►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Commission
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
All
right
good
evening-
and
let
me
turn
on
my
video
and
welcome
to
the
Boise
City
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
is
a
chat
function
in
Zoom.
This
is
not
part
of
the
record
and
should
only
be
used
if
technical
difficulties
arise.
A
Our
procedures
for
public
hearings
begin
with
a
presentation
from
the
planning
team,
then
we'll
go
to
the
applicant
and
then
the
representative
of
the
registered
neighborhood
association
Then,
followed
by
questions
from
the
commission.
After
that,
we
proceed
to
public
testimony,
starting
with
those
who
are
in
person,
then
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
nine
to
raise
your
hand.
A
Finally,
each
member
of
the
public
is
allowed
up
to
three
minutes
for
Testimony.
We
are
strict
with
this
time
as
it
is
limited
in
code.
Finally,
the
applicant
has
allowed
five
minutes
for
rebuttal,
after
which
the
hearing
will
be
closed
and
the
commission
will
deliberate
and
render
a
decision.
Mr
chair
you
have
the
floor.
B
Any
any
decision
made
tonight
may
be
appealed
to
the
city
council,
provided
that
the
appeal
is
filed
within
10
days
of
this
hearing.
In
order
to
file
an
appeal
you
must
have
given
written
or
oral
testimony
at
tonight's
meeting.
That's
why
it's
important
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.
B
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
of
just
detailed
a
few
minutes
ago
with
staff,
applicant
neighborhood
association
and
then
public
testimony.
Thank
you
all
for
attending
tonight.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
roll.
D
E
B
Okay,
thank
you
all
right.
We
have
a
few
items
eligible
for
our
consent
agenda
this
evening
to
start
out
without
objection,
I'll
place
our
meeting
minutes
from
our
April
3rd
meeting
on
the
consent
agenda
and
then
moving
to
new
business
tonight.
I
believe
item
number
two
is
eligible
for
consent.
This
is
cup
23-9.
B
B
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
uses
related
to
and
operated
by
a
religious
institution
on
0.84
acres
in
an
r1c
Zone,
and
is
the
applicant
present
tonight
great
and
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
staff
report?
Okay,
let
the
records
show
that
the
applicant
is
present
and
in
agreement
with
the
staff
report,
and
is
there
anyone
in
attendance
tonight?
B
23-20,
the
golden
eagle
Audubon
Society,
the
address
is
3451
East,
Barbara,
Valley
Drive.
This
is
a
Boise
River
system
permit
to
enhance
habitat
and
wetlands
on
approximately
50
acres
of
Class
A
and
Class
B
lands
at
very
various
locations
along
the
Boise
River
between
Highway
21
and
Marion,
Williams
Park
within
the
sp01
and
sp02
and
A1
zones,
and
is
the
applicant
present
this
evening?
Okay,
and
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
on
the
staff
report?
B
B
B
B
Thank
you.
Okay.
We
will
move
on
then
back
to
the
top
of
our
agenda
of
new
business.
First
item
to
hear
tonight
is
item
number
one:
SOS
23-7,
Dark,
Horse,
Associates
LLC.
The
address
for
the
project
is
3304
North,
39th
Street.
This
is
a
waiver
request
to
the
subdivision:
ordinance
requirement
to
construct
curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk
as
part
of
a
minor
land
division
on
0.36
acres
in
an
R1
CS
Zone
we're
going
to
hear
from
Staff
first
and
Miss,
Delaney
garlic.
H
The
subject
property
is
located
at
3304
North
39th
Street
on
0.36
acres
in
a
r1cs
single-family
residential
with
Sycamore
neighborhood
overlay,
Zone,
the
property
fronts
39th
Street
on
the
west,
and
the
area
consists
of
predominantly
detached
single-family
homes
with
a
manufactured
home
park
adjacent
to
the
site.
The
subject
property
is
less
than
a
quarter
mile
from
Owens
park
and
less
than
a
mile
from
the
hill
and
36th
Street
Neighborhood
Activity
Center.
H
The
applicant
cites
lack
of
sidewalks
along
the
street
and
adjacent
to
the
property,
the
rural
and
agricultural
nature
of
the
Sycamore
neighborhood
and
the
need
to
pull
in
trailers
to
the
back
of
the
property
for
horses,
livestock
and
gardening.
As
justification
for
the
waiver
request,
39th
Street
is
currently
contains
sections
of
curb
Gutter
and
attached
sidewalk,
as
seen
in
the
overlay
on
the
aerial
in
green
recent.
Curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk
were
installed
as
a
result
of
a
minorland
division.
Just
one
lot,
north
of
this
about
134
feet
from
the
subject
property.
H
The
granting
of
this
waiver
would
result
in
a
missed
pedestrian
connection
and
opportunity
for
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood,
as
there
is
potential
for
infill
directly
adjacent
to
this
property
in
similar
Redevelopment
opportunities.
All
along
39th
Street
that
could
occur
in
the
future
attached
sidewalk
can
be
installed
within
the
existing
right-of-way
without
the
requirement
of
a
pedestrian
access
easement
and
would
allow
for
existing
maturities
to
remain
waiving
the
requirement
to
install
the
curb,
Gutter
and
sidewalk
would
contradict
several
goals
of
our
comprehensive
plan.
H
The
applicant
has
stated
the
need
to
maintain
access
for
trailers
and
keeping
of
agricultural
character
of
the
neighborhood.
However,
the
resulting
lot
split
creates
two
7
800
square
foot
Lots,
which
would
not
allow
for
the
keeping
of
large
animals
or
livestock
as
the
minimum
lot
size
would
need
to
be
half
an
acre.
H
B
I
Hi
good
evening,
Commissioners
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
provide
additional
context
to
this
request
for
a
sidewalk
waiver
I
hope
to
demonstrate
that
the
waiver
request
is
consistent
with
blueprint
Boise,
the
collister
neighborhood
plan
and
the
Sycamore
neighborhood
plan
and
I
will
ask
that
you
approve
my
waiver
request.
I
The
Sycamore
neighborhood
overlay
district
is
included
within
the
boundaries
of
the
Hollister
neighborhood.
It
has
adopted
its
own
neighborhood
plan,
the
Sycamore
neighborhood
overlay
District,
which
is
codified
in
Boise
city
code
1104-12.
The
mission
of
the
neighborhood,
the
Sycamore
neighborhood
plan,
is
to
retain
rural
elements
nestled
within
the
urban
environment
of
Boise.
At
page
1.4.
The
Sycamore
plan
notes
that
the
streets
quote
maintain
their
rural
flavor
through
the
absence
of
sidewalks
and
curbs
unquote
at
page
213,
the
Sycamore
plan
discusses
sidewalks
in
depth,
where
it
states
quote
the
neighborhood's.
I
Local
streets
have
low
traffic
levels,
narrow
paved
streets,
gravel
shoulders
for
on-street
parking
and
no
delineated
edge
of
right-of-way.
These
characteristics
are
consistent
throughout
the
neighborhood.
Unquote
blueprint
Boise
lays
out
certain
goals,
one
of
which
is
goal
nac3
to
quote
enhance
the
character
of
established
neighborhoods
goal.
Nac
3.1
further
States
quote
encourage
residential
infill
that
complements
the
scale
and
character
of
the
surrounding
neighborhood
section.
I
In
fact,
a
picture
of
the
streetscape
is
included
in
the
comprehensive
plan
in
this
section,
which
demonstrates
the
lack
of
curb
gutter
or
sidewalk
in
the
district.
While,
as
the
reviewing
planner
noted
blueprint,
Boise
contains
policies
and
principles
which
provide
overall
guidance
for
City
growth
and
management.
I
A
reader
should
Accord
greater
weight
where
specific
guidance
is
provided
for
a
particular
District
or
area.
If
this
waiver
is
denied,
the
commission
is
essentially
expressing
its
goal
to
construct
curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk
throughout
the
entire
Sycamore
District,
in
direct
contravention
to
blueprint
Boise
and
the
Sycamore
neighborhood
plan.
Anything
less
would
be
disparate
treatment
within
a
singular
District.
I
There
are
other
quite
practical
reasons
that
the
residents
who
choose
to
live
in
the
Sycamore
District
wish
to
avoid
curbs
gutters
and
sidewalks.
As
I
experienced
myself
and
Delaney
referred
to
in
her
presentation,
my
family
owned
a
shy
acre
on
Sycamore
Drive,
where
we
did
have
horses,
pygmy,
goats
and
a
large
garden.
I
Horses
wouldn't
necessarily
be
appropriate
on
this
lot,
but
a
large
garden
would,
as
would
chicken,
coops
or
similar
uses
in
the
karabar
animals
and
property.
It
was
often
the
case
that
we
pulled
trailers
through
the
grass
in
the
side
yards
to
bring
hay,
feed
dirt
and
similar
items
to
the
back
of
the
property
closer
to
areas
where
we
were
working.
I
I
This
is
the
very
nature.
The
very
purpose
of
the
Sycamore
District
sidewalks
would
have
made
the
enjoyment
of
our
property
far
more
difficult,
as
we
would
have
had
to
bump
up
and
over
curbs
and
sidewalks
to
deliver
items
or
animals
risking
spillage
damage
to
items
and
possibly
even
injury
to
the
legs
of
our
animals,
not
to
mention
potential
damage
to
the
curb
or
sidewalk.
I
The
Sycamore
District
boundary
cuts
across
39th,
approximately
550
feet
to
the
north
of
our
property,
such
that
the
Northeast
portion
of
39th
lays
outside
the
Sycamore
District.
The
reviewing
planner
was
astute
in
her
observation
of
sidewalks
to
the
north
on
39th.
However,
although
sidewalks
do
exist
between
Taft
and
Catalpa,
they
peer
almost
exclusively,
if
not
entirely
along
the
Eastern
side
of
39th,
either
outside
the
Sycamore
District
or
immediately
adjacent
to
properties
that
are
outside
the
Sycamore
District,
which
already
have
contiguous
sidewalk.
I
As
noted
in
the
staff
report,
our
property
is
134
feet,
south
of
the
nearest
curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk
well,
within
the
Sycamore
District
along
39th
Street
within
the
district,
several
homeowners
recently
constructed
or
improved
significantly
sized
homes
on
large
lots
that
are
unlikely
to
be
redeveloped.
Their
landscape
plans
embrace
the
rural
feel
of
the
streetscape.
I
You
can
look
at
3208,
North
39th
and
see
a
beautiful
example
of
this.
In
short,
while
a
small
amount
of
sidewalk
has
crept
down
from
the
North
in
a
small
area
of
more
dense
development
originating
outside
the
Sycamore
district,
there
is
otherwise
no
curb
gutter
or
sidewalk
along
any
property
on
either
side
of
39th
Street
within
the
Sycamore
District.
Curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk
are
the
exception
throughout
the
Sycamore
District.
I
In
fact,
by
my
brief
calculation
across
approximately
16
125
linear
feet
of
north-south
Street
Frontage
in
the
district,
only
340
linear
feet
of
sidewalk
exists
and
all
of
it
appears
to
be
to
the
north
on
39th
adjacent
to
more
dense
projects
outside
the
Sycamore
District.
The
majority
of
this
sidewalk
is
along
what
has
become
side
property
boundary,
as
that
developer
chose
to
create
an
internal
Road
Network,
for
that
particular
development,
which
is
immediately
adjacent
to
the
Sycamore
District
boundary.
The
only
other
sidewalk
now
runs
along
one
flag
lot
and
one
house.
I
I
If
the
commission
were
to
deny
this
waiver
request,
it
would
require
us
to
construct
a
non-contiguous
segment
of
asphalt,
right-of-way
curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk
extremely
unlikely
to
ever
connect
with
anything
this
spot
construction,
particularly
the
asphalt,
would
erode
over
time
and
would
exist
in
complete
contravention
of
the
original
mission
statement
of
the
Sycamore
District,
the
collester
neighborhood
plan
and
the
Boise
comprehensive
plan.
Accordingly,
I
respectfully
request
the
commission's
approval
of
my
waiver
request.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
consideration.
B
I
Sorry
about
that,
yes,
my
name
is
Wendy
Clark
and
my
address
is
47150
Southeast
162nd
Street,
that's
in
North,
Bend,
Washington,
98045,
great.
I
J
J
I
wanted
to
express
my
support
for
this
waiver
application
city
code
allows
granting
a
waiver
from
the
sidewalking
gutter
requirements
if
the
installation
would
result
in
substantial
hardship
or
inequity,
but
those
terms
are
pretty
difficult
to
Define.
So
historically,
the
Commissioners
have
turned
to
the
comprehensive
plan
for
guidance
on
weighing
the
positive
results
envisioned
by
the
code,
with
the
negative
results
on
a
wider
perspective
of
making
Boise
a
livable
sustainable,
City
full
of
a
diversity
of
neighborhoods.
J
The
comprehensive
plans
principle
IDP
n.2,
which
the
staff's
report
points
to
in
support
of
the
sidewalks
in
this
location,
asks
you
to
consider
the
established
streetscape
characteristics
of
the
area.
Miss
Garlic's
analysis
points
to
a
number
of
other
sidewalks
in
the
area.
However,
missing
from
that
analysis
was
the
consideration
of
the
Sycamore
overlay,
which
this
property
lies
in.
If
you
could
hit
my
PowerPoint
yep,
so
I
added
to
her
chart
here
the
green
line
that
shows
where
the
overlay
exists
right
now.
J
Can
you
guys
see
this?
Okay?
Is
that
working
to
show
the
boundary
of
the
Sycamore
overlay
throughout
the
overlay?
Sidewalks
are
purposely
avoided.
The
overlay
recognizes
that
this
section
of
the
city
has
a
greater
agricultural
element
to
it.
This
area
looks
different.
The
use
of
the
land
is
different
and
where
values
Collide
the
adopted
vision
for
the
overlay
should
control.
J
J
On
the
left,
we
have
that
bit
of
pull
out
development,
that
is
in
the
overlay
and
on
the
right.
We
have
some
of
the
r1a
Lots
along
39th,
Hawthorne
and
Sycamore
and
I
just
wanted
to
sort
of
compare
and
contrast.
The
two
of
these,
the
the
overlay
you
can
see
on
the
right
is
defined
by
mature
trees,
open
pastures
and
agricultural
activity.
