►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning 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
All
right,
good
evening,
everybody
Welcome
to
work
session
for
August
7th
we've
got
hopefully
a
kind
of
short
evening
ahead
of
us
we'll
see,
but
to
start
us
off,
we
have
minutes
from
July
10th
that
we'll
need
to
accept
so
make
sure
we
get
those
right.
At
the
beginning.
There
item
one
is
cup
2329
for
yesco
LLC
outside
1124,
South,
Roosevelt
Street,
and
it's
a
conditional
use
permit
for
an
electric
messaging
display
sign
associated
with
an
existing
religious
institution
in
the
r1c
single
family,
residential
Zone.
A
We
are
recommending
approval
and
we
can
try
for
consent
on
item
one
item:
two
is
PUD
2319
for
Jeff
Reed
and
that's
at
12,
685
West,
McMillan
Road.
It's
conditional
use
permit
for
a
planned
residential
development,
comprised
of
four
multi-family
units
on
0.32
acres
and
an
r1c
single-family
Zone.
We
are
also
recommending
approval
on
this
and
can
can
try
for
consent.
A
Item
three
is
car
23
8
for
Rock
Solid
civil
at
9797,
West,
Shields,
Ave.
There's
a
couple
permits
associated
with
this,
but
this
first
one
is
a
rezone
of
approximately
0.95
Acres
from
r1c
single
family,
residential
to
r2d,
multi-density
or
medium
density,
residential
with
design
review
accompanying,
that
is,
a
PUD
PUD
23
9
for
10
dwelling
units
and
a
parking
reduction
in
that
pending
r2d
Zone
and
then
finally,
we've
got
a
subdivision:
20
sub
2271,
it's
a
prelim
plat
for
this
residential
sub,
comprise
of
five
single-family
Lots
on
0.95
acres.
A
In
that
pending
Zone,
we
are
recommending
approval,
but
we
do
have
a
SLI
a
recommender,
a
proposed
slight
change
to
condition
number
three.
So
we'll
briefly
hear
that
one
item
four,
we
will
be
hearing
as
well
at
CVA,
23
8
for
the
city
of
Boise
fire
department
and
that's
at
6124,
North,
North,
Bogart
Lane.
It's
a
variance
to
encroach
the
side
setback
for
an
access
drive
on
2.1
acres
and
a
c2d
General
commercial
with
design
review
Zone.
A
We
are
recommending
approval,
but
we
do
have
a
slight
modification
to
one
of
the
conditions
that
we
would
like
to
propose.
So
we'll
be
briefly
hearing
that
one
as
well
item
five
cup
2327
for
Reina
gibard.
At
8277
North
Andy
Lane,
it's
a
conditional
use
permit
to
add
eight
additional
units
to
an
existing
manufactured
home
community
on
3.8
acres
and
an
r1c
single-family
residential
Zone.
A
We
are
recommending
approval
and
can
try
for
consent
and
then
last
but
not
least,
is
item
six
sub
2316
for
Leone
Hills
subdivision
number:
two:
that's
at
3773
North,
Cartwright
Road.
It's
a
prelim
and
final
plat
for
residential
subdivision,
comprised
of
four
buildable
Lots
on
9.35
acres
and
an
r1b
single-family
residential
and
A1
open
land
Zone.
We
are
recommending
approval
and
can
try
for
consent
so
again
to
go
through
that.
We
have
minutes
and
items
one
two
five
and
six.
B
We
are
a
citizen
volunteers,
appointed
by
the
mayor
and
appointed
by
the
city
council.
We
make
final
decisions
on
conditional
use,
permits,
variances
and
appeals
and
recommendations
to
the
city
council
on
subdivisions,
rezones,
annexations
and
code
or
comprehensive
plan
amendments.
Any
decision
made
tonight
may
be
appealed
to
the
city
council,
provided
that
the
appeal
is
filed
within
10
days
of
this
hearing.
In
order
to
file
an
appeal
you
must
have
given
written
or
oral
testimony
at
tonight's
meeting.
