►
From YouTube: Historic Preservation Commission
Description
January 31, 2022
A
B
B
B
They
were
a
special
designed
by
an
architect
known
as
wesley,
bentz
and
so
they've
been
referred
to
as
what's
called
the
bence
pool
design.
There
are
very
few
that
are
in
existence
today
and
I
think
and
sean
can.
We
will
address
this.
I
believe
there's
only
like,
maybe
even
one
or
two
that
are
actually
functional
right
now,
those
that
are
still
standing
are
have
been
decommissioned
and
those
communities
are
trying
to
determine
what
they
want
to
do
with
the
pools
moving
forward.
B
They
really
have
cool,
as
you
saw
in
the
picture
before
the
art,
deco
and
and
the
design
elements
from
the
front
highly
recognizable
by
anybody
who's
grown
up
here
in
the
city
of
boise
and
has
that
unique
nostalgia
on
swimming
at
both
of
these
pools
or
learning
how
to
swim
at
both
of
these
pools.
I
have
talked
to
more
people
than
I
can
count
that
have
told
me
that
they
grew
up
going
to
south
and
low
pool,
so
there's
quite
a
significant
interest
in
what
is
going
to
happen
with
these
two
pools.
B
They
do
have
some
access
issues
and
again
sean
will
address
some
of
that,
but
one
of
the
issues
is
that
all
of
our
pools
have
some
sort
of
a
shallow
end
or
a
zero
depth
feature
to
them.
This.
Both
these
pools
do
not
have
that.
The
shallow
end
is
three
feet.
It
does
create
some
access
issues
for
a
very
small
children
being
able
to
access
the
pool.
Then
it
has
the
12
foot
and
again,
if
you're
familiar
with
them.
B
We
have
diving
boards
at
those
pools
as
well
as
you
would
guess,
they're
the
two
of
the
oldest
pools
we
have
from
1953,
they're,
70
plus
years
old,
and
and
have
a
number
of
issues
that
that
we're
going
to
need
to
address
before
I
turn
it
over
to
sean.
Both
pools
have
been
decommissioned
the
last
two
years.
B
C
C
We
looked
at
each
of
the
systems,
this
kind
of
engineering
architecture
talk,
but
the
systems
are
like
mechanical
electrical.
Oh
plumbing
the
site,
the
architecture
we
also
looked
specifically
at
the
pool
systems.
There's
some
specialty
systems
there.
Then
we
did
an
accessibility
study,
but
we
have
not
done
so
far.
Structural
integrity,
we're
just
finishing
up
that
study
right
now.
We
should
have
something
pretty
soon
on
the
structure.
C
So,
generally,
the
condition
assessment
revealed
both
of
the
assets
are
in
overall
poor
condition,
pretty
much
across
every
system
or
discipline.
We
looked
at
they're
kind
of
aging
out.
I
guess
both
pools
all
the
systems,
they're
kind
of
aging
out
at
the
same
time.
So,
but
what
we
also
found
was
quite
a
bit
of
code
challenges
and
these
are
kind
of
different
code
challenges.
Some
of
it
was
with
the
pull
systems,
some
of
it
with
accessibility,
just
quite
quite
a
bit
of
problems
with
code.
C
Last
thing
we
did
is
looked
at
site
constraints,
so
the
south
pole
is
on
your
left.
Walls
on
the
right,
the
blue,
shaded
area
is
the
site
and
kind
of
the
black
dashed
lines
or
site
constraints,
setbacks
from
adjacent
properties,
those
sorts
of
things
just
to
kind
of
better
understand
hey.
If
we
are
going
to
look
at
the
fate
of
the
pools,
you
know
what's
going
to
constrain
the
alternatives
valuation
for
that
some
next
steps
from
a
facility
standpoint
is
the
structural
assessment,
which
is
ongoing.
C
B
Thank
you,
sean
commission
members,
so
just
to
quickly
go
over
the
process
of
our
outreach
and
community
engagement.
We
actually
began
in
december
with
stakeholder
focus
groups
for
each
of
the
pools
we
identified
the
stakeholders,
mostly
those
that
we
felt,
would
have
an
interest
in
what
we're
doing
with
these
two
pools
was
the
first,
how
we
first
identified
stakeholders
and
then
anyone
that
has
contacted
us.
So,
as
we've
been
hearing
from
neighborhood
associations
or
neighborhood
representatives,
we've
just
said:
once
we
get
ready
to
start
that
initial
outreach.
B
We'll
have
you
come
to
a
meeting,
so
we
assembled,
I
think
we
had
somewhere
between
11
and
15
individuals
that
came
to
each
of
the
different
meetings.
So
we
had
two
separate
meetings
for
each
of
the
pools.
It
is
facilitated.
They
were
facilitated
and
will
continue
through
our
outreach
by
our
consultant,
which
is
agnew
beck,
which
has
done
a
number
of
consultation
projects
with
the
city
of
boise.
B
B
B
B
So
now
the
the
process
that
will
start
in
february
is
we'll.
Do
a
community
survey
that
we
have
worked
to
put
together
with
our
consultant?
There
will
be
public
meetings,
a
series
of
public
meetings
that
we
will
hold.
We
also
are
planning
workshops
that
we're
going
to
host
at
each
of
the
pool
locations.
B
So
not
only
is
there
an
accessibility
problem,
but
there's
a
lot
of
code
issues
as
well
associated
with
moving
people
throughout
the
pool,
the
both
pool
facilities
and
that's
why
we
feel
it's
important
to
host
workshops
on
site.
So
people
get
a
feel
our
community
gets
a
feel
of
that
we
will
continue
to
keep
those
initial
stakeholders-
those
11
to
15
community
members
that
represented
both
locations
engaged
through
this
process.
B
B
So
I
know
that
was
really
real,
quick.
We
are
committed
to
coming
back
to
you
again
after
we
get
most
of
the
community
engagement
piece
done
and
update
you
on
on
how
the
engagement
process
went
with
the
public
and,
at
that
point
in
time,
really
get
some
of
those
priorities
in
front
of
you
to
take
a
look
at
and
get
your
feedback
on
as
well.
So
both
sean
and
I
would
stand
for
any
questions
that
commission
members
may
have.
E
E
E
I
live
on
the
bench
and
I
hope
that
the
south
pool
doesn't
get
demolished
because
of
the
lack
of
survey
and
its
association
with
historic
properties
on
the
bench.
There
are
historic
properties
on
the
bench.
There
are
potential
historic
districts
on
the
bench,
but
they
have
not
been
identified
by
the
city
because
the
city
has
not
taken
that
effort
to
do
that.
So
I
just
want
to
put
that
out
there
that
shouldn't
have
go
into
the
consideration.
E
That
lowell
was
near
a
historic
district
because
there's
not
been
a
survey
on
the
bench
to
identify
a
historic
district,
and
if
you
go
around
that
area,
there
are
some
amazing,
mid-century,
historic
properties
there
that
are
individually
eligible
for
listing.
The
phillips
house
is
listed
there
right
across
the
field
from
this
pool
and
there
are
other
trout,
nerve
residences
that
are
also
in
that
area
that
deserve
to
be
listed
and
protected.
But
we
have
not
done
that.
E
B
Commissioner
malloy,
yes,
so
I'll
just
kind
of
like.
Let
me
hit
some
of
your
your
points.
First,
one
on
the
website.
I
haven't
looked
at
it
recently.
I
do
know
we
did
a
very
thorough
q
a
and
we
were
very
deliberate
in
making
sure
we
had
historical
details
in
that
q.
A
if
that
didn't
get
put
over
on
the
website.
We
will.
B
We
will
work
on
because
we
want
to
make
sure
everyone
does
understand
the
historical
significance
of
both
pools
as
far
as
the
historical
nature
of
that
south
area
or
whether
it's
in
whether
it's
a
little
pool
that's
in
a
in
a
historic
district
really.
I
I
think
it's
important
to
note
that,
but
I
think
it's
really
more
important
to
look
at
the
actual
structures
themselves
and
and
be
cognizant
that
these
are
pools
that
are
70
plus
years
old,
and
how
do
we?
B
How
do
we
move
forward
and
taking
care
of
them,
whether
it
be,
and
we
don't
use
the
term
demolish?
We
don't
want
to
get
into
those
details
and
talk
in
those
terms.
We
want
it
to
be.
Very
you
know
a
very
benign
process
right
now
and
really
hear
what
the
community
has
to
say,
and
so
everything
really
at
this
point
in
time
for
the
mayor
and
council
is,
is
on
the
table
on
how
this
all
shakes
out
as
far
as
the
funding.
B
One
of
the
studies
that
our
public
works
team
led
by
sean
will
sean
did
was
determine
just
bringing
up
the
code
of
compliance,
get
an
estimate
on
what
that
is,
and
a
year
and
a
half
ago
when
that
study
was
done
actually,
just
over
a
year
ago,
that
was
approximately
2.4
million
per
pool,
so
the
money
doesn't
go
real
far
in
that
earmark
of
3.2
and
3.5
million
that
we
have
for
both
pools.
