►
From YouTube: Citywide Advisory Committee Meeting
Description
Monthly meeting for the City of Boise's Zoning Code Rewrite Citywide Advisory Committee. This meeting streams on YouTube, where the public can view it.
A
Good
afternoon
we
are
here
for
the
zoning
code
rewrite
Citywide
advisory
committee.
The
date
is
September
29th,
2022.
A
and
we'll
go
ahead
and
get
started.
We
have
a
lot
of
really
good
information
to
cover
with
you
we're
going
to
start
off
with
some
module
3
information,
then
we're
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
community
outreach
because
we're
going
to
head
back
out.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
you
know
the
dates
and
can
invite
any
of
your
constituencies
to
any
of
those
events
or
invite
us
to
come
visit
them,
whether
they're
an
organization
or
a
group.
A
We
can
certainly
do
those
targeted,
Outreach
efforts
as
well,
and
then
we
want
to
talk
about
some
of
the
upcoming
city-wide
advisory
committee
meetings.
How
far
do
you
guys
want
to
take
the
path
with
us?
Do
you
think
it's
valuable
to
continue
to
meet
through
January
through
full
adoption?
What
is
ultimately
your
thoughts
on
and
how
you
can
best
participate
and
when
we
talk
about
participation,
I
think
it's
also
a
really
good
reminder
about
what
the
city-wide
advisory
committee
is.
We
often
get
asked
questions.
A
What
is
the
city-wide
advisory
committee
do,
and
so
the
city-wide
advisory
committee
is
unique
members
from
throughout
the
city
of
Boise
that
are
are
sounding
board
and
so
they're
listening
to
ideas,
making
sure
that
information
is
accurate,
concise,
clear
and
really
accomplishing
the
goals
of
the
city
before
we
take
it
out
to
the
public,
so,
ultimately
not
decision
makers,
but
very,
very
important
to
raise
Flags,
where
they're
appropriate,
to
provide
key
information
to
us
to
make
sure
that
we're
collecting
and
creating
the
best
information
that
we
can
so
I
think
that
is
a
good
start
to
where
we're
at
oh
I
could
start
my
video
too,
and
then,
if
we
could
go
to
the
next.
A
A
A
So
when
we
get
into
draft
module
three,
it's
important
to
remember
that
draft
module,
3,
really
talks
about
the
process
and
the
procedures
so
who's
reviewing
what
application,
how
individuals
can
participate
in
the
process?
No
matter
who
you
are
whether
you're
an
agency,
a
neighborhood
association,
a
Community
member,
a
neighbor,
even
an
interdepartmental
component
of
the
city
of
Boise,
it
it
kind
of
identifies
that
process
where
you
can
participate
and
how
we
can
collaborate
with
you.
A
So
when
we
went
out
for
the
revised
module
one
and
module
2
Outreach,
we
heard
some
preliminary
feedback,
which
was
really
nice,
because
it
allowed
us
to
bridge
that
Gap
from
those
allowed
uses
that
we
heard
in
module
one
to
some
of
those
design
standards
in
module.
Two
but
people
continually
said:
hey,
consistent
and
predictable
decisions
is
key
and
that
it
was
really
something
that
was
important
to
them.
A
They
also
wanted
us
to
coordinate
all
of
our
conversations
with
all
of
our
partners,
and
so
whether
that
was
transportation-
and
we
heard
that
often
from
Muse
yeah.
You
know
how
can
brt
be
a
part
of
the
process.
How
can
achd
or
ITV
be
a
part
of
the
process?
The
community
said
that
as
well,
so
they
really
want
us
to
work
with
all
those
public
service
providers
to
make
sure
that
we
can
all
coordinate
together.
A
So
when
we
took
that
we
ultimately
created
so
before,
we
had
a
very
clear
message
of
ensuring
that
we
were
securing
the
city's
Edge,
and
so
we
were
avoiding
sprawl
that
we
were
valuing
neighborhoods
in
various
sizes
and
we
want
to
continue
that
story
and
so
with
module
3.
This
is
going
to
be
our
first
question,
so
we
wanted
to
kind
of
boil
that
down
and
what
is
the
message
that
we're
trying
to
send
out
and
comments
that
we
want
to
receive.
A
Is
our
development
process
will
reinforce
our
desired
outcomes,
so
it
will
ultimately
we're
creating
the
rules
and
regulations
that
are
going
to
create
things
that
allow
the
city
to
prosper
over
time
involving
Our
Community
Partners
early
to
ensure
our
concept
meets
our
desired
outcomes
and
then,
lastly,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
getting
those
excellent
projects
that
we're
seeking
and
so
I
guess
just
to
stop
there.
Do
you
think
our
messaging
is
right
with
process
and
procedure,
and
this
doesn't
have
to
be
the
end
of
that
conversation.
A
It
can
certainly
evolve
as
we
talk
throughout
the
day
and,
of
course,
as
you
have
time
to
think
about
it,
you
might
send
a
midnight
note
as
well,
but
does
that
really
capture
what
module
3
does
and
reflect?
What
we've
heard
from
our
community
and
developers
with
those
consistent,
predictable
decisions,
creating
those
clear
stakeholders
and
then,
of
course,
making
sure
that
people
are
involved
at
the
right
time
and
coordinating
efforts.
C
This
is
Richard,
Luellen
I
would
ask
to
me.
They
generally
seem
good,
but
in
terms
of
kind
of
magnitude
of
effort
in
each
of
these
directions.
How
does
it
relate
to
the
existing
state?
You
know
so?
Do
we
want
to
have
more
public
input
or
less
Etc,
so
I
thought,
maybe
maybe
it
doesn't-
belong
in
this
exact
high
level
overview,
but
maybe
it
does
so
just
a
quick
thought.
D
Ben
zamzo
I
I
think
this
covers
a
lot
of
it.
This
talks
about
the
predictability
of
the
process,
but
what
is
important
to
our
firm
as
a
developer
and
other
colleagues
is
also
the
predictability
of
the
time
frames
involved
and
I
know
that
the
process
will
change
as
a
lot
of
design,
review
gets
lumped
into
the
actual
building
guidelines
and
understanding
how
the
development
communities
expectations
should
change
in
terms
of
review
times
and
I
know
that
doesn't
go
into
the
code,
but
should
be
part
of
the
conversation
on
the
Outreach.
A
E
Is
Byron
Falwell
I'm
just
wondering
if,
as
we
move
into
module
three
specifically
about
the
process
and
the
city
processes
being
fairly
labyrinthine
for
people
to
understand,
is
there
should
some
of
our
messaging
really
be
outwardly
facing
and
talking
about
education
of
the
process
or
at
least
reduction
or
paraphrasing
that
process?
F
I
think
a
note
on
that.
That
would
be
really
helpful
for
today.
Do
you
all
have
a
lens
on
is
this?
This
is
a
lot
of
information
that
we're
going
to
be
sharing
with
you
and
at
many
points
we
can
take
very
deep
Dives
and
and
have
discussions
about
the
relationship
with
all
that
and
and
that
that
is,
you
know
what
we
want
to
do
and
continue
to
do.
But,
but
is
it
too
much
too
soon?
Is
the
order
right?
F
How
do
we
explain
this
in
a
simple
way
and
then
also
give
give
that
ability
to
to
really
get
into
the
details
of
somebody
wants?
So
it
might
be
something
like
you
hear
it
for
the
first
time
today
and
then
we
we
need
to
continue
the
dialogue
or
act.
Absolutely
we're
gonna
have
to
continue
to
dialogue,
because
there's
a
lot.
A
Yes,
and
so,
as
we
kick
off
with
that,
but
I
mean
ultimately
when
we
talk
about
reinforcing
our
desired
outcomes,
so
this
is
kind
of
our
Compass.
So
we
are
thinking
that
we
would
like
to
create
application
types
and
we're
going
to
take
a
deep
dive
into
what
that
means
as
well,
but
keep
that
in
mind
creating
a
new
application
type
which
is
going
to
have.
If
it's
an
allowed
use,
it
still
needs
to
meet
the
allowed
form
or
if
there's
an
alternative
form,
that's
proposed.
A
There
would
be
a
separate
process
that
you
would
go
through
establishing
and
what
is
we're,
calling
an
interdepartmental
review
process
reintroducing
the
hearings
examiner,
so
they
could
be
a
decision-making
body.
A
Our
design,
Review
Committee,
would
transition
into
a
full
commission
very
similar
to
the
historic
preservation
commission
and
then
taking
a
deep
dive
into
what
are
our
findings
for
our
application,
so
really
updating
those
so
that
they
reflect
what
we
as
a
city
are
looking
for,
and
so
we're
going
to
go
into
each
one
of
those
and
I'm
going
to
take
you
through
the
creation
of
that
application
types.
And
so
what
do
we
mean
by
when
we
say
creating
application
types?
A
Ultimately,
we've
created
four
categories,
which
are
a
little
bit
different,
and
so
that
type
one
is
going
to
be
a
very
simple
review
process,
and
so
that's
something
that
does
not
require
a
lot
of
effort
in
review.
It's
going
to
be
relatively
simple:
do
you
meet
that
criteria,
or
do
you
not,
and
so
we
can
get
you
in
and
out
very
quickly,
so
in
some
cases
it
might
be
over
the
counter.
A
In
some
cases
it
might
be
a
day
or
two,
but
it's
going
to
be
a
relatively
quick
process,
because
it's
not
going
to
require
a
lot
of
collaboration
externally
or
internally
type,
2
applications
or
administrative
reviews,
and
so
with
module.
Two.
We
spent
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
some
of
those
use,
specific
standards
and
some
of
those
design
criteria,
and
so,
ultimately,
those
use
specific
standards.
If
somebody
proposes
a
duplex,
we
would
review
the
duplex
against
those
standards
and
do
they
meet
them
or
not.
A
So
that's
going
to
require
a
little
bit
more
time
and
maybe
some
coordination
with
some
of
our
internal
departments,
but
those
would
all
be
reviewed
administratively.
Now,
there's
a
caveat.
There
is
some
applications
that
might
be
difficult
and
might
require
additional
collaboration,
and
we
would
send
those
to
the
interdepartmental
Review
Committee,
but
we're
gonna
tell
you
a
little
bit
about
what
those
are
and
we're
also
going
to
identify
what
types
of
applications
fall
into
each
one
of
these
buckets
too.
A
And
it's
interesting
too,
when
we
talk
about
type
3
and
type
4,
some
of
those
are
dictated
not
necessarily
by
our
process
but
by
the
state
of
Idaho,
so
the
local
land
use
planning
act
actually
requires
us
to
notice
for
certain
applications
and
they
require
public
hearings
for
some
applications,
so
we're
going
to
take
a
deep
dive
into
what
that
is
as
well.
So
when
we
talk
about
some
of
those
examples
for
those
type
1
reviews,
so
if
you
have
a
temporary
sign,
that's
going
to
be
a
relatively
simple
process.
A
We're
looking
at
the
square
footage
we're
clearly
communicating
that
you're
allowed
to
do
that
for
x
amount
of
days.
We
can
approve
you
either
over
the
counter
or
within
just
a
few
days
to
get
you
well
on
your
way,
those
type
2
administrative
approvals.
That's
going
to
be
like
your
record
of
survey.
A
It
might
be
a
minor
small
lot,
so
sometimes
people
have
referred
to
those
as
substandard
Lots,
but
we've
kind
of
expanded
that
category,
because,
with
the
creation
of
some
of
our
newer
zones
or
the
reduction
in
lot
sizes,
some
of
those
are
going
to
fall
into
that
category.
So
that's
a
minor
small
lot
non-conforming
uses.
If
we
have
larger
developments
that
are
coming
in
with
sign
programs,
group
Child,
Care,
Facilities
accessory
dwelling
units
duplexes
triplexes
fourplexes.
A
We
have
some
other
zoning
permits
that
we
have
in
a
category.
Some
of
those,
for
example,
might
be
a
mural,
and
so
that
that
requires
us
to
coordinate
with
our
arts
and
history
Department.
We
also
have
a
river
system
permit.
That
is
also
us
working
closely
with
our
public
works
department,
so
you're
going
to
see
as
we
get
down
there's
some
more
collaboration
that
needs
to
be
done:
minor
design,
review
applications
and
then
those
uses
that
we've
deemed
allowed
that
are
appropriate
in
the
zone
and
they
meet
all
of
our
allowed
forms.