J
We
believe
that
sidewalks
are
a
critical
part
of
keeping
and
making
Boise
walkable
and
bikeable.
We
support
their
use
in
true
infill
projects
like
the
one
you
saw
a
moment
ago
in
that
graphic,
but
our
neighborhood
is
already
walkable
residents
from
the
surrounding
areas,
love
to
walk
through
the
Sycamore
overlay.
The
traffic
is
minuscule
and
cars
come
second
there's
no
safety
concern
and
sidewalks
would
not
improve
the
navigability
for
pedestrians.
Here.
J
F
F
H
The
the
current
lot
is
0.36
Acres.
Okay.
What
they
proposed
was
a
two
lot
split
with
about
7
800
square
foot.
Lots
the
minimum
lot
size
would
be
5
000
square
feet,
so
maybe
we
could
get
three
units
out
of
it,
but
what
they're
proposing
is
two
okay.
H
F
F
F
G
Do
you
know
I
as
I?
Look
at
this
map
I'd
be
I'd,
be
more
swayed
by
people
calling
this
a
you
know
an
agricultural
throwback
neighborhood,
but
it
looks
like
the
neighbors
have
like
already
gotten
all
theirs,
because
at
my
count,
there's
like
nine
or
ten
flag
Lots,
which
means
these
people
separated
their
lots
and
then
built
a
house
behind
it.
H
Yeah
Mr
chairman
commissioner
Blanchard
there
has
been
a
history
of
minor
land
divisions
along
that
39th
Street.
There
I
can
point
to
the
most
recent
lot
split
that
we
reviewed,
and
that
was
in
2021,
similar
situation
to
lot
split.
They
did
put
in
the
curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk,
so
they
were
able
to
do
that
and
abide
by
the
code
to
speak
to
previous
ones.
I
I
cannot
speak
to
the
waiver
process
that
they
went
through
or
what
requirements
were,
and
at
that
time
I
will
note.
B
Delaney
I
think
I
understood
this
from
your
presentation,
but
it
seems
pretty
I
mean
sometimes
we
see
that
there's
conflicts
with
these
applications
right,
but
in
this
case
we
have
the
right
of
way,
there's
really
no
complex.
We
don't
have
any
irrigation
facilities,
we
don't
have
any
large
trees
in
the
way.
Is
that
a
fair
summary?
This
is
a
pretty
pretty
clean
opportunity.
Mr.
H
B
B
I
I
I
guess
I
would
just
say
that
one
of
the
important
aspects
of
living
in
that
neighborhood
was
was
the
feel
of
the
streetscape
and
I
I
would
hate
to
think
that
people
chose
to
live
there
and
and
chose
that
lifestyle
and
then,
regardless
of
the
having
the
Sycamore
District
overlay
they're,
going
to
have
that
changed
for
them.
I
I
also
wanted
to
mention
that
the
the
one
house
that
does
have
sidewalk
in
front
of
it
and
the
one
flag
lot
that
does
is
directly
contiguous
to
sidewalks
that
already
existed
in
that
very
dense
kind
of
development.
That's
immediately
adjacent
to
the
Sycamore
District
boundary,
so
I
guess
I
would
just
I
would
just
request
that
the
the
wishes
of
the
neighborhood
would
be
honored
in
this
case.
B
C
L
B
L
Chair
commissioner
finbrock
please
so
as
we
heard
tonight,
the
waiver
requires
certain
conditions
be
met,
but
the
applicant's
reason
for
not
wanting
to
install
curb,
Gutter
and
sidewalk
is
just
lack
of
current
infrastructure,
and
that
isn't
one
of
those
conditions.
So
you
know
again,
as
Dad
pointed
out,
we'll
miss
the
opportunity
to
support
The
Pedestrian
connectivity,
which
can
only
happen
through
these
minor
land
divisions
like
the
one
in
front
of
us
now,
so
our
goal
being
pedestrian
connectivity.
We
have
to
make
it
happen
through
these
land
divisions
and
you.
L
As
everybody
you
know,
as
these
happen,
we
can,
we
can
require
curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk,
and
we'll
have
that
connectivity
in
these
neighborhoods
that
we
have
wanted
all
along.
So
we
can
only
do
this
through
these
applications,
and
so
it's
like
a
baby
step
forward.
So
for
that
reason,
I
think
we
should
go
ahead
and
deny
this
application.
F
I'm
going
to
be
in
support
of
the
support
of
the
motion,
the
unusual
circumstance
bar
I,
don't
think,
was
met.
I
appreciate,
Miss,
Miss,
Clark's.
Testimony
I
think.
The
issue
that
I
have
with
it
is
that
it's
mostly
almost
wholly
reliant
on
the
Sycamore
plan
and
our
comprehensive
plan,
whereas
what
we
also
have
to
consider,
which
is
our
our
codified
laws,
our
subdivision
ordinance,
and
that
is
very
clear
in
this
instance
I-
think
that
this
neighborhood
is
slowly
changing.
I.
F
Think
that
very
evidence
of
this
application,
this
at
this
application,
is
very
evident
of
that
you're.
Seeing
the
flag
lot
subdivisions,
so
things
are
changing,
and
last
thing
I
would
say
is,
if
there
is,
is
a
desire
for
a
trailer
to
be
put
towards
the
back
end
of
this
parcel.
Well,
when
it's,
when
the
proposals
in
front
of
us
for
the
development
of
it
and
the
layout
of
it,
then
the
driveway
and
how
it
orients
towards
the
home
and
towards
the
back
of
the
unit,
is
still
very
very
possible.
E
C
B
Very
good
we'll
go
ahead
and
then
and
move
to
the
vote
here.
I.
Think
again,
we
have
a
motion
to
deny
the
waiver
with
the
motion
by
commissioner
finfrock
in
a
second
by
commissioner
Daly.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
roll
instead.
D
B
All
right,
thank
you
all
right
up
next
on
our
agenda
tonight
is
item
number
three
cup
22-68
hatch
design,
Architects
the
address
is
6780
South,
Cole
Road.
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
self-service
storage
on
2.17
acres
and
a
c2d
with
a
d,
a
a
design
review
with
with
a
development
agreement
and
first
we're
going
to
hear
from
staff
Sabrina
Mortensen.
N
Chair
members
of
the
commission,
the
item
before
you
is
a
request
for
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
self-service
storage
facility
on
2.17
Acres,
located
at
6780
South,
Cole
Road
and
a
c2da
Zone.
The
subject
parcel
is
vacant
and
was
recently
annexed
into
the
city
with
a
zoning
designation
of
c2dda.
The
development
agreement
for
the
property
restricted,
specific
auto-oriented
uses,
which
are
typically
Allowed
by
Wright
in
the
C2
Zone
and
included
development
standards
regarding
vehicular
access
to
the
site
during
the
public
hearings
for
the
annexation.
N
The
proposed
storage
facility
is
not
compatible
with
the
surrounding
area,
which
consists
of
single-family
homes
and
the
community
center
and
open
space
for
the
serengo
valley.
Specific
plan
area.
The
Proposal
is
in
conflict
with
policies
of
the
comprehensive
plan
which
encourage
increasing
opportunities
for
housing
and
Neighborhood
Services,
while
retaining
distinctive
rural
elements
of
the
Southwest
planning
area.
The
subject
property
is
located
adjacent
to
an
identified
priority
travel
Corridor
into
level
three
bikeways.
N
The
proposal
to
cite
an
auto-oriented
industrial
use
in
this
location
contradicts
circumference
of
plants,
vision
for
this
area.
Additionally,
the
Southwest
Community
comprehensive
plan
encourages
citing
industrial
uses
within
the
airport
influence
area
and
the
subject
property
is
not
located
within
that
area.
N
The
planning
team
prize
of
the
site
is
large
enough
to
accommodate
the
proposed
use,
and
the
proposed
storage
facility
is
not
anticipated
to
generate
excessive
traffic,
noise
or
lighting
impacts,
which
would
adversely
affect
other
property.
Additionally,
no
commenting
agencies
have
expressed
concern
regarding
the
cup
request.
O
O
O
The
buttons
this
is
great,
it's
a
little
unique
in
that
we're
landlocked
by
a
canal
and
overpass
on
two
sides,
and
we
have
our
access
to
the
very
south
which
was
negotiated
through
that
D.A
with
annexation.
Appropriate
specific
for
this
use.
O
With
that,
the
consideration
is,
we
do
have
neighborhood
subdivisions
on
three
sides
and
soon
to
be
the
fourth
side.
All
these
have
fairly
highly
restrictive,
HOAs
and
ccnrs,
and
we
found
that
storage
is
a
fairly
accessory
use
to
more
compact
subdivisions
where
they
need
places
to
store
their
recreational
vehicles,
especially
this
close
to
kind
of
the
Eastern
side
of
Boise.
O
So
going
back
to
our
current
site
plan,
we
have
our
office
amenity
and
building
a
so
as
far
as
the
buildings
on
the
perimeter,
so
that
the
development
has
a
complete,
feel
and
complete
structure.
As
far
as
the
second
phase
that
is
really
based
on
the
demographic
of
the
area
to
make
sure
that
that
is
built
out
appropriately
to
the
use.
O
So
the
staff
report
and
comments
that
we
received
there
was
a
concern
about
traffic
storage.
Is
the
lowest
generating
use
for
traffic
based
on
acht's
impact
fee
report?
So
we
feel
that
this
is
inappropriate,
use
and
was
approved
with
access
based
on
that
use.
As
far
as
the
intersection
itself,
it's
a
little
unique
from
a
restriction
standpoint,
but
it
also
with
the
overpass
raising
and
elevation
about
12
feet.
The
sub
this
proposed
project
would
be
tucked
in
and
isolated
with
our
Landscaping
on
the
perimeter
buffer.
O
We
feel
that
that
would
be
appropriate
because
we
got
a
canal
with
landscape
and
mature
trees
on
one
side
and
an
intersection
with
additional
landscaping
and,
on
the
other,
two
sides
properly
screening
that
from
the
neighbors
across
the
street
and
then.
Lastly,
as
far
as
the
comprehensive
plan
we've
seen
with
developments
with
Brighton
and
Hubble,
that
in
many
cases,
storage
is
incorporated
into
subdivisions
nowadays
strategically.
We
feel
that
this
is
a
fairly
appropriate
and
strategic
location
for
this,
based
on
the
developments
around
it
and
being
an
accessory
use
to
this
area.
O
B
B
L
I
had
a
question
for
staff.
What
what
intended
use
would
you
prefer
to
see
this
particular
plot?
Be
I
mean
what
what
would
I
mean?
What
would
be
best
case
scenario.
N
Mr
chair,
commissioner
finfrock.
There
are
a
number
of
uses
in
the
C2
Zone
that
would
provide
a
more
active
use.
That's
more
directly
accessible
for
the
Neighbors.
Multi-Family
is
also
an
allowed
use
in
the
C2
Zone
through
a
conditional
use.
Primrent.
L
Mr
chair,
please
just
one
follow-up
question:
the
applicant
just
said
that
when
they
rezone
the
property,
they
proposed
that
this
location
be
a
storage
unit.
Was
that
acceptable
then?
And
if
it's
not
acceptable,
if
it
was
and
it's
not
now
can
we
go
like
maybe
get
a
little
bit
of
descript
like
reason?
Why.
N
Sure
Mr
chair
commissioner
finbrock,
when
the
applicant
brought
the
annexation
forward.
They
did
mention
Self
Storage
as
a
potential
use
of
the
site,
but
they
chose
to
proceed
with
the
annexation
separately
from
the
cup
and
didn't
bring
that
in
at
the
same
time.
So
with
the
annexation,
we
were
really
evaluating
whether
it
was
appropriate
to
bring
that
property
into
the
city.
With
a
specific
zoning
designation,
we
didn't
have
you
know
anything
that
tied
it
to
a
specific
use
at
that
time,.
E
L
This
is
a
Activity
Center,
correct.
It's
like
it's!
Actually,
when
we
annexed
it,
we
identified
it
as
an
activity
center
is
that
craft.
N
P
O
B
B
B
B
N
M
B
Okay,
so
we
have
braid
brush.
Q
Yes,
hi,
commissioner
Mr
chair
Commissioners.
Thank
you.
My
name
is
Brie
brush
I
live
at
7627,
West
Havana
drive
I'm
here
this
evening.
Speaking
in
a
personal
capacity,
my
home
is
in
the
baseri
subdivision,
directly
across
Cole
Road,
from
this
property
to
the
West
and
being
in
a
new
subdivision
myself.
I
fully
expected
this
area
would
change
and
grow
up
around
us
and
it's
something
I
was
actually
really
excited
about,
because
I
know
with
more
rooftops.
Q
Q
Maybe
there's
a
huge
demand
for
this
that
I'm
not
aware
of,
but
I
actually
spoke
with,
one
of
the
owners
of
the
facilities
near
us,
and
he
said
that
their
occupancy
and
demand
has
decreased
so
much
in
recent
months
that
they've
recently
dropped
their
rates
to
try
and
attract
customers.
So
we
really
do
have
a
lot
of
these
facility
days
are
ready
and
capacity
for
folks
who
want
to
utilize
this
nearby.
Conversely,
the
closest
gas
station
to
my
property
is
1.7
miles
away
and
the
closest
grocery
store
is
about
three
miles
away.
Q
So
why
not
use
this
property
to
offer
something?
The
new
and
growing
neighborhoods
in
this
area
can
walk
to
the
neighborhoods
on
either
side
of
this
property
have
installed
really
great
to
touch
sidewalks
and
Pathways,
and
there's
even
a
multi-use
path
on
Lake
Hazel.
An
appropriate
use
for
this
area
is
one
that
would
capitalize
on
this
infrastructure
Investments
to
develop
something
people
would
actually
want
to
walk
and
bike
to.
For
all
these
reasons,
I
asked
you
deny
the
cup.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration.
B
Good
we'll
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
testimony
at
this
point:
Mr
hatch,
you're
up
for
rebuttal.
O
O
So
it
would
be
difficult
to
accommodate
those
uses
without
an
appropriate
access
for
a
larger
generation,
further
away
from
the
intersection.
As
far
as
staff's
considerations
for
pedestrian
activity,
we
feel
that
the
the
streetscape
improvements
to
and
through
this
development
will
be
will
be
helpful,
but
in
addition,
this
particular
facility
is
geared
towards
recreational
storage.
