►
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
Good
evening,
everyone
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.
Is
the
item
you're
interested
in
comes
up
for
discussion,
you'll
be
called
upon
and
unmuted.
There
is
a
chat
function
in
Zoom,
though
this
is
not
part
of
the
record
and
should
only
be
used
if
technical
difficulties
arise.
A
Our
procedures
for
public
hearings
begins
with
a
presentation
from
the
planning
team,
then
we'll
go
to
the
applicant
and
then
a
representative
of
the
registered
neighborhood
association,
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
9.
A
To
raise
your
hand,
each
member
of
the
public
is
allowed
up
to
three
minutes
for
testimony
and
we
are
strict
with
this
time
as
it
is
limited
in
code.
Finally,
the
applicant
is
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
B
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.
B
We
utilize
a
consent
agenda.
This
means
that
if
the
applicant
agrees
with
the
staff
report
and
if
there
is
no
public
opposition
data
will
be
placed
on
the
consent
agenda,
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
the
public
testimony.
C
D
B
B
B
B
Sorry
I
have
to
go
back
to
the
top
of
our
agenda
one
more
time.
We
also
have
item
a
up
for
consent.
This
is
PUD
20-39,
it's
CBA,
20-52,
Rodney,
Evans
and
partners
pllc.
This
is
a
Time
extension,
a
two-year
time
extension
for
project
at
three
zero:
zero
five
West
Malad
Street.
Without
objection,
I'll
go
ahead
and
place
item
a
on
the
consent
agenda.
B
B
Next,
up
is
item
number
10.,
so
car
22-15
Westminster
homes,
the
address
is
1715
South,
Maple
Grove
Road.
B
Excuse
me
this
is
a
rezone
of
approximately
1.75
Acres
from
an
r1a
Zone
to
an
r1b
Zone
with
a
d.
A
is
the
applicant
present
this
evening,
yeah
okay,
and
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
staff
report?
Terrific,
let
the
record
show
the
applicant
is
present
and
in
agreement
with
the
staff
report.
Is
there
anyone
here
tonight
to
testify
in
opposition
to
this
item.
B
Up
next
is
item
number
11..
This
is
Cup
22-46
Boise
State
University
at
1507
South,
Oakland
Avenue.
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
to
allow
for
a
height
exception
on
10.26
Acres
than
our
3D
Zone,
and
is
the
applicant
with
us
this
evening.
Let
the
record
show
the
applicants
present
and
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
staff
report?
D
B
B
Next,
for
consent
is
item
number
13..
This
is
PUD
22-54
and
SUV,
22-56,
Rodney,
Evans
and
partners.
The
address
is
1423
West,
Franklin
Street.
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
planned
residential
development
comprised
of
two
single-family
units
on
0.28
acres
in
r3hd
zone,
and
then
a
preliminary
plant
for
this
for
said
subdivision
is
the
applicant
present
tonight.
B
G
B
Good
evening,
Ben,
are
you
in
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
staff
report?
Yes,.
G
E
B
Number
15
cup
22-54
Boise
State
University
this
one's
at
1910
West,
University
Drive.
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
height
exception
associated
with
new
University
Housing
on
101.68,
acre
One
101.6
Acres
in
the
University
Zone,
and
is
the
applicant
present
terrific
in
our
agreement
with
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
staff
report?
B
B
C
B
Great,
thank
you
very
much
for
those
items
up.
Next,
we
have
one
deferral,
one
deferral
request:
this
is
for
item
number
14.,
it's
PUD,
22-61,
Chrysalis
architecture
at
5033,
West,
State
Street.
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
planned
residential
development
comprised
of
18
multi-family
units
on
a
on
0.54
acres
in
a
c2d
Zone.
As
the
applicant
present
tonight.
B
B
G
When
I
was
reviewing,
this
I
just
wanted
to
confirm
that
that
when
we
do
talk
about
this
next
week,
we'll
break
open
the
State,
Street
Transit,
oriented
development
plan
and
start
looking
at
the
collister
drive
station,
which
is
this
development,
is
part
of
that
station.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
going
to
look
at
that
closely.
Okay,.
H
B
B
Okay,
thank
you.
Okay.
Now,
a
couple
of
quick,
revised
findings
items.
This
will
wrap
up
our
housekeeping
here
tonight.
This
first
one
here
is
Item
B.
B
This
is
SOS
22-15
Tilly's
land
surveying
project
address
is
5320
West
Wiley
Lane.
This
was
a
waiver
to
subdivision
ordinance
requirement
to
construct
curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk
as
part
of
a
minor
land
division
of
0.99
acres
in
r1c
zone.
This
item
is
essentially
revised.
Findings
from
when
we
heard
this
item
in
our
last
meeting
at
this
point,
I
would
entertain
a
motion
to
open
this
item
for
any
quick
discussion
and
then
a
vote.
H
Just
emotion,
yeah
got
it.
Commissioner.
Commission,
commissioner
I
make
a
motion
that
we
approve
the
revised
findings
for
Item
B
SOS
22-15,
as
in
our
packet.
D
B
Terrific
thank
you.
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
by
commissioner
Danley
and
a
second
by
commissioner
Moore.
Is
there
any
further
discussion
on
this
item?
Mr.
H
B
Any
further
discussion:
okay,
very
good
again,
this
is
item
BS,
so
SOS
22-15
motion
to
approve
by
commissioner
Danley
second
by
commissioner
Moore.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
vote.
D
B
Thank
you
and
last
but
not
least,
item
number
item
letter
C,
SOS,
22-14,
Stephen
tenuto
at
2915,
West,
Taft,
Street
I.
Like
the
previous
item.
This
was
a
waiver
to
the
subdivision,
ordinance
requirement
to
construct
curb
Gutter
and
sidewalk
as
part
of
a
minor
land
division
on
0.28
acres
in
r1c
zone.
Again.
This
item
is
revised
findings
from
our
discussion
at
our
last
meeting.
At
this
point,
I'll
entertain
a
motion
Mr.
A
B
E
E
I
I'll,
take
this
one
I
think
yeah
the
revised
findings
capture
our
discussion
pretty
accurately
and
have
no
changes.
Okay,.
E
B
B
J
Thank
you,
Mr
chair
and
Commissioners
I'm
Caitlin
manage
at
the
design
review
division.
This
is
an
appeal
of
a
designer
View
application,
drh22-00116
a
duplex
on
a
substandard
lot
at
1301
South
Euclid
Avenue.
J
The
application
was
approved
administratively
on
May
24th.
The
southeast
neighborhood
association
appealed
the
approval
on
June
2nd.
The
design
Review
Committee
heard
the
appeal
on
July
13th
and
denied
the
appeal
and
the
neighborhood
association
appealed
the
design,
Review
Committee
decision
on
July
22nd
and
now
the
appeal
is
before
the
Planning
and
Zoning
Commission.
J
The
site
is
located
at
the
southwest
corner
of
Rossi
Street
and
Euclid
Avenue
surrounding
uses
include
both
single
family
and
multi-family
residential.
This
large
building
to
the
Northeast
is
Albertsons
Boise
State
University
is
about
a
block
away
to
the
north
and
there's
a
church
on
the
south
side
of
the
subject.
Block.
J
The
southeast
neighborhood
association
provided
two
grounds
for
their
appeal
that
the
project
does
not
provide
the
required
open
space
and
the
parking
requirements
have
not
been
met
for
a
duplex.
Each
unit
is
required
to
provide
a
minimum
of
375
square
feet
of
open
space
in
the
rear
yard,
with
a
minimum
15
foot
Dimension
and
no
Dimension
less
than
five
feet.
The
applicant
has
identified
two
375
square
foot
open
space
areas
at
the
rear
of
the
property
that
meet
this
requirement,
and
the
designer
view
committee
approved
the
site
design
at
their
hearing.
J
Another
point
of
the
appeal
was
that
the
project
does
not
provide
the
required
parking.
The
zoning
ordinance
requires
four
off-street
parking
spaces
for
a
duplex.
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
provide
three
full-size
parking
spaces
on
the
subject:
property
and
secure
a
fourth
parking
stall
on
a
nearby
property
within
a
five
minute.
Walk
and
a
condition
of
approval
requires
the
recorded
parking
agreement
to
be
submitted
prior
to
issuance
of
a
building
permit.
J
The
designer
view
committee
was
in
favor
of
utilizing
a
parking
agreement,
and
the
city
is
supportive
of
parking
agreements
in
areas
where
alternative
transportation
is
available.
This
property
is
within
walking
and
biking
distance
to
a
grocery
store
and
other
Commercial
Services
along
Broadway
Boise,
State
University
and
the
bus
transit
line
on
Broadway
and
the
neighborhood
is
walkable
and
bikeable.
The
planning
team
finds
that
the
project
complies
with
the
parking
requirements.
J
K
Eric
Berg
1301
South
Grant
Ave.
Is
there
a
way
I
can
share
my
screen
for
PowerPoint.
B
Yeah
give
us
one
minute
to
get
the
tech
organized
on
our
side.
K
K
Excellent,
all
right
so
for
every
Rule
and
code,
one
can
usually
point
to
a
development
that
didn't
work
out
or
wasn't
compatible
to
show
what
the
impetus
behind
that
being
enshrined
to
call
code
code
was
and
living
in
the
Boise
Broadway
Beacon
triangle:
I'm,
intimately
aware
of
the
shortcomings
of
the
code
over
the
years
that
have
necessitated
changes,
especially
when
it
comes
to
duplexes.
These
changes
have
made
a
positive
difference
and
need
to
be
adhered
to.
K
That's
why
the
board
of
the
southeast
neighborhood
association
both
unanimously
to
appeal
this
project,
both
the
administrative
review,
approval
and
the
design
review,
rejecting
the
appeal,
because
these
things
need
to
be
because
it
does
not
meet
the
parking
or
open
space
requirements
set
out
in
code
and
the
solution
to
these
things,
and
these
deficiencies
have
been
shown
to
be
unworkable.
This
project
simply
doesn't
fit
the
parcel
as
design,
and
this
is
evidence
to
the
degree
to
where
they
are
violating
the
code.
K
It's
true
that
Lincoln
property
has
an
extra
parking
space.
It's
not
true,
rather
sorry
that
the
Lincoln
property
has
a
extra
parking
space
to
move
in
the
first
place.
There
is
nothing
about
parking
in
the
variants
the
Lincoln
project
was
granted
to
use
a
five-foot
setback
when
it
was
originally
allowed.
K
It
was
approved
with
a
10-foot
set
back
and
if
you
see
in
their
approval
from
April,
it
required
them
to
revise
the
site
plan
to
meet
that
in
June.
They
got
a
set
back
to
go
to
five
feet,
but
it
never
went
any
Beyond
five
feet.
It
says
that
the
setback
can
increase,
encroach
five
feet,
but
is
not
you
know.
All
other
set
packs
were
to
be
met
and
note
that
this
is
a
c1d
Zone,
and
this
was
a
variance,
not
a
reason.
K
When
I
talked
to
planning
about
this,
they
said
well,
the
city
has
2.5
foot
setbacks
in
the
duplex
code,
but
the
problem
is:
is
that
is
specifically
for
residential
R1
R2
situations,
it's
not
for
a
c-1d
zone.
So
the
current
the
original
project
that
they're
trying
to
move
the
parking
from
1207
Lincoln
simply
doesn't
meet
this
requirement.
As
you
can
see,
there
are
five
parking.
K
K
The
other
reality
is
is
1207.
Lincoln
is
already
under
parked.
This
is
the
front
of
1207
Lincoln,
as
you
can
see
on
the
site
plan.
That
is
not
a
parking
space
on
there,
but
it
is
such
because
this
is
eight
under
park.
Building,
it's
got
10
bedrooms
in
it,
and
the
five
parking
spaces
in
the
back
plus
parking
space
in
the
front
are
constantly
full,
so
the
idea
that
they
would
actually
be
utilizing
this
parking
space
from
Euclid
seems
a
bit
of
a
stretch
because
it
would
more
likely
be
full.
K
Finally,
when
we
really
look
at
this,
this
is
five
blocks
or
a
third
of
a
mile
away.
It
kind
of
strains
credulity
that
a
person
would
park
their
car
on
Lincoln,
walk
all
the
way
back
to
Euclid
when
they
could
just
get
a
residential
permit.
There
has
been
a
suggestion
that
this
could
be
instead
a
shared
parking
with
a
property
on
Manito
that
would
be
far
better,
given
the
fact
that
that
is
something
that
may
actually
be
used.
K
At
the
end
of
the
day,
we
are
required
to
have
375
square
feet
of
private
open
space
space
located
in
the
rear
or
a
yard
must
have
a
minimum
dimension
of
15
feet,
but
may
include
setbacks.
This
was
the
original
design,
which
was
approved
administratively
they've
since
changed
this
to
this
design.
Foreign.
K
In
regards
to
the
open
space,
we're
looking
for
375
square
feet,
Unit
A
qualifies
for
that
unit.
B
does
not
I've
gone
over
this
plan.
A
million
times
taking
the
eighth
of
an
inch
to
a
foot
and
I
am
confused
how
they
find
375
square
feet
out
of
that
unit,
B
area,
because
every
single
time
I've
measured
it
it's
nine
feet
by
33
feet
in
total
for
297
square
feet,
20
percent
below
the
requirement.
K
It
also
doesn't
meet
the
standard
of
having
a
15
foot
minimum
Dimension.
It's
only
nine
feet
wide
at
its
at
any
point
and
the
patio
is
7.5
feet
by
nine
feet,
half
of
which
is
a
walkway.
In
fact,
63
feet
out
of
the
108
feet
of
cement
is
walkway
access
to
the
property
that
clearly
doesn't
meet
the
standard
for
private
open
space
as
much
as
it
would
need
to
be
open
to
walk
through.
Without
this
walkway
there
would
need
to
be
open.
The
patio
becomes
only
seven
and
a
half
feet
by
six
feet.
K
Having
lived
in
the
area,
there
are
two
primary
uses
for
these
patios
patio
tables
and
beer
pong
tables
standard.
I
had
to
look
this
up
the
standard
beer
pong
tables,
apparently
four
feet
by
eight
feet:
the
size
of
the
girl
piece
of
plywood,
and
if
you
look
at
the
right,
these
are
suggestions
for
minimum
recommended
outdoor
patio
size
for
patio
tables.
A
seven
and
a
half
foot
by
six
foot
patio
isn't
going
to
fit
either
of
these.
It's
not
large
enough
to
be
of
any
use.
K
Okay,
so,
let's
get
to
the
standard
review
for
Appeals.
This
allows
decisions
to
be
reversed
or
modified
for
five
reasons,
and
we're
asking
for
this
appeal
to
be
upheld
under
standard
five
and
six
under
standard
five.
The
design
was
made
in
disregards
or
sorry.
The
decision
was
made
in
disregards
to
the
facts
and
circumstances
presented.
This
is
due
to
the
fact
not
the
project
does
not
meet
the
open
space
or
parking
requirements
under
standard
six.
K
There
have
been
many
corner
lot.
Developments
in
this
area
that
we've
been
fined
with
because
they
met
code
across
the
street,
there's
a
Triplex
that
we
didn't
have
any
comment
on
and
there's
a
single
family
house
with
an
Adu
that
was
just
built
up
Euclid.
The
difference
is
that
both
of
these
have
met
the
code,
whereas
this
project
doesn't.
E
B
L
L
The
front
area
has
a
five
foot
porch,
so
the
that
is
the
three
bedroom
side
that
you're
looking
at
here
and
then,
as
you
walk
down
to
the
alley
side.
That's
going
to
be
our
five
bedroom
side
and
the
five
bedroom
side
is
where
the
bulk
of
our
parking
is,
which
that
will
eliminate
a
lot
of
the
street
parking.
L
And,
most
importantly,
this
is
in
a
really
walkable
area.
So
the
likelihood
of
all
of
the
tenants
bringing
their
vehicles
is,
it's
pretty
slim,
so
I'm
just
standing
on
the
corner
of
the
lot
here
and
you
can
see,
there's
the
back
side
of
Albertsons
and
then
there's
three
houses
that
separate
us
from
Albertsons
and
then,
of
course,
Broadway
is
right
there.
L
L
This
is
the
site
plan
that
we
have
just
all
looked
at,
and
the
positioning
of
this
outdoor
space
was
a
collaboration
between
our
architect
and
the
City
and
I
just
kind
of
drove
around
the
different
Alleyways.
Because
you
know
the
city
standard
is
a
nine
foot
wide
parking
space.
But
if
you
drive
behind
all
the
duplexes,
you
can
see
that
there's
plenty
of
room
for
more
than
three
cars.
These
kids
are
not
driving
SUVs
like
a
Suburban
they're,
not
driving,
F-350
trucks,
they're
driving,
very
small
SUVs.
L
L
This
is
my
Lincoln
duplex
that
we
own,
and
this
one
you
can
see.
There
are
five
cars
parked
here
and
again,
we've
got
five
or
six
feet
between
the
fence
line.
I
mean
there's
just
adequate
parking.
You
can
also
see
the
manner
in
which
we
care
for
our
properties.
We
have
brand
new
gravel,
there's
no
potholes
behind
our
property.
There's
no
mattresses,
there's
no
beer
cans.
We
keep
a
weekly
maintenance
program.
We
we
care
for
the
property
very
much.
L
We
have
fencing
so
that
our
tenants
are
have
adequate
privacy
and
again,
if
these
kids
were
to
tighten
up,
I
mean
six.
Cars
would
easily
fit
there,
but
we
have
a
very
loose
five
there
very
comfortably,
and
then
this
property
has
I
think
Three
Doors
Down,
oh
no,
there's
one
in
between
us
here
and
these
guys
have
six
across
now.
They're
obviously
pushing
the
limits,
but
it's
just
super.
It's
just
to
show
you
look
at
there's
a
massive
truck
there
and
there's
still
six
cars
in
there.
L
So
1207
Lincoln
has
an
additional
non-occurring
sparking
spot
that
would
be
designated
for
1301
and
and
I
do
see.
Mr
Burke's
point
to
this.
It
is
a
little
bit
far
and
at
our
last
meeting
we
talked
about
Mr
Koba,
who
owns
the
property
on
1210
South
manto
has
said
that
that
could
be
an
option
and
that's
about
five
houses
away,
we're
still
very
available
to
do
that.
He's
still
very
willing
to
do
that
and
then
the
outdoor
space.
L
L
Our
lease
is
required
that
nothing
is
left
out
front
and
we'll
get
to
that
in
a
little
bit.
But
I
don't
think
we
can
make
decisions
based
on
the
potential
for
a
beer
pong
table.
L
And
then
you
can
see
kind
of
the
wraparound
area
here
and
that's
the
amount
of
space
that
we
kind
of
over
the
side
and
there's
obviously
going
to
be
some
flexibility
that
we
are
willing
to
to
take
into
consideration.
And
if
we
need
to
move
it
around
we're
more
than
willing
to
I
just
kind
of
wanted
to
get
a
big
overview
of
the
properties
that
there
are
options.
L
L
So
would
you
have
a
big
yard?
Guess
what
you
invite,
so
this
is
the
house
next
door
to
our
Lincoln
duplex,
and
this
is
me
standing
in
my
backyard,
and
this
is
what
you
do
when
you
have
a
large
backyard
when
you
have
a
lot
of
space
to
deal
with
you
pretty
much
attract
the
tenants
that
don't
have
a
lot
of
pride
in
their
home
environment,
certainly
they're
a
good
time,
but
their
expectations
for
what
their
landlord's
expectation
all
these
different
they're
just
different,
and
you
choose
a
property
like
this.
L
L
This
is
another
property
and
as
a
mom
of
two
college
students
and
a
nephew
who's,
also
in
college
I
can
tell
you
what
the
kids
do.
The
kids
that
want
to
host
the
parties,
rent,
the
old,
dilapidated
houses
with
the
big
yards
and
the
kids
that
want
to
live
in
a
nice,
clean
home
environment,
rent
these
homes.
L
We
have
the
highest
of
Standards
I
pulled
up
on
Wednesday.
Thank
you.
I
pulled
up
on
Wednesday
straight,
not
I,
didn't
give
the
kids
any
notice
that
I
was
coming,
and
this
is
my
house.
The
girls
had
purchased
a
little
scarecrow.
They're
only
allowed
to
hang
Boise
state
flags
and
the
American
flag,
that's
per
their
lease,
and
this
is
how
the
house
looked.
There's
no
garbage
out
front
the
patio
furniture
that
you'll
see
on
the
porch
I
purchased.
L
I
happened
to
be
an
interior
designer,
so
I
love
to
do
these
things,
they're
not
allowed
to
change
it.
There's
no
beer!
Pong
tables
allowed,
there's
no
couches
allowed.
