►
From YouTube: Citywide Advisory Committee
Description
March 17, 2022
A
A
Citywide
advisory
committee
meeting:
we
will
go
ahead
and
get
kicked
off
with
the
meeting
we
just
wanted
to.
Let
everybody
know
that
we
are
well
into
our
community
engagement
and
our
community
outreach.
We've
heard
a
lot
of
great
discussion
in
regard
to
module
two
and
then
even
information
that
goes
back
to
module
one,
so
that
will
get
us
started.
We
also
wanted
to
introduce
to
you
our
new
planning
and
development
services
director
timothy
keane.
A
He
actually
goes
by
tim
keane,
but
he
is
not
quite
here
with
us
yet
so
we
may
go
ahead
and
flip-flop
items
number
two
and
three
and
really
kind
of
talk
about
some
of
the
things
that
we
have
been
hearing
not
only
from
our
community
but
also
kind
of
a
debrief
on
you
know.
What
do
you
guys
think
about
the
city
council
work
session?
A
B
B
A
I
think
that's
a
really
good
point
for
us
to
to
really
stop
and
then
kind
of
debrief
on
the
city,
council,
presentation
and
just
to
give
us
an
idea
of
where
we've
been.
So.
We
kicked
off
the
public
engagement
event,
ultimately
with
an
initial
meeting
with
the
city
council,
and
they
told
us
at
that
time
that
they
had
had
an
opportunity
to
take
a
look
at
module
two.
But
they
had
some
ideas
and
they
wanted
to
share
those
with
us.
A
And
so
we
took
that
opportunity
to
have
a
conversation
with
them
and
then
we
wanted
to
have
a
public
work
session
as
well,
so
that
the
community
heard
what
our
council
was
looking
for
and
how
they
would
move
forward.
And
so
they
did
that
on
march
1
and
I
went
ahead
and
forwarded
that
meeting
video
to
you.
So
you
should
have
had
an
opportunity
to
take
a
look
at
that,
and
then
I
know
that
a
couple
of
you
have
said
hey.
A
C
C
You
know,
and
so
he
was
nervous
or
concerned
about
adding
things
into
our
code
that
gave
rights
to
people
that
aren't,
you
know
prescribed,
and
so
you
know
I
I
feel
like
we're
we're
looking
at
it,
and
I
mean
we're
all
looking
at
this
in
a
holistic
way
about
how
can
we
have
growth
in
the
city?
And
you
know
in
my
neighborhood
I'm
particularly
concerned
about
infill
development.
I
think
a
lot
of
the
other
neighborhood
people
that
are
in
this
discussion
are
concerned
about
that,
and
so
you
know
I
feel
like
that.
C
Effort
is
kind
of
just
being
pushed
aside
and
it
was
really
all
about.
Well,
how
can
we?
How
can
we
just
build
mass
without
thinking
about
these
other
things?
I
I
don't
think
you
know
looking
at
setbacks
or
talking
about
you
know,
building
something.
That's
an
infill
development
that
blends
well
with
other
things
in
the
neighborhood
I
mean,
I,
I
don't
think
that
go.
I
think.
That's
like
the
intent
of
this
process
of
how
can
we
make
the
city
of
the
future?
A
D
D
D
In
truth,
city
council
didn't
have
any
solutions
for
me
in
particular,
except
to
you
know
my
impression
after
listening
to
that
is
that
there
was
a
lot
of
good
discussion.
There
was
no
solutions
and
to
direction
to
pnz
was
to
go
back
and
do
some
more
work,
and-
and
I'm
was
presuming
that
doing
more
work
would
involve
us
as
the
committee
and
some
of
the
feedback
it's
difficult.
I
find
it
difficult
when
we
talk
about
this
holistic
nature
of
the
city.
Well,
I
totally
agree
with
that.
D
F
G
E
I
E
Go
go,
go
go
for
it,
I
don't
know.
I
I
hear
what
they
say.
I
don't
know
how
to
react
to
that.
The
kind
of
different
conversations
we've
been
having
internally
one
thing
that
I
thought
was
striking
and
take
it
whatever
direction
you
will
is
the
comment
from
elena
craig.
That
said,
she
looks
at
how
the
zoning
code
is
written
today
or
how
it's
being
rewritten,
and
it's
almost
as
if
it's
being
written
for
the
voices
that
we
currently
have
not
for
the
future
boise.
I
guess
that
we're
trying
to
achieve
so.
F
H
H
I
could
be
wrong,
but
I
think
some
of
the
conversion
map
would
actually
result
in
some
immediate,
like
large
amounts
of
non-conformities
in
certain
areas.
Take
lusk,
for
example,
with
mixed-use
street.
I
think
just
about
anything
built
over
there
in
the
last
decade
would
be
have
been
taller
than
what
the
zone
allows.
C
H
Of
some
of
the
confines
of
that
zone,
and
then
on
a
residential
level,
I
think
maybe
it
was
mentioned
r3
that
we're
not
differentiating
these
zones
quite
enough.
I
think
just
as
a
general
message
that
was
kind
of
my
takeaway
is
that
there's
more
work
to
do
at
a
prescriptive
level
of
how
the
zones
can
be
both
applied,
but
also
massaged
a
bit
more.
F
F
F
Not
going
tall
enough
not
going
dense
enough
and
and
forget
about
some
of
the
setbacks,
it's
okay
to
go
clear
to
the
curb
basically,
and
so
I
was
pretty
alarmed
that
we
have
a
community
engagement
process.
That's
moving
along
city
council
is
giving
you
a
really
specific
direction
to
go.
That
seems
at
odds
with
where
probably
a
lot
of
homeowners
feel
the
city
should
be
going,
and
I
it
feels
like
a
runaway
train
to
me.
J
Yes,
hello,
can
you
hear
me
yeah
great?
Thank
you
yeah.
Thank
you,
andrea,
for
coming
last
night,
I
it's.
It
is
true
that
we,
there
is
a
lot
of
anger
out
in
our
area,
as
I
think
it's
true
a
lot
of
the
kind
of
edges
of
boise.
The
way
I
see
the
city
council
response
as
well.
That
was
the
response
of
you
know
a
city
council
at
five
out
of
six
live.
J
You
know
a
couple
miles
of
each
other
in
the
north
end
and
east
end,
and
I
would
love
it
if
we
could
have
a
hyde
park
out
in
my
neighborhood
and
if,
if
simply
by
kind
of
following
kind
of
letting
you
know
relaxing
some
of
these
standards,
we
get
hyde
park.
But
we
know
we
don't
get
that.
What
we
get
is
proposals
kind
of
that
that
francis
mentioned
you
know
where
there
will
have
been
no
step
downs
and
has
taken
huge
battles.
J
J
It's
just
not
realistic,
and
I
think
I
look
at
this
process
and
I
think
well
in
a
couple
of
years
we're
going
to
have
city
council
that
is
representative
across
the
city,
and
I
feel,
like
the
city
council,
is
kind
of
trying
to
rush
this
through
when
we
have
five
out
of
six
are
in
the
north
and
east
ends
and
really
don't.
I
don't
think,
really
have
much
of
an
understanding
of
what
goes
on
in
the
rest
of
the
city.
So
and
also.
J
L
K
Okay,
I
could
probably
echo
many
of
the
comments
that
richard
and
kelly
and
francis-
and
you
know
them
have
said
about
our
concern
with
trust.
You
know
we've
been
at
this
for
two
years
and
I
thought
we
were
going
a
little
too
far
on
some
of
it
already
and
then
to
see
the
city
council.
Six
people
push
right
past
us
was
really
disheartening.
K
Whatever
that
kind
of
bothered
me
a
bit-
and
I
tried
mentioning
this
last
night-
well,
let
me
say
I
mentioned
that
two
weeks
ago
or
a
week
ago
I
mentioned
that
you
know
the
city
council
was
doubling
down
on
stuff
to
the
city
council
and
they
got
angry
with
me
like
that's,
not
what
they
were
saying,
and
I
was
really
confused
by
that.
You
know
transparency.
K
I
mean
at
least
be
straight
up
with
what
you're
trying
to
do.
I
mean
I've.
Confronted
you
on
your
your
agenda
and
you
you
look
down
at
me
like
I'm
talking
out
my
butt,
and
you
know
the
trust
that
the
city
is
lost.
Here
is
incredible.
You
I've
been
to
a
lot
of
these
meetings
and
you
know
nobody's
understanding
what's
going
on
or
why
their
voice
isn't
being
heard.
K
I
mean
you're
blocking
the
sun
out
from
one
house
permanently,
and
I
understand
probably
what
you're
doing,
because
I'm
in
structural
engineering-
and
I
understand
why
it's
probably
expensive,
to
maybe
tier
the
building,
multiple
roofs
is-
are
probably
you
know
or
cost
more.
But
you
know
there
was
no
effort
made
to
protect
that
neighborhood,
not
to
mention
the
parking.
I
don't
want
to
get
into
the
parking.
K
That
was
that's
horrifying,
but
you
know
they
weren't,
protecting
that
that
neighborhood
in
any
way-
and
what
I
see
with
that,
is
it's
just
an
example
for
the
developers
to
come
in
and
do
what
they
need
to
do
and
whatever
they
want
and
the
city
to
set
an
example
like
that
that
that
scares
me.
So
that's
that's
my
take.
A
All
right
we
have
esther
and
then
byron
and
then
I
would
love
for
us
to
transition
quickly
to
timothy
keane,
because
I
know
he
has
another
meeting
that
he
needs
to
get
to
so
I'd
love
for
you
guys
to
be
able
to
meet
him
and
hear
what
his
vision
is,
because
I
think
he's
going
to
take
a
lot
of
these
thoughts
and
really
place
them
together.
Based
on
his
past
experience,
he's
a
very
kind
and
talented
man.
M
M
M
In
some
respects
we
are
not
there
anymore,
and
so
we,
you
know
a
lot
of
what
I've
heard
and
a
lot
of
what
I
previously
in
involved
in
planning
and
zoning
public
comment.
Opportunities
really
emphasized
was
like
keeping
boise
the
way
that
it
is
and
we
should-
and
we
do
have
an
obligation
to
the
extent
possible
to
maintain
those
aspects
of
the
city
that
we
cherish.
But
at
the
same
time
I
feel
that
we
need
to
be
realistic
and
think
about.
If
we
are
going
to
grow,
what
does
that
look
like.
