►
From YouTube: Citywide Advisory Committee
Description
For Zoning Code Rewrite
A
A
A
D
A
The
majority
of
our
committee
here
with
us
so
we'll
go
ahead
and
kick
off
and
then,
as
others
can
join
us,
we'll
get
them
all
caught
up.
So
welcome
to
the
june
17th
citywide
advisory
committee
meeting
for
the
zoning
code
rewrite
we
want
to
thank
you
for
your
participation
and
being
able
to
join
us
today.
A
I
do
want
to
do
some
quick
introductions.
We
do
have
some
of
our
usual
suspects
aboard
today,
but
we
actually
have
a
couple
of
new
people
that
have
been
helping
us,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
everybody
is
familiar
with
them
as
well.
So
my
name
is
andrea
tuning
and
I
am
with
the
comprehensive
planning
division
with
the
city
of
boise.
A
A
We
have
maria
weed.
She
is
our
community
engagement
director
and
then
we
have
lindsey
moser
and
lindsey
driebergen,
who
are
also
here
from
community
engagement,
they're
kind
of
our
new
faces,
but
they're
going
to
help
us
with
some
community
engagement
activities
and
helping
facilitate
us
with
some
of
our
it
needs
so
that
we
can
actually
produce
this
va
tube.
So
we've
got
those
individuals
with
us
today
and
we
also
have
our
consulting
team
with
us,
so
we
have
don
elliott,
gabby
hart
and
diane
krishlan,
all
representatives
of
clarion
associates
or
krishlan
and
associates.
A
A
Just
to
get
us
kicked
off
a
little
bit.
We
want
to
let
you
know
that
we
went
ahead
and
released
module
one
in
april,
and
we
took
that
out
to
the
public
and
we
just
finished
our
community
engagement
efforts
for
that
initial
module
one.
So
the
next
couple
of
weeks
we're
going
to
be
really
busy
compiling
that
information,
so
that
we
can
get
that
information
both
to
our
public
and
to
you,
and
you
know
what
our
community
is
saying.
A
A
We
also
had
a
public
survey
as
well,
and
then
we
also
had
an
opportunity
to
offer
the
opportunity
for
anybody
that
was
interested
to
meet
with
deanna
dupuy
or
myself
to
kind
of
talk
about
the
zoning
code,
changes
what
those
mean
and
really
what
is
in
module
one
so
we'll
be
busy
compiling
that
and
make
sure
that
you
get
that
very
soon,
and
we
anticipate
you'll
probably
have
that
by
that
july
meeting,
so
just
to
give
us
a
brief
review
of
what
we're
charged
with
and
what
our
goals
are.
A
As
we
move
forward
as
a
committee
just
a
reminder
that
the
city
of
boise's
vision
is
really
to
create
a
city
for
everyone.
So
please
keep
that
in
mind
as
we
open
up
our
discussions
and
and
think
about
things.
As
we
ask
you
questions
or
ask
for
feedback,
our
mission
is
to
create
a
city
for
everyone
by
embracing
our
community
and
the
decision-making
process
innovating
and
investing
to
protect
our
environment
and
ensuring
a
thriving
local
economy
that
benefits
all.
A
We
have
some
strategic
priorities
that
are
important
for
us
to
to
note
a
safe,
healthy
city
for
everyone,
a
home
for
everyone,
movement
for
everyone,
a
clean
city
for
everyone,
opportunity
for
everyone
and
then
engaging
everyone
and
then
really
looking
at
the
goals
of
what
the
zoning
code
rewrite
is
intended
to
do.
We
are
hoping
to
create
a
modern
ordinance
that
will
help
us
implement
our
comprehensive
plan,
known
as
blueprint
boise.
A
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
building
on
those
policy
directions
of
those
strategic
priorities
that
we
just
talked
about
so
really
focusing
on
how
we
can
create
that
city
for
everyone
making
sure
that
everyone
is
engaged
in
the
process,
so
citizens
and
all
of
our
stakeholders
making
sure
that
we
are
finding
the
best
fit
for
the
city
of
boise.
That
includes
both
traditional
form-based
or
performance-based
zoning
tools
that
allows
us
to
be
boise
but
allows
us
to
achieve
those
planning
goals
that
we
have
in
blueprint
boise
as
well.
A
We
as
a
larger
committee.
We
are
a
group
of
community
members
that
are
distributed
throughout
the
city.
We
all
have
various
interests.
We
all
have
various
experiences
in
our
life
and
we're
hoping
that
you
are
that
sounding
board
for
the
ideas
and,
as
we
present
questions
to
you,
that
you
can
provide
us
some
direction
and
give
us
some
a
beacon
so
that
we
can
move
through
this
process
with
intention
and
really
just
to
go
over
those
basic
rules
of
engagement.
A
No,
we
want
you
to
arrive,
prepared
and
ready
to
share
your
thoughts
and
ideas
being
open-minded
and
thinking
about
community,
treating
others
with
kindness
being
active
listeners,
not
interrupting
others
being
ready
to
learn
and
then
really
just
doing
your
personal
rest
so
bring
in
what
you
have
to
the
table.
So
we
are
excited
to
have
everybody
here
today
and
I
look
forward
to
a
valuable
meeting
so
with
that.
A
B
Are
you
ready,
I'm
ready,
thank
you,
and
I
should
have
clued
andrea
in
before
this,
but
gabby
hart
is
traveling
today.
So
it's
all
me.
Unfortunately,
unfortunately,
you
don't
even
have
the
the
relief
of
a
second
speaker,
but
we
will
we'll
get
through
this
and
and
get
a
good
discussion
going.
So
I'm
going
to
share
a
screen
here.
We
go.
Somebody
give
me
a
thumbs
up
if
you
can
see
this
screen.
Okay,
that.
F
B
Let's
oops
is
this
you're
seeing
the
the
two
slide
version
of
this
right.
E
B
Let's
get
going
I'll
just
do
a.
B
Those
who
are
not
following,
but
I
won't,
spend
a
lot
of
time
because
you've
seen
these
graphics
many
times,
we've
got
we've
gotten
through
the
phase
two,
which
is
diagnostic
report,
we're
trying
to
stay
true
to
that
diagnostic
report.
It's
not
cut
in
stone.
Of
course
things
change
along
the
way,
but
that's
our
roadmap
for
what
we
draft
and
we
are
now-
we've
done
the
public
input
for
module
one.
I
do
want
to
be
very
clear:
the
door
is
never
closed.
B
The
city
has
to
allocate
its
staff
time
to
engaging
people
and
drawing
people
out
about
the
drafts,
and
that
is
a
concerted
effort
to
gather
feedback.
But
if
you
get
feedback
two
months
from
now
on
module
one,
it
will
still
be
accepted.
The
door
is
never
closed.
It's
a
democracy,
it's
a
public
process,
and
so
it
helps
us
to
get
that
feedback
earlier,
but
the
door
is
never
closed.
B
So
now
we
are
working
on
module
two
and
then
there'll
be
a
similar
outreach
effort
on
that
and
then
module
three,
which
is
processes
so
we're
now
dealing
with
development
standards.
I
think
all
of
you
know
this
by
now
that
blue
part
at
the
right
is
very
important.
The
city
has
tried
not
to
oversell
itself
and
say
hey
once
we
get
done
talking
about
it.
B
We're
done
talking
about
it
after
we
get
the
three
modules
together
and
then
we
put
the
whole
thing
together,
there's
a
lot
of
time
built
in
for
additional
discussion
and
refinement
once
again
as
we
did
for
module.
One
we've
broken
this
into
pieces.
At
the
last
meeting
we
talked
about
lot
and
building
dimensions,
building
form
standards,
different
ways
of
addressing
building
form.
B
Today
it's
subdivisions
sensitive
lands,
access
and
connectivity
next
time
it
is
the
various
other
parking
landscaping
lighting
other
development
standards.
I
know
people
care
if
boise
doesn't
get
a
good
discussion
on
parking.
It'll
be
the
first
big
city.
I've
ever
worked
in
that
doesn't
have
a
good
discussion
on
parking,
so
we're
going
to
do
that
in
july.
Why
did
we
do
it
this
way?
B
And
the
answer
is:
when
you
talk
not
about
intensity
or
use
but
you're
talking
about
how
development
happens,
we
start
with
the
big
pieces,
subdivisions,
sensitive
lands
axis
and
connectivity
and
I'll
probably
repeat
these
points
as
we
get
into
the
three
topics,
but
I
I
for
those
of
you
who
are
not
you
don't
wake
up
in
the
morning
speaking
zoning,
I
do
want
to
slow
down
and
explain
the
logic
behind
this.
These
are
the
macro
pieces.
When
we
get
into
july
we're
talking
more
about
micro
pieces,
I
own
a
lot.
B
I
have
a
right
to
do.
Multi-Family
I
have
a
right
to
do
a
house.
I
have
a
right
to
do
a
hotel.
How
do
I
park
it?
How
do
I
landscape
it?
How
do
I
light
it,
etc
by
that
time
we're
talking
about
a
building
or
multiple
buildings
on
a
particular
lot
that
has
been
approved
and
recorded
as
part
of
an
overall
subdivision
a
framework
for
development
by
that
time,
you're
supposed
to
have
the
framework
right?
B
B
So
the
plan
talks
about
framework
blueprint
boise,
but
we've
got
three
topics
here
today,
which
are
the
fundamental
building
blocks
of
the
future
of
the
city.
Subdivisions,
sensitive
lands,
accents
and
connectivity,
and
I
want
to
again
for
the
non-zoning
geeks
there's
an
interesting
phenomenon
in
boise:
it's
not
unique
to
boise.
B
We
are
reviewing
and
rewriting
a
document
called
the
zoning
ordinance,
but
that
zoning
ordinance
includes
already
today,
and
our
proposal
is
that
the
new
one
will
also
include
subdivision
regulations
technically,
legally
subdivision
regulations
are
different
than
zoning
regulations,
but
most
large
and
medium-sized
cities
want
them
in
one
document,
you've
already
crossed
that
bridge,
we're
refining
it
and
trying
to
make
it
better,
but
why?
Why
are
they
different?
It's
because
subdivisions
were
handed
to
the
city
by
your
state
legislature.
B
With
the
left
hand,
they
said
you
have
the
power
to
regulate
how
lots
are
created,
how
new
development
lots
are
created
to
ensure
they
have
access
to
a
public
street
to
ensure
they
have
adequate
utilities
to
ensure
that
they
are
legally
described.
So
you
don't
get
fraud
in
the
land
development
process.
B
Interestingly,
subdivision
powers
were
given
to
city
governments
long
before
zoning,
because
they
have
to
do
with.
Does
a
road
go
through
here
I
own
land.
How
can
I
get
to
it
if
a
road
doesn't
go
through
here?
I
had
land.
I
thought
I
had
utilities,
I
don't
have
utilities.
How
did
that
happen,
and
so
subdivisions
are?
B
B
B
Sensitive
lands
and
access
and
connectivity
are
actually
they
relate
to
subdivisions
and
they
relate
to
our
june
topics
and
I'll
talk
more
about
that
when
they
get
it.
But
when
you
think
about
this
discussion,
think
about
all
right,
we
got
to
get
the
lots,
the
rules,
how
you
create
developable
parcels
right
and
then
the
what
are
the
big
things
that
you
don't
want
to
go
wrong.
B
One
is,
if
you
want
to
protect
lands,
flood
plains,
foothills
areas
around
airports,
areas
with
pollution
which
doesn't
really
affect
you
guys
very
much,
but
things
that
you
want
to
make
sure
you
don't
expose
people
to
or
you
protect,
because
they're
major
assets
get
that
first
write
that
down.
First,
have
it
relate
to
the
way
you
do
subdivisions
by
the
way
telegraphing.
