Okay, I've got six o'clock. Let's get this party started.
I would like to welcome everyone to the February 10th, 2000. No, not 10th.
» Wrong date. >> Uh February 24th, 2026 planning and
zoning meeting for the city of Nampa. Um, we really appreciate your attendance
and being part of helping us shape the future of the city. Um, let's start with
roll call, please.
» Here, >> Copeland. Kirkman. Morgan
» here. >> Kho
» here. >> Turner
» here. >> Daffer here.
» Miller >> here. Garner
» here. >> All right. You have a quum.
» Thank you. have a report
Ashby.
Good evening. Um, chairman and commissioners. Rodney Ashby, planning
and zoning director. For the record, um, we had several projects go before a
couple of projects go before the city council last week. The first one was the
subdivision final plaque approval for Middle Mbury North number four and this
was northwest of Orchard Avenue and Midway Road. Um you had recommended
approval on the 10th of uh February. This was for 13 single family detached
dwelling units and four common lots. And the city council did approve that. The
next one was a public hearing for annexation and um zoning for the ride
ofway along Cherry Lane um as part of the East Ranch subdivision. Really
simple one. If you recall, we just we they just missed some right away that
they needed to incorporate into the annexation and so that one was approved.
You had recommended approval as well. And then um the next one was a variance
of 102320 limiting permanent freestanding pole or
monument signs in the BC zone. Uh this is near the um or excuse me northwest of
Lake Lel Avenue and 12th Avenue Road. Uh right along um
you know I'm trying to think of the name of the shopping center there where True
Value. >> Thank you. Hawaii Center. Um and uh that
one was approved for a little bit larger sign and um height. Essentially, they're
keeping the same sign height. It was just approved in the past when it was
allowed at that height and now our current code would not allow it and
they're just um putting in a new sign. Um and then last of all was annexation
and zoning for Orchard Acres um to BC and Orchard Acres is one south
of Greenhurst Road east of um Happy Valley Road. Um, you had recommended
denial and there was five yeses and three nos on that one due to traffic uh
concerns and uh the proximity of the train and congestion
um impact to schools and multifamily were some of the concerns expressed at
the hearing and uh city council as well denied that uh project. So that was a
four to two vote and that's all I have for you.
» Thank you,
» Mr. Chairman. >> Yes.
» I make a motion that we remove from the consent agenda subdivision final plan
approval for Mberry South number one at zero Midway Road uh for Kent Brown
representing Endurance Holdings LLC. Original concept was for 50 single
family detached lots and seven common lots and the applicant has requested to
put this on hold. So I would make a motion that we remove from the consent
agenda. >> Second.
» Been moved by Garner, seconded by Daffer to remove this item from the consent
agenda. All those in favor? >> I.
» Any opposed? >> Okay, we'll go ahead and remove that
item. >> And chairman, if I may, um maybe a
clarification on the motion. Is this to remove it from consent to general agenda
or to continue it to a later date? >> So some clarification for that. They're
not ready to do anything with it at this point. They will resubmit and we will
put them on a new agenda when they resubmit.
» Okay. >> Remove.
» Well, we might just for clarity sake, we'll maybe have another motion to
remove it entirely from the entire agenda.
» Okay. Because usually when we lift something from consent, it will then go
into the remainder agenda for further discussion.
» Okay? >> And so this will just be lifting it from
the entire agenda. >> Okay?
» Mr. Mr. Chairman, for clarification purposes, I recommend that we remove the
subdivision final plat approval for M middleberry south number one at zero
Midway Road parcel number as noted in the staff report for Kent Brown
representing Endurance Holdings LLC. Original concept was for 50 single
family detached lots and seven common lots and remove it from the agenda
entirely. Second,
» that works. Thanks, sir. Again moved by Garner, seconded by Daffer to remove
this item completely from the agenda. All those in favor?
» I. >> Any opposed?
» Okay. This item will be removed. >> Mr. Chairman.
» Yes. >> I recommend that we approve the amended
consent agenda removing the item just removed.
» Second. >> Been moved and moved by Garner, second
by Daffer to approve the consent agenda that is now amended. All those in favor
I >> I. Any opposed?
» Okay. Consent agenda has been passed. >> Updated.
» Updated. Um Okay. So, we'll go ahead and get
started with our meeting. Um if you haven't been to our meeting before, we
will allow the uh applicant to come up. They'll have time, five minutes to
present what they would like to do with their item. Um then we'll turn the time
over to staff. They will give us their report. They have unlimited time. Then
we'll open it up for public hearing at which time you can come up and speak
for, against, or undecided on each item. Um, you will have three minutes to tell
us what you think about the project, whether you like it, you don't like it,
and why. Um, we're all pretty good about taking notes. Uh, applicants are usually
pretty good about taking notes. And then when the public is done speaking, we'll
call the applicant back up and ask those questions of them at that point. so you
guys can um hear what they have to say um and hopefully answer some of your
questions. We'll also ask some questions of staff because those are always
brought up as well. So, um, we'll go ahead and get started with item 3-1,
conditional use permit for barber or beauty shop, day-pa nail salon, Grace
Beauty Company in the CN zoning district in CH Form District at 12213th Avenue
South for Desiree Vasquez. We're representing Ian Lawson.
» Um, and thank you for allowing me to speak. My name is Desire Vasquez and I'm
the owner of Grace Beauty Co. Salon. I am here to today to respectfully request
approval of our permit so we can continue to operate and serve our
community. Grace Beauty Co. was founded with the vision of creating a family
oriented salon environment that is welcoming, peaceful, and grounded in
strong values. We strive to provide a space where clients of all ages feel
comfortable. mothers and daughters, families, and individuals who want not
just beauty service, but genuine care and connection. While there are other
salons in our area, our business offers something intentionally different. We
focus on a calm, serviced driven atmosphere that reflects our commitment
to kindness, integrity, and treating every guest with respect. Our goal is
not to compete with neighboring businesses, but to complement the local
marketplace by serving clients who are specifically looking for this type of
environment. As a small locallyowned business, we contribute to the community
by supporting independent professionals, creating flexible employment
opportunities and encouraging our team members to grow their careers while
serving the people of Nampa. Our clients are local residents, families, and
neighbors, and we are proud to be part of the fabric of the city. We are
committed to operating responsibly, maintaining a professional and
well-managed space, and being a positive presence in the area. Approving this
permit allows us to continue building a business that reflects the values of
family service and community care. Thank you for your time, your consideration,
and your support of local small businesses.
