►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Commission - 3/1/21
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Hey
everyone
yeah
all
right
tonight.
I
think
the
main
event
will
be
work
session.
To
be
honest,
I
think
it's
gonna
be
a
quick
night
so
quickly.
I
just
wanna
do
introductions.
We
have
a
new
commissioner
virtually
attending
tonight
chris
danley.
Well,
I
should
say
new
old
commissioner
or
old
new
commissioner.
How
do
you
want
to
be
described
chris?
B
I
don't
know
so
if
everyone
wants
to
go
around
and
do
quick
introductions,
I
don't
know
how
maybe
how
long
you've
been
on
the
commission
what
you
do,
that
kind
of
thing
just
and
then
one
of
these
days
we'll
get
back
in
person
and
have
you
know
normal
conversations
like
normal
humans,
but
yeah
meredith,
yeah.
A
Kick
us
off
sure
welcome,
commissioner
danley
super
excited
to
have
you
aboard
I'm
meredith
stead,
I'm
currently
serving
as
the
chair.
A
I've
been
on
the
commission
for
about
three
years,
and
this
is
I'm
just
starting
my
second
term
as
the
chair
my
day,
job
is
with
boise
valley,
economic
partnership
in
marketing,
and
that's
it
I'll
pass
it
over
to
jennifer
and
she
can
pass
it
on
to
the
next.
C
Sure
so
I'm
jennifer
moore-
and
this
is
my
first
year
on
the
commission,
been
on
there
since
right
at
a
year.
I
guess
and
then
I'm
an
architect
for
cool
architects.
D
Hi
people
hi
chris
welcome
I'm
chris
blanchard.
I
just
completed
my
first
year,
commissioner
moore
and
I
were
appointed
at
the
same
time.
Last
year.
I
work
for
indy,
dwell,
yeah
doing
sales
and
marketing.
So
welcome
glad
to
have
you.
A
Yes,
mel
give
us
an
intro
for,
for
commissioner.
E
I
know
chris
because
I
served
on
the
commission
with
chris,
so
chris
I
can't
remember
how
long
I've
been
on
the
commission.
I
really
can't,
but
I'm
so
glad
you're
back
and
you
know
welcome
and
thank
you
so
much
for
your
service
to
the
city
and,
for
you
know,
all
you've
done
for
this
community
for
a
long
long
time,
and
I
I'm
anxious
to
catch
up
with
you
in
person
and
hear
about
all
that
all
of
your
adventures.
E
The
last
time
I
think
I
saw
you,
you
had
a
small
office
in
the
it's,
not
the
alaska
building,
it's
where
the
rose
room
is,
and
it's
just
great
to
see
you
again
and
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
celine
to
pass
to
somebody.
I
think
we
should
make
james
talk,
because
I
see
him
sitting
back
there
in
the
corner
and
and
he
he
deserves
to
say
a
few
words.
Thank
you.
F
Thank
you,
milt,
I'm
james
smith,
chris
welcome.
I
I'm
one
of
the
attorneys
in
city
legal
assigned
to
cover
these
meetings.
So
it's
it's
really
great.
To
have
you
great
to
have
new
commissioners,
we
have
a
fantastic
training,
lined
up
for
your
work
session,
sir,
and
over
to
commissioner
schaefer.
G
Thank
you
james
welcome
chris,
I'm
bob
schaefer,
I'm
currently
serving
as
co-chair
I'm
in
year
three,
I
guess
or
my
second
year
and
I'm
a
landscape
architect.
I
work
for
the
land
group
out
in
eagle,
so
welcome
or
welcome
back.
I
guess,
as
the
case
may
be,
and
then
with
that
I'll
pass
it
over
to
janelle.
H
Thank
you.
I
am
jenelle
finfrock
I've
been
on
the
commission
for
a
little
over
two
years.
I
think,
and
I
am
a
litigation
paralegal
for
parsons
bailey
and
vladimir.
B
And
then
we
are
missing
ashley
squires
tonight,
hopefully
she'll
be
with
us
next
week,
but
actually
works
with
the
meridian
urban
renault
agency
and
some
other
private
work.
I'm
sure
I'm
not
covering
her
extensive
resume
as
well
as
she
could,
but
I
believe
most
of
you
know
ashley
and
I
really
want
to
know
what
mel's
doing
with
his
plant.
I.
B
Yeah
and
chris,
why
don't
you
introduce
yourself
to
everyone.
F
B
I
Well,
you
can
hear
me,
I
assume
yes,
okay,
great
well,
my
name
is
chris
danley
and,
as
was
discussed,
this
is
indeed
my
second
time
around.
The
fun
fact
is
milt
and
I
were
appointed
on
the
very
same
night
x
number
of
years
ago.
Milt.
I
don't.
I
think
it
was
about
I'm
gonna
say
about
seven
or
eight,
something
like
that
anyway.
My
first
go-around
I
served
about.
I
I
think
it
was
a
little
over
three
years
and
enjoyed
the
process
and
know
what
I'm
in
for
and
know
what
you
all
have
been
through,
and
so
my
appreciation
slash
condolences,
it's
a
difficult
task,
but
we
all
do
it
for
our
individual
reasons
and
I'm
guessing
for
our
love
of
this
city
that
we
live
in,
and
I
am
a
planner
urban
planner
by
trade.
I
I
have
a
small
consulting
company
that
I've
had
now
for
over
a
decade
and
we
do
a
lot
of
work
in
the
world
of
planning
and
health
integration,
everything
that
has
to
do
with
health.
From
you
know,
physical,
social,
environmental,
economic
and
on
and
on
and
on.
We
do
a
lot
of
things
in
the
world
of
walkability
and
transportation
and
a
few
other
things
and
so
been
in
the
city
for
15
years
as
a
resident
and
have
two
little
ones
at
home,
and
that's
probably
about
it.
I
I
mean
there's
more
to
come
as
we
get
to
know
each
other
and
I'm
really
looking
forward
to
the
days
when,
yes,
we
can
all
sort
of
sit
around
and
have
a
good
conversation
in
person
and
and
share
the
free
pizza
that
we,
we
all
you
know,
look
forward
to
for
our
for
our
compensation,
so
look
forward
to
it.
So
thank
you
all.
B
Yes,
it's
the
free
pizza.
Why
you
all
couldn't
keep
coming
back?
Well,
thanks!
