►
From YouTube: Historic Preservation Commission - 12/28/2020
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).
A
She
did
a
lot
of
our
surveys
over
the
last
few
years
for
the
different
areas
of
the
city,
and
they
were
just
some
of
the
best
surveys.
I
think
we
have
in
our
system
so
but
kerry
did
pass
away
about
a
week
ago
from
a
battle
with
cancer.
So
I
know
some
of
you
knew
her
worked
with
her,
so
I
just
wanted
to
to
bring
that
up
very
sad.
She
will
be
missed
for
sure
by
the
preservation
community,
as
well
as
the
city.
A
A
Item
number
two
drh2469
is
an
appeal,
an
appeal
of
an
administrative
decision,
and
that
will
be
heard
as
it
is
an
appeal
that
is
a
project
that
michaela
owens,
our
assistant
planner,
worked
on,
so
michaela
will
be
presenting
that
when
it
comes
up.
A
Item
number
three
drh2488
on
1202
east
washington
street
is
a
request
to
add
an
addition,
as
well
as
construct
a
garage
with
a
with
an
accessory
dwelling
unit.
On
top
that
one
is
proposed
to
be
heard
largely
due
to
the
the
adu
garage
being
taller
than
the
hou
than
the
main
structure
on
the
site.
A
A
A
Item
number
five
drh2526
at
1609
25th
street
is
a
request
to
construct
a
rear
edition.
Demolish
an
existing
garage
construct,
a
garage
with
accessory
dwelling
unit.
The
roof
will
also
be
altered
and
increased
on
this
non-contributing
property.
Now
this
is
the
one
that
somehow
the
garage
elevations
didn't
make
it
in
the
packet.
So
I
did
email
those
to
you.
A
We
have
not
heard
any
concerns
from
the
public
and
the
applicant
has
not
expressed
concerns
with
the
staff
report,
so
that,
as
well
is
proposed
for
consent.
Item
number
seven
drh20
535
at
1420
north
harrison
boulevard,
is
a
request
to
demolish
an
existing
garage
and
construct
a
garage
with
accessory
dwelling
unit.
A
Similarly,
this
one
also
has
well
on
this
one.
We
did
receive
a
comment
from
the
public.
It
wasn't
opposed
to
the
structure
or
opposed
to
the
adu
the
letter,
if
you'll
note
in
the
packet
just
it
addressed
the
location
of
the
stair
and
the
landing,
and
that
it
might
cause
some
privacy
concerns
so
other
than
that
we
have
not
heard.
A
That
being
said,
that
one
can
be
on
consent
or
heard.
Obviously,
if
the
commission
would
like
to
hear
it,
we
can
do
that
as
well,
but
we'll
propose
it
for
consent.
If
the
commission
wants
to
pull
that
off,
then
we
can
go
ahead
and
do
that
item
number.
Eight
are
the
findings
from
an
application
you
heard
last
month
at
1901,
north
harrison
boulevard.
A
So
that's
largely
that
was
the
project
that
had
the
addition
on
the
rear.
It
had
the
large
garage
that
that
exceeded
the
height
of
the
house
and
the
higher
lot
coverage,
and
so
that
was
denied
by
the
commission,
and
so
those
findings
are
in
the
packet
and
that
would
be
on
the
consent
agenda.
If
the
commission
agrees
with
the
findings
of
fact,.
B
Thanks
ted:
do
any
commissioners
have
any
issues
with
the
proposed
items
for
consent
that
would
be
items
four,
five,
six,
seven,
eight.
D
B
Okay,
we'll
go
ahead
and
call
the
work
session
and
we'll
see
everything.
C
C
Well,
I
didn't
have
any
questions
for
ted
on
the
agenda,
but
I'm
wondering
ted.
If
this
is
a.
Maybe
this
isn't
the
time
or
not,
but
can
you
maybe
help
us
as
commissioners
a
little
bit
on
the
disc
on
the
topic
of
going
to
planning
and
zoning
to
get
variances
on
setbacks
and
how
that
relates
to
when
we
approve
or
deny
of
something,
I'm
always
a
little
bit
confused
on.
C
You
know
if
we
approve
something
that
goes
outside
of
the
setbacks
or
outside
of
you
know
those
kind
of
things
that
require
a
variance
well,
why
we
can't
they
can't
get
the
variance
first
and
then
come
to
us
and
maybe
with
some
of
the
new
commissioners.
Maybe
a
little
bit
of
explanation
would
be
helpful.
Would
you
be
able
to
provide
that
right
now.
A
Sure,
absolutely
so
we
have
a
you
know
due
to
the
nature
of
the
lots
and
the
these
historic
districts,
they're,
sometimes
pretty
small
or
awkward
lots,
and
so
a
lot
of
times.
A
lot
of
them
are
substandard,
so
a
lot
of
times
the
variance
is
requested.
A
Sometimes
that
would
be
more
convenient.
However,
state
law
requires
that
the
historic
process
occur
first,
so
we
do
have
to
hear
the
historic
review
prior
to
that
very
variance
review
and
sometimes
again,
that's
a
little
awkward,
because
if,
if
you
guys,
you
guys
could
approve
a
project,
then
it
has
to
go
to
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
for
variance
approval.
If
they
don't
approve
the
variance,
then
the
project's
got
to
be
redesigned
and
come
back
to
you,
so
it
kind
of
creates
an
awkward
situation.
A
A
You
do
have
the
ability
to
you're
not
denying
the
variance
but
you're
devon
you're,
denying
maybe
a
site
plan
you're,
denying
a
location
of
of
a
property
or
a
location
of
an
addition
or
a
location
of
a
new
garage.
A
A
So
sometimes
those
are
seen
when
a
lot
is
substandard
is
very
small.
That
is
sometimes
a
hardship
for
that
can
be
used
and
on
those
for
those
findings,
but
other
times
you
know,
and
I
I
warn
whether
you
guys
approve
it
or
not.
I'll
all
warn
applicants
that
you
don't
have
a
hardship
here
or
what's
your
hardship.
You
know
the
commission
might
approve
this.
A
So
they
can't
move
their
project
because
they're
trying
to
save
a
tree
that
that
would
be
a
reason,
a
circumstance
to
to
allow
a
variance.
But
if
you
don't
have
that,
if
you
don't
have
that
special
circumstance
or
hardship,
it's
difficult
to
get
a
variance
approved
so
and
so
that's
kind
of
a
discussion
we
have.
Sometimes,
if
I
don't
see
that
hardship,
if
an
applicant
just
wants
the
project
where
they
want
it
and
there's
no
hardship,
it
can
be
moved,
it
can
be
adjusted
to
meet
the
setback.
A
We'll
have
that
discussion
with
them
and-
and
just
say,
look,
you
know,
even
if
the
commission,
the
historic
commission,
does
approve
your
project,
you
it
doesn't,
you
don't
have
a
hardship,
you
don't
have
a
reason
for
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
to
give
you
this
variance,
and
so
it
makes
it
a
little
more
difficult
and
could
cause
that
more
work
on
the
side
of
the
applicant
to
have
to
redesign
their
project
come
back
to
historic
if
they
don't
get
that
variance.
So
it's
kind
of
a
a
weird
circular
thing
with
variances.
