►
From YouTube: Design Review Committee - 12/9/2020
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).
B
A
A
A
Our
procedures
for
public
hearings
begin
with
a
presentation
from
the
planning
team,
we'll
then
go
to
the
applicant
and
then
the
representative
of
the
neighborhood
association,
if
present
followed
by
questions
from
the
commission.
A
A
A
B
C
B
C
B
B
B
Yes,
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
recommended
conditions
of
approval
in
the
in
the
staff
report.
B
B
G
C
B
C
H
C
F
B
Thank
you,
and
please
note
that
commissioner
aguilar
has
recused
herself
on
this
particular
item
or
a
stain.
Excuse
me
on
our
new
business.
The
first
item
to
be
heard
this
evening
is.
B
B
This
item
has
been
deferred
from
the
previous
november
18
2020
hearing
and
will
be
heard
this
evening
is
the
applicant
present.
B
Oh
I'm!
Sorry,
I'm
sorry!
Oh
first,
the
first
order
of
business
then
will
be
to
have
the
staff
present.
The
report
on
this
project
josh.
I
Perfect
good
evening
design
review
committee.
Can
everyone
please
let
me
know
if
you
can
see
my
shared
screen?
I
I
So
this
project
has
been
deferred
twice
the
first
time
it
was
deferred
in
anticipation
of
achd
comments
and
the
second
time
by
the
applicant's
request
due
to
a
memo
submitted
to
the
design
review
committee
on
november
17th,
though
already
in
the
record,
I
wish
to
summarize
the
memo,
as
will
be
a
point
of
discussion
tonight.
The
city
is
modifying
the
conditions
of
approval
to
restrict
access
along
eisenmen
future
lake
hazel
to
one
driveway.
I
Previously,
the
report
recommended
compliance
with
achd
draft
comments,
which
included
closing
the
second
driveway
in
the
future.
However,
further
analysis
has
led
us
has
led
us
to
propose
restricting
access
now,
rather
than
at
an
unknown
future
date
that
may
or
may
not
come
to
fruition
with
the
additional
information
putting
that
temporary
status
into
question.
We
followed
common
practice
and
issued
a
memo
modifying
the
report
and
recommendations.
I
Now.
My
presentation
tonight
will
mostly
focus
on
access
points
to
try
and
clarify
some
anticipated
points
of
contention.
If
the
committee
has
any
questions
on
design
or
landscaping
or
any
other
elements,
we
can
go
back
to
that.
Karen
gallagher
of
our
comprehensive
planning
team
is
also
here
tonight.
As
someone
who
works
more
on
long-term
transportation
planning,
I
believe
she'll
be
an
asset
tonight
to
answer
any
questions
that
the
design
review
committee
may
have
so
for
some
site
context.
You
can
see
the
aerial
here.
I
The
area
is
predominantly
vacant,
but
it
is
an
area
of
anticipated
future
development.
It
is
mostly
industrial
on
the
outskirts
of
current
city
limits.
Now
I
did
have
a
member
of
the
public
reach
out
to
me
yesterday
with
concerns
about
speed
limits
in
the
area.
The
topic
of
speed
limits
is
not
a
topic
that
we're
discussing
tonight
with
design
review,
and
I
did
direct
them
to
talk
to
achd,
but
I
did
want
to
get
their
concerns
in
the
record
tonight
for
them.
I
So
here
is
the
proposed
site
plan
for
clarity.
This
site
plan
is
horizontal
versus
the
vertical
orientation
of
the
actual
property.
What
we
see
here
as
the
right
is
actually
the
south.
You
can
see
the
two
proposed
driveways.
The
southern
access
is
designed
for
both
passenger
and
commercial
vehicles,
while
the
northern
access
point
is
proposed
for
the
exiting
of
trucks.
Only
while
we
do
appreciate
the
applicant's
desire
to
separate
the
different
forms
of
traffic,
we
believe
the
site
is
large
enough
to
accommodate
one
access
point
that
meets
the
same
intent.
I
However,
before
we
get
into
the
proposed
restrictions
too
much,
I
would
like
to
make
a
clarifying
point.
Throughout
the
staff
report,
achd
report,
written
testimony
and
inevitably
in
discussion
tonight,
blue
cloud
lane
is
mentioned.
Blue
cloud
is
not
an
actual
street.
It
is
essentially
a
driveway
right
now
with
an
easement.
Blue
cloud
is
not
a
street
again,
and
the
phrasing
was
adopted,
however,
due
to
an
ease
of
referencing,
a
point
on
a
map
to
be
clear
and
for
future
understanding.
I
It
will
also
inevitably
have
a
different
name
again.
This
distinction
is
important
for
clarity
and
future
reference.
However,
it
also
addresses
some
written
comments
that
were
received.
A
request
was
made
to
require
dedication
of
right-of-way
for
the
construction
of
this
potential
feature
street
alignment,
as
well
as
partial
payment
for
the
street
section.
I
I
I
We
are
not
requiring
access
to
any
future
north-south
street
alignment,
but
are
also
not
restricting
it
as
such,
we're
also
not
requiring
any
cross
access.
