►
From YouTube: Design Review Committee
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Hey
Josh
all
right,
Mr
chairman,
if
you'd
like
we
can
just
run
through
the
agenda,
real
quick
sounds.
B
A
So
item
number
one
on
Gowen
Road
for
two
new
Warehouse
buildings.
We
are
requesting
deferral
on
that
one
to
the
September
13th
meeting.
A
Item
number
three:
substandard
lot
of
record,
with
some
additional
stories
added
or
story
added.
We
are
recommending
that
one
for
the
consent
agenda.
A
Item
number
four:
on
Cole
Road:
it's
an
expansion
of
an
existing
Athletic
Facility;
we're
recommending
that
for
the
consent
agenda.
A
Item
number
five
on
Clinton
is
a
new
17
000
square
foot,
industrial
building.
We
were
recommending
that
for
the
consent
agenda.
A
A
And
unless
has
anyone
has
any
questions
or
concerns
with
any
of
those?
That's
what
the
night's
looking
like
thanks.
C
B
E
Yes,
Josh
do
we
need
to
specifically
call
out
the
comments?
Okay,
I
like
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
the
committee
work
session
minutes
and
then
meeting
minutes
on
July
12th,
in
addition
to
the
recognition
given
to
Tom
sabala
as
discuss
added
to
the
minutes.
B
B
B
G
B
The
second
item
to
be
well
we'll
do
these
individually
at
this
time,
I
take
a
motion
for
the
deferral
of.
B
E
B
Thank
you,
Mr
stead,
Christina
call
the
roll.
E
B
Next
item
to
be
considered
for
our
deferrals
is
item
number
six.
It's
Dr,
h23-00231
location
is
9177
South,
Federal
Way
for
the
construction
of
a
new,
approximately
48,
000
square
foot,
industrial
building
with
Associated
site
improvements
on
a
property
in
one
The
Zone,
and
this
also
would
be
deferred
to
the
September
13th
day.
Is
there
any
member
of
the
audience
wishing
to
speak
to
this
item?
Who
cannot
make
the
September
13th
date
seen
that
in
person
any
online
Josh?
No,
this
time,
I
would
look
for
a
motion
on
this
item
for
deferral.
B
Us
a
good
luck
with
that.
Please
call
the
role.
B
The
first
item
to
be
considered
for
consented
genomes,
item
number
three:
it's
drh,
23-00196
location
is
1422
East
Franklin,
it's
a
renovation
of
an
existing
residence
on
a
substandard
lot
of
record,
with
a
waiver
request
to
exceed
one
and
a
half
stories
in
height
on
a
property
in
our
r1c
zone.
Is
the
applicant
present.
B
Applicant
is
not
present,
and
here
applicant
is
online.
When
able
is,
are
you
in
agreement
with
recommended
conditions
of
approval.
E
B
Okay,
let
the
record
show
they
are
in
agreements.
Is
there
any?
Member
of
the
audience
wishing
to
speak
testify
in
opposition
to
this
item
tonight.
B
Seeing
none
in
person
any
online
Josh
see
none
online.
This
item
will
be
moved
on
to
the
consent
agenda.
Second
item:
to
be
considered
is
item
number
four
h23-00228
locations,
11
16,
North
Cole,
it's
construction
of
approximately
fifteen
thousand
square
foot,
Athletic
Facility
Building,
located
on
a
property
in
an
r3d
zone.
Is
the
applicant
presence
who's
that
the
record
show
the
applicant
is
present?
Are
you
in
agreement
with
recommended
conditions
of
approval?
B
B
See
none
in
person
any
online
Josh
and
none
online.
This
will
also
be
moved
to
the
consent.
Agenda.
Next
item
would
be
item
number
five
to
be
considered.
It's
drh
23-00207
location
is
5917
West,
Clinton
Street
for
the
construction
of
a
new,
approximately
17,
000
square
foot,
industrial
building
with
Associated
site
improvements
on
a
property
in
am
1D
Zone
is
the
applicant
present
that
the
record
show
the
applicant
is
present.
Are
you
in
agreement
with
the
recommended
conditions
of
approval?
B
Please
let
the
record
show
that
the
applicant
is
in
agreement.
Is
there
any
member
of
the
public
wishing
to
testify
in
opposition
to
this
item,
see
none
in
person
and
none
online?
No.
Okay.
This
item
will
also
be
moved
to
our
consent
agenda
and
that
concludes
our
items
for
tonight.
This
time,
I
would
be
open
for
a
motion.
F
B
E
B
Rh-23-0209
and
with
that
I
will
turn
it
over
to
Caitlin
and
staff
for
their
presentation.
H
H
So
the
site
layout
includes
the
fire
station
building
toward
the
street
corner
with
the
apparatus
space
along
Bogart
Lane.
There's
a
parking
area
located
behind
the
building
on
Monday,
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
granted
a
variance
allowing
the
service
drive
to
have
a
zero
setback
at
the
North
property
line.
The
applicant
is
constructing
the
12-foot
wide
pathway
along
State
Street,
as
well
as
a
pathway
along
the
north
of
the
site.
The
proposed
landscape
plan
includes
the
required
trees
and
low
water
use
plant
things.