I
I
I
I've
seen
multiple
things
happen,
and
so
that's
been
pretty
frustrating
as
well.
Specifically
because
I
know
that's
not
the
only
boy
scene-
that's
out
there.
Those
are
the
boys
scenes
that
tend
to
attend
those
neighborhood
meetings,
but
there
are
many
other,
possibly
hundreds
of
other
types
of
boiseans
that
we
haven't
heard
from
and
or
at
least
we
as
a
group
may
not
have
heard
from
and
certainly
haven't
heard
from
in
the
neighborhood
meetings,
because
they're
primary
method
of
responding
to
the
comments
from
module
one
or
two
are
likely.
I
We
don't.
We
don't
have
access
to
those
they're,
probably
emailed
they're,
probably
texted,
to
city
staff.
So
we
don't
hear
from
those
people
as
a
group
either.
So
it's
easy
to
see
it's
easy
to
become
convinced
that
what
we're
hearing
is
nothing
but
negativity,
nothing
but
anger
from
boiseans
as
a
whole.
When
that's
really
not
the
case
it.
It
is
interesting
to
me
that
so
many
of
the
com,
questions
and
confusions
that
lie
around
these
neighborhood
meetings
tend
to
be.
I
I
mean
it
is
a
legal
document
in
a
certain
sense,
it's
difficult
for
the
average
voice
ian
to
know
how
to
respond
to
things
like
setbacks
or
height
limits
and
density
limits.
So,
in
a
way
I
do
understand
where
they're
coming
from,
I
understand
where
their
their
anger
and
fear
is
coming
from,
but
so
much
of
that
has
to
do
with
just
this
lack
of
information
or
lack
of
ability
to
kind
of
comprehend
the
plan
itself
and
understand
that
growth
is
happening
anyway.
D
D
They
are
very
focused
on
the
areas.
What
are
the
things
that
this
may
be
more
of
a
question
of
when
we
go
back
to
things
on
how
to
improve
modules?
Two
and,
if
necessary,
is
you
know?
The
meeting
that
struck
me
that
might
have
been
closest
to
yesterday's
was
the
foothills
meeting
where
people
are
concerned
about
open
space
areas
and
I'd
like
to
and
that's
open
space
private
land,
not
public
land.
You
know
at
some
point
have
the
opportunity
to
hear
what
are
the
other
options
for
those
areas.
D
A
Well,
thank
you
and
then,
if
other
people
do
have
comments,
you
know
we
may
have
additional
discussion
time
that
we
can
dive
in.
But
I
want
to
introduce
tim
keene.
He
is
the
new
planning
and
development
services
director
with
the
city
of
boise
he's
been
with
us
for
a
little
over
a
week.
He
has
been
very
interested
in
taking
a
deep
dive
into
the
zoning
code,
rewrite
and
he's
actually
been
able
to
attend
multiple
of
our
community
engagement
events,
so
he
has
a
really
great
handle
on
what
our
community
is
saying.
N
G
Thank
you,
andrea
and
I'm
sorry
that
I'm
meeting
some
of
you
for
the
first
time
here
on
zoom,
I
did
get
a
chance
to
meet
some
of
you,
however,
last
night
and
at
the
meeting
in
the
foothills
last
wednesday,
which
was
my
first
day
with
the
city
of
boise
I'll
start
by
just
thanking
you
for
participating
in
this
group,
as
was
just
mentioned
by
roberta.
This
is
such
an
important
group
that
you're
leading
community
conversations
beyond
the
public
meetings,
and
you
know
critiquing
this
process
and
the
details
of
what's
being
proposed
along
the
way.
G
This
is
the
ultimate
in
public
service
that
you
would
give
your
time
and
volunteer
to
help
the
community
through
this.
What
is
always
a
very
challenging
process
which
can
be
emotional
and
there's
so
many
opinions
related
to
so,
thank
you.
So
much-
and
it's
been
mentioned
a
couple
times
already
in
30
minutes,
you've
been
on
the
call.
I
was
a
few
minutes
late,
but
I've
heard
several
compliment
the
staff,
and
I
want
to
do
that
myself
arriving
here
just
last
wednesday.
G
So
I
want
to
acknowledge
what
a
talented
group
of
people
and
talented
in
addition
to
dedicated
to
the
city,
and
just
my
last
thing
is
really
just
and
esther
was
speaking
to
this,
and
I
I've
had
a
few
people,
including
last
night,
at
the
public
meeting
we
had
asked
me.
You
know
why.
Why
are
you
here?
G
I'm
coming
from
the
southeastern
united
states,
of
course,
and-
and
I
I'll
tell
you
that
the
reason
that
I
thought
this
was
a
place
I'm
interested
in
in
living
and
and
helping
is
for
the
reasons
that
you're
discussing
you
know
the
the
fact
that
this
is
number
one,
a
community
that
recognizes
the
relationship
between
the
physical
place
and
the
prosperity
of
the
people.
I've
been
in
the
city
for
seven
years.
That
didn't
recognize
that
so
I
was
excited
to
be
in
a
place
again.
G
In
the
midst
of
related
to
how
to
organize
your
regulations,
such
that
they're,
producing
the
best
that
they
can
is,
is
substantially
why
I
decided
to
to
come
to
to
boise,
and
I
say
that
just
to
to
say
these
are
really
really
you
know
even
last
night
and
much
of
the
discussion,
some
of
which
was
related
to
the
technical
aspects
of
what
was
being
presented.
But
much
of
it
was
also
not.
G
G
Because
of
that
concern
that
you
have
for
the
place
and
understanding
of
the
place
as
it
relates
to
solving
these
these
problems,
because
you
can't
not
deal
with
the
place
if
you're
going
to
deal
with
affordability
and
mobility
and
conservation
and-
and
I
will
say
my
expectation-
is
that
we're
not
looking
at
sharing
the
burden
across
the
city
or
we're
not
looking
at
balancing
things,
we're
looking
at.
What's
the
optimal
condition
for
boise?
What's
the?
G
Who
can
live
here
and
and
what
your
quality
of
life
is
like,
as
it
relates
to
things
like
getting
around
the
city
and
having
varieties
of
options
for
where
you
live
and
and
jobs,
and
things
like
this
and
that
we're
seeking
the
best
solutions
and
the
best
outcomes?
Not
you
know,
balancing
things
or
sharing
burdens,
so
andrea.
N
A
B
Thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
tim.
I
had
a
chance
to
speak
with
him
briefly
last
week
and
I'm
glad
he's
there.
I'm
glad
he
had
time
to
to
share
your
thoughts
and
your
approach.
You've
got
your
value
system
with
us
a
little
bit
today.
So
so
everybody
take
a
deep
breath.
I
guess
what
I
would
say
as
we
start
into
this
is
two
things
a
as
many
of
you
remember
when,
when
the
mayor
was
elected,
she
reconstituted
this
group
and
she
deliberately
put
on
it.
B
People
with,
I
think,
significantly
divergent
opinions
about
what
would
make
boise
the
best
city.
As
tim
says.
What
and
that's
not
a
bad
thing.
That's
a
good
thing.
That
is
what
we're
experiencing
the
difficulty
of
some
of
these
meetings.
The
difficulty
of
the
strong
emotions
one
way
or
the
other
is
just
you
know.
It's
just
reflective
of
the
fact
that
it's
a
diverse
group
and
it
is
to
the
city's
credit
that
it's
not
afraid
of
having
a
diverse
group
like
this.
B
Some
of
your
comments
about
the
the
planning,
commission
and
city
council
kind
of
suggests
that
you
wish
there
were
more
diversity
of
opinion
on
those
groups,
and
so
we
have
it
here.
So,
let's,
let's
just
keep
working
with
it.
It
is
an
advantage,
it's
not
a
disadvantage.
It
is
likely
to
result
in
more
thoughtful
thoughtful
outcomes
and
things
that
are
more
likely
to
lead
us
to
the
best
boise.
So
second
thing
I'd
say
is:
let's
take
a
breath.
B
I
think
everybody
that
I
have
talked
to
in
in
attending
some
of
the
neighborhood
meetings
and
in
seeing
the
email
communications
that
happen
and
talking
to
staff
about
these
meetings.
Is
people
really
want
to
understand
modules,
one
and
two
and
all
of
us
have
said
all
the
way
along
the
line.
They
are
not
done
until
they're
done
and
they're
always
drafts
they're
always
available
for
modification,
and
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
are
listening
to
those
things
and
the
comments
of
too
much
of
this,
and
too
little
of
that
is
it's.
B
You
know,
we've
said
it
so
many
many
times,
and
and
we
mean
it,
those
things
are
all
in
play
until
you
get
to
near
the
end
of
this
process
and
we're
not
near
the
end
of
this
process,
and
so
I
know
staff's
doing
the
outreach
to
to
increase
that
understanding
and
I'm
confident
it'll
be
successful.
But
let's
take
a
breath
because
part
of
what
makes
will
make
boise
the
best
city
is
what
we've
put
out
in
module
one
and
two:
what
can
you
do
on
your
property?
How
big
can
it
be?
B
Will
it
shadow
the
neighbors?
Is
there
enough
parking?
Is
there
too
much
parking?
Is
there
landscaping?
Is
there
buffering?
All
of
that
is
part
of
what
makes
boise
a
great
city,
but
I
I'm
asking
you
to
shift
gears
today
in
the
next
couple
of
months.
We
need
to
start
talking
about
the
issues
of
how
the
city
does
business,
how
it
could
do
business
in
a
in
in
a
better
way
and
I'll
just
say
it
one
that
would
create
more
confidence
and
less
distrust
of
the
city.
B
But
we
have
heard
that-
and
we
heard
it
today-
we've
just
heard
20
minutes
of
it
25
minutes
of
the
distrust
and
the
disconnection
between
what
people
want
the
city
to
be
and
how
they
want
it
to
interact
with
citizens
and
builders
and
and
what
they
perceive
as
the
way.
It
is
right
now.
So
that's
module
three
stuff.
It's
important!
It's
not
getting
ahead
of
the
card
ahead
of
the
horse.
B
It
is
tackling
the
third
kind
of
leg
of
the
stool,
which
is
that
how
the
city
engages
people
treats
people
listens
to
people
responds
to
people
engages
people
is
a
big
part
of
what
makes
a
great
city
and
what
makes
a
happy
city
and
a
not
distrustful
city.
So
let's
go
into
this
and
I'm
going
to
do
so.
