Yeah, thank you.

Okay, test test.

I think we're there.

Good evening.

And welcome to the city Nampa City Council meeting.

Thank you all for being here this evening.

Um as you might notice, a few of us are in uh festive attire.

And it tonight is ugly sweater contest, and so we'll do that in just a minute.

Um I just borrowed a shirt, so I don't get to compete.

But here we go.

We do have a tradition here, and that is that we open in prayer, and I so appreciate um our youth minister, Dustin Yankovich that is here to open us in prayer, and he is with the Rock Church of Christian and Missionary Alliance.

Thank you so much for being here this evening.

Let's stand and we'll open in prayer.

And then the pledge.

Let's pray.

Father, I thank you so much for this evening, God, and uh this time, Lord, I thank you for the leadership of our city.

Uh Jesus, I believe your hand is here alive and active, Lord, and working through these men and women as they lead our city.

I pray, Father, that you would encourage them in the decisions that they make.

I pray that you would give them wisdom, Lord, that they need to make good uh and right decisions, Lord, that are good for the the people of Nampa.

I pray that you would also give them the knowledge that they need, Lord Jesus, the data that they need to make those good decisions, Father.

I pray that they'd have all the pieces on the table to know how their decisions will impact the future of this city.

Uh I thank you, Father, for those in attendance, Lord.

I thank you, God that they are here.

I thank you for their involvement uh in how this city runs and and is put together and the services and value that it gives to those who call this place home.

Jesus, I pray that you would be with us this evening.

I pray, Father, for unity among the members uh of the council.

I pray that you would help them, Lord Jesus, to have their opinions and have their desires, but at the end of the day to be able to walk away from this table from this bench, Lord Jesus, and be friends.

I pray, Father, for your unity, I pray for your spirit and your presence to be here in this room this evening.

We ask all of this in Jesus' name.

Amen.

And to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, roll call.

Rodriguez.

Reynolds here.

Griffin.

So Councilman Reynolds.

Thank you so much for being in charge and putting together our ugly sweater contest.

So take it away.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

It works today.

That's fantastic.

Thank you, James.

Thank you, James.

That's a Merry Christmas to the council right there.

So uh everybody that participated today, I see a few of you.

Please line up here in the front.

I'll come down there with you.

If you have a sweater on, you're gonna get judged.

There is a prize, and we have uh four celebrity judges or five.

We have uh two captains from NAPA police department and a lieutenant, and we have Jimmy Whistler from International Minute Press and Elaine from BRT.

So they are going to judge.

There is a uh plaque, trophy, and a gift card for the winner.

So please line up here.

I'll meet you down there.

No.

Yeah.

Let's go get judged ready.

I don't have a sweater on.

I like it.

So why don't we just do it next?

Okay, after the contest.

Well, I love that it is.

No, I don't have to.

Yeah, that is uh yeah.

I'd rather sweat.

If you're a number experience, you can judge from behind.

I won last year.

I couldn't show them all up.

Is there any ready?

Should we go have a little Power over here?

Okay.

We're gonna have an idea.

I would love to go to the computer.

So while the judges, while the judges are judging, I will tell everybody here, you should go to the NAPA PD social media page.

They had a very fun Grinch um sighting, and it's on the MPD social media page.

So if you want to see something fun, go out there to Facebook to the NAMPA PD page.

And to the NAMPA Christian football team, you guys are on next.

So we're excited to have you here.

Yeah.

Greg, we'll have you up next in just a minute.

Thank you.

All right.

Well, thank you all for disp for participating.

Uh we waited in the back hallway before for several minutes for any bribes, but they didn't come through, so we had to do this the old-fashioned way.

Uh very tough decision, very tough decision.

Uh we love the slayer and the geometry and the Grinch, but I think we're gonna have to go with ugly sweater best with the elf on it beach.

So the deciding factor was which is the one you wouldn't buy.

So uh thank you all for participating to our our uh trophy tonight that I got uh honor to approve as they made it is hideous, by the way.

Um but uh International Interpress, which is Jimmy and Cheryl's company, they made this and donated it.

Um so come on up here, we'll present this to you, and we can you can hang this on the wall proudly.

I've got uh again.

Oh first of all, I want to thank God.

Um yesterday at 3 30 p.m.

I went to Sabers and I found this little number.

This wasn't in the men section, we'll just say that.

Thanks everybody.

What is the parts of parts?

Yeah.

That's awesome.

Well, as as we get kind of situated, why don't we just have all of you Nampa Christian football players come to the front?

And Greg, you come too.

Um come on over, guys.

Yeah, go ahead and just stand up front.

Okay, except for you can stand at the microphone.

How's that?

Woo-hoo!

Coaches and administration, please come up.

Coach Jenks stayed here with me.

And then I would love for Randy Haverfield to get to say, because Randy was the one that said this needs to happen today.

So Greg, we'll let Randy say something, and then I would like for you to share.

So Randy Haverfield has a quick word, and then has he ever had a quick word?

That's an oxymoron.

Oh, okay.

Um this is a full circle moment for me.

Uh I coached at Nampa Christian, as you know, for a few years, and uh we never made it across the threshold that you did, coach.

Um wonderful accomplishment.

They say a good coach can change your life, but a great coach uh well no, can change your game, and a great coach can change your life.

You've done that.

This group of young men, um wonderful testimony testimony.

Uh Tina, Mark, thanks for coming tonight.

Again, what you guys do at Napa Christian uh means a lot uh because not only did they win a state championship on the field, but they won the state championship in the classroom as well.

They had the highest GPA in the state of Idaho at their class.

That means you're setting them up for life.

Uh where they go from here, whether it's to college and on to work, or whether it's to play football at the next level.

Uh you've done a wonderful job in mentoring them.

The time that you guys spend in the weight room working together bit builds teamwork and helps you to be leaders.

Uh, I look around this room.

Uh the Crane family, I I saw Tyler, I thought, uh Gray earlier, uh, and uh a few others that have gone through this program, and for the rest of their lives, they are leaders in our community.

Um it means a lot to us.

Uh thank you, Brent.

Thank you, Jaron, if you're here.

Uh I thought I saw Josh Lewis.

Um, I just got to know Corey Hall.

Corey Hall now lives in the valley as a contractor.

And Corey and Josh hit each other uh at uh on the opening kickoff, and we played Glenn's Ferry down there and Josh came off the field.

Corey kept playing.

Um course he went on and played for the Green Bay Packers.

It's uh there's nothing these guys can't accomplish.

And thank you for your leadership.

Thank you again.

Well, I forgot the very first thing I wanted to say.

Uh that's when you go off cuff.

When we talk about faith, family and football, uh, when the first thing that I said to the parents is I want to mentor each of your young men that uh they will know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.

That's the number one goal that we have in this program.

They wear Christian on their chest, they represent Nampa as well.

So it's a community effort and it's the community support.

Family again, there's so many uh family members that have come out, but part of the family element is the classroom and the time that they spend there, because they might not play a whole season, they might play only a few uh downs, but as long as they're doing well in the classroom, they're ready for college.

And then uh football is to win a state championship.

We got close a few times, but we never accomplished what you guys were able to do.

Thank you for uh carrying it across the goal line.

And I know that it was an overtime win.

So uh Coach Lombardi always said that uh the finest hour is the one that where you've spent everything to win, and uh so you've done that.

Congratulations.

Well, just real quick, Mayor, thank you so much for your support of Naprocristian schools for these years, and and you led through COVID, so that's like serving ten terms.

Uh so we appreciate that.

Uh, and your support of Naprocristian schools through the years.

One thing, um, my very first year I got to go on a golf scramble, and Randy and I talked football the entire time.

He's a pretty good golfer too, but uh your stories about football just kept me intrigued.

So we've we've kept in touch, and so thank you for your service here in Nampa as well.

That both of you are uh maybe this is the last meeting uh for both of you, but thank you for what you've done uh for Nampa Christian schools.

But NAPA uh has grown tremendously under your both of your leadership, so thank you.

I think we need to give them a big hand, so thank you.

I just want to uh there's always uh a myth out there that we recruit all of our football players.

How many of you have gone to Napa Christian over 10 years?

How many of you for twelve years?

How many for eight years?

Well, just saying that some of these kids have been here from pre-K all the way through.

Um really want to appreciate Coach Jenkins and the work that he does with these young men, as you know, as a head football coach job, there's a lot of time and effort.

Uh so let's give a big hand for Coach Jenkins.

I'll turn the mic over to him.

Uh I just want to say thank you to everyone that's that's uh had us out today.

Um very, very proud of these young men and what they've done over the last not just this year, but over the last four years for us.

Um for these seniors, this is their third academic state championship in a row, and each one of those we've had the highest GPA for football in the state in every classification, six A all the way down to one A.

So um thank you, fellas, for again working so hard in the classroom, um, putting it all together this year, um, bringing home a state championship to Napa Christian.

And and someone had asked me, is this your best team that you've ever had?

And I say, not by a long shot, but this is the closest team we've ever had, and that's why we were able to accomplish what we did.

So thank you, fellas.

Um, thank you, Mr.

E, Ms.

Pelke, Dr.

Wallace for bringing me here six years ago um to be the head coach, um, and just looking to continue a lot more success here.

So thank you guys.

That's impressive.

So we're gonna do a photo.

So squeeze in really tight.

Greg, come on, the whole everybody, Nampa Christian, pull in here, and we're gonna do a photo council.

Yep.

Here we go.

And guys, we are so impressed with you.

Congratulations.

Congratulations.

Can you see over their heads?

Raise the hand.

Raise your hand, how many are the fire functions tonight?

Yeah, they gotta get going.

That's great.

Thank you.

Oh, yeah.

We're back in the house.

Yeah.

Okay, so we're gonna get back on schedule with our agenda.

And I guess real quickly, our I don't have any proposed amendments to the agenda.

Council, do you have any proposed amendments?

Okay, I would send.

I'm sorry.

I had previously emailed about one five B, but I don't have any further questions on that.

So we're gonna say you're good to go.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

So if there are no proposed amendments to the agenda, I would um ask for a motion to adopt the agenda as presented.

So moved.

It's been moved and seconded.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, and I would stand for a motion to approve the consent agenda as provided.

We'll move.

It's been moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Okay.

So we don't have any agency or commission reports, but we have several staff communications.

So I'll let you guys go ahead and come forward.

The first one is from Parks and Rec, and then we're gonna move on to public works, but we have quite a bit tonight.

So Beach, congratulations.

Oh my, you're like on top of the world.

Thank you so much.

I love it.

Well, I'm getting this setup.

Beech Johnson, recreation manager, Nampa Parks and Recreation.

Mayor Council, good evening.

Merry Christmas, everybody.

Um I legit like 3:30 yesterday.

I was like, I gotta get a sweater.

And I really I mean, I I sewed this on myself, but I did not knit this amazing sweater.

Cardigan.

All right, let me get let me get uh presentation.

I know today is a uh hefty day uh as far as the agenda goes, so I'm gonna be quick uh and then I'll introduce Adam Ancini, he'll come up and talk a little bit, and then our director Cody as well.

All right, let me share here.

All right.

So I want to give a quick update on this this the timing in the segue of having a high school state championship team here is perfect because I want to talk a little bit about youth sports uh and what we do here in NAP and how really important it is to the community.

Uh I'm gonna go view.

So youth sports uh is growing, you know, as our population has grown.

The thing that's really interesting right now is traditionally we have very or we've had very the distinct seasons, right?

So spring was for baseball, softball, summer was for some summer ball, fall was for football, winter was for basketball.

Well, youth sports anymore is year-round.

And because of that, we're we're seeing that we're gonna have to make at our level, the rec level, we're gonna have to make some adjustments.

For example, our biggest sports program or some of our biggest sports program is youth basketball.

We have two seasons.

We have a fall season uh that ends in November, and then we have a winter season that will start on January twelfth.

What we've seen is is that the soccer season is now two really big seasons as well, and so they have crept into our fall season as well as football.

So we were we're missing something.

So we're gonna probably have to adjust our basketball season into the winter, so it'll be more of a uh December January season instead of having two seasons.

So it's it's interesting.

Football isn't just fall anymore, it is the fall season plus seven on seven season, and they're start they start in June and July.

So we're now competing with baseball and softball season at our facility.

So youth sports is continuing to grow.

Uh our volunteer coaches are the backbone of how we have success at NAPA Parks and Recreation.

So a huge shout out to them.

As a matter of fact, Dustin, is Dustin still here?

Dustin, uh, who gave you the indication he has coached in our program for a couple seasons, so thank you to Dustin.

Um building character through sport, and I'll go through fast.

We are we're teaching kids accountability, respect, and we always are trying to chase happiness.

And I actually want to switch that dialogue to joy because that's really what we want kids and families to have is joy.

We make sure that they're trained well, that we understand where they're coming from.

A lot of who we hire high school kids, and so this is their first job.

So we can teach them how to be uh great employees.

Uh and because it's a lot going on all the time, uh, something really important for us is burnout prevention, meaning that we lead with empathy, that we understand life happens, we want them to be successful at life as well.

Um, real quick, I do want to uh you know recognize the incredible work the parking rec marketing team does.

They're always behind the scenes, they do a phenomenal job for our department.

So a huge thank you to our marketing team for everything that they do.

Um we are great stewards of our budget, and that's you know, a core value for the city.

And and Mayor has uh made sure that that is a part of what we do.

So we are great stewards of ourselves and the budget.

And then uh lastly, recreation is more than games, it is connection.

Uh it's where kids grow, families connect, and community thrives.

You know, we are building a community recreation one game, one coach, and one family at a time.

Thank you guys for your time and your support financially to our department uh to make sure that we can continue to connect families and just bring more joy to the community.

So, with that, any questions, the whole as I'll hand it off to Adam and Zini.

Yeah, thanks everybody.

Peach, thank you for just making it fun and for your oversight and work with our recreation division.

It's so important to so many kids' lives, families as a whole.

Thank you for that.

You're welcome.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Yeah, Adam Ancini.

Thank you.