We're
excited
to
have
you
and
welcome
aboard
so
tonight
for
tonight's
festivities.
We
will
have
part
two
with
mary
grant,
our
other
city
attorney,
who
helps
cover
for
pnz
items
and
then
we'll
review
the
agenda
so
mary.
Take
it
away.
J
All
right
good
evening,
madam
chair
commissioners,
as
saleen
said,
this
is
sort
of
part
two.
I
think
we
had
last
time
just
ended
on
appeals
and
today
we're
really
looking
at
due
process
some
conflicts
of
interest
and
other
aspects
to
consider
when
making
decisions
and
then
sort
of
what
our
role
is
legal
is
I'm
sure
for
most
of
you.
J
This
is
a
review,
so
thank
you
for
for,
nonetheless,
the
attention
as
we
go
over
some
of
these
considerations
and
then
also
want
to
make
sure
I
give
all
kudos
to
james
for
this
presentation
who
put
he's
the
one
that
put
it
together
and
kindly
has
shared
this
resource
with
me.
So
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
share
my
screen.
D
J
B
J
J
All
right
are
you
seeing
the
full
screen
presentation.
J
All
right
so,
as
I
mentioned,
we're
just
really
starting
with
due
process
tonight.
What
is
it?
How
do
we
do
it?
The
primary
basis
is
that
where
you
as
commissioners
are
sitting
in
a
quasi-quasi-judicial
position,
that
is
where
you
are
weighing
evidence
in
regards
to
a
particular
application
and
essentially
adjudicating
whether
or
not
that
application
should
be
approved
or
denied
you.
J
You
sort
of
sit
like
a
judge
in
imposing
that
process
and
protecting
the
rights
to
make
sure
that
all
of
those
decisions
happen
based
on
a
clean
record
and
and
providing
that
opportunity
for
folks
involved
in
the
process.
J
When
we're
looking
at
due
process,
really
there's
two
aspects
this,
what
we're
maintaining
mostly,
is
procedural
due
process.
The
other
aspect
is
substantive
due
process.
If
we
were
asking
the
question,
what
is
substantive
versus
procedural
substances
really?
Can
the
government
regulate
this?
Do
they
have
the
authority
to
regulate
this,
and
the
procedural
due
process
is:
how
should
the
government
administer
this
regulation
or
make
these
decisions
so
that
the
process
is
fair
with
procedural
due
process?
It
is
a
flexible
concept.
H
J
Or
it's
just
a
development
permit,
and
some
of
those
differences
in
consideration
are
are
based
on
what
kind
of
impact
or
or
right
might
be
affected
by
that
particular
property
owner.
So
that's
where
you
see
a
little
bit
of
difference
and
a
little
bit
of
flexibility
in
what
procedural
due
process
is
at
the
very
basis
of
it.
It's
simply
notice
an
opportunity
to
be
heard.
J
So
that's
where
a
lot
of
our
notice
provisions
come
in
making
sure
that
we
have
agenda
items
on
in
time,
making
sure
that
any
correspondence
or
testimony
or
other
evidence
that
they
want
to
seek
to
put
on
the
record
is
put
also
submitted
in
a
timely
manner
that
we
provide
a
process
for
ways
to
consider
information.
That's
provided
after
that,
and
then
the
opportunity
to
be
heard
really
is
just
that
public
hearing
piece.
J
J
Ex
parte
communications
first
of
all
are
problematic
when
you're
sitting
in
a
quasi-judicial
capacity,
it's
very
similar
to
a
court
hearing
where
you
know,
one
attorney
on
a
side
of
a
case
can't
grab
the
judge
and
try
to
bend
his
or
her
ear
about
how
the
case
ought
to
go
without
the
other
party
being
present
and
ex
parte
communications
operate
much
the
same
way
with
regards
to
commissioners
and
have
the
real
potential
to
come
up.
Each
of
you
have
a
role
in
a
public
capacity
or
or
private
capacity.
J
As
a
business
owner
or
an
employee,
where
you
may
have
contacts
with
folks
who
have
applications
pending
before
the
commission,
so
these
are
any
kind
of
communications
that
really
regard
the
substance
of
a
pending
matter,
something
that
the
commission
will
have
to
take
an
action
on
and
it's
outside
the
presence
of
other
interested
parties,
and
that
would
be
outside
the
private
presence
of
all
other
commissioners
outside
the
private
presence
of
the
applicant
for
the
neighborhood
association.
J
Anybody
who
may
have
a
stake
in
the
outcome
of
that
particular
item.
The
issues
with
ex
part
pay
communication
really
come
with
making
sure
that
the
commission
and
again
having
that
clean
process
is
that
the
information
is
provided.
So
that
or
complete
incorrect
information
is
provided
on
the
record.
So
any
party
looking
at
what
I
would
call
a
cold
record
knows
exactly
what
information
was
considered
and
put
into
making
that
decision.
J
That
opportunity
to
be
heard
is
making
sure
that
information
is
present
so
that
any
person
participating
can
try
to
rebut
that
information
provide
contrary
evidence
or
try
to
outweigh
with
additional
evidence
and
really
ensuring
that
that
decision
is
limited
to
the
record.
So
where
we
spoke
about
last
time,
if
a
decision
goes
up
on
appeal,
all
that
really
we
have
is
that
cold
record
that
what
is
limited
to
for
what's
been
provided
at
the
public
hearing.
J
J
You
want
to
identify
the
source
of
the
information,
so
the
name
of
that
person,
the
relationship
they
have
or
the
interest
they
have
in
particular
to
that
item.
That's
pending
before
you
provide
a
summary
of
that
contact
and
provide
any
documents
that
that
person
or
party
showed
to
you,
or
that
you
saw
during
that
contact,
keep
in
mind
that
this
does
not
always
cure
the
problem
with
ex
parte
communications.
J
It
depends
on
the
extent
to
which
that
information
weighed
into
the
decision-making,
but
nonetheless,
at
least
disclosure
provides
that
opportunity
to
rebut
the
information
and
so
with
disclosure.
There's
less
likelihood
that
it
would
cause
a
disruption
in
the
decision
or
outcome
of
pnz,
and
just
as
an
example,
you
know
it
might
be
that
somebody
calls
you
at
work
starts
telling
you
that
there's
a
parking
problem
with
the
the
conditional
use
permit
or
with
the
pud
that
you're
about
to
hear
that
itself
is
still
an
ex
parte
communication.
