►
From YouTube: Design Review Committee
Description
October 13, 2021
A
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
boise
city
design
review
committee
meeting
a
few
things
to
start
out
with
for
tonight's
proceedings,
everyone
from
the
public
entering
the
hearing
via
zoom
has
been
automatically
muted
and
cannot
speak.
As
the
item
you're
interested
in
comes
up
for
discussion,
you
will
be
called
upon
and
unmuted.
A
A
After
that,
we
proceed
to
public
testimony,
starting
with
those
who
signed
up
on
the
online
sign
up
sheet
in
advance
and
then
anyone
else
who
raises
their
hand.
Virtually
anyone
from
the
public
present
in
person
will
be
asked
to
raise
their
hand
and
approach
the
diocese.
If
you
are
attending
through
your
telephone,
you
can
type
star
9.
To
raise
your
hand,
each
member
of
the
public
is
allowed
up
to
three
minutes
for
testimony.
B
C
B
B
E
B
B
B
E
C
B
B
B
B
B
E
H
And
here
we
have
the
first
floor
plan
and
kind
of
the
layout
of
the
building.
We
have
an
entry
at
the
corner
and
then
they
have
circulation
along
the
north
and
west
there
and
then
a
large
lobby
and
restaurant
space
and
bar
on
the
first
floor
and
then
from
the
elevations.
You
can
see
that
they've
used
a
variety
of
materials,
including
some
traditional
and
then
more
contemporary
details.
That
kind
of
tie
into
the
surrounding
buildings
and
the
applicant
is
in
agreement
with
all
the
conditions
of
approval,
so
we
can
and
they're
present
as
well.
I
J
So
the
overview
of
this
is
a
boutique
hotel,
that
is
134
rooms
and
from
the
first
two
floors
are
mixed
use,
space
or
hotel
amenities,
and
the
second
floor
also
has
some
conference
in
it
as
well.
And
then,
as
you
go
up,
it
is
guest
room
floors
for
the
next
seven
floors
of
the
building
and
then
at
the
top
is
a
convention
or
conference
ballroom
with
a
rooftop
patio
bar
area.
J
The
intent
of
the
design
is
to
blend
historic
elements,
which
is
the
base
all
the
way
up
to
the
seventh
or
up
to
the
eighth
floor,
and
then
we
step
back
and
provide
a
modern
element
which
would
have
been
more
of
the
contemporary
addition
to
the
building
so
that
it
separates
itself
from
the
more
brick
stone
and
exterior
facade.
That
would
be
more
of
your
traditional
design
elements.
J
G
D
J
So
we've
had
discussions
with
ownership
and
we're
looking
at
a
multitude
ways
of
parking.
Both
bicycle
they're
also
looking
at
doing
bicycle
storage
and
bicycle
sharing,
which
they
would
have
provide
in
the
building
as
well
and
they're,
actually
looking
at
a
potential
of
where
they
can
locate
the
scooters,
as
well
as
a
operational
well-non-bicycle,
but
part
of
a
pretty
contemporary
way
of
getting
around
downtown
now,
which
seems
to
be
there.
So
that's
we
are
looking
into
how
those
are
stored
and
where
we
would
keep
them
on
property
as
well.
G
E
Okay,
thank
you
so
kudos
on
well,
both
the
project,
its
location
and
the
historic
design.
I
think
it
does
a
very
good
job
of
echoing
historic
brick
architecture
without
trying
to
pretend
that
it's
something
it
isn't,
which
I
think
is
hard
to
pull
off
and
this
building
does.
My
concern
starts
at
the
top
of
the
building.
E
Really
and
then
sorry,
I'm
just
gonna
finish
my
thought
and
then
that
dark
modern
part
looks
more
contemporary
than
modern
like
it.
It
see
it
feels
like
it
needs
to
contrast
further
with
the
historic
elements
of
the
building,
and
I
think
the
reason
it
isn't
doing.
That
is
because
it
has
more
than
one
roof
line.
