►
From YouTube: Historic Preservation Commission
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
A
A
So
Troy
on
the
corner,
the
first
house
with
the
Clinger
just
carry
your
finger.
My
favorite,
it's
gonna
come
in
new
wine
screaming
around
my
basement
windows
because.
A
A
A
C
A
A
D
Hi
everybody:
let's
go
again,
go
ahead
and
call
the
fork
session
to
order
Josh
I'll
go
ahead
and
turn
it
over
to
you
or
I
guess:
Richard
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you.
E
Okay,
this
work
session
is
for
us
to
consider
the
creation
of
a
new
historic
district
and
down
downtown
area
and
we're
just
wanting
to
explore
the
possibility
of
establishing
it.
We're
gonna
be
able
to
provide.
E
You
know
you've
gotten
in
your
packets
before
the
information,
including
the
historic
inventory,
the
map
with
the
keys
and
the
photos
and
some
information
about,
and
the
legislation
of,
the
state
enabling
legislation
and
our
city
code
section
that
refers
to
how
this
process
occurs
and
I
think
the
we
will
all
come
come
to
see
or
I
am
assuming.
E
We
will
just
determine
what
the
next
steps
are
and
if
a
committee
were
to
be
established
to
look
into
it,
the
roles
of
HPC
as
Commissioners
and
as
staff,
and
how
we
will
get
the
ball
rolling
on
establishing
a
new,
downtown
district
and
I'll
just
quickly
go
through.
There's
the
map
of
the
location
and
some
general
photos
to
give
you
some
ideas:
Masonic
nearby
Empire,
you
know
the
U.S
Bank
buildings
included.
E
In
the
gym-
and
oh
there's
a
better
name
for
that,
but
the
building
adjacent
to
Jim
and
a
few
of
these
other
buildings.
E
But
this
building
has
been
modified
substantially
on
the
exterior,
so
we
will
more
than
likely
consider
this
a
non-contributing
in
the
district
and
there
you
go
and
that
building
is
shown
on
the
map
to
a
degree.
But
it's
not
going
to
be
considered
a
contributing
building
from
what
I
recall
and
we're
not
I'm
not
going
to
scroll
through
88
pages
of
historic
inventories.
E
They
were
just
all
in
there
for
your
perusal
to
get
a
further
background
into
each
building
and
why
they
are
significant
and
why
this
is
a
outstanding
boundary
for
a
historic
district,
and
we
definitely
staff
recommends
moving
forward
with
creating
a
historic
district
is
there's
a
lot
of
development
happening
in
the
area.
There's
the
vacant
parking
or
not
vacant,
but
parking
lots.
E
E
From
my
assessment
of
the
ordinance
I
think
it
would
be
maybe
I
think
one
of
the
one
of
the
better
ways
to
look
forward
is
I.
Think
we
discussed
this
a
little
bit
is
to
establish
a
subcommittee
or
committee
that
within
the
commission
that
would
liaise
with
me
and
staff
and
try
to
work
through
the
process
of
generating
the
report.
E
What
the
report
looks
like
based
on
past
reports
that
have
probably
been
done
for
other
proposed
districts
and
how
to
compile
it
together
and
something
that
we
can
present,
because
it's
not
in
my
brain
perfectly
right
now,
but
I
think
our
process
is,
we
establish,
we
create
that
we
notify
pnz,
because
they
are
would
look
at
it
and
provide
feedback,
and
they
have
a
certain
time
period
in
which
they
can
do
that.
E
And
then
we
would
present
this
to
the
council
at
and
then
the
council
would
act
on
it
and
the
final
product
they
would
act
on
and
it
would
become
a
local
historic
district
making
it
sound
like
this
is
a
three-day
process,
but
it
most
certainly
isn't,
and
so
then
that's
kind
of
the
roughly
the
chain
of
of
events
that
will
occur
so
I
guess
the
good
place
to
start
is
to
to
look
into
getting
a
group
of
Commissioners
together
to
start
the
process
is.
G
G
I
guess
maybe
your
all
feelings
about
this
District,
the
viability,
the
importance
of
it
and
then
determine
if
you're
going
to
move
forward
with
preparing
that
report,
then
I
think
preparing
that
report
comes.
You
know
the
task
of
a
subcommittee
for
lack
of
a
better
term.
Without
that
subcommittee,
we
would
will
need
to
work
carefully,
we'll
consult
our
legal
team
about
how
to
best
approach
that
you
know.
G
Obviously,
if
there's
a
quorum,
it
would
have
to
be
an
advertised
public
hearing
I'll
see
what
the
sideboards
are
for
us
to
work
within
some
sort
of
subcommittee.
If
it
is
a
not
majority,
you
know
if
there's
not
a
majority
of
the
Commissioners
on
that.
G
If
we
can
accomplish
that
outside
of
regular
work
sessions,
if
not,
if
that
needs
to
be
a
public-facing
process,
we
can
set
another
work
session
for
next
month
and
work
through
start
to
work
through
what
that
report
code
is
somewhat
vague
about
what
that
report
to
pnz
and
ultimately
Council
that
you
all
prepare
looks
like,
but
I
think
it
would
be
an
evaluation
of
the
properties,
their
significance,
how
much
of
the
district
is
still
intact?
G
What
the
Integrity
is
and
put
some
metrics
to
that,
and
then,
ultimately,
that
would
guide
your
decision
about
whether
you
would
Rec,
because
it
there
will
ultimately
be
a
public
hearing
right.
That
would
be
advertised
that
the
commission
would
need
to
act
officially
in
order
to
forward
this
on
to
council,
and
that
would
be
after
these
reports
were
evaluated.
The
viability
district
has
confirmed,
and
you
all
have
come
into
agreement
that
that's
the
way
to
proceed.
Okay,.
D
H
E
Yeah
sure
it
will
be
like
from
West
Bank,
mostly
along
yeah,
mostly
along
10th
Street
10th
in
the
street,
down
from
Westbank
down
to
the
south
side
of
West,
Main
I'd
say
the
West
boundary
is
to
the
you
know
the
buildings
west
of
11th
and
then
to
the
you
know,
it's
going
to
pick
up
that
building
and
yeah.
So
that's
roughly
the
boundary.
The
red
line
is
the
boundary
the
color
coding
indicates.
E
If
it's
in
our
listed
it
has
the
the
pink
and
yeah
and
then
the
other.
You
know
it
if
it's
been
shown
to
be
eligible
on
an
unevaluated
or
ineligible
start
by
dots
and.
H
F
Pink
shade
and
that
pink
dot
is
actually
a
previous
building.
That's
no
longer
there
that
was
listed
in
the
National
artist,
sir.
It
was
tore
down
some
years
ago
and
replaced
with
the
Royal
building
records
haven't
been
updated,
no.
H
Longer
there
got
it
and
then
my
next
question
was
have
you
talked
to
the
owners
of
these
buildings
at
all
about
whether
they
want
to
a
historic
district,
because
I
saw
in
the
process
there's
at
some
point
a
comment
period,
but
I
would
think
if
we're
going
to
create
a
historic
district.
We'd
want
to
know
that
we
have
buy-in
from
the
owners
of
these
buildings
before
putting
a
different
District
on
top
of
them
right.
E
That
would
probably
be
a
good
idea.
I'd
have
to
re-read
the
the
ordinance
in
detail
to
what
degree
they
would
have
to
be
informed,
but
we
would
definitely
won't
buy
in
for
sure,
regardless
of
what
the
code
says,.
F
Richard,
can
you
also
discussed
like
how
many
buildings
currently
have
facade
easements
and
things
like
that?
Oh.
E
Okay,
I
I
did
have
that
somewhere
in
my
I.
Don't
know
that
it's
on
my
drive,
where
am
I
well
so
I,
don't
know
if
I
can
pull
that
up
readily,
but
yeah
I
did
do
an
overlay
that
I,
unfortunately,
I
cannot
access
right
now.
Okay,
but
I
did
do
a
map
that
showed
all
the
layers
yeah.
F
They're
they're,
currently
17
proposed
buildings
in
this
District.
Three
of
them
would
be
non-contributing.
F
Five
of
them
already
have
overlays
on
them,
which
means
the
owners
have
already
some
restrictions,
what
they
can
do
to
the
facades
of
those
buildings,
partly
the
reason
why
I
want
this
district
is
because
it
has
some
of
the
most
substantial
commercial
buildings
left
in
the
downtown
in
our
downtown,
and
it
could
also
allow
for
the
opportunity
if
they
have
a
project,
to
engage
the
tax
credits
to
get
20
off
their
the
rehabilitation
cost,
and
many
of
these
owners
us
for
five
of
them
already
have
the
sod
easements
on
their
buildings
and
then
the
other
ones,
I
think
are
so
substantial
to
Boise's
history
that
if
we
lost
them,
it
would
be
a
great
strategy,
and
so
for
me,
this
District's
sort
of
like
the
East
Main
District.
F
H
I'm
not
disagreeing
that
these
are
all
meaningful,
District,
meaningful
buildings
to
Boise,
but
I
do
think
that
owner
buy-in
is
incredibly
important.
If
you're
going
to
Institute
new
rules
on
people,
you
buy
a
building
with
a
certain
understanding
about
what
you
can
and
can't
do
with
it,
and
then
to
change
those
rules
on
somebody
after
purchasing.
It
is
a
big
decision
and
is
a
big.
It's
going
to
have
a
big
impact
on
them
so
having
their
buy-in
I
think
is
incredibly
important.
These
are
clearly
important
buildings
and
when
people
bought
them,
they
probably
understood
that.
H
But
you
know
we
don't
it's
it's
incumbent
on
us
as
a
commission
to
make
sure
that
we
are
getting
everybody
involved
and
not
just
doing
what
we
like,
because
we
think
these
are
pretty
buildings
like
we
have
to
make
sure
that
the
entire
Community
is
being
addressed
as
part
of
it.