H
Here
we
have
the
elevations,
we
have
a
unique
fire
station
design
with
some
angular
building
forms.
The
materials
include
a
variety
of
metal
panels
in
different
colors
at
the
bottom
of
the
screen.
You
can
see
the
west
elevation
with
the
apparatus
phase
along
Bogart
Lane
and
then,
as
you
turn,
the
corner,
the
Southwest
facade
is
parallel
to
State
Street
and
we
have
a
prominent
main
entry.
H
G
There
you
go
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
Sarah
Schaefer
I'm
at
150,
North,
Capitol,
Boulevard
I'm,
with
the
city
of
Boise,
Public,
Works
Department,
and
the
design
that
you
have
before
you
has
been
worked
on
by
pivot,
North
design
and
rfm
out
of
Portland
working
on
fire
station
design.
We
have
them
consult
on
all
of
our
fire
stations
for
the
city
of
Boise
for
the
internal
layout.
G
C
Chair
I
just
want
to
get
an
idea
of
what
the
the
timeline
for
the
project
development
on
this
was.
How
much
overlap
did
you
have
with
the
zoning
code,
rewrite
as
it
was
marinating
for
the
last
couple
years.
G
G
We
started
design
just
about
a
year
ago,
and
so
we
have
that
was
purchase
of
land
a
year
ago
and
have
gone
Full,
Speed
Ahead
since
then-
and
so
we
are
doing
this
in
order
to
be
able
to
meet
timelines
for
adjoining
property
development
as
well,
because
we
have
several
residential
developments
that
are
held
up
due
to
the
course
of
the
fire
station
to
go
in.
So
that's
the
whole
reasoning
ahead
for
this
fire
facility.
It's
also
in
conjunction
with
police.
So
we
have
a
bunch
going
in
for
this
property.
G
Will
be
included
inside
the
structure
so
as
part
of
this
development,
we
have
four
bed
facility,
we're
actually
constructing
six
with
the
with
the
captain,
so
that
there's
a
little
bit
of
room
for
expansion
on
the
fire
apparatus,
and
then
we
have
police
kind
of
substation.
It's
more
report
writing
facility
within
the
same
building,
and
then
the
two
departments
will
co-exist.
G
So
there's
simply
just
a
report
writing
room
as
well
as
a
possible
not
really
interview
room
but
space
where
they
can
sit
and
talk
to
any
members
of
the
public
who
may
come
in
with
questions
for
officers
to
drop
in
and
write
reports.
They'll
have
at
least
four
to
six
desks
inside
that
location.
This
is
something
we've
started
to
do
with
other
fire
facilities
within
town.
I
have
constructed
these
in
fire
stations.
Seven,
we
have
them
at
fire
station.
G
Let's
see,
I
haven't
met
fire
station
Seven.
We
have
placed
them
at
one
other
station
I'm.
Sorry
I
can't
remember
where
I've
placed
that
one
we
have
them
going
into
13
and
we're
continuing
to
build
them
into
other
facilities
that
they
can
co-locate
they're,
going
to
use
joint
kitchen
facilities
and
restroom
facilities
throughout
and
they'll,
be
able
to
use
the
gym
and
fitness
facilities
as
well.
B
Other
questions,
thank
you
very
much
appreciate
it.
Is
there
any
member
of
the
public
wishing
to
testify
tonight
see
none
in
person
any
online
Josh
good
anything
else
from
the
applicant
with
that
we'll
close
the
public
portion
of
the
you're
going
to
bring
back
to
you,
the
committee
for
discussion
and
emotion,.
C
Mr
chair,
yes,
I
know
that
we
need
to
consider
projects
based
on
their
current
zoning,
and
you
know
not
not
look
at
what
necessarily
might
be
on
the
horizon,
but
given
that
this
is
a
city
project
and
that
the
city
is
also
driving
a
rewrite
of
the
zoning
code
and
this
particular
area
is
scheduled
to
become
an
MX3
Zone,
which
is
an
active
mixed-use
area
with
a
height
limit
of
70
feet
and
where
there's
particular
favor
given
to
buildings
that
are
four
stories
tall
or
higher.
C
C
C
C
But
you
know
we
are
in
the
process
of
visioning
what
is
going
to
be
there
and
I
I
just
can't
help,
but
think
that
this
is
it's
somehow
inappropriate
in
in
the
way
that
it's
masked
and
the
way
that
it's
laid
out,
and
this
could
be
a
much
more
efficient
site
that
would
leave
more
land
there
for
whether
it's
the
affordable
housing,
land,
trust
or
whether
it's
other
agency,
housing
or
whatever
it
may
be
it.
It
just
seems
like
a
missed
opportunity
to
me.
E
Mr
chair,
yes,
I,
don't
necessarily
disagree
with
Mr
erstad,
but
I
also
believe,
since
this
is
a
public
project,
we
need
to
be
mindful
of
the
public
safety
needs
in
that
area,
and
also
that
the
the
cost
for
this
project
is
public.
It's
taxpayer,
money
and
I
think
we
should
be
mindful
of
that
as
well
to
provide
an
adequate,
appropriate
public
building
at
that
space
and
being
mindful
of
cost
to
the
taxpayers
and
also
to
Public
Safety.