[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6582107,"mediaKeyId","3154583-526fe432695b0a51667211b68c82a9c6","parentId",3154583,"title","Boise council approves code change to allow de novo review of conditional use permit appeals","audioSeconds",3114,"startMs",1292000,"endMs",4406000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3154583-526fe432695b0a51667211b68c82a9c6&start=1292&end=4406","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3154583-526fe432695b0a51667211b68c82a9c6/thumbnail_1292000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6582107/Idaho/Boise-council-approves-code-change-to-allow-de-novo-review-of-conditional-use-permit-appeals","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6582107-0b1fbb1ff6652ea34b07a894272157f2/orig.mp4?Expires=1770939623&Signature=WfNLz0fnu5rm0V4jkrBe04vwX7P~wG87~-r0jGIsvlCkmA-eBQWyy6vJ6bSJd0wtpXzGoWdo21oSBN~6ZQv7JYHfETwFoj4x0kCVfLkFE1QjbIqrmYvM5VtIkzAiyg--NWzanvt8K2VX3u6xC0NufUnvcm4I-j1-n8fBifyQfEY6nDx8zzTEX7QTwJpy1rt4fTNTd2zIMZUbSPLKPJacOoUSc-hdJKAzxsVo5~AY1hIoYW0o~cVRSuVS58LalhR1oK4JCrYnRTyW1eNBjzWKzqTjWmHjBXODGQYCyNsQqhcaTL9H39qaaiZ5Av9u2tdj7TiMV-MlPxj7pRPYo2MWyg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Boise","date","2025-04-30T04:08:37.367Z","article","Boise City Council on April 25 approved ZOA 25-2, an amendment to the city’s appeals procedures that allows the council to conduct de novo reviews of conditional use permit (CUP) appeals and clarifies the city’s arbitrary-and-capricious standard of review.

City planning staff described the change as a response to a recent Idaho Supreme Court decision and as a way to ensure that elected council members — not only advisory commissions — have the authority to reexamine contested, high‑impact land‑use applications. Deanna, a city planning presenter, told the council that “de novo review of conditional use permits does not mean city council will disregard the thoughtful deliberation of the Planning and Zoning Commission.”

The nut of the amendment is procedural: under a de novo review, the council hears an appeal with an open record, accepts new testimony and evidence, and applies the CUP approval criteria directly to the application before it. Under the city’s prior practice, many CUP appeals were reviewed for legal or procedural error on a closed record; council members said that standard limited their ability to respond to new community testimony or to impose conditions to mitigate impacts.

Supporters in the public hearing said the change increases transparency and accountability. Larry Ice, speaking for the Centennial Neighborhood Association, said the amendment “provides additional opportunities for the public to comment on conditional use permits” and argued elected officials should be the final decision‑makers for disputed, high‑impact projects. Several council members said they had repeatedly encountered situations where additional testimony after a Planning and Zoning Commission hearing would have produced stronger outcomes for neighborhoods.

Opponents said the amendment risks politicizing technical land‑use reviews and undermining the expertise of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Katie Decker of the Veterans Park Neighborhood Association urged the council to reject the change, arguing it “allows you to retry cases from scratch” and could invite more litigation. Multiple speakers raised concerns about the timing of the proposal, noting it followed closely on the court ruling that prompted the staff recommendation.

Staff said the changes also include smaller corrections to appeals procedures (typos, incorrect cross‑references) and do not alter other code sections; planning staff told the council the Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval after deliberation. Staff said the city will continue a broader review and audit of the zoning code that is scheduled for upcoming Planning & Zoning work sessions.

After public comment and council discussion, a motion to adopt ZOA 25‑2 passed. The council directed staff to prepare the official reason statement reflecting the debate and the council’s findings.