» Thank you. >> Oh, could you give your address for the
record, please? Name and you already gave your name and address.
» Uh 121 South Georgia Avenue, Cal, Idaho 83605. Thank you.
» Okay, Damian, you're up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and
commissioners. Damian Snodgrass, associate planner. So, the requested
action item today is for a conditional use permit for a barber or beauty shop,
day spa or nail salon. This is more specifically a nail salon. Um, within
the CN Central Nampa zoning district and the CH Form district. Um, going to go
into some of that code since we just recently had a code change where we
adopted formbbased code. So this will be our first application coming through
that falls under those new zoning guidelines.
So the property details, it's in the downtown comprehensive map designation
and the current zoning is CN, but is specifically under that CH central
historic form district. To the north, south, east, and west, we have all
similar form districts and zones, and there are current utilities to the
property. The applicable regulations here are the
criteria for a conditional use permit which we can cover in the findings as
well as some applicable regulations for formbased code. So form-based code is
was implemented so that we can redefine and show the form and look and
feel of the downtown area. And in doing so we have more building requirements
and things like that that will go into these developments coming downtown.
However, since this is a change of occupancy um and we'll have a tenant
improvement to the existing building and the building itself isn't changing, we
can apply all of the criteria for those downtown implementations with this kind
of application. So, we took some of the code that we know that we can apply to
this under the use table in 10153C. uh barber shop, beauty, salon, and spa
falls under localized services, which is a conditional use permit for this
specific type of localized service within the CH form district. And over on
the right here, we have a map of the form district. And just to go over that
for everybody, the the form districts fall under that CM zoning district. So
there are different looks and feels within each form district that falls
under the same zoning. So each forum district will have different criteria
that it has to adhere to and follow as well as land uses within those.
So for this one, we did a downtown analysis of that. And looking at the
pre-existing building, I attached a photo in your staff report of the
pre-existing building. it mostly follows the row building type um within this
zone on the requirements because the building itself doesn't conform with
what we would want for a new row type. We just took the criteria that we can
apply to the existing one which is on the ground floor a localized service
would be a permitted use and the required occupied space which is a 30-ft
minimum from all the facade and full doors. The required occupied space is
the space within the front of the building that is usable and walkable and
open. Basically, what this allows is stopping from storage or something
blocking the windows essentially. So, you can't put all of your storage right
on the front of the window and you look in, you can't see what it is. 30 ft from
that window, you have to have usable space. Whether in this case it's nail
salons and you see people when you walk by the look and feel of downtown is you
can look in and see that it is a nail salon and it's not blocked off on the
windows. And so with that looking at the existing building and the criteria that
we can apply we found most of these to be not applicable. So I took a lot of
that criteria out that we would apply to the row building type and just kept
these ones be for this kind of conditional use permit.
And here are some pictures of a row building type as defined within that
area of code. Again, this building does not conform with that code since it is
only one story. Um, and within this zone, we would need them to be minimum
of two stories. So, this is just the criteria that we felt we could attach to
this conditional use permit.
For correspondence, we received a comment from the building department and
their criteria and conditions are that it follows all of the city ordinances
and codes for title 4 building regulations. And with that, having a
tenant improvement permit pulled for the change of occupancy and any remodeling
or occu or alterations to the scope of the space. A licensed architect will
have to provide a code analysis for any design change of the nail salon, any
mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and structural permits as well as mechanical
ventilation permits that are required for a nail salon. And uh all of that
needs to come through a licensed architect or engineer as well as some
accessibility requirements as far as ADA requirements will have to be addressed
at the time of the building permit. For public comments, we did receive one late
comment. Um, we received one comment from the neighboring business um,
regarding the amount of barber shops and salons going along in the area along
with health and safety concerns of neighboring tenants and most is most of
this was in regards to the ventilation system which is addressed by the
building tenant improvement which will be later on in the conditions.
So here are those criteria that the proposed use is supported by the NRA
comprehensive plan. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance
of the property and project will not adversely impact the intended character
and appearance of the general vicinity. That the proposed use is served
adequately by essential public facilities and services. and that the
proposed use will not involve any activities or processes, materials,
equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,
property or general welfare by reason of excess traffic, noise, smoke, fumes,
glares or odors. Here are those proposed findings. Um the
biggest ones to bring into the relevant facts is that the proposed use must
conform to that international building code and adhere to those HVAC
ventilation standards to mitigate any kind of fumes or odors that may be
emitted from this type of business. And as far as the other ones is that it will
conform to the central Nampa historic form district design standards if there
was anything to happen to the outside of the building. Um the proposed uses near
other businesses of the same use, sewer, water, irrigation services already
provided to the property and the NA comprehensive plan describes objectives
of the downtown regarding business and development expansion which includes
professional services as such. So weighing all of the facts and criteria
under the conditional use permit, staff found that these criteria were to be
met. Here are the proposed conditions. That
the applicant owner shall comply with all city codes, policies, and standards
at time of building permit, including those listed by the building department.
And that the applicant maintains the requirements of the row building type
during the duration of the cup. And listed is the ground floor use of
keeping that use on the ground floor and that the required occupied space be used
with having that 30 foot of walkable open space within the front of that
building. And any others that the commission may add. Here are your pot
here are your potential motions and I will stand for any questions.
» Damian, in your opening statement, you mentioned
a letter from another business next door to this
u business they want to open and they were talking about they should have a
ventilation system which you mentioned. Um, if you agreed and required the new
business to have a ventilation system, could you
go back or could we go back and say to the business that's asking them to have
a ventilation system that they should have their own because they have tobacco
products that have an odor in themselves.
So when it comes to back requiring another business to update their
systems, that would more fall under the building department. A tenant
improvement or change of occupancy would need to happen to bring it up to
different codes or standards. And um the building department would determine then
what are those applicable criteria in accordance to the building code that
would be required for their kind of business type. But as it sits right now,
they would have to come back in for some type of construction
to that building to back require them to get a new ventilation system. So they
would have to come through and get a building permit. Let me rephrase the
question because I'm not sure you answered what I was thinking of.
» Can an existing business require a new business to do something that they are
not required to do themselves like the ventilation system? In other
words, can the new guy say to the old guy, "Well, you don't have one, so why
do I have to have one or whatever?" >> Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Kho, um,
so they can make that comment to you,
but the building department has the requirement on the tenant improvement.