So
that's
why
it
is
important
to
give
your
name
and
address
when
you
testified
tonight.
B
B
Without
further
public
comment
for
items
not
on
the
consent
agenda,
we
will
hold
a
full
public
Hearing
in
the
order
just
detailed
a
few
minutes
ago
with
staff,
applicant
neighborhood
association
and
then
the
public
testimony.
Thank
you
for
all
for
attending
tonight's
meeting
with
a
clerk.
Please
call
the
rule.
B
B
B
Foreign,
so
asking
if
there
are
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
Staff
report
is
not
going
to
happen.
Okay
I,
don't
see
anybody
on
the
on
Zoom
or
in
the
chambers.
So
without
objection
item
number
one
will
go
to
the
consent
agenda.
Let
me
back
up.
Are
there?
Is
there
anybody
here
tonight
who
wishes
to
testify
in
opposition
to
item
number
one
or
online
just
to
make
sure
seeing
that
now
we
can
go
ahead
and
move
item
number
one
to
the
consent
agenda.
B
All
right
up.
Next
item
number
two
put
PUD
23-19
located
at
12,
685
West,
McMillan
Road,
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
planned
residential
development
is
the
applicant
in
attendance
or
online.
You
are
okay.
Are
you
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
staff
report?
Yes,
let
the
record
reflect
that
the
applicant
is
in
attendance
and
is
in
agreement
with
the
tournament
the
condition
of
the
staff
report.
Is
there
anybody
in
the
chambers
or
online
who
wishes
to
testify
in
opposition
to
the
item
all
right?
Seeing
none!
B
B
Next
up
is
item
number
five
cup
23-27
located
at
8277,
North,
Andy
Lane,
a
conditional
use
permit
to
add
eight
additional
units
to
an
existing
manufactured
community
is
the
applicant
in
attendance.
Yes,
you
are
and
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
Staff
report?
Yes,
you
are
let
the
record
reflect
that
the
applicant
is
in
Chambers
and
is
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
the
staff
report.
Is
there
anybody
in
the
chambers
or
online
who
wishes
to
testify
in
opposition
to
item
number
five
cup
23-27.
B
B
Yes,
you
are
and
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
staff
report?
Let
the
record
reflect
that
the
applicant
is
in
attendance
and
does
agree
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
staff
report.
Is
there
anybody
in
Chambers
or
online,
who
wishes
to
testify
in
opposition
to
item
number
six
SUV
23-16.
D
Blanchard
I
move
that
we
move
item
one
cup,
2329
item
number,
two
PUD
2319
item
five
cup
23-27
and
item
number,
six
SUV
2316,
as
well
as
the
meeting
minutes
from
July
10th
to
the
consent
agenda.
E
B
C
B
B
F
The
applicant
is
requesting
to
rezone
the
property
from
r1c
to
r2d,
along
with
a
planned
unit,
development
consisting
of
10
residential
dwelling
units
comprised
of
four
duplexes
and
two
single-family
homes
with
a
parking
reduction
and
a
subdivision
containing
five
buildable
Lots
is
also
included.
The
subject.
Property
is
0.95
acres
in
size
and
located
at
9797
West
Shields
Avenue.
The
surrounding
area
is
comprised
of
residential
neighborhood,
containing
detached
single-family
houses,
apartments
and
a
manufactured
home
Community,
an
irrigation
canal,
abuts
the
property
to
the
South.
F
F
As
previously
stated,
the
development
is
comprised
of
four
single-story
duplexes
along
the
south
side
of
the
property,
which
would
take
access
from
Kate
Street,
in
addition
to
single-family
homes,
on
one
parcel
that
a
butt
Shields
Avenue
is
also
included
with
the
development.
The
applicant
is
also
proposing
a
12
foot,
wide
multi-use
path
on
the
adjacent
to
the
south
of
the
property
of
budding
the
irrigation
canal.
In
summary,
the
subdivision,
Pioneer
development
and
parking
and
park
induction
comply
with
the
required
findings
as
per
the
development
code.