B
The
future
it'll
also
relate
to
the
july
discussion,
because
you
try
to
set
up
lots
that
don't
mess
up
your
sensitive
lands
and
compromise
them,
and
you
want
access
and
connectivity
streets
trails,
bike
paths,
roads,
anything
that
has
to
do
with
how
transit
how
things
get
around
and
connect
to
the
lots.
So
this
discussion
it
starts
here
rather
than
for
some
people.
B
We've
got
zoning.
You
prove
to
us
that
your
luck
complies
with
zoning.
We
turn
the
crank
and
here's
your
platinum
record
that
has
changed
dramatically
in
the
field
of
land
use
people
put
more
and
more
time
into.
Let's
get
the
framework
right.
Let's
try
to
figure
out
how,
by
the
time
we
get
to
july's
topics,
we're
really
sure
that
sensitive
lands
have
been
protected.
B
But
we
will
be
back
to
talk
about
the
details
in
july
within
the
framework
of
today's
discussion
and
then
by
august
we
intend
to
present
the
draft
of
module
two
which
covers
all
of
these
topics,
so
I
did
want
to
I'm
sorry
for
the
long-winded,
but
it
it's
helpful
to
set
a
a
a
foundation
for
why
we're
doing
it
this
way
and
how
important
it
is.
These
are
maybe
not
the
sexiest
topics
that
people
can
prepare
to
talk
about,
but
they're
very,
very
important.
So
we
did
want
to
say.
B
Does
anybody
have
comments
about
the
the
the
topics
we
raised
last
week,
which
were
just
in
case
you
don't
remember.
We
talked
about
all
the
different
ways
in
which
boise
regulates,
density
and
intensity
and
in
form
maximum
dwelling
units
per
acre
maximum
floor
area
ratios
lot
size
lot
with
lot,
frontage,
etc.
B
B
I'm
sorry
for
if
I
look
like
I'm
not
paying
attention
it's
because
I
have
two
screens
going
and
you
can't
look
at
both
of
them
at
the
same
time.
So
anything
about
those
topics
not
module
one,
but
the
opening
discussion
on
module,
2
on
form
and
intensity.
B
Once
again,
in
the
interest
of
valuing
your
time
and
respecting
your
time,
I'm
not
going
to
dwell
on
that
spicy
to
say
that
the
door
is
always
open
for
comments.
B
So
let's
talk
about
subdivision
we're
going
to
do
one
of
these
topics,
the
one
that
I
just
blathered
on
about
first
and
then
we're
going
to
take
a
small
break
and
go
on
to
the
second
and
third
topics
here.
So
I
want
to
talk
about
the
basics
of
subdivision
design.
So,
on
the
right
hand,
you
could
see
it
could
be
an
urban
fabric,
kind
of
a
thing,
lots
and
blocks
or
lots
set
up
around
cul-de-sacs.
B
It
could
be
open,
more
open
lands
where
you're
trying
to
protect
sensitive
lands,
even
in
an
urban
context,
by
moving
the
development
away
from
the
lands
you're
trying
to
protect.
So
those
are
just
images,
but
I
do
want
to
talk
about
the
kinds
of
things
when
somebody
comes
in
and
says
I
want
to
plant
new
lots:
it's
a
next
land
or
it's
unused
land.
It's
didn't
fill
in.
I
want
to
plant
new
lox
and
the
city
reviews
it
and
says
good
enough.
This
is
these.
Are
good
lots?
What
is
it
reviewing?
B
B
How
important
is
it
to
reinforce
that
fabric
if
it's
in
an
alley,
loaded
area
where
everybody
has
alleys,
is
it
important
to
continue
those
alleys
you
do
not
want
to
have
some
cities,
don't
want
to
have
a
mix
and
match
this
is
kind
of
a
suburban
block,
and
next
to
it
is
an
urban
block
and
next
to
it's
a
suburban
block
frontage,
how
much
frontage
should
each
lot
have
on
the
street?
I
realize
it's
getting
technical,
but
that
often
that
has
to
do
with.
How
do
I
lay
this
out
how
to
okay?
B
You
can't
do
that.
There's
minimum
lot
sizes,
there's
frontage
and
the
issue
here
is
often
bigger.
Frontages
drive
up
infrastructure
costs
back
in
the
day,
much
of
our
older
cities
were
planted
with
25
foot
frontages,
so
just
making
the
math
easy.
You
know
if
you
had
a
400
foot
lot
and
you
have
20
a
2400
foot,
long
block
and
you
have
25.
B
You
know
four
times.
Four:
that's
16
lots
facing
that
street.
The
utility
charges,
the
price
of
doing
pipes
and
wires
in
that
street
are
divided
over
16
lots.
It
increases
the
size,
the
cost
of
those
lots
less
than.
If
you
had
after
world
war
ii,
we
sometimes
had
zone
districts
with
a
minimum
lot
size
of
70
feet.
B
Well,
you
could
do
the
math
yourself
if
that
70
feet
within
a
400
foot
block.
That's
about
six
lots
less,
so
the
infrastructure
cost
of
building
the
road
building
the
infrastructure,
the
pipes,
the
wires
is
spread
over
six
slots,
not
16
lines.
Those
lots
are
going
to
be
more
expensive
and
so
over
time
people
have
got
to
say.
B
Well,
if
there's
a
reason,
if
we're
reinforcing
character
and
it's
important
to
us,
we
could
have
big
ones,
but
beware
of
the
cost
of
what
you're
doing
when
you
do
that,
because
it
has
a
there's,
a
trade-off
between
character
and
cost
street
patterns
no
secret
to
anybody
here.
Old
cities
were
largely
planted
on
grids.
B
New
ones
are
on
often
in
the
post-war
area,
with
curvilinear
streets,
sometimes
connecting
sometimes
deliberately
not
connecting,
because
nobody
wanted,
through
connectivity
and
in
sensitive
land
areas,
often
trying
to
minimize
the
intrusion
you
have
on
steep
slopes
or
crossing
waterways,
and
so
what
is
this?
What
is
the
desired
street
pattern
and
does
it
differ
based
on
the
different
areas
of
the
cities?
B
City
cities
also
got
to
look
at
the
private
street
rights
of
ways
and
easements.
Basically
again
in
the
post-war
area
era,
there
were
a
lot
of
standards
written
which
basically
said
wide
streets
are
great,
people
can
drive
without
hitting
each
other
and
and
we
realized
60
or
40
30
40
50
years
later
and
said
wow.
That
also
means
the
cars
go
pretty
fast.
That's
not
pretty
safe.
The
streets
are
too
wide
to
cross
easily.
B
So
there's
an
issue
here:
how
do
you
coordinate
the
fabric
that
you
want
to
create
in
different
parts
of
the
cities,
with
the
standards
for
streets
and
by
the
way
the
trend
is
to
try
to
narrow
them,
for
cost
reasons
and
for
walkability
reasons-
and
you
know
if
I'd
said
25
30
years
ago,
slow
the
cars
down
narrow
the
streets,
so
the
cars
have
to
slow
down.
People
would
laugh
at
me
now
that's
a
very
common
discussion.
B
No,
we
would
want.
We
want
cars
to
slow
down.
We
want
the
people
to
be
able
to
walk
across
more
safely
and
not
have
to
cross
as
much
land
and
as
we
all
age,
that's
important.
The
hidden
issue
here
is
private
streets
because
of
the
affordable
affordability
challenges
we
have
talked
about
before,
and
the
fact
that
city
engineering
departments
may
not
want
the
streets
wide.
Sometimes
they
want
them
wide
and
the
fire
department
wants
them
wide,
so
fire
engines
can
get
through
planners
tend
to
want
them
narrow,
but
you
reach
a
compromise.
B
They
got
to
be
at
least
this
size
for
this
type
of
street.
For
a
compromise
between
design
with
the
narrow
tensions-
and
they
have
to
be
built
to
last
engineering
folks,
because
the
city
has
to
maintain
many
of
these-
have
to
demand
that
they
actually
be
built
to
last,
which
means
they're,
expensive,
they're,
not
going
to
crumble
in
five
years.
B
The
response
to
that
in
the
private
sector
or
sometimes
is
well.
I
don't
want
to
meet
those.
That's
driving
my
costs
up.
I
want
to
do
private
streets,
I
will
not.
May
I
will
not
dedicate
them
to
you,
so
you
don't
have
to
worry
about
how
long
they
last
I'll
take
care
of
them
and
that
creates.
We
can
go
down
that
road
if
you
like,
but
in
general.
B
Most
cities
want
to
see
the
private
street
standards
be
pretty
close
to
the
public
street
standards.
They
they
don't
want
to
narrow
the
streets
or
make
them
lighter
in
weight
and
less
durable,
because
they
worry
that,
even
though
that
drives
down
the
cost,
eventually,
those
streets
will
need
to
be
maintained
and
if
they
can't
be
maintained,
privately
they'll,
wind
up
back
being
maintained
by
the
city
and
the
city
will
say,
that's
pretty
expensive
to
maintain.
Who
approved
this
insert.
B
We
approved
private
streets,
but
then
why
are
we
doing
it
well
because
they
fell
apart
and
the
systems
we
had
in
place
to
maintain
them
didn't
work.
So
that's
that
is
something
that
comes
into
subdivision
standards.
What
what
not
only
what
the
network
of
streets
is?
Are
there
two
sets
of
standards
for
these
things
and
there's
a
tension
there
again,
it's
cheaper
to
do
things
streets
that
are
not
as
wide
or
as
durably
built
as
the
city
usually
wants
to
have
force
for
streets
that
at
once,
and
so
there's
a
trade
off
there.
B
Public
improvements,
the
standards
you
have
for
water,
sewer
utilities
and
irrigation.
Sometimes,
even
though
we're
going
to
talk
about
landscaping
in
july,
sometimes
there
are
requirements
in
subdivision
that
say
when
you
lay
out
a
new
subdivision,
we're
not
going
to
talk
about
individual
lot,
landscaping
or
landscaping
along
each
street
because
we
got
that
covered
in
other
ways.
But
we
do
talk
about
bor.
B
We
we
don't
talk
about
lot
landscaping,
but
we
sometimes
talk
about
the
edges
of
where
your
subdivision
comes
up
against
the
road
or
your
neighbors
does
have
to
be
landscaped
and
buffered,
or
up
against
open
space.
Hey
you're
planting
lands
next
to
open
space,
you've
got
to
put
in
buffers
and
landscaping,
and
actually
that
often
happens
along
trees.
We're
not
going
to
talk
about
your
parking
lots.
That's
lot
by
law!
We're
not
going
to
talk
about
your
edges
of
your
lots.
We
are.
B
B
B
That
falls
on
your
property
to
get
off
your
property
without
interfering
with
your
neighbor's
property,
and
so
there's
a
tension
there
about
that
and
blueprint
boise
addressed
some
of
that
foothills,
we'll
talk
about
later
in
sensitive
lands,
but
it
also
says
regulated
to
avoid
environmentally
sensitive
areas,
water
bodies,
floodways
landslides,
fault
zones,
steep
slopes,
etc
and
then
adopt
subdivision
standards
necessary
to
prevent
the
establishment
of
uses
that
are
noise,
sensitive
and
conflict
with
the
safe
operations
of
the
airport.
So
one
way
this
happens,
zoning
can
say:
hey,
you
know
it's
an
airport.
B
We
don't
want
gatherings
of
people,
schools,
nursing
homes,
churches,
we
don't
want
those
things
near
the
airport,
because
those
are
sensitive
lands
and
it's
a
lot
of
people
and
if
anything
went
wrong,
a
lot
of
people
are
at
risk
and
by
the
way
we
also
don't
want
residential,
where
it's
going
to
be
affected
by
noise,
so
that
is
often
it
can
be
done
through
zoning.