So, whenever someone comes in to move into a new space, the building
department can require it. The neighbor can't come and say, "You shall do these
things." It's it's up to building code to make that determination.
» But but if building code people said, "Yeah, it's a good idea. You should do
it." Can the new Can they go back to the other guy and say, "Well, your your
product smells just as bad, if not worse, than ours does."
» Not if they've already been approved to be in that space. If they have
certificate of occupancy for that space and they've met the codes for their type
of a business, then no. >> Okay. So, it's do as I say, not do as I
do. >> Thank you very much. You're welcome.
» I think it'd be helpful to state that it's not the opinion of the code
official either. It's what's required by the building code.
» But does that apply to the new one and the old one or do you
» It applies to all of them. >> But it depends when the code was adopted
because maybe when the business that's next door went in, that specific item
wasn't >> a code. They didn't have to
» wasn't in the code. >> But the it's the code says if you have
this type of product, you have to have this type of ventilation. It's not the
building official takes a sniff and says, "I don't like it and I'm going to
require it." >> Right.
» Same thing. >> I just wanted a level playing field. I
can't They didn't want one guy beating up the other guy.
» Right. They should be under whatever code was in effect at the time.
» Yeah. >> Same thing with the business. You can't
They can say literally anything they want. It's just whatever's in the code
at the time you apply. So, just because they said it doesn't mean
it's going to happen. >> Right. Thank you all.
» Mr. Mr. Chair, can I ask a >> please
» question? The other concern that was raised was saturation of the market in
that area. My tendency is to let the market
determine what businesses would be profitable.
Is there a planning reason to be worried about a saturation of a certain type of
business in an area? Like is what's your thoughts on that?
when it comes to um other in this instance a conditional use is coming
before you in a public hearing but in the instance that other areas where this
business would be permitted um we don't have any plans in place that go over the
specific occupancy of each individual building
» um and in the findings that this business type is permitted in a lot of
other commercial type business zones and if every single one of them became a a
barber shop. There's nothing in planning code that would dictate that we limit
the amount of each business type in each different zone.
» So, there's not a a planning principle that you learn in school that teaches
you to avoid clustering certain types of businesses. I didn't go to planning
school. I don't know. >> Now, you're just being
» No, these guys are planning professionals. They learn these there's
principles behind this stuff, right? So, I'm not trying to be facitious.
like I like a diversity of businesses seems healthy too.
» Yeah, Mr. Chairman. >> Um, so that's why I was wondering and
and maybe would you like to speak to maybe you don't want to speak to why
this particular business requires a CUP versus other types?
It is within the adopted code that right now under the central NPA that this
business type is conditional um as adopted within this code um the
code would need to come back forth and be changed in front of city council if
» council decided otherwise. >> Thanks Mr. Chairman Kman. As to the
proliferation of the same type of business, that's actually a healthy
thing because it tends to weed out the poor
businesses, the ones that don't do a good job. Um because the competition
will drive them out of business. So that's a healthy thing to have, not not
a detriment.
Anybody else? Okay, we'll go ahead and open the public
testimony portion of our meeting up. Madam clerk, is there anybody signed up?
» Okay. Is there anyone that would like to speak for, against, or undecided on this
specific item?
Okay, Vasquez, would you like to come back up?
» Any questions we have for >> any other comments you'd like to make?
» She I Mr. Mr. Chairman, >> did you get and are you in agreement
with the conditions as they've been stated in the staff report? Are you
aware of them? >> Yes. So, we have our own laws too within
like the Idaho, you know, so the ventilation system. I already knew that
was going to be >> Yeah. So,
» Okay, perfect. >> Yeah.
» Okay. >> Thank you.
» Okay, I guess we're good. Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. Yep. I'll make a motion
that we close the public hearing. >> Second.
» It's been moved by Garner, second by Kho to pl the close the public hearing. All
those in favor? >> I.
» Any opposed? >> Okay. Public hearing is closed.
Thoughts, ideas?
» I say more than market, let it work itself. Y
» Yeah, >> I agree. I think the people she brought
with them seemed to be fairly passionate about what they do. And I could tell by
the looks on their faces as she was giving her proposal that they are and
they're they're they want to do this for the right reason. So I I think
» anything to do with the gun on any of the address?
» No. >> Oh, okay.
» I think I think I think uh I think they'll do well.
» Yeah, I think so, too. >> That's on the record, Steve.
» Mr. Chair. >> Yeah. I move to approve the project as
stated on screen with recommended conditions and proposed findings.
» I'll second it. >> Okay. It's been moved by Daffer, second
by Garner to approve this item. All those in favor?
» I >> I.
» Any opposed? >> Okay.
This cup will become effective 15 calendar days from the date the written
decision and reason statement is provided to the applicant unless an
appeal has been filed with the planning and zoning department with the
appropriate fee. No action should be taken on this CUP until the appeal
period has concluded. The applicant must confirm with the planning and zoning
staff that there have been no appeals. >> Okay.
» Thank you.
You don't have to you don't have to hang out for the rest of night if you don't
want to. >> You're good to go.
» Thank you so much. >> Okay. Item 3-2, conditional use permit
for automobile or truck repair for budget tires at 102 11th Avenue North
and 106 11th Avenue North for Javier Gonzalez.
» Oh, how you doing? >> Okay, just name and address for the
record and tell us what you want to do. >> Uh, Javier Gonzalez Jr. My address is
408 2nd Avenue North here in Nampa. Uh the address is 1021 11th Avenue North
right in front of Commercial Tire. >> Okay.
Tell us about what you want to hear. >> Um so I'm the owner of Budget Tires on
Third Street North and 11th Avenue North of one block away. Uh we just acquired
this building. We will be performing the same thing just one block away and that
is uh selling new and used tires and performing just auto repair light auto
repair uh auto maintenance and just providing more affordable
tire service instead of going to like bles and commercial. So it's kind of
like a little bit cheaper option for people that are in a a good spot. So
sometimes they just can afford a used tire and they can't get new tires at the
time. So this is just affordable option for the area. And it's been pretty
successful. We've done about 20,000 vehicles since we've been open since a
year and a half. And our projections are somewhere around 10,000 to 15,000
vehicles per year that we'll be servicing. And most of them are
residents of Nampa. And yeah, that's that's about it. Any
questions? >> Um, no, I don't think so.