So
the
intention
is
boats
and
things
that
are
going
to
be
actively
taking
you
Outdoors.
So
we
feel
that
that
is
a
complementary
use
in
this
area
and
I
will
stand
for
any
other
questions.
B
F
C
B
Okay,
we
have
a
motion
to
deny
by
commissioner
Danley
with
a
second
by
commissioner
finfrock,
any
discussion
Mr
chair,
Mr
Daly,
so.
F
But
I
remember
hearing
this
when
it
first
came
in
front
of
us
and
nothing
has
changed,
it's
the
concept
of
highest
and
best
use
and
further
I,
remember
talking
about
this
at
the
last
hearing,
which
is
achd
just
spent
a
whole
bunch
of
money
on
this
roadway
so
for
us
to
approve
a
storage
shed
or
storage
facility.
F
I
I,
don't
know
that
that
necessarily
works
and
honors
sort
of
that
relationship
that
we
have
with
them
investing
in
us
and
making
sure
that
the
land
use
part
of
the
equation
is
and
reaches
at
highest
and
best
use
I
think
that
Miss
brush
hit
it
on
the
head.
We
have
a
significant
residential
population
that
needs
things
to
do
places
to
go.
You
know
and
things
to
spend
money
on
so
I
would
High
really
encourage
the
applicant
now
that
they
got
their
rezone
to
come
forward
with
another
application.
E
F
We
heard
tonight
so
for
those
reasons:
I
I
recommend
denial,
foreign.
R
L
Chair
yeah,
commissioner
I'll
just
add
to
you
that
the
Southwest
Community
comprehensive
plan
actually
encourages
that
industrial
uses
to
be
put
in
that
airport
influence
area
which
is
pretty
close
by
and
so
using
our
residential
or
the
area
where
we
could
add
more
residential
uses
or
even
commercial
uses
at
this
location
would
would
be
definitely
a
drawback
for
the
community
and
it
isn't.
You
know
it
doesn't
support
the
opportunity
for
housing
or
Community
or
neighborhood
services.
So
for
that
reason
also
I'll
be
in
support
of
the
motion.
Okay,.
B
Mr
hatch,
I
I'm,
going
to
Second
commissioner
danley's
comments.
I
know
you're
in
a
tough
position
here
and
I'll
tell
you
I've
been
kind
of
going
back
and
forth
on
this
one.
You
know
I
think
the
the
canal
is
an
interesting
constraint
with
the
property
right
like
it.
It
feels
like
in
some
ways
this
is
a
good
use
for
that
property
because
you
do
have
an
island.
B
E
B
We'd
like
to
see
something
more
active
on
that
corner
for
the
community
without
having
to
cross
the
canal,
so
I
think
I,
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
tending
right
now
with
my
thought
process
is
that
is
agreeing
with
staff
and
agreeing
with
the
motion
that
this
is
probably
not
the
highest
and
best
use
of
this
parcel,
but
trying
to
understand
it.
That
puts
you
in
a
tough
position
right
with
the
application.
So
that's
my
thoughts
on
the
matter
anyhow,
any
other
discussion.
B
B
C
G
B
Okay,
we'll
keep
on
trucking
here
up
to
item
number
four
cup
23-10
platform
architecture,
design
at
203,
South,
Orchard
Street.
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
large
Child
Care
Center
as
part
of
an
existing
mixed-use
development
on
4.73
acres
in
a
PCD
Zone.
First,
we're
going
to
hear
from
staff
Matt
Dennis.
S
S
The
use
of
the
property
is
compatible
with
the
general
neighborhood,
which
is
located
at
the
center
of
the
Franklin
and
Orchard
Community
Activity
Center.
This
will
also
provide
an
active
use
near
key
intersection
with
four
existing
Transit
stops
within
250
feet
of
the
site
that
will
support
the
growth
retention
and
profitability
of
existing
businesses
in
the
vicinity.
S
S
The
child
care
center
will
not
negatively
impact
other
property
in
the
vicinity,
as
it
will
provide
a
public
service
and
active
use
along
an
arterial
roadway
with
the
majority
of
activity
occurring
indoors.
As
such,
the
proposal
will
provide
an
important
service
at
a
convenient
location
for
individuals
who
live
and
work
in
the
area.
S
The
Proposal
is
located
within
the
Moda
Franklin
mixed
use,
development,
which
includes
a
total
of
five
buildings
and
plans
to
occupy
the
southernmost
pad
site
known
as
the
double
dutch
within
the
original
planned
unit
development
application.
The
double
dutch
pad
site
was
intended
for
a
two-story
mixed-use,
building
containing
ground
floor,
retail
and
second
floor
amenities
for
the
residents
of
the
development.
S
The
site
is
large
enough
to
accommodate
the
proposed
use,
as
required
by
code.
The
proposed
parking
is
shared
with
the
planned
mixed
use
development
and
exceeds
the
minimum
requirement
with
eight
spaces
required
and
34,
provided
there
are
designated
parking
spaces
for
pickup
and
drop-off,
and
additional
parking
that
is
reserved
during
business
hours.
Comments
received
from
public
agencies
confirmed
that
the
proposed
use
will
not
place
an
undue
burden
on
the
transportation
system
or
other
services
in
the
vicinity.
S
The
Proposal
includes
a
2
800
square
foot
building
which
can
accommodate
up
to
80
children
as
required
by
as
the
required
gross
indoor
floor,
space
can
be
accounted
for.
Additionally,
the
site
is
directly
adjacent
to
Franklin
Park,
with
a
gated
entry
which
can
be
which
can
accommodate
the
required
100
square
feet
of
outdoor
play
area
per
child.
The
application
had
originally
proposed
to
serve
up
to
72
72
children.
However
late
correspondents
received
from
the
applicant
expressed
the
desire
to
maximize
the
number
of
children
to
80..
S
T
Good
evening,
Kathy
Sewell
with
platform
architecture
and
design,
280
North,
8th,
Suite,
108
Boise
Idaho
I,
appreciate
staff's
comment.
We
agree
with
the
conditions
of
approval
indicated
in
the
staff
report.
We
understand
that
there
are
a
couple
of
neighbors
that
may
be
in
opposition
to
this,
so
with
that
I'll
reserve
my
time
to
respond
to
their
questions
or
if
the
Commissioners
have
any
questions
for
me
right
right
now,
I
can
respond
to
those.
B
Okay,
great
we'll
first
check
in
with
her
neighborhood
associations,
see
if
we
have
a
representative
from
the
central
bench
Ethan
here:
no
okay!
E
G
Well,
I
am
super
excited
to
see
a
daycare
run
by
a
great
provider
coming
right
into
our
neighborhood.
However,
I
do
recall
that
this
is
the
very
piece
of
property
that
our
former
planning
director
Hal
Simmons,
died
on
because
he
wanted
the
buildings
built
out
on
the
street
and
I
just
really
wish.
There
was
some
way
we
could.
We
had
a
Maverick
application
there
remember
and
long
before.
G
Yes,
we
did
and
Hal
wanted
it
parked
in
back
and
building
in
front,
and
they
finally
said
no
and
they
sold
it
to
these
guys
who
were
developing
this
thing
so
I'm,
just
kind
of
bummed
that,
after
all
that
we're
going
to
park
this
daycare
in
the
front
along
Orchard
that
just
kind
of
bums
me
out
I
wish
there
was
something
we
could
do
on
the
site
to
not
do
that.
No,
no
question
per
se.
E
T
Commissioner,
Blanchard
chairman,
you
know
we
came
to
the
project
from
our
client
who
had
had
discussions
with
the
developer
Fisher
on
this
and
was
understanding
that
the
pad
site
that
was
for
the
double
dutch
was
just
the
pad
side
that
was
available
to
us.
They
were
working
with
the
parking
situation,
so
there
really
was
no
upper
discussion
in
regard
to
relocating
the
building.
T
It
is
a
great
spot
for
our
use
in
that
it
does
front
the
the
park
and
provides
a
great
spot
to
drop
off
and
for
parking
and
traffic
interaction.
S
G
S
E
B
U
Thank
you.
My
name
is
Lindsay
mulharan
I
live
at
5221
West
Pike
Street,
just
down
the
block
from
Franklin
Park
in
the
proposed
development
site,
I'd
like
to
express
my
opposition
to
installing
a
large
Child
Care
Center
at
this
site.
It
contradicts
the
goals
that
are
set
out
in
the
central
bench
neighborhood
plan
for
Franklin
Park,
which
envisions
the
park
as
a
dynamic
neighborhood
Gathering
space.
U
Given
those
goals
I,
don't
feel
that
child
care
center
is
the
best
use
for
this
parcel
compared
to
the
cafe
type
space
that
was
initially
proposed,
which
would
integrate
with
the
park
and
create
safe
pedestrian
access
to
community
spaces.
A
large
Child
Care
Center
would
reduce
pedestrian
connectivity
by
fencing
the
development
office
from
the
Turning
neighborhood,
and
it
would
also
preclude
the
addition
of
a
gathering
space,
because
the
only
other
commercial
spaces
on
the
site
face
Orchard
Road,
which
there's
not
a
lot
of
space
between
the
building
and
Orchard.
It's
an
attached,
narrow,
sidewalk.
U
It's
just
not
going
to
be
appealing
spaces
for
any
type
of
gathering
space
business
to
move
into
so
for
context.
The
closest
Gathering
space
from
our
neighborhood
is
a
bar.
That's
a
three-quarter
mile
walk
down
Orchard,
which,
as
well
established
it's
not
pedestrian,
friendly
or
bike
friendly
Road.
In
comparison,
there
are
three
child
care
centers
within
one
block
of
Franklin
Park
and
two
others
within
a
half
mile
radius.
U
I'm
also
concerned
about
the
proposed
design,
which
would
get
off
the
south
end
of
the
development
for
the
play
areas
as
mentioned,
and
this
would
reduce
pedestrian
connectivity
and
instead
of
having
the
housing
float
into
the
park,
as
was
originally
proposed,
which
would
benefit
the
quality
of
life
for
existing
residents
as
well
as
residents
of
the
apartments.
It
would
instead
fence
that
off
in
in
order
to
access
commercial
space
on
the
front
of
the
building,
pedestrians
would
be
pushed
to
Orchard
or
Franklin
roads.
U
So
yeah
I
guess
in
summary,
I,
am
opposed
to
having
a
large
Child
Care
Center
at
this
site.
I
would
really
like
to
see
that
building
become
a
gathering
space
for
all
members
of
our
community
and
to
see
that
improved
pedestrian
access
throughout
the
park.
D
Good
eating,
my
name
is
Alex
Moody
I
live
at
5221
West
Peck
Street
in
Boise,
I'd
like
to
largely
Echo
Lindsay's
concerns
and
just
add
some
verbiage
from
the
central
Bridge
neighborhood
plan
in
regards
to
Franklin
Park,
which
Lindsay
to
bring
up,
but
just
like
to
repeat
at
least
some
of
the
figures
in
there.
D
Some
items
that
were
designated
for
that
area,
where
promotion
of
community
Gatherings
coordination
of
Park
activities
with
adjacent
businesses
and
conduction
of
place,
making
and
pop-up
activities
in
Franklin
Park,
which
I
felt
that
the
proposed
retail
space
and
Cafe
space
opening
up
into
the
park
really
idealized
and
would
no
I
think
I.
Think
those
those
ideas
went
well
with
that
kind
of
commercial
activity
and
would
have
increased
vibrancy
in
the
neighborhood.
D
B
T
You
know:
I
can't
really
speak
to
the
greater
I
guess:
development
opportunities
within
the
mixed
use
area.
I
know
there
are
some
other
mixed
uses
proposed.
T
You
know,
I
think
the
developer
might
have
a
better
handle
on
that
I.
Don't
think
that
the
proposed
Giraffe
Laugh
is
intending
to
close
off
pedestrian
connection
to
the
park.
T
I
do
understand
that
the
park
will
be
fenced
and
is
fenced
and
we
will
have
our
own
direct
access,
but
I'm
not
aware
of
what
other
access
points
there
may
be
for
the
the
residents
and
but
it's
certainly
not
the
intent
to
to
close
off
the
other
pedestrians
and
people
within
the
neighborhood
to
to
access
the
park
and
the
other
pedestrian
oriented
uses
within
the
development.
B
G
Blanchard
I
move
that
we
approve
cup
23-10
with
the
conditions
stated
in
the
staff
report.
B
E
G
Reiterate
what
I
said
before
is
that
I'm
super
happy
to
see
Giraffe
Laugh
coming
up
there
Lori's
of
well-known
operator
and
great
business
owner
I
think
it
is
a
great
compliment
to
the
area
and
my
bench,
neighborhood
people
I
I'm,
very
familiar
with
that
line
in
the
cbna
neighborhood
plan,
which
has
always
confused
me,
because
the
right
Congregational
Church
right
across
the
street
has
like
always
served
as
like
the
community
center
for
that
area,
with
food
trucks
and
community
garden.
G
It's
for
the
central
bench
holds
are
meetings
there.
The
it's!
It's
frequently
used
for
all
kinds
of
community
Gatherings
up
there,
so
I
was
always
kind
of
mystified
that
the
neighbors
didn't
feel
like
they
had
a
place
together
because
they're
already
Gathering
there,
but
anyways
I,
know
there
where
and
there's
a
Darth
of
stuff
up
there,
but
anyways
they're,
working
on
it
and
I
I
I'm
glad
to
see
giraffe
left
up
there
so
good
for
you
guys.
G
M
W
I
actually
would
I
would
be
interested
in
hearing
from
the
commission
if
there's
any
thoughts
on
ways
that
we
can
condition
this
to
encourage
further
connectivity
and
accessibility.
W
While
you
know,
I
I
also
can
absolutely
support
the
use
of
this
land
for
this
facility
and
understand
it
won't
burden
infrastructure
and
you
know,
fits
with
our
code
or
comprehensive
plan,
but
I
just
was
curious
and
so
I
support
the
motion
and
also
I'm
curious
to
see,
if
there's
any
discussion
on
ways
that
we
can
consider
the
neighbors
comments
by
thinking
about
additional
connectivity.
I
was
just
curious.
If
anybody
have
any
thoughts
on
that.
