense
that
you
don't
get
to
use
your
property
in
this
way.
Unless
you
meet
the
condition
your
use
is
conditioned
on
complying
with
with
what
we
have
instructed
the
conditions
here,
we're
permitting
and
the
conditions
here
were
offense.
K
We
don't
want
to
be
in
a
situation
where
the
perception
is
that
you
can
ignore
a
condition
of
use
and
then
come
back
and
say
well.
I've
already
built
this
structure.
I've
already
built
this
fence,
I've
already
relied
on
my
non-compliance.
It
will
harm
me
a
lot
to
go
back
and
do
what
you
told
me
to
do.
We
don't
want
to
be
you
know
creating
that
pattern
and
practice.
K
This
small
business
that's
trying
to
do
its
best
and
that's
it's
a
hustle
and
it's
tough
and
I
understand
so
I
would
you
know
I
would
vote
to
approve
the
motion,
but
I
really
don't
care
for
coming
back
and
saying
you
know.
Essentially,
oh
earlier,
when
we
told
you
we
wanted
a
wood
fence,
not
a
vinyl
fence.
We
really
didn't
mean
that
we
meant
it,
and
so
this
is
my.
K
J
Madam
mayor,
yes,
I
appreciate
the
comments
from
my
colleagues
and
I
especially
appreciate
the
grace
that
council
president
clegg
is
extending,
because
fences
are
a
big
deal
to
council
president
quagg.
J
J
You
know
to
do
what
you
did
so
I
really
do
hope
that
you
will
do
something
for
our
community
in
ex,
not
in
exchange,
but
in
honor
of
the
grace
that
appears
to
be
extended
to
you
today.
K
D
B
B
B
All
right
we
are
back,
I
guess
I
should
have
said
25-ish
or
30-ish.
Okay,
we're
gonna,
get
go
ahead
and
get
started
now
see
our
19-31
on
maple
grove,
road.
I
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
members
of
council.
This
is
a
request
to
re-zone
just
over
five
acres,
located
on
the
southwest
corner
of
maple
grove,
road
and
emerald
street.
The
proposal
is
to
change
the
zoning
from
m1d
or
light
industrial
with
designer
view
to
c1d,
with
a
development
agreement
or
neighborhood
commercial
with
design
review
and
a
development
agreement.
The
planning
commission
heard
this
along
with
a
conditional
use,
permit
for
a
102
unit,
multi-family
residential
project
in
may.
At
that
time
they
approved
the
plan
unit
development
and
recommended
approval
of
the
re-zone.
I
There
was
testimony
and
opposition,
but
the
pud
was
not
appealed,
so
it
is
only
the
re-zone.
That's
before
you
this
evening.
Again,
the
request
is
to
change
the
zoning
from
light
industrial
to
neighborhood
commercial.
It
is
somewhat
unique
to
change
to
commercial
zoning
for
a
residential
project,
but
the
site
is
really
in
somewhat
of
a
transitional
location.
It
is
designated
industrial
on
the
land
use
map
but
uses
in
the
area.
Really
don't
really
don't
reflect
that
for
the
most
part,
in
fact,
many
of
the
properties
are
actually
occupied
by
offices
call
centers.
I
You
even
have
a
nursing
home
adjacent
to
the
west
and
a
lot
of
the
uses.
A
lot
of
the
uses
in
the
area
were
actually
established
in
the
county
where
they
had
more
flexible
allowances
in
the
industrial
areas.
Even
our
own
city
facility,
just
west
of
here,
is
located
in
an
industrial
zone
with
an
industrial
land
use,
and
I
don't
think
that's
what
you
typically
see
associated
with
with
an
industrial
area.
It's
interesting
that
this
site
actually
hasn't
been
developed.
I
So
again,
the
re,
the
requested
commercial
zoning,
among
other
things,
does
allow
residential
development.
It
also
allows
a
number
of
more
auto
oriented
uses
because
of
this
and
to
protect
the
industrial
uses
to
the
south.
The
applicant
included
a
development
agreement
in
the
request
that
agreement
prohibits
things
like
drive-through
establishments,
car
washes
and
c-stores,
and
it
also
essentially
ties
development
of
the
property
to
the
residential
development
shown
on
the
screen.
I
I
don't
want
to
get
into
all
the
specifics,
but
but
because
it
is
referenced
in
the
development
agreement.
I
would
like
to
touch
on
the
highlights
again.
The
proposal
is
for
a
102
unit,
multi-family
residential
development,
with
a
combination
of
one
two
and
three
bedroom
units
in
three
different
building
types,
all
required
parking
and
amenities
were
provided.
I
Parking
is
located
behind
the
buildings
for
the
most
part
away
from
the
street,
there's
also
a
significant
setback
to
the
buildings
to
the
south
and
an
eight-foot
cmu
wall
with
significant
landscape
to
provide
buffering
there.
I
would
also
note
that
there's
a
ten
foot
wide
public
pedestrian
pathway,
easement
that
has
been
required
along
the
canal
to
the
west.
I
I
I
would
note
that
we
do
have
bus
service
in
both
emerald
and
maple
grove
as
it
butts
the
site,
there's
also
a
well-established
network
of
bicycle
lanes
in
the
area
that,
combined
with
the
host
of
services
already
in
place,
the
commission
found
to
make
this
a
good
location
for
multi-family
housing,
so
we
are
recommending
you
adopt
the
commit
the
commission's
recommendation
and
approve
the
rezone
this
evening.
Thank
you.
E
Vladimir,
yes,
just
note
that
it's
really
good
to
see
the
canal
condition.
Thank
you.
B
All
right,
the
applicant
is
the
applicant
online
because
are
not
here
with
us.
You
have
kent
brown,
john
carpenter,
julie,
fisher,
james
doolin,.
Z
There
you
go
there
we
go
for.
The
record
is
kent
brown.
My
business
address
is
3161
east
springwood,
meridian,
idaho,
and
I
think
cody
covered
everything
really
good.
We
have
tried
to
find
a
project
and
a
location.
Z
We're
excited
about
this
location
because
it's
proximity
to
provide
workforce
housing
to
the
surrounding
area,
to
the
mall,
to
the
businesses
directly
to
the
east
and
to
the
west
of
us.
This
makes
this
area
prime.
For
this
there
are
other
multi-family
developments
as
you
go
to
the
north
on
the
other
side
of
the
canal,
so
this
corridor
has
been
recognized
because
of
the
transit
and
its
proximity
to
these
other
facilities
and
we're
excited
to
be
approved.
With
this,
we've
tried
to
buffer
our
our
neighbors,
our
industrial
uses.
B
B
I
lost,
I
lost
track
of
the
word.
There
are
no
people,
not
testifiers.
There
are
no
people
wishing
to
testify
on
this
item.
With
that,
I'm
going
to
just
figure,
mr
brown,
that
you
don't
have
anything
to
rebut.
P
E
Mayor,
if
I
could
real
quickly
just
say
you
know,
the
mall
area
was
always
envisioned
to
be
mixed
use,
which
included
some
residential
and
really
excited
to
see
this
project
because
I
think
it
it
begins
to
live
up
to
that
promise.