J
This
is
very
much
part
and
parcel
to
export
communications
because,
most
likely,
through
an
ex-parte
communication,
you're
going
to
be
obtaining
facts
outside
of
the
record.
However,
you
can
also
get
facts
outside
of
the
record,
even
without
necessarily
having
spoken
to
another
individual.
So
what
we
have
outlined
here
on
this
is
a
case
that
went
up
before
the
supreme
court,
where
the
board
of
commissioners
actually
viewed
a
site
on
an
application
for
a
land
division,
but
they
didn't
give
notice
of
that
site
visit.
J
They
didn't
have
enough
given
opportunity
to
the
parties
to
be
present,
and
essentially
the
idaho
supreme
court
said
that
was
a
a
due
process,
violation
and
and
not
one
that
could
be
cured
since
simply
by
disclosing
something
on
the
record.
J
So
just
in
consideration
of
that,
where
this
may
happen
on
more
of
an
individual
basis
is,
if
you
this
is
a
site.
You
happen
to
drive
by
on
your
way
to
work
or
if
your
your
curiosity
led
you
to
go
check
out
this
site
on
a
pending
issue.
J
If
you
have
personal
knowledge,
just
simply
because
it
was
a
friend
of
a
friend
of
a
friend-
and
you
heard
it
through
conversation,
looking
things
up
outside
of
the
record
on
your
own
and
viewing
google
earth
maps
or
other
satellite
images,
things
like
that
that
you're
using
to
inform
your
decision
making
outside
of
a
record
that's
been
provided.
Those
are
all
facts
outside
of
the
record,
and
so
that's
something
that
again
isn't
creating
a
clean
record
or
the
full
record
on
the
hearing.
J
Unless
and
until
you
have
brought
that
forward
and
disclosed
those
details
prior
to
deliberation.
So
that's
where
this
slide
is
is
getting
into
is,
if
you
have
those
new
facts
or
facts
outside
of
the
record.
How
and
where
do
you
bring
them
in
you?
Don't
don't
want
to
do
it
past
or
when
you're
already
in
deliberations
right,
if
we're
back
to
those
key
concepts
of
procedural
due
process,
it's
known
as
an
opportunity
to
be
heard.
So
early
disclosure
is
better
and-
and
this
is
oh,
I
think
I
just
there.
J
We
go
sorry
about
that,
and
this
is
where
we're
just
taking
this
directly
from
code,
that
if
the
you
do
observe
any
facts
or
or
have
those
as
considerations,
you
want
to
disclose
any
comments
received
or
observations.
You
have
made
on
the
record
prior
to
the
time
for
testimony,
so
this
would
be.
J
You
know
when
the
item
is
brought
forward
by
madam
chair
and
and
prior
to
any
testimony
by
the
staff
or
applicant
being
able
to
interject
and
speak
up
about
what
those
facts
that
are
in
in
your
purview
so
to
speak,
and
that
gives
them
both
the
applicant
any
other
parties
providing
testimony
on
that
item
to
rebut
that
information
or
or
maybe
supplement
it.
J
This
is
just
sort
of
a
fyi.
I
know
we
know
that
sometimes
facts
outside
the
record
cannot
be
avoided,
especially
where
it's
inadvertent,
where
ex
parte
communications,
where
somebody
has
reached
out
to
you,
but
we
would
just
ask
steer
clear
of
new
facts
and
observations
during
the
deliberation
again
that
is
kind
of
too
little
too
late
to
cure.
Any
issues
that
might
be
brought
forward
and-
and
you
know,
could
then
affect
the
due
process
of
that
deliberation.
J
This
is
one
that
actually,
you
know,
comes
up
quite
often
and
just
want
to
state
to
the
commissioners.
We
appreciate
you
being
so
cognizant
of
conflicts
of
interest
and
very
routinely
sending
those
questions
via
staff
and
staff
often
is
consulting
with
james
and
I
about
potential
conflicts
of
interest.
So
really
that's
just
a
a
kudos
to
you
all
of
being
aware
and
paying
attention
to
this.
So
this
really
is
just
a
very
brief
overview.
J
Any
actual
conflict
has
to
be
disclosed
on
the
record.
A
apparent
conflicts
also
should
be
disclosed
on
the
record
when
whether
or
not
it
is
of
a
situation
where
a
commissioner
must
recuse,
if
it's
an
actual
conflict
of
interest,
you
have
to
recuse
yourself
apparent
conflicts
of
interest.
They
are
sort
of
subjective
right
and
that
to
the
level
at
which
your
objectivity
or
independence
could
be
questioned.
J
Sometimes
it's
better
to
err
on
the
side
of
caution
where
that
potential
conflict
is
is
rather
remote
or
peripheral.
You
may
just
disclose
that
on
the
record
and
then
also
state,
you
do
not
believe
that
it
impairs
your
objectivity
or
your
independence,
and
you
are
still
going
to
continue
deliberations
and
take
a
vote
on
that
matter.
J
So
really
that
is
where
we
will
kind
of
get
into
that
role
of
legal
of
when
you
should
bring
forward
those
questions
to
legal
and
again,
if
you
recuse
yourself,
that
means
you
do
not
participate
in
a
decision
or
vote
on
that
pending
item
that
will
not
affect
a
quorum
for
the
ability
of
making
a
decision
and
when
there's,
even
even
if
there
is
an
actual
conflict
of
interest,
there
is
an
exception
for
a
de
minimis
interest.
If
it
just
happens
to
be
less
than
fifty
dollars
or
is
otherwise
pretty
remote.
J
The
last
aspect
is
really
just
ensuring
fairness
and
hearing
procedures.
This
is
where
code
is
your
friend.
I
mean
it
is
anyway,
because
that
gives
you
the
criteria
and
basis
for
your
decision
making,
but
especially
helpful
in
this
fairness
of
procedures.
As
it's
outlined,
how
the
order
of
testimony
is
to
go
what
that
time
frame
is
and
ensures
that
fairness
of
each
participant
in
the
role
that
they
play
getting
their
adequate
time
and
opportunity
the
opportunity
to
rebut
new
information.
J
So
if
there's
are
comments
from
staff
after
a
public
hearing,
that
is
the
question
and
answer
period
where
it's
important
to
flesh
out
that
information,
here's
one
that
doesn't
come
up
often,
but
if
it
does
just
a
reminder
that
oftentimes,
while
documents
are
often
offered
during
a
hearing,
sometimes
it's
just
a
picture
or
a
short
power
point
or
something
like
that.