F
This
includes
the
design
standards,
open
space
requirements
and
perimeter
setbacks.
The
specific
the
specifics
of
the
project
are
detailed
within
the
project
report
and
and
and
affirm
this
this,
the
the
staff's
recommendation.
However,
the
applicant
is
requesting
to
remove
a
specific
condition:
the
helping
request
to
remove
the
recommended
condition
of
approval
number
three,
which
will
require
pathway
be
installed
prior
to
the
recording
the
final,
the
applicant
or
the
planning
team
included
this
condition,
because
without
it
there's
no
guaranteed,
the
pathway
would
be
installed
after
the
development
is
completed
and
subdivided.
F
According
to
the
Ada
County
Assessor
parcel
map,
the
irrigation
canal
is
located
within
an
improved
right
away,
as
you
can
see
on
the
map,
and
you
can
tell
where
the
parcel
where
that
parcel
or
the
irrigation
canal
does
Connect
into
Horseshoe
Bend
Road
there's
no
parcel
line
separating
it,
so
it
is
according
to
this
map,
unimproved
right
away.
F
F
Alternatively,
the
planning
team
suggests
that
the
condition
be
modified
to
to
as
what's
stated
here.
Essentially,
it
adds
the
LA
it
at.
It
adds
the
last
aspect
of
this,
which
is
on
the
states
that
unless
the
applicant
can
demonstrate
that
the
adjacent
parcel
to
the
South
is
not
publicly
owned,
so
you
know,
in
other
words,
they
would
have
to
do
it
unless
they
can
demonstrate
that
it's
that
indeed,
it's
not
public.
You
know
not
right
away
and
is
indeed
private
property,
because
the
staff
cannot
require
improvements
on
somebody
else's
land.
F
So,
in
conclusion,
the
planning
team
recommends
approval
of
the
rezone
subdivision
PUD,
with
the
with
the
parking
reduction
as
as
with
the
modified
conditions.
I
would
also
note
that
Dane
with
our
Pathways
program
manager
is
online
to
ask
to
answer
any
questions
you
might
have
regarding
pathways.
B
G
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Jim
Jewett
4123,
West,
Garnet,
Street,
Boise,
Idaho
I
want
to
thank
Dave
for
his
presentation
there
and
his
workability
with
me
through
this
whole
process.
His
knowledge
was
very
helpful
in
me
understanding
this
process.
G
One
further
clarification
on
this
timing.
My
issue
also
is
constructing
a
pathway
that
goes
nowhere
and
there
is
no
connectivity
to
it
now
and
my
concern
in
constructing
it
before
I
record.
G
The
final
plot
is
that,
if
the
rest
of
the
pathway,
which
would
be
built
by
the
city,
reportedly,
if
it's
years
out,
that
whatever
I
built
will
deteriorate
with
weed
growth
and
weeds
coming
through
it,
because
it's
right
next
to
a
canal
with
water,
so
my
concern
is
not
being
there
when
it's
done
it's
behind
a
fence,
it's
going
to
encourage
possible
unwanted
activity.
So
my
proposal
was
some
sort
of
a
bond
trust
fund
or
possibly
charitable
contribution
that
would
allow
the
city
to
build
my
section
once
they
got
ready
to
build
the
entire
section.
G
So
I
appreciate
the
staff's
additional
comment
that
I
wouldn't
have
to
do
it
under
the
private
ownership,
because
there
is
a
there
is
an
issue
there
because
we're
researching
it
as
we're
going
now.
It's
kind
of
on
the
Fly
here,
but
I
think
that
I
would
rather
just
find
some
way
of
either
Bond
trust,
funding
it
or
charitable
contribution.
So
my
portion
could
simply
be
built
when
the
city
is
ready
to
build
the
entire
section.
B
Any
questions
great,
if
you
could
just
hang
tight
and
make
sure
I
need
to
turn,
make
sure
the
neighborhood
association,
Northwest
neighborhood
association,
anybody
I,
don't
see
anybody
in
line
nobody's
been
in
Chambers
that
we
had
no
record
of
them
wanting
to
testify.