That
was
actually
put
in
place
at
least
five
years
ago
and
has
not
been
updated.
E
E
D
F
A
A
D
A
Is
not
part
of
the
current
request?
The
applicant
did
request
a
determination
of
eligibility
from
chippo
and
that
was
provided
in
the
packet
yeah.
I
think
they
want
to
talk
about
that
tonight,
but
that
is
not
part
of
the
current
request
and
would
require
you
know
a
subsequent
application
to
this
commission.
G
D
Yeah,
okay,
just
curious
because
the
changes
just
seem
like
they
would
make
it
non-contributing,
which
has
already
kind
of
been
deemed
on
contributing.
So
I
wasn't
sure
but
and
then
my
other
question
is
there's
two
there's
two
applications
that
have
detached
or
attached
garages
that
are
part
of
the
plan
and
I'm
guessing
each
one
is
unique
and
how
that
kind
of
how
the
you
know
the
house
is
situated,
because
typically
we
don't
allow
those.
But
do
you
can?
A
Yeah
so
yeah
you're
right,
there's
two
attached
garages
and
we
don't
typically
see
that
because
in
a
typical
historic
district
property
with
an
alley
folks
like
to
have
the
detached
garage
have
some
backyard
space,
the
one
project
proposed
it
attached
off
an
alley.
So
we
still
get
the
alley
access
that
we
desire,
but
they
chose
to
make
it
attached
really
the
considerations
there
are
setbacks
and
bulk
right
anytime.
A
The
garage
is
attached,
it's
going
to
increase
the
bulk
and
the
garage
in
that
case
has
to
meet
full
setbacks,
because
it
is
an
attached
structure.
It
doesn't
qualify
for
those
accessory
structure,
reduced
setbacks,
the
case
the
other
one
is
an
existing
garage
that
they're
rebuilding
to
make
usable.
D
F
D
A
D
G
D
H
E
A
D
G
H
D
J
D
D
K
E
D
A
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
commission.
Item
number
one
tonight
is
drh
21-00429
at
1613,
north
sixth
street.
It's
a
request
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
demolish
an
existing
non-contributing,
single
family,
home
and
outbuilding,
and
construct
a
new
two-story
home
with
detached
garage
and
adu
on
property
and
r1ch
zone.
It
is
in
the
north
end,
historic
district
and
the
home
is
now
contributing.
A
A
The
applicant's
proposal
is
to
construct
a
new
home
with
with
a
detached
garage
and
adu
fronting
onto
6th
street.
They
meet
the
setbacks
of
the
zone.
I
will
correct
a
condition
related
to
the
detached
garage
and
adu
later
in
the
presentation,
but
the
home
itself
meets
the
front
required
front
setback
and
actually
exceeds
the
required
side
setbacks.
A
In
the
staff
report,
we
included
conditions
of
approval,
addressing
the
lot
coverage
and
massing
of
the
home.
The
lot
coverage
was
over
35
and
then
the
home
was
rather
wide
and
large.
You
know
it's.
Certainly
in
a
neighborhood
of
larger
homes,
there
are
two-story
homes,
you'll
see
in
the
surrounding
photo
pictures
around
this
structure,
but
the
width
relationship.
A
We
did
feel
in
combination
with
the
exceeding
lot
coverage.
We
did
condition
it
that
that
be
reduced
to
no
more
than
35
percent
lot
coverage
and
that
the
width
relationship
of
that
home
to
the
on
the
front
facade
would
be
modified.
The
op
submitted
revised
plan,
which
was
distributed
to
the
commission
in
late
correspondence.
On
friday.
They
were
proposed
to
move
to
remove
the
wall,
enclosing
the
semi-covered
porch
at
the
front
of
the
structure.
A
There
and
it's
highlighted
in
blue
on
this
side,
reducing
some
of
the
lot
coverage
and
then
also
take
some
square
footage
off
of
the
patio
in
the
rear
to
reduce
that
spot
coverage
below
35
square
feet.
That
also
narrows
the
appearance
of
the
home
from
6th
street.
With
the
wider
portions
set
back
from
the
street
and
that
really
front
level
of
the
facade
is
narrowed
to
35
feet
in
width.
A
They
provide
a
landscape
plan
with
street
trees,
some
trees
around
the
perimeter
of
the
property
and
some
lawn
again.
The
home.
The
proposed
home
is
two
stories,
features
a
couple
of
front-facing
gables,
a
covered
front,
porch
and
then
a
prominent
chimney
and
some
side
cables
facing
those
side.
Elevations.
A
Photo
of
the
existing
home
again,
a
non-contributing
single
level
structure
located
to
the
side
of
the
property
towards
the
south
boundary
and
some
of
the
surrounding
homes
in
the
neighborhood.
The
the
photo
labeled
south
is
directly
adjacent
to
this
property.
To
the
south
is
a
full
two-story
structure.
A
A
We
would
recommend
that
condition
1a
be
revised
to
for
them
not
to
exceed
the
35
and
follow
the
plan
submitted
on
july
or
january.
26
2022.,
the
garage
and
adu
by
the
zoning
ordinance
do
have
to
meet
the
full
setbacks
of
the
zone.
In
the
staff
report,
we
included
a
condition
of
approval
that
referenced
kind
of
a
more
general
statement
about
meeting
setbacks,
we're
getting
a
variance.
A
L
L
L
My
understanding
and
we've
actually
met
the
family.
Had
seven
children,
where
you
see
that
kind
of
white
prefabricated
home
that
their
original
home
used
to
be
right.
Next
to
that,
it
was
in
a
drainage
ditch
and
it
flooded
almost
like
every
kind
of
rainy
wintry
fall
season,
so
it
destroyed.
The
home.
Leona
was
the
mother
of
the
seven
children
she
moved
into
that
prefabricated
home
and
then
lived
there
until
she
passed
away
a
couple
years
ago,
and
then
the
family
recently
wanted
to
sell
it.
L
We,
my
husband
and
I
and
our
family-
we
actually
live
one
block
away.
We
saw
this
home
we've
kind
of
watched
it.
I
don't
want
to
use
the
word
stock
because
I'd
probably
be
illegal,
but
so
we
really
love
the
north
end
and
we're
my
husband.
I
grew
up
in
boise.
We
love
just
the
access
to
everything
it
has,
so
we
we
felt
really
fortunate
to
get
it.
Our
current
home
has
a
tiny
backyard.
L
We
have
a
six
and
a
three-year-old
so
to
have
this
to
be
able
to
build.
The
house
that
we
are
proposing
is
really
a
big
deal
to
my
family,
to
have
kind
of
an
outdoor
space
and
a
yard,
and
probably
also
pretty
big
for
our
dog
to
actually
run
somewhere,
because
our
current
home
is
is
quite
small
and
and
so,
and
we
actually
know
a
fair
amount
of
the
neighbors.
Some
of
them,
I
think,
wrote
letters
just
because
we
live
a
block
away.
L
That
we've
got
an
opportunity
to
know
everyone
if
you
could
go
to
the
next
slide,
please
this
is
the
house
to
the
south.
It
is
a
two-story
home.
It
is
fairly
tall.
I
don't
know
the
the
difference
between
how
tall
that
home
is
in
in
our
home,
but
it
does
shade
our
lot
quite
a
bit.
So
that's
the
house
to
the
south.
The
next
slide,
please,
these
are
the
houses
to
the
north
or
sorry.
L
This
is
the
house
directly
to
the
north,
and
this
is
a
an
edu.
It
is
something
that
they're
renting
it's
actually
a
two-bedroom
two-bath
edu.
It's
it's
mostly
been
rented
to
travel
nurses
throughout
the
pandemic,
which
is
pretty
cool,
but
it
is
quite
large.
Our
proposed
garage
would
be
near
that
we
kind
of
did
that
on
purpose,
so
that
both
garages
would
be
closer
to
each
other
and
kind
of
share
that
space.
L
And
then
these
are
the
houses
across
the
street.
All
two-story,
the
one
on
the
bottom
right
is
currently
being
constructed,
but
that's
it's
close
to
finished,
but
that
is
a
newer.
I
guess
a
a
remodeled
home
as
well.
Next
slide,
please.
So
I
did
want
to
address
the
site
plan
and
the
lot
coverage
modifications,
and
when
we
submitted
our
plan
it
ended
up
being
about
30
percent
of
coverage.
L
L
My
assumption
now
is
it's
going
to
become
the
neighborhood
fairy
garden
for
our
daughters
and,
but
so
that
was
about
300
square
feet
and
the
back
of
the
home,
where
that
kind
of
pink
rectangular
long
rectangular,
we
removed
a
foot
of
patio
space,
and
that
is
a
covered
patio.
