►
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).
B
All
right
good
evening,
chair,
Danley
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Tessa
grieger
and
I
manage
the
mobility
and
public
spaces
program.
So
we're
excited
tonight
to
be
before
you
to
provide
an
overview
of
information
planning
and
the
City
of
Boise
and
how
we
approach
that
work.
Karen
Gallagher,
sorry,
are
you?
Okay,
okay,
all
right,
so
Karen
Gallagher
is
going
to
be
providing
the
bulk
of
the
presentation
tonight,
but
I
wanted
to
take
a
few
minutes
just
to
kick
things
off
and
provide
a
high
level
introduction
to
mobility
and
public
spaces.
B
The
team
and
the
program,
so
mobility
in
public
spaces
is
a
new
program
area
for
the
city
of
Boise
within
our
planning
and
development
services.
Division.
So
before
you
on
the
slide
is
a
high-level
org
chart
for
planning
and
development
services,
and
you
can
see
where
mobility
and
public
spaces
lies
within
that.
So
we
are
one
of
five
program
areas
within
the
planning
division
alongside
development
services,
Planning
and
Zoning,
City
design
and
design
review
and
historic
preservation
So
within
Mobility
public
spaces.
B
We
have
three
people
currently
so
myself,
I
started
with
the
city
in
December,
so
I'm
still
still
pretty
new
here,
but
then
also
Karen
Gallagher,
who,
like
I
said,
will
be
giving
the
presentation
tonight
as
well
as
Dane
Hoskins,
so
Dane
just
joined
the
city
a
little
over
two
weeks
ago.
So
Dane
is
our
new
Pathways
program
manager,
which
we're
super
excited
to
have
him.
B
Karen
has
been
with
the
city
for
24
years
and,
sadly
for
us
but
exciting
for
her
she's
retiring
in
a
couple
weeks,
so
our
team
is
in
flux,
but
nevertheless
this
is
the
the
strong
and
mighty
growing
team
before
you
today
and
I'm
excited
to
move
forward
with
really
developing
the
mobility
and
public
spaces
program,
as
we
look
ahead.
B
So
just
a
lot
of
words
on
this
slide
here,
but
one
thing
I
wanted
to
mention.
We
are
working
with
a
consultant
right
now,
parametrics
to
work
with
our
team
to
work
with
the
planning
department
to
really
develop
the
charter,
the
vision,
the
objectives
for
the
mobility
and
public
spaces
being
that
it
is
a
new
program
area
for
planning.
So
this
is
high
level
really.
B
What
we're
striving
to
achieve
moving
forward
but,
like
I,
said
as
we
work
with
parametrics,
and
our
teams
will
be
refining
this
and
really
developing
the
plan
for
the
next
several
years
to
understand.
How
do
we,
as
a
team
within
the
city,
really
Advance
our
mobility
and
transportation
goals,
as
well
as
our
goals,
around
public
space
and
really
creating
public
spaces
that
are
inviting
active
and
connected
to
people
and
to
our
community
so
excited
to
be
moving
that
work
forward?
B
We
would
be
happy
to
come
back
to
the
commission
with
more
information,
as
we
have
that
built
out,
so
you
have
a
better
understanding
of
where
we're
going
several
years
down
the
road
as
we
look
at
the
mobility
in
public
spaces
team,
so
today
just
to
talk
high
level
about
our
primary
responsibilities
as
a
team.
So
we
are
largely
focused
on
Transportation,
Planning
and
Karen
will
speak
to
this
today.
B
But
this
includes
coordinating
with
our
partner
agencies,
as
you
all
are
very
well
aware
of
achd
brt
CCDC
Compass
to
advance
our
mobility
and
transportation
projects
and
priorities,
conducting
development
review,
supporting
Transportation
plans,
so
the
transportation
action
plan
or
other
Transportation
plans
as
they
come
up
and
then
some
involvement
with
different
projects
such
as
the
8th
Street,
where
we
have
some
ownership
pathway
projects
are
newer
to
our
team.
But
this
is
something
that
we
are
really
excited
to
be
expanding
on,
especially
as
we
have
a
new
Pathways
program
manager
with
us
currently.
B
So
we
have
a
couple
priority
projects
that
we
have
funding
for.
This
includes
the
garden
and
Kasha
pathway
project
as
well
as
Broadway
and
Federal
Way.
So
those
are
two
that
we're
advancing
currently,
but
we
also
have
a
whole
Pathways
master
plan
that
we're
working
to
develop
and
Implement
moving
forward
and
then
Mobility
programs.
So
one
of
the
projects
that
we're
working
on
right
now
we
have
a
council
Works
session
planned
for
tomorrow
to
provide
an
update
on
our
shared
micro,
Mobility
Program.
B
So
those
are
a
few
just
primary
responsibilities
today,
but
moving
forward,
as
I
mentioned,
we're
working
with
the
consultant
to
really
develop
and
build
out
what
is
the
program
structure?
B
What's
the
charter
for
this
team
and
the
way
that
we're
looking
at
this
is
having
programs
that
are
really
focused
in
these
four
areas
that
are
listed
on
the
slide
here
before
you
so
having
projects
that
are
identified
and
that
we're
supporting
moving
forward
under
the
mobility
Network
Pathways
program,
so
not
just
delivering
on
key
projects
but
really
developing
and
advancing
a
program
around
Pathways
Mobility
options.
B
So
having
different
programs
and
initiatives
that
support
people
with
their
transportation
options,
so
whether
that's
education
or
encouragement
or
supporting
different
enforcement
programs
and
then
one
of
the
big
opportunity
areas
working
with
our
partner
departments
as
well
as
our
partner
agencies,
is
public
spaces.
So
that's
one
that
we're
really
looking
to
further
refine
to
determine
what
is
the
best
role
for
mobility
in
public
spaces
to
play
in
terms
of
activating
and
really
creating
these
inclusive
and
welcoming
public
spaces
in
our
community.
C
Thank
you,
Tessa,
thank
you,
chair
and
commission,
so
in
2016,
the
city
embarked
on
a
transportation
plan,
and
it's
built
on
the
premise
that
no
city
has
ever
built
its
way
out
of
congestion.
So
therefore
we
were
really
looking
at
other
ways
of
moving
people
and
it
not
only
is
it
a
vision,
it
is
an
action
plan.
C
That's
four
round
trips
and
if
you
take
a
trip
to
a
soccer
game
or
to
the
bank
or
to
whatever
that
is
all
of
those
add
up
and
if
you've
got
teenagers
you
have
more
and
if
you
have
a
single
person,
you
know
senior
you're
going
to
have
less,
but
on
average
it's
10.,
and
so
we
were
looking
at
even
if
we
could
reduce
that
by
10
percent
one
vehicle
trip
or
two
round
trip.
You
know
how.
C
C
So,
as
you
know,
you've
got
subdivisions
conditional,
uses
plan
unit
developments,
everything
that
comes
across
you
and
everything
that
goes
to
the
other
decision
makers
as
well,
that
design
review
and
staff
level
and
then
on
the
public
side.
Of
course,
we've
got
the
Ada
County
Highway
District,
that
is
building
through
their
five-year
work
plan.
We've
got
the
city
investing
in
Pathways,
Valley,
Regional
Transit,
of
course,
ccdc's
building
infrastructure,
as
well
as
money
that
comes
through
Compass
to
various
agencies.
C
And
to
accomplish
that,
we
do
have
checklists
checklists
before
things
come
to
across
for
your
decisions
and
then
checklist
as
we're
looking
at
achd
or
VRT,
or
whatever,
investing
as
well
and
we're
looking
at
all
the
modes
and
looking
at
ways,
even
with
the
new
zoning
code,
of
how
those
can
be
highlighted
to
make
it
obvious
what
The
Pedestrian
environment
is
just
in
one
sheet
at
a
time
to
look
at
those,
so
I
think
we've
got
some
advances
that
are
going
to
make
that
easier
to
look
at
looking
at
the
modes.
C
One
by
one.
Transit
is
one
of
the
best
ways
that
we
can
move
people
it's
efficient
and
it
just
has
a
reach
of
from
you
know
less
than
a
mile,
or
you
know
if
you
people
walking
about
a
mile
everything
beyond
the
mile
up
to
you
know,
23
miles
can
get
you
to
Caldwell
that
walking
and
biking
won't
get
too
everywhere.
But
Transit
really
is.
Is
our
Ace
in
moving
people
more
efficiently?
C
So,
to
do
that,
we
need
land
uses
along
those
routes
that
support
that
which
again
is
a
direct
connect
with
the
business
it
takes
place
here
with
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
and
then
just
briefly
wanted
to
you
know:
higher
frequencies
equates
to
more
writers
and
there's
a
conversation
tomorrow
night
at
city
council,
with
our
annual
public
hearing
before
city
council,
to
talk
about
the
level
of
funding
and
more
information.
If
you're
interested
in
that
feel
free
to
tune
in
then
looking
at
achd,
we
have
them
involved
in
two
levels,
on
the
bicycle
Network.
C
C
So
this
involves
a
lot
of
a
lot
more
shares,
but
then
enhanced
Crossings
so
that
people
can
get
across
the
arterials
way
finding,
and
it's
just
a
great
way
that
achc
is
advancing
multiple
miles
to
get
people
across
all
sections
of
the
city.
You
know
they've
done
neighborhood
plans
on
each
of
our
everything,
but
the
airport
planning
area
to
come
up
with
networks
and
and
there
they
are
definitely
making
progress
on
the
low
stress
bike
Network.
C
The
other
one
is
on
the
arterials,
which
is
a
little
more
nuanced
and
I
did
want
to
just
touch
base
with
you
on
this.
The
like
in
this
example
the
the
mile
arterials,
are
shown
here
mostly
in
green
and
a
lot
of
those
achd
does
have
plans
to
improve
the
bike.
Network
and
they've
switched
from
the
five
foot
bike
path:
bike
lane
on
the
street
to
the
multi-use
path
that
has
at
least
a
four
foot
buffer
on
it.
C
So
we've
got
a
little
bit
of
a
disconnect
there
and,
through
the
city's
pathway,
planning,
sometimes
we're
trying
to
catch
that,
but
we're
supportive
of
achd
getting
that
policy
completed
so
that
if
it
comes
to
the
development
process
or
if
it
comes
through
achc's
Capital
we're
getting
the
same
result,
but
you'll
see
a
little
difference
in
that
right.
Now.
C
Still
on
that
interim,
of
course,
the
other
one
is
Tessa
was
touching
base
on
is
that
we've
got
the
whole
pathway
Network
throughout
the
throughout
the
city,
Citywide
and,
as
we
know,
people
highly
desire,
an
off-street
network
to
walk
or
bike,
and,
of
course
this
does
connect
to
Transit
as
well.
C
So
the
last
mode
is
walking
and
just
wanted
to
talk
about.
A
few
highlights
on
that
that
you
know
a
high
quality
pedestrian
environment
really
helps
to
support
walking
an
interesting
walk,
active
building
facades,
no
blank
walls.
This
is
always
a
challenge
with
parking
garages,
then,
of
course,
shade
created
by
Street
trees.
The
trees
also
add
interest.
They
also
help
with
traffic
calming
they
get
us
a
big
bang
for
our
buck
and
then,
of
course,
there's
all
the
environmental
ones
too.
C
So
trees,
of
course,
are
great
in
that
buffer
that
gets
created
between
the
moving
traffic
and
pedestrians,
either
walking
or
if
it's
a
multi-use
path
at
the
Bice
clean.
Of
course,
we
mentioned
the
enhanced
Crossings
to
get
across
arterials
to
break
down.
Those
barriers
is
also
really
helpful
for
walking
that
you
don't
have
to
walk.
Pardon
me
a
half
mile
or
more
out
of
your
direction
to
get
a
safe
Crossing
that
we
have
worked
with
achd,
at
least
on
the
arterials,
to
try
to
get
enhanced
Crossings
at
the
quarter
mile.
C
So
that's
three
in
between
your
major
intersections
and
then
the
last
thing.
If
you
remember
nothing
else
that
I
talked
about,
it
would
be
detached.
Sidewalks
detached
sidewalks,
detached
sidewalks,
that's
one
of
the
main
decisions
that
gets
made
or
that
a
lot
of
times
that
the
developer
has
either.
Maybe
some
would
rather
take
a
different
approach
than
the
condition
that
staff
has
recommended
and,
like
I,
said
that
infrastructure
is
in
place
for
easily.
C
E
E
I
know
when
I
started
a
couple
of
years
ago.
Man
I
can't
believe
it's
been
that
long,
but
working
together
on
many
many
Corridor
projects
and
sub
area
plans
and
all
those
types
of
things
back
in
those
fun
days
and
I.
Just
think
I
just
know.
All
of
us
appreciate
those
thankless
moments
and
countless
hours
that
you
spent.
You
know
doing
everything
that
you
can,
on
behalf
of
the
city
and
the
residents
of
this
city,
to
make
the
transportation
Rome
a
better
one.
So
thank
you
for
your
service
and
enjoy
retirement.
F
I
would
like
to
chime
in
as
well
I
can't
the
city,
it
won't
be
the
same.
Karen
I,
just
can't
believe
it
and
I
I
think
you
know
our
places
up
on
Casa
Street.
But
if,
if
you
guys
have
not
been
up
there,
you
you
should
come
now
that
you're
retiring
you
can
come
sit
on
the
front
porch
that
we
just
built
and
see
what
you've
done
to
cash
the
street,
because
it's
spectacular
it
really
is.
It
is
like
the
e-bike
Super
Highway.
F
It
is
the
cutest
thing
you've
ever
seen
in
your
life,
because
we
have
you
know
Borah
down
the
one
side
and
then
you
go
all
the
way
down
cash,
the
street,
of
course,
into
the
park,
and
it's
just
it
is
the
most
fun
thing
to
watch
these
families
with
those
big
cargo
bikes
and
they
got
their
kids
on
the
back
and
radios,
and
it
is
just
the
coolest
thing
in
the
world
and
when
that
Garden
Street
piece
goes
through
through
the
park,
I
I
think
it's
just
going
to
be
spectacular.
F
I
know
so
many
people
are
waiting
for
it,
but
yeah.
It's
just
great
work
and
it's
super
super
exciting
to
see
and
I
hope
what
they
did
on
the
other
side
of
Kasha
actually
moves
our
way
too
so
it'll
and
what
they're
doing
on
Kootenai
with
bull
bouts
and
that
kind
of
thing
that
would
be
really
cool.
We
still
have
a
lot
of
speeding
on
Casa
Street
and
it
really
is
starting
to
be
used
in
more
of
a
multimodal
fashion
up
there.
So
yeah,
it's
just
super
great
work
and
oh
my
God.
F
It
will
be
just
a
different
place
without
you
here.
E
E
Yes,
that's
a
great
thing,
but
as
achd
because
nacto
as
you
know
and
ashto
are
not
the
same
thing
and
and
I
think
you
would
agree
that
nacto
is
much
more
in
line
with
their
guidances
in
terms
of
what
we're
trying
to
achieve
and
maybe
not
as
much
as
achd,
but
maybe
I'm
wrong
on
that.
So
I
loved
your
take
on
we're
going
this
way.
Are
they
going
that
way
and
are
we
going
to
be
aligned.
C
Oh
Mr,
chair
a
really
good
question.
You
know
we
definitely
desire
to
adopt
some
standards
so
that
you
know
every
once
in
a
while.
We
get
into
a
situation
where
we
would
like
to
point
to
a
standard
and
other
than
achds
that
more
fully
align
with
the
city's
Transportation
goals.
So
nacto
was
one
possibility
to
achieve
that.
C
It's
still
kind
of
interesting
since
we
don't
control
our
streets,
I
mean
nacto
is
set
up
for,
of
course,
not
a
lot
of
set
up
for
the
situation
that
we
have
and
so
I
think
it'd
be
interesting
to
have
more
of
a
conversation
with
nacto
to
see
if
they
would
even
allow
us.
Actually
they
have
to
accept
you
right,
you,
you
would
apply
and
see.
C
If
that
would
work,
yeah
achd
did
just
send
it
one
or
two
people
to
Necto
from
their
team
that
they
came
back,
I
think
very
excited
of
what
they
experienced
there.
C
So
I
think
that's
an
opportunity
for
us
to
talk
with
achd
too
to
see
what
the
possibilities
are,
but
it's
probably
not
as
straightforward
as
we
might
have
thought.
It
was
when
we
first
came
up
with
the
the
tap.
C
Know
in
Ashton's,
even
of
course
advancing
in
ways
that
are
more
supportive
as
well,
not
as
fast
as
and
not
quite
to
the
extent,
but
you
know
I
think
there's
more
room
for
that
conversation
as
we
move
forward.
Well,.
E
And
you
know
like
with
ite:
that's
everybody
in
the
engineering
World
bow
down
to
itd
right
but
or
ite,
but
you
know
they
have
Crossing
guidance
that
in
some
cases,
goes
down
to
every
300
feet
in
urban.
Downtown
areas
marked
signalized.
What
have
you
we're,
picking
and
choosing
which
one
of
those
policies
and
I
don't
mean
us
I'm?
Just
you.
E
Partners
in
some
cases,
like
you
just
described
the
quarter
mile
spake
spacing
a
question.
I
would
ask
you.
10
trips
per
day,
has
been
the
standard
for
ever
right.
I'm
curious.
Where
are
things
trending
between
the
deliveries,
home
deliveries,
right,
Amazon,
the
UPS,
FedEx
everything
and
then
I'm
curious?
If
our
the
household
surveys
from
Compass
have
backed
up
any
declines
in
that
number,
are
we
getting
to
nine
or
even
less
than
that
or
how
is
that
trending.
C
G
C
As
they
build
for
the
the
next
long
range
plan
that
hopefully
we
can
get
some
good
data
from
that
other
than
that,
maybe
that's
a
request
that
we
could
put
into
achd
to
you
know
it
takes
a
really
kind
of
unique
situation.
I
mean
I,
can
remember
when
I
was
at
achd
and
how
we
picked,
or
they
traffic
had
picked
a
development
that
was
a
cul-de-sac
that
had
all
the
homes
that
were
occupied
in
it.
C
C
H
E
Any
more
questions,
I
just
have
one
more
comment,
but
making
sure
no
I
gotta
say
what
I
gotta
say
be
in
lieu
of
you've.
Heard
me
say
it
before:
on
sidewalks
city
of
Lewiston
has
one
they
have
a
model
ordinance
and
I.
Think
that
there's
so
many
times
when
we
have
applications
in
front
of
us
and
it's
either
we're
all
in
or
we're
all
out
right.
It's
either
we
nope
you
have
to
build
it
or
yep.
E
Sidewalk
segment
is
Paramount
for
one
reason
or
another
right
and
but
in
capturing
fun
that
would
otherwise
go
to
those
sidewalk
segments.