As Adam comes up, I want to say thank you to Adam today because he was instrumental in helping us.

We've got a menorah here at City Hall, and uh Adam helped me with that today, and just to get that situated, I really appreciate it.

That's new to the city.

Um, but we are happy to support our uh Jewish community.

So I'm thrilled to have that here.

And thank you, Adam.

And thank you.

Squirrels and the Christmas tree downtown.

Oh my goodness, you know, different years, there's different sagas.

The squirrels had been a little bit of a problem.

Um, did we chase the squirrel away?

Or squirrels?

I believe we did, yes.

Okay, I think we put some spray that made them not want to get in the tree.

Whatever, that was tricky.

Yeah.

My apologies.

Okay.

Good job.

Okay.

Um, I wanted to take a moment to first of all recognize the Treasure Valley Canopy Network.

If any of you aren't familiar with the Treasure Valley Canopy Network, the City of Napa, particularly Napa Forestry.

By the way, I'm sorry, I'm Adam Mancini, uh City Forester for the City of Nampa.

Um, we have had a partnership and coordinated efforts with the Treasure Valley Canopy Network for over 10 years since its inception.

And the Canopy Network has been a huge part of driving a healthier, more diverse, sustainable tree canopy throughout the Treasure Valley.

Why we're here today is the Canopy Network is expanding their vision and their goals and their initiatives out to NAMPA, and NAPA citizens are going to benefit greatly from this program that they will be presenting here in just a moment about um the opportunity to provide a service to citizens that aren't able to typically afford it.

So again, extremely grateful, very excited for this opportunity.

I wanted to uh welcome Emma Stammer.

She's uh program director for the Treasure Valley Canopy Network.

Thank you.

Adam, um, and first off, apologies that I don't have my ugly sweater on today.

I came unprepared.

Um like Adam said, uh, my name is Emma Stammer.

I'm the program director with nonprofit called the Treasure Valley Canopy Network, and as you may have guessed, we work with all things trees.

And as you may have guessed, we work with all things trees.

So one of those things is planting trees, but the other thing is also caring for trees because an urban forest is only healthy if you care for it, maintain it, and support it as it grows and prepare for the inevitable of having to remove trees.

So we have this awesome new program called the Community Tree Care Program.

And so I think if anyone has had tree work done, we know that it's pretty expensive.

So it's really cost prohibitive to our neighbors that can't afford it.

So this program is here to provide funding to cover needed tree work.

So that might be trees that are dead, dying, declining, just need pruning, all on private property, so at homes in our community.

And so thanks to funding from the Forest Service, we're able to provide a limited amount of funding, but enough funding to provide some really significant tree work across the area.

And so what our process looks like to implement this program.

We have a map here, and you'll see those blue sections there are all of our work areas.

So that includes a lot of NAMPA.

And we're reaching out to homeowners across the area.

So we need their address, we confirm that they're homeowners of their property.

We get a description of the tree work they might need.

If you know if someone has a limb hanging over their home, a broken branch, that kind of thing.

And then there's also an income requirement.

So we are asking for 60% of the medium income of the area.

So it goes to neighbors that need it most in our zone.

And then from there, we're at the application zone right now.

So we're accepting applications across the valley.

And then we're gonna move into our review.

So we're picking as many homeowners as we can to get treat needed tree work done and making sure that the people that need it are getting that tree work the most.

And then the tree work will happen late spring, early summer.

So we have a pretty quick turnaround, and we're looking forward to really providing this opportunity to NAMPA residents, Treasure Valley residents, and having some really great um improvement for urban forest.

So that's a quick um program overview of that.

I'll also add that we have a planting program as well that will complement this.

So if trees are removed or there's opportunity to plant trees, we are providing free trees to NAMPA residents as well in the spring.

So I got any questions.

Yes, Councilman Haverfield.

Just a quick question.

Um C as an example, uh, they have uh tree mitigation requirements.

If the tree is removed, uh equal caliper has to be placed back on the property.

Is a part of this at all uh a community effort where, say, the additional caliper of trees that might not need be needed on that particular piece of ground, maybe can be placed somewhere else outside of the city of Boise.

I mean, are you cooperative?

Uh is there a cooperative arrangement with other smaller communities that might not have again, like say the money available to fund for new trees uh where there might be something available as uh part of that cooperative councilman Haberfield uh and mayor.

Um so to answer your question, uh this program is is purely designed to provide the planting program that Emma referred to is uh basically to residents and citizens that want to enhance their properties and plant trees.

They have done initiatives where they've planted trees at schools and done group planting projects with uh volunteer groups throughout Boise.

Um you may be familiar, might have heard the City of Trees Challenge from Elaine Clegg.

She initiates she's the initiator of that program in the city of Boise.

Um but to directly answer your question.

This does not isn't designed to satisfy the mitigation in our city code, uh, but it would go towards the potential if someone did remove a tree because it was dead or dying or needed to be removed for some reason.

The city code does require you to have to replace a tree for a tree that was lost.

Um of course, if I were to make an exemption based on limitations in space, visibility concerns, or um other issues that might provide me and provide them an exemption, that would be the one time.

But otherwise, yes, a tree would need to be replaced.

Um, and this would hopefully go towards that if people have lost trees.

The city of NAMPA does also have our own program.

Um, unfortunately, we have to charge people and private property owners, but we do have a right-of-way tree program where trees have been lost.

We were able to plant trees in the right of way to replace trees that have been lost for citizens at 150 dollars a tree with the guarantee, and as we come out and plant it, do a consultation and everything.

This is separate than that.

These are free trees anywhere on the people's property and right in the residence.

Um, so it's a great initiative.

Extremely grateful.

Uh, mayor personally knows that we've had some challenges where we've had a lot of people come to us and have a need for this, um, particularly the maintenance program for pruning on trees.

And unfortunately, the city of NAPA doesn't have a program right now established for that and any funding.

So this would hopefully be something that we could jump start in the future and potentially dedicate some funding to continue the tree maintenance program in the city of Nampa.

So I hope that answered your question somewhat somewhat.

Yeah, it just tells me that there isn't a cooperative arrangement with between cities.

Yes, uh, which is too bad.

Um example has a lot more mature older trees that are large uh to be able to mitigate, you know, as far as something if that goes down, uh they can't put it on the same piece of property uh equal.

So uh it'd be great if there was a cooperative arrangement alike with an outlying smaller city community that didn't have the money to be able to put in trees in their new park spaces or something along those lines.

So it might be something just to think about in the future.

Definitely, thank you.

We'll consider that.

Any other questions for myself or Emma?

Be none.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you, and thank you for your time.

Thank you.

And Cody.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

Um Cody Swanner, City of Neapolit Parks and Recreation Director.

I just wanted to come before you tonight as uh the department was giving some updates, and thank you very much to to Bijan and Adam and Emma.

But I wanted to touch on another project that's in the fiscal year 26 budget for the parks department, which is an exciting sign project.

Um I put some renderings in your packet that are probably moot because I found out some information on locations that are not available for us to locate city uh welcome to Nampus signs or something.

I think was kind of the intent at the beginning.

So um you can ignore those.

Those were really just a rendering for an idea sharing.

But now that I have some answers that I need from the Idaho Department of Transportation, I'll be reaching out to some folks to put together uh small committee of of people to decide what do these signs look like, what colors are they, what size are they, where do they go?

It's all very important things.

Um my bringing the idea was to have them at the exit ramps on three ways, so as people exited the interstate, they could see welcome to Nampa.

Um, the problem that I learned is that uh any federally funded um road systems like the interstate, um uh they do not IT does not allow uh signage in the right-of-way areas that it is federally funded.

They do have an exception for uh being on ITD property if it is not federally funded, um, or it could of course be on private property or city property.

So um I intend to reach out.

I think I can invite two members of the council to participate on um that group committee.

So I this week I'll be sending out invites to two that I've talked to previously, and uh along with some city staff from economic development and other uh mayor's office, other departments.

And I just wanted to let you guys know that that plan was moving forward, and then we will be back before you with a concept design once we find a location that works and a sign style that everybody agrees on, and um uh bring that back to you for final approval.

Are there any questions?

Thank you, Cody.

Seeing none, thank you so much.

Thanks for the time.

Thank you.

Okay, public works.

All right, good evening, Mayor and Council.

Um I feel like I'm I'm fairly cheery when I come up here.

Uh so this one is going to be a little bit more somber.

So bear with me for a moment um as I try and provide some information for what we're looking at in the coming years.

I specifically want to speak about Elijah drain today, but before I speak about that, I'm gonna give you guys some general um knowledge about how we analyze these top types of water features and what it means.

So the first thing I want to talk about is letting you guys know that water is not technically just water here in the city of Nampa.

Um, how public works divides it, and this is very, very high level.

If it's a creek or a river, um, if one of those bridges needs replaced or Culver's needs replaced, uh hundred percent of the funding should come from streets from the transportation budget.

So for mine drains, which take both irrigation, water, and the street run-off water is shared 50-50 between transportation and irrigation.

John Spencer, so he's up here with me as well to answer questions.

And then anything that is an irrigation district is a hundred percent out of John's budget, no matter how much I want to make him pay for all of my stuff.

So the next I I want to kind of give you the difference about like what is a bridge versus uh what is a culvert.

We typically call these things crossings holistically, and it could be either one.

So I'm going to talk about all of the Elijah Drain crossings today.

But first, a bridge is anything that has an opening greater than 20 feet.

That's what we consider a bridge, and that's as it's measured along the center line of the road.

It does not have to be a single span.

It could be a giant culvert that is metal, it can be made of concrete, it can be a series of culverts all put together as long as they're close enough.

So the material doesn't matter.

It's the width of the opening.

So anything over 20 feet is typically what we consider a bridge.

The culvert is anything under 12 feet.

So I've got some pictures below.

Again, it does not matter what the material is made out of.

It can be your typical metal CMP that you see in a lot of like irrigation ditches.

It can be made out of plastic, it could be made out of concrete on the right.

It can be a stiff leg, it can be square, round, does not matter about shape, it's just about the opening lengths.

So these bridges and bridges and culverts that we have, we inspect them.

We try and inspect them annually, but we don't get them all done because we have too many and it costs too much candidly.

These inspections give us valuable information on the condition of the crossing, the defects associated with it, service life, and the safety of the structure.

So again, I'm gonna give this very high level, and I tried because this is transportation and I like it better than the water stuff.

I try to make it almost like a street light over to the right.

Um, when we get the bridge inspections, we get a condition rating from nine to zero.

Anywhere that's from like nine to seven, we consider that good in good condition.

We don't really have to worry about it.

When you get into the six and the fives, we consider it fair, we need to start watching it.

Then four and below is poor and critical.

Of all of our crossings that we inspect, um we have 298, 289, so close to remembering crossings that we inspect every single year.

23 of them are in excellent condition, 112 are in very good, 66 are in good condition.

I will say most of those are the ones over the creeks and the rivers, so the ones that are associated with the roadways only.

Uh, we have 45 that are satisfactory, 33 that are uh fair, nine in poor.

When this was done, one was in critical.

Now we have two in critical.

We have none in imminent or failed right now.

Um, but this side of the scale is when we start start worrying about things, right?

We've got 10 to 11 structures that we know are in poor or worse condition in the city of Nampa, and these are just the ones that we inspect.

But not everything's gloomy.

I want to talk about specifically Elijah Drain.

So the map right here, this is just one of the water features that runs through our beautiful city.

So I'm not looking at all of them, just focus on Elijah Drain right now.

Um, Elijah Drain has 40 crossings, it's a mix between bridges and culverts.

Three of them are on the federal highway system, two are maintained by ITD, one is maintained locally.

Um, when I say federal highway system, I mean that it's eligible for federal aid in order to replace it.

The rest of them are not twenty-six of those structures.

We hire a consultant to come and inspect them every year for us.

We use Hughes Engineering.

Um, Hughes does a really great job for us.

He is also the inspectors for Nampa Highway District One, Highway District Four, and the City of Caldwell.

This provides really good continuity between all of the different agencies in our area where we can kind of compare apples to apples when people are inspecting them.

11 of those structures along the drain have not been inspected.

Three of them are owned by the city, four are on private property, and four are on NNU property.

So 11 of the structures that I'm gonna talk about, we don't even know the condition of those.

So I want to talk about a little bit what happens when something gets into that poor and critical condition and it starts to fail and how it impacts us and how it impacts the property taxes.

This was not on our system.

This was technically on the highway districts and in the city of Caldwell.

Um, but it was one that was fairly impactful and not too long ago, so I wanted to bring it up.

It was at Elijah Drain in Midway.

It flooded about 20 homes in 2017, cost about a million dollars for them to repair that.

Um, and this was an emergency repair repair.

So think unbudgeted and very, very high impact.

This does not also include any of the impacts of actually like shutting off water, shutting off irrigation, shutting off a roadway for a long period of time.

So this doesn't count the non-mare monetary impacts that the citizens were feeling because of a closure like this in an emergency.

Another one that is on our radar and is is already failing, is at 12th and Dewey.

Um you can kind of see it big star right there.

So 12th Avenue is state highway 45.

So this one's technically ITDs.

In 2022, Hughes Engineering inspected this for us and listed it, listed it as critical.

It has taken from 2022 to now in order to get the emergency funds to replace it, design it, and now it's under construction right now.

ITD is having to pay about 1.4 million dollars for this emergency repair.

You can kind of see the interior conditions on the right hand side, the heavy corrosion, the pipe is failing.

Um and then unfortunately, the picture on the bottom left, this stacked head wall.

We've got a lot of these throughout the city of Nampa in the past.

That's basically how they used to build the head walls, and they're starting to cause problems now.

The next one, which I will be coming to the city of uh city council very very soon with request for emergency funding for repairs at Pine and Lincoln.

This is just downstream, a couple of blocks of that 12th and Elijah drain that I talked about before.

This one cropped up this year.

We ended up having to complete an underwater inspection on it.

We found 20% wall thinning over the last 13 years, so it's failing quicker and quicker.