A
Then
we're
going
to
have
some
of
our
complex
Hillside
applications
as
well
as
river
system,
because,
again
that's
going
to
take
some
collaboration,
we
may
need
to
work
with
some
external
outside
agencies,
large
design,
review
projects.
So
what
does
that
mean
over
5
000
square
feet
for
commercial
or
office
districts
or
over
ten
thousand
square
feet
for
industrial?
So
we'll
continue
to
run
those
through
the
hearing
process,
major
small
Lots,
so
you
saw
minor
small
Lots
in
type
2.
What's
the
difference?
A
Type
two
is:
if
you
have
four
or
less
units
type
3
is
we're
saying:
hey.
We
think
that
somebody
else
needs
to
review
it
other
than
the
administrative
staff.
So
five
are:
greater
units
is
what's
going
to
Define
that
and
then
those
certificate
of
appropriatenesses
that
are
also
clearly
defined
currently
as
well,
and
then
those
type
four.
We
know
that
those
are
not
only
going
to
review
require
some
interdepartmental
collaboration
with
that
interdepartmental
review,
but
they're
also
going
to
need
city
council
final
approval.
So
those
are
your
comprehensive
plan.
A
Amendments
rezones
or
zoning
ordinance
amendments
planned
unit
developments
and
subdivisions,
so
those
are
all
so.
We've
tried
to
organize
them
in
Simplicity
and
the
amount
of
collaboration
that
is
taking
place,
and
so
there's
two
items
that
are
bolded
on
here.
So
the
the
very
last
one
on
type
2
applications
is
the
allowed
use
in
a
loud
form
as
well
as
in
type
three.
A
It's
the
second
one
down
the
allowed
use
or
the
alternative
form
we're
going
to
talk
to
you
a
little
bit
about
that,
because
that's
ultimately
the
next
item
that
we're
going
to
talk
about,
and
so
we're
going
to
go
into
a
little
bit
more
detail
with
that,
and
so
before
we
go
there
we
want
to
make
sure
is
the
purpose
of
categorizing
these
applications.
Does
it
seem
reasonable
and
then
really
thoughts
on
how
how
they're
organized
does
it
does
it
make
sense?
Is
it
clear,
is
it
understandable?
G
Andrea,
this
is
Andy
herstad
good
afternoon.
I
have
a
couple
just
real
real,
quick
questions.
The
the
types
one
through
four
one
and
two
seem
to
be
really
straightforward
and
can
be
handled
at
an
administrative
level
and
and
three
four
are
obviously
public
hearing
notice
conditions.
Is
there
a?
Is
there
a
desire
or
a
goal
to
try
and
have
types,
one
and
two
non-appealable
or
just
a
matter
of
course,
because
they
they
meet
all
of
the
criteria
and
and
are
allowed.
A
So
we
have
had
that
discussion
quite
thoroughly
internally
and
based
on
what
we
came
up
with
is
our
legal
department
has
said:
it's
always
good
to
have
checks
and
balances,
and
it's
always
good
for
people
to
be
able
to
be
heard
when
it's
appropriate
and
so
what
would
happen
and
what
we
will
propose
or
what
we
believe
we're
going
to
propose
through
module.
Three
is
that
if
you
have
a
type,
1
or
type
2
application,
that's
administratively
approved.
A
You
could
appeal
that
decision,
but
you
could
appeal
it
to
the
hearings
examiner,
and
so
that
is
an
independent
individual.
That
has
a
legal
background
and
so
they're
truly
going
to
evaluate
what
that
criteria
is.
Did
staff
make
an
accurate
determination
in
if
they
did,
that
decision
would
stay?
If
not,
the
decision
would,
of
course
be
overturned,
but
what
that
does
is
that
allows
us
to
get
an
internal
checks
and
balances
and
making
sure
that
we
have
a
second
set
of
eyes
that
we've
made
the
correct
determination,
but
it
eliminates
those
other
steps.
G
Okay,
I
think
that
the
reason
for
the
question
and
I've
actually
had
this
question
from
some
other
people
was
they're,
taking
away
our
rights
and
I'm
saying
no.
If
these
are
if
these
are
totally
allowable
and
totally
conforming
actions
within
a
within
a
parcel
of
ground,
there's
there's
really
no
rights
to
to
appeal
it.
G
Although
there's
no
need
to
appeal
it
because
it
it
follows
under
the
under
the
guidelines
and
and
so
I
like
the
idea
that
you've
had
the
internal
discussion
and
the
hearing
examiner
would
be,
would
would
be
that
person
I.
Think
one
of
the
goals
from
my
perspective
is
we've
been
working
through.
This
whole
thing
is
Clarity
Clarity
of
process,
Clarity
of
of
of
allowance.
Clarity
of
use
and
I
appreciate
your
response
on
that
on
types
one
and
two.
H
C
Okay,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that
I
could
have
just
talked
but
I
think,
for
instance,
the
Blue
Valley
case
is
informative.
C
Here,
Blue
Valley,
you
know
it's
back
in
the
news
and
it's
back
threatened
once
again
by
this
time,
potentially
heavy
Industrial
Development
next
to
it,
and
it's
really
in
this
situation
because
of
mistakes
made
both
lack
of
public
participation,
which
the
plan
zoning
Commissioners
have
made
clear
in
the
past
that
when
they
were
annexed
in
the
city
as
industrial,
there
was
just
almost
no
public
participation
from
Blue
Valley
Community,
so
areas
were
made
nonetheless,
entitled
uses
continue
and
there
are
circumstances
as
this
one
in
which
the
general,
for
instance,
even
police
powers
of
a
city
could
very
well
be
called
in
to
protect
the
health,
safety
and
Welfare
of
its
citizens
in
these
cases
or
other
Clauses
that
are
clearly
written
into
the
code.
C
For
instance,
in
this
case,
industrial
uses
should
not
create
a
hazardous
condition,
so
those
are
subjective
to
some
extent
and
they
require
I,
believe
public
input
and
so
to
say
yes,
if
it's
an
allowed
use,
then
there
is
no
reason
for
the
public
really
to
participate.
I
think
is,
hopefully
the
case
more
often
than
not
I
think
it
is,
but
there
certainly
are
exceptions
and
the
exceptions
can
be
devastating
to
people's
lives.
C
So
that's
I'll
get
off
that
that
you'll
probably
hear
me
bring
up
Blue
Valley
again,
because
I
do
think
it's
informative,
but
there
are.
There
are
lots
of
other,
perhaps
smaller
situations
in
which
the
decisions
and
uses
are
not
necessarily
clear-cut,
even
if
they
should
fall
into
a
category
of
an
allowed
use.
C
So
in
terms
of
yeah
most
I'll
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
For
the
time
being,
thanks.
A
Richard
I
think
when
we,
when
I,
kicked
off
this.
Originally
we
talked
about
refining
what
those
findings
are
and
and
that'll
be
part
of
our
goal,
as
we
are
creating
findings
for
rezones
or
annexations,
or
whatever
entitlement
that
you're.
Looking
for
that.
We
have
clear
objective
standards
that
they're
predictable
and
so
that
we
eliminate
some
of
that
subjectivity
and
then
just
in
the
example
that
you've
provided
I
mean
ultimately
Blue
Valley.
It's
some
of
that
is
getting
our
dimensional
standards
right,
which
we
reviewed
as
part
of
module
two.
A
So
if
you
are
a
residential
district
or
residential
use,
so
you're
adjacent
to
Industrial,
maybe
you
provide
an
additional
setback
and
so
you're
going
to
see
that
in
the
the
code,
as
it's
written,
that
some
additional
setback
is
required
for
residential
adjacent
to
Industrial,
and
so
so
you're
going
to
start
to
see
how
all
of
these
things
fit
together.
But
those
are
those
are
good
examples,
and
so,
hopefully
that
gives
us
a
good
ideology
and
and
then
also
when
we
look
at
this
too
I
think
it's
important
the
items
that
we
highlighted
in
green.
A
The
reason
we
highlighted
those
is
because
they
go
above
and
beyond
what
the
local
land
use
planning
act
require
as
far
as
noticing
in
public
hearing,
so
we're
saying
that
these
are
important
and
they
might
impact
those
neighbors.
So
major
expansion
of
non-conforming
uses
or
those
complex,
Hillside
or
river
system
permits
those
very
large
design
review.
Those
could
impact
those
neighbors,
and
so
we
want
to
have
a
hearing.
So
these
are
items
that
go
above
and
beyond
what
the
local
land
use
planning
act
would
would
require
of
the
city.
A
A
A
non-conforming
use
ultimately
means
that
you
were
in
existence
prior
to
the
zoning
code,
that
is
in
existence,
so
oftentimes
our
non-conforming
uses.
Today.
Are
you
built
a
tire
changing
Center
on
28th
Street
in
an
r1c
Zone,
but
it
was
prior
to
1966,
so
there
weren't
any
rules
and
regulations
in,
but
you
were
already
built.
So
we
recognized
you
as
a
legal
non-conforming
use.
A
So
they
would
be
establishing
a
legal
non-conforming
use
through
type
2
at
the
type
2
application,
which
is
Administrative
and
oftentimes.
You
need
those
for
your
financial
documentation.
So
if
you're
taking
out
a
loan,
a
bank
wants
to
know
that
yeah,
you
might
not
be
in
a
loud
use,
but
you
are
legal
non-conforming,
and
so
that's
what
that
is,
but
then
you're
going
to
notice
in
the
type
3
category
next
door.
If
you
want
to
expand
that
non-conforming
use
now,
we
think
that
a
review
body
is
appropriate.
C
C
Some
of
those
things
can
be
quantitatively
defined,
I'm,
not
sure.
If
that
one
can
be
20.
B
E
Is
that
a
quick
clarification,
the
difference
between
Type
3
and
type
4
when
we
say
Type,
4
Council
review?
Are
we
talking
about
city,
council,
okay,
and
so
all
of
the
commission
level
review
is
in
type
three.
A
Correct
so
you're
gonna
find
a
hearings.
Examiner
might
fall
into
some
of
those
you're
going
to
have
your
Planning
and
Zoning
commission,
your
historic
preservation,
commission
and
your
designer
view
Commission,
because,
as
we
talked
about
a
little
bit
earlier,
they're
transitioning
from
a
committee
to
a
commission
right.
E
Thank
you
yeah.
This
is
Byron
by
the
way.
Sorry
one
quick
question
too,
and
this
is
sort
of
like
off
the
beaten
path
a
little
bit,
but
the
difference
between
notification
and
hearing
hearings
are
I
mean
notifications
are
often
linked
with
hearings.
E
Has
there
been
any
discussion
about
whether
or
not
notifications
can
be
separated
and
I'm
kind
of,
like
looking
for
and
I'm,
not
trying
to
create
daylight
between
Type,
2
and
type
3,
but
there
is
some
like
benefit
to
notification
via
administrative
review
and
I'm
wondering
if
some
elements
in
type
3
could
get
reclassified
into
type
2
if
they
were
notified,
but
don't
necessarily
need
a
hearing,
if
that
makes
sense,
making
the
making
sure
that
the
neighbors
in
the
neighborhood
are
informed
of
an
upcoming
change.
E
If
that
upcoming
change
is
so
closely
aligned
with,
what's
already
an
allowed
use
in
the
new
code
that
maybe
a
notification
would
be
appropriate,
but
a
hearing
would
be
extraneous.
I
guess
has
that
discussion
happened
in
internally
or
can
you
see
what
I'm
getting
at?
We.
A
Have
talked
about
it,
and
just
so
you
know,
through
our
discussions,
we
actually
had
five
buckets
originally
and
we've
Consolidated
down
to
four.
So
as
we
talk
about
some
of
those
things,
you
know
the
we
could
know.
Those
are
things
that
you
know
we
can
explore
as
we
continue
forward,
they
were
just
particular
items
that
had
sometimes
life
safety
attached.
When
we
talk
about
those
complex
Hillside
and
river
system,
or
that
it
was
going
to
be
a
larger
change
in
a
neighborhood,
so
we
thought
that
those
should
be
recognized.
A
A
I
This
is
Marissa,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
your
chart
here.