You
can
go
to
other
things
that
are
more
pressing,
so
that's
that's
my
two
cents
oops
all
right,
happy
retirement.
Thank.
C
C
Funny
I
did
just
want
to
put
a
plug
in
for
acht,
since
they
were
the
ones
that
did
the
cash
Bikeway,
that
that
is
getting
all
that
wonderful
use
and
we're
glad
to
work
with
them
to
get
that
connection
they're
at
Albion
between
Albion
and
the
park
to
further
it,
but
just
really
want
to
give
kudos
JC
for
the
work
they've
done
there.
So
thank
you.
A
A
So,
starting
from
the
top,
we
do
have
six
minutes
that
we
need
to
approve
so
make
sure
we
get
those
at
the
beginning
and
the
next
item,
probably
or
I
guess
the
first
item
before
we
do
the
consent
and
gender
actually
I.
Don't
remember
which
goes
first
item
two
did
not
post
the
site,
and
so
we
cannot
hear
that
tonight.
So
we
just
need
to
defer
that
to
the
next
hearing,
first
and
foremost,
and
then
back
up
at
the
top
of
the
agenda.
A
We've
got
an
appeal
of
drh
2333
by
the
Royal
Plaza
Master
Owners
Association
at
120
North,
12th
Street.
This
is
an
appeal
of
the
design
review
committee's
approval
of
a
modification
of
the
conditions
of
approval
for
a
previously
approved
26-story
mixed-use
building
to
allow
early
morning
concrete
pores
during
construction
on
the
property.
This
isn't
a
c5dd
Zone
and
we
will
be
hearing
that
we
are
recommending
denial.
A
I,
don't
know
how
to
pronounce
the
applicant's
name
so
I'm.
Just
going
to
let
you
read
that
that
is
at
1299
North
Orchard
Street,
it's
conditional
use
permit
for
a
trade,
slash
Vocational
School
on
12.21
acres
and
a
c3d
Zone.
A
We
are
recommending
approval
on
that
and
can
try
for
consent
item
four
is
CVA
23
6
from
Amy
Young.
This
is
at
10
417,
West
Harvester
court
and
it's
a
variance
to
encroach
into
the
rear
inside
setbacks
for
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
on
0.42
acres
and
an
r1b
single-family
Zone.
We
are
recommending
approval
on
that
and
haven't
heard
anything
from
neighborhood
association
or
neighbors.
So
we
can
try
for
consent
on
that.
If
you
are
willing
item,
five
is
PUD
23
2
from
Andy
Thompson
Construction,
and
that
is
at
2576
North
Linda,
Vista
Lane.
A
It's
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
planned
residential
development
comprised
of
six
multi-family
units
on
0.86
acres
in
an
r1c
Zone.
We
are
recommending
approval,
but
the
applicant
is
contesting
condition
two
requiring
the
consolidation
of
access
points.
So
we
will
be
hearing
that
and
we
did
have
a
last
minute
call
from
a
neighbor
who
will
be
coming
up
to
speak
item.
Six
is
car
23
6
from
the
Conger
group.
A
We
are
recommending
denial
of
the
request,
so
we
will
be
hearing
that
and
we
do
expect
some
public,
although
they
did
not
sign
up
in
advance
item.
7
is
CPA
23
6
and
car
2313
from
Micron
Technologies.
It's
at
8,
000,
South,
Federal
Way.
Generally,
it's
a
comprehensive
plan.
Land
use
map
amendment
to
adjust
the
city
area
of
impact
boundary
to
incorporate
517
Acres
with
an
assigned
industrial
land
use
designation.
An
additional
79
Acres
with
a
planned
Community,
Land
Use
designation,
also
included,
is
the
request
to
Annex
those
areas
or
to
the
517.
A
Acres
excuse
me
and
modify
the
existing
development
agreement.
To
take
care
of
that,
we
are
recommending
approval.
We
can
try
for
consent.
We
haven't
heard
anything
on
that
one
if,
if
we
want
to
and
then
finally
the
big
mouthful
item,
eight
CR
2248
from
BBA,
this
is
generally
located
at
6310,
South,
Orchard,
Street
and
5110
South
or
West
Lake
Hazel
Road.
A
But
wait.
I
am
not
done
yet.
We've
got
a
CPA
associated
with
it
as
well.
That's
cpa223
and
that's
the
comp
plan
amendment
to
change
the
land,
use
designation
of
approximately
26
Acres
of
this
area
from
industrial
to
Commercial,
and
then
we've
got
the
sub
23
1
and
that
would
be
the
innovator,
Business
Park
subdivision
and
that's
a
preliminary
plat
for
a
mixed
use.
Non-Residential
subdivision
of
42
buildable
Lots
on
120.2
acres
in
that
pending
m1da
and
c2da
Zone.
A
A
We
need
to
defer
item
two.
We
can
try
for
consent
on
three
four
seven
and
eight
and
we
will
definitely
be
hearing
1,
5
and
6.
A
All
right,
good
evening,
everybody
Welcome
to
the
Boise
City
Planning
and
planning,
and
zoning
commission
public
hearing
a
few
things
to
start
out
with
for
tonight's
proceedings.
Everyone
from
the
public
entering
the
hearing
virtually
has
been
automatically
muted
and
cannot
speak.
As
the
item
you're
interested
in
comes
up
for
discussion,
you
will
be
called
upon
and
unmuted
there's
a
chat
function
in
Zoom,
though
this
is
not
part
of
the
record
and
should
only
be
used
if
technical
difficulties
arise.
A
Our
procedures
for
public
hearings
begins
with
a
presentation
from
the
planning
team,
then
we'll
go
to
the
applicant
and
then
the
representative
of
the
registered
neighborhood
association,
followed
by
questions
from
the
commission.
After
that,
we
proceed
to
public
testimony,
starting
with
those
who
are
here
in
person,
then
those
who
signed
up
on
the
sign
up
sheet
in
advance
and
then
anyone
else
who
raises
their
hand
virtually
if
you
are
attending
through
your
telephone,
you
can
type
in
Star
9.
To
raise
your
hand,
each
member
of
the
public
is
allowed
up
to
three
minutes
for
Testimony.
A
E
E
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
gotten
given
written
or
oral
testimony
at
tonight's
hearing.
So
that's
why
it
is
important
for
you
to
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
is
no
public
opposition,
the
item
will
be
placed
on
the
consent
agenda.
E
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
minutes
ago
with
staff,
applicant
neighborhood
association
and
then
the
public
testimony.
Thank
you
all
for
attending
tonight.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
roll.
E
Okay,
so
on
to
our
consent
agenda
we're
going
to
change
the
batting
order
up
a
little
bit
and
begin
with
meeting
minutes.
So
we
have
meeting
minutes
from
April
24th
April,
25th,
April,
26th,
April,
27th,
May,
8th
and
the
work
session
from
May
8th.
Is
there
any
discussion
on
any
of
the
items
for
any
of
the
meeting
minutes
hearing
none.
We
will
move
all
six
of
the
meeting
minutes
to
the
consent
agenda.
E
All
right
next
up
for
consent
is
item
number
two
wait
a
minute:
I
apologize!
That's
not
item
number
two!
That's
a
deferral!
Number
three
cup
23-12,
Arc
Terriers.
How
do
you
say
that
arcteriors,
okay
I'm
going
to
go
with
that
located
at
1299,
North,
Orchard
Street,
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
vocational
school?
Is
the
applicant
here
or
online
I
see
the
applicant
is
here
Mr
Stewart!
Is
that
you?
E
E
E
Are
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
in
the
staff
report?
Yes,
you
are
okay,
great.
Is
there
anybody
here
or
online
who
wishes
to
wishes
to
object
or
to
to
testify
an
objection
to
this
item?
E
No
Okay
cool,
so
item
number
four
is
eligible
for
the
consent
agenda.
Moving
forward
item
number
seven
CPA,
23-6,
car
23-13,
Micron
Technology
a
name.
We
know
a
located
at
8,
000
South,
Federal
Way,
which
is
a
comprehensive
plan.
Land
use
map
amendment
is
the
applicant
or
representative
of
the
applicant
here
or
online
yes
familiar
face.
Okay,
and
do
you
agree
with
the
terms
and
conditions
in
the
staff
report?
E
Seeing
non
number
seven
item
number
seven
is
eligible
for
the
consent
agenda.
Item
number
eight
is
next
eligible
for
the
consent
agenda.
Car
22-48
bva
located
at
2310
South
Orchard
Street
and
5110
West
Lake
Hazel,
Road
I'm
gonna
move
forward
to
the
next
one.
Do
I
have
to
read
every
bit
of
that?
Yes,.
E
One
more
time
anybody
from
bva
nobody,
okay,
well,
is
anybody
here
or
online
willing
or
wanting
to
testify
in
opposition
to
either
of
those
three
applications
seeing
none
items,
all
three
items
number
that
comprise
number
eight
are:
all
else
are
eligible
for
the
consent
agenda.
Anybody
willing
to
make
a
motion.
Yes,
commissioner,.
F
E
F
Blanchard,
just
so,
we
don't
hold.
F
I
am
not
in
favor
of
putting
item
eight
on
the
consent
agenda,
I
think
it's
too
complicated
I
think
it's
I
think
a
representative
should
have
at
least
shown
up
and
shown
their
face
and
done
at
least
that
courtesy
to
us
before
putting
something
lysis
like
this
on
the
agenda,
so
I
will
be
a
no
vote.
E
I
E
Okay,
we
have
item
number
two:
a
request
for
deferral.
This
is
PUD
23-08,
Walsh
Holmes,
located
at
3712,
North,
Patricia
Lane,
a
modification
for
conditional
youth
permit
is
the
applicant
in
Chambers
or
online.
E
Don't
have
to
be
okay,
we're
good
on
that
all
right.
So
is
there
anybody
here
this
evening
that
was
hoping
to
testify
on
item
number
two
PUD
23-08.
E
L
Move
that
we
defer
item
number
two
PUD
23-8
until
July
10th.
Second,
okay,.
E
E
Okay,
now
on
to
the
show
item
number
one:
this
is
an
appeal
of
design
review
committees,
it's
drh23-33,
Royal,
Plaza,
Master,
Owners,
Association
Inc.
The
project
is
located
at
120,
North,
12th,
Street
and
again.
This
is
an
appeal
made
by
the
master
Owners
Association
of
the
decision
from
design
review
committee.
So
with.
M
M
M
M
So
at
the
this
or
the
March
8th
2023
designer
view
hearing
the
applicant
brought
forward
a
request
to
modify
the
conditions
of
approval
that
were
placed
on
the
application
when
it
was
approved
by
the
designer
view
committee
that
application,
or
that
condition
was
that
construction
is
limited
to
the
hours
of
6
30
a.m,
to
6,
30
p.m,
on
weekdays
and
8
30
a.m,
to
6
p.m,
on
Saturdays
and
Sundays.
M
This
is
a
standard
condition
of
approval
that
is
placed
on
designer
view
applications
in
the
subsequent
time.
Since
this
approval
back
in
2021,
we
have
modified
the
way
that
we
do
business
and
added
some
Provisions.
That
applicants
can
make
an
easier
request
to
modify
conditions
of
approval
and
related
to
construction
activities.
This
is
a
request
that
we
have
seen
a
few
times
in
the
past
and
I
believe
that
the
commission
has
as
well
recently
so
at
that
hearing
the
design
Review
Committee
did
modify
the
conditions
of
approval.
M
The
applicant
had
requested
a
4
AM
start
time
for
large
concrete
pours
for
the
project
on
some
limited
days
for
about
a
year
of
construction.
You
know
a
few
days
a
month
when
they
do
these.
These
significant
pores
the
applicant
is
here,
will
testify
about
how
many
they
have
of
those
and
what
they
expect
to
see
there.
M
They
required
a
schedule
of
the
extended
pores
to
be
provided
to
the
adjacent
residents
to
the
project
monthly
and
then,
if
there
are
changes
or
that
poor
was
not
going
to
take
place,
they're
required
to
notify
the
residents
within
three
days
of
that
scheduled
for
that
there
was
a
change
to
that
monthly
schedule
they
distributed
so
repeal
was
submitted
by
the
royal
master
Owners
Association,
which
is
the
adjacent
Residential
Building
to
this
project
on
the
vicinity
map,
they
are
located
at
the
corner
of
11th
and
Main
down
there
at
the
southeast
corner
of
the
same
block
that
this
project
is
on
so
certainly
folks.
M
That
would
be
heavily
impacted
by
construction
activities
on
this
site.
The
grounds
for
appeal
are
in
your
the
memo
distributed
to
the
to
the
commission
tonight
and
here
on.
The
screen
and
staff
has
has
taken
a
look
at
these
grounds
for
appeal,
and
we
do
find
that
the
committee
was
within
their
their
purview
in
making
the
decision
to
modify
the
condition's
approval.
It
was
based
on
application
materials
submitted
in
the
public
record.
M
The
design
Review
Committee
listened
to
testimony
both
from
the
applicant
and
from
adjacent
residents
in
terms
of
the
impacts
of
the
noise.
Ultimately,
the
commission
or
the
committee
decided
that,
while
this
is
a
significant
inconvenience
and
they
did
recognize
that
it
is
an
activity
that
is
typically
associated
with
downtown
construction
and
it
would
be
anticipated
in
the
downtown
core,
they
found
that
the
time
that
it
takes
to
pour
these
large
volumes
of
concrete
justify
the
extension
to
the
hours.
M
The
applicant
has
some
information
they
presented
about
the
safety
of
the
public
transportation
system,
with
additional
trucks
on
the
roadway
during
the
busiest
times
of
the
day
as
part
of
their
justification,
and
also
just
the
fact
that
the
concrete
pour
is
this
large
take
a
very
long
amount
of
time
to
complete.
If
they
were
not
granted
the
extended
hours
of
construction,
they
would
have
to
modify
the
construction
methods
that
they
are
using
to
pour
these
large
slabs
and
break
them
into
two
pores.
Instead
of
doing
them
in
one
in
the
applicant.
M
Some
detailed
information
about
that
in
that
presentation
as
well.
So,
based
on
all
of
that,
we
did
find
that
the
design
Review
Committee
acted
within
their
Authority.
It
was
based
on
relevant
information
and
testimony
in
the
public
record,
and
we
would
recommend
that
you
deny
the
appeal
and
uphold
their
decision
with
that.
I
would
stand
for
any
questions.
Great
thank.
E
G
E
So,
in
this
case,
we're
going
to
go
with
the
the
appellant-
in
this
case,
the
representative
from
the
Royal
Plaza
Masters
Owners
Association,
which
is
John
Marshall
John
you
signed
up
here.
Are
you
present?
This
must
be
you,
okay,
come
on
up.
If
you
would,
please
start
with
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
N
Certainly,
my
name
is
John
Marshall
I
live
at
1112
West
Main,
Boise,
Idaho,
83702
number
504
I
am
a
resident
of
the
Royal
Plaza
building
and
I'm.
Here
tonight,
though,
on
in
my
capacity
as
a
as
a
representative
of
the
Owners
Association
representing
the
the
broader
the
broader
range
of
ownership
interests
with
all
the
owners
in
the
in
the
association
I,
don't
need
to
take
a
ton
of
time
here.
I
think
our
appeal
is
straightforward.
N
As
as,
as
Josh
indicated,
the
the
existing
condition
of
approval
is
one
that
we
feel
appropriately
balances
interest.
It's
a
start
time
of
6
30
in
time
of
6
p.m.
N
You
know
we
just
assume
not
have
that,
but
of
course
that's
not
unreasonable
and
we
understand
that
we
live
downtown
and
there
are
construction
projects
happening,
and
we
fully
recognize
that
and
are
appreciative
actually
of
of
the
builders
efforts
to
date
to
to
work
with
us
and
be
considerate.
We've
had
some
good
interactions
on
many
different
things,
but
what
we're
asking
tonight
of
you
all
is
to
is
to
balance
the
competing
interest
of
of
two
downtown
neighbors.
N
Now,
on
the
one
hand,
you've
got
the
Builder
who
wants
to
efficiently
build
their
building
and
on
the
other
hand,
you
have
the
neighboring
owners,
like
literally
the
adjacent
neighbors,
and
you
saw
the
map.
I
mean
we're
right
next
door
and
they're
they're
staging
areas
to
the
west,
and
then
the
building
is
right
to
the
north
of
ours,
and
so
the
impacts
of
this
building
are
are
quite
significant.
I,
don't
think
disputed
I
mean
the
the
impacts
of
the
destruction
noise.
N
The
light
from
the
crane
and
the
floodlights
to
get
construction
during
times
when
there's
when
it
when
it's
not
light,
is
significant.
There's
there's
the
noise
there's
the
dust,
it's
it's
a
significant,
it's
a
significant
burden
on
the
Resonance
of
the
Royal
Plaza,
and
so
we're
asking
you
to
to
balance
interests.
On
the
one
hand,
again,
you've
got
the
the
interest
of
the
Builder
to
go
more
efficiently
on
large,
concrete
pours.
N
Our
interest
is
as
neighbors
to
not
have
that
construction
impact
happening
in
what
we
consider
the
middle
of
the
night,
and
we
we
think
it's
it's
completely
feasible
and
reasonable,
based
on
the
testimony
so
far
for
these
pores
to
happen,
and
if
it
takes
two
poor
two
times
to
do
a
single
pour
that's
not
going
to
significantly
affect
the
timing
of
this
project.
It's
a
two
and
a
half
to
three
year,
build
I,
believe,
and
so,
if
you've
got
say
it's
say
it's
10
days
or
20
more
days.
N
However,
those
times
when
you
do
have
the
construction,
starting
at
4
AM,
there's
a
significant
percentage
of
the
members
or
the
owners
of
the
Royal
Plaza
who
just
aren't
going
to
be
able
to
sleep,
the
noise
and
the
light
and
the
dust
it's
just,
it's
very,
very
impactful
and
very
disruptive,
and
so
so
we're
asking
that
you
balance
that
interest
and
say
between
the
efficiency
of
the
build
versus
the
impact
on
the
neighbors
and
the
fact
that
it's
not
going
to
significantly
increase
or
even
really
measurably
increase
or
decrease
the
amount
of
time
it's
going
to
take
to
construct
this
building,
recognizing
the
recognizing
the
severe
impact
to
the
neighbors.
N
The
balance
is
appropriately
struck
by
the
existing
condition
of
approval,
which
is
that
6
30
start
time
and
again
the
the
impact
to
that
4
a.m.
Start
time
on
the
neighbors
is
significant
enough,
where
we
feel
it
does
is
not
justified
by
Whatever
by
whatever
convenience
is
added
to
the
developer
or
the
Builder
in
terms
of
its
construction.