I
you
can't
do
that
in
this
slot,
but
it
is
also
sometimes
done
in
subdivision,
where
you
basically
say
we're
not
going
to.
Let
you
create
residentially
sized
lots.
B
We
know
what
happens
to
those
we,
you
create,
those
lots,
you
told
us
they
were
going
to
be
in
office
park.
The
office
park
market
went
away,
you
guys
just
counseled
to
rezonia
for
residential.
Now
we
have
residential
near
the
airport.
We
didn't
want
that,
and
so
it
can
be
addressed
both
through
zoning
and
through
subdivision.
B
So
that's
what
blueprint
boise
says.
I
did
want
to
talk
about
just
to
see
the
discussion,
the
clustering
as
one
of
the
major
topics.
I
talked
about
street
networks.
We're
going
to
talk
about
that
later
in
accessing
connectivity,
talk
about
sensitive
lands,
that's
coming
up
after
the
break
so
other
than
street
networks
and
connectivity.
B
One
of
the
major
things
that's
coming
up.
Excuse
me
street
networks
and
sensitive.
It's
clustering.
The
images
on
the
right
show
you.
The
concept
you
guys
are
may
be
familiar
because
boise
already
uses
this
in
the
foothills.
So
the
right
hand,
top
image
is
simply
old
style
subdivision
we
called
it.
We
call
it
cookie.
Cutter
you've
got
a
right
to
x
lot.
Your
lot
size
is
whatever
it
is.
Five
thousand
square
feet
and
you've
got
a
plot
of
land.
That
is,
you
know.
B
Let's
multiply
it
out
forty
thousand
square
feet.
You
gotta
write
to
eight
labs,
draw
your
lines
and
record
it
and
we'll
just
make
sure
that
we've
required
you
to
put
utilities
in
there,
but
go
ahead.
This
is
an
extreme
case,
but
obviously
the
problems
with
that
is
you
had
a
creek.
B
You
had
a
waterway,
you
don't
want
lots
to
ignore
the
terrain,
and
so
clustering
simply
means
down
at
the
bottom,
the
the
requirement,
either
an
incentive
or
a
requirement
to
say
in
areas
with
a
rural,
chara,
more
rural
character
or
a
more
open
space
character
or
a
larger
lot
character.
B
We're
going
to
require
you
to
put
the
same
number
of
lots
or
more
laps
on
the
least
sensitive
parts
of
the
land
or
the
least
visible
parts
of
the
land
or
the
least
compromised
parts
of
the
land.
So
these
visible,
as
I
said
so,
the
way
it
normally
works
is
in
in
codes
in
your
foothills.
You
do
this
and
we'll
talk
about
in
a
minute.
Forget
the
foothills.
For
now
what
about
the
rest
of
the
city
do?
B
B
So
the
classic
way
of
doing
this
would
be
to
say.
Okay,
you
have
if
we
just
took
your
minimum
lot
size
divided
it
by
your
parcel.
You
have
the
right
to
x,
lots,
you
know,
stay
away
from
all
the
sensitive
stuff
and
we
will
let
you
have
x,
lots
or
x
plus
two.
Frankly,
we
don't
care
about
the
number
of
lots.
We
care
about
you.
Staying
away
from
the
sensitive
lands
in
older
codes,
they'd,
say:
here's
a
carrot.
Here's
two
more
lots
for
doing
the
right
thing.
B
I
will
say
that
in
in
newer
codes,
they
sometimes
say
this
is
not
a
carrot.
This
is
a
requirement.
You're
gonna
stay
away
from
things
and
we're
going
to
give
you
two
more
lines
for
doing
it
all
right.
This
is
not
a
choice,
so
obviously
the
advantages
are
more
open.
Space
can
be
protected,
open
states.
Ten
can
be
concentrated
in
these
priority
areas:
more
consistent
management
of
the
open
space
that
if
you
tried
to
do
it
on
each
lot,
if
you
look
at
that
top
right
image,
there's
a
lot
of
open
space.
B
It's
just
going
to
be
managed
as
a
yard
and
probably
managed
differently
by
the
nine
lot
owners
in
that
area,
because
it's
their
private,
open
space.
The
bottom
one
is
more
likely
to
be
shared.
Open
space
does
not
have
to
be
open
to
the
public.
I
want
to
be
clear
about
that.
It's
pretty
hard
to
make
that
open
to
the
public,
so
it's
likely
to
be
usable
by
those
lot
owners,
but
it's
going
to
be
managed
by
an
hoa
or
managed
under
some
common
scheme.
B
That
says
this
is
what
we're
trying
to
achieve
with
the
open
space
and
again
these
the
infrastructure
costs
on
clustering
are
often
a
lot
lower
because
you
are
running
those
pipes
and
wires
over
a
shorter
area
of
land.
The
disadvantage
is:
it's
simply
a
market
one.
There
are
plenty
I've
had
this
discussion
in
a
lot
of
communities
and
they
say
you
know
don
it.
E
B
All
the
sense
in
the
world,
but
I
my
mark
they
want
to
buy
acreage.
They
want
big
acreage,
they
want
to
control
their
anchorage,
they
don't
mind
mowing
their
anchorage.
They
would
you
know
if
you
told
them
that
the
bottom
right
image
had
greater
views,
and
now
you
don't
have
to
look
over
your
neighbor's
lots.
B
What
if
the
surrounding
area
is
not
clustered
what,
if
the
established
factor
of
fabric
of
that
area
is
not
in
the
fringes
of
cities,
you
sometimes
have
an
area
where
the
grid
of
streets,
kind
of
peters
out
or
the
subdivision
of
streets,
the
curvilinear
post-war
lots
are
beautiful,
they're
working
out,
but
now
you
have
raw
land
and
on
the
one
hand,
clustering
would
be
a
great,
a
good
thing
for
all
the
advantages
pointed
out
here,
but
it
would
be
inconsistent
with
what's
next
door
next
door.
B
They
have
done
fairly,
you
know
medium
to
large
size,
curve
or
linear
lots,
subdivision
lots
which
sold
like
hotcakes
and
are
very
valuable
people,
love
them.
So
there's
this
inconsistency
and
fabric
between
the
two
so
lan.
So
here's
the
question
the
question
before
the
break
so
again,
clustering
of
new
development
lots
can
often
result
in
the
preservation
of
more
open
space,
reduce
the
infrastructure
goals.
Should
your
regulations
require
instead
of
just
allowing
this?
B
Should
this
be
the
defacto
or
and
I've
we
tried
to
state
it
in
a
few
words
on
one
slide,
or
should
it
be
more
kind
of
contextual,
it's
required
for
raw
land
in
certain
areas
identified
in
blueprint,
boise
and
in
other
areas?
We
don't
because
it
would
be
inconsistent
with
the
existing
walkable
fabric
or
the
suburban
fabric
of
the
city.
Should
it
be
more
contextual
or
should
it
be
kind
of
the
default
unless
you
need
it
or
less?
The
plan
calls
for
a
different
character
in
that
area.
B
I
think
that's
our
question
and
then
we'll
do
a
break.
So
that's
the
question:
should
it
be
required
versus
then
just
encouraged
or
allowed?
And
here
I'm
going
to
put
this
slide
back
up
just
so
that
you
could
look
back
and
refer
back
to
this
if
you'd
like
to
in
making
comments.
So
does
anybody
have
any
thoughts
about
and
again
that's
the
question?
But
if
you
want
to
talk
about,
other
aspects
of
subdivision
have
adam.
H
Thanks
yeah,
I
I
think
that
at
least
my
opinion,
as
far
as
my
my
limited
understanding
of
it
is,
you
know,
I
think
cluster
should
be
probably
required
where
it's
relevant
to
the
existing.
You
know
character
or
if
there
is
no
existing
character.
For
that
matter,
I
mean,
I
think
it's
interesting
my
opinion
is
this
clustering
actually
kind
of
maintains
the
existing
character
of
the
site
and
makes
it
more
interesting.
As
a
you
know,
development
more
interesting
to
design
as
well,
so
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
Okay,.
I
Thank
you
don.
I
just
have
a
question
so
in
other
areas
where
it
has
become
a
requirement,
how
do
these
jurisdictions
get
around
oddball
parcels
and
parcels
in
which
this
sort
of
conflicts,
as
a
blanket
requirement
with-
I
guess,
the
specificity
of
some
inconvenient
topographical
features
right?
We're
always
going
to
have
exceptions
to
this
rule.
So
how
do
they
deal
with
those.
B
Well,
actually,
it's
designed
to
deal
with
those.
It's
it's
a
newer
subdivision,
ordinance
say:
look.
The
first
step
in
this
process
is
not
to
show
us
your
preliminary
plan
by
the
way
for
for
the
non-zoning
geeks.
The
way
this
happens
is
that
the
applicant
reads
your
code
comes
in
with
a
drawing
of
where
they
want
to
put
the
lots.
That's
called
a
preliminary
plat.
B
So
it's
going
to
go
to
a
hearing
and
it's
one
way
or
another
going
to
be
approved
by
city
council,
because
you
are
building
the
fabric
of
the
city
and
they
are
responsible
for
some
costs
in
the
long
run,
so
they
they
they
do
not
want
to
approve
it
or
have
it
just
foisted
upon
them.
So
that's
how
it
happens.
You
turn
in
a
preliminary
plan.
B
The
public
hearing
process
says
yeah.
This
is
right.
This
is
right.
That's
wrong!
That's
wrong
fix
it.
You
go
back,
fix
it
and
bring
it
back
and
that
is
what's
filed,
so
there's
a
two-step
at
least
a
two-step
process.
That
says:
okay,
there's
no
legal
document
until
you
file
the
plan.
Now
you
can
sell
lots
in
newer
codes,
they
would
start
with
where
you
started
byron
and
they
would
say.
Actually
it's
a
three-step
process.
First
thing
you
show
us
is
a
land
analysis.
B
You
identify
rock
outcroppings,
you
identify
wetlands,
you
identify
creeks
and
drainages.
You
identify
some
places,
they
even
say
this
land
is
highly
visible,
so
identify
the
lots
that
are
located
on
ridgelines
because
we'd
like
you
not
to
build
on
the
rich
lines,
so
everybody
has
to
stare
at
your
house.
You
know
you
love
it.
You
can
see
the
views.
Everybody
else
has
to
stare
at
your
house.
B
Sometimes
they
often
so
they
identify
and
they
say,
show
us
a
land
analysis
that
that
reflects
the
things
we've
listed
in
the
code
that
we
don't.
We
want
you
to
stay
away
from
and
we'll
review
that
with
you
informally,
no
public
hearing,
we'll
just
review
that
within
informally
and
we'll
say
good.
We
think
you
got
it
right
or
no,
you
still
say
you
want
to
build
guys.
I
don't
write,
I'm
not
making
a
judgment
here.
You
still
putting
all
your
houses
on
the
ridge
line.
We
don't
want
it
there.
B
Our
code
says:
don't
do
it
there
and
so
go
back
and
fix
it.
So
that's
informal
and
then
the
plan
is
from
so
I
I
don't
know
if
I'm
missing
your
point,
but
actually
clustering.
The
reason
clustering
exists
is
primarily
to
deal
with
weird
topographic
and
geological
and
soil
features
its
side.
Benefits,
are
open
space
character
and
preserving
views.
Things
like
that.
C
I
B
B
But
you
do
list
in
the
code
the
things
that
you
need
to
regulate.
For
example,
if
the
code
does
not
say,
rich
lines
are
important
to
us
and
the
guy
brings
in
his
land.