So,
even
though
it
looks
like
it's
a
concrete
pad
on
that
there
I
I
might,
what
we
learned
is,
that
is,
is
with
the
lot
or
that's
being
covered
by
the
lock
coverage,
because
it
was
kind
of
a
larger
covered
patio.
L
L
An
outdoor
living
space
is
included
in
that
because
it's
covered,
but
I
did
want
to
point
that
out
and
we
have
tried
to
address.
I
guess
kind
of
the
front
lot
coverage
by
stepping
back
the
house.
So
the
front
of
the
house
is
sorry,
I'm
looking
at
my
notes.
It
is
about
35
39
feet
wide
and
which
is
about
52
percent
of
the
total
lot
width
and
so
looking,
hopefully
looking
from
the
the
home
from
the
street.
L
L
L
It
is
just
difficult
to
show
the
setbacks,
so
we
put
them
in
yellow
to
show
that
the
front
of
the
house
would
stick
out
more
and
then
it
it
does
kind
of
widen,
as
the
house
goes
further
back
into
the
lot,
a
couple
of
things
that
were
really
important
to
our
family
is
our
girls
really
wanted
rooms
upstairs
they
begged
us
for
it.
So
that's
that's
part
of
the
two-story
element,
so
the
two-story
on
that
second
story.
Those
bedrooms
would
likely
be
our
kids
bedrooms.
L
Also,
the
windows
on
the
right
side
of
the
front
door
is
a
dining
room.
That
was
a
really
also
big
deal
to
our
family,
we're
both
from
the
area
because
of
our
current
historic
home,
and
we
can't
have
family
over
for
dinner
because
not
everyone
fits,
and
this
year
I
almost
lost
my
mom,
and
so
it
would
be
a
big
deal
for
our
family
to
have
everyone
together
for
the
holidays.
L
And
then
looking
at
the
next
slide
and
that's
the
rear
of
the
house,
it
slightly
shows
that
outdoor
covered
patio-
you
can
see
the
posts
by
that
kind
of
larger
window
door.
So
that's
part
of
the
the
lot
coverage
that
we
wanted
to
bring
up
and
we
did
a
lot
to
kind
of
shrink
down
the
upstairs,
so
it
was
brought
back
in
on
the
sides
and
also
the
front
and
the
the
back
of
the
house.
So
it's
not
a
very
large
upstairs
it's
it's
it's
smaller
than
the
footprint
of
the
home.
L
L
This
currently,
as
mr
wilson
said,
is
11
feet
from
the
alleyway
that
issue.
It
wasn't
brought
to
our
attention
in
the
staff
report
about
the
requirement
of
of
it
being
15
feet
away
from
the
alley.
So
my
request
today
would
be
of
variance
our
garage
and
the
space
above
is
total
about
a
thousand.
I
think
it's
a
thousand
sixty
if
I
wrote
down
that
number
correctly,
a
thousand
sixty-four,
so
we're
just
over
that
thousand
square
footage.
L
Our
garage
and
edu
space
is
also
kind
of
dwarfed
by
our
neighbors.
It
is
much
smaller.
It
would
be
difficult
for
us
to
narrow
down
the
square
footage
of
both.
We
typically
use
our
garage
for
a
home
office
kind
of
quarantine
space,
both
my
husband
and
I
do
work
from
home.
It's
pretty
difficult
with
little
kids,
so
it
would
be
difficult
to
shrink
down
that
space
below
a
thousand
feet.
L
It
would
also
be
difficult
to
move
it
within
the
site
plan
if
we
had
to
move
it
back
four
feet
that
would
be
very
close
to
our
home.
So
essentially,
our
request
today
would
be
for
a
variant,
and
then
I
think
that
that
is
my.
The
next
slide
is
my
last
slide.
I
just
want
to
thank
you
for
your
attention
today.
Thank
you.
H
Man,
I'm
sure
I
have
one
question:
did
you
consider
it
all?
I
mean
your
overall
width
of
the
house
is
59
feet
and
that's
that's
quite
wide.
I
mean
obviously
there's
it's
a
very
wide
lot.
The
block
you're
on
has
a
lot
of
large
houses,
so
you
know
that
that
that
seems
to
fit
okay,
but
the
width
is
is,
is
very
wide,
so
have
you
considered
at
all
making
the
house
you
know
deeper
and
not
as
wide
I
mean.
H
L
I
know,
hopefully
I'm
not
on
the
record
for
when
we
try
to
sell
our
home,
but
it's
a
mud
pit.
It's
really
difficult
to
maintain
we're
on
our
third
type
of
grass
from
zamzo,
because
it's
so
shaded
by
all
of
our
neighbors.
So
we
did
consider
that
we
also
considered
a
basement
as
well
to
try
to
use
that
kind
of
square
footage,
and
our
problem
is
by
the
height
of
the
neighbors
homes.
We've
had
a
couple
contractors
look
at
it
and
we
thought
that
it
would
be
associated.
L
It
would
be
extremely
dark,
so
we
thought
about
both,
and
so
ideally
we
would
have
a
backyard
space.
That's,
I
guess
one
space,
that's
cohesive,
because
another
alternative,
it
would
kind
of
make
an
l-shaped
backyard
space,
and
I,
the
only
words
are
coming
to
mind-
is
that's
just
not
what
we
want.
So,
yes,
we
did
consider
it,
but
it
was
difficult.
E
L
That
is
a
good
question.
We
met
with
a
designer
or
a
draft
addressman,
I
think,
is
what
they're
technically
called
so
we
just
gave
them
pictures
of
north
end
homes
within
the
area
that
we
really
liked,
and
then
they
kind
of
came
up
with
that,
and
it
was
the
first
one
that
they
gave
us
and
we
gave
we
asked
for
very
little
revision.
D
J
Hi,
I
am
here
online.
Thank
thanks,
madam
chair.
This
is
kate,
henwood
1116,
north
12th
street
yeah.
We
have
just
a
couple
comments
on
this
home
one.
I
just
want
to
stress
that
we
really
like
the
landscape
plan.
You
know,
as
you
can
see,
from
the
pictures
of
the
lot.
There
are
a
few
trees
that
stand
on
this
lab
on
this
lot,
but
they're,
either
undesirable
species
or
already
dead
or
clearly
diseased
or
would
surely
be
damaged
by
construction.
J
So
we
really
love
seeing
the
large
shade
trees,
species
on
the
landscape
plan
and
three
new
street
trees.
Where
there
are
none.
Now
we
don't
have
any
specific
issues
with
the
home
design.
It
is
very
wide,
but
it
is
a
wide
lot
and
we
think
we'll
fit
in
with
the
other
homes
on
the
block.
We
did
also
notice
the
37
lot
coverage
called
out
by
staff,
so
we
were
glad
to
see
that
revised
plan
and,
of
course,
we
strongly
recommend
the
applicants,
use
permeable,
paving
and
down
lighting
in
their
design.
D
D
L
H
H
H
So
I
mean
I'm
concerned
about
I'm
concerned
about
59
feet
across
on
the
front.
I
I'm
actually
leaning,
I'm
leaning
towards
approving
it,
but
I
do
have
a
concern
because
it
is
quite.
It
is
quite
wide
the
the
street
that
it's
on,
though,
is
got
a
lot
of
large
houses
on
it.
So
I
actually
think
it
fits
in
pretty
well
in
that
regard,
as
far
as
height
wise
and
lot
coverage
wide,
but
I'm
I'm
interested
in
any
of
the
other
commissioner's
opinion
on
on
the
width
at
all.
E
I
guess
I
can
comment
the
I
mean
the
width
is
rather
large
and
I
think
there
might
be
some
opportunities
for
them
to
use
vegetation
and
things
like
that
to
screen
some
of
those
side
areas.
So
what
you
see
at
the
front
is
that
middle
section,
so
I
don't
know
if
that's
something
you'd
want
to
add
just
using
some
vegetation
to
screen
that
section.
K
Sorry,
madam
chair,
it
looked
like.
Maybe
they
had
some
screening
in
that
it
was
quick
on
the
plan
for
the
they're
definitely
putting
trees
on
the
street,
which
kind
of
helped
me,
because
if
you're,
driving
by
at
least
those
trees
on
the
street
won't
make
it
so
obvious
that
it's
such
a
large
home,
you
can
pull
up
that
landscape
plan
again.
That
would
be
great.
D
Well,
I
I
would
agree
that
I,
like
that
suggestion
of
some
vegetation
and
it
does
look
like
there-
is
some
out
there
and
potentially
there
could
be
some
more.
I
appreciate
that
the
house
is
there's
an
attempt
to
set
back.
So
it's
not,
you
know
all
the
way
across
facade
right
at
the
front
of
the
property.