» Right now, >> no pet cremation services.
» No, not not at this time. >> Okay.
» Okay. Appreciate it. We'll call you back up.
» Thank you.
» Okay, Damian. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman and
Commissioner. Damian Snodgrass, associate planner. The requested action
item tonight is a conditional use permit for automobile or truck repair for
budget tires at 1021 11th Avenue North and 106 11th Avenue North. And uh the
concept is to sell tires, fix flats, and occasionally break pads.
So, some of the property details currently this is under the BC community
business zone and to the kind of northeast we have the BC zoning which is
the Eagles Bar. Southeast um couldn't find the actual use of the building but
it is a cinder block building that is also commercial. To the southwest we
have the zoning for the Union Pacific Railard and to the northwest we have
zoning which is the commercial tire. Um and as far as public utilities and
services, there's already services to the property.
Here are those applicable regulations for a conditional use permit. We'll
cover those in the findings. And here are some more applicable
regulations. So, a conditional use permit is required when located within
the BC Community Business Zoning District, as well as some of the off-
streetet parking spaces required uh for this type of business use. Um due to the
change of use on the property and the adjoining property, which right now is a
vacant lot, um there will have to be some site improvements that are done to
the property, including adding striping for parking and things of that nature to
improve the property up to current city standards.
Here is a part of the the building plans. uh before the conditional use
permit came forward, a building permit was submitted and that's what started
this process of just kind of the proposed use of wanting to store some
tires with a fence, adding a landscape buffer and then conversion of the
existing building into a tire shop.
So for correspondence from Nampa Development Engineering, um we received
some comments uh about the existing utilities in the area as well as some
notation around the construction of the parking lot for that 106 11th Avenue
North to be reviewed by Idaho Transportation Department. So the
conditions are that the applicant owner shall comply with all city codes,
policies, and standards at the time of the building permit.
From the Nampa Fire District, we received some general fire access and
water supply comments. In addition, we received some comments regarding the the
specific type of fire mitigation that is necessary for the storage of tires
outside. So with under planning and zoning requirements, we would require a
design reviewed fence to shield any of that exterior storage of merchandise on
the side of the building, which is allowed. However, the storage of tires
up to a certain margin will kick in some fire requirements, and the Nampa Fire
District provided those um within their comments of what that'll specifically
be. The M Nampa building department reviewed the proposed conditional use
permit and had some other specifications regarding the tenant improvement that
will be required for the change of classification of the building. U which
include things like fire separation within the building that has to be done
by a licensed architect and that the change of occupancy has to go with the
international existing building code and bring the building up to compliance for
the proposed use. Here are those propo find proposed findings
that the proposed use is supported by the Nampa comprehensive plan and this is
designated as commercial and this falls under one of those commercial uses. Um
so staff found this to be met but the design construction operation
maintenance of the property and project will not adversely impact the intended
character and appearance of the general vicinity. Um, it fits in with
neighboring land uses, having another tire shop directly across the street,
um, and fits in with that general area, and it will utilize an existing building
and have improvements to the facade. So, staff found this to be met. there is
currently utilities available to the property
and that the proposed use will not involve any activities, processes,
material, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to
any persons, property or general welfare by reason of excess traffic, noise,
smoke, fumes, glares or odors. Um and under this that the proposed use uh will
have mitigations put in place by the building code and the fire code that
will mitigate any of those noise smoke fumes glares or odors that may come from
a business of this type. And when it comes to traffic, businesses are meant
to generate traffic to a certain margin. Um and so they it will not propose a use
that would generate any type of excess traffic from the others in the
surrounding use. So staff found this to be met.
Here are those proposed conditions of approval that the applicant owner shall
comply with all city codes, policies and standards at time of property
development or redevelopment and prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy. So this includes the conditional use permit which will have
any sub permits associated with that. floor plans, landscaping and irrigation
plans, fencing plans, parking improvement plan plans with striping and
ADA compliance, and any sign permits that will need to be done on the
property to add any signage. That the conditional use permit is granted only
to the current owner of the property and location for the duration of the use and
shall not be transferable to any other owner or location. that they comply with
all city codes policies and standards and that any proposed construction on
the lot for 106 is subject to ITD review or comment and any others that the
commission may impose. Here are your potential motions and I
will stand for any questions.
» Mr. Chair, >> yes. Um, regarding the ITD comments, I
don't know if this is Daniel question. They're saying the only way to get in is
through the alleyway and then the and then exit only onto 11th.
» There are currently approaches onto 11th. With the change of use, ITD will
um want to review that and may require changes to the access on 11th. Um
ultimately that is ITD's jurisdiction and their decision. Um so the condition
is just there so that um the applicant is aware that with in that building
permit process ITD they will have to contact ITD and determine what their
requirements will be for um the accesses on 11th. My anticipation is there
currently two accesses there. My anticipation is one of them will be
required to be closed. >> But can one of them be an entry? Did I
see somewhere on there that it might be an exit only? Um,
I didn't do the specific review on that and it looks like the applicant may be
able to speak to that. Um, they may have already contacted ITD and had
discussions. >> Okay. I don't know if I should opine
now, but that would be a little bit concerning to me because as you know,
First Street one way there. So, if you're not if you're coming from the
eastern side of town, kind of a weird way to get in there if
if it's only a if you can't get on there on 11th
and you can't get on there on first if you're going the wrong way.
» Well, and the reality is I mean, you'd be able to go up to second to come
around the block and and access it that way or the alley.
» Come long way down the alley >> or or come down the alley. Yes. Or what
was the other way you said? >> Go down Second Street to 12th around the
block and and up first. >> Oh, all the way to 12th.
» Sure. >> Okay.
» Wait, what? >> Yeah.
» Second. Well, you couldn't turn into there from 11, though, right?
» Well, I think you're coming from west to east.
» What if you're coming from east to west? >> You'd have to go all the way around the
city block back out. Unless you turned early and went down
like fourth and then went over and through the back way down the alley.
» There's ways. >> Make maps for your customers.
» There's ways. >> No, that's that's not
» I guess I'm just a little concerned that makes it more of a hardship on them
because >> ultimately the access on 11th Avenue is
ITD's jurisdiction, not the cities. >> Okay. So there's nothing
» for us to do here. >> There is we have no jurisdiction over
those access. So there's there would be no reason for us to remove that
condition. You wouldn't recommend? >> I would not recommend removing that
condition regardless. ITD has control of that road and the change of use will
provide them the opportunity to require things to be meaningless if I remove
that condition. >> Yes,
» pretty much. Thank you. >> That's what I needed to hear.