So
the
type
three
the
variances
and
the
conditional
use
permits.
Those
would
also
go
on
to
city
council
right.
A
So
the
when
we
talk
about
who's
making
the
decision
so
that
level
above
tells
us
who
that
decision
maker
is
so
the
simple
review
and
the
administrative
review
is
a
staff
level
person
and
then,
when
we
go
to
an
appointed
body,
that's
going
to
be
our
commissions
and
then
our
Council
level
review.
That
is,
ultimately
the
council.
So
those
are
your
end
decision
makers,
okay,.
A
J
K
A
Yes
and
then
we
have
Ian,
has
his
hand
up
and
then
I
saw
that
Andy
had
his
up
as
well.
So
Ian
do
you
want
to.
L
Yeah,
this
is
Ian
McLaughlin,
I,
guess
between
the
different
types.
Do
we
have
any
idea
of
you
know
we're
talking
about
the
option
to
you
know
appeal
type:
twos
I
mean.
Is
there
any
predictability
on
the
timeline
between
these
I
mean
because,
potentially
not
you
know
trying
not
to
add
time
to
to
you
know,
projects
that
are
allow
uses
or
buy
right,
but
maybe
a
little
bit
different
or
a
little
more
complicated,
I
guess.
L
There's
there
any
I'm
sure
you've
thought
about,
but
is
there
any
thought
on
how
the
timelines
of
these
different
types
of
reviews
pan
out,
maybe
I'm,
maybe
I'm,
jumping
on
a
little
bit.
A
Yes,
so
we've
we've
thought
quite
extensively
about
the
process
and
timing
and
how
that
happens,
I
mean
ultimately
when
you
are
allowed
to
so
today.
If
you
had
an
administrative
approval
and
that
was
appealed
it
potentially.
If
it
goes
to
the
design,
Review
Committee,
it
would
be
appealed
from
staff
to
the
design
Review
Committee.
If
you
are
unhappy
with
that
decision,
you
could
move
on
to
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission.
If
you
were
unhappy
with
that,
you
could
go
to
the
city
council
before
you
went
to
the
district
court
system
for
that
ultimate
determination.
A
So
we're
proposing
that
you
we
we
shorten
that,
but
still
acknowledge
that
appeals
may
be
appropriate.
Staff
can
error,
and
so
the
public
does
have
the
right
to
appeal
that
decision.
They
would
appeal
it
to
the
hearings
examiner,
but
at
that
point,
if
they
were
unhappy
with
that
decision,
they
would
take
it
to
the
district
court
system,
so
it
eliminates
some
of
those
other
layers,
but
to
make
sure
that
you
know
the
checks
and
balances
are
there
that
people
are
making
the
right
decision
and
allows
people
to
participate
in
the
process.
G
Foreign,
my
question
is
in
terms
of
the
the
change
of
design
review
from
a
committee
level
to
a
commission
level
and
I
think
I'm
picking
it
up
on
it
right
now.
If
you,
if
you
go
into
a
Type
3
and
it's
a
design
review
decision,
it's
not
a
Planning
and
Zoning
decision.
Somebody
challenges
that
decision
as
as
either
an
error,
or
you
know
the
basis
of
challenge
that
goes
from
the
plant
from
the
design
review
commission
up
to
city
council.
G
A
M
Thanks
this
is
all
good
work
and
I
think
I'm
following
it,
but
I
wanted
to
make
sure
I
understood.
Sorry
if
you
said
it
and
I
just
missed
it,
but
in
the
type
3,
if
it's
appealed,
do
all
of
them
go
to
counsel
or
do
some
of
them
go
to
a
third
party
hearings.
M
A
It
would
depend
how
it's
structured,
so
a
hearings
Examiner
would
likely
go
to
planning
and
zoning
a
Planning
and
Zoning
a
design,
review
or
historic
preservation
decision
would
be
appealed
to
city
council,
and
so
there
would
not
be
an
appeals
board.
We
did
talk
about
you
know
what
does
that
mean?
How
could
we
evaluate
that,
and
we
felt
that
our
council
could
make
really
good
decisions?
A
M
Okay
and
then
I
guess
the
follow-up
and
maybe
it's
getting
into
the
weeds,
and
we
can
just
you
can
we
can
just
punt
it,
because
maybe
it's
not
important
for
this
at
this
juncture,
but
does
the
hearing
Examiner
I
mean
my
where
I'm
coming
from
I'll
I'll
try
to
explain
where
I'm
coming
from
so
that,
then
you
can
try
to
help
me
understand.
M
My
concern
is
that.
M
Sometimes,
bringing
appealing
to
the
council
can
put
the
council
in
scenarios
where
they
might
not
fully
understand
legal
ramifications
of
their
decisions
and
I.
Think
that,
generally
the
you
know,
Council
sophisticated
enough
to
do
that,
and
maybe
that's
where
you
all
landed,
but
I'm
just
wondering
what
type
of
if
that
hearings,
commissioner
or
whatever
you
called
it
sorry
is
also
looking
at
it
from
is
that
I
mean?
Is
that
what
they're
doing
looking
at
it
from
illegal
perspective.
A
Then
we
have
Jessica
followed
by
Hillary.
N
Hello,
hello:
this
is
Jessica
Aguilar,
hey
I,
like
the
hearing,
examiner
idea,
I
think
that's
great,
a
question
if,
let's
say
there's
a
design
review
application
and
it
gets
approved,
but
there's
a
member
of
the
community
that
wants
to
appeal
it.
But
it's
they're
appealing
it
say
for
a
land
use
concern
not
necessarily
a
design
concern,
because
that
happens
quite
a
bit.
We
have
folks
that
come
to
Dr
and
they're
not
happy
about
the
use
when
it
is
an
approved
use.
A
No,
it
certainly
does
so.
Ultimately,
we
need
to
clearly
Define
our
decision
makers
rules
and
the
roles
that
they
hold,
and
so
we
are
proposing
to
keep
design
review
the
same
so
they're
reviewing
the
design
of
the
project
so
they're
reviewing
all
of
the
architectural
and
the
aesthetic
components
that
go
with
that
land
use
decisions
would
still
be
with
Planning
and
Zoning.
So
we
as
staff
as
appeals,
come
in.
A
We
can
of
course
go
through
it
within
the
individual
and
say
you
know
this
is
an
allowed
use,
so
we
can
discourage
them,
but
they
could
always
utilize
the
process,
but
we
will
be
astounding
board
will
be
available
to
advise
them.
You
know
whether
that
is
a
design
criteria
or
a
land
use
specific
criteria,
because
that's
going
to
be
very
important
as
we
Define
roles
and
and
duties
and
you're
going
to
see
that
in
module
three.
O
I
just
have
a
question
and
maybe
I
missed
it.
I
heard
you
say
that
the
hearing
Examiner
is
appealable
to
planning
and
zoning
is
that
is
the
hearing.
Examiner's
decision
always
appealable
to
Planning
and
Zoning,
or
is
it
just
sometimes
appealable
I
mean
I,
guess
I'm.
O
A
Ultimately,
yes,
so
they
would,
they
would
be
the
stop
for
any
appeal
going
through
the
administrative
process.
However,
the
hearings
examiner
could
be
making
the
determination
for
a
variance,
because
we
would
like
to
send
our
variances
to
the
hearings
Examiner
now
if
they
wanted.
If
somebody
wanted
to
appeal
their
decision,
that's
what
would
go
to
Planning
and
Zoning.
So.
K
The
key
is
to
think
of
this,
and
because
we'll
we
have
another
side
that
talks
about
the
appointed
bodies,
but
what
here
it's
by
type,
so
the
decision
so
type
2
is
an
administrative
decision
and
it
can
be
appealed
to
the
hearing
examiner
and
then
it
stops
type
three
goes
to
a
commission,
it
can
be
appealed
and
it
gets
appealed
all
the
way
up
to
city
council.
Eventually,
okay,.
F
I
So,
can
you
explain
a
little
bit
about
the
hearing
examiner
and
who
that
is
it
one
person
is
it?
Will
it
be
like
different
people
that
person
is
so.
A
Typically,
it
is
one
person:
it's
a
contract
individual,
like
we
said,
they're,
an
individual,
that's
experienced
with
law
and,
typically
land
use,
so
a
retired
judge,
a
land
use
attorney.
Somebody
of
that
nature
that
has
a
good
understanding
of
what
that
is,
and
ultimately
they
would
be
taking
a
lot
of
what
we're
seeing
go
to
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission.
I
Okay,
I
think
my
only
caution
with
that
is,
if
a
retired
judge
versus
like,
if
you
have
an
active
land,
use
attorney,
making
sure
there's
no
conflict
of
interest
there,
because
I
mean
Richard
can
attest
to
how
difficult
it
is
to
find
any
attorney.
That
does
not
have
some
prior
relationship
with
a
developer.
That
would
even
talk
to
you
and
so
just
making
sure
the
appearance
of
nothing
bad.
A
O
Yeah-
and
this
is
just
a
comment
just
generally
for
the
legal
community
in
defense
of
my
community-
a
little
bit
yeah,
it's
very
true
that
people
that
do
real
estate
are
a
small
community
and
yes,
we
all
have
at
some
point
or
another
representative
developer.
We
have
also
at
some
point
or
another
represented
individuals
who
are
contesting
one
sort
of
decision
or
another,
and
we
have
also
many
of
us
represented
public
entities.
O
We
have
done
all
of
those
things
and
while
we
are
always
an
advocate
for
our
client,
while
we
are
representing
our
client,
that
certainly
doesn't
mean
that
we
bring
those
biases
when
we
are
sitting
as
an
independent
Arbiter,
and
it
certainly
doesn't
mean
that
we
bring
those
biases
into
anything
like
this,
where
we're
providing
our
own
personal
input
or
where
we
are
serving.
O
You
know,
as
a
member
of
the
of
the
public
or
serving
in
capacity
where
we're
serving
the
public
good.
So
you
know
I
I,
get
it
I
I
understand
why
people
have
concerns
about
that,
but
it
it
really
lawyers,
despite
all
of
the
stories
out
there,
they
do
take
their
roles
very
seriously
and
I.
Think
anybody
that
the
city
would
appoint
in
the
role
of
a
hearing
examiner
would
take
his
or
her
responsibility
very
seriously
to
be
impartial,
foreign.
P
Right
so
everybody's
awake,
okay,
strap
in
so
I.
Let
me
just
back
up
for
one
second,
which
is
helpful
that
it's
at
the
top
of
the
slide,
so
to
kind
of
Link
these
ideas
together,
because
I
think
that'll
help
our
explanation
of
this
component
of
module
three.
So
going
back
to
those
modules,
one
and
two
one
of
the
key
parts
of
our
framework
is
that
we
want
our
code
to
reinforce
our
desired
outcomes
right,
and
we
also
do
that
through
our
development
and
our
design
standards
and
all
the
different
parts
of
our
code.
P
So
that's
step.
One
step
two
which
we
just
went
over
is
that
we
have
we're
now
introducing
this
idea
of
allowed
use
and
allowed
form
or
allowed
use
in
alternative
form,
and
so
these
two
concepts
are
going
to
be
very
much
tied
together.
So
keep
that
in
mind
reinforcing
desired
outcomes
and
then
thinking
about
the
specific
form
of
an
allowed
use
and
how
it
does
or
does
not
reinforce
desired
outcomes.
P
So
what
you
can
see
here
on
this
map,
we
tried
to
map
it
out
for
you
to
show
specifically
that
this
applies
in
specific
zones
and
my
apologies,
it's
a
little
hard
to
read.
We
keep
refining
this
map,
so
if
you
have
any
input
on
What's
hard
to
see
on
it,
let
us
know
and
and
we'll
update
it,
but
what
you
can
see
there
is
the
r1b
and
r1c
Parcels
that
meet
the
locational
criteria
for
the
Strategic
infill
incentive.
P
If
you'll
remember
that
from
the
last
time,
there's
also
the
MX
one,
three
four
and
five
zones,
so
those
neighborhood
mixed
uses,
active
corridors,
Tod
nodes
and
then
the
downtown
mixed
use
areas
and
then,
on
the
right
hand,
column
there.
You
can
see
that
these
are
the
allowed
uses,
Within
These
zones
that
could
have
either
an
allowed
or
alternative
form.