D
So
I
appreciate
that
step
back
in
there
and
I
you
know
you're
meeting,
all
the
setbacks
or
exceeding
them,
and
if
this
were
a
narrower
lot,
you
know
you
may
have
a
narrow
house,
but
you
probably
would
have
the
same
setbacks
on
that
as
well.
So
I
I
think,
based
on
the
fact
that
we
haven't
heard
any
opposing
testimony
as
well,
that
I
will
be
approving
voting
to
approve
this
tonight.
A
G
G
A
A
A
F
A
They
said
that
if
the
roots
are
indeed
impacting
the
foundation,
they
could
be
cut
without
adversely
affecting
the
tree
to
mitigate
that
damage,
and
in
our
report
we
found
that
evidence
has
not
been
submitted.
That
demonstrates
that
the
tree
is
dying,
diseased
or
public
or
posing
a
public
safety
risk.
So
we
would
recommend
denial
of
drh
21-00461
and
I
would
stand
for
any
questions.
K
D
D
I
G
A
The
landscape
plan
shows
some
existing
mature
trees.
The
applicant
does
have
a
somewhat
unique
request
in
that
they
would
propose
to
salvage
the
existing
home
if
they
can
find
a
buyer.
That
would
require
the
removal
of
a
tree
in
the
front
yard
if
the
home
was
to
be
moved.
No
and
when
I
say
sell,
I
shouldn't,
say
salvage,
they
say
moved.
They
would
like
to
move
the
home
from
the
property.
A
A
A
Photo
of
the
existing
home
the
tree
in
the
photo
on
the
right
there
is
the
one
that
would
need
to
be
removed.
I
don't
have
you
know
an
arborist
evaluation
of
that
tree.
It
is
an
oak
that
does
appear
appear
to
be
at
least
in
decent
shape.
Maybe
the
applicant
could
provide
some
further
information
about
the
condition
of
that
tree.
A
Four
plans
again
showing
the
two-story
home
with
the
attached
garage
access
from
the
alley
with
that
staff
did
recommend
approval
of
the
application.
The
request
to
move
the
home
versus
the
tree
was:
it
was
a
late
addition
to
the
packet
and
was
not
fully
contemplated
in
the
conditions
of
approval,
so
I
would
recommend
that
the
commission,
whatever
direction
you
decide
to
go,
would
be
appropriate
to
insert
a
condition
relating
to
that
tree
and
whether
it
should
be
saved
or
be
allowed
to
be
removed.
A
Madam
chair
commissioner
malloy
I'll,
let
the
applicant
address
that,
but
I
don't
believe
so
the
location
you
know
on
the
landscape
plan
here
it
is
a
pretty
fair
distance
off
the
front
of
the
proposed
home
and
I
think
it
you
know,
certainly
there'd
be
some
impact.
There
is
any
time
you
construct
that
close
to
a
tree,
but
I
think
it
could
be
saved
through
the
construction,
but
maybe
I'll.
Let
them
address
out.
M
Okay,
thank
you
so
much
it's
randy
haverfield.
I
don't
know
why
it
says
randy
ann,
but
it's
randy
haverfield,
I'm
the
project
architect
for
this
proposed
building
and
my
address
is
224.
16Th
avenue
south
in
nampa
name
of
the
business
is
architecture
northwest,
I'm
not
sure.
If
ryan
weimer
is
possibly
on
the
call
as
well,
he
would
have
been
the
one
that
might
have
called
in
the
request
to
look
into
trying
to
salvage
the
building
and
or
the
tree.
But
you
can
speak
if
he's
on
the
line.
Maybe
he
could
speak
further
into
that?
M
You
know
my
involvement
with
the
project
was
to
design
a
building
that
would
be
as
cohesive
as
possible
meeting
the
owners
program
requirements
for
building
size.
We
tried
to
retain
all
of
the
vegetation
that
we
could
on-site
trees
and
otherwise
to
try
to
maintain
the
maturity
of
what
was
there.
The
building
is
on
a
0.14
acre
property
in
the
north
end
historic
district,
and
I
can
speak
more
to
the
project,
but
I
think
josh
has
done
a
good
job
of
speaking
to
the
elevations.
M
The
footprint
of
the
building
we're
proposing
that
that
building
coverage
be
limited
to
35
percent
of
the
site,
paving
to
10
percent
and
landscaping
55
percent
of
the
site.
Would
we
re
remain
as
landscape
area.
It
is
a
two-story
building.
One
comment
that
that
came
up
through
the
process
was
the
height
of
the
building.
M
The
massing
of
the
building
was
designed
to
create
one
story,
elements
to
a
second
story
level
on
both
sides
of
the
building.
Obviously,
on
the
on
the
east
or
north
and
south
sides
of
the
building,
we
have
limited
setback
to
work
with
there
as
far
as
to
be
able
to
articulate
or
offset
wall
planes.
So
we
did
provide
some
perspective.
Views
3d
imaging
that
didn't
get
part
of
the
presentation
that
josh
has.
M
I
don't
know
if
he
still
has
that
available,
that
he
could
show
to
you,
but
it
kind
of
gives
you
the
feel
of
of
the
craftsman-style
home
that
that
we're
hoping
to
be
able
to
provide
in
this
location
again
we've
tried
to
be
sensitive
to
what
the
the
comments
were
from
the
neighbors
and
tried
to
minimize.
Obviously
the
impact
on
the
site
from
a
landscaping
standpoint.
The
building
itself
is
an
older
building
if
there
was
a
buyer
for
it.
M
D
N
So
regarding
the
tree,
it's
a
35
foot
oak
and
let
me
get
the
diameter
here:
35
foot
oak
18
inch
diameter
and
we're
caught
in
a
little
bit
of
a
pickle
between
you
know
not
having
to
demo
the
existing
home
we'd
like
to
to
preserve
it
and
get
it
moved
to
somebody
that
can
use
it
versus
preserving
the
existing
tree
there.
Now,
if
we
were
granted
permission
to.
N
Have
the
tree
removed,
we
would
be
planting
one
in
its
place
upon
job
completion,
so
those
are
the
things
that
we're
considering,
obviously
having
to
choose
between
either
demoing
the
home
or
saving
the
home.
We
just
wanted
to
to
let
everyone
know
that
we
were
thinking
about
that
and
wanting
wanted
everyone's
opinion
on.
You
know,
what's
in
everyone's
best
interest
and
in
that
discussion,
so,
but,
as
you
can
see,
we're
really
excited
about
the
product.
N
H
M
M
H
Okay
and
then,
if
this
is
the
one
plant
you
presented
to
how
much
how
much
interaction
did
you
have
at
city
staff
level
to
make
sure
your
understanding
of
the
different
requirements
needed
and-
and
maybe
that's
a
little
vague
question?
I
just
I'm
just
curious
to
how
much
how
much
interaction
you
had
with
staff.
H
G
H
M
M
H
H
M
H
M
K
N
N
C
E
M
M
Well,
the
bathroom
window
on
the
on
the
south
side
on
the
upper
level
is
meant
to
just
provide
light,
wasn't
necessarily
intended
to
be
a
larger
and
an
obscure
type
glass.
So
if,
if
it's
your
preference
to
have
a
larger
window
to
match
the
heights
of
the
others,
that
would
be
easily
added
as
a
condition
of
approval.
E
M
M
H
H
M
That
would
be
something
I
obviously
would
like
to
see
more
of
a
wood,
clad
type
or
a
wood
window
with
a
vinyl,
clad
or
metal
clad
on
it.
Like
a
pella,
you
know
they're
a
little
bit
more
of
an
upscale
type
glazing,
but
if
there's
again,
if
you're
concerned,
as
far
as
having
just
a
vinyl
extruded
window,
that's
not
the
intention.
H
H
So
as
a
commissioner,
when
we
see
plans
that
come
across
our
desks
that
are
specifying
single
hung
that
you
know
poses
a
number
of
questions
or
raises
a
number
of
flags,
because
vinyl
windows
are
not
allowed
in
the
historic
districts
right
and
and
if,
in
fact,
your
single
hung
is
your
specification,
it's
going
to
be
awful
difficult
to
find
many
manufacturers
that
can
do
it
on
the
wood
window
side
now
from
an
historic
perspective.
As
far
as
for
the
rest
of.
H
Standards
single
hung's
was
a
that
was
a
prevalent
specification
in
very
large
buildings
and
very
historic
buildings
decades
and
decades
ago,
but
in
our
districts
we
there
are
very
few
actual
wood
single
hungs
and
I
have
I've
not
seen
any
wood
or
cloud
wood
single
homes
used
in
the
three
years.
I've
been
here
in
the
historic
district,
so
just
so
randy
just
a
note
for
you,
I
guess
just
gonna
be.
M
H
M
H
The
I
actually
disagree
a
little
bit
with
our
guidelines
in
that
we
we
it's,
it
says.