» Okay. Any other questions? >> I I need to be done. So
» I'm not following that up. Okay. Um, okay. So, we'll go ahead and open
this up to the public testimony portion. Madame clerk, anybody signed up?
» There are no signups. >> Okay. Anybody in the audience that would
like to speak for, against, or undecided on this proposal, please
clarify some things for us. Address for the record.
» Uh, my name is Christy Butler. When you said the cremation thing, that made me
think. Um, we're actually working with a historical society and one of the
methods of getting rid of that horrible paint job is like a chemical burn. So, I
kind of thought that's like a cremation to the building.
» Well, that's so you don't know that was beautiful. But
what how long ago was that proposed? >> LA last year somebody came in suggesting
this building be turned into a pet crematorium.
» Oh, no. >> I wasn't suggesting that's what you were
doing. >> Oh, no.
» Burning your tires to cremate. No, no, but it'll be like a chemical burn to get
rid of that nasty paint or whatever. And I wanted to mention on the traffic
thing, the location that he's at right now has the same issue. There's medians
in that road and they have to go all the way around the block, but it'll be good.
» Okay. I've never tried to go into that business. I guess I just
» Oh, well, once we get it established, come on in, Drew. That's all I wanted to
say. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody else?
Okay.
Motion to close public hearing. >> Moved.
Second. >> Been moved by Kho, second by Daffer to
close a public hearing. All those in favor?
» I. >> Any opposed?
» Okay. >> They grow their business. I'd love to
see that building say it's cool building. I'd love to get rid of the red
paint job on it, but >> Well, apparently they're going to. So,
» not what is the building. I like building and to see to to see a business
in Nampa that's that's willing to grow themselves is is exciting.
» Move to a bigger better location that they can
» do more business and that's that's cool. I like to see that.
» We're all for that.
» Well, I've given him a hard enough time hold up.
» I move to approve the project as stated on the screen with the recommended
conditions and proposed findings. Second.
» It's been moved by Morgan, second by Kho to approve this item. All those in
favor? >> I.
» Any opposed? >> Okay. Motion carries.
» This cup will become effective 15 calendar days from the date the written
decision and reason statement is provided to the applicant. Unless an
appeal has been filed with the planning and zoning department with the
appropriate fee. No action should be taken on the cup until the appeal period
has concluded. The applicant must confirm with the planning and zoning
staff that there have been no appeals. Thank you.
» Thank you and good luck. >> Thanks.
» Look forward to it.
Okay. Item 3-3, annexation and zoning to RS7, potential development agreement and
subdivision preliminary plat for Hudson Yards
at 03319 East Sheet Mountain Lane. Bonnie
Leighton representing Endur's Holdings and Thomas Murray
Leighton.
» Good evening, chairman and members of the commission. My name is Bonnie
Leightton. I'm at 5561 East Hoot Lowl Drive in Boisee, Idaho, 83716.
And I'm here tonight on behalf of uh the development team to represent Hudson
Yards uh subdivision. This is our request for annexation, zoning, and
preliminary plat of 21.51 acres to RS7
uh including 59 residential lots. Um, quickly, uh, the NPA future land use
map, you can see in the red outline with the star, that is the location of our
property. Um, it butts up to, um, an existing um, development. And so, we're
just tying into um, what we're currently uh, developing. So, um, as I mentioned,
um, the future land use map uh, designation for this area is medium
density residential. uh and RS7 is part of that uh one of the
zones that is allowed in that uh future land use map designation. The
description requires a gross density of um 2.51 to 8 dwelling units per acre.
Uh on the zoning map, you can see that we have RS 8.5 next to us. Um there's
some BC uh to the northwest and um kind of surrounded by development
uh in this location.
Um again our vicinity map. So you can see we've got Locust Lane to the north,
Southside Boulevard um on our kind of to our west and Alma Lane uh to the south.
Um, so our site plan, um, so I've rotated it. Uh, north is to the left.
Uh, basically we're developing 59, uh, lots in this with, um, some pretty
significant open spaces, uh, basketball court, uh, shade structure. Um, you can
kind of see in the center park area. Um, there's also an existing house on the
site which will remain. Um so and then there's um also the canal along along
the boundary that will uh fence off. Uh there's walking trails throughout as
along with sidewalks to provide connectivity um and recreation for our
residents. Stub streets that you can see at the top of uh this plan as I
mentioned stub into um existing plats uh in the area.
And then uh to look a little bit more detail of of this plaid, as I mentioned,
it's 21.51 acres. We've got 59 residential lots that we are proposing
with a overall density of 2.74 dwelling units per acre. So, we're
really on the low end of um density for this project. Um we have an overall open
space of 34.22% 22% and or common area and um actual uh open space of 18.18%.
So that's usable uh open space. Let's see
next slide. We will be developing this project into two phase in two phases. Uh
phase one is in green and then phase two is uh the remaining lots um there
that'll be on the north end of our site. As I mentioned, you can see um in the
phase 2 area there's a already an outline of a building. That's the home
that will remain. And
um we will just continue to build uh single family detached homes uh
just like the ones in the um subdivision to our east. Uh these are uh character
photos of what we build and what we intend to build in this project. Um,
here are some more images. And with that, I will stand for any
questions.
» Questions? >> No.
» Okay, we'll call you back up. >> Thank you very much,
» Christie. Right.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and commissioners. Christy Watkins,
principal planner for the city of Nampa. As stated, the action before you this
evening is for annexation and zoning to RS7 with a preliminary plat for the
Hudson Yard subdivision at 3319 East Sheep Mountain Lane for the development
of the Hudson Yard subdivision. This property is located in the medium
density residential designation on the comp plan and it is currently enclaved
and under Canyon County jurisdiction. Adjacent parcels contain single family
residential homes that are in the city limits and some commercially zoned
property to the north that is not developed yet.