B
B
B
So
I
just
wanna,
I'm
just
doing
logistics,
so
you're,
the
applicant
you're,
the
appellant,
yes,
okay,
mr
ritter
or
mr
gourley
all
right
and
then
the
applicant.
B
We
have
a
list
here
of
sean
murphy,
steve
hardy,
jason,
hess
or
hessie
kyle
marcu,
and
then
also
michael
toolson
signed
up
to
testify.
However,
mr
toolson,
you
were
not
as
we
as
far
as
we
can
tell
a
party
of
record,
so
I'm
gonna,
I'm
just
saying
all
this
because
we're
gonna
start
with
cody
go
to
the
appellant,
then
the
applicant,
then
the
nobody
else
is
in
this
room.
B
I
This
item
is
an
appeal
of
the
planning
and
zoning
commission's
approval
of
a
variance
to
allow
the
encroachment
into
the
front
and
street
side
setbacks
for
the
construction
of
a
new
single-family
home.
The
project
is
located
at
the
northwest
corner
of
11th
and
eastman
streets
in
an
r1ch
or
single-family
residential
with
historic
overlay
zone.
I
The
project
is
located
about
one
block
east
of
hyde
park.
As
you
can
see
in
your
packet,
the
commission
did
approve
the
two
variances
in
may
of
this
year.
Those
variances
reduce
the
street
side,
setback
from
15
to
5
feet
and
the
front
setback
from
20
feet
to
15
feet
for
parking
with
the
variances.
The
intent
is
to
convert
the
existing
home
at
the
back
of
the
property
to
an
accessory
dwelling
unit.
The
commission
found
the
narrow
width
of
the
parcel,
or
only
30
feet
for
a
corner
lot
did
present
an
exceptional
circumstance.
I
I
I
I
In
this
case,
the
existing
home
would
be
converted
to
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
and
it
does
exceed
the
10
10
lot
size
referenced
in
the
code.
However,
the
code
allows
this
flexibility
for
unique
situations
like
this.
I
was
cl
and
it
I
guess
for
the
record,
it
was
clear
the
commission
wasn't
focused
on
the
adu
standards.
In
fact,
if
it
weren't
for
the
variance
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
would
have
been
approved
administratively.
I
The
next
ground,
the
appellant,
doesn't
agree
with
the
commission's
finding
of
exceptional
circumstance.
The
commission
did
find
that
a
30-foot,
wide
corner
lot
was
unique
and
that
limited
width
with
the
imposition
and
position
of
a
15-foot
street
side
setback
would
would
almost
render
this
parcel
unbuildable.
I
The
appellant
is
concerned
that
the
va
that
the
variants
will
negatively
impact
their
property.
I
guess
for
clarification.
The
common
setback
along
that
northern
property
line
that
setback
will
be
met.
Additionally,
the
15-foot
setback
on
the
front
does
match
that
of
the
adjacent
property.
The
new
home
will
have
a
porch,
that's
located
10
feet
from
that
front
property
line,
but
that
setback
for
living
space
is
allowed.
I
I
would
acknowledge
that
replacing
open
space
given
the
way
the
existing
home
is
situated
on
this
lot
will
have
an
impact
on
the
neighborhood,
certainly
from
an
aesthetic
perspective.
However,
a
single
family
home
isn't
allowed
use
of
the
property,
and
I
don't
believe
it's
unreasonable
to
to
expect
that
it
be
developed
in
that
manner.
With
that
we
were
unable
to
find
an
error
in
the
commission's
decision
on
on
this
ground.
I
I
believe
that
wraps
up
our
comments,
I
would
like
to
acknowledge
you
know
the
new
home
on
the
property
will
change
things
for
the
appellant,
but
we
don't
see
where
there
was
an
error
in
the
commission's
decision
or
the
manner
in
which
it
was
reached.
So
with
that,
we
are
recommending
denial
of
the
appeal
this
evening.
I
B
Any
questions
for
cody,
madam.
E
Mayor,
yes,
just
to
be
clear,
the
boise
city
code
allows
accessory
dwelling
units
with
any
single
family
home
on
any
size
lot
as
long
as
it
meets
the
other
standards
of
the
zone,
and
the
change
here,
that's
being
asked
so
that
it
can
so
that
we
can
get
an
adu
on
this
lot
is,
is
some
relief
from
the
setbacks,
but
those
are
ones
that
meet
existing
nearby
buildings
is
that
am
I.
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
for
the
record.
I
Yeah,
madam
madam
mayor,
councilmember,
clay,
that's
that's
correct
the
accessory
dwelling
unit,
that's
with
approval
of
the
variants.
That's
that's!
Ultimately,
the
the
result.
The
accessory
dwelling
unit
is
allowed
on
on
any
residential
lot,
and
the
code
does
have
some
flexibility
for
these
unique
situations
where
you're,
maybe
retrofitting
an
existing
home
or
or
converting
an
existing
home
to
an
accessory
dwelling
and
constructing
a
new
home.
So
the
code
doesn't
recognize
that.
Thank.
E
AA
Madam
mayor
council
members,
my
name
is
kim
gourley,
I'm
an
attorney.
My
office
is
at
jones,
william,
furman
and
gloria
here
in
boise,
at
225,
north
9th
street
suite
820
boise
idaho.
I
represent
the
appellant,
mr
james
ritter,
mr
ritter,
is
president
attending
by
zoom,
but
is
not
here
in
person
with
me
today.
AA
Mr
ritter
owns
the
residence
that
is
immediately
adjacent
contiguous
to
the
subject.
Potassium
parcel,
mr
ritter's
place
is
just
to
the
north.
Its
address
is
his
address
is
1601
north
11th
street
boise,
idaho,
the
betazol
parcel,
as
it
currently
exists,
has
a
standalone
residence
that
is
located
on
it
that
consists
of
644
square
feet.
AA
It
utilizes
slightly
less
than
50
percent
of
the
parcel.
If
you
looking
at
the
site
plan
that
cody
pulled
up
for
you,
you
can
see
that
it's
just
just
slightly
less
than
50
percent
of
the
parcel.
What
is
proposed
pursuant
to
the
application
for
the
variants
is
to
construct
a
new
and
additional
1
527
square
foot
dwelling
that
is
separate,
and
apart
from
the
existing
dwelling
site
plan,
you
can
see
it's
not
attached.
AA
It's
not
made
to
be
part
of
the
existing
dwelling,
they
will
be
standalone
residences
and,
of
course,
the
application
is
totally
premised
on
on
the
concept
that
the
existing
dwelling
would
somehow
qualify
as
an
adu
under
the
boise
city
code.
We
respectfully
disagree
with
that
and
I'll
explain
that,
in
a
minute
before
I
go
into
the
facts
relating
to
the
adu,
this
council
is
well
aware:
the
pursuant
to
the
boise
city
code.
AA
This
council
can
find
heir
and
reverse
the
decision
of
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
decision
if
it
finds
that
the
decision
was
made
in
violation
of
the
law
is
arbitrary,
capricious
or
an
abuse
of
discretion,
as
a
decision
is
not
supported
by
substantial
evidence.
We
respectfully
assert
to
this
council
here
tonight
that
all
of
these
are
applicable.
AA
AA
There
were
apparently
five
non-objection
support
statements
that
were
submitted
by
the
applicant.