But
if
it's
any
kind
of
substantive
or
lengthy
written
document
that
was
not
provided
ahead
of
time
and
according
to
the
schedules
that
helps
control
and
provides
us
late
correspondence.
J
One
thing
I
would
note
is
that,
if
documents
like
this
are
offered
during
a
hearing-
and
the
commission
rejects
it,
if
that
applicant,
you
know
had
their
their
project
denied
and
it
were
to
go
up
to
council
on
appeal.
That
document
would
also
go
up
to
council
on
appeal
and
council
would
also
have
the
opportunity
to
review
whether
or
not
it
was
error
to
reject
that
information.
J
We
often
see
deferrals.
This
is
also
an
aspect
where
we
just
didn't
want
to
ensure
that
there
is
a
fair
process.
It's
not
a
routine
request.
If
there
is
public
opposition
to
the
project,
there
are
several
considerations
to
be
made.
If
there
are
have
been
previous
deferrals,
you
know.
Are
there
additional
studies
redesigns
that
number
of
things
how
many
citizens
are
present
to
testify,
either
for
or
against,
and
whether
or
not
their
input
can
be
provided
on
a
date
specific
to
that
deferral?
J
And
does
the
review
body
have
an
actual
written
deferral
request
from
the
applicant
oftentimes
staff
will
take
care
of
this
in
the
sense
of
the
at
the
end
of
work
session
and
prior
to
the
start
of
the
public
hearing.
What
items
have
been
requested
as
deferral?
J
If
this
commission,
on
its
own,
takes
up
a
motion
for
deferral,
it
cannot
be
extended
for
more
than
60
days
without
the
agreement
of
the
applicant,
and
then
there
are
a
couple
of
considerations
as
far
as
where
deferrals
may
come
up
absent
to
request
from
the
applicant
and
really
from
the
commission
itself,
and
that's
either
due
to
lack
of
quorum
or
lateness
of
hour.
So
this
commission
has
the
discretion
on
its
own
motion
to
make
that
kind
of
a
deferral
in
either
case
it
will
be
set
for
the
next
immediate
public
hearing.
J
On
oops,
one
last
thing
on
deferral.
Excuse
me
is
that
on
any
deferral
in
terms
of
asking
of
whether
or
not
a
public
member
of
the
public
who
wishes
to
testify
in
regards
to
that
specific
item,
if
that,
if
that
person
is
not
available
to
come
at
that
next
date,
specific
that
their
opportunity
to
provide
testimony
has
to
be
allowed
at
that
hearing,
it's
it's
brighter
than
just
asking
hey.
Can
you
come
back?
J
J
Date,
all
right
so
where
we're
at
now
is
in
terms
of
how
we
can
help
and
what
what
we
james
and
I
are
here
and
to
support
you
with
and
really
our
role
is
fairly
limited
when
it
comes
to
public
meetings,
but
definitely
want
to
remind
you
all
of
the
scope
in
which
we
can
provide
service
to
you
and
to
staff
at
meetings
really,
the
rule
is,
is
limited
or
more
defined
to
that
due
process
aspect
and
ensuring
that
fairness
and
procedure,
and
that
the
notice
and
opportunity
to
be
heard
is
provided
to
all
parties.
J
So
really,
if
I
want
to
do
this,
how
should
I
frame
the
motion?
What
is
our
procedure?
Is
this
allowable
to
defer?
How
long
can
we
defer
it?
For
you
know,
what's
the
order
of
testimony
or
how
much
time
do
I
need
to
give
this
neighborhood
association
who
came
in
late?
You
know
kind
of
a
thing.
How
much
time
do
I
need
to
provide
them
for
testimony
outside
of
the
meetings?
We
really
can
answer
more
of
those
substantive
questions
of
what
is
the
authority
the
commission
has
to
impose
this
commission.
J
Is
this
really
a
taking
whose
interpretation
is
correct
so
to
speak?
Does
this
agency
report
bind
our
decision
or
do
we
have
to
follow
this
recommendation,
or
that
and
really
legal
issues
often
are
not
black
and
white
and
those
lines
aren't
clear.
So
when
it
comes
out
we
we
would
encourage
you
to
ask
and
to
ask
in
advance
in
preparation
for
the
hearing
when
we're
actually
at
the
hearing.
J
J
If
it's
something
of
a
sensitive
nature,
then
we
may
look
to
an
executive
session
to
have
that
conversation
with
you
all,
but
really
when,
when
we're
on
record
or
and
then
just
as
a
another
backdrop
to
that,
we
are
in
constant
communication
with
staff,
and
so
you
know,
reaching
out
to
staff
to
help
bring
some
clarity
to
the
issue
is
definitely
encouraged
and
we're
here
to
provide
that
for
you.
J
Some
things
are
black
and
white,
but
really
we're
there
to
provide
interpretation
and
to
kind
of
say
here,
are
the
options
and
what
the
considerations
and
drawbacks
might
be,
but
where
the
discretion
and
decision
lies
with
the
commission
on
any
given
application
or
pending
pending
application,
you,
you
all
sit
as
that
decision
maker
and
and
we're
not
going
to
impose
our
you
know
our
what
we
might
decide
personally
or
or
as
a
department
on
to
the
commission,
as
that
is
the
commission's
purview
and
when
there
is
questions,
because
the
ambiguity
does
exist,
it's
this
is
where
it
harkens
back
to
the
first
legal
legal
training
we
did
last
month.
J
Talk
about
what
the
facts
are
there
for
and
against
what
way
in
favor
of
finding
for
certain
criteria
or
what
don't
how
it
meets
or
does
not
meet,
and
and
explaining
the
reasons
why
you
need
to
go
with
one
or
the
other,
and
certainly
I
know
oftentimes
clarifications
are
asked
from
staff
and
those
types
of
things
and
where
there
is
a
concern,
I
mean
we're
we're,
probably
not
in
a
position
to
be
able
to
render
candid
or
complete
legal
advice
on
the
spot
and
on
the
record,
and
so
even
though
sometimes
that
might
be
helpful,
really
where
you
all
are
faced
with
the
task
of
of
sort
of
interpreting
those
laws
to
the
best
of
your
ability
and
within
the
discretion.