So there is no traffic study required because there's only 59 lots in this
particular subdivision. The proposed access points meet the spacing
requirements for the city's access management policy. Water, sewer, and
pressurized irrigation shall be supplied to the site through the existing and
proposed lines installed or being installed in the New York Landing
subdivision to the east. These lines have adequate capacity to serve this
project. Sewer will be provided through the New York Landing subdivision and be
serviced by the New York Landing lift station. The city is in negotiations to
take over the New York landing lift station with a latecomers agreement to
reimburse the development that installed that station. The developer shall
provide documentation that the existing pumps in the New York landing lift
station are adequate to serve the property without upgrade.
So as far as the analysis of the plat, she covered it pretty well. Um the
density is 2.74 which fits within the range for the medium density
residential. The lot sizes in the RS7 zone can range from 7,000 ft to 14,000
square ft. The plat shows a range of 7,04 square ft to 11,395
ft. All of the lots meet the lot width and depth required by city code.
um they have the appropriate amount of open space on 3.91 acres which is
18.18%. A sports court and walking paths are
shown on the landscape rendering. Um the landscape plan was reviewed by
the city forester and some requests were made seeking alternative species of some
of the trees that were listed um due to some diseases that have been rampant
lately. Um as far as correspondence is concerned
um the engineering division had their comments regarding traffic access,
utilities, drainage and irrigation. The NA building department had their typical
um comments about um adhering to building code. The forester talked about
the trees um that had some disease u that need to be replaced on the
landscape plan. The police department um is recommending a commitment to fund
0.02 additional officers and 0.1 additional support staff. The closest
police department is 4.8 miles away. The call volume in this area is 103 service
calls annually. The fire department does not oppose this
application. This development is located approximately 3.3 miles away from fire
station 2 with an approximate response time of 8 minutes.
Um, the impact fees from this will be $1,267
per unit for an approximate total of 7 74,753
for the development for the fire department. This subdivision will add
approximately 167 residents to that 59 lots and will increase a personnel
demand of.17 firefighter positions. So as far as annexation is concerned,
there are four criteria to be used in determining the appropriateness of
annexation. All land owners have consented to this annexation. The
property is contiguous to the city limits. The comprehensive plan includes
this area within its area of annexation and the property is subject to the
city's agreement with the current highway district.
And as for um the zoning, the RS4 zone is an allowed zone within
the medium or sorry RS7 that's incorrect. RS7 is an allowed zone within
the medium density residential designation. There are three criteria
for determining the appropriateness of the zoning.
Staff has found that the request is in harmony with the comprehensive plan. The
proposal would provide for uses that are deemed to be compatible with the
adjoining properties that are also residential. The proposed zoning is in
the interest of the public and reasonably necessary. Um it as it
matches the comp plan to define compatibility
um and it will bring um improvements to the property.
These are the recommended conditions of approval based on the engineering
comments and these are your potential motions.
So, I'll stand for any questions.
» Questions? Anyone?
» Okay, we'll open it up for public testimony. Madam Clerk, is there anybody
signed up? >> Is there anyone here that would like to
speak for, against, or undecided on this item? Anyone online?
» These guys don't care. They're like, "No."
Okay, seeing none, I would take a minute. Bonnie,
» well, yeah. Leon, do you have anything you'd like to add? Do we have any
questions for Miss Leon? >> No, I don't.
» Um, I'll just say quickly again, Bonnie Leon, for the record. Um, we reviewed
the staff report. We're in agreement with the conditions of approval that
staff have recommended for um this project should you uh choose to approve
us this evening. So, thank you very much for your time and if you have any
questions, I'm happy to answer them.
» Nobody. >> I think so.
» Okay. Thanks. >> Thank you.
» Thank you. >> Motion to close the public hearing.
» Second. >> It's been moved by Kho, second by Garner
to close the public hearing. All those in favor? I.
» Any opposed? Okay. Public hearing is closed.
What are we thinking? >> Seems like a no-brainer. It's just
filling in more of what's already there. So, I don't
» Yeah. And I like all the exter filling into the canal. So,
» looks good to me.
I >> meant to ask this question.
» Nope. >> I guess I'm not.
» Maybe not. >> Question.
» So, this is Hudson Yards. The other one's New York Landing.
There's stuff. >> What's going on over here?
» Use Steves. >> He likes to talk away from his mic, so
when he leans forward, it gets real loud.
» I'll stay back here. >> So there's there's all these New York
names and then you got Red Sox way right in the middle of this subdivision.
» Somebody's a prankster. >> You're not an
» There's not a Yankees in here. There's a Mets.
» Maybe Cory was a Yankee. Who knows? Maybe it's an anti Yankees thing cuz
there's a Mets in here. Anyway, I agree. I think it's a perfect infill project.
Um, it doesn't it doesn't add any new connections to the streets. It's got
green space. It's compatible. So, I'd support it.
» We put a condition in that they need to rename one of them.
» Fenway Road. >> There there's already a Fenway
subdivision coming to the south of that. So,
» no. >> Nope.
» No. Okay. >> There's a there's a theme in this area
that is not compatible. And I don't know if that's is that compatibility that we
can consider or >> street naming is all under GIS and
there's a giant list they have to be unique on. So street naming gets
challenging anymore. >> Bonnie, can we get rid of the basketball
court and put in a baseball field?
» Sorry. >> Okay.
Daff. >> Uh I move to recommend approval of the
project as stated on the screen. Second. It's been moved by Daffer,
second by Kho to recommend approval for this item. All those in favor? I
» I. >> Any opposed?
» Okay. Motion carries. >> You're welcome.
» Take back what I said. There is a Yankees way.
» Yankees way. >> Okay. Item 3-4, zoning map amendment for
RS6 toBC zoning district at 1111 11th Avenue North
for Raquel Padrazza. >> Good evening everyone. Thanks for
letting me speak. Um, my name is Lennin and I'm here to represent Noah Leuga and
Raquel Pedraza because they say that my English is better than theirs. That's a
lie. Okay, they speak really good English. Mine is not that good. Uh if
you have if you guys have any question just get back to me. Um I am requesting
a resoning of my property >> point of order. Can we please get first
last and >> Lenny Cavalero
L E N I N Cavalero. C A B as boy. L E R O.
» Your address. >> What was that? Sorry.
» Address. Address. >> My address or the address on the
property? >> Yours? Uh it is 11:25
Powell Avenue. Nampa, Idaho 83687.
» Perfect. >> All right. Thank you.
» I am requesting a resoning on my property in order to operate a mobile
auto repair business with limited low impact use on the site. The proposed use
is specifically for storage of tools, equipment, and automotive automotive
parts as well as preparation and dispatch to offsite service locations.
