City Council - Regular Meeting

very helpful. But I'm I'm actually Take a second. Okay.

So it's I could still it's in too. How many good? I don't know. relationship.

Are you answer? Remember that.

Okay. Amen. Thank you. My hand is pushed. I won't be here. Excuse me.

My How is it? Chrome.

Good evening. Welcome. Thanks for joining us. Um the mayor is absent tonight so I will be um filling in for her. We will start with an invocation which we recognize with a moment of silence and then please join us for the pledge of allegiance. flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God,

indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Will the clerk please call the role? Corus here. Halle Burton. Morales here. Nash here. Dead here. Will here by president when absent. Um first up we have a request for approval of the minutes. Madame Mayor, I request approval for city council minutes and on work session for May 5th and regular evening meeting on May 5th. I'm taking that as a motion to approve the minutes. Approved. Do we have a second? Second. Great. We have a motion and a second. Um if there's no discussion, will the clerk please call the vote? Nash, yes. Dead, yes.

Willis, yes. Corus, yes. Morales, yes.

All in favor? Motion carries. Next up, we have um a revised findings for C25-3 and SUB25-12. Um, welcome Jesse is up to tell us more. Good evening, madame mayor and council members. Uh this item is C 253 and SUB 2512 uh a revised reason for decision. Um so this uh project is located on State Street. On April 14th, uh the council denied the reszone from R1A to R2 and on the 28th council denied the subdivision SUV uh 2512. Uh the reasons are outlined in further detail in your packet, but uh just a general synopsis of the discussion was that the mobility network proposed was not compatible with surrounding development. There's no ability to turn east on the state street as proposed. The traffic impacts uh on the neighborhood would be uh detrimental in that the safety concerns for vehicles and pedestrians with no additional mitigation. Uh, so tonight we need an action to either accept the revised reason for decision or modify the reason for decision that was presented. Thank you, Jesse. Madame Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to approve to accept the uh revised findings for CR25-00003 and SGB 25-000012. We need a second. Madame Mayor, I was not present for the approval of C25-00003.

Am I okay to make the motion? Um, you can make the motion to your second. You make the second and um if you and I know council member Will also was not present for that. So, if you both wanted to abstain but stay up here, the rest of us can vote and I think that should be fine. Madame Mayor, I'll second. Great. Thank you, Council Member Morales. Um, if there's no further discussion, will the clerk please call the vote? Nash, no. Yes. Will abstain. Coralus, yes. Morales, same. Two in favor, one opposed. Motion carries.

Thank you. Okay. Next up, we have the consent agenda. Madame Mayor, I move to approve um the items that are listed and starred on the consent agenda.

I'm going to need a second. Second. Great. We have a motion and a second. If there's no discussion, will the clerk please call the vote? Nash, yes. D, yes. Willis, yes. Corus, yes. Morales, yes. All in favor favor. Motion carries.

All right. Um we have um one ordinate two ordinances on second reading. Madame Mayor, I ask unanimous consent that all ordinances on the second reading calendar be read by number and title only and filed for third reading calendar. Without objection or 12-26, an ordinance C25-000024 for property located at 9145 South Federal Way annexing 1.05 acres of certain lands and territory situated in Ed County, Idaho, adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the city of Boisee City. Establishing and determining the land use classification of said 1.05 05 acres as I-1 light industrial establishing and determining the sensitive lands overlay district of set acres. Setting forth a reason statement in support of such annexation and zone change. Directing the city engineer at the lodge and file a legal description and map for said annex lands and territory. Providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed the ada county auditor, the ada county treasurer, the ada county assessor, the ada county recorder and ID tax commission. providing that a copy of said legal description and map of said annex lands and territory be recorded with the ad county reporter and filed with the ad county assessor and the state tax commission as required by law and providing effective date o-13-26 an ordinance zoa25-00001 amending the seringa valley specific plan 2016 spo3 as implemented by title 11 chapter 7 section 3 to establish the minimum square footage of commercial space within the village center subdist and providing an effective date.

Madame Mayor, I move that uh further reading of um ordinance 14-26 be dispensed with and the record reflected has been read in that has been read the third time in full. Okay, pardon me.

Okay, sorry. We're going to scratch that. We have um three four ordinances on first, second, and third reading tonight, and we'll read those separately. So, madam mayor, I move that all rules um of the council interfering with immediate consideration of ordinance 1426 be suspended. That the portion of Idaho code 50-92 requiring an ordinance to be read on three different days, twice by title, and once in full, be dispensed with that the record show it has been read the third time in full. in favor of dispensing with the rule. If not, move to Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Yeah. Sorry. Go ahead. Please read. Do you want to do all four or you need a second? Oh, without objection. No. Um, after the reading, we'll go for approval. 144-26, an ordinance repealing Boyisey City Code, Title 3, Chapter 22, short-term rentals, providing for a waiver of the reading rules, and providing effective date. Madame Mayor, I move that ordinance 14-26 be approved without objection. Oh, I think we have to vote on this one. Second. Second. Give it to Council Member Wels.

Great. Uh, without discussion, if there's no discussion, will the clerk please call the vote? Ash, yes. S, yes. Will, yes. Horus, yes. Morales, yes. All in favor? Motion carries. We have three more to go, so this is going to get more smooth, I think. Yeah. Madame Mayor, I move that the rules of the council interfering with the immediate consideration of ordinance 15-26 be suspended. that the portions of Idaho Code 50-902 requiring an ordinance to be read on three different days, twice by title and once in full, be dispensed with, that the record show it has been read the third time in full. Without objection,

15-26, an ordinance repealing Boyisey City Code, Title 3, Chapter 8, Auctions and Auctioneers, providing for a waiver of the reading rules, and providing an effective date. And madame mayor, um I move that ordinance 15-26 be approved. Second, will the clerk please call the vote? Nash, yes. Then yes. Willis, yes. Corus, yes. Yes. All in favor, motion carries.

And madame mayor, um I move that all rules the council interfering with immediate consideration of ordinance 16-26 be suspended. that the portion of Idaho Code 50-92 requiring an ordinance to be read on three different days, twice by title and once in full, be dispensed with that the record show it has been read the third time in full. Without objection, I-16-26, an ordinance repealing Boyisey City Code, Title 3, Chapter 8, Article A, Pond Brokers and Jewelry Auctions, providing for a waiver of the reading rules and providing effective date. Madame Mayor, I move that ordinance 16.26 be approved. Second. Will the clerk please call the vote? Nash, yes.

Ste, yes. Willis, yes. Corus, yes. Morales, yes. All in favor, motion carries. Okay. And last one. Madame Mayor, I move that all rules of the council interfering with immediate consideration of ordinance 17-26 be suspended and that the portions of Idaho code 50-902 requiring ordinance to be read on three different days, twice by title and once in full be dispensed with that the record show it has been read the third time in full. Without objection, 17-26, an ordinance repealing Boyisey City Code, Title 3, Chapter 1, Article B, going out of business, closing out sales, providing for a waiver of the reading rules, and providing an effective date. Madame Mayor, I move that ordinance 17-26 be approved.

Second. Uh, will the clerk please call the vote? N yes. Ste, yes. Will, yes. Horus, yes. Morales, yes. All in favor? Motion carries.

Great. Thank you. Uh moving into subdivisions, we first up have the Crona town home subdivision SCB2-82 at uh 1504 Manito Avenue. Madame Mayor and council members, uh item for you is SUB 2582. As you said, this is a preliminary and final plat for residential subdivision comprised of three buildable lots on 0.25 25 acres located at 1504 Manitu Avenue in the R2 zone. The applicant proposes to remove the existing home and construct three town homes which will be reviewed under a subsequent application. There are currently no sidewalks along either Manitou or Highland and a condition of approval will require 10-ft detached sidewalks along both street printages as they are both collector roadways. The applicant has submitted updated documents showing the required sidewalks as conditioned um and that's also shown on the screen. There's a large healthy oak tree within the right of way along Manitou and the applicant is proposing to meander the sidewalk around the tree to preserve it within the landscape buffer and both staff and ACD are uh uh in support of this. So in conclusion, the planning and zoning commission recommends approval and I will stand for any questions.