There's
no
old
recliners
allowed
they're
allowed
to
use
the
furniture
that
we
provide
for
them
from
the
front
yard.
They
all
agree.
Here's
my
neighbor,
you
can
see.
They've
got
just
trash
everywhere.
There's
beer
bottles,
there's
a
big
backyard,
there's
just
a
ton
of
garbage.
That
fence
is
rarely
ever
closed
and
there's
a
soaking,
wet
recliner.
L
We
have
a
couple
chairs
and
Mattress
in
this
alleyway,
so
we
provide
the
furniture
and
so
here's
our
kitchens,
you
can
see
we
provide
the
counter
stools.
Those
will
never
end
up
in
the
alley.
We
provide
the
laundry
and
then
we
provide
a
pantry
with
a
second
fridge
again.
This
is
all
provided
by
us
all.
The
kids
sign
Elise.
They
also
know
that
250
of
the
deposit
does
not
go
back
to
them
because
they
clean
all
the
furniture
and
I.
Have
the
house
professionally
cleaned
for
the
next
group.
L
Everybody
has
their
own
bathroom,
there's
no
issues
there.
You
can
see
these
guys
that
have
a
shower
their
own
vanity,
their
own
sink,
and
then
everybody
has
a
very
well
organized
closet
and
the
kids
take
a
lot
of
pride
in
these
places.
This
is
not
you
know
your
thrash,
your
property
and
the
property
on
Euclid
will
be
to
the
safe
standards
and
again
here's
our
backyard.
You
can
see
the
difference.
This
was
me
just
showing
up
on
Wednesday.
This
was
not
giving
them
any
any
warning.
L
B
B
E
I
It's
funny.
I
actually
knew
somebody
who
rented
this
house
for
a
few
years
and
just
recently
moved
from
the
house,
so
I'm
really
familiar
with
this
house.
So
but
my
biggest
question
the
residential
parking
passes.
Do
you
have
to
pay?
Is
there
any
cost
to
those?
If
you're
in
a
Zone.
J
Know
that's
handled
there
say
clerk's
office
and
I
think
there
are
some
parameters
for
obtaining
one
and
I
know
they
have
some
say
in
the
amount
of
parking
permits
that
they're
issuing
per
like
block.
They
kind
of
keep
track
of
how
many
they're
issuing.
I
Yeah
and
and
if
if
the
applicant
knows.
B
L
I
Sure,
please
so,
for
the
shared
parking
agreement,
I
think
we
were
seeing
pictures
of
cars
kind
of
lined
up,
oh
kind
of
looked
like
over
parking
or
over
property
lines.
Is
there
any
sort
of
landscaping
requirement?
I
think
my
biggest
concern
is
if
they're
parking
over
property
lines
in
a
Alleyway,
where
does
the
trash
go
and
the
recycling
and
things
like
that?
Do
those
just
go
on
the
neighbor's
property
and
the
neighbors
have
to
deal
with
it.
J
Mr
chair,
commissioner
Moore,
the
duplex
ordinance
allows
the
two
foot
side
setbacks
for
parking.
If
you
have
a
fence,
so
you
have
to
have
a
fence
on
both
sides
to
make
sure
that
you're
not
kind
of
encroaching
into
the
neighbor's
property.
N
Thank
you
Mr
chair.
This
is
for
staff,
so
the
applicant
mentioned
that
1210
Manito
may
be
an
additional
option
for
alternative
parking.
What
would
has
staff
evaluated
that
site?
Is
that
appropriate,
I?
Think
personally,
I
would
be
more
interested
in
that
being
part
of
the
parking
agreement,
but
just
would
like
to
hear
from
you.
J
N
J
G
Mr
chair,
sorry,
yeah
how
for
staff,
how
for
these
parking
agreements
and
and
the
alternative
that
the
owner
presented,
I
I,
don't
have
much
of
any
experience
with
that
is
that
common?
It
seems
to
violate
the
spirit
of
the
code.
J
Mr
chair,
commissioner
Mooney
parking
Agreements
are
pretty
common.
We
like
to
see
them
in
places
where
they
are
more
areas
that
are
more
walkable,
so
we
probably
wouldn't
be
supportive
of
one
if
it
was
a
neighborhood
that
didn't
have
sidewalks
and
wasn't
very
walkable
in
this
location,
we
like
to
see
parking
being
utilized
to
the
fullest
extent.
So
if
a
property
does
have
an
extra
parking
space
beyond
what
is
required,
we're
supportive
of
a
parking
agreement,
they
submit
that
parking
agreement
to
us.
We
approve
it.
So
we
approve
the
language.
J
G
Mr
chair
another
follow-up
for
staff,
same
thing
with
the
open
space,
it
seems
the
code's
intent
is
for
whoever
lived
there.
Obviously,
this
is
duplex
code.
It's
not
student
housing
code,
because
not
necessarily
students
may
live
there
in
the
future,
so
the
open
space
intent
is
for
the
people
that
live
in
that
three
Plex
to
be
able
to
enjoy
some
private
space,
and
it's
around
the
backside.
What's
staff's
thoughts
about
the
intent
of
the
code
regarding
open
space
for
a
duplex.
J
Mr
chair
commissioner
Mooney,
so
this
duplex
is
a
front
unit
and
a
back
unit
just
because
of
the
layout
of
the
site,
and
our
code
does
require
the
open
space
to
be
in
the
rear
yard,
so
that
front
unit
could
utilize
the
street
side
yard
if
they
wanted
to
utilize
that,
but
to
meet
the
code.
They
also
have
that
private
open
space
kind
of
along
the
street
side
there
and
the
applicant
has
provided
a
walkway
to
it.
J
So
it's
private
in
the
sense
that
they
don't
have
to
cross
the
back
units
property
area
to
get
to
their
area.
So
in
that
regard,
I
believe
it
meets
the
intent
of
the
code
that
they
each
have
their
own
separate
private,
open
space.
B
Foreign
to
clarify
the
question
for
you
I
guess
to
start,
we
were
to
switch
the
parking
agreement.
Is
it
1210,
manitow.
D
B
The
address,
let
me
sorry
I-
could
do
that
with
a
condition.
I
think
I
lost
sight,
does
do
you
own
that
property
at
1210
Manito
or
is
that
a
different
owner?
B
B
B
J
Mr
chair
there
was
an
administrative
submittal.
Previously
it
was
a
little
different,
but
the
layout
is
very
close
to
what
it
originally
was,
and
then
this
was
the
design
that
they
showed
at
the
design.
Review
Committee
appeal
hearing-
and
this
is
the
design
that
the
designer
view
committee
approved.
E
B
Other
questions
for
staff
on
applicant,
okay,
great
thanks,
everybody,
okay,
we'll
go
ahead
then,
and
open
up
this
item
for
public
testimony,
because
I
could
testify
on
this
item
and
you're
in
person.
You
can
queue
up
here
at
the
podium
and
if
you're
online,
please
go
ahead
and
raise
your
hand
to
testify.
L
Just
in
agreement
with
the
manitob
parking
option
and
the
the
the
outdoor
space
is
almost
like
a
second
choice
for
the
people
on
the
three
bedroom
side.
That
is,
you
know
that
gives
that
meets
the
requirement,
but
they
also
have
that
big
wrap
around
porch.
They
also
have
quite
a
bit
of
yard
space
out,
front
and
I
know.
Mr
Berg
is
concerned
about
people
bringing
things
up
front,
leaving
them.
That's
that's
just
not
going
to
happen
it's
in
their
lease
and
we
have.
L
We
have
weekly
people
that
come
by
and
it's
just
something
that
we
take
very
seriously
and
it
hasn't
happened
at
our
current
property.
So
it's
something
that
they're
required
to
to
sign
up
for
and
then
given
that
layout
of
the
property
we
designed
it
so
that,
in
the
event
that
we
do
have
eight
cars
I
don't
think
we
will
it's
just
too
close
to
everything.
L
L
K
Thank
you,
so
I
just
want
to
make
clear
the
issue
here
is
not
that
you
know
I
I
agree,
the
current
house
is
unrentable
and,
and
you
know,
needs
to
be
replaced
and
there's
certainly
good
things
to
be
had
for
newer
housing
stock.
That's
not
really
the
issue
here
and
I
appreciate
that
you
know
these
guys
go
to
Great
Lengths,
to
try
and
be
good
neighbors,
but
again
that
isn't
relevant
to
this.
K
If
you
can
show
me
a
a
site
plan
that
actually
has
the
dimensions
on
it,
such
that
it
shows
that
that
isn't
a
33
foot
by
nine
foot
space,
then
you
know
that's
something
else
to
talk
about,
but
from
every
site
plan
that
I've
gotten
directly
from
the
city.
It
appears
it's
33
by
nine,
which
does
not
equal
375
and
does
not
meet
the
15
foot.
Minimum
requirement
and
I
just
want
to
point
out
one
thing
about
the
importance
of
this
parking
is
we're
we're
starting
to
go
on
this.
K
You
know
where
we
can
maybe
fit
more
cars
in
there.
This
obviously
shows
we
have
a
severe
parking
issue
here
and
you
can
see
from
the
pictures
from
the
applicants
that
one
of
theirs
showed
five
out
of
five
spots
parked
just
like
I've
seen
and
then
we've
seen
the
other
one
in
the
front
yard.
The
fact
is
is
that
we
need
to
either
look
into
requiring
more
parking
for
duplexes
that
are
three
plus
bedrooms,
which
is
going
to
come
into
the
new
code.
K
It
looks
like,
or
there
are
no
limits
on
Park
residential
parking
per
block.
So
that's
another
thing
we
may
want
to
work
on.
K
My
biggest
point
to
this
is
that
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I'm
not
trying
to
say
that
you
know
these
are
going
to
be
good
or
bad
tenants
or
anything
else,
and
I
wasn't
trying
to
make
a
point
with
the
beer
pong,
except
that
this
space
is
too
small
to
even
do
that.
The
space
is
too
thin
to
even
put
a
table
in
these
things
won't
be
used
in
this
manner.
This
is
a
50
foot
lot,
there's
33
feet
of
the
of
that
open
space.
K
Then
there's
a
three
foot
pathway
and
there's
the
seven
feet
that
gets
you
to
or
about
six
feet.
That
gets
you
to
the
property
line.
So
I
would
just
ask
that
the
commission
require
them
to
do
as
it
sounds
like
we
can
do
to
change
the
parking
agreement
with
the
manitow
property,
which
I
think
would
fix
that
issue
and
then
put
a
requirement
in
to
revise
this
site
plan
to
meet
the
standards
so
that
there
is,
you
know,
usable
open
space
for
the
tenants
and
I.
K
K
You
can't
put
it
in
the
front
yard
for
that
usable
open
space,
so
you
know,
hopefully
we
can
come
up
with
and
I'd
be
happy
to
sit
down
with
them
and
come
up
with
a
site
plan
that
meets
that
requirement.
K
So
there's
a
reason
why
this
is
in
the
code
and
there's
a
reason
why
we
should
require
Builders
to
follow
that
code.
If
you
have
any
questions,
let
me
know
otherwise.
I
just
encourage
you
to
to
require
this
project
to
meet
the
clear
code.
E
B
B
N
Mr
chairman,
yes,
I,
think
we
found
a
solution
for
the
parking
that
is
much
more
palatable
for
the
neighborhood
and
and
for
myself.
You
know
regarding
the
open
space
for
me.
If
staff
says
it
meets
the
requirement,
it
meets
the
requirement
and
I'm
not
going
to
question
them
on
that,
and
so
I
with
that.
I
will
just
ask
for
the
commission
support.
N
E
I
And
just
to
add
on
to
that
obviously
I'm
in
support
of
the
motion.
I
think
you
know
our
packet
page,
66
kind
of
lays
out.
Staff's
interpretation
of
private
open
space
is
a
minimum
one
minimum
dimension
of
15
feet,
but
no
Dimension
smaller
than
than
five
feet
and
I.
Think,
as
shown
on
the
plan,
that's
kind
of
how
I
see
the
open
space
provided,
it's
kind
of
laying
out
so
I
think.
I
The
way
that
it
is
written
in
code
is
a
little
bit
confusing,
but
this
interpretation
in
our
packet
does
kind
of
adhere
or
is
consistent
with
the
plans
that
we're
provided
and
then
on
the
parking
you
know
being
familiar
with
that
site.
I
know
that
it
is
incredibly
walkable
easily
walkable
to
BSU
and
sorry
I
think
that
that's
reasonable
yeah
and
large
yards
small
yard.
I
You
know,
there's
there's
not
always
the
guarantee
that
you're
going
to
own
the
property
and
that
when
you
sell
it
or
whatever
you
know,
the
ownership
may
change
and
have
different
values.
You
know
that's
always
something
to
contend
with
as
well.
How
you
know
future
owners
are
going
to
use
it
as
well,
but
I
think
All,
Things,
Considered
I
think
it's
it's
appropriate
for
that
corner.
G
Thanks
to
the
owner,
obviously
from
the
picture
is
a
great
approach
to
this
housing
challenge.
G
I'm,
going
to
support
the
motion
primarily
for
the
reasons
commissioner
Squires
laid
out
already,
but
also
like
to
thank
Cena
and
Mr
Berg
for
bringing
this
to
our
attention
and
and
I
think
we
heard
the
parking
solution
as
a
conditional
condition.
That's
that's
great
I'm,
still
a
little
scratching
my
head
about
the
open
space,
but
based
on
the
owner's
track
record,
it
looks
like
that.
Hopefully
will
work
and
and
I
also
don't
want
to
question
staff
on
what
the
PDF
180
1
8.
The
one
inch
looks
like
for
measurements:
okay,.
B
Mr
daily
any
thoughts,
nope,
okay,
very
good
thanks
all
for
the
discussion
thanks
to
the
applicant
and
the
appellant
and
staff
I
will
be
supporting
the
motion
as
well.
I
I
think
we
have
found
a
nice
solution
with
the
parking,
as
discussed
and
I
also
agree.
I
think
you
know,
with
staff's
blessing
on
the
open
space
and
their
understanding
of
the
code
and
the
intent
I'm
comfortable.
B
Proceeding
with
the
motion,
as
stated
by
commissioner
Squires,
so
I'll
do
one
last
call
for
any
final
thoughts
and
with
that
we'll
go
ahead
and
call
the
roll
again.
This
is
drh22-116.
We
have
a
motion
to
deny
the
appeal
motion
was
by
commissioner
Squires
and
psychos
by
commissioner
Moore.
The
clerk.
Please
call
the
roll.
C
B
Two:
this
is
PUD
22-51
and
SUV
22-54
Riley
planning
services
and
crew
James
subdivision
the
address
is
2801
West,
Palouse
Street.
This
is
a
conditional
use
permit
for
Planned
residential
development,
comprised
of
30
town
homes
on
0.49
acres
and
r2d
D.A
Zone,
and
then
the
associated
preliminary
platform
said
subdivision.
O
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission,
the
item
before
you
is
an
application
for
a
plan:
residential
development
comprised
of
30
town
homes.
At
the
October
3rd
meeting,
the
applicant
presented
a
site
plan
showing
seven
Townhomes
from
Team
police,
with
the
drive
aisle
located
on
the
east
side
of
the
site.
There
was
public
testimony
concerning
the
massing
of
the
building
and
the
location
of
the
drive
aisle
that
headlights
from
the
development
would
negatively
impact
the
property
at
2750,
palu
Street
after
discussion.
O
On
these
points,
the
commission
voted
to
defer
the
application
and
gave
the
applicant
direction
to
modify
the
submitted
plans
to
address
the
massing
and
the
driveway
placement.
The
applicant
has
designed
or
declined
to
make
these
modifications
and
has
not
submitted
revised
plans.
The
planning
team
has
not
made
any
changes
to
its
original
recommendation.
However,
the
commission
may
approve
deny
or
modify
any
conditions
proposed
and
tonight.
Our
recommendation
on
the
subdivision
and
the
decision
on
the
Pud
is
needed
and
I'll
stand
for
questions.
P
No,
we
did
not
submit
any
modifications
to
the
site
plan.
I
just
want
to
go
through
the
approval
criteria,
that
is
in
Boise
city
code
and
also
discussed
in
the
staff
report.
So
location
is
compatible
to
other
uses
in
the
general
neighborhood.
P
P
The
proposed
use
will
not
place
an
undue
burden
on
transportation
and
other
public
facilities
to
the
opposite.
It
supports
Transit
strongly
there's
no
additional
public
facilities
that
need
to
be
constructed.
It
doesn't
expand
police
or
Fire
EMS
service
areas.
It
supports
Transit,
which
is
really
important.
Not
everybody
wants
to
use
Transit,
but
when
we
have
a
site,
that's
so
close
to
a
bus
stop,
and
it
goes
straight
to
downtown,
which
is
how
you
get
anywhere
else
in
the
city.
P
So
I
think
that
probably
we
passed
semester
on
that
one
next
one
is
a
site,
is
large
enough
to
accommodate
the
proposed
use,
etc,
etc.
Well,
we
were
one
space
short
of
tripling
the
guest
parking
on
this
site.
P
We
had
three,
which
was
what
was
required.
We
now
have
seven
excuse
me.
Eight.
We
now
have
eight
part
guest
parking
spaces
on
the
site,
plus
we
have
three
amenities,
which
is
more
than
we're
required
to
have
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
question
that
the
site
is
large
enough
to
accommodate
the
proposed
use,
as
well
as
those
amenities
and
Extras
that
make
a
project
more
livable.
P
The
proposed
use,
if
it
complies
with
all
conditions
and
pause,
will
not
adversely
impact
other
property
in
the
vicinity.
We
would
submit
to
the
commission
that
there
is
no
adverse
impact
on
a
personal
note.
I
live
right
next
to
the
Spring
Hill
on
Park
Center,
although
I
just
moved
adverse
impact
is
when
you
listen
to
a
generator
running
all
night
associated
with
an
RV.
That's
parked
in
the
parking
lot
and
adverse
impact
is
listening
to
an
industrial
dryer
for
40
for
14
hours
a
day
and
having
50
decibels
in
your
bedroom.
P
That's
an
adverse
impact.
Two
or
three
seconds
of
lights.
Flashing
can
be
easily
solved
with
curtains.
It's
not
an
adverse
impact.
The
proposed
use
is
in
compliance.
Comprehensive
plan.
Jesse
did
an
excellent
job
of
extracting
out
of
the
blueprint
Boise,
a
good
selection
of
ways
that
the
project
supports
is
supported
by
the
comp
plan
and,
finally,
with
regard
to
multi-family
buildings
with
two
or
more
residences.
That's
what
design
review
is
all
about.
P
I
spent
over
seven
years
on
Boise
City
design,
Review,
Committee
and
I
have
to
say
that
I'm
sure
that
them
in
association
with
the
excellent
design
review
staff
that
you
have
here
at
the
city
of
Boise,
that
whatever
Design
Elements
need
to
be
modified.
That
will
be
taken
care
of
at
that
venue
and
with
that
I'm
going
to
yield
to
Mr
Martinez.
Thank
you,
foreign.
Q
Steve
Martinez
9165,
West,
State,
Street,
Boise,
Idaho,
83714
Mr,
commissioner
and
fellow
Commissioners
just
wanted
to
give
a
history
of
the
project.
This
project
has
come
before
you
a
few
different
times.
We
bought
this
property
in
early
2001,
with
the
goal
of
bringing
Workforce
housing
to
Boise
felt
like
that
was
in
line
with
the
city's
goals
at
that
time,
unless
the
plan
has
changed,
I
still
feel
like
that
is
within
the
city's
goals.
Here.
Currently
we
met
with
the
city
to
determine
what
the
highest
and
best
use
for
this
project
was.
Q
At
that
time
we
were
asked
to
use
a
zone
that
is
currently
in
the
toolbox.
It
was
the
Lo,
Zone
and
I
think
that's
what
pnz
had
the
biggest
heartache
on,
but
they
also
had
the
heartache
on
the
density,
and
so
the
project
was
denied.
At
that
time
we
then
went
to
the
city
council.
The
city
council
actually
was
in
favor
of
the
density.
They
had
no
problem
with
the
density.
They
had
a
problem
with
the
Zone.
In
fact,
there
was
a
comment
made
at
the
city
council
meeting.
Q
Q
So,
after
going
both
through
the
process,
we
went
back
to
the
drawing
board.
We
changed
the
Zone,
we
reduced
the
density,
we
changed
the
style
of
the
buildings
from
Modern
to
traditional,
we
lowered
the
building
Heights,
we
moved
buildings
away
from
lot
lines
based
on
neighborhood
concern.
We
moved
we
added
parking
above
and
beyond
what
was
requested
by
code.
We
added
amenities.
Above
and
beyond
what
was
asked
of
code.
Q
I
also
want
to
point
out.