So
I
would
really
push
for
understanding
what
the
owners
of
these
buildings
are
thinking
before
we
go
down
a
long
process,
because
if
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
ownership,
buy-in
I
think
that
that's
going
to
be
a
big
uphill
fight
for
us.
D
I
would
agree,
commissioner,
otter
I
do
think
that
it's
part
of
the
process
per
the
code
of
developing
a
new
historic
district
that
that's
required
in
order
for
us
to
move
forward,
and
my
my
thoughts
are
that
I
would
love
to
see
this
happen
and
I
think
that
that
is
part
of
the
very
first
next
steps
that
we
take
is
reaching
out
to
the
owners
of
the
building
or
the
buildings
in
the
proposed
District.
D
I
I
would
I
would
agree
with
that.
You
know
I,
think
property
owner
buy-in
is
important.
I
think
I
think
perhaps
before
that
step
there
is
that
that
sort
of
getting
our
ducks
in
a
row
as
a
commission
first
to
clearly
understand
this
is
a
great.
This
is
a
great
report
to
kind
of
understand,
what's
there
but
sort
of
that
that
next
level
of
understanding
that
this
is
what
the
commission
would
like
to
see
and
then
talk
to
Property
Owners
to
see,
if
that,
if
that
is
in
their
realm.
I
Essence,
this
is
this:
is
a
zoning
change
of
sorts
right,
yeah
and
and
I?
Would
you
know
as
a
property
owner
I
would
want
to
be
very
involved
if
and
when
that
were
to
happen
to
my
property?
So.
E
And
one
way,
I
I'm,
going
to
put
on
my
old
hat
working
at
the
Ohio
shippo
as
a
tax
credit
reviewer.
One
way
to
help
to
get
buyer
owner
buy-in
or
support
is
to
have
somebody,
maybe
like
me,
trumpet
the
value
of
the
historic
preservation,
tax
credits
and
how
that
all
adds
a
layer
of
protection
and
that,
through
local
codes,
we
can't
look
inside
but
with
tax
credits.
Not
only
with
the
exteriors
of
these
buildings
be
preserved.
E
But
the
interior
would
have
a
look
too
and
they
would
get
a
great
financial
incentive
so
long
as
they
meet
the
Secretary
of
the
Interior
standards
for
all
the
work
that
they
propose
and
I
believe.
This
state
has
very
few
tax
credit
applications
and
anything
that
can
help
to
boost
that
would
be
a
win
for
the
owner,
the
tenant,
the
whoever
would
want
to
do
the
tax
credits,
and
it
would
be
a
win
for
the
preservation
of
the
exterior
and
the
interior
of
the
buildings
and.
I
A
sort
of
report,
or
packet
or
or
presentation
that
highlights
other
cities
where
a
commercial
District
such
as
this
has
been
very
successful,
and
what
that
looks
like
to
sort
of
help
build
the
vision
instead
of
oh,
we
just
want
to
put
all
these
restrictions
on
your
property.
Congratulations
right!
Let's
make
it
up
kind
of
an
understanding
or
create
the
vision
of
what
it
could
look
like
there.
D
Right
and
I
think
even
the
notion
that
30
of
our
historic
districts
in
the
city
of
Boise
are
commercial,
historic
districts
that
that's
you
know
a
really
great
visual
to
compare
to.
When
you
look
at
Hyde
Park,
you
look
at
you,
know
Haze
and
you
look
at
old
Boise.
Those
are
great
examples,
just
within
our
own
city,
of
what
it
could
look
like
I,
do
think
to
commissioner
Park's
Point
about
having
our
ducks
in
a
row
before
we
approach
the
the
property
owners
would
maybe
be
beneficial
to
us.
D
So
perhaps
I
I
mean
I,
guess
asking.
Are
there
any
Commissioners
who
would
like
to
participate
in
a
subcommittee
regarding
this.
F
I'll
participate
since
I
brought
this
to
stock.
Thank.
D
You,
commissioner,
Malloy
any
others.
D
You,
commissioner,
Parks
I
would
also
be
willing
to
participate
and
I
suppose
we
can
revisit
this
discussion,
maybe
via
email
from
staff
sent
to
those
Commissioners
who
are
not
here
if
they'd
be
willing
to
participate
as
well
and.
D
E
I,
don't
know
for
sure
that
there
are
I
just
think
that
I
think
that
we've
got
it
was
good
to
present
it.
It
seems
like
we're
all
in
favor
of
it
with
some
caveats,
especially
getting
the
property
owner,
buy-ins
and
I
think
we're
we
can
go
from
here
and,
as
you
say,
I'll
request
it
we'll
let
the
other
Commissioners
know
and
try
to
get
and
see
if
they
want
to
be
involved
in
this
committee,
and
we
will
proceed
from
there.
G
Item
number
three
Nina
would
like
to
comment
on
this
briefly,
I
think
other
than
that
the
applicant
and
it
is
and
staff
for
an
agreement.
G
So
if,
if
you
want
to,
we
could
move
that
one
ahead
of
number
two
just
to
get
it
out
of
the
way
quickly,
because
I
think
there'll
be
more
discussion
on
item
number
two
just
for
the
applicant
on
that
one.
Just
as
a
convenience
item
item
number
four:
is
a
deferral
there's
a
memo
in
the
packet
that
would
be
to
May,
22nd
and.
G
Will
definitely
hear,
and
then
this
is
probably
a
good
time
to
mention
that
there's
messaging
on
the
website
we'll
work
on
getting
the
word
out
more,
but
there
will
not
be
an
April
hearing
the
Monday.
Our
hearing
falls
on
that
was
taken
for
the
zoning
code,
rewrite
hearings
at
planning,
a
zoning
commission
and
then
with
an
early
Hearing
in
May
because
of
Memorial
Day.
I
I
D
You
any
questions
for
Stuff.
D
G
A
D
Evening
everybody
I
am
going
to
go
ahead
and
call
the
historic
preservation
committee
or
commission
meeting
to
order
Christina.
Would
you
please
call
the
roll.
B
D
You
before
we
jump
into
our
main
agenda
this
evening,
I
do
want
to
announce
that
there
will
be
no
April
hearing
this
year
due
to
the
zoning
code
rewrite
hearings,
so
our
next
hearing
is
scheduled
for
May
22nd
moving
forward.
D
D
We
will
not
have
a
consent
agenda
this
evening,
but
we
do
have
a
couple
of
items
to
address
before
we
jump
into
new
business
item
number
one
drh
23-00021.
D
At
1115,
North
10th
Street
has
withdrawn
their
application,
so
we
will
not
be
hearing
that
item
tonight
and
we
also
have
a
deferral
on
item
number.
Four.
That's
crh.
D
23-00048
Scott
noriyuki
at
17,
1721
North,
7th
Street.
Is
there
anyone
tonight
that
is
here
to
testify
on
that
item
that
will
not
be
able
to
make
the
May
22nd
hearing
doesn't
appear
so
in
person.
Anyone
online
great
so
therefore,
I
move
to
approve
or
I'm
sorry
I
moved
to
defer
item
number
four
drh
23-00048
to
the
May
22nd
hearing.
D
Thank
you.
We
do
have
two
applications
tonight
that
seem
to
be
heavy
with
public
testimony
so
out
of
convenience.
We
will
be
moving
item
number
three
to
the
first
item
we'll
be
hearing
tonight,
so
we
will
first
start
with
drh,
22
or
23.
Excuse
me:
Dash:
zero,
zero,
zero,
four
four
Byron
Falwell
at
1101,
North,
22nd,
Street
and
Richard.
May
we
please
have
the
report.
E
This
is
a
request
to
approve
the
construction
of
a
single
story,
Adu
on
a
property,
it's
in
the
North
End
and
the
existing
house
is
contributing.
Here's
the
site,
Matt
Ariel,
to
give
you
an
idea
of
where
it's
located
within
the
North
End.
This
is
the
front
of
the
existing
house.
E
This
is
the
side
yard
of
the
existing
house
with
the
border
or
box
indicating
the
general
location
of
the
Adu
and
we'll
see
it
more
clearly
with
elevations
general
idea
of
the
neighboring
properties
to
get
a
sense
of
skill
in
the
vicinity.
E
K
E
The
alley
looking
towards
the
North
and
here's
the
site
plan-
this
fence
here
shown
here
is
a
new
fence
will
be
referred
to
later
on.
Just
thought.
E
I
would
point
that
out
and
there'll
be
more
information
about
the
pergola
and
a
seating
area
and
a
little
Cook
Area
here
that
came
to
me
recently,
I
believe
after
or
definitely
after
your
packets
there's
the
floor
plan
of
the
Adu
and
the
elevations
as
you
you
have
seen
before,
and
then
I
recently
got
some
additional
site
views
indicating
to
pergola
something
I
requested,
but
I
did
not
receive
in
time
and
another
idea
where
the
pergola
will
be
one
more
View
and
aerial
overview
of
where
it
all
sits.
E
And
got
us
some
comments
from
Nina
about
the
trees
and
a
representative
from
Nina
will
probably
be
speaking
of
this
during
the
testimony
phase.
E
As
I
said,
this
is
a
one
story:
Adu
it
will
be
about
the
same
height
or
should
be
the
same
height
as
the
existing
house
uses
the
utilizes,
the
existing
design
motees
of
the
house
and
the
detached
garage,
and
because
it's
a
under
a
thousand
square
feet
and
22
feet
in
height
complies
with
the
full.
E
Well,
it
complies
with
the
setback
requirements
of
the
Zone
anyway,
and
the
pergola
seating
area
and
Grill
all
meat
setback
requirements,
and,
as
I've
mentioned
before,
when
I
was
showing
the
site
plan,
the
fencing
shown
on
the
site
plan
will
not
be
installed,
as
the
new
fence
would
encroach
on
the
achd
right-of-way.
However,
this
may
not
make
a
lot
of
sense,
but
it
is
true
that
the
existing
fence
will
remain
and
I
believe
it
can.