Thank you, Jesse. Any questions for staff? Um okay, then um do we have the applicant here? Taran, hi. Um, are you in agreement with the terms and conditions of the staff report? Great. Let the record reflect that they are. Um, do we have a Would you like to You're welcome to speak if you would like to at this time. You have questions. We're happy to answer. Thank you. I'll let the record reflect that they're here to answer questions if we have them. Um, do we have an a representative from the um Southeast Boise Neighborhood Association with us?

No. Okay. Uh with that then is there anybody here to testify on this item? Okay. Seeing none then um we'll close the public hearing and the item is before the commission. Madame Mayor the council I move to approve the Corona town home subdivision subdivision SUB2-000082 uh boy city preliminary and final plot. Second. Any discussion? Uh, madame mayor, I think this is a really great infill project. Um, you know, more and more we're seeing these smaller infills and, um, they're making good contribution to the city. So, happy to see this. Thank you, Madame Mayor.

Uh, with council member Halle Burton not here, I do want to bring up the tree. Thank you for uh, working staff and the applicant um, working to preserve this tree. It's a beautiful neighborhood. It's in in district 4 and uh, great project. So, thank you. Thank you. Uh, with that, will the clerk please call the vote? Nash. Yes. D. Yes. Willlet. Yes. Coralus. Yes. Morales. Yes. All in favor? Motion carries.

Okay. Next we have SOS26-3. This is the Camp Brown planning sub suburban land track subdivision. Um at 2475 South Beverly Street. Uh request to vacate plat notes. Um and we'll turn it over to staff. Hi ma'am.

Thank you madam mayor. The item before you is a request to vacate two plat notes which delineate setbacks and maximum lot coverage on lots two and six block three of the suburban land tracks unit one uh subdivision on a total of 10.8 acres in an I1 AIO zone industrial light with airport influence area. And I will note that there was a typo that made its way onto the legal description which stated lot 4 rather than lot six in addition to lot 2. This correction will be reflected on a forthcoming resolution for the vacation. Um, interestingly enough though, the same vacation occurred on lot four. The vacation requests are associated with the development of the properties with an industrial development containing warehouses as shown here. The northernmost blue shaded warehouse depicts a future development on lot two. Lot six, which would be directly south of the site plan shown here. Uh just under just below that brown shaded warehouse would be lot six, does not currently have construction plan, but will soon accommodate a a similar warehouse design. Shown here is the subdivision plat recorded in 1972. As you can see, the highlighted plat notes in red conflict with the proposed development. These standards were included to establish in in 1972 were included to establish a uniform development layout amongst these lots. However, with the adoption of the current zoning code, the the site will be subject to improvements such as streetscape, landscaping, and more through design review application. In conclusion, the planning the planning team recommends approval of the request to vacate platted setbacks and maximum lot coverage with respect to lots two and six. And I will stand for any questions.

Thank you, Matt. Um, so next we would hear or is the applicant here, Kent Brown? Hi. Um, are you in agreement with the terms and conditions of the staff report? Great. Let the record reflect that they are. Um, do we have a representative here from the South Cole Neighborhood Association? No. Seeing none. And, uh, is anybody from the public here to testify on this item? No. Okay. Um, then with that, uh, we will close the public hearing and the item is before the the council. Madame Mayor, I move to approve SOS26-00003 Camp Brown Planning Suburban Land Tracks Subdivision, Boyisey City Vacation of the Platinote.

Second. Great. If there's no discussion, will the clerk please call the vote? Nash, yes. Ste, yes. Willis, yes. Corus, yes. Morales, yes. All in favor? Motion carries. Um, okay. Then moving along, we have item number three, which is the Zura town home subdivision number two, SB25-26 um at 3210 West Morris Street. This is the preliminary and final plat for residential subdivision comprised of two buildable lots um in an R2. You again, Matt.

Thanks again, council members. The item before you is a preliminary and final plan for residential subdivision comprised of two buildable lots located at 3210 West Moore Street on 0.1 acres in an R2 residential compact zone. Both of the proposed lots meet the dimensional standards of the R2 zone. The dwellings are will be oriented to the southwest towards more street and individual driveways will provide vehicular access to each lot. The planning director had approved a sidewalk waiver request to allow a 5 foot wide attached sidewalk rather than the typically required uh detach 5 foot wide detached sidewalk. In conclusion, the planning and zoning commission recommended approval of the preliminary and final plots and I will stand for any questions.

Thank you. Um is the applicant present? Hi. Um and are you in agreement with the terms and conditions of the staff report?

Thank you. Let the record reflect that they are. Um, and we have a representative from the neighborhood association. I think this is the west end, Justin Buckley. I don't see him here. Um, okay. And, uh, is there anybody from the public here to testify on this item? No. Okay. Seeing none, um, we will close the public hearing. And that item is before the council. Madame Mayor, um I move to approve the Zura Town Home subdivision number two sub25-000026 of Boisey City uh preliminary and final plot. Second. And if there's no discussion, will the clerk please call the role? Nash, yes. D,

yes. Willis, yes. Coralus, yes. Morales, yes. All in favor? Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. Uh moving into public hearings, we have uh new fees for non-consent toe pursuant to title 3, chapter 16 of the Boise City Code um with OD18-26. And I think we're going to hear from Emily and also Edie or Emily in support with Ed. Welcome. Great to see you guys.

Hi guys. Hi council. Uh today we are returning to the discussion of allowable fees for non-conent towing in our city code that we started in January. The ordinance proposes an update to Boisee City Code title 3 chapter 16. Back in early January, council held a public hearing on an ordinance that would comply with state Idaho state code and also update allowable non-conent towing fees and rates. No action was taken that night, but we did hear the concerns from the towing community and took those seriously. Later in January, council did also take action to align with the legislative changes so that we could remain in compliance with state law. So why are we here at this point? The public hearing in January provided us with opportunity to look more closely at the fee aspect. Since then, there has been a concerted effort by a team of staff members from across the city departments. I'd like to recognize Ed Fritz from BPD, who you're going to hear from shortly, and also Mike Pondino from legal for all their hard work. We integrated feedback from the towing community, guidance from council members at the earlier hearing and considered the impact to Boisee residents at every turn. We have also closely monitored Ada County who is going through a similar process and have worked to align our fees and rates as much as possible for the ease of billing and continuity throughout the valley for the towing businesses. The proposal we are putting forward today reflects these different components to meet the needs of all interested parties to the best of our abilities. I'm going to give it over to Ed now from BPD to give you a deeper dive into the specifics of the proposed changes. Then I'll come back and close us out. Thank you, Madame Mayor, Council Ed Fritz, Boyisey Police Department crime prevention supervisor. I have the benefit of uh supervising our vehicle impound unit which oversees uh abandoned

vehicles to throughout the city. So, it's it's very important for the city for the department to maintain reliable towing services. First and foremost, there's officer safety, public safety. the longer the time an officer is on the side of a road waiting for a tow, waiting for a scene to be cleared, the more detrimental it is to their safety from there. Uh, in addition, clearing roadway for um accidents and and such, making sure that when an accident happens in an intersection along a city street, we're able to effectively clear clear that to not only move traffic as well as safety of the public, safety builders waiting in traffic there. Boisey Police Department has a need for towing services for our investigations, for anything we tow, for for evidence, anything we take into evidence, we have to have a tow to take these vehicles to a safe storage lot to preserve that evidence. And finally, I think just effective government services for the citizens of Boisey, whether it's an abandoned vehicle tow, whether it's a parks tow, whether it's cleaning this, you know, clearing an accident scene, it is expected that the city be able to effectively and efficiently remove these vehicles quickly to return operations to normal. And so there's two types of toes. Uh we'll mainly be focusing on non-consent toes tonight. Consent toes are basically when the owner calls the tow company themselves. The insurance company calls the tow company theelves. That would be nothing different than me calling for my vehicle to be taken to a service and calling the toe company knowing the tow company I want for there. What we're discussing mainly is non-consent toes, which is um either private citizen or mainly government services, law enforcement requesting a tow under their lawful authority without the consent of of the owner. That could be the owner is not present or the owner is not able to be um make a valid decision on whether they should tow the vehicle or or not. Like I said, these are conducted under the the lawful authority either of Idaho State code or boy city code. One reminder for all of these all what conduct all toes that the boy police department conducts are considered non-consent toes either once again pertaining to the boyisey city code or Idaho state code and these could include