P
So
I'm
going
to
run
through
a
specific
example
of
this
in
the
MX3
Zone
in
a
second,
but
take
a
look
at
that
map
before
I
move
on
just
so,
you
can
kind
of
set
the
stage
for
where
locationally
in
the
city.
This
is
proposed
to
apply
okay,
so
walking
through
a
specific
example
of
this.
So
how
would
this
actually
work?
P
Take
the
MX3
Corridor,
so
Fairview,
State
or
Vista.
What
we're
saying
here
is
that
multi-family
is
an
allowed
use
in
the
mx-3
zone.
However,
not
all
types
of
multi-family
development
are
the
same,
and
if
we're
the
ideas
that
we
want
to
reinforce
our
desired
outcomes
and
again
we
want
to
put
development
where
we
have
planned
public
investment
where
our
development
or
our
density
can
support
our
Transit
goals
and
support
our
walkability
goals.
P
Well,
it
really
depends-
and
it's
really
important-
what
type
of
use
is
being
deployed
there,
what
the
form
is.
So,
on
the
left
hand,
there
you
see
what
would
be
considered
an
allowed
user
in
a
loud
form,
so
you
have
an
apartment
building
and
it's
four
stories
or
greater.
So
it's
really
making
good
use
of
that
limited
resource
of
having
land
right
on
a
Transit
corridor.
P
That
would
be
considered
a
staff
level
review
with
interdepartmental
review.
So
what
that
means
is
that
would
be
an
administrative
decision
staff
would
review
against
all
of
those
development
and
design
standards
that
we
have
worked
out
in
modules,
one
and
module
two,
and
then
we
would
also
have
an
interdepartmental
review.
So
that
would
be
a
gathering
of
all
of
our
agency
partners.
P
Achd
Public
Works
fire,
making
sure
that
all
of
those
people
are
in
the
room
together
to
review
that
application,
so
that
there's
consistency
in
the
feedback
and
there's
consistent
coordination
amongst
those
agencies
to
get
the
most
excellent
project
that
we
can
and
I
want
to
make.
One
clarification
Point
here,
which
is
I,
think
somebody
has
pointed
out,
which
was
good,
is
that
you
know
there's
a
difference
between
the
design
of
a
project
and
the
use
of
a
project.
P
So
this
is
talking
about
the
the
question
here
is
the
use,
but
there
is
still,
they
may
still
need
to
apply
for
a
design
review
permit
and
that
that
would
be
a
separate
procedure
right.
So
if
it's
a
major
design
review,
that's
going
to
go
to
here
to
the
design
review
commission
so
just
want
to
make
sure
there's
Clarity
that
those
two
things
are
separate,
because
I
find
that
very
confusing.
P
On
the
right
hand,
side
you
have
the
allowed
use
conditional
for
I'm.
Sorry,
alternative
form,
I
misspoke.
So
what
you
have
there
is.
You
can
see.
Yes,
it's
multi-family,
but
it's
three
stories
or
less
it's
much
more
of
a
Suburban
type
form
and
it
doesn't
contribute
as
well
to
those
goals
that
we
have
of
really
wanting
to
put
development
where
we
have
planned
public
investment,
we're
still
getting
a
project
that
is
spreading
out
our
land
uses
that
is
creating
Seas
of
parking,
which
doesn't
help
us
meet
our
walkability
goals.
P
P
Maybe
there's
a
way
in
which
the
project
on
the
right
does
contribute
to
city-wide
goals,
and
it's
really
great
and
amazing,
and
that's
okay,
because
it
is
an
allowed
use.
But
the
goal
here
is
to
say
that
we
have
these
really
great
design
criteria
and
we
have
staff
that
are
trained
in
the
code
that
can
review
those
consistently.
P
If
it's
that
alternative
form,
we
need
additional
checks
and
balances
there
to
say
you
know
our
resources
as
a
city
are
are
precious
and
how
we
develop
is
really
important
and
how
we
grow.
So
if
this
is
the
form
that
you're
proposing,
then
there
should
be
explanation
at
a
public
hearing
and
more
investigation
into
how
it
does
or
does
not
contribute
to
the
findings
that
are
in
module
three
and
in
what
our
desired
outcomes
so
that
we've
stated
as
a
community
through
this
process.
P
Okay,
so
that
was
a
lot
but
Richard
go
ahead.
C
So
when
we
look
at
those
two
different
uses,
the
obvious
thing
to
me
is
the
magnitude
of
use
here
and
the
magnitude
of
impacts,
and
so
the
one
that
we're
proposing
to
be
allowed
and
go
through
administrative
potentially
has
very
large
impacts
and
I
will
step
and-
and
so
this
is
maybe
the
disjunct
between
the
the
current
planning
and
the
long-term
planning
worlds.
C
For
instance,
in
my
neighborhood
we
have
some
four-story
apartments
planned
along
State
Street.
This
was
not
allowed
use,
and
so
it
went
to
planning
and
zoning
and
planning
and
zoning
agreed
with
the
neighborhood
and
actually
the
applicant
as
well
in
a
kind
of
a
roundabout
way
that
that
really
needs
to
be
a
traffic
signal
on
State
Street
at
that
location.
It's
it's
it's
yes,
it's
planned,
but
it
could
be
planned.
C
It
could
be
20
years
down
the
road
like
many
things,
and
so
it's
only
through
the
public
hearing
process
that
we
had
that
agreement.
A
developer
agreement
put
on
to
the
Pud.
That's
another
question
I
have
but
now
puds
are
in
in
before
city
council.
So
that's
something
maybe
we
could
discuss
later,
but
at
any
rate,
it
was
only
through
that
public
process
in
which
the
magnitude
of
the
impact
could
be
assessed.
C
Achd
could
be
kind
of
in
a
roundabout
way
because
they
weren't
very
active
in
the
first
place
brought
into
the
process.
Only
after
the
neighborhood
said.
This
is
crazy
and
the
developer
agreed
applicant
agreed
that
there
really
needed
to
be
a
traffic,
a
new
traffic
signal
on
State
Street,
but
I
I
see
the
public
process
as
essentially
the
only
way,
often
even
when
things
are
planned
to
bring
them
about
to
bring
about
about
these
infrastructure
changes
in
which
we
all
need
no
need
to
occur.
C
The
question
is:
do
they
occur
concurrent
with
the
development
and
and
can
mitigate
the
impacts
or
do
they
occur?
Who
knows
when
so
yeah?
So
I
look
at
the
magnitude
of
those
of
those
different
categories
there
and
that's
what
concerns
me
is
if
we
remove
the
public
from
the
from
the
larger
impacts.
There's
quite
a
few
times,
I
mean
I
understand
the
counter
argument.
C
F
Curious
because,
because
of
our
over
the
MX3
along
State
stream
and
the
quarter
block
that
one
is
pretty
deep
so
right,
so
that
would
have
required
a
rezone
of
the
R1.
What
we're
now
calling
R1
sure
C.
So.
G
F
C
Then
go
to
council
I
appreciate
that,
of
course,
if
the
law
was
different,
they
may
have
designed
the
project
differently,
so
they
could
have
avoided.
You
know
they
could
have
crammed
everything
up
along
State
Street.
To
avoid
that
I
mean
it
would
have
been
possible.
So
it's
a
moving
landscape.
F
Here-
and
that
is
something
that
we
are
doing
constantly
with
everything
that
we're
proposing
here
and
is
looking
at
real
live
projects.
What
was
the
process?
What
was
the
outcome?
What
would
the
process
be?
F
Would
that
be
the
same
outcome
or
not,
and
and
that
the
testing
on
this
will
continue
throughout?
You
know
all
of
all
of
the
next
six
seven
eight
months
of
work
so
and
it
is,
it
is
good.
The
real
lives
examples
are
are
worth
kind
of
flushing.
A
Through
this
yeah
and
two
hold
tight,
because
I
think
you're
going
to
see
that
the
process
gets
changed
up
a
bit
and
so
even
though
it's
an
administrative
approval,
we
are
still
going
to
have
an
interdepartmental
coordination.
So
achg
is
still
invited
to
the
table.
So
we're
going
to
talk
about
a
number
of
those
things
as
well,
and
the
neighborhoods
are
going
to
have
ways
to
identify
that
there's
indicators
that
things
are
happening
throughout
their
area
so
that
they
can
provide
input
so
I
think
you're
going
to
be
pleasantly
surprised
as
we
move
forward.
C
As
Richard,
let
me
just
I
hope
so
and
thank
you
for
that.
But
I
will
say
here
you
know
just
the
politics
of
the
situation.
The
reason
that
we
were
able
to
get
kind
of
achd
on
board
was
through
the
large
public
process
that
happens
to
be
a
collection
year.
C
Etc,
it's
something
where
public
is
leveraging
the
political
hearing
process
in
this
case
I,
don't
think
if
it
was
just
back
room
people
with
achd,
meaning
that
there
would
have
ever
been
a
traffic
signal
required
at
this
at
the
new
Duncan
Ulmer
realignment.
So
so,
at
any
rate,.
P
Richard,
just
one-
and
we
want
to
move
on
to
other
comments,
but
I
just
want
to
thank
you,
I
mean
I,
think
that's
a
really
good
point
and
I
think
it
really
speaks
to
something
that
we're
hoping
is
clear
in
how
we
walk
through
this
with
the
community
during
Outreach,
which
is,
we've
spent
a
lot
of
time
as
staff
trying
to
think
very
critically
about
what
is
the
purpose
of
each
component
of
our
process
and
our
procedure
right
of
the
public
hearing
process
of
administrative
reviews
of
appeals
and
not
from
the
perspective
of
how
can
we
just
make
it
as
simple
and
as
efficient
as
possible?
P
Yes,
we
want
predictability
of
timeline
and
we
want
things
to
be
efficient
when
they
can
be,
but
also
you
know
we're.
We
are
humans
and
not
machines.
It's
very
it's
a
very,
very
complicated
thing
to
build
a
city
and
to
develop
it.
And
so
it's
important
to
us
that
we
really
have
Clarity
around
how
each
piece
of
the
process
works,
so
that
those
kinds
of
things
don't
get
lost
in
the
mix
and
so
that
it's
more
clear
for
people
how
to
participate
and
when
so
that
there
isn't.
J
A
So
there
is
a
multi-family
project,
that's
being
proposed
on
the
corner
of
Duncan
and
State
Street.
If
we
look
in
the
long-term
Street
classification
and
Street
mapping,
system
Duncan
will
realign-
and
there
is
a
proposed
signal
there.
So
in
the
Capital
Improvements
plan
that
the
signal
is
identified,
Richard
is
commenting
that,
yes,
it
was
programmed.
It
was
in
for
design
all
of
those
good
things,
but
because
of
the
development
they
were
able
to
move
that
forward
in
the
Capital
Improvements
plan
to
make
it
happen
earlier
than
what
it
was
intended
to
on
paper.
D
We
talked
a
lot
about
Max
building
Heights
in
module,
two
and
I'm
just
wondering
if
I
missed
it
or
if
this
is
a
a
new
topic
which
is
minimum
building
Heights
and
then
I'm
wondering
in
addition,
where
this
will
live
in
the
code.
Well,
it
will
be
in
the
use
table
itself
or
in
the
dimensional
standards,
and
then
does
this
get
appealed
to
Planning
and
Zoning
or
to
the
design,
Commission
and
then
last
thing.
Just
on
its
very
surface
for
sharing
about
this
I
worry
about
the
amount
of
volume.
D
This
will
add
to
public
hearings
on
how
many
people,
depending
on
the
scope
of
the
the
minimum
height
restrictions,
I,
think
a
lot
of
folks
could
be
coming
in
with
projects
that
don't
hit
the
Min
Heights
for
public
hearing
approvals.
P
I'll,
try
try
I'll
I'll,
try
and
then
you
can
back
me
up
if
I
don't
have
the
answer,
so
this
is
Lena
again,
I
I
think,
if
I'm
tracking,
what
you're
saying
so
this
would
not
be
implementing
a
minimum
height
as
in
like
in
the
in
the
dimensional
standards
for
an
entire
Zone.
It
would
because
that
would
require
for
all
uses
within
that
zone
to
hit
a
minimum
height.
So
this
is
a
dressing.