As
my
understanding,
two
of
those
were
from
an
immediate
neighbor
who's
rescinded
support
one's
from
a
renter
that
has
since
moved,
one
is
from
a
current
renter
and
one
is
from
an
address
with
the
hyde
park.
Mennonite
fellowship
we're
not
really
sure
what
the
address
of
that
particular
person
was
the
first
basis.
I
would
assert
to
this
council
for
reversal
of
the
planning.
Zoning
commission
relates
to
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
exceeding
the
allowed
square
footage.
AA
The
boise
city
code
is
very
specific
as
to
adus,
and
it's
mandatory.
It's
not
an
optional
standard.
It
uses
the
term
must
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
must
not
be
larger
than
10
percent
of
the
lot
area
or
700
square
feet.
Whichever
is
smaller,
I
would
assert
to
this
council.
That's
mandatory
language
then
give
the
option
of
deviating
from
it.
Then
the
code
goes
on
and
creates
two
exceptions
to
this
mandate.
The
two
exceptions
are
where
practical
the
10
size
standard
may
be
altered
to
accommodate
logical
expansions.
AA
That's
exception
number
one:
expansion
of
the
adu
or
two
internal
conversion,
an
internal
conversion
of
the
adu.
In
this
situation
there
is
no
expansion
of
the
adu.
That
is
proposed
in
any
way,
and
in
this
situation
there
is
no
internal
conversion
of
the
adu
that
is
proposed
in
any
way.
The
adu
will
remain
in
its
existing
form
as
a
separate
stand-alone
residence.
AA
So
I
would
submit
to
this
council
that
the
exceptions,
the
two
exceptions
set
forth
in
the
boise
city
code
are
not
applicable,
and
thus
the
council
is
mandated
to
go
back
to
the
standards
that
the
adu
cannot
exceed
10
or
700
square
feet.
Whichever
is
smaller
in
our
situation,
the
lot
is
3450
square
feet,
and
so
under
the
adu
standard
permitted
pursuant
to
the
code,
the
adu
cannot
exceed
345
square
feet.
In
this
situation,
the
existing
dwelling
is
644
square
feet,
which
is
about
180
percent
of
the
mandated
standard,
and
so
it
doesn't
qualify
now.
AA
This
issue
was
raised-
let's
say
momentarily
by
the
finding
the
zoning
commissioner
bratton
over,
but
he
was
incorrectly
informed
in
in
that
meeting
that
the
new
standard
was
700
square
feet
and
there
was
no
reference
to
the
10
limitation.
That
is
also
part
of
the
mandate.
AA
Now
I
recognize
that
staff
takes
the
position,
this
application
for
variants
and
that
the
boiler
city
code
allows
some
sort
of
deviations
or
discretion.
We
respectfully
disagree.
I
don't
think
the
discretion
is
there.
The
the
two
exceptions
that
are
set
forth
are
clearly
and
articularly
set
forth,
and
I
don't
think
that
the
council
or
the
planning
of
zoning
commission
has
ability
to
create
additional
exceptions
that
fall
outside
of
that.
AA
So
we
respectfully
disagree
as
to
the
authority,
I
guess
of
the
staff
to
approve
it,
and
I
do
want
to
reference
that
if
you
look
at
the
staff
report
on
page
three,
the
staff
have
essentially
already
informed
the
council.
They
intend
to
approve
the
adu
based
on
the
700
square
foot
limit
instead
of
the
10
percent
limit,
which
I
think-
and
I
searched
this
council
is
contrary
to
the
law.
I
recognize
that
we're
dealing
with
an
issue
of
does
the
applications
application
for
variance.
Does
it
involve
a
decision
on
the
adu?
AA
I
look
at
it
as
kind
of
a
chicken
in
the
egg
situation,
but
I
don't
know
how
the
planning
of
zoning
commission
or
this
council
sitting
on
appeal,
can
consider
or
approve
an
application
for
variants
without
a
resolution
of
the
adu
issue.
For
example,
if
the
dwell
existing
dwelling
unit
doesn't
qualify
as
an
adu,
then
in
that
situation
would
a
variance
ever
be
approved
because
there'd
be
no
need
for
it.
AA
If,
if
the
existing
dwelling
was
going
to
be
modified
renovated
in
some
way,
it
would
never
come
close
enough
to
the
street
to
need
that
front
yard
setback.
If
the
existing
dwelling
was
going
to
be
removed
and
demolished
and
replaced
with
the
new
dwelling
again,
there
would
be
no
reason
for
variance
from
the
front
yard
setback.
AA
The
only
reason
that
the
variance
request
has
any
application
at
all
is
because,
on
the
theory
that
the
existing
dwelling
qualifies
as
an
adu
and
can
remain
and
respectfully
assert
that
that's
not
correct,
and
so
I
think
there
has
to
be
a
resolution
of
the
adu
issue
before
there
can
ever
be
a
decision
as
to
approving
the
variance
and
based
on
that.
I
think
that
this
council
can
find
air
and
reverse
the
planning
of
zoning
commission
and
say
second
basis,
we've
already
referenced
it
that
we're
concerned
about
this
becoming
a
multi-family
use.
AA
We
have
two
stand-alone
dwellings
that
are
not
being
designed
to
to
be
used.
I
guess
with
one
another:
it
creates
the
situation
for
what
I
call
short-term
or
long-term
rentals.
I
recognize
the
boyce
city
code
requires
at
least
one
of
the
ones
to
be
owner
occupied,
but
I
can't
believe
the
boise
city
code
or
this
council
contemplated
or
supports
short-term
or
long-term
rentals
of
adus.
AA
A
third
basis
I
would
assert,
is
what
I'll
call
the
excess
footprint
that
is
being
created.
If
you
look
at
this
lot,
the
lot
is
115
feet
long
and
if
you
look
at
the
site
plan
and
evaluate
where
the
existing
dwelling
is
and
where
the
new
dwelling
will
be
placed
out
of
115
foot
lot,
we
are
going
to
have
approximately
100
feet,
lineal
feet
of
what
I'll
call
foundation
between
the
two
dwellings.
AA
There
is
a
six
foot
gap
between
the
two
dwellings,
but
essentially,
if
you
look
at
this
lot,
the
concept
is
the
footprint
is
going
to
take
up
the
entire
lot
and
to
have
a
hundred
feet
of
what
I'll
call
foundation
on
a
corner.
Lot
like
this
in
this
area,
I
don't
think
is
appropriate.
It's
it's
just
too
much
building
for
the
size
of
the
lot,
and
I
don't
think
that's
what's
contemplated
last
week
we
did
set
forth
some
other
bases,
and
mr
ritter
built
his
residence
in
2007.
AA
He
ensured
that
his
property
fully
complied
with
all
the
setback
requirements,
and
so
his
his
residence
is
set
back
to
meet
those
standards,
and
he
has
only
a
25
foot
wide
lot
and
had
to
build
a
15
foot
wide
house.
He
made
that
work.
It
was
readily
accomplished.
It
seems
like
the
same
standards
should
be
applicable
to
the
betazol
property
we
were
concerned
or
are
concerned
about
the
the
front
yard
setback
and
the
street
sight
setback
relating
to
corner
lots.