Aside
from
the
cross
access
already
proposed
at
the
south
of
the
property,
this
restriction
is
important
to
preserve
the
flow
of
the
street,
which
will
be
an
extension
of
lake
hazel
in
the
future.
We
have
learned
in
past
projects
such
as
the
eagle
road
interchange
that
access
points
can
really
make
or
break
the
flow
and
safety
of
the
mobility
arterials.
I
Additionally,
the
applicant
may
bring
up
a
deed
with
itd
in
their
presentation,
and
it
has
been
brought
to
the
attention
of
our
legal
staff.
However,
it
is
our
stance
tonight
that
this
is
a
separate
issue
and
not
part
of
the
design
review
process
with
that
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
drh
20-00408
as
modified
in
the
memo
submitted
november
17
2020.
I
B
B
J
J
Thank
you.
I
do
have
a
powerpoint
if
I
could
share
that.
J
J
J
J
The
city
has
made
a
significant
investment
in
the
eisenmann
road
area
by
acquiring
real
property
and
entering
into
a
development
agreement
in
2018,
with
a
developer
to
facilitate
the
leasing
and
construction
of
the
area
as
an
industrial
park.
This
proposed
trucking
terminal
is
a
supportive
use
immediately
adjacent
to
the
industrial
park,
which
will
provide
convenient
services
to
existing
and
future
industrial
park.
Tenants
and
users.
J
This
is
our
site
plan.
I'll
just
walk
you
through
it.
Briefly,
we
are
showing
two
direct
access
points
onto
south
eisenmann
road.
The
this
entrance
so
for
to
get
you
oriented
north
is
left
on
this
plan.
J
The
the
main
entrance
is
here
to
the
south,
and
everyone
enters
at
this
location
for
the
safety
of
or
for
the.
So
we
have
both
passenger
vehicles,
which
will
access
the
convenience
store
and
trucker
lounge
on
this
side
of
the
property,
so
they
would
come
in,
and
this
is
this
is
their
gas
area,
and
then
this
is
an
rv
area
and
then
the
larger
commercial
vehicles
would
travel
around
to
the
backside
and
in
here-
and
this
is
their
canopy
for
their
fueling
station,
and
then
we
have
a
substantial
area
for
for
parking.
J
This
northernmost
access
is
exit
only
so
everyone
enters
to
the
south
and
only
the
large
trucks
exit
to
the
north
staff
originally
got.
This
right
got
their
analysis
right
when,
on
page
eight,
they
analyzed
this,
as
the
separation
of
passenger
and
commercial
vehicles,
increases
the
safety
and
prevents
commercial
vehicles
from
having
to
turn
around
on
the
site.
J
Two
access
points
are
found
to
be
appropriate
by
both
the
design,
review
staff
and
ada
county
highway
district.
I'd
like
to
point
out
also
that
our
traffic
study
looked
at
this
considerably
and
that
was
conducted
by
kimberly
horn
and
the
proposed
development
meets
the
conditions
of
two
access.
Driveways
per
achd's
policy.
J
7205.4.4
the
elevations
are
shown
here,
and
this
is
the
convenience
store
and
the
driver
lounge.
It's
a
single
story.
Building
with
a
height
of
approximately
25
feet.
Most
of
the
building
is
at
21
feet.
The
design
provides
for
varying
roof
designs
and
a
mix
of
materials
and
colors
the
metal
roof,
exterior
and
exterior
walls.
J
There's
a
metal
roof.
Sorry
exterior
walls
are
stucco,
there's
a
board
and
bat
siding
in
gray
tones
and
aluminum
windows
indoors
and
silver.
The
fascia
and
trim
are
stone,
veneer,
fiber,
cement
with
cmu
and
metal
in
tan
and
gray
and
larson.
Architects
is
the
architect
and
they're
on
the
call
we
have
our
design
team
on
as
well.
Should
you
have
specific
questions?
J
J
The
main
reason
is
to
bring
this
southern
access
as
far
south
as
possible
to
get
it
away
from
the
future
roundabout
and
then
this
northern
one
gets
it
off
of
the
curve,
so
that
the
line
of
sight
is
is,
is
better
at
that
location
for
better
visibility
and
our
design.
Locates
the
auto
traffic
closer
to
the
interstate
to
potentially
mitigate
auto
and
industrial
professional
driver
conflicts.
J
J
The
access
points,
this
one
is
wider
like
this,
because
it
it
references
everything
by
station
number
and
it
calls
out
that
the
access
can
be
within
this
area
of
the
station.
So
it's
a
hundred
foot
area
and
then
the
other
one
is
called
out
exactly
at
this
location
and
it
it
references
them
as
40
feet.
J
And
I
am
going
to
bring
josh,
I
have
josh
leonard
with
me
and
I'm
going
to
trade
places
with
him
and
he's
going
to
talk
to
you
more
about
these
deeds
and
I'm
going
to
switch
to
we'll
come
back
to
those
there.
We
go.
K
K
That's
incorrect,
however,
and
in
fact,
as
we're
going
to
demonstrate
tonight,
the
content
of
that
warranty
deed
is
crucial
to
the
committee's
decision
on
the
number
of
acts,
a
number
and
location
of
accesses.