So
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
the
commission
for
any
questions.
F
Oh
yes,
Mr
Chairman's,
commissioner
Dane.
Our
our
Pathways
program
manager
is
available
online
I
believe
yeah.
H
My
question
is:
what's
our,
how
have
we
handled
this
in
previous
developments?
We
just
recently
I,
remember
just
a
recent
meeting
hearing
where
we
entitled
a
pathway
project
same
same
path
on
the
South
Side,
and
we
handled
that
with
the
same
condition
as
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
where
what
are
we?
What
are
we
doing
differently
here?
I,
wonder
if
staff
could
answer
that
I.
F
Could
initially
try
and
then
I?
Maybe
Dane
could
follow
up
how
we've
handled
the
on
Pathways,
along
this
section
before
some
of
those
Pathways
may
have
been
on
on
actually
on
private
property,
for
instance,
like
the
the
manufactured
home
Community
was
crossing
private
property,
so
it
hands
a
little
bit
differently
in
that
situation,
whereas
if
it's
in
right
away,
although
they
no
matter
what
you're
still
going
to
have
to
the
city,
will
still
have
to
negotiate
a
license
agreement
with
the
easement
holders
for
the
irrigation
to
get
it
in
there.
F
But
none
of
the
the
life,
the
easement
holder
or
the
irrigation
folks
said
that
they
would
be
opposed
to.
They
just
said
they
had
to
get
into
a
license
agreement:
I
I!
Let
I'll
stand
for
for
Dane.
If
you
had
any
additional
follow-up.
H
Mr,
chair,
Mr,
Mooney
I'll,
follow
up
on
the
applicant's
recruit
or
suggestion
of
a
funding,
alternative
kind
of
a
trust
for
what's
what's
the
right
terminology
for
that,
I
guess
for
staff.
F
It's
your
member
commission,
there
would
be
some
sort
of
it
would
be
a
fund
or
a
sort
of
similar
to
what
I
guess.
If
you
look
at
what
the
parks
department
has
for
their
tree
mitigation,
where
they
would
pay
into
a
fund
that
would
that
goes
and
that
fund
would
go
towards
a
planting
of
additional
trees.
Unfortunately,
we
have
nothing
in
existence
for
this
type
of
thing
right
now,
so
there
is
no
fund
or
mechanism
for
us
to
take
it.
F
D
Mr,
chair
Mr
Blanchard
question
for
staff
David.
Is
there
a
reason
we
don't
have
something
from
the
Irrigation
District
in
the
packet.
F
Mr
chair
members
of
commission,
we,
we
did
not
actually
receive
anything
from
Boise
Valley
irrigation.
Ditch
we
did
receive
something
from
Ada
from
the
Ada
County,
ditch
drainage
dish,
number
two
who
also
owns
uneasement
across
that
they
were
both
transmitted
I.
Don't
know
why
the
one
didn't
what
the
one
didn't
follow
up.
They
they
provided
me
comments
on
the
on
the
property
just
down
the
block
from
this.
H
Mr,
chair
I
got
a
question
Mr
Moon
regarding
parking,
a
question
for
staff.
Total
total
is
20
required.
Could
you
walk
through
that?
Because
my
reading
of
the
of
our
code
is
that
a
single
family
up
front
home
in
the
front
two
spots
required
and
then,
as
I
read
it,
the
applicant
is
describing
the
other
residents
as
an
Adu,
not
a
single
family
home.
So
that's
one
versus
two
okay,
so
just
rolling
through
the
numbers
sure.
F
Mr
Mr
remembers:
commission
the
the
home
in
the
front
has
been
since
modified
from
an
Adu
to
a
single
family.
It's
just
a
it's
a
process
of
trying
to
get
it
built
quicker.
F
You
know
and
not
actually
have
the
under
our
current
code,
the
deed
restriction
attachment
to
it
and
the
Pud
allows
for
two
single-family
homes
on
one
par.