N
With
that
I
guess:
I'll,
I'll,
I'll
close
and
stand
for
questions.
Okay,.
G
E
O
Thank
you,
Austin
Conger,
mcilvain
construction,
5700,
West,
gallon
Road
83709
is
the
clicker
working
Josh,
okay,
so
12th
and
Idaho
is
a
26
Story
cast
in
place
residential
project,
concrete
activities
currently
taking
place
and
will
continue
into
January
of
2024
weekly.
We
have
deck
pours
consisting
of
approximately
400
cubic
yards
of
concrete
per
pour.
If
you
look
at
a
standard
concrete
truck,
they
hold
about
10
yards
so
that
quick
math
is
40.,
40
trucks.
O
So
you
know
one
of
our
big
concerns
with
this
is
safety.
So
you
got
these
hundred
thousand
pound
trucks
rolling
down
the
road
if
we're
pushed
back
to
a
6,
30
start
that
pushes
in
us
into
the
downtown
corridors
peak
time
of
traffic,
also
pedestrians
walking
back
and
forth
across
the
street.
So
we
really
want
to
limit
the
exposure
to
the
public
with
these
high
volume
pores
we're
trying
to
have
a
truck
there,
every
seven
minutes.
O
So
it's
it's
a
really
intense
operation
schedule
we're
placing
the
deck
core
wall,
which
we
would
call
in
layman's
terms,
the
the
stairwell
and
the
Elevator
Shaft
and
columns
all
in
the
same
day
in
order
to
meet
our
schedule.
O
Concrete
isn't
always
like
it
shows
in
the
movies
it
takes
a
little
bit
for
it
to
set
up
before
you
can
actually
get
out
on
it,
so
that
us
starting
earlier
allows
us
to
get
on
that
slab
sooner,
so
we're
not
pushing
into
the
late
time
frame
for
the
pores
late
into
the
afternoon
evening,
and
also
we
start
the
Shoring.
So
that's
building
the
next
floor
the
same
day
that
we
pour
the
deck.
This
is
a
standard
practice.
O
That's
done
all
across
the
country,
nothing,
nothing
new,
but
definitely
different
to
our
sleepy
town
of
Boise
Idaho
heat.
So
that's
always
a
concern.
So
with
with
the
hotter
temperatures,
it
kicks
the
concrete
off
into
a
quicker
curing
cycle,
which
is
a
lot
more
intensive
for
our
employees
that
are
going
to
need
to
work
in
the
afternoon.
O
O
So
we
understand
that
this
construction
is
a
nuisance,
but
one
of
the
way,
some
some
of
the
ways
that
we
look
to
eliminate
that
nuisance
or
reduce
the
nuisances
all
the
concrete
trucks
are
equipped
with
white
noise
back
alarms.
O
Our
crews
will
meet
to
mitigate
to
remind
them
to
be
respectful
of
our
neighbors
and
construction
and
how
inconvenient
it
is
from
you
know
normal
parking
to
lunch
breaks
to
whatever
and
we'll
focus
specifically
on
our
our
noise
as
we're
communicating
with
each
other,
so
we'll
use
tower
crane
lights
to
reduce
the
light
pollution
to
surrounding
buildings.
O
So
we
won't
have
a
bunch
of
light
plants
like
generators
and
here
in
a
couple
floors
we're
going
to
be
above
the
Royal
Plaza,
so
they're
not
going
to
be
getting
hit
with
that
light
pollution
that
you'd
normally
see
on
a
big
downtown
pour
also,
we
use
radios
to
communicate
between
our
Pub
truck
on
the
on
the
ground
to
the
cruise
up
on
the
deck
pouring
and
yeah.
That's
it
I'm
hoping
for
questions.
E
Okay,
I
think
Mr
Conger
we're
going
to
see
if
anybody
here
from
the
neighborhood
association
and
if
not
we'll,
come
back
to
questions.
Is
there
anybody
from
the
downtown
Boise
neighborhood
association,
who's
here
to
testify
or
online,
seeing
none.
Okay.
At
this
point,
we'll
turn
it
over
to
questions
from
the
commission.
E
L
I
think
maybe
this
is
a
question
for
staff
or
perhaps
applicant,
but
in
the
late
correspondence
that
we
received,
it
said
that
we
they
were
pouring
as
early
as
two
and
three
o'clock
in
the
morning.
Do
we
know
it
sounds
like
a
complaint
officer
was
contacted
about
that?
Do
we
know
if
that
has
that
been
confirmed?
Is
there
any
follow-up
to
that
Mr.
M
Chairman
commissioner,
stood
I
would
defer.
L
P
M
Mr
chairman
commissioner
Moore,
absolutely
so
as
the
commission
as
or
the
condition
as
the
committee
approved
it.
P
M
Mr
chairman
commissioner
Moore,
so
there
has
not
been
an
update
to
any
of
this
since
the
design
review
committee
took
their
action.
So
when
the
designer
view
committee
changed
the
condition
of
approval,
that
condition
would
be
in
force
except
for
an
appeal
was
filed
by
The
Neighbors.
E
P
Just
and
I
guess
this
is
kind
of
the
application
made
a
little
bit
of
reference
to
kind
of.
If
a
design
review
application
would
happen
today,
it
would
have
a
different
language
to
the
condition.
Yes,.
M
I'm
picking
up
which
foot
down
now
sorry
about
that
yeah,
so
we
have
changed
internal
policies.
You
know
this
condition
of
approval.
It
just
kind
of
sets
those
construction
hours
in
stone.
The
current
ordering
of
that
condition
is
that
the
planning
director
has
the
authority
to
process
requests
to
modify
the
condition
the
hours
of
construction
during
very
limited
circumstances.
You
know
they
would
have
to
provide
justification,
there's
not
like
a
set
list
of
criteria.
That
would
be
a
request
to
the
planning
director
to
modify
outside
of
6
30
to
6
on
weekdays.
E
P
Ahead
and
I
think
this
is
a
question
for
mcelvaine,
so
I
think
you
sort
of
answered
it,
but
just
to
confirm
Why
not
start
at
six
and
end
at
8,
30.
I
know
the
summer
months.
You're
dealing
with
heat
during
the
day,
totally
understand
that
yes,
please,
but
you
know,
for
the
other,
eight
or
nine
months
of
the
year,
Why
not
start
at
six
and
end
at
8,
30.
O
So
we
are
on
a
six
day
deck
cycle,
so
every
six
days
we're
pouring
in
elevation.
So
as
as
you
can
imagine
all
of
the
operations
when
you're
doing
that
much
work,
you
move
from
a
daily
schedule
to
an
hourly
schedule,
so
you're
trying
to
cram
and
get
as
much
done
possible
within
those
12
hours.
I!
Guess
of
that
day
that
you're
allowed
to
work.
Does
that
answer
your
question.
R
P
To
some
extent,
but
I
think
the
the
biggest
is.
Why
start,
why
request
to
start
early
as
opposed
to
just
staying
later?
If
the
because
I
think
a
lot
of
the
public
comment
is
about
just
the
earliness
of
the
hour,
that's
you're
starting
and
it
seems
like
maybe
going
a
little
bit
later,
might
mitigate
some
of
that.
You
know
feeling
of
starting
in
the
middle
of
the
night
yeah.
S
O
I
feel
if,
if
you
shift
the
summer
time
hours
granted
the
next
three
months
call
it
you'll
be
pushing
later
in
the
evening
the
wintertime
months
when
it's
colder,
it
takes
a
lot
longer
for
the
concrete
to
cure.
That's
when
you
you
need
the
earlier
time
you'll
be
out
on.
That's
the
guys
will
be
working
that
slab
late
and
won't
be
able
to
accomplish
those
other
activities.
I'd
mentioned
other
than
just
pouring.
That
slab.
E
O
So,
thank
you
for
acknowledging
that
this
type
of
construction
is
a
lot
different
than
what
we
would
do
on
another.
You
know
Podium
style
type
of
building
with
those
podiums
you're,
usually
larger
square
footage,
so
in
those
larger
square
footage
you're
not
relying
on
the
floor
you're
pouring
to
instantly
get
back
on
top
of
when
you've
got
larger
square
footage.
Podiums,
like
you
know,
let's
throw
30
000
square
feet
out
there
for
an
example.
O
You
typically
do
about
12
to
15
000
square
feet
pores
at
a
time.
Well,
that
just
happens
to
be
what
our
12th
and
Idaho
project
is.
Once
we
go
typical,
it's
a
single
floor
plate,
so
you
are
stuck
until
you
get
that
floor
done.
You
can't
go
any
higher.
You
can't
do
any
other
operations,
so
it's
as
it's
a
rapid
game
as
soon
as
you
can
build.
O
On
top
of
that,
the
better
you
know
with
the
podium
or
the
Tilt
up
or
a
grocery
store
right,
it's
different,
because
you
usually
have
larger
masses
that
you're
working
with.
So
that's
that's
why
it's
different
than
what
our
typical
projects
that
we've
done
here.
I
think
this
is
this:
is
the
tallest
cast
and
play
structure?
That's
in
Boise,
so
a
lot
of
the
other
ones
were
structural,
steel,
I.
Think.
E
Okay,
one
more
question,
and
this
could
be
for
you
for
you
or
if
it
could
be
also
be
for
staff.
What
I'd
like
to
know
is
what,
if
what
is
the
official
action
at
4am
that
necessitates?
This
is
the
beginning
of
activities.
In
other
words,
is
the
staging
of
trucks
at
3
30
in
the
a
in
the
morning,
not
part
of
the
official
green
flag,
so
to
speak,
and
is
that
hey
we're
pumping
concrete
here
at
4
00
a.m?
Is
that
what
exactly
is
it
about
the
operations
that
we're
describing?
M
Mr
chairman,
thank
you,
I.
Think
that
that's
a
very
thoughtful
question.
It
is
the
it
is
a
commencement
of
noise
generating
activities
on
site,
so
it
would
be
the
trucks
arriving
on
site
there.
There
is
in
this,
as
mentioned
on
commissioner
Moore's
question.
This
new
condition
that
we've
written
does
specify
that,
inter
you
know,
once
the
building
gets
enclosed
and
there
are
noiseless
activities
inside
like
painting
something
like
that,
those
are
allowed
to
take
place
at
any
time
in
our
new
condition
clarifies
that,
but
this
is
outside
noise.
O
That
you
agree
with
that.
Why,
if
I
step
in
so
the
noise
generation,
that's
going
to
be
happening
so
so
at
4am,
our
pump
truck
is
showing
up
on
site.
That's
on
the
opposite
end
of
where
Royal
Plaza
is
that's
on
12th
side
of
the
project.
O
Idaho
side
of
the
project
sorry
got
confused
so
that
truck's
on
the
opposite
and
around
4
30
4
45,
is
when
the
parade
of
concrete
trucks
starts,
showing
up
and
really
the
noise
that
that's
going
to
be
the
loudest.
That's
generated
during
that
time
is
The
Surge
from
the
pump
truck
and
also
the
con
concrete
trucks
going
in
a
high
Revolution
trying
to
spin
the
rest
of
the
mud
out
of
their
truck
and
then
on
top
of
the
deck
operation,
where
the
where
the
craft
is
actually
working.
O
You're
going
to
hear
vibrators
that
are,
you
know,
stinging
the
concrete
getting
it
to
move
around
to
activate
the
concrete,
as
we
go
up,
obviously,
that
that
noise,
the
conveyance,
is
going
to
change
right
or
we're
going
to
end
up
shooting
over
the
top
of
Royal
Plaza
they're
not
going
to
have
nearly
as
much
exposure
as
they
currently
do.
Right
now,
for
these
next
few
weeks,.
E
Any
other
questions:
okay,
let's
go
ahead
and
move
forward
to
public
testimony.
Is
there
anybody
here
you
can
go
and
have
a
seat.
Thank
you.
Anybody
here
who
wishes
to
testify
on
this
item.
Item
number
one:
the
appeal
of
design,
review,
23-33
in
Chambers
or
online.
E
T
My
name
is
Tiffany
penicard
I
live
at
1112,
West,
Main,
Street,
number,
603
and
I
was
one
of
the
ones
that
complained
that
when
we
had
a
couple
times
three
o'clock
morning
and
it's
not
just
the
it's,
not
just
the
the
cement
trucks,
it's
the
pound,
pound,
Pound
I
have
a
dog,
and
she,
where
we
are,
it
has
been
better
but,
for
example,
as
of
6
30
when
they
start
they're
there
at
six
o'clock,
and
we
can,
we
can
hear
it
and
I
get
it.
T
That's
why
I
moved
downtown
because
we
want
to
live
by
these
big
buildings.
We
I
want
to
be
down
here
by
that,
but
not
being
able
to
sleep.
It's
it's
brutal
and
if
there's
a
way
to
figure
that
out
to
where
we
could
extend
until
8,
30
or
whatever
that
looks
like,
but
it's
it's,
it's
not
just
the
cement
trucks.
I
am
on
the
corner
in
the
back
and
I
get
up
and
I
look
out
on
my
balcony
and
it
I
have
it.
I
have
videos
of
it
and
not
because
I'm
trying
to
be
difficult.
T
E
E
Seeing
none
okay,
rebuttal,
we're
gonna,
go
in
reverse
order,
now,
right,
okay,
so
our
app
are
appellant,
gets
to
come
up
and
rebut.
Anything.
You've
said
if
you.
E
O
Yes,
thank
you.
Austin
Conger,
5700,
West,
gown,
Road,
83709,
Boise,
I
understand
the
inconvenience
that
construction
does
in
a
growing
city.
O
I
have
a
I,
have
a
rather
large
family
and
I,
understand
dogs,
barking
and
kids
being
loud
or
not
getting
sleep
I
get
it,
but
I
feel
that
the
the
new
sense
is
worth
avoiding
any
issues
with
our
Peak
travel
times
within
in
and
out
of
the
downtown
Corridor
for
where
12th
and
Idaho
is
located,
trying
to
get
those
concrete
trucks
out
of
there
as
soon
as
possible.
So
yeah,
that's
my
appeal.
Okay,.
E
Great
now
the
appellant
Mr
Marshall,
if
you
can
again
again
state
your
name
and
address
please
one
more
time.
That's.
N
Right,
John
Marshall
one
one,
one,
one:
two
West
Main
Street
number
504
on
behalf
of
the
Royal
Plaza
Master
Owners
Association,
just
a
couple
of
quick
comments.
It's
it's
completely
clear
and
we
do
not
dispute
the
fact
that
it
would
be
better,
more
efficient
for
mcilvane
to
be
able
to
start
their
concrete
work
earlier.
N
But
what
we've
heard
is
is
is
actually
quite
inconsistent
on.
On
the
one
hand,
we
hear
that
it's
about
getting
the
the
trucks
out
of
the
area
sooner,
but
the
volume
of
concrete
is
I,
can't
remember
the
numbers,
but
it's
you
know
every
seven
minutes.
A
concrete
truck
comes
so
there's
concrete
trucks
on
the
highway
at
the
peak
traffic
times.
No
matter
what
it's
just.
Do
you
have
a
few
more
that
start
earlier
and
again,
our
position
is
that
whatever
benefit
is
gained
from,
that
is
not
worth
the
impact
that
it
has
on
us.
N
We
also
hear
that
the
need
to
do
this
earlier
start
time
is
because
of
the
heat
of
the
summer,
and
then
it
turns
out.
That's
actually
not
about
the
concrete
it's
about
the
workers
and
their
convenience,
and
it's
the
winter
time
when
we
actually
need
to
have
the
earlier
start
time
for
the
for
the
concrete.
So
it's
kind
of
an
it's
it's
an
evolving
story
and
again
we
recognize
it's
it's
better,
it's
more
efficient
for
Medical
Vein.
If
they
can
do
this
at
4am,
but
again
we're
asking
you
to
stay.
N
N
We
just
think
it's
it's
too
much
to
ask
of
us
and
it's
not
it's
not
essential,
and
so
it
asks
you
to
to
to
grant
our
appeal
and
deny
design
reviews
approval
of
the
application
to
change
that
start
time
to
4
AM
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
E
E
P
I
know
that
we
deny
the
rh-23
the
appeal
of
drh-23-33
for
the
reason
stated
in
the
staff
before
second.
P
I
think
the
transcript
from
the
designer
view
committee's
meeting
is
very
thorough,
I'm
comfortable
with
the
questions
they
asked
I'm.
Seeing
this
kind
of
request
would
be
a
once
a
week
thing
kind
of
that
maximum
on
average
over
the
next
year.
It's
it's
a
lot,
but
that
will
mean
ultimately
shorter
schedule.
Fewer
6
30
start
times
that
we've
done
sooner
instead
of
extending
the
schedule,
that's
more
6,
30
start
times
so
I
think
it
does
condense
that
disturbance.
P
If
you're,
not
extending
the
construction
schedule,
it
does
condense
that
disturbance-
it's
not
part
of
it,
but
it
does
kind
of
help.
Part
of
the
the
complaint
I
suppose,
but
on
top
of
that,
you
know,
based
on
discussion,
I
think
it's
a
safety
and
a
convenience
matter
on
a
few
different
levels.
So.
G
P
The
summer
starting
earlier
gets
workers
out
of
the
heat
of
the
day
which
it
does
get
hot
and
that
that
is
a
safety
issue.
You
have
workers
working
in
100
degree
heat
during
the
day.
That's
that
is
a
safety
issue,
on
the
other
hand,
in
the
winter
there's
potential
based
on
what
we
heard
tonight
for
it
to
extend
later
into
the
evening
and
then
we're
in
a
similar
situation.
P
If
we
start
later
so,
regardless
of
what
happens,
you're,
either
starting
really
early
or
you're
extending
later
in
the
evening,
and
that's
the
middle
of
the
night
again
so,
and
unfortunately,
there's
not
a
great
solution
that
everybody
will
be
necessarily
happy
with,
but
because
it's
once
a
week
because
it's
to
help
keep
things
on
schedule
to
minimize
those
6
30
start
times.
Ultimately,
in
favor
of
upholding
the
denial
Mr.
R
L
I,
don't
see
any
fault
with
the
decision
made
by
the
design,
Review
Committee,
which
is
why
I
support
the
motion,
but
I
have
so
much
empathy
for
this
4
AM
start
time.
That
is
really
brutal
and
I'm.
L
You
know
it's
too
bad
that
as
a
city
we're
not
taking
into
account
the
residents
impact
in
this
scenario,
the
first
time
it
when
it
when
it
was
first
discussed
because
we're
not
I'm,
not
I,
don't
feel
like
I'm
here
to
critique
the
decision
that
was
made
more
than
the
process
of
their
decision,
which
I
don't
see
fall
down.