Analysis
and
city
says
you
know:
we'd,
like
you
not
to
build
on
the
ridgelines,
the
applicant's
perfectly
in
their
rights
to
say.
If
you
want
a
law,
saying,
don't
build
on
the
original
lines,
you
put
it
in
your
cone,
you
don't
make
it
up
as
you
go
along.
B
You
can't
just
raise
whatever
occurs
to
you
when
I
lay
a
drawing
out
in
front
of
you,
so
you
do
have
to
get
it
in
the
code.
You
have
to
name
the
things
that
you
would
like
to
have
that
are
based
in
blueprint
boise.
But
if
you
don't
name
them,
you're
not
going
to
be
able
to
raise
them
along
the
way.
So
you
got
to
think
about
it
ahead
of
time.
F
Yes,
thank
you
yeah.
This
certainly
looks
positive
to
me.
I
mean
it's
certainly
at
least
to
allow
it.
As
it's
been
explained
to
me,
you
know
this
wasn't
and
maybe
that's
not
correct,
but
but
you
know
a
straight
subdivision:
if
it
wasn't
a
pud,
this
essentially
wouldn't
be
allowed
and
and
that,
as
as
I
understood,
it
was
a
big
reason
to
have
puds
and
clearly,
as
you
pointed
out,
there's
other
complications
with
those.
So
to
allow
sounds
great,
I
guess
whether
or
not
to
require
it.
F
I
guess
so
much
of
that,
as
you
just
pointed
out,
would
depend
on
what
we
would
determine
as
those
important
features
to
avoid,
but
but
I
see
this
as
a
positive
thing
most
definitely
to
allow
and
and
if
we
can
come
up
on
with
good
criteria
of
valuable
areas
to
avoid,
then
that
would
also
be
positive.
So
thanks.
E
B
Anybody
else
yeah.
J
Yeah
real,
quick,
don
help
me
out
with
one
thing:
on
the
top
example
say:
the
100-year
floodplain:
wasn't
there
the
riparian
area?
Wasn't
there,
it
was
pancake
flat
if
clustering
was
still
required.
In
that
scenario,
would
it
almost
act
as
a
quasi-like
black
coverage,
condition
to
where
you
say
you
have
x
amount
of
this
large
area
to
put
parcels
on
the
rest
will
be
preserved
for
open
space
or.
B
If
it's
platted,
with
nine
lots
that
we're
just
a
house
on
each
lot
is
going
to
compromise
the
value
of
either
the
view
from
the
road
there
or
the
view
behind
it,
and
so
they
would
say
all
right.
So
it's
not
funky
land,
there's
nothing
there
on
the
land
itself
to
preserve.
But
we
want
you
to
preserve
the
open
space
character.
So
you
are
going
to
need
to
put
50
of
the
la
of
the
site
area
at
open
space.
You
choose,
but
you
cluster,
the
rest
of
it
in
the
following
ways:.
C
Thanks
building
off
of
what
what
mr
alexander
just
asked
like
do,
we
would
this
be
the
case
with
every
new
subdivision,
so
this
would
prevent
us
from
ever
allowing
something
like
the
north
end
or
what
have
you
where
you
have
like
a
grid
structure
and
say
that
every
new
subdivision
has
to
be
a
mixture
of
open
space
and
developed
area
everywhere
forever.
I
understand
we're
not
doing
that.
Well,.
B
I
think
you've
answered
your
own
quest
yeah.
I
answered
your
own
question.
I
can't
say
yes
to
that.
No,
no,
I'm
sorry
to
interrupt
you
practice.
The
the
short
answer
is:
if
peop
in
those
jurisdictions
where
clustering
is
mandatory,
they
usually
it
only
applies.
It
usually
only
applies
to
raw
land
development.
B
So,
for
example,
if
you
were
rich
and
you
bought
a
block
of
any
a
half
a
block
of
lots
in
an
established
area
of
the
city-
and
you
wanted
to
replant
it-
you
would
not
have
to
cluster,
they
usually
apply
it
where
to
raw
end
or
redevelopment
parcels,
and
that's
why
I
raised
earlier.
B
Normally
they
would
say
unless
the
established
character
on
the
lot
surrounding
this
is
allie
loading,
which
case
we
want
you
to
do
alley
noted
or
is
of
a
different
character.
It
usually
is
applied
to
raw
land
as
it's
brought
into
the
city,
and
it
usually
has
outs
for
various
purposes,
but
not
just
because
you
don't
want
to
just
not
just
because
you
feel
like
doing
a
cookie
cutter
subdivision,
so
it
becomes
the
default
for
raw
land
subdivisions.
C
Thanks,
I
I
appreciate
that
the
outs,
I
think
matter
quite
a
bit.
I
mean
I
think
about
what's
happening
at
a
place
called
harris
ranch.
I
don't
know
how
much
you
know
about
that
development
in
south
boise,
where
they
have
denter
areas
that
have
like
sort
of
a
grid
system.
They
definitely
have
open
space
preserved
in
certain
areas,
but
would
this
have
prevented
us
from
creating
a
place
like
harris
ranch?
If
this,
if
we
had
required
clustering,
I
guess
maybe
is
a
good
way
to
phrase.
My
question.
C
C
B
C
Well,
if
you
want
to
have
a
new
development,
it
technically
is
open
land,
but
you
wanted
to
have
a
more
urban
character,
but
would
do
it
do
we
require
a
semi-rural
character
with
open
space
on
every
new
plot?
It
would
might
be
an
unintended
consequence
of
this
thanks.
I
got
it.
D
Hello,
everyone,
so
I
was
just
thinking
of
this
and
then
how
it
relates
to
planned
puds,
because
when
I
was
looking
at
the
slides,
I
was
thinking
of
a
proposal
called
plano
development,
which
was
proposed
in
northwest
boise,
not
as
far
northwest
as
richard
llewellyn,
but
off
of
collister
on
the
northwest.
D
D
It
was
a
development
company
from
utah
working
with
a
local
landowner
and
due
to
the
steepness
and
also
sensitive
plants,
and
because
it
was
considered
a
planned
uni-
and
I
guess
maybe
the
question
dawn
to
you-
is
what
is
the
difference
between
a
pud.
D
And
this
type
of
subdivision,
because
the
pud
actually
promoted
higher
density
in
one
location,
with
preservation
or
conservation
of
the
landscape
and
other
areas,
and
I
think
they
got
don't
quote
me
on
this.
I
may
be
completely
off
because
it's
been
many
years
think
they
got,
they
got
it.
They
got
to
put
extra
houses
in
the
location
based
on
the
amount
of
based
on
how
much
open
space
they
were,
leaving.
B
The
short
answer
to
your
question
is
puds.
This
could
be
done
through
a
pd
and
the
example
that
you're
talking
about
sounds
like
it
was
done
through
a
pud.
So,
yes,
you
could
do
this
through
a
pd
clustering
regulations
in
subdivision.
Remember
what
I
said
right
hand
left
hand.
Puds
are
kind
of
both
hands
holding
together.
I
got
a
deal
for
you,
it's
a
combination
of
zoning
and
how
I
want
to
lay
this
out
which
has
to
do
with
subdivision.
B
So
I
I'm
going
to
go
bring
this
forward
and
I
want
a
deal
that
would
be
both
zoning
and
subdivision.
Clustering
in
subdivision
regulations
is
an
alternative
path.
That
says
I
don't
need
rezoning.
Nor
do
I
want
to
go
through
a
political
process
to
rezoning.
I'm
satisfied
with
the
density
and
the
type
of
development,
it's
residential
density
and
I
bought
the
land,
and
I
know
I
could
have
a
right
to
build
25
houses.
B
B
The
zoning
is
not
up
for
grabs.
It
is
simply
how
you
lay
out
the
lots,
so
this
would
go
forward
not
as
a
combined
zoning
and
pud
deal.
It
would
simply
say
the
guy.
Has
zoning
he's
filed
a
plat,
we're
digging
to
a
public
hearing
and
here's
how
he
wants
to
lay
out
the
roads
and
lots
and
that's
consistent
with
our
clustering,
but
we're
not
negotiating
the
land
uses
or
other
lot
size.
D
B
You
andrea,
if
if
we
don't
have
any
more
hands,
I
I
we've
got
about
48
minutes,
something
like
I
would
pref.
I
would
suggest
we
do
a
break
sooner
rather
than
oh.
I
see
that
daniel
has
his
hand
up
so
after
that,
because
we
have
two
big
proj,
two
big
topics
after
the
break
that
I'd
almost
rather
take
the
break
a
little
early
and
save
that
time.
For
later,
after
after
daniel.
K
Great
thanks
so
don,
maybe
following
up
on
on
on
patrick's
remarks.
So
is
there
if
it
is
required,
is
there
a
limit?
Are
there
size
limits
so
that
you
can
say
so
because
I
could
imagine
if
you're
saying
hey
we're
doing,
I
don't
know
50
acres,
it's
like
yes.
Let's
definitely
do
that,
there's
a
scale
where
you
definitely
want
to
be
doing
this
and
taking
a
broad
look
at
the.
But
if
it's
like
you
know,
I
don't
know
if
it's
two
acres.
Well
then
no,
I
wouldn't
want
you
to.
K
You
know
something
because
you've
definitely
seen
this.
This
can
run
amok.
You
know
like
there's
a
there's,
a
low
pot
and
some
people
call
it
a
wetlands
and
they
say
well,
no,
it's
a
riparian
area,
so
we're
going
to
draw
a
huge
area
around
it
and
you
know
we're
not
going
to
get
any
houses
there.
So
I
mean
that's
a
separate
issue
in
terms
of
how
we
how
how
what
we
classify
as
wetlands,
but
I
think
the
bigger
point
is:
are
there
when
you
have
these?
K
When
it's
a
requirement
do
do
cities,
you
know,
create
an
escape
valve
either
by
size
or
some
other
way
where
they
don't
have
to
we're,
not
required
to
basically
build
open
space
into
the
site
beyond.
What's
already
part
of
the
code,
that's
part
of
the
result.
B
The
answer
is
yeah,
the
answer
is
yes,
some
cities
do
not
put
a
minimum
size
on
it,
but
most
do,
and
I
would
recommend
that
you
do
for
exactly
the
reasons
that
you've
said.
It
reminds
me
of
several
of
these
comments
remind
me
of
the
old
adage.
You
know,
there's
nothing
more
dangerous
than
a
good
idea.
If
it's
the
only
one
you
have
you
know,
even
if
it
sounds
great
trying
to
apply
it
everywhere
is
a
problem
right.
The
answer
is
yes.
J
B
Well,
the
next
two
topics
we
have
sensitive
lands
and
axis
and
connectivity
are
interesting
parts
of
zoning
ordinances
because
in
newer
codes,
they're
related
they
they
often
have
two
subsets.
They
say
when
so
sensitive
lands.
Here's
what
you
need
to
do
when
you're
subdividing,
here's
the
additional
things
you
have
to
do
through
zoning
and
the
same
is
through
three
axis
and
connectivity.
Usually
it
has
a
section
that
says
this
is
what
you
do
at
the
subdivision
stage,
and
then
we
have
other
things.
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
Go
so
let's
go
sorry
for
the
delay,
so,
let's
move
on
to
sensitive
lands.
Here
I
we
can.
We
I
want
to
meet.
We
have
to
cover
both
this
and
the
access
and
connectivity,
so
we
can
still
leave
some
time
for
public
comment
at
the
end
of
this,
but
sensitive
lands,
let's
again
systems.
These
are
systems
that
you
want
to
build
in
and
protect
to
begin
with.
Currently,
you
in
the
boise
ordinance
talks
about
so
I
wish
I
hadn't
animated
these,
but
this
is
what
you've
got.