That's
my
report.
D
Okay,
thank
you
is
the
applicant
present.
Please
come
forward
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
you'll
have
20
minutes.
K
Byron
Falwell
199
North
Capitol,
Boulevard,
Boise,
Idaho,
Madam,
chair
Commissioners.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
talk
to
you
about
the
Woodring
Adu
project.
It's
been
a
pleasure
to
work
with
the
Woodring
family
these
past
few
months
on
designing
a
right-sized
Adu
to
provide
flexible
living
space
for
their
family
members,
both
older
and
younger.
As
we
all
know,
affordable
housing
choices
for
retirees
and
young
adults
alike
are
very
hard
to
find
in
Boise,
and
this
project
will
bring
housing
stability
to
the
wood
ring
family
far
into
the
future.
K
The
outdoor
covered
patio
is
designed
to
provide
functional
connectivity
between
the
Adu
and
the
main
house,
while
providing
cover
for
All
Season
Outdoor
Living.
The
patio
structure
is
centered
on
the
Adu
facade
and
common
materials,
provide
a
cohesive
architecture
within
the
site.
Patios
like
these
not
only
provide
for
the
Health
and
Wellness
of
the
homeowners,
but
they
also
provide
they
also
support
vibrancy
life
and
social
connections
within
the
neighborhood
as
well.
We
hope
that
the
commission
agrees
with
the
intent
of
our
design
and
we'll
now
stand
for
questions.
Thank
you.
Thank.
D
C
Madam
chairwoman,
Sandy
Herman
1404
North,
7th
Street
Nina,
has
the
Nina
historic
committee
has
a
concern
about
the
existing
Tree
on
the
North
corner
of
the
existing
garage
building.
Is
our
preference
that
that
tree
be
pruned
rather
than
removed,
particularly
in
light
of
the
complete
redesign
removal
of
the
exist
of
existing
landscape?
Currently
we
request
that
the
trees,
if
the
tree
is
not
able
to
be
saved,
that
a
new
that
new
trees
be
planted
on
the
south
side
right
of
way
and
backyard
to
equal
the
caliper
of
the
existing
tree.
C
We
estimate
this
fairly
mature
tree
to
be
about
12,
inches
or
or
a
little
bit
above
that
the
quoted
size
in
in
the
plan
is
six
inches
and
then
our
one
other
comment
is.
We
were
a
little
bit
fuzzy
on
the
lot
coverage.
C
We
estimated
it's
closer
to
34
with
the
patio
cover
which
is
still
under
the
35
percent
limit,
but
probably
worth
clarification.
We
think
there
might
be
some
discrepancy
with
whether
the
fenced
in
right
away
is
being
factored
in.
That's
all.
D
Thank
you
very
much
any
questions.
Okay,
thank
you.
All
I
had
was
Mr
Falwell
here
to
testify.
Is
there
anyone
in
the
audience
wishing
to
testify?
It
looks
like
we
have
someone
online.
J
Maxfield
1112
North
22nd
Street
I
apologize
I'm,
not
on
video.
For
some
reason,
I
can't
get
that
to
work.
Of
course,
I
am
directly
across
the
street
from
Mike
we've
known
them
since
they've
moved
in
they've
been
great
neighbors
I.
Don't
really
have
a
whole
lot
to
say
here
other
than
the
fact
that
I've
pulled
up
their
plans
from
the
PDS
and
I
really
appreciate
that
the
Adu
there
proposing
is
fully
off
of
the
street.
It's
almost
not
even
visible
at
all
from
the
street.
J
It
seems
like
it's
a
very
appropriate
size
for
an
Adu.
You
know
it's
a
what
is
like
600
square
feet,
or
so
the
style
seems
to
match
the
house.
I
I,
think
in
total
I'm,
not
really
sure
where
this
is
going
to
go,
because
I
haven't
seen
the
commission's
feedback
in
adus
in
general.
But
you
know
growth
is
coming
and
having
some
responsible
growth
in
the
area
where
we
have
a
good
fit
of
a
relatively
small
additional
Adu
I
think
that
kind
of
locks
us
into
appropriate
structures
versus
folks.
J
You
know
doing
crazy,
stuff
and
tearing
things
down
so
and
I
appreciate
their
leaving.
You
know
some
of
the
original,
you
know
garage,
that's
there
and
whatnot,
and
it
sounds
like
there's
some
debate
on
some
details.
Elsewhere,
I'll,
let
you
guys
work
that
out,
but
the
Adu
itself
looks
great
and
we
appreciate
them
as
neighbors
and
I
think
it's
very
appropriate.
Thank
you.
D
Thank
you,
Mr
Mr
Maxfield,
any
other
members
of
the
public
wishing
to
testify
on
this
item.
D
Okay,
Mr
fallwell.
You
have
five
minutes
for
rebuttal.
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair
yeah.
It's
it's
completely
acceptable
to
the
owner
to
try
to
retain
the
maple
tree.
That's
on
site,
that's
next
to
the
garage
that
was
shown
as
a
tree
to
be
removed
because
of
how
close
it
is
to
the
planned
Adu.
We
will
do
everything
that
we
can
to
save
the
tree.
If
we're
unable
to
do
that,
we
certainly
are
amenable
to
replacement
on
the
south
side
in
the
right
of
way,
as
suggested.
D
Wonderful,
if
you
don't
have
anything
further
I
do
have
a
question.
Can
you
speak
to
the
lot
coverage
and
just
clarify
what
that
is
yeah.
K
Absolutely
so
the
lock
coverage,
as
it
appears
on
the
building
plans
on
the
site
plan,
so
it's
29,
and
that
was
done
with
the
calculation
of
building
envelope,
only
calculated
it
with
the
covered
patios.
Thank
you,
yeah
with
the
outdoor
seating
area
and
the
covered
patios
we're
at
33.5.
I
Do
have
a
question,
commissioner.
Sorry,
commissioner,
please
I
just
want
to
clarify
the
pergola
and
some
of
the
renderings.
It
looks
like
a
solid
covering
and
then
some
of
the
other
documentation.
It
looks
like
more
like
what
I
would
consider
a
Pergola
where
it's
it's
sort
of
open,
open,
rafter,
open
trust.
K
Madam
chair,
commissioner
Parks.
Thank
you
for
the
question
in
the
site
plan
that
you
can
see
there.
That
is
the
outline
of
the
structure.
It
is
planned
to
be
a
full
covered
roof,
so
a
flat
roof
with
exposed
structure
below
okay,
very
good.
Thank
you.
D
D
Okay,
I
guess:
I'll
start
with
my
thoughts.
The
clarity
clarification
for
the
walk
coverage
answered
that
for
me
and
I.
Actually,
I
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
this
application.
I
think
it's
it's
a
great
project
that
meets
all
of
our
guidelines
and
criteria.
I
I
personally,
don't
feel
great
about
the
loss
of
the
potential
loss
of
the
tree,
but
I
also
don't
feel
like
that's
something
that
we
can
condition
in
the
application
or
I'm.
D
Not
sure
I
would
feel
comfortable
doing
that
if
there
were
to
be
a
condition
put
in
I
would
request
a
condition
of
replacement
if,
in
the
in
the
event
of
any
tree
being
lost
that
it's
replaced
and
kind,
but
other
than
that
I
don't
feel
like
we
can
condition
them
to
keep
the
tree.
H
H
I'm,
not
clear
and
I
think
we
can
indicate
if
you
lose
a
tree,
that
you
have
to
replace
it
as
part
of
this
landscape
plans,
and
it
sounds
like
the
homeowner
is
amenable
to
trying
to
keep
it
so
I'm,
not
sure
exactly
what
I
I
guess
I
would
be
okay,
approving
this
with
or
without
those
conditions,
it's
kind
of
where
I
sit
on
it.
Thank.
I
Yeah
I
know
I
really
have
no
further
thoughts.
I
think
you
know,
height
size
form
shape.
You
know
it
all
makes
sense
with
with
what
for
the
size
and
location
of
it,
the
condition
on
the
tree,
I
guess
I,
don't
quite
under
stand,
they've
offered
to
try
and
keep
the
tree
if
possible,
great,
and
if
not,
then
you
know
replacement
as
as
indicated
so
I'm,
not
exactly
sure
what
the
condition
would
or
wouldn't
look
like
and
I.
Think
I
would
be
fine
agree
either
way
with
that.
D
You,
commissioner,
Parks
any
other
discussion
or
emotion.
H
D
Thank
you.
The
next
item
on
our
agenda
tonight
is
item
number
two
drh
23-00039
EV
Studio
at
811,
East
McKinley,
Street
Richard.
Can
we
please
have
the
report.
E
E
Here's
the
site
aerial
still
showing
the
resonance
that
was
since
removed
there.
This
is
the
current
existing
site
status
and
here
are
some
street
views
of
the
adjacent
properties
to
give
a
sense
of
scale,
you'll
notice,
two-story
to
the
left
and
one
and
one
and
a
half
story,
properties
and
multi-family
was
adjacent
or
is
adjacent
to
this
site.
Multi-Unit
I'm,
sorry
multi-unit
buildings.
E
This
is
as
I
say.
It's
a
duplex.
E
And
this
house
is,
as
mentioned
in
a
block
in
a
block
where
block
areas
of
they
have
a
mix
of
single
one
and
a
half
story
and
two-story
structures.
This
building
is
going
to
be.
Most
adjacent,
properties
are
22
to
28
feet
wide.
E
This
duplex
width
measurement
is
33
feet,
four
along
the
primary
facade,
and
so
it
staff
deemed
it
does
maintain
and
blend
with
the
width
of
the
buildings
on
the
adjacent
site
being
only
slightly
larger
and
the
design
guidelines
state
that
it
should
use
masking
and
form
similar
to
neighbor
buildings,
and
this
design
does
meet
that
requirement,
because
this
the
size
due
to
similarity
and
size
as
compared
to
previous
applications
for
this
site
and
the
structure,
is
using
Design,
Elements
and
reforms
being
more
right
to
linear
now
than
it
was
as
previously
submitted
in
a
HBC.