It's gonna cost, I'm estimating around 550,000 to repair this.

Um, to put it in scale.

If this had been a planned project, we normally see a project cost about 60% of what an emergency repair would cost for something very similar like this.

You can see in the pictures on the left, the the culvert has failed.

It's creating uh sinkholes along the outside.

We ended up having to close off part of this intersection so that it didn't undermine the roadway.

Um on the right hand side, you can see the the water has eroded completely underneath the head walls.

There's large, large voids that are very problematic.

Crystal, I think you just said we have to close off part of this roadway.

It's a sidewalk.

The road is not closed, correct?

Right.

I drive that all the time.

So I just want to be clear.

Thank you for that.

We've closed off the sidewalk, but it is not impacting the road.

Not yet, yes.

Thank you.

So little tidbit for you, I will be coming to council soon with a with a hope for an amendment.

Uh the next one that has cropped up again this year on Elijah Drain.

This is just a few blocks upstream of that 12th and Dewey, uh, is at Holly and Colorado.

This is just south of the NNU campus for you guys' uh uh view on the right-hand side.

You see that that stacked head wall that I talked about before that causes problems.

Um, this is a little bit of view in this picture on the left.

You can see there's a couple inches of uh exposed gutter where the concrete is actually sagging.

That is actually what triggered off on this.

And when we went out to inspect it, not gonna play.

Um I'll give you the summary.

The entire area below this sidewalk has completely washed away down the drain, unfortunately.

This sidewalk is is in essence floating in the air.

So we have also closed this sidewalk so that it does not cause any future problems for or safety concerns.

We're designing a repair right now to see what we can do.

Uh you can see the inside condition of this.

There is corrosion coming through, so this pipe will likely be a contender for being uh lined.

It won't have to be replaced all the way, but this the stacked head wall is what's causing the problem, it's causing all of the uh material to erode away behind it.

My best estimate on this is about a half a million dollars.

This will also be coming as a budget amendment for an emergency repair.

Can I go back and ask a question?

Because I thought the last one was this one.

So is Dewey when I was clarifying that it actually I could be wrong.

Is the road closed or is it the sidewalk?

I said it as a statement, and it should have been a question.

Uh Mayor, thank you for the question.

There's technically not a sidewalk over on the Dewey.

This one right here.

Right.

Um, there is sidewalk adjacent to it, and we have shut it down so people don't do it.

Um, but I believe the intersection is still open right now.

Okay, thank you.

Uh we did shut it down uh temporarily until we could get the underwater inspectors in there to see how far the undermining had gone on the culvert.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

So these are ones that we know about our problems right now that have already failed in critical condition that we need to go and get fixed.

Um that's 40% higher than what we would pay if we had budgeted money to take care of these projects.

Here's a couple ones that we're watching that um haven't technically been listed as critical, but I want to give you an idea of them.

This is Chicago and Elijah, so on our southeast side of Nampa.

And you can see the condition of the culvert on the right.

There is very um strong evidence of the tree roots growing through the culvert.

So I would hazard to say this is likely and failed in critical condition.

You can see the tree on top of the culvert, which is also problematic.

Um, this is one that we will need to get replaced.

Clear on the other side.

So I'm giving you the whole drain photo, and I can tell you all of these are around most of the crossings on this drain were installed about 60 years ago.

So when we typically see one failure, you can anticipate a domino effect as it goes.

So this one's at midway in Moss.

Another one of those problematic stacked head walls that I keep talking about over and over again.

You can see on the right hand side, it created a little sinkhole where all the material is washing out from behind it.

We have not gone in and we have not been able to inspect this culvert yet on the condition.

So I don't know what that one looks like yet, but when we see repeated failures like this, it will get critical very soon.

So I painted a bleak picture of what this drain looks like.

And I'm like I said, we have thousands of crossings here in the city of Nampa.

I've only talked about 40 of them on Elijah drain, and of those 40, 11 we don't even look at yet.

So 30 or so.

So what do we need to do is we need to increase dedicated funding.

I know fiscal responsibility is very, very important.

Every year we budget between 400 and 500,000 for an annual culvert replacement, and we have been doing that diligently, but it's not enough.

Um obviously we're falling behind.

Um, and when something becomes critical in an emergency closure, that's when it costs more money.

So you guys will be seeing I wanted to give you a preview in the budget.

You will see an increase when it comes to culvert maintenance.

I think it's probably gonna need to be closer to a million dollars for the next few years to get us caught up on this one drain that doesn't even include all of the other crossings that John has to do.

So we need to focus on replacing the failed crossings first.

We have data on most of those, and so we can prioritize that.

Um, then we need to look at the the ones in poor condition and see if they can be saved, see if we can put some line them and make them cheaper and things like that, and then we really need to start thinking about some form of preservation program um looking at it long term to see if there's maintenance that we can do now so that you know it'll make it last another 30 or 40 years for us.

With that, I will stand for questions.

I also brought John Spencer with me, uh director of water resources, so he can answer questions on irrigation and condition of some of those types of pipes, or you know, obviously anything on the drains since we share these 50-50.

Thank you.

Council, do you have any questions for them at this time?

Yes.

Crystal, I didn't see a dollar amount.

I know it's probably difficult to calculate, but if this was a tab, do and payable right now, the fix of repairs for the deteriorated needing to be fixed today projects.

How much are we looking that we'll need to spend?

I don't have a dollar uh council council member Griffin Mayor.

I don't have that number off the top of my head, honestly.

Um I had mentioned before that we have 10 or so drains that are in poor failed condition.

You can anticipate, and I said drains crossings, you can anticipate anywhere between 500 and a million for each one of those, um, probably closer to the 500 to 750.

It depends on the length and the size, obviously.

And if it's really poor condition, then it's a full replacement versus just being able to line it.

So if we got ahead of them, um, but somewhere in the course of that, I will say those are of the crossings that we inspect.

So we inspect just shy of 300.

Um, when you look at John's irrigation ditches, and I'm sorry if I'm checking under the bus here, John, he has thousands that we do not inspect.

Um, in last year's budget, a camera was approved to do some of those underwater inspections.

So now we have the tools that some of our internal staff can start doing that and seeing the conditions of those.

Um, but uh we we don't even have a good frame of reference of the condition of them yet.

And John's team is starting to try and do some like pipe bursting and some lining in-house, which will also save a significant amount of money.

So potentially up to 10 million dollars of the failed, and I say quotes hasn't failed, but the roads have not closed today.

When I think full failure, it's the roads close, we have to do full repair.

How many of those are close, if not almost to that point where they're at full failure?

In the way I described.

I would say that the 10 that I talked about earlier.

Let me go back up to this slide.

Um, so none are full failures, which uh, like if you think about like the Midway and Elijah one that I talked about, if you um think about uh Gardy Interchange north side, some of these that we love so much and so dear to our hearts, none are there right now, and we don't want them to get to crap catastrophic failure because that's when safety is a concern.

Um, the imminent, that's when we start looking at closing it.

Um so we've got 10 that are in poor and critical.

Uh unfortunately, when you talk about deterioration of these crossings, it's not um lateral each by each.

So one could deteriorate much much faster than another one, unfortunately.

Um, so it's just increasing the frequency of inspection.

Um I think what I'd like to suggest is that we have the camera now correct.

Okay, so I think what I would recommend is that you guys bring back a report to city council that shares what your prioritization of inspection is.

Is the critical structure, the one that we're doing the emergency repair on now.

Which one is critical?

Uh because you have one is critical.

This data is based mayor.

This data is based on RGIS data.

The critical structure there was the 12th and Dewey.

So it's being fixed.

We have had one more critical structure, which is now Pine and Lincoln.

Um, and those were about the $550,000 range.

The 12th and Dewey ITD is not ours.

Um, this one's around 550 for the Pine and Lincoln.

But we're not responsible for the ITD one, correct?

Correct.

Right.

Thank goodness that we're not.

Um so I think with that, I would recommend that you guys come back with uh maybe with a longer term financial forecast for them.

I think the thing that um it would have been nice to have known when we were addressing our irrigation increase.

We they asked for a 10% increase.

We agreed to a five percent.

I understand none of us want an increase, but we've got increases.

We've got things that have to be done.

Um, the one thing that we all know, NAMPA is a large older city, not a small older city, a large older city.

So we've got, as you said, we've got a lot of crossings in in the city.

So anyway, thank you for this.

So if you guys would bring back a report, do an assessment and with your new camera, what your prioritization is, and then uh we know that we've got two that we need to address now, and then we'll have a plan as we move forward.

Thank you very much.

Council, any other comments, questions?

Okay, thank you.

So um I think planning and zoning, this is just a really quick update, right?

Clay, you'd be ready for yours quick.

We're gonna be running a little bit late, but we're gonna have to get through the first five agenda items before we step into public hearing.

Thank you, Mayor.

And council, uh, this is really quick.

We had three final plots that you had on your consent agenda, so I'm not gonna cover those.

The next one was uh annexation and zoning for um right-of-way for Cherry Lane along the East Ranch subdivision, and that one was recommended for approval and will come before you on February 17th.

And then the next one was a conditional use permit that uh planning and zoning considered and for gun-related sales and services at the 1836 East uh Selbridge Street, and that one was approved, and then the last one was annexation and zoning for orchard acres, and this was a pretty extensive project.

It had um a whole bunch of different zones BC, RMH, RML, RD, RS4, RS6, RS 8.5, and RS12, uh, and master plan community and development agreement, and uh this is west of South Robinson Boulevard, south of East Greenhurst, and north of Locust Lane, and that one uh was uh 276 acres to be platted in the future.

So it was just the annexation and the master plan community and the zoning.

Um and the planning and zoning commission considered it and they recommended denial.

Um, and this will come before you on February 17th, and we'll talk about the all the reasons for their recommendation then.

Rodney, thank you.

Council, do you have any questions for Rodney?

Just Mayor, just a quick note.

Um, our public hearings tonight.

We have several that are comprehensive plans.

Just wanted to remind you that we do these every six months, and so that's why you're getting a whole bunch all at the same time.

Um, and you'll see it again in six months from now.

Thank you, Rodney.

Appreciate it.

Okay, Clay.

Good evening, Council and Mayor for the record clay long, chief of staff.

Uh, you saw in your packet a memo that came out from Aaron from Canyon County.

I just wanted to give a high-level update of where we are with the animal shelter contract uh and the actions that have been taken so far.

So in September, the can the county released an RFP for folks to put in proposals to manage uh the facility and serve as the organization that would oversee the animal shelter.

That process um resulted in two applicants that came forward, uh, the current provider as well as the Copper Quill Haven, uh, a new organization that has uh individuals that are part of a more extensive and long-term uh facility from the Idaho Falls area, as well as the current on-call vet for West Valley.

The team of individuals reviewing it included NAMPA.

We had two representatives, myself and Captain Scoglen.

Caldwell had individuals, Canyon County had individuals.

We met went over the RFPs and ranked them to start with.

We then asked the two organizations to come back to give us presentations, and then from there we made a recommendation that went forward to Canyon County on the 9th of December.

And the county commissioners approved our recommendation and has awarded it to CopperQuill as the organization that would take that.

A couple of the things that were identified and that we know our initial work to be done is going through and looking at the actual counts of who's providing and who's taking animals to the facility so there can be a better allocation of those costs directly to the cost associated by the organizations that are having individuals or city entities or county provide those animals to the shelter and then set level setting a uh levels of expectations and what um the cities desire to have within that service.

So the county is currently working on uh with the organization what that transition date looks like, what are those milestones, and they have reached Copper Quills has reached out to meet with uh the city to have that initial conversation.

So I just want to provide that update.

I know it was uh a big discussion during budget as well, um, but uh the memo kind of lays out all of those pieces as well as the ranking that was finalized from the committee, and I'm happy to stand for any questions.

Mayor Clay, thank you.

Okay, so I have Councilman Haverfield and Councilman Bills.

Just a quick question are they gonna be utilizing the same facility?

That is correct.

Thank you.

Councilman Bills, transition, what's the time frame?

Um they are working on that with the county and Copper Quills as well as the animal, the current provider to identify what that looks like.

Um, the county's running lead on that.

I uh we haven't gotten any update yet from the county on some specific dates.

I know that Copper Quills is already wanting to meet with the impacted entities, but we haven't gotten a timeline of when that transition will be official.

Then where are we standing uh what we budgeted and what uh the current party was wanting uh the differential and we bridged the gap for a month or two.

Here we are four or five months down the road.

Where do we stand on all that?

That's a great question.

Um so one of the the big differences between the two proposals was the current provider uh was continuing to go with that higher amount, the 1.5 million between the three entities.

Uh Copper Quill provided back what was budgeted in current year budget to manage the facilities.

So in answer and what are we paying under the interim?

Are we staying with what we budgeted?

We are staying within our budget.

And we will be um one thing that Clay will be and Eric Scogland has been the liaison that we've talked about is that the city of Nampa is paying higher feed in Coldwell.

They will be looking at that, but we are within our budget.

Okay, but we made the decision we really didn't have an option.

Um it would have been much more expensive for us to stand something up quickly, but we are we are not going over what we budgeted, stayed right within our budget, but they're also going to be looking at the intakes and ensure that they're tracking them.

That's been a request that we've made.

Yeah.

Back to us subsidizing other communities.

Yep, you're right.

Any other questions?

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay, so we've got we're running late, but we've got we've really we need to get through um five one, two, three, four, and five before we go into public hearing.

The first two I think are going to be very quick, so I'm going to start with them.

Five one is an action item, it's to authorize the mayor to sign a contract agreement with Mid-America Golf and Landscape to install a new irrigation system at Centennial Golf Course for three million eight hundred and nineteen thousand seven hundred and fifty-nine dollars and eighteen cents.

We discussed this at the last meeting.

Um, it's come back again.

Council, do you have any questions for Cody?

Make a motion to approve.

Second.

It's been uh moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

Roll call.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Coverfield.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

Five two is an action item.

It's to authorize the mayor of the public works director to sign a task order with JUB.