Generally
speaking,
you
need
to
have
double
hunger,
single
home
windows,
because
that's
just
one
of
the
historic
standards,
but
in
designing
homes
during
the
period
of
time
that
we're
in
right
now,
that
necessarily
isn't
the
predominant
specification.
So
I
think,
there's
room,
I
think,
there's
room
in
the
guidelines
for
other
types
of
windows.
In
this
case
in
this
home,
your
double
hung
is
going
to
be
your
predominant
specification.
D
While
you're
turning
down
there,
I
will
note
to
the
commission
that
the
two
of
the
conditions
that
are
in
the
report
are
to
do
single
hunger,
double
hung
windows
as
well
as
wood,
metal
cloud,
wood
or
fiberglass,
so
they
they
are
listed
in
there.
What
they
can
do
already
in
their
conditions
of
approval.
J
We
are
thanks,
madam
chair
kate,
henwood
1116,
north
12th
street,
so
we
did
review
the
initial
plans
that
had
been
submitted
with
this
application.
So
our
comments
were
based
on
that
meaning
the
larger,
like
the
32
foot
height,
those
those
sorts
of
things,
but
before
the
the
size
was
scaled
back,
so
we
did
send
those
notes
over
to
mr
have
a
field.
So
we
really
appreciate
him.
J
You
know,
hearing
our
concerns
and
and
sounds
like
he
has
addressed
them
by
bringing
that
height
down
one
one
concern.
I
guess
that
that
still
stands
is
that
the
guidelines
are
pretty
clear,
that
full
two-story
homes
should
generally
only
go
on
locks
with
two-story
homes
on
either
side,
and
I
don't
think
that's
the
case
here.
J
The
house
on
the
right
is
quite
small
and,
as
discussed,
the
home
on
the
left
is
a
is
one
story,
so
I
you
know,
even
though
that
overall
height
has
come
down
from
32
feet
to,
I
think
26
feet,
which
is
fairly
significant
reduction.
You
know
just
just
want
it
noted
that
you
know
that
is
still
a
large,
a
large
home
in
the
midst
of
other
small
homes.
On
that
block,
I
guess
one
thing
I
need
to
do
more
homework
on.
J
Is
this
the
idea
of
the
attached
garages
not
being
allowed?
I
mean
I
do
recall
you
know
in
the
past
couple
of
months.
I
think
a
home
was
that
maybe
lemping
24th,
where
there
was
an
attached
garage.
So
I
don't
know.
I
personally
just
need
to
do
more
more
homework
on
that,
but
I'm
curious
if
the
commission
is
going
to
have
any
more
discussion
on
that
point,
but
otherwise
just
our
normal
suggestions
of
permeable,
paving
and
and
down
lighting,
to
limit
the
project's
environmental
impact.
D
O
O
O
M
You
know
your
interaction
with
us
tonight.
It's
it's
definitely
appreciated
the
detached
garage
again,
something
that
that
did
catch
me
off
guard.
I
didn't.
I
was
not
made
aware
of
that
with
the
conversations
that
I
had,
so
I
apologize.
If
that
is
a
standard
that
can't
be
waived,
but
again
we
do
have
room
to
be
able
to
make
that
movement
and
detach
the
garage.
I
would
just
ask
for
what
distance
would
be
the
required
amount
between
the
building
and
the
detached
garage.
M
As
far
as
the
size
of
the
home
we've
tried
to
mitigate
and
lower
the
the
size
of
the
building,
a
two-story
home
is
is
what
it
is,
but
the
size
of
the
homes
on
either
side
of
this.
This
lot.
Obviously
we
can't
you
know
do
much
about
that.
We
would.
We
would
hope
that
that
they
would
appreciate
the
value
of
their
homes,
increasing
by
virtue
of
of
this
home
being
built.
So
again,
everything
that
we've
done
is
with
a
good
faith
effort
to
try
to
satisfy
the
requirements
of
the
historic
district.
M
If
we
missed
a
few
things,
I
apologize
for
that
and
take
more
responsibility,
but
moving
forward.
We
will
definitely
make
the
modifications
to
detach
the
garage
and
put
brick
in
lieu
of
the
cultured
stone
to
make
sure
that
the
elevation
difference
between
the
road
or
sidewalk
in
the
front
of
the
building
is
up
at
least
18
inches
that
it
is
over
a
crawl
space.
It's
not
a
flat
concrete
floor.
M
M
D
K
F
K
A
A
D
D
All
right:
well,
then,
I
will
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
portion
of
the
hearing
and
consider
a
motion.
I
guess,
although
before
I
do
that,
I
might
give
my
thoughts
on
this
particular
case.
I
I
do
appreciate
the
applicant
for
listening
to
the
concerns
of
both
the
neighborhood
association
and
what
we've
talked
about
tonight.
I
think
that
that
definitely
shows
a
willingness
to
work
in
the
neighborhood.
D
I
do
still
have
a
concern
with
the
height,
not
necessarily
the
actual
height
of
the
building,
but
more
in
relationship
to
the
neighboring
houses,
and
I
don't
have
a
very
good.
I
could
see
a
little
bit
in
the
pictures
of
the
two
neighboring
houses
and
can
see
that
they
are
quite
a
bit
smaller
and
and
if
you
look
at
our
guidelines,
there's
clear
graphics
on
showing
that
height
disparity
between
the
you
know,
they
don't
do
that.
D
You
know
taller
house
in
between
the
two
smaller
houses,
but
I'm
not
quite
sure
what
else
is
beyond
those
houses
and
around
them.
So
I'll,
be
kind
of
curious
to
hear
what
my
fellow
commissioners
have
to
say
about
the
the
height
of
it.
But
otherwise
I
would
feel
comfortable
with
all
the
other
topics
that
we've
discussed
as
revisions
to
the
conditions
of
approval.
H
Item
chair,
I
guess
I'll
I'll
go.
First,
I've
got
I've,
got
quite
a
list
of
things
to
to
read
through
and
and
which
will
hopefully
here
lead
to
emotion.
But
I
do
I
do.
I
do
feel
badly
for
the
applicant.
Actually,
I
think
we
we
may
have,
I
don't
know,
failed
him,
as
is
a
strong
word,
but
I
don't
I
don't.
I
think
we've
could
have
gotten
more
direction.
H
You
know
we
have
the
set
of
guidelines
for
the
historic
district
and
and
it's
not
written
like
a
code,
it's
more
written
as
a
guideline,
and
it's
done
that
way
on
purpose,
because
the
idea
is
to
guide
our
our
neighbors
and
the
people
that
are
living
here
and
want
to
live
here
and
want
to
remodel
and
want
to
build
to
guide
you
along
the
process
of
the
design,
and
when
I
asked
about
you
know
how
many
revisions
of
the
plan
was.
I
mean
that's
kind
of
where
I
was
going
with
this.
H
Is
you
know
what
kind
of
guidance
have
we
given
the
applicant
to
make
sure
that
they
design
a
house
that's
congruent
in
the
neighborhood
and
for
the
purposes
of
the
public
and
and
and
the
people
are
listening
today,
I'm
going
to
read
a
few
things.
I
mean
the
first
on
page
two
of
our
guidelines.
The
first
paragraph
is
the
purpose
of
the
design
guidelines
for
boise
residential
historic
districts
is
to
provide
guidance
to
property
owners,
architects,
designers,
builders,
developers,
city
staff
and
historic
preservation,
commission
and
city
council.
H
So
it
really
is
is
a
document
that
in
some
ways
is
hard
difficult
to
read,
but
in
other
ways
it's
not
it's
like.
If
you
just
follow
these
guide
this
guidance,
we
can
help
you
design
a
project
that
will
fit
it
states.
Two
and
I'll
read
this
on
it's
on
page
three,
which
is
the
it
states.
The
new
construction
should
be
contemporary,
but
can
congruence
with
the
existing
buildings
in
their
setting
within
the
historic
district
as
a
whole.
H
H
Eight
of
them
are
one
story
and
very
small,
relatively
small
one
stories.
One
is
a
two
story
on
the
same
side
of
the
street
and
one
has
a
two
story
edition
on
the
back
of
it
or
or
a
story
and
a
half
edition.
So
there's
you
know
eight
single-story
houses
on
this
block
and,
as
you
go
north
in
this,
this
block
the
next.
H
H
The
house
that's
going
to
be
torn
down
is
under
20
feet.
It's
a
single
story
house.
The
house
directly
to
the
north
is
a
flat
roofed
single
story.
I
think
it
it's
probably
10,
maybe
11
feet
at
the
most
and
the
house
directly
to
the
south
of
it
again
is
is
similar
in
size
to
the
current
house,
which
is
under
20
feet.
It
looks
like
I
might,
it
might
be
as
much
as
high
as
20..
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
Also
note
5.3.1
maintaining
the
similarity
of
building
roof
form
and
roof
porches
for
found
on
the
block
when
appropriate.
That's
I
I
don't
feel
they've
been
appropriate
there
because
of
the
height
of
the
roof.