A
C
So
it
would,
I
haven't
been
in
in
many
planning
and
zoning
meetings
or
washington,
but
would
you
say
that
if
we
approve
something
that
does
require
variance
that
the
weight
of
that
approval
from
historic
does
weigh
into
the
decision
of
planning
and
zoning
or
as
a
way
of
support
for
the
project?
I
don't
know.
A
It
helps
so
if,
if
you,
if
you
approve
a
project
that
requires
a
variance
you're,
an
asses
in
essence,
giving
a
recommendation
to
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
that
you're
okay
with
that
variance-
and
so
that
does
help
so
the
planner
that
takes
the
variance
forward
to
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
will
have
that
as
part
of
his
report.
His
or
her
report
there'll
be
a
discussion
in
there
that
was
reviewed
by
the
historic
preservation
commission.
A
The
commission
reviewed
the
site
plan
and
had
no
problem
with
the
encroachment
or
the
or
the
need
for
a
variance,
and
so
it
does
carry
some
weight
and
that'll.
Sometimes
if,
if
a
project
is
kind
of
teetering
on
a
knife's
edge,
I
guess
that
could
kick
it
over.
You
know
if
the
commission
is
supporting
this
and
reviewed
it
and
is
okay
with
it.
A
Then
the
planning
and
zoning
commission
might
just
say:
okay,
but
if
it's
clear
that
there's
no,
you
know
if
you,
if,
if
this
commission
approved
a
project
and
it's
clear
that
there's
no
need
for
the
variance
that
the
project
can
be
reoriented
or
read
or
redone,
so
that
it'll
meet
the
setbacks.
Then
it's
hard
for
the
pnc
commission,
even
with
your
recommendation
to
to
approve
that
because
they
still
have
to
make
those
findings.
A
E
F
I
have
a
question
for
ted,
so
there
was
a
survey
that
I
guess
the
zoning
theory
that
went
out
and
there's
some
questions
about
preservation
and
things
on
that.
Will
we
see
the
results
of
those
surveys.
F
F
No,
it
was
the
zoning
online.
There
was
a
donate
to
update
the
zoning
ordinances,
and
so
I
was
wondering
if
there
is
questions
about
general
zoning,
but
there's
questions
directed.
If
you
were
concerned
about
preservation,
you
could
check
the
box,
so
I
was
wondering
if
we
could
see
those
results.
A
Yeah,
so
when
that
process
started
the
team
that
is
the
the
steering
committee
for
the
zoning
change
that
is
being
worked
on
right
now,
did
meet
with
the
historic
preservation.
Commission,
I
think
it
was.
It
was
early
on
in
the
process.
I
think
it
was
last
winter
it
was
prior
to
covid.
So
the
that
that
team
came
in
and
talked
to
the
commission.
A
That
being
said,
comments
can
be
made
to
that
process
through
the
planner
who
is
kind
of
leading
that
up
andrea
tuning.
A
A
B
Is
that
something
the
commission
would
be
interested
in.
F
A
B
B
D
B
Let's
go
ahead
and
call
the
december
28th
historic
preservation
commission
meeting
to
order.
I
will
go
ahead
and
turn
it
over
to
ted
for
our
virtual
introduction.
Oh
actually,
should
we
probably
do
roll
first.
That
would
probably
be
a
good
idea
victoria.
Would
you
please
call
the
roll
husky.
E
G
A
A
We
will
ask
if
you
have
slides
to
share
or
if
you
can
use
the
planner
slides
for
your
visuals.
If
you
have
your
own
slides,
you
will
be
promoted
to
a
panelist.
This
may
log
you
off
for
a
moment
and
log
you
back
in
and
then
you'll
have
the
capabilities
to
share
your
screen,
a
quick
overview
for
zoom.
The
capabilities
and
options
are
different,
depending
on
which
device
you're
using
if
you're
on
a
smartphone
you'll
be
limited
to
only
speaking
and
sharing
your
camera.
A
If
you're
on
a
computer,
you
can
share
your
webcam
or
your
screen
when
called
upon
some
laptops
might
not
have
microphone
capabilities.
If
you
wish
to
speak
over
the
phone
but
watch
on
your
computer,
the
phone
number
for
this
hearing
is
listed
on
the
email
you
received
when
registering
for
tonight's
hearing,
for
both
smartphone
and
computer
participation.
A
A
B
B
Fantastic
hearing,
none?
I
will
take
a
motion
on
november
30th,
20
20
minutes.
H
Madam
chair,
commissioner
weaver,
I
move
to
approve
the
minutes.
I
B
C
Madam
chair,
I
approve
deferral.
H
B
B
B
B
B
B
J
B
B
B
C
B
Motion
carries.
Thank
you.
Any
applicants
whose
items
were
on
the
consent
agenda.
You
are
free
to
go
or
exit
the
zoom
call.
B
L
So
I'm
going
to
be
providing
kind
of
our
staff
report
presentation
here
for
drh200469
at
1810
west
bella
street.
So
this
is
an
appeal
of
an
administrative
approval
to
modify
the
condition
of
approval
b,
which
was
to
not
allow
staggered
shingle
siding
in
the
gable
areas.
This
is
located
in
r1ch,
single-family,
residential
with
a
historic
overlay
zone.
L
L
L
L
L
These
are
just
more
documents
that
they
provided
photos
showing
what
they
were
planning
to
do:
lap
sighting
on
the
body
and
a
staggered
edge
shingle
in
the
gables.
So
there
are
grounds
for
the
appeal
of
the
condition
which
did
not
allow
them
to
put
staggered
edge
shingle
in
the
gable
areas.
L
Their
first
ground
for
appeal
was
that
the
current
sighting
is
aluminum,
which
is
not
the
original
sighting.
So,
just
as
a
little
bit
of
background,
if
they
were
to
apply
to
put
aluminum
siding
on
now,
we
would
probably
say
that
that's
not
an
appropriate
sighting
and
would
suggest
an
alternative
sighting
generally.
The
two
sightings
that
we
approve
for
contributing
homes
are
wood,
lap,
siding
and
then
smooth
fiber
cement,
siding
with
no
artificial,
grooves
or
texturization.
L
L
L
However,
the
sighting
is
mentioned
in
the
comments
and
is
noted
with
it
still
maintaining
its
contributing
status.
Finally,
the
ground
final
grounds
for
appeal
was
that
the
neighbors
have
a
board
and
baton
sighting
and
to
maintain
diversity.
They
would
like
to
use
the
staggered
shingles
in
the
gables,
so
born
baton
was
not
the
only
thing
that
was
suggested
so
now,
I'm
kind
of
jumping
into
what
the
planning
official
response
was
to
these
grounds
for
appeal.
L
So
for
the
first
one
staff
actually
approved
a
variety
of
materials
that
were
not
aluminum
that
complied
with
the
design
guidelines
and
with
the
history
of
the
home
generally.
Our
policy
is
that
there
are
those
two
materials
that
we
allow
on
pretty
much
every
contributing
home
and
then,
if
there
is
another
material,
that's
in
the
citing
layers
that
would
be
approved
or
is
within
the
design
guidelines.