Engineers for the Pertham Lift Station Upgrade Planning Project and the amount not to exceed 128,000.

And this isn't approved in the FY26 budget.

So moved.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

Roll call.

Jingula.

Yes.

Bills.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Haverfield.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

So the next three items are related to sewer reimbursement, a sewer water reimbursement services.

So 5-3 is an action item.

It's to authorize the mayor to sign the sewer and water service agreement with Murphy Development for a 78-acre parcel near the intersection of Eustach Road and Canada.

And Mark, did you want to present or uh council?

Do you have any questions on this?

I move that we pass it.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded that we uh authorize the mayor to sign this agreement.

Is there any discussion?

Seeing none roll call.

Pingula.

Yes.

Haverfield.

Uh yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Phil's.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

5-4 is an action item.

This is to authorize the mayor to sign the sewer reimbursement agreement between the city of Napa and Murphy Development Company.

So moved.

It's been moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

Roll call.

Pingula.

Yes.

Haverfield.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Bills.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

5-5 is an action item to authorize the mayor to sign the sewer reimbursement agreements between the city of Napa and six property owners represented by Idaho Holdings, LLC, Mark Bottles Real Estate.

They moved.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

Roll call.

Bills.

Yes.

Haverfield.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Jingula.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

Since you guys are here this evening, I want to pause for just a second and say thank you.

Thank you so much for working with legal and uh on these particular agreements.

Uh you've done an amazing job.

Thank you.

Thank you for investing as we need to extend and your willingness to invest as we need to extend this the Purdue drain to get out.

So we really appreciate it.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Okay, so it's a few minutes after six.

The next two new business items, I think we'll do.

Um Natalie needs to step away.

Um she will be back, so we will leave these last two until after public hearings.

So with that, we're gonna go to our public forum and then we'll step into public hearings.

And and we don't have any proclamations this evening.

So we do have one resident signed up for public forum this evening.

Madam Mayor, we do have three people signed up.

Okay.

Our first speaker is Kimra Luna.

And as you come forward, I'm sorry, the name again.

Kimra Luna.

Kimra Luna.

Is Kimra Luna here?

Okay, and I will say um as you guys come forward to speak.

We have three minutes.

Go ahead and state your name, your address, and you'll have three minutes.

So thank you.

Hello, hi.

Um, good evening, council members.

Um, my address is 1207 Maple Street.

Um, my name is Kimra Luna, and I am born and raised here in Napa, Idaho.

I'm 39 years old, and I'm a parent of three.

Recently, my 10-year-old son came home from school upset and confused.

He asked me what what would happen if his friend's parents were taken by ice.

He started crying and asked where his friends would go and who would take care of them.

That conversation didn't come out of nowhere.

Just one block from my son's bus stop.

Four people from the same family were detained.

My son put the pieces together as his school is primarily Latino kids now because Snake River School had closed and the kids all transferred to his school.

This is not happening far away from us.

It's happening where our kids wait for the bus.

A week before this, the NAMPA police called ICE on a couple who was simply asking for help when their vehicle caught on fire.

And a few days ago, ICE also attempted to detain uh workers at a construction site on Cherry where people were framing homes in a new neighborhood.

Um no one was detained from what we are aware, but the workers dropped their tools and ran.

That kind of fear doesn't disappear when vehicles and ice agents leave.

We've seen the police racially profile people by polling them over and asking them for their legal status and letting people go without giving them a ticket.

Families are afraid to leave their homes.

People are afraid to go to work, to shop, or to call for help in an emergency.

Local businesses are feeling it.

Our neighbors are feeling it.

People are terrified not only by ice, but now of the police as well.

As NAMPans, we are demanding answers as to why the NAMPA police department is calling ice on people who are asking for help and support.

And why has the city made no public statements acknowledging the presence of ice in our community for uh an um addressing the fears that have been caused?

We see that you, the mayor, have been giving awards to folks for their work in the Hispanic community on Facebook, but we don't see any words or even clarity on what is going on with the immigration enforcement in NAMPA.

Some being that affects a large portion of NAMPans, given that we have a large population of Latinos here.

When people are afraid to ask for help, that makes everyone here less safe.

I'm asking that this council to take responsibility for their role in what the city plays to set clear boundaries between law enforcement and federal and immigration enforcement and to publicly affirm the values of trust and dignity and safety for everyone who lives here.

Our children are watching, they are listening and they are learning what we choose to protect.

Public safety should mean care, not fear.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Madam Mayor, our next speaker is Crystal Flippants.

Hi, Chris.

Go ahead and share your name and address again.

Thank you for allowing me to speak.

My name is Crystal Flippants.

I am uh a resident of Nampa.

I live at 1201 South Vonneville Drive, NAMPA.

And I love my community.

Um I'm 35 years old, and I've lived in Idaho since I was 18 years old, fresh 18 in 2009.

I moved here.

That's a longer story that I won't share today, but I love Idaho and I love my community.

Um so but this isn't about me.

Today I'm speaking on behalf of another Nampa woman, another NAMPA family.

Um they're an indigenous Native American family, as a matter of fact.

Um they have their um they have their papers and everything.

And um she she can't be here today because her child is in counseling, because their patriarch, their father figure was taken by ICE, they call it kidnapping.

I don't, I I'm I'm I'm not gonna share an opinion on that today, but um she would like to be here, and I'm gonna be here in her stead to represent her and her family and everyone who is like her and her family in NAMPA who are being scared and terrorized by ICE in our community.

Um ICE is traumatizing our community, and ICE is traumatizing our indigenous children, our Hispanic children.

If you look like me, you don't have anything to worry about.

I don't have anything to worry about.

I don't worry about that on a daily basis.

But you know what I do worry about?

I worry about my neighbors, I worry about my friends, I worry about my community, but all of my community, not just the people who look like me, but all of us.

We all deserve to feel safe.

A significant portion of our of our community right now does not feel safe due to the ICE presence in our city and the cooperation of the police, and by cooperation, I mean calling ICE when people are asking for help.

And it makes people not want to trust our police.

And I don't think that's a good thing for our community.

I think we need to be able to trust our police, all of us.

Um I'll leave it there.

I said what I needed to say, and uh thank you so much for hearing me, and I hope to hear something more positive in the future coming from our city council uh regarding uh this situation.

Thank you so much for coming tonight.

I appreciate you sharing.

Thank you.

Thank you, thank you.

Madam Mayor, our last speaker is Dominique Powell.

Hello, my name is Dominique Howell.

I am a former NAMPA resident.

I currently live in Boise Congressional District 2, Council District 5.

I am a local business owner, voting constituent.

Dominique, you know what?

I I sincerely apologize that this particular section is only for NAPA residents, and only because I have stopped someone previously that wasn't from NAMPA.

I'm gonna have to stay true, or it's gonna get me in really big trouble because I've got to stay consistent.

That's fine.

So it's it is noticed as only NAMPA residents hearing from our residents.

Is the topic the same?

It's similar.

Okay, which so I'm not gonna let you finish, and I apologize, but it is our rule, and I'm gonna be real to stay with our rules.

That said, um, thank you for coming.

Okay.

And um I do have a copy of my statement if you'll take it.

That'd be great.

Yes, we will.

We'd be happy to.

So, Dominique, thank you so much, and I apologize.

So um typically we don't provide response to testimony, but I don't we have uh two people here.

We have thank you so much.

Um counsel, we will get this all to you.

So we have both Eric Scogeland, thank you, and Brad Shoulders here.

Would either of you like to, I'm not sure who's better equipped if it should be Eric as a captain, thank you, and Brad, thank you for being here.

Um I will say, I would like for them to speak to what they are doing versus what they aren't doing.

I do want to say though, before we start, that we have met with the Idaho Hispanic Chamber.

In fact, I had a meeting with all the mayors across the Treasure Valley recently, and we met and they listened to um uh I just totally blinked out.

Um sorry, I all of a sudden I lost her name, Mati Ramos, who is the executive director of the Idaho Hispanic Chamber to talk about the very thing that you're talking about.

Um we definitely have a heart of compassion for what's happening, and it's very difficult.

Eric, could you speak to our policy um with police and what we're doing and what we're not doing?

Yes, Mayor, if you could.

Uh Mayor and Council Eric Scopelin.

Um so I uh you're probably a little more familiar, perhaps from conversations with the chief.

I know the chief has been meeting with uh members of the Hispanic community who have reached out to him and uh fielded some questions and given some responses.

Um we treat ICE like we do any other federal partner or other agency that reaches out to us if they have something they need assistance with, we assist those agencies as long as it falls within the purview of what we do.

Um at least one of the cases uh that was mentioned uh where an individual was arrested that it called in for some assistance on that edge of individual didn't have a warrant.

So that was the that was a circumstance when why they were arrested.

But when we do take action and detain or arrest people, it is because there is some crime that has occurred uh or a warrant that has been issued.

So um so that has been our practice, uh, and we do that regardless of whether it's ICE or whether it is DEA or FBI or whatever agency it is that we are working with.

So um, but our uh we so I'll I'll just leave it at that.

So my understanding, and just for the public, is that what we have clearly stated is that we are not searching out or looking for illegal immigrants, however, we are enforcing the law, and so if I is here, um we don't get in the way and prohibit their work because they are a federal agency and we are if they call for an assist.

My understanding is we have a responsibility to show up.

Is that correct?

Correct.

If any agency calls for our assistance and they're in NAMPA, we'll go assist them.

Right.

So the reason gonna going back to this one, because there was a warrant, that's why they were called because there was a warrant out.

So what we are trying to do is uphold the law if there is any criminal activity.

That said, this whole the season we're in is very awkward and very difficult.

And I'll just make a statement.

I am going out of office, but I'll make a statement, whether it's popular or not.

We need immigration reform.

We have a number of people that have been here for many, many years that have no criminal history that need a path to immigration.

They play a very important role in our community in certain in the agricultural industry, whether it's um the dairy farms and and they do so much work that we have to have done.

And so for those that have been here for a very long time, the question is, and it's not gonna be an easy process.

What is a long time?

It's not gonna be an easy thing, but we need to address it because there are a lot of people that are living in fear that don't have a criminal history, and that makes it very, very difficult.

And so um we do need to sit down and have some discussions.

I appreciate you guys having the courage to come and speak up.

Um is that we do enforce the law.

So if there is a criminal history, then we are going to enforce that.

But for the where there's no criminal history, um that we need to figure that out, and so it's something that we'll work on.

Um, what we don't want to do is have a situation where the people are afraid of NAMPA PD.

So is it Eric, is there anything else we should be sharing?

I want to make sure I'm representing correctly what I understand.

Oh, I'll I will just a point that you made.

We don't go out and actively seek out uh individuals who may be here illegally, that's not our mission.

That's ICE's mission, perhaps, or Department of Homeland Security.

Um so but when we encounter situations where somebody has a warrant related to that, then we do enforce that.

It's actually above the city of Napa when it comes to what ICE is doing.

That is gonna be that's a step up at the federal level, and so that would be more of a congressional discussion as far as what is happening, but um it's at the federal level versus the local level, so there is definitely a difference.

Is that correct?

I want to make sure that what I'm saying is correct.

Yes, but I don't disagree that we need to have a discussion.

So thank you guys for being here this evening.

And thank you for your respect when I didn't let you finish.

I apologize.

I just have to adhere to our rules.

So thank you so much for your grace on that.

Thank you.

Okay, so that concludes our public hearing.

And I'm sorry, we're a little bit late.

Um excuse me, our public forum.

Late getting started, yes.

Do we have someone else?

We actually do have one more person for our public forum.

I apologize.

Thank you.

And who do we have?

I just need uh a minute of your time.

Oh, so council president.

Today I had the uh honor and privilege of going to the VRT Compass Holiday Luncheon and Awards uh presentation, and um why I was there, they uh recognize Mayor Kling for her many years of service to COMPASS and also the BRT, and then she was given this award, a leadership and motion award um for leadership by example from an elected official.

Uh, this is a really high honor, and um I wanted to make sure that she was recognized tonight at our council meeting for receiving this award.

So thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That is so sweet.

Thank you so much.

That is so kind of you, and I have to say I was extremely honored to get this award.

Very honored by um that leadership team.

So thank you so much.

Thank you.

Okay, so that concludes public forum, and now we're gonna get ready for our public hearings.

We have a number of public hearings this evening.

I think we have a total of five.

And um I think our first ones should be relatively short.

So we'll start with public hearing 8.1.

This is an action item.

It is a public hearing on the summary of the consolidated annual performance evaluation report, which is called the CAPER, and authorize the submission of the 2024 CAPER to the Department of Housing and Urban Renewal honor before December 31, 2025.

Matt, thank you for being here.

Uh good evening, Mayor Kling and Council.

Um pleasure to be here again with you guys.

Uh yep, you've summarized that quite well.

Um excuse me.

Uh this is uh annual uh performance report that I submit to HUD.

Um it is one of two things that requires a public hearing.

Uh, this one is uh is one of those.

Uh the CAPER is in essence a summary of what we did in the prior fiscal year.

Uh that's both was expenses, um, the number of people we assisted as well as I do some narrative on the uh some of the things we're doing in the community that aren't related to money, so like the things we're involved in, like Region 3 Housing Coalition, the Health Impact NAMPA stuff, uh things that we're doing in the community that doesn't necessarily involve spending funds.

Uh but we report out on all that, and then how do we review that here the first part of the year, and then and then uh hopefully as they usually do approve that uh caper, and then we can move on uh to getting more funding the next year.

Uh but this is just us providing our sort of um our responsibility to provide that, I guess.

Uh not sure why it's not advancing.

There we go.

Uh so uh real quickly, uh the 2024, which is what I call the annual action plan, which is the 2025 fiscal year.

Uh we had uh a little over a million dollars.

We had 1 million dollars, 25,782 18 available in that plan to expend.

Um, and then we also had the remaining 78,000 dollars in CARES Act funds for a total of uh of 1.1 million uh and some change, but those are the funds that were available in the plan and the remainder of that CAPER, or excuse me, the CARES Act funding.