I'm
going
to
do
the
first
half
of
this
presentation
and
then
and
then
gabby's
going
to
do
the
second
part.
B
Now
we
heard
that,
oh,
I
think
we
heard
some
of
that
reflected
a
little
bit
today
too.
I
have
said
before
and
I'll
say
again:
we
have
heard
less
fewer
comments
about
design,
review
committee
and
design
review
process,
fewer
negative
questions
than
our
comments
than
we
did
two
years
ago,
so
that
has
changed.
The
personnel
have
changed
and
I
just
want
to
acknowledge.
B
This
is
what
we
put
in
the
diagnostic.
This
is
what
we
had
heard
you
can
see
on
the
right
hand,
side
of
the
screen.
The
code
is
where
you
talk
about
how
neighborhood
meetings
happen,
how
they
operate
and
how
design
review
happens
and
how
it
operates.
So
we're
going
back
to
what
did
we
hear
on
the
right
hand?
Side
now,
you
can
look
at
our
recommendations,
strengthen
the
general
decision-making
criteria,
to
increase
clarity
and
transparency
and
simplify
and
standardize
the
waiver
and
adjustment
provisions
to
limit
the
number
of
variance,
requests
and
increase
predictability.
B
B
B
What's
likely
to
happen,
the
more
that
happens,
the
more
you
build
trust
and
so
again,
we've
got
you
can
go
and
see
on
the
left-hand
side.
This
is
an
example
of
what
you
have.
You
have
some
things
that
are
words.
They
are
typical
words,
but
they
leave
a
lot
of
room
for
different
outcomes
and,
frankly,
I
often
hear
in
communities.
I
won't
put
this
in
boise's
mouth,
the
same
people
who
are
just
at
the
same
time.
B
You
sometimes
hear
comes
from
citizens
they're
disappointed
because
it
seems
like
for
every
rule,
there's
an
exception,
you'll
hear
from
developers
that
for
every
rule,
there's
a
way
to
deny
the
project,
and
so
it
is
not
a
one-sided
thing.
Predictability
is
part
of
good
governance,
it
doesn't
mean
the
rule
has
to
be
x,
but
the
rule
ought
to
be
clear
enough
that
if
it's
not
x,
it
might
be
y
and
under
the
following
circumstances.
B
B
B
A
signed
permit
usually,
is
just
a
decision
for
staff.
If
it's
not
too
tall,
it's
not
too
high.
It's
not
too
close.
It's
not
too
brightly
lit.
It
gets
approved
because
the
rules
are
in
the
code,
I'm
giving
that
as
an
example.
If
it's
huge,
it
might
go
to
a
hearing,
but
lots
of
things
are
just
staff.
Does
it
have
enough
parking
or
not,
is
often
a
staff
ratio
if
you're
reducing
a
property
in
a
new
way?
Hearing
examiner
question
mark
the
city
has
been
discussing
and
it
has
this
in
writing.
B
It
doesn't
have
it
staffed.
Should
there
be
a
hearing
examiner
for
future
use
for
minor
applications
that
require
a
hearing
you
don't
want
to
just
have
the
director
do
it?
You
want
people
to
be
able
to
comment
on
whether
it
meets
these
criteria
or
not,
and
you
give
that
decision
to
a
hearing
examiner
the
question
mark
is
the
city
hasn't
decided
whether
it
wants
one
or
not,
but
we're
putting
it
on
the
table
because
they
are
thinking
about
it.
It's
an
efficient.
B
It's
a
way
to
give
minor
or
technical
things
to
someone
who
is
trained
to
listen
to
the
testimony,
listen
to
sometimes
technical,
geological
or
engineering
or
hillside
reasons
and
say
all
right.
I
think
it
caught
or
floodplain
and
say
it.
It
meets
it
or
doesn't
need
it
with
a
right
of
appeal,
but
basically
a
hearing
with
something
that
is
not
in
front
of
a
larger
group
design.
Review
committee.
You
are
well
aware
of:
we've
talked
about
it.
Their
general
role
is
aesthetics
of
a
project
subject
to
design
review.
B
Basically,
in
boise
it's
a
little
bit
of
an
overstatement,
but
not
much
to
say
that
all
multi-family
commercial
and
industrial
projects
are
subject
to
design
review.
There's
historic
preservation!
Commission,
you
understand
their
role,
there's
a
planning
and
zoning
commission,
which
is
a
fairly
a
very
important
body
in
this
system,
as
as
because
they
make
recommendations
to
city
council
on
major
applications,
rezonings,
etc.
B
So,
again,
design
review
usually
has
a
limited
ambit.
It's
pretty
broad
in
boise
historic
preservation
has
a
limited
ambit
planning.
Commission
is
a
lot
broader
amp
for
an
appointed
group
and
then
of
course,
city
council
for
final
legislative
authority,
and
you
know
adopting
the
code
or
adopting
a
zoning
change.
Now
appeals
body
has
a
question
mark
too.
Some
cities,
in
addition
to
this
list
would
have
a
separate
board
of
adjustment.
That
is
there
to
hear
appeals.
B
It
is
there
to
frankly
not
have
appeals,
go
up
to
city,
council
or
elected
or
appointed
or
elected,
or
a
planning
commission
and
in
those
cities,
and
it
is
many
of
them
who
have
a
separate
appeals
board.
They
don't
ask
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
to
hear
appeals.
They
have
a
separate
group
and
its
focus
is
not
did.
Will
this
decision
implement
our
plans?
That's
planning
and
zoning
commission's
decision.
It
is.
Did
somebody
make
a
mistake
in
applying
our
code?
B
I
we
put
a
question
mark
after
it,
because
this
is
a
question
for
the
city
to
consider,
as
it
thinks
through
how
it
wants
to
do
business
in
the
future.
Maybe
some
of
you
will
have
comments
on
that
in
the
future
boise.
I
think
there
are
boise
in
my
mind.
I
will
say
for
a
medium-sized
city,
most
of
them
have
a
separate
hearing
board.
Most
of
them
do
not
have
historic.
Excuse
me,
planning
and
zoning
making
those
decisions.
It
does
not
mean
it's
wrong
at
all.
It's
just
it
is.
B
So,
let's
just
talk
about
roles,
so
the
those
are
the
groups
and
most
cities
try
to
run
themselves
so
that
they
they
clearly
define
in
the
procedures.
What
will
be
decided
at
an
administrative
level
and
they
implement
it?
They
decide
these
decisions
for
those
who
are
not
geeks
about
zoning.
When
you
get
public
hearings,
there
are
two
different
kinds
of
public
hearings
that
go
out
there
and
they
have
legal
consequences.
B
Quasi-Judicial
decisions
are
the
re-zoning
of
a
particular
piece
of
property
or
a
variance
it's.
They
require
discretion
to
determine
whether
they're,
consistent
with
the
comp
plan
or
with
the
standards
in
the
code
and
basically
most
of
what
planning
and
zoning
does
design
review.
Does
historic
preservation
does
or
that
a
hearing,
examiner
or
appeals
board
would
do
is
doing
this.
We
are
trying
to
evaluate.
Does
this
site
specific
application
conditional
use
on
a
particular
site
variants
on
a
particular
site,
rezoning
of
a
particular
piece
of
land?
B
Does
it
meet
the
criteria
for
making
that
decision
in
as
put
forward
in
the
code
and
the
third
one
is
legislative
decisions,
and
that's
only
city
council
and
in
certain
cases,
for
example,
the
adoption
of
the
new
zoning
ordinance
when
that
comes
forward
or
the
adoption
of
a
conversion?
Zoning
map
are
usually
legislative
decisions.
They
are
setting
up
a
new
system
of
rules
for
the
entire
city.
B
They
are
not
applying
it
to
my
property
or
your
property,
or
this
neighborhood
or
that
neighborhood
it's
a
big
piece
of
land
or
it's
a
city-wide
issue
and
the
reason
they're
different
is
that
in
legislative
decisions,
it's
much
more
likely.
The
city
will
be
deciding
the
city
council
be
deciding
based
on
the
overall
good
of
the
entire
population
and
there's,
frankly,
a
lot
less
due
process.
Do
that's
why
you
elect
them,
so
they
can
use
their
judgment
as
to
direction
setting
and
rule
making
for
the
entire
city
in
a
quasi-judicial
decision.
B
So
there's
a
little
bit
more
due
process
to
allow
questioning
and
creating
a
record
so
that
you
know
exactly
why
this
decision
was
made.
Sometimes
city
councils
don't
have
to
create
nearly
as
detailed
a
record
as
to
why
they
do
legislative
decisions.
It
was
a
public
hearing.
You
heard
the
discussion,
they
decided
they
wanted
to
go
in
this
direction,
so
those
are
the
basic
backgrounds.
I
wanted
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
how
boise
does
public
hearings
because
that's
been
a
topic.
B
The
way
the
city
is
set
up.
Their
public
hearings
take
place
at
different
regular
times
each
month
for
different
decision-making
bodies.
You
you
submit
written
testimony
by
the
thursday
prior
to
the
meeting
you
can
sign
up
in
advance
or
at
the
meetings
and
they're
all
held
at
a
time,
and
the
image
on
the
right
side
is
simply.
B
These
are
the
time
frames.
This
is
the
calendar
of
when
you
have
public
hearings
and
and
when
you
have
to
submit
things
in
order
to
be
have
it
considered
for
the
public
hearing.
This
is
pretty
standard,
but
it
it
is
a
process
by
which
you
set
people
up
for
success.
You
you
can't
just
walk
in
and
drop
a
document
in
that
nobody's
had
a
chance
to
look
at
it
that
you're
someone
who
might
agree
with
you
would
say.
Well,
I
didn't
even
know
that
was
out
there.
B
So
I
want
to
just
set
these
out
and
we're
going
to
go
to
a
question
pretty
quickly
on
this
and
take
a
break
right
now
you
have
a
lot
of
conditional
uses,
a
broader
number
of
not
just
uses,
but
other
things,
other
decisions
in
boise
that
require
a
conditional
use.
Permit
approval
our
initial
reaction
when
clarion
looks
at
the
code
is
those
are
not
conditional
uses.
There
are
other.
There
are
other
things
that
other
cities
don't
say:
go
through
a
conditional
process.
B
What
if
it's
a
conditional
use
subject
to
design
review?
That's
that's
two
kind
of
public
hearings
and
review
and
approvals
major
subdivisions.