B
B
It
is
related
in
almost
every
city,
pretty
closely
to
federal
standards,
to
try
to
keep
the
city
qualified
and
hopefully
at
good
insurance
rates
for
federal
flood
insurance
and
reinsurance.
So
flood
protection
is
tied
to
fema.
We
are
seldom
asked
to
update
those
unless
the
state
is
updating
their
version
of
fema.
I
have
not
heard
that
that's
part
of
this
work.
Boise
river
system
is
broader
than
that.
It
goes
back
around
it's.
Its
goal
is
to
protect
fish
and
wildlife,
riparian
wetland
areas
and
recreation
from
development
along
the
boise
river.
B
So
it
is
a
optional
boise,
driven
set
of
fairly
complicated
regulations
about
what
you
can
do
in
around
the
rivers
that
is
not
related
to
flood
protection
and
it's
related
to
character
and
wildlife
and
open
space.
In
addition,
as
all
of
you
very
well
know,
you've
got
the
hillside,
foothills
development
standards
and
if
it
is
again
fairly
complicated,
set
of
standards
related
to
slope
erosion,
unstable
soils
talking
about
all
these
things,
what
to
do
for
grading?
How
do
you
need
to
revegetate
it
erosion,
control,
hydrologic
control,
roadways?
B
How
do
you,
how
do
you
lay
out
streets
and
roadways
to
get
through
it
and
maintenance
standards?
And
then
you
have
airport
controls.
I'm
happy
to
have
this
conversation
go
anywhere
I'll,
do
a
little
bit
more
about
this,
but
most
of
the
discussion
so
far
has
been
about
hillside.
So
far,
I
have
not
had
a
lot
of
comment:
everybody
loves.
It
seems
or
likes
or
values
the
hillside
protections
around
boise,
not
many
people
have
suggested
boise
river
system
or
floodplain,
so
just
to
telegraph,
we're
not
anticipating
making
significant
changes
to
those.
B
I'm
sorry
airport
you've
got
but
wildfire
and
wildlife
are
things
that
are
increasingly
protected
or
addressed
in
subdivision.
In
particular,
these
are
areas
where,
basically,
once
you
lay
out
the
subdivision,
you
either
have
protected
wildlife
through
the
corridors
and
habitats,
or
you
have
not
it's
very
hard
to
go
into
an
individual
lot
at
the
lot
development
size
and
say
wildlife
and
wildfire
protection.
The
usual
answer
is:
if
you
wanted
me
away
from
that,
why
did
you
plant
my
lot
there?
B
That's
not
true
of
everywhere,
but
it
is
true
in
these
two
cases
and
frankly,
my
personal
opinion
is
that
most
communities
in
the
west
are
not
taking
wildfire
seriously
enough
in
order
to
see
what's
going
to
come
down
the
road
in
terms
of
risks,
but
anyway
that's
it.
I
did
want
to
talk
about
here's,
what
I'm
moving
on
to
foothills
and
we'll
open
up
and
take
comments
on
any
of
these
topics
or
or
other
sensitive
lands
topics,
but
in
foothills
now?
What
does
it
say?
You
do
cluster?
B
You
do
have
clustering
requirements
based
on
goals
that
are
unique
to
the
foothill
standards.
You've
got
density
bonuses
for
protecting
more
than
they
were
required,
a
amount
of
open
space.
You
can
see
the
figures
there.
If
you
do
25
of
open
space,
you
get
a
point.
Half
du
per
acre
bonus.
If
you
do
63
you
get
2.25
and
there's
a
gradation
in
between
it's
a
sliding
scale.
You've
got
requirements
on
cut
and
fill
being
minimized
in
the
foothill
areas
and
building
envelopes.
B
Now
the
traffic
on
the
right
is
just
to
to
show
you
very
very
often
in
zoning.
The
zoning
says:
okay,
you
got
a
lot,
you
need
to
set
the
building
back
and
that's
the
dotted
line.
That's
inside
the
outside
boundaries.
The
building
cannot
be
too
near
to
your
neighbors.
How
close
is
to
near?
We
just
drew
it
for
you.
It's
five
feet.
It's
20
feet.
It's
10
feet.
It's
whatever
your
neighbors.
Have
it's
fine
on
sensitive
lands.
It
is
often
true
that
you
define
a
building
envelope.
B
I
know
I
could
build
it
anywhere
in
that
gray
line
deadline,
but
I
am
hereby
committing
to
develop
it
on
the
least
sensitive
part
of
that
land.
So
I
am
if
it's
wetlands
I'll,
keep
it
as
far
from
the
wetlands
as
possible.
If
it's
ridge
lines
I'll,
keep
it
off
the
ridge
line
as
much
as
possible
and
in
the
planning
process
they
not
only
draw
the
streets
and
the
lots
they
draw
building
envelopes
on
the
lots
or
they
come
up
with
a
process.
B
Saying,
okay,
we
did
your
plaid,
but
before
we'll
give
you
a
building
permit
for
a
house
you're
going
to
come
in
and
define
building
antelopes
you've
already
got
that
in
the
foothills
right
now.
So
that's
what
you
currently
have
and
then
you
have
a
prohibition
on
gated
entrances
and
again,
just
like
the
disturbance
of
cut
and
fail.
You've
got
sensitive
lands.
B
You've
got
the
avoidance
of
roads
crossing
sensitive
lands
as
much
as
possible.
So
this
is
what
you've
got
in
layman's
terms
today
and
what
I
and
against
what
I
wanted
to
to
raise.
Is
these
general
issues
of
sensitive
lands
and
we'll
go
to
the
question?
But
again
here
are
the
things
you
could
talk.
We
could
we
want
to
make
sure
we
get
because
it's
a
fundamental
framework.
Are
there?
Have
you
thought
in
this
area
in
the
sensitive
lands
areas?
Have
you
thought?
B
Do
you
think
they're
adequate
to
deal
with
what
climate
change
is
going
to
bring
in
terms
of
wildfire
events
and
flooding
events
and
again
just
throwing
it
out
there?
Since
this
is
such
a
hot
topic
in
boise?
Are
there
ways
to
make
it
better
either
by
making
it
less
time
consuming
to
get
through
the
process
or
protecting
wildlife,
habitats
and
quarters
or
helping
with
the
affordable
housing
challenge?
Remember
people
love
foothills,
you've
got
them.
You've
got
very
extensive
regulations.
B
Just
asking
the
question:
have
you
addressed
what
you
want
to
address?
Do
you
want
to
improve
it
in
any
way?
Is
there
any
more
guidance
you'd
like
to
give
us
about
that
and
dot
dot
dot?
If
you
have
a
comment
and
it's
not
on
foothills,
but
it's
on
something
else
happy
to
take
that
comment
too
about
things.
Boise
should
be
doing
on
sensitive
lands.
B
So
here's
the
question,
I
guess
and
here's
here's
what
I'm
sorry,
here's
our
blueprint
boise
says:
encouraging
high
quality
design
and
maintenance
of
stormwater
management,
flood
mitigation
and
floodplain
areas.
This
is
just
about
sensitive
lands,
zoning
and
development
standards
for
rail
corridors
such
as
mitigation
matrix
for
non-combustible
roofs
has
to
do
with
wildfire
and
then
to,
and
then
this
wildland
interface,
which
is
also
related
to
wildfire.
So
there's
language
in
blueprint
boise
about
this
and
here's
the
question,
so
everybody
loves
hillsides
in
boise.
B
L
B
I'm
getting
the
chat
around
here
suggesting
that
some
people
cannot
hear
me,
so
I
don't
know
where
to
go
with
this,
since
most
of
you
say
have
nodded
at
least
the
ones
whose
pictures
are
shown
are
nodding
and
saying
that
they're
you
can't
everyone
can
hear
you.
You
cannot
hear
us,
I'm
sorry,
okay,
I
am
for
lack
of
a
better
idea,
I'm
going
to
log
off
and
log
back
on
and
hope.
It's
better
the
next
time
around,
so
I'm
going
to
get
off
of
here.
So
sorry.
A
Okay,
don's
gonna
see
if
he
can't
work
out
some
of
his
technical
issues,
but
we
can
all
think
about
that
question.
You
know
we
do
have
things
that
regulate
some
of
our
sensitive
lands,
but
are
there
things
that
we
are
missing
and
I
don't
know
chris
if
you
want
to
hold
off
and
wait
for
dawn
richard?
Do
you
want
to
hold
off,
or
would
you
like
to
share
with
the
group
now
well.
A
B
M
E
B
E
L
Excellent,
so
I
guess
my
question
is
more
clarification
regarding
the
boise
river
part.
So
a
lot
of
the
topics
have
been
about
the
hillsides
and
the
foothills,
but
with
the
boise
river
are
there
in
what
we
have
currently
protections
in
place
for
this
area
that
we
would
then
just
continue.
So,
for
example,
like
there's
green
belt
areas
throughout
most
of
the
city
limits,
and
I
think
almost
all
the
way
to
the
almost
the
far
eastern
end.
B
A
So
I'm
going
to
add
one
caveat,
so
what
I
have
heard
is
individuals
asking
for
additional
wildlife,
wildlife,
urban
interface
criteria,
so
specific
to
plantings
those
types
of
things
or
appropriate
building
materials
just
making
it
more
codified
rather
than
just
being
a
zone.
I've
also
heard
that
it's
important
for
us
to
look
at
our
landscape
species
that
we
allow,
especially
in
wildlife
corridors,
so
we've
often
times
heard
of
the
eu
impacting
some
of
our
wildlife
in
a
negative
way
as
it's
a
poisonous
substance
to
deer
and
those
type
of
species.
A
E
G
A
A
So
currently
we
do
not
have
any
protected
corridors.
One
of
the
most
predominant
corridors
that
might
be
located
in
the
city
of
boise
is
actually
located
in
harris
ranch
and
they
did
try
and
preserve
that
migration
corridor
so
and
that
migration
corridor
also
happens
to
follow
the
idaho
power
easement.
So
they
have
created
that
type
of
open
space
and
clustered
around
that.
So
they've
identified
that
yes,
that's
a
wildlife
corridor,
that's
important
to
our
deer
and
elk
during
those
wintering
seasons
and
and
so
they've
clustered
development
outside
of
there
in
order
to
preserve
that.
G
Okay-
and
I
was
contacted
by
somebody
from
the
golden
autobahn
society
who
was
saying
that
some
of
their
membership
had
they
thought
they
had
contacted
the
planning
department
to
talk
about
birds
and
greater
protections
for
birds,
as
the
city
grows
is.
Is
that
a
dialogue
that's
taking
place
right
now.
A
So,
yes,
we
have
made
contact
with
them
and
they
have
provided
us
with
some
guidance
in
hopes
that
we
can
help
with
bird
strikes,
and
that
would
be
specific
to
like
building
materials,
glazing,
those
types
of
things
that
we
can
think
about
as
we
move
forward
and
grow.
Okay,.
B
B
Okay,
any
other
thoughts
of
this.
I
I
don't
have.
F
Great,
thank
you.
I
I
probably
have
too
many
thoughts
to
to
be
very
coherent
about
it
right
now.
But
let
me
start
with
you
know
the
the
kind
of
small
farmstead
landscape,
which
is
something
that's
you
know
not,
I
don't
think
really
recognized
by
boise.
It
does
have
some
features.
You
know
kind
of
on
a
smaller
micro
scale,
not
the
kinds
of
wildlife
corridors
that
fish
and
game
would
designate,
but
things
that
traditionally
served.
F
You
know,
fence
lines
laterals,
you
know
easements
for
laterals
and
the
trees
that
we
tend
to
grow
along
those
canals
all
those
things
that
kind
of
created
that
those
kinds
of
like
on
the
bones
of
the
this
kind
of
landscape,
and
they
traditionally
were
also
kind
of
shared
spaces
it.