E
The
reform
and
other
elements
of
the
design
are
and
the
narrowness
have
met
these
goals,
and
that
and
with
that,
we
recommend
approval.
H
I
guess
I
have
a
question
Madam
chair,
please
Richard.
We've
seen
this
property
a
bunch
of
times
since
I've
been
on
the
commission
and
it
wasn't
a
vacant
lot
when
this
whole
situation
started
and
so
I'm
curious.
How
staff
thinks
about
the
fact
that
it
was
a
house,
a
single
family
house
at
one
point
and
is
now
because
they
had
to
come
multiple
times
after
moving
a
building
that
wasn't
supposed
to
be
moved
a
vacant
lot
and
how
that's
what
staff
thinks
about
that
and
how
staff
considers
it.
G
Madam
chair
commissioner
otter
I'll
jump
in
since
I
handled
those
previous
applications,
so
when
the
existing
non-contributing
home
was
removed
without
permits,
the
applicant
was
required
to
come
back,
obtain
after
the
fact
approvals
for
that,
so
they
have
obtained
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
that
was
approved
by
this
by
this
commission
to
remove
that
home.
That
was
their
retroactively.
G
L
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
Commissioners
I'm
Amanda
Bidwell,
725
East,
2nd
Street
in
Meridian,
Idaho
I
have
a
presentation.
There.
L
A
L
L
The
project
does
not
include
any
garages
on
the
rear,
so
there
would
be
parking
off
of
the
alley
to
help
reduce
some
of
the
scale
we're
proposing
papers
there,
instead
of
asphalt
to
blend
in
with
the
historic
district
a
little
bit
better.
The
property
building
does
now
face
McKinley
and
we
eliminated
some
of
the
odd
angles
from
the
previous
applications
and
then
reduce
the
overall
massing
of
the
building
as
well.
L
L
Landscape
plan
here
shows
how
we
kind
of
intend
to
screen
some
of
the
side
of
the
building,
which
would
be
visible
because
of
the
angles
of
the
street
and
help
reduce
the
massing
there
as
well
floor
plans.
Give
a
little
bit
of
an
idea
of
how
this
is
laid
out.
I
did
aim
to
not
have
any
Windows
looking
directly
into
the
neighbor's
property,
so
they
either
face
the
street
or
they
face
the
alley.
L
The
side
windows
are
all
high
to
prevent
views
into
neighboring
properties,
and
then
these
are
some
of
the
elevation
views
the
street
facing
there.
We
we
did
similar
raised
first
floor
with
a
covered
porch
on
the
front,
and
then
that
equates
to
a
raised
back
patio
that
would
step
down
to
just
kind
of
the
covered
or
not
a
covered
patio.
Sorry,
just
the
patio
on
the
site
plan
and
then,
as
you
can
see
here,
all
of
the
windows
on
the
sides
are
up
high
to
avoid
views
into
neighboring
properties.
D
Okay,
thank
you
is
the
registered
neighborhood
association
here
to
testify
great,
come
forward
state,
your
name
and
address
for
the
record,
and
you
have
20
minutes.
M
M
I
first
want
to
say
that
this
plan
has
improved
considerably
compared
to
the
last
two
that,
and
we
want
to
thank
the
architect
and
the
Builder
for
listening
to
our
concerns
from
the
last
two
applications.
However,
as
I
stated,
a
few
residents
did
reach
out
to
Ena
with
a
few
concerns
for
this
application.
M
M
Is
it
possible
for
them
to
do
a
basement
with
a
story
and
a
half?
Could
that
possibly
reduce
the
height
of
this
building
enough
that
it
would
be
compatible
with
the
addition
of
the
basement?
Could
they
also
get
a
little
bit
more
square
footage?
So
then
it
would
be
a
compromise
for
all
with
their
not
being
a
garage.
M
Could
they
build
a
carport,
or
at
least
some
storage
Outdoors
for
bikes,
lawn
mowers,
that
type
of
thing
so
that
there's
a
place
to
put
that
stuff,
the
walls
creating
the
guard
rails
for
the
patios?
Could
they
be
broken
up
and
opened
so
that
they
didn't
have
such
a
massive
look
to
them
and
the
last
one
was:
could
they
add
some
detailed
trim
and
overhangs
that
were
more
consistent
with
the
historic
character
to
blend
in
more
with
the
surrounding
homes
versus
having
more
of
a
hidden
I?
M
Ian
is
trying
really
hard
to
preserve
our
historic
districts,
and
we
ask
that
this
commission,
you
know
we
would
like
your
help.
In
doing
this,
we
are
asking
the
commission
to
please
look
at
the
height
the
massing
and
the
Styles
and
the
materials
to
ensure
that
we
are
not
losing
the
Integrity
that
keeps
our
historic
districts
healthy.
We
know
that
Boise
needs
housing
and
we
know
that
we
are
responsible
for
absorbing
a
percentage
of
that
growth
that
we
are
seeing,
but
we
would
also
like
to
keep
the
Integrity
of
our
historic
districts.
D
Your
time,
thank
you
so
much
any
questions
for
Mrs
Grisham.
Okay,
thank
you.
Are
there
any
members
of
the
public
wanting
to
testify.
I
have
Dan
Hutchinson.
Please
come
forward
state,
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
You
have
three
minutes.
N
Good
evening,
Madam,
chairman
and
Commissioners
name
is
Dan.
Hutchison
I
live
at
102
North
Jan
Tony
Drive
in
Boise
Idaho,
that's
over
on
the
east
end,
just
off
of
Warm
Springs
a
little
bit
a
little
background
of
myself.
I
worked
in
historic
preservation
from
70
1972
until
the
mid-1990s
As,
a
head
of
Regional
Offices
federal
agencies
on
historic
preservation
on
both
archaeological
and
historic
periods
and
I.
N
As
the
East
End
developed
as
one
of
the
first
subdivisions
out
from
the
core
of
the
city
of
Boise,
it
wasn't
a
1950s
Style
one
Builder
built
a
thousand
homes.
It
filled
in
slowly
and
allowed
for
a
mixture
of
mainly
single-family
homes
that
were
mainly
owner
occupied,
but
a
number
of
them
also
were
developed
as
rental
units,
and
there
are
a
few
scattered
historic,
duplex
and
other
multiple
family
units
in
the
area,
but
as
we're
managing
the
historic
district
trying
to
keep
that
same
balance.
N
The
population
that
has
thrived
and
survived
in
the
East
end
for
the
last
over
130
years
is
has
some
historical
significance
in
that
it
was
family
oriented
what
areas
where
families
to
enjoy
private,
secure
space
for
children
to
thrive
and
and
share,
as
well
as
the
community
aspects
and
so
continuing
the
same
sort
of
Lifestyle
for
our
neighborhood
is
quite
important
for
historic
preservation.
Otherwise,
you
end
up
with
places
like
River
Street,
where
we
have
one
house
preserved.
N
That
no
longer
has
any
historic
landscape.
No
longer
has
any
historic
Community.
It's
just
a
monument
to
an
architectural
style
of
that
period
and
when
we're
looking
at
the
historic
landscape,
we
also
have
to
consider
the
viewpoint
where
do
you
view
that
historic
landscape
from
in
this
particular
property
on
on
McKinley
Street,
that's
situated
towards
a
predominant
view.
As
you
drive
up
McKinley
Street,
this
particular
lot
is
the
one
that
stands
out
the
most,
so
I
would
prefer
to
see
it
as
a
single
family
rather
than
a
duplex.
Thank.
D
You,
like
Mr
Hutchinson,
thank
you.
Are
there
any
other
members
of
the
public
wishing
to
testify
this
evening.
D
D
O
My
opposition
for
this
is
primarily
the
congestion
for
any
parking
that
would
be
I
feel
like
that's
kind
of
a
dangerous
intersection
to
begin
with,
and
I
just
really
want
to
make
sure
that
that
is
really
taken
into
consideration.
Even
if
it's
the
whether
it's
the
back
alley
or
it's
front
parking,
you
know
street
parking,
it
does
get
congestion
so
anyway,
that's
that's
to
be
considered.
I
hope.
The
other
part
is
just
the
mass.
O
The
height
of
the
house
itself
is,
is
I,
think
a
concern
for
the
East
End
anyway.
I
I
just
also
hope
that
that's
a
consideration,
whether
it's
shortening
the
the
ceilings
or
if,
if
a
basement
is
an
option
and
I
do
agree
with
the
gentleman
that
just
spoke
I
would
love
to
see
a
single
family
home.
Just
like
the
couple
that
moved
in
initially
said
that
it,
it
would
be,
and
has
now
you
know,
come
come
in
with
a
couple.
O
G
B
L
Madam,
chairman
Commissioners,
so
I
want
to
touch
on
a
couple
of
the
concerns
brought
up
by
people
that
have
brought
testimony
tonight,
views
to
the
neighbors
I
touched
on.
We
did
look
at
that
in
the
design
and
only
put
High
clear
story
windows
on
the
side,
so
that
we
aren't
looking
directly
into
neighbors
as
far
as
the
height
and
a
basement
goes.
L
I,
don't
know
that
the
owner
would
be
amenable
to
a
basement,
but
the
height
does
fit
in
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood,
as
staff
mentioned,
there
is
a
two-story
house
directly
next
to
it
and
we
did
not
go
with
tall
ceilings
like
are
in
a
lot
of
modern
homes.
So
we
did
try
and
keep
with
the
same
scale
as
the
historic
neighborhood,
exterior
storage
I
think
we
would
be
amenable
to
a
condition
to
supply
some
exterior
storage.
L
We
had
not
provided
it
as
we
were
trying
to
keep
the
massing
of
the
project
down,
but
we
would
be
okay
with
adding
that
back
in
if
it
was
a
condition
of
approval.