This
is
a
frustration
on
our
end
and
it's
a
frustration
within
the
development
community
and
it's
probably
got
to
be
a
frustration
within
the
city.
We
had
four
different
planners
on
this
project.
That's
four
different
visions
of
what
our
project
should
be.
That's
four
different
people
with
ideas
of
what
we
should
be
adding
and
deleting
we
and
and
I'm
I'm,
not
throwing
staff
under
the
bus.
They
all
had
great
input.
Q
They
were
all
great
to
work
with,
but
for
a
short
amount
of
time
to
have
four
different
project
managers
on
this
job
just
had
us
ping-ponging
all
over
the
place,
adding
time
and
and
headache
with
re.
The
the
problem
with
the
proposed
project
now
is
that
the
affordable
aspect
is
completely
gone
and
that
I
know
the
city.
Council
is
going
to
be
very
sad
to
hear
we
lost
14
units.
We've
lost
the
time
that
it
has
taken
to
get
to
this
point.
Interest
rates
have
gone
up,
cost
of
building
has
gone
up.
Q
We
anticipate
this
about
a
seven
million
dollar
hit
to
this
project.
I
know
the
city
doesn't
care
about
profitability,
but
they
should,
when
they're,
talking
about
affordable
housing
as
someone
that
builds
affordable,
housing
I
think
that
that
is
something
that
the
city
needs
to
take
as
a
component.
Q
If
you
want
that
to
continue
in
your
city,
if
the
city's
goal
is
to
raise
the
cost
of
housing
and
add
burdensome
and
unnecessary
time
to
the
process-
and
you
guys
are
doing
a
great
job,
I
feel
like
this
has
been
very
frustrating
from
our
perspective
as
we've
been
trying
to
morph
this
project
into
what
the
city
would
like
to
see,
and
yet
we
keep
the
the
goal.
Post
keeps
getting
moved
and
moved
and
moved
with
regard
to
the
lights
and
I'd
love
for
the
graphic
of
the
project,
backup.
Q
If
the
commission
would
have
taken
30
seconds
to
look
at
this
map,
you
will
notice
that
our
Drive
aisle
is
pointed
at
a
detached
garage.
It's
not
pointed
at
their
house,
no
matter
where
we
put
this
driveway
every
car
that
turns
are
going
to
get
a
three
second
shine
of
light
going
in
and
out
of
this
project,
just
as
we
are
going
to
get
that
same
three
second
light
of
somebody
across
the
street
coming
out
of
this
project.
Q
It's
very
frustrating
the
that
to
sit
here
and
I've
been
out
there
several
times
at
night
with
headlights
and
it's
shining
exactly
on
their
detached
garage,
and
yet
we
got
deferred
because
the
neighbor
who
wasn't
here
at
the
last
hearing
they
are
here
tonight,
didn't
even
show
up
to
complain.
It
was
the
neighbor
to
next
door
to
them
and
I
I,
don't
know
their
circumstances,
but
if
it
was
a
big
enough
deal,
I
felt
like
they
should
have
been
here
to
to
talk
about
that.
Q
We,
we
purposely
lined
our
driveway
with
their
driveway,
so
that
it
wouldn't
have
a
negative
impact
on
headlights
into
their
home,
so
to
be
deferred.
Because
of
that
was
quite
shocking.
The
last
meeting,
if
the
city
is
actually
going
to
get
serious
about
density
and
affordability,
you
are
going
to
have
to
make
some
death
decisions
and
if
headlights
shining
in
a
garage
is
a
tough
decision,
I
really
struggle
with
the
decisions
that
you're
going
to
have
to
make
going
forward
with
other
density
and
affordability
issues.
Q
And
so
obviously
you
can
tell
I'm
frustrated
by
this
process,
frustrated
by
the
ping-ponging
of
the
staff
and
and
the
time
that's
been
the
to
get
to
this
point.
But
it's
really
come
to
the
point
where
you
know
our
goal
is
to
keep
moving,
as
is
with
this
design.
So
thank
you
for
your
time.
R
R
R
Yet
Riley
planning
continues
to
submit
the
same
plan
and
expect
a
different
outcome.
They
seem
to
be
toned
up
to
the
needs
and
desires
of
the
community.
The
existing
streetscape
on
this
section
of
blue
street
is
one
that
includes
single-family
homes,
with
larger
Lots,
established
landscaping
and
beautiful
Arch
trees.
We
are
concerned
that
the
proposed
plan
includes
a
single
row,
as
I
mentioned,
of
seven
attached
homes
and
minimal
Frontage,
if
approved
as
proposed
the
contrast
between
the
existing
homes
and
the
development
again
will
be
very
Stark.
R
15
months
later,
we
still
believe
that
attached
homes
in
a
duplex
or
Triplex
would
be
more
fitting
for
the
portion
which
directly
faces
police
Street.
Along
with
this,
the
existing
dwellings
are
a
variety
of
designs
and
we
ask
for
a
very
design,
aesthetic
for
all
structures
facing
a
street
to
be
considered
for
the
new
project
row.
Homes
on
the
interior
portion
of
the
property
will
not
interfere
with
the
streetscape
and
we
support
denser
housing
with
row
homes.
R
On
the
interior
of
the
lot
at
the
Boise
city
council,
meeting
February
15
2022.,
the
rezone
was
approved
with
direction
to
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
and
the
design
Review
Committee
for
future
entitlements.
They
suggested
to
provide
off-site.
This
is
a
quote:
provide
off-site
pedestrian
connections
to
Lem
High
Street,
to
provide
better
connectivity
to
the
neighborhood.
R
This
pedestrian
walkway
between
Palouse
and
Lemme
high,
would
add
better
connection
to
the
neighborhood
and
the
Vista
neighborhood
association
is
disappointed
that
this
was
completely
disregarded.
As
most
of
our
comments
have
been
at
last
month's
meeting,
Riley
planning
said
that
this
was
not
considered
because
Lem
High
Street
has
a
curve
in
it,
I'd
like
to
remind
them
that
people
walk
on
streets
with
curbs
every
day
and,
in
fact,
by
providing
a
walkway
through
to
palu
Street
neighbors
would
even
have
another
route
around
the
curb
on
them.
R
High
Street
during
the
public
meeting
last
month,
as
well
as
previous
meetings
on
January
3rd
2022,
the
driveway
location
in
and
out
of
the
development,
has
been
identified
as
a
concern
as
submitted.
It
is
in
line
with
2750
West,
Police,
Street
Palouse
and
with
Palouse
and
with
most
of
the
traffic.
Turning
right
to
go
into
this
tab,
the
headlights
will
flash
directly
into
this
home.
R
So
if
you're
going
out-
and
you
turn
right
and
the
garage
is
there
and
their
house-
is
there
it's
going
to
shine
into
their
home
again
in
the
statements
from
the
January
meeting,
the
Pud
was
the
time
to
address
this
concern.
Now.
Is
that
time,
the
VNA
hopes
that
you
consider
and
address
this
visitor
parking
is
another
concern
with
30
proposed
units
and
eight
visitor
parking
spots.
The
VNA
asked
for
the
neighborhood
meeting.
If
Riley
planning
could
add
more
and
we
were
met
with
silence,
we
accept
that
there
will
be
more
traffic.
R
In
summary,
our
primary
concerns
about
the
new
site
plan
include
concerns
over
the
massive
homes
on
Palouse
Street,
maintaining
the
existing
streetscape
and
design
aesthetic
in
our
neighborhood
walkable
connectivity
within
the
neighborhood
neighbors
homes
being
directly
in
line
with
the
driveway
and
The
Limited
number
of
visitor
parking
spots.
If
Riley
planning
would
make
the
changes
that
have
continually
been
suggested
by
neighbors
the
VNA,
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission,
the
city
council,
this
development
could
be
a
great
addition
to
our
neighborhood.
R
D
B
Very
good
go
ahead
and
move
on
to
public
testimony.
Then
we
have
a
few
folks
sign
up
if
you
sign
up
and
you're
in
person.
Please
queue
up
here
at
the
at
the
podium
and
you'll.
Each
have
three
minutes
to
testify.
Please
start
with
your
name
and
address
my.
F
Name
is
Natasha
Tully
and
I
live
at
2750,
West,
Palouse
street,
so
Mr
chair
and
esteem
Commissioners.
Thank
you
for
allowing
us
the
opportunity
to
speak
tonight
as
you're.
Well
aware,
this
has
been
been
a
very
long
and
drawn
out
process
that
starts
back
in
March
30th
2021
with
the
caar
21-12.
This
is
my
fifth
time
speaking
in
regards
to
this
project,
along
with
multitude
of
letters
that
I
sent
to
the
planning,
zoning
commission
and
the
city
council
from
the
very
beginning,
I
opposed
this
project.
F
This
is
in
conjunction
with
the
concerns
that
commissioner
Mooney
made
about
the
driveway
and
commissioner
Gillespie
voice
concerns
about
the
massing
which
commissioner
Blanchard
has
voiced,
concerns
about
in
previous
projects.
This
can
be
found
in
the
transcript
from
the
January
3rd
2022
meeting.
We
were
told
that
this
would
be
addressed
in
the
Pud.
Now
is
the
time-
and
this
is
the
Pud
in
the
past.
I've
shown
pictures
of
our
street
and
single-family
homes
with
large
Lots.
F
The
commission
has
made
statements
about
what
is
consistent
and
expected
in
a
neighborhood
setting
a
large
block
of
seven
homes
facing
Palouse.
Isn't
what
is
expected
in
this
neighborhood
setting,
additionally
to
the
the
impact
of
my
home
is
significant
with
the
increase
of
traffic
and
the
alignment
of
the
driveway
to
my
homes.
The
following
information
is
from
a
letter
by
achd
by
Don
battles
to
the
developers
agent
Penelope
constantikes,
which
is
dated
10
10
2022.
The
current
flow
of
traffic
is
28
trips
per
day
with
a
new
proposed
unit.
F
F
The
phone
call
in
a
phone
conversation
with
Don
battles
of
achd
dated
10
9
2022.
She
stated
as
a
general
rule.
They
preferred
Road
alignment
with
existing
roadways
and
duly
advised
that
the
achd
would
approve
alignment
with
apps.
If,
as
you're
aware,
this
is
a
position
to
petition
for
a
continual
use,
permit
part
of
the
criteria
for
conditional
abuse
permit
is
to
review
the
possible
adverse
impacts
to
the
neighboring
properties.
The
massing
of
the
homes
along
Palouse
is
inconsistent
with
what
is
expected
and
the
600
increased
600
percent
increase
in
traffic
will
impact
the
neighborhood.
F
E
S
I
just
want
to
bring
up
that
it
was
addressed
as
a
conditional
use
permit.
The
lights
that
were
mentioned
are
going
to
directly
affect
my
home,
but
it
isn't
just
the
lights.
It's
the
fact
that
folks,
directly
to
the
east
of
the
driveway
folks
directly
to
the
west
of
myself,
are
going
to
be
impacted
by
this
driveway
from
individuals
pulling
out
depending
on
which
direction
which
direction
they
are
going.
S
Everybody
in
the
neighborhood
understands
that
this
development
is
going
to
move
forward.
We
accept
that
we
would
just
like
to
be
heard,
and
every
time
we
have
talked
we're
the
developers
I've
met
them
multiple
times
in
neighborhood
meetings
right
across
the
street
from
myself
I've
spoken
here.
S
They
just
haven't,
listened
to
us
and
it's
become
more
and
more
frustrating.
We
I
spoke
directly
to
Penelope
directly
to
the
gentleman
of
the
Riley
Planning
Commission
and
asked
him
it.
Wouldn't
it
be
easier
just
to
listen
to
what
we
have
to
say.
It
would
save
them
money,
it
would
save
everybody
time
and
they
could
move
forward
with
this.
But
again
it
always
comes
up
with.
This
is
the
way
it
is.
This
is
the
way
we're
going
to
do
it.
S
It's
extremely
frustrating
for
us,
and
we
would
like
this,
the
driveway
and
the
masting
to
change
on
the
complex.
If
the
driveway
were
moved
and
the
masting
split
up,
they
could
develop
a
localized
Community
within
the
area
they're
proposing,
which
would
be
extremely
nice
for
the
residents
extremely
nice
for
the
neighborhood
and
have
less
impact
in
general.
S
I
did
speak
directly
to
Dawn
battles
at
achd,
and
she
confirmed
with
me
that
achd
would,
without
question,
approve
a
driveway
that
was
directly
in
line
with
AB
street.
That
is
the
preferred
method.
The
achd
would
like
to
go
in
such
developments
like
this.
If
there's
the
an
adjacent
street
that
folks
can
drive
right
right
out
onto
again,
this
is
from
day
one.
S
S
In
conclusion,
we
just
we'd
like
to
see
that
massing
be
reduced
and
we'd
like
to
see
the
driveway
be
moved
and
I.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
G
T
Foreign
Mr,
commissioner
Commissioners.
Thank
you
for
letting
me
speak.
I'm
Mark
shepherdson
come
pull
that
mic
up
a
little
higher
there.
I'm
Mark,
shepherdson
I
reside
at
2702,
West
Palouse,
83705.,
I
live
next
door
to
Richard
and
Tasha
and,
as
Steve
mentioned,
I
spoke
last
week
and
concerned
about
the
headlights.
Tosh
and
Richard
couldn't
be
at
that
meeting
because
they
were
in
Ireland.
It
wasn't
because
they
didn't
want
to
be
here
and
I
came
to
that
meeting
in
opposition
to
the
driveway
I'm,
not
in
opposition
to
infill.
T
On
that
on
that
lot,
I'm
in
opposition
to
the
the
whole
seven
units
how
it's
going
to
look.
The
mainly
I
was
in
opposition
to
the
driveway
location,
how
it's
going
to
actually
directly
impact
rich
and
Tasha,
the
social
adjacent
to
the
property
line
to
the
2750
property.
So
all
the
noise
and
how
they
turn
out
onto
palooza
is
right
next
to
their
driveway.
So
they
may
have
trouble
even
backing
out
of
their
driveway,
but
just
prior
and
I'm
very
frustrated
right
now.
T
After
what
I
heard
earlier
so
I
came
to
that
October
meeting
and
I
signed
up
to
speak,
but
just
prior
to
that
meeting,
I
spoke
to
Penelope
in
the
back.
She
was
talking
to
Dave,
Kangas
and
I.
Just
went
back
and
asked
her
one
question
I
said
where's
the
driveway
going
to
be
in
Penelope.
He
said
to
me
this
is
a
quote
on
the
far
East
End
of
the
property
where
achd
wants
it.
T
T
It
doesn't
want
it,
their
achd
approved
a
plan,
the
met
their
minimum
requirement,
so
the
very
first
meeting
I
attended
at
that
site
was
it
showed
the
tall
white,
modern
stall
buildings
and
I
went
to
that
meeting
with
just
two
questions.
One
was
how
tall
are
the
bill
is
going
to
be
and
how
many
are
going
to
be,
but
knowing
that
the
interest
of
that
property
would
be
on
AB
street,
because
right
now
the
driveway
you
go
down.
T
Abs
you
bounce
across
abs
and
that's
where
the
driveway
to
go
to
the
property
is
right
now
and
has
been
for
as
long
as
a
growth
septic
system
built
septic
tanks
there.
It
has
two
driveways
except
I,
look
at
the
plan
and
the
driveway
was
on
the
East
End
of
the
property
and
I
asked
Penelope.
Why
is
the
driveway
here
I'm
not
on
app
Street
and
I?
Remember
this
very
well,
and
she
said
achd
said
it
would
be
too
confusing
and
I.
T
Remember
that
very
well,
because
the
sound
is
strange
to
me
why
the
driveway
wouldn't
be
on
ABS
or
there
would
be
the
safest
traffic
pattern
and
the
least
impact
to
the
neighborhood
so
and
that's
why
I
stood
up
to
speak.
I
also
mentioned
in
that
meeting
last
week
that
I
had
60
cars
and
there's
really
much
more
there's
174
cars
coming
in
out
of
there.
T
So
it's
a
huge
impact
I
just
the
plan
is,
it
needs
to
develop
the
cars
need
to
enter
in
and
out
through
app
Street,
not
dumping
out
on
police
streets,
a
two-lane
residential
street.
It's
not
a
Fairview
or
Overland
with
four
lanes
and
a
turning
lane
or
anything
like
that.
It'd
be
much
safer.
That
entrance
on
ABS
into
their
Community
would
make
their
own
world
inside
that
Community
make
a
nice
development
and
also
break
up
the
townhouses.
T
U
Hello,
chair
and
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Mark
Phillips
I
live
at
2815,
West,
Lem,
High
Street,
just
south
of
the
proposed
development
and
from
the
beginning
of
course,
I
was
concerned
about
this
development
just
because
of
noise
and
specifically
traffic
in
the
area,
while
I'm
not
I,
realize
that
the
developer
has
is
you
know,
we
have
to
find
a
happy
medium,
of
course,
for
the
developer
and
the
people
that
live
there,
but
I
just
want
to
speak
to
the
fact
of
excuse
me,
the
the
devil
really
is
in
the
details.
U
Quite
frankly
and
I
realized
that
let
me
just
get
that
home,
sorry
about
that.
The
devil
really
is
in
the
details
and
and
specifically
to
traffic.
I
live
right
next
door
to
the
house
that
burned
a
few
years
ago
and
the
new
home
was
built
there
single
family
dwelling
that
is
now
occupied
by
college
students.
Initially
there
were,
you
know,
there's
two
cars
parking
off
the
street
available
for
two
cars
parking
off
the
street
and
a
two-car
garage.
There
are
eight
cars,
Associated
and
tied
to
that
house.
U
So
I
just
want
to
make
everyone
aware
that
best
case
scenarios
and
not
are
not
always
the
reality
if
these
subdivision,
if
this
neighborhood
is
if
this
development
is
occupied
by
any
number
of
college
students,
the
the
numbers
could
go
off
the
chart.
So
my
biggest
concern
is
noise
and
parking
and
I
know
sometimes
appeasing
the
the
details,
maybe
struggle
for
the
developer,
but
it
can
make
a
big
world
of
difference
for
the
neighbors
that
live
in
that
area.
We're
all
connected
all
of
Boise
is
super
awesome
and
super
cool
I.
U
B
M
I
don't
know
if
it'll
work,
it's
a
long
document
am
I
an
attendee
or
a
panelist.
B
M
B
M
If
you
can
give
me
the
button
I
need,
but
I
will
keep
talking
and
fill
in
table
1106
dot.
One
the
table
of
allowed
uses
does
not
allow
in
the
R2
Zone
multi
family
buildings,
seven
to
twenty
units
per
acre.
So
if
we
could
get
down
to
three
units
per
building
along
palu,
so
I
think
we'd
be
more
in
line
with
what
the
code
intended.
M
M
That
was
for
20
units,
and
we
have
three
I
think
it's
came
about
because
of
some
errors
in
the
paperwork.
It
was
never
evaluated
correctly,
the
other
ones
they
are
21
triple.
Zero.
Twelve
was
an
evaluation
for
40
town
homes
on
2.9
acres,
and
it
says
the
applicant's
proposal
to
reconstruct
the
existing
12-foot
driveway
located
13
feet:
east
of
the
site's
West
property
line.
M
M
I
also
would
like
to
ask
and
they're
calling
it
a
driveway.
This
goes
into
more
than
five
six
units.
This
goes
into
30
units.
This
I,
don't
think,
is
really
classified
as
a
driveway
anymore.
I
think
it's
some
kind
of
a
streak
and
because
we
can't
quite
get
it
together,
we
can't
quite
get
the
correct
answers.
I
hope
you
are
going
to
deny
this
application
and
that's
all
I
have
thank
you
great.
B
Okay,
we'll
go
ahead
then,
and
move
to
to
rebuttal
from
the
applicant.
Q
Steve
Martinez
9165,
West,
State,
Street,
Boise,
Idaho,
83714
Commissioners
I
want
to
just
dive
into
a
couple
points
that
were
brought
up
because
we
have
met
with
so
many
neighbors
on
this
I
feel
like
it
has
been
disingenuous
to
state
that
Penelope
has
said
no
and
we've
said
no
and
that
we're
not
doing
this.
We
have
made
so
many
changes
to
address
neighborhood
issues,
the
first
one
being
in
meeting
with
the
Lem
High
neighbors.
They
did
not
want
the
access
from
our
project
on
Palouse
to
Lem
high.
Q
They
were
concerned
about
the
safety
they
didn't
want.
People
walking
in
between
their
homes
lemhai
does
not
have
sidewalks.
Everybody
parks
on
the
street
on
Lem,
High,
you've
got
a
choke
point,
and-
and
there
was
a
comment
made,
that
people
can't
walk
around
a
corner.