arrests and vehicle toes as the removal of that abandoned vehicle toes uh traffic hazards roadway obstructions or as I said previously uh vehicle toes for evidence just to give you kind of the scope of what the the services provided for the city are is about 3,000 toes a from our Boisey police rotation where an officer would be in the field and requesting a tow for one of those main services. That's the service that we described from from there. This does not include um the scope of what the public requires for for this. Idaho state code allows a citizen to remove a a vehicle from private property also without the owner's consent and would be in addition to any condos conducted by by government by the city departments. And of the note on on there, the vast majority of those toes are are light duty vehicle with a few more very few as heavy duty, very few motor homes included in that.

Madam Mayor, Council Wlet, go back to that slide. I'm I'm curious about the police vehicles. Tell me more about that. That is for our fleettos. So that could be anything from an officer being in a traffic accident themselves to a flat tire to the car maybe uh no longer run. out and about from there. And so we have one class, one department, one, excuse me, one company contracted specifically for that that service. Thank you.

So for the boy police toll rotation to be on a rotation, uh you have to first and foremost have a non-consent license with the city. Most of the folks that have a non-consent license will will be on a rotation even though they don't have to from from there. In the process, how an officer gets a tow is when they have that that need, be it on the side of road for an accident, for a DUI, for an abandoned vehicle, they will contact Bob police dispatch and they will call a toe for for them through our list. And it's a a sequential selection where you have 31 companies on there. They start at the top and they work way through the bottom from there. if there's necessary for for that. The first person that accepts a toe gets the toe and then they go on to the next list, the next person list for the next toe and so on and so forth for that. And looking at the number of toes uh per week, that can average out to one to four depending on what's going on, depending on the tour's availability, depending on accidents and everything that's happening throughout the city of Boisee. And so from time to time there are challenges in of obtaining tow services for for the department. we've had specific issues communicate us through officers through dispatch and in the ability to quickly um obtain a tow service for for an officer that once again results in you know impacts to officer safety potentially and roadway clearance and in you know kind of trying to really determine why these issues are you know we have a tow industry that's already increased that's seeing increased labor costs increased fuel cost equipment cost compos for compliance and already being strained by by those costs additionally and currently under the Boise city co the maximum tow rates allowed are lower than the 80 county rates uh that same rates are lower than the ISO state police rates as as well and so so when we put it at our last hearing that they're in this to make money and so if you're comparing a to from another agency to us we are not the priority because they make less money less money to show up to a boy please call than they would an ada county call to an ISP call

so we have done interimm measures to ensure the city maintains in service. The department maintains service. Two of these majors have been in establishing contracts, tow contracts for specific types of toes. Both the abandoned vehicle and the evidence vehicle toes are contracted out with uh separate tow companies. And the graph you see on the before you kind of displays the the results of that contract over the past five plus years and the year before where very few RBs and trailers have been towed because that had been a challenge for our officers to secure services through the first year of the contract and it increasing greatly until the first full year of the contract where we're able to tow 108 RVs and trailers. and the benefit with the ability for us to tow these types of vehicles to secure those toes. We've been able to reduce that number each year after the contract has been been in place. So to start with the fees, um we're proposing matching ADA counties rates on the similar to services that we we control the rates on. And so the first is kind of the show up fee. That would be get the code company get the op the tow truck to the scene of of the accident. Currently, our our rates raised go between 125 up to 225 depending on the size of the vehicle. We're proposing matching the 80ount rates or the soon to be 80ount rates that they're proposing of $180 across across the board. The one thing to note with this is the light and medium duty. This is the bulk of of the toes that we uh request services for. And so that would see the greatest impact in just the show up fee. The next is the hourly rate. Currently under the Boisee city code it's $75 for a light or medium duty um labor and $100 after that. And in addition to that, the first hour of that is free. We're proposing matching the 80 county proposed rates of $120 an hour for light and medium and 360 for heavy duty and the freehour and no longer having the free hour included in in that. And while you saw on the previous slide that the

um the show up rate was slightly reduced for the heavy duty toes is made up in here by reducing removing the first hour and increasing the rate to reflect truly the the need of this toe and the the cost it has for a toe company to perform. We're also uh requesting the light and medium duty and heavy duty uh rates match that as a county as well. That would be a boost of $25 to the light and medium duty. And in this case it would be a wash for for the heavy duty based on just a vehicle from from there. The reason why we have this fee in general is parking space is limited space is limited where we can store vehicles is at a premium in the city and the the biggest impact that will be felt for the toll companies will be the the light and duty and medium duty rates and be able to charge more for that and additionally reducing or excuse me eliminating the the first free day which is currently in in our city code. with the mileage. Once again, we propose matching the mileage for the ADA county, which is going from $4 we currently have to $6. The notable differences in matching these 80 county fees um of course the show up fee unified $180 which is very easy to remember across across the uh board for any co and easy because it's matching the 80 county rates makes it more unified and easier for building uh confusions not to happen. Um it does reduce the heavy duty labor toe fee but is more than made up for the labor increases in both that toe the light duty and the heavy duty toes plus the um first hour labor no longer being free. In this we eliminated the special equipment and cleanup fees which were typically happening during the first hour but feel these are made up with the increase of the labor being able to charge that first hour. In addition to that, eliminating the first day of storage no longer being free, able them to charge the second they get into the lot, being able to start charging storage to account for the vehicle. There's a few fees that we're encouraging um or proposing fee raised that are unique to the Boyisey City. The after hours gate fee, the drop fee, and

the credit card administration fee, and moderate changes of $25 to the first two and an increase of 1% to the credit card admin fee. the after hours gate fee. Um the reason is Idaho code requires tow companies to be available during business hours to to release a vehicle to release property of a vehicle. Boy city codes goes a step beyond that requiring that tow companies respond all times of the day to release vehicle or to have access to that vehicle. So they should be um compensated for for that requirement. The drop fee in Idaho state code allows a reasonable charge of a of reasonable fee, a token be can charge and a mileage included for that when the vehicle is not currently in tow. Boyisey city code is simply capping this fee at a certain amount. And the immediate administrative fee is simply to balance out the credit card payments. Boyisey city code also mandates that uh a company be allowed to take credit card or should take credit card for these cases. and the 100% fee is balancing out that fee of what they're currently charging now of four could charge now of 4% to the what they're for the excuse what they're charged by the card companies. So to kind of put it all together, it's kind of hard to determine what this true impact will be across across the board across until you look at kind of estimated out per what a typical tow could be. And so currently for a a a tow with one hour of labor, five miles of uh mileage hours on there, excuse me, five miles on there, and two days of storage, that would equate to about $175, excuse me, $170 charge for to the to the citizen for for this. And once again, this is not factor in any special equipment or cleanup fees that could have been charged. We could vary that bill by another $50. And so the proposed rates with the matching ada county with no longer the first hour free, no longer first day of storage free will put that to um $430 with an increase of $260 they can make per toe. To create a heavy duty once again for the the current city of Boisee rates, a tow with two hours of labor, five miles,