J
So
the
intent
of
the
dome
is
that
it
was
part
of
that
traditional
building,
as
you
can
see
on
the
corner,
I'm
not
sure
if
the
perspectives
as
part
of
the
presentation
are
here,
but
if
you
look
at
it
on
the
perspective
side,
the
stone
colonnade
or
the
stone
that
continues
up
through
it
actually
continues
up
into
the
dome.
So
that
was
part
of
it
that
it
was
that
older
1950s
60s
mentality
that
that's
actually
the
part
of
the
building
and
that
it's
accentuated
up
there
as
part
of
what
was
traditionally
built.
J
What
would
be
the
walls
of
the
eighth
level
with
the
conference
room
and
everything
else,
and
then
the
second
roof
line?
That's
visible
in
the
elevations,
is
actually
the
screening
wall
to
protect
because
of
the
rooftop
units
that
are
up
there
that
are
required
to
be
screened.
So
in
the
elevation.
That's
why
you're
seeing
the
two
separate
roof
planes
is
because
there's
it
actually
steps
back
behind
where
we
have
it
and
we're
trying
to
reduce
that
footprint
as
much
as
possible.
J
So
that
we
do
have
every
rooftop
unit
closed,
but
the
kubla
element
is
the
feature
that
continues
up
through
the
corner,
so
that
would
have
been
built
with
the
building,
as
if
it
was
one
of
the
bell
towers
or
the
clock
tower
from
a
historical
standpoint
and
then
and
then
the
materiality
is
just
it's
the
same
material
for
all
of
it
with
being
there.
If
it's
the
materiality
on
the
modern
verse
contemporary
side
of
it,
I
think
that's
something
we
could
work
with
design
review
to
go
back
through
and
see.
J
You
know
if
it
is
too
dark
or
too
light
for
where
it
sits
being
a
metal
panel.
So
but
that's
the
intent
for
the
stylistic
move
is
that
the
cupola
is
part
of
the
existing
building
and
then
the
modern
piece
behind
it
sits
there,
as
you
can
see
from
the
street
front,
it's
sort
of
that
hidden
gem
that
sits
up
there.
E
Mr
chairman,
yes,
just
in
response
to
that,
so
the
materials
are
not
of
concern
at
all.
What
I'm,
what
I'm
wondering-
and
I
it's
difficult
to
tell
from
the
renderings,
although
these
are
quite
helpful,
will
anybody
be
able
to
see
the
cupola
and
the
more
modern
roof
structure
at
the
same
time,
because
they
those
seem
to
work
only
when
you
see
them
separately?
E
E
I
don't
know
what
to
call
it.
The
modern
box
and
then
the
cupola
now
here
makes
sense,
but
if
you
can
see
it
at
the
same
time
as
the
more
modern
structure,
then
that's
when
they
seem
to
conflict.
But
I
you
know
it's
hard.
When
we
look
directly
sideways
at
a
building,
I
I
can't
I
have
no
idea
if
there's
any
time
any
pedestrian
or
you
know
anybody
would
see
this
view
because
of
the
height
of
the
building.
J
So
it's
going
to
be
a
significant
distance
that
you
would
have
to
see
it,
and
I
would
believe
that
you're
actually
most
likely
not
going
to
see
the
wall.
You'd
probably
first
see
the
mechanical
screening.
If
anything,
since
that's
the
highest
piece
of
it
and
you'd
you'd
have
to
be
pretty
far
away
from
it
to
see
that
from
a
pedestrian
standpoint,.
G
F
F
Thank
you.
As
a
matter
of
personal
preference,
I
would
just
say
that
it
would
probably
look
better
if
there
were
a.
You
know
a
brick
similar
in
color
to
that
that
nice
band
that
you've
got
going
across
there.
But
that's,
I
don't
think
I'm
really
here
to
make
personal
preference
calls
just
an
observation.
So
thank
you.
E
K
K
Located
at
1016
north
31st
straight
so
as
mentioned
and
for
a
brief
project
overview,
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
construct
new
single-family
homes
on
those
five
contiguous
substandard
lots
of
record
located
in
the
multi-family
residential
with
a
design
review
overlay
zone.