Um one thing I do want to highlight real quick, it's a slightly different from the memo that I submitted um in working with finance uh just going through and doing a final reconciliation.

We identified two transactions uh invoices.

One was our second part of the year I cramp allocation that didn't get uh kind of flowed in where we could see it, and then one is an invoice for West Park that they preferred I move back to the 25 fiscal year.

So those weren't in our expenditure numbers.

I wanted to highlight them here, and I'll have highlighted where they're different in the charts in your memo in this, and then I will provide Shar at the end um the updated, and I will change all these numbers in the CAPER when I submit it to HUD.

But the total impact was $2,544, so nothing really major, but we want to make sure we get it in the right place.

Um so uh as far as the activities that were in the annual action plan.

Um this chart just kind of summarized the things that were funded.

So our public services, they fully expended all the money.

Uh those are uh fully expended and completed.

Um our home repair loan program actually came very close to expending all of its fund.

We fell short by about 4400, but we were able to help quite a few people this year.

Um Creech's court, uh, just an that activity is still active.

They're currently right now, they've torn it up and they're I think they're prepping to get ready to put the concrete back down.

So that one is underway.

Uh, we're hoping to have that one done by the first part of January.

We've had really good weather for this kind of stuff, thankfully.

And then um the public works uh ADA and crossing improvements, that's still also an active project underway, and uh I'm hoping that one will be finished up here in the spring of the 26th fiscal year.

Uh we did not move forward with any ADA improvements.

Uh we still have the 2023 allocation and those ADA improvements we were doing at various facilities around NAMPA.

So I we wanted to wait and finish those before we did any other allocation to make sure we could finish what we'd already started before we before we move on with others, because we've been having a timeliness issue.

So those funds will be reallocated into something in this current um fiscal year.

We'll find an activity with public works, parks, or facilities to make sure those funds get into something new in the current fiscal year.

So we're back to you to uh to help allocate those funds at a later date.

Matt, can you explain um I guess I'm wondering, I know the ADA is really important and we have a lot of needs, and I know that we came close, not a finding, but close because we didn't use something in an in an allotted time.

Can you help me understand why on our ADA facility improvements we're not able to get them done and we're having to reload reallocate those to something else?

I'm not sure.

Uh so the of the things that we picked, I think they they gave us the highest priority.

So those were the five buildings that we did some ADA improvements on.

So it was Color Lawn and the NDSC building City Hall, which is going to be happening here at the end of December, first part of January.

So they're making improvements to all those facilities.

Um, but it just took a really long time to work its way to the point where we were actually doing work.

And so it it took so long to develop.

I was worried about putting this into something new that might take another year and a half to develop because what we didn't want was to have it draw out over time.

So we were I would we were waiting to make sure the first ADA improvements, facility improvements got done.

Um, but it at this point we can put it into whatever we want.

So we'll probably find the thing that can be done the quickest, and we'll get that money out the door since it was last year's money.

We'll find something that can spend now, and then we will we can work with facilities again to identify the next list and and get it applied for, allocated, and then maybe ready to start in the next fiscal year.

It's kind of my hope.

I would like to get it in something that is sh is more shovel ready and we can do right away.

I guess just a quick comment.

Um Clay on this ADA with facilities.

I would because it was originally allocated to ADA.

I think we need to be really quick to figure out is there something we can get done that is meeting one of our ADA needs.

And so I would like to ask that we prioritize that if we'll be happy to go there to the ADA.

I'll be happy to work with them.

Did we get it done?

I'm not sure why it's taking so long.

So if you would I'll let you just address that, or you don't have to even speak to it tonight.

Let's just get it done.

I guess would be my comment.

Thank you.

And I know that they will.

Yeah, no, I have I have every confidence.

I it was just uh for whatever reason those five buildings just took a while to get designed and and through all the steps we needed to get through.

Um but uh but at this point though those are gonna be completed here in January, and so we'll be ready to move on to the next thing.

So I'd be happy to work with them and figure out what we can work on and what we might be able to accomplish, but uh more than happy to.

We can we can always come back and reallocate the facilities.

I'm not saying they they don't need to get it, I'm just saying we'll find something that we'll spend it.

I guess let me ask Councilman Bills, did you have a thought or a comment?

Actually, you're gonna be here longer than I'm gonna be here.

So if you feel differently, um I would need to be careful because I'm not gonna be here.

Well, my thought or comment is is uh we're losing the due diligence uh between facilities and and this side of the program, and we've got to re-kick back in the due diligence of getting things when we're seeing stuff in 24 and we're getting ready to talk about 27 budget.

So something's something's slipping well from my side, and I understand your side is a little different from what I'm used to in life.

Yeah, uh, but I I'm just looking at it, doesn't do well to do sidewalks and ADA ramp change outs in December, January.

Right.

Uh I haven't had great success on those uh surfaces always holding up.

So it just seems like our timing and and the reporting and so forth is dragging on my mind.

I don't want to try to be critical.

It's just we gotta energize some due diligence in several of our areas.

And I think enhance it, we'll just enhance our communication with the facilities department.

So working with Clay, um, so that we can figure out how we can get these done, and then we do have council members on that facilities review, so you can have these discussions, and so we'll just put that on your next meeting.

You bet that'd be great.

And just for a point of clarification, the t when I when I'm using 2024 action plan and 2024 CAPER, that is what HUD would call or call as a funding year.

So it's confusing because most of us use fiscal years as well.

So it I try to always separate it as just a program year.

So my 2024 CAPER and an act action plan is your 25 fiscal year.

So we're this was something that I would have hoped would have happened in this current fiscal or excuse me, the prior fiscal year, we just didn't get anything launched.

Um we were still finishing up something from the prior fiscal year.

So that was this is really only one year out with no activity, and so I although I I do not want that, uh it's uh it's not two years back, I guess is what I wanted to clarify.

It's really just the last fiscal year.

I run one year behind the fiscal year in our planning year, so I don't know why they do it that way.

But it's confusing.

It's the year that we get the grant, which is uh October of each year.

So and then I'm only briefly talk on talk about the CARES Act.

We there was a right in mid-year, there was a couple activities that we fully finally fully expended the grant.

Uh that one is now completed and uh no more funds outstanding, which I'm excited for.

I won't have to address it in next year's plan or CAPER.

Um, and then um I this section that's highlighted in yellow that that I cramp amount that I said we were gonna need to add in.

This is slightly different from what was in the packet.

Uh that increased the admin expenses to 11, 379 76, which is still well below the 20 percent cap.

Uh, we're at 16 percent on that, and public services again um fully expended their funds, but uh we were just under the 15 percent cap that is uh regulatory requirement for public service activities.

Um this is sort of a combined of our year-end accomplishments for activities that were completed.

Um so we did finish the West Park bathroom.

That was a big ADA improvement, um, which moved that bathroom over closer to the parking lot and tied into city services, which was really helpful.

Um, and then we uh all of the public services were completed.

Um they were um all pretty much on par, if not exceeding uh their estimated goals, and then the home repair loan program, we were able to assist 13 households last year with things like furnace, water lines, uh roof repairs, and then the the just that highlighted there in the yellow.

That was just the last two little bits of accomplishment we had with the CARES Act funds that uh ended up rolling up into a grand total, and then the fifth street pet ramps finished up in last this last fiscal year, and our the core um housing development on 12th Avenue.

That one is we anticipate will be fully leased up in uh the end of this month, early January.

So that that one will be counted and sort of recognized in next year's report.

But they're I think they're finished with construction, they're just doing the lease stuff at this point.

And that is try as quick as I could get through a lot of information.

Um I do have two action items if you want.

I this is the one that came in the packet.

I added one on if you wanted to add the language that says to include those other funds that I mentioned earlier.

Uh it's just kind of how you'd like to read that.

I guess we do need to do public comments.

We do have public comments, so thank you.

So this is the action item that you would ask for to include the identified and additional expenses.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Council, do you have any questions for Matt before we move into public hearing?

Seeing none, we'll have you back if we have a question.

Thank you for that report, Matt.

Matt, thank you.

I know that, and just as a reminder, this CDBG funding is federal funding.

There is a lot of regulatory oversight that we probably don't see an experience here at the bench that Matt has to track, and you do a really good job of that, and I just want to say thank you.

You do a great job.

So this is a public hearing.

Madam Mayor, there is no one that requested to provide public testimony on this item.

Is there anyone here that had intended to provide public testimony that did not get signed up on this hearing?

Okay, seeing no one.

Um do you have any additional questions or any questions for Matt?

Just ask it again.

Seeing none, I would stand for motion to close public hearing.

Second.

All in favor?

Okay.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

What is the will of the council?

Council discussion.

Mayor, I make the motion to uh approve the action item as uh listed.

Is that all right if I can just say that?

Listed on the screen.

It's been moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

Seeing none, roll call.

Bills.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Have a field.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

Matt, thank you.

We appreciate your work.

Thank you guys.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Okay, 8 2 is an action item.

This is a comprehensive plan text amendment.

It's a zoning text amendment and zoning map amendment to redefine the NAMPA downtown NAMPA core, change various chapters and sections of Title 10 where downtown is referenced or needs to be added for new form districts and change zoning designations from downtown historic to central NAMPA, downtown village to gateway business, and downtown business to gateway business, which is GB1 zoning districts for the city of Napa.

How are you today?

I'm doing well.

How are you?

Thank you.

All right, we'll get started here.

All right.

So uh good evening, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Brianna Howe, uh senior planner with the planning and zoning department.

Um so between myself tonight and Christy and Rodney and Doug and anyone else that might be able to answer your questions.

Um, we're gonna present this to you uh this evening.

Um we're bringing forward a comprehensive plan uh text and zoning uh text amendment along with a zoning map amendment um to adopt form-based code for downtown NAMPA to redefine the downtown Nampa core, um changing various references and code sections to reflect the new form districts and the new downtown zoning designations.

So why form based code for downtown NAMPA?

So form-based code was a top recommendation that came out of the downtown implementation plan that council adopted.

Um it is more explicit in what the city desires for the standards of development in downtown.

Um it keeps the fabric and character of downtown in place while still alleviate while alleviating that disconnect that we've had between business owners and the city and developers and property owners.

So how will form-based code impact downtown and the process for reviewing um development?

So we've called out a few key ways that this will positively impact the downtown development process here.

So first, um, under current code, it requires that all buildings look historic, which can be very subjective, which we have found through our review process through the various boards and commissions under the new form-based code.

It allows greater flexibility in the building form, which um is more objective, um, which creates certainty.

Um, right now the current code um has created uh a disconnect between developers, staff, boards, and commissions.

Um, you have each of these groups thinking a different thing on what historic means and relating to the other buildings, um, which has just been difficult for for staff when writing staff reports for developers coming in knowing what to expect and then going before the different boards and commissions and getting different um kind of responses back.

So, under the new form-based code, um, just really clear expectations, um, which I think is what we want to put out to the development community and our business owners.

Um, so less confusion is always a good thing.

Um, one of the things we kept hearing through this process is that the building design and review process in downtown was long and uncertain.

Um, the new code addresses this and it will now only be reviewed by staff.

Um, any appeals to staff decisions would then go before the uh design review committee.

Um that's exactly how we're handling industrial design review right now, so it'll be a similar process to that.

So, lastly, by creating this more streamlined and clear process with greater flexibility.

We anticipate that this will um ultimately encourage new development downtown.

Um, our consultant on this project um who is actually online if you have any questions for him and staff uh created um this review worksheet to ensure a smooth process for applicants so the applicant will fill this out and staff will review it.

So it's easy for them to use and easy for us to review.

So I'm gonna quickly go over the form districts here.

So the form-based code um will cover what was previously identified as the DH downtown historic zoning district.

Um this zone will now be the CN, the central NAMPA zoning district.

Um within the CN zone, there are five total form districts.

Uh the CH, the central historic, is the orange there in the center.

That will be the most restrictive, which is where our National Register of Historic Places district is.

It has about 10 buildings in it.

And certain architectural styles will be required in that form district.

The other form districts, the C11, the CD, the CR, the C16, will just have recommended architectural styles.

So during this process, we held several different workshops with various boards and commissions and downtown stakeholders and city council members.

We heard that the current historic zoning district was confusing and restrictive and misnamed, perhaps, with few buildings that were actually historic.

So we've reduced the historic district significantly, as you can see here, going from this whole thing being called historic to just that little piece.

So more aptly named.

Again, during this process, we heard very specific concerns.

Some of these from our council members, others from downtown business owners.

So we just wanted to quickly address how what we heard and how we addressed it in code.

So we heard concerns around architectural styles, so we made sure that we added in the classical and our Nouveau and modern styles.

Only required architectural styles are in the CH form district.

We heard a concern over requiring a three-story minimum height requirement.

So we reduced that to the requirement being a minimum of two stories in all form districts.

Certain uh nuisance uses being permitted.

So we ensured that the following uses are not permitted anywhere in the central NAMPA zone, sexually oriented businesses on mobile sales and on local service uses, drug paraphernalia store, vape store, outdoor storage, storage facilities, payday lending establishments, and drive-thru establishments.

So those will not be allowed anywhere in that CN zoning district.

And then projects, the last thing, the big thing we heard that projects going before the Arts and Historic Preservation Commission were going before them unnecessarily.

So again, we removed this requirement that projects go before AHPC for a recommendation, unless they're listed on the National Register of Historic Places or are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, which are only 26 buildings out of the 116 of the surveyed area.

So very few will have to go through that more restrictive process.

So I'm going to briefly go over the development standards.

Many of you have seen this when we held our workshops.

You'll see similar slides here.

And again, our consultant is online if you have more specific questions.

So form-based code is regulated by four major parameters: furniture type, building type, form district, signage, and then use.

So the form is really what's regulated.

So the stepback and setbacks in the pedestrian space in front of the building.

Form-based code is more focused on how the building interacts with that pedestrian space rather than the use that's in the building.

So the depending on the frontage type and the street type, you're going to have different standards that reflect what that pedestrian area should look like and how the building should interact with that.