and two days of storage would equate to a $395 U tow fee. under the new rates with the the labor no longer being um included free in the first hour and no longer storage, it increases the rates up to $130 for that toe, which might seem like a very large amount, a very large increase. But in looking back to when we first had this coins in place, it was 2008. And so a lot has changed and especially in the the need for these toes and the cost of the toe companies to perform these toes. And we feel that um that balances out what we're proposing the current charges to be. And one last spec specific consideration we I wanted to discuss is the RV towing and disposal of of RVs. And so you looking through the stats we had RV toes from the the rotation are fairly rare and those are more frequent with an owner to pick up the vehicle. And so an RV is not collected and requires special disposal by the tow companies to their their cost. a more targeted solution seems appropriate to to address these through our contracts that we have currently as opposed to a general fee inside the code. And so majority of these toes for RVs are coming through abandoned vehicles. They're coming through scoff which we have two companies specifically covering each one of those contracts. And so staff recommends addressing the cost of RV disposals through the existing contracts with these two companies. Ed is much taller than me by a mile hair. Um, so just to reiterate the benefits to the community. Um, we understand that this is a very valuable service that the city of Boisee needs to have access to and we need to have our partners in the towing community be able to respond to calls. Um, this preserves officer safety and roadway safety. It maintains timely vehicle remov removal from our roadways. It aligns costs throughout the community for ease of billing and continuity and it provides clarity and predictability for tow

companies and residents as well. Our recommendations are to adopt these changes and to also ask staff to report back to council in 6 to 12 months on how the fees are working as well and to avoid making significant changes infrequently as has been the case for these this last period of time since 2008. We recommend aligning the ADA county with the ADA county and implementing a fee review process every three to five years. So we are both available for any questions you may have. Thank you. It looks like no questions at this time. Um so if there are no questions for staff, we'll move into public testimony. Um I don't have anybody signed up in advance. Is there anybody here that would like to testify on this item? I see a couple hands come up. If you'd like to testify, please go on up to the front row. Um Justin, you can go ahead and take the mic and then jump the other gentleman if you don't mind taking a seat in the front row. You'll have three minutes. Please start with your name and address.

Hi, my name is Justin Hughes and my address is 6210 Edgewater Drive. Well, I can't be the only one that's ever had their car towed, and I don't see how raising the price of that would be a benefit to the community. Uh, the signage is often cited as a problem, and I think that's where most uh civilian sort of noncriminal or accident towings come from. Uh, so I've had it, you know, go to your friend's apartment. It's at night. Oh, this space is for uh non-residents. a space for residents, a lot of fuzzy signs. You go to pick them up, oops, 30 minutes later, your car is gone. Uh, so it's really doesn't feel like a great benefit to the community to raise the price of that. I think we could instead of nickel and dimming the people of the city, we could maybe just focus on somewhere else to gather revenue from. I guess that's all. Thank you. You're good, Justin. Thank you so much.

I'm an actual If you'd like, you're welcome to testify if you'd like to. Yeah, please start with your name and address. You'll have three minutes.

My name is Harley Luwendowski. My address is 1823 North Curtis Road. Um, I've had a lot of involvement in the coming up with the rates and feedback with the city and I think the the turnout of to companies today kind of speaks for itself. I know a lot of people that do what I do for a living and they're very discouraged with this process and trying to express our value to the city to, you know, it's, you know, I I put a lot of work into collecting data. I know other people that put in a lot more work than I did. We were asked for feedback. We gave that feedback. Uh we were given deadlines to get that feedback and couldn't get any feedback on the feedback that we gave. And I expressed at the first meeting that getting in alignment with Ada County is better than nothing. Um, but it's it's getting in alignment with something that already needs improvement. And this is something that's gone. The tow rates were bad to begin with in '08. I've been doing this since 09. And you know, we had almost 20 years of no improvement as far as the rates are concerned. And you know, now we're jumping forward a percentage when our costs in a lot of areas have

doubled, tripled. Uh, property values have doubled, more than doubled, fuel has increased. My insurance costs have almost tripled since I've started doing this. So, um, yeah, it's about all I have to say is just that we were hoping for more and, um, I hear the public, too, but it's also I don't think people quite understand the the time invested in doing some of these toes and the kind of money it takes to go do some of these toes. And you know, a company can't even make, you know, a company can't make a profit with the rates where they are right now. So, this is an improvement. So, like I said, it's better than nothing. And that's pretty much how I view it. But, I'm just a little disappointed with the whole process.

Thank you. Anybody else here to testify on this? Anybody online? No. Okay. With that then uh we will close the public hearing and the item is uh before the council. Do you have questions? No. Okay, great.

Yeah, Madame Mayor, I do have one question for our staff here um for Ed. So, I I just want to clarify um that our new proposed rates um are not necessarily even aligning with Ada County's current rates, but they're aligning with a potentially proposed rate that may come in the future. And really, the city has gone out in front to increase those larger tow fees. Is that correct? Mayor, Council Member Corus, that's exactly correct. I sat in on the the 80 county hearing and these were the same fees that they were proposing before commissioners. I'm not sure the exact date that they will vote on that. Okay. So, and to confirm then those rates have not been in effect and um they're not in place today. That is correct. Okay. Great. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Council member, I also have a question. Ed, um, just because we we got testimony tonight, uh, concern about towing, uh, rates, can you clarify when a non-consent tow would happen on a public street and the difference between maybe the towing that they're thinking about private contracts and like a student housing apartment complex and how we're talking maybe about something different here.

Correct. So, um, Madame Mayor, Council Member Morales, um, a non-conent toe is truly an a lawful act by by state code for by an officer, by a person with authority, or in this case, a private party, a person to have a vehicle removed. And so, this would also include private party contracts for apartment complexes, stores, business complexes, where a a vehicle could be parked there, and they would have the lawful authority to to remove that. And this would be controlling those fees as well. And so while it would be um a DUI toe would have the exact same rates, these rates would also be controlled for that private property as well.

And in terms of parking on public streets to versus just getting a parking ticket, um what what's the bar for getting a tow from a from a parking incorrectly on the street? Madame Mayor, Council Morales, uh we work closely with our parking services team and so we refer cases back back and forth depending on the circumstances, depending on what's going on. First and foremost, our goal isn't to tow any vehicles. If we can educate the public, if we can warn the public, could follow the state processes. We that's a win if they move the vehicle, they're in compliance with the code. And so it really depends on the situation. It depends on the vehicle, depends on how long it's there. Many times we'll be preferred a a case by parking services. They ticket it again. They ticket it again. It's still there for two straight weeks. And so they will put it on to us where we'll uh inactivate a vehicle process. If we've had issues with consistent complaints, but we've been ineffective as a vehicle impound unit, we'll refer them back to parking services just to see if they can handle that differently.

Thank you. Okay. With that then um I will stand for a motion. Madame Mayor, I move that the council adopt the fees as presented by staff and that ordinance 18-26 be moved to the reading calendar. Second. Great. We have um a motion and a second. Any discussion? Yeah, I'd just like to clarify for the record that this is not revenue that the city collects. This is council member.

Yeah, this is for um the the towers that do that work. So, I just want to clarify that for the record. Yeah, we the city is not permitted from um gathering revenue from these types of services. Um but it is a service nonetheless. Um and we appreciate the work that the tow companies do. I'm glad that we're it feels good to be leading the trend on where it looks like things need to go to cover costs. I know on our side costs have gone up around the across the board. So I I trust it has on their side too. I also want to thank staff for all their work that they've put into this. We first heard this and heard um a lot of discussion with the tow companies in January as was mentioned and um council was interested in digging a little bit more into it. It was the first time that had come to us this issue. So, um, really want to commend staff for the work that they've done to answer a lot of the questions and work with the companies to find a middle ground that will continue service and also uh um move us in the right direction, I think. So, thank you for that. And will the clerk please call the vote?

Oh, sorry. Couple comments. Yeah, council member.