This
was
previously
approved
through
pud
21-20.
K
K
Just
to
give
you
a
brief
site
plan
here,
the
applicants
are
requesting
a
reduction
in
the
front
setback.
Their
two
neighbors
have
a
25
foot
setback
which
would
require
a
20-foot
front
setback
for
these
lots.
The
applicants
are
requesting
that
it's
between
10
and
12
for
their
front
setbacks.
Staff
has
conditioned
that
the
external
lots
on
the
north
and
south
are
going
to
have
15
foot
front
setbacks.
K
K
Just
to
give
you
some
elevations
here,
staff
is
requiring
that
there
be
some
some
structural
changes
to
two
of
the
five
homes
there
in
order
to
increase
architectural
diversity.
It's
a
partial
two
story
design,
but
the
peak
height
is
only
21
foot
and
six
inches.
They
have
a
mix
of
materials,
including
stucco,
wood,
lap
and
stone
for
their
sighting.
With
a
color
palette
of
blues
tans
and
grays,
the
garages
are
just
one
material
there
and
it
is
the
wood
lap.
K
We
have
received
some
public
commentary
on
this.
Primarily
the
concern
is
traffic
and
that
the
increased
density
would
increase
traffic
in
a
few
areas.
There
were
also
comments
regarding
the
garages
which
share
common
walls
to
have
those
detached.
Instead
of
sharing
the
walls
that
the
proposed
front
setbacks
were
too
small
at
10
to
12
feet.
This
was
addressed
by
staff
and
increasing
those
external
front
setbacks
to
15
feet.
K
K
G
G
L
M
L
A
A
L
L
L
B
M
D
L
B
G
E
M
K
Yeah,
the
applicant
is
correct
in
that
they
did
provide
updated
plans
to
me
that
weren't
presented
here,
because
they
were
a
bit
after
the
cut
off
for
this
hearing.
However,
they
have
already
adjusted
those
to
be
15
feet
for
those
external
properties.
The
intent
of
that
15
foot
was
to
be
more
in
line
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
K
B
M
Utilizing
the
space
that
we're
given
on
these
substandard
lots
and
and
maximizing
the
the
garages
is
very
important
to
us.
We
have
done
some
substandard
construction
over
near
the
university
and
we
did
join
the
garages
with
a
common
wall
and
and
with
fire
protection,
and
we
just
need
that
extra
space
for
parking.
L
E
B
E
I
I
think
the
attached
or
the
one
building
for
the
garages
is
a
great
solution
for
these
narrow
lots
and-
and
you
know,
unless
we
become
a
city
where
people
don't
drive
cars,
we're
gonna
have
to
figure
out
creative
solutions
like
this,
and
this
is
a
very
good
one.
I
I
do
have
a
question
and
again
it's
for
staff,
I'm
concerned
about
the
the
design
of
the
second
story
of
these
houses
and
I'm
wondering
if
it's
because
of
our
code,
that
it
ended
up
looking
like
so
so
to
me,
I'm.
E
E
I'm
just
wondering
if
there's
a
a
reason
that
it's
not
you
know
a
single
roof
line
which
would
be
a
lot
more
consistent
with
you
know,
cottage
type
blocks,
and
I
I
have
no,
I
mean
it.
I
think
it's
fine
that
we've
asked
the
applicant
to
vary
the
design
styles.
I
have
no
problem
if
they
were
all
exactly
the
same
in
just
different
colors,
I
think
it.
Some
uniformity
can
look
really
good
when
it's
only
five
houses
on
a
block,
especially
when
they're
small,
but
it
it's.
E
G
K
So,
yes,
more
than
likely
that
design
did
stem
from
the
substandard
law,
ordinance,
it
is
pretty
restrictive
and
to
maximize
your
size,
it
is
difficult
to
do
so
without
providing
those
bump
outs
there.