L
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
concern
about
bringing
a
multi-family
building
into
this
neighborhood.
There
is
president
for
it
and
it
is
a
duplex.
It's
not
multiple,
multiple
units,
it's
just
too
and
as
far
as
parking
goes,
we
did
locate
all
of
it
on
the
rear
of
the
property
to
try
and
keep
it
off
of
the
street,
and
we
wanted
to
provide
enough
parking
so
that
it
didn't
the
property.
Didn't
sorry,
the
project
didn't
take
up
additional
street
parking
in
the
area,
so
we
did
look
into
that
as
well.
I
L
We
had
gone
with
solid
wall
because
it
matched
a
number
of
the
other
houses
in
the
neighborhood,
but
I
would
for
sure
be
open
to
a
railing
there.
Instead.
I
Also
the
architect
in
the
room,
looking
at
the
the
front-facing
elevation
of
the
house,
the
second
floor
windows
are
both
sort
of
offset
from
the
the
sort
of
the
center
lines
of
their
messing,
which
seems
more
of
a
modern
interpretation
as
opposed
to
something
that's
centered
in
the
massing.
It
looks
on
the
plan
like
those
windows
could
be
adjusted
where
they
are
more
in
the
center
line
and
more
traditional
form
for
for
the
sort
of
house
or
or
structure.
Is
that
something?
You
might
be
a
mineral
too,
as
well.
L
Madam
chair
commissioner
Parks:
yes,
if
it
works
with
the
floor
plan
of
where
the
bedroom
walls
lay
out,
then
yes,
okay,
thank
you.
F
D
Question
please.
F
With
several
neighbors
asked
about
the
one
and
a
half
story
with
the
basement
is
that
possible?
Is
that
something
that
the
owners
are
willing
to
explore.
L
Madam
chairman,
commissioner
Moy,
is
that
something
that
we
would
need
to
come
back
with
another
application,
with
a
complete
redesign
on
that
or
I.
Don't
know
that
that
could
be
conditioned.
L
H
L
B
D
And
commissioner
otter,
if
I,
if
I
may
I,
might
have
the
answer
to
your
question,
I
I
actually
live
on
McKinley
further
west
and
the
majority
of
the
two-story
houses
are
actually
one
and
a
half
stories
and
many
do
have
basement
or
seller
sellers
within
them.
So
I
do
believe
that
the
one
directly
to
the
east
is
a
total
two-story.
E
Both
sides
of
for
what
I've
thrown
up
onto
the
presentation
on
both
sides
of
this
site
are
two-story
structures.
E
D
Hopefully,
that's
helpful
a
little
bit.
Are
there
any
other
questions
for
Miss
Bidwell.
D
Okay,
thank
you
with
that.
I
will
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
portion
of
the
hearing
and
would
entertain
some
discussion.
F
It
has
improved,
the
design
has
improved
since
the
last
time.
Last
few
times,
we've
seen
it
and
I
still
think
there's
room
for
improvement.
I
know
Richard
said
that
it's
close.
The
width
for
me
is
too
wide
still
if
most
of
houses
are
22
to
28
feet
wide
and
the
average
is
26.
F
feet,
and
this
would
be
33
feet
wide.
It's
just
too
still
too
large,
I,
don't
mind
it
being
a
duplex
I.
Think
it's
great
to
add.
You
know
multi-family
home
into
this
into
the
slot,
but
I
I
think
this
design
is
not
quite
there
yet
I
think
there's
room
for
improvement
for
the
width
of
it
and
also
the
height.
F
B
D
Commissioner
Malloy
any
other
discussions.
I
I
would
just
I
think
I
was
trying
to
get
a
handle
on
on
the
height
and
some
of
the
concerns
around
the
height
itself.
One
thing
I
would
say:
yes,
the
design
is
I.
Think
it's
much
improved.
I
am
more
inclined
to
think
that
it's
approvable
at
this
moment
in
time.
I
think
that
one
thing
that
I
do
appreciate
that
they've
done
that
does
impact.
I
The
height
is
raise
the
ground
floor
up
off
the
grade
plane,
that's
an
important
characteristic
of
our
historic
districts
and
something
that
is
not
often
seen
in
in
more
Suburban
areas.
I
I
think
the
form
they've
done.
Some
nice
moves
to
address
the
the
width
and
the
way
that
the
the
form
is
subdivided
and
said
set
back
and
I
do
appreciate
that
there
are
a
couple
of
moves
that
I
think
would
be
nice
to
make
windows
and
portrayaling.
That
sort
of
thing
I
would
be
curious
to
see
what
a
one
and
a
half
story
with
basement
would
bring
to
the
table,
but
I,
you
know
I'm
not
particularly
opposed
to
what
they
presented
here
this
evening
either.
So
thank.
D
You,
commissioner,
Parks
any
other
discussion.
D
H
I'm,
just
struggling
with
the
height
I
can't
get
a
sense
for
what
the
20
feet
looks
like
in
comparison
to
the
neighbors
and
since
Ina
and
the
neighbors
all
had
concerns
about
it.
That
makes
me
concerned
because
I
can't
none
of
the
drawings
have
any
relative
Heights
on
them.
So
I
can't
tell
relative
to
anything
else.
What
we're
looking
at,
which
makes
it
really
hard
to
I,
don't
mind
the
duplex.
H
D
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Otter
yeah,
my
thoughts
are
pretty
much
very
similar.
I
do
have
concerns
with
the
height
and
the
precedent
that
That
Could
set
I
already
have
concerns
with
the
precedent
about
this.
Entire
situation
can
set,
but
given
the
fact
that
the
neighborhood
association
and
the
neighbors
have
concerns
with
amassing
I
I'm,
just
not
comfortable
moving
forward
to
me,
the
design
really
has
has
evolved
and
I
I.
Very
much
appreciate
that.
D
But
in
looking
at
you
know
the
front
elevation,
it
still
looks
like
a
big
house
to
me,
and
this
law
is
really
tricky
to
work
with
it's
awkward
and
funky
and
I
think
it
would
be
difficult
to
distinguish
if
it
is,
if
you're,
just
driving
or
walking
down
the
street
without
standing
in
front
of
it,
you
wouldn't
know
it
was
a
duplex
and
that
to
me
I,
don't
know.
D
I
just
have
some
concerns
with
the
massing
and
the
width
contributing
to
that
I
do
want
to
say
that
I
I
really
appreciate
the
landscape
plan.
That's
in
here
the
landscape
mitigation
plan
for
this
lot
was
not
followed.
D
D
But
given
the
concerns
and
testimony
of
the
neighbors
and
the
neighborhood
association,
I,
don't
think
I
can
support
this
application.
As
is,
and
with
that
I
would
entertain
a
motion.
D
D
Don't
feel
like
it
would
be
right
for
the
commission
to
approve
a
scenario
that
we
haven't
seen
in
front
of
us,
so
I
I
think
that
I
would
definitely
be
interested
in
seeing
a
one
and
a
half
story
in
a
basement
and
how
that
scale
looks
on
the
lot.
F
It
still
leaves
me
up
with
to
make
a
motion
of,
but
I'm
I'm
still
I'm,
like
you
I'm
concerned
about
the
the
width
and
the
height
of
it,
because
we've
seen
a
lot
of
new
construction
in
the
historic
districts
in
the
last
two
and
a
half
years,
I've
been
on
the
commission
and
some
of
the
stuff
that
is
being
built
in
our
historic
districts.
F
It
is
not
pretty
it's
too
large
for,
what's
historically
there,
it
doesn't
meet
the
massing
form
and
everything
that
we
should
be
seeing
for
new
construction
in
our
historic
districts.
You
drive
down
the
street
and
it's
there's
so
many
large
homes
that
you
think
would
be
in.
You
know:
Meridian,
like
a
lot
of
these
historic
homes,
were
only
900,
1200
square
feet
and
we're
putting
on
like
a
3
500
square
foot
house
on
these
small
lots
and
in
our
historic
districts,
and
they
just
don't
belong
so
I,
don't
know.
D
So
I
guess
just
to
I,
don't
know
brainstorm
potential
ideas.
We
could
deny
the
application
before
us.
We
could
I
think
technically
defer
the
application
and
be
specific
in
what
we
want
to
see
or
we
could
approve
the
application
with
some
conditions.
H
D
Let
the
record
show
that
the
applicant
said
deferral.
Okay,
that
being
said,
I
guess
I
would
entertain
a
motion.
H
D
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Otter
do
I
have
a
second.
D
You,
commissioner,
Malloy
Christina,
would
you
please
call
the
roll.
B
D
D
Thank
you,
and
our
final
item
tonight
is
item
number
five
drh22-00437
Belgravia,
an
old
Boise
Condominiums
Association
at
150,
South,
5th
Street
staff.
Maybe.
Please
have
the
report.
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
commission.
So
this
is
an
appeal
of
an
administrative
approval
to
install
prefabricated
Standalone
restroom
facility
in
CW
Moore
Park,
located
in
the
old
Boise
historic
district,
one
of
our
commercial
districts
vicinity
map
the
the
site
is
located
on
the
northeast
corner
of
Grove,
Street
and
5th
Street,
and
has
been
a
public
park.
Certainly
for
as
long
as
I've
been
with
the
city
and
for
a.
I
G
Of
years
there
are
adjacent
residential
and
mixed
use,
mixed-use
buildings
surrounding
the
site,
some
new
construction
across
5th
Street
to
the
West,
which
is
completed
last
year,
and
then
there
is
a
number
of
existing
historic
buildings,
including
the
Belgravia
building
directly
across
the
alley
to
the
north
from
the
park.
G
Some
photos
of
the
park
as
it
exists
today
and
this
photo
does
show
the
general
location
of
the
proposed
restroom
again
in
this
here.
It
would
be
located
within
the
planting
area
outside
of
the
alley
to
the
right
of
the
telephone
pole
and
within
setbacks
of
the
site
which
we'll
we'll
get
into
a
little
bit
more
another
view
of
CW
Moore
Park.