L
The
second
response
is
that
the
survey
does
note
the
sighting,
as
I
mentioned,
and
the
house
was
still
determined
to
be
contributing
and
it's
actually,
the
sighting
is
mentioned
twice,
and
they
even
pull
out
that
the
sighting
in
the
gables
is
the
four
inch
vertical
aluminum
siding.
So
that's
partially,
why
staff
recommended
that
not
necessarily
aluminum
siding
is
maintained,
but
that
the
orientation
of
the
siding
in
the
gables
is
maintained,
which
couldn't
be
done
with
the
staggered
shingle.
L
So
we
don't
usually
look
to
diversify
from
neighbors.
We
just
use
the
design
guidelines
to
determine
what
would
be
appropriate
and
the
history
of
the
home,
which
is
what
staff
did
in
this
case.
If
they
were
wanting
to
diversify.
It
appears
that
the
nearest
neighbors
already
use
shingles
in
their
gables,
but
they
do
that
because
well,
it
was
mentioned
on
their
historic
survey
that
those
staggered
shingles
were
there
at
least
when
it
was
surveyed
and
seemed
to
be
of
use
historically.
So
I
just
wanted
to
provide
a
little
bit
of
context
with
photos
after
this.
L
L
This
is
just
to
provide
context,
so
the
neighbor
to
the
west
is
kind
of
this
minimal
structure,
very,
like
mid-century
structure
that
they
use
brick
flat,
roof
very
different
from
the
structure
that
we're
discussing
here,
but
then
their
neighbor
to
the
east,
which
seems
to
be
their
closest
neighbor.
They
actually
split
the
lot
with
this
neighbor
or
the
lot
is
split,
at
least
with
this
neighbor.
It
looks
like
they're
using
so
they
have
shingle
siding
and
then
they
have
those
cedar
shingles
in
the
gables,
so
that's
kind
of
their
other
neighbor
to
the
side.
L
So,
just
to
kind
of
show
you
what
was
proposed
for
the
siding
materials,
it
would
be
wood
or
smooth
fiber
cement
on
the
body,
but
the
gable
siding.
This
is
the
condition
b
that
is
being
appealed,
was
approved
to
be
smooth,
fiber,
cement
or
wood,
preferably
in
a
vertical
configuration,
but
other
configurations
were
also
suggested
and
approved.
L
Stucco
sighting
because
it
looks
like
it
was
used
elsewhere
on
the
home,
or
at
least
nearby
in
the
neighborhood
was
appropriate,
looks
like
it
was
used
on
the
home.
It
was
a
little
bit
difficult
to
tell
and
then.
Finally,
this
is
the
point
of
contention
that
the
staggered
shingle
sighting
is
not
approved
because
it
could
not
be
found
in
the
citing
layers
of
a
contributing
home
just
to
take
a
quick
look
at
the
surveys
which
are
mentioned
as
the
grounds
for
appeal
and
in
our
response.
L
L
However,
I've
highlighted
here
where
they've
mentioned
the
sighting,
so
they
include
the
minimal
traditional
style,
as
well
as
the
horizontal
aluminum
siding
on
the
body
and
then
the
four
inch
vertical
aluminum
siding
on
the
gables.
So
taking
that
all
into
account
it
was
still
considered
a
contributing
home.
L
Finally,
I'm
including
1801
north
18th
street,
that's
their
nearest
neighbor,
the
one
they
split
the
lot
with
who
uses
the
shingle
siding.
So
you
can
see
again.
Their
area
of
significance
is
architecture,
however,
they
are
approved
for
or
have
used
traditionally
shingle,
both
on
the
body
and
in
the
gables.
It's
not
mentioned
specifically
that
they
use
it
in
the
gables,
but
the
wood
shingle
siding
is
mentioned
on
their
survey,
so
it
makes
sense
that
they're
using
that
essentially
so.
Finally,
staff's
recommendation
is
that
the
commission
deny
this
appeal.
G
L
So
I
think
there
were
a
few
that
we
were
talking
about
in
general.
The
staggered
seems
to
be
like
a
cedar,
but
hardy
does
make
a
few
that
are
similar
to
that
staggered.
Shake
and
we've
discussed
both
of
those,
and
it
seemed
like
neither
of
those
would
meet
the
intent
of
of
wanting
to
keep
the
orientation
the
same
or
at
least
using
something
that
was
historically
used
on
the
home.
G
Okay,
so
it
doesn't
matter
what
material
it
is.
You're
just
feeling
like
the
shingle
isn't
appropriate
for
that
area.
L
Yeah,
so
it's
just
based
on
the
history
of
the
home.
Generally,
our
policy
with
contributing
homes
is
that
we
only
allow
those
one
of
two
materials
so
generally
like
a
wood,
lap,
siding
or
smooth
lap
siding,
so
the
smooth
fiber
cement
lap
sighting
unless
they've
used
another
material
historically
on
the
home,
they
weren't
able
to
find
any
evidence
of
it,
this
shingle
being
used
on
the
home.
Essentially,
so
I
denied
that
for
the
gables.
L
Yes,
madam
chair
commissioners,
yes
traditional,
they
did
actually
pull
off
some
of
it
and
they
found
that
there
was
wood
lap
citing
below,
but
it
didn't
seem
like
they
were
able
to
find
any
other
citing
history
in
those
layers.
D
B
B
M
I
think
the
distinction
that
we
need
to
make
here
is
we're
just
talking
about
the
appeal
of
the
material
that
was
recommended
by
staff
for
in
the
gable
ends,
and
so
you
know,
as
we
understand
it,
the
pattern
would
be
a
vertical
pattern
and
what
we
were
proposing
was
a
horizontal
pattern
with
the
staggered
shingles.
Now
what
we
wanted
to
offer,
as
as
a
compromise
and
ryan,
please
jump
in
if
you
want
to,
is
a
straight
edge
shingle
which
would
mimic.
M
M
B
B
B
B
D
C
Chair,
maybe
to
get
things
going
here
I'll
give
this
a
shot.
I
would
finding.
C
I
would
move
for
denial
of
dr820-00469
based
by
the
recommendations
of
staff
regarding
planning
and
zoning.
Our
zoning
ordinance.
C
11-03-03.09,
subsection
c,
noting
that
I
find
no
error
in
the
decision
being
made
by
staff.
It's
my
approval
or
that's
my
denial.
Excuse
me
my
emotion.
B
Okay,
victoria,
would
you
please
call
the
roll
koski.
D
E
B
A
A
The
item
is
at
1202
east
washington
street.
It
is
a
request
to
remove
an
attached
carport
construct,
a
rear
addition
and
construct
a
garage
with
accessory
dwelling
unit.
A
It's
about
a
473
square
foot
addition
and
then
in
the
hash
mark
back
toward
the
alley,
you'll
see
where
the
garage
and
adu
will
be
located
and
that
will
be
currently
the
property
does
take
access
from
locust
street
to
the
driveway
and
carport
on
the
rear
of
the
house.
So
with
the
new
garage,
access
would
be
taken
from
the
alley
and
then
side
loaded
into
the
new
garage.
A
And
as
you'll
note,
it's
it's,
this
is
about
a
one
and
a
half
story
garage
with
pony
walls
and
a
steep
pitched
roof
and
then
small
dormers
on
the
sides.
So
it
you
know
for
a
garage
with
an
adu.