F
Just
a
quick
question
to
commissioner's
dad
is
okay,
I
I'm,
not
understanding
what
the
claim
is
either
when
I
see
the
the
images
I
see,
the
back
part
portion
of
the
building
from
the
back
of
the
physical
wall
to
the
edge
of
property
is
being
fenced
in,
but
at
least
according
to
the
renderings
in
the
site
plan
it
looks
like
to
me
the
Integrity
of
the
park
pathway
is
maintained
and
so
I'm
not
understanding
what
that
claim
of
it.
Being
blocked
off
is
and
I'm
hoping
the
roof
doesn't
leak.
W
F
Sure
yeah,
just
for
the
sake
of
the
discussion,
page
132
of
the
PDF
anyway,
it
has
renderings
good
Lord
has
renderings
of
the
back
of
the
building
and
the
views
from
from
within
the
site
and
in
both
images,
I,
don't
see
anything
that.
B
B
B
We're
gonna
take
a
little:
let's
take
a
five
minute
break,
let
the
storm
pass
over.
So
everybody
can
hear
us:
okay,
okay,
folks,
let's
see
if
we
can
bring
this
bring
this
back,
get
this
going
again
staff.
Can
you
hear
me
I.
B
No
lightning
strikes
we're
just
gonna
deal
with
rain,
keep
it
positive.
Okay,
just
to
catch
us
back
up,
we've
been
through
all
the
testimony
and
rebuttal
we're
now
deliberating
and
some
of
the
discussion
we're
left
off
with
commissioner
stead
was
concerned
about
connectivity
adjacent
to
the
site
into
the
park.
Is
that
good,
summary
Meredith
yeah.
W
I
would
just
love
because
I
also
I'm
necessarily
seeing
in
the
issue,
but
I
would
be
curious
to
see
if
other
and
so
therefore
I
support
the
motion
as
it
stands.
However,
I'm
curious
to
see
if
other
Commissioners
are
recognizing
that
connectivity
issue
and
have
any
suggestions
for
ways
that
we
can
condition
because
I
know
that's
important
to
us
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
just
like
looking
at
all
sides
of
this.
B
Sure,
looking
at
the
site
plan
so
to
be
clear
to
you,
I'm
I'm,
in
support
of
the
motion
as
well
and
sort
of
in
support
of
the
project
I
understand
the
concerns.
That
was
rate
that
were
raised
during
testimony,
but
I
think
that
the
use
fits
the
site
just
fine
and
the
programming
for
the
property.
Just
fine
I
actually
actually
think
it's
a
nice
transition
that
the
building
is
set
back
from
the
road.
B
The
parking
lot
you
know
between
the
building
and
the
robe
I
think
that's
actually
a
nice
transition
into
the
other
existing
neighborhood.
You
know
to
the
South
so
I'm
not
not
opposed
to
that
location
of
the
building.
Looking
at
the
site
plan
I
understand
the
concerns
about
connectivity
into
the
park.
It
sure
seems
that
maybe
there's
an
opportunity.
B
Maybe
on
the
North
side
it
looks
like
we
have
a
crosswalk,
a
designated
crosswalk.
You
know
across
the
parking
lot
that
leads
to
a
sidewalk
on
the
north
side
of
the
building
there.
If
there
might
be
an
opportunity
to
provide
some
connectivity
into
the
park
on
that
north
side
of
the
building
south
side
of
the
building.
It
looks
a
little
more
challenging
just
because
you
have
you,
know:
privacy
fence
along
that
property
line
south
end,
so
it
creates
a
bit
of
a
tighter
condition.
I
think
for
that.
B
I
guess,
while
we
consider
that
idea
staff,
are
we
good
with
the
motion?
Are
we
good
regarding
the
change
to
that
condition?
Number
two
regarding
the
number
of
children,
or
do
we
need
to
clarify
that
a
little
more
thoroughly
for
the
record
Mr.
A
Chair,
it
doesn't
hurt
to
clarify
it
more
thoroughly.
Sorry.
B
F
So
there's
two
conceivable
opportunities
because
there
is
no
direct
connection
to
the
park
from
the
orchard
walkway
from
the
from
the
sidewalk
there.
Along
that
stretch,
of
course,
so
you
could
either
take
that
out
and
make
a
sidewalk
along
that
that
privacy
fence
and
Connect
into
the
the
pathway,
that's
interior
of
the
park
or
if
you
look
towards
the
North,
and
you
see
the
the
the
drive
aisle
that
comes
in
and
has
the
the
the
quarter
Circle
there
the
arc.
F
If
the
purpose
is
to
make
a
connection
like
that,
I
see
opportunity
to
condition
that
as
I,
the
only
the
only
concern
I
have
is
I,
don't
see.
What's
interior
of
the
park
on
this
site
plan,
so
I
don't
know
you're.
Looking
at
the
aerial,
it
looks
like
there's
an
opportunity
to
make
that
and
so
like.
We
could
certainly
entertain
that
condition
and
I
think
I
agree
with
commissioner
Blanchard
100
in
that
I
wish.
F
The
building
was
pulled
up
to
the
street,
especially
in
a
pedestrian-oriented
Zone
that
we've
labeled
it,
but
that
ship
has
sailed.
So
the
next
best
thing
would
be
to
make
a
connection
that
gets
us
to
the
park
on
that
southern
part
of
that
parcel,
as
opposed
to
having
to
go
clear
up
towards
the
the
the
northern
part
of
that
area
and
make
that
connection.
L
Can
we
just
add
an
added
conditions
and
let
the
design
team
do
that
or
let
the
applicant
worry
about
that
I
mean
or
actually
design
the
access
from
Orchard
Street,
because
I
mean
I.
Think
it's
really
hard
to
actually
come
up
with
a
plan
from
the
pulpit,
and
maybe
we
could
just
give
them
the
opportunity.
B
G
G
B
G
Okay,
well,
this
is
the
motion
or
then
I'm
going
to
amend
my
original
motion
again,
move
that
we
approved
cup
2310
with
the
update
to
condition
number
two
that
the
daycare
be
allowed
up
to
80
children
and
then
with
a
further
direction
that
staff
work
with
the
applicant
on
connecting
the
site
to
the
existing
neighborhood
again,
because
we've
designated
this
as
a
pedestrian
Zone.
B
C
B
Jbi
Elemental
and
then
associated
with
that
is
SUV.
23-6
honeymoon,
honeymoon,
Cove,
subdivision
project
address
is
at
10133
West
Overland
Road.
The
Pud
is
a
modification
to
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
planned
residential
development,
comprised
of
nine
townhome
units
on
0.97
acres
in
an
nod,
Zone
and
then
the
SUV
23-6
is
the
preliminary
plot
for
said
residential
subdivision,
comprised
of
one
common
lot
and
nine
townhomes
on
the
same
0.97
acres
and
we're
and
we'll
hear
from
Staff.
First
David
Mosher.
X
The
project
also
includes
a
modification
of
the
original
conditional
use
permit
from
2008
to
remove
the
building
height
restrictions
and
allow
for
two-story
structures.
A
preliminary
plot
subdivision
comprised
of
nine
billable
one
common
lot
was
also
included
and,
as
you
can
see
from
the
aerial
photo
here,
the
properties
located
between
an
assisted
living
facility
to
the
north
and
a
detached
single-family
residential
neighborhood
to
the
South.
The
sub
property
is
also
about
a
quarter
a
mile
away
from
a
community
activity
center
located
at
the
intersection
of
Five,
Mile
and
Overland
roads.
X
The
development
is
comprised
of
nine
attached
two-story
town
homes,
with
a
density
of
9.2
units
per
acre,
the
L,
the
no
Zone
allows
for
a
density
of
14.5
units
per
acre.
The
applicant
is
requesting
a
plan
unit
development
with
reduced
interior
side
setbacks,
reduced
lot
sizes
with
Street
Frontage
standards,
which
are
required
for
the
town
townhouse
development
to
occur.
Each
townhouse
will
provide
two-car
garage
and
get
and
two
guest
parking
spaces
in
the
driveway
apron.
X
X
The
project
design
also
provides
lockyard
setbacks
with
the
houses
adjacent
to
the
South
and
West.
The
proposed
two-story
townhouses
are
compatible
and
will
not
adversely
impact
the
adjacent,
neighborhood
or
adjacent
Residential
Properties
due
to
the
large
setbacks
and
the
proposed
perimeter
Landscaping.
X
Finally,
the
comprehensive
plan
encouraged
residential
uses
near
the
community
activity
centers
such
as
the
community
activity
center,
located
at
Five,
Mile
and
Overland
Road,
which
this
site
is
about
a
quarter
mile
away
from
these
elevations
show
the
townhouse
building
designs,
which
are
32
feet
in
height
to
the
peak
of
the
roof
or
27
and
feet
in
height
to
the
midline
of
the
roof.
The
allowed
height
of
the
no
Zone
and
the
adjacent
r1b
single
family
zone
is
35
feet.
X
The
planning
team
has
received
public
comment
expressing
concerns
with
the
proposed
development.
These
concerns
are
in
general
or
in
general,
regardings
to
traffic
and
parking
compatibility
and
adverse
impact
in
terms
of
loss
of
privacy,
since
there
is
a
change
of
grade
between
this
site
and
the
and
the
neighbors
of
a
few
feet
to
address
these
concerns,
I
would
note
the
following.
First:
as
for
the
traffic
impacts,
the
anticipated
amount
of
traffic
generated
from
the
project
is
about
five
vehicle
trips
during
PM
peak
hours.
X
As
such,
there
is
traffic
capacity
on
the
adjacent
roadways
to
support
the
project.
Also,
each
single-family
house
will
provide
two
parking
spaces
within
a
garage
and
there
are
two
guest
parking
spaces
on
the
driveway
apron
in
front
of
each
unit.
Secondly,
the
proposed
single-family
attached
town
homes
are
compatible
with
the
existing
detached
single-family
residential
neighborhood
since
they're
both
inherently
single-family
residential
uses.
X
In
addition,
it
will
not
adversely
impact
the
adjacent
properties
due
to
the
proposed
perimeter,
setbacks
that
exceed
all
the
required
setbacks
of
Zone
and
the
required
setbacks,
as
dictated
in
the
2008
conditional
use
approval.
In
addition,
there
is
a
primitive
landscaping
area
surrounding
the
southwest
and
these
property
lines.
In
conclusion,
the
planning
team
recommends
approval
the
Pud
and
the
subdivision.
Thank
you.
Y
Perfect,
my
name
is
Brett
glosh
I'm,
with
Hillside
architecture.
We
are
at
345
West,
Bob,
White,
Court,
Boise,
Idaho,
83706.
I
just
have
a
couple
slides,
keep
it
quick,
I,
think
David
nailed
it
so
I,
don't
have
much
to
add
here.
Y
I
think
that
they're
all
net
net
positive
changes,
I
think
what
we've
been
able
to
do
is
you
kind
of
see
representative
here
is:
we've
been
able
to
increase
landscaping
and
and
kind
of
increase,
that
kind
of
privacy
and
setbacks
and
buffers.
So
so
honestly,
I
think
we've
gotten
a
stronger
Proposal
with
working
through
staff,
so
I
just
want
to
thank
them,
because
I
think
they've
been
David's
been
very
diligent
in
kind
of
implementing
this,
and
with
that
I
just
leave
it
with
a
quick.
Y
B
B
F
F
I
want
to
just
make
sure
so
we
have
a
landscaping
plan
in
place
that
that
is
specifically
depicting
multiple
trees
between
the
building
number
unit,
number,
nine
and
the
property.
That's
to
the
east.
Is
that
that's
accurate,
first
and
foremost
just
to
make
sure.
X
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission:
yes,
they
are
I,
think
there
are
three
trees
planted
there,
the
applicant
or
that
I
believe
the
neighbor
expressed
that
they
want
something,
maybe
more
conifers
that
are
evergreens
at
that
location
and
maybe
the
inclusion
of
a
clear
story,
windows
at
the
second
floor,
to
protect
the
Privacy.
If
I
remember
the
letter
you're
talking
about
okay.
G
Can
you
pop
up
that
East
Elevation
again
as
we're
looking
at
that.
G
Next
one
there
we
go.
Thank
you.
B
A
P
X
B
B
F
To
make
sure
Mr
Moser
so
on
the
plant
schedule
for
this
application,
the
trees
in
question
are,
at
this
point,
labeled
deciduous
but
you're.
Mentioning
that
the
app
the
neighbor
has
requested
evergreens.
Is
that
correct
I?
Don't
I
didn't
see
that
any
term
in
the
conditions
that
that
distinction
be
made.
X
B
Z
Hello,
my
name
is
Marianne
mcelhose
and
our
property
is
adjacent
to
the
South
West
corner
at
10262,
Countryman
drive
and
I.
Don't
have
a
rebuttal.
I
just
have
a
question
when
you
brought
up
the
fact
that
the
east
side,
I
believe,
is
what
they
were
talking
about,
we're
on
the
west
side
and
what
is
going
to
be
planted
there,
because
we
have
the
same
differential
of
elevation.
So
the
second
story
is
going
to
be
looking
down
into
our
backyard.
Z
So
I
guess
that
would
be
a
question
and
will
there
be
Windows,
whereas
the
position
I
couldn't
really
tell
from
the
drawing
the
position
on
that
very
far
west
unit?
B
B
Okay:
let's
go
ahead
to
the
focus
online
looks
like
we
have
one
hand
up:
Miss,
Melissa,
iPhone,
so.
AA
My
name
is
actually
Craig.
Heath
I
am
here
with
Melissa
Walters.
We
are
the
homeowner
I'm.
What
I
would
say
is
directly
next
to
the
west
side
of
the
property
line
at
10235,
West
Sutherland
Drive,
not
a
huge
rebuttal
and
I'll,
keep
it
kind
of
short
and
sweet.
Obviously,
my
concerns
are
the
same
as
the
concerns
as
everyone
else.
Privacy
they've
made
modifications
to
the
plans
and
they've
moved
things
forward
and
everything
which
you
know
increases
my
privacy
from
their
original
plans
before
they
made
their
modifications.
AA
AA
AA
There
are
no
speed
bumps,
so
a
suggestion
that
I
would
have
in
order
to
allow
something
like
this
to
happen
is
to
possibly
put
some
speed
bumps
within
that
area,
maybe
even
further
down
on
Sutherland
to
just
slow
cars
down
from
entering
in
to
the
proposed
subdivision,
because
even
as
now,
visitors
go
into
Spring
Creek
Fly
by
in
front
of
our
house,
and
you
know
we
have
a
five-year-old
daughter
who
is
learning
to
ride
her
bike
right
now
out
on
that
street
with
our
supervision.