And these are the permitted architectural styles.

These are required in the CH form district and recommended in the other districts, as I said earlier.

There are also specific architectural features such as roof style, storefront materials that are either required or recommended based on the form district.

So I'm going to move on from the form-based code specifically and just talk about the comprehensive plan text amendments that had to be done in conjunction with this.

So we are updating the text of the NAMPA 2040 comprehensive plan to address the changes to the downtown core.

In chapter five, we added a section for the downtown land use designation.

In chapter four, we made a small change to update a known downtown event.

Just change the name there.

And then the exhibit in chapter five was also updated to include the downtown designation.

And then we there it goes.

Idaho law requires that the city develop a comprehensive plan and that the plan include all of it, all relevant conditions and trends.

So unlike zoning uh codes, the comp plan can be flexible and subject to change as desired by city council.

These are the proposed findings for the comprehensive plan text amendments.

And I'm going to turn the rest of the time over to Christy to cover the zoning text amendments and zoning map amendments.

Thank you, Ruby.

Great job.

Thank you, Mayor.

Council Christy Watkins, principal planner for the city of Nampa.

This will probably look familiar to you.

We brought this to you a couple months ago to ask how you want us to handle this.

This area right here is what we lovingly refer to as our downtown core.

It is going to remain downtown on the future land use map in the comprehensive plan as a designation.

And what that does is it allows us to insert certain exceptions into our regular code for this area that is in the downtown designation.

But the DB, D V and DH zones will change.

And then the DH will be changed to C N.

So the facts for rezoning the proposed CN, GB1 and GB2 zoning districts will be permitted zones under the comprehensive plan future land use map designation of downtown should this request get approved, because that's exactly what Bree was just talking about.

We have to make some text amendments within that comprehensive plan to make all this work.

The DH zone will change to CN again, DV to GB2, DB to GB1, both would be regulated under Chapter 4, again, with some exceptions for just those areas that are within the downtown designation.

The proposed zoning does comply with the definitions for compatibility density and smart growth.

The staff conducted extensive comparisons of the uses and the design standards to ensure compatible transition between both existing uses in the zones and with the surrounding properties that may be in different zones.

So we have the BC zone, the IL zone, the IH zone.

There is some multifamily and some limited multifamily.

So why does it require a conditional use permit for multifamily downtown?

In the GB2 zone.

So the GB zone is a commer G B1, sorry, is a commercial zone.

It doesn't allow any residential.

The G B2 then is the transition zone for that.

And then they require conditional use permit.

And the reason for that is because if we are putting residential next to commercial or vice versa, then we can put some conditions on those developments to kind of buffer each other.

Okay, so if we have housing want to come in.

I just note I was just noticing I just had some meetings on we've had a lot of discussion about attainable housing, yes, and needing attainable housing.

Had a discussion just recently with some people interested, but as I'm looking at the uh could you go back to your map?

Um so GB2, where does GB one starts at 6th Street?

Sixth Avenue, correct.

Sixth Avenue, which Fifth Avenue is right there, right next to us.

Okay.

So if we go over further, I'm just trying to think, it's in that, I guess it's in G V two, maybe not in G V one.

Okay.

My concern is is that we uh we make a decision and we cannot do some housing right here that really would be a good location with some commercial down below and some attainable housing up above.

Yeah, and as you get closer to away from the main corridors like north or um yeah, north side and the boulevard out there by Fred Meyer, as you move more towards downtown, that's where the residential will start to pick up, and then in the CN zone, it's allowed outright.

I'm just noticing in it's at 6th Street, so it goes to fifth here where none is allowed, and then you go over one block and it is allowed.

Yes, with a conditional use permit.

With a conditional use permit.

I'm still confused on why we need a conditional use permit.

Is it just to regulate what goes in?

And when we did our analysis of this, those were the two zones that were most closely related to what we already have.

And so we were trying to kind of fit them into that box.

Um the GB2 zone has always required a conditional use permit for multifamily, and so we just kept it that way.

As we approve it, does it because it's called G V2 and we're trying to replicate something someplace else?

Um, I guess what I my thought is, and I again I know I'm gonna be gone, but we need to make attainable housing attainable.

If we create too many hurdles for a developer to come in and get it done, we're not gonna get it done.

And so as I'm thinking about this G V2, even for them to have to come in and get a variance.

There's a lot of work that has to go in to get a variance, and and that may not be in our best interest as a community to put too many hurdles in there, we may not get it done, and it's an added cost to our developers to come in and get it done.

So I know we're trying to replicate, but it just occurred to me that this may be a hurdle that we're creating for some attainable housing.

So a conditional use permit costs $350, and it goes to the planning and zoning commission only.

Um it's not too difficult to do, it is still an extra hurdle.

I totally understand that.

Um, it's not a big hurdle.

Okay, thank you.

Yes, so some correspondence or comments that were uh I think sent to council who was talking fourth street, and the ability to do commercial on the north side of fourth uh and the impact of residential across the street.

So is there gonna be somebody comes in and proposes a project that may be commercial down and some residential up or just commercial uh transforming uh some of that area across the street will be existing residential correct?

That's correct.

Okay.

Is there anything that is going to require a public hearing with a submission?

Or is it basically we adopt this and it meets the GB1 that somebody could come in and purchase some property one way or the other and go ahead and move forward on a commercial project?

Um councilman Bills.

Um the reason that we chose the GB1 district for this one is because it was the most uh aptly suited to what we were already doing.

Um they can already do that in the zone that we have now.

Okay, um, and we haven't seen that be a problem.

Um we have city hall here where we're standing, um, and then the hotel that went up um across from the Civic Center.

Um all of that is commercial, but you know, it's a services for the residences, and so we haven't really seen um too much conflict there, and it doesn't change really the uses that are already allowed.

Okay, that clarifies just I'm just trying to get the clarity based on the correspondence.

So thank you.

Absolutely, thank you.

Mayor, yes, uh, this Rami.

Uh I just wanted to confirm what has been stated here.

I'm looking at the uh land use table right now, and it almost matches almost exactly.

So G B1 is the same as that uh DB zone that it currently is, so it really doesn't change anything in a business combined or residential unit combined with a business is permitted in both.

Thank you.

Okay, all right.

Um rezoning the properties again will have little to no effect on the existing properties or the uses.

The proposed zoning compliance uh with those definitions.

City codes are written to protect the public interest by providing guidance for development, um, and this will help with that by getting rid of those downtown zones.

Um City of Napa adopted the downtown implementation plan in October, um, and it outlined specific recommendations.

One of those was to rezone uh the DH zoning district to CN.

Um by doing that, we then have to kind of deal with the leftover two downtown zones, and this is our solution to that.

So adding the form districts and corresponding code language will serve to provide a clear expectation.

Uh currently, NAMPA City Code, Title 10, Chapter 15 provides all of the requirements for our downtown subdistricts.

A rezone for all the downtown zones is requested to accomplish this.

A number of amendments are required.

One of these required amendments is a zoning map amendment to change the zoning designations.

So that's the rezone of those three zones.

This now is the text amendments that have to come along with that.

So we did an extensive extensive search of our code for the DB, DV, and DH references, and I'm gonna walk you through all the places that we found those.

So in chapter one, um we are proposing to remove the definition for early 20th century architecture because inform-based code there is a number of different styles of architecture that will be allowed.

Um we are removing all references to the DH zone as they will be then referred to as CN if they're applicable.

Reference to the downtown implementation plan for streetscape standards.

We will replace again DHDV and DB with CN and then let the GB1 and the GB2 handle the other two.

Again, chapter 22, same thing, replacing DH with C N.

Chapter 28, replacing all three of them with C N and then referencing the GB1 and G V two.

In chapter three, we have columns that were specific to those zones.

We will be removing the DB and the DV, and then we will be changing the DH to CN.

And then in our form-based code chapter, we'll have very specific charts for the uses that are allowed in the CN zone, which is our downtown.

They will not be using chapter three to find the uses, they will be using chapter 15 to find those uses because they're they're more clearly outlined there.

Um in chapter 34 is our design review chapter.

So DH becomes CN, and we will use the form-based code to to uh do any kind of review for projects down in that zone.

Um any mention of DH is being removed from the chapter, and then all of chapter 15 is being replaced with that 144 pages of form-based code.

This is chapter 4.

So this is our GB1 and GB2 zones.

Um, this is where we're making reference to those areas that are designated as downtown still on the future land use map, but are in the GB zones.

Um we have right now a front yard setback of 35 feet in our regular gateway business zones.

Um, the properties in the downtown core aren't that deep, and so we have left it at 10 feet, and what that does is it pulls those buildings forward a little bit and gives it a more pedestrian-friendly um environment, more accessibility directly from the sidewalk, that kind of thing.

Um we also did the same thing for the parking and building setbacks.

Um, and then we had we did some clarification with the landscaping berms.

Um, we still require a landscape berm in our regular GB zones, but in the downtown um we took that requirement away as an exception for those downtown zones because it doesn't make a lot of sense to have a berm in front of some of those smaller properties like that.

It's not very inviting.

We did not receive any comments from the public.

Um I don't know that if you guys received anything.

I was not aware of it.

Um agency and department comments received indicated no comments or concerns, and then these are your potential motions.

I'll stand for any questions.

Christy, thank you.

This has been a heavy lift.

We've had a number of different meetings on this.

There's a lot to look at.

Thank you for your work.

We thank you also for your work.

Council, do you have any questions?

No, I know we've had some workshops on this, and we've gone over it.

We've talked we've talked it to death as you just said.

Yes, we have, just to make sure, but okay.

So I'm not seeing any questions from here, so thank you.

Thank you.

So this is a public hearing, and Madam Mayor, no one has requested to provide public testimony on this item.

Is there anyone here this evening that had intended to testify on this particular public hearing?

Good evening, Mark.

Thank you for giving your name and address.

I've got to memorize Mark Mitchell 123 by 5 Landau Way nearby.

Um question on the parking part of it, because we did own a home on 9th Avenue and between third and fourth.

Um that is where you've got commercial on third and ninth on the corners.

The parking you could do diagonally there, but when you got to ours, the there was curb grass sidewalk.

If we could have taken out the curb and grass, then you still could diagonal because there is professional building, it is on residential professional.

So we did run into some parking issues, I should say.

So that would be my and I noticed that you mentioned parking, so I'm not sure if that's if that's an upgrade that you're going to do if they're going to allow commercial and require that parking to be added because it can become a real cluster muck with if you just do it curb curbside.

It's a nightmare.

So anyway, that's just my two cents work.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

Welcome.

And Christy, I'm gonna have you guys come back and answer that question.

However, I'll ask is there anyone else here that had intended to testify this evening?

Yes.

And thank you for going ahead and giving your name and address.

Uh yes, my name is Morgan Treasurer with the Economic Development Department.

Um, I just wanted to come and support my friends here in planning and zoning.

Um, we also participated with both the uh downtown Nampa Association and the Arts and Historic Preservation Commission with all of those meetings, the workshops and all the talking.

I just wanted to make sure we had on the record that those groups participated in the process and were um giving their comment the whole way um across the board.

I thought I know sometimes when we get to the decision making and reflect, that always comes up.

Did we talk to everyone?

And we did talk to everyone.

We also had some additional conversations with the individual property owners and developers that work extensively in NAMPA, and they were incredibly supportive of this effort.

Um Brie did a great job in her presentation talking about the levels of confusion and ambiguity that come up for anybody who's looking at developing in downtown, and this effort allows those property owners and investors to hand a piece of code over to their architects and their engineers so that they can take a project back to the city that fits within defined parameters.

It gets rid of a lot of that subjective decision making that we've seen be a problem.

Morgan, thank you so much for that testimony.

I appreciate it.

Council, do you have any questions for Morgan?

That was I appreciate it.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Okay, is there anyone else that had intended to testify?

So see no one.

Um I don't know who wants to come back, Christy or Bree and talk about the parking.

Daniel, hi.

Thank you.

Mayor, Council.

The the parking that was being referenced is right-of-way parking that the zoning code does not cover.

Um, and so when we look at that right-of-way parking um in the commercial and the downtown kind of core area, that's how that's been developed.

The residential properties, their curbs and gutters are still out, and there's parallel parking along there.

Um, as those areas transition, um, depending on the type of business and the location, we have transition areas to angled diagonal parking along those frontages in the path.

It's really a case-by-case basis and an evaluation to determine if that's what's appropriate in that case.

Um, there isn't a code that requires it or disallows it.

Okay, so I think that sounds good because as you just said, there isn't a code that allows it or disallows it.

It can be done.

I know thank you.

That answers your question.

Perfect.

Thank you so much.

Mayor, yes, let me just add one thing there that um the code still does require off-street parking for new development.

So if if they were to tear down a building or something, we would still require the new development to have off-street parking in the GB1 and the GB2 zones.

It's tear down, but if someone has an existing property and it's existing, and they just want to adjust the parking, there is a path possibly for yes.

Okay, thank you.

Appreciate that.

Okay.

Um do you have any closing comments?

Christy or Bree, anything you want to share?

Council, do you have any questions for staff?

Okay, seeing none, I would stand for a motion to close public hearing.

Second.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

What is the will of the council?

Mayor?

Yes.

I move to approve the comprehensive plan text amendment as stated on the screen.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded.

Is there any discussion?

Roll call.

Bills.

Yes, Reynolds.

Yes.

Haverfield.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

Thank you.

Okay, so we have one more comprehensive plan map amendment.

Then we're going to take a brief break, and then we're going to come back for the last two public hearings, just so council's aware of that.

So we're going to move to 8.3.

This is an action item.

This is a comprehensive plan map amendment from medium density residential to industrial for eight parcels located at 1627, 1704, 1705, and 1811 East Florida Avenue 00, 1820, and 1722 East Iowa Avenue for the City of Napa and David Snow.

The original concept is properties currently contain industrial uses but are designated as medium density residential.

The request is to align the comprehensive plan, future land use designations with the current uses.

Thank you.