It
is
relatively
modest
in
size.
A
A
And
then
this
is
the
rear
of
the
property.
As
you
can
see
the
attached
carport
here,
where
my
cursor
is
in
the
driveway
that
will
go
away
with
the
addition
and
then
the
project
area
here
for
the
garage.
This
is
the
alley
and
then
the
garage
will
be
located
in
this
area
and
side
loaded
and
then
here's
another
western
view.
West
side
view
of
the
property.
A
So
the
garage
adu
certainly
is
taller
than
the
one-story
house.
It
should
be
noted
that
the
applicant
did
consider
it
is
a
non-contributing
house
and
it
was
considered
briefly
to
increase.
You
know,
potentially
on
these
non-contributing
houses,
you
can't
increase
the
height,
but
it
was
decided
the
home,
the
owners
liked
the
house
the
way
it
was
and
didn't
want
to
mess
with
the
roof
or
increase
the
height.
A
So
with
that
staff
does
recommend
approval
of
the
project.
However,
it
should
be
noted
that
there
is
a
condition
of
approval
in
the
report
that
the
garage
in
adu
does
not
exceed
the
height
of
the
house,
so
essentially
the
approval
would
be
for
the
addition
only
and
the
garage
if
the
garage
was
rebuilt
or
reconfigured
it
wouldn't
with
that
condition,
would
not
be
able
to
exceed
the
height
of
the
house.
O
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
rob
sepich
and
I
am
the
owner
of
the
house.
We
also
had
our
our
architect,
mr
richard
george,
who
is
also
online,
answering
architectural
questions
you
might
have.
So
I
guess
I
might
just
start
out
by
thanking
the
commission
for
your
time
and
kind
of
give
you
an
idea
of
what
our
plan
was
with
this.
So
we
wanted,
as
ted
mentioned,
maintain
the
majority
of
the
house
as
it
is
and
try
to
add
on
with
with
minimal
interruptions.
O
Most
of
our
neighbors
are
two-story
buildings,
kitty
corner
to
us
at
425.
They
have
those
that
block
of
two-story
duplexes
immediately
to
the
east
of
us.
This
is
a
25
foot
tall
structure
that
is
a
single
family
unit
building,
so
we
were
trying
to
figure
out
a
way
to
maximize
the
potential
of
our
property.
O
So
a
big
part
of
that
is
that
we
decided
to
dig
down
into
our
basement
in
order
to
maintain
our
roof
height,
so
we're
trying
to
convert
what
is
right
now
about
a
five
and
a
half
foot
basement
structure
to
something
that
is
a
full
compliant
eight
foot
wall.
O
So
we
try
to
follow
the
the
recommendations
in
the
4.1.7
on
the
the
recommendations
on
the
boise
state
season
of
boise
city
website,
and
we
were
trying
to
figure
out.
O
A
way
to
you
know
include
hips
and
dormers
that
are
very
similar
to
what
you
might
see
in
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood,
and
also
that
are
congruent
with
what
the
house
has
itself
right
now
the
house
has
some
aluminum
siding
a
lot
of
aluminum
windows,
we'd
like
to
restore
to
something
that's
a
little
bit
more
to
what
the
original
configuration
of
the
home
would
be
go
more
towards
something
that
is
a
bit
more
like
a
three
inch
before
it
should
clap
that
sort
of
thing
with
that,
madam
chair,
I'm
gonna
be
happy
to
take
any
questions
that
the
committee
might
have,
but
do
appreciate
your
time
on
this.
C
It
in
the
conditions
of
approval
and
and
also
in
working
with
staff.
It's
mentioned
that
the
your
garage
and
accessory
dwelling
unit
be
lowered
in
height
from
to
be
lower
than
the
house.
I
mean
right
now.
Your
garage
plan
is
23
foot
tall
and
your
existing
house
height
is
18
foot
six,
so
you've
got
gotta,
make
up
you
gotta,
bring
that
height
down
four
and
a
half
feet,
or
so
looking.
C
I
I
don't
see
how
you
can
actually
do
that.
Take
four
and
a
half
feet
off
the
top
of
that
building.
So
have
you
worked
with
staff
or
worked
with
your
architect
to
figure
out
a
way
to
meet
that
condition,
to
create
to
have
this
garage
with
an
adu
and
and
have
it
lower
height,
lower
than
height.
J
Looking
through
the
design
guidelines
and
residential
historic
districts
we've,
you
know
all
the
pictures
shown
in
here
are
relating
appro,
approved
examples
and
unapproved
examples,
and
it
relates
to
the
whole
neighborhood
and
not
just
one
particular
lot,
and
so
we
were
thinking
that
our
train
of
thought
was
to
keep
the
house.
J
Pretty
much
looking
like
it
has
or
blends
in
like
it
always
has
been.
The
house
just
to
the
east
of
us-
is
25
feet
to
their
ridge
and
we're
below
that
with
our
adu.
J
I'm
not
quite
sure
where,
in
the
I
don't
know,
if
it's
city
guidelines
that
our
particular
new
adu
needs
to
be
lower
than
our
main
roof,
you
know
we.
We
were
looking
at
design
options
on
tossing
larger
roof
framing
on
our
existing
house
in
order
to
make
it
follow
those
guidelines
to
line
up
with
the
adu
we're
talking
four
and
a
half
feet,
that's
shorter
than
I
am
tall,
not
that
I'm
you
know,
I'm
not
very
tall,
and
this
is
not
like
a
full
two-story
house.
J
It's
a
story
and
a
half
which
is
exactly
what
is
next
to
us
to
the
east,
which
is
two
and
a
half
feet
taller
than
our
proposed
structure
and
right
behind
us
in
the
alley.
In
that
north
view
that
he
that
was
shown
earlier,
you
could
see
two-story
houses
right
behind
us
and,
like
rob
mentioned,
the
duplexes
across
the
street
are
two-story.
I
think
they're
a
flat
roof.
I've
measured
them
and
they're
easily
26
feet
tall.
J
Blending
with
the
neighborhood
guidelines,
I
think
we're
there
looking
at
design
review.
Let's
see
guidelines
below
shall
apply
to
developments
on
substandard
lots
of
record
location,
design
of
adjacent
buildings,
landscaping
of
right-of-way
improvements,
etc.
Number
of
stories
there's
an
exception
here.
J
C
Well
in
in
6.1.2,
it
specifically
says
that
the
adus
cannot
be
taller
than.
C
The
wording
is
dual:
the
dwelling
unit
is
not
taller
than
the
primary
building
and
when
I
guess
my
question
for
you
is,
if
you
were
able
to
meet
the
conditions
that
are
proposed
for
approval
by
lowering
the
height
of
the
building
four
and
a
half
feet,
what
would
you
have
to
do
to
redesign
it.
J
Well,
we
wouldn't,
we
wouldn't
have
a
second
floor
or
we
wouldn't
have
a
adu
is
what
would
be
the
issue?
We
just
have
a
roof
over
a
garage
four
and
a
half
feet.
Is
you
know
you
can't
even
walk
in
that,
so
we've
got
a
probably
eight
foot
height
in
the
middle
of
this
building
and
then
it
slopes
down
to
about
three
feet
on
each
side.