K
I
apologize
just
one,
let's
see
if
I
have
it
here,
maybe
I
don't
have
it
okay?
Well,
I
I
will
reference
the
the
deed
in
just
a
second,
but
for
now
let's
jump
right
back
to
where
we
were
in
the
slideshow.
K
When
we
talk
about
a
deeded
access,
it's
important
to
understand
what
that
means.
In
this
case,
the
the
property
was
existed
as
a
single
parcel
with,
what's
now
across
eisenmann
road
for
it,
when
the
idaho
transportation
department
came
in
and
realigned
eisenmann
road,
the
then
owner
of
the
property,
mr
elliott,
deeded
par
part
of
his
property
for
eisenmann
road
to
cut
right
through
the
property
in
doing
that,
he
reserved
an
easement.
K
The
important
part
of
this
this
section
is
in
the
sub
b,
if
the
governmental
entity,
with
jurisdiction
over
the
road
that
the
property
has
a
deeded
access
to,
denies
the
property
owner
the
right
to
use
the
easement.
The
denial
shall
constitute
a
taking
of
the
access
right
for
which
just
compensation
shall
be
owed.
K
What
this
means
effectively
is
that
there
are.
There
are
three
access
points
that
are
reserved
as
a
matter
of
law
in
a
matter
of
right
on
this
side
of
eisenmann
road.
One
of
those
is
to
the
southern
property.
That's
outside
the
city
and
not
a
part
of
our
application,
two
of
those
are
to
the
the
subject
site
and
where
the
project
will
be
located.
K
If
the,
if
the
design
review
committee
planning
and
zoning
or
the
city
council
had
followed
staff's
recommendation,
it
was
about
a
50
50
chance
as
to
whether
or
not
it
would
be
deemed
a
regulatory
taking
and
whether
or
not
the
city
would
have
to
write
a
check
after
this
was
adopted,
and
this
was
adopted
because
the
idaho
legislature
saw
the
inconsistency
that
was
happening
in
the
in
the
courts
on
determinations
as
to
whether
deeded
accesses
were
takings
or
not
when
they
were
removed.
K
K
K
How
about
that?
Is
that
better?
Okay?
So
this
is
the
deed.
It's
from
1979,
it's
from
glenn
elliott,
a
trustee
and
hilda
elliott
as
a
co-trustee
they're,
dedicating
it
to
micron
technology
from
micron
technology
it
pursuant
to
their
arrangement
with
the
idaho
transportation
department.
It
is
conveyed
to
the
idaho
transportation
department.
From
that
point,
it's
conveyed
to
the
aida
county
highway
district
and
I'm
talking
about
the
the
current
existing
alignment
of
eisen
road.
K
Exhibit
a
includes
the
the
calls
of
a
legal
description
and
then
towards
the
end
includes
reservations.
K
The
key
reservations
are
here,
the
last
two
accepting
their
from
and
reserving
to
the
grantor
grantor
rights
of
access
over
and
through
the
above
described,
parcel
the
eisenmann
road
for
ingress,
egress
and
access
to
the
grantor
between
grantor's,
two
remaining
parcels
separated
by
the
above
described
parcel.
When
it's
split
he's
talking,
he
wants
to
be
able
to
access
his
parcels
on
either
side
via
eisenmann
road.
K
The
next
part,
though,
is
the
important
is
the
crucial
part,
also
accepting
their
from
and
reserving
to
the
grantor
two
public
road
connections
for
each
of
the
grantor's
remaining
parcels
to
the
proposed
extension
of
eisenmann
road,
such
public
road
connections
to
be
at
locations
on
each
side
of
the
proposed
item
eroded
approximately.
Then
it
goes
through
and
lists
where
they're
located
after
that,
let's
see
if
I've
got
it
here
after
that
comes
this
exhibit,
and
this
wasn't
an
exhibit
to
the
initial
deed.
K
This
exhibit
you
can
see
on
the
red
marks,
shows
the
existence
or
where
the
beaded
access
points
are
on
the
yellow
property,
which
is
the
subject
property.
The
one
here
that's
got
a
gap
between.
It
is
because
it's
got
a
it's
got
an
area
between
which
that
deeded
access
can
be.
It's
not
a
specific
location.
It's
within
that
area
down
here
at
the
bottom.
The
southern
access
is
a
specific
point
above
is
a
is
the
the
location
and
then
you
can
see
down
below
on
that
other
parcel.
That's
not
a
part.
K
It's
again
a
span
of
location
based
on
the
the
code
that
we
identified
see
if
I
can
pull
that
up
again
here.
Those
dated
accesses
are
a
property
right
and
to
deny
those
accesses
to
the
applicant
is
a
compensable
regulatory
taking.
My
understanding
is
that
this
has
also
been
submitted
to
the
city's
legal
counsel
and
I'd.
Ask
that
you
consult
with
with
her
or
him
as
to
whether
or
not
that's
that's
a
correct
interpretation
of
that.
J
We've
read
the
staff
report
and
agree
with
staff's
analysis
with
the
exception
of
the
late
memo
that
is
dated
november
17th.
We
ask
that
that
memo
not
be
included
in
the
approval
and
that
you,
since
it
is
a
confusing
situation
and
achd,
is
the
jurisdiction
for
the
road.