We
realize
and
recognize
that
the
vision
triangle
standard
that
minimum
is
met.
AA
We
do
believe
that
this
particular
application
is
prejudicial
to
the
ritter
property
and
it
has
a
detrimental
impact
upon
its
value
as
to
exceptional
circumstances
and
hardships.
We
assert
there.
There
is
no
exceptional
circumstances
or
hardships
to
justify
the
variance
nothing's
changed
from
the
time
that
the
tazo
brought
this
property.
There's
been
no
to
my
knowledge,
legal
change.
There's
been
no
factual
changes.
The
lot
nothing
has
occurred,
except
that
there's
a
desire
now
to
create
essentially
a
footprint
of
about
100
feet.
AA
B
We're
good
for
now!
Thank
you.
Thank
you
all
right.
Next
up
we
will
have
the
applicant,
so
I
see
ms
manweiler
is
on
the
zoom,
but
mr
reed
you're
here
you're
you're,
starting
are
you
both?
Are
you
okay,.
AB
So
then,
let
terry
take
over
great
thanks
and
my
name
is
kenneth
reid,
I'm
an
architect
and
I
live
at
2415
compass
drive,
boise,
idaho,
and
so
I
designed
this
building
working
with
ted
venegas
and
ethan
mansfield
later,
like
all
projects,
I
started
with
a
discussion
with
ted
and
how
we
would
design
a
possible
expansion
of
this
property.
It
became
clear
that
if
we
knocked
the
existing
home
down
as
an
anomaly
to
the
code,
it's
a
30
foot
wide
parcel,
and
so
it's
unbuildable
at
that
point.
AB
AB
AB
It
was
questioned
in
the
in
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
about
the
10
celine
verified
that
you
can
have
an
adu
that
exceeds
600
square
feet
if
planning
and
zoning
merits
the
constraints
and
the
design-
and
this
is
a
also
a
parcel
that
is
substandard,
and
so,
if
mr
ritter's
parcel,
which
is
a
substandard
lot
and
this
parcel,
which
is
a
subcenter
lot,
these
all
meet
the
conditions
of
those
ordinances.
AC
AC
AC
As
mr
reed
has
properly
told
the
council,
the
project
has
been
approved
unanimously
by
the
historic
district,
which
is
not
an
easy
thing
to
do
when
you're
constructing
something
new
in
the
north
end,
particularly
on
eastman
and
11th,
and
we
also
got
an
unanimous
approval
from
the
planning
and
zoning.
I
would
like
to
note
that
there
was
no
misrepresentations
made
to
the
commissioners
at
the
time
of
the
planning
and
zoning
hearing.
AC
In
fact,
I
specifically
quoted
the
boise
city
code,
11-06-0
3.1,
a
which
mr
gorley
did
rely
on
to
say
that
the
the
ten
percent
cannot
be
altered
or
amended.
That's
just
simply
not
how
the
statute
reads.
The
code
reads,
it
specifically
reads:
examples
of
this
include,
but
are
not
limited
to.
That
is
not
a
shell.
That
is
not
a
must.
AC
That
is
a
discretionary
term
of
art
for
this,
for
this
council,
for
the
commission,
before
it
and
for
the
historic
commission
to
decide
whether
or
not
this
is
unique
circumstance
where
variance
is
appropriate,
and
it
is.
This
is
a
very
unique
lot
with
that
with
a
home
that
is
built
in
an
unusual
place
on
the
lot,
so
the
way
that
the
the
site
was
then
readjusted
for
ken
reed's
plan
actually
makes
this
a
much
more
usable
site.
The
the
issue
with
the
the
adu
is
simply
not
an
issue
here.
AC
For
example,
the
adu
has
not
even
been
applied
for
and
is
not
an
issue
before
this
commission
over
this
council.
The
adu
unit
is
a
separate
issue.
A
separate
variance
has
to
be
granted
for
that
adu
accessory
dwelling
unit.
The
uniqueness
of
it
is
that
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
just
happens
to
be
the
building,
that's
already
in
existence.
The
new
structure
will
be
the
primary
residence
to
dissuade
mr
gorley's
concerns
that
this
will
be
a
multi-family.
AC
This
will
in,
I
guess,
encroach
upon
the
neighbors
by
having
multiple
families
on
there.
The
whole
point
of
an
adu
is
to
create
infill
in
cities
like
boise,
where
we're
trying
to
bring
the
population
back
into
the
core.
The
accessory
dwelling
units
statute
and
code
specifically
requires
owner
occupied
occupation.
So
there's
no
should
be
no
concern
about
this,
just
being
a
multiple
rental
unit
for
whoever's.
You
know,
building
this
to
rent
in
the
north
end,
that's
not
what
this
is
built
for,
and
that
is
not
what
the
intent
of
the
parties
is.
AC
The
second
issue
is
the
issue
with
the
setbacks.
That's
the
whole
point
of
this
variance
request
the
whole
appointment.
The
whole
position
of
the
application
was
that
this
is
a
unique
circumstance.
This
is
a
unique
property
and
we
do
need
a
variance.
The
variance
needs
to
be
for
the
setbacks,
because
this
is
a
corner
lot,
because
of
the
way
that
the
property
is
situated.
AC
There
are
setback
requirements
that
need
to
be
met
and,
in
this
particular
case,
alleviating
the
requirements
of
those
setbacks
does
allow
for
the
construction,
as
mr
reed
has
has
has
designed.
There
is
no
issue
with
the
corner
site,
as
the
staff
has
already
pointed
out.
The
line
of
sight
is
perfectly
clear
on
the
corner
of
eastman
and
eleventh,
that's
not
an
issue.
AC
The
only
issue
with
regards
to
the
variance
is
the
front
yard
setback,
because
the
way
the
house
is
now
situated
in
in
its
drawing
the
variance
is
actually
a
front
yard
setback
where
it's
coming
onto
11th
street
and
what,
in
order
to
have
the
parking
spaces,
the
design
of
the
property
and
design
of
the
house
was
actually
done
so
that
the
parking
was
done
underneath
the
house
itself.
So
you
know,
frankly,
every
single
accommodation
that
could
have
been
made
to
make
this
a
viable
project
has
been
done.
AC
That's
why
it
got
accolades
with
the
historic
commission.
That's
why
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
approved
it
unanimously.
Now
I
do
appreciate
and
understand
mr
ritter's
position.
It's
a
house!
That's
going
right
next
to
his
house.
His
house
is
also
for
the
record
new
construction
in
that
area.
Mr
ritter
built
a
skinny
house
on
a
very
narrow
lot
and
he
would
like
to
preserve
his
view,
and
I
can
appreciate
that.
We
can
all
appreciate
that,
but
this
is
the
north
end
of
boise.
You
don't
buy
in
the
north
end
to
have
a
beautiful
view.
AC
You
move
up
to
the
hills
if
you
want
a
beautiful
view,
when
you're
in
the
north
end
you're
in
the
north
end
for
the
feeling
of
community
and
when
you're
trying
to
construct
a
residence
which,
by
the
way,
is
spectacularly
beautiful
and
will
add
and
enhance
the
north
end
in
this
particular
view.
That's
not
that's
not
the
purpose
of
this
particular
residence.