Um, couple things. First of all, thank you. I think we have more people who came for towing than testified. So, thank you for coming. Um, appreciate you being here. Uh, am concerned I didn't hear from you, so I hope that's a good thing that you like. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Um, well, that's that's how that's how I feel. So, thank you for saying that. Uh, let's let's be frank. Getting your to getting your car towed is the worst. It will be the worst day of your week to get your car towed. Yeah. It's a it's a it's expensive. Uh and I appreciate the gentleman who talked about the mistakes you make and that you pay for. Uh however, we do have laws and rules and we need people to do this work. And I wish that things cost the same they did in 2008, which is the last time the city took a look at this. Uh, I think we all wish that the housing prices were like they were in 2008. Unfortunately, they're not. So, I think what we've tried to do here is strike a balance. I really appreciate the folks that came in January. What you said in that meeting made a difference. We would not be here had you not shown up. So, I want you to know that. Take take pride in that. And also, uh, I hope that it goes to show that when people show up, we really do try to do due diligence. It's not perfect. I can sense that. It's a step in the right direction. What we at the city is are trying to do is create this balance between ensuring that you all stay in business because we need you, but but that we're also being cognizant of the cost to the consumer. So, we're going to do our best. We'll

see how it works. We appreciate your your engagement so much and let's give it a try. Madame Mayor, Council Member Morales,

I also just want to comment on that too. I think uh we got a lot of really good testimony in person in January, but also a lot of great written comment. I mean, we had a owner provide um facts and figures, a breakdown, analysis, and just really appreciated uh this coming together that helped get us to at least this point. And I and thank you staff for taking more time to dig into this. I do recognize that, you know, this pump has been dry for 18 years and this is priming the pump. And I and I kind of see that as as a way to continue these conversations. Um and we can do that countywide, right? It makes sense. we're all kind of in this together. So, I want to thank you for the work that you do. And, you know, I will echo as someone that you I was a poor college student when I had my car to this fortunately the only time and and I still don't think it was my fault. But um um appreciate the the service that you do bring our community and just ensuring that especially as our city is growing um that you know we are making the the right decisions um and and where we're parking. Then also our streets are safe because I think a majority of these are there's a car in the middle of the road just had an accident, horrible situation. We got to get got to get it off and get it cleaned up. and thank you for the the service that you bring um you know in situations like that that aren't aren't easy workplaces, right? It's not a quiet office job. So, thank you for all you do.

Madame Mayor, Council Member Cors.

Yeah, I really appreciate you guys coming out and as was mentioned, your voice mattered in January. We were prepared to move forward with fees. Then we heard from you and said, "Hey, this this might not be far enough." We we asked for feedback. The process was absolutely messy. we were trying to get something in sooner in February and we're trying to wait for another municipality to see where they would go to get that alignment that we heard um and realized we needed to move. So your testimony in January, your written comments, your continued feedback is greatly appreciated and that's what's landed us here today. Um people need to know that non-conent towing plays a critical public safety role. uh you're clearing the crash from the scenes, you're removing abandoned vehicles, keeping the roads safe and accessible for emergency responders and the public. Um and uh quite frankly, it's embarrassing that we haven't raised our rates in 18 years. I I don't know how we got there. Um but I can tell you everyone on up here is committed to have periodic review so we won't see this happen again. Um, and I appreciate um, again your comments and I appreciate showing up here tonight and we'll be moving this forward so to make you a little bit more whole in your business. Thank you. Okay, I think with that uh, will the clerk please call the vote?

Nash, yes. Dud, yes. Willis, yes. Corus, yes. Morales, yes. All in favor? Motion carries.

Okay, thank you. Um, we are moving on to the last item of the evening, which is C25-28, Studio L Architecture at 9501 West Bernett Drive, an annexation of approximately 2 acres um of R1B AIO. Um, and we'll pass it over to staff. Good to see you, Mr. Moser. Thank you, Madame Mayor. Members of the council, the applicant is requesting an annexation of approximately 1.665 six 65 acres with an R1B AIO zone which is a residential suburban with an airport area influence overlay and a three lot preliminary and final plat subdivision is included and these are the findings for an annexation application. The central property is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Victory and Bernett Drive. The surrounding area is comprised of residential neighborhoods with lots ranging in size from 02 to 2 acres. The adjacent properties to the north, south, and west are lo are located within the city of Boise and the adjacent properties to the east and southeast are located within Ada County. The overall area of the subject property being of being annexed approximately 2 acres which includes the adjacent rideways. The subject property is currently zoned R1 in Ada County and the R1B zone is requested with the annexation. The R1B zone is consistent with the large lot rural land use designation of the comprehensive plan and the surrounding area contains a mix of R1A, R1B, R1C zones. In addition, the adjacent neighborhood to the north across Victory Road is zoned R1C and R1B. As such, the R1B zone is compatible with the comprehensive plan and the

development patterns of the surrounding area. The proposed R1B zone would also facilitate the development of additional housing and a mix of housing types in the neighborhood. And there is a need for the creation of additional housing within the city of Boise as detailed within the housing needs analysis report from 2021. The applicant proposes to annex the subject property and construct a cottage village development on the west side of the property on lot two and a forplex on the south side of the property in lot one. In addition, the applicant will maintain the existing single family house at the corner of Victory and Bernett Drive, which is lot three. Vehicle access to the proposed cottage village and the forplex will be from a service drive with a connection to Bernett Drive. The cottage village and the forplex are conceptual and are not before the council tonight. With the proposed conditions of approval, the proposed three lot subdivision complies with the standards of requirements in terms of lot size and street frontage of the R&B zone. And in addition, the applicant is proposing a 30- foot wide landscape easement along Victory Road. The applicant will also install an 8 foot wide landscape buffer, a 5-ft detach sidewalk along Bernett Drive, and an 8 foot wide landscape buffer and 10-ft detach sidewalk along Victory with Street trees. The planning team did receive a number of letters and a petition in opposition to the project from the public expressing concerns about increased traffic safety and in general that the proposed R1B zone is not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms of density. To address these concerns, I would note that the R1B zone is consistent with the comprehensive plan land use designation and there is a similar R1B and R1C zone properties and neighborhoods adjacent to the north across Victory Road and to the west along Victory Road at the intersection of Mitchell and Victory. Also, the applicant will improve the adjacent roadways abuing the site and ACD said they will improve Victory Road to five lanes adjacent to the site between 2030 2031 and 2035. In summary, the planning and zoning

commission recommends approval of the annexation and subdivision. Thank you. Thank you, David. Um, we'll next hear from the applicant. Is Robin is Okay, great. Perfect. Come on up. Uh, please start with your name and address.

My name is Tanner Verhooks. Uh, address is 26230 Moonglow Drive in Middleton, Idaho. Uh, Madame Mayor, council members, thank you for your time tonight. Uh, we're excited to bring this annexation, reszone, and subdivision here to a lot split to you uh to enable a variety of housing. As David explained, we're we're considering a uh cottage development, um some town homes and existing house. Um I think that meets your guys' goals of existing housing and the vision of that. Uh we've done a another cottage development uh off Pierce Park Lane. Going to be getting our grading uh permit soon and breaking ground. So, we're excited about that. Um, but more importantly, we're just uh looking forward to moving forward in the process and bringing the uh planning applications forward and being good neighbors. Um, Haven Idaho, uh, the company I'm a part of, we uh strive to add without taking away. Um, so we've had a a track record and a history of working with neighbors among many of our projects and um, so looking forward to continue to do that here.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, we will so you can have a I think are there any questions for the applicant at this time? No. Okay, you can have a seat. Thank you so much. Um, is there do we have a representative here from the Southwest Ada County Neighborhood Association? Is Marissa here online? No. Okay, great. Um, then we will move into our public testimony. I have two signed up on the signup sheet. So, we'll start there, Carol and then Susan. Welcome, Carol. Please start with your name and address and you'll have three minutes. You can pull that microphone down to reach you, too. Great.