Is
that
the
city
just
defer
to
achd
for
the
access,
and
we
ask
for
your
approval,
based
on
the
conditions,
as
codified
in
the
conditions
of
approval
and
with
that
we'll
stand
for
questions.
G
Thank
you.
I
have
a
question
for
josh.
G
A
Committee,
member
zach,
I'm
sorry,
I
assume
you're
referring
to
me.
There's
two
josh's
present.
A
G
F
Again,
I
think
this
is
a
question
for
josh
kind
of
follow
up
on
that
initial
question
has
the
achd
staff
report?
I
think
they
have
the
two
accesses
as
being
approved
or
approvable
for
their
policy.
Is
that
something
that
I'm
correct
about?
I
guess.
A
Yeah,
mr
chairman
committee,
member,
simple,
that's
correct:
achd
does
allow
up
to
two
accesses.
The
city
can
be
more
restrictive
than
the
achc's
recommendation,
but
we
cannot
grant
access
as
an
excess
of
what
they
would
allow.
Thank.
F
B
B
C
M
Hi
I'm
ron
patel,
the
president
of
the
south
heisman
neighborhood
association
and
my
members
of
our
association
obviously
have
a
question
about
traffic
impacts
with
a
truck
terminal.
M
We
have
roughly
400
people
living
out
here
on
eisenmann
road.
I
do
have
a
question
about
the
right
and
right
out
portion
of
the
staff
report
to
me.
That
would
be
people
turning
in
going
right
and
going
out
of
it.
Turning
right.
Turning
right
would
take
him
down
eisen
road
to
gallon,
which
is
exactly
where
we
would
prefer
they
not
go.
M
M
It's
a
two-lane
road
by
our
park
and
large
amounts
of
traffic
would
be
a
definite
negative
impact
for
us,
and
since
there
is
a
really
nice
interchange
right
there
on
where
eisman
crosses
highway
84,
that
would
seem
to
be
the
appropriate
place
for
that
track
that
criminal
to
enter
in
excess
from,
and
that
would
be
our
desire.
Our
our
preference
would
be
for
them
to
use
that
ingredient
ingress
positive
possible
because
we
do
have
small
children
walking
along
the
road
which
would
be
a
public
danger.
M
So
we
just
want
to
express
our
concerns
and
put
on
record
that
that
we
would
like
to
have
some
form
of
of
you
know
what
some
form
of
control
that
would
direct
traffic
to
take
the
heisman
interchange
rather
than
gallon
road.
B
Thank
you,
mr
puccinelli,
for
the
record
before
you
leave.
Could
we
get
your
address
for
the
record
2247.
M
Blue
lake
lane
eyes
in
boise.
Thank
you,
sir.
A
Mr
chairman,
deborah
nelson
will
be
next.
B
Could
we
get
your
name
and
address
for
the
record?
Please.
N
Thank
you
debra
nelson.
My
address
is
601
west
bank
street
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
landowner
to
the
north,
the
eisenmann
exchange
llc,
they
own
two
parcels
that
are
just
immediately
north
of
the
mr
gas
project
site,
and
we
are
here
to
provide
comments
on
this
application
to
let
you
know
we
we
support
the
application.
Generally,
we
don't
have
concerns
with
the
use
that
they
propose,
but
we
have
concerns
about
how
it
could
impact
our
property
to
the
north,
in
particular.
We're
very
concerned
about
any
routing
of
their
trucks
over
our
property.
N
They've
got
over
5000
trips
per
day,
with
significant
heavy
truck
traffic
associated
with
the
trucking
terminal.
We
appreciate
staff's
recommendation
not
to
require
those
trucks
to
be
routed
through
our
property
directly
to
the
north,
through
cross
access
or
otherwise.
So
just
wanted
to
confirm
that
we
we
are
in
agreement
with
that
recommendation
that
wouldn't
be
safe
or
reasonable
to
burden
our
property
with
that.
N
N
N
Now
we
can't
require
a
right-of-way
to
be
dedicated,
but
I
I
would
say
the
the
opposite
is
true
that
if
you
don't
take
it
into
account
now,
as
was
already
planned
in
2008,
it
will
be
too
late
once
you've
approved
a
site
and
not
taken
into
account
those
design
considerations,
and
so
it
is
appropriate
to
require,
as
was
originally
described
in
the
city
staff
report,
for
them
to
design
in
a
way
that
accommodates
future
right-of-way
dedication
at
that
northwest
corner,
so
that
that
expected
future
public
roadway
does
have
room
to
connect
down
to
serve
their
property,
including
the
proposed
cul-de-sac
where
it
will
dead
end
on
their
property.
N
So
even
if
they
don't
dedicate
the
right
of
way
now
it's
accommodated
in
their
site
design.
In
fact,
the
city
itself
has
a
lot
of
control
over
how
that
blue
cloud
lane
will
become
a
public
roadway
in
the
future
because
they
have
control
over
the
land.
That's
needed
for
the
right
of
way.
Our
clients,
eisenmann,
has
dead,
agreed
to
dedicate
right-of-way
that
falls
on
their
property,
so
that
half
of
the
road
could
fall
on
their
property
in
half
on
the
city's
property.