The business will operate strictly as a mobile service. No customers will visit
the property and no on-site customer services will be provided.
All vehicle repairs and customer interactions will take place at the
customer's locations wherever their vehicle is situated. Uh the property
will not function as a traditional auto repair shop open to the public. The only
individuals involved in the business operations will be Raquel Pedrasa and
Noel Chuga. There will be no additional employees, no ship changes and no
increase in traffic beyond normal residential use. Business related travel
will consist so subtly of deporting the property to service to service customers
and returning upon completation of service calls. A shop located on the
property will be used only for storage of tools, equipment and parts as well as
of maintenance and preparation related to the mobile repair services. Uh the
existing residents on the property will not be used for customer activity or
retail purposes and will be util utiliz utilized solely for a storage of office
files, records and administrative materials related to the business. This
proposed use is attendant to be quiet, low impact and compatible with the
surround surrounding properties um with no anticipated noise, parking or
traffic issues beyond what is typical for a residential property. Uh the
reszoning request would allow the business to operate in comp in
compliance with local regulations while maintaining the the character and
integrity to the area. Sorry, I'm I get really nervous about talking in person.
That's what I'm kind of like. >> You're doing good. You're doing really
good. You're doing good. You're doing really good.
» And that's it. >> Okay.
» So, we have the address of the property. It's 1111 11th Avenue North there in AA
83687. >> We have questions
» yet? Nope. No. No. >> Okay.
» Good.
» Okay. >> I I want to I want to call Rodney cuz
he's not ready. Call him. He can do it. >> But I'll let you do it, Christie.
» Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. Christy Watkins,
principal planner for the city of Nampa. As stated, the request before you this
evening is to reszone from RS6 to BC at 1111 111th Avenue North to allow for the
operation of a mobile auto mechanic business.
The property is currently located in a medium density residential designation
on the comprehensive plan, but it is adjacent to a commercial designation
which can be stretched onto this property.
To the north of this property is a um Iel zoned property and
um the Mason Creek um industrial park there as well as the
um the Shortline Railroad. To the east is an RS6 property. Um that is actually
a uh storage yard as far as we can tell. Um we don't have any permits for that
loca for that property to be used in that way at this point. Um and to the
south west is a residence and to the souththeast is also residential.
So these are the uses that are allowed in 1032. So a dwelling combined with a
business is a permitted use in the BC zone.
Um, automobile parts and accessories that will be stored in the the out
building is a permitted use in the BC zone. Automobile and truck repair, if
it's on site, requires a conditional use permit. Um, as stated, they're not
requesting a conditional use permit tonight because that service will not
happen there. Um, I just wanted to bring that to your attention that they would
need an extra application if they were to do that at that location.
So, should they choose to turn this into a full-fledged business and be approved
to do auto repair, they would be required to bring the property up to
code, which would require a 20ft landscape buffer in the front and a
number of parking spaces that would be required based on the usable area of the
buildings once they choose to convert it. Again, just for your information,
they're not required to do that at this time because they're not converting it.
But if they do convert it to a full-on auto repair business, these are the
requirements that they will be held to. So, the correspondence that we received
um the building department says that this will require the property to be
utilized solely for the storage of tools and equipment as well as for business
filing purposes with the exception of vehicles owned by the property owner. No
automotive repair work shall take place on the premises. Should automotive
repair services be desired on site, among other requirements, an occupancy
change will be necessary and shall comply with the relevant commercial
building codes outlined in all of the code books that we refer to. Um, code
compliance has noted that there are some code violations on this property. Um,
they are maintaining they need to maintain whatever nuisance was outlined
by code compliance. They didn't outline it in their memo. They just noticed
nuisance. Um, prevention of vehicular nuisances. So, I'm thinking they want to
get ahead of any kind of storage of vehicles.
Um, and then it's unlawful to leave inoperative vehicles on private
property. So, again, I feel like this is kind of an an effort to get ahead of
some things that might take place on the property.
The Nampa Fire District does not oppose this application subject to compliance
with all of the code requirements listed by the building department. The
engineering department does not oppose this application with the following
conditions. Um the roads adjacent to the site are managed by the city of Nampa
and um the public roadway that provides access to the site is 11th Avenue which
is a collector public rideway along 11th Avenue at the required width has already
been dedicated. So, no further dedication is required at this time.
Frontage improvements, including sidewalk, curb, and gutter are already
there, so they don't have to install that. And the city maintains all of the
utilities um in 11th Avenue. They're available to the site.
So, as stated, these are the proposed conditions um and any others that you
may choose to recommend at this time. So, the facts for resoning
there again are the three criteria. It is in harmony with the comprehensive
plan. It does propose a use that is compatible with is in the interest of
the public because um it will be providing a service to our community
that is much needed. These are your potential motions and
I'll stand for any questions. >> Christie,
um it's a big piece of property and they're
going to be in the auto repair business and I'm concerned about the buildings
that they're going to put their spare parts in. What happens if those
buildings get to be too small and they got more parts that will fit in there or
like an engine block is not something that you can just stick in a building
and uh put on your back and then haul it
back out again. So, it takes a lot of mechanical stuff to lift the heavy
equipment. Is anything prevent them from over filling the lot with parts, car
parts? >> Um, Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Kho,
at this point, if you were to stand directly in front of the property and
look at it head-on, there's a house there and there's a and there's a fence
that almost completely screens the whole backside of this property from the right
of way. Um, so any storage that they might have on site around their
building, um, you're not likely going to see it. Um, if they did outgrow this
location, then I would assume that they would either build another out building
to store some of their stuff or find a better location and grow their business.
» Hey, me.
» Hey, here.
» Yep. >> You let me ask more questions,
» please. >> Had a rough night. Um,
I know we can't change this stuff on the fly. Is this the best way to get this
compliant? Like there's no path through conditional use
for it seems weird to have this chunk of BC
this residential zone like I assume a home occupation wouldn't work for this
use. Yeah. >> Um thank you Mr. Chairman and um
Commissioner Morgan. Our home occupation is an interesting
um device. Um we used to allow automotive repair, quote unquote. Um
in a home occupation situation, um we had a lot of problems with that.
We've had a lot of complaints about that and that was removed from code.
Um, as far as storing automotive parts and operating technically in business
out of the location, um, we don't have anything in our home
occupation code that would address that particular use. So, by reszoning it
then, um, like I showed you on the chart, those are the things that would
be allowed in that zone, which is what they're asking to do.