That
is
a
very
dangerous
Corner
when
you've
got
cars
parked
on
the
street
and
so
to
ask
us
to
give
a
pedestrian
access
to
Lem.
Q
High
We
felt
like
was
actually
making
it
more
dangerous
plus
we
were
listening
to
the
neighbors,
so
we're
getting
beat
up
now
for
listening
to
the
neighbors
and
making
a
decision
based
on
that
the
driveway
location
was
based
on
the
neighbors
originally,
when
we
had
44
units
all
of
our
units
fronted
on
the
east
side
of
that
and
our
access
was
closer
to
abs
and
those
neighbors
that
backed
up
to
that
property
came
and
complained
that
our
units
were
too
close
to
their
property.
They
didn't
want
that
massing
in
their
backyard.
Q
They'd
lived
there
for
a
long
time
and
didn't
want
to
do
that.
Those
neighbors
aren't
here
tonight
because
we've
addressed
their
concerns.
The
Neighbors
on
lemi
aren't
here
tonight,
because
we've
addressed
their
concerns,
I
think
it's
very
frustrating
to
hear
that
we
just
kept
saying
no
we're
not
doing
this.
No
we're
not
doing
this.
It
was
the
neighborhood
meeting
where
we
took
our
parking
spaces
based
on
neighborhood
input
and
brought
them
from
three
to
eight
spaces.
We
said
you
know
what
we
can
move
our
bike
parking.
Q
That's
a
great
idea:
let's
get
some
more
parking,
we're
over
parked
already
in
our
subdivision,
and
yet
we
made
the
decision
based
on
neighborhood
consultation,
to
add
more
parking
to
this
project,
so
I
I
think
the
narrative
is
that
we
just
keep
saying
no
at
every
turn,
but
we're
not
going
to
make
everybody
happy.
We
have
addressed
almost
every
neighborhood
neighbor's
concern.
The
fact
that
we
have
two
neighbors
here
with
their
concerns
means
that
we've
addressed
the
other
30
neighbors
that
showed
up
to
the
meeting
that
had
concerns
our
our
property
to
the
West.
Q
There
we're
concerned
that
our
PR
our
building
was
too
close
to
their
backyard,
and
so
we
pushed
it
back
and
removed
a
trash
enclosure
so
that
we
could
get
some
space
between
in
their
unit
and
and
the
first
of
ours
I
want
to
point
out.
Achd's
calculations,
I
I
love
these
kind
of
Scare
Tactics
that
there's
going
to
be
a
600
percent
increase,
and
you
know
10
million
people
driving
down
these
streets
based
on
achd's
calculations.
Q
It's
six
trips
an
hour,
that's
a
huge
Far
Cry
from
the
174
people
that
are
all
going
to
be
lined
up
trying
to
get
out
of
this
project
all
at
one
time.
Six
trips,
an
hour
is
a
far
cry
less
from
that
and
yeah
there's
going
to
be
times,
I'm
sure
randomly
that
there
are
more
cars
or
less
cars,
but
that's
based
on
achg's
calculations
and
that's
all
we
have
as
an
agency
to
be
able
to
go
off
of.
Q
And
then
I,
it
was
brought
up
that
there's
a
already
an
existing
driveway
to
the
West
that
fronts
onto
ABS.
That
is
correct,
but
there's
also
a
driveway,
that's
already
there
to
the
east.
That
is
exactly
where
we're
proposing
to
put
the
driveway
on
this
project.
So
there's
two
accesses
to
this
project
currently
and
so
to
say
that
you
know
we're
doing
something.
Q
That's
not
already
there
I
I,
just
felt
like
was
very
unfortunate
and
I
do
take
offense
when
Riley
or
Penelope's
name
keeps
getting
thrown
in
that
she
said
this,
and
she
said
that
we
have
worked
tirelessly
with
the
neighbors
and
and
bent
over
backwards.
Q
At
every
point,
we
aren't
going
to
make
everybody
happy,
but
we've
probably
made
99
of
the
the
neighbors
happy
in
this
project,
and
so
I
like
I,
said
I
just
were
made
out
to
be
the
bad
guy
in
this
situation,
and
we
really
it's
come
down
to
one
or
two
issues
and
we're
not
giving
any
credit
for
the
45
other
issues
that
we
addressed
so
I'll,
Stand
I,
don't
know
if
there's
questions
I,
don't.
B
Okay,
that
does
it
for
testimony
and
rebuttal
we'll
go
ahead
and
bring
this
back
before
the
commission
to
render
a
decision
again
we're
this
is
PD
22-51
and
SUV
22-54,
and
just
a
reminder
that
we
are
recommending
on
the
subdivision
on
the
SUV.
G
Mr
chair
commissioner
Mooney
since
I
started
this
discussion
last
last
month.
My
motion
is,
we
deny
PUD
2251
and
sub
and
recommend
denial,
sub
2254.
I
think
that's
correct
right
for
the
recommended
tonight.
Yep
for
the
crew
James
subdivision.
G
Chair
yeah,
you
bet
obviously
the
PD's,
where
we
have
the
chance
to
as.
D
G
Lemi
neighbor
said
be
super
awesome
and
super
cool
and
try
to
do
some
good
things
for
the
city
and
that
started
with
some
discussions
back
at
the
annexation
hearing
where
we
talked
about
the
driveway
and
tried
to
get
some
considerations
of
that
issue
forward
to
the
applicant
and
the
applicant's
been
very
patient
throughout
this
process
and
done
as
I
agree
with
the
applicant
in
their
Outreach
and
what
they've
done
for
the
Neighbors.
G
Similarly,
council
member
cleggs
desired
to
see
a
pedestrian
connection.
Alumni
we
talked
about
that
last
month
and
that
was
I
was
satisfied
with
the
discussion
from
last
month
on
that
as
well.
So
what
I'm?
G
My
motion
to
deny
is
based
on
I
agree
with
the
applicant.
The
locations
come
out
compatible
to
other
uses
in
the
neighborhood.
The
location
Pros
use
will
not
place
an
undue
burden
on
transportation
and
other
services.
The
site
is
large
enough.
The
proposed
use
will
not
adversely
affect
property
in
the
vicinity.
I
agree
with
all
that.
G
However,
the
proposed
use
is
in
compliance
with
the
comp
plan
and
that's
where
we
have
some
subjective
exercise
available
to
us
and
I
will
cite
so
in
our
project
report
staff
cites
many
comp
plan
goals
that
are
made
with
this
application,
but
the
ones
that
that
we
talked
about
last
time
with
commissioner
Gillespie
myself
about
massing
and
the
slot
development
on
Palouse
weren't,
obviously
addressed
at
this
hearing.
G
Infill
design
principles
for
neighborhoods
from
the
comp
plan,
States
ensure
infill,
is
compatible
with
the
height
scale,
existing
and
massing
of
adjacent
homes
and
overall
character
of
the
street
Frontage.
Additionally,
in
the
central
bench
portion
of
the
comp
plan,
where
diverse
housing
is
emphasized-
and
this
is
an
area
of
some
infill
anticipated.
V
G
Housing
types
are
on
the
land
use
map,
so
these
two
statements
are,
in
my
view,
significant
for
being
able
to
deny
this
from
a
subjective
perspective
quote:
encourage
infill,
consistent
with
design
principles
and
comp
plan
to
ensure
compatibility
of
the
surrounding
homes.
Also
quote:
consider
limits
on
overall
lot
coverage
for
infill
to
reserve
the
Integrity
of
the
area's
larger
lot
sizes,
unquote,
so
I'm,
not
an
architect
but
I,
know
slot
development
and
the
discussions
that
evidently,
commissioner
Blanchard
might
have
had
for
this.
One
he's
not
here.
So
those
are
the
reasons.
D
E
I
I
will
not
be
in
support
of
the
motion.
I
I
do
understand
the
the
spirit
and
the
intent
of
the
denial
honestly
I
think
you
know
massing
Assad.
You
know
seven
units
in
this
particular
neighborhood,
it's
different
than
the
rest
in
the
neighbors,
but
that's
kind
of
in
the
comp
plan,
though
it's
a
variety
of
housing
types.
I
These
houses
are
these
town.
Homes
are
a
little
over
27
feet
tall
and
that's
too
top
of
roof,
the
very
very
top-
and
you
know
the
roof
slopes
back.
It's
it's
not
a
flat
roof
or
a
parapet,
so
it
will
feel
much
shorter
just
because
the
angle
of
the
roof.
I
You
know
those
townhouse
that
row
along
the
front
portion.
They
do
jog
a
little
bit
and
it's
you
know
two
feet
for
each
Mass
kind
of
slides,
but
that
will
add
some
Shadow.
Some
relief
it'll
help
to
kind
of
break
up
the
mass
because
it
won't
seem
as
sheer
as
some
developments
do.
I
think
so.
You'll
get
a
little
bit
of
volume
there.
You
know,
maybe
a
little
bit
more
shifting
could
help
with
that.
But
I
think
the
intent
here
is
is
kind
of
starting
to
be
achieved
and
that's
also
design
review.
I
Something
is
on
that
one
yeah
in
general,
I
think
you
know
there's
in
our
packet
there's
no
requirement
as
far
as
I
can
tell
to
break
up
the
massing
into
a
certain
number
of
units.
I
know
that
a
lot
of
it
is
kind
of
a
context
and
adjacency.
It's
kind
of
a
general
compatibility,
but
I
don't
see
this
as
being
particularly
particularly
incompatible
just
because
the
volume,
the
Heights
feel
kind
of
compatible
to
the
the
single
story.
It's
similar
to
some
of
those
skinny
houses.
I
I
H
H
I've
got
the
following
reasons.
First
of
all,
I
think
it's
important
to
note.
Take
a
step
back.
All
of
us
are
citizens
all
of
us
volunteer.
All
of
us
have
a
bit
of
expertise
in
various
Realms
and
that's
why
we
sit
up
here.
We
have
again
as
a
volunteer.
We
sign
up
for
this.
So
there's
no,
no
pity
party
here,
however,
that
being
said,
we
are
doing
our
best
we're
doing
our
best
and
sometimes
that's
going
to
take
a
minute.
H
H
So
with
that
being
said,
I
do
believe
that
the
applicant
has
made
quite
a
number
of
concessions
from
the
very
beginning,
I
believe
44
units
were
now
down
to
30.
the
changes
of
the
number
of
parking
stalls
that
has
changed
some
of
the
internal
open
spaces,
and
things
of
that
nature
have
been
changed.
This
is
a
series
of
compromises
and
it's
not
always
going
to
be
pretty
and
the
end
result's
not
always
going
to
make
everybody
happy.
H
I
would
love
to
see
abst
Street,
be
the
main
connection
too
I.
Think
splitting
this
Mane
up
in
half
or
or
what
have
you
makes
sense.
That
being
said,
I
can
think
of
at
least
three
different
developments
off
top
of
my
head.
That
look
very
similar
to
this
in
a
very
similar
context.
So
I
don't
know
that
it's
necessarily
that
out
of
scale.
The
one
point
I
want
to
hit
home
on
is
the
transportation
piece.
H
This
is
a
bit
of
a
misnomer
and
when
we
say
that
there
are
170
trips,
174
trips
that
are
generated,
that
trip
doesn't
mean
every
single
one
is
in
and
out
of
the
complex.
It
means
it's
generated
and
it
comes
back
to,
but
there
are
other
trips
that
are
made
throughout
the
network
in
the
system.
Also
worth
considering
is
not
every
one
of
these
trips
are
going
to
be
happening
during
dark
hours
right.
H
There
is
an
impact,
but
I
don't
think
it's
quite
to
the
level
of
what
commissioner
Mooney
mentioned
with
respect
to
the
Pud
and
conditional
use
permit
requirements
that
we
have
to
to
meet
in
that
threshold.
So
that's
a
lot.
I
think
it
needs
to
be
said,
and
so
for
those
reasons,
I
will
not
be
in
support
of
the
motion.
N
So
I
Echo
commissioner
danley's
comments
about.
We
are
trying
to
do
our
best
up
here
and
it
it
sometimes.
It
is
really
ugly.
You
don't
like
to
see
how
to
make
the
sausage.
Sometimes
you
know
I,
don't
appreciate
being
admonished
by
the
applicant.
We
are
trying
to
figure
out
a
compromise
for
the
neighborhood
and
we're
doing
our
best
and
with
that
said,
I
won't
be
supporting
emotion,
while
I
do
believe.
Abb
Street
would
be
a
much
better
design.
N
N
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Squires
I
will
also
not
be
in
support
of
the
motion.
That's
before
us
right
now,
I
think
that
I'm
gonna
second
and
third,
the
comments
from
Commissioners,
Danley
and
Squires
regarding
the
project
I
think
there
has
been
a
number
of
concessions
and
I
think
the
project
itself
has
improved
with
with
time
and
through
this
process,
which
is
exactly
why
we're
here
right
is
to
make
to
vet
the
issues,
make
the
projects
better
and
hopefully
make
the
city
better
as
well.
B
I
was
born
here.
I
grew
up
not
far
from
where
this
site
is.
This
building
is
going
to
outlast,
probably
all
of
us
in
this
room
right,
so
we
have
to
make
sure
that
we're
vetting
through
the
issues
and
making
the
best
decision
that
we
can
so
I
also
will
be
denying
not
in
support
of
the
motion
and
I
I
would
actually
just
for
the
applicant
Mr
Martinez
actually
found
your
rebuttal
to
be
the
most
productive
of
your
testimony
tonight.
B
You
know
we
understand
that
the
process
can
take
time
and
we
understand
that
staff
has
been
through
a
tremendous
amount
of
turnover.
These
last
couple
of
years.
I
you
know
I
can
look
at
as
that's
the
cost
of
doing
business
in
this
town.
Currently
right
now,
so
I,
don't
particularly
appreciate
being
admonished
as
well.
B
Like
commissioner
Squire
said,
and,
to
be
quite
honest,
it
was
more
productive
to
hear
your
rebuttal
at
the
end
where
you
actually
vetted
back
through
the
process
and
your
changes
to
the
site
that
made
it
better
over
time,
so
that
would
have
been
more
productive,
a
way
to
start
out
this
discussion
tonight.
Okay,
so
something
to
consider
when
you
inevitably
make
this
presentation
to
city
council
again.
E
B
So
with
that,
I
will
go
ahead
and
call
the
roll
and
then
we'll
proceed
from
there
again
currently
reports.
We
have
a
motion
to
deny
this
application.
It's
a
PUD,
22-51
and
SUV
22-54.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
roll.
B
I
Mean
that
we
approve
PUD
2251
and
recommend
approval
for
SUV
2254,
for
with
all
the
terms
and
conditions
in
the
staff
report.
For
the
reason
stated
in
the
staff
report.
D
B
B
Okay,
will
the
clerk
please
call
the
roll.
C
B
Right
thanks,
everybody
we'll
move
on
to
item
number
three.
B
The
project
address
is
3691
North,
Harbor
Lane,
there's
a
rezone
to
modify
a
development
agreement
to
allow
drive
up
establishments
on
0.38
acres
in
a
C1
D
Zone
with
a
d
a
and
then
we're
also
looking
at
a
conditional
use
permit
for
said,
drive
up
establishment
we're
going
to
hear
from
Staff.
First
Miss
Delaney,
garlic.
W
Good
evening
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission,
before
you
is
a
request
for
a
DA
modification
conditional
use,
permit
and
variance
the
subject.
Property
is
located
at
the
intersection
of
Harbor
Lane
and
State
Street.
It
is
on
the
Northern
edge
of
a
large
residential
neighborhood
and
assorted
office
and
Commercial
uses
line
both
sides
of
State
Street.
W
The
property
is
located
within
the
boundaries
of
the
Northwest
planning
area
and
is
designated
as
mixed
use
on
the
land
use
map.
The
site
is
part
of
a
original
Lake
Harbor
planned
unit
development
that
was
approved
in
1984,
which
was
designated
as
LOD.
The
property
was
since
rezoned
in
2007,
from
LOD
to
the
C1
DDA.
W
W
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
1925
square
foot,
drive
up
coffee
establishment,
which
requires
a
modification
to
the
existing
da
and
a
cup
to
allow
the
drive-up
establishment
in
a
c-1d
Zone.
Additionally,
a
variance
is
requested
due
to
the
proximity
to
residential
uses
and
zones
within
200
feet
of
the
site.
W
W
The
site
has
Frontage
on
both
state
and
North
Harbor
Lane,
which
is
a
private
road
and
serves
as
one
of
the
three
entrance
points
to
the
lake
harbor
development
that
this
specific
intersection
has
been
expressed
by
both
staff
and
achd.
As
concerns
with
traffic
impacts
due
to
queuing
the
applicant
provided
a
revised
site
plan
that
has
increased
the
capacity
for
queuing,
but
the
stacking
of
cars
would
be
off-site,
the
off
site
would
be
within
the
Athletic
Club
parking
lot
to
the
Southwest,
which
has
a
shared
access
agreement.
W
W
With
the
variance
request,
the
residential
use
directly
south
would
have
the
largest
impact
from
the
proposed
drive
up
due
to
the
shared
access
potential
vehicle
conflict
points
in
the
shared
Drive
aisle,
as
well
as
direct
proximity
and
view
of
the
drive
up
aisle
order,
window
vehicle
queuing
and
vehicles.
Idling
staff
did
not
identify
a
hardship
or
an
exceptional
circumstance.
With
this
variance
request,
agency
Commons
were
received
achd
and
did
indicate
concerns
with
the
amount
of
queuing
and
they
decided
other
similar
projects
that
would
require
around
15
vehicles
for
queuing
on
site.
W
Public
comments
were
also
received
from
the
Lake
Harbor
Master
Association.
That
indicated
concerns
with
the
traffic
being
generated
and
did
request
a
more
thorough
traffic
study
be
executed.
E
X
Sometimes
that
doesn't
work
Mr
chairman
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Jay
Gibbons.
My
business
address
is
2002
South
Vista.
It's
about
six
houses
from
the
last
application.
X
So
I
represent
the
black
Black
Rock
Coffee
North,
Harbor
Lane.
Subject:
property
has
history,
it
would
it
was,
as
staff
stated,
it
was
part
of
the
original
Lake
Harbor
development
in
the
80s
and
then
specifically,
the
subject.
Parcel
was
rezoned
to
c1da,
with
with
the
Dr
overlay
in
2007
that
was
15
plus
years
ago
did
set
vacant.
Since
then,
staff
also
discuss
or
discuss
the
the,
as
you
can
see
on
this
graphic,
the
vacant
property
directly
south
that
impacts
our
drive
through
drive
through
stacking
everything.
X
These
two
properties
are
both
under
the
same
ownership
and
the
owner
of
these
two
properties.
A
year
ago,
almost
a
year
ago
sold
they
owned
the
Crunch
Fitness
as
well
and
end
up
vested,
but
still
on.
These
two
properties
that
are
I
have
set
vacant
that
would
I
have
as
far
as
the
D.A
is
is
concerned.
X
I'll
get
back
to
this
Slide,
the
original
D.A
from
2007.
What
was
approved
through
the
D.A
and
the
reason
I
need
to
modify
the
da
is
was
a
multi-tenant
retail
establishment,
which
is
great.
It
never
came
to
fruition
and
it
still
only
had
seven
or
eight
parking
spots
and
so
four
thousand
square
foot
building.
X
It
could
be
the
reason
it
still
sits,
fake
into
this
day
that
the
intended
uses
at
that
point
were
like
a
salon,
nail
salon
or
a
tanning
type
of
business
type
of
business
or
retail.
That
would
work
off
the
potentially
those
customers
would
come
from
the
fitness
center
and
also
from
the
neighborhood
itself,
because
that's
the
purpose
of
neighborhood
commercial,
so
we're
trying
to
find
a
use
for
the
property
that
works.
We
have
a
client
in
BlackRock
coffee
that
chose
this
property
to
try
to
develop
and
create
a
drive-through.
X
It
also
has
a
retail
component
to
for
associated
with
coffee
inside
it
has
interior
seating.
We
have
two.
We
have
several
outdoor
seating
opportunities
as
well
and
it
is
a
very
small
site.
We
still
have
Seminary
parkings
places
that
that
leaves
us
with
only
you
know,
six
stacking
spaces
on
our
property,
but
associated
with
for
the
owner
to
the
South,
our
current
owner
and
and
the
access
easement
agreements
that
we
have
around
those
two
properties.
X
We
have
a
secondary
access
that
is
south
of
those
future
condo
property
that
provides
a
second
axis
and
it
would.
It
would
be
the
preferable
access
in
and
out
per
se
of
the
drive-through,
as
well
as
as
get
to
the
stoplight
around
the
corner
to
get
out
of
westbound
on
State
Street.
It
can
be
tenuous.