G
Just
for
some
familiarity
of
setting
so
the
site
plan,
they
propose
to
construct
a
pre-fabric
or
install
a
prefabricated
restroom
outside
of
the
front
and
Alley
side,
setbacks,
relocated
approximately
23
feet
from
the
front
setback
along
5th,
Street
and
then
11
feet,
6
inches
off
of
the
alley
which
exceed
the
required
setbacks
in
the
A1
Zone,
just
to
kind
of
set
the
stage
for
the
appeal,
so
appeals
of
administrative
decisions
are
open
records.
Before
this
commission
there
is
not
a
limitation
on
new
information,
not
a
limitation
on
who
can
testify.
G
So
it
varies.
Maybe
some
from
some
appeals
you've
seen
before
city
council,
where
they
do
have
a
more
refined,
closed
record.
So
the
commission
tonight
is
charged
with
making
the
decision
of
if
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
meets
this
ordinance
findings
and
complies
with
the
commercial
guidelines.
It
is
not
a
finding
of
error
in
the
decision
or
anything
like
that.
It's
like
an
open
record
like
a
new
decision
that
is
before
you
tonight,
so
the
site
plan
with
the
proposed
restroom
again
there
elevations
of
the
facility.
G
It
is
a
prefabricated
facility
made
of
steel
with
a
contemporary
design.
It
has
louvered
vents
at
the
floor
and
ceiling
to
provide
ventilation
and
visibility
into
the
structure
for
security
reasons.
G
The
applicant
provided
a
sample
of
a
recently
installed
restroom
in
the
Sherry
Buckner
Webb
Park
in
downtown
Boise.
That
would
be
similar
to
the
proposed
facility
in
CW,
Moore
Park.
G
So
in
the
commercial
res
or
the
commercial
historic
guidelines
there
are
minimal.
There
is
minimal
guidance
when
it
comes
to
accessory
structures
in
section
213.
It
does
talk
about
what
is
generally
appropriate
and
then
what
is
generally
not
appropriate
in
that
this
is
a
public
park
with
no
primary
structures.
Much
of
the
language
in
the
guidelines
are
revolve
around
making
accessory
structures
compatible
secondary
to
the
primary
structure.
This
park
does
not
have
a
primary
structure,
so
there
is
minimal
guidance
in
terms
of
what
is
appropriate.
G
G
You
know
maintain
and
blend
Heights
of
buildings
and
adjacent
sites.
This
proposed
structure
is
certainly
much
less
massive
than
any
surrounding
buildings.
These
materials
traditionally
not
used
in
the
district
is
discouraged.
G
You
know
there
are
certainly
applications
of
Steel
within
the
district.
This
building
is
a
contemporary
design,
which
you
know
does
differentiate
it
from
the
historic
features
on
the
site
and
does
not
permanently
alter
the
site
in
terms
of
its
historic
significance.
G
So,
with
all
of
those
findings
in
mind,
we
did
approve
the
installation
administratively,
which
was
subsequently
appealed.
I
know
that
the
appellant
is
here
tonight.
The
applicant
is
here
tonight
to
speak
to
you
and
I
would
stand
for
any
questions.
Thank
you.
Thank.
D
P
P
P
D
P
So
so
we
can
have
a
discussion
on
just
the
narrow
aspects
of
the
historic
preservation
laws
and
how
this
proposed
Portland
Lou
is
not
appropriate.
We
can
also
maybe
have
a
broader
discussion,
albeit
this
is
probably
beyond
your
jurisdiction
as
a
historic
preservation
Commission.
P
P
P
There
is
no
consideration
at
all
to
the
design
and
to
its
surrounding
this
is
just
a
feet:
pre-fra
prefab
industrial
looking
element
just
being
plopped
right
into
the
park
if
you're
just
to
design
a
Portland
Lou
for
the
Ada
County
Landfill.
It
would
look
exactly
the
same
as
what
you're
proposing
to
put
in
this
park.
P
P
P
P
This
is
a
tall
order.
How
do
you
accomplish
all
these
things?
How
can
this
be
done?
Well,
it
has
been
done.
It
was
done.
The
SRI
Buckner
Webb
Park.
They
accomplished
this.
They
provided
landscape
buffers
between
the
functions
of
the
park
and
the
restroom.
They
put
it
in
appropriate
spot
with
high
visibility,
which
the
manufacturer
highly
was.
Their
recommendation
is
how
these
things
are
supposed
to
be
placed.
P
P
That
right
now
is
a
Surface
parking
lot
and
has
a
much
busier
Street
and
you
can
start
from
scratching
your
design
and
you
have
the
opportunity
to
place
it
and
do
it
right
and
create
the
theme
and
the
style
and
and
everything
about
the
park
and
make
it
work
what's
proposed
at
CWB.
Moore
Park
is
very
inappropriate.
No
consideration
at
all
to
the
historic
atmosphere
that
is
in
that
Park.
P
P
Q
Say
the
name
Mr
Miller
on
the
a34
west,
Two
Rivers
Lane
in
Eagle.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
So
I'm
also
an
owner
of
two
units
and
I
also
am
on
the
board,
and
tonight
I
want
to
talk
to
you
a
little
bit
about
why
I
believe
CW
Moore
Park
is
not
the
place
for
Portland
lieu.
So
in
researching
this
issue,
I
actually
reached
out
to
Portland
Lou
themselves.
I.
Q
This
is
the
actual
study
that
that
was
sent
to
me
was
written
by
Marsha
Birnbaum
who's,
a
PhD,
and
it
is
due
diligence
that
Washington
DC
did
so
first.
According
to
this
study,
one
of
the
most
important
keys
to
success
of
installation
of
the
Portland
facility
is
what
they
call
crime
prevention
through
environmental
design
principles.
Q
So
what
are
those
they
are?
An
O.
The
the
Portland
news
should
be
open,
visible
location
with
a
lot
of
pedestrian.
Vehicular
traffic
should
be
in
a
near
a
commercial
area
that
eyes
can
be
kept
on
it
at
all
times,
with
nearby
businesses
and
communities
that
have
bought
in
with
good
Street
lighting
at
night,
an
arrangements
made
made
by
the
police
and
others
to
monitor
it.
We
believe
the
city
of
Boise's
choice
to
locate
the
Portland
Lou
in
the
neighborhood
C.W
Moore
Park
does
not
meet
any
of
these
crime
prevention
through
environmental
design
principles.
Q
Cw
Moore
is
not
open
and
visible.
It
is
not
highly
trafficked.
It
is
not
near
a
commercial
area.
We
don't
believe
any
study
has
been
done
to
find
out
the
buy-in
of
the
community
and
the
businesses
nearby,
there's
very
poor
lighting
there
and
we
have
not
been
apprised
by
the
city
and
how
it
plans
to
maintain
the
Portland
Lou
or
keep
the
location
safe.
Q
Q
It
talks
about
issues
that
may
arise,
and
these
are
the
actual
thoughts
from
cities
that
have
implemented
these
Portland
lose
one
locks,
broken
graffiti,
inappropriate
items,
flush
down
the
toilet,
frozen
pipes
used
for
shooting
up
possible
use
for
prostitution,
given
that
shooting
up
in
the
lose
it
on
frequently
closed
spaces
like
public
restrooms
Washington
sea
may
consider
installing
a
needle
drop
as
many
other
cities
have
installed.
Portland
news
have
done
cities
where
the
problems
are.
Multiple
include
prostitution.
They
include
sleeping
inside.
Q
They
include
camping
in
Portland
Oregon,
where
the
Portland
Lou
is
from
the
city
has
had
issues
with
shooting
up
in
Washington
Olympia
Washington.
The
city
has
had
issues
with
graffiti
sleeping
in
the
Liu
arson,
replacing
door
hinges
and
Hardware
and
Monterey
California
is
issued
with
graffiti.
Has
the
historical
preservation
Commission
of
the
city
of
Boise
thought
about
the
unintended
consequences
and
the
relative
cost
benefit
analysis
of
bringing
a
Portland
Lou
to
C.W
Moore
Park.
We
just
heard
testimony
from
some
neighbors
here
about
the
impact
of
putting
up
a
taller
building
next
to
their
houses.
Q
Q
Now
in
these
pictures,
what
are
you
going
to
see
you're
going
to
clear
that
the
Portland
news
have
been
located
in
places
with
open
sight
lines
highly
trafficked
areas?
Many
are
placed
in
very,
very
public
places
like
right
near
your
Red
Sea,
like
literally
on
the
street,
on
the
streets
right
near
sidewalk,
right
near
sidewalks,
right
near
crosswalks,
literally
in
isolated
places,
where
it's
the
only
thing
you
can
see
why
it's
a
safety,
it's
a
it's!
It's
it's
all
about
safety
and
being
able
to
see
what
is
going
on
in
those
in
those
lose
C.W.
Q
Fourth,
the
location
is
too
close
to
other
buildings
as
picture
one
through
the
pictures
that
you
see
there.
Portland
news
are
not
installed
in
close
proximity
to
buildings,
as
the
pictures
show
these
pictures,
but
I
just
also
pass.
These
are
pictures
that
I
took.
One
of
them
is
from
the
Belgravia
building
to
the
specific
site
and
the
other
one
is
from
the
CW
Moore
Apartments
to
the
Pacific
specific
site.
You're
talking
20
to
25
feet.
Q
Q
We
talked
about
the
Aesthetics:
let's
talk
about
its
functionality.
If
you
look
in
that
study,
that
I
gave
you
look
at
how
the
other
cities
are
talking
about,
how
they're
being
used
Cincinnati,
the
Portland
is
being
used
100
to
150
times
a
day,
Miami
250
times
a
day,
Olympian
Portland
Washington
highly
used
Salt
Lake
City
100
times
a
day,
San
Antonio
Texas
100
times
a
day.