F
If
we
could
have
some
recognition
of
those
things,
I
mean
they
don't
you
know
they're
not
going
to
serve
as
as
major
wildlife
corridors
anymore,
but
they
could
be
very
important
still,
for
you
know,
songbirds
pollinators
as
well,
potentially
as
trails
so
I'll
just
throw
that
out
there.
The
other
thing
I'd
like
to
say
real
quickly
is,
I
think,
if
anything,
we
should
really
think
about
expanding
thermal
protection
for
the
river.
F
In
some
places
you
know
as
things
warm
up
and,
as
you
know,
cold
water
becomes
more
and
more
critical
and
important.
The
more.
F
I
think
we
may
need
to
look
at
increasing
shading
for
the
river
rather
than
diminishing
it,
and
I
know
that
other
jurisdictions,
garden
city
doesn't
really
kind
of
follow
our
that
they
don't
have
our
our
value
in
that
right
now,
and
so
we
may
need
to
make
up
for
that
on
some
level.
So
thank
you.
B
So
this
is
a
richard.
Your
comment
is
a
as
a
good
one
and
a
bridge
a
bridge
to
the
july
meeting
as
well,
because
just
to
telegraph
ahead,
though
the
fundamental
thing
to
get
right
at
the
start
is
these
systems,
drainage
systems,
wildlife
corridors,
street
systems,
open
space
systems,
things
that
can't
be
put
back
together
very
easily,
once
you've
failed
to
protect
the
connectivity,
the
continuity
as
much
of
it
as
you
want
from
property
to
property,
but
you've
raised.
B
Your
small
farmstead
comment
raises
the
fact
that
sensitive
lands
are
sometimes
also
addressed
in
the
zoning
owners.
Okay,
you
got
a
lot,
but
within
that
lot
you
have
some
areas
of
sensitive
lands
and
we
would
like
you
to
lay
your
development
out
on
a
given
lot.
Yes,
it's
not
part
of
a
macro
framework,
but
the
nature
of
your
property
inc
does
have
the
potential
for
wildlife,
enhancing
wildlife
and
therefore
that's
a
choice
to
make.
But
I
wanted
to
point
out
that's
one
of
the
examples
of
how
wildlife
sometimes
is
addressed
at
it.
B
H
Yeah,
I
think
richard
brought
up
a
good
point
about
tree
coverage
and
I-
and
this
might
be
a
question
for
you-
andrea,
I'm
not
as
familiar.
If
is
there
a
tree
overlay
or
is
that
somehow
incorporated
into
the
boise
river
overlay,
or
is
it
somehow
related
into
the
you
know
if
you're
building
on
a
site,
there's
a
certain
caliper
tree
that
you
can
remove
any
larger
than
that
you
can't.
A
So
the
city
currently
has
a
tree
mitigation
policy.
Ultimately
it
says
that
if
I
remove
a
14
inch
caliper
tree,
that
is
in
good
health,
so
we
have
to
assume
that
it's
in
good
health
and
it's
contributing
to
our
system,
then
you
would
have
to
replace
that
mini
caliper.
So
it
then
you
could
replace
that
with
seven
two
inch,
caliper
trees
or
you
could-
you
know,
do
that
by
some
other
type
of
divisibility,
but
you
ultimately
have
to
replace
that
now.
A
What
we
have
run
into
in
the
past
is
is
that
you
know
some
site
is
highly
forested
and
as
we
remove
those
trees,
there
is
no
room
to
replace
that
mini
caliper.
So
we
we
need.
We
do
need
to
evaluate
how
that
is.
Our
legal
staff
has
taken
a
look
at.
Is
there
a
way
that
somebody
could
contribute
monetarily
to
like
the
parks
fund
to
plant
elsewhere
throughout
the
city
to
mitigate
for
that,
and
they
don't
seem
very
receptive
to
that,
so
we
ultimately
need
to
evaluate.
A
Is
there
a
tree
preservation,
that's
appropriate
that
we
would
like
to
consider
as
part
of
this
ordinance.
Is
there
a
better
way
to
mitigate,
and
you
know
we
oftentimes
hear
that
two
inch
caliper
trees?
They
they
don't
serve
the
same
purpose
as
that
much
larger
one.
So
we
can't
avoid
the
heat
island
effect.
We
can't
cool
our
waters
and
those
other
types
of
things
that
are
there.
So
you
know
we
have
to
weigh
all
of
that
very
carefully.
H
Just
to
follow
up,
thank
you
for
the
response
that
that
helps
clarify
you
know
as
the
city
of
trees.
I
think
that
that
should
be
something
that's
prioritized.
I
I
understand
that
you
know
on
a
very
wooded
site.
You
also
have
to
respect
people's
rights
to
kind
of
build
on
their
own
property.
H
I
also
am
kind
of
concerned
that
you
know
the
the
question
of
whether
or
not
it
is
a
healthy
tree,
often
at
least
in
my
past.
Experience
has
come
into
play
where,
if
you
get
the
right
arborist
to
look
at
your
tree
than
it,
oh,
it's
not
healthy.
B
So
I'd
like
to
just
say
so,
I
think
there
are
two
levels
on
that
that
comment
of
tree
protection,
canopy
and
its
operation
could
relate
to
the
boise
river
area
to
richard's
comment,
and
the
river
in
particular
is
something
that
needs
to
be
cooled.
It'll
also
come
up
in
july,
because
tree
protection
and
the
degree
and
the
way
it
works
and
what
you
can
and
can't
remove
and
how
you
mitigate
is
usually
done
at
the
site
level.
A
Yes-
and
we
have
drew
up
next.
J
It's
real
quickly
to
piggyback
on
what
ian
was
saying.
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
truth.
There
we're
the
city
of
trees,
there's
a
lot
of
importance
there.
One
system
I
just
recently
stumbled
across,
I
was
visiting
ole
miss
and
they
have
a
system
where
they
place
a
value
on
each
tree
based
on
the
type
of
tree.
It
is
you
know,
age,
growth
or
caliper,
even
so,
in
line
with
what
we
may
have
just
mentioned,
maybe
that's
an
area
we
could
explore
for
that
sensitivity
if
you
can't
replace
up
to
that
on
the
site.
J
B
Shall
we
move
on
to
the
access
and
connectivity
we're
taking
notes,
you're
taking
notes?
Well,
you
know
diane
cushman's,
taking
notes
as
we
go
along.
I
don't
want
to
rush,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
we
don't
run
out
of
time
for
that
one
because
I
I
predict
there's
going
to
be.
A
B
Right
I
am
trying
again
after
the
glitch
to
to
share
screen
properly.
Can
you
guys
see,
can
you
guys
see
that?
Are
we
showing
the
two
version
or
the
one.
B
It
doesn't
cooperate
very
well,
so
I'm
gonna
stop
here
and
try
it
again.
Just
a
second,
let's
try
to
oh,
I
know
what
let
me
try
something
else
here.
B
Sorry,
it's
not
that
funny,
but
still
that's
you
know
whatever
can
go
wrong
will
go
wrong.
So
give
me
one
more.
Try
one
more
try
on
this.
B
Yeah
we're
still
back
on
two
all
right,
so
in
the
interest
of
time
I,
if
I
get
a
chance
to
swap
it
out,
I
will
but
my
my
dashboard
is
not
being
very
friendly
right
now,
so
it
may
not
work
that.
Well,
let's
try
this
you,
you
do
see
the
two
version.
Do
you
see
the
two
version
now
or
do
you
see
nothing
at
all.
B
B
I
did
want
to
just
talk
in
general
about
access
and
connectivity.
The
graphics
in
this
case,
don't
really
are
not
what
I
want
to
talk
about,
so
I
don't
know
who
an
animated
list,
transit
connections,
here's
the
things
that
increasingly
subdivisions
and
then,
in
some
cases
also
zoning
address
related
to
this.
Once
again,
when
we
talk
about
access
and
connectivity,
our
outline
to
you
says
this
deserves
to
be
its
own
chapter
and
so
far
nobody
has
disagreed
with
this.
B
So
it
is
going
to
be
its
own
chapter
and
the
re
and
it
in
older
ordinances.
It's
not,
but
the
reason
is,
it
sometimes
gets
lost
in
the
shuffle
because
it
historically
was
not
part
of
subdivision.
So
you
got
kind
of
bad
street,
but
you
got
technical,
cookie
cutter
street
patterns
and
it
wasn't
addressed
a
lot
because
now
it's
too
late,
the
streets
have
been
laid
out.
B
So
increasingly,
there's
two
parts
to
this,
as
I
explained
earlier,
and
these
are
the
kinds
of
things
that
are
addressed:
transit
connections,
public
transportation
routes,
pedestrian
accessibility
to
and
from
those
routes,
meaning
how
does
the
public
get
to
and
from
them,
transit
facilities
drop
off
at
curbside
delivery
areas
related
to
that
pedestrian
and
bicycle
circulation
unrelated
to
transit?
Also,
so
where
do
you
have
to
do
a
width?
Where
are
you
going
to
do
bike
bike
paths?
Where
are
you
going
to
do
connector
paths?
B
Connector
paths
sometimes
take
the
form
of
if
your
building
is
longer
than
x.
You
need
to
come
you
if
your
site
is
longer
than
x
or
your
property's
longer
than
x.
You
need
to
come
up
with
a
through
block
connection
so
that
pedestrians
can
get
through
without
having
to
walk
around
a
long
block,
particularly
a
super
block,
particularly
something
bigger
than
a
city
block.
B
B
Do
you,
or
do
you
not
want
to
protect
vision
triangles?
That
is
the
area
that
is
between
usually
not
a
driveway,
but
two
streets
that
are
intersecting.
This
is
one
of
those
things
you
just
end
up
talking
about
a
lot.
The
bottom
driveway
at
the
bottom,
drawing
shows
vision
triangles
around
a
driveway.
The
top
ones
show
them
at
a
street
corner.
Most
codes
do
included
at
street
corners,
do
not
include
them
around
driveways
and
do
not
require
them
at
all
in
some
downtown
areas,
because
the
truth
is
it
was.
B
Everything
was
built
right
up
to
the
property
line
and,
at
this
point
trying
to
protect
what
we
would
protect
in
a
more
suburban
context,
the
ability
to
see
around
a
corner
would
ruin
the
fabric,
so
we're
not
gonna
do
it,
but
all
of
these
things
are
topics
to
be
addre
to
be
addressed
in
kind
of
what
is
the?
How
do
we,
how
much
connectivity
do
we
want
to
have
so
at
the
subdivision
level?
Again:
parsing,
whoops
parsing,
what
I
said
earlier.
B
Obviously
you
all
know
this.
Your
public,
many
aspects
of
your
public
streets
are
controlled
by
ada,
county,
healthy
department
or
idaho
transportation.
There
is
in
your
current
code,
there's
acknowledgement
of
that.
There's
acknowledgement
of
the
shared
responsibility
and
the
lack
of
control
they
have
in
some
areas
because
of
these
other
jurisdictions.
B
There
is
a
general
statement
already,
but
it's
just
a
general
statement
that
when
you
do
new
streets
they
should
be
designed
for
multimodal
use.
Newer
codes
usually
include
much
more
detailed
descriptions
of
what
does
that
mean?
What
types
of
streets
need
to
have
bikes
what
types
of
streets
need
to
be
for
for
pedestrians?
B
When
we
worked
in
albuquerque
a
few
years
ago,
they
kind
of
reluctantly
came
to
the
conclusion.
They
had
some
streets
that
were
just
about
moving
traffic
from
one
part
of
albuquerque
to
the
other,
and
it
had
to
work
that
way
and
they
couldn't
widen
it
and
they
weren't
going
to
narrow
it,
and
so
they
actually
had
to
say
in
spite
of
our
multimodal
philosophy,
there
are
places
where
this
does
not
apply.