J
J
C
I
thank
you
for
clarification
that
that
was
in
the
our
design
guidelines
and
to
read
it
to
read
it
exactly
to
make
sure
for
the
record.
We
have
it
correct.
It's
6.1.2,
which
states
where
that
comes
from
yeah.
It.
D
J
J
This
garage
is
on
the
far
north
east
corner
away
from
the
side
street
and
we
would
have
you
know
my
my
drawing
of
the
two
together
is
kind
of
a
perspective,
not
a
a
3d
model
and
we
would
have
landscape
between
the
sidewalk
and
our
driveway
and,
and
I
haven't
asked
what
they
want:
a
offend
the
backyard
fence
in
front
of
that
landscape
strip
or
not.
J
Yes,
there's
I
mean
in
this
2d
drawing
it
looks
like
it's
huge
compared
to
the
house,
but
in
reality
we're
talking
four
and
a
half
feet
in
a
very
small
frame
building
and
it's
60
feet
away
from
the
street
from
the
curb
of
the
street
50
feet.
Maybe
so
you
know
in
perspective,
the
house
is
gonna.
You
know
perspective.
J
The
house
is
gonna,
look
three
times
the
size
of
this
garage
in
a
2d,
drawing
you're
not
going
to
see
that
perspective
and
I'm
not
sure
how
to
show
sample
drawings
of
sample
adus
that
that
show
what
I'm
talking
about
the
house
definitely.
J
Distorts
the
size
of
the
garage,
because
it's
not
really
that
large-
and
this
is
not
all
you-
know-
four
and
a
half
the
whole
thing's,
not
four
and
a
half
feet
above
the
ridge
of
the
house.
It's
you
know
sloping
back.
We
have
the
the
gable
dormer
small
gable
dormer
and
the
shed
dormer
and
just
the
front.
The
back.
B
Can
you
tell
me,
or
maybe
the
owner
is
better
equip
to
answer
this
question?
What
is
the
primary
function
of
the
adu?
Is
it
going
to
be
used
as
a
home
office?
Is
it
intended
to
be
rented
out.
Q
O
Rob
sepich
the
owner,
so
our
intended
function
is
to
enable
my
folks
to
come
over
and
join
us.
So
we
we
just
had
a
baby
october
28th,
so
we're
trying
to
create
a
space
that
my
mom
and
dad
might
be
able
to
come
over
and
see
the
baby
and
be
able
to
spend
time
they
live
in
portland
oregon.
O
So
we're
hopeful
that
they'd
be
able
to
come,
spend
quite
a
bit
of
time
or
my
sister
might
be
able
to
come
out
and
use
that
space
that
otherwise
might
be
dead
space
that
you
just
hold
cars.
That
was
kind
of
our
idea
behind
that.
B
Thank
you
so
much
and
congratulations,
I'm
looking
here
at
the
site
plan.
I
think
I'm
on
page
13
in
the
packet
and
I
I
really
appreciate
how
modestly
done
this
site
plan
is.
I
feel,
like
you,
you
do
have
a
larger
adu
garage
situation
happening,
but
given
the
size
of
your
home,
it's
easy
and
probably
intentional
to
do
so.
Can
you
speak
to
as
the
owner
of
the
property-
and
maybe
you
kind
of
already
mentioned
this,
but
what
does?
B
What
is
the
importance
of
having
the
adu
space
to
your
family,
given
that
you've
just
had
a
baby?
Can
you
kind
of
elaborate
on
that
a
little
bit
more.
O
Yes,
ma'am
sure
I'd
be
happy
to
a
big
part
of
it
is
you
know,
good
fences
make
good
neighbors,
and
sometimes
space
is
good
for
family
to
do
so,
especially
having
a
newborn
he's
got
some
lungs
on
him,
so
having
a
little
bit
of
space
to
allow
my
folks
to
be
able
to
spend
some
time
very
close
to
us,
but
but
still
have
a
little
bit
of
that
separation.
O
It
was
really
gonna,
be
probably
a
pretty
good
thing
for
our
family
in
order
for
for
us
to
have
happy
people
on
every
side
and
make
sure
that
everybody
is
not
feeling
on
top
of
each
other.
And
that's
that's
the
big
part
of
this.
I.
K
O
Unfortunately,
with
kovid
we've
been
very
far
apart,
but
sometimes
overexposure
can
be
quite
a
bit
so
we'd
like
to
set
up
a
spot
where
you
know
my
folks
can
come
over
and
have
a
lot
of
time
to
spend
with
my
my
son,
that
that
means
a
lot
to
us,
and
that
is
something
that
we're
really
really
focused
on
as
a
family.
But
right
now
you
know
having
them
so
far
away
is
very
difficult
for
us
to
try
to
to
make
that
happen.
O
F
E
O
Thank
you,
commissioner
brown,
to
answer
your
question.
We
there
is
some
wood
lab
siding
currently
on
the
house
underneath
that
gaudy
aluminum
stuff,
so
we'd
like
to
see
what
the
condition
is
of
that.
If
there's
original
wood
under
there
and
it's
intact,
we
would
love
to
keep
that.
Otherwise,
our
intent
was
to
put
in
some
some
fiberboard,
just
to
kind
of
you
know,
make
that
a
little
bit
more
congruent
with
what
otherwise
in
the
neighborhood.
O
It's
probably
the
only
thing
my
neighbors
complain
about
I've
got
a
painter
as
a
neighbor
and
he
hates
those
that
aluminum
side
with
a
passion
so
we're
you
know,
we'd
like
to
get
something
a
little
smaller.
That
looks
a
little
bit
more
like
it
usually
would.
F
Okay,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
I
just
wanted
to
bring
that
up,
because
one
of
the
main
reasons
your
house
is
non-contributing
or
because
of
the
alterations,
and
if
you
are
able
to
pull
off
that
siding
and
repair
it
and
rehabilitate
it,
you
could
actually
probably
make
your
house
a
contributing
structure
within
the
neighborhood.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner
brown.
I
appreciate
that
sentiment.
Are
there
any
final
questions
for
the
applicant
or
his
architect
before
we
move
on.
B
Great,
thank
you
so
much
to
the
applicant
and
the
architect
is
anyone
from
the
registered
neighborhood
association
here
to
testify.
That
would
be
ina,
which
should
be
sheila
grisham.
P
Hi,
this
is
sheila
grisham
with
the
east
end
neighborhood
association,
I'm
at
1204,
east
state
street
boise
83712,
and
I
must
say
I'm
a
little
conflicted
on
this
one,
especially
after
commissioner
brown's
comment
about
the
possibility
of
it
being
changed
to
a
contributing
house.
P
What
the
higher
garage
than
the
house
would
do
to
that
status.
If
that
were
to
be
something
to
be
considered,
I
must
say,
though
too
I
am
very
pleased
and
happy
that
the
homeowners
are
keeping
the
house,
especially
the
facade,
all
the
same
and
just
adding
on
to
the
back
and
not
turning
it
into
a
two-story
house
or
something
that's
much
bigger.
P
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
they
need
more
space
and
the
garage
is
one
of
the
ways
to
do
that
without
changing
the
house,
so
not
really
sure
how
I
feel
about
it
strongly
one
way
or
the
other.