Let
me
go
back
to
this
other
slide
for
a
second.
P
This
is
addressing
specific
allowed
uses
within
specific
zones,
so,
for
example,
for
each
of
these
uses
in
MX3,
if
it
were
an
attached
single
family
project,
if
it
were
a
four-plex,
a
multi-family
building,
a
retail
sale
or
a
restaurant,
each
of
those
would
have
specific
criteria
that
would
make
it
either
allowed
use
aloud
form
or
allowed
use
alternative
form
within
that
zone,
so
instituting
a
minimum
height
would
be
a
much
broader
brush.
P
A
And
they're,
not
necessarily
minimum
Heights,
so
think
about
it,
as
so,
you
have
a
maximum
Building
height.
Now
you
cannot
exceed
that,
but
now
in
use
specific
standards,
so
in
the
table
of
allowed
uses
you're
going
to
see
that
that's
an
allowed
use,
but
at
the
very
end
column
that's
going
to
identify
that.
A
There's
some
use
specific
standards
that
go
with
that
you're
going
to
have
General
standards
that
you
meet
and
then
in
these
identified
criteria
it's
going
to
have
some
additional
standards,
and
so
now
we're
looking
for
four
stories
in
height
along
some
of
those
MX3
corridors.
And
if
you
are
not
meeting
that
you
just
go
through
a
different
process,
so
you
ultimately
get
to
choose
your
adventure.
A
So
if
you're
going
four
or
more
stories,
you
go
the
administrative
route
if
you're
going
less
than
that,
you're
going
to
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
to
tell
them
your
story
and
your
concept
and
how
you
contribute
to
the
larger
community.
So
you're
choosing
your
adventure
you're
still
an
allowed
use,
but
there's
a
little
bit
different
scenarios
that
go
with
that.
So
that's
how
you're
gonna
know
exactly
what
you're
looking
for
in
the
use
table.
A
K
And
and
I
think
an
important
thing
to
note
here
just
to
tie
it
back
to
like
this
is
a
tool
to
reinforce
our
desired
outcomes.
It's
not
happening
at
all
mixed
use
zones,
so
you
see
MX2,
isn't
on
this
list,
but
it's
saying
we
have
these
form
standards
that
help
support
what
we
heard
a
lot
of
buy-in
from
the
community,
which
was
direct
development,
where
we
have
that
investment
so
making
sure
that
our
land
use
is
actually
helping
to
support
that
investment
that
we
made.
B
K
I
think
we
could
walk
through
an
example,
maybe
towards
the
end
of
every
single
one
of
these,
but
right
now
in
the
face,
we
still
have
a
couple
more
things
we
want
to
present,
but
I
think
that's
a
good
question
and
we
yeah.
We
have
some
examples
that
we
can
give
at
the
end.
E
This
is
Byron
I,
I,
think
I'm
generally
in
support
of
the
allowed
and
alternative
path
and
I
and
I
get
why
that
can
be
a
really
great
incentive
to
provide
those
desired
outcomes
that
we're
talking
about
I,
think
one
thing
and
I
don't
know
if
the
other
architects
in
the
commission
or
the
committee
agree
with
this,
but
the
use
of
the
word
form
might
be
a
little
bit
confusing
if
we're
not
talking
about
design
standards
or
if
the
alternative
form
doesn't
apply
to
design
itself.
E
Maybe
there's
another
word:
we
can
use
there
I'm
not
really
sure,
and
then
the
the
other
item.
I
would
note,
is
to
Ben's
question
about
stories.
You
know
our
designs.
Are
our
zoning
standards
really
talk
about
Building
height,
but
not
stories?
There's?
A
I
think,
as
we
have
thought
through
this
process,
we
have
evaluated
stories
and
feet
and
it
comes
into
terms
of
height
very
differently,
so
we've
kept
those
Concepts
separated
from
one
another,
but
you're
going
to
notice
that
as
Deanna
had
mentioned,
when
you
start
to
see
these
allowed
forms
which
we
have
had
discussions
on.
Is
that
the
right
term
and
is
alternative
and
allowed
the
right
terms
as
well?
A
So
if
you
have
thoughts
in
regard
to
that,
we're
trying
to
nail
that
down
to
make
it
as
clear
and
concise
as
possible,
but
it's
going
to
be
where
we're
placing
those
High
public,
Investments
and
so
you're
going
to
have
60
feet.
That's
available
to
you
in
that
MX3
Zone,
we're
saying
you
have
to
have
four
stories
or
greater,
so
you
still
have
quite
a
bit
of
room
to
play
with
it's
not
going
to
be
where
you're
restricted
at
35
feet
in
height,
where
you're
having
to
achieve
that.
G
Andrew,
while
we're
while
we're
going
back
between
slides
I
may
have
a
quick
question
for
you
and
the
and
the
and
the
group
The.
The
slide
that
you
showed
at
Valor
Point
would
have
would
be
an
approved
use
and
allowed
within
the
within
the
MX3
type
2
staff
level,
with
interdepartmental
review.
G
The
the
reality
of
that
illustration
is
shrouded
in
a
more
complicated,
more
complicated
use
and
that
that
was
that
it.
It
was
basically
a
permanent,
Supportive
Housing
project
and
there
was
an
immense
amount
of
resistance
by
the
neighborhood
and
and
then
and
we're
seeing
the
same
resistance
across
the
street
again,
which
would
be
in
the
MX3
Zone.
G
How
do
we
address?
How
do
we
address
that?
That
the
use
is
good?
The
the
review
is
straightforward
and
and
the
Zone
works,
but
there's
cements
neighborhood
resistance.
G
A
You
know
I
think
that
is
not
even
just
a
local
concern.
I
think
it's
a
nationwide
concern
specific
to
uses,
so
I
can't
promise
that
the
appeal
process
may
not
be
abused,
but
I
guess
I
can
tell
you
that
that
the
appeal
process
would
be
in
place
and
with
hopes
that
that's
the
final
checks
and
balances
that
we've
evaluated
things
correctly.
We've
used
the
objective
criteria
and
and
from
then
you
can
move
on
so.
G
Okay,
okay,
I
I,
just
think
it's
as
we
as
we're
making
sausage
with
this
whole
process.
Transparency
is
pretty
important
and
and
I
like
the
fact
that
you
chose
a
very
controversial
project
to
illustrate
the
goals
and
and
the
desired
outcomes.
Thank
you.
P
P
What
exactly
is
the
purpose
of
this
hearing
right
so
to
have
a
hearing
examiner
allows
us
to
have
somebody
with
a
legal
background
who
is
really
digging
into
the
question
of?
Has
the
code
been
followed
correctly?
Has
it
been
applied
appropriately,
as
opposed
to
is?
P
Is
this
just
a
a
free-for-all
to
to
open
up
the
box
and
talk
about
every
single
component
of
it
that
it's
helpful
to
have
Clarity
around
what
is
being
reviewed
and
what
is
up
for
discussion,
and
so,
hopefully
that
helps
to
add
some
predictability
and
some
reliability
to
the
process
so
that
it's
being
used
in
the
manner
that
it's
intended,
as
opposed
to
being
used
for
whatever
other
reason,
so
that
that
Clarity
is
very
important.
K
So
this
kind
of
moves
us
into
the
next
phase,
which
is
we
really
want
to
design
a
process
that
will
result
in
excellent
projects,
and
that
really
starts
with
making
sure
that
the
stakeholders
know
their
role
and
that
the
right
applications
are
being
reviewed
by
the
body.
That's
best
fit
to
review
that
application.
So
again,
in
some
of
this
we've
already
Loosely
been
discussing.
K
So
we
know
we're
going
to
have
administrative
review
where
the
decision
maker
would
be
the
director,
with
with
a
staff
recommendation
and
they're,
going
to
be
reviewing
that
using
those
use,
specific
standards
making
sure
it
complies
to
the
Zone
district.
And
then
it's
Meeting
those
use
specific
standards
and
any
other
design
guidelines
and
those
are,
as
we
said,
are
going
to
be
the
application
types
one
and
two.
Then
we
have
a
review
body.
K
Expertise
and
helps
coordinate
the
various
different
needs
so
think
fire
department,
achd,
Valley,
Regional,
Transit,
so
folks,
who
have
specific
land,
use
or
Transportation
expertise
and
making
sure
that
they're
coming
to
a
project
early
on,
so
that
we
can
get
the
best
project
we
can,
and
these
are
going
to
review
some
of
those
type,
two
so
ones
that
are
complex
or
large
and
scale,
as
well
as
all
applications
that
are
type
3
or
type
four.
K
Our
next
review
body
will
be
the
hearing
examiner
so
review
body
individual,
and
this
is
really
going
to
help
provide
a
lot
of
predictability
to
the
process
so
having
objective
and
consistent
review
on
specific
applications.
So
this
will
be
the
hearing.
Examiner
will
review
all
appeals
from
type
2
so
that
they
could
provide
that
consistent
and
objective
review
of.
Did.
We
did
staff
review
this
correctly
and
make
the
right
decision
as
well
they'll
be
tasked
with
some
Type
3
applications,
which
largely
will
be
variances
so
and
that
consistent.
K
How
are
we
applying
the
findings
of
a
variance
consistently,
so
we
felt
that
that
would
be
a
really
great
efficiency
to
get
out
of
moving
variances
to
the
hearing
examiner
again
we're
elevating
the
design,
design,
Review
Committee
to
a
commission,
especially
because
we're
really
focusing
on
design
and
giving
that
commission
more
weight
in
terms
of
their
decisions
right.
We
want
a
well-designed
city
and
we
believe
that
this
is
the
one
of
the
ways
they
can
do.
K
It
they'll
be
reviewing
Marissa
had
that
question,
I
think
about
they're,
going
to
be
making
reviews
on
the
architectural
design,
so
that
will
be
their
scope
of
review
and
that
will
be
three
type
three
and
four
applications.
Historic
preservation,
commission
they'll
be
reviewing
it
according
to
the
historic
guidelines
and
those
are
again
three
and
four
are
planning,
and
zoning
commission
makes
the
land
use
decisions
and
then
city
council
makes
policy
decisions.
K
And
just
a
little
bit
more
again
about
the
how
we
really
feel
that
having
an
interdepartmental,
Review,
Committee
or
commission
or
group
will
help
ensure
that
excellent
projects,
a
lot
of
other
cities,
have
this
as
a
formalized
step,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
taking
this
so
we're
hoping
to
bring
together
groups
from
Public
Works
Parks,
the
fire
department,
achd
and
itd,
so
the
Idaho
Transportation
Department
to
make
sure
that
we're
having
all
eyes
on
a
project
early
on
in
the
process
so
that
we
can
flag
issues
before
developers
too
far
down
the
line
to
adjust
or
we're
having
to
slow
process
down.
K
So
we
have
some
slot
process
flow,
charts
that
you'll
see
where
this
Falls
in
we
know
that
there'll
be
other
groups
that
may
need
to
be
involved
on
in
projects
as
they
come
up,
so,
whether
it's
police,
CCDC
arts
and
history,
the
school
district,
irrigation
districts
there's
so
many
agencies
that
staff
happy
to
coordinate
with.
So
how
can
we
make
this
a
bit
more
formal
so
that
we're
getting
the
best
feedback
we
can
and
and
also
making
the
best
project?
R
Okay,
this
is
Esther
just
a
quick
question
as
I
look
through
Public
Works
parks
and
fire
department
are
all
you
guys
know
the
specific
context
there.
But
what
does
that
look
like
for
achd
and
itd?
Because
you
could
say
hey.
We
want
input
from
these
agencies
and
you're
going
to
get
input,
but
it's
going
to
be
input
from
a
individual
or
individuals.
A
So,
with
all
of
our
agencies,
we
have
clearly
identified
individuals,
typically
they're,
located
near
the
top,
so
I'm
going
to
use
itd,
for
example.
So
we
have
the
District
3
engineer,
which
we
notify
then
they're
able
to
distribute
it
to
their
correct
person.
So
we
have
an
individual
contact
for
all
of
our
agencies.
We
have
invited
some
of
those
agencies
in
and
said,
hey.
What
do
you
think
about
an
interdepartmental
review?