So
this
so
it
removes
the
deed
restriction
aspect
and
since
now
it's
a
single
family,
it
requires.
It
also
requires
two.
So
you
need
two
per
each
duplex
and
then
two
for
each
single
family,
home.
H
So
we're
pretty
short
on
parking,
which
is
gonna,
be
an
issue
probably
for
or
could
be
an
issue
for
Neighbors.
There's
a
comment
in
the
report
that
the
bike
parking
alleviates,
the
the
shortfall.
Can
you
expand
on
that.
F
It
helps
alleviate
Mr,
chairman
of
the
commission.
The
bike
parking
for
each
duplex
does
help.
It
helps
alleviate
the
park.
Some
of
the
parking
impacts
per
se
plus
there's
on
street
parking
along
Kate
Street,
it
is
33
back,
occur
back
a
curb
that
they're
building
back
there
and
there
is
on
street
parking
in
the
neighborhood,
as
you
continue
down
Kate
street.
That
will
also
help
alleviate
the
impacts
of
this
I
would
also
note
you
know
they.
They
are
proposing
at
some
point
we'll
get
a
pestering
or
multi-use
pathway
directly
adjacent
to
this.
F
That
will
connect
to
it
on
the
adjacent
parcel.
So
at
some
point
in
the
future,
we'll
have
a
connection
to
a
larger
pathway
Network
through
the
area.
So
I
think
you
know,
given
that
that
there
are,
there
is
justification
for
the
parking
reduction.
F
I
would
also
note
that
you
know,
given
the
modern
zoning
code,
rewrite
that
was
just
approved
by
Council.
That
in
itself
is
a
will
ultimately
change
the
parking
standards
for
duplexes
and
and
multi-family
greatly
reducing
it.
H
Is
your
last
question
Mr
Mooney,
so
cap
question
for
the
applicant,
so
regarding
that
pipe
bike,
parking
discussion
and
the
the
auto
parking
reduction,
would
you
be
agreeable
to
secure
bike
storage
on
these
duplex
Lots.
G
Commissioner,
Rooney
at
let's
define
what
that
means
simply
in
a
cabinet
so
that
it
would
be
not
or
lockable
I
guess.
I
need
to
have
some
clarification.
What
that
would
mean.
H
Yes,
yeah
in
a
cabinet,
a
lockable
cabinet,
something
that
you
see
in
a
lot
of
urban
areas
where,
for
example,
if
someone
moves
into
this
duplex
and
they've
got
an
e-bike
because
they've
been
told
they
don't
have
a
parking
space
and
they
and
they
don't
want
their
e-bike
stolen
because
they're
expensive,
they
put
it
in
a
cabinet.
Basically
that
protects
the
bike
from
the
elements
and
is
secure.
Would
you
be
interested
in
doing
something
like
that?
I.
A
I
I
I'm
not
sure
so
the
phrase
covered
bicycle
parking
spaces
is
used
in
the
report
and
presumably
as
some
meaning
to
the
city
in
the
code
or
whatnot
I'm,
not
sure
what
a
bicycle
cabinet
I
don't
know
how,
like
so
we're
going
to
put
in
a
condition
you're
suggesting
we
put
in
a
condition
that
says
the
applicant
provide
one
secure
covered
bicycle
parking
space
per
dwelling
unit
for
four
of
them
right,
so
that
would
be
four
total.
Is
that
or
is
it
eight
total
I'm?
Sorry.
H
Yeah
Mr:
that's
that's
effectively.
What
I'm,
suggesting
and
I
recognize
the
code
doesn't
cover
this
and
I
think
that's
a
gap
in
our
code
that
we
don't
have
a
means
to
start
asking
applicants
to
consider
Secure
Storage
for
expensive
bicycles.
We
do
it
for
cars
can
be
locked.
Bikes
can't
very
well
be
locked
when
they're,
expensive,
right
right
right
right.