You
sometimes
have
a
system
where
you're
reviewing
the
basic
layout
of
a
subdivision
plat
at
both
planning
commission
and
for
approval
having
it
at
city,
council
and
then
the
last
one
is
simply
this
that
it
appears
to
us
and
once
again
we,
your
your
procedures,
are
pretty
complicated
as
we've
gotten
into
trying
to
understand
them
and
and
not
entirely
clear
how
it
works.
B
B
I
wasn't
sure
how
design
review
would
come,
but
I
disagree
with
that
outcome.
I
didn't
like
the
decision
that
was
made,
I'm
just
picking
on
those
as
examples
and
that
each
each
one
of
these
to
the
degree
there's
uncertainty,
it's
kind
of
compounded
when
you
have
multiple
public
hearings.
I
I
lost
this
time
around.
I
thought
maybe
I'd
win
the
next
time
around.
I
lost
that
time
too,
and
so
it
is.
B
So,
as
I
have
hinted
in
the
comments
so
far
as
we
get
into
thinking
about
how
the
city
does
business,
these
are.
These
are
some
questions
in
general,
when
we
are
asked
to
work
with
cities
to
rewrite
codes,
we
are
asked:
are
there
opportunities
for
us
to
consolidate
public
hearings
so
that
more
aspects
of
a
decision
could
be
considered
in
a
single
public
hearing?
Rather
than
having
multiple
public
hearings,
sometimes
we
have,
you
could
have
a
consolidated
hearing
in
which
a
group
I'm
making
this
example
up,
I'm
just
completely
making
this
example
up.
B
But
it's
it's
an
example
where,
if
you're
going
to
have
two
public
hearings
on
a
condition
use
permit
in
a
design
review,
you
do
them
in
one
hearing-
and
you
say
for
purposes
of
the
conditional
use
we're
applying
these
criteria
in
per
in
connection
with
the
design
review
committee.
We're
applying
these
criteria,
but
we're
not
going
to
go
around
twice
here
and
there
are
times
I've
actually
seen
times
where
people
have
joint
meetings.
They
have
the
design,
review
and
planning
commission
have
it
together.
So
they
have
that
decision
together
rather
than
sequentially
and
then
appeals.
B
B
The
you
want
to
have
as
few
of
those
situations
as
possible
and
if
you
can
consolidate
them
so
that
you
create
the
impression
look.
This
is
a
pretty
clear
and
transparent
set
of
criteria.
If
there's
a
mistake,
we'll
consider
it,
but
some
committees,
some
communities,
are
trying
to
consolidate
those.
So
I
do
want
to
talk
about
one
more
thing:
we
you
do
have
this
table,
it's
the
top
line
of
a
table
in
your
current.
B
Basically,
it's
it's
reformatted,
but
to
talk
about
who
makes
which
kinds
of
decisions,
what
kind
of
neighborhood
meetings
are
needed
and
what
kind
of
notice
is
needed?
And
then,
where
would
you
go
to
get
more
information?
Adding
more
more
detail
to?
That
is
a
way
of
being
transparent
to
being
clearer,
even
if
there
are
exceptions
that
have
to
be
footnoted
and
then
the
other
trend
that
is
happening
again
in
a
number
of
states.
B
A
floodplain
variance
has
to
do
with
its
risk
of
creating
a
flood,
not
whether
people
like
it
or
not,
a
river
system
permit
has
to
do
with
its
probable
effect
on
the
environment.
A
hillside
development
permit
has
to
do
with
erosion
as
well
as
the
aesthetics,
and
so
often
when
hearing
examiners
are
created.
It
is
because
you
want
somebody
who
can
keep
focused
on
the
technical
public,
health
safety,
welfare,
environmental
values,
rather
than
planning
and
general
future
of
the
city
values.
B
So
today
I
just
want
to
go
there
design
review
procedures
today,
I'm
going
on
because
we're
going
to
put
two
questions
out,
one
about
the
relationship
of
different
groups
and
one
about
design
review.
It's
basically
required
for
all
multi-family
commercial
office
and
industrial
development,
meaning.
And
what
do
we
mean
by
that?
Well,
you
can
see
in
modules
one
and
two
what
we
classify
in
those
things,
there's
a
flow
chart
on
the
right
as
to
how
you
do
it
now
and
again.
B
It
is
a
separate
procedure
right
now
and
you
do
have
a
system
of
minor
design
review,
which
is
a
plot
approved
at
the
staff
level
and
major
that
goes
up
to
the
drc.
Just
for
those
of
you
who
haven't
been
through
the
process.
That's
your
your
process
today,
so
I'm
I've
shifted
in
the
last
slide
to
say.
Let's
we
talked
about
general
relationships
now
we're
talking
about
design
review
in
many
cities
and
in
the
version
of
module
two
that
is
out
there
for
discussion
right
now.
We
have
made
some
changes.
B
You
have.
We
have
put
into
the
code
some
objective
design
standards,
some
things
that
are
just
objective.
They
are
close
to
the
street,
far
from
the
street
location
of
things,
doors
and
windows
on
the
street,
and
in
I'm
this
three-step
process
is
we're
trying
to
kind
of
communicate.
How
are
other
cities
thinking
about
this?
B
Increasingly,
there
are
things
which
are
just
reviewed
because
there's
design
standards
in
the
code
just
like
the
number
of
parking
spaces,
it's
it
either
isn't
adequate
or
it's
not
adequate.
There's
adjustments
either
you
get
an
adjustment
or
you
don't
get
an
adjustment,
but
these
are
objective
design
standards
approved
for
broad
categories
just
period.
That's
a
trend.
B
Some
communities
keep
that
and
also
have
a
minor
design
review
procedure,
meaning
we
put
in
black
and
white
what
we
thought
were.
We
could
decide
today
about
these
different
things,
but
there
is
a
different
process
at
staff
level,
where
you
have
to
put
people
through
a
more
discretionary
process
where
you
basically
say
we
think
staff
can
decide
it,
but
it
does
involve
some
discretion.
However,
these
decisions
are
not
often
appealed.
Nobody
seems
unhappy
with
them
and
so
it's
a
different
list.
B
Instead
of
just
black
and
white,
it
is
some
criteria
on
which
to
approve
a
somewhat
discretionary
result,
design
review
and
then
let
it
be
appealed
if
the
applicant
doesn't
like
it
or
the
neighbors,
don't
like
it
appeal
up
to
the
designer
of
your
body.
Why?
Because
there
is
some
discretion
involved.
Well
don.
I
thought
you
said:
discretion
went
to
the
to
the
design
review
group.
B
Yes,
most
of
it
does,
but
a
number
of
cities
delegate
minor
things
down
to
save
time,
because
in
their
experience
not
many
people
appeal
these
decisions
and
they
are
routinely
approved
and
the
development
community
gets
used
to
them
and
as
predicts
the
outcome,
and
so
there
you
go,
the
question
mark
is,
you
know,
do
do
we
need
minor
design,
review
and
also
objective
design
standards.
They
could
be
one
thing:
some
cities
don't
have
minor,
they
say
if
it's
objective
staff
decides
it.
If
it's
got
discretion,
it
goes
up
to
the
hearing.
B
Some
don't
some
keep
it
separate.
But
some
say
you
know,
look
with
these.
Your
minor
decisions.
Our
staff
report
tells
you
that
we
would
approve
this
based
on
minor
design.
We
think
it
meets
the
design
route,
but
we're
sending
it
up
to
planning
and
zoning
because
they
need
to
decide
the
fundamental
issue.
We
don't
really
expect
them
to
question
our
judgment
on
the
design,
but
they
could
and
then
major
design
review
which
you're
used
to
which
is
often
appealable
to
a
governing
body.
So
I
put
the
middle
as
a
question.
B
Sometimes
there's
a
three
tiered
system.
Sometimes
it's
only
two
tiers
and
if
you
had
to
guess,
okay
don
we
want
to,
we
want
to
go
one
or
two.
I
would
say
the
trend
is
most
places,
go
to
one
and
say:
look,
let's
try
to
be
objective
at
design
standards
and
if
it's
got
to
go
somewhere,
it
just
goes
up
to
start
pressure
or
design
review
commission
committee.
B
So
these
are
the
two
questions
in
the
first
half
what
types
of
decisions
should
go
before
city
council
planning,
commission
design
review.
I
would
be
particularly
interested
with
anybody
who
says:
I
think
they
should
go
up
or
these
or
shouldn't
go
up
and
then
are
there
opportunities
to
consolidate.
You
have
a
separate
system
for
design
review.
We
completely
understand
the
logic
of
that,
but
it
does
add
time
and
it
does
add
some
level
of
uncertainty,
so
andrea.
A
Yes,
so
as
we
kick
this
off,
we
had
a
couple
of
questions
that
had
come
in
and
it
was
specifically,
you
know
when
appeals
happen
is
when
we
have
an
appeals
board
as
a
possibility.
Are
the
appeal
boards,
elected
or
appointed,
and
then
don?
Do
you
have
any
specific
example
of
a
city
size
or
a
threshold
where
appeals
boards
are
typically
used.
B
The
short
answer
is
that
hearing
hearing
examiners
are
usually
appointed
under
a
contract
with
the
city.
The
city,
just
like
it
asks
for
a
zoning
consultant,
says
we're
interested
in
hiring
somebody
on
a
part-time
basis,
with
knowledge
about
our
code
and
about
sometimes
it's
a
lawyer.
Usually
it's
a
lawyer,
somebody
who
understands
how
to
create
a
legal
record
and
they
take
procurement,
and
then
they
take
the
most
qualified
candidate
and
put
them
on
a
contract
for
a
year.
That's
what
usually
it
is
in
bigger
cities.
It's
sometimes
a
a
salaried
position.
B
If
they
have
a
large
number
of
these
things,
I
don't
have
a
number,
but
I
would
be
happy
andrea
to
send
you
examples
of
cities
that
do
use
a
hearing
board
and
and
their
populations,
so
you
could
circulate
it
to
the
group
and
say:
do
we
think
we're
more
like
this
or
not?
There
isn't
a
threshold
people.
Do
it
very
differently
I'll.
Stick
with
what
I
said
earlier,
usually
about
the
time
when
you're
the
size
of
boise,
it's
more
common
to
see
a
separate
appeals
board,
but
I'll
send
you
examples.
A
B
I
would
I've
already
said:
I
think
cities
your
size
often
have
an
appeals
board
separate
from
the
planning
board.
I
I
would
not
make
that
same
statement
about
hearing
examiner.