We
have
been
next
to
that
Park.
My
units
happen
to
be
right.
Next
to
that
Park
that
Park
is
a
neighborhood
park.
It
is
not
a
destination
Park.
Q
You
will
not
get
the
usage
expected
of
the
Portland
Lou
in
other
cities
there.
Lastly,
I
want
to
just
mention:
is
operational
costs
I?
Don't
think
that
the
historic
commission
is
really
considered
the
incremental
cost
that
it's
going
to
take
and
bear
to
have
Portland
lose
so
in
these
other
cities
again,
I've
cited
them
from
that.
From
that
very
study,
I
gave
you
in
Secure,
there's
four
costs:
security,
cleaning,
needle
drops
and
maintenance
costs
in
Miami
Florida,
for
example.
Additionally,
we
highly
recommend
having
the
restrooms
monitored.
Q
This
is
why
we
believe
we
have
no
issues.
Police
monitor
was
required
in
Arcata
California
Cambridge
Miami,
Monterey,
Olympia,
Portland,
Salt
Lake
and
San
Antonio
and
Vancouver
Vancouver
most
of
these
places.
Actually
some
of
them
actually
have
monitors
the
entire
time
they're
opened.
Have
you
thought
about
the
cost
of
that
needle
drops?
There's
seven
of
the
cities
of
the
13
cities
that
actually
responded
to
the
Washington
DC
questionnaire
they
put
together
a
five-page
questionnaire,
13
cities
responded
and
seven
of
them
recommended
actually
installing
needle
drops
next
to
the
Portland
lose.
Q
So
the
question
I
really
have
is
looking
at
that
study.
Looking
at
the
pictures
looking
at
what's
happening
there,
looking
at
the
Aesthetics
looking
at
the
fact
that
Washington
DC
did
four
studies,
not
just
from
the
historical
perspective,
but
rather
from
all
elements
of
the
city
services
is.
Is
this
the
only
voice
that
Boise
City
should
listen
to
in
order
to
approve
this
for
this
city
in
the
questionnaire
they
reached
out
to
28
cities,
and
one
of
the
key
takeaways
was:
do
The
Upfront
work
necessary
to
ensure
the
business
and
Community
Support?
Q
Q
Has
the
historical
preservation
committee
put
together
a
budget
for
the
incremental
costs
of
maintaining
monitoring
needle
drops,
cleaning
policing
and
if,
if
there
is
I,
would
like
to
see
that
budget?
So,
for
all
these
reasons,
the
company
itself
is
telling
us
this
is
the
wrong
place.
The
pictures
from
other
cities
show
this.
This
is
the
wrong
place.
Q
Q
So
for
all
these
reasons,
we
believe
that
placing
a
Portland
Lou
like
this
in
a
neighborhood
park
from
ninth
with
with
things
from
the
1900s
putting
a
2023
steel
Colossus
in
the
middle
of
it
We're
The
Neighbors,
we
need
the
renderings.
We
don't
believe
this
is.
We
think
this
is
ill-advised.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
D
Thank
you,
I
do
have
one
kind
of
question
statement.
Excellent.
Thank
you
very
much.
These
submissions
that
you've
provided
this
evening
were
not
a
part
of
your
appeal
packet.
Is
that
correct.
D
Q
You
explain:
I've
done
the
work
subsequent
to
that
so
I
reached
out
to
the
Portland
new
company
about
two
weeks
ago.
D
Okay,
that
is
helpful.
Legal
has
informed
me
that
the
applicant
has
not
received
this
information
and
that
they're
entitled
to
receive
this
information.
D
D
So
as
a
commission,
we
can,
by
majority
vote
with
consideration
of
the
possible
Prejudice
to
other
parties.
The
commission
may
a
reject
these
documents.
B
reviewed
during
hearing
or
reset
during
the
hearing
or
recess
or
C
defer
the
hearing
until
the
documents
can
be
properly
reviewed.
H
The
documents
didn't
address
anything
that
comes
up
in
our
historic
code,
and
so
my
questions
are
more
aimed
at
what
this
commission
is
in
charge
of
which
is
the
historic
code,
stuff
and
so
I
think.
Maybe
I
don't
know
about
the
rest
of
the
Commissioners.
But
the
documents
are
interesting,
but
they're
not
relevant
to
what
we
can
or
can
a
pine
on.
Q
The
document
does
deal
with
Aesthetics
right,
which
is
what
you
do.
It
also
talks
about
police
and
monitoring
and
needle
drops,
and
things
like
that,
which
I
don't
know
I
think
would
be,
would
be
interesting
to
you.
I
mean
the
Aesthetics
part.
Isn't
part
of
my
testimony
for
sure.
H
I
guess
the
aesthetic
part
yes,
but
I
mean
we
can
see
the
Aesthetics
from
the
presentation
that
staff
gave
us.
So
there's
nothing
new
to
that
for
this
discussion.
If
we
have
to
take
these
documents
into
consideration,
we
would
have
to
defer
this
I
think
until
the
May
22nd
hearing
so
I.
Would
you
prefer
that
we
do
that.
Q
We
prefer
that
these
documents
be
seen
and
considered
yes,
because
this
is
the
actual
testimony
of
other
cities
that
have
done
the
exact
same
thing.
You
have
and
I
think
it's
very
valuable
information
and
also
these
pictures,
which
I
was
also
given
two
weeks
ago.
At
the
same
time,
I
was
given
the
study.
I
think
those
are
very
valuable
because
they
show
from
a
historical
perspective
where
the
appropriate
location
of
these
are,
which
is
very
open
spaces,
not
historical
neighborhood
parks,
so
I
think
they're,
very
I,
think
they're
very
helpful.
H
Sorry
they
said
that
they
want
these
documents
on
the
record.
So
then,
at
this
point,
do
we
continue
this
hearing
or
do
we
defer
it?
Because
we
need
to
give
these
to
the
city
to
come
back
with
comments.
G
I
think
chairman
Toto
may
have
some
guidance
so
I'll.
Let
her
weigh
in
then
I'll
yeah.
D
If
necessary,
well,
it's
it's
by
a
majority
vote
and
considering
the
possible
Prejudice
to
the
other
parties
in
this
appeal.
D
My
my
personal
vote
would
be
to
defer
the
hearing
until
the
documents
can
be
reviewed
because
in
in
my
just
reviewing
the
summary
page,
I
I
do
think
that
this
is
some
pretty
significant
data
that
the
city
actually
may
find
incredibly
helpful
to
this
appeal
so
I.
That
would
be.
That
would
be
my
vote.
R
Chair
if
I
may,
please,
for
the
record,
James
Smith,
Deputy,
City
attorney
I
think
it
might
be
helpful
to
the
whole
commission
if
I
just
recite
for
the
record
the
portion
of
Boise
city
code
that
speaks
to
this
this
bit
of
process.
R
That
written
testimonies,
submitted
to
the
review
body
during
the
hearing
shall
be
accompanied
by
a
one-page
summary
of
the
document,
a
statement
of
why
the
testimony
or
document
could
not
be
submitted
by
the
deadline
and
a
request
that
such
testimony
or
document
be
accepted
for
the
record,
the
review
bodies
shall
have
the
options
of
so
here
is
the
code
providing
your
options,
rejecting
the
information,
reviewing
the
information
during
the
hearing,
taking
a
recess
to
review
the
information
or
deferring
the
hearing
and
or
action
until
the
testimony
or
document
can
be
reviewed,
so
you're
not
obligated
to
defer
to
review
you
know
these
are.
R
This
is
all
the
options
that
you
have.
It
goes
on
to
say.
The
action
to
be
taken
on
such
requests
shall
be
by
a
majority
vote
of
the
review
body
in
deciding
whether
or
not
I
continue
quoting
in
deciding
whether
or
not
to
accept
the
information.
The
review
body
shall
consider
Prejudice
to
other
parties.
If
the
information
is
accepted,
I.
B
H
R
So
I
think,
subject
to
hearing
from
anything
from
the
applicant
I
think
it'd
be
fair
to
open
up
for
any
any
concerns
or
what
the
applicant
we've
heard
before
before
you
know
shunting
the
rest
of
the
hearing.
Okay,.
D
Great,
so
we
will
move
forward,
hear
from
the
applicant
and
go
from
there.
D
R
Oh
I,
well
I
was
thinking
that,
if,
if
your
intent
is
to
is
to
defer,
in
response
to
the
to
the
request,
to
submit
this
additional
materials
that
you
might
just
get
some
input
from
the
applicant
before
taking
up
that.
D
A
S
I'm
with
the
city
of
Boise,
Parks
and
Recreation
in
the
landscape
architect
of
record
on
this
project
in
regard
to
the
statement
as
far
as
deferment
I
mean
from
our
perspective,
this
is
a
little
bit
concerning
to
us
because
the
implementation
of
this
project
is
based
on
a
Federal
grant
which
is
likely
to
expire.
So
that's
why
we
have
in
some
ways
you
know
sought
to
get
expedite
this
in
our
process.
Obviously,.
S
We
have
you
know
some
concerns
with
additional
information.
We
have
done
a
ton
of
research.
We
have
focused
on
a
lot
of
different
things
tied
to
this
project,
so
it's
not
I.
Don't
think
we
would
be
overwhelmingly
surprised
by
any
information
that
we
saw
in
the
document,
but
that's
kind
of
our
opinion
at
this
point.
D
Have
you
have
you
reviewed
in
your
research,
the
specific
study,
findings
and
takeaways
for
Washington
DC
from
a
question
you're
administered
to
cities
that
have
installed
the
Portland
Lou
by
Marsha
Birnbaum
PhD.
S
So
we
have
not
looked
at
that
specific
study
again
as
a
part
of
this
project.
Our
we
designed
a
sidewalk
restroom
A
Portland
Lou
is
like
one
manufacturer
of
that
restaurant
there's.