Sidewalks
are
already
required
on
both
sides
of
your
streets
as
a
part
of
the
planning
process.
B
At
the
site
plan
level,
you
do
have
some
general
statements
about
safe
ingress
and
egress
and
service
driveways.
In
terms
of
how
they're
located
I
have
to
say
in
general,
this
is
an
important
topic.
We
are
already
organizing
your
content
into
a
new
chapter
that
will
address
both
the
subdivision
and
the
site
plan
level,
but,
frankly,
the
standards
are
pretty
general
and
not
the
strongest
in
terms
of
this.
If
it
is
a
priority
for
boise,
if
you,
if
it
blueprint,
boise
talks
a
lot
about
it,
we've
heard
a
lot
about
it.
B
B
So
I
want
to
talk
about
some
just
general
thoughts
about
how
some
cities
do
this
and
then
throw
it
out
for
throw
it
out
for
discussion.
So
again,
there
are
two
alternative
approaches,
often
included
in
modern
zoning
ordinances,
primarily
at
the
subdivision
level,
which
is
why
we're
raising
it
today.
B
So
the
top
drawing
is
a
conceptual
drawing
out
of
a
series
of
drawings
that
basically
says
when
you
are
laying
out
particularly
raw
land
land,
on
which
you
have
not
subdivided
before
you
need
to
have
a
certain
amount
of
connectivity,
for
example,
and
I'm
just
making
this
up
for
every
quarter
or
every
you
know
a
quarter
mile
or
a
half
mile
of
frontage
distance.
You
need
to
have
at
least
one
north-south
collector
running
through
in
one
east-west
collector.
Coming
through.
This
is
not
a
requirement
for
a
grid.
B
It's
a
requirement
that
you
allow
different
ways
of
getting
through
your
property.
You
can
make
it
you
can
make
it
curved.
You
can
make
it
straight.
You
could
make
it
whatever,
but
you've
got
to
have
a
way
for
a
medium-sized
road
to
get
through
your
property
and
then
sometimes
it
goes
on
another
drawing
says
for
every
quarter,
mile
of
frontage,
you
need
to
have
at
least
some
sort
of
a
a
major
local
or
a
low
or
low
level
collector
going
through
there.
That's
what
the
lines
mean.
B
The
text
says
when
you
look
at
a
piece
of
land
of
this
size
and
you
bring
in
a
plat
we're
going
to
hold
it
up
against
this.
Drawing
and
say:
do
you
have
an
arterial
on
the
section
lines?
Do
you
have
a
collector
at
least
one
every
so
often
do
you
have
a
local
street
network
that
connects
among
the
collectors
and
they're
general?
They
allow
the
the
the
land
subdivider
a
lot
of
freedom
in
how
they
do
it,
but
they
also
they.
B
If
you
show
up
and
say
well,
I
kind
of
had
in
mind
something
that
is
highly
exclusive
and
I
don't
really
want
people
going
through
here.
The
city
says:
that's
not
enough.
Connectivity,
the
lower
image
is
a
connectivity
index
and
that
is
been
used
in
modern
codes.
Some
of
them
not,
I
would
say,
a
minority
of
them.
Sometimes
it's
applied
to
large
parcels
of
land
that
says.
Okay,
you
bring
us
a
plat,
we're
going
to
do
this
kind
of
analysis.
B
We
are
going
to
count
up
how
many
street
segments
you
have
and
those
are
yellow
dots
segments
between
intersections.
Then
we
are
going
to
count
up
the
blue
dots
of
intersections
places
where
you
can
connect
to
a
different
path
to
a
different
place
and
the
play
and
the
blue
dots
of
your
connections
to
the
outside
world.
We're
going
to
count
them
up
we're
going
to
do
some
math
and
we're
gonna
say
you
gotta
have
at
least
a
ratio
of
1.71,
there's
no
magic
to
that
number.
B
I've
seen
it
played
around
all
some
say
two,
some
say
1.65,
it's
an
artificial
number,
but
it
is
done
often
by
a
city
going
into
its
existing
neighborhoods
with
a
level
of
connectivity
that
they
like
and
say
you
don't
have
to
do
a
grid.
We
realize
the
world
is
not
all
a
grid
street
that
a
lot
of
places
stop
doing
that
after
the
war.
But
we
like
the
level
of
connectivity
that
happens
through
that,
so
we're
going
to
measure
it
and
it
turned
out.
It
was
1.71,
it
turned
out.
B
It
was
1.5,
it
turned
out,
it
was
2.0
and
when
you
come
back
in
we're
going
to
say
you
know
talk
with
your
site,
planner
design
to
your
market,
but
we're
going
to
see
that
level.
We
want
to
see
that
level
of
connectivity.
If
you
show
up-
and
you
don't
hit
this
number
we're
going
to
say
you
need
to
add
some
intersections-
you
need
to
add
some
points
of
connectivity
internally
or
externally,
because
that's
how
we
want
to
regulate
it.
B
B
We
went
back
and
studied
our
subdivisions
and
said
it
is
hard
to
apply
this
so
we're
gonna.
Take
it
out,
take
it
out
and
go
with
something
more
like
the
upper
drawing
another
way
of
doing
it
in
urban
areas.
Urban
context
is
to
say
we
don't
want
to
see
blocks
longer
than
x
or
perimeters.
It
is
often
we
don't
want
to
see
blocks
longer
than
600
feet
or
we
don't
want
to
see
perimeters
of
a
block
more
than
1600
feet.
B
Something
like
that
new
urbanists
like
this
idea,
because
it
says
you
go
ahead,
I'm
not
saying
it's
a
grid,
I'm
saying
without
a
higher
math
in
the
lower
drawing
or
conceptual
connections
in
the
upper
drawing
we're
going
to
measure
the
outer
perimeter
of
your
lots
and
when
they're
too
big
we're
going
to
say
you
need
to
break
that
up.
B
You
need
to
have
a
smaller
line,
and
again
I
mentioned
earlier
some
newer
ordinances
say:
if
you've
got
a
big
parcel,
we
want
to
see
a
you,
don't
have
to
build
another
street,
but
we
want
another
way
for
pedestrians
and
bicycles
to
get
through
because
it
takes
them
longer
to
get
places
so
blueprint
boise
talks
about
a
lot
of
the
street
network.
Vehicle
bicycle
pedestrian
passes
all
travel
modes
in
the
design
of
streets.
You
really
talked
about
this.
A
lot
encourage
walking
in
a
variety
of
strips,
adding
sidewalk
connections.
B
B
So,
as
I
kind
of
hinted
earlier,
many
new
ordinances
establish
a
more
detailed
standards,
either
maximum
block
dimensions
or
streets
cost
money.
So
I
you
could
talk
about
any
of
these
maximum
block
dimensions.
Connectivity
index
through
connectivity,
drawings,
but
again,
there's
a
trade-off
here,
guys,
the
more
streets
you
have,
the
more
it
costs
money,
those
street
costs
and
utility
costs
under
the
streets
have
to
be
divided
over
the
lots
and
more
streets
often
means
fewer
lots.
B
Some
newer
codes
say
we
we
like
the
streets,
we
like
the
connectivity
and
we'll
give
you
more
lots.
We
don't
care
we'll,
have
more
intensity
for
the
sake
of
more
connectivity.
So
the
question
is:
what
do
you
want
to
tell
us
about
balancing
we've
talked
connectivity.
Your
blueprint,
boise
is
all
over
the
topic,
and
then
you
have
and
then
you've
got
this.
This
discussion
about
affordability
and
affordable
housing
and
streets
cost
money,
so
you've
got
attention
here.
What
do
you
want
to
tell
us
about
how
to
resolve
that.
K
Yeah,
so
I
the
I
thought,
the
materials
that
were
included
in
our
packet
for
this
meeting
addressed
this
we're
helpful
on
helping
think
through
this
issue
and
one
of
the
things
they
talked
about
is
just
you
know.
If
you
can
have
smaller
streets,
then
that
may
be
part
of
how
you
compromise,
which
is
you
devote
less
of
acreage,
to
call
for
yeah
to
cars
and
and
and
that,
so
I'm
wondering
how,
if
that
has
been
part
of
the
solution
sex.
I
think.
K
Certainly
it's
it's
highlighted
in
blueprint,
boise
and
there's
a
lot
of
reasons
to
think
this
connectivity
and
access
for
walking
and
biking
is
something
we
really
do
want
to
build
into
our
communities
and
and
narrower
streets
may
help
with
that.
So
how?
How
have
other
jurisdictions
have
other
jurisdictions
used
narrower
smaller
streets
to
to
hit
this
balance.
B
K
B
I
got
it,
I
that's
why
I
I'm
not
happy
with
my
answer
to
you.
Portland
oregon
is
usually
cited
as
an
innovator
in
this
area.
They
had
fights
between
people
who
wanted
wider
streets
and
wider
streets
for
fire
engines
or
other
things,
and
citizens
who
wanted
narrow
streets
for
affordability
and
walkability.
B
I
am
told
that
in
layman's
terms,
the
mayor
locked
him
in
a
room
and
said
come
out
when
you
agree,
you
know
I
I
we
are
going
to
reach
a
compromise
and
we
are
going
to
stick
with
that
compromise
and
they
did.
They
came
up
with
the
skinny
streets
handbook
and
were
able
to
make
good
progress
on
that,
but
that's
what
it
takes.
It
takes
somebody
forcing
it
to
happen,
and
my
understanding
is
that's
difficult
and
boise
because
of
the
relationship
there.
A
So,
just
to
add
a
little
bit
to
that,
so
yes,
achd
does
own
and
control
our
roadways,
but
there's
another
facet
as
well
as
so.
Our
emergency
services
have
also
provided
significant
comment
in
regard
to
that.
So
achd
has
actually
just
recently
allowed
us
to
use
some
narrower
street
sections
and
narrow
our
right-of-ways
for
the
public
streets.
A
The
city
creates
their
own
standards
and
design
criteria
for
private
streets,
so
we'll
be
focusing
mostly
on
those
private
streets,
but
we
can
also
focus
on
other
ways
of
connectivity
so
using
pathways
along
our
irrigation
canals.
You
know
using
internal
pathways
that
allow
bicyclists
and
pedestrians
to
get
from
one
block
to
another
as
well,
so
so
there's
some
alternatives
that
we
can
think
of
as
we
move
forward
so
chris,
followed
by
patrick
and
then
drew.
L
So
this
transitions
well,
because
part
of
my
question
was
what
control
we
do
have,
knowing
that
hchd
has
control
over
the
roads,
and
so
I
guess,
if
there's
any
additional
things
to
add
to
that,
that
would
be
helpful
of
what
things
we
can
actually
put
into
the
code
that
can
address
things
like
roads
and
but
my
question
that
sort
of
expands
on
this
is
specifically
related
to
transit
connections.
So
what
controller?
L
What
things
can
we
put
into
the
zoning
code
regarding
transit
so
especially
knowing
that
our
transit
currently
isn't
all
that
comprehensive,
but
that
there
are
a
lot
of
plans
to
change
that
dramatically
in
the
next
20
years?
What
are
things
that
we
can
actually
include
in
the
code
that
will
address
things
like
public
transit
things
like
the
future?
For,
if
light
rail
comes
in
what
things
can
we
actually
put
in
that
addresses
that,
in
the
zoning
code.
B
So
we're
not
here
to
talk
about
module
one,
but
we
did
address
some
of
that
in
module
one,
because
the
zone,
districts
that
are
activity,
centers,
the
big
activity
centers
and
the
medium
activity
centers
at
the
last
section
of
those
has
a
has
a
form
control
subset,
not
on
the
smallest
ones,
but
on
the
media,
actually,
all
three
of
them.