You
can
see
that
there's
a
a
median
Island,
and
so
it
is
a
write
and
write
out
off
of
North
Harbor
at
this
access
point.
X
It
is
full
service
at
the
southern
most
access
point
south
of
the
future
condos
that
were
approved
in
2001.
X
X
That,
as
I
understand,
is
in
line
with
the
future
State
Street
Transit
corridor
plan,
Master
Street
plan,
and
so
you
know
that
you
end
up
with
138
feet
of
12
foot
sidewalk
that
connects
to
a
five
foot
slower
to
the
West,
as
well
as
to
the
east
so
BlackRock.
This
is
this:
is
a
black
rock,
a
standard,
more
more
standardized
footprint
for
for
this
coffee
shop?
X
They
do
have
black
Rockies
in
three
other
locations
in
the
valley
it
has
has
been
popular,
and
so
you
know
we
have
a
mix
of
materials
and-
and
you
know
very
aesthetic
type
of
of
elevations
with
regard
to
that
and
we'll
be
to
design
review
and
if,
if
and
when
we
get
to
that
point,
if
possible.
X
We
also
because
actually
the
retail
establishment
is,
is
an
approved
use
in
the
C1.
However,
if
we
have
a
drive-through
requires
cup,
and
we
have
to
have
a
variance
to
allow
that
cup
because
we're
within
200
feet
of
a
residential
district
I'll
note
that
part
of
the
residential
okay,
we
have
a
residential
use
directly
south
same
building
that
my
own
owner
owns
the
other
residential
district
is
in
a
it
is
right
across
Lake,
North,
Lake,
North,
Harbor
Lane.
Those
are
all
offices,
there's
no
residential
in
that
one.
X
That's
the
closest
neighborhood
zoning
District
per
se,
there's
one
across
State
Street
as
well,
so
we
are
trying
to
jump
through
all
the
hoops
and
what
I,
what
I
would
term,
as
as
you
know,
and
as
as
being
what
as
Steph
said
well,
you
didn't
really
provide
any
information
as
to
why.
Why
is
the
extenuating
circumstance
for
the
variance
itself?
X
It's
a
vacant
property.
It's
been
vacancy.
It
was
since
it
was
zoned
that
way
15
years
ago.
That's
an
extenuating
circumstance
and
we're
trying
to
build
something
on
that
property
and
and
yes,
the
only
residential
within
200
feet
is
actually
what
my
current
owner
has.
The
entitlements
for
per
se
may
or
may
not
be
built,
but
it
is
entitled
for
that.
We
have
access
of
North
Harbor
Lane
in
two
situations:
it's
suitable
for
a
drive-through
establishment,
it's
buffered
from
State
Street
and
it's
quite
a
ways
from
the
other
residents.
X
With
that
you
know
we
provide
commercial,
commercial
use,
supporting
neighborhood
itself
as
well
as
office
uses
in
the
area
and
the
city's
wish
for
a
C1
neighborhood
commercial.
With
that
I'll
stand
for
questions.
E
B
Thanks
Jay
we'll
stay
tight
on
questions
for
a
minute.
First
we'll
check
in
and
see.
If
we
have
someone
from
the
Callister
neighborhood
association
with
us.
E
E
W
G
W
I
I
W
Mr
chair
commissioner
Moore,
the
200
foot
radius
for
it's
for
both
residential
use
and
Zone
District.
So
in
this
case
we're
looking
at
several
different
properties.
The
one
directly
south
is
residential
and
lo
across
Lake,
Harbor
or
Harbor.
Lane
is
office,
suites
approved
and
R3
or
R2
Zone,
and
then
there
is
also
residential
within
200
feet
across
State
Street,
that
is
within
that
buffer
as
well.
But
staff
did
note
State
streets,
quite
a
distance,
and
really
the
most
impactful
site
is
the
one
directly
south.
W
H
You
Mr
chair,
Mr,
Danley,
I'm,
sorry,
I
just
can't
help
but
notice.
So
let
me
make
sure
I
have
that
straight.
We
have
residential,
that's
built
in
limited
office
and
we
have
office
built
in
limited
and
residential.
That's
right!
No
I
can't
wait
for
the
zoning
to
rewrite
right.
My
question
is
actually
to
the
applicant
and
so
Mr
Gibbons.
If
you
wouldn't
mind
real
quick
question
for
you
here,
given
that
this
property
is
on
State
Street,
given
that
we
know,
we've
spent
a
ton
of
money
and
time
on
State
Street
under
the
C1.
H
As
far
as
I
can
tell
you
have
an
opportunity
to
build
upwards
of
35
feet
in
in
height
and
you've
mentioned
that
the
other
property
in
the
other
properties
in
vicinity
are
owned
by
the
same
property
owner.
So
my
question
is:
why
not
go
to
35
feet
and
why
not
figure
out
with
the
parking
some
sort
of
a
joint
parking
Arrangement
since
it's
a
common
property
owner.
X
Mr,
chairman
Mr
Danley,
and
that's
a
good
point
it
was
it
was
we
were
building
to
suit
to
the
the
Black
Rock
Coffee
came
to
us
and
and
said
hey.
If
you
developed
this
property,
we
we
would
like
this
and
that
their
prototypical
building
is
is,
as
you
see
it's
a
single
story.
Building
and
granted.
We
anything
anything
bigger
the
even
the
4
000
square
feet.
You're
gonna
need
more
parking.
It's
going
to
require.
You
know
an
agreement
because
you're
never
going
to
get
enough
parking
on
that
site
itself.
E
E
B
V
My
name
is
Dave
Fuji
I'm
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
Lake
Harbor
Master
Association,
which
is
the
closest
thing
you'd
get
to
a
neighborhood
association.
We
don't
belong
to
Callister
or
any
of
them.
I'm
at
5269,
West,
Silver,
Lake
Lane
in
Boise
yeah
Lake
Harbor
is
a
mixed-use
development
and
you'll.
Oh,
let's
see
I
can
click.
This
can't
I
like.
V
Cool,
so
it's
an
excuse:
development,
that's
basically
what
it's
composed
of
in
the
Lake
Harbor
Master
Association,
manages
the
whole
group
of
Lake
Harbor
properties.
V
V
Typically,
you
know
two
cars,
each
many
with
three
to
four
there's
185
apartment
units
that
feed
North,
Harbor,
Lane
and
also
feeding
North
Harper
liner,
some
small
businesses
where
we're
estimating
around
50
cars
shown
in
green
with
daily
commutes
during
business
hours
and
then
I
belong
to
the
crunch.
Fist,
fitness
facility
in
blue
upper
middle.
We
hear
that
there's
around
1500
members
with
the
club
designed
for
a
capacity
of
3
000
members,
you
can
see
the
purple
Square.
V
Also
upper
middle
is
where
BlackRock
coffee
is
being
proposed.
North
Harbor
Lane
is
not
built
for
for
traffic.
It's
it's
really.
It's
got
a
it's
a
skinny
Street
landscaped
divider
down
the
middle
of
it
with
trees
and
green
Greenery
and
supportive
blueprint,
Boise's
goal
es6
healthy
Urban
forest
and
principal
GDP,
and
N
dot.
Five
pedestrian
oriented
streetscapes,
it's
optimized
for
Aesthetics
nice
walking
paths
not
for
traffic
volume
and
by
the
way,
if
a
curb
cut
off
of
State
Street
near
crunch
could
be
implemented.
We
wouldn't
be
having
this
concern,
but
that's.
E
B
Okay,
very
good,
we'll
go
ahead
and
close
the
testimony
Jake
will
come
up
for
a
few
minutes
of
rebuttal.
X
Mr
chairman,
thank
you
and
Commissioners.
First
off
I
I
appreciate
Dave
the
Master's
Association
being
here
tonight.
We
met
with
him
early
on
before
we
way
before
we
submitted
an
application
and
the
neighbors
Association
was
out
of
it.
They
would
like
a
way
through
the
meeting
Island
so
that
they
have.
They
do
have
a
traffic
issue
on
on
Harvard
Harbor
Lane
that
people
do
Drive
the
wrong
way,
sometimes
and
and
peak
hours.
It's
it's
it's
tenuous.
X
If
you're
going
to
go
west,
you
really
need
to
go
to
the
signalized
light
for
that
off
hours.
Aren't
so
bad.
In
some
respect.
In
my
experience,
I
haven't
been
there
several
times
once
we
got
a
staff
report
from
achd
last
month
or
late
September,
whenever
that
was
then
I,
I
called
achd
at
that
point,
knowing
who
to
talk
to
exactly
and
and
asked
them
okay.
So
the
question
is
you
didn't
make
any
mention
of
North
Harbor
Lane
I?
X
What
I
want
to
know
is
it
in
fact
still
a
private
Street
as
it
was
when
it
was
originally
developed?
And
two
are
you,
as
they
said
she
gonna
have
any
heartburn.
If,
if
we
were
to
work
with
the
city
to
open
a
hole
in
that
in
that
median,
so
we
could
get
traffic
clerk,
you
know
to
to
come
out
and
then
and
then
go
eastbound
or
west
at
least
they're
in
the
right
lane.
X
At
that
point
and
achd
said,
that's
that's
between
you
and
the
city
that
that
is
a
private
Street
still
is
to
this
day
and
and
if
the
city
is
amenable
to
open
an
ad
up,
as
as
Dave
said
that
this
this
project
could
be
much
more
palatable
to
them
at
that
point,
because
they're
they're
mainly
concerned
about
traffic,
not
just
from
my
project
but
the
residential
next
to
it
and
then
and
then
cringe
Fitness
too.
So
really,
that's
all
I
have
to
say
at
this
point.
So
thank
you.
Okay,.
B
B
I
have
a
motion
to
deny
by
commissioner
Danley
in
a
second
from
commissioner
Moore
Christmas
starts
out.
H
E
H
H
Corridor
has
been
the
focus
of
so
much
effort
and
and
so
much
money
a
lot
of
money's
coming
by
the
way
lots
of
like
several
multiple
million
dollar
grants
are
being
implemented
on
this
quarter
as
we
speak
or
in
the
very
near
future,
and
so
it
needs
to
be
highest
and
best
use,
and
so
you
know,
as
I
mentioned
in
my
question,
a
35
foot,
height,
I,
think
you'd,
be
I,
think
you
would
see
a
friendly
audience
If,
instead
of
coming
in
for
a
rezone
for
a
drive-through
single
story,
drive
through
I
think
you'd
be
you'd,
be
welcomed
with
a
rezoned
for
a
change
in
the
zone
that
actually
allowed
you
to
go
to
a
five,
maybe
even
a
six-story
building,
because
that's
what
I
know
that
this
this
city
wants
along
State,
Street,
specifically
on
the
Frontage
of
State
Street
and
especially
given
how
much
parking
is
here
and
can
be
worked
out.
H
H
I
think
if
we
in
one
Fell
Swoop
approved
a
drive-through
with
the
queuing
that
it
that
it's
going
to
have
and
I
think
that
undermines
a
lot
of
the
mission
of
what
the
city
is
trying
to
do
frankly
and
and
I
think
flies
in
the
face
of
our
comprehensive
plan
and
and
what
we're
trying
to
really
achieve
in
the
future.
So
that's
a
little
bit
of
a
different
issue,
but
for
all
of
those
reasons,
I
will
be
voting
in
support
of
the
motion
since
I
made
it
and
denying
the
application.
E
I
I'll
just
add
really
quick,
yeah,
the
residential
district
to
the
East
and
then
the
residences
in
the
office
District
to
the
South,
especially
when
you
you
take
into
account
that
the
kind
of
off-site
stacking
it
really
gets
close
to
those
residential
districts
and
I
think
that
that
really
is
the
reason
why
I'm
in
support
of
the
denial
is
just
especially
accounting
for
that
tracking.
It's
starting
to
encroach
okay.
B
I
agree
with
the
statements
you
know
the
commissioner
Danley
commissioner
more
just
this
just
said,
I
think
there's
just
probably
too
many
hurdles
at
the
end
of
the
day
right,
you
know
we're
asking
for
a
modification
for
a
DA
we're
asking
for
a
various
we're
asking
for
a
cup
I
also
agree.
You
know
that
that
perhaps
this
probably
isn't
this
isn't
the
best
highest
and
best
use
of
the
site
as
well.
B
Want
to
see
something
developed
there,
like
you
said,
has
been
vacant
forever,
but
this
probably
isn't
it
from
what
we
can
see
here.
So
with
that
I'll
be
supporting
the
motion
too.
Okay.
Okay,
again,
we
have
motion
to
deny
car
22-9
and
cop
22-12
and
CVA
22-13
motion
was
by
commissioner
Danley
second
by
commissioner
Moore.
Will
the
clerk
please
call
the
roll.
C
D
B
Okay,
folks,
we'll
get
we'll
get
rolling
again.
Sorry
for
the
delay.
D
B
Okay,
we'll
go
ahead
and
get
moving
here.
We'll
move
on
to
item
number
four:
this
is
CAA
22-81,
Schumann,
Newell
and
Woodward
address
is
3013
North
El,
Dorado
Street.
This
is
an
appeal
of
an
in-home
group
child
care
facility
on
0.23
acres
in
an
r1c
Zone,
we'll
start
with
staff
and
Delaney
garlic
again.
W
Great
thank
you
good
evening.
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission.
Before
you
is
an
appeal
of
an
in-home
Child
Care
application.
The
project
site
is
0.23
acres
in
an
r1c
Zone
located
at
3013
North
Eldorado
Street
on
July
16
2022.
The
planning
director
approved
an
in-home
group
child
care
for
7
to
12
children
within
an
existing
single-family
dwelling
which
meets
the
minimum
criteria,
including
both
indoor
and
outdoor
space
parking
and
all
other
Boise
city
code
requirements
on
September
19
2022.
W
An
appeal
was
filed
by
Ben
and
Tegan
Schumann
Dave
and
Kathy
Noel
and
Boyd
and
Annelise
Woodward
appellants
grounds
for
an
appeal
include
increased
traffic
to
the
neighborhood
unsafe
location
due
to
nearby
Sober
Living
homes
and
registered
sex
offenders
and
inadequate
parking
for
the
site
staff.
Assess
these
concerns
and
found
that
the
traffic
generation
is
minor
in
the
location
of
the
site
is
on
a
local
Street
with
the
capability
of
handling
the
use.
W
W
During
the
licensing
review,
both
the
child
care
operator,
family
members
within
the
home
and
any
child
care
workers
will
require
a
background
check.
As
for
the
parking,
there
is
a
two-car
garage
and
space
for
two
off-street
parking
in
the
driveway
apron,
as
well
as
on-street
parking
which
meets
the
minimum
parking
standard
for
the
group
child
care
home.
W
Y
All
right,
so
my
big
concern
here
and
why
my
neighbors
and
I
did
file.
This
appeal
is
the
location
of
the
proposed
daycare
is
and
I
believe
I
miswrote
on
my
initial
appeal:
it's
not
sober
living.
It
is
halfway
houses.
There
is
literally
one
right
across
the
street
that
has
recently
had
pedophiles
at
there
is
one
approximately
300
feet
and
across
the
street
to
the
left
of
this
location.
Y
They
also
have
multiple
vehicles
that
have
been
parked
on
the
street,
blocking
traffic
blocking
sidewalks,
so
I
ask
again:
where
are
they
planning
to
have
individuals
pull
over
to
park
to
drop
off
their
kids,
regardless
of
whether
or
not
this
is
a
public
Street?
The
increase
in
traffic
will
be
noticeable.
Y
The
it's
already
been
an
issue
with
the
number
of
cars
that
have
been
parked
in
front
of
this.
This
house
to
begin
with.
Y
As
far
as
parking
on
the
streets
are
concerned,
I've
submitted
multiple
photos
for
viewing
different
days
so
that
way
to
show
I'm
not
just
trying
to
find
the
most
opportune
moments
and
different
times
of
the
days,
to
also
show
that,
on
average,
they
have
two
to
three
vehicles.
In
their
driveway
blocking
the
sidewalk
and
overtaking
the
sidewalk,
I've
seen
them
Park
on
their
driveway
because
they
didn't
have
space
or
park
on
their
lawn
because
they
didn't
have
space.
Y
They've
got
another
three
vehicles
that
have
pretty
much
stayed
stationary
out
front
of
their
house
for
about
the
last
week
and
a
half
plus
two
other
vehicles
that
tend
to
come
and
go,
but
are
there
at
least
half
the
time
with
the
number
of
cars
that
are
out
front?
There
is
no
parking
unless
you're
going
to
be
parking
across
the
street
and
then
having
children
cross.
That
street,
which
again
is
on
a
corner,
which
is
a
blind
corner
with
multiple
Hedges.
That
block
as
well
as
the
vehicles,
creates
an
unsafe
situation.
Y
And
I
will
secede
any
further
information
to
or
any
other
time
to,
Dave
and
Kathy,
who
I
believe
are
in
who
are
present
at
your
location,
okay,.
B
B
Z
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Dave
Newell
I
live
at
7225
West
San
Fernando
drive
here
in
Boise,
83704
I've
lived
at
that
location
for
probably
possibly
40.
45
years
now,
my
wife,
there
has
been
there
for
55
years,
we're
well
aware
of
the
neighborhood
area.
In
addition
to
that,
I
have
on
occasions
been
in
the
house
that
we're
talking
about
and
on
the
property
multiple
times
because
of
work
that
I
do
so
I'm
well
aware
of
the
situation.
Ben
has
explained
the
issue
quite
well.
Z
Z
That's
not
the
issue
here,
but
in
talking
with
some
of
the
I,
don't
know
really
what
to
call
them
other
than
inmates
that,
through
these
past
few
years,
have
passed
by
and
and
chosen
to
to
speak,
there
are
anywhere
from
12
to
14
people
living
at
those
locations
at
any
given
time
they
have
their
own
vehicles
that
come
and
go
in
addition
to
that
they
are
allowed
people
to
come
visit.
So
we
have
traffic
from
there
from
that.
Z
Also,
this
location
is
located
very
close
to
Cole
Road
and
it
serves
a
large
subdivision.
So
the
traffic
from
that
subdivision
flows
through
that
same
street
Ben
mentioned
that
that's
a
blind
corner.
It's
real
hard
to
know
as
you're
coming
around
that
corner.
What's
there
because
of
the
multiple
vehicles
that
these
people
that
live
there
apparently
have
there
at
all
times.
Z
There
is
only
one
way
that
I
can
see
that
people
dropping
off
and
picking
up
their
children
would
have
to
do
that,
and
that
would
be
either
to
park
at
another
location
and
walk
in
or
double
Park,
which
is
more
likely
what
they'll
be
doing,
because
there
are
a
lot
of
other
cars
that
are
located
on
this
this
street
from
from
other
residents
there
I
do
say
it
as
a
safety
issue.
I
I
believe
that
the
issue
of
traffic
there
is
has
been
a
very
understated.
Z
This
is
becoming
a
very,
very
busy
location.
It's
a
it's
busy
because
there
are
are
two
at
colon
Ustick.
You
have
a
number
of
businesses
that
attract
that
traffic
and
I
I,
frankly
see
it
as
a
very,
very
poor
idea
and
I
view
it
as
a
safety
issue,
I
I'd
like
to
thank
Mr
chairman
and
the
commission.
That's
that's
all
I
have
to
say
for
now.
J
B
AA
That's
okay!
Thank
you.
This
is
Boyd
Woodward
I
live
at
7301,
West,
San,
Fernando
drive
on
island
in
between
Dave,
Newell
and
and
Ben
and
I
just
want
to
reaffirm
everything
that
they've
said.
Our
main
concern
is
all
the
vehicles
that
are
already
presently
there,
and
you
know
we
like
to
go
on
evening
walks
and
we
take
our
10
month
old
and
a
stroller
and
whatnot
and
oftentimes.
We
have
to
go
out
in
the
road
because
the
vehicles
are
parking.
The
sidewalk
there
to
walk
and
I
just
see
additional
business.
P
AB
B
AB
My
name
is
rahima
asmani
I've
been
living
there
in
six
months
now,
I
live
in
301,
North,
Liberty,
El,
Dorado,
Street
I
just
have
a
business
for
daycare.
What
they're
saying
about
the
vehicle
most
time?
The
vehicle
is
like
something
they
visit
coming
like
the
the
the
parents.
AB
The
one
day,
I
take
care
of
the
kid
they
just
come
in.
They
pick
up
the
kids,
sometimes
when
they
see
too
many
vehicles,
I,
sometimes
I
just
have
the
the
meeting
with
the
parent.
If
you
have
like
something
they
think
about
the
kids,
I
need
to
call
the
parents
and
discussing
with
them.
So
if
that
one
is
they
just
feel
like
is
not
very,
very
well.
I
can
say
sorry
for
that,
but
I
have
visited
like
is
that
the
parents
were
a
kid.