AA
But
it's
just
one
of
those
concerns
that
we
have
as
parents
and
the
safety
of
our
child
as
well.
So
again,
don't
really
have
a
rebuttal.
We
are
opposed
to
the
building,
but
we
understand
something
has
to
go
there.
Something
is
going
to
go
there,
so
those
are
just
suggestions
that
I
would
like
to
be
taken
into
consideration.
AA
AB
Hi
thanks
guys
yeah
I'm,
the
resident
to
the
east
there
that
submitted
that
testimony
letter
online
and
I
just
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
when
I
see
that
it
was
red
and
I
just
wanted
to
voice
my
concern
again
with
the
Privacy
issue
on
that
Unit,
Nine
and
I'm
I'm
only
wanting
to
get
on
here
and
make
sure
that
the
team
has
at
least
considered
my
suggestions
in
there
with
regards
to
horizontal
windows
and
just
a
touch
on
the
trees.
The
Deciduous.
My
concern
was
that
the
radius
of
those
is
gonna.
AB
A
I
might
remind
the
person
online
that
if
they
want
to
raise
their
hand
from
their
phone,
they
would
press
star
nine.
C
Y
Chairman
Commissioners,
thank
you
and
and
neighbors.
Thank
you
for
showing
up
and
voicing
your
concerns.
You
know
a
quick
note
on
kind
of
privacy.
It's
a
two-way
street,
so
I
think
it
is
going
to
be.
You
know
it's
not
people
staring
at
their
Windows
looking
in
people's
backyard,
but
that's
that
I
think
there's,
there's
validity
to
it
and
I'm
happy
to
I
think
we're
happy
to
look
at
doing
a
landscape
plan
within
the
conditions
of
approval.
Y
If
that's,
if
that's
something
that
kind
of
sways
the
jury
or
the
judge
here,
I
am
biased.
That
I
do
like
Maples
a
little
bit
better
than
junipers,
and
things
like
that.
I
just
think
they're
a
nicer
looking
tree,
but
that's
a
bias
I
think
at
the
end
of
the
day.
That's
that's
that
in
terms
of
traffic,
I,
think
David
said
it
well
in
terms
of
there's
five
five
vehicles
peak
times.
Y
I
do
think
the
traffic's
limited,
but
I
think
that
again,
what's
nice
about
what's
coming
here
is
that
these
are
going
to
be
neighbors.
These
are
going
to
be
homeowners.
These
are
going
to
be
people
that
have
accountability
to
their
to
their
neighborhood
and
I.
Think
people
that
have
accountability
to
their
neighborhood
drive
like
it's
their
neighborhood,
so
I
think
that's
that
one
I
think
that's
pretty
much
it.
So.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
B
Okay,
we'll
go
ahead
and
bring
these
items
back
before
the
commission
to
render
a
decision.
We
have
two
items
before
us
gangs
with
PD
and
then
the
sub,
so
we
could
pick
them
up
one
at
a
time
or
do
them
together.
It's
up
to
you
all.
Let
me
know
how
you
want
to
handle
it.
F
I
think
we
can
handle
both.
Let's
do
it,
let's
try.
Let's
do
it
see
we
got
okay,
I
make
a
motion
that
item
number
six,
specifically
PUD
23-03
the
modification
to
the
conditional
use
permit
be
approved
and
that
sup
23-06.
The
preliminary
plot
for
the
residential
subdivision
recommend
approval,
with
the
additional
condition
that
the
planting
schedule
include
evergreen
trees
along
the
eastern
and
Southwestern
property
lines.
B
B
F
I
think
I
think
this
is
frankly
pretty
easy
in
terms
of
the.
How
does
it
fit?
Well,
we
have
a
retirement
community,
Town
Homes
into
single
family.
It's
you
know
it's
a
pretty
awesome
transition.
The
height
is
below
what
is
allowed
so
I'm,
not
concerned
with
that
the
parking
I
mean
there's
two
garage
parkings
and
two
on
the
apron.
That's
four
per
home,
so
I'm
not
concerned
with
that
the
street
I'm
sensitive
to
you
know
pass-through
traffic,
but
in
this
particular
instance,
that
street
is
relatively
short,
at
least
that
accesses
the
property.
F
So
at
that
point
the
only
thing
I'm
left
with
really
is
the
Privacy
issue
and
to
me
I,
don't
want
to
sit
there
and
tell
you
exactly
what
to
plant
where
to
plant.
That's
not
our
job,
but
I
do
think
at
least
codifying
the
Evergreen
versus
the
Conifer
is
important
and
so
and
I
think
it
respects
the
neighbors
in
in
their
existing
homes
and
their
privacy.
So,
for
those
reasons
I'll
be
in
supportive
of
my
own
motion,
I.
P
P
Chair
Mr,
Squires,
I
Echo
everything
that
commissioner
Danley
said
and
I
just
wanted
to
say
thanks
to
the
developer,
for
the
willingness
to
being
a
good
neighbor,
and
thank
you
again
to
the
neighbors
for
showing
up
and
sharing
your
concerns
and
it's
oh,
we
don't
get
these
Happy
Endings
very
often.
So.
Thank
you.
B
Any
other
discussion,
yep
I'll,
signed
off
real
quick,
be
in
support
of
the
Motions.
Thank
you
to
the
folks
who
testified
tonight.
Thank
you
to
the
development
team
for
being
flexible
with
the
comments.
I
do
agree
with
your
summary
that,
where
you
your
first
iteration
of
a
site
plan,
this
is
a
great
Improvement
in
many
ways,
and
so
I
appreciate
your
thought
and
the
care
to
blend
this
in
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
So
well
done
there
yeah
I,
agree
with
Fisher
Danley.
B
You
know,
I,
don't
think
it's
our
job
to
dictate
exactly
what
plant
goes
where
at
this
level,
so
yeah,
please,
when
you
move
into
design
review,
just
make
sure
you
address,
I,
think
those
comments
about
the
planting
plan
and
the
privacy
and
probably
work
with
the
neighbors
to
some
degree
on
making
sure
that
we
get
to
that
happy
ending
that
commissioner
Squire
has
referenced
so
appreciate
your
your
effort
here:
okay,
again,
PUD
23-3,
sub
23-6,
recommending
approval
and
approval,
and
the
motion
by
commissioner
Danley
was
second
by
commissioner
Squires.
C
B
Thank
you
all
right,
I'll,
say
last
item
tonight
is
item
number
seven
PUD
23-1
and
CVA
23-7
pivot,
North
Architects
at
60,
North,
Cole
Road.
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
planned
residential
development
comprised
of
200
multi-family
units
and
a
height
exception
on
2.5
acres
in
a
c2d
Zone
there's
also
a
variance
request
to
exceed
the
residential
floor
area
ratio
and
we're
going
to
hear
from
Staff
first
David
Mosher
again.
X
Thank
you,
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission.
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
plan
unit
development
comprised
of
200
dwelling
units
and
a
height
exception
on
2.5
acres
located
at
60
North
Cole
Road
in
a
C2
c2d
Zone,
a
variance
to
exceed
the
residential
floor
floor
area
ratio
of
the
C2
zone
is
also
included,
as
you
can
see,
from
the
aerial
photograph.
The
property
is
located
at
the
intersection
or
near
the
intersection
of
coal
and
Franklin
roads
with
a
railroad
right
away.
Along
the
South
property
line
of
the
site.
X
X
The
development
is
comprised
of
a
80
foot
9
inch
tall,
seven-story,
building
containing
200
dwelling
units
with
structured
parking
and
amenities
that
include
Pool,
Patio,
elevated,
open
space,
the
project
density
is
80
units
per
acre
and
a
height
exception
is
also
requested.
The
proposed
density
and
Building
height
are
substantially
greater
than
any
other
development.
X
In
addition,
the
project
complies
with
all
the
required
setbacks
and
parking
standards.
The
planning
team
also
supports
the
variance
request
to
exceed
the
residential
far
the
justification
for
this
variance
is
that
is
the
parcel
configuration
and
the
subject
properties
location
near
the
mall,
a
regional
Activity
Center.
X
The
general
purpose
of
the
far
is
to
control
the
mass
of
the
building
while
mitigating
for
the
intensity
of
the
use.
It
was
not
intended
to
discourage
the
type
of
anticipated
development
within
a
Boise
within
the
Boise
Town
Square
Mall
Regional,
Activity
Center,
or
restrict
the
potential
for
affordable
housing
in
the
area.
X
X
These
elevations
of
the
building,
as
seen
from
Bethel
Street,
which
is
the
top
picture
and
there's
a
view
of
of
the
building
as
seen
from
the
coal
and
road
or
Coal
Road
and
Franklin
intersection,
which
is
the
bottom
one.
The
picture
next
to
the
elevations
also
gives
you
an
idea
of
the
building
Heights
within
the
surrounding
area.
As
for
the
height
exception,
the
proposed
building
Heights
is
greater
than
any
other
building.
Currently
in
the
area,
the
area
generally
consists,
as
you
can
see,
from
the
from
the
from
the
picture
of
two-story
buildings.
X
However,
the
planning
team
is
supportive
of
the
height
exception
since
the
prod,
since
the
project
is
located
in
close
proximity
to
the
regional
Activity
Center,
which
anticipates
the
construction
of
taller
and
larger
buildings
of
approximately
seven
feet
in
height.
This
type
of
development
has
already
been
has
already
started,
with
the
approval
and
approximately
70
foot,
but
70
foot
high
multi-family
Building,
located
along
Cole
Road
about
a
quarter
mile
to
the
north,
basically
Colin
Denton.
X
The
planning
team
has
received
comments
from
the
public
expressing
concerns
of
the
post-development.
These
these
points
are
generally
involved
around
traffic
and
the
compatibility
and
adverse
impacts
of
the
project
in
terms
of
the
residential
use.
To
address
these
I
would
note.
As
for
the
traffic
impacts
associated
with
the
200
dwelling
unit,
multi-family
project,
it
will
generate
a
similar
amount
of
traffic,
as
the
existing
commercial
use
is
on
site.
This
has
been
stated
by
the
achd
within
their
project
board.
X
In
addition,
the
revised
traffic
analysis
from
the
T
from
the
TSI
report,
as
shown
at
the
bottom
of
this
page,
indicates
an
increase
of
about
30
vehicle
trips
during
P
during
the
am
peak
hours
and
roughly
about
the
same
amount
of
traffic
being
generated
during
the
during
the
PM
Peak,
as
noted
also
within
the
ACC
report.
Also,
there
is
capacity
on
Coal
Road
to
support
support
the
project.
X
The
compatibility
and
adverse
impacts,
concerns
expressed
by
the
public
generally
involve
the
development's
proximity
and
its
adverse
impact
on
the
operation
of
the
Port
of
Hope
halfway
house
located
adjacent
to
the
site.
However,
there
are
no
restrictions
within
the
Boise
City
development
code
or
the
port
of
Hope's
planning
approval
that
prohibit
residential
uses
from
being
located
adjacent
to
this
halfway
house.
X
B
M
Thanks
for
having
us
appreciate
all
your
hard
work
really
appreciate
working
with
the
planning
staff,
my
name
is
Brian
Wenzel
I'm,
with
pivot
North
architecture
address,
is
116
South
6th
Street
in
Boise,
and
really
excited
to
show
our
proposal
here
and
hear
what
you
have
to
say.
So,
like
I
mentioned,
we
have
worked
extensively
with
planning
staff.
M
We've
also
worked
with
achd
Union
Pacific
Nampa,
Meridian,
Irrigation,
District
fire
department,
solid
waste,
all
those
departments,
and
also
some
neighbor
Outreach
as
well,
so
really
excited
to
engage
as
many
groups
as
we
can
to
understand
the
requirements
and
desires
and
needs.
So
this
isn't
the
first
time
you
come
to
planning
staff
for
this
project.
We
originally
proposed
a
different
building
configuration,
but
we've
revised
it
to
more
thoughtfully
accommodate
some
of
the
comments
we've
received
from
planning
staff.
M
So
the
project
before
I
use
a
200
unit,
new
multi-family
apartment
community
with
Associated
amenities,
Associated
parking
bike
parking,
some
open
space
and
residential
amenities
out
outside
as
well
we're
proposing
201
vehicle
parking
stalls.
So
at
least
one
salt
per
resident
unit.
M
The
three
main
project
goals
we've
tried
to
embrace
with
this
project
is
affordability,
Transit
and
safety,
also
weaving
through
all
that
some
sustainable
goals
as
well
so
affordability
with
David
did
a
great
job
addressing
68
provided
income
restricted,
affordable
units-
that's
quite
a
significant
give
by
the
developer
to
the
community
really
embracing
that
as
an
opportunity
for
the
community
to
provide
much
needed,
affordable
housing.
M
Also,
the
location
we
see
is
a
really
great
opportunity
for
people
to
walk
to
the
mall,
walk
to
public
transit,
a
really
great
site
potential
I
think
so
really
happy
to
propose
on
the
site.
The
units
are
proposed
out
of
80
Ami
and
consistent
with
the
housing
density
bonus
ordinance.
That's
currently
codified,
we're
providing
35
of
the
proposed
affordable
units
as
two
bedrooms,
so
great
mix
among
the
unit.
M
As
far
as
Transit
David
and
team
mentioned
that
the
projects
within
half
a
mile
of
at
least
eight
bus
lines
in
the
future
Regional
Rail
line,
that's
planned,
there's
more
than
200
bike
parking
saws
that
are
proposed
to
encourage
alternative
transportation.
Hopefully,
that'll
reduce
some
of
the
parking
cons.
Sorry,
some
of
the
traffic
concerns
as
well
and
we're
adjacent
to
a
future
public
pathway
that
we're
proposing
to
the
South
so
really
anticipate.
M
That
could
be
another
way
to
encourage
folks
to
circulate
from
this
site
to
other
places
and
then
a
safety
there's
currently
two
site
accesses
to
the
commercial
development
at
60,
North
Pole
Road
we're
proposing
to
reduce
that
to
one
that's
consistent
with
the
fire,
the
fire
code.
So
we
feel
comfortable
with
what
we're
proposing
there.