J
You
have
just
resolve
it
as
best
as
you
can
by
development
of
that
record.
There
are
very
few
examples
I
can
think
of
where,
where
we
might
answer
a
substantive
legal
question
on
the
record,
I
can
only
think
of
one
that
I've
done
in
the
six
to
eight
months,
plus
that
I've
been
sitting
as
council
on
on
some
of
these
commission
meetings,
and
that
was
a
direct
question
of.
Is
this
illegal
as
one
of
these
tests?
J
You
know
one
of
the
people
testifying
claims
and
that
was
sort
of
a
clear
black
and
white,
where
I
could
answer?
No,
it's
not
illegal,
but
really
where,
if
there's
any
other
kind
of
ambiguities
or
potential
interpretations,
you
may
get
an
answer.
Well,
maybe
you
know.
K
J
Is
the
the
typical
lawyer
response
right?
It
depends
so
you'll
you'll
likely
hear
the
word,
it
depends
or
words.
It
depends.
J
J
B
J
Said
or
this
memorandum
said
and
then
you
go
on
to
say
something
in
a
public
hearing
that
may
be
a
waiver
of
that
attorney-client
privilege,
and
then
you
can't
necessarily
rely
on
that
in
the
same
way
and
really
that
sort
of
caveat
or
that
preface
of
my
attorney
said,
or
this
legal
advice
was
or
anything
like
that
isn't
necessary
because
your
decisions
stand
on
their
own,
you,
you
all,
are
granted
the
authority
to
make
these
decisions
on
the
pending
applications,
and
and
so
there's
no
need
to
have
to
rest
that
authority
or
decision
making
on
any
other
entity.
J
So
really
it's
just.
I
conclude
that
this
commission
finds
xyz,
that
kind
of
a
thing
and
then
also
as
far
as
having
an
attorney
there
and
asking
procedural
questions,
or
even
maybe
some
clarifications
that
may
whisper
to
the
chair
or
or
to
another.
Commissioner.
J
N
J
E
E
Next,
not
this
one,
the
next
one,
next
one
next
one,
the
next
one.
E
So
one
of
the
this
was
the
page.
I
wanted
to
talk
about
mary
and
james,
because
one
implication
of
new
facts
and
deliberations
or
new
facts
at
certain
parts
is
that
we've
always
encouraged
the
commissioners
not
to
ask
questions
once
we
pass
the
question
period
and
that
sometimes
that's
really
hard,
because
someone
in
the
public
will
say
something
that
we
don't
understand
or
that's
new
or
that's
not
in
the
because
they're
putting
it
into
the
record
when
they
say
it.
E
So
can
you
talk
about
why
we
don't
why
we
discourage
asking
questions
at
that
part
of
the
hearing.
A
I
I
can,
I
mean
I
know
what
mill
is
getting
at,
because
we
have
been
through
this
before
a
lot
of
these
commissioners
had
joined,
and
I
I'm
sure
mary
will
have
a
better
perspective
on
it.
A
But
but
my
understanding
is
that,
if
questions
are,
if
there's
new
information
that
comes
forward
after
the
public
testimony
begins,
we
then
need
to
allow
everybody
that
had
spoken
on
the
record
in
public
testimony
to
speak
again
if
they
wanted
to
with
a
new
three
minutes
per
person,
but
I'm
sure
there's
a
more
sophisticated
mary
answer.
J
Well-
and
I
also
would
invite
james
to
jump
in
here
if
he
wants
to
at
all
really
what
it
is,
is
that,
generally
speaking,
the
most
of
the
evidence
on
which
other
than
verbal
testimony
upon
which
the
commission
is
going
to
be
making
his
decisions
would
be
provided
by
the
staff,
the
applicant
or
the
neighborhood
association
in
written
form.
J
I
know
that
we
do
sometimes
have
public
folks
from
the
public,
testifying
that
may
provide
a
a
slideshow
or
a
map,
or
something
of
that
nature
and,
in
terms
of
evidence,
that's
being
considered
into
way.
You
know
the
verbal
testimony
should
nest
should
be
answered
by
rebuttal
by
the
applicant
when
they
have
an
opportunity
to
follow
up
after
the
close
of
all
public
testimony
james
happy
to
turn
it
over
to
you.
If
you
have
any
other
aspects
to
add.
F
F
So
so
questions
can
can
can
go
on
a
rolling
basis
through
the
the
through
the
public,
testimony
that
that
that
you
have
specific
authority
for
that
in
the
code
and
then
the
there's
a
section
about
final
comments
that
if,
if
there
are
additional
facts
provided
from
from
staff,
members
of
the
public
may
may
address
those
additional
facts,
and
so
that
that's
something
where
the
code
provides
a
a
specific
procedure
to
follow.
And
I
think
getting
to
milt's
question
is
more
about
it's
more
about
the
the
process
of
it.
F
So
you
can
be
flexible
there
and,
and
one
of
the
sideboards
certainly
is
receiving
new
information.
After
closing,
the
hearing
or
receiving
new
testimony
from
staff
after
the
rebuttal
has
has
passed,
and
so
as
these
things
go
go
on,
and
if
the
chair
has
any
questions
and
legals
here
to
address
those
and
when
in
doubt
may
as
well,
ask
if,
if
a
question
is
all
right
or
if
there's
any
any
concern
before
you
go
forward.
A
I
would
add
to,
I
think
you
know
we
want
the
public
to
be
able
to
testify,
based
on
all
the
evidence
that
we
all
have
so
things.
I
know
a
mistake
that
I
had
made
early
on,
that
I
didn't
realize
until
this
presentation
was
something
in
deliberation
of
saying
like
well,
that's
my
neighborhood.
So
I
know
what
that
neighborhood
is
like,
and
I
know
that
there
is
or
isn't
parking
or
whatever
the
case
might
be.
A
But
we
want
to
allow
the
the
public
to
be
able
to
testify
on
all
the
all
the
evidence
that
we're
using
to
make
our
decision.
D
Blanchard
yeah
thanks
mary,
thank
you
so
much
to
both
of
you,
mary
and
james.
For
this
this
is
really
valuable
question
for
you
or
james
and
maybe
milt
with
his
long
history.
Have
you
it's
any
experience
with
ex
parte
communication.
I
just
know.
In
my
year
I
haven't
haven't
experienced
it
at
all.