A
Thus
far
everybody's
been
very
excited
about
it
again,
we
need
to
work
out
some
issues,
but
it'll
be
very
similar
to
what
a
pre-application
meeting
is
so
it'll
be
held
on
the
same
day
so
that
everybody
can
plan
accordingly,
that
an
agency
representative,
if
they're
the
right
individual,
they
can
block
that
time
out.
So
they
know
that
they're
going
to
be
at
the
round
table
each
Thursday
or
each
Friday.
A
Whatever
the
day
we've
identified,
and
so
we've
identified
those
Partners,
we
think
we've
got
some
good
days
and
then
we
want
it
to
be
consistent
as
well.
So
we
want
to
be
meeting
frequently
so
that
we
don't
hold
up
the
process
and
that
we're
thinking
about
the
timeline.
Well,
so
that
we
can
keep
everybody
moving
through
the
process.
This
is
just
happening
much
earlier
and
and
the
project
isn't
developed
as
far
along
so
and
you're
actually
going
to
see
in
one
of
the
diagrams.
So
you
can
visually
see.
A
The
project
is
going
to
develop
so
they're
going
to
meet
with
us
early
on
at
25.
So
there's
very
minimal
input.
That's
gone
into
this
then
they're
going
to
hold
the
neighborhood
meeting,
because
we've
heard
we
want
to
be
involved
earlier
and
we
want
to
understand
what's
happening.
So
we
can
provide
our
input,
then
they're
going
to
go
to
the
design
or
the
interdepartmental
review
at
about
50
percent
concept
review
before
we
do
a
full-blown.
A
So
it's
going
to
take
some
training
for
a
developer
to
know
yeah
you're
going
to
want
to
come
to
staff
early
on
to
talk
about
your
concept
and
and
help
you
form
your
site
plan,
but
we're
going
to
be
along
the
way
with
you
so
but
we're
keeping
in
mind
those
timelines.
How
people
want
to
be
involved
when
they
want
to
be
involved.
L
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
say,
I
think
this
is
great
as
a
designer
architect.
We
find
that
these
pre-application
meetings
are
great
early
ways
to
get
our
questions
answered.
I
might
I
would
encourage
you
to
get
as
many
people
involved.
People
and
groups
involved
in
these
meetings
as
possible.
I
would
probably
add
on
to
their
some
of
the
utilities
groups,
if
possible,
Idaho
Power,
if
possible,
but.
D
This
is
Ben
I,
I.
Think
I
also
really
like
what
I'm
hearing
but
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
Andrea.
He
said
it
was
like
a
pre-app
meeting
with
achd
and
itd,
or
are
they
actually
in
this
process
involved
in
a
pre-app
or
are
they
involved
post
application,
but
it
has
the
looks
and
feel
of
a
pre-app,
but
you've
already
done
the
application.
A
So
I've
been
trying
to
avoid
the
term
pre-application
because
we
have
all
come
to
know
that
as
a
process,
but
so
we're
using
it
as
a
similarity.
So
you
call
the
city,
you
schedule
a
formal
appointment.
You
meet
with
us
on
a
Thursday.
You
get
a
time
slot.
That's
allowed.
What's
going
to
be
different
instead
of
30
minutes,
we
don't
want
to
rush
you.
A
D
I
love
that
that
sounds
fantastic.
My
only
concern
is
just
I
know.
All
government
and
related
agencies
are
having
issues
with
Staffing
and
I,
know
achd
and
itd
in
particular,
it's
really
difficult
to
get
feedback
from
them
early
on
in
the
process,
so
the
more
projects
that
are
coming
through
this
you
know
quasi-pre-app
process
and
then
also
blocking
out
more
time
for
those
applicants
trying
to
get
achd
and
itd
to
those
tables
which
I
would
love.
D
A
And
hopefully
you
don't
have
to
shop
either,
and
then
everybody
is
hearing
exactly
what
that
message
is,
and
we
don't
get
pitted
against
one
another.
I,
don't
want
achd
to
put
you
and
I
against
one
another
and
I
don't
want.
You
know
you
to
pay
achd
and
I
against
one
another.
We
want
to
be
working
collaboratively
and
understand
what
the
goals
are
and
what
we
have
to
achieve.
C
Yeah,
this
is
Richard,
so
I'm
hearing
everyone
and
inclusivity
and
all
it'd
be
a
great
place
to
invite
a
neighborhood
representative
as
well
getting
early
and
often
we
do
know
things
that
other
people
don't
believe
it
or
not
so
yeah.
Thank
you
and.
A
You're
going
to
see
in
the
process
that
actually
the
neighbors
will
be
involved
earlier,
you're
going
to
see
the
project
at
25
completion
we're
going
to
meet
with
the
developer
and
say
what
did
you
hear
from
the
neighbors
so
that
we
as
we
get
to
the
50
to
the
interdepartmental
review,
we're
including
that
in
the
conversation?
So
so
it's
not
a
lost
message
and
you'll
see
that
in
some
of
those
visuals
yeah.
A
K
So
but
I'll
walk
through
this
quickly,
not
quickly
I'm
gonna
go
slow,
but
we're
going
to
show
kind
of
the
top
is
the
current
process
and
then
the
proposed
process
for
the
other
types
and
I
think
there's
a
room
to
get
feedback
on
here
and
I
know
it's
kind
of
small
but
the
current
process,
if
it's
a
staff
level
application.
So
it's
not
going
to
a
public
hearing.
K
What
we're
finding
is
a
staff
person
or
an
applicant
may
come
to
us
with
various
degrees
of
quality
application
and
they
can
come
they'll
talk
and
then
they'll
submit
an
application
and
there's
no
feedback.
Loop
or
quality
control
on
the
application
before
it's
submitted,
so
it
will
be
submitted.
Staff
will
be
directed
to
write
a
staff
report
and
then
make
a
decision
in
the
proposed
process.
So
now
things
application
types
one
and
two
again
the
one
is
the
very
simple
review.
So
that
will
probably
be
similar.
K
Where
there's
just
a
quick
concept
review,
we
go
okay,
you're
trying
to
do
a
temporary
sign.
These
are
the
things
you're
going
to
need,
they
submit
the
application
and
the
decision
is
made
the
type
twos.
So
this
would
require
it's
large
enough
in
scale
where
we're
going
to
say
we
need
that
interdepartmental
review.
It
may
be
administrative,
but
we
need
to
make
sure
we
have
fire
at
the
table
or
solid
waste.
So
again,
this
first
one
is
called
concept
review
meeting.
K
So
we
want
to
talk
to
the
applicant
when
their
ideas,
only
25
percent
of
the
way
flushed
out
they
haven't,
spent
a
ton
of
money.
There
isn't
a
ton
of
pressure
to
staff
to
get
it
through
right.
We
want
to
talk
to
you
before
it's
when
it's
a
concept
when
you're
about
a
quarter
of
the
way
to
something
you
think
is
ready
for
some
metal
staff
will
talk
and
have
a
meeting
with
that
applicant
and
they'll
come
back
they'll.
K
Take
that
feedback
they'll
come
back
one
more
time
to
staff
at
what
we're
calling
a
mid
process
review
so
about
50
percent
staff,
planning
staff
will
review
and
say
all
right.
This
looks
good
you're
ready
to
present.
You
know
we're
ready
to
talk
to
our
interdepartmental
review.
We
need
to
tap
fire
for
this.
Now
you
have
enough
refinement
to
tell
us.
We,
like
the
we
know,
the
use.
We
know
what
you're
proposing.
We
know
the
scale
of
it.
K
We're
gonna
go
bring
this
to
the
other
partners,
there'll,
be
that
interdepartmental
review
there'll
be
some
recommendations
from
there
and
then
again.
I
would
go
to
that's
when
they
can
finally
submit
the
application.
So
again,
this
is
adding
a
lot
more
front
front
work,
but
it's
the
goal
is
to
really
result
in
an
excellent
project
that
staff
isn't
all
of
a
sudden
reacting
to
something
that
develop
a
developer
or
an
applicant
has
put
forward
to
say:
I
already
spent
my
money
on
it
make
it
work.
K
We're
saying
talk
to
us
at
25
50,
let's
bring
in
the
people
who
are
going
to
have
to
service
you
and
then
then
we'll
be
ready
to
review
your
application
once
you
submit
it,
the
next
would
be
our
hearing
level
application
so
again,
at
the
top
is
our
existing
process.
These
are
ones
that
go
to
public
hearing
again,
they'll
have
a
pre-application
meeting
with
staff,
and
it-
and
this
is
varying
degrees
of
refinement,
right
they'll
come
to
staff.
I
have
and
I
some
people
come
with
a
napkin.
K
Some
people
come
with
full
blown
engineering
drawings
and
it's
a
variety
of
things
that
staff
have
to
react
to.
They
hold
their
neighborhood,
meaning
I'm
sure
a
lot
of
neighborhood
people.
Neighborhood
leaders
understand
this.
Sometimes
they
come
with
a
sketch,
maybe
they
just
say
something
or
they
already
have
a
fully
baked
plan
and
then
that's
when
they
submit
their
application.
We
go
through
some
transmittals
neighborhood
noticing
things
like
that.
K
Once
the
application
has
been
submitted
and
then
your
you
get
a
staff
report
and
you're
scheduled
for
public
hearing
you'll
notice
that
green
is
kind
of
when
the
public
gets.
There
gets
to
be
involved
in
our
proposed
plot
process.
So
this
is
those
type
three
applications
that
are
going
to
go
to
a
commission
or
the
hearing
examiner
or
again
as
staff
going
to
have
that
initial
meeting
with
the
applicant.
K
So
it's
only
25
of
the
way
there
staff
would
give
a
green
light
to
say
all
right,
you're
ready
to
speak
with
the
neighborhood
to
have
your
neighborhood
meeting.
They
would
come
back
to
staff
before
they
submit
their
application
and
we're
working
on
a
process
to
have
a
reporting
back
to
staff,
about
the
neighborhood
meeting,
to
make
sure
that
that
voice
of
what
was
heard
at
that
neighborhood
media
is
reflected
later
on
in
the
application
it's
not
just
held.
So
that
would
be
that
mid-process
review
to
review
the
neighborhood
meeting
feedback.
K
K
Staff
report
and
then
public
hearing
so
very
similar
in
terms
of
cadence
in
the
back
and
forth,
we're
just
starting
the
process
earlier
and
we're
not
saying
you're
green
lighted
to
submit
until
we've
spent
that
time
working
through
the
project
ahead
of
time
and
again,
the
last
one
is
pretty
similar
to
the
previous,
but
it's
just
showing
when
it
goes
to
city
council.
Again
you
in
our
typical
process,
you
have
your
pre-app,
your
neighborhood
meeting.
You
submit
your
apples,
you
submit
your
application
staff
report.
K
Planning
and
Zoning
recommendation
city
council
approval
our
proposed
process
meeting
much
earlier
on.
Having
the
neighborhood
meeting
have
requiring
the
applicant
to
come
back
to
the
city
to
share
what
they
heard
from
the
neighborhood
meeting
us
refine
that
application
again
interdepartmental
review
application
is
submitted,
traditional
noticing,
noticing
we're
proposing
stays
the
same
traditional
noticing,
staff
report
planning
and
zoning
and
city
council,
and
then
the
last
process
is
we
want.
We've
heard
this
a
lot,
and
this
has
been
something
that's
been
talked
about
for
quite
a
while.
K
It's
like
how
do
I
know
what's
going
on
in
my
neighborhood
acella
is
not
the
easiest,
so
we're
trying
to
create
a
website
to
make
it
much
more
clear
and
much
more
obvious
to
involve
our
community
early
on
as
well
as
to
really
learn
to
get
that
information
quicker,
especially
for
those
type
2
applications
that
may
not
be
going
to
public
hearing,
but
wanting
to
be
aware
of
if
they're
happening
so
we're.
K
This
screenshot
is
of
our
tenant,
we're
still
working
through
it,
it's
beta,
but
our
online
tracking
tools,
so
that
you'll
be
more
easily
able
to
identify
when
a
project
is
happening
in
a
certain
area
of
the
city
and
then
I
skipped
the
first
two
balls,
but
you
I
think
I
made
that
clear
earlier
neighborhood
meetings
and
then
we
would
require
a
summary
of
that
neighborhood
meeting
to
be
submitted
to
the
city
and
I
think
we're
that's
all
of
it
so
perfect
for
discussion.