L
But
I
would
ask
the
city
to
please
keep
a
very
close
eye
on
compliance
for
this
project
that
they
are
not
starting
earlier
than
they
have
been
permitted
to
and
that
that
they're
effectively
communicating
that
schedule
as
requested,
because
it
sounds
like.
Maybe
that
hasn't
been
happening
to
the
degree
that
the
city
expected
it
to.
R
Mr,
chair
I'll,
just
add
one
thing:
if
I
may
Mr
chair,
please
just
for
the
record
James
Smith,
Deputy,
City
attorney,
just
to
add
just
to
make
sure
that
commission's
aware
there
there's
no
requirement
to
find
error
with
the
decision
below
and
that
this
commission
can
sustain,
deny
or
modify
the
decision
and
conditions.
Thank
you
even
without
finding.
U
U
Would
I
would
concur,
particularly
with
commissioner
stead
in
terms
of
just
so
much
empathy
I'm
one
of
those
crazy
people,
that's
usually
up
at
4
or
4
30
every
day,
but
I
wouldn't
want
that
noise
even
being
awake.
U
I
think
this
is
a
really
challenging
situation.
What
I'm,
hoping
for
is
by
these
earlier
start
times
allows
the
workers
to
be
more
efficient
and
to
get
through
the
process
as
quickly
as
possible
and
I'm.
Just
really
sorry
that
there
is
the
impact
to
you,
because
I
do
believe
that
rest
is
really
important
to
human
beings
and
I
will
just
ask
that
mcilvane
be
a
good
neighbor
and
stick
to
the
start
times.
I,
don't
want
to
hear
that
this
is
coming
back
with
earlier
times.
So
that's
all
I
have.
E
You
know
yeah
boy,
this
is
gonna
happen
more
and
more
right.
I
mean
this
is
a
residential
Tower.
So
the
folks
who
live
in
this
future
building
may
very
well
be
impacted
by
a
building
right
next
door
and
into
the
future
for
something
very
much
the
same
and
as
we
continue
to
see
more
residential
uses
in
downtown.
E
This
is
going
to.
This
is
a
growing
pain
right.
We
haven't
had
a
ton
of
residential
in
downtown,
it's
happening
more
and
more
and
more.
This
is
going
to
continue
the
only
thing
I
keep
coming
back
to
is
and
I
don't
know
if
there's
Merit
here,
but
splitting
the
difference
does
that
have
any
Merit.
In
terms
of
the
time
I
I
hear
I
hear
it
compelling
argument
on
the
construction
side,
not
mine.
E
You
know
sort
of
baileywick
so
to
speak,
I'm
having
to
take
and
have
faith
in
that
discussion
that
that's
the
way
that
it
is
and
that,
unfortunately,
that
does
take
a
lot
more
time
and
effort
and
a
complicated
build.
So
I
certainly
do
respect
that.
The
only
thing
I
could
keep
coming
up
to
is
every
now
and
then
up
here.
We
hear
about
this
notion
of
a
good
neighbor
agreement,
and
that
sometimes
has
you
know
value.
Sometimes
it
doesn't
I,
don't
know
if
that
even
applies
here
but
I.
E
Think
to
commissioner
Squires
and
commissioner
stead
everybody's.
Really
we
got
to
comply
with
that.
We
gotta
comply
with
that
right.
We
can't
have
a
bunch
of
staging
and
stuff
at
3.
3
30,
4
o'clock
is
already
gonna
be
super
early
I
will
be
supportive
of
the
motion,
but
I
really
do
agree
that
this
has
to
be.
You
know
hard
and
fast
at
that
time.
So
any
other
discussion
all
right.
Well,
the
clerk.
Please
call
vote.
E
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
all
right.
Moving
forward.
Let's
see,
item
number
five.
This
is
PUD
23-02
Andy
Thompson
Construction
Inc,
located
at
2576
North
Linda
Vista
Lane,
a
conditional
use
permit
for
Planned
residential
development
comprised
of
six
multi-family
units,
and
we
hear
from
staff
Jesse
Lyle.
V
Mr,
chair
and
Commissioners
good
evening
item
before
you
is
PUD
23-2,
a
plan
residential
development
comprised
of
six
multi-family
units
located
at
2576,
Linda
Vista
Lane
on
0.86
acres
in
an
r1c
Zone,
the
applicant
proposes
to
add
two
duplexes
and
one
small
detached
unit.
In
addition
to
the
existing
single
family
home
on
site,
maximizing
the
allowed
density,
all
parking
requirements
have
met
have
been
met
and
the
applicant
is
proposing
detached
sidewalks
with
Street
trees
along
Linda
Vista.
E
W
Oh
and
just
start
up,
yeah
go
for
it.
It's
all
good.
What
Builder
I
I
have
a
little
YouTube
video
that
I
can.
X
A
Mr
Thompson,
it
looks
like
you
declined
to
be
promoted
to
panelists.
So
just.
W
G
W
W
No
good
at
speaking
in
front
of
people
so
I,
just
read
it
out,
so
I
wouldn't
go
on
for
hours
and
hours.
W
First
of
all,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
express
my
point
of
view
about
my
choice
of
design.
The
one
disagreement
with
staff
approved
conditions
of
approvals
is
that
you
can
consider
consolidation
of
the
two
driveways
one
existing
one
proposed
the
other
to
remove
the
the
detached
Adu
entirely
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
do
that.
That'll
satisfy
the
fire
department,
Solid
Waste
utilities,
comments
and
many
of
the
others,
if
not
all,
of
the
conditions
by
staff.
W
My
client
for
this
design
is
directly
neighboring.
The
project
I
did
two
years
ago.
This
design
came.
This
neighbor
came
to
me
through
not
through
advertising
nor
word
of
mouth,
but
by
admiring
my
design
physically
in
the
real
world.
These
neighbors
live
on
the
site
in
question.
They
want
to
add
density,
which
is
good
for
Boise.
First,
they
have
a
place
of
their
first
to
have
a
place
where
their
own
grown
children
to
live
and
also
for
future
potential.
W
Passive
income
I
tell
you
this,
because
the
first
thing
that
I
told
them
when
they
came
to
me
is
the
city
would
want
to
see
only
one
driveway.
They
prefer
to
keep
their
driveway
private
for
their
own
home
and
for
good
reason.
Honestly,
who
wants
to
see
their
grown
children
coming
and
going
every
day
about
me.
I
have
a
very
strict,
often
self-conflicting,
design
standard.
That
I
feel
aligns
itself
very
well
with
the
city
of
Boise
number.
W
One
safety
is
Paramount
number
two,
and
this
is
where
two
and
three
tend
to
conflict
quality,
good,
looking,
pleasing
design
and
increase
density,
while
maintaining
privacy
hard
design
to
make.
This
is
what
I've
done
here
for
the
good
of
the
client,
for
the
good
of
Boise
and
for
the
good
of
the
neighbors
and
passwords
by
I
already
have
a
plan
B
that
was
originally
the
plan.
It
fits
all
the
current
conditions
of
the
approved
approval
by
designing
staff.
W
Originally
I
designed
the
two
duplexes
originally
Plan
B
was
Plan.
B
was
the
original
plan
and
I
designed
the
additional
two
duplexes
with
the
four
units,
with
the
intention
of
only
one
driveway
accessing
the
garages
from
the
side.
This
created
a
rear
private
backyard
space,
as
required
by
code
that
directly
butted
up
against
the
new
sidewalks.
W
We
had
already
installed
this
results
in
one
of
two
things:
a
privacy
fence
that
conflicts
with
my
rule
of
good,
looking
and
eye
pleasing,
or
an
open
backyard
that
allows
more
decorative
facade,
but
completely
contradicts
the
spirit
of
the
personal
private
area.
It
also
creates
four
garages
in
a
row
in
full
view
of
any
passage
by
well.
Not
parallel
with
the
road
are
quite
obvious
and
possible
to
make
look
like
anything
other
than
random
row
of
storage
units.
W
W
There
are
good
and
justifiable
reasons
with
my
current
design,
and
should
that
should
be
allowed
within
the
city
staff.
The
Ada
County
and
the
cut
itself
it
has
been
and
I
quote,
approved
as
designed
by
both
with
both
new
and
existing
Drives
By
The
achd,
so
no
conflict
there
with
the
county,
which
would
usually
have
been
one
of
the
biggest
hurdles
number
two
at
my
pre-application
meeting
with
Planning
and
Zoning
I,
had
specifically
asked
about
the
two
driveways.
To
my
surprise,
a
senior
member
of
staff
made
one
of
the
most
amazing
comments.
W
He
said
in
the
end,
the
ideas
that
we
that
it
looks
like
we
intended
to
do
it
this
way,
not
as
if
it
were
there
and
as
an
afterthought
I
was
floored.
It
was
a
brilliant
answer.
It
mirrored
my
thoughts
on
design
exactly
design
and
infill.
Exactly
note
that
in
the
pre-application
notes
that
it
says
a
single
calm,
driveway
is
preferred.
It
does
not
say
that
it
is
required.
W
Number
three
I
believe
wholeheartedly
with
code
city
code,
1174.3
or
0.3
C,
which
states
doesn't
mean
to
improve
safety
and
traffic,
to
improve
traffic
safety
and
to
improve
the
visual
quality
of
an
area.
The
number
of
driveway
intersections
with
public
or
private
roadway
and
residential
progress
projects
shall
be
minimized
now,
wouldn't
it
be
easier
to
say
just
one
rather
than
to
minimize
or
must
rather
than
shell,
remove
all
questions
save
us
all
time
it
does.
W
It
does
say
it
does
not
say
only
one
and
to
believe
that
those
who
wrote
the
code
had
a
good
reason.
It
is
because
it
could
contradict
itself
if
I
could
have
Consolidated
the
existing
driveway
and
still
best
improve
the
visual
quality
of
the
area.
I
would
have
choosing
an
inferior
design
was
never
the
intention
of
when
the
code
was
written.
As
for
my
number
one
rule
safety
and
the
first
thing
the
code
mentions
the
safety
aspect
of
it.
W
This
street
is
littered
with
private
driveways,
a
possession,
a
pedestrian,
walking
North
within
150
feet
on
that
side
of
the
street,
we'll
walk
past
three
driveways,
then
the
current
existing
driveway,
then
the
proposed
common
driveway
there
is
no
surprise
or
danger
to
pedestrians
or
by
Vehicles
entering
or
exiting.
If
there
were
a
safety
issue.
I
would
have
never
put
a
second
thought
into
this
plan
from
there.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
I
could
go
on
but
defer
to
questions.
Okay,.
E
Great,
thank
you.
Mr
Thompson,
stand
close
by
we'll
go
next
to
the
neighborhood
association.
Is
there
anybody
here
or
online,
who
is
from
the
West
Valley
neighborhood
association
who'd
like
to
testify.
G
E
Seeing
none
we'll
go
to
questions
from
the
commission.
E
E
Okay,
well
going
once
going
twice:
Miss
Thompson
you
get
to
rebut
nothing.
If
you'd
like
you
can
come
right
back
up
and
if
there's
anything
else,
you
want
to
add
you're
welcome
to
do
that,
you're
right.
We
need
to
do
public
testimony.
Thank
you,
I'm,
not
feeling
no
one's
going
to
be
here,
but
let's
see
we
don't
have
anybody
yeah.
We
do
wow
man
I'm
all
over
the
place.
E
Mark
as
Andrus.
Yes
got
something
right
tonight,
all
right
come
on
up
Mark.
If
you
wouldn't
mind,
please
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
Thank
you.
S
Mark
Andrews
2640
North
Linda
Vista
I
was
gone
when
we
had
your
first
meeting,
I
was
in
Ecuador,
so
I
missed
everything
I,
mainly
you
showed
up
to
see
what
was
going
on
because
nobody's
ever
gotten
to
me
all
right,
it
looks
good
really
I
was
I
was
amazed.
S
What
I
would
like
to
see,
though,
is
no
parking
signs
on
the
road
the
road's
too
narrow
on
it.
If
you've
ever
been
down,
Linda
Vista,
you
know
two
cars
almost
hit
each
other
all
the
time.
It's
really
really
close
and
big
trucks
forget
it.
You
know
car
and
a
Truck
cannot
go
by
there.
S
That's
basically,
all
my
only
concern
is
just
like
one
side
of
it.
Put
no
parking
on
the
street
that
way
that
Street's
gonna
be
wide
enough
for
two
cars
and
pedestrians
and
it'll
be
safer
for
everybody.
E
W
Andrew
Thompson
1625,
South,
Holland,
Street,
Boise,
83705.,
yeah
I'd,
add
no
parking
signs.
If
does
he
allowed
me?
I
have
no
problems
with
it.
The
street.
We
did
actually
improve
both
sides,
one
with
my
project
and
they
the
neighbors,
join
me
with
that
improvements
to
save
money,
two
at
a
time
kind
of
things,
and
they
knew
that
they
were
going
to
try
to
improve
this
a
lot
shortly
after.
So
that's
where
we
are,
it's
already
improved
both
sides,
so
it's
the
widest
part
of
the
street.
W
All
the
way
down
and
also
achd,
is
planning
to
in
their
2024
budget
or
workflow,
whichever
that
is
they're
actually
going
to
take
the
entirety
of
Linda
Vista
and
improve
it.
Both
sides.
E
L
I
move
that
we
approve
PD
23-2
with
the
terms
and
conditions,
as
stated
in
the
staff
report,.
L
Yeah
Mr
chair
this
seems
like
an
easy
that
we
I
guess
we
see
projects
where
it's
more
complicated
to
do
one
driveway,
and
so
it
makes
sense
to
have
more
than
one
curb
cut
where
necessary.
But
this
one
looks
pretty
simple
to
me
to
line
up
with
the
one
curb
cut
so
I
support
the
consolidation.
L
I
think
that's
just
makes
sense.
That
makes
you
know
better
neighborhoods
to
have
fewer
fewer,
curb,
Cuts
I.
Think
the
achd
improvements
on
the
horizon
is
even
more
reason
to
reduce
those
curb
cuts
in
regards
to
the
public
comment
about
no
parking
on
the
street.
That's,
unfortunately
not
something
that
the
city
can
mandate.
I,
think
that
would
come
from
achd,
so
I
encourage
the
resident
to
look
into
that,
because
I
think
that
you
can
do
permanent
parking,
no
parking
things
like
that
on
the
street
through
achd.
P
I'll
be
in
support
of
the
motion
and
the
consolidation
of
the
the
two
current
Cuts
100
appreciate
Trying
to
minimize
the
look
of
four
garage
garage
doors
lined
up
I.
Think
that's
absolutely
in
line
with
a
lot
of
the
goals
of
design
review,
but
I
think
because
there
is
an
alternate
that
works
functionally
with
the
site.
I
think
it
does
make
sense
to
consolidate
it,
because
there
isn't
a
reason.
P
There's
not
really
a
reason
not
to
besides
the
garages
and
I
think
that
there
are
ways
based
on
your
design
that
can
absolutely
or
mitigate
some
of
that
appearance
in
a
really
creative
way.
So
I
I
think
it.
It
makes
sense
to
consolidate,
because
it's
possible.
U
I
am
in
support
of
the
project.
I
am
not
in
support
of
the
motion.
I,
don't
think
consolidation
is
needed
in
this
particular
instance.
It's
a
local
Road.
It's
not
slated
to
be
a
collector
with
traffic.
There
is
very
limited
direct
access
to
Linda,
Vista
and
I.
Just
don't
see
the
need
to
consolidate
it
I
think
it's
so
minimal.
The
impact
is
going
to
be
pretty
it's
going
to
be
it's
going
to
be
very
minimal.
I
guess
is
the
point
and
I
think
we
should
take
the
opportunity
to
get
a
better
design.
E
You
know
I
generally
understand
the
the
notion
of
of
driveway
consolidation,
especially
along
arterials
and
collectors.
I
tend
to
agree
in
this
instance
with
commissioner
Squires,
especially
looking
at
the
design
and
noticing
that
you
know
the
way
that
we
do
curb,
Cuts,
driveways
and
so
forth,
and
the
sidewalk
now
is
very
different
than
it
was
in
the
70s
and
80s,
where
it
was
all
one
line.
E
Now
we
do
this
Wing
design
where
we
wrap
and
pull
back,
and
it
elevates
The
Pedestrian
profile,
which
adds
safety
and
visibility
and
I
think
as
described
with
a
local
Road.
I
have
much
less
heartache
with
that
than
I
would
in
what
we've
seen
in
other
applications
on
arterials,
in
fact,
I
think
just
last
month
and
I
think
it
lends
itself
well
to
the
overall
design.
E
E
E
L
E
We
can
do
that
before
we
all
the
role.
Is
there
any
other
discussion.
F
Well,
we
no
one
expected
that
this
would
come
to
this,
but
I
will
chime
in
as
well
Mr
chair.
F
I
do
tend
to
agree
with
commissioner
Squires
I,
don't
that
there
are
so
many
trade-offs
on
this
one,
where
I
would
prefer
fewer
curb
cuts.
Frankly,
the
code
that
staff
sites
I
think
is
really
it's
not.
It's
definitely
not
staff's
fault.
The
code
is
really
not
drafted
well
and
it's
probably
not
going
to
reappear
in
the
new
code
because
it
isn't
drafted
well.
So
I
think
we
have
leeway
here.
F
I
I,
don't
prefer
what
is
the
slot
design,
but
I
would
definitely
take
the
slot
design
where
you're
driving
down
the
street
and
you're
instead
of
seeing
a
building
you're
seeing
a
a
slot,
but
I
would
take
that
over
scene
garage
is
that
that
is
for
sure,
and
so
this
is.
This
is
a
really
difficult
one
I'm
glad
we
didn't
have
to
argue
over
the
Adu,
because
that's
one
we
just
can't
serve
safely,
but
yeah
I
mean
I.
F
Think
I'm
inclined
to
take
the
design
as
presented
and
not
require
that
second
condition.
E
Okay,
thank
you,
commissioner
Blanchard.
So
let's
go
ahead
and
take
the
votes
that
the
clerk
would
call
to
vote.
First.
L
E
E
U
E
E
Great
before
we
move
on
to
item
number
seven,
let
me
take
a
five
minute
break
since
this
one's
gonna
be
a.
G
H
Great
Mr,
chairman
members
of
the
commission,
before
you
tonight,
is
request
to
modify
an
existing
development
agreement.
The
project
site
is
located
within
the
southern
region
of
the
southeast
planning
area.
It's
characterized
by
low
rural
residential
densities
with
large
industrial
sites
nearby.
H
H
Initially,
this
application
was
denied
by
Council.
However,
a
request
for
reconsideration
was
made
in
which
the
city
council
remanded
the
application
to
go
back
to
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
with
direction
to
the
applicant
to
provide
a
development
agreement
with
specific
language
that
the
council
wanted
to
see
with
the
annexation
and
ReSound
request.