E
I
can
talk
to
that
just
briefly
chris
as
a
commissioner,
so
about
once
every
seems
like
two
or
three
years,
which
means
I've,
probably
gotten
four
or
five
either
people
will
leave
me
a
message
on
my
phone.
That's
happened,
I
think
twice
and
once
or
twice
like
you
know,
a
friend
of
mine
at
some
bar
or
restaurant
will
want
to
talk
about
a
specific
application
and
and
on
the
messages
I
think
I've
forwarded
one
to
celine
or
cody
or
scott.
Once
and
said
I
didn't
listen
to
it.
I
stopped
the
minute.
E
E
I
think
I
forwarded
one
once
to
the
staff.
You
know
you
read
enough
of
it
and
then
you
just
stop
and
then
you
know
a
lot
of
times.
People
will
want
to
talk
to
you.
Usually
it's
about.
I
have
this
idea
for
this
piece
of
property.
What
do
you
think,
and
I
just
basically
say
look,
I
can't
talk
about
a
specific
piece
of
property.
I
can
talk
in
general
about
what
you're
thinking
about
from
a
city
policy
or
code
perspective,
but
I
can't
talk
about
an
individual
piece
of
property.
M
J
The
in
a
way
that
the
city
is
might
be
slanting
its
policy.
Those
kinds
of
things
are
all
fair
game
to
discuss
on
an
individual
basis.
It's
really
when
it's
coming
to
a
specific
piece
of
property
or
specific,
pending
application
that
could
become
before
the
commission
and
to
your
question
more
specifically,
commissioner
blanchard.
I
I've
had
this
come
up,
or
I
think
that
james
and
I
have
seen
this
come
up-
I
wouldn't
say
fairly
routinely,
but
often
enough
that
we
feel
the
reminders
are
definitely
useful.
I
Just
to
jump
onto
milt's
point
a
couple
things
that
came
to
my
mind
is
one
I
recall
when
the
shakespeare
festival
had.
There
was
the
application
for
the
50-something
units
and
storage
that
was
nearby,
and
that
was
a
big
deal
and
a
lot
of
people
weren't
wanting
to
talk
about
that,
and-
and
I
for
me,
I
happen
to
live
not
too
far
away
from
that
as
well.
So
it
was
definitely
one
of
those
points
where
you're
just
kind
of
no.
I
No,
no,
but
the
other
curveball
that
comes
up
occasionally
is
the
conversation
about
traffic,
and
then
you
get
into
the
whole
achd
role
and
and
sort
of
obviously
how
those
two
things
can.
Sometimes
you
know
really
be
problematic,
and
so
it's
another
one
of
those
where
you
know
we
got
to
be
careful
and
have
to
be.
You
know
mindful
and
obviously
do
the
disclosure
thing
as
was
discussed,
so
those
are
just
a
couple
things
that
came
to
my
mind.
J
E
E
F
F
E
Okay,
one
other
thing
mary
and
james,
so
I
actually
think
this
whole
due
process
thing
is
a
really
interesting
and
cool
topic.
If
you
like
it,
there's
a
really
classic
and
easy
to
read
legal
essay
written
in
1975
by
a
guy
named
judge
henry
friendly,
and
it's
called
some
kind
of
hearing,
and
you
can
get
that
in
a
simple
google
search
and
actually
read
his
article
and
it's
super
interesting.
He
was
a
federal
judge
and
he's
talking
about
due
process
and
that's
all
I
got.
J
Thank
you
for
that.
I
will
definitely
go
check
it
out
and,
as
you
are
in
capable
hands
with
james
tonight,
I'm
gonna
sign
off
and
hope.
You
all
have
a
great
meeting.
E
B
Mary
all
right,
we
we
used
up
all
of
our
time,
but
I
believe
the
agenda
is
short
enough,
that
we
don't
need
to
review
the
agenda.
So,
let's
start
off
for
tonight
good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
boise
city
planning
and
zoning
commission
public
hearing
a
few
things
to
start
out
for
tonight's
proceedings.
B
Everyone
from
the
public
entering
the
hearing
has
been
automatically
muted
and
cannot
speak
as
the
item
you're
interested
in
comes
up
for
discussion,
you'll
be
called
upon
and
unmuted
there
is
a
chat
function
in
zoom.
This
is
not
part
of
the
record
and
should
only
be
used
if
technical
difficulties
arise.
If
the
chat
function
isn't
available
to
you,
you
can
email
zoning
info
at
cityofboise.org
with
any
technical
issues.
B
If
you
are
attending
to
your
telephone,
you
can
type
in
star9
to
raise
your
hand,
each
member
of
the
public
is
allowed
up
to
three
minutes
for
testimony.
We
are
strict
with
this
time
as
it
is
limited
in
code
and,
finally,
the
applicant
is
allowed
up
to
five
minutes
for
rebuttal,
after
which
the
hearing
will
be
closed
and
the
commission
will
deliberate
and
render
a
decision.
B
A
Floor,
thank
you.
Saleen.
We
are
citizen,
volunteers
appointed
by
the
mayor
and
approved
by
the
city
council.
We
make
final
decisions
on
conditional
use,
permits,
variances
and
appeals
and
recommendations
to
the
city
council
on
subdivision,
rezones,
annex
subdivisions,
rezones,
annexations
and
code
or
comprehensive
plan
amendments.
A
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's
important
that
you
give
your
name
and
address
when
you
testify
tonight.
We
utilize
a
consent
agenda.
This
means
that
if
the
applicant
agrees
with
the
staff
report
and
if
there's
no
public
opposition,
the
item
will
be
placed
on
the
consent
agenda.
A
All
items
that
are
placed
on
the
consent
agenda
are
approved
with
one
motion.
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
moments
ago,
with
staff,
applicant
neighborhood
association
and
then
the
public
testimony.
A
Thank
you
all
for
virtually
attending
tonight.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
roll.
D
D
I
A
Okay,
the
first
item
for
consideration
on
the
consent
agenda
is
item
number
one.
This
is
sos
21-2
tealy
land
surveying
at
95.07
west,
sunflower
lane.
This
is
a
waiver
to
the
subdivision.
Ordinance
requirement
to
construct
curb
gutter
and
sidewalk
is
the
applicant
present.
Please
virtually
raise
your
hand.