I
would
say
it
is
probably
I
would
actually
say
a
minority
of
cities
have
a
hearing
exam
that
usually
the
threshold
for
when
you
put
somebody
on
salary
or
a
contract
for
appeals,
is
a
little
higher.
So
I
I
know
of
a
number
of
cities
that
have
a
board
of
adjustment
and
don't
have
a
hearing
examiner.
A
Nope,
that's
great,
and
I
think
that
leads
us
really
nicely
into
some
of
these
questions.
So
really
talking
about
what
items
do
you
think
are
reasonable
to?
You
know,
be
reviewed
by
our
different
bodies
and
are
there
opportunities
to
maybe
consolidate
those
or
to
do
them
a
little
bit
differently
than
what
we
have
so
we'll
open
it
up
for
any
comments
or
thoughts,
recommendations.
D
E
Cool,
so
I
I
do
appreciate
that,
currently
some
projects,
I
think
it's
multi-family
projects
in
a
certain
zone,
are
required
to
go
through
design
review.
I
think
that
kind
of
holds
a
certain
scale
and
type
of
project
accountable
and
make
you
know
accountable
to
design
review
standards
and
all
that.
So
I
I
think
there
are
projects
that
definitely
need
to
be
looked
at
smaller
scale.
E
I
don't
know
that
it's
as
critical-
I
guess
just
throwing
this
out
there
to
the
point
of
having
a
multi-tiered
system
like
minor
design
review
or
some
major
design
review.
That
just
starts
seeing
it
seem
a
little
convoluted
for
me.
You
know
if
I'm
a
designer,
I
don't
know
which
one
I'm
ultimately
going
to
have
to
go
to,
and
then
it's
just
going
to
kind
of
add
time
to
that
process.
O
Thanks
all
right
so
much
on
this,
I
think
one
thing
I
just
want
to
say
as
a
statement
that
is
that
we
haven't
talked
about,
and
I
want
to
understand,
if
I
you
know,
maybe
it's
worth
diving
into
for
another
time
or
not.
There
is
something
that
I
feel
is
very
unique
in
boise,
and
that
is
when
you
go
to
a
meeting.
A
lot
of
those
items
will
be
moved
to
consent
at
the
time
of
the
meeting,
depending
on
whether
or
not
there
is
somebody
in
present
and
now
virtual.
N
O
For
a
handful
of
reasons,
I
think
it's
really
inefficient.
I
think
it.
I
don't
think
it
benefits
community
members
developers
or
the
the
board
that
you're
seeing
so
I'd
be
curious.
If
you
have
any
thoughts
on
that
to
the
consultant
team
or
if
that's
addressed,
maybe
it's
state
law.
I
don't
know
item
number
one.
O
The
idea
of
consolidating
design,
review
and
planning
commission
for
certain
larger
scale
projects,
I
think,
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
In
my
experience
when
I
have
to
go
to
planning
commission,
it
is
a
true
entitlement
and
we
spend
a
lot
of
time
and
a
lot
of
money
making
sure
that
we
are
able
to
meet
that
entitlement
and
by
the
time
we
go
to
design
which
can
be
appealed
and
by
the
time
we
go
to
to
design
review.
There
really
is
not
much
that
they
are
able
to
have
any
meaningful.
O
It's
a
false
sense
to
the
community
and
provides
uncertainty
to
the
community
that
there's
really
much.
The
design
review
board
can
do
when
you're
talking
about
large
larger
projects,
and
so
I
think
it
gives
people
a
very
false
sense
of
the
power
that
they
do
or
don't
have
by
having
those
two
meetings.
Two
two
public
hearings,
two
appeal
process.
O
Just
as
the
other
day,
a
woman
came
up
to
me
and
said:
how
come
there
weren't
more
people
here
at
this
design
review
meeting
it's
like
because
it
doesn't
matter,
it
is
entitled
the
site
is
entitled
already.
So
I
think
it's
a
really.
I
think
that
is
something
that
should
be
cleaned
up
and
I
just
the
types
of
decisions
that
could
should
go
to
council
planning,
commission
or
design
review.
I
I
don't
understand
really
why
land
use
goes
to
council
much.
O
I
don't
I.
I
think
that
that
non-political
body
would
make
a
lot
of
sense,
and
I
think
it
should
be
viewed
with
the
lens
of
the
legal,
the
legalities
of
the
code.
I
mean
the
code
is
a
legal
document
and
I,
if
I
was
on
council,
which
hopefully
I
never
will
be
but
like
I
would
want
to
know-
am
I
going
to
get
sued
for
voting
one
way
or
the
other
right
like
it
should
be.
Somebody
that
understands
land
use
law,
saying
whether
or
not
this
appeal
is
accurate.
O
O
It
got
administrative,
dr,
but
we
had
to
go
through
a
public
hearing
for
doing
multi-family
on
multi-family
and
and
to
me,
that's
not
a
conditional
use
like
if
I'm
doing
multi-family
on
a
piece
of
property.
That's
zoned
multi-family,
it's
giving
the
community
a
false
sense
of
power
as
to
what
they
can
argue
or
not.
O
B
B
It's
time,
it's
not
a
lot
of
times
a
lot
of
time,
but
frankly,
a
lot
of
mistakes
are
made
sometimes
in
noticing,
and
it
opens
up.
Another
source
of
uncertainty
is
that
you've
gone
through
the
noticing
process
to
get
to
a
hearing
with
the
fair
knowledge
that
you're
not
gonna,
have
the
hearing,
because
nine
times
out
of
ten
those
are
put
on
the
consent
agenda,
so
in
general,
as
people
you
know
I
I
said
this
before
guys
it.
B
The
answer
will
be
right
when
boise
says
it's
right,
there
isn't
the
right
answer,
but
I
don't
have
any
clients
ever
who
have
said
I'd
like
this
process
to
take
longer
and
have
more
steps
in
it,
and
so
that's
that
is,
that
is
one
of
the
ways
in
which
people
have
tried
to
remove
steps
is,
if
it's
very
likely
that
this
is
an
administrative
judgment
that
will
go
on
consent
agenda.
Let's
make
it
an
administrative
judgment,
subject
to
appeal.
A
That's
great
and
shelian
kind
of
led
the
way
that
you
know
saying
that
it
potentially
could
be
easier
for
a
developer
to
have
some
combined
hearings
and
in
the
chat
kelly
has
noted
that
combining
hearings
could
also
make
it
easier
for
the
public
to
participate
as
well.
So
so
that's
an
interesting
dynamic.
J
Yes,
thank
you,
a
quick,
just
minor
point,
but
well
a
detail,
sometimes
from
my
observation.
The
agenda
for
a
meeting
isn't
up
until
after
the
due
date
for
public
comments.
So
that's
a
problem
when
it
happens,
and
I
don't
understand
when
it
happens.
Exactly
it
seems
kind
of
random
in
terms
of
combining
means
are
what
should
be
separate,
and
I
think
this
is
probably
across
the
board.
People
get
upset
by
it,
because
I've
certainly
seen
comments
from
both
neighborhoods
and
applicants.
J
So
when
we
combine
our
practice
now
is
to
combine
those
into
one
hearing
and
it
becomes
very
confusing
because,
of
course,
on
an
appeal,
we
don't
hear
new
evidence
et
cetera,
it's
and
and
and
the
rezone
is
related,
and
these
things
interact
but
yeah.
It
just
becomes,
I
think,
from
a
legal
point
of
view,
as
well
as
just
a
process
point
of
view.
People
are
left,
not
understanding
how
they
can
participate
and
remain
in
bounds
within
that
particular
hearing.
L
J
A
lot
of
times,
they're
not
really
even
separated
in
any
way
internally
as
well,
and
then,
finally,
I
you
know
it's
not
something.
I
know
much
about
and
haven't
thought
much
about,
but
I've
been
surprised
at
how
important
the
exterior
of
especially
larger
buildings
is,
and
I've
been
impressed
with
our
system
of
design
review.
Actually,
I
think
in
part,
maybe
because
we
they
tend
to
be
commissioned
by
professionals
and
I
think
they're
kind
of
they're
people,
I
think
experienced
with
the
ways
that
people
might
be.
J
Applicants
might
be
trying
to
get
around
the
rules
and
and
and
those
those
have
implications,
not
just
for
this
short-term
aesthetics,
but
you
know
long-term
durability
or
or
how
well
something
functions.
So
I
I've
been,
you
know
we
don't
it's
true,
we
don't.
We
don't
go
to
design
review
very
often
in
my
neighborhood,
but
when
we
do,
especially
because
we're
not
in
a
historic
district
that
that
really
does
help
to
have
that.
So
those
are
my
comments.
Thanks.
I
B
I
think
everything
is
on
the
on
the
table.
There
are
three
different
I
I
was
not
actually
suggesting
getting
rid
of
the
design
review
committee.
I
was
suggesting
that
some
cities
say
if
we
can
tell
this,
is
going
to
go
for
both
the
cup
and
design,
the
design
review
committee,
delegates
to
planning
and
zoning
to
make
a
decision
subject
to
the
same
things
same
standards.
They
would
have
to
apply
in
that
situation.
Now.
Okay,.
B
Answer
as
well,
but
the
design
review
committee
is
architects
and
the
planning
and
zoning
are
not
trained
in
design
so,
but
I
was
not
suggesting
that
they
that
the
committee
be
dismantled
or
merged.
You
could
do
that,
but
I
was
suggesting
that
there
may
be
times
where
you
either
do
a
joint
meeting
or
one
group
delegates
to
the
other.
The
ability
to
make
a
joint
decision
on
two
sets
of
criteria.
I
Okay,
yeah
thanks
for
the
clarification
to
shawn's
point,
I
guess
about
the
phasing
for
a
typically
large,
a
typical
large
project,
a
multi-family
project.
Let's
say
in
you
know
internally
having
to
rely
on.
You
know,
and
I
am
in
support
of
some
degree
of
consolidation.
I
think
any
kind
of
any
time
we
can
consolidate
public
hearings
right
off
the
bat
we
have.
I
We
we're
still
kind
of
chasing
this
carrot
of
affordability
right
for
any
kind
of
project
that
has
any
chance
of
being
of
achieving
affordability
for
specifically
housing
products.
Anytime,
we
can
cut
one
hearing,
one
public
hearing
out
of
the
the
entitlement
project
process
or
permitting
process.
That's
thousands
of
dollars,
if
not
tens
of
thousands
of
dollars,
depending
on
the
size
of
the
project.