P
B
Okay,
if
the
applicant
would
like
you
have
five
minutes
for
rebuttal
or
any
additional
comments.
O
Thank
you,
matt.
I'm
sure
I,
I
guess
I'll
just
take
time
to
thank
everyone
for
being
here
and
for
participating,
we're
just
it's
it's
a
very
small
house.
You
know
it
says
it's
over
a
thousand
square
feet,
but
it
sure
doesn't
feel
like
that,
especially
when
you
bump
your
head
on
the
basement,
so
we're
just
trying
to
expand,
to
meet
our
new
family
and
and
to
try
to
make
things
as
congruent
as
we
can.
O
We
love
this
neighborhood
we're
going
to
stay
here
for
a
very
long
time,
so
we
really
appreciate
your
time
and
look
forward
to
the
outcome
of
this.
Thank
you.
B
C
Drh20-00488
for
the
addition
portion,
but
based
on
6.1.2
and
the
recommendations
from
staff
that
the
garage
and
adu
portion
be
not
included
in
the
approval.
B
Oh
yeah
go
ahead.
C
So
I
I
they've
done
it.
I
think
the
applicant's
done
a
great
job
with
the
addition
on
the
house.
C
While
the
garage
is
set
back
far
from
the
front
of
the
house,
they
have
a
side
facing
street
and
I'm
looking
at
in
our
packet.
It's
page
97
just
got
the
site
plan
on
and
the
2d
drawing
of
the
street
view
from
locust
street.
You
know
that
that's
that's
pretty
significantly
taller
than
the
house.
The
adu
is,
and
while
the
conditions
of
approval
and
the
staff
report
say
that
they
could,
if
they
meet
the
height
of
the
house
with
the
adu,
the
staff
would
would
agree
to
approving
it.
C
The
problem
I
have
with
that
is
in
order.
In
order
to
meet
that
height,
you
got
to
completely
redesign
that
house
or
excuse
me,
the
garage.
So
that's
why
I
left
it
off
of
my
approval
of
my
motion,
so
I
don't
know
if
that
makes
it
any
clearer,
but
I
I
have
I
struggle
with
the
height
of
that.
It's
it's
significantly
higher
in
the
house.
B
I
suppose
let's
have
some
discussion
and
then,
if
you
want
to
revisit
your
motion,
you
can
feel
free
to
clarify.
I
am
kind
of
surprised
by
the
fact
that
here
we
have
an
application
before
us
of
a
non-contributing
house
and
we
are
seeing
an
incredibly
modest
addition
to
the
back
of
this.
In
addition
to
the
need
for
a
garage
with
a
very
small
edu,
I
understand
their
guidelines.
I
understand
it's
not
ideal.
It's
it's
not
accepted.
B
B
Need
to
address
the
affordable
housing
issue
and
wanting
more
adus.
B
I
think
this
is
a
situation
where
we
need
to
really
look
at
what
we
have
in
front
of
us,
which
is
this
family,
has
a
need
to
stay
in
their
home.
They
need
to
make
it
work
for
them,
and
this
adu
is
a
way
for
them
to
have
maintained
space
in
their
home.
So
I
that's
yeah.
Those
are
my
thoughts,
I'm
interested
to
hear
what
others
have
to
say.
F
I'll
have
some
discussions
I'll
just
elaborate.
My
concerns,
I'm
concerned
about
the
height
of
the
adu.
F
F
H
Madam
chair,
just
a
quick
comment.
I
I
agree
with
the
addition.
I
think
that
whether
this
house
was
contributing
or
not
that
this
edition
would
have
would
have
probably
been
be
fine.
So
I
think
it's
fine.
If
I'm
understanding
staff's
report
correctly,
if
we
approve
it
and
don't
take
the
garage
off,
it's
still
not
approved
as
a
two-story
structure.
So
the
only
way
they
could
build
the
garage
is,
if
it's,
it's
just
a
regular
one-story
garage
lower
than
the
house.
A
Madam
chair
yeah,
the
the
reason
you
know,
especially
on
a
non-contributing
house.
The
applicant
did
consider
increasing
the
height
of
the
house
to
meet
the
height
of
the
garage.
A
So
the
idea
with
leaving
a
condition
of
approval
in
there
that
the
you
know
the
applications
approved,
but
the
garage
adu
shall
not
exceed
the
height
of
the
house.
Essentially
it
it
erases
the
current
ability
to
to
construct
a
new
garage
in
adu.
However,
it
does
approve
an
adu
for
the
property
in
in
essence,
so
if
the
applicant
did
want
to
come
back
to
the
city
and
do
something
that
would
make
it
work,
you
know
increasing
the
height
of
the
house
like
they
had
considered
a
little
bit.
A
That
would
be
a
possibility,
so
it
just
essentially
leaves
a
little
bit
of
flexibility
in
there.
They,
as
is
with
that
condition.
They
cannot
build
the
garage
and
adu.
You
know,
obviously,
because
they
can't
they
can't
go
higher
than
the
house,
but
it
does.
It
does
leave
some
flexibility
in
there
if
they
were
to
go
back
and
and
wanting
to
alter
the
the
how
the
height
of
the
house
to
meet
the
height
of
the
garage,
because
it
is
a
non-contributing
house.
H
A
A
So
if
it
was
just
a
if
they
wanted
to
come
back
and
say,
okay,
fine,
we
won't
do
the
adu
we'll
just
do
them
we're
going
to.
We
want
to
construct
a
modest
garage
which
I
you
know,
they're
getting
rid
of
the
carport,
closing
the
access
and
and
creating
an
alley
access.
So
it
would
allow
them
to
build
a
garage
not
higher
than
the
house.
H
Yeah,
I
guess
that
was
my
point.
If
we
take
it
off,
we
say
that
they
can't
do
it,
then
whether
they
decide
to
try
and
fit
it
under
the
height
of
the
house
or
not.
They
still
couldn't
build
a
garage
because
it
wouldn't
be
approved,
but
if
we
approve
it
as
it
is
right
now,
they
can't
go
higher
than
it,
but
they
could
still
build
the
garage
that
makes
sense.
C
Yeah
and
and
commissioner
weaver,
madam
chair,
the
the
reason
I
took
it
off
of
my
original
motion
is
is
not
is,
is
to
give
the
commission
the
ability
to
see
the
redesign
come
back
in
front
of
the
commission
for
us
to
approve
of
it.
Not
if
we
approve.
C
The
we
approve
of
this
based
on
the
conditions
we
would
not
have
the
ability
to
re
to
see
the
new
design
so
we'd
be
approving
something
that
we
have
no
ability
to
see
if
it
was
a
simple
garage
that
would
be
approved
at
staff
level.
We
don't
need
to
see
that,
but
if
it
was
an
adu,
that
was
one
story
as
an
example.
We
would
have
just
approved
it
without
seeing
it,
and
so
that's
why
I
made
the
motion
the
way
it
did.
C
B
F
I
have
just
one
more
thing:
I
wanted
to
add
just
another
thing
that
you
should
think
of
the
house.
Next
to
it
is
a
contributing
property,
so
I'm
not
quite
sure
if
you're
looking
at
the
house
next
to
it
and
you're,
you
look
off
to
the
left.