H
Specifically,
they
wanted
to
include
a
limit
of
the
number
of
lots
that
could
be
plotted
until
a
secondary
access
road
was
provided.
They
gave
Direction
on
Street,
on
which
street
construction
traffic
can
use
and
also
identified
a
zone
that
the
property
will
revert
back
to
it's.
A
secondary
emergency
vehicle
Access
Road
could
not
be
provided.
H
In
the
two
years
since
the
70th
lot
received
its
final
plot,
the
applicant
was
unable
to
make
any
Headway
in
obtaining
an
easement
for
that
proposed
emergency
access
road.
It
should
be
noted
in
2021.
The
applicant
did
propose
to
create
a
separated,
Access,
Road
running
parallel
and
north
of
East
Columbia
Road
between
the
Micron
campus.
In
this
existing
subdivision,
the
intent
was
to
help
ensure
that
Columbia
Road
would
remain
possible
at
all
times.
However,
this
request
was
not
approved
by
achd
and
ultimately
was
withdrawn.
H
H
During
review,
public
comment
in
opposition
was
received
for
the
proposed
modification.
They
cite
concerns
with
safety,
increased
risk
to
life
and
property,
with
the
proposed
alternative
mitigation
and
lack
of
secondary
access.
H
H
As
a
reminder,
the
commission
can
add
delete
or
modify
conditions
of
The
Da,
which
ultimately
are
considered
by
the
city
council
I
wanted
to
identify
some
possible
action
items
for
you
this
evening
that
you
can
consider
one
would
be
to
recommend
denial
of
The
Da
modification
as
proposed
by
the
applicant.
The
zoning
of
the
remaining
unplotted
Parcels
would
then
revert
back
to
an
A2
open
land,
as
cited
in
the
development
agreement.
H
Second,
you
can
recommend
approval
of
a
modification
that
would
eliminate
the
time
frame
required
to
obtain
and
install
the
secondary
access
road.
This
would
allow
the
applicant
more
time
to
work
through
options
on
secondary
access
without
reverting
the
property
back
to
A2
three,
you
can
recommend
approval
of
the
proposed
da
with
conditions
added
by
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission,
so
at
your
discretion,
or
for
recommend
approval
of
the
applicant's
proposed
da,
which
would
include
that
mitigation
plan
and
replace
the
requirement
for
secondary
access.
H
In
conclusion,
the
planning
team
does
recommend
denial
of
the
proposed
da
modification.
However,
we
would
recommend
and
support
approval
of
a
modification
to
the
DA
that
would
eliminate
the
time
frame
requirement
to
obtain
that
secondary
access
with
that.
The
motion
needed
this
evening
is
a
recommendation
and
I'll
stand
for
any
questions.
Great.
Q
Q
Okay,
so
this
application
is
one,
that's
got
a
long
history,
if
anything,
I
hope
to
keep
everybody
awake
tonight
with
this
tangled
web
of
agency
and
and
hearing
comments,
but
I
want
to
go
back
to
I
think
this
was
in
2016
2017..
Q
This
is
a
an
area
of
the
city
is.
Is
the
commission
is
well
aware
where
the
city
has
looked
to
grow?
It's
one
of
the
last
kind
of
large
areas
where
the
city
has
the
potential
of
adding.
You
know
thousands
of
of
lots
and
there's
long
been
an
effort
to
try
to
promote
that
growth,
but
it's
been
a
bit
of
a
struggle
and
that
has
been
in
large
part
due
to
it
being
the
area
being
controlled
by
Micron
and
Simplot,
essentially,
but
in
when
we
were
coming
through
with
this.
Q
Initially
we
that
we
were
part
of
a
group
that
helped
to
promote
this
East
Columbia
sub-area
master
plan,
and
you
can
see
on
that
that
large
most
of
the
property
owners
there
or
most
of
the
property
is
controlled
by
Micron
and
Simplot.
There
are
a
few
properties
that
are
in
the
other
category
and
those
are
the
purple
properties
and
and
the
they
constitute
the
largely
the
five
neighborhoods
that
have
been
approved
within
Boise
City.
Q
That
interim
plan
was
reviewed.
That's
what
allowed
us
to
move
forward
at
the
time
it.
The
city
also
did
a
fair
amount
of
utility
planning
and
work.
At
that
point,
there
is
sewer
capacity
for
all
of
the
Lots
within
the
five
neighborhoods
that
are
shown
here
with
Rush
Valley,
taking
up
the
essentially
the
last
of
that
sewer
capacity.
Q
Q
So,
amongst
those
four
other
subdivisions,
besides
Rush
Valley,
there's
four
about
400
units,
none
of
those
they
were
all
approved
prior
to
Rush
Valley.
None
of
them
are
subject
to
sprinkling
requirements,
Rush
Valley
after
several
hearings,
if,
if
I
had
an
excuse
for
the
loss
of
hair,
which
happened
during
law
school,
so
I
can't
really
blame
it
on
this,
but
Rush
Valley
would
have
definitely
contributed,
but
we
were
approved
in
2018
for
the
412
Lots
on
110
acres.
There
was
a
requirement
of
sprinkling
at
the
time.
Q
Little
did
I
know
that
I
I
wasn't
happy
with
Ron
Johnson
at
the
time
when
he
applied
the
the
sprinkling
requirement,
but
that
is
something
that
we
agreed
to
and
and
applies
and
again
as
as
was
mentioned,
there
was
a
development
agreement
that
requires
the
secondary
access
before
we
can
go
above
the
70
units
foreign.
So
when
we
talk
about
the
single
access,
I
do
want
to
clarify
the
single
access.
Condition
really
only
applies
in
the
area.
That's
shown
on
the
screen
in
green.
Q
The
areas
in
Blue
on
the
west
are
within
Micron
and
there
are
accesses
along
there.
The
area
where
you're
really
constrained
is
just
short
of
a
mile
along
the
green
area
as
we
develop
and
as
painted
Ridge
develops
and
a
sunny
Ridge
develops
on
the
East,
though
that
area
does
have
secondary
accesses
through
the
neighborhoods
that
are
being
provided
as
we
go.
So
we're
really
focused
on
the
green
segment
as
we
discussed
this
tonight.
Q
So
at
the
time
of
the
approval,
we
were
focused
on
two
different
agencies.
Achd,
as
you
know,
has
a
policy
on
single
access,
achd
reviewed
this
and
approved
a
waiver
of
their
policy.
It
was
largely
based
on
the
condition
of
Columbia
Road
and
it's
and
its
Dimensions,
so
you
have
26
to
32
feet
of
pavement,
and
this
is
just
a
screenshot
from
achd's
decision.
Q
Broad
shoulders
and
achd
concluded
that
if
the
entire
Road
were
blocked
due
to
a
crash,
there's
adequate
room
to
use
the
shoulders,
and
why
did
they
say
that?
Well,
this
is
what
Columbia
looks
like
in
addition
to
the
paved
areas
of
26
to
32
feet,
plus
the
the
shoulders
that
Dimension
is
actually
about
92
feet
from
fence
to
fence
50
feet.
If
you
look
at
the
pavement
from
shoulder
to
shoulder.
Q
Boise
fire
department
reviewed
this
at
the
time
they
were
the
other
major
agency
that
was
involved.
Their
their
approvals
of
the
prior
subdivisions
did
not
impose
a
sprinkling
requirement.
Q
Bonneville
number
two
went
through
with
the
final
plaid
at
the
same
time
as
we
were
going
through
and
didn't
have
a
a
sprinkling
requirement,
but
when
they
reviewed
this
they
did
approve
it.
You
know
the
secondary
access
was
not
a
requirement
of
Boise
fire.
What
Boise
fire
said
was
that
if
you
don't
have
a
secondary
access,
then
you
have
to
you
have
to
sprinkle
all
the
units
and
that's
in
accordance
with
international
fire
code
at
the
time.
Q
This
is
the
language
from
the
cited
section
where
there's
more
than
30
dwelling
units
on
a
single
public
or
private
fire
apparatus,
access
road,
you
can
Ex.
Two
directions
are
not
required
as
long
as
you
have
an
automatic
sprinkler
system.
That
is
the
same
language.
That's
in
the
2021
international
fire
code.
It
hasn't
changed
before
or
since
so
again,
after
the
after
several
hearings,
the
70th
lot
requirement
was
imposed
by
Council.
Q
That
was
in
excess
of
fire
code.
That
was
not
a
requirement
of
Boise
fire.
It
was
not
a
requirement
of
achd
so
moving
on
to
date.
Q
We
have
worked
with
those
Property
Owners
to
obtain
an
emergency
access.
We've
had
no
success
so,
as
Delaney
mentioned,
we
have
also
looked
at
other
applications
to
try
to
address
this.
One
of
those
was
to
do
a
parallel
Road
in
that
green
area.
That
I
mentioned
before,
to
try
to
keep
that
area
as
wide
open
as
possible.
Q
We
discussed
it
with
achd.
They
ultimately
came
to
the
conclusion
that
they
would
not
support
it,
and
that
was
because
they
had
already
approved
the
single
access
waiver.
In
other
words,
they
had
decided
that
it
was
just
fine
and
that
they
any
additional
maintenance
that
we
had
offered
to
cover
the
maintenance,
but
any
additional
maintenance
that
came
along
with.
That
was
not
something
that
they
wanted
to
incur.
Q
So
the
question
is:
if
secondary
access
is
beyond
our
control
and
our
best
efforts
at
this
point
and
then
what
do
we
do?
We
don't
think
that
there
is
a
safety
issue,
but
if
there
is
one
doing,
nothing
doesn't
improve
the
existing
situation
for
400
plus
lot
owners.
So
we've
been
looking
at
it
from
the
perspective
of
how
can
we
improve
the
situation
and
allow
the
project
to
move
forward,
and
so
we've
worked
with
Charlie
to
develop
a
wildfire
safety
plan
and
I
see
that
I've
been
going
a
little
bit
long
here.
E
J
I
talk
very
fast
Mr
chair,
Commissioners,
Charlie
bond
with
Environmental
Conservation,
Services,
5011,
North,
Clearview,
I,
guess
it's
Street,
sorry,
new
house,
Eagle,
Idaho
83616.,
as
stated
I
developed
the
wildlife
safety
or
Wildfire
safety
mitigation
plan
under
code,
basically
under
city
ordinance
4103-2,
because
of
where
they're
located,
which
is
mui
Wildland,
Urban
interface,
specifically
in
ri1,
which
is
sorry,
I
gotta.
Look
at
that
the
ignition
resistant
construction
zone,
one
the
ability
of
the
proponent,
can
actually
ask
to
do
a
while
or
a
wildfire
safety
plan.
J
Basically,
you
have
Baseline
standards,
that's
already
identified
for
we
ir1
that
the
basically
the
fire
department's
already
come
up.
What
we
can
do
with
the
Wildfire
safety
plan
is
basically
exceed
those
which
we've
done
significantly
the
biggest
things
we
have
on
this.
One
is
multiple
aspects:
I
think
we
went
to
look
at
this
one,
the
structural
requirements
already
identified.
They
meet
Boise
city
code,
4109,
which
again
is
class
one
fire
existing
resistance
under
the
international
Wildland
Urban
interface
code,
so
they
meet
and
or
exceed
those
already.
J
In
addition
to
that
Landscaping
requirements
under
existing
code,
you
have
30
feet
of
dispensable
or
defensible
space.
That's
it
the
additional.
What
we've
added
is,
there's
a
requirement
for
all
external
lots
to
actually
have
a
review
by
a
firewise
safety
specialist
for
all
of
those
Landscaping
plans
to
basically
control
the
type
and
connectivity
of
vegetation
on
those
areas.
If
you
actually
look
at
now,
some
of
the
houses
that
are
already
out
there
are
basically
landscape,
like
the
North
End
of
Boise.
That
is
not
a
good
place
to
be
putting
those
vegetations.
J
So
that's
part
of
the
construction
standard
of
the
Landscaping
standards
that
are
they're
added
to
that.
In
addition
to
that
homeowner
requirements,
there's
a
list
of
13
homeowner
requirements
on
there
that
all
exceed
everything
currently
identified
in
Boise
code.
In
addition
to
that,
a
little
bit
on
outdoor
fire
pits
right
now,
there
are
no
fireworks
in
addition
to
that,
there's
also
right
now
nothing
identified
for
no
outdoor
fire
bits
this
one
that
does
identify
those.
J
In
addition,
that
homeowner
assessments
and
audits,
this
is
actually
one
of
the
biggest
ones
it's
not
required
under
this
plan.
Every
time
a
new
home
is
on
the
periphery
is
put
out
there.
The
homeowner
has
to
go
through
a
basically
an
education
with
the
firewire
specialist
will
come
through
and
identify
why
they're
in
wui,
why
they're
limited
on
the
type
of
landscaping?
They
can
do
the
structural
requirements
and
go
through
all
that
with
the
landowner.
Now,
if
this
was
the
one.
Y
G
J
We
would
run
into
issues
over
time.
The
issue
of
this
is
every
five
years,
there's
an
additional
audit.
So
every
five
years
these
external
landowners
actually
have
an
audit
on
their
Landscaping
structural
requirements
all
day
to
make
sure
they
are
in
compliance,
so
there's
actually
an
enforcement
mechanism
with
that.
Next
to
that
is
external
fuel
break
again.
This
is
not
required
under
current
voice
ordinance.
There's
a
30-foot
fuel
break
around
the
entire
periphery
of
the
proposed
development.
This
does
one
of
two
things.
J
First
of
all,
it
breaks
up
the
continent,
continuity
of
fuels
to
the
structures.
Second,
it
allows
an
access
point
for
when
Fire
gets
out
there,
fire
can
actually
use
that
access
point
to
one
get
to
the
periphery
faster
and
quicker
response,
and
they
can
actually
use
that
for
a
back
burn,
so
they
can
use
that
to
back
burn
to
the
phase.
That
is
not
a
requirement.
That'll
be
around
the
entire
proposed
development.
In
addition
to
that,
there's
also
also
five
Wildfire
egress
points.
J
This
again
allows
increases
the
speed
by
which
the
fire
assets
can
get
out
and
fight
the
fire
outside
of
the
development
itself,
so
it
increases
the
probability
of
them
getting
the
fire
before
the
Fire
gets
to
the
structures
and
then
the
last
one,
multiple
on-site
Refuge
areas,
there's
actually
three
on-site
Refuge
areas.
This
is
specifically
for
shelter
in
place
if
somehow
Columbia
Road
is
shut
down
and
nobody
can
get
out,
there's
actually
three
sizable
areas
within
the
development
that
people
can
go
to
safe
areas.
Each
one
of
these
will
be
equipped
with
safety
materials.
J
J
They
are
outlined
in
this
fire
plan
and
have
to
be
implemented
last
one
Community
communication
plan
so
and
this
one
is,
we
have
an
emergency
contact
for
all
agencies
after
that
a
residential
call
tree
specifically
emphasizing
residents
the
need
if
they
need
to
be
taken
out
and
we'll
call
it
high-risk
residents
for
everybody
to
identify,
be
able
to
call
them
and
go
help
them
if
they
need
help.
J
Last
one
is
emergency
response
that
identifies
all
the
maps
of
all
the
egress
points:
fire
hydrants
and
access
any
grass
points
for
the
community
and
their
escape
plan.
All
of
that
is
required
all
that
is
required
under
the
Wildland
fire
safety
plan.
It's
been
proposed
and
all
of
those
are
not
required
under
current
voice
ordinance.
So
it
is,
we
like
to
say
a
robust
fire
plan
and
is
intended
to
basically
significantly
reduce
risk
for
Wildland
fire
in
the
area.
With
that,
any
questions,
okay,.
E
Thank
you
very
much.
We'll
come
back
to
questions.
Is
anybody
here
from
the
southeast
neighborhood
association,
Mr.
Q
I
will
be
quick
for
the
record
Heath
Clark
251
East
Front
Street,
so
this
map
kind
of
illustrates
what
Charlie
was
talking
about
with
the
areas
that
allow
fire
and
land
Wildfire.
Excuse
me:
Wildland
fire
access
points,
the
perimeter
break,
as
well
as
the
Refuge
sites
and
I'll
I'll
blast
through
this.
Q
This
is
from
the
the
fire
department's
letter
and
they
indicated
that
it
is
a
robust,
wildfire
and
safety
plan
that
it
can
be
approved
with
an
edit
removing
the
sentence
stating
that
fire
sprinklers
would
not
be
required
once
the
plan
is
fully
implemented.
That
was
a
misunderstanding.
We've
always
we
will
be
keeping
the
the
fire
sprinklers
in
place,
so
our
proposal
is
only
to
modify
the
development
agreement
to
remove
the
requirement
of
secondary
emergency
access
in
favor
of
the
Wildfire
safety
and
mitigation
plan.
Q
We're
not
talking
about
changing
any
of
the
lot
Dimensions
any
any
of
the
other
standards
and
I'll
talk
about
two
last
things.
One
is
that
the
Wildfire
plan
improves
the
overall
situation.
It
provides
a
break
protecting
the
neighbors
from
the
south,
where
the
wildfires
are
likely
to
come
from,
and
it
also
provides
secondary
routes
up
to
our
green
segment
for
sunny
Ridge,
Bonneville
point
and
Farewell
Bend.
If
Columbia
Road
is
ever
blocked
in
that
blue
area,
that's
north
of
our
project.
Q
In
contrast,
this
is
the
existing
situation.
This
is
one
of
the
neighbors.
Has
a
fire
pit
out
into
that
area.
What
we're
looking
to
do
is
to
try
to
close
all
that
off
and
end
up
with
a
situation
that
we
think
will
be
safer,
and
so
again
our
proposal
is
to
change
that
development
agreement
as
we've
listed
here.
Thank
you
great.
E
Thank
you,
Mr
Clark,
okay,
neighborhood
association
is
southeast
Eric,
Berg
I,
don't
see
in
person
nor
online
nope,
okay.
Okay,
with
that
the
items
before
the
commission
for
any
questions.
P
It's
maybe
a
little
bit
in
the
weeds,
but
the
particular
Amendment
to
the
IFC
is
a
city
of
Boise
Amendment,
meaning
in
specific
to
Boise,
as
opposed
to
elsewhere.
P
H
Chairman
commissioner
Moore,
that
request
actually
did
come
from
city
council
for
city
of
Boise
fire
to
pass
an
ordinance
to
revisit
how
many
of
those
lots
could
be
plotted
in
a
situation
like
this.
So
I
think
officially
that
took
effect
in
2000
end
of
2020
or
into
2021.
H
E
I
have
a
question
then
I
will
ask
of
the
applicant
Mr
Clark
I'm,
not
sure
if
you,
if
you
can
answer
this
great,
but
you
know
you
you
referenced
as
well
as
Mr
Vaughn
Landscaping
already
out
there.