I
F
Mr,
chair
of
members
of
the
commission,
that
that
is
correct,
I
mean
they'll,
be
required
to
provide
a
bike
rack.
So
one
bicycle
parking
space
per
unit,
but
that's
just
one
of
the
standard
Hoops
they.
If
there's
space,
to
locate
it
under
the
you
know
under
the
carport,
then
they
could.
You
know
they
could
squeeze
it
in.
There,
then
that's
possible,
but
it
is
nothing
so.
I
F
Would
actually
have
that
as
a
condition,
so
they
would
have
to
find
a
spot
for
it
on
site,
probably
next
to
the
parking
for
each
duplex.
I
G
Mr
chairman
commissioner
Gillespie
The,
Standard
Parking,
that
that
is
required.
We
do
in
almost
every
multi-unit
building
and
it's
just
a
standard
hoop.
We
pour
into
an
area
next
to
the
entry
sidewalk.
So
it's
just
an
area
we
provide
and
they
they
lock
up
a
cabinet.
We
would
probably
have
to
design
it
into
the
building.
So
we'd
have
to
look
for
closet
space
or
somehow
modify
the
building
to
have
a
cabinet
where
the
bikes
would
go
up
vertical
and
it'd
be
hooked
onto
a
hook.
G
That
would
be
the
easiest
way
to
store
and
we
would
have
an
owner's
cabinet
somewhere
in
our
design
as
far
as
with
a
carport.
So
we
would
just
incorporate
it
in
that
same
area,
the
same
storage
area
we
just
would
put
a
bike
hook
than
in
there,
but
then
that
limits
them
to
that
one
and
only
well.
We
would
probably
put
the
other
one
in
we'd,
probably
put
them
both
in
Mr.
I
B
H
F
H
G
B
I
F
Mr
chair
members
of
commission,
as
far
as
the
carports,
you
could
just
modify
that
condition
too
that
it
that
the
plans
need
to
be
revised
to
show
this
preferred
before
going
on
to
designer
View,
and
this
will
go
design
review
as
well
and
they'll.
Look
at
the
location
as
well.
You.
B
And
I
guess
one
of
our
commissioners
is
taking
good
notes
on
what
that
condition.
Might
look
like.
Okay.
If
that
concludes
all
of
our
questions,
then
we
can
go
ahead
and
open
it
up
to
public
testimony
and
it
looks
like
we
have
nobody
online
and
I'm
pretty
sure
nobody
in
Chambers.
B
Means
that
I
also
need
to
undo
what
I
did
this
early
right?
Okay
bear
with
me,
Commissioners
I
made
a
mistake:
I
need
to
read
into
the
record
our
hybrid
introduction,
unless
you
want
to
do
it.
A
So
we
do
allow
virtual
testimony.
You
can
raise
your
hand
which
you
are
doing
Mr
satterberg,
but
each
member
of
the
public
is
allowed
up
to
three
minutes.
We
are
stripped
at
this
time
as
it
is
limited
in
code
and
finally,
the
applicant
will
be
allowed
five
minutes
for
bottle,
after
which
the
hearing
will
be
closed
and
the
commission
will
deliberate.
The
chat
function
in
Zoom
is
not
a
part
of
the
record
and
should
only
be
used
if
technical
difficulties
arise
and
I
will
unmute
you
when
you
are
called
upon.
A
B
Let's
clarify
that
for
sure
you're
wanting
to
testify
on
this
item.
This
is
item
number
three
James.
Are
you
with
us
Mr.
J
B
J
All
right
so
I'm
here
then
I
just
joined
apologies,
but
I
saw
a
sign.
That
said,
there
was
a
public
hearing
about
an
electronic
sign
going
up
in
our
neighborhood
and.
B
It
touches
okay,
so,
on
that
note,
Ms
shutterberg,
we
that
was
item
num
number
one
of
our
agenda
this
evening,
and
that
item
has
already
had
action
taken
on
it.
It
was
on
our
consent
agenda
for
approval
earlier
this
evening.