So
and
that's
just
architectural
engineering
fees,
some
legal
fees
so
anytime,
we
can
do
that.
That
makes
sense.
I
I
I
want
to
be
wary
of
of
taking
away
that
control
piece
and-
and
I
guess
the
overall
goal
would
be
to
try
to
find
efficiencies
there
right
to
give
everybody
kind
of
what
they
need,
but
also
kind
of
cut
the
fat
from
the
from
the
process,
the
unnecessary
parts
of
the
process.
So
I'm
in
favor
of
that,
but
there's
a
there's.
Another
part
that
shawn
spoke
to
about
the
entitlement
process.
I
So
much
of
a
project
in
the
early
stages
really
is
trying
to
find
that
form,
if
not
the
very
specific
design
elements,
but
definitely
the
form
and
architects
are
usually
in
this
kind
of
holding
pattern
or
kept
in
limbo
during
the
planning
process
whereby
we,
we
don't
have
this
solid
ground
so
to
speak
to
to
design
from.
If
we
don't
know
that
the
land
entitlements
aren't
going
to
go
through
in
the
in
a
particular
way.
I
I
So
if
we
are
speaking
about
predictability,
it
seems
to
me
like
that
is
our
guiding
light
for
finding
that
efficiency
between
those
two
commissions
that
if
we
have
that
degree
of
of
predictability
that
can
serve
the
design
process
well
and
it
can
also
kind
of
possibly
trim
one
or
two
additional
approval
processes
that,
like
shelling
said,
are
just
without
legs
as
you
go
further
through
the
process.
I
hope
that
made
sense,
but
I'm
kind
of
thinking
live
here.
P
P
P
P
Those
meetings
would
go
on
until
two
in
the
morning
on
some
cases,
and
that
would
not
be
fun,
and
I
think
that
would
discourage
volunteers
like
myself
and
others
who
want
to
who
participate
on
those
committees,
and
I
think
at
some
point
down
the
road.
It
would
discourage
the
public
because
who
wants
to
go
to
a
number
five
on
the
agenda
and
each
agenda
item
is
going
to
take
three
hours
or
two
hours.
So
I
think
that's
something
to
think
about.
P
P
They
don't
consider
or
think
about
it
and
it's
not
necessarily
publicly
said
in
those
meetings.
But
my
fellow
commission
members,
we
kind
of
know
what
each
other's
hot
spots
are
and
what
we
want.
What
we're
going
to
pick
on
and
shawn
was
at
our
meeting
last
week
and
she
brought
in
a
great
project
and
she
knows
how
the
system
works
and
what's
to
what
to
do,
and
there
wasn't
really
a
lot
of
question
with
her
project.
P
I
thought
that
was
a
very
successful,
really
good
outcome,
but
we
have
others
who
don't
always
bring
in
great
projects
like
shawn
did
and
there's
a
lot
of
little
details.
Simple
little
details
like
my
pet
peeve
for
your
architects
and
engineers
here
is
rooftop
units
and
a
lot
of
times.
They
come
in
they're,
not
screened
a
lot
of
the
apartment
buildings
like
downtown.
They
want
to
do
like
p-tac
units
and
what
those
are.
Those
are
the
units
that
are
like
in
the
wall
of
your
apartment,
like
you
might
see
it.
P
If
you
go
in
a
hotel
and
you
see
those
units
in
your
hotel
room,
they
like
to
do
that
and
that
really
impacts
the
exterior
of
the
building.
So
that's
those
are
like
things
little
minor
things
or
to
me,
they're,
not
minor,
but
things
that
we're
looking
at
at
that
level
of
detail,
and
I
don't
think
in
general
and
it's
globally
known
that
that
those
are
the
some
of
the
items
that
we're
looking
at
and
we're
trying
to
discourage
in
some
of
our
a
lot
of
our
buildings.
P
N
N
N
N
The
processes
out
that
guarantee
neighbors,
community
members
and
clients
or
neighbors
community
members
and
and
owners
and
developers
due
process,
and
so
the
city
uses
the
consent
agenda
as
an
affirmation
of
that
due
process,
because
you
can,
if
you
don't
agree
with
the
city's
report
on
a
project,
you
can
go
back
in
and
ask
for
it
to
be
heard
and
publicly
discussed
and
and
if
you
agree
with
it
or
you,
don't
have
anything
wrong
with
it,
then
the
consent
agenda
allows
it.
At
least.
N
Everyone
has
an
opportunity,
then,
to
look
at
the
design,
review,
process,
planning
and
zoning
has
a
similar
process.
I
have
yet
to
see
a
consent
agenda.
I
well.
No,
that's
not
true.
I've.
I've
had
a
consent
agenda
in
planning
and
zoning,
but
it
was
so
long
ago.
Most
of
you,
weren't
probably
born.
So
you
know
I
I
think
we
have
to
protect
the
process
that
ensures
neighbors
and
and
the
community.
N
L
L
I
think
that
you
know
what
andy
race
is
valid,
but
it
was
very
astonishing
to
me
just
how
much
design
review
heard
and
how
many
items
went
to
consent
agenda,
and
I
think
you
know
from
a
legal
perspective.
That
begs
the
question
as
to
whether
you
actually
need
that
beefy
of
an
agenda
and
whether
dr
should
apply
to
as
many
things
as
it
does.
L
I
think
that
dr
does
have
a
place.
I
do
think
it
is
different
than
what
planning
and
zoning
might
be
looking
at
it's
you
know
primarily
focused
on
aesthetics
interaction
with
the
streetscape
neighboring
buildings
that
kind
of
stuff.
I
think
it
is
difficult
right
now
the
way
that
the
design
review
code
is
written.
There
is
a
lot
in
the
design,
review
code
and
standards
that
will
likely
be
folded
in
to
what
we're
discussing
right
now.
L
L
I
also
just
don't
think
that
we
need
to
have
design
review
guidelines
that
apply
to
every
single
project
in
the
city.
I
think
that
the
critical
items
for
design
review
are,
you
know,
areas
that
we've
labeled
as
gateway
areas,
high
profile
projects,
large
public
projects,
very
large
scale
projects,
and
potentially,
though
I
know
I'm
going
to
get
a
lot
of
blow
back
on
this
from
some
of
the
developers,
but
potentially
where
you
have
projects
that
are
approved
by
right,
but
do
not
need
to
go
through
a
public
hearing
process.
L
I
I
A
Well,
when
we
talk
about
once
a
development
application
is
submitted,
we
have
this
pretty
intense
process.
That
happens
immediately,
so
we
transmit
to
all
of
our
agencies
and
let
them
know
when
their
comments
are
due
because
they
do
have
a
different
schedule.
If
it's
a
administrative
level
approval
versus
a
commission
or
public
hearing
level,
and
then
we
also
have
to
publish
anything
that
goes
to
public
hearing,
so
really
the
process
that
we
have
now.
We
have
to
know
which
avenue
that
goes
very
early
on.
A
I
Yeah,
I
guess
the
other
question
that
comes
to
mind
really
is
you
know
we
have
some
discrete
applications
right
now
for
projects
that
are
fairly
common
and
I'm
thinking
of.
Let's
say-
and
this
is
a
very
small
scale-
type
of
project,
but
an
adu
in
a
historic
preservation-
district
projects
like
that
that,
depending
on
where
they
are
in
which
district,
how
close,
they
are
to
say,
the
foothills,
a
project
like
that
can
sometimes
require
five
different
applications
and
approvals.
I
You
know
in
a
worst
case
scenario,
the
worst
spot
in
boise
to
build
an
adu
five
five
permits
right.
So
I'm
wondering
if
some
projects
that
are
commonplace
enough,
multi-family
four-plexes,
there's,
probably
a
host
of
other
projects
of
mixed-use
projects
too,
that
are
common
enough,
whose
application
material
or
applications
could
be
consolidated
into
one
based
on
project
type.
I
guess
is
what
I'm
thinking.
A
O
Well,
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
on
the
consent
agenda.
I
think
I
think
where
I
struggle
with
it
is,
I
think,
there's
a
great
place
for
consent,
and
it
is,
it
is
for
the
it.
What
is
what
is
what
is
hard
about
the
way
we
do
consent.
I
think,
in
this
community
is
that
the
public
can
pull
off
consent.
It
doesn't
require
the
board
or
the
commission
to
pull
off
consent,
and
I
think
that
gives
the
public
a
false
sense.
O
Yes,
they
can
pull
it
off
to
have
a
public
discussion,
but
if
staff
has
approved
it
to
jessica's
point,
if
you've
got
competent
staff,
if
you've
got
a
decent
code,
staff
has
recommended
it
and
it
recommended
it
to
be
on
consent
it.
There
is
nothing
to
argue
about
right
there.
It
in
theory,
I'm
saying
like
if
everyone's
doing
their
job
right,
there
should
be
nothing
to
argue
about
and
to
give
the
public
the
right
to
pull
it
off.
Consent
gives
them
a
false
sense
of
what
their
a.
N
O
Great,
I
just
think
the
idea
that
the
public
can
pull
it
off
now.
If
one
of
the
board
members
sees
something
on
consent,
that
is
questionable,
or
maybe
this
is
too
big
of
a
project
to
be
on
consent,
or
I
heard
from
my
constituents
that
this
is
a
really
upsetting
project
board.
Members
should
be
able
to
pull
off
consent.
O
I
that's
that's
where
I
was
going
with
that.
I
just
didn't
know
if
people
understood
that
and
then
to
I
think
it
was
hillary
that
made
the
point.
I
am
a
developer,
I'm
all
for
going
to
design
review,
even
if
I
have
a
buy
right
entitlement
because
it
forces
me
and
my
design
team
to
do
the
right
thing.
O
So
I
don't
think
that
is
a
big
hiccup.
As
long
as
you
know
the
entitlement-
and
you
know
the
form,
then
you
have
your
capital
and
you
can
start
moving
forward.
So
I
think,
from
that
perspective
like
that
all
makes
good
sense.
What
doesn't
make
sense
is
when
you
have
your
entitlement
and
then
you
also
have
to
go
to
you
know.
A
No,
I
think
this
is
all
really
really
really
good
discussion.
Does
anybody
have
anything
else
they'd
like
to
talk
about
when
we
talk
about
some
of
our
boards
and
hearings
and
anything
like
that,
because
we
can
move
on,
and
we
know
that
you
know
we
are
a
little
bit
over
time.