That's
not
the
purpose
of
the
north
end
and
that's
not
how
the
people
who
live
there
feel
now.
AC
While
I
appreciate
the
comments
that
several
neighbors
were
opposed
to
this,
this
is
an
appeal.
What
is
in
the
record
is:
what's
before
the
council,
there
are
not
supposed
to
be
a
whole
bunch
of
people
testifying
about
how
they
feel
about
this
property.
This
is
an
appeal
from
mr
ritter
trying
to
establish
that
there
has
been
some
abuse
of
discretion:
some
misinterpretation
of
code,
some
violation
by
the
commission
in
approving
this
project,
and,
quite
frankly,
as
I
put
forth
in
my
memorandum,
that
has
simply
not
been
the
case.
AC
I
do
ask
that
I'm
sure
it's
been
submitted,
but
my
memorandum
to
this
to
this
council
sets
forth
all
of
the
reasons
why
mr
ritter
has
not
set
forth
that
there
has
been
any
basis
to
grant
his
appeal
and
for
those
reasons,
and
the
reasons
that
I
set
forth
in
my
memorandum
we'd
ask
that
this.
This
council
deny
the
appeal
and
allow
miss
pitazzo
to
move
forward
with
her
project,
and
I
will
be
happy
to
stand
for
questions
from
anyone.
K
For
the
applicant's
council,
it's
it's
about
1106.031a,
which
is
what
you
cited
you're
right.
It
provides
exam.
You
know
the
fourth
sentence
provides
a
list
of
examples
and
that's
not
limiting,
but
the
sentence
right
before
it
says
where
practical
the
10
size
standard
may
be
altered
to
accommodate
in
one
of
two
things:
logical
expansions
or
internal
conversions.
K
Then
it
says
examples
of
this
include
but
are
not
limited
to
etc,
etc.
My
concern
is
that
when
you
go
for
the
adu
permit
the
adu
application
process,
someone
is
going
to
read
this
and
say:
look
it.
You
can't
deviate
from
this
size
unless
it's
to
accommodate
a
logical
expansion
which
this
is
not
or
an
internal
conversion
which
this
is
not,
in
other
words
the
discretion
in
the
sentence
that
begins
with
the
words.
Examples
only
applies
to
logical
expansions
or
internal
conversions.
K
K
AC
Well,
there
is
no
both
yeah,
there
is
no.
Both
the
adu
application
would
be
done
simultaneously
to
any
request
for
building
permit.
If
the
edu
is
not
approved,
then
doesn't
make
any
fiscal
sense
to
go
forward
with
the
construction
of
the
residents,
because
one
of
them
would
be
outside
of
compliance
with
the
code.
The
what
I
would
submit
to
councilman
bajan
is
that
the
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
is
most
definitely
being
converted.
AC
It
is
a
residence
right
now
it
is
the
primary
residence
on
the
lot.
It
is
not
an
adu.
It
is
literally
quite
literally
being
converted
to
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
which
are
favored
so
with
respect
to
the
the
language
that
allows
for
modifications
to
the
specific
sentence
in
the
code.
This
is
one
of
those
unique
circumstances,
because
it
is
not
an
already
established
adu
with
an
adu
approval.
AC
AC
I
understand
and
appreciate
the
confusion
of
what
you
know
means
to
be
an
accessory
dwelling
universe
as
a
residence.
But
in
this
particular
case
it
is
the
current
residence
and
cannot
be
characterized
as
the
adu
until
the
variance
hearing
on
the
adu
process
begins
and
is
incomplete
is
complete.
AC
Absolutely
because
there's
no
language
in
there
that
that
indicates
that
it
has
to
be
new
construction,
adu.
B
E
Madam
mayor,
I
think,
there's
a
question
for
staff,
but
I'll
pose
it
now.
The
five
foot
setback
in
the
15
foot
setback
variances
on
the
south
and
the
facing
11th
street
are
consistent
with
many
other
setbacks
in
the
general
neighborhood.
E
I
don't
see
any
specific
examples
really
nearby
here
did
staff
look
at
that.
E
I
mean,
for
instance,
I
I
know
of
some
on
resview
in
this
same
block,
face
about
four
blocks
south,
but
I
don't
know
the
character
of
the
north
end
does
undulate
somewhat,
but
where
those
character
pieces
exist,
they
they
tend
to
congregate,
and
I
just
wondered
if
you
looked
at
at
where
those
other
examples
existed
near
this.
I
Yeah,
madam
mayor
councilmember
clegg,
I
think,
interestingly
enough,
even
even
the
existing
home
on
the
home
on
this
property,
along
that
it's
especially
prevalent
with
these
really
narrow
corner
lots,
and
this
existing
home
is
about
five
feet
from
the
from
the
street
property
line,
and-
and
you
know,
our
setback
table
with
the
15
20
foot
setbacks.
I
It
works
really
well
out
in
newer,
newer
parts
of
town,
but
in
these
older
parts
of
town,
where
we
have
kind
of
wider
rideaways
and
detached
sidewalks,
it's
quite
common
to
have
setbacks
below
that
20
15
15
feet.
I
don't
have
a
list
of
specific
addresses
in
front
of
you
just.
I
would
just
note
that
it's
prevalent
throughout
the
you
know
the
older
parts
of
town,
including
the
north
and
east
end.
B
All
right,
if
there's
nothing
else,
we
will
now
move
into
the
residents
that
have
signed
up,
but
first
I
just
want
to
make
sure.
Is
anybody
from
neenah
here
the
north
end
neighborhood
association
on
zoom.
B
AD
Hi
so
yeah
my
name's
sean
murphy.
I
reside
at
1610
north
11th
just
across
the
street
from
the
current
property
and
would
just
first
like
to
thank
the
council
for
their
performance
over
the
last
few
months
and
seriously
a
sincere
thank
you
to
you
guys.
I
know
it's
been
a
difficult
time.
AD
AD
No
one
would
ever
allow
it,
and
my
purpose
here
is
that
to
say
that
other
properties
on
this
block
and
adjacent
to
my
own
have
undergone
similar
selection
bias
to
what's
occurring
on
this
current
property
and
that
selection
bias
has
allowed
variances
and
height
restrictions
to
go
unnoted
that
were
then
later
regretted
by
neighbors
and
including
the
resident
themselves.
Calling
me
saying,
I
can't
believe
how
high
it
is,
but
I've
already
ordered
the
windows
and
the
fact
that
the
commission
was
questioned
about
a
large
amount
of
leeway
given
in
the
previous
hearing.
AD
From
that
particular
ordeal,
they
admitted
to
making
a
mistake,
which
now
affects
me
and
my
family,
and
I
see
a
similar
one
being
made
here,
and
so
I
think
that
when
granting
a
variance,
the
zoning
committee
committee
should
serve
as
a
fail-safe
or
a
backup
to
the
historic
preservation
board.
In
this
case,
it
shouldn't
be
assumed
that,
because
they
said
it's
okay,
we
should
too.
AD
Specifically
in
this
case,
no
one,
not
me
not
any
other
neighbor
objected
to
this,
and
the
reason
being
is
that
I
didn't
think
it
would
ever
pass.
Nor
did
I
think
the
house
next
door
to
me
would
pass
and
if
you
drive
by
it,
you'll
know
which
one
it
is
the
adu
conversion
has
already
been
spelled
out.