5.3.2
is
the
massing
in
form
similar
to
neighborhood
buildings
and
new
construction,
and
also.
H
H
H
H
Man,
I'm
sure
I'll
just
add
that
I
you
know
I
was
pretty
long-winded
there
and
listed
off
a
bunch
of
things,
but
I'm
trying
to
trying
to
give
direction
to
the
applicant-
and
I
I
don't
see
any
other
way
except
to
move
to
deny
this
there's
too
many
modifications
that
would
be
needed
and
and
making
a
motion
to
defer
this,
because
I
I
do
think
I
don't.
I
don't
think
we
should
see
this
tonight.
I
don't
want
to.
H
K
Madam
chair,
I
guess
I'm
struggling
with
a
couple
things
in
the
application.
The
building
height
is
still
listed
at
32
feet,
but
in
randy's
conversation
he
talked
about
it
at
being
26
feet,
so
I
feel
like
maybe
we
missed
something
there
in
our
information,
but
I'm
still
going
back
to
number
to
commissioner
kazakh's
comment
about
the
garage
and
5.4.8
says:
designing.
Constructing
a
garage
as
part
of
a
primary
building
should
not
be
appropriate,
so
it's
generally
not
appropriate
to
design
and
construct
a
garage
as
part
of
a
primary
building.
D
That
allows
you
to
drive
across
the
sidewalk
to
get
into
the
garage,
but-
and
I
haven't
read
that
section
in
a
while.
So
if
the
period
in
that
is
in
it
makes
it
a
little
bit
confusing,
you
know,
potentially
that's
just
something
that
we
need
to
amend
or
if
it
needs
to
become
a
condition
of
approval,
with
some
sort
of
description
in,
for
you
know,
future
applications.
D
E
I
can
also
comment
if
you
look
at
the
period
of
significance
for
the
historic
districts
they
end
up
to
world
war
ii,
like
basically
world
war
ii.
That's
when
it
ends
and
that's
when
you
have
that
post-war
boom
and
you
have
the
garage
become
attached
to
the
house,
so
that's
kind
of
for
these
historic
districts
that
we're
looking
at
right
now.
If
we
had
a
mid-century
historic
district,
this
would
not
be
in
there
because
it
couldn't
every
single
house
has
a
attached
garage.
E
So
it's
just
a
trend,
the
neighborhood
trend
and
that's,
I
think
what
the
guidelines
are
getting
at
at
the
time
is
that
this
was
the
trend
of
buildings
and
home
styles,
and
so
the
garage
was
always
like
towards
the
the
rear
or
accessed
from
the
alley.
It
was
always
in
the
cases
I
think
in
the
east
end
where
you
might
have
a
garage
that
accesses
from
the
front.
It's
probably
built
around,
that
that
time
frame
in
the
early
40s
to
mid
40s
when
that
that
trend
started
to
change
so.
D
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Madam
chair
members
of
the
commission,
drh21-00472
at
1301,
north
18th
street
is
a
certificate
appropriate
request
to
construct
an
addition
to
an
existing
detached
garage
on
property
and
r1ch
zone.
It
is
in
the
north
end,
historic
district
and
the
classification
is
contributing.
A
A
A
The
addition
to
the
garage,
the
applicant
stated,
the
application
will
be
used
for
a
storage
space
and
you
can
see
in
the
elevations
here.
That's
the
alley
facing
elevation
with
the
garage
doors
on
it.
You
can
see
that
single
story
portion
of
the
garage
adjacent
to
the
neighbor's
property,
with
the
store
and
a
half
addition
extending
to
the
side.
A
D
P
P
Because
they
can't
get
in
the
seagull
car
garage
right
now,
the
the
on
the
other
side
of
the
alley
is
a
garage.
So
and
then
you
have
a
single
door
which
is
fairly
narrow,
so
they
can't
pull
in
so
part
of
adding
on
to
the
garage
is
to
get
them
a
big
18
inch
wide
garage
door,
so
they
can
pull
into
the
garage
and
then
there'll
be
enough
storage
for
their
sporting
equipment
and
yard
equipment.
P
So
we
don't
want
to
tear
down
the
garage.
We
want
to
keep
its
integrity
with
the
brick
and
what
we
will
do
is
with
the
the
portion
of
the
garage
that's
going
to
be
encompassed.
With
addition,
we
will
take
that
brick
and
repurpose
it
and
use
it
on
the
addition.
So
from
the
alley,
the
lower
level
around
the
door
will
be
all
brick
and
then
on
the
west
side,
going
into
the
backyard
that
will
also
be
brick
and
then
we'll
do
stucco
on
in
the
gables
that
match
the
house.
P
P
D
J
D
P
P
P
D
E
Manager,
I'd
like
to
open
that
discussion,
so
the
reason
I
wanted
to
pull
this
off
the
consent
agenda
was
we
don't
look
at
garages
a
lot
and
there's
a
lot
of
garages
that
get
torn
down
or
converted
to
adus
like
they're,
proposing
here
and
garages
can
be
significant
to
the
site
and
our
guidance
that
says:
2.1.4
preserve
existing
historic
garages,
significant
landscape
features
and
auxilia
auxiliary
buildings,
and
actually
this
this
garage
is
a
rare,
brick
garage
in
the
historic
district.
You
don't
see
a
lot
of
them
in
existence.
E
I
mean
I
do
applaud
the
applicant
for
preserving
part
of
it.
What
I'd
I'd
like
to
see-
and
I
probably
will
not
see
but
standard
10-
it
says
new
additions
and
adjacent
or
related
new
construction
shall
be
undertaken
in
such
a
manner
that,
if
removed
in
the
future,
the
essential
form
and
integrity
of
the
historic
property
and
its
environment
would
be
unimpaired.
E
D
D
G
G
I
H
Madam
chair,
just
I
just
to
add
to
the
discussion
I
didn't
speak
up
earlier,
but
it
would
be
helpful
for
us,
and
maybe
this
josh
is
something
for
for
the
future.
If
we
had
reports
of
the
historic
survey
we
used
to
have
those
in
our
packets
of
each
property
and
even
when
additional
outbuildings
or
accessory
buildings
are
on
property
and
even
if
they're,
not
labeled
or
marked
as
contributing
those
surveys
actually
can
give
us
quite
a
bit
of
information.
H
So
often
they
speak
of
the
outbuildings
and
how
it
how
it
may
contribute
to
the
property
itself,
even
if
the
building
itself,
even
if
that
garage
routes
out
building,
is
not
a
contributing
structure
in
the
survey.
So
I
think
in
I.
I
feel
that
in
my
voting
no
on
this
would
it's
I'd
almost
rather
rather
defer
it
like.
I
want
more
information
in
order
for
me
to
appropriately
vote,
because
of
all
the
things
that
that
madam
chair
and
and
the
other
commissioners
have
said
it's
a
it's.
H
I'll,
also
note
that
the
plans
and
the
drawings
that
are
in
the
packet
don't
give
us
a
good
idea
of
what
the
addition
and
it's
going
to
look
like
so
having
a
survey
having
maybe
some
more
detailed
plans
would
be
very
helpful
to
me
as
a
commissioner
to
to.
Hopefully,
you
know,
approve
this
in
a
future
meeting.
G
I
A
This
property
is
in
the
expanded
north
end
and
it
is
contributing
and
we'll
I'll
speak
to
that
a
little
bit
more
later
in
the
presentation,
so
the
applicant
or
the
subject.
Property
is
on
the
northeast
corner
of
ryden
boss
street
and
north
24th
street
contains
a
structure
with
a
attached
garage
currently
accessed
from
ryden
ba
through
a
a
u-shaped
driveway,
and
then
an
accessory
structure
at
the
rear
of
the
property
near
the
alley
containing
an
adu.
A
A
A
A
They
felt
met
the
findings
to
make
the
home
non-contributing
a
status.
Change
is
not
before
you
in
the
request
tonight.
That
would
be
a
separate
subsequent
application,
but
the
applicant,
I
believe,
did
want
to
provide
that
information
for
your
consideration
tonight
in
your
decision,
and
I
believe
they
are.
They
are
available
online
and
want
to
speak
further
on
that
as
well
photo
of
the
existing
home.
This
would
be
from
24th
street.
E
A
I
believe
that
you
can.
I
may
I
may
lean
on
ty
a
little
bit
here
and
I'll
kind
of
do
some
digging
into
the
ordinance
myself
as
well,
but
the
it
is
the
the
commission's
per
you
know.
Status
of
properties
is
the
commission's
purview.
If
there
is
clear
evidence
that
the
property
should
be
non-contributing,
I
believe
you
can
initiate
that
status
change.
Let
me
just
do
a
little
digging
in
the
ordinance
to
make
sure
we're
on
solid
ground
there,
but
I
believe
you
can.
D
Yeah,
I
almost
feel
like,
without
doing
that,
we
can't
prove
any
of
these.