Marissa.
I
This
is
Marissa,
so
one
of
my
concerns
with
having
the
developer
report
back
to
the
city
on
the
concerns
of
the
neighborhood
is
that
they
are
not
always,
including
all
the
concerns
and
I
know
that,
because
I've
heard
developers,
State
neighborhood
concerns
at
public
hearings
and
it's
not
at
all
what
was
discussed
at
the
neighborhood
meeting.
K
I
think
that's
a
good
suggestion
and
something
we
can
like
I
know
we're
in
the
online
tracking
tool.
We
were
trying
we're
working
on
it
like
submit
feedback
directly
function,
and
that
could
be
one.
Maybe
it's
I'm
sure
we
can
incorporate
like
neighborhood
meetings,
submit
feedback,
then
I
think
the
idea
is
to
get
your
the
neighborhood
feedback
before
the
application
is
even
submitted.
Instead
of
after
it's
been
transmitted
and
submitted.
M
Thanks
this
is
Sheldon,
can
you
go
back
to
the
I
think
it
would
be
slide,
35
or
36-
probably
yeah?
Maybe
the
next
ones.
M
So
I
think
that's
a
good
point
that
Marissa
made
I
think
it
was
Marissa
just
making.
You
know
figuring
out
a
way
to
make
sure
that
both
the
neighborhood
that
the
neighborhood's
concerns
are
actually
captured
or
not,
and
why
you
know
from
a
development
application,
other
communities
that
I've
worked
in
have
staff
at
those
meetings
not
to
a
pose,
or
you
know
just
for
no
other
reason.
M
Besides
to
hear
I,
don't
know
if
that's
too
costly
I
could
see
how
that
could
be
costly,
but
it's
an
idea
and
then
I
do
feel
like
there's
a
point.
I
think
it
was
to
Richard's
point
that
you
know
if
the
neighborhood's
so
chooses
to
have
somebody
involved
at
that
mid
process
review.
They
don't
have
yay
or
nay
position
per
se,
but
they
would
have
a
similar.
M
N
M
An
idea,
I
also
think,
that's
you
know.
Neighborhood
associations
are
not
paid,
so
that's
kind
of
a
tough
ask
as
well
and
then,
but
it's
an
idea
is
the
25
initial
review.
I
mean
is
that
is
you're
you're.
That
is
like
the
pre-op
meeting
and
the
con
conceptual
meeting
and
I.
My
concern
with
that
is
it's
just
it
just
seems
it
seems
like
it's
going
to
be
hard
to
do.
M
G
So
Sheldon
makes
a
a
really
good
point
concept.
Conceptually
you
start
projects
and
it's
a
it's
a
heavy
lift
and
a
long
road
before
you
know,
if
you
really
even
have
a
project
and
I
I
agree
completely
with
her
that
this
sort
of
25
percent
is
is,
is
a
number,
but
it's
not
a
reality.
I
think
I
think
that
the
initial
review
meeting
is
when
we're
ready
for
an
initial
review.
G
By
that
time,
the
design
team
has
worked
enough
with
the
clients
program
and
the
clients
worked
enough
with
the
contractor
to
understand
what
the
budgetary
constraints
are
and
whether
or
not
there's
a
project
or
or
not,
and
I
think
that
bodes
well
for
everyone,
because
why?
Why
have
a
series
of
meetings
when
you
don't
have
appropriate
or
accurate
information?
G
G
Think
again,
the
projects
come
to
the
neighbor,
the
neighborhoods
when
they're,
when
there's
enough
information
to
know
whether
or
not
the
project
is
a
is
a
viable
project,
and
when
we
do
neighborhood
meetings,
we're
obligated
and
under
the
current
code,
under
the
current
ordinance,
by
the
way,
which
is
law,
we
are
obligated
to
invite
the
neighbors
and
depending
on
where
you
are
within
the
neighborhood
in
in
some
instances,
we
are
obligated
to
invite
two
or
three
different
neighborhood
associations,
I
I,
think,
once
once
that
invitation
is
established
and
it's
out
there,
it's
incumbent
and
and
I
don't
I
know.
G
People
are
going
to
take
offense
of
this,
but
it's
incumbent
upon
the
neighborhoods
to
have
their
representative.
Who
is
supposed
to
be
that
conduit
that
that
link
between
the
process
and
the
neighborhood
to
to
be
to
be
there
and
available
and
then
to
also
be
the
the
Arbiter?
If
you
will,
of
what
the
developer
might
say,
happened
and
and
believed
happened,
and
what
the
neighborhood
says
and
and
believes
happened
which,
by
the
way,
a
lot
of
times
in
almost
all
of
our
projects
were
in
lockstep
in
some
of
our
projects.
G
There's
no
way
you're
ever
going
to
be
in
lockstep.
That's
such
a
contentious,
contentious
issue,
and
so
you
know
again.
G
This
whole
process
has
been
predicated
on
everybody,
knowing
everyone
having
an
adequate
notification
of
what
we've
been
doing
for
well
over
a
year,
and
we
keep
getting
feedback
that
nobody
knew
about
this
or
nobody
is
you
know
no
one's
invited
to
the
table.
Everyone
in
the
city
has
been
invited
to
the
table
in
more
ways.
The
city
has
done
an
absolute
Herculean
job
of
of
notifying
the
neighborhoods
and
notifying
agencies
and
notifying
those
of
us
who
deal
with
the
city
on
a
day-to-day
basis.
G
If
you
want
to
be
engaged,
you'll
be
engaged,
and
so
in
this
process
list
I
I
agree
get
the
neighborhoods
in
involved
early,
but
it's
incumbent
upon
the
neighborhoods
as
representatives
of
of
their
zones,
to
to
be,
if
you
will
that
conduit
and
and
I
think
collectively,
we'll
all
work
together,
but
I
don't
think
you
can
I,
don't
think
we're
going
to
get
very
far
if
we're
expecting
the
city
to
now
have
a
staff
person
go
to
every
single
neighborhood
meeting
that
a
project
is
being
proposed
in
because
it's
not
going
to
happen,
there's
no
there's
no
money,
there's
and
I.
P
Andy,
if
I
could
just
respond
really
quickly
to
to
some
of
the
points
that
you
had
had
made,
I
mean
from
for
our
team,
especially
from
a
notification
and
public
Outreach
process.
Obviously
we're
we're
all
familiar,
and
it's
been
a
topic
of
discussion
at
the
CAC
meetings.
Many
times
of
it.
It
is
very
difficult.
P
It's
just
very
difficult
to
keep
everyone
in
the
know
and
I
think
that
when
we
do
Outreach,
our
hope
is
to
be
able
to
have
people
actually
use
that
online
tool
and
explore
it
a
little
bit
to
see
what
it
would
look
like
to
to
be
able
to
look
at
a
map
and
at
any
given
time
you
can
see
all
of
the
applications
that
are
currently
live
near
your
neighborhood
or
whatever
part
of
the
city.
P
You're
interested
in
our
hope
is
that
that
can
help
to
bridge
some
of
that
Gap
to
really
Empower
people
to
yes,
we'll
still
do
traditional
noticing.
Yes,
we
have
neighborhood
meetings,
but
also
this
is
a
way
that
you
don't
have
to
navigate
sort
of
the
labyrinth
to
get
to
the
information
you
need
it's
there.
Whenever
you
want
it
and
then
the
email
for
the
planning
department
will
also
be
attached
to
that.
G
You
you
guys
have
done
a
brilliant
job,
notifying
the
community
and
I.
My
hat
is
off
to
you
and
if
I
I,
I'm
I
feel
like
I
need
to
be
out
there
being
a
champion
for
what
an
amazing
job
the
city
has
done
every
turn
of
the
of
the
road
every
opportunity,
you've
you've,
invited
you've,
encouraged
you've
included
you've
given
Avenue,
so
hats
off.
Thank
you
very
much.
I'll
shut
up
now.
L
Yeah
I
guess
I
would
probably
just
reiterate
what
what
Andy
said.
I
mean
projects
are
nebulous
and
the
design
changes
drastically
from
you
know,
beginning
to
end
so
I
think
the
25
is
a
good
Target,
but
whether
or
not
that's
actually
the
case
is
another
story.
L
One
concern
I
will
erase.
Is
you
know
at
what
point?
Is
this
go
to
the
public
right?
If
we're
requiring
a
25
percent
initial
design
review
meeting
the
project
may
not
be
developed
to
a
degree
where
it's
ready
for
public
viewing
I
I
know
that
that's
been
somewhat
contentious
with
some
of
the
the
builders
and
developers
that
I've
worked
with
that
hey.
L
You
know
we
have
this
pre-app
meeting
I
wasn't
quite
ready
to
show
this
to
the
to
the
world,
yet
so
just
something
to
think
about
at
what
point
was
that
you
know
made
made
available
and
then
kind
of
the
other
thing
I.
You
know,
I
think
this
is
a
great
process
and
I
guess
one.
L
You
know
part
of
me
thinks
okay,
this
is
great
and
I
get
multiple
other
points
to
kind
of
get
feedback
on
on
the
project,
and
you
know
that
that's
that's
all
well
and
good,
but
we
are
adding
effectively.
L
You
know
two
additional
meetings
to
this
process,
whereas
right
now
we
just
have
a
pre-application
meeting,
so
I
be
interested
to
hear
how
we're
planning
or
how
the
city's
planning
on
kind
of
Staffing
up
and
making
sure
that
this
doesn't
get
bogged
down
and
add
additional
work
to
you
all
who
are
already
very
busy.
So
thank
you.
A
And
right
before
we
move
on
I
I,
think
you
know
the
zero
to
25
or
50
I
think
those
numbers
we
can
certainly
work
with
I
think
the
conceptual
design
is,
is
that
Ben
comes
in
and
says
hey
I'm
interested
in
doing
a
multi-family
development
along
State
Street.
That
gives
me
the
opportunity
to
say:
okay,
Ben.
Are
you
aware
that
the
pathways
plan
has
a
multi-use
pathway
on
State
Street?
So
you
need
to
accommodate
for
that.
A
Our
design
guidelines
say
that
your
building
is
up
front
with
your
parking
to
the
side
or
to
the
rear,
and
we
know
that
the
neighbors
have
asked
for
a
signal
at
at
this
location,
so
that
I
can
give
you
that
feedback
very
early,
so
that
you
can
start
to
integrate
those
Design
Concepts
very
early
on
it's
not
going
to
be
very
specific
feedback,
not
yet
so
I
think
that
can
happen.
Just
he
and
I
talking
over
the
telephone.
He
and
I
coming
in
those
are
very
Brief
Encounters,
but
we
have
some
playrooms.
F
This
is
Jessica
if
I
can
chime
in
just
on
the
Staffing
front,
which
this
is
in
in
the
weeds,
but
to
just
convey
that
we
are
aware
and
that
changing
the
process
and
moving
up
front
in
that
process,
so
much
higher
level
review
and
conversation
that
we'd
be
kind
of
flopping
Staffing
on
that
more
Staffing
in
general
is
needed,
but
also
at
this
point
right
now,
when
you
go
in
for
your
pre-app
you're
you're,
starting
with
staff
that
are
more
Junior
in
their
career
and
then
after
submittal.
F
It's
it's
more
senior
planners
carrying
those
through
to
hearing
and
we'd,
be
spreading
that
out
more
that
you
have
a
group
that
we're
standing
up
called
the
development
services
to
be
that
Interfaith
face
with
developers
and
applicants
before
they're
submitting,
as
well
as
managing
this
interdepartmental
Review
Committee.
It
does
require
more
staff,
but
then
also
a
higher
level
of
professional
skills.
At
that
point,
in
time,
too,.
J
D
Thanks
this
is
Ben
zamzo
and
I
appreciated
Jessica
and
Ian's
comments
on
the
Staffing.
That
was
another
concern
of
mine.
I.
Don't
have
a
recommendation
yet
I'm
staring
at
this,
but
the
the
one
part
of
the
proposed
process
that
I
think
would
trip
Rocky
Mountain
our
company
up
in
our
types
of
projects,
which
are
primarily
retail
but
I,
do
think.
The
new
zoning
code
is
going
to
have
a
lot
more
development
along
the
corridor,
so
they'll
have
more
retail
mixed-use
aspects
to
it.