They
just
come
and
sometimes
pick
up
the
kids
drop.
AB
H
W
B
E
B
All
right
thanks,
Delaney,
thanks
all
we'll
go
ahead
and
open
this
up
for
any
testimony.
If
you're
here
to
testify
on
this
item,
please
come
on
up
to
the
podium.
AC
Us
yes
hi,
my
name
is
Justin
Snyder
addresses
2905,
North,
38th
Street
I'm,
actually
here
to
testify
on
another
piece
this
evening,
but
this
one
as
a
child
care
facility
owner
myself
here
in
Boise
I,
just
know
that
we
are
in
grave
need
of
more
child
care.
Spaces
and
I
wanted
to
speak
in
favor
of
this
proposal,
and
that
is
all
okay.
B
All
right,
thank
you,
Mr,
Schneider,
okay,
I,
think
that
does
it
for
Testimony
we'll
bring
this
back
for
rebuttal.
Now,
we'll
start
with
the
rebuttal
by
the
applicant.
Do
you
have
any
other
final
thoughts,
you'd
like
to
share
with
us.
AB
I
can
say,
like
I,
just
need
them
to
like
if
it's
something
they
just
make
concern
or
something
they
feel
like.
They
feel
it's
not
good.
They
can
come
and
talk
to
me
or
we
see
this.
It's
not
good,
because
you
have
those
kind
of
business
they
can.
They
can
tell
me
something
to
make
it
better
because
we
are
working
together
like
parents
like
mother
father,
so
if
they
see
something,
is
it
the
it's
not
good?
They
can
come
and
talk
to
me.
Y
Yes,
I
would
like
to
rebuttal
in
regards
to
parking
they've
indicated
that
the
parking
that
there
are
two
spots
inside
of
the
parking
garage
and
two
spots
on
the
driveway.
However,
the
two
spots
inside
the
garage
are
not
currently
being
used
for
vehicles.
Y
They
are
used
for
household
items
as
I've
seen,
walking
my
own
child
and
having
to
walk
in
the
middle
of
the
street
myself,
because
there's
no
space
on
the
sidewalks
again,
it's
a
blind
Corner,
multiple
cars
that
have
remained
stationary
for
a
number
of
weeks,
if
not
months,
really
the
only
vehicle
that
I
ever
see
actually
drive
from
there
is
their
Hummer
as
far
as
visitors
to
the
household.
Yes,
they
do
have
visitors,
but
those
individuals
also
double
Park
and
cover
the
cover.
Y
The
sidewalk
and
I've
seen
them
stop
in
the
middle
of
the
road,
which
is
again
lined
Corner
safety
issue,
and
with
that
I'm
done.
B
Okay,
thank
you.
Mr
Schumann,
with
that
we'll
close
rebuttal
we'll
bring
this
item
back
before
the
commission
to
render
a
decision
again.
This
is
CAA
22-0081.
G
Moody
I
recommend
we
deny
the
appeal
for
CAA
2281.
B
G
Off
yeah
Mr,
chair,
yeah,
I
agree
with
the
staff
and
the
applicant
that
the
traffic
and
the
parking
issues
that
the
that
we've
heard
in
testimony
are
not
related
to
the
child
care
operation
and
the
unsafe
issues
of
sex
offenders
and
halfway
houses.
Those
are
all
the
allowed
use
is
a
halfway
house
in
the
area
and
I
agree
with
the
staff's
explanation
of
that.
For
that
reason,
I
I
think
this
should
be
denied
okay,.
E
H
Daley
just
a
brief
comment
and-
and
that
is
that
to
the
neighborhood
Associated
to
the
neighborhood
and
the
individuals
living
in
it,
you
absolutely
have
every
right
to
call
and
make
a
complaint
about
city
code
in
the
sense
of
there
being
a
24-hour
ordinance
on
the
books
right
now
that
if
anybody's
parked
there
for
longer
than
24
consecutive
hours,
then
they
can
be
cited
and
potentially
towed.
So,
if
that's
a
a
reoccurring
issue,
then
there
is
a
a
recourse
there
that
probably
should
be
exercised
whether
those
Vehicles
belong
to
the.
H
In
this
case,
the
applicant
of
the
daycare
I
have
no
idea,
but
nevertheless
that's
that's
an
Avenue
to
at
least
exercise,
but
otherwise
I.
Don't
think
that
the
conditions
of
overturning
the
administrative
decision
have
been
met
and
therefore
I
will
be
supportive
of
emotion.
Okay,.
B
Thanks,
commissioner,
daily
okay,
yeah
I'll
second
Thoughts
by
commissioner
Rooney,
commissioner
Danley
I'll,
be
supporting
the
motion
as
well.
I,
don't
see
anything
in
in
the
code
that
you
know
the
applicant
has
missed
and
with
this
application,
I
believe
the
director
made
the
appropriate
decision
in
with
the
administrative
approval
of
the
application.
So
I
agree
with
commissioner
Danley.
If
there
are
some
extenuating
circumstances
within
the
neighborhood,
there
are
other
means
to
deal
with
that.
B
But
this
this
child
care
facility
doesn't
seem
to
be
necessarily
the
cause
of
all
of
those
issues.
So
I
don't
see
any
reason
where
we
can
deny
it's
the
application,
all
right,
we'll
go
ahead
and
call
the
role.
Then
again,
this
is
ca22
Dash
81.
The
motion
to
deny
the
appeal
motion
by
commissioner
Mooney
with
a
second
by
commissioner
Danley
will
clerk.
Please
call
the
roll.
C
E
B
Okay,
thank
you
all.
Okay,
all
right
we'll
go
ahead
and
press
on
to
item
number
five
and
at
this
point,
I'll
need
to
be
recusing
myself
from
this
item.
As
my
office
has
been
handling
some
of
the
survey
work
and
other
components
of
this
project,
it's
going
to
hand
off
chairmanship
duties
to
commissioner
Danley
at
this.
H
Point
and
the
new
sheriff
guarantees
he'll
shoot
himself
in
the
foot,
just
letting
you
know
and
all
right.
So
moving
forward
on
our
agenda
item
number
five:
this
is
car
22-18,
an
application
from
Architects
at
800,
West
State
Street,
an
application
for
a
rezone
of
about
0.42
Acres
from
limited
office
to
design
review
or
I'm,
sorry
to
Central
Business
in
downtown,
and
so
first
up
is
Miss
Carly.
Take
it
away.
W
Great
thank
you.
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
commission.
The
subject
property
is
located
at
the
corner
of
8th
Street
and
State
Street,
with
the
8th
Street
identified
as
a
key
north-south.
Multimodal
Corridor.
The
project
site
is
within
the
urd
expansion
area,
which
will
allow
CCDC
to
assist
with
connectivity
and
infrastructure
improvements
along
the
8th
Street
between
State
and
Franklin.
This
site
is
approximately
580
feet:
Northwest
of
the
downtown
Boise
Regional
activity
center,
with
the
state
capitol
grounds
to
the
southeast
and
a
small
area
of
r3d
Zone
at
Franklin
and
Ninth.
W
The
adjacent
properties
to
the
Northeast
and
West
are
zoned.
Lod
limited
office
with
designer
View
and
c5dd
is
to
the
South
across
State
Street.
This
area
is
comprised
of
a
mix
of
commercial
office,
religious
institutions
and
historic
uses.
The
property
is
designated
in
the
downtown
mixed
use
on
our
land
use
map
and
the
comprehensive
plan.
W
The
applicant
is
requesting
a
rezone
of
approximately
0.42
Acres
from
the
LOD
to
c5dda
Central
business
with
downtown
design,
review
and
development
agreement
located
at
800
West
State
Street.
The
planning
team
finds
that
the
proposed
Zone
would
be
most
appropriate
for
the
property
due
to
the
fact
that
the
boundary
of
the
West
Side
District
urban
renewal
plan
was
amended
to
include
this
block.
Shifting
downtown
planning
North
and
the
c5dd
is
directly
to
the
South
with
proximity
to
downtown.
W
The
applicant
requested
zoning
in
order
to
develop
a
six-story
structure
comprised
of
basement
level
parking
first
floor,
retail
space,
fronting
State
Street
and
8th
Street
Second
Story
floor
commercial
office
space
with
the
third
fourth
fifth
and
sixth
dedicated
to
residential
uses.
In
order
to
ensure
the
future
development
provides
the
required
improvements.
A
development
agreement
is
included
with
the
reason
application.
The
da
will
prohibit
vehicular
access
from
State
and
8th
Street
and
require
all
vehicular
access
to
come
from
the
alley.
Additionally.
W
W
Public
comment
was
received
during
the
review
and
detailed
concerns,
with
obstructing
existing
views,
incompatibility
with
historic
character
of
the
neighborhood,
identifying
Nick's
use
as
not
appropriate
at
this
particular
intersection
and
safety
concerns
due
to
the
height
and
proximity
to
government.
Buildings,
planning
staff
recommends
approval
and
the
motion
needed
is
a
recommendation
to
city
council
and
I'll
stand
for
questions.
H
AD
AD
Thank
you
to
the
commission
for
hearing
our
application
and
to
the
staff
for
the
review
of
our
application.
We,
of
course,
concur
with
the
staff's
recommendation
of
approval
and
the
reasons
behind
their
decision.
There
are
conditions
of
approval
and
the
included
development
agreement.
AD
The
applicant
sees
the
advantage
to
having
a
mixed-use
building
in
this
location
with
its
ties
to
the
state
capital
and
its
functions
and
walkability
to
downtown.
It
will
activate
a
corner.
That's
been
vacant
for
years.
Within
the
current
zone
of
LOD,
the
development
is
limited
by
Building
height,
which
is
45
feet
and
setback
requirements.
AD
AD
We
brought
with
us
an
image
that
shows
just
a
little
bit
more
design.
We
are
in
the
schematic
level
of
design
right
now.
This
is
by
no
means
the
the
final
design
and
it
will
be
changing
as
we
move
forward,
especially
with
design
review,
but
it
shows
a
little
bit
better
than
the
mass
that
was
shown
in
our
application.
AD
We
felt
that
this
will
hopefully
ease
some
some
fears
about
the
design
of
the
building,
so
we
are
proposing
a
mixed-use
development
and
that
will
consist
of
basement
level
parking
that
parking
will
be
accessed
off
of
the
alley
off
of
8th
Street
behind
the
building,
and
we
are
considering
one
to
two
levels
of
parking.
Each
level
provides
about
40
to
45
parking
spaces.
AD
The
first
floor
is
retail
space,
fronting
State,
Street
and
8th
Street.
The
intent
is
for
this
to
be
an
active
space
for
dining
and
Gathering.
We
hope
that
the
retail
that
comes
into
this
area
is
something
such
as
a
cafe,
especially
on
8th
Street.
We
have
created
14
feet
of
space
beyond
the
allotted
sidewalk
space,
to
allow
for
tables
and
seating
for
a
cafe
type
area
for
Gathering
and
to
activate
that
area.
AD
The
second
floor
will
be
commercial,
Office
Space,
and
it's
still
not
decided
exactly
what
will
be
going
in
that
space.
Third,
fourth
and
fifth
floors
are
condominium
units.
AD
AD
The
tower
on
the
corner
at
8th
and
state
is
intended
to
create
an
urban
Edge
and
it's
a
connection
to
the
rest
of
Eighth
Street
running
North
I
mean
running
South,
while
the
building
tapers
down
towards
the
historic
architecture,
the
uppermost
uppermost
floor
plate
will
not
exceed
75
feet
in
height.
We
want
to
stay
out
of
the
mid-rise
building
category,
so
we're
not
going
to
go
any
higher
than
than
that
higher
end
finishes
will
be
selected
to
reflect
the
the
buildings
surrounding.
AD
So
we
are
currently
looking
at
a
combination
of
stone
and
glass
and
similar
to
the
Hall
of
Mirrors
having
glass
located
so
that
it
reflects
the
beautiful
architecture
around
it
and
it
doesn't
take
away
from
it.
AD
We
also
understand
that,
of
course,
this
will
all
be
evaluated
when
the
project
reaches
design
review.
So
thank
you
again
for
reviewing
our
application
and
I.
Think.
That's
all
we
have
it
this
time.
H
E
AA
H
First,
up
I'll
go
with
Eric
Hagan
of
the
North
End
neighbor
Association
I,
see
Eric
that
you
are
in
fact
online
go
ahead.
State
your
name
address
all
that
wonderful
stuff
and
assuming
10
minutes
is
okay.
AE
Yes,
good
at
good
evening,
commissioner
Danley
and
fellow
commissioners,
my
name
is
Eric
Hagan.
My
address
is
809
North
18th
Street
I'm,
the
North
End
neighborhood
association,
Planning
and
Zoning
chair
I,
actually
looked
at
renting
space
in
that
old
historic
building
several
years
ago.
AE
It'll
be
a
shame
to
see
that
that
building
go.
We
are
in
favor
of
mixed
use
on
higher
density
in
Heights
along
the
State
Street
Corridor.
We
are
all
for
in
urban
infill
as
well
as
adaptive
reuse.
We
we
love
what
Hummel
is
proposing.
The
mixed
use
of
retail
and
offices
and
condos
is
just
what
the
Syria
needs
we
just
wish.
It
was
on
mostly
vacant
Surface
Street
parking
lots
such
as
the
one
that's
across
the
street
instead
of
taking
down
mid-century,
modern,
historic
piece
of
architecture.
H
All
right
is
that
it
Mr
Hagen.
Yes,
thank
you.
Next
up
from
the
downtown
neighborhood
association,
Jennifer
mock,
are
you
online.
G
There's
a
no
cut
moratorium
on
state
after
they
do
the
mill
and
inlay,
which
sounds
like
it's
supposed
to
be
done
like
now
by
22.
Doesn't
sound
like
it's
going
to
happen?
Is
that
going
to
affect
this
project.
W
E
I
I
think
I
think
this
is
a
question
for
staff.
There's
one
two
I
think
three
different
iterations
I
think
they're
of
fundamentally
the
same
model,
but
just
more
developed
massings,
which
version
is
intended
to
be
in
the
D.A.
W
Mr
chair,
commissioner
Moore.
The
conceptual
plans
that
are
associated
with
the
D.A
were
the
site
plan
that
was
submitted
by
the
applicant.
The
massing
renderings
themselves
aren't
necessarily
part
of
that.
We
do
rely
on
Dr
to
kind
of
review,
further
review,
the
actual
look
and
height
of
that
building.
I
H
We'll
have
just
just
hold
just
hold
tight
we're
coming
to
that
just
right.
Next,
your
timing
is
perfect.
I
I
do
have
a
question
of
staff,
so
when
it
comes
to,
we
have
our
land
use
map
and
we
have
our
zoning
coordinate
code,
and
so
this
parcel
yeah.
If
we
could
maybe
print
bring
that
up,
it
would
be
helpful,
but
this
parcel
applies.
W
Yeah,
thank
you.
Mr
chair.
As
far
as
the
land
use
map
goes
you're
correct.
It
is
within
that
downtown
mixed
use
area.
That
area
does
extend
another
Block
north.
As
we
review
this,
we
have
existing
zoning,
that's
primarily
composed
of
that
LOD
in
that
particular
area.
When
looking
at
the
rezone,
we
did
see
proximity
to
C5
across
the
street.
W
We
did
identify
this
particular
intersection
at
State
and
eighth
as
an
appropriate
location
for
the
C5,
because
it's
contiguous
to
other
C5
zoning
as
well
as
you
move
further
north
there's
going
to
be
some
more
overlays.
Some
more
constraints
based
on
that
location,
so
very
unique
to
the
site,
is
what
we're
looking
at
for
the
rezone
change.
This
particular
area
has
had
a
lot
of
review
from
staff
and
even
when
looking
at
our
zoning
code.
So
in
light
of
that,
we
felt
this
was
appropriate
request.
Great.
H
Thank
you
all
right,
any
other
questions
from
the
commission
shaking
our
heads
all
right.
Okay,
with
that
we'll
move
forward
to
public
testimony
and
we'll
start
off
with
the
folks
who
have
already
signed
up,
and
then
anybody
who
didn't
sign
up
but
is
still
in
the
chambers
who
wishes
to
testify,
and
so
first
up
is
Missy
swykoski,
first
name
and
you're
already
challenging
me
holy
moly.
If
you
can
just
re
for
the
record,
that's.
AF
Apologize
for
speaking
out
of
turn,
I'm
Missy,
swikovski
I'm,
the
senior
award
mid,
St
Michael's
Cathedral,
and
if
you
could
pull
up
the
picture,
the
rendition
of
that
that.
AF
The
drawing
of
the
new
building-
that's
a
lovely
picture
except
the
building.
That's
next
to
it
is,
was
built
in
1902
and
it
doesn't
show
up
here.
It
looks
like
it's
modern
building.
H
AF
AF
Is
part
of
the
Capital
District
historic
register?
Several
buildings
are
on
that
are
recognized,
they're
built
between
1902
1939
and
a
block
away.
You
have
Boise
High
I'm,
realistic
about
development
in
the
area.
I've
been
working
with
Zach
Pete
Meyer
CC
DC
for
the
last
two
years
on
proposals
to
eliminate
parking
on
the
west
side
of
state
of
8th
Street
for
four
blocks
going
to
St
John's.
This
is
a
real
concern
for
us.
AF
The
gentleman
that
has
purchased
this
also
purchased
the
Carnegie
building
in
2019
with
the
decision
to
renovate
it,
then
in
2021
decided
to
sell
it
but
didn't
sell
it
and
now
still
has
it.
And
if
you
look
at
the
designs
for
the
Carnegie
building,
there's
no
additional
parking
involved
developed
along
with
this
building
now,
which
would
be
twice
the
height
of
what
is
currently
there.
It
would
go
from
45
feet
to.
D
AF
Currently
in
that
area,
there
is
no
residential
area
within
that
two
block
area
and
it
needs
to
provide
a
range
of
Commercial,
Services
and
Retail
Services
that
are
not
available
in
the
immediate
neighborhood,
but
they
are
they're,
downtown
and
I'm
understand,
as
you
mentioned
earlier,
commissioner
Danley,
that
State
Street
is
an
area
that
the
city
wants
to
develop
five
and
six
story,
buildings
and
residential.
We
don't
have
a
problem
with
development,
but
we
would
like
it
to
match.
AF
I
would
have
gladly
sent
in
a
written
my
written
concern
about
the
actual
design
of
the
of
the
building.
Five
days
ahead
of
time,
but
it
was
only
published
today,
I've
been
working
with
other
people
trying
to
locate
the
proposed
design,
and
we
didn't
have
it
until
today
to
give
written
comments
on
that.
AF
H
Appreciate
your
time,
thank
you.
Miss
wykowski,
Phoebe,
Smith.
AG
Good
evening
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Phoebe
Smith.
My
address
is
1605
North
21st
Street
in
Boise
I'm,
a
30-year
resident
of
the
North
End,
and
also
a
longtime
member
of
St
Michaels,
and
a
former
member
of
the
Vestry,
which
is
the
governing
board
of
the
St
Michael's
parish.
I
oppose
this
resigning
for
a
number
of
reasons.
AG
The
proposed
building,
which
is
over
twice
as
high
as
the
current
structure
located
on
that
spot,
is
simply
too
tall
for
the
neighborhood.
It
will
dwarf
Saint
Michael's.
It
may
also
interfere
with
the
light
that
reaches
the
buildings
at
St,
Michael's
campus,
and
that
would
impact
the
beautiful
stained
glass
windows
that
are
part
of
our
historic
structure.
AG
Also,
the
setback
is
inadequate
and
a
major
concern
is
the
issue
that
they
want
to
eliminate
that
set
back
in
the
rezone,
which
would
impact
how
big
the
hole
is
that
they're
going
to
have
to
build
to
build
this
structure,
and
this
has
been
one
of
my
greatest
concerns
regarding
the
construction.
Is
this
two
potentially
two
level
Subterranean
garage
and
how
much
deeper
is
that
hole
going
to
be
if
they
have
to
accommodate
the
mechanical
structures?
For
that
building,
this
is
going
to
be
a
big
hole.
AG
A
very
big
hole
and
I
have
wondered
whether
anybody
on
the
staff
or
anybody
who
is
working
for
the
developer
has
considered
the
potential
effects
of
such
a
large
excavation
on
the
structure
and
Foundation
of
St
Michael's
Cathedral
and
the
Tuttle
house,
which
are
both
directly
across
from
this
location.
Both
of
them
are
very
old,
as
Missy
mentioned,
the
cathedral
was
built
in
1902.
It
is
an
unreinforced
masonry
building
and
it
is
questionable
whether
it
could
withstand
some
of
the
types
of
impacts
that
could
happen
during
construction.
AG
There
are
numerous
field
conditions
where
construction
activities
in
an
urban
setting
can
potentially
damage
neighboring
structures.