We
wouldn't
be
able
to
prove
any
of
these
changes,
because
they
would
go
against
the
guidelines
that
we
have
in
place
for
historic
structures,
so
it
seems
like
we
would
have
to
do
that.
Otherwise,
you
know
we
wouldn't
be
following
the
guidelines.
H
A
H
A
So,
madam
sheriff
commissioner
koski
I'll
just
kind
of
read
some
excerpts
here
from
the
letter,
real,
quick,
so
upon
careful
review
of
the
information
provided.
Our
office
has
determined
that
the
property
is
not
eligible
for
listing
international
register
historic
places
and
should
be
considered
a
non-contributing
resource
within
the
north
end
residential
historic
district.
Q
Q
So
I
I
was
unaware
that
this
would
not
be
determined
at
the
same
time.
I
because
we
got
deferred-
and
I
thought
part
of
that
was
for
part
of
this.
I
know
that
we
would
want
to
look
at
the
eligibility
before
coming
in
for
certificate
of
appropriateness,
but
we
we've
gone
to
quite
a
few
design
rounds
on
the
house
as
far
as
it's
certificate
of
appropriateness
is
concerned,
to
try
and
address
a
lot
of
the
issues
that
were
going
on
with
the
house.
Q
Q
We,
and
as
far
as
the
front
elevations
of
the
house,
are
concerned,
there
was
a
the
addition,
like
he
indicated
in
2007
that
had
the
angled
roofline
came
out
and
it's
it's
not
really
a
porch
right
there,
it's
an
entry,
there's
some
steps
going
up
and
you
have
a
very
small
vestibule
there
in
front
of
the
front
door
that
was
added
on.
I
have
it
notated
in.
Q
Q
I
think
they
made
a
little
sheltered
area
there,
but
it's
not
necessarily
a
porch
or
patio
or
anything
like
that.
So
we
decided
to
come
in
with
a
roof
line,
that
kind
of
fit
in
better
with
the
neighborhood
and
gave
them
a
little
more
of
a
pedestrian
friendly
elevation
there
and
allow
them
to
interact
with
the
neighborhood
a
little
bit
more,
as
as
it
is
now
that
it's
kind
of
shut
off
at
that
at
the
front
elevation
and
especially
with
the
45
degree,
roof
line.
Q
It's
it's
definitely
doesn't
there's
nothing
else
like
we
could
find
in
the
area
that
has
anything
like
that
and
as
far
as
the
additions
towards
the
back
we're
expanding
the
kitchen.
So
most
of
the
most
of
the
addition
in
the
back
is
towards
the
center
of
the
house,
with
the
exception
of
the
covered
patio
in
the
back.
G
L
Q
Can
have
access
with
a
van
and
be
able
to
get
into
the
space.
There
is
a
detached
garage
at
the
back
and
staff
had
made
some
mentions
of
maybe
doing
a
breezeway
or
something
like
that.
We
looked
at
a
couple
different
options
for
moving
the
garage
more
towards
the
center
of
the
lot
and
accessing
through
there,
but
we
would
have
to
get
rid
of
trees,
large,
mature
trees
that
we
don't
want
to
do
and
probably
wouldn't
be
allowed
to
do
so.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members,
commission.
So
the
ordinance
you
know
has
a
pretty
specific
section
about
change
in
status.
It
says
the
different
information
has
been
provided
to
to
justify
this
change
in
status,
that
the
commission
shall
act
on
the
change
in
status
before
the
certificate
of
appropriateness,
so
it
would
be,
it
would
be
a
motion
and
a
vote
on
the
status
of
the
property
and
then
on
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
itself.
D
R
R
We
are
currently
not
living
in
the
house
because
we've
been
hoping,
hopefully
wanting
to
get
started
on
the
remodel,
but
the
small
garage
we
need
to
have
an
attached
garage.
There
is
an
attached
garage.
As
you
see,
we
need
to
have
an
attached
garage
for
a
handicapped
van,
so
we
can
exit
the
house
safely
during
the
winter
time
when
there's
ice
to
snow.
R
Currently,
if
my
wife
was
in
the
house
alone-
and
I
was
at
the
store,
it's
a
fire
hazard
there-
she
has
very
hard
time
walking
up
and
down
steps
even
with
grab
bars.
She
any
rate
I
would
appreciate
if,
if
you
could
have
a
motion
and
address
the
and
have
the
status
change
to
non-contributing
and
if
you
have
any
other
questions,
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
them.
D
J
Thank
you,
kate,
henwood,
1116,
north
12th
street
yeah.
You
know
when
we
had
originally
reviewed
this.
It
was
with
the
understanding
that
the
home
was
contributing.
So,
as
you
can
imagine,
we
had
many
objections,
but
in
light
of
this
new
information,
I
don't
I
don't
think
we
have
any
major
concerns.
You
know
want
to
make
sure
that
the
side
setback
is
addressed
with
a
variance
and
it
can
be
tricky
on
those
corner.
D
K
I'm
sure
I
have
a
question
for
you
on
the
contributing
factors
the
the
shippo
letter
at
the
bottom.
It
says
that
that
they
cannot
be
a
substitute
for
evaluations
made
at
the
local
level
of
the
city
of
boise
staff
and
the
historical
preservation
commission.
Have
you
done
any
has
staffed
on
any
evaluation
of
whether
this
is
contributing
or
not
contributing.
A
Madam
chair,
commission,
member
otter,
no-
and
I
I
believe
what
they're
alluding
to
is
that
their
determination
cannot
take
the
place
of
the
historic
preservation
commission.
Our
code
gives
the
authority
in
determining
and
changing
status
to
the
stork
preservation.
Commission
specifically,
so
you
know,
I
think
that
was
kind
of
a
disclaimer
that
you
know
they
cannot
change
status.
It
would
have
to
be
an
action
by
the
city
of
boise.
You
know
I.e
the
historic
preservation
commission.
D
R
Yes,
we
want
we've
spent
tens
of
thousands
of
dollars
on
architectural
fees
and
and
to
make
this
a
livable
space
in
our
senior
years,
we're
both
over
70,
and
we
want
to
pass
the
house
on
to
my
son
chris
tillman,
who
is
a
professional
in
boise
and
as
a
I
just
wish.
We
could
get
through
this
a
little
bit
we'll
have
to
go
through
the
proper
steps,
but
we
we
would
certainly
like
to
have
an
approval
and
any
rate.
Thank
you.
D
D
G
H
H
That
being
said,
a
letter
from
state
historic
preservation
office
is
significant,
they're,
the
pros
and
and
noting
that
the
alterations
that
have
been
done
it.
You
can
see
it
from
the
photos
there.
They
have
been
significant
over
time
and
you
know,
like
you
just
said
you
just
we
don't
take
these
lightly.
H
I
also
is
worth
noting
to
us
as
commissioners
when
we're
approving
projects
and
going
forward
with
other
projects
that
we
approve.
We
have
to
keep
in
mind
that
any
any
project
we
approve
on
a
contributing
house
at
the
end
goal
of
that
project.
The
goal
should
be
that
it's
still
a
contributing
house
and
obviously
some
alterations
have
been
significant
alterations,
have
been
on
this
house
that
no
longer
make
it
contributing.
G
H
K
Well,
I
was
just
going
to
say
I
was
looking
for
the
survey
too,
because
I
wanted
to
understand
what
percentage
of
the
houses
were
becoming
non-contributing
in
that
area,
based
on
the
presentation
we
had
last
month
by
actually
by
dan
at
chippo,
that
you
know
you
have
to
maintain
a
certain
percentage
of
contributing
houses
in
the
district
to
maintain
the
district
status.
I
was
interested
to
know
what
the
survey
looked
like,
so
I
was
agreeing
with
commissioner
kozak
that
probably
needed
it
this
time
because
ask
you
sorry.
D
E
H
D
A
Drh21-00517-1706
north
h
street
is
a
request
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
construct
a
second
story
addition
to
an
existing
single-family
home
on
property
in
r1ch
zone
is
in
the
north
end
historic
district,
and
it
is
contributing
you
will
recognize
this
property,
and
that
is
the
wrong
pho.
That
was
the
wrong
aerial
for
that.
But
you'll
recognize
this
property.
A
From
your
hearing
last
month
there
was
an
application
to
change
the
status
from
contributing
to
non-contributing.
That
request
was
denied.
It
was
clear,
I
think
and
acknowledged,
however,
in
that
hearing
that
there
had
been
changes
to
the
home.
It
is
not
in
its
original
configuration
kind
of
has
an
unusual
side-facing
front
door
if
you'll
recall,
but
the
property
does
have
a
attack
or
a
detached
garage
at
the
rear
at
the
alley.
A
A
A
They
have
explored
other
options
for
expanding
the
home
to
meet
the
growing
needs
of
their
family
and
did
not
come
up
with
any
alternative,
any
suitable
alternatives.