B
G
Jewett
4123
West,
Garnet,
Street,
Boise,
Idaho,
okay,
no
I,
don't
think
I.
B
H
With
a
change
in
condition,
number
four
that
currently
States
one
bike
parking
space
shall
we
installed
per
duplex
unit.
This
space
shall
provide
two
points
of
contact
and
meet
all
development
code
standards
change
to
read
one
secure
bike,
parking,
secure,
enclosed
bike
parking
space
shall
be
installed
per
duplex
unit.
This
space
shall
provide.
H
B
Okay,
real
quick
commissioner
Mooney
I
think
we've
got
that.
The
other
item
that
was
discussed
was
the
opposition
and
the
pr
the
potential
change
that
staff
offered
any
thoughts
on
that
before
we
move.
Look
for
a
second
I.
B
D
Mr
chair
commissioner
Blanchard.
Perhaps
commissioner
Mooney
would
just
accept
a
friendly
amendment
that
we
on
his
motion
that
we
approve
or
add
the
modified
condition
of
approval,
three
that
requiring
the
12-foot
wide
multi-use
pedestrian
pathway
unless
the
applicant
can
demonstrate
the
adjacent
property
is
not
publicly
owned.
I
think
if
we
tack
that
in
there
with
his
concerns
over
the
bike
parking,
we
might
be
able
to
get
a
second.
B
B
H
Thanks
to
Mr
Jewett
for
a
great
project
and
and
I
think
everything
that
we've
handled
here
with
the
two
adjusted
conditions
complies
with
the
intent
of
the
code.
B
E
E
But
generally
you
know
if,
if
there
is
opportunity
to
put
in
those
Pathways
I
think
it's
important
to
do
so.
It's
supported
by
the
comprehensive
plan
and
and
just
numerous
kind
of
items
from
that
plan,
and
so
that's
kind
of
wanted
to
support
that
motion.
If
possible,.
D
Just
real
quick,
Mr,
chair,
Mr,
Blanchard,
yeah
I,
appreciate
you
taking
the
time
to
find
out.
If
that
is,
we
can't
compel
you
to
do
anything
if
it
is
private
property.
So
thanks
for
taking
the
time
on
that,
we
are
pretty
insistent
on
the
pathways.
Obviously,
one
of
the
things
that
came
out
the
zoning
code
rewrite
is
that
residents
were
really
concerned
that
a
lot
of
times.
D
We
approve
these
kinds
of
projects
and
we
say
oh
and
we're
going
to
get
a
pathway
and
then
the
development
doesn't
happen
and
then
the
pathway
never
happens,
and
then
everybody
comes
back
and
is
frustrated
with
us.
So
that's
one
of
the
reasons
there's
also
a
ton
of
development,
as
you
know,
going
on
over
there
on
Shields
in
utahna,
so
so
much
of
that
has
gone
down
and
I,
at
least
at
least
from
my
perspective.
D
It's
that
we're
kind
of
making
a
hash
of
that
streetscape
over
there.
Frankly
and
that's
for
Jimmy
to
settle
but
anyways
I
think
we
all
want
to
see
that
pathway
there,
because
we
really
need
to
get
to
some
kind
of
consistent
streetscape
over
there
on
Shields,
because
there's
been
so
much
development
and
then
yeah,
we
don't
have
any
way
of
doing
a
fee
in
lieu
of
a
program
that
you
were
talking
about,
which
is
something
I
know.
D
B
B
F
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair
members
of
the
commission.
I
will
try
to
keep
this
short.
The
application
before
you
tonight
is
a
variance
for
from
a
for
a
service
drive
to
encroach
into
the
north
side
property
line
for
the
site
located
at
6124
North
Bogart
Lane
in
a
c2d
Zone.
The
property
is
located
at
the
intersection
of
Bogart
Lane
and
State
Street
and
will
be
developed
as
fire
station
number
13..
In
summary,
the
variance
complies
all
the
required
findings
as
per
the
development
code.