Deep,
excavation
and
vibrations
such
as
vibration,
vibration
from
pile
driving
can
cause
a
variety
of
damage.
Any
zoning
change
and
any
development
agreement
should
require
that
the
developer
indemnify
St
Michael's
for
any
damage
to
this
Irreplaceable
historic
Cathedral.
AG
There
are
undoubtedly
additional
safeguards
that
could
be
taken
depending
on
soil
stability,
excavation
methods
and
other
factors
that
we
may
not
know
about.
St
Michael's
could
be
very
negatively
impacted
by
rezoning
this
area
to
build
a
structure
that
is
simply
too
large
for
that
lot.
It
is
too
big
for
the
neighborhood
I'm.
H
Going
to
have
to
stop
you
there
Miss
Smith
as
you're
overtime,
but
thank
you
very
much
for
your
your
testimony
tonight.
I
appreciate
it.
Okay.
Is
there
anybody
else
in
the
chambers
who
wishes
to
testify
on?
This
item
looks
like
none,
so
in
that
case
we
will
go
to
online.
Is
there
anybody
on
our
Zoom
meeting
that
would
like
to
testify
and
again
this
is
car
22-18.
H
AD
It's
great
I
just
have
a
few
things
in
considering
the
the
Bank
building
that
is
currently
there
early
on.
As
a
team,
we
did
look
at
keeping
that
building
and
possibly
constructing
the
project
on
the
west.
Half
of
the
parcel
the
building
would
have
to
be
several
stories
taller
in
order
to
have
the
same
viability.
If
we
were
to
do
that,
and
the
proportions
were
wrong
and
not
working
the
floor
plates
were
too
confined
and
it
would
have
required
us
to
go
to
mid-rise
building
codes.
AD
We
have
shared
our
plans
with
shippo
State,
historic
preservation
on
the
demolition
of
the
bank
and
have
worked
with
them
on
ways
that
we
can
preserve
the
the
story
of
the
building.
That's
on
that
site,
because
we
understand
that
that's
important
and
we
are.
We
are
aware
that
the
subject
may
come
up
again
during
the
design
review
process
regarding
parking,
we're
still
studying
the
parking
one
versus
two
floors.
AD
Honestly,
we're
liking
likely
only
going
one
story
down.
We
wanted
to
reserve
the
right,
but
it
is
looking
like
the
40
to
45
parking
stalls
is
more
than
enough
to
meet
the
requirements
for
the
parking
in
that
building.
The
intention
is
to
have
one
to
two
stalls
per
condo
unit
and
the
rest
to
go
to
the
retail
and
office
tenants.
AD
So
specifically,
that
is
being
created
to
keep
people
off
of
parking
on
the
street
and
not
creating
more,
and
we
also
want
to
note
that
the
office
functions
and
probably
most
of
the
retail
functions
and
their
hours
will
be
off
hours
from
the
weekend
uses
that
will
be
occurring
around
the
immediate
area
and
then
that
we
understand
this.
This
application
is
for
a
rezone
and
that,
as
I
mentioned,
the
design
is
still
very
much
in
flux.
AD
This
is
a
very
schematic
we,
we
shared
it
only
to
show
the
the
progress
from
what
was
an
initially
submitted
and
as
we
go
through
the
design
review
process,
we
are.
We
are
definitely
open
to
hearing
comments.
Thank
you.
H
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
with
that.
This
item
is
now
before
the
commission
so
again
set
the
table.
Car
22-18,
a
rezone,
and
we
are
recommending
body
to
council
from
limited
office
to
Central,
dis,
Central,
Business
and
downtown
of
approximately
0.42
acres,
and
with
that
anybody
willing
to
make
a
motion.
Q
N
H
I
I
Sure
I'll
take
it
I
think
you
know
at
its
base,
we're
looking
at
a
site
plan
we're
not
really
looking
at
building
massing
or
or
this
design
in
particular.
Even
but
it's
really
at
the
site
plan
it
takes
up
and
it's
adjacency,
it's
the
it's
the
Zone
and
that's
that's
the
the
fundamental
of
a
little
bit
of
programming.
I
You
know
the
use
is
contained
within
that
development
agreement,
but
from
what
I
can
tell
on
our
kind
of
when
looking
at
the
current
zones
and
then
the
comp
plan,
you
kind
of
overlay
them,
and
this
is
in
that
what
I
kind
of
feel
is
a
bit
of
a
transition
space
zone
right.
I
So
it's
the
downtown
mixed-use
bleeding
from
C5
downtown
design,
review
to
LOD,
and
it's
just
like
it's
in
that
kind
of
transition
zone
and
so
I
think
it's
completely
reasonable
that
that
zone
might
bleed
into
LOD
and
especially
with
the
increasing
of
that
that
kind
of
downtown
boundary
as
well
recently
and
I.
Think
because
of
that,
and
because
you
know
obviously,
there's
still
work
to
be
done
through
design
review
and
and
still
you
know,
figure
out
how
much
parking
is
actually
required.
H
N
I
would
just
Echo
what
commissioner
Moore
said.
You
know
this
is
a
rezone
application,
the
design,
the
parking
everything
that
goes
along
with
that
site
design
will
be
evaluated
at
a
later
time,
and
I
can
assure
you
that
staff
will
make
sure
that
all
the
conditions
are
are
met
per
the
code.
I
think
this
is
an
exciting
project.
You
know,
that's
that's
the
place.
I
got
my
first
home
loan
when
I
first
moved
here
to
Boise
in
the
late
90s.
You
know
it's
a
cool
building.
N
It
really
is,
but
I
understand
that
it
doesn't
fit
and
it
it
is
hard
to
retrofit
a
building
such
as
that
too.
So
I'm
excited
about
this
project.
We
knew
this
was
coming
when
they
amended
the
urban
renewal
District
last
year.
So
we've
known
something
what's
happening
with
this
block
I'm
excited
to
see
what
it
can
be.
N
I
think
what
I'm
seeing
is
ex
you
know
is
something
that
I'm
really
looking
forward
to
I
think
this
extends
downtown
a
little
bit
further.
It
Blends
the
north
North
End
to
downtown
it
increases
density.
N
The
proposed
density
in
order
to
support
the
transit
I'm
excited
to
see
the
curb
Cuts
go
away
off
of
State
Street
and
have
access
to
sort
of
the
alleyway
and
I
just
think
it's
going
to
be
a
nice
addition
and
I
think
the
neighbors
will
ultimately
be
really
pleased
with
it.
So
with
that
I'll
be
supporting
the
motion.
G
D
H
I
will
be
in
support
of
the
motion.
I
think
this
is
a
natural
progression
of
things,
and
this
land,
in
terms
of
even
our
whole
state,
is
some
of
the
most
valuable
that
we
have
and
so
building
up
makes
sense
to
me
and
I'm,
confident
with
the
development
agreement
and
and
all
the
checks
and
balances
that
we
have
in
place.
H
We've
seen
a
number
of
buildings
of
this
size
or
even
larger,
and
so
the
confidence
in
the
construction
process
and
everything
that
goes
into
it
all
the
inspections,
I
think
are
have
been
demonstrated
over
the
last
several
years
in
particular,
and
so
I'm
quite
confident
and
I
agree
that
this
is
an
exciting
project
and
look
forward
to
it.
So
with
a
clerk,
please
call
the
roll
foreign.
H
B
Do
you
got
for
us,
but
I
just
want
to
check
in
we
are
at
9,
30.
I,
think
we're
probably
to
a
point
where
we
should
probably
entertain
deferring,
maybe
our
last
last
two
items
to
next
week's
hearing,
but
I'd
like
to
get
a
little
bit
of
feedback
from
you
all
about
that.
We've
got
four
or
more
to
hear
four
more
on
the
agenda
tonight
we
are
meeting
next
week.
B
So
in
my
mind
we
are
at
9
30
right
now
go
ahead
and
hear
items
six
and
seven
into
four
items.
Eight
and.
B
B
wizard
base
is
that
amenable
to
everybody,
so
we
can
help
get
some
of
these
folks
out
of
here
we're
not
going
to
get
to
them
tonight.
Okay,
all
right!
Well,
having
said
all
that
I'll
I'll
entertain
a
motion
to
defer
those
those
last
two
items.
B
E
H
Oh
good
I
took
a
break
just
for
the
record.
I'll
make
a
motion
that
item
number:
eight
PUD,
22-43
and
item
number
12,
PUD,
22-43n,
CBA
22-26
both
be
deferred
to
our
November
14th
meeting.
B
B
Thank
you
all
for
that
and
then
move
ahead
here
to
item
six
and
then
item
seven.
Let
the
records
show
that
I
will
again
be
recusing
myself
from
both
of
these
items.
As
that
I
am
the
landscape.
Architect
of
record,
for
these
particular
projects
and
I
will
be
handing
off
the
chairmanship
to
commissioner
Danley
again
yeah.
H
Okay,
moving
on
item
number
six
car
22-23,
a
rezone
on
1385
South,
Capitol,
Boulevard
and
CVA
22-28
of
variance
to
encroach
also
at
the
same
address
turn
over
to
staff
Mr
Moser.
Thank.
V
H
V
And
r3dc
to
an
Rod
c
d,
a
that's
a
lot
so
I'll
try
to
or
spell
that
out.
That's
a
residential
office
with
design
review,
and
it's
in
the
Capital
Boulevard
special
designer
view
overlay
with
the
development
agreement.
Zone.
The
software
property
consists
of
two
two
Parcels
separated
by
Lois
Avenue,
a
public
Street.
Please
note
that
the
applicant
has
removed
the
request
for
the
variants
and
we'll
comply
with
all
the
required
setbacks.
V
As
seen
on
this
Slide,
the
requested
Ro
zone
is
compatible
with
the
surrounding
area
due
to
its
proximity
to
downtown
BSU
and
Transit,
as
such
a
high
density
to
a
higher
density,
residential
development
or
or
development.
That,
then,
is
okay
as
such
a
higher
high
density
development
than
what
is
currently
allowed
in
the
C2
and
R3
zones
is
supported
by
blueprint,
Boise
and
encourage
and
and
would
encourage
a
compact,
pedestrian
friendly,
infill
development,
while
still
maintaining
compatibility
with
the
area.
V
The
proposed
Ro
Zone
would
allow
for
a
Max
density
of
87.1
units
per
acre,
which
would
allow
for
the
type
of
dense
residential
development
envisioned
by
blueprint
Boise
and
the
RO
zone
is
intended
to
intended,
specifically
for
residential
office
uses.
In
addition,
it
will
encourage
mixed-use
projects
which
include
and
which
include
a
limited
amount
of
commercial
space
such
as
restaurants
and
Retail.
V
The
request
at
our
zone
is
compatible
with
the
comprehensive
plan,
as
it
is
designates
a
site
mixed
use
on
the
land
use
map
within
which
the
proposed
R
zone
is
allowed
and
anticipated.
The
planning
team
did
receive
a
revised
memo
from
the
public
works,
Solid
Waste
Department,
expressing
concerns
with
the
proposed
Solid
Waste
staging
area
along
Lois
Avenue.
V
It
is
good
to
note
the
these
concerns
now,
since
there
is
a
conceptual
design
and
site
plan
associated
with
the
D.A
and
to
address
this,
the
planning
team
did
include
a
recommended
condition
of
approval
within
the
da
that
requires
the
applicant
to
comply
with
all
of
and
in
the
entire
public
work,
solid
waste
design
standards.
Ideally,
these
design
issues
will
be
further
addressed
during
the
design
of
your
application
process.
V
Okay,
the
application
before
you
as
noted
is
a
reason
with
the
development
agreement.
The
applicant
intends
to
construct
two
buildings:
a
five
and
six
story:
building
or
six
story
buildings
in
height
for
a
total
of
88
dwelling
units
comprised
of
a
mix
of
apartments
and
about
900
square
feet
of
commercial
on
the
ground
floor
of
the
building
along
Capital
Boulevard.
V
The
the
second
building
off
of
of
off
of
Capital
the
the
ground
floor
would
be
the
then
the
structured
parking,
the
lobby
area,
amenities
and
then
the
upper
floors
would
be
residential
to
ensure
the
active
use
is
along
along
the
street
Frontage
this
and
the
design
standard
as
a
lust
Street
master
plan
had
been
met.
A
DA
has
been
included
with
the
rezone.
The
planning
team
recommends.
The
D.A
include
the
following
conditions
that
are
stated
here
on
the
slide
to
ensure
the
cities
and
neighborhoods
goals
have
been
addressed.
V
V
As
such,
it
is
the
desire
of
the
planning
team
for
the
applicant
to
work
with
with
achg
and
the
city
on
on
the
draft
Pathways
plan,
as
it
is
being
developed
right
now.
I
would
also
note,
as
you
can
see,
I
had
to
have
a
picture
of
of
the
of
the
draft
pan
that
planned
that
achg
just
submitted.
They
do
note
out
a
five
foot
wide
landscape
buffer,
a
long
capital.
V
I
would
note
that
the
city
wants
to
have
a
an
eight
foot,
wide
landscape
buffer
along
Capital
Boulevard,
as
required
by
our
city
Citywide,
or
by
Capital
Boulevard
design
over
the
overview
standards
and
our
general
comprehensive
plan.
V
The
neighborhood
association
and
several
members
of
the
public
have
expressed
concerns
with
the
project
in
terms
of
compatibility
and
compliance
with
the
lust
Street
master
plan.
The
compatibility
concerns
are
in
response
to
generally
the
size
and
mass
of
the
building
with
which
the
public
contends
is
not
consistent
with
the
character
of
The,
Lost,
Street,
neighborhood
and
or
Capitol
Boulevard
I
would
say
at
the
comprehensive
plan
anticipates
high
density
and
more
intense
uses,
given
besides
proximity
to
downtown
BSU
and
Transit.
V
The
other
concerns
is
that
the
project
does
not
provide
enough
storefront
commercial
and
it
is
basically
and
another
student
housing
project.
There's
a
number
of
student
housing
projects
already
located
within
the
lust
Street
neighborhood
to
address
this
I
would
note
that
the
D.A
requires
a
minimum
of
40
percent
of
the
street
Frontage
be
comprised
of
active
uses
and
the
applicant
is
proposing
I
believe
53
percent
of
active
use
is
a
lot
for
the
building
fronting
capital.
V
V
H
Thank
you,
Mr
Moser,
next,
up
we'll
hear
from
the
applicant
Mr
Trevor
is
a
sure.
That's
not
Trevor
sure,
okay,.
AH
AF
AH
Great,
so
with
me
this
evening,
our
representatives
of
the
project
team,
including
the
and
sea
of
Interest
Who,
will
develop
own
and
operate
this
project.
Sea
Of
Interest
has
experience
developing
high
quality
projects
across
the
country
and
with
modern
amenities,
creating
a
superior
resident
experience
and
a
few
examples
are
shown
here.
AH
City
of
interest
is
currently
in
the
process
of
developing
the
917
Lusk
project
on
the
Green
Belt,
just
north
of
this
site.
Bd
bde
architecture
is
the
architect
for
the
project
and
they
have
focused
on
building
this
typology
and
the
multi-family
market
for
over
25
years.
Also
with
us
tonight
who
can
answer,
questions
is
Jason
Dinsmore
with
the
land
group
who
is
doing
the
site
design.
AH
We
have
really
appreciated
working
with
David
on
this
project
and
we
are
in
full
agreement
with
staff's
recommended
conditions
of
approval,
as
David
modified
this
evening
on
the
multi-use
pathway.
We
are
also
confident
that
we
will
comply
with
the
city's
Solid
Waste
requirements
here
and
we'll
continue
to
coordinate
with
them
on
their
on
their
needs,
as
David
explained
we're
seeking
a
rezone
to
ro
to
allow
the
construction
of
88
multi-family
housing
units
and
amenity
space
with
ground
floor,
commercial,
Podium,
parking
and
Street
improvements
on
this
vicinity
map.
AH
Currently,
the
site
includes
the
Elmer's,
Diner
and
surface
parking.
This
first
slide
shows
views
of
the
current
surface
parking
on
the
interior
lot,
those
proposed
for
building
a
and
looking
down
lowest,
where
you
can
see
surface
parking
on
both
Lots.
These
pictures
illustrate
how
underutilized
this
key
infill
site
is.
Currently,
this
slide
shows
a
lot
with
Elmer's
dining
building
and
additional
surface
parking.
It
also
illustrates
some
of
the
unique
and
constraining
features
of
the
site
in
the
lower
left
picture.
AH
You
can
see
a
landscaped
area
between
the
building
and
the
street,
which
is
actually
an
extra
parcel
of
land
owned
by
achd
and
is
not
part
of
the
project
site.
Also
in
the
lower
right
picture,
you
can
see
existing
landscaping,
that's
within
the
achd
parcel
and
on
our
site
that
straddles
the
bub
Canal
easement
that
runs
along
the
entire
north
side
of
the
project.
You
can
also
see
the
retaining
wall
and
fencing
there
that
and
below
that
sidewalk.
AH
AH
Overall,
the
project
site
consists
of
the
two
buildings
on
the
two
Associated
parcels
for
a
total
of
88
units,
39
on
the
interior
side
and
49
on
the
front.
The
unit
mix
is
61
small
farm
format,
that's
Studios
through
two
bedrooms
and
39
large
format.
This
mix
illustrates
that
this
project
is
specifically
designed
to
cater
to
both
non-students
and
students,
who
are
looking
for
amenitized
housing
with
walking
access
to
work
or
school,
commercial
businesses,
Transit
access
and
Recreation.
It
is
not
designed
to
be
a
student
housing
project
by
itself.
AH
Residential
amenities
in
the
building
include
a
lobby
with
seating
and
Business
Center
package
room
breakfast
area,
state
of
the
art,
fitness
center
bike,
storage
and
repair
station
Upper
floors
include
an
exterior
Courtyard
with
Spa
fire
pit
and
Clubhouse
with
lounge.
The
fourth
floor
features
a
Sky
Lounge
with
an
exterior
Terrace
facing
capital
building
a
also
has
amenities
with
the
lobby
and
lounge
and
bike
storage
on
level.
One.
AH
The
project
includes
approximately
900
square
feet
of
retail
to
benefit
the
neighborhood
as
a
whole,
reflecting
an
increase,
as
requested
by
staff
structured
parking
with
modern
vehicle
stackers
efficiently
hides
vehicles
from
the
streets.
The
project
will
increase
the
amount
of
enclosed
bike
storage.
Based
on
the
comments
from
Boise
Police
to
double
the
proposed
enclosed
storage,
the
street
frontages
will
be
improved
with
new
and
improved
sidewalks
in
alignment
with
the
general
lustrate
master
plan
requirements.
Both
buildings
offer
exterior
patio
seating
that
will
serve
the
General
Public.
AH
AH
Some
additional
views,
the
project
is
aligned
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
It
is
the
future
land
use
map
designates
this
area
as
mixed
use,
where
the
city
has
already
determined
that
Ro
is
an
appropriate
Zone
and
that
housing
and
Commercial
are
appropriate
land
uses.
The
site
is
also
within
a
Neighborhood
Activity
Center,
where
the
comp
plan
encourages
high
density
residential.
AH
The
project
is
also
consistent
with
the
Lusk
Street
area
master
plan
building
a
the
interior
lot
is
in
a
multi-family
Hotel
sub
District
this
plant.
The
plan
states
that
hotels
and
residential
exist
there
now
and
this
area
is
appropriate
for
development
and
Redevelopment
in
high
density.
Residential
use.
Building
B
along
capital
is
in
the
retail
District.
The
plan
notes
that
the
blocks,
front
and
capital
are
currently
underutilized
and
should
be
promoted
for
dense
mixed
use,
including
retail
and
urban
housing
uses.
AH
Specifically,
the
plan
supports
housing
opportunities
on
the
upper
floors
and
the
retail
District
to
provide
diverse
Urban
housing
in
a
walkable
neighborhood.
The
project
is
consistent
with
these
sub-districts,
with
high
density,
residential
and
building
a
and
the
interior.
Lot
and
a
mixed
use
on
the
ground
floor
and
facing
Capital
activated
with
commercial
and
residential
amenities
with
storefront
glazing
and
the
upper
floors
in
urban
housing.
AH
They
meet
the
transportation
goals
in
the
Lusk
area,
master
plan
providing
an
enhanced
pedestrian
environment
with
wide
sidewalk,
shade,
seating,
Street,
trees,
Street
lighting
and
parallel
street
parking.
This
project
will
add
13
on-street
parking
spaces
where
currently
only
six
exist
on
Street
parking
goals
are
also
met
within
the
plan,
providing
that
on
street
parking,
encouraging
surface
slots
to
transition
to
New
Uses,
locating
parking
within
structures
and
encouraging
parking
reductions
based
on
proximity
to
walkable
environments.