L
L
We
are
the
aforementioned
development
partner
with
the
city
of
boise
for
the
boise
gateway
industrial
park,
which
has
a
development
agreement
in
place
for
the
parcel
to
the
northwest
of
the
mr
gas
proposed
parcel
and
likewise,
with
miss
nelson.
We
generally
don't
have
any
opposition
to
this
use
or
the
proposed
plan
that
has
been
shown
by
the
applicant.
L
We
also
have
concerns
about
plans
for
any
north-south
roadway
that
may
be
considered
as
part
of
this
application.
L
We
are
not
in
favor
as
the
party
that
development
party
for
the
east
parcel
that
is
controlled
by
the
city
of
part
of
boise
to
route
traffic
through
the
land
we
have
under
our
development
agreement
for
a
roadway.
L
We
are
also
concerned
about
when
you
look
at
the
trip
counts.
If
that
traffic
is
applied
to
the
freight
street
road
further
to
the
north,
that
may
be
extended
from
eisenman
road.
What?
What
will?
L
How
that
will
impact
the
functionality
of
that
intersection
of
freight
street
and
eisenman
at
that
location
when
you
consider
additional
development
for
the
parcels
that
are
directly
north
of
mr
gas,
as
well
as
the
planned
development
that
we
have
for
the
city
of
boise
parcels
under
our
development
agreement,
so
were
were
not
in
favor
of
a
north-south
road
in
that
area.
Without
further
discussion,
we
would
say
that
we
feel
like
there.
L
There
could
be
additional
dialogue
in
that
regard
to
come
up
with
a
a
potential
solution,
but
just
on
the
the
surface
of
it,
where
we
have
serious
concerns
about
additional
truck
traffic
and
roadway
implementation
that
may
impact
our
parcel
and,
furthermore,
trigger
any
additional
infrastructure
cost
requirements
on
behalf
of
the
boyer
company
for
roadway
improvements
that
in
no
way
benefit
the
parcel
that
we
have
under
our
control
and
that's
the
end
of
my
comments.
Thank
you
I
and
welcome
any
questions
that
you
may
have.
B
I
believe
we
have
no
other
public
testimony
on
this
at
this
time.
L
E
D
So,
as
was
stated
earlier,
there
was
a
plan
done
by
both
ach
and
the
city
of
boise,
looking
at
the
lake
hazel
alignment
study,
and
in
that
it
was
planned
to
really
have
half
mile
access
points
here
at
the
junction,
with
the
interstate,
as
casey
mentioned,
were
hypersensitive
really
to
access
points
after
we
saw
what
happened
by
the
saint
luke's
at
the
eagle
road
interchange
and
how
the
access
points
there
really
caused
a
lot
of
congestion
for
many
years
until
they
put
the
median
in
that
restricted
them
to
write
in
right
out.
D
So
having
that
experience,
we
know
that
access
restrictions
coming
off
an
interstate
ramp
really
can
make
or
break
the
flow
and
all
the
investment
that
we
put
in
to
have
the
public
traveling
on
those
roads.
So
in
this
case
lake
hazel.
I
just
want
to
highlight
that
you
know
we.
We
typically
deal
with
local
roads
than
collector
than
arterials,
and
in
this
case
it's
a
mobility
arterial,
it's
really
to
move
regional
traffic.
D
So
it's
even
kind
of
above
and
beyond
what
we
deal
with
on
fairview
or
even
state
street,
on
what
we're
looking
at
for
moving
traffic
on
these
roads.
So
that
said,
I
don't
even
think
we
have
the
half
mile
spacing
that
we'd
like
from
the
ramp
to
the
proposed
roundabout
here,
but
we
know
that
every
driveway
that
is
introduced
increases
the
driver,
load
and
we'd
like
to
minimize
that
to
reduce
the
conflict,
points
and
crashes
in
the
future.
D
I
guess
the
other
thing
that
I'd
like
to
bring
up
is
that
at
eisenmen
and
lake
hazel
is
planned
around
about
so
the
concern
that
was
brought
up
by
the
neighborhood
association
access
restrictions
at
this
driveway
people
would
then
be
able
to
access
the
roundabout
to
get
back
in
the
direction
of
going
towards
the
interstate
without
routing
all
the
way
around
up
eisenmann
road,
and
I'm
glad
to
ask
her
answer
more
specific
questions.
But
I'm
hoping
that
gave
you
an
overview
of
the
regional
plan
and
the
sensitivity
near
the
on-ramp.
B
G
D
All
right,
so
we've
got
the
interstate
and
the
ramp
and
as
we
travel
along
abutting
this
property,
then
there
then,
then
you
come
to
the
roundabout
there
at
the
t,
the
the
dog
leg
right
there.
D
So
if
somebody,
if
a
person
came
off
the
off
ramp
access,
mr
gas
and
then
took
a
right
turn
out,
they
would
then
travel
down.
Eisenman
come
to
the
interchange
or
the
roundabout
and
then
head
back
towards
the
interstate.
If
that
was
the
direction
they
were
hoping
or
that
was
their
destination
to
get
back
on
the
interstate
did
that
make
sense.