You
showed
a
picture
of
fire
pits.
You
know
there
was
obviously
a
reference
to
to
fireworks
and
it
sounds
as
though,
as
of
right
now
there's
very
little
enforcement,
because
these
things
exist.
E
So
can
you
speak
to
that
I
mean
we
already
have
a
whole
bunch
of
homeowners
out
there
and
we
have
one
Ingress
egress
route
and
we
have
conditions
that
could
potentially
bring
about
a
fire.
Your
proposal
suggesting
a
whole
slew
of
of
treatments
that
would
hopefully
prevent
a
fire
but
of
the
existing
neighborhoods.
What
about
the
enforcement
of
that.
Q
J
Mr
chair
on
that
one
relative
to
the
vegetation
that
we
have
out
there,
it's
a
mix
of
basically
shrub
grass
step,
so
a
highly
low
stature
fuels
on
the
base
with
larger,
with
the
shrubs
relatively
the
existing.
When
you
talk
about
landscaping
again
when
we're
talking
Landscaping
on
that
one
we're
talking
about
the
homeowner
Landscaping,
so
that's
a
big
one
relative
to
those
that
are
there.
There
are
no
current
Wildlife
fire
plans
anywhere
out
there.
It's
just
current
fire
code
and
there
is
limited
enforcement
or
enforceability
on
those.
J
The
one
different
one
with
this
fire
plan
is
and
kind
of
didn't
touch
on
it.
There's
also
a
funding
component
to
this.
This
requires
that
every
homeowner
within
the
development
pays
60
per
year
into
this
fire
fund.
The
fund
is
specifically
used
for
maintenance
of
the
fuel
breaks
conduct,
conducting
the
homeowner
assessments,
basically
making
sure
that
we
implement
the
fire
plan,
which
that's
what
you're
talking
about
is
honestly
historically
they've
had
development
out
there.
There
is
no
enforceability.
E
J
Old,
so
Mr
chair
on
that
one,
the
only
one
for
the
Wildland
fire
plan
so
far
would
be
those
new
existing
units.
You
can
put
that
on
people.
J
So
the
intent
of
all
this
also
is
the
new
proposed
development
wall
actually
act
as
a
buffer
for
those
two
units.
There
again
there's
some
more
units
that
are
further
to
the
east.
That
would
be
unprotected
and
will
continue
to
be
unprotected.
But
the
intention
also
is
once
you
start,
that
is
to
start
kind
of
expanding
on
that
coordinating
with
both
the
BLM
on
those
we
can
do
fuel
projects
with
the
BLM
restoration,
Rehabilitation
projects.
J
Those
funds
are
a
big
component
of
that
and
then
working
with
BLM
there's
a
significant
amount
of
area
on
that
I
work
with
them
all
the
time
they
really
like
to
do.
Fuels
projects,
especially
on
those
nobody's,
really
taken,
really
implemented
any
of
those
with
the
existing
developments.
I
think
this
development
can
actually
push
that
forward
and
be
a
mechanism
by
which
to
bring
in
the
other
developments
to
do
some
of
the
same
measures
that
are
there.
Q
Where
you're
at
it
can
I
crawl
up
the
map
again
guys.
G
Q
So
I
think
this
map
helps
quite
a
bit
to
illustrate
what
Charlie's
talking
about
and
when
we're
talking
about
adding
this
project,
we're
talking
about
buffering
the
entire
Southern
portion
of
the
property,
which
is
where
the
wildfires
are
likely
to
come
from
across
that
open
space
coming
north,
and
you
know
a
couple
items
to
answer:
Mr
chair's
questions
like
one
this
would
apply
to
all
of
our
all
of
Rush
Valley.
We
still
remain
in
control
of
the
ccnrs,
and
so
we
can
make
those
modifications
to
incorporate
this
for
the
existing
68
Lots.
Q
So
we
haven't
actually
to
address
something
that
Delaney
mentioned.
We
actually
haven't
hit
the
70th
lot
yet
we're
only
at
68.,
but
the
this
would
be
something
that
would
be
applicable
to
everyone.
It
would
also
be
you
know,
from
our
perspective,
we're
looking
at
this
as
a
as
a
benefit.
This
would
not
be
something
that's
limited
to
in
an
emergency
to
the
use
of
Just
The
Rush
Valley
neighbors.
Q
If
there
were
a
shelter
in
place
situation,
these
Refuge
sites
would
be
available
to
all
of
the
neighbors
if
they
were
to
come
and
I.
Think
I.
Think
with
that
I'll
maybe
turn
to
your
questions.
Mr
chair.
E
E
Yeah
either
one
of
those
that's
fine,
so
a
question
I
would
have-
and
this
might
be
for
Mr
Vaughn,
but
those
power
lines
right
that
those
power
lines
high
wind
coming
through
Snap
next
thing,
you
know
brush
fire
out
there.
What's
the
scenario
that
would
unfold,
you
know,
based
on
the
existing
residents
that
proposed
new
residents.
How
did
I
mean
walk
us
through
a
little
bit
about
this?
Is
that
separation
between
the
development
and
their
egress
route
towards
the
west?
And
we
have
these
power
lines
in
between
right?
E
J
Mr
chair
on
that
one,
so
yeah
that
would
be
technically
we'll
call
the
worst
case
scenario,
which
would
sure
we're
severing
the
the
only
access,
egress
Point,
a
Wildland
fire
progresses,
and
then
that's
where
the
shelter
in
place.
The
intent
of
those
is,
if
you're
trapped
within
a
development
itself
and
cannot
get
out.
You
have
an
area
to
shelter
in
place
which
is
exactly
what
it
means
you
can
go
there.
J
Theoretically,
the
fire
would
burn
through
the
change
in
we'll,
say
historic
communities
where
it
will
burn
up
and
then
start
the
community
on
fire.
The
intent
of
the
Wildfire
plan
with
the
fuels
break
the
30-foot
fuel
break,
as
well
as
the
Landscaping
requirement
for
the
external
units.
Now
you
have
a
50
to
60,
plus
up
to
100
foot
break
in
fuels.
The
intent
of
that
one
is
when
the
when
the
Fire
Hits
it
stops
there.
So
that's
why
the
Landscaping
all
that
stuff
is
basically
critical
for
protecting
the
community
itself
and
then
within
the
community.
J
You
also
have
these
areas
that,
even
if
the
community
were
on
fire,
you
can
go
into
in
their
protected
areas.
So
you
can
see
a
couple
of
these,
especially
the
largest
one,
which
is
actually
underneath
the
power
line
up.
There
would
be
potentially
underneath
the
easement.
That's
a
thousand,
that's
a
thousand
foot
wide
easement
boom,
but
that
entire
area
would
be
basically
have
limited
vegetation.
That
area
right
now
is
a
kind
of
a
mix
of
native
shrubs
grasses
with
a
lot
of
invasive
species.
J
The
Proposal
on
that
one
would
be
basically
to
limit
the
vegetation
completely
making
that
almost
a
xeriscape,
if
you
will,
you
can
incorporate
Trails
anything,
but
the
intent
of
that
would
be
zero
vegetation.
So
if
a
fire
were
ever
to
go
through
there,
there
is
no
vegetation
whatsoever.
You
see
the
smaller
Greener
areas,
they're
also
they're,
just
green
grass.
So
that's
that's.
J
E
E
U
J
Sure,
well
as
I
say,
council
person,
sorry,
commissioner
Square,
that
I
mean
again
that's
we
can
only
plan
for
it
for
so
much
on
that
when
we
can
get
I
mean
if
you
go
down
to
you,
know
Colorado
100
mile
an
hour
winds
again
the
biggest
one
with
that
one
is
try
to
basically
limit
the
connectivity
of
fuels.
J
J
The
nice
thing,
if
you
will
is
because
of
the
fact
that
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
shrubs
and
we
have
zero
trees
in
that
area.
Your
amount
of
Ember
accumulation
goes
way
down.
So
when
you
get
those
big
wins
at
that
point
is
strict
and
it's
direct
fuel
length.
Only
Emory
accumulation
is
minimized,
but
again
the
structural
components
take
that
into
consideration
as
well.
So
you
do
have
a
vent.
J
All
your
vents
are
are
there's
no
ember
accumulation
points,
venting
cementation,
siding,
Class,
A
roofs,
all
of
those
are
built
into
the
houses
themselves,
so
it's
kind
of
a
double
win.
Again.
You
can
plan
as
much
as
you
want
and
at
some
point,
though
there
is
I
mean
you'll,
get
that
with
100
mile
an
hour.
Winds,
shelter
in
place
is
still
that's.
That's
your
final,
basically
emergency
use.
If
you
will.
E
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
so
at
this
point
we
will
turn
it
over
to
the
general
public
I.
Don't
have
anybody
signed
up
on
a
sign
up
sheet?
So
if
you
are
in
the
chambers
and
wish
to
testify,
please
come
forward
now
and
we'll
get
to
the
folks
that
are
online
momentarily.
Is
anybody
on
in
the
chambers
that
would
like
to
testify?
Okay
go
ahead
and
come
on
up?
It
doesn't
matter
which
order
yep
I
put
this
here.
E
If
you
would
just
state
your
name,
your
address,
pull
that
microphone
nice
and
close,
and
you
have
three
minutes.
Thank
you.
There
we
go
I.
D
Need
my
name
is
Amy
blazak
I
live
at
6704,
East
Black,
Gold
Street,
that's
in
the
sunny
Ridge
subdivision.
So,
first
of
all,
thank
you
for
letting
me
address.
The
commission
you've
heard
all
the
details
about
the
proposal
from
from
the
Conger
group.
The
main
problems
that
I
have
with
this
proposal
is,
first
of
all,
it
seems
to
not
take
into
account
the
four
other
subdivisions
that
are
out
there.
Sure
it's
great
for
Rush
Valley
to
have
all
this.
D
You
know
protection,
but
we
don't
have
that
and,
as
you
could
see
from
their
picture,
they
border
on
one
side
of
our
subdivision,
but
other
two
sides
are
wide
open
and
also
the
other
thing
is
that
it
it
passes
on
the
cost
for
maintaining
and
the
responsibility
for
maintaining
this
plane
plan
to
The
Rush
Valley
residents,
which
you
know.
Hopefully
they
would
do
that,
but
no
guarantee
I
noted
in
the
letter
from
the
fire
chief
that
he
referred
to
the
updated
fire
code,
which
I
think
you
brought
up
a
little
bit
ago.
D
Don't
know
why
the
achd
ever
approved
the
Rush
Valley
division
in
the
first
place,
because
if
it's
finished
there
will
be
a
total
of
about
800
houses
out
there
with
access
from
in
One,
Direction
in
and
out
and
I
think
that's
a
problem,
but
even
in
that
exception
that
they
granted,
they
didn't
ever
say
that
they
were
doing
away
with
the
requirement
for
the
two
directions:
the
at
the
secondary
access
road
that
was
needed.
D
So
that
condition
was
part
of
the
agreement
to
rezone
this,
the
land
to
even
start
Rush
Valley
to
be
built.
So
that
was
already
done
and
agreed
to
long
before
and
signed
by
Corey
Barton
long
before
the
city
adopted
a
new
fire
code.
D
So
it
seems
like
to
me
it
makes
no
sense
at
all
to
be
building
more
houses
out
there
without
a
secondary
Road
from
a
different
direction.
So,
once
again,
here
we
are
the
neighbors
trying
to
encourage
and
hope
that
the
commission
and
the
city
council
will
stand
up
for
the
safety
of
the
current
residents.
So
we're
asking
that
you
would
not
the
proposal.
That's
on
the
table.
Thank
you
all
right.
K
My
name
is
Rachel
grimsrud
and
I
live
at
6761,
East
Black,
Gold
Street
and
my
property
directly
Borders
The,
Rush,
Valley
subdivision
so
I'm
a
resident
of
the
sunny
Ridge
Subdivision
in
Southeast,
Boise
and
I've
attended
every
one
of
these
meetings
have
not
missed
one.
Regarding
the
Rush
Valley
subdivision
I've
expressed
my
concerns
on
this
matter
to
both
planning
and
zoning
committee,
as
well
as
the
city
council.
K
The
current
proposal
for
the
developer
would
remove
previous
previously
placed
requirements
of
a
secondary,
Access
Road,
a
road
that
they
promised
would
be
they
would
build
in
order
to
get
their
original
application
approved.
The
current
proposal
includes
actions
to
reduce
fire
danger,
which
is
great
I,
have
no
problems
with
this,
but
the
inclusion
of
that
plan
and
additional
access
doesn't
mitigate
the
original
need
for
the
secondary
Access
Road
Idaho
experiences
wildfires
every
summer,
and
they
burn
everything
in
their
path.
K
In
the
event
of
a
wildfire,
the
only
option
is
to
evacuate
without
a
secondary,
Access
Road.
Thousands
of
people
will
have
the
same
Dead
Road
to
evacuate
with
a
fire
bearing
down
on
us.
No
one's
going
to
be
hanging
around
to
make
sure
the
developers
fire
mitigation
Solutions
will
work.
We're
heading
out.
We're
evacuating
as
more
homes
are
added
without
an
additional
evacuation
route.
The
risk
to
life
increases
exponentially.
K
When
considering
this
proposal,
you
also
need
to
remember
the
existing
homes
and
subdivisions
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
The
Rush
Valley
subdivision
a
fully
completed.
Rush
Valley
would
more
than
double
the
number
of
residents
and
vehicular
traffic
conservatively
speaking
in
the
event
of
an
evacuation.
That
means
there's
an
additional
860
cars
that
would
need
to
use
Columbia
Road
to
evacuate
the
area.
If
you
add
that
to
the
subdivisions
that
already
exist,
that
means
over
1500
cars
trying
to
evacuate
on
a
dead
end.
K
Road
the
same
time,
emergency
Personnel
are
trying
to
come
in
on
that
Dead
End
Road
on
April
23rd,
2018
I
stood
in
this
very
room
and
warned
the
city
council
that
this
day
would
come.
The
developer
of
Rush
Valley
promised
the
city
council.
They
would
build
an
emergency
access
road
through
land,
but
they
did
not
and
still
do
not
own.
Five
years
ago,
the
owners
of
the
land
in
question
made
it
very
clear.
They
had
no
intent
of
selling
their
land.
K
I
warned
the
city
council
at
that
time
that
the
developers
would
not
get
access
to
the
land
and
they
would
request
an
exception
be
made
to
eliminate
the
emergency
access
road
that
was
five
years
ago.
I
promised
then
that
the
city
council
I'd,
be
back,
and
here
I
am
I'm,
asking
you
to
hold
the
developer
accountable
to
their
promises,
the
promises
that
they
made
to
get
the
Rush
Valley
subdivision
approved
in
the
first
place.
They
have
a
responsibility
to
follow
through
on
the
Promises,
regardless
of
how
difficult
that
might
be.
K
E
X
X
If
somebody
had
had
an
emergency
during
that
time,
I
don't
know
what
they
would
have
done.
They
talk
about
the
fires,
mainly
starting
from
coming
from
the
south
I
beg
to
disagree.
I
have
seen
them
from
the
East
multiple
times,
they've
started
from
the
West
when
they
were
by
Micron
between
Micron
and
our
subdivisions.
X
In
2008,
we
lived
down
in
Columbia,
Village
and
I
watched
houses
burn
within
minutes
on
Oregon
Trail,
Heights
I,
a
lady
died.
I
do
not
believe
it
that
that
is
acceptable
to
put
us
in
the
position
where
existing
homes
we're
going
to
be
fighting
traffic.
If
we
can
even
get
out,
if
that
road
is
even
going
to
be
open
If,
there
really
needs
to
be
a
secondary
access.
X
It's
basically
been
a
bait
and
switch
give
us
the
authorization
we'll
get
the
secondary
road.
Then
they
don't
follow
through.
They
talk
about
the
audits
and
then
doing
them
every
five
years,
I
I
don't
see
you're
gonna
get
you
can't
get
homeowners
to
keep
their
lawns
neat
you're
not
going
to
get
homeowners
to
follow
fire.
X
You
know
any
any
recommendations
and
does
the
additional
cost
come
to
us
for
these
items,
the
current
homeowners
or
will
Rush
Valley,
be
the
only
safe
neighborhood
in
the
area
anyway.
X
I
just
I
really
hope
that
you
consider
this.
It's
not
safe
and
I.
Don't
believe
that
the
additional
traffic
is
it
just
isn't
worth
it
so
anyway.
Thank
you.
W
W
You
know
it
looks
to
me
like
really.
The
best
option
for
a
secondary
road
is
to
cut
straight
across
on
the
south
end
of
that
Rush
Valley,
because
it
you
know,
you're
only
looking
at
about
a
mile
parallel
to
the
Columbia
Road,
that's
already
there
and
I.
You
know
in
some
ways
this
is
almost
more
of
a
question
to
the
applicant,
because
the
original
proposal
had
a
secondary
access
road
that
was
emergency
only
going
like
up
to
Highway,
21
and
and
I.
Don't
think
the
prospects
for
approval
were
very
high,
but
I
don't
know.
W
E
Great,
thank
you
very
much.
Okay,
anybody
else
in
the
house
all
right.
Okay,
let's
go
ahead
and
move
to
the
folks
who
are
online.
First
up
looks
like
we
could
go
with
Matthew
Sabin.
Y
Y
Lastly,
I'd
like
to
say
that
I
appreciate
their
plan
to
make
their
development
safer
from
fire,
but
I
ask
if
we
really
believe
individual
homeowners
or
their
tenants
are
going
to
remember
to
shelter
in
place
when
the
fire
comes
over
the
hillside,
I
love
the
idea
that
they're
pushing
better
fire
preparedness.
Y
I
would
like,
as
a
HOA
to
participate
in
making
hours,
also
safer,
but
again
I,
don't
think
that's
going
to
keep
my
residents
from
deciding
to
leave
and
right
now,
achg
is
demonstrating
that
chip
sealing
can
close
us
into
our
environment
for
20
or
30
extra
minutes,
which
is
enough
time
for
a
fire
to
do
some
serious
damage,
never
mind
fire.
Y
You
know
we
have
all
kinds
of
reasons
why
there's
an
access
problem
to
these
to
our
developments.
A
fire
is
a
very
important
one
and
I
appreciate
all
the
attention,
but,
frankly,
lots
of
reasons.
Residents
might
suddenly
want
to
use
the
road
and
then
can't
because
it's
full
so
in
closing
I
would
encourage
you
to
vote
to
deny
this
modification
and
allow
time
for
micron
or
achd
to
put
in
secondary
access
if
the
applicant
can't
find
their
own.
Thank
you.