The amendment takes effect according to the city’s ordinance process; staff will post a formal reason statement and update hearing procedures to reflect the open‑record de novo review for CUP appeals.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Boise City Council - Evening Session","oneSentenceSummary","Boise City Council on April 25 approved ZOA 25-2, an amendment to the city’s appeals procedures that allows the council to conduct de novo reviews of conditional use permit (CUP) appeals and clarifies the city’s arbitrary-and-capricious standard of review.","taxTitle","Boise City, Boise, Ada County, Idaho","taxId",8706,"location","Idaho","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6582103,"Council upholds Ada County jail expansion but trims EV‑parking requirement to four spaces",3868,3243000,7111000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3154583-526fe432695b0a51667211b68c82a9c6&start=3243&end=7111","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3154583-526fe432695b0a51667211b68c82a9c6/thumbnail_3243000.jpg","/articles/6582103/Idaho/Council-upholds-Ada-County-jail-expansion-but-trims-EVparking-requirement-to-four-spaces","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6582103-e05762f0a2d5a2f30ead6b22839a4b4e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770939623&Signature=bzrLso5BMCwKHXuwIMXgVL9UV3Y2LFrmvzKolhyFIzSAgMk~r2fWN9aXkxiViywZRaDITN4YPmVGf75d2SpT~FBzdF96Bej50-JWA2mFxeZ4Ru76WEqXRunFinxiBYDlJEepZ2zpOjQptHIi5VINDlcnuyZRCUn0J3qRSH~4~A3By7R8b0RY2pMMCeHg7L80Uup2sqDdDVp6CNAYJA0Y-xdnumzdEy2qT3yBnzo~NhCVGimWrdr-3BP8e4ebhdVJ1N2ZZ9IlG8THEWbcDuDaGrC6ZyCnavo1N25wCOYAHi~gmMvQobX1RMjkx7HLIFnS9Mp~YGTbKVKd9mUKJIVCug__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Boise City Council on April 25 denied an appeal by Ada County and upheld a Planning & Zoning Commission approval of a conditional use permit for an expansion of the Ada County Jail — but amended the permit’s condition on electric‑vehicle parking, ordering four EV‑capable spaces.

The dispute centered on how many EV‑capable parking spaces the city may require. Planning staff had recommended 31 EV‑capable spaces based on the expansion’s gross floor area and the city’s code formula; the county argued the requirement should be based on the number of newly installed parking stalls and sought either to remove the condition or reduce it. The applicant proposed several figures during the process — including a plan showing conduit for eight stalls and a later offer of four fully installed charging stalls — while staff and the commission relied on the code’s square‑footage calculation.

David Mosher, a city planner, told the council that the city’s development code requires square‑footage–based computation for parking and that “the total number of parking spaces being required for the individual project based on its size and use” is the basis for determining EV requirements. He said the commission’s 31‑space figure came from applying the code to the expansion’s floor area.

Ada County’s counsel, Amon Taylor, argued that the legislative landscape had shifted during the project and that House Bill 86 (signed earlier in 2025) limits local governments from imposing new EV infrastructure requirements in building plans. Taylor told council the county was concerned that leaving the 31‑space condition in place could create a conflict with state law during subsequent design‑review and permitting steps.

Council members questioned the county and staff about the evolution of the numbers. The record shows the applicant at one point proposed 21 EV‑capable spaces in negotiations with staff, later offered four fully installed chargers at the hearing, and had submitted design plans that showed conduit for eight stalls. City staff told council they had earlier recommended 33, then 31, after reviewing the proposed scope and the applicable code provisions.

An electrical engineering estimate provided in the hearing put rough retrofit costs for EV‑capable conduit in the range of $15,000–$20,000 per stall; adding a functioning charger was estimated at about $6,000 per stall in the staff discussion. Council members cited those costs in debating what was reasonable for this particular public safety project.

After deliberation, the council denied the county’s appeal of the commission decision but, citing ambiguity in how the code applied to this expansion and to resolve the matter, attached a condition requiring four EV‑capable spaces. The council asked staff to draft a reason statement explaining the decision and directed the county and city to continue coordination through the design‑review and permitting process.

The council vote on the motion to deny the appeal was recorded as four in favor, one opposed; the motion carried.","Boise City Council denied Ada County's appeal of a Planning & Zoning condition that required EV‑capable parking for the Ada County Jail expansion, but the council reduced the required number to four EV‑capable spaces. The Planning & Zoning Commission had required 31 EV‑capable spaces; staff and the county disputed the method for calculating that","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Boise council approves code change to allow de novo review of conditional use permit appeals

Council upholds Ada County jail expansion but trims EV‑parking requirement to four spaces