Okay. My name is Carol McFaden and I live at 95 9500 West Bernett Drive. And I wish we could have those pictures up that they showed earlier when he was talking about it, the plan. Okay. and especially yeah the one that shows Bernett Drive there is actually Quirkus now because it's changed its name since the Diamonte subdivision went in. Um unfortunately we don't have any of these type of actual cottage developments that have been completed in the in in the area that we can see exactly how it's affected the surrounding neighborhoods. They're platted. They may be approved, but nothing has really broken ground yet. Um, everything south of Victory and West and east of Mitchell is either R1A or R1, which is 2 acres and halfacre lots. The homes mentioned across Victory are far away and well fenced off and you really don't see them. There's large landscape buffers on each side of the street, so they really don't have much of an effect on us. So anyway, the uh the parking is not adequate. They're proposing up to 15 more units on 1.65 acres, including the existing home and the garage, which has been now completed, the new garage. And there's only they're only allowing about one parking space per unit. Bernett or now as it's actually known as Quirkus is a narrow street. There is no place for off-road parking on it. There's not going to be a sidewalk or any parking strip on the east side of Quirkus. So where these people are going

to park and it's unrealistic to expect that they only own one vehicle per house. So that's the sad thing. There are appropriate places for this type of cottage kind of a cottage development. There's one place that was constructed during 2024 directly east of the Fred Meyer located at FiveM and Victory. It is back off of I'm sorry, five mile in Overland, excuse me. It's back off of Overland. It's not in the middle of a of a subdivision that's large, you know, larger lots, well-developed. It's backed up against the canal. Uh there is a roadway completely around the development. Each development has its own garage plus one or two additional parking spaces for each unit. So there's not an off-road parking problem. Plus, they've built commercial space up along Victory. So, it's kind of a self-contained community back there with 40 units, and it's very livable in its design. It's not what we really have here because we don't have enough time.

All righty. Thank you. Thank you so much, Miss. Um Susan, you're up next. Um, and if there's anybody else that would like to testify at this, I will ask you to please come up to the front row so we can keep moving. I know who's queued up. Welcome, Susan. Please start with your name and address. You'll have three minutes.

Hi. Oops. Whoa. Um, uh, my name is Susan Barkcus. I live at 9402 West Bernett Drive. Um, I've lived in Boise for 43 years and the last 16 of them have been in Southwest Boise. I'm two houses two doors down from this site. Um, when I moved to this location, I was delighted with the space and the overall rural feel of this area. I wasn't going to repeat all of the uh issues that all of my neighbors have for this. I think it's well documented in the in the packet you received. Actually, Carol and I met with uh 40 or more of our close uh neighbors over the weekend and found no one that was in in um in favor of this. What we have is this 2acre lot or almost 2acre lot that you're taking putting 9 to 14 general that's what I what has been shown units on this property. Well, Diamonti subdivision right next to it, there's 19 homes. So, the concentration of units in this little space just makes no sense in this area. Uh the density of of of these homes or this this lot is what everyone is is really concerned about. Um, so I will say that I'm disappointed that we have such a large concentration of units just two doors down from me. This new development just does not make sense when you really look at the surrounding areas. And just because it meets all the zoning and housing requirements doesn't mean that it's really a good idea. And if any of you lived in this neighborhood, I doubt you'd be supportive of this

development. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Barkus. Um, anybody else here to testify? Anybody online? Yeah. Okay. Madame Mayor, this is Sean or Amy Tips. Sean or Amy Tips, please go ahead.

Hi, my name is Sean Tips. We live at 9638 West Bernett Drive. Our backyard will share a fence with the parking lot on this particular uh on this particular thing. Um I would point out before we even get into all of the problems with this that you're proposing to put the same density on 1.65. This is 1.65 acres, not two. You're proposing a density of 1.65 65 acres that matches or nearly matches the density that we all bought in this subdivision. Again, sharing a fence line on 10 acres. This is absolutely an inadequate use of that property. It doesn't fit. It doesn't belong there. I would just point out that we live in a no bus zone. That means that we're too close to the elementary and junior high school for our children to ride the bus. So, you're proposing to use the uh the low income to add additional units here so that more kids will have to walk across the street where there are no crosswalks, specifically quirkus. So, the junior high and elementary kids will double. Also there are al there are not sufficient parking lots in this there 13 or 14 parking spaces is not sufficient. There's no way that people are going to be able to park on on what what you guys call Bernett, but it's really quirkus right now. There's there's no way to park there. That that road is narrow and dangerous. I would also point out that

unlike the last time we we we spoke, they said, "Oh, well, the residents don't use it." They didn't say why the residents here don't use it. The residents here don't use it because it is unsafe in the winter. That particular piece of road that they propose, the sole ingress and egress freezes in the winter and if you try to go down that, you slide into victory. If you try to go up that, you can't. So, we already have we already have way too much overflow parking in the neighborhood, and that is going to push all the overflow parking into our neighborhood. I would also point out that using the the low income exception here, the argument is that there will be fewer cars because they're low low income. I would point out that um the nearest grocery store is 1.7 miles away and there is no bus service. So, I want to finish up and say, you know, I empathize.

I'm sorry, that's the end of the time, but if the second person wanted to take their own three minutes, you're welcome to start testimony again with your name and address and then have your own.

My name's Amy Tips and our address is 9638 West Bernett Drive. Um, so the first concern I have is the fact that the developer at the last meeting stated that there would be no fencing along the front of Victory Lane. That is a four-lane road. It's highly dangerous. And my concern is like if they want to put in low-income housing, that means there's kids there. Those kids are at risk for I mean parents don't always supervise their kids and they're going to be running into that road. There's no bike lane and they're going to be we could end up with injuries and who's going to be responsible for that? Secondly, with like Circus, I drive to work every morning going down Quirkus and in the winter that is an unserviceed road. I have slid into Victory Lane at least twice because it's not service and it is slick as heck. But thirdly, you know, I empathize with wanting to have a low-income housing. I have kids who can't afford to buy a home in Boise because it is so expensive. We want to downsize, but we can't find anywhere in Boise to downsize. And so I empathize having this kind of a housing development behind us, but you know, I was on welfare 12 years ago and I've worked my butt off as a nurse to work my way up to be a manager to afford this house. Not to have it overlook a a this area, which we have looked at for eight years, which has been a dump. And now we're going to put 20 homes behind us. I don't I I'm I've earned a right to have a good view and I have all the noise of 20 people, 20 homes living behind me, a parking lot, construction desk. I mean, I've earned my right too to live in a wonderful home that we've earned and worked for and, you know, deserve as well. And I have seen what you guys what they did down in um Lake Hazel and uh Five Mile that was supposed to be single homes for affordable housing and they turned them all into forplex and now

they're all rentals. And that's what's going to happen behind here. And you we we spent a lot of money on these homes here down. We have million-dollar homes across the street and we're all half million dollar homes and you're going to put 20 homes behind us and our values are going to tank. And so that's our concern and that's kind of what I have to say. Thank you. Disapproved this. Okay. Is there any other anybody else online to testify? No. Okay. Anybody else here? No. Okay. Uh with that then it would go back to the um applicant for a fiveminute rebuttal if you'd like it.

Yeah, absolutely. You can use it however you'd like. Um I'll just ask that each of you introduce yourself with your name as you take the mic. so the record can reflect who's speaking.

Uh Tanner Verhook's here, 26230 Moononglow Drive in Middleton. Uh Madame Mayor, council members. Uh thank you. Um a lot of the testimony and discussion um was about future applications and and not really the applications here at the point. So I can comment on those things. I don't know if it's the best use of our time. Happy to answer questions. Um, but again, we are, uh, we built a new threec car garage with the existing house, uh, knowing that families would live there to give them plenty of parking. Um, future applications, we're we're looking at the zoning codes and and thinking about parking and landscape buffers and fences and and things of those natures. Um, we uh we have a reputation. Um, um, we're not here to do uh cheap uh or or poor developments. We want to uh provide quality housing. Um, we think this is a good housing product, uh, Cottage Villages that still meets an affordable need. Um, we don't foresee a lot of families living there. Um, we we think it's going to be, um, just retired uh, people or minimalist living people, things of that nature. These are thousand square feet as you guys know. Um, but yeah, we're we're looking forward to bringing future applications uh forward for for those developments and working through that with the neighbors uh and and staff and and going through the process. So, happy to answer any questions. And uh here's Robin.