Z
Z
Ian
Sander
I
live
at
8050,
South,
Gold,
Bluff
I'm,
also
speaking
as
a
member
of
our
HOA
board
as
well
since
I've
lived
here
in
the
three
years,
we've
had
Three
Fires
one
which
did
shut
down
Columbia.
Z
That
did
actually
come
from
the
north
and
crossed
over
Columbia
and
shut
that
down
for
quite
a
few
hours
off
top
of
my
head.
I,
don't
know
The
Proposal,
I,
think
to
mitigate
fire
and
Wildland
fire
safety.
I
think
is
admirable.
I
do
think
that
it
is.
It
should
be
a
requirement
for
any
and
all
subdivisions,
even
the
ones
that
are
current.
It
should
have
been
put
in
place
long
before
now.
Z
Somebody
mentioned
the
2008
fires
that
burned
down.
Oregon
Trail
Heights
I
actually
live
right
behind
that,
and
if
you
want
to
talk
about
a
fire
break,
that's
a
60-foot
cliff
that
the
fire
went
right
up
and
burned
down.
So
I
can't
remember
how
many
houses,
so
there
are
a
lot
of
things
with
fire
that
you
just
can't.
Plan
for
and
I
do
agree
with.
That.
I
also
agree.
Z
You
know
shelter
in
place
is
your
last
resort,
but
the
problem
with
that
is
that,
if
you're
Sheltering
in
place-
and
you
have
no
way
out
if
there
is
an
emergency-
something
that
a
normal
homeowner
can't
take
care
of
medications,
heart
attacks,
things
like
that,
the
chance
of
someone
surviving
things
like
that
or
smoke
inhalation
is
another
one
things
like
that:
cause
a
large
safety
to
a
large
amount
of
people.
Z
When
we
were
talking
a
thousand
homes
that
could
be
3
000
people,
if
you
want
to
put
an
average
of
three
people
per
home,
so
I
really
think
that
the
commission
please
highly,
take
this
under
consideration
and
all
the
stuff
you've
heard
from
homeowners
today
and
and
deny
this
this
request.
Thank
you.
AA
Okay,
Amanda
Rickson
and
the
address
is
5730
East,
Bend,
Ridge,
Street,
Boise,
83716,
I'm,
part
of
the
painted
Ridge
Neighborhood
and
listening
to
part
of
the
fire
safety
about
how
you
know
in
worst
case
scenario.
Some
you
know
a
fire
pole
would
break
firewood
start.
We
had
just
you
know.
Last
summer
someone
ran
into
a
fire,
pole
broke
it
in
half
and
Colombia
was
closed.
AA
Q
Thank
you,
Mr
chair,
Heath,
Clark,
251,
East,
Front
Street
in
Boise,
so
had
an
opportunity
to
listen
to
the
neighbors
and
appreciate
everybody's
comments.
Q
I
think
everybody's
coming
at
this,
you
know,
with
with
good
intent,
I
think
that
the
question
that
the
the
commission
needs
to
think
about
and
that
we've
been
thinking
about
is
that
if
it's
not
safe
now
whether
whether
there's
400
approved
Lots,
what's
the
right
answer,
the
you
know,
we
would
be
glad
to
work
with
the
other
HOAs
we'd
be
glad
to
you
know,
allow
them
to
participate
in
any
of
those
programs.
Q
You
know
everything
that
we've
talked
about
today
is
going
to
be
an
rhoa's
cost,
we're
not
asking
the
other
HOAs
to
contribute,
and
we
can
make
sure
that
all
of
that
is
enforceable
through
ccnrs
that
have
limited
Amendment
rights
and
are
enforced
through
you
know.
Professional
property
managers
so
I
have
no
concerns
about
all
of
that.
Q
But
if,
if
it's
not
safe,
then
we
need
to
look
at
what
can
be
done
and
right
now
secondary
access
is
not
something
that
can
be
done
so
we
need
to.
From
our
perspective,
we
think
that
the
best
outcome
is
to
complete
that
buffer
to
try
to
provide
shelter
in
place
areas
that
don't
currently
exist,
that
the
single
access
is
already
an
issue,
and
so
you
know
with
that.
Q
You
know
I'd
ask
the
commission
to
look
at
this
from
that
perspective
like
if
it's
not
safe,
now,
what's
the
best
solution
and
what
is
the
best
of
the
available
options
and
and
then
approach
it
from
that
perspective,
I
I
would
also
mention
one
other
thing
that
you
know
the
fire
submitted
a
letter.
Fire
department
submitted
a
letter,
it's
a
fairly
technical
letter.
Q
It
says
that
it
doesn't
recommend
approval
of
the
changes
and
the
reason
it
said
that
was
because
it
doesn't
comply
with
the
70
unit
limitation.
That
was
implied
that
was
applied
by
the
city
council
and
it
doesn't
comply
with
the
60
unit
limitation.
That
was
subsequently
added.
Q
Q
They
were
unwilling
to
contradict
that
with
the
recommendation.
I
understand
where
that's
coming
from,
but
I
think
what
we
have
to
look
at
here
in
the
question.
The
question
we're
asking
you
to
decide
and
then
ultimately
for
city
council
to
look
at
is
that
same
one
I
mentioned
if
it's
truly
not
safe.
Now
and
a
lot
of
these
folks
have
been
here
for
years
in
that
unsafe
condition.
Q
E
E
E
P
I'll
try
a
motion
for
discussion.
I
move
that
we
recommend
approval
of
the
da
modification
to
eliminate
the
time
frame
required
to
obtain
and
install
the
secondary
Access
Road.
E
L
P
P
In
my
mind,
that's
not
something
that
I'm
comfortable
deviating
from
specifically
because
the
fire
at
Marshall
as
well,
is
recommending
adhering
to
that.
However,
you
know
there's
applications
from
Micron
there's
you
know,
achd
is
starting
to
show
some
of
those
connections.
P
I
think
there's
potential
that
maybe
that
second
access
could
be
coming
at
some
point
in
the
future
and
having
that
ability
to
kind
of
move
forward
wants
that
access
becomes
available
seems
reasonable
to
me,
however,
removing
the
requirement
for
that
access,
specifically
because
it
is
part
of
code
is
not
something
that
I'm
comfortable
doing
based
on
our
recommendations.
U
Fully
agree
with
commissioner
Moore
and
we'll
be
supporting
the
motion.
You
know
they
could
ask
the
question.
You
know
if
it's
not
safe
now,
what
do
we
do?
Well,
you
implement
the
proposed
plan
for
the
existing
homes.
That's
what
you
do
and
you
don't
build
more
until
there's
a
secondary
access
that
you
promised.
U
F
Just
real
quick,
Mr
chair,
yes,
I'm
supportive
of
the
motion
as
well
eventually
I
think
what's
going
to
happen
is
time
is
just
going
to
run
out
in
the
the
private
sector
is
going
to
say
we're
not
going
to
ensure
these
homeowners
anymore
up
there
and
you
guys
are
going
to
be
dead
in
the
water
I.
Don't
know
how
they're
getting
insured.
Now,
with
this
being
the
case,
so
yeah
I'm
comfortable
with
the
approval,
I
hope
you
guys
can
get
that
done.
F
I
mean
obviously
there's
a
big
investment
up
there.
We
want
people
to
be
safe,
but
yeah
and
I
definitely
willing
to
have
you
guys.
You
know
get
time
to
get
that
thing
done
and
implementing
the
firewise
plan
is
that's
going
to
become
a
reality
all
over
the
city
as
it
expands,
and
so
that's
I
commend
the
work
on
this
and
I
think
you,
you
should
probably
just
out,
of
course,
Implement
what
you've
what
you
proposed.
G
E
I'll
chime
in
real
quick
here
so
man
this
is
one
I
personally
regret
because
I
was
on
the
commission
when
this
was
approved
in
2016
and
it's
one
I
wish
I
could
vote
on
it
again.
I,
don't
think
this
development
should
have
ever
been
approved
frankly,
but
it
was
and
I
regret
that,
but
here
we
are
so
I
actually
am
going
to
be
in
support
of
the
motion,
but
I
do
want
to
say.
I
I
commend
the
applicant.
G
E
Because
I
do
believe
what
the
applicant
is
trying
to
do
is
not
only
take
proactive
steps
to
ensure
the
safety
of
the
future
residents
and
the
future
dwellings,
but
I
do
think
those
steps
would
go
towards
the
safety
of
the
existing
residents.
However,
nothing
gets
to
the
Ingress
egress
aspect
of
it
and
that's
the
Fatal
flaw
to
me.
I,
don't
know
what
the
motivation
for
Simplot
is
to
hold
some
of
their
properties.
E
They
have
no
idea
and
I
and
I'm
I
I
know
it's
a
rock
and
a
hard
spot
for
the
applicant
trying
to
get
a
road
through
there.
I
do
have
one
concern,
and
that
is
if,
in
fact,
that
we
are
successful
in
this
road
going
through
I,
wonder
then
What
Becomes
of
all
of
these
steps
that
are
being
proposed
now.
Will
they
go
away
that
cost
of
the
road
is
not
insignificant?
I
understand
that
so
I
have
can.
I
do
have
concerns
that
this
may
end
up
being
an
either
or
type
of
a
situation.
E
That's
going
to
be
one
to
keep
our
eye
on
moving
forward,
but
in
any
case,
I
think
that
road
is
Paramount.
I,
think
it
absolutely
is
Paramount,
adding
several
hundred
more
rooftops
of
what
was
discussed
with
the
public
of
folks,
who
can't
always
be
controlled
right
and
take
take
actions.
They
have
something
on
the
grill
that
goes
on
fire
and
it's
like.
Well,
we
can't
police
everything
so
anyway,
for
those
reasons,
I'll
be
supportive
of
the
motion.
Any
other
comments,
any
questions
or
not
questions.
Okay.
Will
the
clerk?
Please
call
the
vote.
E
Okay,
we
do
have
one
more
item
and
this
will
be
interesting
item
number
eight
car
22-48
BBVA.
This
is
the
application
it's
located
at
6310,
South,
Orchard,
Street
and
5110
Lake
Hazel
Road.
It
is
an
annexation
request,
a
comprehensive
plan,
Amendment
development
applications,
our
development
agreements
rather
and
a
preliminary
plot.
So
with
that
staff,
please
take
it
away.
H
Thank
you
Mr
chairman
and
members
of
the
commission.
Just
to
orient
you.
This
entire
project
site
is
consisting
of
161
Acres
total,
with
approximately
40
acres
to
the
annex,
located
at
the
intersection
of
Orchard
Street
and
Pleasant
Valley
Road,
the
40
acres
is
surrounded
on
all
sides
by
properties
within
the
city
limits.
H
H
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
rezone
the
existing
C1
da
portion
of
the
property
in
the
southwest
corner
from
a
neighborhood
commercial
to
M1
DDA,
which
would
be
a
light
Industrial
and
situate
all
commercial
development
within
the
26
Acres,
located
in
the
northwest
corner
of
the
intersection.
At
the
future,
Pleasant
Valley,
Road
and
South
Orchard
Street,
the
CPA,
isn't,
is
necessary
to
facilitate
the
ultimate
zoning
and
rezoning
of
the
project
site
and
to
have
a
Consolidated
C2
area
with
an
appropriate
proximity
to
the
existing
serango
Valley
conceptual
master
plan.
H
H
Commercial
Services,
provided
here,
would
be
Consolidated
and
be
at
a
more
appropriate
location
than
what
was
originally
proposed
south
of
Lake
Hazel
Road.
So,
with
this
application,
the
applicant
will
be
modifying
the
existing
development
agreement
to
add
the
new
annexation
area
and
to
update
the
proposed
zoning
designation
designations.
As
seen
on
your
screen,
the
intent
is
to
Simply
to
simplify
future
Planning
and
Development
processes
on
the
entire
site.
By
having
a
single
development
agreement
in
place,
comments
were
received
from
agencies.
H
The
Department
of
Finance
and
admin
did
request
more
time
to
do
analysis
on
the
projected
tax
revenue
versus
cost
of
services
and
achd
requested
more
time
to
review
a
modified
Tis.
So
this
item
will
not
be
scheduled
for
city
council
until
those
reviews
have
been
completed
and
fire
has
tentatively
approved
a
proposed
future
fire
station
location,
and
so
with
that
that
would
comply
with
the
existing
da.
E
Okay,
great,
thank
you.
Let's
go
ahead
and
move
forward
to
the
applicant
and
I
think
that
the
applicant
is
online.
E
AB
K
AB
Mr,
chair
and
Commissioners
are
Rob
sunderlidge
and
Haley
Hart.
They
are
bva
engineers
and,
to
the
extent
that
questions
become
detailed,
technically
I
thought
I'd
bring
them
for
completeness,
and
perhaps
they
could
add
to
this
desk
if
it'd
be
okay
with
you,
if
that
becomes
necessary,
I
will
I
will
be.
I
will
be
brief.
AB
I
want
to
thank
Delaney
and
her
colleagues
really
all
staff
for
for
working
with
us.
It's
because
of
their
efforts
and
Direction
and
guidance
that
we're
here
with
our
amended
application
and
so
we're
very
appreciative
of
their
help
and
direction
to
provide
just
very
quickly
some
some
context
and
not
to
regurgitate
anything
but
shown
and
the
in
the
screen.
AB
It's
important
to
also
note
that
separate
from
these
two
Parcels
that
are
shown,
bva
also
owns
an
additional
40
acre
parcel
to
the
Northeast
that
is
presently
annexed,
M1
and
is
not
subject
to
this
application
or
to
the
existing
development
agreement,
and
I
mentioned
that
and
I
and
I
think
it's
for
overall
context
now
that
in
total,
if,
if
what
we're
proposing
is
recommended
for
approval
by
this
commission
and
ultimately
approved
by
the
city
council,
we
will
own
200
Acres,
approximately
174
of
which
will
be
M1
industrial
with
26
acres
for
C2.
AB
In
other
words,
this
is
an
industrial
site
as
the
master
developer
of
the
site,
in
conjunction
with
our
partner
Adler
construction.
We
are
treating
this
as
an
additional
industrial
site
and
planning
accordingly,
I'll
discuss
here
briefly
in
just
a
moment,
but
we
do
feel
the
need
for
ancillary
commercial
that
can
serve
the
residential
to
the
West,
the
industrial
to
the
East
and
serve
as
an
appropriate
buffer
and
transition
between
those
two
areas.
AB
Importantly,
we
feel
that
the
the
comprehensive
plan,
the
goals
stated
therein
will
be
met
by
by
consolidating
and
really
swapping
out
commercial.
In
other
words,
the
net
total
of
of
of
the
commercial
that
we're
proposing,
isn't
increasing
by
the
40
acres
that
we
were
originally
contemplating
as
as
submitting
to
be
commercial,
we're
doing
a
type
of
a
swap,
and
so
maybe
that's
what
I'll
oh
before,
I
go
to
that
and
that's
a
great
slide
to
have
up.
AB
But
the
question
probably
will
be
asked
as
pertaining
to
this
40
acres
in
the
present
application.
Why
this
was
not
included
in
the
original
application
for
annexation
and
rezone
that
we
did
in
2021
and
which
is
now
reflected
by
the
development
agreement.
That
was
because
of
then
existing
litigation.
AB
So,
during
the
hearing
on
annexation
for
the
original
121,
the
reverse
l,
this
members
of
the
Boise
city
council
requested
confirmation
that
that
the
40
acres
now
before
you
that
we're
addressing
wasn't
going
to
be
left
unincorporated
forever.
In
other
words,
they
expressed
concern.
That
was
just
going
to
be
a
donut,
and
we
assured
them,
then
that
we
would
be
back
once
the
litigation
had
resolved
itself
and
concluded,
and
that's
why
we're
here
now,
in
other
words,
out
of
necessity
due
to
the
then
Penny
litigation.
AB
This
really
had
to
become
a
two-step
process,
where
we
completed
the
first
step
of
annexation
and
rezone,
and
now
we're
back
with
a
proposal
for
this
remaining
40
acres.
So
if
we
could
go
to
the
next
slide
and
briefly,
what's
depicted
what's
depicted
in
the
green
on
the
screen
and
what
you
have
in
the
materials
that
were
submitted
to
is
that
120
Acres
that
was
part
of
the
2021
annexation
included
in
that
is
the
red
portion
at
that
time.
That
was
approved
as
part
of
the
application
to
be
zoned
C1.
AB
This
relocates
the
commercially
zoned
property
away
from
the
intersection
of
Lake,
Hazel
and
Orchard,
and,
as
stated,
our
primary
goal
has
always
been
for
this
to
be
a
significant
Industrial
Park,
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
As
part
of
that,
we
recognize
the
need
for
some
some
servicing
of
of
the
industrial
areas
and
on
their
employees
as
well
as
a
buffer
in
transition
from
residential
I.
AB
Just
very
briefly
and
I
know,
my
time
is
short,
so
I
will
not
go
over,
but,
as
was
submitted
as
part
of
our
application,
we
have
considered
I
I
believe
very
thoughtfully.
The
relevant
standards
for
an
amendment
to
a
comprehensive
plan
and
those
are
set
forth
in
Boise
city
code,
section,
11-3-4,
Point,
16,
B,
7
and
just
review.
AB
Those
just
on
the
record
here
is
that
the
first
of
those
criteria
and
factors
is
that
the
proposed
amendment
is
in
furtherance
of
public
convenience,
necessity
or
the
general
welfare
of
the
community,
and
it's
clear
that
there
have
been
significant
development
in
this
area
that
this
will
be
a
major
Corridor.
It
will
be
a
major
transition
between
residential
and
Industrial
and
providing
those
services
for
the
industrial.
Will
be
an
important
component,
we
we're
the
master
developer
for
the
the
whole
200
acres,
and
so
this
isn't
going
to
be
a
drop
and
run.
AB
AB
That
study
results
in
the
extension
of
Lake
Hazel
across
the
New
York
Canal
its
connection
to
Orchard
Street.
It
becomes
a
major
connection
between
the
interstate
and
areas
Southwest
of
the
airport,
so
retail
users,
such
as
a
grocery
store
or
maybe
a
home
improvement
and
building
material
store
or
discount
department
store
in
the
area.
AB
We
came
in
with
the
first
annexation
application
with
the
traffic
study.
As
indicated,
the
traffic
study
has
been
modified.
We
had
completed
one,
but
because
of
the
proposed
swap
for
lack
of
a
better
term
that
needs
to
be
modified
and
that's
in
the
process.
We've
submitted
that
scoping
memo
to
achd
and
are
working
closely
with
Miss
Wallace
and
her
staff
to
complete
the
traffic
study
here.
I'd
also
note
that
we
worked
and
part
of
the
development
agreement
to
identify
the
location
for
a
fire
station,
and
that
has
been
worked
through
and
and
identified.