Beyond
this,
you
know
the
applicant's
intention
with
the
status
change
was
to
accomplish
this
addition,
but
they
did
not
succeed
in
that
application
and
would
like
to
proceed
with
getting
the
second
story
edition
approved
before
you
tonight
photo
of
the
existing
home
again
that
side
facing
entry
and
the
clipped
gable
facing
the
street.
A
S
S
S
The
big
picture
of
what
we're
looking
for
in
the
certificate
of
approval
is
it's
about
a
500
square
foot
edition
for
which
we're
seeking
approval.
It
does
require
a
four
foot:
height
increase
to
a
contributing
home,
and
I'm
going
to
provide
several
reasons
why
I
believe
that
our
home
is
can
is
uniquely
situated
for
historic
preservation.
Commission
approval
recognizing
that
it's
not
something
in
the
norm
for
this
commission.
S
S
This
is
the
picture
that
mr
wilsham
just
showed
you.
We
are
pretty
much
out
of
options.
We
have
a
really
long
skinny
lot
and
we
have
open
space.
That
is
our
small
backyard
that
we
enjoy
right
now,
that's
about
25
by
40
feet.
I
do
also
point
out
that
we
have
a
very
small
front
yard,
that's
just
a
really
narrow,
narrow
strip,
and
that's
because
the
home
was
include
closed.
S
I
believe
it's
a
pretty
modest
edition.
It's
about
505
square
feet.
Our
entire
home
is
about
1
63
square
feet
right
now,
all
we're
seeking
to
do
up.
There
is
house
those
stairs
to
get
up
there
and
then
a
master
bedroom
closet
and
a
master
bath.
The
idea
is
that,
right
now
our
master
is
in
the
basement.
S
So
if
we
can
get
that
up
to
the
second
story,
then
that
basement
area
can
be
the
space
that
we
want
for
our
kids
as
they
are
11
and
13
to
start
be
able
to
have
slumber
parties
have
friends
over.
You
know
just
kind
of
the
kid
teenager
hangout
space,
along
with
able,
we
would
be
able
to
access
the
closets
that
are
down
there
for
additional
storage.
S
This
is
a
real
traditional
old
house
and
our
kids
closets
are
you
know-
maybe
maybe
this
big,
so
just
typical,
off-season,
clothing
storage
for
them
downstairs
as
they
can.
They
just
are
getting
a
lot
bigger,
so
the
1633
plus
505
square
feet
that
would
put
the
total
square
footage
around
2138
square
feet.
S
S
S
S
S
S
H
S
Thank
you,
commissioner
koski.
I
apologize,
I
feel
more
comfortable
moving
around,
but
so
I
think
that
there
was
no
question
that
the
home
originally
when
built
in
1900,
looked
a
lot
like
this:
a
pyramid
hip
west
facing
entrance
as
all
the
other
homes
on
eighth
street
with
a
porch
and
then
now
we
have
the
clipped
gable
and
the
entrance
has
been
moved
around
to
the
south
side.
S
So
the
home
has
been
significantly
altered
from
1900.
It
is
still
contributing,
but
it
has
been
altered
and
from
our
perspective,
this
should
allow
just
some
latitude
in
permitting
changes
to
accommodate
our
growing
family
and,
from
my
perspective
it.
You
know
it
provides
a
distinguishing
factor
in
addition
to
the
other
factors
that
I've
mentioned
to
others
who
may
come
before
this
commission
and
request
a
height
increase
to
their
contributing
house
again,
there
are
many
unique
factors
that
would
allow
us,
I
believe,
to
just
have
a
modest
increase
of
four
feet.
S
Overall,
I
think
this
is
part
of
what
mr
wilson
provided
to
you,
but
all
of
the
homes
around
us
are
second
story.
Even
with
the
four
foot
increase,
it
would
be
shorter
than
all
of
the
houses
around
us
which
goes
to
what
commissioner
koski
was
speaking
to
in
the
inverse
regarding
not
wanting
to
allow
one
tall
house
with
all
the
short
houses.
D
J
J
So,
while
the
historic
guidelines
don't
explicitly
prohibit
a
second
story,
addition
to
a
contributing
home,
they
do
seem
to
discourage
addition
discourage
additions
that
are
taller
than
an
original
contributing
structure.
So
you
know,
I
think
we
can
agree.
We've
all
seen
far
worse
done
to
our
historic
homes,
simply
for
profit
or
out
of
carelessness,
and
this
is
not
that
our
concern
is
that
the
next
application,
or
the
one
after
that
may
not
be
so
reasonable.
J
And
by
supporting
this
application,
we
worry
about
setting
a
precedent
that
has
the
potential
to
impact
the
approval
of
additions
that
are
not
so
thoughtful
or
modest
and
have
the
potential
to
be
to
have
a
detrimental
impact
to
our
district's
historical
integrity.
So
it's
hard
to
know
with
the
to
what
degree
the
ripple
effect
will
be,
but
it's
surely
not
so
insignificant
that
it
shouldn't
be
given
due
consideration.
J
The
bottom
line
is
that
nina
supports
what
this
family
is
trying
to
accomplish
to
allow
them
to
stay
in
their
home,
and
we
appreciate
the
fact
that
they've
exhausted
all
of
their
possibilities
and
do
not
think
that
this
particular
change
would
be
injurious
to
the
integrity
of
the
historic
district,
particularly
given
that
the
contributing
status
would
remain
intact,
which
was
very
important
to
us.
So
we'll
also
say
we
were
really
pleased
to
see
so
much
neighbor
input
and,
as
applicant
pointed
out,
it
was
all
supportive.
D
S
D
H
D
I
K
Again,
I'd
probably
like
to
see
the
survey,
I
guess
I
would
say
the
house
almost
seems
borderline
to
not
be
contributing
anyway.
I
wasn't
here
for
that
december
16th
meeting
where
so,
it's
already
on
the
border
of
where
contributing
and
non-contributing
is,
and
I
would
like
to
see
a
family
be
able
to
stay
in
their
house.
They've
been
there
for
16
years
and
they
have
kids,
and
I
understand
the
need
for
the
addition.
K
It's
a
small
house
as
it
is,
and
with
all
the
other
neighboring
houses
being
taller
than
it
that
you
know
I'd
love
to
see
the
survey
to
see
if
all
those
other
houses
are
not
contributing
or
where
they
sit
in
in
the
scope
of
things
and
how
many
changes
have
been
made
there.
But
I
I
I
guess
I
would
lean
more
towards
allowing
them
to
to
increase
the
size
of
it
by
four
feet,
just
because
I
think
it's
already
probably
a
borderline
and
we're
probably
going
to
lose
it
as
it
is
and
so
like.
K
E
This
is
really
where
the
city
would
benefit
for
doing
a
comprehensive
survey.
Every
comprehensive
survey
of
this
area-
I
know
the
city
has
said
they
don't
want
to
do
it,
but
it
comes
down
to.
There
have
been
substantial
changes
to
the
historic
district
since
it's
been
surveyed-
and
I
hate
to
say
it
that
those
numbers
if
we
resurveyed,
I
think
our
boundaries
would
be
a
lot
smaller.
E
So
I'm
a
preservationist,
I
want
things
preserved.
They
also
have
to
be
by
law
eligible
for
listing
in
the
national
register
of
historic
places
and
without
the
city
not
committing
to
resurveying.
We
are
making
some
times.
I
think
arbitrary
decisions
based
on
really
old
survey
data
and
we
shouldn't
be
making
those
decisions.
E
D
I
think
you
will.
Unfortunately,
we
do
have
to
work
with
what
we
have
today,
so
we'll
have
to
make
a
motion
based
on
that,
and
I
do
feel
that
the
addition,
depending
on
how
you
look
at
it
that's
somewhat
over
the
power
of
the
house.
I
guess
my
biggest
concern
is
that
which,
which
my
mind
would
make
it
become
potentially
non-contributing.
Is
that
once
it's
on,
you
can't
really
ever
take
it
off
and
the
house
won't
go
back
to
what
it
originally
was.
It's
it's.
D
But
I
I
do
understand
that
there
are
very
very
little
options
in
this
house
and
it's
unfortunate
that
you
know
the
back
can't
be
expanded,
because
it
would
be
a
perfect
opportunity
to
kind
of
tuck
that
addition
away
behind
at
the
back
of
the
house.
But
I
know
that's
been
explored
and
it's
not
an
option
at
this
point
in
time.
H
We
can
talk
about,
you
know
wanting
to
stay
in
the
neighborhood
and
and
all
these
kind
of
great
things
I
live
in
historic
district.
Also,
we
have
to
go
by
the
guidelines.
What's
the
rules
are
that
as
commissioners
that
we've
been
given
in
front
of
us
and
that,
according
to
the
guidelines,
this
addition
doesn't
meet
those.