Actually
two
manufacturers,
the
the
primary
manufacturer
that
we
submitted
in
our
packet,
was
ROM
Tech,
which
was
the
restroom
it's
a
slightly
different,
but
then
they're
kind
of
on
the
same
approach.
So
again
we're
taking
a
lot
of
information
from
one
source
that
isn't
necessarily
the
one
that
was
in
the
design
or
project.
S
S
We
were
focused
on
a
restroom
facility
based
on
federal
funding,
to
provide
an
amenity
to
the
community
and
Portland
Lewis
won
product
yeah
and
the
old
that
you
know
because
they're
a
very
similar
project
products
we
have
to
you
know
as
a
city
and
entity.
We
have
to
accept
the
lowest
bid
and
the
contractor
can
really
choose
that
project.
All
we
can
do
is
unequal,
and
so.
H
H
S
Was
the
one
that
we
submitted?
They
are
very
similar
structures.
D
Any
other
questions
for
the
applicant
I
guess
I
do
have
one.
You
mentioned
that
there's
some
urgency
surrounding
the
Federal
grant
funding
that
would
pay
for
this
installation.
What
is
your
deadline
on
that?
When
does
that
grant
funding
expire
so.
S
S
At
that
public
meeting,
we
went
through
our
proposed
design,
which
was
a
lot
lighter
impact
to
the
park,
and
then
we
heard
from
the
applica
or
from
the
Appellate
the
concerns
that
were
listed
and
a
lot
of
the
decisions
made
in
the
current
design
package
were
based
on
concerns
that
were
brought
forward
from
then,
and
so
we
have
held
a
public
meeting
prior
to
submitting
this
application
and.
D
I
I
do
have
one
follow-up
question,
since
the
ROM
Tech
in
the
Portland
Lou
are
similar
in
infrastructure.
D
Would
you
say
that
the
the
components
that
would
lead
to
a
successful
installation
are
similar
to
that
of
the
Portland
Lou?
That
location
is
key
and
access
to
areas
that
are
visible
from
the
sidewalk
industry?
Would
you
say
that
there
are
similar.
S
D
B
S
Have
about
10
plus
events
a
year
at
CW,
Moore
Park,
in
which
we
open
it
up
for
reservations
and
that
we're
literally
bringing
in
Portable
Restrooms
and
setting
them
right
on
the
Alley.
You
could
see
that
in
the
sidewalk
that
was
shown
there
now
and
so
those
public
rest
those
restrooms
have
to
come
in
every
time.
S
That
facility
is
being
rented
and
with
the
new
improvements
being
done
along
520,
not
521,
but
the
Grove
Street
blocks
were
anticipating
a
greater
Demand
on
our
rentals
right
now
our
rentals
are
restricted
Friday
through
Sunday,
and
we
hope
to
be
able
to
open
up
the
site
to
do
more
in
the
future.
But
this
restroom
is,
you
know
we
feel
like
this
is
a
better
long-term
solution.
The
location
was
chosen
largely
because
of
one.
S
We,
we
positioned
it
far
enough
away
from
the
alley
which
is
further
than
the
zoning
requirements,
and
we
we
did
that
in
the
location,
because
all
of
our
utilities
are
located
at
the
kind
of
northwest
corner
of
the
park.
So,
in
order
for
us
to
kind
of
shift
the
building
you
know
to
the
South
or
further
to
the
east,
even
it
would
greatly
impact
the
Integrity
of
the
park
even
further.
S
So
we
went
from
this
kind
of
light
scheme
where
we
weren't
going
to
impact
the
park
very
much
at
all,
but
we
were
kind
of
outside
of
our
building
setback
to
being
considerably
inside
our
building
setback
and
and
making
a
more
of
an
impact
than
what
we
had
originally
hoped
for
for
the
park.
But
the
overall
improvements
for
the
for
that
restroom.
We
really
can't
position
the
structure
elsewhere
within
the
park
without
significantly
damaging
trees
benches.
S
A
lot
of
the
historical
elements
that
are
there
are
rented
from
the
historical
commission
and
those
you
know
we
we
don't
want
to
displace
those
for
this
structure
and-
and
this
was
the
most
open,
visible
location
in
which
we
could
choose
an
appropriate
site.
H
S
This
was
the
the
version
that
we
we
modified
from
the
public
meeting.
We
listened
to
the
feedback.
We
said
we
recognized
their
concern
about
it
being
very
close
to
the
building.
We've
positioned
the
building
further
inside
the
setback,
as
far
as
we
could
without
damaging
the
existing
class
trees.
That
are
there
so
again,
like
all
of
our
utilities,
are
right
at
that
corner
and
that's
kind
of
the
key
location
was
chosen
in
the
design.
I
Madam
chair,
the
opponent,
had
made
a
comment
about
a
significant
magnolia
tree
that
would
come
out
as
a
part
of
this
project
is.
Is
that
can
can
I
didn't
see
it
like
a
demolition
plan
or
anything?
Can
you
address
that
yeah.
S
So
there's
three
Magnolias
right
now:
there's
kind
of
a
bubble
doubt
planter
in
the
northwest
corner
of
the
park
and
our
Portable
Restrooms
there's
a
there's,
basically
a
concrete
walk
in
between
that
planter
and
the
the
alley,
which
is
where
we're
putting
our
Portable
Restrooms
every
time
we
need
to
hold
and
hold
an
event
in
our
original
public
meeting
that
we
did
before
we
submitted
this
application.
S
We
had
a
small
restroom,
basically
going
in
that
location,
so
that
that
planner
was
preserved
and
we
were
able
to
keep
the
Magnolias
that
were
shown
based
on
our
research
with
the
sight
lines
and
improving
our
maintenance
and
access
around
the
structure.
That's
when
we
position
the
structure
further
to
the
South
inside
the
setback
line
that
caused
us
to.
S
H
S
That
is
the
location
that
we
are
going
to
put
it
the
other
side,
there's
a
basically
a
cupola.
We
have
a
water
wheel,
we
have,
you
know
like
a
Colonnade,
including
Lighting
in
the
centerpiece,
so
there's
really
no
other
location
to
go
within
the
park
than
the
one
that
is
shown
on
the
plan.
D
G
I
Yes,
the
pellet
had
also
made
mention
of
another
nearby
park.
That's
being
developed.
Is
that
something
you
can
address?
Yeah.
S
I
can
definitely
address
that,
so
the
there's
a
park
called
521,
that's
going
to
be
located
at
6th
and
Grove.
That
is
a
public
park
that
is
in
the
planning
process.
Right
now,
CCDC
is
actually
developing
the
park
to
turn
it
over
to
Boise
Parks.
Ultimately,
I
encourage
the
applicant
to
provide
as
much
feedback
to
the
to
the
designers
of
that
Park,
as
as
they
have
time
to
do
so.
It
is
not
a.
We
don't
really
have
a
lot
of
control.
S
Basically
it's
going
to
be
donated
to
us
and
that
that
Park
may
be
a
good
place
for
restroom.
It
may
not
like
I
said
as
as
Boise
Parks.
We
try
to
provide
restroom
and
amenities
for
our
our
community
members
and
the
521
Park
project
is
it's
basically
I'm.
Sorry
most.
S
Any
control
at
this
point
to
determine
the
amenities
that
are
within
that
Park
the
amenities
within
CW
Moore.
We
chose
to
add
this
because
we
had
the
federal
funding
to
do
so
and
we
rarely
get
that
opportunity
to
provide
an
additional
amenity
to
the
community
from
from
our
internal
funding
sources.
So
that's
that's,
plus
the
closest
restroom
nearby
public
restroom
is
actually
cherry
book,
Buckner
Park,
which
is
nine
blocks
away,
and
so
with
the
increase
of
activity
in
this
area,
and
we
had
the
opportunity
to
fund
this.
That's
why
we
chose
to
do
so.
D
R
Oh
I'm
sure,
absolutely
and
I
think
the
the
what
would
be
an
order
is
just
a
a
motion
to
resolve
whether
to
accept
the
okay.
The
document
I
believe
a
septed
report:
okay
document
there,
okay,
you
know,
subject
to
what
we
said
with
the
Prejudice
consideration
and
and
all
that.
D
D
Okay,
I
guess
before
I
make
a
motion
to
do
that
since
I
have
the
written
verbiage,
I
I
would
take
a
walk
at
that
I.
D
Will
give
some
information
as
to
why
I'm
gonna
make
this
motion
I
am
in
just
revealing
briefly.
This
document
submitted
I
think
that
that's
this
has
some
very
valuable
information
that
the
applicant
would
find
very
helpful
in
this
process,
as
Josh
mentioned
our
job
as
as
the
commission
is
to
look
at
this
appeal
tonight
from
the
historic
standpoint
and
I
guess.
My
personal
thoughts
on
that
are.
D
My
son's
preschool
comes
here
every
single
day
and
they
play
and
the
water
wheel
is
their
absolute
favorite.
It's
Monumental
to
these
little
kids
and
I
I
do
think
that
having
a
restroom
there,
as
you
know,
the
mother
of
a
preschooler
would
be
great,
but
I'm
not
sure
that
this,
given
this
information
and
the
potential
visual
impacts
that
this
could
have
on
the
overall
Historic
Park
I'm,
not
sure
that
this
is
the
right
option
and
I
don't
feel
like
without
reviewing
these
documents.
D
That
I
can
make
that
decision
right
now.
So
therefore,
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion
to
resolve
and
accept
the
documents
submitted
by
the
appellant.
D
D
F
D
Thank
you
for
that
clarification.
I
appreciate
that.
So
that
being
said,
we
do
have
to
have
a
majority
vote,
so
that
would
be
I
guess
we
would
well
Christina.
Please
call
the.
D
Okay,
thank
you.
We
will
revisit
that
at
the
May
22nd
hearing
and
and
chairman.
D
Yes,
please,
and
with
that
I
will
go
ahead
and
call
this
meeting
to
an
end.
Thank
you,
everyone
for
being
here.
Thank
you.