D
I
can't
imagine
ever
getting
to
that
50
review
before
going
and
sitting
down
with
achd
or
ITV
to
talk
about
access
and
how
that's
going
to
affect
the
project
and
I
really
liked
what
Andrea
said
earlier
about
the
interdepartmental
review
and
being
able
to
get
achd
itd
in
the
room.
So
there's
no
finger
pointing
everybody
here
is
the
exact
same
thing,
but
I
just
can't
picture
having
two
meetings
with
the
city
and
a
neighborhood
hearing
before
approaching
them.
A
J
This
is
Roberta
demito
I
was
thinking
that
I
really
like
the
concept
of
the
online
tool
before
Andy
started
to
speak
and
I
also
I
wanted
to
ditto
what
Andy
said
is
from
the
beginning,
in
the
fall
of
2020
I
participated
in
a
lot
of
the
community
meetings
that
were
virtual,
involving
neighborhoods
or
other
citizens
in
some
manner.
I
think
will
help
that,
but
people
are
very
limited
in
time,
so
so
the
the
online
tools
are
really
a
great
idea.
So
thanks.
Q
Thanks
just
my
thoughts
on
this,
hopefully
quickly,
I've,
hosted
and
coordinated
a
handful
of
neighborhood
meetings
for
planning
projects
each
and
every
one
of
those
conversations
and
I
also
go
to
a
lot
of
neighborhood
association
meetings
are
I,
think
effective
for
the
process
that
ensues
I've
found
that
the
cumbersome
side
or
the
stressful
side
is
the
mapping.
The
mailing,
the
synchronization
of
the
timeline,
cut
off
dates.
Q
Those
types
of
things
I
wonder
if
there's
an
opportunity
to
soften
an
initial
neighborhood
meeting
requirement
to
where
it's
more
of
a
conceptual
introduction
to
a
project
in
a
conversation
with
the
community
because
again,
I
think
that
is
going
to
be
informative
to
a
successful
project.
That's
supported,
but
then
somewhere
in
here
is
slotted
in
a
type
of
check-in,
with
the
neighborhood
somehow
and
I
liked.
What
Andy
said
of
how
using
maybe
n
a's
early
on
is
that
conduit?
Q
If
you
could
soften
that
requirement
up
front
on
that
initial
concept?
Conversation
so
that
it
isn't
I
do
find
it
daunting
sometimes,
but
then,
when
you
have
something
more
fleshed
out
based
on
that
feedback
based
on
further
thought
from
your
own
development
team,
maybe
there's
there's
a
second
piece
to
that.
B
Q
Say
that's
on
every
one
of
these
strings,
these
application
types
but
I
would
yeah
that
maybe
that's
a
way
of
echoing
what
Marissa
and
Sheldon
have
said
about
the
importance
and
Andy
others
I
think
everyone's
kind
of
made
the
point
of
making
sure
that
the
neighborhood
feedback
we
get
is
valuable
and
at
the
right
point
in
time.
I
This
is
Marissa
I.
Also,
don't
think
that
City
staff
needs
to
be
at
neighborhood
association
meetings
or
neighborhood
meetings.
I
guess
you
guys
probably
don't
want
to
be
there
either,
but
I
think
you
know
something
to
keep
in
mind
is
like
at
least
in
RNA.
We
do
try
to
attend
as
many
neighborhood
meetings
as
we
can,
but
we
are
volunteers
and
I
have
to
prioritize
like
the
last
one
was
on
my
child's
birthday.
So
it's
like
sorry
kid.
I
We
can't
go
out
because
I
gotta
go
to
our
neighborhood
meeting,
like
you
have
to
make
choices
so
I
think
relying
on
the
N
A
there
to
be.
There
is
not
probably
the
best
thing
to
do.
I
I
think
India's
try
to
try
to
make
as
many
as
they
can,
but
I
do
think
that,
like
one
thing
that
could
be
improved,
is
the
letter
that
developers
send
out
with
the
notice,
because
some
of
them
are
very
detailed
and
some
of
them
just
have
absolutely
no
information
other
than
like
there's
a
meeting
this
date
and
this
time
and
so
I
think
like
and
and
when
we
get
those
type
of
ones.
I
I
do
try
to
call
the
developer
or
somewhere
on
somebody
on
my
board,
tries
to
college
developer
and
ask
more
questions,
but
I
think
you
know
like.
Are
you
asking
for
a
reason
how
many
stories
like
there
just
needs
to
be
like
a
certain
level
of
info
in
those
letters
just
just
to
make
them
more
usable
for
the
community
and
that's.
B
A
R
So
in
my
nearly
two
decades,
almost
two
decades
of
being
involved
with
my
neighborhood
association
I,
have
seen
two
approaches:
one
where
the
neighborhood
association
was
never
provided
any
notification.
It
was
when
we
went
into
the
actual
City
files
and
saw
that
there
was
a
meeting
held
and
then
there
have
been
other
instances
where
the
development
isn't
necessarily
proposed
within
our
boundaries.
R
But
in
an
adjacent
neighborhood,
where
we
have
received
notification
for
it's
on
the
edge
and
we've
received
notification
typically
from
the
architect,
the
Architecture
Firm,
that's
working
on
it
and
I
think
that
they
do
it
out
of
my
out
of
just
making
sure
that
the
neighborhood
is
informed
a
lot
of
times.
That
notification
only
goes
to
the
folks
that
live
within
a
certain
of
radius
to
the
proposed
project.
We
saw
that
as
recent
as
the
project
for
I
think
11
or
12
Town
Homes
on
Hill
Road
between
Hollister
and
36th
Street.
R
So
I
too
agree
that
I
don't
think
we
need
City
staff
at
these
neighborhoods
I
think
that
maybe
the
city
should
strongly
recommend
that
the
developer
send
not
just
notices
to
the
immediate
neighbors
but
to
the
neighborhood
association,
also
recognizing
that
the
neighborhood
association
does
not
have
direct
communication
with
depending
on
the
neighborhood
they
we
don't.
R
We
just
don't
have
direct
communication
with
the
majority
of
our
our
neighbors,
so
yeah,
it's
a
tough
one
but
again
I
I
guess
I
would
say
that
if
there's,
if
there's
an
opportunity
for
the
city
to
ensure
that
part
of
the
process,
part
of
the
application
process
is
a
requirement
that
you
send
and
notice
to
meet
a
neighborhood
meeting
notice
to
the
neighborhood
association
because
I,
don't
you
know
I
we've
got
three
other
neighborhood
folks
here
that
are
actively
involved.
A
A
R
I
Marissa
again
yeah,
we've
we've
had
that
happen
where
we
were
not
noticed
and
we
brought
it
to
the
attention
and
they
had
to
go
back
to
the
beginning
and
I,
like
part
of
me,
doesn't
like
doing
that,
but
the
other
part
is
like.
If
you
don't
do
it
then
like
what's
the
point
of
having
that
requirement,
if
they're
not
if
it's
not
going
to
be
adhered
to,
so
it's
kind
of
like
teaching.
I
It's
teaching
somebody
the
process
that
they
need
to
follow,
but
I
will
say
that
like
if
you
want
the
neighborhood
association
there
occasion
have
had
people
call
me
before
they
schedule
a
meeting
to
be
like
hey.
These
are
the
dates
we're
working
with.
Do
one
of
these
work
for
you?
Can
you
guarantee
that
someone
from
your
Association
will
be
there
and
that's
really
helpful,
because
there's
also
like
city
council
hearings,
there's
PNC
hearings,
there's
for
us,
there's
Ada
County,
Ada,
County
PNC,
there's
like
there's
a
lot
of
things
going
on.
I
A
No,
that
is
great
and
we
are
actually
coming
to
a
close.
So
we've
got
about
five
minutes
left,
but
I
did
want
to
let
you
know
that
we've
got
our
upcoming
Outreach
for
module
3,
beginning
on
October
13th,
so
we're
going
to
have
four
in-person
events
they'll
be
located
throughout
the
city
of
Boise,
plus
one
virtual
and
so
you'll
see
those
dates
up
above
we'll
put
those
in
the
minutes
for
you,
but
they're,
October,
13th
and
17th,
which
is
a
Thursday
and
a
Monday.
A
And
then
we
have
November
3rd,
which
is
a
Thursday
and
then
I.
Think
November
8th
is
a
Monday
and
then
we're
back
to
November
16th.
So
we'll
make
sure
that
you
have
that.
But
before
we
depart,
we
also
wanted
to
see
what
how
far
along
the
process.
Would
you
like
to
be
involved.
So
we've
had
an
initial
opportunity
to
share
with
you
our
preliminary
thoughts
in
regard
to
module
three.
If
we're
going
to
have
the
release
of
that
and
then
we're
going
to
kick
off
public
engagement.
A
So
that's
not
going
to
be
our
fourth
or
our
fifth
Thursday,
but
that's
ultimately
going
to
be
the
second
Thursday,
but
that's
gonna
fall
somewhere
between
that
October
and
January
hearing,
because
January
we're
gonna
know
exactly
what
we're
modifying
based
on
what
we
heard
from
our
community,
which
we
can
share
with
you
on
December
8th
modify
our
code.
Let
you
know
what
that
is,
obtain
your
feedback,
then
February
is
going
to
sneak
up
on
us
and
we're
going
to
submit
our
application,
we're
going
to
be
ready
to
roll.
A
A
Yep,
does
that
sound
reasonable
because
we
think
we're
going
to
have
deliverables
for
you?
We
will
have
met
with
the
community.
We
can
share
that
continue
to
talk
about
module
three
and
then
we
can
share
with
you
what
we
are
modifying
so
that
you
know
what
we're
moving
forward
to
Planning
and
Zoning
in
city
council,
foreign.
A
So
online
we
have
lots
of
support,
I'm,
hearing
lots
of
support
internal
up
to
the
building
as
well,
and
then
we
also
have
a
visitor,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
allow
them
the
opportunity
Charlie.
Do
you
have
anything
that
you'd
like
to
share
with
the
committee.
S
Can
you
guys
hear
me
yeah,
hi,
no
I,
just
appreciate
the
discussion
I'm,
a
newish
member
of
the
Easton
neighborhood
association
board
and
trying
to
raise
awareness
with
neighbors
about
what
it
actually
is
and
Etc
and
yeah
just
enjoyed
following
the
conversation
I'm.
Definitely
looking
forward
to
having
a
neighborhood
specific
engagement
opportunity
at
one
of
our
either
board
meetings
or
open
house
related
to
once
the
code
is
actually
released.
This
final
draft
so
yeah.
Looking
forward
to
that.
Thank
you.
A
And
I
guess
that
is
all
that
we
have
unless
anybody
else
has
anything
that
they'd
like
to
share.
T
Sorry
I
was
late
everybody.
This
is
Tim
Keane,
director
planning
and
I
just
wanted
to
close
the
meeting
by
first
of
all,
thanking
all
you
CAC
members
again
for
the
time
you're
giving
to
this,
and
also
mention
we
had
a
meeting
all
of
us
here
on
this
on
this
side
of
the
room
earlier
this
week
about
module
three
and
one
thing
I
wanted
to
acknowledge
that
impressed
me
about
it
is
when
I
got
here.
T
You
know
that
it
was
heavily
consultant
driven
and
even
in
answering
questions,
there
was
Sometimes
some
hesitancy
around
answering
questions
just
because
of
that
separation
between
between
the
staff
and
the
actual
work
and
we're
at
a
point
now
where
this
group
of
people
here
is
completely
owning
this.
You
know
that
there
is
a
a
lot
of
thought
going
into
and
and
consideration
of
obviously
the
regulations
themselves,
but
but
how
people
access
them
and
and
how
they
work
in
in
practice,
for
people
in
simple
ways
and
in
more
complicated
ways.
T
So
I
really
just
wanted
to
acknowledge
the
the
way
that
this
group
of
people
that
works
for
you
has
has
just
just
jumped
into
this
over
the
past
six
months
and
greatly
appreciate
the
creativity
and
and
and
commitment
they've
made
to
it.
So
thank
you
and
them
for
this
we're
actually
in
a
spot
now
where,
if
we
keep
progressing
the
way,
we
have
been
that
we
perhaps
could
get
this
done
by
next
summer.
So
thank
you.