G
G
G
D
Oh
okay,
so
in
the
roundabout,
just
the
preliminary
work
that
the
city
did
is
going
to
be
sized
such
to
accommodate
easily
the
20-year
traffic
projections
in
this
area.
You
know
the
plan
is
for
lake
hazel
road
to
continue
to
the
west.
Actually,
the
next
application
on
your
agenda
deals
with
an
application
to
the
west
of
that
north-south
part
of
eisenmann
and
so
we're
in
an
industrial
area
until
we
get
over
almost
to
the
orchard
or
pleasant
valley
alignment.
If
that
helps
with
the
land
uses
in
this
area,.
G
D
I
I
B
G
B
Very
good:
are
there
any
other
questions
of
staff
or
the
applicant
at
this
time?
The
applicant
you
have
five
minutes.
Oh
excuse
me,
commissioner,
tabloid
you
got
a
question.
H
Sorry
about
that
operator
error
it.
While
the
map
is
up
there
or
maybe,
if
someone
either
staff
or
ms
gallagher
could
answer
with
the
right
turn
to
the
to
get
to
the
roundabout.
What
is
the
approximate
distance.
D
I
think
I
think
we're
just
under
the
half
mile,
if
you
were
at
the
midpoint
of
their
property
it
it
when
we
measured
it,
it
didn't
quite
come
out
to
the
half
mile.
We
were
a
bit
maybe
more
than
a
bit
shy.
I'm
sure
josh
leonard
would
have
that
dimension,
though.
H
Okay
and
while
I,
while
I'm
asking
that,
would
you
just
use
your
pointer
to
show
me
where
the
lake
hazel
is
lake
hazel,
the
next
street
up
going
east
west
or
where
is
that
alignment
that
we're
talking
about.
D
So
I
actually
don't
think
I
have
access
to.
Does
my
pointer
actually
show
up
here.
H
D
I
don't
think
it
does,
but
maybe
casey
or
josh
can
help
me
with
this,
that
so
what
we
see
is
memory
road
coming
off
here
from
the
interstate
and
coming
around.
It
would
continue
directly
to
the
west
from
that
intersection,
where.
H
H
Okay,
so
off
of
the
it
would
be
off
of
the
roundabout,
then
correct.
H
B
You
are
there
any
other
questions
of
the
staff
for
the
applicant
okay,
tamara.
You
have
five
minutes
for
any
rebuttal
comments,
you'd
like
to
make.
J
Thank
you,
sir
again
tamara
thompson
for
the
record
I'll
go
through
the
question
or
the
comments
real,
quick,
the
neighborhood
association,
mr
puccinelli,
he
is
karen,
was
correct
in
what
she
said
there
that
this
would
not
go
through
the
intersection
and
could
I
share
my
screen
again.
It's
not
allowing
me
to
do
that
at
this.
C
J
There
we
go.
I
just
have
a
couple
exhibits
to
show
you
so
one
of
them
we
did
drop
the
city's
roundabout
onto
the
plan,
just
to
show
you
how
that
works.
J
So
the
question
about
access
and
having
a
write-in
right
out,
the
two
access
points
are
approved
by
achd,
and
these
northernmost
access
would
not
go
to
write
in
right
out
until
such
time
as
the
roundabout
was
in,
and
so
you
would
exit
that
roundabout
and
take
a
right
and
go
around
the
roundabout
and
back
to
the
freeway,
and
I
want
to
point
out
that
our
northernmost
access,
how
we
have
where
it's
currently
designed,
is
roughly
1550
feet
to
the
roundabout
and
freight
on
eisenmann
is
1380
1,
380,
so
much
much
closer
than
than
how
far
away
ours
is
the.
J
As
far
as
the
connection
to
the
north,
the
city,
the
staff
report
does
not
require
cross
access,
we're
not
opposed
to
it,
but
we
are
not
requesting
cross-access
and
one
of
the
things
I
want
to
show.
You
is
just
how
unreasonable
it
would
be
to
use
what
others
are
calling
blue
cloud.
This
is
our
access
point
here,
and
this
is
just
a
simple
clip.
J
I
think,
commissioner,
zuckerman,
that
the
first
question
that
you
asked
is:
how
does
the
city
have
jurisdiction
here
and,
and
they
really
don't
this-
is
this
is
arbitrary.
There's
no
policy
that
backs
this
up.
The
memo,
that's
included,
does
not
include
any
policy
whatsoever.
J
The
the
study
that
is
referenced
has
not
been
approved
by
the
city
and
just
real
quickly.
If
I
am
running
out
of
time
what
I
just
want
to
show
you
on
this
study.
This
is
the
alignment
map
and
please
note
this
number.
One
here
says:
access
was
granted
by
itd
during
the
design
and
construction
of
isaac's
canyon
interchange,
so
it
is
referencing
the
deeded
access
points
that
were
originally
approved.
J
So
in
conclusion,
this
development
of
the
property
provides
an
essential
service
to
encourage
the
orderly
development
of
the
gateway
east
urban
renewal
district
in
accord
with
the
boise
city
code.