Go ahead and come forward.

Whoever's going to speak this evening.

Thank you and give us your name and address.

Good morning.

Good evening.

It's nighttime.

Excuse me.

There, yeah.

Mayor and council members, thank you for letting me be here.

Mayor Kling, thank you for your eight years of service.

I think this is your last meeting, and um you've just been awesome.

So thank you.

Thank you.

And Councilman Halverfield, thank you for your 12 years of service.

Thank you.

Yeah.

So for the record, my name is Carrie Smith, and I'm here representing David Snow, the owner and operator of the landscaping business, Clearwater Landscape on East Iowa Avenue.

The request before you tonight is not about introducing a new industrial use into a residential neighborhood.

It is about aligning the city's future land use map with long-standing existing conditions.

Something your planning and zoning commission, long-range planning staff, Canyon County, the Fire District, and every reviewing agency have found appropriate.

A bit of history here matters.

Mr.

Snow purchased the parcel on East Iowa in 2014.

Prior to that purchase, he contacted the city of Nampa and city representatives expressed interest in annexing the parcel as light industrial.

At that time, his business was small, and the site was used minimally, primarily for parking of clear water vehicles.

Over time, he acquired additional parcels in 2017, 18 and 2023, not for speculation, but to support the existing landscaping operation, growing and storing trees and shrubs, staging equipment, and operating a small business that serves this community.

These parcels are uniquely situated for that use because they are centrally located in the Treasure Valley, buffered to the north by the seed business and surrounded primarily by rural character residential uses with some single family residential rather than urban-style neighborhood development.

It also is important to recognize that Mr.

Snow's landscaping operation itself functions as a transitional buffer.

Rather than placing high intensity industrial activity directly adjacent to rural residences, this use, largely outdoor plant material, limited structures, and seasonal activity creates a lower impact transition between the seed business and nearby homes.

In planning terms, this is a graduated edge, not an incompatibility.

It softens impacts instead of intensifying them.

That context is reflected throughout the staff report.

The city acknowledges that this area has evolved through multiple future land use designations over time from light industrial to employment center to medium density residential.

While existing industrial uses never left, what is out of alignment today is not the use of the land but the map designation.

I also want to address neighbor concerns directly and respectfully that were found in the staff report.

Mr.

Snow has consistently worked to be a good neighbor.

He currently provides free landscape maintenance to both adjacent neighbors.

He has installed privacy landscaping in key locations to reduce visual impacts and improve security.

When neighbors ask for help in the vicinity, whether it includes materials or service, he also provides those.

On the limited occasions when concerns have been raised, such as employee behavior, speed, or loud music, those issues were addressed immediately and corrected.

They were isolated, not systemic events.

Regarding the complaint about debris and grass clippings near the Elijah Drain, Mr.

Snow has been clear that it was grass clippings placed with the intent of weed suppression.

Once notified that it was considered a nuisance, the materials were removed immediately, and all green waste is now taken to an approved recycling facility.

City code compliance staff recently confirmed that there are no ongoing violations, and that's also in the staff report.

Both neighbors who raised concerns stated they would support this proposal if reasonable conditions were included.

And that is an important note.

And that brings me to annexation and zoning.

When Mr.

Snow applies for annexation and zoning in the near future, he understands and agrees that this is the appropriate stage for conditions to prevent incompatibility with surrounding land uses, the residential ones.

He is willing to accept the city's recommended framework, which includes light industrial zoning only, require buffers and screening, limitations on operating hours, and restrictions on high impact industrial activities.

Annexation does not reduce oversight, it increases it.

It brings these parcels fully under city authority, allowing conditions to be clearly defined, enforced, and carried forward with the land.

This request is not spot zoning for a new industrial island.

It is not an invitation for heavy industry.

It is a map correction that reflects reality, strengthens regulatory control, and creates a clear long-term framework for both the businesses and nearby residents.

If this amendment is denied, the existing businesses do not disappear.

The industrial activity remains.

What is lost is the city, the city's ability to manage it proactively through annexation zoning and enforceable conditions.

Approving this amendment reduces uncertainty, aligns the comprehensive plan with existing conditions, and supports a responsible low impact transition between industrial and residential uses.

Exactly what good planning is meant to do.

On behalf of Mr.

Snow, we respectfully ask you to approve the comprehensive plan amendment to industrial, consistent with your planning and zoning commission's recommendation as well as staff's recommendation and their findings.

Thank you for your time and thoughtful discussion and consideration tonight, and I will stand for any questions.

Thank you very much.

Yes, Councilman Bills.

So I understand existing industrial buildings north of the drain.

And those coming into compliance far as an IL zone.

Please explain south of the drain how that land is an existing industrial when it hasn't served that until the expansion of the operation that's taking place there.

Um he has been in um in operation for over 10 years on that site.

And so it was through the county.

However, um the property through the county is zoned residential, and so um I would admit that the property probably has been operating outside of the parameters of the county.

Um it has been operating harmoniously for 10 years until recently.

Mr.

Snow acquired the most recent piece, which um one of the neighbors complained and started a code enforcement case in Canyon County when the violation was um brought up.

And so Mr.

Snow elected to work with the city, especially since the industrial activity on a very large parcel to the north existed, and so it would not constitute spot zoning as far as the city be based on a comp plan amendment and um neighboring industrial.

And this does provide a really good buffer with a very low intensity use that is a good transition to those neighborhoods.

So have another question.

Then how is it?

I don't understand the buffer to take uh industrial IL.

So it's a mowing business right now and a few other ancillaries, but nothing prevents from once that zones there for setting up a whole different use.

I totally agree with you.

Say again, I totally agree with you.

And so when the property goes through annexation and zoning, um, we would propose very limiting conditions so that higher intensity or other types of uses would not be permitted there.

And so um we feel obligated as well to protect the neighbors from those higher intensity uses.

So a development agreement would be signed limiting it to that use.

But IL zone seems like that's a that's a big step for here, considering the residential that is around this property, uh, even though some properties are still one to three acres.

It just seems we're opening the door to bring IL and heavy industrial, and I understand you're saying that I'm not seeing that as part of this application as far as restrictions be in place.

Right, um, because that wasn't the option yet.

So staff recommended moving forward with just the comprehensive plan right now to change the designation to industrial, and then we would work with staff on what the appropriate zoning would be that would fall in line with the industrial designation.

Well, that's one step, but I don't seem to me once we grant comprehensive plan for it industrial, then the doors open pretty wide.

That would be a good question for staff.

Thank you.

Thank you.

How about a statement?

Wait for staff to be able to answer the question.

Yeah, we'll let staff speak to that.

That's okay.

Okay.

Any other questions?

Carrie, thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

We'll move to staff presentation and then we'll have you back.

Hey Christy, I think you hear our questions, so you'll know what you can address.

Thank you.

Counsel.

Uh Christy Watkins, principal planner for the city of Yampa.

Um, as stated, the request tonight is strictly just for the comprehensive plan map amendment.

Um to explore options.

Um, if this gets approved, he stated that he would then move forward with annexation, and at that time we would be able to put conditions on that annexation.

Um, that is also our long-range planner's um suggestion as well to put certain conditions on these properties if they if they choose to annex.

Um, this is uh an exercise to see if you are willing to go that direction before we go down the road of annexation.

So the four Iowa address parcels are under Canyon County jurisdiction currently.

They're pending Canyon County code compliance issues for an existing landscaping company.

Um they are in the city's impact area and designated as medium density residential on the future land use map.

The four Florida Avenue address parcels are within the city limits and zoned IL already.

Um, there has been an existing seed company in operation there for a number of years because of the old railroad spur, um, and that is now the Stottered Pathway, they no longer use that.

Um, all immediate the surrounding um land uses are residential to some extent.

Um, there is an RS6 um subdivision to the north.

There is Canny County single family residential large lots to the south.

Um, to the east, there is an RS6 single family residential zone subdivision, and to the west again, Canyon County large residential, and then immediately to the north of these properties on Iowa is the seed company and the drain.

So the existing sea company um is currently connected to city water only, they do not have sewer services there.

The landscaping company on Iowa has uh pressurized irrigation, sewer, and water all available to it at this time.

So she talked a little bit about uh the land use designation history, and I just want to address that.

Um in 2014, as it was stated that when he purchased this property, he came and talked to the city.

Um at that time, there was kind of a unspoken policy that if you were adjacent to a certain zone, you could request that zone.

Um the policy since Rodney and I came in 2019.

Um, we are looking for more guidance from the comprehensive plan, and we're trying to follow what the comprehensive plan is telling us.

So in January of 2004, um the comprehensive plan future land use map showed that just the seed company as light industrial and everything to the south was medium density residential in 2012.

Um, this entire area was designated as an employment center, and that was in an effort to do more infill type of projects where we might bring um higher density housing projects and more commercial services to a more central area with residential in it.

Um it did not develop out that way when it we went through our update in 2019-2020.

Um it was determined that maybe it was just best to keep it all medium density residential, and maybe it would redevelop in that way.

Um that has not happened either.

So comprehensive plan amendments are really your call.

It's up to you to decide if this is appropriate or not appropriate.

Um, it's pretty flexible as far as state code goes.

Um, it's something that you guys decide.

Because it is intended to be guidance for our community and for developers, we only allow it to be changed by the applicant twice a year, as Rodney stated earlier, so that's why you're hearing it so many of them tonight.

So these are the facts that were listed in your staff report.

Um, I kind of have walked through quite a few of these just in my presentation already.

The correspondence that was received, um she went through that.

They talk about dumping piles of concrete and debris, scraps of sod and grass clippings near the drain, um, that if there is a smell and that the flies are unbearable.

Um then another gentleman commented um had a list of extensive comments about creating an industrial island within a residential fabric.

Um and then the fire department um had some comments about access to the property, and they will probably have more comments if this property chooses to annex.

Um there were no conditions of approval because those will be placed um if this property chooses to annex into the city.

Oops, sorry about that.

And these are your potential motions.

I'll stand for any questions.

Christy, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, council questions.

You have any, would you like to ask additional questions?

Uh no, I uh I'm opposed, so from my my perspective, can we divide this and and the existing industrial light industrial buildings get zoned and leave the south of the drain uh as uh as a residential councilman bills?

Um probably not necessary at this point.

The seed companies existing, it exists in the I.

Nothing for that property will change.

Um they won't be in violation of any codes at this time unless they choose to completely raise the property and redevelop it, then it would redevelop as medium density residential.

Okay, so uh if we're opposed to south of the drain being changed IAL, then we would move to deny.

Well, yeah, and we're not into the public hearing yet.

So typically before public hearing.

I'm not making a motion, I'm just asking the question of direction.

Just uh revealing your thoughts, I guess is what's happening.

So we want to not reveal your opinions until after public hearing.

Mayor?

It yes, so I can I just legal's good.

It makes it are we able to attach a development agreement uh in this sense as well if it's a comprehensive map amendment because it's a specific application, or is there no development agreement that could be attached to this approval or denial?

Uh mayor, councilman Griffin, typically your DAs are when you do an initial zoning.

Um here we're doing a uh comp plan amendment is all.

Um there's no initial zoning designation.

Those are the we typically do it only in those instances.

Not that you couldn't, but our code explicitly says this is when we typically will be doing it.

Thank you.

And the only reason that I bring that up is for the potential alleviation of heartburn is maybe that this is tacked on to the specific business owner business at the time of sale, it nullifies and is able to resume its previous, but I don't know that we can necessarily do that if it's already designated at one point, making it where it could revert back to its original designation.

I uh that's a legal question.

I have no idea what direction we can go with that, but maybe so the question is in a comprehensive uh plan amendment.

Is there a bill and ability to do what councilman Griffin is asking?

Yeah, mayor uh councilman Griffin.

It's a good question.

I think you can.

Um it may be a little unconventional.

It's not a zoning, it's not an annexation.

This is a comprehensive plan amendment.

That's it.

Which is very different.

It's it'd be pretty unconventional.

A development agreement is a private agreement, right, between the city and the property owner.

Um that's why we do it on a zoning designation.

That's a little more concrete decision than just a comp plan amendment.

Remember, this is a guiding use, not binding in any nature, so it'd be pretty unconventional to do it.

I would lean on maybe steering away from it, but if you're asking legally, could you do it?

I think you could shoehorn it in.

Um my advice would be probably not to go.

Okay.

And just pull it.

I'm sorry, I I better jump in here because I I think um staff's understanding of that has always been that it was zoning or annexation that we would do a DA, which sounds like that's typical.

Um, I did not know that that was even possible for a comprehensive plan amendment.

So I didn't advertise it that way for this public hearing.

So I don't know if that matters for tonight.

Um, mayor, I think it does.

I think it's it shows the city's practice is adopted that um whether uh a legal question, can you, can't you?

You might be able to shoehorn it in here where it is a private agreement, but it would be quite unconventional and maybe unprecedented.

So well, and not noticed.

Not noticed that way.

So that thank you for sharing that.

I I have a question.

Um, we are currently in the process of updating our 2050 comprehensive plan.

Is there a reason why this was not addressed during that process that we're currently in, or that it is not being addressed during that process?

Um thank you, Mayor.

Um, that process is still about 18 months away from being completed.

Um, we still have a lot of conversations and a lot of public input we need to gather and go through.

Um the map will definitely be one of those conversations, but we're not there yet.

Um I'm not sure that this gentleman with the code compliance issues he's having with the county right now can wait that long.

Mayor, follow-up.

Yes.

Why why isn't this coming before us as a CUP rather than an entire comprehensive plan amendment?

If it's a code compliance issue, why wouldn't it be a conditional use permit for his specific business rather than going ahead and trying to redesignate the whole area?

So, Councilman Griffin, um, he's not under our jurisdiction.

Right now he's under Canyon County jurisdiction.

So co-compliance issues through Canyon County.

Okay.

Um that is a residentially designated area in the county.

Um, and so his ask tonight is that you allow for this future land use map to be changed to industrial so that he can annex into a zone that would allow him to do what he's currently doing.

Thank you.