AB
It
included,
and
it
will
be
in
our
in
our
subdivision
and
in
talking
with
with
Romeo
and
the
fire
department
to
make
sure
that
they
have
access
so
once
that
tis
concludes
and
determines
exactly
where
the
access
points
will
be.
We
already
have
agreement
with
the
fire
station
to
provide
them
them
services.
AB
So,
finally,
as
we
go
to
the
final
slides
like
to
set
forth
that
again
minimizing
consolidating
the
commercial,
this
of
course
is
a
conceptual
site
plan,
but
what
we
have
is
the
The
Pedestrian
pathway
and
if
we
can
go
quickly
to
the
next
slide,
it
also
shows
the
master
plan
and
the
the
movement
it
was
shared
with
us
that
there
really
needs
to
be
thoughtful
consideration
for
connectivity
and
pedestrian
experience
for
this
overall
site.
AB
Obviously,
when
we
come
in
for
design
review,
should
this
proposal
be
recommended
for
approval
and
ultimately
approved
will
work
to
really
get
into
the
granular
detail
of
this,
but
this
shows
an
overall
site
how
and
go
back
one
if
you
could
please
that
this
will
be
the
commercial.
The
rest
will
can
be
the
the
Consolidated
and
and
frankly,
better
placed
industrial
and
so
again,
I
can't
thank
Steph
enough
for
kind
of
helping
us
navigate.
E
Okay,
thank
you
very
much.
Mr
Peterson
would
next
move
forward
to
anybody
from
the
neighborhood
association
and
that
person
would
be
SD.
The
France
and
I
don't
see
her
here
nor
online.
E
Okay,
with
that,
let's
go
ahead
and
turn
our
attention
to
the
commission
for
questions.
F
AB
AB
The
timing
on
this
is,
as
stated
that
what's
depicted
is
Phase
One
that
has
gone
through
for
project
Dove,
it's
hard
to
say
whether
that
would
actually
go
first
or
whether
or
in
conjunction
with
phase
two.
That
would
go
first,
but
overall
we
would,
you
know,
need
to
go
through
the
plotting
process
and
so
in
best
case
scenario,
we
we
would
love
to
see
some
some
dirt
being
moved
on
either
phase
two
or
phase
one
about
this
time
next
year
that
that
might
be
ambitious.
But
that's
that's
the
overall
Target.
F
Can
we
go
back
one
slide
and
I'll
tell
any
if
I
could
just
continue
really
quick,
no
one
I'm,
sorry
I
think
it
was
the
first
slide
in
the
presentation.
F
No,
it
was
the
one
that
showed
the
overall
map
of
of
the
plan
the
site
plan.
There
was
one
that
was
a
detailed
version
of
that
yeah.
H
A
F
So
I
guess
I
mean
I'll.
Just
put
my
cards
on
and
say:
well
here
we
go.
Is
that
I'm
totally
comfortable
with
this,
with
the
annexation
and
I
guess
if
we're
not
gonna
even
start
moving
dirt
until
next
year,
I
mean
let's,
why
not
wait
and
get
get
better?
Zoning
frankly
I
mean
when
I
look
at
that
for
can.
Can
we
get
your
presentation
back
up
again,
I
mean
here's.
What
I'm
I
I
like
the
idea
of
the
commercial
that's
out
there,
but
what
we're?
F
What
we're
really
trying
to
do
with
the
new
zoning
code?
That's
coming
up
is
get
out
of
this
mindset
of
commercials
here,
residential
is
here
and
Industrial
is
here.
It's
like
we're
trying
to
talk
about
mixed
use.
That's
why
everything's
going
to
MX
mxmxmx
right
and
when
I
look
at,
do
we
have
the
the
first,
the
main
slide.
F
Is
yeah
there
we
go
there.
We
go
yep
you're
on
it:
okay,
nope
nope!
There
we
go
right.
There
stop
stop
pushing
buttons,
okay,
so
again
like
when
I
look
at
this
I
it
just
it's
like
this
is
not
a
business.
This
looks
like
a
business
park
that
we're
remodeling
that
we're
re
renovating
all
over
the
country.
F
Now
because
it's
obsolete,
that's
what
it
looks
like
to
me
when,
when
you
talk
about
the
connectivity
and
whatnot
the
connectivity
areas,
if
everybody
can
see
this
I,
don't
know
what
they
can
see
are
the
areas
for
pedestrians
here
are
labeled
in
number
seven,
and
so
there's
one
there
on
Orchard,
Street
and
I.
F
Don't
know
what
a
pedestrian
would
be
doing
out
there
and
there's
one
over
here,
and
if
this
is
a
business
park,
I'm
thinking
like
any
Gathering
areas,
you
need
it's
just
like
this
just
looks
like
a
1950s,
Business,
Park
and
so
I,
just
I'm
surprised
that
director
Keane
would
have
said.
Oh
yeah.
This
is
this
is
like
exactly
what
we're
trying
to
go
for
in
our
new
in
our
new
development
code,
I
mean
I.
Guess
if
I
get
sum
the
whole
thing
up,
it's
like
there's
still
like
this.
F
When
I
see
this
there's
still,
this
mindset
of
we're
gonna
put
trees
in
a
parking
lot
versus
parking
in
a
forest
and
what
what
I?
What
I
want?
If
in
a
subdivision
application,
is
I,
want
to
see
parking
in
a
Forest
right?
Not
we
put
trees
in
the
parking
lot,
because
that's
what
the
code
said
so
it
just
just
it.
It
doesn't
look
Innovative
and
it's
called
the
innovator,
Business
Park
Subdivision
I'd
really
like
to
see
something
that
was
more
mixed
use
before
I
went.
Let's
sign
off
on
this
subdivision,
yeah.
AB
Mr
chair,
commissioner
Blanchard.
Thank
you
for
those
those
comments.
I
can
address
it
in
threefold.
First
I
think
it's
important
to
note
that
this
is.
This
is
a
conceptual
site
plan
and
of
course
we
would.
We
would
stick
to
this
configuration
and
hopefully
materiality
I
would
expect
that,
as
we,
you
know,
get
into
design
reviews
we
get
into
those
types
of
things
that
are
beyond
the
comp
plan
and
annexation
stage
that
this
would
be
exactly
as
you
describe.
AB
So
I
I
hear
you
loud
and
clear:
I
think
it
was
director
Keane
who,
who
did
you
know,
suggest
the
the
consolidation
that
it
that
it
could
and
as
part
of
those
discussions
and
answer
to
your
question,
why
not
wait
that
as
we
looked
at
those
codes
and
we
looked
at
the
potential
proposed
changes
that
are
underway
right
now,
as
we
speak
that
if
this
were
going
to
be
a
paradigm
shift,
if
this
were
going
to
be
something
that
was
was
so
outlandishly
different,
I
totally
agree,
it
would
make
all
the
sense
in
the
world
to
pause
and
to
wait
to
see
exactly
what
the
landscape
is.
AB
We
might
be
dealing
with
here.
However,
as
we
line
by
line
went
by
the
code
and
with
the
help
of
director
key
and
staff
to
see
you
know
what
the
materiality
is
functionally
the
equivalent
and
so
let's
let's
proceed
as
as
is
the
third
and
final
Point
and
I.
Think
I
think
this
answers
your
question,
or
at
least
goes
to
it
in
part,
and
if
not,
then
then,
then
you
know
correct
me
but
to
come
in
with
you
know
a
C2
and
again
it's
conceptual
at
this
stage.
AB
AB
We
want
to
work
with
with
the
feedback
that
we
got
and
it
was
at
the
request
that
we
consider
C2
that
that's
why
we
put
it
in
the
way
that
it
was
so
that
there
could
be
the
potential
for
a
perspective,
a
big
box
of
some
type,
because
C1,
of
course,
doesn't
allow
it.
You
know
anything
over
that
60
000
threshold,
so
it
provides
us
that
potential
to
really
provide
some
some
synergies
in
that
area.
AB
But
all
that
said,
I
I
obviously
am
on
the
record
whether
I
want
to
be
or
not,
but
we
will
not
be
building
anything
that
appears
like
a
1950
business
park.
That's
that
would
torpedo
our
entire
business
plan
just.
F
A
quick
follow-on,
then
I
mean
well
I'm,
going
to
challenge
you
a
bit
on
that,
because,
when
I
look
out
at
10,
Mile
and
I-84,
it's
like
that
looks
like
the
greatest
missed
opportunity
on
the
planet.
To
me,
it's
just
a
big
part.
You
have
to
drive
into
work
to
your
building
there.
Now
there's
nowhere
for
anybody
to
go.
There's
no
green
space,
there's
no
Bodega,
there's!
No
there's
no
there's!
No
anything.
F
You've
got
to
drive
in
and
out
of
everywhere
and
that's
the
way
most
of
the
bva
developments
are
and
that's
why
I'm
concerned
that
it's
like
that,
we're
not
getting
through
with
what
we're
looking
for
as
far
as
future,
it's
like
I,
don't
really
care
about.
C2
I
want
to
see
the
MX3
or
you
could
even
go
deep.
We
have.
This
is
the
time
to
get
this
right
in
the
southwest,
where
we
got
bare
dirt
out
there
and
we're
gonna
build
an
entirely
new
city.
I
mean
we're
talking
about.
F
F
Well,
no
again
I'm
just
trying
to
get
my
where
I'm
at
is
I'm
happy
to
do
that,
I'm
happy
to
do
the
annexation,
but
I'm
not
at
all
crazy
about
this
as
it
stands.
Right
now
may.
AB
A
wood
note
for
the
record
that
10
Mile
Crossing
is
is
not
completed,
yet
it's
still
under
construction
and
Topgolf
is
out
there.
We
have
the
retail
coming
in
I
think
that
what
this
Valley
will
find
is
that
when
10
Mile
Crossing
is
complete,
it
will
be.
It
will
be
in
every
way
a
rival
to
the
Village.
It
will
be
in
every
way
the
type
of
Gathering
Place.
AB
That
was
that
it
was
intended
to
be
here,
of
course,
we're
not
dealing
with
10
Mile
Crossing
we're
dealing
with
the
Pleasant
Valley
Business
Park
and
again
what
you
have
shown
before
you
is
we're
at
the
comp
plan
stage,
we're.
G
AB
Annexation,
this
is
very
conceptual,
but
what
we're
trying
to
depict
and
describe
is
a
buffer
and
and
planning
101
transition
from
residential
to
Industrial
I.
Don't
know
like
right
now:
there's
there's
burrowing
owls
there
and-
and
it
may
be,
we
have
the
village
out
there,
but
right
now
we're
trying
to
I
think
we're
so
close
to
saying
the
same
thing:
that
what
we're
trying
to
create
is
something
of
a
synergistic
area
that
is
200,
Acres,
Industrial
and
residential,
and
so
we're
trying
to
provide
that
buffer.
E
This
piece,
and
on
on
that
line,
I'm
going
to
follow
up
with
some
of
commissioner
Blanchard's
comments
here.
I
know
this
is
conceptual,
but
do
you
have
conceptually
an
idea
of
how
many
parking
stalls
are
on
this.
AB
Yeah
I'm
gonna,
if
it's
appropriate
for
these
types
of
more
detailed
questions,
sure.
AB
AC
Sunderlidge
1144
South
Silverstone
to
be
the
office
and
I
will
say:
I,
don't
know
it's
from
the
standpoint
of
the
number
of
parking
stalls,
but
what
we
typically
like
to
do
when
we
look
at
any
type
of
office
or
we,
we
have
a
typical
parking
standard
that
it
sometimes
exceeds
and
sometimes
matches
depend
on
the
jurisdiction,
but
with
Boise
we
we
tend
to
comply
with
that
parking
standard
for
the
retail
and
I
guess.
I
would
point
out.
The
development
itself
is
largely
retail.
It's
it's
going
to
be
implementing
retail
space.
AC
Restaurants
shopping,
not
not
so
much
office
where
it's
it's
kind
of
the
destination
for
the
office.
This
is
largely
like
Tana's
Express,
it's
a
it's
an
industrial
area,
so
the
parking
will
be
accommodated
to
facilitate
the
retail
use.
AC
Restaurants
around
that
seven
to
eight
stalls
per
thousand
square
feet
of
parking,
but
we
don't
have
an
exact
number
and
again
just
to
express
this
is
very
conceptual
to
get
lots
configured
and
we
will
be
going
through
the
Dr
application
on
each
of
these
individual
sites,
which
will
bring
a
lot
more
of
a
dynamic
site
with
plazas
and
and
how
these
different
users
will
occupy
the
space.
But
it's
a
long-winded
answer
to
the
question
as
far
as
parking
it
would
be.
The
typical
retail
type
parking
for
restaurants
and
Commercial
uses
such
great.
E
Can
you
pull
up
the
master
plan
that
showed
the
pathways
around
the
perimeter
and
internal
of
the
site?
Please.
Thank
you.
My
my
question
is
I.
Don't
understand,
I
unders
I
do
get
that
it
does
the
language
say
it
says
minimum
so
there's
a
dot
dot,
dot
there
and
there's
another
one
that
says
seven
to
ten
feet.
But
what
I'm
wanting
to
understand
is
why
is
there
a
seven
foot
pathway
around
the
perimeter
along
the
arterials
and
upwards
of
a
10-foot
pathway
on
the
internal
of
the
site.
AC
Probably
the
reason
for
any
type
of
connectivity
that
we
like
to
implement
on
the
BBE
developments.
We
have
a
typically,
we
have
a
ring
path
that
allows
people
to
get
out
and
do
a
a
walk
around
the
site
through
the
site
and
creating
a
space.
That's
a
path,
that's
10,
to
12
feet.
It
facilitates
more
of
a
user
experience
rather
than
just
walking
down
a
sidewalk
meeting
the
the
standards
for
sidewalks
along
the
arterials,
the
extra
width
rather
than
a
four
or
five
foot
sidewalk.
E
What
I'm
not
clear
on
and
I,
don't
understand
is
the
dimensions
because
to
me
the
dimensions
are
off:
if
we're
going
to
have
arterial
Pathways,
which
is
great,
they
need
to
be
10
even
12
feet
wide
on
the
arterials
that
add
that
allow
bicycling
for
not
just
your
tenants
but
obviously
the
residents
that
have
been
mentioned
here.
So
that's
where
I'm
not
sure
is:
why
is
there
wider
Pathways,
internal
and
narrower
along
the
busier
roads
so.
AC
We
have
represented
what's
been
typical
with
achcd,
but
I
know
that
they
they
have
been
in
conjunction
with
the
jurisdictions
implementing
larger
Pathways.
If
that's
something
that's
desired.
Tom
has
mentioned
we're
still
going
through
that
traffic
impact
study
and
we're
waiting
for
conditions
of
approval,
but
we
would
absolutely
look
at
implementation
of
what
types
of
Pathways
would
be
more
preferable
along
their
arterials,
but
right
now
it's
just
set
as
the
standard.
AC
E
Okay.
With
that,
then,
let's
go
ahead
and
open
it
up
to
public
testimony.
I
don't
have
a
sign
up
sheet.
Is
there
anybody?
There's
four
of
you
anybody
over
here
and
I?
Don't
have
anybody
online
so
unless
security
wants
to
chime
in
on
this
I
think
we're
good,
so
no
public
testimony
that
would
conclude
public
testimonies
phase
rebuttal,
there's
nothing
for
you
to
rebut
unless
you
really
want
you're
entitled
to
time
to
anything
else.
You
want
to
add
before
we
conclude
the
hearing
and
make
a
decision.
AB
Actually,
only
only
to
State,
it
meant
no
disrespect
to
this
commission
or
this
process
that
I
wasn't
here
at
the
beginning
to
start
and
I'm
very
I'm.
Sorry
for
that,
but
it
was
should
not
be
interpreted
as
as
being
dismissive
of
the
importance
of
being
here
when
it
started
at
6
p.m.
So
that's
all
I
wanted
to
put
for
the
record.
E
Thank
you
great.
Thank
you
very
much.
Okay,
with
that,
the
public
hearing
is
concluded.
We
have
three
items
before
us:
car
22-48,
which
is
the
annexation
request,
CPA
22-3,
which
is
the
comprehensive
plan,
map,
Amendment
and
then
sub
2301,
which
is
the
preliminary
plot
portion
of
the
application
so
with
three
different
items
in
front
of
us.
So
with
that
turn
it
over
to
commission
for
a
decision,
a
recommendation.
E
E
L
E
Okay,
thank
you,
commissioner
steads
for
the
second.
Is
there
any
discussion,
foreign.
U
Not
much
to
add
other
than
you
know
this,
we
obviously
need
industrial
uses.
Industrial
space
within
our
our
city,
BBA,
has
been
great
in
providing
that
in
the
past
and
currently
in
in
the
future
as
well
too.
U
G
U
E
E
Okay,
I'm
gonna
be
brief,
because
I
feel
compelled
to
speak
up
on
this
one
on
I'm,
totally
in
support
of
the
annexation
and
I'm
completely
in
support
of
the
comp
plan.
I
think
that
we
need
industrial
space.
I
know
we
are
woefully
inadequate
in
in
terms
of
this
Valley
and
that
the
problem
I
have
is
I
agree
with
commissioner
Blanchard
I
think
that
this
preliminary
plot
frankly
is
so
far
off
that
I
have
a
hard
time
even
moving
forward
with
it,
even
knowing
that
it's
still
got
a
long
way
to
be
massaged.
E
When
I
look
at
that,
I
see
nothing
but
drive-throughs.
That's
what
I
see
I
see
single
story,
drive-throughs
and
surface
parking
lot.
That
just
is
massive
and
those
go
against
what
we're
trying
to
do,
even
if
it's
and
frankly
too,
this
is
this
is
Greenfield
development
right.
This
is
this
is
our
chance
to
get
it
right.
This
isn't
a
a
Redevelopment
and
I'm
thinking
about
Industrial
buffer
areas
like
in
Twin
Falls.
They
have
their
entire
Warehouse
district,
for
example,
which
is
I.
E
Think
a
great
I
can
I
mean
there's
other
places
around
the
state
where
you
can
show
where
we
have
industrial
uses
and
Retail
that
work
really
well
together
and
create
a
Vibe
I
mean
they're,
seeing
some
of
that
frankly,
even
in
Garden,
City,
right
and
so
I.
Just
to
me,
I
can't
in
good
faith
good
conscious
support
that
sub.
The
way
that
it
is
because
I
do
think
it's
just
so
far
from
where
we
want
to
be.
E
But
the
motion
was
made
for
all
three,
so
that
puts
me
in
a
bit
of
a
bind,
but
for
that
reason
I
think
ultimately,
I'm
gonna
end
up
having
to
vote
no
simply
because
they're
tethered
together.
So
any
other
discussion.