Developing
an
efficient,
safe,
trucking
terminal
will
support
the
planning
goals
and
patterns
already
established
in
the
media
area
and
enable
the
area
to
become
more
desirable
for
future
investment,
responsible
development
and
employment
opportunities,
while
managing
growth.
J
B
F
Mr
chairman,
mr
simple,
I
guess
I
just
kind
of
want
to
start
the
conversation
with
the
rest
of
the
committee
regarding
traffic
and
access
points.
You
know,
I
see
I
guess
both
sides
of
it
from
staff
point
of
view,
as
well
as
applicants,
point
of
view
I
just
when
it
it
sounds
like
it's
really
based
on
traffic,
which
typically
we
don't
handle.
I
see
access
points
impacting
design.
F
It's
just
hard
for
me
to
wrap
my
head
around
restricting
site
access.
I
guess
when
we're
looking
at
documents
that
are
granting
two
points
of
access,
but
again
also
looking
at
that
as
a
legal
document,
an
agreement
that
typically
design
review,
does
not
have
purview
over
agreements
outside
of
the
design.
H
H
H
Having
to
do
with
exactly
the
point
of
needed
access
points,
whether
there's
any
conflict
between
the
the
proposals
and
the
and
the
statute
in
ques,
you
know
the
the
idaho
code,
provision
or
idaho
code
section
that
deals
with
deeded
access
points,
and
if
I
recall-
and
if
somebody
can
guide
me,
I
would
appreciate
it
but
is-
is
there
is?
Has
there
been
a
request
for
a
review
by
the
city
attorney
as
to
some
of
these
legal
consequences
of
regarding
the
access
points?
Did
I
hear
that
correctly.
H
And
do
do
we
know
what
the
status
of
that
is
and
and
if
so,
if
not,
how
would
my
concern
is?
We
could
make
a
a
decision,
one
that
is
outside
of
our
purview
number
one
and
two
that
may
ultimately
be
in
conflict
with
what
you
know.
The
decision
of
the
city
attorney
is
which
to
me
could
really
delay
this
project
plus
cause
a
real
problem
for
all
concerned.
H
So
you
know
I'm
inclined
to
to
I
just
don't
I
don't
I
don't
know,
I
just
don't
see
how
we
can
impose
that
that
condition.
For
those
reasons.
A
Mr
chairman
committee
member
talboy
I'll
jump
in
real
quick,
so
our
legal
staff
is
aware
of
the
issue.
They
are
analyzing
it
it
was.
It
was
a
late
addition
to
the
record,
so
we
do
not
have
an
answer.
I
would
just
say
that
they
will
go
through
the
process
and
analyze
that
and
that
that
takings
analysis
is
a
separate
issue
from
the
design
review
approval.
It
is
not
a
part
of
tonight's
decision
that
that
process
can
take
place,
regardless
of
your
decision
tonight.
E
I'm
struggling
with
this
a
little
bit
as
well.
It
is
we
are
supposed
to
be
looking
at
the
not
only
the
designer
guidelines,
but
we're
also
supposed
to
be
looking
at
the
comprehensive
plan
and
the
various
approved
policies
and
plans
that
are
in
place.
I
struggle
with
the
late
memo.
E
E
I
understand
the
city's
concerns
with
those
access
points
locations
because
now
is
the
time
to
adjust
and
make
these
decisions.
I
used
to
work
near
to
the
st
luke's
on
eagle
road,
so
I
have
first-hand
knowledge
on
how
crazy
it
is
over
there.
Those
access
points,
but
I'm
not
seeing
in
the
memo
specific
policies
that
are
in
conflict
with
the
achd
approvals.
F
F
Yeah,
I
I
think,
I'm
in
agreement
with
committee
member
aguilar
and
cowboy
I
I
think
that
it's
it's
you
know
it
looks
like
achds
report
allows
for
the
two
accesses
itd
has
approved
those
accesses,
there's,
obviously
some
historical
grant
of
access
points
there
and
I
know
we're
talking
about
a
future
roadway
and
roundabout.
F
I
know
in
with
experience
in
the
past,
achd
has
allowed
certain
access
points
and
then
you
know,
subject
to
if
there
are
reports
of
vehicular
conflict
or
pedestrian
and
vehicular
conflict
that
they
can
revise.
You
know
their
approval
of
those
access
points
and
require
closures
of
them
to
help
with
public
safety.
F
So
I
mean
I'm
kind
of
leaning
towards
approval
of
the
project
subject
to
the
conditions
of
approval.
F
I
guess
I'd
like
to
hear
what
other
committee
members
think
about
you
know
you
know
an
approval
of
the
project
without
the
november
17th
memo
due
to
you
know
some
ongoing
legal
discussions
with
the
city
internally,
the
the
legal
department
there,
as
well
as
with
the
applicant.
So
I
I
guess
again
kind
of
looking
to
see
what
everyone
else
feels
like.
B
F
B
B
Very
good:
do
we
have
a
motion,
then
it's
for
the
from
the
committee.
F
F
C
M
C
M
C
F
B
We
have
nest
is
a
site
located
at
2155
east
freight
street,
and
the
proposal
is
to
construct
a
trucking
terminal
and
warehouse
building
totaling
approximately
two
hundred
and
eighty
thousand
square
feet
with
associated
site
improvements
on
property
located
in
an
m2d
heavy
industrial
design,
review
zone.