So we we kind of went around this in our office as well like what would be the
best way to address this problem. Um because
um the only automotive repair situation that we had for our home occupations was
no longer allowed. So this is the only way we could figure
to get it compliant. >> And I guess I'm already tipping my hand.
I'm a little concerned about like I don't have a concern with him doing
this. I'm concerned about when they outgrow it and move. Now we've got this
chunk of BC on this skinny lot in the middle of a bunch of RS6.
Unless you think the that's the way the rest of this neighborhood's going to go
as it develops. But >> if you look down the road, I think
there's one little road of maybe duplexes.
» Yeah. >> And then it turns into industrial the
rest of the way. So like it's right on the edge.
» Yeah. And the one and the one right next to
it, that's what it is now anyway. It's just
not zoned for it. >> Correct.
» That's what the future land use map wants it to be.
» Wants it to be commercial or industrial or
» um I did I don't see the code or the
colors, but >> what's the future land use map there? So
the future land use map on the property currently is medium density residential
but it is touching commercial. So it can be stretched.
» Did you say somewhere in there that it was adjoining some county property?
» No, it's adjoining the railroad property.
» What was the
» Oh, yeah. I wonder if that got copy pasted from a different
» I think it probably did. >> Okay, cuz they have to access it off of
Happy Valley >> down here in the bottom right.
» Oh. >> Oh my god.
» That's a That's a That's a long access. >> Wow.
» That's crazy. >> Oh, it just shows that I was reading,
not listening. Okay. Um
» Okay. So, you don't think there's And I guess we couldn't do another path today
without readvertising and everything, but there's no way like because it's not
automotive repair like if people aren't bringing it to that site. I'm trying to
see what the difference between that is and having gun parts for sale at your or
something else, any other product for sale that you take somewhere else. But
you you didn't feel like that would be justified in the home occupation code.
Well, because we specifically took that out of our home occupation
requirements for automotive
u I don't know uses. >> Yeah, deliberately.
» We felt Yeah, we deliberately took that out of our code. We kind of felt like we
needed to take this a step further
» than just a conditional use permit.
Rodney stood up. I don't know if he may want to say something.
» Name and address for the record, please.
» And that was a a specific direction from our elected officials to do that. So, we
had it, we had the concerns, and then we just we were directed to make that
change in code. And so I just don't think that the home occupation is the
tool that the our elected officials want to use for
and you asked earlier about like conditional use permits and and you know
that they are used to address impacts to neighboring properties like noise and
fumes and that kind of thing. But um in this situation, they they just were not
comfortable with those land uses at all because they were claiming at the time a
lot of people were claiming, hey, we're not going to impact noise. We're not
going to impact traffic. And then and then it was happening. So they wanted to
eliminate that isn't even an option that we would have to go back and mitigate
later. And I I think I agree with that
that um reasoning. I just don't know that that's what this is. But
that's my opinion. And as stated earlier, I'm not a planning
professional. So
that's all. Brett, I'll be quiet. >> All done.
» I'm all done. Thank you.
» Hey, any other questions for >> I got one.
This is for my education, but what is the difference between a reszone and a
zoning map amendment? Or are they the same thing?
» Um, Commissioner Daffer, they are the same thing.
» Okay, that's it. >> Reszone's just easier to say.
» Anybody else? >> Okay,
we will open up public testimony for this item. Madam clerk, do we have
signup sheet? We do not. >> Is there anyone here that would like to
speak for, against, or undecided on this proposal?
» Seeing none, I would close public hearing.
» Want to invite him back up or >> Oh, wow.
» Would you like to come back up and tell us anything else or no?
» Okay, >> there we go. Okay, it's been moved by
Kho, second by Morgan to close the public
hearing. All those in favor? >> I.
» Any opposed? Public hearing is closed.
» I'll finish my thought, then I'll be quiet. I think I I want this to go
through. I want them to be able to do this business here. There's no there's
no compatibility issues for me right now. it it I don't love the idea of
having this little spot zone of a BC in this residential area.
I'll get your guys' thoughts on it. I don't know if it's enough for me to
reject it, but that's my concern. >> I do. I mean, it's it's touching the
residential on the one side. I mean, it's close to the residential, but
again, it's like right in between pretty heavy industrial stuff and some
residential, right? And so because of the uses that are just, you know, a
couple hundred feet away, I it's not as big an issue for me as it might be
otherwise. And like you said, the people right next
to them, >> they're doing the same thing.
» That should be a BC zone as well. >> They just haven't done it. So,
and a lot of those are pretty old houses on some goodiz lots. So maybe as they
get redeveloped, it'll just continue to I don't have a problem with it.
Yeah, I don't. Just like you said, because it's so close
and if we were right smack in the middle of residential,
I might feel a little bit different about it. But
» as Chris just said, you can't even see what's going on from the outside of the
property. >> You can't. Yeah,
» but theoretically somebody could come down, tear down the house, put in a
business there. >> I don't think it would ever happen. Like
I'm not going to oppose it on those grounds. But that's kind of what we're
letting happen though. >> Yeah. But like I say, a lot most of
those are pretty old on on goodsiz lot. So if it did start to get redeveloped,
it >> going to be a more intense use anyway.
» Yeah.
some of those other requirements.
» True. >> I'll support it.
» I think it's a good idea, >> Mr. Chair.
» Yep. >> Um I move to recommend approval of the
reszone as stated on screen with all recommended conditions of approval and
proposed findings. >> Second.
It's been moved by Daffer, second by Turner to approve this item or recommend
approval for this item. All those in favor?
» I. >> Any opposed?
Motion carries. Okay. U now we would like to invite
Rodney up so he could practice his budget presentation.
» Well, can we journ this meeting first so the rest of us can go home?
But we don't have somebody to adjurnn the first.
He's not here. >> I guess I guess we're stuck here all
night. Uh >> oh, he's on his way. We I invited him
and now we got to listen. >> Thank you guys.
» Thank you. Good luck. >> We need more money.
» Second,
» Mr. Chairman. >> Yes.
» Make a motion that we adjourn. >> Okay.
» Who Who second it? Who wants it? >> All right. Give it to them.
» Okay. Okay, it's been motioned by Garner, second by Daffer to adjourn the
meeting. All those in favor? >> I.
» Any opposed? Meeting is adjourned.