I
didn't
want
to
disrupt
the
really
rich
conversation
and
the
experience
that
you
were
sharing,
because
I
do
think
it
was
really
additive.
A
So
we
can
always
cover
this
at
a
future
meeting,
but
we
can
go
ahead
and
kind
of
move
on
and
then
I
also
want
to
make
sure
that
if
any
of
our
attendees
would
like
to
say
something
at
the
end
that
we
give
them
a
little
bit
of
time
as
well,
so
gabby
I'm
going
to
let
you
go
ahead
and
see
what
we
can
do
and
if
we
can't
get
through
it,
that's
okay.
We
can
always
revisit
that's
good
I'll
talk.
L
A
B
Yeah,
let's
lay
it
out
here
at
lisa,
you
can
be
thinking
about
it
if
we
have
time
to
discuss
that's
great,
but
we'll
respect
your
time.
So
the
the
as
gabby
was
saying-
and
I
had
a
hard
time
hearing
her
too.
The
one
of
the
things
that
is
a
very
powerful
way
of
improving
predictability
is
the
criteria
by
which
you
make
the
decision
and
the
clarity
of
those
criteria.
So,
on
the
right
hand,
side
you've
got
some
examples
about
approval
criteria,
a
lot
of
words,
a
lot
of
words
current
code.
B
Your
current
code
has
a
separate
criteria
for
each
specific
procedure
and
decision,
and
again
one
of
the
things
that
you
know
they
go
all
the
way
from
very
broad
to
very
detailed.
All
the
way
from
must
comply
with
the
comprehensive
plateau,
not
place
an
undue
burden
on
transportation,
other
public
facilities
in
the
in
the
vicinity
and
some
are
vague
and
not
relevant
to
that
particular
procedure.
This
is
a
backwater
of
zoning.
It's
the
unsexy
side
of
zoning
people
don't
like
to
talk
about
it.
B
It
makes
a
huge
deal
on
whether
you
actually
get
projects
approved
that
take
you
where
you
want
to
go,
so
we
want
to
spend
some
time
on
it.
So
that's
what
you
have
now.
There
are
trends
in
this
area
too.
Avoid-
and
you've
heard
me
rant
about
this
before
these
are,
among
my
four
least
favorite
words
in
the
english
language,
harmonious,
appropriate,
contextual
and
character.
Why?
Because
it
means
we're
gonna
argue
about
it.
B
It
means
that
we
are
guaranteed
to
disagree
about
whether
it's
harmonious,
whether
it's
appropriate,
whether
it's
contextual,
whether
it's
in
character
and
again,
the
right
hand
box
is
kind
of
just
a
definition.
It's
one
that's
uniformly
verifiable
and
involves
no
personal
or
subjective
judgment.
I'll
tell
you
as
an
example.
Sometimes
we
have
clients
who
say
we're
going
to
use
the
word,
contextual
and
then
they
define
contextual
contextual,
has
to
do
with
the
size
of
the
building,
the
width
of
the
building,
the
mass
of
the
building,
the
roof
shape
of
the
building.
B
You
know
list
whatever
you
wanted,
but
they
tell
you
what
it
means
it
doesn't
mean.
I
don't
like
the
look
of
this
building.
Unless
you
say
the
facade,
it
includes
the
facade
articulation,
so
the
point
is
to
be
as
objective
as
possible
and
the
other
trend
is
to
avoid
people
just
throw
this
word
in
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
for
decisions
that
are
too
minor
for
the
plan
to
give
effective
guidance
or
that
are
by
their
nature,
deviations
so
variances.
B
Well,
what
is
a
variance?
The
variance
is
a
deviation
from
the
rule.
You
adopted
the
rule
to
implement
your
plan
and
for
various
reasons,
this
person
is
asking
to
move
away
from
a
rule
that
was
designed
to
implement
the
plan,
it's
very
hard
to
say
that
will
implement
the
plan.
What
would
implement
the
plan?
Was
the
rule
now
you're
asking
for
an
exception
to
the
rule.
B
I
particularly
doesn't
make
sense
to
say
if
it's
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
for
these
types
of
minor
things
or
a
temporary
use
or
an
accessory
use,
it'd
be
a
very
rare,
comprehensive
plan.
That
said,
we
should
really
limit
the
amount
of
festivals
and
fares
we
have
or
car
washes,
are
out
of
control
in
this
town
and
so,
but
so
be
careful
big
decisions
absolutely
are
they
required,
as
first
of
all,
the
entire
code
is
supposed
to
be
drafted
to
implement
the
comp
plan?
B
That's
the
default
when
you
send
things
to
a
public
hearing
or
to
city
council.
It's
because
reasonable
people
could
disagree,
and
you
need
to
evaluate
this
project
on
its
own
and
it's
valid
to
say.
Do
we
really
think
this
project
in
this
location
is
going
to
implement
the
comprehensive
plan?
We
can
really
have
a
disagreement
about
it,
but
not
on
little
small
things,
and
often,
I
would
say
I
would
almost
add,
conditional
use
permits
to
that
list
at
the
bottom.
B
It
would
be
very
rare
for
a
comprehensive
plan
to
tell
you
whether
a
bed
and
breakfast
is
appropriate
in
a
particular
neighborhood.
When
it's
listed
as
a
conditional
use
in
that
neighborhood
it.
Usually
they
just
don't
go
down
there.
You,
you
know
high
cite
the
part
of
it
that
says
hey.
This
is
economic
development,
and
my
neighbors
cite
the
part
of
it
that
says:
preserve
neighborhood
character
it.
It
often
gives
very
little
guidance,
that's
usable
for
little
projects,
so
that's
another
key
to
getting
it
right.
B
The
trend
is
to
draft
general
baseline
criteria
to
govern
decisions
by
staff,
so
that
you
can
focus
on
a
particular
considerations
for
that
type
of
application
and
then
often
a
criteria
for
minor
amendments
for
prior
approvals,
so
that,
instead
of
having
each
type
of
approval,
say
well,
if
you
want
to
modify
it
in
the
future,
here's
our
one-off
bespoke
list,
we
have
a
list
of
things
called
if
you
want
to
modify
an
approval.
You've
gotten
here,
are
how
we
evaluate
it.
B
It's
done
by
staff
subject
to
appeal,
and
if
it's
a
big
one,
you
go
right
back
to
the
body
that
you
talked
to
before,
and
and
because
it's
significant
enough
that
we
should
probably
hold
the
public
hearing
again
or
have
the
same
criteria
again
and
again.
Major
modifications
require
repeating,
but
to
come
up
with
a
minor
and
not
make
them
a
separate
list
for
each
time
saying:
let's
create
a
community
expectation.
B
So
again,
I
want
to
move
on
because
we
want
to
put
this
on
the
table
whether
we
have
time
to
talk
about
it
today.
We
if
we
don't
today,
I
really
want
to
talk
about
it
next
time,
neighborhood
meetings,
a
common
source
of
mis,
misunderstanding
or
conflicting
understandings
about
what
this
is
about,
you're
requiring
them
for
quite
a
long
list
of
things
here,
and
that
doesn't
make
it
wrong
at
all.
It
just
means
this
is
this
is
not
a
trend.
This
is
not
a
judgment,
one
way
or
another.
B
This
is
communicating
to
those
who
haven't
memorized
the
code.
What
boise
requires
neighborhood
meetings
for
it's?
It's
a
fairly
long
list
of
things
again,
here's
what
it
says
now.
Neighborhood
meetings
have
to
be
held
less
than
six
excuse
me,
no
more
than
six
months
or
less
than
12
days
prior
to
submitting
the
application,
you
can't
have
a
meeting
and
then
file
an
application.
B
B
Usually
the
question
of
this
comes
up
all
the
time
shouldn't
a
city
staff
member
need
to
be
in
attendance
and
or
facilitating
the
meeting
most
codes
do
not
say
that
they
say
that
the
director
gets
to
decide
how
to
allocate
their
staff
time
and
they
will
assign
them
when
they
think
it's
a
large
or
complex
project.
They'll
say
I
need
somebody
to
go
to
this
meeting.
It
is
pretty
rare
to
say
that
the
planning
staff
facilitate
the
meeting
they're.
Often
there.
Usually
it
is
the
presenter,
the
applicant
who's
doing
the
meeting.
B
B
It
is
not
in
the
code,
but
almost
usually
clarify
what
materials
have
to
be
presented
by
the
applicant
and
by
the
way
they
almost
never
include
things
that
require
you
to
do
engineering,
traffic
studies
or
architectural
details.
You
need
to
present
enough
that
people
can
visualize
the
size,
the
shape
the
location.
What
it's
going
to
be
it
it
is
intended
to
not
require
engineering
study.
Well,
how
do
you
know
the
traffic
will
be
adequate?
That's
not
for
a
neighborhood
meeting.
B
The
project
is
not
at
that
stage
yet,
and
so
usually
this
is
clarified
better,
but
it
is
not
at
that
level.
There's
usually
a
you
got
to
narrow
the
gap
between
how
much
information
you.
It
is
reasonable
to
expect
at
that
site
in
the
process
and
they
clarify
who
is
authorized
or
required.
To
summarize,
the
discussion
the
norm
is
to
say:
well,
anybody
at
the
meeting
can
send
us
a
note
about
it.
B
Some
codes
say:
the
developer
must
summarize
it
and
they
we
trust
them
to
be
honest,
because
if
they
are
dishonest
and
say
oh,
they
love
my
project,
they're
always
subject
to
some
guy
coming
in
and
saying
we
did
not
love
his
project
so
but
usually
they
clarify
it
and
usually
it's
pretty
wide
open.
It's
not
narrow
that
one
side
or
the
other
or
one
party
or
another.
It
is
either
required
of
it
of
the
applicant
to
summarize
or
it
is
allowed
for
everybody
to
summarize.
B
B
That
may
be
enough
to
keep
us
going
and
I
don't
want
to
run
us
completely
out
of
time,
but
the
two
questions
we'd
like
you
to
think
about-
and
maybe
we
need
to
bring
this
back
next
time-
andrea
is
you
know,
are-
are
there
places
where
you,
based
on
your
personal
experience,
think
that
the
city
should
adopt
more
objective
decision,
making
center
or
or
be
wrong?
Now
you
think
they're
plenty
objective
and
it
would
stifle
creativity
and
engagement
to
make
them
more
objective.