So
they
are
proposing
a
partial
two-story
style.
A
full
two-story
likely
would
not
have
been
approved,
so
the
partial
two-story
was
probably
the
most
that
they
could
fit
onto
the
site
in
order
to
accommodate
as
much
space
as
possible.
K
That
being
said
in
my
report,
I
also
suggest
that
you
know
a
single
story
or
a
one
and
a
half
story
is
the
preferred
height.
The
partials
two
story
makes
sense
here
because,
on
the
surrounding
properties,
I'll
pull
that
up
real,
quick
on
the
surrounding
properties.
Internal
to
them
is
usually
a
garage
or
a
shop
type
structure.
So
the
partial
two-story
made
sense
in
this
instance,
because
it
wouldn't
be
looking
right
into
someone's
house,
which
is
why
I
said
it
wouldn't
have
adverse
effects
on
the
surrounding
properties.
D
K
So
yes,
they
would
need
to
reduce
the
size
of
the
structure
itself
by
those
few
feet
that
were
missing
so
those
three
feet.
Usually
in
this
instance,
it
appears
in
order
to
accommodate
the
open
space
that
they
require,
so
they
wouldn't
be
able
to
just
push
it
back.
They
would
have
to
cut
off
a
few
feet
there,
because
otherwise
they
won't
meet
their
minimum
375
square
feet
of
open
space
in
the
rear.
D
K
Members
yeah,
I
I
think
that
would
be
the
best
course
of
action.
I
will
probably
have
to
speak
with
the
applicants
to
ensure
that
that
will
work
for
their
design,
but
that
was
the
intent
of
the
condition
would
be
that
we
would
reduce
the
size
of
the
structure
slightly
rather
than
pushing
it
back.
Yeah.
D
E
Sorry
I
no
this
is
difficult
to
resume.
Can
I
suggest
that,
instead
of
of
doing
that,
that
we
ask
that
the
setbacks
consistent,
I
I
understand
the
staff
suggestion
and
why
the
end
units
have
been
asked
to
increase
their
setbacks,
but
I
I
think
it's
going
to
look
really
funny
to
have
five
houses
that
read
as
a
a
unit
or
development
or
a
neighborhood,
and
you
know
that
they
won't.
Maybe
they'll
relate
better
to
the
houses
adjacent,
but
they'll.
K
Mr
chair
committee
members,
so
there
are
quite
a
few
tenants
of
the
substandard
law
ordinance
which
are
purposefully
included
to
decrease
how
developments
have
a
presence
on
the
street
so
varying
the
setback
varying
the
architectural
diversity.
Those
are
all
inclusions
in
the
substandard
lot
ordinance
to
reduce,
essentially
the
presence
that
a
development
like
this
when
it
is
built
on
these,
smaller
substandard
lots,
would
have
on
the
street,
so
that
is
included.
K
F
I
would
like
to
just
point
out-
and
I
think
it's
kind
of
difficult
to
read
on
this
site
plan.
The
center
house
is
already
a
varied
setback.
I
believe
that's
the
one.
That's
set
10
or
12
feet
back
the
two
that
flank
that
are
10
feet
back
and
then
the
five
the
additional
five
feet,
so
the
15-foot
setback
is
on
the
furthest,
north
and
south
house.
F
So
there
there
already
is
a
variety
of
setbacks
called
out.
It's
not
two
that
are
set
back
on
either
end
and
then
three
aligned
in
the
middle,
and
I
think
that
the
substandard
housing
ordinances
well
well
thought
out.
In
that
regard,
I
think
that,
having
that
sort
of
implied
organic
feel
to
it
where
you
know
they
aren't
all
the
exact
same
lot
and
building
set
in
there
do
help
to
integrate
that
into
whatever
neighborhood
existing
neighborhood
is,
is
being
used
as
the
site.
F
G
K
F
G
H
K
G
F
F
F
Are
there
any
requirements
that
certain
material
packages
be
diversified
in
those
structural
changes
like
so,
for
instance,
1014
and
1008
can't
be
both
the
same
structural
alterations
right
so
that
it's
the
same
material
package
that
gets
altered
at
the
same
time?