M
Also
we
have
our
traffic
analyst
on
the
line
in
case
any
questions
or
result
from
that
and
in
addition
to
taking
those
number
of
site
accesses
down
we're
proposing
to
relocate
the
one-site
access
north
I
think
it's
an
edition
of
I.
M
Have
it
here
edition
of
130
feet
in
Greater
distance,
from
the
train
and
from
the
Franklin
intersection,
so
that
alone
will
greatly
increase
the
safety
of
that
intersection
and
we're
encouraging
folks
to
do
right
in
right
out
and
we'll
work
with
achd
and
those
required
required
techniques
to
encourage,
write
and
write
out
to
discourage
folks
from
going
towards
Franklin
encourage
them
away
from
that
intersection.
So
we
have
here
a
schedule
of
what
we're
proposed.
M
Sometimes
we
like
to
address
that
we
anticipate
the
construction
sequence
to
start,
if
all
goes
well
in
March
of
next
year
and
proceed
a
couple
years,
but
that
kind
of
coincides
with
some
of
that
leases.
The
existing
tenets
of
entered
into
so
being
sensitive
of
that
with
the
owner,
but
the
affordable
housing
we're
proposing.
We've
looked
at
a
five
mile
radius
as
the
effective
Outreach
for
folks
that
live
in
affordable
housing.
They
can
get
to
jobs,
they
can
get
to
shopping.
M
Pretty
much
encapsulates
Meridian
Boise
Garden
City.
A
lot
of
great
things
that
are
reached
within
the
five
mile
radius,
in
addition
to
the
copious
public
transit
I,
think
we
understand
the
site
pretty
well,
but
you
can
see
how
how
close
the
proximity
of
the
mall
is.
I've
actually
walked
quite
a
few
times
from
North
Pole
Road,
along
North,
Cole
Road
from
the
site
up
to
West,
Park
and
crossover.
M
It's
pretty
convenient,
walk
so
really
excited
for
residents
to
experience
that
the
current
zoning
is
c2d,
we're
not
proposing
a
zone
change,
but
we
are
asking
for
some
height
and
some
far
I
think
we
want
to
be
forthcoming
about
that.
It's
a
it's
a
significant
ask
probably,
but
we
feel
like
some
of
the
gives
that
we're
entering
into
as
a
kind
of
a
discussion
May
outweigh
some
of
the
tasks.
M
M
So
this
site
is
eventually
envisioned
to
be
MX3,
so
that
kind
of
furthers
that
story
of
being
connected
to
the
mall
and
part
of
the
greater
Activity
Center
supportive
proximity.
So
really
excited
about
the
site's
location.
I
think
it's
a
great
opportunity
for
housing
for
affordable
housing,
for
people
to
work
and
shop
at
the
mall,
where
they
try
to
reduce
some
of
those
vehicle
trip,
counts.
M
Here's
the
Landes
map
I
think
it's
a
commercial
use,
but
we
believe
residentials
allow
conditional
use,
which
is
why
we're
here
today
so
spent
a
lot
of
time.
Understanding
the
context
and
walking
by
the
train
I
think
when
we
get
into
building
plans.
Real
quick,
we'll
show
some
of
those
changes.
We've
made
addressing
the
trafficking,
and
we
have
the
traffic
engineer
on
the
line.
M
The
buildings
laid
out.
As
you
see
here,
we
worked
with
achg
initially
in
early
planning
studies
to
locate
that
entry
week
realize
it's
quite
close
to
Bethel,
but
that's
where
they
advise
us
to
put
it
because
any
further
south
it
would
be
too
close
to
Franklin
any
further
north
it'd
be
too
close
to
Bethel,
so
without
any
kind
of
agreement
to
the
north
to
Bethel.
This
is
really
the
location.
M
They
advised
here's
the
configuration
of
the
building,
we're
using
that
double
loaded
quarter
to
kind
of
screen,
some
of
the
sight
lines
and
sound
from
the
train
to
the
South
and
some
resident
amenities
that
access
onto
the
open
space
we
located
the
courtyards
to
kind
of
visually
break
down
the
mass
of
the
neighbors,
the
North
and
the
east,
and
emphasize
views
to
the
north
as
well,
and
you
can
see
from
the
roof
plan
we're
trying
to
embrace
solar
panels
on
the
roof
and
carports
and
here's
some
views.
M
We've
got
high
quality
materials,
durable
materials,
a
really
impactful
elevation
that
we
believe
will
go
well
with
design
review
when
that
time
comes,
but
trying
to
make
this
a
billboard
for
the
area
and
really
celebrate
the
affordable
housing
and
maybe
unique
artwork
on
the
on
the
corner.
There's
a
billboard
for
people
from
The
Interchange
to
be
drawn
to
the
to
the
development
of
the
project
and
take
some
sense
of
Pride
and
ownership.
M
M
Here's
the
view
coming
down
the
the
West
on
Franklin
and
then
corner
of
Franklin
Cola.
We
tried
to
articulate
the
building
break
up
some
of
the
massing
on
the
longer
face
vertically
horizontally,
add
some
unique
patterns
and
interest
and
high
quality
durable
materials.
You
can
visit
this
if
needed
some
data
here,
and
we
really
tried
to
embrace
a
lot
of
the
objectives
of
the
Boise
blueprint,
encouraging
infill
development,
supporting
existing
Transit,
organizing
the
building
well
and
embracing
the
street
and
the
high
density
infill.
M
We
really
feel
this
is
a
great
site,
great
opportunity
to
walk
to
the
mall,
so
I
guess.
In
summary,
we
are
now
requesting
his
own
change,
we're
instead
asking
for
a
little
relief
in
the
height
and
the
far
we
understand
that,
in
exchange
we're
offering
to
give
extra,
affordable
units
a
believe,
the
housing
density
bonus,
ordinance,
envisions
15
of
the
total
units
to
be
affordable
at
80,
we're
providing
34.
M
So
quite
a
big
uptick
from
that
and
hoping
that
extra
floor
encourages
planning
stuff
to
see
the
same
and
walkability
proximity
to
the
trail
bike
parking
to
discourage
hard
trip.
So
with
all
that
said,
hope
that
you
any
how
much
you
might
have,
we
can
have
here
to
answer
and
hope
you
enjoy
help
thanks.
B
Okay,
thank
you
Brian
first
we'll
check
in
see
if
we
have
anyone
from
the
Liberty
Park
neighborhood
association
present.
B
Doesn't
look
like
that
we
do
it's
quieter
now.
B
The
rain
is
really
loud
up
here
on
the
dice.
Okay,
let's
go
ahead
and
bring
this
back
for
any
questions.
Sorry
not
bring
it
back.
Questions
by
the
commission
to
staff
for
the
applicant.
L
Proctor
question
for
Steph
so
for
David,
the
so
there's
the
halfway
house,
that's
adjacent
to
this
property,
and
if
this
application
goes
through,
then
that
halfway
house
will
pretty
much
cease
to
exist
because
the
FBOP
is
not
going
to
re-license.
It
I'm
just
wondering
what
your
take
on
that
is.
I
mean:
isn't
that
adverse
to
I
mean
as
an
ad
as
a
condition.
It
can't
adversely
affect
any
other
property,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
how
you
think
that
this
doesn't
adversely
affect
that
property.
X
Please
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission.
You
are
correct,
I
mean
there's
an
outside
agency.
Will,
basically
it's
not
my
understanding.
Won't
allow
won't
give
them
the
funding
or
won't
allow
to
happen
anymore.
It's
not
something
the
city
is,
is
regulating
it's
not
in
our
code.
It's
not
a
condition
of
approval.
Our
city,
Co
or
our
city
blueprint
Boise,
envisions,
high
density
residential
here
so
within
next
to
the
mall.
X
It
envisions
it
because
even
within
the
you
know,
the
the
the
current
modern
zoning
code,
that's
going
through
review
now
anticipates
a
mix
of
residential
uses.
Here,
it's
it's
in.
It's
part
of
what
the
city
would
like
to
see.
I
anticipate
I
I
understand
that
if
a
residential
use
in
this
location
is
going
to
make
things
difficult
or
render,
the
halfway
house
would
have
to
move.
I
don't
have
a
solution
for
that.
Although
it's
it
goes
against
everything.
The
city
is
envisioned
for
a
Neighborhood
Activity
Center
for
this
location,
Mr.
D
X
L
X
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission,
we
did,
but
we
did
not
specifically
attach
any
condition
on
that
that
prohibited
residential.
That
is
an
outside
party,
much
like
a
ccnr.
In
a
sense,
it's
an
additional
agreement
between
two
different
people
that
the
city's
not
involved
and
we're
not
making
the
move.
It's
I
understand
that
it's
another.
It's
another
agency
that
is
I
I,
just
don't
have
a
solution
here.
X
Other
than
you
know,
what's
being
proposed,
meets
every
aspect
of
our
blueprint,
Boise
and
the
comp
plan
and
everything
that
we
envisioned
within
a
regional
Activity
Center,
including
the
affordable
housing.
And
it's
you
know
the
the
restriction
on
residential
is
not
within
our
development
code.
It's
it's
not
a
condition
of
approval
of
that
of
that
original
PUD
for
the
halfway
house.
X
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission,
I
understand
your
concern
and
yes,
there
is
a
an
adverse
impact
statement
to
this
and
usually
what
that's
in
usually
what
that
adverse
impact
is
trying
to
get
is
towards
the
Privacy
towards
lighting
towards
sound
towards
noise.
X
The
physical
aspects,
you
know
what
we're
getting
more
here
is
more
of
a
compatibility
issue,
I
suppose,
but
it's
it's
a
compatibility
constraint
attached
to
it
by
a
different
agency,
that's
particular
to
this
one
use
so
I
don't
know
if
this
is
necessarily
A
an
adverse
impact
per
se
that
that
the
code
anticipated
that,
in
a
sense
that
it's
not
a
physical
adverse
impact
onto
the
site,
it's
it's
more
of
a
compatibility,
but
the
the
use
is
also
compatible
with
everything
else
in
the
area
you
know.
X
As
far
as
the
staff
report
is
concerned,
I
understand
your
concern.
I
I,
just
don't
have
a
solution
to
make
to
somehow
see
that
they
can
still
exist.
That
being
said,
like
I
said,
our
the
city's
long-term
vision
for
this
area
is
to
see
residential
here
the
MX3
that
the
modern
zoning
code
anticipates.
The
numerous
plans
in
the
comprehensive
plan
call
for
residential
in
this
area
so.
B
F
I'm
going
to
ask
a
question
of
the
applicant
if
I
can,
so
what
is
in
existence
today
on
this
site?
Is
commercial
operations
so.
H
F
Curious
if
there
was
any
discussion
had
or
or.
F
M
Commission,
chair
members,
the
commission
great
question:
our
developers
are
primarily
a
residential
developer,
so
they
were
interested
first
and
foremost
when
proposing
what
they
know
and
what
they're,
what
what
they
know
Works
in
this
in
this
location,
there
wasn't
extensive
discussions
as
far
as
retail.
If
you
refer
to
this
to
the
ground
floor
plan,
we're
challenged
with
providing
the
amount
of
parking,
the
Oddity
of
the
triangle
site,
the
the
prescription
of
where
the
entry
needs
to
be
from
achd
and
needing
their
residential
amenities
to
support
the
project.
M
So
there
wasn't
a
whole
lot
of
opportunity
to
locate
commercial.
It
would
have
to
be
where
the
Bike
Room
is
and
we'd
have
to
find
a
different
place
for
that
which
would
take
parking
out
which
we
could
do,
but
would
impact
the
amount
of
vehicle
parking
we're
providing.
So
it's
kind
of
a
a
lot
of
variables
playing
into
that.
But
there
was
an
extensive
discussion
now,
a
commercial.
We
felt
that
the
mall
was
sufficient
for
providing
some
commercial
at
the
moment.
F
Okay,
Mr
chairman,
so
there's
extensive
discussion
in
the
staff
report
and
in
achd's
report
about
this
potential
connection
to
Bethel.
In
fact,
there's
even
some
renderings
that
show
a
connection
on
a
site
plan
to
Bethel
I
understand
that
it
sounded
as
though
you
engaged
in
a
discussion
with
the
adjacent
property
owner
tried
to
get
the
connection
to
go,
but
it
just
didn't
go
anywhere.
They
they
just
didn't
agree
to
it.
Has
there
is
there
any
hope
of
that
whatsoever,
or
is
that
ship
just
totally
failed.
M
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission,
great
question:
I.
There
was
a
discussion
that
we
had
laid
out
the
plan
initially,
assuming
that
that
agreement
would
come
into
place
that
I
understand
they
agreed
agreement
didn't
happen
so
I,
don't
know
barring
the
two
parties
getting
back
together.
M
My
understanding
is
our
developer
would
be
willing
to
reach
out,
but
it
takes
two
to
kind
of
Tango
on
that
in
that
regard,
so
I
think
we'd
be
open
to
looking
at
scenarios
that
make
the
project
better.
We're
always
looking
to
to
do
improvements.
So
if
there
was
an
agreement
or
I
suspect
our
developer,
I
can't
speak
100
for
them,
but
I
suspect
from
what
we
know
of
them.
They'd
be
willing
to
entertain
it.
B
L
Or
sorry,
question
for
staff
for
David
again
in
our
late
correspondence,
itd
or
maybe
it
was
in
our
normal
correspondence
and
County.
The
Ada
County
Sheriff
Office,
actually
both
in
Maine
correspondence
and
our
late
correspondents
commented
that
they
were
concerned
about
the
traffic
congestion
along
coal
and
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
could
speak
to
that,
and
just
maybe
like
go
over
the
issues
that
you
discussed
and
why
why
it
wouldn't
be
a
concern.
At
this
point.
X
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission,
I
believe
the
police
to
address
Ada
County
Sheriff.
They
did
submit
a
letter
initially
with
the
report
expressing
concerns
with
traffic
and
the
development
in
general.
I
think
the
applicant
had
numerous
or
at
least
had
conversations
with
them
and
try
and
explain
kind
of
the
situation
and
the
amount
of
traffic
that's
being
generated,
and
the
traffic
impact
statement
and
study
I
should
say
based
on
the
achg
report
and
their
revised
traffic
impact
study
that
had
the
200
units.
X
The
the
project
is
generating
a
similar
amount
of
traffic
as
the
original
development
in
terms
of
PMP
there's
a
slight
increase,
I
think
during
the
amp
hours,
but
roughly
I,
think
about
30.