But
it's
designed
to
say
if
you
are
in
these
activity,
centers,
which
are
generally
located
to
reinforce
your
emerging
transit
system.
B
You
need
to
provide
good
connectivity
to
and
from
the
surrounding
areas
into
the
section,
and
that
means
not
just
for
bikes
and
pads,
but
frankly,
bikes
and
beds,
and
to
prevent
them
from
interfering
with
cars.
You
you
need
cars,
because
some
people
are
going
to
drive
and
ride,
and
some
people
are
not
and
you'd
like
those
to
not
run
into
each
other.
All
the
time
we
tried
to
address
it
in
the
activity
center
in
module,
one.
C
Very
quickly,
I
agree
with
the
general
sentiment
that
expressed
both
in
the
chat
and
some
of
the
comments
to
the
extent
that
we're
able
to
narrow
streets
or
paths,
or
what
have
you
less
roadway,
but
still
maintain
that
connectivity
is
a
nice
way
to
meet
a
compromise.
Thanks.
B
Let
me
ask
you
a
question:
I
don't
want
to
cut
drew
off,
but
I
do
fun.
It
relates
to
the
last
three
comments.
Andrea
did
I
overstate
the
fact.
The
comments
about
private
streets
is
boise,
more
willing
to
consider
private
streets,
because
that
is
a
way
of
getting
even
narrower
streets
or
more
connectivity
than
you've
been
able
to
negotiate
with
achd
and
the
city
is
willing
to
absorb
the
future
maintenance
of
those
streets.
I
don't
want
to
overstate
what
was
a
national
true
statement,
but
may
not
be
true
given
boise
situation.
A
Well,
you
know
the
city
of
boise
would
prefer
to
have
all
of
our
roadways
to
be
public
and
it's
a
way
to
provide
consistency
for
maintenance
and
those
types
of
things.
When
we
talk
about
affordability,
when
you
build
a
private
street,
sometimes
you
have
lesser
standards.
Sometimes
you
have
lesser
widths,
however,
that
affordability
is
then
passed
on
to
those
homeowners
over
time,
so
oftentimes,
what
we'll
see
is
a
street
with
a
cul-de-sac
at
the
end,
and
we
only
have
seven
property
owners.
A
Well,
when
you
divide
the
maintenance
up
over
seven
homes,
they
are
unable
to
afford
to
repair
that
and
achd
will
not
take
that
road
on,
like
some
other
jurisdictions
do
nationwide.
So,
ultimately,
then
we
end
up
with
a
neighborhood
or
a
street
or
a
cul-de-sac
that
is
now
in
disrepair.
It
will
not
be
fixed,
it
will
not
be
repaired.
Now
they
have
lesser
access
to
emergency
services
to
get
there
quickly.
They
might
not
have
the
surfacing
that's
necessary
and
then
it
ultimately
becomes
disinvested,
and
so
is
that
equitable?
Is
that
fair?
A
So
we
always
say
that
the
public
street
is
the
best
way
to
go.
It
can
also
ensure
that
we
are
getting
the
connectivity
that
we're
talking
about
today,
but
you
know
there
are
always
instances
where
you
can't
always
work
in
a
public
street
or
there
are
instances
where
achd
has
simply
said.
We
don't
want
to
maintain
a
cul-de-sac
because
it's
expensive
and
it
only
serves
those
individuals.
It
doesn't
provide
connectivity
to
anyone
else,
and
so
they
want
to
put
that
onus
on
that
smaller
neighborhood.
J
Well,
just
echo
kind
of
patrick
said:
support
for
being
creative,
with
some
of
the
lack
of
tools
that
we
may
have
compared
to
other
places
and
if
that
means
pathways,
narrower
streets,
etc.
I
think,
when
I
asked
about
subdivisions
earlier,
I
think
that's,
maybe
one
of
the
more
critical
areas.
J
If
you
were
to
pull
up
that
graphic,
you
had
up
earlier
that
agricultural
land
to
the
north
probably
will
be
developed
at
some
time,
maybe,
and
if
this
isn't
required
in
some
way
shape
or
form
five
or
six
or
seven-year-old
wants
to
bike
over
their
friend's
house.
That
adjacent
subdivision
would
be
forced
to
go
onto
a
busy
county
road
and
that's
a
critical
piece
of
having
character
and
having
livable
neighborhoods
so
some
level
of
requirement.
J
B
Can
I
ask
one
of
I:
I
know
that
andrea
you'll
want
to
get
some
public
comments,
but
let
me
ask
this
so
you
know
blueprint.
Boise
is
all
over
this
issue,
and-
and
I
get
the
comments
that
the
comments
have
been
largely
about
the
trade-off
between
cost
and
other
things
cost
and
connectivity.
B
I
put
out
three
paradigms
generalized
requirement:
don't
bring
us
a
flat
that
doesn't
have
a
through
connectivity
of
the
following
type,
at
least
every
so
many
feet,
a
connectivity
index
which
is
math
and
a
block
perimeter
block
size
issue,
those
of
you
who
have
developed
or
participated
in
the
development
of
property.
B
Do
you
have
any
thoughts
on
which
one
you
would
like
to
see?
You
know
liberty,
boise,
makes
clear
and
the
current
regulations
make
clear.
You
need
something
more
if
you
want
to
get
to
where
you're
going
to
go.
So
what
kind
of
more
does
anybody
have
anything
to
offer
in
terms
of
well
I'd
sure
hate
to
see
boise
adopt
x
or
I
would
love
to
see
boise
adopt?
Why
so.
E
I
I
Going
through
this
process,
a
number
of
times
is
frequently
the
lots
and
the
parcels
that
we're
dealing
with
are
surrounded
by
existing
development
that
either
rejected
connectivity
or
for
whatever
reason,
are
completely
cut
off,
and
it's
really
difficult
to
know
how
to
connect
say,
an
internal
parcel
to
the
parcels
that
surround
it,
but
every
once
in
a
while.
There
is
connectivity
there
and
there
are
some
there's
a
path.
I
You
know
to
clear
as
long
as
the
requirements
address
historic
connectivity
for
previously
developed
parcels
and
having
that
be
higher
on
the
hierarchy
of
development
requirements,
I
would
say
that
almost
all
of
these-
I
don't
know,
I
have
a
hard
time
kind
of
landing
on
which
requirement
really
is
best
because,
of
course
it
depends
okay,
but
I
would
say
that
that's
a
fairly
high,
that's
a
fairly
high
level
of
importance
for
the
developments.
I've
been
a
part
of
okay.
B
People
have
adopted
it,
but
I
do
I
do
I.
I
think
I
was
very
clear.
Some
places
love
it
and
a
lot
of
places
have
found
it.
B
But
what
I
hear
for
what
so,
what
I'm
gathering
is
connectivity
with
historically
planted
and
established
roots
is
important
and
flexibility
is
important.
It
is
you
know
if
you
look
around
any
city.
Even
you
know,
there
are
parts
which
are
streets
and
alleys
and
it's
very
predictable,
but
any
interesting
city
has
places
where
it's
not
streets
and
alleys.
It's
something
else,
and
as
long
as
it
connects
through,
people
can
live
with
it
and
in
fact
you
get
which
we
get.
B
A
F
Yeah,
so
I
think,
there's
kind
of
a
different
or
has
been
a
different
philosophy
between
achd
and
maybe
some
people
in
urban
planning,
and
maybe
it's
helpful
to
think
of
that.
I
believe,
achd
and
and
some
people
believe
that
most
of
the
traffic
flow
and
by
traffic
flow
here
I'm
talking
about
cars,
should
be
on
arterials
and
versus
having
kind
of
connectivity
or
kind
of
flow
through
neighborhoods.
F
I'm
not
sure
how
much
that
applies
here,
but
if
it
does
apply
that
might
be
a
useful
kind
of
conversation
or
or
to
think
about.
So
just
throwing
that
out.
There.
B
Thanks,
no,
I
I
think
you're
right
richard
from
my
my
distant
view
of
the
relationship
and
and
the
priorities,
I
think.
E
A
Okay,
if
there
isn't
anything
else,
we
do
have
two
individuals
that
are
with
us
today,
so
we
have
ed
mccluskey
and
joshua
clements,
and
you
know
I
will
go
ahead
and
you
know
ask
them:
do
they
have
anything
that
they
would
like
to
share
with
us
today.
A
N
N
I
would
just
say
on
the
connectivity
thing
that
I
I
agree
with
richard
in
terms
of
trying
to
respect
existing
neighborhoods,
I'm
not
a
fan
of
any
more
designs,
particularly
in
a
very
dense
area
where
I
live
near
the
city
to
have
other
roads
blowing
through
or
getting
rid
of
the
the
occasional
dead-end
streets
which
are
small
by
you
know,
four
to
six
houses
being
considered
as
another
pathway
for
connectivity,
there's
already
a
great
deal
of
assault
on
that
in
many
parts
of
the
inner
core
of
the
city.
N
So
I
think
that's
an
interest
that
I
have
and
I
think
the
southeast
neighborhood
association
has
as
well
to
connectivity
matters
when
there's
more
room,
but
when
we
have
this
sort
of
grow
with
concentration,
where
it's
already
concentrated,
then
we
get
an
imbalance
with
some
of
these
formulae.
That's
all.
I
really
wanted
to
say,
and
thanks
for
listening.
A
Thank
you
ed
and
then
josh.
If
you
would
like
to
share
with
us
you're
welcome
too
you're
also
welcome
to
pass.
If
you
should
choose.
M
Well,
thank
you
for
this
discussion.
I'm
an
urban
planner
from
from
elsewhere
in
the
country
and
I'm
pursuing
some
opportunities
in
the
region,
and
so
I
saw
this
meeting
with
scheduled
and
as
a
planning
nerd.
I
thought
I
would
attend
and
learn
something
today.
So
thank
you
very
much.
A
A
B
I
I
would
just
add
one
thought
it's
been.
You
know
it's
been
fun
for
me
to
listen
to
the
the
conversations
that
go
on
amongst
you
in
between
these
meetings
and
and
sometimes
the
articles
that
you
refer
each
other
to,
and
I
look
at
those
articles
too.
B
I
I
try
to
read
them,
and
so
I
would
just
encourage
people
to
keep
doing
that,
and-
and
you
know,
if
you,
if
you
have
something
pro
or
con
or
just
a
different
angle,
on
the
things
that
we're
going
to
talk
about
next
time,
which
include
landscaping
and
lighting
and
parking
very
you
know
that
and
design
just
general
design
issues
go
ahead
and-
and
you
know,
if
you
feel
comfortable
share
them,
because
I
think
that's
helpful,
like
there
has
been
frankly
a
good
level
of
of
con
of
communication
amongst
all
of
you
in
between
the
meetings
better
than
in
some
cities.
B
A
Yeah,
I
would
just
like
to
remind
everybody
that
if
we
are
sharing
materials,
you
know
make
sure
that
it
comes
from
a
credible
or
worthy
source.
Oftentimes,
scientific
or
you
know,
planning
related.
Those
types
of
things
are
certainly
best,
so
just
make
sure
that
you're
reviewing
the
source
and
that
it's
a
quality
source.
A
Look
at
that
great
job
guys.
We
had
a
great
conversation
today
and
many
of
you
participated.
We
will
be
sending
out
the
survey
as
we
normally
do.
So
that's
going
to
give
you
an
opportunity
to
provide
any
input
that
you
may
think
of
later
or
as
you
share
with
others,
so
go
ahead
and
get
that
to
us
so
that
we
can
start
to
use
that
material
to
inform
us
as
we
draft
module
two.