Hi, Robin Gates, 2115 Heights Drive. Um, so I this is my fourth cottage development and um Carol's correct. None of have been built yet. Hopefully, we're starting in the Pierce Park one soon. Um, I have a reputation with the planning department of trying to put together quality projects. My goal is not to go in and make a parking lot. Um, the plan that you saw was conceptual. Uh, the application was focused on the subdivision and the annexation. The cottage development will be a whole new um application. And our goal is these are this is not low-income housing. These are going to be um sold individually to families. Uh we don't want to sabotage the project by not providing enough parking. It's a balance. It a lot of thought goes into it and I'm currently working on that. Um but I I can promise you that my reputation matters to me and it's not going to be a parking lot. Um, I do realize people are concerned um because they can't visualize and they live there and and I respect that, but uh we will be bringing forward a really thoughtout development that we think everybody will be happy with.

That's it. Thank you, Madame Mayor. Uh Council Member Willitz and then Council Member Corass. Uh Robin, thanks for being here. I have a couple of questions. Um, and and I appreciate you pointing out that this is the first step and that's the annexation. I'm curious why you want to annex into Boisey because this is technically county land. Why why Bo Boyisey? Why annex with us?

Because the entire goal was to do a highquality cottage project. Um, and from my my standpoint, I'm not sure if he's going to have something to add to it. The city of Boise has been fantastic to work with. Their new zoning with uh cottages has been simple. It's been streamlined. Um I've had nothing but success working with them. Um mad mayor followup. Did you approach the county at all or did you come straight to Boyisey? Straight to Boyisey.

Okay. Uh and then I have another one. Um could you talk to us about the road? that seems to be a reoccurring uh concern and I understand roads are to be driven on and also to be parked but I am I'm familiar with this area and I I don't think the infrastructure was made for anything but single family homes. So help help me see the vision here.

Sure. Sure. Uh so so we know that Victory is getting widened uh to enable traffic. uh Cirus coming off the side is a I'll call it a a rural lane right now. Uh we are planning to improve our side of it with curb gutter um and detached sidewalk. Um so there's the development to the to the south of us. Uh that that road section's already improved. Um and so we would continue that forward. Um I I don't have a street view with me. I don't know if David has one handy. um or or or maybe we go back to the aerial. Um and so you can see just south of our property, uh that whole section is improved. Um and so we we're just going to continue that forward and kind of match the curb gutter and sidewalk that's to the south of us. Uh we do um um we do acknowledge that there's acreage lots to the east of us. Um, I actually spent a good part of Saturday morning uh walking the entire irrigation ditch with the neighbors uh to understand how the irrigation works that comes through our property. Um, so I got to walk walk through a lot of those backyards and spend some time with some of the neighbors. Um, I'll just reiterate that, you know, we're trying to be good neighbors. Um, and we'll take into account uh happy to sit down and talk with neighbors about concerns and solutions and ideas.

Madame Mayor, follow up on that street question. So on Quirkus um it wasn't clear in the on the record but um ACD's site specific condition number two construct Quirkus Avenue/Bernett Drive is half of a 33 foot wide local street section with curb gutter and a minimum of 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk. Can you just confirm what we're talking about? So now that we have this graphic up here, we're talking about from victory to that improved Bernett Drive. Mhm. your half of that property would be widened and would it have space for street parking, new street parking? Uh David, could you go back to the site plan?

Um so you can see here uh what we're proposing. Uh so we are uh dedicating right away um as required and then we're going to uh have an easement to the to the back side of the sidewalk there. Okay, maybe I'll just have David confirm um we have time for staff questions. Street parking. Madame Mayor, members of council, the highway district's going to require them to improve uh Cirus um as a 33 ft street section. That's a standard uh local road, at least their half of it with curb and gutter. Um I don't know offhand the current rideway width along Perkins right now. I would I would guess it's about 50 ft. So that should be there should be room to it would be like a standard local street that allows for parking on both sides. Although they're just going to approve their half of it.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Why David? I need I need you to say this plainly. If this is approved and if it's built with this the uh potential uh development, can you can you park and can you drive on that street once the improvements are done? Madame Mayor, members of council, if the highway districts require them to improve this as half of the 33t street section. So the assumption is that at some point if the other half of the street gets developed it will become a full 33 ft street section which is a standard local road which allows for parking on both sides.

So sorry I'm going to ask the audience to to please be respectful of the other speakers and the process that we have as we were for you. Thank you. So and with curb gutter they should they when it's done it it should allow for parking on both sides. I I'd have to do the math in my head on what a half a half a street section would allow and given what's currently there that I don't know. I guess my my question is if in order to have folks park and to have people drive, do we have to wait until that next development comes in order to lengthen it because there you would only have to do your half. That's this that's the summation of my question. Sure. Perhaps.

Yeah. And and so so hearing what uh Mr. David Moser is saying um our side being developed will allow parking on our side and then when the other side is developed in the future that'll allow parking on that side in addition to as well. Pull up. I know I'm being pedantic here. Sure. But so can park. Can you drive too? Like can two cars get like could two cars be on that road with a parking spot? Um, I I don't know if we have the Do we have the ability to pull Google Earth, Google Maps, put up a street view there? I've tried. So, I'd love you I'd love for you to I'm sorry I'm not prepared with this uh tonight. Um, I I was just there. Uh, I drove down it with my my large truck.

Yeah, you did your walkabout. Yeah, I I I I believe uh I I don't think there's going to be a sea of parking. Uh I'm not going to say that we'll have that, but I think there will be some parking there. We're per we're planning to provide um adequate parking per code uh on the two new lots and we provided more than adequate parking for the existing house. Um and then just knowing what a cottage development is and and the idea of 1,000 square ft two bedrooms. I don't foresee as many cars as a typical 20 house subdivision would would draw.

So I think what I hear you saying is because they're smaller units, you're not going to have probably aren't going to have as many people renting. they will likely this is their way to downsize perhaps correct or get into the housing market. Yeah. Minimous living uh single parents uh retired. Um we're making sure in the future plan and I don't want to get I know it's not the topic of tonight but we're making sure that some of these cottages have uh master bedrooms down uh to accommodate retired um uh uh our Pierce Park Pats Cottages uh cottage project. We are um going through the the condo process there so that they can be sold individually and so these won't just be a bunch of rentals and low income as the concerns are stating.

Thank you. I think you might have had to find a friend. David, did somebody Yes. Just madame mayor, members of council. Um just got a clarification on the highway district uh report. They're going to require them to improve half a street plus 12 feet. So it's half plus additional 12 feet. There should be plenty of space there to improve the road, allow for for passibility and parking on one side at this time. Sure. And then and then Robin's pointing out to me that uh as our uh concept is currently drawn, not shown, uh we are providing above and beyond the the parking minimums for a cottage development.

Thank you. Um I know Cath Council member Corus had a couple of questions if they're still see if I can remember them. Thanks. Thank you so much for being up here tonight. Um can you with understanding this is a preliminary plot and um a rean an annexation into boyisey. What were the total number of units that were being proposed? Do you recall? I think we're 14 14 total um with the existing and then 15 with you count the existing house.

Correct. and the forplex. Now that you guys redid the zoning, you could have two, sorry, you can have two cottage developments right next to each other. So instead of the forplex, we're going to do more of a cottagey. That's our I mean it I've been working really hard on this. So I mean I've got a visual and I hate to throw out numbers till it's like final, but that's what we're looking at right now with way more than the minimum parking. That's very important to our success as well.