O
And
madam
chair
members
of
the
commission,
I
just
received
an
email
from
the
applicant
stating
they're
having
some
technical
issues
getting
online
but
that
they
are
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
staff
report.
A
Excellent.
Thank
you,
mr
holmes.
Great
is
there
anybody
present
tonight
who
wanted
to
testify
in
opposition
of
this
item.
Please
virtually
raise
your
hand.
A
The
next
item
for
consideration
of
the
consent
agent
is
item
number
three.
This
is
cop
21-2
for
rocky
mountain
companies
at
406,
south
third
street.
A
conditional
use
permit
to
operate
a
tavern
is
the
applicant
present.
C
A
And
are
you,
mr
ursada,
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
staff
report
and
is
there
anybody
present?
That
would
like
to
testify
in
opposition
of
this
item?
A
Please
virtually
raise
your
hand,
okay,
seeing
seeing
thank
you
for
putting
your
hand
down
mr
seeing,
then
we
will
place
item
three
on
the
consent
agenda
and
the
chair
will
entertain
emotion.
A
Second
great,
we
have
a
second
from
commissioner
moore.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
vote,
stand.
M
D
A
Okay,
hang
on
one
second,
okay,
we
have
a
request
for
a
deferral.
This
is
item
number
five.
A
A
this
is
car
21-1
for
marianne,
dick
and
pud
21-3,
the
architect's
office
at
121,
south
springtree
lane.
This
is
a
rezone
and
a
conditional
use
permit
requesting
referral
to
march
8th.
A
A
A
second
second,
thank
you
second
from
commissioner
moore.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
vote.
Stan
aye
schaffer.
M
N
D
E
I
A
O
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
commission,
I'll
try
to
keep
this
pretty
brief
before
you,
as
a
minor
text
amendment
to
section
11-8
of
the
development
code
which
regulates
flood
hazards.
As
you
can
see
here,
this
is
really
just
adding
about
a
sentence
or
so
shown
there
in
red
and
underlined,
which
adds
some
details
to
the
subsection
of
code.
The
specific
language
is
required
by
the
national
flood
insurance
program
community
rating
system
and
will
allow
residents
to
access
flood
insurance
at
a
somewhat
discounted
rate.
O
As
detailed
in
project
report,
the
planning
team
is
recommending
approval
of
the
amendment
as
it
complies
with
the
comp
plan
and
is
in
the
best
interest
of
the
general
welfare.
As
a
reminder
with
these
text
amendments,
the
commission
is
a
recommending
body
to
city
council.
I'd
be
happy
to
stand
for
any
questions.
A
Thank
you,
mr
holmes,
so
this
does
not
apply
to
any
specific
neighborhood
association.
So
we'll
just
move
on
to
questions
from
the
commission.
A
Okay,
seeing
none-
and
we
don't
have
anybody
signed
up
to
testify
on
this
item-
is
there
anybody
present
that
would
like
to
testify
this
item
tonight?
Please
virtually
raise
your
hand.
A
Okay,
cnn,
mr
holmes,
would
you
like
to
use
your
time
for
a
rebuttal?
B
A
Record
show
note
that
mr
holmes
is
waving
the
rebuttal
we'll
now
close
the
public
portion
of
the
hearing,
and
the
item
is
now
before
the
commission
manager.
Commissioner,
moore.
A
C
A
Any
further
discussion:
okay,
seeing
none
will
the
clerk.
Please
call
the
vote.
I
A
Okay,
moving
on
to
item
number
four:
this
is
car
21-2
for
eibar
catch,
a
cat
hitch.
Sorry
I'll
look
forward
to
hearing
how
that's
pronounced
at
8410
west
vincent
street.
This
is
a
rezone
of
0.96
acres
from
r1a
to
r1bda,
we'll
first
hear
from
staff.
Miss
rain.
P
The
item
before
you
is
a
rezone
of
0.96
acres
at
8410
west
vincent
street,
from
r1a
single-family
residential
with
2.1
units
per
acre
to
r1bda
single-family
residential
with
development
agreement
at
4.8
units
per
acre.
The
property
is
located
at
the
corner
of
vincent
and
vanilla
streets.
Approximately
340
feet
south
of
overland
road.
It
currently
has
one
single
family
residence
on
the
south
side
of
the
lot
adjacent
to
visit
street.
The
surrounding
area
is
zoned,
r1a
to
the
west,
south,
east
and
south
c1da
to
the
north
and
lod
to
the
northeast.
P
P
The
applicant
requests
r1bda
or
zoning
in
order
to
split
the
property
into
two
lots
and
allow
the
construction
of
an
additional
single-family
home.
The
planning
team
finds
the
proposed
r1b
da
zone
to
be
most
appropriate
for
the
property
based
on
the
allowed
zones
of
the
suburban
land
use.
The
lot
does
not
meet
the
dimensional
standards
for
a1
or
a2
zones,
and
those
zones
would
not
allow
for
any
additional
development.
P
P
In
order
to
comply
with
the
b1
airport
influence
overlay.
A
development
agreement
has
been
submitted
with
the
rezone
application
to
keep
residential
density
to
the
five
units
per
acre
allowed
within
the
airport
engine
policy
for
parcels
within
the
b1
overlay,
but
outside
the
65
dnl
noise
contour,
the
boise
airport,
has
indicated
no
objections.
The
density
maximum
of
4.8
units
per
acre
on
the
property
provided
that
a
navigation
easement
is
reported.
P
The
planning
team
did
receive
a
letter
of
opposition
stating
no
objection
to
the
rezone
itself,
but
to
the
addition
of
another
access
point
on
vanell
street.
The
letter
states
that
two
existing
access
points
to
the
north
of
the
site
and
a
dog-like
intersection
south
of
the
site
already
placed
too
heavy
a
burden
on
vanell
with
existing
traffic
levels
and
that
the
addition
of
another
access
point
would
compound
these
traffic
impacts.
P
Barring
access
from
vanilla
would
make
adding
an
additional
dwelling
impossible
without
removing
the
existing
house,
while
the
approximate
43
feet
between
the
east
side
of
the
home
and
the
right-of-way
could
dimensionally
fit
a
ride.
A
driveway.
The
code
prohibits
residential
driveways
within
50
feet
of
an
intersection
with
over
90
feet
between
the
proposed
drive
and
the
nearest
existing
access,
a
speed
limit
of
20
miles
per
hour
and
a
clear
line
of
vision
down
vanell.