But
it's
and
it's
lowering
the
the
trial
or
the
curb
cuts
on
to
Coal
by
one
and
pushing
it
farther
away
and
to
still
be
writing
and
right
out.
X
The
the
applicant
might
be
able
to
chime
in
a
bit
more
on
on
their
discussions
with
them,
since
they
had
talked
with
them.
As
for
itd,
they
weren't
necessarily
opposed
to
it.
I
think
they
were
expressing
concerns
about
any
possible
increase
in
traffic
in
the
area,
because
the
The
Interchange
onto
184
at
Franklin
is
congested,
but
once
again,
I
would
note
that
you
know
the
the
traffic
being
generated
is
is
fairly
or
comparable
there's,
if
not
similar,
to
what
is
currently
there.
X
Obviously,
a
slight
increase
in
traffic
during
the
am
Peak,
but
roughly
about
the
same
during
the
PM.
According
to
the
applicant's
report,
so
I
didn't
see
an
issue
on
this.
K
F
Don't
think
it's
been
discussed
so
I
think
it's
worth
mentioning
just
for
the
sake
of
the
discussion
on
the
bottom
of
page
396,
which
is
the
PDF
in
the
achd
staff
report
under
3B
under
the
site-specific
conditions.
Number
four
specifically
also
requires
the
applicant
to
install
candles
reflective
candles
in
the
median
and
the
gaps
between
the
existing
meeting.
That's
out
there
now
to
further
prevent
left-hand
turns
coming
into
or
out
of
because
we
know,
unfortunately,
not
all
right
in
right
out
always
works.
B
Ly
shaped
parcel
in
this
case
right
and
oddly
shaped
parcel
to
the
East
and
North.
Basically,
it's
a
puzzle,
piece
that
butts
against
it.
Do
you
have
any
idea
what
the
depth
where
the
cross
access
was
contemplated,
going
to
Bethel
any
idea?
What
the
depth
of
that
is
from
like
the
parcel
line
to
Bethel
the
right-of-way
on
Bethel.
X
There
is
a
condition
that
they
provide
cross
access
with
this
that
they
just
provided
and
then
the
site
on
the
other
side
ever
redevelops.
Then
we
can
get
it
on
that
side
and
get
it
through
I,
don't
know
if,
when
or
if
that
will
ever
happen
with
the
parcel
adjacent,
but
that
was
sort
of
the
idea.
I
don't
know
the
depth
offhand
right.
There.
X
B
David,
have
you
ever
seen
another
app,
so
looking
at
achds
I
lost
it
now
their
staff
report
I,
don't
I,
can't
think
of
another
staff
report
from
achd.
That
has
a
like
a
direct
note
to
the
city
of
Boise
to
further
contemplate
that
cross
access.
I
think
it
was
note
three
right
above
the
conditions.
Have
you
ever
seen
that
before.
X
E
B
E
B
Okay,
all
right,
thank
you,
we'll
go
ahead
then,
and
open
up
the
public
hearing
portion
for
Testimony
you're
a
person
here.
Podium
is
free.
Please
start
with
your
name
and
address,
and
everyone
will
have
three
minutes
to
testify
and
if
you
could
speak
up
too
we'd
appreciate
it
because.
K
Yeah
it
sounds
like
it's
starting
to
heat
up
again.
It
is
yeah
so
Mr,
commissioner,
chair,
sorry,
Mr
chair
and
Commissioners
Matthew
Parks
802,
West,
Bannock,
Street,
Suite,
lp110,
Boise,
83702,.
K
My
client
is
property
development,
company
LLP,
the
owner
of
the
property
to
the
north
and
to
the
East
and
I'm
here
to
voice
objections
to
the
application.
You've
already
discussed
the
main
points
of
our
application.
Objection
just
want
to
want
to
hit
on
those
as
well
as
far
as
the
Port
of
Hope.
That
institution
is
going
to
be
required
to
close
and
move
as
a
result
of
this
application.
So
I
do
think
it
does
adversely
impact
property
adjacent
to
the
proposed
development.
K
I
think
that
is
a
pretty
clear
negative
of
impact
when
you're
required
to
move
and
they're
going
to
have
they.
They
already
moved
once
several
years
ago
and
as
you
know,
they
came
here
before
you
got
the
conditional
use
permit,
so
they
could
locate
in
this
location.
It's
very
difficult
for,
as
you
can
imagine,
for
a
business
like
this
to
find
a
location,
so
I
think
that
is
a
a
a
negative
impact
that
should
weigh
heavily
on
the
the
commission.
K
As
far
as
the
traffic
one
I'd
like
to
comment
that
we
did
point
out
that
the
traffic
study
in
the
project
report
and
the
materials
provided
was
incorrect
and
it
identified
170
units.
This
is
the
first
I've
seen
of
the
updated
and
corrected
traffic
study
I'm,
assuming
that
this
means
that
that
updated
and
corrected
traffic
study
was
not
provided
to
achd.
K
Nor
was
it
provided
to
itd
I
think
it
is
important
to
provide
that
to
achd
to
get
an
updated
comments
from
them,
because
they
did
rely
heavily
on
the
report
by
saying
that
this
is
not
going
to
increase
traffic
or
it's
going
to
be
substantially
the
same,
and
then
we
now
discovered
that
that's
not
correct.
It
is
going
to
increase
traffic
I.
Think
acht
should
have
the
ability
to
weigh
in
on
that.
K
This
is
a
unique
property.
It's
going
to
require
a
write-in
right
out.
K
It's
a
I
guess
a
good
solution
to
the
impact
of
the
traffic
that's
going
towards
coal
and
Franklin,
but
what
the
traffic
study
does
not
account
for
and
what's
not
in
any
of
the
materials
is
how
that's
going
to
impact
that
increased
traffic
on
Bethel
everyone's
going
to
turn
right
out
onto
coal
and
they're,
going
to
turn
right
onto
Bethel,
go
right
around
Barrister
and
then
turn
left
and
I
think
that's
going
to
have
a
significant
impact
on
the
traffic
on
Bethel
and
that's
going
to
impact
my
clients
who
have
Warehouse
use
and
truck
traffic
going
through
there
with
that.
K
I
would
like
to
ask
as
a
condition
of
approval,
if
you're
going
to
approve
this
project
that
you
require
that
the
developer
put
in
traffic
cushions
on
Bethel.
These
are
not
speed
bumps.
These
are
traffic
cushions
designed
specifically
to
reduce
passenger
vehicle
traffic
speed,
but
would
not
impact
the
truck
traffic
speed,
not
to
say
that
the
trucks
are
going
to
be
speeding.
But
it's
just
that
we
really
are
very
concerned
with
additional
several
hundred
trips
a
day.
K
The
indication
was
that
there's
going
to
be
a
car
a
minute
onto
coal,
so
you
can
imagine
at
least
half
of
those
are
going
to
go
on
to
Bethel,
so
we'd
like
to
have
some
way
to
reduce
the
speed
of
that
traffic
going
for
safety
concerns
as
well,
and
also
if
I
can
comment
really
quickly.
One
last
thing:
the
parking
here
is
insufficient.
It's
going
to
lead
to
people
parking
on
Bethel
and
causing
traffic
concerns
there
there's
nowhere
for
people
to
park
for
guests
or
anybody
else.
Thank
you
very
much.
B
B
AC
My
name
is
Diane
Bagley
I
am
here
to
represent
the
adjacent
property
owner
property
development
company
at
7225,
West,
Bethel
Street.
First
of
all,
I
want
to
thank
you
for
the
work
you
do.
It
is
it's
very
important
for
our
city,
and
the
next
thing,
I
want
to
say
is
I
would
I
agree
with
everything.
Matthew
said
he
had
more
to
say,
I'm,
going
to
try
and
flesh
out
a
little
bit
of
it.
AC
The
first
thing
I
want
to
address,
though,
is
Port
of
Hope
Port
of
Hope
came
to
me
a
few
years
ago,
like
seven
or
eight
years
ago,
they
had
taken
a
year
to
find
this
location
after
the
city
of
Nampa
permitted
a
daycare
500
feet
from
their
location.
Now
the
Federal
Bureau
of
Prisons
has
some
pretty
heavy
restrictions
on
where
you
can
locate
prisoners
coming
out
of
Federal
Detention.
AC
We
have
pedophiles,
we
have
felons
these
people
have
every
right
to
come
into
this
community
and
restore
their
lives
to
productive
use,
and
that's
what
Port
of
Hope
does
it's
a
very
unique
it's
a
very
unique
use.
So
there
are
several
adverse
effects
to
this
application
for
us.
One
is
the
loss
of
Port
of
Hope's
Federal
Bureau
of
Prisons
permission
to
conduct
its
business
in
its
current
location.
There
are
two
specific
monetary
or
so
I'm.
Sorry,
significant
monetary
damages
to
that.
AC
AC
Put
nine
hundred
and
twenty
thousand
dollars
into
this
non-profits
building
because
we
believe
in
them
we
believe
in
the
purpose
that
they
are
serving
in
this
community.
We
use
that
money
to
construct
residential
dorms
bathrooms
and
common
areas
for
Port
of
Hope's
unique
residential
use.
There
is
no
other
viable
tenant
for
this
building.
It
is
not
the
type
of
residential
use,
but
individuals
would
choose
to
be
in
dormitory
style,
living
and
gang
showers.
AC
The
second
thing
I
want
to
address
is
the
passenger
vehicle
congestion
fouling
up
our
industrial
tents,
Trucking
operations.
Thank
you.
David
I'm,
just
going
to
use
the
little
nice
green
pointer
here,
so
traffic
coming
out
of
of
the
apartments
cannot
go
south.
They
can't
go
south
to
get
to
this
freeway
access.
It
can't
go
south
to
go
either
way.
AC
B
AC
B
V
Increasing
housing
is
of
utmost
priority,
in
which
I
commend
each
of
you
outstanding
efforts,
Tana
gray
into
our
community.
The
needs
cannot
be
ignored.
My
greatest
concern
is
how
traffic
has
a
dangerous
potential
for
pedestrians
in
the
very
intersection
of
impact,
Franklin,
Coal
Road
and
the
railroad
tracks.
V
If
the
new
residents
of
the
proposed
200
departments
choose
to
go
green
I,
commend
these
efforts
without
the
addition
of
the
apartment
residence
walking
on
the
connecting
these
connecting
streets
with
a
ride
in
ride
out
access
has
potential
danger
without
them,
as
a
person
they're,
also
using
a
bicycle
and
with
children
through
the
years
a
rocker
and
or
walking
sticks
on
those
streets
having
previous
simobability
with
total
hip
replacements,
my
reservations
are
planning
for.
Potentially
new
pedestrians
need
further
consideration.
V
So
I
repeat,
traffic
will
be
impacted
regardless
of
the
reports,
in
addition
to
the
truck
drivers
driving
with
vehicles
of
links,
maybe
only
12
feet
long
up
to
75
feet.
Long
I
see
all
the
truck
drivers
and
Through
the
Years
they've
been
so
respectful
to
pedestrians
or
bicyclists
or
other
vehicles,
but
there
is
a
danger
that
we're
facing,
and
also
the
impact
of
losing
the
businesses
that
provide
outstanding
protein
nourishment
and
electrolyte
imbalance.
Prevention,
I
am
a
dietitian
and
to
me
they're
significant.
E
E
M
You
can
hear
me
okay,
great
appreciate
the
Neighbors
coming
out,
really
love
to
get
their
feedback
and
we're
not
working
in
a
vacuum.
We
really
want
to
make
this
a
great
place
for
the
city
and
for
the
community,
so
I
think
one
of
the
points
that
was
raised
was
access
from
Bethel
street,
so
we
initially
and
probably
some
of
the
documents,
show
we've
initially
laid
out
the
site
with
the
assumption
that
that
agreement
could
be
undertaken.
Ultimately,
that
did
not
come
to
pass.
M
Unfortunately,
so
we
kind
of
had
to
adjust
and
redesign
to
the
site
access
we
could
take
from
our
site.
You
know
it's
difficult
for
property
developer
to
take
access
from
a
site
that
they
don't
control.
So
we
are
embracing
and
worked
with
City
staff
on
a
great
location
for
a
future
cross
access
agreement
that
you
know
in
the
future.
However,
many
years
down,
the
line
This
the
adjacent
site
to
the
east
gets
developed.
M
C
M
The
comments
that
were
made
about
The
Pedestrian
connection
and
the
safety
and
I
can't
think
of
another
site
close
to
the
mall.
That
is
got
this
combination
of
great
bus
access,
great
pedestrian
access,
great
access
for
vehicles
to
get
downtown,
get
these
new
residents
from
affordable
residents
where
they
need
to
go
so
I
really
think
the
site
could
create
a
unique
opportunity
and
looking
looking
ahead
at
you
know,
the
zoning
code
rewrite
the
site
is
envisioned
to
be
I,
think
it's
70
feet
for
MX3.
M
So,
although
we're
asking
for
height
exception,
it's
not
as
significant
as
what's
featurely
planned,
I,
don't
believe,
there's
a
density
restriction
on
MX3
either.
So
the
some
of
the
far
concerns
maybe
go
away,
but
really
want
to
work
with
the
neighbors.
If
we
can
really
want
to
be
a
good
neighbor
provide
some
great
housing
for
the
neighborhood
and
really
think
we've
we've
done
what
we
can
to
mitigate
the
safety
concerns
and
the
traffic
concerns
within
reason.
M
I
think
the
developer
you
know,
did
reach
out
to
the
neighbors
and
would
be
amenable
to
reopening
that
dialogue,
but
they
can
only
go
so
far.
So
hopefully,
we've
done
the
best
we
can
with
what
we're
given
so.
F
F
This
is
this:
if
this
is
not
allowed,
then
please
obviously
strike
me
down,
but
a
point
of
inquiry
as
a
clarification
of
a
specific
term
of
condition
from
the
achd
staff
report.
I
wanna
I
need
to
make
sure
I
understand
the
math.
F
So
David,
if
I,
can
real
quick
same
place
bottom
of
the
PDF
anyway,
page
396,
3B
number
two
and
number
four
there's
site-specific
conditions
of
approval,
so
number
two
says
close:
the
the
condition
is
that
they
close
the
existing
driveway
there's
two
of
them:
one
237
feet:
North
and
700
and
272
feet
north
of
Franklin
Road
right.