B
And,
finally,
how
could
we
clarify
the
neighborhood
meeting
process
just
so
that
you
know
what
have
they
worked
well
and
not
counting
well
great
applicant,
very
responsible
builder
likes
to
do
this
stuff,
and
so
they
did
it
well,
when
have
they
been
productive?
When,
when
you
have,
you
know,
let's
say
an
average
developer
or
an
average
builder,
an
average
applicant
who
is
not
terribly
skilled,
what
rules
would
be
necessary
in
that
case,
and
so
now
we
have
11
chats,
I'm
turning
it
back
over
to
you,
andrea.
A
Yes,
so
to
get
us
kicked
off.
Richard
had
pointed
out
that
the
city
as
well,
they
essentially
appointed
an
advisory
committee
in
2018
to
really
look
at
neighborhood
meetings
where
we
updated
some
of
our
noticing
and
neighborhood
meeting
requirements,
but
he
did
note
that
that
doesn't
mean
that
they
can't
be
improved
or
clarified,
and
so
this
is
a
really
good
opportunity
to
talk
about.
You
know
where
is
their
opportunity
to
make
them
better?
So
I
want
to
hear
from
kelly.
C
N
B
So
I
would
this
will
be
an
interesting
discussion
based
on
what
you
just
told
me
about
deanna
and
how
they
work
in
boise
in
most
communities.
If
the
plan,
if
the
neighborhood
plan
was
adopted
by
council,
it
meant
council
agreed
that
this
was
a
valid
supplement
to
the
comprehensive
plan
now
generally.
B
If
so,
so
it
is
considered
as
a
criteria.
For
example,
a
number
of
cities
say
it
must
be
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
by
that
they
mean
our
comprehensive
plan,
is
the
equivalent
of
blueprint,
boise
and
neighborhood
plans
that
have
been
adopted
by
city
council.
Since
that
time
most
communities
say
well,
occasionally
I've
run
in
very
rarely
occasionally.
I've
run
into
a
neighborhood
that
does
a
plan
on
its
own
and
a
vision
statement
upon
its
own,
not
authorized
by
the
city
city
council,
never
adopted
it
and
that's
not
considered
a
plan.
B
But
if
it's
been
adopted
by
council,
the
usual
approach
is
to
say
then
consider
it
stapled
onto
the
comprehensive
plan,
and
we
will
consider
this
when
we
consider
consistency
with
the
comprehensive
plan
caveat
if
the
comp
plan
says
if
you
are
directly
conflicting
with
the
comp
plan,
I'm
making
this
up
guys.
The
comp
plan
says
this:
neighborhood
should
be
zoned
for
five-story
buildings
and
that's
what
we
intend
to
approve
and
the
neighborhood
plan
says
now.
We
think
three,
usually
the
comprehensive
plan
prevails.
B
Neighborhood
plans
are
allowed
to
supplement
and
add
detail
and
nuance
and
geographic
specificity,
but
they
are
usually
they're.
Not
you
don't
prevent
people
from
writing
the
words,
but
the
usual
system
is
to
say
when
you
run
into
a
direct
conflict
with
the
city's
overall
vision
for
the
overall
growth
of
the
city.
The
comprehensive
plan
is
going
to
be
given
the
heavier
weight
in
that
evaluation.
So.
Q
So
my
comment
was
just
on
neighborhood
meetings
and
I,
as
the
n.a
president,
I
get
like
notices
of
every
single
neighborhood
meeting
that
happens
in
the
city
in
the
county
and
it
seems
like
small
projects
like
edus
or
people
do
building
shops
like
I'm,
not
100
sure
that
those
types
of
projects
really
need
a
neighborhood
meeting
like
that.
Just
might
be
something
that
can
be
a
notice
to
your
immediate
neighbors,
but
those
types
of
really
small
projects
that
don't
impact
a
community
all
that
much.
That
might
be
some
way
to
cut
down
on
those.
B
Had
a
question
in
the
chat
box,
andrea,
I
can
answer
pretty
quickly.
Diane
asks
you
know.
Could
we
talk
about
the
difference
between
wording,
something
as
compliance
or
not
in
conflict?
Is
there
a
legal
difference
you
know,
sort
of
there
is
in
different
states
near
case
law
in
general.
I
think
the
better
practice
is
to
draft
that
just
speak
english.
If,
in
this
case
you
need
to
comply
with
the
following
standards
or
you
need
to
be
consistent
with
a
complaint,
don't
use
a
double
negative,
not
inconsistent,
they're,
not
negative.
B
A
Does
anybody
else
have
any
thoughts
in
regard
to
neighborhood
meetings
and
where
those
are
done?
Well,
I
know
that
I've
heard
a
lot
of
individuals
say
you
know
we
currently
require
that
a
neighborhood
meeting
be
within
a
certain
distance
of
a
site,
but
I've
heard
elderly
people
talk
to
me
and
say
hey.
A
B
B
I
think
that's,
I
think
it's
unusual
to
do
that.
I
think
most
of
times
it's
in
it's
in
a
public
facility
or
a
basement
or
a
church
or
a
public
meeting,
and
usually
it's
indoors
for
exactly
that
reason.
If
you
want
to
drive
by
the
site
and
see
it.
But
frankly,
most
to
my
I
haven't
done
research
on
this,
but
I'm
surprised
a
little
bit
at
that,
because
a
neighborhood
meeting
is
for
conversation
back
and
forth.
B
You
can
look
at
the
site,
but
you're
unless
you're
great
at
visualization,
it's
harder
for
the
developer
to
present
what
they're
doing
and
it's
hard
for
people
to
visualize
it
on
the
site.
So
anyway,
that's
true.
I
have
some
other
thoughts
we
could
give
on
that.
But
I
see
we
have
three
hands
now
so
yeah.
C
So
I'll
just
be
really
quick,
I
you
know
on
the
neighbor.
First
of
all,
I
would
like
to
have
some
more
time
where
we
can
maybe
talk
offline
about
my
question,
deanna
about
the
neighborhood
plans
and
how
that
fits
in,
because
that's
a
topic
that
keeps
coming
up
in
these
meetings
that
we
have
right
with
the
neighborhoods
and
then
you
know.
I
would
like
to
see
the
the
meetings
with
the
developers
be
more
of
a
dialogue.
C
E
A
Q
Is
that
way,
and
that
excludes
you
know
quite
a
bit
of
people
that
way
and
then
some
of
the
best
neighborhood
meetings
that
I've
been
to
it
really
is
just
dependent
on
a
developer
like
we
had
one
where
the
it
was
a
lady.
I
don't
even
recall
her
name
now,
but
she
wanted
to
build
an
apartment
complex
and
she
came
in
basically
with
her
site
plan
and
said
we're
not
married
to
this.
We
can
move
the
buildings
around
and
she
let
the
neighbors
be
like.
Q
Well,
if
you
put
this
building
here,
it's
going
to
block
my
son,
for
you
know
from
noon
till
the
sunset
and
she
actually
changed
her
development
based
on
the
neighborhood
concerns.
But
I
would
really
love
to
see
like
something
some
report
back
to
city
like
these
were
the
neighborhood
concerns,
and
this
is
what
we
did
about
it.
This
is
how
we
address
those
in
our
development
so
that
we
can
see
somehow
that
those
neighborhood
meetings
have
a
purpose
and
that
they
are
relevant
to
the
process.
M
I
agree
with
marissa.
I
have
been
to
a
handful
of
neighborhood
meetings
on
the
property
site.
In
a
few
cases,
no
information
really
was
handed
out.
That
handed
out
that
I
recall,
except
for
a
sign-in
sheet,
so
yeah,
because
what
I've
seen
in
the
callister
neighborhood
it
is
a
developer
or
the
entity.
That's
representing
the
developer
will
show
up
and
they
will
just
want
everyone
to
sign
in
and
some
provide
some
level
of
information.
M
Others
don't
there's
one
architectural,
I
think
they're,
like
some
kind
of
architectural
company,
that's
been
doing
a
lot
of
work
in
the
collister
and
and
then
over
off
the
pierce
park
area
and
they've
actually
been
pretty
decent.
They
will
send
an
email
to
the
neighborhood
board.
Just
saying:
hey,
we've
got
this
meeting,
here's
information.
M
Can
you
please
share
this
with
your
list
and
then,
at
the
same,
in
the
same
breath,
we've
got
folks
that
you
know
I
was
looking
at
something
that's
being
reviewed
by
the
city
or
planning
and
planning
services.
Right
now,
and
I
never
saw
anything
didn't
even
know
that
there
was
any
meeting
of
any
sort.
It
is
really
in
my
experience
in
the
hollister
neighborhood
in
the
last
12
years.
It's
really
all
over
the
place.
E
Yeah
really
quickly,
I
would
touch
kind
of
based
on
what
marissa
and
esther
were
saying.
Definitely
if
we
can
have
the
meetings
in
a
centralized
location
inside
instead
of
on
site,
that
would
not
only
be
better
for
the
participants,
but
also
be
better
for
the
architects,
presenting
it's
a
lot
easier
to
have
something
up
on
the
screen
or
something
in
the
past
life.
E
A
A
A
So
if
not,
then
you
know
I'll
let
the
committee
and
do
we
feel
comfortable
with
some
of
our
discussion.
I
know
that
we
want
to
pick
back
up
and
talk
about
some
more
of
this.
In
addition
to
that,
we've
also
heard
that
the
committee
would
like
to-
or
some
of
the
members
of
the
committee
would
like
to
actually
have
perhaps
our
next
meeting
like
really
open.
A
So
we
can
have
some
fluid
dialogue
and
people
can
really
talk
about
some
of
those
key
issues
that
are
important
to
them,
where
they
might
have
some
questions
and
so
we'd
love
to
be
able
to
facilitate
that
too.
So,
you
know
just
really
have
an
open
agenda,
and-
and
let
you
guys
talk
about
what's
important
to
you
or
where
you
think
additional
information
or
or
knowledge
needs
to
be
presented
or
provided
to
you
to
make
it
a
good
decision.
So
we'll
continue
to
work
with
that
and
keep
you
apprised
as
to
how
that
develops.
A
But
if
anybody
doesn't
have
anything
else,
I
think
we've
had
a
really
good
meeting
today
and
we
want
to
thank
everybody
that
has
been
coming
to
the
community
engagement
events.
I
think
it's
really
important
for
you
to
hear
what
our
community
is
saying,
what
we're
learning
what
our
council
and
our
committees
are
all
hearing.