I
don't
want
to
spell
that
out
anymore.
The
current
house
is
not
five
feet
from
the
curb.
I
measured
it
today.
AD
The
houses
that
were
comparing
two
on
this
current
block
are
at
five
foot,
eight
inches
and
six
feet
from
the
property
line.
As
I
measured
them
today,
okay,
what
this
setback
is
going
to
do
is
it's
going
to
set
it
at
five
feet?
Okay,
those
properties;
okay,
those
properties
that
we're
comparing
to
have
a
single
story.
The
roof
peak
at
the
front
of
the
closest
adjoining
comparative
property
at
the
aforementioned
setback
is
170
inches.
AD
AD
AE
I
don't
really
object
to
having
a
house
built
there
and
things.
My
concern
has
always
been
the
setback
variants
which
I
just
wanted
to
be
sure,
is
not
going
to
interfere
with
the
clear
vision
triangle
on
11th
and
eastman
streets,
especially
since
now
11th
street
is
supposed
to
be
the
new
bikeway,
and
I
don't
my
concern
is
that
if
you
can't
see
you
know
at
the
intersection
to
see
what's
coming
the
other
way,
then
there
could
be
something
pretty
tragic
happen
there.
AF
Thank
you
first.
Thank
you,
council
for
your
hard
work.
My
name
is
jason
hess,
I'm
a
native
to
idaho
and
live
four
lots
down
from
the
resident
in
question
at
1613
11th
street.
I
support
the
appeal.
While
I
support
an
additional
unit
on
this
lot,
the
proposed
design
is
horrifically
unreasonable
to
use
terry
pickens
words.
You
don't
buy
a
tiny
lot
to
build
a
second
massive
house.
You
buy
a
large
lot
in
the
foothills
first
I'd
like
to
say,
I
met
the
tenant
of
the
property
a
few
months
ago,
and
they
said
they
were
renting.
AF
First,
madame
clegg
per
your
question
to
the
commission,
the
commission
says
this
building
complements
the
development
development
patterns
and
follows
similar
setbacks,
but
I
can't
find
a
single
two
two
and
a
half
story
home
with
its
primary
structure
wall.
This
close
to
the
sidewalk,
there's
no
precedence
for
it.
I
spent
five
years
in
boston
and
I'm
used
to
three-story
homes,
five
feet
off
the
sidewalk,
but
this
is
not
the
normal
for
the
north
end
and
if
it
is,
the
codes
should
be
changed.
So
everyone
has
the
same
opportunity
to
such
lucrative
building
projects.
AF
AF
All
the
architectural
drawings
under
this
case
file
still
indicate
a
22
foot
wide
structure
which
wouldn't
even
fit
even
with
these
massive
setbacks.
So
it's
not
until
the
foundation
is
poured
that
us,
the
neighbors,
can
go
measure
it
to
prove
to
the
commission
that
they're
wrong,
regardless
of
these
conflicting
drawings.
AF
The
main
exceptional
circumstances
for
this
thin
for
this
case
is
a
thin
house.
However,
a
5
10
foot
reduction
on
the
side
setback
is
unreasonable
and
would
result
in
a
dwelling
wider
than
50
of
the
homes
on
the
same
side
of
the
block.
A
five
foot
reduction
is
is
much
more
reasonable.
The
fourth
error
is
for
code.
AF
11060303E01C.C,
it
presents
multiple
examples
of
waze
two-story
structures
and
mind
you.
This
is
two
and
a
half
how
its
heightened
roof
line
design
should
reduce
its
imposition
on
adjacent
dwellings.
I
would
highlight
that
the
third
story
of
this
proposal
should
have
a
three
foot
setback.
The
commission
says
this
code
doesn't
need
to
be
followed
as
long
as
the
five
foot
shared
setback
is
met,
and
I
don't
think
that's
accurate.
The
fifth
error
is
for
code
11
1203,
and
it
presents
two
clear
triangles
for
the
code.
AF
However,
the
response
from
the
planning
team
only
addresses
the
easier
of
the
two,
so
I
don't
know
how
they're
not
considering
the
second
one,
which
impinges
into
a
sloped
driveway
and
it's
questionable
if
the
clear
vision
requirement
can
be
met
when
the
vehicle
is
below
grade.
The
sixth
item
is
for
the
planning
team
stating
that
there
are
no
smaller
lots,
but
the
lot
at
the
opposite
end
of
the
alley
is
smaller.
AF
This
is
a
monster
house.
It's
forced
into
a
very
tiny
lot.
If
the
owner
requested
a
variance
for
a
single
parking
space,
the
third
story
could
be
removed
and
still
allow
for
a
1200
square
foot
residence.
A
one
one
and
a
half
story
unit
would
be
much
more
appropriate
for
this
lot
than
the
three
story
proposed.
AF
AF
The
adu
is
too
large.
The
adu
has
an
unoccupied
residence.
The
driveway
is
within
50
feet
of
the
intersection,
10
foot
reduction,
one
side,
five
foot
reduction,
the
other
side,
no
additional
three
foot
reduction
to
the
third
story
and
an
unsafe,
declining
shortened
driveway.
So
not
only
does
the
driver
not
have
the
same
amount
of
distance
to
see
my
child
on
the
sidewalk,
but
they're
coming
up
an
incline.
AF
B
Line
michael
the
michael
that's
there
is
that
michael
toolson.
B
He
didn't
raise
his
hand
all
right.
I
just
wanted
to
clear
up
that
we
had
somebody
sign
up
early,
but
mr
toolson
was
not
a
party
of
records,
so
I
just
wanted
to
check
in
before
we
went
to
patrick's
boots.
Welcome
patrick.
AG
Thank
you
so
much
it's
nice
to
be
here.
I
want
to
speak
in
support
of
this
project
and
the
associated
variances.
I
live
at
a
912
west
brumback
in
boise,
and
I
think
this
is
a
really
nice
project.
It's
a
wonderful
part
of
town.
I
walk
by
this
lot,
often
and
always
thought
it
was
a
little
bit
odd
that
there
was
a
small
home
on
the
back
half
and
the
front
half
was
empty.
AG
I
think
it
is
delightful
that
they
found
a
way
to
propose
a
new
unit
on
the
front
half
that
is
consistent
with
the
requirements
and
recommendations
of
the
historical
preservation
group,
and
I
think
it's
great
that
hopefully
another
family
will
get
to
live
in
this
part
of
town
in
a
manner
consistent
with
the
neighborhood
character.
I
would
like
the
council
to
approve
this
project,
as
stated.
Thank
you.
B
All
right
there's
nobody
else
on
the
line
so
now.
B
All
right,
great
so,
first
off
before
we
go
into
rebuttals
any
questions
for
staff.
N
Madam
mayor
go
ahead
yeah.
This
is
jimmy
question
I
guess
for
cody,
so
we've
heard
from
the
appellant
we've
heard
from
the
applicant.
N
You
said
something
earlier
about
the
adu
code
and
how
it
was
designed
to
give
wiggle
room
in
cases
like
these,
and
I
guess
I'm
just
wondering
if
you
could
expand
on
that
and
explain
that
to
me
a
little
bit
more
so
that
I've
got
some
clarity
on
how
that
lines
up
with
what
the
applicant
and
the
appellant
brought
up.