F
The
modification
to
this
condition
is
simple,
and
it
basically
is
to
remove
the
requirement
for
a
direct
connection
to
Bogart
lane
or,
quite
simply,
just
remove
the
word
direct
from
the
condition.
The
reason
for
this
is
that
the
property
owner
to
the
north,
who
has
allowed
for
the
property
and
the
pedestrians
to
cross
onto
is
onto
is
a
onto
a
site
through
a
public
access.
Easement
refuses
to
have
any
changes
occurred
to
his
property,
so
they
can't
physically
change
the
site
to
provide
more
of
a
direct
access.
F
K
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
commission,
my
name
is
Sarah
Shafer
I'm
at
150,
North
Capitol,
Boulevard
I'm,
with
the
planning
I'm
actually
with
the
public
works
department,
we're
in
agreement
with
a
modified
condition.
I
spoke
with
the
property
owner
to
the
north
again
this
morning,
they're
in
agreement
with
the
cross
access.
However,
they
don't
want
to
modify
the
fence
line
that
runs
along
Bogart
to
add
that
additional
connection
up
to
the
bogart
sidewalk
and
would
like
for
us
just
to
use
existing
sidewalk,
that's
in
place.
B
B
H
Mooney,
sorry,
I,
guess
I'm
hearkening
back
to
hardship
and
there's
not
a
whole
lot
of
hardship
on
this
flat
parcel.
It
seems
the
hardship
is,
there's
an
existing
access
point
and
we're
not
willing
to
move
it.
I
don't
is
I
I,
guess
my
questions
for
staff.
Did
we
lay
out
the
turn
rate
eye
and
and
the
whole
site
plan
to
site
decide
that
it
was
okay
to
do
this.
F
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission:
it's
not
really
a
hardship,
it's
an
exceptional
circumstance
in
this
case,
and
it's
in
its
regard
to
that
they
have
to
push
I
mean
there's
there.
The
building
has
to
go
in
a
particular
location,
given
setbacks
and
easements
and
everything
else,
and
they
have
to
push
the
the
access
point
as
far
north
as
possible
to
allow
for
the
Turning
radiuses
of
the
fire
trucks
to
maneuver
back
into
the
service.
Bays
I
haven't
looked
at
the
the
turning
radiuses
myself
I'm,
trusting
that
Public
Works
in
the
fire
department.
F
You
know
they're
telling
me
that
it
won't
work
unless
they,
unless
they
have
it
here
and
moving
it
anywhere
more
further
south
interferes
with
the
ability
of
the
fire
trucks
to
make
that
maneuver
So.
Based
on
that,
it's
not
really
a
hardship.
You
write
it
as
a
flat
parcel,
but
it
is
an
exceptional
circumstance
to
the
intended
use.
B
B
Going
once
going
twice:
okay,
okay,
let's
go
ahead
and
open
it
up
to
public
testimony
doesn't
see
anybody
online.
Nobody
in
Chambers
public
testimonies,
closed
any
rebuttal
that
you'd
like
to
offer.
Okay
sounds
good
with
that.
The
item
is
before
the
commission
item
number
four
CVA
23-08
located
at
6124,
North
North.
J
J
D
Blanchard
David,
can
you
put
our
recommended.
D
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr
chair
I
move
that
we
approve
CVA
23-08
for
the
variance
to
approach
the
side
setback
at
6124,
North,
Bogart
Lane,
to
include
the
modification
of
approval
number
three
so
that
The
Pedestrian
and
bike
Pathways
shall
provide
a
connection
to
the
sidewalk
along
Bogart
Lane.
We.
B
B
H
I'm,
not
in
support
of
the
variants
that
I
I
just
don't
think,
there's
enough
information
in
the
project
package
to
understand
the
turn
radii.
If,
if
that
would
have
had
been
there
in
in
the
site,
you
could
show
me
that
that's
the
only
reason
for
it
then
I
would
be
voting
in
favor
of,
but
it's
not
there
and
so
I'm
any
other
applicant.
We
would
ask
them
to
move
that
access
point
so
I'm,
not
in
favor.