It
would
be
you
know,
a
kind
of
mix
and
match
have
had
the
alterations
on
two
of
them
and
have
them
also
get
different
material
call
outs.
H
K
Chair,
yes,
so
those
would
be
two
different
issues,
I
believe
so.
What
I
called
for
in
the
condition
was
that
there
be
architectural
changes
and,
just
in
speaking
with
the
rest
of
the
dr
team,
we
decided
that
to
change
two
of
them
would
make
the
most
sense,
especially
because
they
do
use
similar
packaging.
So
it's
two
different
units,
essentially
that
they're
repeating
the
styles,
so
it
would
make
more
sense
to
just
change
that
one
style
just
to
simplify
it
for
builders
and
developers.
K
B
G
K
E
I'm
going
to
have
to
disagree
with
my
fellow
committee
member.
I
I
like
that.
It
reads
as
one
building.
I
think
it
just
makes
it
a
lot
cleaner,
especially
given
the
fact
that
it's
a
garage-
and
I
don't
think
it
should
garner
much
attention
and
like
that,
it's
sort
of
a
you
know,
lower
slung,
simpler
building
and
yeah,
and
would
like
to
leave
it
alone.
E
My
concern
is
really
the
bump
outs,
but
that
appears
to
be
something
that
I'm
gonna
have
to
somehow
figure
out
how
we
work
with
our
guidelines
to
fix.
So
we
don't
get
too
much
of
this,
and
I
I
just
have
to
say
it's
more
of
a
zoning
issue
than
a
design
issue,
but
I
really
like
infill
projects
like
this,
and
I
think
that
they
look
especially
good
when
they
read
as
one
project.
It
doesn't
look
like
a
cookie
cutter
subdivision,
but
it
looks
like
you
know.
E
Someone
came
in
took
a
an
empty
or
derelict
lot
and
added
good
housing
stock
for
boise,
and
so
I
I
have
no
problem
with
uniformity
of
any
kind
when
it
comes
to,
especially
because
the
houses
are
so
small
and
so
close
to
each
other.
I
think
it
looks
neater,
cleaner
and
more
neighborly
when
they're
similar
in
style,
instead
of
being
all
over
the.
D
D
I
would
agree
with
commissioner
zirkerman's
comments
on
the
garages.
I
think
they're.
I
don't.
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
that.
I
think
it
would
be
easy
enough
to
for
the
owners
to
figure
out
which
which
unit
belongs
there
to
themselves,
and
I
think,
as
the
project
progresses
and
has
final
reviews
with
the
applicant
and
staff
in
terms
of
the
front
elevations.
D
D
I
think,
with
the
as
I
recall,
in
the
landscaping
portion
of
this
there's
a
fair,
fair
amount
of
landscaping
in
terms
of
trees
and
shrubs
and
that
that
could
be
also
used
and
instead
of
replicating
the
same
layout
house
to
house,
they
could
adjust
those
as
they
go
through.
So
each
house
has
a
sort
of
a
unique
identity
in
terms
not
only
of
the
architecture
but
of
the
site
development.
E
K
Located
at
709
north
cole
road,
just
as
a
brief
project
overview,
this
is
an
application
to
construct
a
new
61
unit,
multi-family,
building
with
a
height
and
parking
exception,
previously
approved
through
a
pud
process
on
1.64
acres
in
a
neighborhood
commercial
zone,
with
design
review
overlay
and
a
development
agreement
just
for
a
bit
of
development
context.
Here
this
is
located
within
the
west
bench
planning
area,
it's
located
to
the
south
of
west
emerald
street
and
to
the
west
of
north
coal
road.
K
K
Given
the
reidenbach
canal
easement,
there
are
some
parking
spaces
located
on
the
northwest
corner
that
staff
is
requiring
to
be
relocated
as
they
encroach
that
easement
there,
and
they
also
would
require,
if
a
larger
car
than
a
compact
one
parked
in
them,
then
it
would
have
the
rear
of
that
car
in
the
drive
aisle.