You
see
that
okay
number
four
and
let
me
let
me
go
through
this
sorry
number
three
then
says
the
new
driveway
is
to
be
350
feet
north
of
Franklin
right.
So
you
follow
me.
F
F
So
if
272
is
the
most
northernmost
driveway
and
the
candles
are
to
go
75
feet
beyond
that
right
following
me
here
that
actually
puts
you
just
short
of
the
350
feet,
where
the
driveway
that
they're
requiring
to
go
in
is
located.
So
the
candles
would
actually
not
go
past
that
midpoint
of
that
driveway,
where
there's
a
ride
in
and
right
out
now
what
I
don't
know
is
it
also
says
to
fill
in
gaps
of
the
existing
median.
F
X
Mr
chair
members
of
commission
I'm
trying
to
put
this
map
together
in
my
head
at
this
point
and
I
and
I
did
visit
the
site
several
times.
I
walked
past
it
just
last
week
and
I
I
think
there's
a
median
out
there,
but
I
don't
know
how
far
it
extends,
because
it
is
currently
maybe
the
aerial
photographs
or
something
of
that
nature,
or
maybe
a
street
view
on
Google
might
show
it.
But
I
don't
know
how
far
it
extends
down.
X
F
B
B
So
if
you
know
I
don't
want
to
get
too
down
into
the
weeds.
Knowing
that
there
will
be,
you
know,
more
detail
and
more
clarity
to
come
with
that
design
review
application
in
the
future.
So
just
something
to
keep
in
mind
as
we
navigate
this
evening,
but.
F
F
B
B
B
B
F
G
B
F
Yeah
so,
okay,
the
there
there's
two
few
things:
three
things:
one
I
I'd
love
to
see:
a
market,
a
small
market
and
I'm,
not
even
suggesting
a
public
market
I
can
go
stay
at
a
hotel
and
buy
some
Pringles
right.
I've
got
500
people
who
are
going
to
be
living
here
to
be
awesome
to
trip
capture
by
having
some
sort
of
even
a
co-op
type
of
Arrangement
on
the
ground
floor.
That
has
some
basic
amenities
that
we
know
people
are
going
to
need.
I
think
that
would
be
a
wise
thing
to
explore.
F
It's
not
part
of
the
application,
but
I
would
encourage
you
to
think
about
that,
because
that
further
gets
into
the
traffic
component
of
things.
So
in
the
traffic
component
of
things,
this
is
where
it
gets
really
interesting.
We
have
two
existing
driveways.
Now
we
have
commercial
use,
which
typically
is
more
of
a
generator
of
traffic
than
residential,
but
both
of
those
are
going
to
be
stopped
and
or
or
prevented
in
a
new
one.
In
with
a
write-in
right
out,
the
the
residential
traffic
is.
F
In
the
way
that
it
yeah
it
does
it's
what
I
do
for
a
living,
sir.
So
what
this
is
about
is
am
traffic
is
different
because
that's
a
commercial
Corridor
in
a
commercial
Corridor,
the
hours
of
operation
are
going
to
be
more
PM
based,
so
that
am
I'm
not
concerned
with
the
trip
generation
that
comes
in
in
the
PM
is
a
different
animal
because
it's
actually
less
than
what's
coming
in
there
now.
F
What
I'm
concerned
about
I,
don't
think
I
heard
anybody
say
this,
however,
is
the
right
out
that
might
head
north
that
actually
wants
to
come.
South
I,
don't
know
that
they'll
go
to
Bethel
I,
think
what
they'll
do
is
they'll
cross
to
the
furniture
row
and
come
around
behind
the
building
and
come
back
to
Coal,
because
that's
the
quicker
route,
that's
the
straighter
route,
it's
much
easier
than
going
clear
around!
F
So
that's
a
concern,
but
my
bigger
concern
is
the
Port
of
Hope
and
I'm.
Looking
for
help
from
my
fellow
Commissioners
on
this,
because
I
do
think,
we
need
a
condition
somehow
for
the
applicant
to
work
with
Port
of
Hope.
If
a
relocation
is
to
come
about,
but
the
problem
is
that's
not
a
certainty.
This
isn't
like
what
we've
had
recently
with
Arbor
Village,
where
we
have
an
existing
population
that
is
absolutely
going
to
be
moved
by
the
new
population
moving
into
the
building.
F
G
Boy
well,
I
guess:
I
can
specify
a
little
bit
since
commissioner
Danley
went
where
I
was
going
as
well.
I
think
that
the
closest
C
store
is
probably
at
Franklin
and
Curtis
and
that'd
be
the
marathon
and
the
Jacksons
and
I
think
the
closest
grocery
is
probably
Fred
Meyer
of
Franklin
and
Orchard.
G
So
yeah
I
would
think
that
and
then
that
MX
area
aren't
we
looking
for
like
1200
to
2
000
square
foot,
you
know
kind
of
footprints
and
I
think
I
think
some
of
the
smaller
C
stores
are
even
there
somewhere
in
that
2000
to
2400
or
something
anyway,
so
yeah.
That
is
definitely
something
that
would
be
worth
exploring.
G
You
will
reduce
a
lot
of
trips
with
something
like
that
and
then
the
bigger
point
is
it's
been
tough
being
on
this
body
over
the
last
four
years,
because
we
keep
having
these
Pandora's
boxes
pop
open
even
after
we
spent
two
years
rewriting
a
zoning
code.
So
we
still
don't
really
have
a
solution
on
what
do
we
do
with
these
people?
What
do
we
do
with
the
Interfaith
Sanctuary
people?
We
have
to
house
those
people.
You
got
to
go
somewhere
right.
G
What
do
we
do
with
the
Arbor
Village
People
they're,
all
on
Medicaid
they're
92
people
who
live
there?
It's
right
around
the
corner
from
my
house
developer
wants
to
turn
into
Apartments.
Well,
that's
just
right,
but
what
do
we
do
with
those
people?
And
now?
What
do
we
do
with
the
Port
of
Hope
people?
I
mean
our
you
know
now.
I
am
just
speechifying,
but
our
criminal
justice
system
is
shameful
in
the
way
they
return.
G
These
people,
the
community
with
so
few
options,
and
now
we
are
going
to
put
a
nail
in
the
coffin
of
I.
Don't
know
how
many
people
are
in
there
and
it
frustrates
me
greatly
that
we
still
after
all
this
time,
don't
have
Solutions
and-
and
we
are
truly
just
speechifying
to
you-
guys
out
there,
because
this
doesn't
even
have
to
go
to
council
now,
where
they're,
not
gonna,
even
read
our
record
and
say
oh
yeah,
Blanchard
made
me
feel
guilty.
G
B
Okay,
well,
here
are
my
thoughts
on
the
matter
and
fair,
certainly
Fair,
questions
and
concerns.
You
know
this
is
a
pretty
complex
situation
with
a
couple
of
outstanding
large
outstanding
issues
at
a
high
level.
B
You
know
I
love,
I,
love
the
project,
I
love
the
density,
I
love
the
use,
I
love
the
location
on
the
transit
lines,
but
then
the
complexity
is
regarding
you
know,
Port
of
Hope
and
the
policies
of
you
know
the
Federal
Bureau
of
Prisons
that
helps
fund
those
facilities
right.
So
here
we
are
with
the
the
land
use
body.
B
You
know
trying
to
shape
and
develop
this
Boise
for
the
future
and
in
the
new
code,
but
we
have
you
know
one
other
agency
with
a
policy
that
doesn't
jive
so
much
with
the
vision
of
the
city
right
so
I'm
not
sure,
really
how
to
Rectify
those
two
competing
issues.
Unfortunately,
it's
probably
you
know.
This
is
probably
the
first
example
of
the
conversation
we
have
in
the
future.
Probably
several
times
over
is
the
new
code
gets
enacted
right
and
things
sort
of
shift
in
the
city
and
the
cities
evolve
over
time.
B
Right
I
mean
this
is
a
natural
evolution
of
of
a
city,
so
this
is
a
in
my
mind.
An
appropriate
place
for
density.
The
Proposal
fits
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
It
fits
with
the
forthcoming
new
zoning
code.
As
far
as
density
is
concerned,
we're
picking
up
some
affordable
units
and
I
appreciate
the
developer,
making
that
effort
to
do
that.
B
B
So
you
know
our
our
job
up
here
is
to
sort
of
Wade
through
all
these
issues,
and
some
of
these
things
are
subjective
to
some
degree
and
I
guess:
I'm,
leaning
towards
you
know
an
approval
here
and
I
sympathize
with
Port
of
Hope,
and
but
you
know,
I,
don't
see
how
the
land
use
body
making
decisions
for
Boise
in
the
future
can
be
driven
by
another
outside
agency's
policy
about
how
they
locate
their
facility
right
cities
evolve
over
time.
I.
B
Think
policies
can
also
evolve
over
time
too,
for
that
matter,
so
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
coming
down
with
it
right
now.
I
agree
with
commission
with
the
Chris's
about
you
know,
so
maybe
some
z-store
or
some
other
you
know
commercial
use
of
some
type
in
the
amenity
space
of
the
building.
I.
Think
that's
a
great
idea
as
far
as
like
the
location
goes,
I
think
it's
a
total
win.
B
Got
Services
nearby
you
got
Transit
nearby,
you
know,
I
would
like
to
see
some
height
in
this
area
too.
You
know
it's
a
it's
a
former,
not
former,
but
you
know
it's
an
industrial
Zone
that
I
think
could
use
some
Redevelopment
and
maybe
some
new
life
and
it's
on
the
corridor
and
again
it
jives
with
our
comprehensive
plan
and
the
forthcoming
zoning
code.
Mr.
B
W
Yeah
this
is
so
hard
I.
This
feels
like
such
a
commonality
for
us
now
that
we
are
having
that
we're
making
a
decision
about
displacing
our
like
our
most
vulnerable
population
and
I,
always
I,
just
even
I,
said
earlier
today
to
somebody
you
know,
I
don't
want
Planning
and
Zoning
should
never
be
like
surprises
for
a
developer
by
the
time
they
come
to
our
meetings.
W
You
know
it's
one
thing
to
be
asking
for
an
exception,
but
there
should
be
no
surprises,
so
I
guess
I,
guess,
I
agree
with
what
you
said
about
you
know
from
a
land
use
perspective.
I,
don't
really
see
a
reason.
W
Why
not,
but
I
wish
that
you
know
as
this
moves
as
as
this
moves
through
the
process,
I
wish
that
we
could
continue
to
keep
in
mind
how
we
can
prevent
these
situations
from
happening
before
they
come
to
us
so
that
we're
doing
a
better
job
of
of
just
like
keeping
you
know.
Keeping
safe
are
our
most
vulnerable
populations,
and
this
is
becoming
more
and
more
common,
so
I
hope
that
the
city
will
re-examine
that
as
it
as
this
moves
forward
through
the
process.
B
AA
B
B
F
L
You
know
I
think
you
said
it
I
mean
everybody
had
pretty
good
comments
and
I
think
I
kind
of
went
over
that
with
the
staff
during
the
question
and
answer
I
I
think
we're
all
at
the
same
point
where
we're
just
really
wish.
We
could
do
something.
We're
not
our
hands
seem
a
little
bit
tight
here
with
some
of
these
applications.
Like
you
said
once
this
one
goes
through,
there
will
be
another
one,
I'm,
not
really
sure
what
to
do.
At
this
point.
E
P
I
I
would
agree,
I
am
just
gut.
Wrenched
I
have
been
ever
since
reading
this
this
weekend,
and
this
is
a
vulnerable
population
and
I
agree.
It's
a
great
project.
I
mean
this
is
exactly
what
we
want
to
see,
except
we
do
what
once
in
Commercial
Services,
you
know
it's
not
just
a
bodega
or
something
foreign
I
wish
I
understood,
and
it's
not
our
place
too,
but
I
do
wish
I
understood
how
all
of
this
worked
a
little
bit
better
to
maybe
come
up
with
a
solution
for
everybody,
but
I.
P
Don't
have
all
the
answers
and
we're
not
in
a
position
to
be
able
to
have
that
dialogue
this
evening,
I
think
we're
in
a
tough
place
and
I
wish.
There
were
other
means
in
front
of
us
to
be
able
to
find
a
compromise,
but
I
I'm
I'm
sad
for
the
decision
that
will
likely
be
made
tonight
in
terms
of
the
impact
it
will
have
on
that
community.
F
Or
yeah
I'm
wondering
if
I
could
phone
a
friend
here
so
I'm
curious
for
a
legal
opinion
to
help
us
at
least
on
this.
The
question
I
hope
I
framed
this
correctly.
But
does
this
body
have
the
authority
to
condition
an
application
for
approval
to
assist
in
relocation
services.
F
R
It
really
is
kind
of
the
weighing
in
terms
of
what
effects
may
be
felt
on
adjacent
properties
and
I
would
hearken
back
to
what
chair.
Shaffer
was
mentioning
with
respect
to
considerations
of
the
comprehensive
plan
of
our
zoning
code
of
doesn't
meet
the
requirements
that
this
particular
application
in
light
of
what
are
those
potential
adverse
impacts?
So
I
recognize
that's
a
squishy
answer,
but
I
think
that
it's
it's
a
way
that
the
commission
needs
to
do
and
understand
kind
of
what
the
expanse
of
our
Authority
is.
L
L
L
You
know
past
more
of
a
residential
re-entry
use
like
in
an
industrial
location
and
at
a
future
point
it
sounds
like
they're,
going
to
probably
be
forced
to
move
somehow
so
I
mean
that
if
it
comes
up
in
front
of
us
again,
maybe
just
have
consideration
that
we're
going
to
have
to
approve
some
of
these
applications
in
places
that
we
don't
normally
see
or
want,
but
just
for
the
so
that
it's
not
within
the
vicinity
of
schools
or
residential
or
everything
else,
I
mean.
That
may
be
a
way
to
remedy
this.
B
Understand
the
you
know,
the
thought
process
and
the
concerns
right
now.
I
you
know
certainly
can
we
can
entertain
another
amendment
to
the
motion,
but
it
doesn't
stand
right
now.
We
we.
E
B
A
motion
to
approve
per
the
staff
report.
B
B
C
B
Okay,
all
right,
thank
you,
everybody
good
night,
and
we
are
adjourned
thanks.