The
planning
team
does
not
anticipate
any
increased
hazards
with
the
addition
of
a
new
access.
P
P
In
conclusion,
the
applicant's
proposal
complies
with
approval
criteria
for
a
rezone.
The
r1bda
zoning
will
limit
development
to
4.8
units
per
acre,
retaining
compatibility
with
large
lot
character
of
the
neighborhood
meeting,
the
requirements
of
the
b1
airport
influence
overlay
interim
policy
and
allowing
the
requested
edition
of
a
single-family
home
it
is
compatible
with
adjacent
uses
in
the
general
neighborhood
and
as
such,
the
planning
team
recommends
approval
of
the
application
with
conditions.
Thank
you
and
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have.
A
Thank
you,
mr
raine.
I
will
next
hear
from
the
applicant
before
questions.
Mr
cottage,
we'll
start
with
10
minutes.
Just
give
us
a
moment
please
to
switch
you
your.
A
Okay,
you
should
be
ready
to
go
just
start
with
your
name
and
address.
Q
My
name
is
ivar
khadij.
Can
everybody
hear
me?
Yes,
great
yeah
we're
looking
at
the
8410
vince
vincent
my
wife
ciao
win
is
here?
Is
it
okay
if
she
speaks
as
well
she's
a
little
more
she's
better
at
this.
A
Yeah
either
one
of
you
can
speak.
Please
ask
her
to
start
with
her
name
and
address
too.
L
We
are
requesting
a
rezone
because,
even
though,
on
the
appraisal,
it
shows
that
it's
0.96
acres,
but
on
the
actual
plat
size
it
shows
it's
0.91.
L
We
just
want
to
have
one
single
family
home
built
on
that
lot,
we're
going
to
keep
all
the
trees
there.
Currently
we
are
working
with
suez
to
upgrade
the
water
connection
and
do
about
do
all
the
process
needed
on
that
side.
So.
Q
Yeah,
I
think
that
pretty
much
sums
up
what
we
want
to
do,
we
both
work
from
home.
She
works
for
st
lux.
I
work
for
wells
fargo,
so
the
impact
as
far
as
traffic
is
pretty
minimal
in
our
case
and
yeah.
I
think
I
hope
that
is
what
we're
supposed
to
say.
Thanks
for
all
your
help,
crystal.
A
Great,
thank
you.
Thank
you
so
much
okay.
So
we
would
next
hear
from
the
neighborhood
association.
This
is
the
south
cold
neighborhood
association.
Do
we
have
a
representative
here
from
that
neighborhood,
okay,
seeing
none
then
we'll
move
on
to
questions
from
the
commission?
First
off
for
the
applicant
commissioner,
gillespie.
B
D
Question
really
quick
crystal
is,
that
is
the
property
on
city
sewer.
P
It
is
yes,
the
sewer
comes
right
down
to
the
property.
D
A
A
H
R
514
west
vincent
street-
and
I
think
it
would
be
a
good
idea
if
they
built
a
house
there,
but
please
remove
some
of
those
trees
because
you'll
have
better
access
for
seeing
coming
and
going,
and
my
husband
and
I
are
here
to
watch
this.
Our
neighbor
next
to
us
wants
to
do
the
same
thing,
but
we
are
three
and
four
lots
down.
A
A
A
K
Good
evening,
I
hope
you
can
hear
me.
Yes,
yes,
oh
perfect.
Thank
you.
Sorry.
I
was
looking
to
how
to
raise
my
hand.
I
am
kathy
corliss.
My
address
is
8528
west
vincent
and
about
four
houses
down
from
this
project.
I
I
I
fully
support
the
rezone
of
this.
I
am
a
little
bit
concerned
of
where
the
new
entrance
would
be
for
the
new
lot.
We
have
lots
of
it's.
K
It's
a
really
tricky
area,
there's
a
dog
leg
right
past
that
house
that
is
oftentimes
congested
and
has
been
the
cause
of
accidents,
and
also
just
the
block
before
that.
You
have
an
entrance
for
one
side
where
money
tree
is,
and
you
have
an
entrance.
I
guess
that
would
be
an
east
and
west
side
that
are
pretty
busy.
So
adding
another
entrance
right
there
onto
vanell
could
pose
a
concern.
K
A
Thank
you,
ms
corliss.
Do
we,
it
doesn't
look
like.
Actually
we
have
any
other
attendees
online,
so
seeing
no,
no,
no
other
hands
to
testify
we'll
next
move
to
rebuttal
from
the
applicant.
Mr,
mrs
cottage,
would
you
like
to
use
that
five
minutes
to
rebut.
Q
I'm
sure
can
you
all
hear
me?
Yes,
okay,
yeah
totally
understand
that
concern.
We
know
the
dog
leg
there.
We
go
up
there
to
feed
our
horses
there
all
the
time.
So
we
understand
that
I
wish
there's
something
more.
We
could
do.
I
can
say
like,
on
the
other
hand,
at
least
if
this
gets
all
approved,
will
just
be
a
nice
single
family
dwelling
home
versus
some
business
moving
in
there
bringing
more
traffic.
So
I'm
hoping
that
this
is
more
of
a
silver
lining
that
this
gets
pushed
through
than
anything.
Q
L
Unless
yeah,
unless
we
take
a
big
chunk
of
the
current
home
and
put
a
driveway
through
there,
which
would
just
be
kind
of
extending
the
street
and
maybe
confusing
it,
it
just
seems
like
it
would
cause
more
issues.
I
guess
we
don't
have
a
solution
for
how
we
would
have
a
different
access
point
into
our
house
if,
if
we're
not
able
to
enter
from
vanell.
A
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
it.
Okay,
so
next,
we'll
close
this
portion
of
the
hearing-
and
the
item
is
before
the
commission
to
render
a
decision.
O
A
H
Yeah
sure
quickly,
the
you
know
the
rezone
complies
with
the
comprehensive
plan,
as
the
zone
is
allowed
within
the
suburban
designation
and
also
maintains
the
residential
use
of
the
surrounding
area.
H
As
to
the
driveway
permit,
as
we
discussed
just
the
rezone
is
in
front
of
the
commission
right
now,
but
the
entrance
is
probably
going
to
be
managed
through
achd
at
a
later
point.
So.
A
8410
west
vincent
street
will
the
clerk
please
call
the
vote.