A
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
As
you
can
see,
with
the
aerial
on
the
screen,
I
can
understand
the
confusion
between
the
two
properties.
They
are
very
close
in
proximity
to
each
other.
A
The
subject
property
for
this
application
is
on
the
west
side
of
the
existing
eisman
road
and
will
be
located
west
of
the
future
roundabout
that
was
previously
shown
to
be
at
the
intersection
of
of
the
future
lake
hazel
there,
as
as
mr
chairman
mentioned,
the
applicant
is
requesting
approval
tonight
of
a
warehouse
and
trucking
facility
on
that
piece
of
property.
A
A
You
know
bisects
this
property,
which
is
currently
owned
by
the
city
of
boise
and
under
contract,
with
the
developer,
to
construct
the
the
subject
building
and
then
some
future
buildings
as
well,
so
that
future
lake
hazel
road
improvement
does
bisect
the
currently
very
large
site.
The
current
application
is
entirely
to
the
north
of
that
future
lake
hazel
road,
so
that
would
be
located
along
the
southern
boundary
of
the
property.
A
This
will
be
a
stipulation
for
future
development
of
this
property
will
be
that
a
subdivision
will
be
required
for
any
future
development
to
the
west
of
the
subject,
building
in
in
the
kind
of
undeveloped
land
out
there
more
on
the
western
side
of
the
site.
A
This
property
is
eligible
for
a
building
permit,
and
thus
it's
before
you
tonight
with
that
slight
property
configuration
staff
in
the
applicant
are
largely
in
agreement
with
the
conditions
of
approval.
The
items
up
for
discussion
were
included
in
a
in
a
late
correspondence
memo
that
was
distributed
to
the
committee
today,
I'll
go
through
those.
A
I
do
have
some
changes
to
those,
and
you
know
apologize
to
the
applicant
and
certainly
the
committee
members
for
the
lateness
of
this
information.
This
has
been
a
somewhat
complex
application,
a
lot
of
discussions
with
the
applicant
when
we
have
that
future
lake
hazel
roadway.
A
The
location
is
not
exactly
known,
the
road
is
not
designed.
So
therefore,
we
have
to
build
into
this
approval
a
lot
of
flexibility
about
how
those
future
improvements
are
constructed
about
what
the
applicant's
obligations
for
those
future
improvements
are
and
then
how
we
treat
those
properties
to
the
west
as
they
develop.
A
A
I
would
modify
this
from
the
memo
today
and
strike.
The
two
bullet
points
propose
there
and
include
that
the
applicant
is
responsible
for
the
maintenance
and
irrigation
of
the
right-of-way
landscaping
located
within
an
eight-foot
buffer
with
trees,
abutting
the
south
side
of
the
maltese
pathway,
the
construction
and
installation
of
the
multi-use
path,
landscaping
and
irrigation
is
delayed
until
the
property
to
the
west
is
developed
and
details
of
the
landscaped
area,
including
with
plant
materials
and
maintenance,
will
be
finalized
through
the
required
subdivision
process.
A
That
will
detail
the
construction
of
those
improvements
and
then
also
in
that
memo
we
did
delete
condition
16.
That
was
a
boilerplate
condition
that
we
place
on
properties
in
close
proximity
to
residential
properties
that
limits
loading
activities.
This
one,
this
property
is
zoned
m2,
heavy
industrial.
A
It
is
certainly
anticipated
that
loading
activities
will
take
place
not
just
between
those
restricted
hours,
so
we
would
recommend
recommend
deleting
condition
16.
with
that.
I
would
stand
for
any
questions
from
the
committee
and
I
believe
the
applicant
is
here
and
would
like
to
discuss
those
addition.
Additional
conditions
in
the
memo
today.
L
Yes,
I
I
am
here-
this
is
david
ward
from
the
boyer
company.
Again,
my
address
is
101
south
200
east
suite
200
salt
lake
city,
utah,
eight
four
one,
zero
one.
L
We
are
first
of
all
thankful
for
josh
and
staff,
and
karen
for
working
through
these
last
minute,
adjustments
on
the
staff
report
and
based
on
those
modifications
that
josh
just
explained.
We
are
in
agreement
with
the
staff
report
and
have
no
other
comments
to
make
at
this
time.
I
I
welcome
any
questions
you
have
regarding
the
project
or
any
other
aspects
of
our
our
position
on
the
staff
report.
L
F
Mr
chairman,
your
sample,
I
just
want
to
clarify
with
the
applicant
that
they
are
in
agreement
with
the
memo
dated
today
with
the
modification
to
the
added
condition.
One
j
that
josh
had
discussed
during
his
presentation.
L
B
Apparently
not
are
there
any
last
questions
for
the
staff
on
this
from
the
committee.
C
B
C
B
C
F
B
Thank
you
one
last
item.
Before
we
adjourn
here,
I
was
remiss
and
not
getting
approval
of
our
meeting
minutes
of
november
18th,
so
I
will
take
a
motion
on
that.
F
G
B
G
C
B
H
I
was
not
in
attendance,
so
I
cannot
vote
on
the
approval
of
the
minutes.