AH
These
are
all
goals
within
the
lust
Street
master
plan
that
are
enhanced
by
this
project,
and
we
appreciate
staff's
recognition
of
that
in
support
of
the
project.
For
that
reason,
for
those
reasons
and
some,
the
project
proposes
to
redevelop
and
underutilize
site,
including
extensive
surface
parking
with
a
mix
of
compact
Urban
housing
with
great
amenities,
structured
parking,
streetscape
improvements,
ground
floor,
retail,
public
Plaza
spaces,
all
walkable
to
area
businesses
and
employers.
The
requested
are,
a
zoning,
is
conditioned
by
the
D.A,
ensures
the
use
is
compatible
with
surrounding
properties
and
the
goals
of
your
plans.
H
Thank
you,
Miss
Nelson,
okay,
next
up,
neighborhood
association,
Kylie
Bowlin
and
that's
I'm,
gonna
guess
not
Kylie.
AI
And
I'm,
with
the
less
District
neighborhood
association,
our
goal
is
here
just
to
clearly
Define
that
the
project
proposed
as
presented
is
student
housing,
and
by
that
we
mean
that
the
developers
admitted
attention
to
rent
out
the
units
by
the
bedroom
and
not
the
total
unit
itself.
AI
Now
to
answer
the
question
is
rezoning
to
allow
for
even
more
student
co-housing
fit
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
neighborhood
master
plan,
discuss,
project
deficiencies,
place
and
placement
of
dumpsters
Public,
Safety
and
Street
section
design
development
proposals
require
defensible
arguments
that
the
replacement
Zone
in
the
project
is
an
improvement
from
the
currently
planned
zone.
They
also
require
adherence
to
all
codes,
comprehensive
plans
and
neighborhood
plans.
Our
goal
is
to
prove
that
the
zone
changes
do
not
improve
the
overall
well-being
of
the
neighborhood,
as
well
as
not
complying
with
the
city
of
Boise's
comprehensive
plan.
AI
Unless
District
or
less
Street
area
master
plan.
Foreign
student
housing
is
not
currently
designed
in
the
city's
municipal
code.
However,
it
will
be
better
to
find
in
the
new
zoning
code
rewrite
as
co-housing,
and
that
is
a
residential
building
that
contains
five
or
more
individual
sleeping
units
where
each
unit
is
designed
for
occupancy
by
one
or
two
individuals.
That
is
why
they
are
trying
to
develop
these
now
rather
than
later.
AI
In
the
planners
project
reports,
the
technical
memorandum
provided
by
Keller
Associates
for
the
traffic
study,
specifically
references
to
88
units
by
Capitol
Boulevard
as
referenced
by
car
22-23
and
the
34
units
on
the
point
street
car
22-19
as
student
apartments
and
student
housing,
the
basis
of
the
traffic
study
utilized
ite
code,
226,
off-campus
student
Apartments
mid-rise.
AI
This
is
in
the
project
report
in
Pages,
1920
and
21
of
car
22-23,
also
Pages,
11,
12
and
13.
for
car
22-19.
AI
The
traffic
study
is
required
documentation
to
achieve
the
requested
approval
if
the
study
is
used
to
obtain
the
approval
the
definitions
contained
within
it
shall
also
be
used
to
define
the
project
itself.
Also.
This,
furthermore,
declares
that
the
original
tension
for
this
development
was
student
housing
that
they
noticed
in
the
comprehensive
plan
and
the
lust
Street
area
master
plan
that
they
just
basically
relabeled.
It.
AI
AI
AI
AI
The
statute
for
housing
choices
is
very
important,
as
we
have
clearly
proven
that
there
is
not
a
variety
of
choices
here.
You
will
also
see
that
the
trash
enclosures
were
designed
within
the
street
right-of-way.
This
development
were
properly
designed.
You
can
see
that
it
would
not
fulfill
the
requirements
necessary
for
approval.
However,
that
has
been
discussed
here
already,
so
we
can
move
on
from
that.
AI
Some
apartment
items
for
the
LA
Street
master
plan
that
are
not
being
adhered
to
in
this
proposal
is
that
student
housing
should
not
be
the
sole
form
of
housing
which
will
overwhelm
the
area
with
a
single
demographic
proposal
should
include
dense
mixed
use,
development,
including
office,
retail
education
technology
and
urban
housing
uses
and
should
reflect
the
dignity
or
the
designation
of
the
Capital
Boulevard
corridor.
AI
AI
The
land
use
map
on
page
8
of
the
streets
lust
Street
master
plan
should
inform
new
development
as
intended.
Therefore,
the
entirety
of
car,
22-19
and.
AI
AI
AI
Okay,
my
screen
is
gone,
we're
good
here,
some
more
student
housing.
You
can
basically
just
see
here
that
these
developments
kind
of
just
take
away
the
interaction
for
to
bring
people
into
the
less
District
neighborhood
Association.
AI
You
can
also
see
Greenbelt
frontages.
Can
we
get
the
screen
back
up
here.
AI
All
right,
I
can
see
the
regrettably
the
green
belt
Frontage
has
been
used
for
parking.
We
were
getting
left
behind
by
Garden
City
in
Greenbelt
activation
sea
Adventures
proposal
right
next
door
to
that
one
also
we'll
be
developing
parking
along
the
green
belt
as
well,
and
that
is
the
project
that
is
917
South
lest
Street,
that
is
under
construction
right
now,
here's
more
of
the
activation
we
would
be
looking
for
as
businesses
along
the
street.
These
are
businesses
along
Lapointe,
Street
and
Le
Street.
AI
Then,
in
conclusion,
the
proposal
fails
to
provide
a
variety
of
multi-family
housing
by
continuing
a
per
bedroom
model
proposal
identifies
itself
as
student
apartments
and
student
housing,
creating
a
lack
of
housing
options
and
overwhelming
the
neighborhood
with
a
single
housing
type.
Ldna
encourages
the
development
that
promotes
diversity,
as
well
as
opportunities
for
residents
of
a
variety
of
incomes.
AI
This
proposal
violates
the
multiple
comprehensive
plan,
statutes
that
seek
to
maintain
healthy
community
and
smart
growth
proposal
violates
multiple
illustri
master
plan
directives,
such
as
a
variety
of
housing,
Street,
typologies
like
and
by
construction.
The
trash
enclosures
we'll
move
on
from
that
proposal
fails
to
validate
why
more
student
housing
is
an
important
sorry.
The
proposal
fails
to
validate
why
more
student
housing
is
an
improvement
over
the
current
zoning
designations.
AI
H
All
right,
thank
you
very
much
so
with
that
we're
going
to
turn
it
over
to
questions
from
the
commission.
As
a
reminder,
car
22-23
rezone
on
1385
Capitol
Boulevard,
along
with
the
develop
or
the
design,
the
try
that
again
development
agreement
and
the
potential
change
that
was
cited
by
Mr
Moser
to
some
of
the
the
terms
and
conditions
in
the
staff
report,
questions
Mr.
I
D
I
I
think
this
is
one
of
the
the
main
issues
at
play.
Here
is
just
commercial
like
ground
activation,
I,
guess,
and
so
the
the
way
this
reads
is
the
minimum
of
40
of
building
fees.
Combine
linear
frontages
along
Capital,
Boulevard
and
Yale
Avenue
shall
be
utilized
for
commercial
retail
uses,
which
may
include
the
residential
buildings
interest
lobby
with
shared
Public
Access
commercial
activities
such
as
coffee
shop
and
bicycle
amenity
and
fitness
areas
for
any
street,
so
I
guess
the
intent
of
that
claws
right
there
is.
V
V
That's
the
intent.
Okay,.
I
G
Moon,
obviously,
the
frictions
between
is
this
student
housing
or
not.
So
what
I
heard
I
think
was
a
rental
by
bedroom.
It
was
that
from
the
neighbors
or
from
staff.
V
Mr
chair
members
of
the
commission,
I
think
the
co-housing
discussion
or
brought
up
was
brought
up
by
the
neighborhood
association.
Our
current
code
does
not
have
a
definition
of
that,
although
the
code
rewrite
that
we're
working
on
would
probably
include
something
like
that,
but
that
was
brought
up
by
the
neighborhood
association.
G
Right
so
a
question
for
staff,
then
Mr
chair,
yeah,
the
the
preponderance
of
a
four
and
five
bedroom
rental
apartments
in
the
city
is
pretty
small,
correct.
V
Mr
chair
members
of
commission,
most
Apartments
that
you
see
come
through
here
are
usually
are
between
two
to
three
bedroom
units
so
to
get
a
five
bedroom
units
or
four,
it's
not
common,
correct.
E
H
AA
H
V
Chair
members
of
commission,
the
original
application
had
a
the
the
the
the
the
amount
of
commercial
that
was
being
proposed
was
500
through
discussion
with
the
applicant
they've,
upped
it
to
900..
H
Okay,
great
Mr
Mozart
a
little
bit
of
a
on
the
spot
question.
I
know
if
you
don't
have
an
answer,
it's
okay,
but
do
we
have
any
idea
of
the
approximate
square
footage
of
the
existing
commercial,
the
Elmer's
in
particular?
That's
there
now.
V
H
Great
I'll
be
waiting
with
baited
breath
in
the
meantime,
I
guess.
Another
question
would
be
this
Fitness
area
I'm,
assuming
again
based
on
commissioner
Moore's
question
and
your
response.
It
sounds
as
though
that
Fitness
area
is
not
necessarily
a
potential
public
or
membership
type
of
an
area.
It's
it's
exclusive
to
the
tenants
of
the
building.
Mr.
H
H
V
Mr
Chairman's,
commission,
the
the
the
right-of-way
abutting
along
Capital
Boulevard
in
front
of
this
parcel,
is,
is
a
little
bit
large
compared
to
the
partial
to
the
north
and
that's
owned
by
the
highway
district.
V
The
master
plan
or
the
draft
pathway
plan
that
the
highway
district
put
out
had
a
five-foot
landscape
offer
on
that
draft
plan.
We
want
eight
feet
as
a
minimum
and
our
Capital
Boulevard
design
overlay
standards
require
an
age
here
that
can
be
negotiated.
Hopefully
in
talk
to
the
highway
district
to
get
an
eight,
but
we
want
eight
okay.
G
I'm
back
to
this
friction
regarding
student
housing.
Is
there
a?
Is
there
a
way
that
this
that
the
city
that
we,
the
city,
can
can
assure
the
neighborhood
that
the
comprehensive
plan
goals
of
the
Lusk
area,
I.E
Urban,
diverse
versus
student
predominant,
can
be
resolved.
V
Mr
chair
members,
commissioner
I
think
it's
difficult
to
tell
a
company
who
they
can
and
can't
at
least
do
I
mean
you
maybe
could
add
a
recommended
condition
of
approval
to
the
D.A
that
says
co-housing
would
be
prohibited,
were
they
renting
out
individual
units
or
individual
bedrooms,
but
you
can't
tell
who
they
can
and
can't
rent
to
that.
That
would
be
prohibited
as
a
follow-up.
The
Elmer's
is
544
square
feet.
H
I'm
quickly
trying
to
go
through
the
traffic
impact
study
that
Keller
did
and
I
guess.
This
would
be
a
question
of
Miss
Nelson.
So
then,
if
the
claim
and
I
just
didn't
catch
this
and
is
that
in
the
traffic
study,
we're
referring
to
encoding
the
the
trip
generation
of
the
building
to
student
housing
of
some
sort
and
we're
claiming
it's
not
and
then
to
commissioner
Mooney's
point
this
rub:
can
you
kind
of
talk
a
little
bit
about
that
I
didn't
catch
it
that's
actually
stated
in
here:
can
we
clarify
that.
AH
AH
What
the
use
is
and,
as
was
noted,
your
zoning
code
currently
doesn't
differentiate
that,
but,
as
a
matter
of
function,
you
know
traditional
student
housing
projects
would
be
large
format,
only
four
and
five
bedrooms
that
then
they
would
be
rented
by
the
bedroom,
then,
and
and
then,
and
actually
in
that
format,
provide
a
great
service
to
students
who
are
not
currently
finding
enough
housing
at
BSU
and
actually
create
more
affordability.
Here,
this
project
is
not
doing
only
large
format.
AH
In
fact,
they
have
the
majority
at
61
percent
in
small
format,
and
that
has
been
partly
an
evolution
from
feedback
from
the
neighborhood
association
and
staff
and
trying
to
accommodate
what
can
fit
well
in
this
building
to
provide
a
mix,
and
so
there
will
be
a
mix
of
housing
units.
The
studio
one
bedroom
and
two
bedroom
are
all
in
that
small
format:
category
that
yes
may
be
rented
by
students
or
also
provide
great
market
rate
housing
for
non-students
and
I.
AH
Think
one
more
point
to
keep
in
mind
as
you're
thinking
about
that
differentiation
I
mean
the
the
city
of
interest,
will
rent
the
unit
by
the
unit
or
the
bedroom
depending
on
what's
desired
by
the
tenant.
They
don't
screen
people
that
would
be
it
would
violate
Fair
Housing
Act
to
say:
are
you
a
student?
We
only
take
students
right.
They
they
will
rent
this
as
the
market
presents
itself
and
it's
the
market
that
really
drives
those
through
the
mix
of
housing.
G
Yeah
that
helps
for
sure
Mr
chair
could
I
follow
up
on
that.
Please
go
right
ahead,
so
I
guess
this
is
for
the
neighborhood,
then.
So
that's
a
compelling
argument
for
Ms
Nelson
regarding
small
format
units.
So
your
number
77
student
housing
in
the
Lusk
area,
based
on
the
accommodations
that
the
applicant
has
made
it
sounds
like
the
small
format
units
versus
the
larger
four
and
five
bedroom
units.
What
would
that
number
be?
If
you
looked
at
that?
It's
not
77,
it's
gonna
be
something
less
than
that.
It
sounds
like.
AI
Of
total
student
housing
in
the
area,
I
think
that
slide
stipulated
that
we
currently
are
already
at
74
percent
of
student
housing
on
that
one.
So
no
more
student
housing
at
all
in
that
area.
We
as
a
neighborhood
association,
do
not
want
to
dictate
who
they
rent
to
at
all.
AI
It's
mostly
just
the
aspect
of
them,
renting
it
out
per
bedroom,
and
that
would
be
the
large-scale
ones,
so
they
have
coalesced
and
added
more
small
units
residences
and
that's
fine,
but
all
of
the
larger
scale
units
will
be
rented
out
per
bedroom,
and
that
does
not
come
from
us.
As
stated
by
the
staff
that
came
from
our
discussions
with
the
developer.
I
I
I
think
that
kind
of,
in
my
mind,
misses
a
little
bit
the
intent
of
activation
to
some
extent
because
it
doesn't
contribute
to
the
neighborhood
quite
as
much
and
so
I'm
thinking
about
the
biggest
one.
That
pops
into
my
mind
is
the
Fowler.
Where
you
have
Form
and
Function
you
have
the
Wilder
and
I
mean
I've
been
to
both
of
those
countless
times.
So
you
know
that
kind
of
brings
people
to
that
neighborhood
and
I'm
thinking
about
you
know
some
of
the
retail
spaces
that
are
labeled
on
the
plan.
I
AH
Thank
you
chairman,
commissioner
Moore.
Absolutely
the
applicant
intends
and
is
willing
to
be
committed
to
providing
that
900
square
foot
of
retail.
AH
The
additional
square
footage
to
meet
the
40
was
included
was
intended
to
include
that
additional
activation
to
make
sure
that
those
spaces
are
activated
architecturally
and
connected
to
the
outdoor
plazas
and
all
the
things
that
are
designed
to
do
to
create
that
pedestrian,
active
experience
and
the
visual
from
Capital,
but
we're
we're
not
planning
to
get
away
at
all
from
that
900
square
feet
from
the
retail,
so
that
we
can
commit
to
that.
Thank
you.
H
Okay
with
that,
we
will
go
ahead
and
open
it
up
to
public
testimony.
I
have
no
sign-in
sheet,
and
so,
if
anybody's
in
the
chamber
who
wishes
to
testify
now
is
the
time
to
do
so.
No
one's
moving
going
once
going
twice:
okay,
anybody
who's
online,
who
might
be
joining
us
who
wishes
to
testify
on
this
item?
Item
number
six
car.
AH
Thank
you,
chairman
Commissioners.
Just
look
at
my
notes,
I
guess
a
couple
quick
items:
one
there
was
testimony
from
the
neighborhood
that
the
917
lust
Street
project,
that's
also
being
developed
by
sea
Adventures
has
parking
along
the
green
belt
that
that's
not
the
case.
They
have
an
outdoor
amenity
area
with
dog
run
there,
there's
no
parking
there
and
and
the
design
and
architecture
here
has
been
really
thoughtfully,
planned
out
with
the
neighborhood
as
well
and
and
actually
really
appreciate
their
their
feedback.
AH
H
I
Right
I'll
try
this
so
I
move
that
we
recommend
approval
of
cir
22-23
with
the
terms
and
conditions
stated
and
amended
in
the
the
late
correspondence
and
with
a
revised
development
agreement
item
4E
to
remove
the
May
to
read,
which
include
the
residential
buildings
in
trips.
Lobby.
I
I
Yeah
I
I
live
in
the
BSU
area
and
I
actually
have
a
one
of
the
a
similar
projects
going
under
construction.
Just
a
couple
blocks
up
the
street
from
me,
so
I
do
understand
the
Lost
districts
position
that
they're
in
and
I
know
that
retail
really
can
help
to
activate
those
things.
I
think
the
mix
of
unit
types
is
unique
for
a
product
like
this
I've
lived
in
something
kind
of
similar,
but
they
were
all
five
bedroom
single.
I
With
their
own
bathroom-
and
this
is
different
than
that-
which
is
kind
of
exciting-
to
see
something
a
little
bit
different
and
just
the
addition
of
retail
I
mean
you
showed
images
of
Lost,
Grove
and
Dawson
Taylor
and
just
thinking
about
the
Fowler
and
how
to
kind
of
bring
some
of
that
retail
back
in
and
I
think
this
can
start
to
achieve
that.
Maybe
start
to
change
that
typology.
Just
a
little
bit
foreign.
G
Thanks
to
the
applicant
for
listening
to
the
neighbors,
it
sounds
like
the
small
format
was
helpful
and,
and
hopefully
that's
we'll
resolve
some
of
the
concerns
of
the
neighborhood.
E
H
As
a
you
know,
an
incredibly
important
entrance
and
exit
into
and
out
of
downtown
and
the
loss
of
I
mean
you're,
taking
it
basically
less
than
20
percent
of
what
exists
there
today
and
it's
not
just
the
retail
space.
It's
also
jobs,
There's
jobs
that
come
along
with
every
one
of
those
square
footage
to
our
feet
and
so
to
take
that,
from
from
that,
large
down
to
900
is
concerning
to
me.
I
would
like
to
I
wish.
H
We
would
have
seen
a
larger
footprint
on
the
the
floor
level
of
of
at
least
opportunity
to
try
and
replace
some
of
that
square
footage.
So
I'm
I'm
torn
on
that,
but
I
also
understand,
then
that
the
market,
where
it
is
right
now
is
that
housing
is
a
critical
and
and
Retail
and
Commercial
is
changing
quickly.
We,
you
know
we're
buying
things
from
other
places
and
not
brick
and
mortar,
so
those
that
the
general
forces
at
work
are
are
even
bigger
than
this.
So.
D
H
Nope,
okay,
all
right!
Well
with
that.
Let's
go
ahead
and-
and
we
have
a
motion
on
the
floor
by
commissioner
Moore
and
seconded
by
commissioner
Mooney-
to
approve
a
recommend
approval
to
car
22-23
with
the
terms
and
conditions
in
the
staff
Report,
with
the
amended
language
that
was
presented
to
us
by
Mr
Moser
regarding
the
pathway,
as
well
as
the
removal
or
I
should
say,
change,
I
think
it
was
from
May
to
shall
is
that
what.
AA
D
C
D
H
H
Okay,
so
we
one
I
think
which
is
what
we
we
discussed
a
bit
I
think
it's
probably
time
that
we
pull
the
plug.
It's
10,
30,
almost
and
I
think
an
excellent
point
by
Commish
by
Miss
Nelson
about
the
daylight
savings,
or
some
issues
going
on.
I
know
up
here
and
it's
a
late
night
so,
but
we
also
have
our
prevailing.
Commissioner,
our
chairman
in
the
back
I,
know
it's
kind
of
been
discussed,
but
do
you
want
to
come
up
or
you
agree
from
a
distance?
We?
H
H
G
Just
I
move:
we
defer
cr2219
to
next
week's
agenda,
14
November.
Second,
okay,.