If
you're
going
to
see
that,
so
we
should
keep
that
in
mind.
C
Send
it
over
to
you
and
and
if
you'd
be
willing
to
make
a
motion.
H
Sure
so,
because
I
I
I
am
with
you,
I
I
think
the
height
of
the
garage
is
too
much.
I
think
it
overpowers,
unfortunately,
the
height
of
the
house,
and
if
it
was
even
though
it's
a
small
lot,
even
if
it
was
you
know,
maybe
a
foot
or
six
inches
above
because
it
can't
be
seen
from
washington
that
potentially
would
be
okay
but
as
high
as
it
is
above
it
it's.
It's
just
becomes
a
structure,
that's
overpowering
the
one-story
structure
on
the
same
lot.
H
So,
but
but
I
I
am
fine,
because
it's
at
35
lot
coverage
right
now
and
I
just
they're
so
limited
on
kind
of
what
they
can
do
and
it's
going
to
be
modest,
no
matter
what,
based
on
height
and
square
footage
on
the
lot.
I
I
so
what
I
I
move
to
approve
drh
20-00488
with
staff's
recommendations.
As
stated
in
the
report.
I
D
I
B
A
So
this
is
the
front
elevation
of
the
proposal.
I
will
show
you
a
photo
of
the
house,
so
this
is
the
current
view
of
the
house
and,
as
you'll
see,
it
has
a
very
shallow
hipped
roof.
A
And
these
are
the
adu
elevations.
The
high
to
the
adu
will
be
23
feet
to
the
peak
which
will
match
the
height
and
the
new
height
of
the
house.
A
F
Kind
of
a
question
ted:
what
is
the
height
of
the
proposed
house
compared
to
the
house
next
to
it,
that's
contributing.
A
Madam
chair,
commissioner
brown,
I'm
not
sure
the
peak
height
of
the
house
next
door,
the
applicant
who
is
here
in
person,
might
be
able
to
elaborate
on
that.
The
compared
the
height
comparison
with
a
neighboring
house.
A
I
will
add
that
there
are
no
proposed
stories
being
added
to
the
to
the
house.
Just
a
a
new
roof
steeper
gable
section.
So.
B
R
R
We
originally
had
proposed
a
rear
edition,
matching
the
existing
roof
line
with
the
ability
to
put
an
adu
above
the
existing
garage.
But,
as
we
all
know,
we
can't
exceed
the
height
of
the
existing
house.
The
existing
home
is
at
16
feet,
6
inches
and
commissioner
brown,
I
believe
the
house
next
to
it,
is
about
the
same
height.
R
R
The
adu
we're
meeting
the
minimum
heights
within
the
garage
and
within
this
second
level,
of
the
structure
on
this
of
the
adu
with
a
fairly
I'd,
say
a
low
profile
roof
to
keep
our
our
roof
height
to
a
minimum.
R
The
house
to
the
it'd,
be
on
the
corner
of
25th
and
hazel,
which
is
to
the
left
of
the
proposed
house,
had
gone
through
a
renovation
where
they
added
height
to
their
existing
home
and
added
height
to
their
existing
garage
too.
I'd,
I'm
not
quite
sure
if
he
has
an
adu
above
there
or
not,
or
if
it's
just
storage,
but
that
had
changed
significantly.
This
is
a
non-contributing
house,
as
ted
pointed
out,
we're
at
35
a
lot
coverage.
R
Yet
we
have
63
of
open
space.
Here.
We've
changed
the
architecture
of
this
particular
house,
because
it
was
I'll
call
it
a
bit
of
a
sleeper.
It
is
a
smaller
house.
It
had
a
very
shallow
hip
roof
to
it.
We
tried
to
give
it
some
personality
and
some
character
by
putting
a
front
porch
gabling
the
roof,
adding
some
craftsman
style
columns.
R
R
The
homeowner
is
really
constructing
the
edu
for
her
retired
parents
who
do
live
out
of
town,
and
it
is
a
place
for
them
to
stay
when
they
come
to
town.
That
was
the
the
reason
for
the
adu
at
this
time.
B
B
Applicant
okay,
with
that
we'll
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
portion
of
the
hearing,
and
I
will
consider
emotion
or
entertain
discussion.
B
F
So
my
concern
with
this
one
originally
was
the
height
of
the
roof,
which
I
think
has
been
fixed.
This
is
another
one
of
those.
If
it
would
be
re-surveyed,
it
would
be
to
be
a
contributing
property
as
it
fits
into
the
expanded
north
end
and
we're
going
to
keep
hitting
these
properties.
That
could
be
contributing.
So
I'd
like
to
keep
that
in
mind
and
really
push
to
a
new
survey
of
this
area
in
the
future,
but
otherwise
I
can
use
to
approve
this.
If
we
are
anybody
else,
does
any
other
discussion.
B
Is
there
any
further
discussion
great
go
ahead?
Commissioner
brown
was
that
your
motion
to
approve.
I
E
B
I
all
in
favor
of
motion
carries
thank
you.
The
final
item
we
have
to
hear
this
evening
is
item
number
seven
dear.
A
A
A
I
did
bring
up
earlier
the
in
the
work
session
that
there
was
a
letter
that
was
sent
to
the
city
on
this
project
and
the
main
concerns
were
the
privacy
associated
with
the
with
the
stair
and
landing
on
the
garage
and
the
privacy
to
the
to
the
adjacent
property.
A
And
this
is
the
existing
house
again
also
a
non-contributing.
A
C
D
A
Madam
chair
commissioner
koski
yes,
I
should
have
brought
that
up
when
I
was
discussing
the
site
plan.
It
is
discussed
in
the
staff
report,
but
correct
garages
that
are
on
substandard
lots,
but
take
access
from
the
streets
are
required
to
still
have
a
20-foot
setback,
so
there
a
variance
would
be
required
for
the
setback
for
the
street
side.
Setback
for
this
garage.
C
You
know
it
also
appears
on
the
site
plan
that
the
proposed
garage
nadu
now
is
closer
to
the
street
than
the
porch
of
the
house
is
definitely
closer
to
the
to
the
rydenbaugh
street
side.
Not,
which
is
the
side,
should
be
noted,
which
is
the
side
of
the
house.
C
A
B
F
S
S
It
will
be
extended
on
that
overlapping,
that
side
of
the
house,
by
about
2
feet
and
with
regard
to
the
issue
with
the
neighbor
I
have
talked
to
him
and
we've
come
to
to
a
conclusion
that
we
would
have
a
a
barrier
on
a
lattice
barrier
on
top
of
that
staircase
to
provide
more
security
for
them.
S
The
other
garages
that
are
on
our
block
are
actually
very
close
to
that
14
foot
four,
so
I
believe
it
would
have
continuity
with
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood.
B
Q
C
I'm
I'm
sure
working
through
staff.
You've
you've
got
lots
of
feedback
on
on
what
set
packs
need
to
be
and
also
lot
coverage
and
so
forth.
But
you
know,
city
encourages
the
the
use.
D
Q
C
S
Eric
you
would
actually
have
to
tear
off
a
small
portion
of
the
porch
that
is
in
the
backyard
to
actually
make
that
happen.
I
N
B
You
josh
is
there
a
member
of
the
public
tonight
wishing
to
testify.