So
staff
is
requesting
that
that
be
relocated
to
that
six
space
compact
parking
area
located
to
the
south
of
the
building.
K
K
Moving
on
to
landscaping,
the
landscaping
is
fairly
adequate
for
the
site.
Again,
it
is
constrained
due
to
the
site's
layout
in
some
areas.
Terminal
planters
are
not
the
full
eight
feet
wide
in
order
to
accommodate
the
drive
aisle
and
the
required
parking,
but
applicant
has
been
willing
to
increase
landscaping
wherever
possible
in
order
to
reduce
that
heat
island
effect
there
again
that
northwest
parking
will
be
replaced
by
a
landscape
planter.
The
number
of
trees
provided
and
the
mix
of
species
is
appropriate.
According
to
the
design
guidelines
for
this
property.
K
The
condition
that
we
would
be
discussing
today
is
that
there
is
the
design
guidelines
require
two
feet
of
metal
banding
above
grade
when
metal,
siding
or
stucco
is
adjacent
to
a
pedestrian
pathway
or
vehicular
pathway,
which
does
occur
in
a
couple
of
places
on
this
site.
As
you
can
see,
there
is
some
roof
line.
Modulation
that's
proposed,
as
well
as
vertical
modulation,
which
helps
break
up
the
massing
of
this
multi-family
building.
K
I
makayla,
thanks
for
your
presentation
and
we've
gone
through
the
staff
report,
and
we
were
close
and
close
with
michaela
to
kind
of
address
some
of
these
issues
before
we
got
here
tonight,
we've
already
reworked
the
site
plan.
We
had
an
issue
regarding
the
park
and
we've
already
provided
a
new
site
plan
relocating
those
two
parking
stalls
and
replacing
them
with
landscaping.
I
The
one
condition
regarding
metal,
siding.
We
didn't
know
we
couldn't
quite
do
that.
We've
done
another
project,
so
we've
seen
around
town
like
well
that
looked
good,
but
we've
discussed
this
and
we'd
like
to
replace
that
with
a
we'll
go
with
a
cement
or
concrete
wayne
scott
up
to
two
to
three
feet
and
we'll
remove
the
metal
siding
from
the
project
to
make
sure
we
all
hear,
and
now
we've
worked
really
hard
to
make
sure
we
make
this
a
nice
development.
I
We
put
a
lot
of
bicycle
parking
in
we've,
worked
closely
with
the
neighbors
to
address
their
traffic
concerns
and
the
speed
that
we've
changed,
that
drive
aisle
to
go
around
and
zigzag
to
development.
So
people
going
through
the
development
can't
go
straight
shot
into
the
commercial
development
slows
them
down.
I
D
K
G
D
I
B
E
Mr
chairman,
yes,
I'm
really
impressed
that
the
architect
was
able
to
fit
all
of
that
on
a
very
difficult
site
and
I'm
excited
to
see
that
that
will
be
an
activated
area
with
more
residents.
And
you
know
previously,
I
probably
would
have
laughed
at
the
requirement
of
a
of
that
much
bicycle
parking,
because
that
area
is
not
very
bicycle
friendly.
But
perhaps
with
the
addition
of
you
know,
new
residents
and
people
who
do
have
access
to
bicycle
parking.
B
K
D
It
well,
I
don't
like
the
whole
piece
here,
but
anyway,
mr
chairman,
I
would
move
for
approval
of
drh
21-00327,
subject
to
the
findings
of
fact,
conclusions
of
law
and
recommended
conditions
of
approval
with
the
addition
of
item,
one
d
and
staff.
Correct
me.
If
I
get
this
out
of
sequence
here,
that
the
metals
removed
that
the
applicant
will
remove
the
metal
siding
from
the
exterior
package
at
the
foundation
level
and
replace
with
the
concrete
material
in
compliance
with
the
boise
city
design,
guidelines.