I
Madam
mayor
councilmember
hallie
burton,
I
guess
guess.
First
of
all,
I
was
99.9
percent
certain
of
how
I
looked
at
this
in
my
mind
and
then
listening
to
council,
member
beijing
and
other
council
speak
then
now
I'm
confused,
no
honestly
the
way
the
way
the
way
we
would
typically
look
at
this.
I
We
really
emphasize
the
including,
but
not
limited
to
language,
and
then
it
referenced
the
ability
to
have
an
internal
conversion,
and
so,
in
this
case,
in
my
mind,
the
internal
conversion
of
that
existing
unit
would
fall
within
that.
Within
that
discretion
I
would.
I
would
note
also
that,
if
the
variances,
if
that
decision
is
upheld
this
evening,
the
applicant
would
still
have
to
file
for
that
accessory
dwelling
unit
and
and
with
that,
if
it
was
approved
administratively,
that
decision
can
be
appealed.
I
N
And
madam
mayor
just
a
follow-up,
so
cody
when
you
say
an
internal
conversion
to
an
adu,
really
there
isn't
anything
that
has
to
be
done
to
make
it
an
adu
like
it
could
be
an
adu.
The
way
that
it
is
right
now
with
a
washer
and
a
dryer
and
a
kitchen
like
the
internal
conversion,
is,
is
potentially
a
remodel
that
they
might
be
doing
to
make
it
nicer,
but
it
could,
as
is
right
now,
if
it
fit
into
the
right
criteria,
it'd
be
an
adu
without
any
internal
conversion.
I
Madam
mayor
council,
councilmember
haley
burton
yeah,
I
think
that's
a
fair,
fair
assessment
once
there's
an
additional
home
constructed
on
the
property.
One
of
them
needs
to
meet
that
kind
of
that
700
square
foot
two-bedroom
criteria.
So
at
that
point
yes
it
would.
It
would
be
an
adu
effectively
without
any
word.
N
Gotcha
yeah.
Thank
you
cody.
I
appreciate
that.
I
think
my
confusion
around
the
internal
conversion.
Is
you
know
what
actually
has
to
be
done
or
not
be
done
to
make
it
an
adu,
and
it
doesn't
necessarily
seem
like
anything
necessarily
has
to
be
done
like
it
could
be
one
right
now
if
it
fit
the
rest
of
the
criteria
with
no
changes
to
the
inside.
E
Just
a
couple
of
logistical
questions,
so
if
we
were
to
deny
the
appeal
tonight
and
uphold
the
decisions
of
the
historic
preservation
commission
and
the
planning
and
zoning
commission,
the
applicant
in
order
to
move
toward
building
permits
on
this
lot
would
first
have
to
get
the
adu
approved
or
concurrently
get
the
adu
approved
and
prove
that
this
lot
is
actually
the
size
that
it
is
and
that
the
building
will
fit
in
the
way
that's
been
approved
in
terms
of
setbacks.
E
B
G
W
AC
I
was
actually
gonna
defer
to
mr
reed
because
he
did
all
the
design
plans
and
the
issues
that
came
up
were
more
with
the
setbacks.
The
requirements,
the
30
feet
versus
the
32,
which
did
come
up
in
the
commissioner's
meeting,
and
mr
reed
did
say
that
there
would
be
an
adjustment
made
and
cody
staff
accurately
put
forth
that
we
would
not
be
issued
any
building
permits
until
these
issues
were
resolved.
So
with
that,
I
would
let
ken
address
the
other
issues
that
came
up
with
regard
to
the
design
and
setbacks.
AB
AB
So
we've
been
at
this
for
a
little
bit
now,
and
so
we
actually
have
a
survey
and
I
do
have
to
adjust
the
the
width
of
the
building
so
that
it'll
accommodate
the
five
foot
setback.
If
we're
given
our
approvals
tonight,
there
was
there
was
one
person
who
said
that
we
should
have
only
one
car,
space
planning
and
zoning.
I
think
tony
cody
will
attest
that
you.
AB
AB
The
design
of
the
building
basically
has
a
unique
character
to
it.
It
is
different,
sherry's,
very
delighted
with
it,
and
it
has.
How
would
I
describe
basically
these
bay
windows
at
the
facade
walls,
but
then
the
design
of
the
roofs
taper
back,
so
the
massing
is
a
little
unique.
It's
it
sort
of
brings
up
something
of
an
urban
environment.
And
again,
you
know
it
didn't,
have
any
issue
with
the
massing
for
the
neighborhood
in
the
historic
district
and
then
there's.
AB
This
property
was
a
very
small
little
one
bedroom,
workman's
cottage
for
a
number
of
years,
and
so
the
number
and
then
we're
what
two
blocks
away
from
hyde
park.
So
the
density
is
increased
in
this
part
of
our
town
city.
So
we
have
a
number
of
examples
if
you're
able
to
zoom
in
cody
that
are
across
the
street,
like
the
mennonite
church,
there's
a
number
of
homes
that
are
basically
right
on
the
sidewalk
there's
a
number
of
homes
that
were
garages
on
the
alley
that
have
been
turned
that
were
garages
and
then
turned
into
homes.
AB
E
AB
That
chimney
is
above
grade
and
it
does
extend
about
a
foot
into
the
setback
and
for
as
far
as
planning
and
zoning
code,
you're
allowed
to
have
a
two
foot
wide
or
two
foot
extension,
eight
foot
wide
into
a
setback
for
a
chimney.
Okay.
This
is
nowhere
near
that
size,
but
there
is
a
chimney
that
extends
a
foot
or
so
into
that
area.
G
AA
Thank
you,
madam
mayor
council,
members
I'll,
be
very
brief.
Just
respectfully
assert
that
what
we're
dealing
with
here
is
an
interpretation
of
boise
city
code.
The
ordinance
there's
been
argument
that
the
phrase
internal
conversion
somehow
relates
to
conversion
to
an
adu.
I
respectfully
assert
that
I
don't
think
that
is
a
proper
interpretation.
AA
Adu
is
illegally
defined
term
within
the
boise
city
code.
Internal
conversions
clearly
relates
to
some
sort
of
construction
remodeling
or
something
that's
occurring
within
the
adu.
Even
the
examples
in
in
the
sentence
that
follow
contemplate
some
sort
of
remodeling
or
something
occurring
within
the
adu,
and
so
I
would
just
respectfully
assert
that
I
don't
think
that
interpretation
is
correct.
AA
I
I
fully
recognize
that
we
got
a
little
bit
of
a
chicken
and
egg
issue
and
to
me
I
just
don't
understand
how
the
planting
zoning
commission
or
this
council
can
properly
evaluate
whether
variants
should
be
granted
in
accordance
with
the
application,
if
it
hasn't
determined
whether
we
have
a
legally
existing
adu
or
not,
because
if
the
existing
building
doesn't
qualify
as
an
adu,
I
my
instinct
would
be
neither
planet.
Amazonian
commission
or
this
council
would
be
approving
a
variance,
that's
not
needed,
and
so
the
adu
issue
is
relevant
to
the
determination.