Yeah. Yeah. I say parking. Yeah. In the areas of concern. Yeah. Thank you. I have one question for staff. David, um I was reading through the ACC report and I'm surprised they didn't bring up um road improvements that they're looking on on Mitchell Street and uh Mitchell and Victory um has just gone through um a review with ACD to put in their 5-year integrated work plan and they're going to design. Have they spoke to the city on that? Madame M members of council not that I were Mitchell's not directly adjacent to this so they haven't spoken to me about that in regards to this particular project and annexation

and can you bring up the other map there so I just want to show people so I guess that would be west uh Mitchell Street there so that's in the U 80 county highway district 5-year plan road improvements all the way down Mitchell Street also including a signalized center um at that intersection of Mitchell and Victory. Um, I'll say they have not confirmed whether or not that's going to just be a pedestrian signalized or a fully signalized area. So, if you have time, make sure you're making your comment on that to Ada County Highway District on what you'd like to see there because that will help the congestion summit. The reason I bring that up is because someone mentioned that pulling out on Victory Road and that will absolutely make a difference. Thank you.

Okay, any questions? Yeah, Council Member Willlets. Um, David, I'm gonna I'm gonna ask you a history question, and you may not know, and that's fine. I don't recall that we get a lot of these onesie, twoozies annexations. Typically, we have much larger ones. Can you give me can is that your impression? You see these all day long,

madame mayor, members of the council. Um we do get them from time to time along Victory Road where uh parcels that are directly adjacent to city limits but on the south side do come in. Um so yeah I think in in the past Diamonte that's how it came into the city at that point in time when that was annexed in. Um they do happen but they don't happen often usually do come in in sort of larger yeah chunks chunks. If can I comment? Uh if I may, uh this this is a good candidate for an infill property. It may seem like uh county. It's it's adjacent to city and we actually do have all of our utilities down Circus that we're tapping into. So it made sense to bring density to this area.

Okay. Any other question? And I'm sorry we I I think we interrupted your rebuttal with a question and then we asked a lot of questions. Um, do you would you like to return to your two-minut uh rebuttal? No. No. Okay. Thank you. Um, I think then it looks like no further questions up here from council. So, thank you so much. You can have a seat. Okay. With that then we will close the public hearing and the item is before the council. Madame Mayor.

Yes. Um, I'd move to approve C25-000028 um at 9501 West Bernett Drive, the annexation of approximately 2 acres with a zoning designation of R1B/ AIO um sub um Ehart subdivision SUB2500100 preliminary and final plat. Second. Any discussion, Madame Mayor? Yes. We'll go to Council Member Morales and then Council Member Corin.

Yeah, I just want to speak to um testimony that was received, planning and zoning testimony that was received for tonight um whether in the written or in person and I want to thank you for coming out and I can totally understand where this project seems totally out of place. I lived off of Victory and Five Mile Road, so very similar. um one property away from that is a is a development that's even more dense than this one could be when it comes back. Um and I think uh we we have to understand that these areas do need improvement. Those roads do need improvement and that improvement comes with good development. Uh specifically uh developers that are um going to meet these conditions that are on this um on this application. And so I'm glad we were able to talk through a little bit about um Quirkus. I hope I'm saying that correctly. Um I you know we're going to be expanding that road, making it better, which is going to cost all of us taxpayers more to maintain that road going forward. And so it is it's an adequate space to have more parking. Could be for your guests if you throw a big party and run out of space, too. Um and so I think, you know, I appreciate the developer coming with a project that is unique in the need that it fills. Um, you know, this this really is an opportunity for a lot of our our folks that want to downsize, um, aging parents, elderly that actually don't want to drive or or maybe those that can't drive. Um, and, uh, being overparked, uh, already kind of shows that it's they're not just trying to get away from the minimum. And I think that, um, you know, there's an opportunity here to to work with a a local developer on mitigating some of the concerns that came up during construction, dust, stuff like that. Um, and so I would hope that as a community that could be able to do that and then looking forward to seeing how this project uh continues to evolve even from the the iteration that that was um part of the application tonight.

Council member Carlos.

Yeah, Madame Mayor. Thank you. Um the reason I um propose supporting this area um this development today u I do live close out in the area of Maple Grove and Overland and we've seen a lot of change. I mean, um, I grew up here, so 25 years ago, this was on the far far edge of the city with nothing around. Um, maybe a corner stop somewhere. Uh, now we're pretty much getting into the middle of the city, believe it or not. Um, and, um, I do think it's a good project for annexation. We have others, uh, right by West Junior High in front of there on that south side of Victory that have already been annexed. Um, what's nice is this is a walkable area. This is walkable to Molenar Park, Maple Grove, West Junior High, and there is a bus stop right at Molinar Park as well. You're also within walking distance from Ada County Library at 5mile. Um, I think we're going to see we're going to see a lot more. We've seen a lot of infill developments and we are going to cons see more. I think the density is good for this. I think it's nice that we're seeing houses that are going to be able to be purchased. That's what people have continually said is they want their own home and this is an opportunity to provide some housing that people can own housing. Um what else I like about this is there are going to be a lot of road improvements out here especially on Mitchell like I mentioned um with bike lanes all the way down that road. It's programmed with an Ada County Highway District 5-year plan and also again with that signalized intersection along with road improvements at Maple Grove and Overland and also five mile um which is going to help with the traffic congestion. It's it is very congested out there and gets more as you travel south. So this I'm glad to see we have this programmed with Ada County Highway District. Uh, one thing I would caution the developer or to maybe not caution, but maybe to consider um is that um is looking at the parking South Boise, they have cars. We have a bus stop that's

nearby, but that's few and far. It's it's the farthest one out there. As someone mentioned, the grocery store is a ways down. um is maybe not not so much for the house as maybe try to move some of those spaces um for visitor spots or for those um the cottage courts. But I like this development and that's why I'm supporting that tonight. Thank you, Madame Mayor. Council member Wills.

Uh thank you for coming out. You've had to sit through quite a few things, so appreciate it. you you endured to towing was not as fiery as it was in January. So it does show that we can get to a good resolution. Um I I have a lot of mixed feelings about this. Um victory is is going to be a major thorough affair. It is now. I mean it's it we have to accept that. What I'm struggling with is annexing this little portion. Um, typically we've had this conversation up here about bigger developments and the conversation has been if the city of Boisey doesn't do it, the county will do it and the county will get the impact fees and and we'll get all the impact. What I'm what I'm struggling with this particular one is because it it didn't go to the county and I I'm worried about shopping a little bit. Like I'm just I'm I'm concerned that the county get didn't get a chance to look at this first before us. Um the de I think there's a disservice here and it's not your fault. just how life is is that we're doing the annexation and then the development is going to come later. So, it's really hard to conceptualize. So, I recognize that. But I I have unanswered questions in terms of the annexation that I'm I'm not going to be able to resolve tonight. Um I like what you've said. I am concerned about the parking, but I my conscious I I'm going to vote no and I wish you the best, but it's just I'm I'm not there yet. So, thank you. Madame Mayor,

member Nash.

Yeah. I just want to say thank you to the applicants uh for your work on this and your commitment to um getting a both a good project and being responsive to neighbors concerns about it. And I just want to thank council for your work and staff for your work that got us here. I think these are the types of developments that our code was written for. So, thank you. Uh thank you. I'll also just add for the neighbors, this is as was mentioned, this is one step in several. Um we'll next have a um development application that will come with a design review process and so additional opportunities to get involved. It sounds like you have um a developer that is interested, willing to cooperate and um I'm sure take feedback and often that's how we get to a better project. Um so it's not this isn't it. There's still much more to come and sometimes even to see renderings and things like that. This is so early it's hard to conceptualize what it might look like that it may it may actually fit into the neighborhood. And so hopefully some of those questions will be answered and satisfied for you um over the coming weeks and months. Um thank you for coming here tonight. If there's no further um discussion, then will the clerk please call the role?

Nash, yes. Dead, yes. Willlet, no. Corus, yes. Morales, yes. Four in favor, one opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. And then with that, I will take a motion to adjurnn. Your mic goes off. Sorry. A motion to adjourn. Thank you. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you. We're adjourned.