Please
virtually
raise
your
hand.
T
Thank
you.
I
did
speak
with
eric.
We
are
the
neighbor
that
is
directly
south
of
his
property.
We
share
the
property
line
running
east
to
west
my
concern
and
why
I
wrote
the
letter
is
the
landing
on
the
southwest
corner
as
proposed,
is,
would
be
moved
or
would
be
raised
above
our
our
fence
line
and
has
direct
access,
visual
access
to
our
entire
backyard.
T
We
have
a
hot
tub.
My
daughter
is
out
there
quite
a
bit,
and
so
I
had
some
privacy
issues
regarding
where
that
landing
was
and
where
the
staircase
was.
I
talked
to
eric,
and
he
assured
me
that
he
would
work
into
his
plan
to
build
a
privacy
privacy
screen
into
the
plan.
My
comment
to
eric
was,
I
would
like
the
privacy
screen
to
be
a
permanent
addition
in
the
build
versus
something
that
would
be
a
temporary.
T
He
originally
had
talked
about
something
in
regard
to
bush's
or
something
like
that.
My
concern
is,
if
eric
were
to
sell
the
property
in
a
short
period
of
time
after
the
garage
was
done,
and
it's
just
hedges
or
something
like
that
that
a
new
homeowner
could
come
in
and
cut
those
down,
and
then
I
have
the
the
privacy
issue
immediately.
T
So
I
would
like
to
see
something
where
it
was
built
into
the
staircase.
That
would
be
a
permanent
addition
that
would
be
not
easily
unraveled
causing
my
privacy
issue
to
to
be
immediate
upon
removal
of
whatever
would
be
temporary.
B
B
If
the
applicant
would
like
you
have
five
minutes
for
rebuttal,.
S
Yes,
thank
you
so
back
to
the
the
distance
of
the
garage
to
the
street
to
rydenbaugh
our
neighbor
to
the
east.
Their
garage
sits
currently
at
I
believe
it's
14
feet
to
the
street
and
the
the
home
at
1501,
16th
street
is
is
roughly
12
feet
to
the
street
and
then
the
home
at
15
1500,
which
is
to
our
north
with
the
white
brick
wall
that
sits
on
the.
S
H
Now
I'm
sure
I
have
a
sorry.
I
have
a
quick
question
sure
when,
when
I
look
are
you
you're
not
you're,
only
proposing
to
do
something
to
your
garage,
correct,
not
the
house.
H
Yeah
when
I
look
at
the
it's-
and
it
must
just
must
be
an
optical
illusion,
but
I
look
at
the
aerial
of
your
property.
It
looks
like
the
existing
garage
is
really
close
to
the
house.
A
lot
closer
than
32
feet,
I
think,
is
what
it
says
on
here.
Yes,
sorry,
yeah
go
ahead.
S
The
renderings
make
everything
look
a
little
distorted
the
garage
is
it
that
it
is
pretty
close
to
the
back
end
of
the
house.
S
And
it's
due
to
that,
I
believe
it's
the
minimum
distance
for
the
alleyway.
S
We
are
going
to
be
going,
I
believe,
for
variance
to
to
hopefully
get
that
east
wall
to
remain
where
it
is.
That
would
also
help
with
the
the
privacy
issue
for
the
neighbor.
If
we
were
able
to
keep
it
closer
to
the
alley.
S
I
believe
so
that
garage
has
got
if
you
were
to
view
the
inside
of
it
has
got
multiple
different
pores.
B
And
I
did
have
one
question:
what
is
your
response
to
your
neighbor's
testimony
this
evening.
S
We
would
certainly
build
some
kind
of
a
lattice
screening
structure
to
help
block
that
off.
I,
I
would
be
more
than
willing
to
work
with
david,
the
neighbor
to
ourselves
just
to
make
sure
whatever
we
choose
is
sufficient
and-
and
that
would
be
kind
of
encompass,
that
that
landing
area
to
to
cover
the
door
height.
B
G
Yeah
I'll
move
to
approve
drh2000
535
with
stock
staff
recommendations.
B
Thank
you.
Is
there
a
second,
oh
I'll,
second
great
any
discussion
before
we
call
the
role.
C
Madam
chair,
I
I
I
I
have
a
hard
time
approving
this
one
when
it
comes
to
vote
unless
the
commissioners
other
commissioners
can
convince
me.
Otherwise,
we've
got
we're
looking
at
a
proposed
structure
that
goes
six
feet:
five
and
a
half
feet
into
into
a
setback
that
is
part
of
our
code.
C
It's
not
six
inches,
it's
not
one
foot!
It's
it's
five
and
a
half
feet.
That's
that's
pretty
significant
to
me.
In
addition,
it
puts
the
garage
closer
to
the
street
side
than
the
house
is,
and
I
know
I
know
the
area.
I
know
the
neighboring
houses.
I
understand
what
the
applicant
said
about
the
different
setbacks
from
the
other
neighboring
houses,
but
I
that
that
is
a
significant
amount
of
overage
to
me.
C
C
It
just
means
they
eliminate
yard
space
between
the
garage
and
house,
and
I
I
I
get
that
I
I
wouldn't
want
that
either,
but
as
as
a
commissioner,
I
don't,
I
won't
be
able
to
approve
this
with
that
significant
of
an
overage
into
into
the
setbacks
that
are
required.
C
So
I'm
going
to
vote
no
on
this.
B
F
Yeah
I
have
some
discussion
and
my
agreements
with
commissioner,
that
we
have
these
guidelines
that
are
written
in
our
code
and
we
should
be
following
them
allowing
these
overages
it's
gonna
be
problematic
in
the
future
with
other
applications.
If
we
keep
allowing
these
things
to
happen,
everybody
is
going
to
want
them,
so
we're
going
to
deal
with
that
in
the
future.
So
I'm
on
board
with
commissioner
for
not
approving
this.
G
Maroney,
I
just
wanted
to
say
they
will
have
to
apply
for
our
variants
with
planning
and
zoning,
so
the
buck
doesn't
stop
with
us.
I
do
understand
that
our
approval
of
this
design
kind
of
gives
a
nod
to
planning
and
zoning.
That
says
we
think
this
is
okay
and
given
the
way
the
current
grudge
is
situated
and
not
ali-axis,
I
think
that
it's
it's
fine
to
keep
it
that
way,
and
I'm
also
familiar
with
this
area.
I
walked
past
it
quite
frequently
and
other,
like
the
applicants
said,
other
structures
are
situated.
G
Similarly,
and
I
don't
think
that
this
detracts
from
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
I
think
that
it
gets
the
applicant
what
they
need,
and
I
think
the
current
way
it
is.
Is
it's
situated
to
head
out
that
way
rather
than
the
alley,
and
so
are
some
other
houses
on
there,
and
so
I
will
be
voting
yes
for
this.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner,
maroney,
and
with
that
victoria,
will
you
please
call
the
roll
posky.
B
Motion
carries
four
in
favor
to
a
post.
Thank
you
victoria.
Thank
you,
everyone.
That
concludes
our
hearing
for
this
evening.
We
will
see
you
at
our
next
hearing
january
25th
as
I
was
corrected
earlier.
Thank
you.
Everyone
good
night.