B
G
E
I
would
move
that
we
deny
the
appeal
of
cda
20-9
at
1110,
west
eastman
street
and
approve
the
planning
and
zoning
commission's
approval
uphold
the
planning
and
zoning
commission's
approval
of
a
variance
to
encroach
into
the
front
and
street
side
setbacks
for
a
new
single
family
home
in
an
r1ch
zone.
O
E
Thank
you,
madam
mayor,
so
I
think
the
appellant
actually
sort
of
summarized
my
thinking
pretty.
Well,
we
if
a
new
building
were
to
be
built
on
this
lot,
it
would
most
likely
need
these
kinds
of
variances
to
be
able
to
be
built
successfully,
given
the
size
of
the
lot
and
the
way
that
it
is
laid
out,
and
so
given
that
the
question
will
be
whether
or
not
an
adu
can
be
approved,
that's
not
before
us
tonight.
E
I
suspect
we'll
hear
this
again
when
that
comes
before
whoever
it
comes
before
and
finally
to
us,
but
without
an
and
up
upholding
the
decision
on
the
variances
tonight,
we
could
never
get
to
a
point
where
we
could
have
that
discussion
in
that
decision.
E
In
terms
of
the
other
issues
that
have
been
brought
up
tonight,
I
think
the
vision
triangle
is
not
an
issue.
I
do
believe
that
getting
in
and
out
of
this
garage
may
be
a
bit
of
an
issue.
I
suspect,
knowing
the
north
end,
that
people
who
use
it
will
be
quite
careful
about
that.
Everyone,
I
know
who
has
this
kind
of
a
situation
is
in
terms
of
being
consistent
with
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood.
E
I
ask
that
question
because
well,
there
is
a
situation
very
much
like
this
quite
near
my
own
house,
quite
on
rescue
and
tenth
many
of
those
side
streets
in
the
north
end
end
up
having
reduced
setbacks
and
in
the
time
we've
been
sitting
here.
E
Hearing
testimony
about
this
I've
counted
almost
a
dozen
within
two
blocks
of
this
particular
site
on
side
streets,
and
so
I
do
think
it's
a
prevalent
condition
very
near
here.
I
think
that
really
does
support
the
fact
that
this
kind
of
variance
is
needed
in
order
to
make
the
kind
of
accommodations
that
we've
wanted
to
have
in
this
area
of
town,
and
so
for
those
reasons,
I
believe
that
it's
appropriate
to
deny
the
appeal
and
help
uphold
this
decision.
K
K
My
thinking
is
pretty
in
line
with
the
council
presidents,
you
know
first
ticking
through
the
things
that
are
not
a
basis
to
grant
the
appeal
public
safety.
K
I
think
the
division
trial
triangle
evidence
in
the
record
is
sufficient
to
support
the
planning
and
zoning
commission's
opinion,
negative
impacts
to
the
appellant's
property,
again,
not
arbitrary
and
capricious,
and
not
lacking
in
insubstantial
evidence
in
the
planning
and
zoning
commission's
decision.
So
that's
not
a
basis
to
reverse
the
size
of
the
law
is
an
inherent
hardship,
or
at
least
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
was
an
arbitrary
and
capricious
or
absent
substantial
evidence
to
decide
that
the
tricky
thing
is
adu.
K
K
K
There's
nothing
being
internally
converted
about
this
property.
You're,
not
sectioning,
off
a
piece
of
the
existing
dwelling
into
an
adu.
The
best
closest
thing
is
it's
a
wholesale
conversion
we're
going
to
convert
the
entire
existing
structure
into
an
adu.
This
provision
of
the
code
doesn't
contemplate
that.
So
I
think
the
applicant
has
a
problem
coming
their
way
when
they
apply
for
the
adu
and
my
response
to
that,
incidentally,
is
not
you
know:
beware
this
should
be
denied.
K
My
response
to
that
is
that
this
may
be
a
portion
of
our
code,
that's
broken
and
that
we
need
to
just
tidy
up
this
issue
so
that
we
don't
have
these
kinds
of
questions.
So
I
support
the
council
president's
motion
because
the
only
questionable
issue
here
is
the
adu
issue,
which
is
not
one.
That's
before
us
and
everything
else
that
was
raised.
I
believe
the
planning
and
zoning
commission's
decision
was
supported
by
substantial
evidence,
not
legally
erroneous
and
not
arbitrary
or
completions.
N
K
P
K
Okay-
yes,
I'm
sorry,
one
quick
thing.
I
meant
to
add
to
my
comments
in
the
event
that
this
doesn't
qualify
as
an
adu.
Is
there
some
way
that
we
can
time
limit
these
variances
so
that
this
variance
is
not
sitting
out
there
attached
to
this
property
in
perpetuity
when
we've
already
determined
that
an
adu
is
not
permissible,
and
I
I
just
wanted
to
throw
out
somehow
making
the
variance
contingent
upon
the
approval
of
the
adu
so
that
we
don't
end
up
with
this
untidy
piece
of
land
use
in
this
property.
I
I'm
sorry,
madam
mayor
council,
council
members,
the
variance
approval
by
code
would
be
valid
for
two
years.
So,
if,
if
something
isn't
constructed
within
within
the
two
years,
it
would
expire.
Okay,.
O
My
turn
thank
you,
madam
mayor,
and
thank
you
council,
president
clegg
for
all
of
your
salient
questions
and
comments,
and
also
council
member
of
agent,
having
grown
up
in
the
north
end.
I
I
guess
I
become
very
comfortable
with
interesting,
shaped
and
sized
houses
kind
of
shoehorned
onto
lots
and
I
think
it
happens
all
over
the
neighborhood.
O
So
I
don't
think
that
this
is
anything
new
for
a
majority
of
the
north
end.
I
understand
that
it's
something
new
for
the
direct
neighbors
and
you
know
I
respect
that,
and
sometimes
it's
painful,
and
I
appreciate
everyone
that's
reached
out
to
us,
but
I
think
in
the
overall
scheme
of
things,
this
is
something
that
the
north
end
has
been
doing
for
over
a
century.
So
I
I
applaud
the
effort
to
build
some
more
density
into
the
north
end.
O
J
Madam
mayor,
yes,
councilmember,
thank
you.
I
I
agree
with
what
everybody
else
has
said.
I
I
myself
owned
a
tall
skinny
house
and
I
also
lost
the
view
because
of
buildings
that
went
up
around
me,
not
nowhere
near
as
close
as
what
this
is
going
to
be,
but
I
still
enjoyed
my
tall
skinny
house
for
as
long
as
I
had
it
and
at
the
end
of
the
day,
what
what
we
need
more
of
in
our
communities
is
housing
options
and
so
I'll
be
supporting
the
motion
today.
E
Thank
you
madame.
Could
I
just
say
one
quick
other
thing.
You
know
the
the
other
thing
that
I
really
appreciate
about
this
particular
application.
If
the
adu
does
in
fact
get
approved,
it
means
that
someone,
instead
of
buying
a
small
house,
scraping
it
and
building
out
one
single
family
house,
that's
for
a
more
affluent
family
is
preserving
at
least
some
semblance
of
affordability
within
the
neighborhood,
and
I
think
that's
a
really
important
goal
for
us.