Does it have to be designated with a comprehensive plan map amendment if we were going to annex it?

Mayor, yes.

Um, that if we gave it a zone that was not designated on the future land use map, that is the definition of spot zoning, and it is illegal.

Thank you.

Mayor, one fall one final one.

Is there any other I don't want to say aggressive because I understand this would classify as industrial?

Is there any other designations that we could classify it under as residential?

Whether it's BC, I don't think it would be neighborhood because it's got industrial buildings a part of it.

Is there any other I just am thinking out loud in the sense of alleviating Harper and for future designation of industrial?

I I personally don't want to see this staying industrial, but I understand the use that it's been served as for 10 years uh isn't as aggressive as I would say industrial is, so I don't know if there's any direction we can go from there.

Mayor Council McGriffin.

Um typically when we're doing comp plan areas, we don't like to just single out small pieces.

We want to take in an entire area and create a cohesive use or cohesive designation for that area.

The C Company already industrial uh landscaping is allowed in the IL zone.

It would also be allowed in the BC zone, but we'd have to change that designation to commercial rather than industrial, and then that would be singling out just those four pieces to be commercial on the Iowa address parcels.

And so what we're trying to do is just create a larger area that is one single designation.

But it would be possible to do the commercial rather than the industrial it would be.

We'd have to come back with another request because we did not advertise it that way.

Thank you.

Okay, so this is a public hearing.

Let's go ahead and move into the public hearing and then we'll come back and have further discussion.

Madam Mayor, we have one person as requested public testimony, and that is Christopher Kral.

Good evening.

Thank you for giving your uh name again and your address, and you'll have three minutes.

Absolutely.

Um good evening, Mayor, Councilmembers, and Commissioners.

My name is Christopher Kroll.

I live at 1018 Amethyst Court, directly north of uh Seneca Seedlot.

Um I'm a retired Army Sergeant First Class and I have a background in residential real estate investing.

I held an active license in Angridge, Alaska.

Uh I oppose the comprehensive plan amendment.

Um it is not a harmless map correction, it's actually a policy decision that converts an internal residential block into a permanent industrial node in the city's long range plan.

Uh Idaho's local land use planning act requires the comprehensive plan to consider previous and existing conditions, trends, and compatibility in land uses.

Uh, and that's Idaho's code 67-6508.

The city adopts an industrial future designation here, surrounded by uh medium density residential and other neighborhoods.

It would be hard to claim that this improves compatibility or creates a plan transition.

Here, the local design gate NAMPA code requires that the commission and the council make three conclusions of law before approving a zoning map amendment and that it is in harmony with the comprehensive plan and the land use map.

It is reasonably compatible with adjoining uses, and that in the public interest of reasonably necessary.

This amendment fails these tests on its face because it creates an industrial island inside an established residential fabric, as the commissioner, or I'm sorry, as the commissioner said.

Once the map says industrial future applicants will cite that does ignition designation to justify rezones, expansions, and annexations as plan consistent.

That increases risk to homeowners who reasonably relied on the comprehensive plan when purchasing their homes, especially those in the past five years.

So rezoning like this could materially impact us.

I want to be clear, I'm not asking the city to shut down in an existing lawful operation.

Um I'm asking you not to expand the city's long-range endorsement of this industrial intensity at this location.

Um this change is also overwhelmingly benefits one party.

The owner gains certainty, uh marketability and a stronger basis for future industrial requests surrounding homeowners inherit the long-term burden and loss of residential continuity without a demonstrated public necessity.

Um Idaho law also requires zoning districts to be in accordance with poly policies set forth in the adopted comprehensive plan.

That is Idaho Code 67-6511.

So changing the plan map here is not a neutral uh outcome.

It sets the foundation for future zoning outcomes.

My request is simple just to deny the CMA.

Um, if the city does insist on approving it anyway, then uh my recommendation is that we consider a land use similar to AG, which I believe that Seneca could be zoned under and install operate in that manner, and which would be uh more conducive to future land uses.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else?

There is no one else signed up to my knowledge.

Is there anyone here that had intended to testify on this public hearing?

No one.

This is an opportunity for our applicant to come back.

Oh, Carrie Smith again for the record.

So um I want to address just a few of the things that were said to council members' question about approving just the area to the north.

I think staff explained it really well that um changing a comprehensive plan just that impacts one property could definitely be conceived as a violation of the state code, and that we should be creating areas.

And so it's not really an island for industrial.

Um, you have on one of the maps that staff had, you can see another much smaller area that was designated for commercial, and so this one is more than double that size, and so it it definitely can be an area designated for that.

I also want to mention that Mr.

Kroll really made the best argument for us.

If you read in his letter on page four at the bottom, and also from his testimony today was nearly the same, is that um I'll read it.

As someone with real estate experience, I can say that buyers reasonably rely on those long-range plan designations as part of their understanding of neighborhood trajectory and risk.

Miss and staff clearly did explain.

Mr.

Snow purchased this property, he met with staff ahead of time, and when he did that, the property had a designation of employment center, which allowed industrial uses.

It would have also allowed commercial, it would have allowed him to have his business here upon annexation of that point.

And so we agree with him that doing your due diligence is very important, and Mr.

Snow did do that.

Um he also stated that it was hard to prove that this would be a transition, and he pointed out that AG would be a better designation.

Um I am a major component uh ag AG represented in our community, and I can tell you that um designating AG next to medium density residential is not a transition.

Um agricultural uses next to that, um, and especially on this small of an area would be spot zoning, and it would be nearly impossible to do any type of ag uses on it.

Um, needless to say, in Canyon County's um comp plan and zoning, if it was zoned agriculture, they could go through a conditional use from a hearing for the landscaping business.

However, if we're looking at planning principles as a whole, um staff said it, and I alluded to it.

Um this property with uh um it is a fairly significant industrial use that's in your community.

Um again, it's agriculture related with the seed business.

Um we are uh we ebb between the number two and the and somewhere between two and five on the major seed producers of the entire world.

Um I sure hope that that business never goes away.

I hope that they um have an opportunity to continue producing um the seed that they do, and so that being said, um it is important and safe for this council to identify that that is a very important business to them that should have the designation as industrial, and so having the property to the south again makes it so that it's not just for one single property, and I believe that Mr.

Snow is very um interested in also continuing his business for a very long time, and it does contribute to our community in a very positive way.

So with that, I would stand for questions.

We absolutely want to be a very good partner to all of the neighbors and to the city and to continue contributing in a positive manner.

Thank you.

Okay, council questions.

Do you have any questions for our applicant?

Councilman Happenfeld?

I have a question for staff.

Okay.

But thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Not sure who Christy.

So why don't you go ahead and um you might want to come back to the front if you don't mind?

It's just easier to have a discussion.

Thank you.

Just in looking at the uh the report, the planning and zoning commission voted to recommend approval.

Did they what issues did they uh find or did they find any issues as far as with this proposal?

Oh thank you, Mayor and Councilman Hammerfield.

Um they did not.

There was very little discussion.

Um they felt like because the seed company was there, it was appropriate, and they approved it unanimously.

Okay.

The only other question I might have asked Carrie, but uh, how is the connectivity of the northern parcel to the southern parcel?

How does that where is that take place at?

Uh there wouldn't be any connectivity, those are completely different there's not uses.

Is there any intention to uh is that a drain line that runs through there that uh separates the two the Elijah drain?

So is there any intent to uh to tile that put it underground or just leave it open?

Uh no, I believe it'll remain open.

They're they're separate entities, so they don't really have any reason.

Um the the Stotterd pathway is right there.

Um so they would connect that way, but they both have fences up.

So thank you.

Any other questions?

Any questions or discussion that would involve our applicant to where we should keep our uh public hearing open?

I'm not seeing any.

So with that, and then I just because we did have a question for staff.

Did the applicant have any different answer than staff regarding that question?

None.

Thank you.

Okay, so with that I would stand for a motion to close public hearing.

All in favor?

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Okay, this is an opportunity for council discussion.

What is council thinking?

Well, I've uh somewhat already voiced uh opinion rather than asking questions, so I'll now confirm the opinion.

Thank you.

And uh I think it's a stretch to uh annex and or well, not annexing, but just even the comp plan uh change.

I think that is uh difficult to put industrial in this uh spot.

And once providing industrial uh right now it's talked about being a continued uh mowing operation, nothing prevents one year, five years from now putting any use that's allowed under our industrial zone.

And uh I don't think this area a great deal of residential has gone on in this area, it's the residential surrounded the existing uh seed operation.

Uh and so folks moving in knew that uh now at this point we're saying we're gonna extend that industrial and we're gonna take it across the street from existing residential.

Some of that residential is county, it's not city.

Uh however, I think from a use and land use point of view, uh it this one just doesn't make sense to me.

Um I understand the designation for the property north of the drain, uh but not south of the drain.

So that's where I'm my opinion.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any other comments from council.

Mayor?

Yes.

Just to reconfirm, and uh I would agree with councilman Bills' assessment of of this application as well, but I go back to is there the ability to restrict specifically for this one applicant, the ability to revert back to the original current designation dated today's date after the fact if he sells the property or intends to do any other industrial work on said property.

I the reason I fight this is I feel that the business uh is uh important and significant to the community, but I do not want to see this turned into an industrial area either.

So that's why I tried to find what designation we could allow to get them back into compliance and to be able to annex them into the city, but I haven't heard a straightforward path in doing so, other than denying them, which leaves them back into the situation that they came here to remedy.

So with a conditional use permit, you could do what you're saying, but this is a comprehensive.

But the conditional use permit would have to be from the county for them to be able to remedy their issues of having code compliance.

It's not an issue of the city, it's them wanting to be able to designate their property to be able to annex into the city.

So if they came to us with an anxiety, could we annex them with a development agreement at that time and avoid all these problems rather than going through this process here?

So this isn't the end of the road if we deny them today, they can still annex well.

Can they continue to function within the county?

Mayor and council, I I think we can answer each of those questions.

Um they can't continue to function in the county.

The county is indicating they're in violation of of their zoning code.

So their remedy is to come to the city and find a zone that will allow them to continue their their operation.

The problem with finding that zone is that the zoning that is it that allows them to operate is either IL or IH.

Those two zones allow them to do their business.

So when they look at the comprehensive plan and they say, I want to annex in with IL or IH, the problem is the comprehensive plan doesn't have industrial as a designation on the comprehensive plan.

So now they're coming to the city saying, let's change the comprehensive plan so that later we can come and probably a short time later, they can come and tell the county, hey, we are applying for annexation to the city.

Now that the comprehensive plan is changed and it allows us to get the IL zoning, now we're going through that annexation process.

During the annexation process, you could put a development agreement on it, but the question tonight is not about the annexation and the zoning, it's about the comprehensive plan, what the long-term vision of that area you want to be.

And the property cannot ask to be annexed into the city without meeting a designation check box.

That's correct.

Mayor, if I may add to that, the standard is it has to be in accordance with the comprehensive plan.

So at the time of annexation.

So they couldn't try and annex with us with a conditional use permit attached to the set annexation.

They would have to be able to satisfy the annexation prior to requesting a CUP.

Mayor and council, there is no um option for a conditional use permit in this situation.

I don't I don't see any uh option for a conditional use permit at all.

And I wasn't suggesting a conditional, I was saying that the what we were talking about was more like that to where you could put the reversion piece with a conditional use, but this isn't that.

So yes, councilman.

So question then comprehensive plan, isn't that to be a guiding document the overall?

And as soon as we put IL as the comprehensive plans designation on this property, it really opens the gate for whatever a person wants to do henceforward in the future.

Um I'm just gonna give my opinion here as planner.

Um, yes, that's exactly right.

Our comprehensive plan um gives us the long-term vision of what we want to see years down the road in this in those locations.

The more specific detailed specific project is typically related to annexation and and zoning.

So I I try to steer people when we talk about comprehensive plan to take a step back and say, what do you want this to be long term?

Okay, I appreciate that concurrence or or that explanation.

So just for clarification, wasn't it staff's recommendation to approve?

What was their opinion on this?

We did not give a recommendation of approval, and I I need to just be very clear about this.

When applicants come to planning and zoning uh department, we give them options.

We uh we are there to assist whoever comes to our desk.

If it's a a citizen, if it's an applicant, we assist them with the options that they can take.

We really strongly uh feel we would rather not give any kind of recommendations because that's the decision of council and planning and zoning commission to make those decisions.

We do at times give a recommendation just based on some pretty critical um compliance with code or the comprehensive plan, but we try as hard as we can to steer away from recommendations.

Okay, so Mayor.

See, my concern, I'm probably reiterating what I've already asked.

We give the comprehensive plan so that we can somehow assist in getting an issue that we really set a precedent and a uh ability for somebody else, if the applicant sells the property, they come back in and say, Well, your comp plan changed this or your recommendation.

You know, so it it just seems like um while we want to be helpful, we're really opening ourselves up for something that is not gonna be helpful for long term.

So it's a unique deal, but it just you know, I mean, uh it's more comments than questions.

So mayor.

So when they came to you, the planning department, what options did you give them aside from this?

My whole goal here is to try and help support the business at the end of the day.

So that's what I'm trying to, whether it's BC, whether there's a different opportunity, because right now they're not in compliance and they can't continue operating based off of their current situation with the county.

So, what are the options that we can help support them in continuing to operate?

So, Councilman Griffin, um, we had to determine first of all what zones we would allow that business to operate in according to our use schedule, it's IL and IH.

To be able to do that, our comp plan has to designate the property as industrial to get that zone.

It is currently medium density residential, which only allows the single family residential zones.

So IL was not an option for them with that.

They said, Well, how do we change that?

This is how we change that.

That was the conversation.

And those are our only two options.

Okay.

That's the zone that this use would fit under.

So Councilman Griffin, I have a question for you.

Not me need to put you on the spot.

But as you say that, and I think we I would not disagree, you want to help a landowner and resolve their issue.

But uh, we also had another local landowner right there talk about protecting the values of the other homeowners.

How do you reconcile that?

Well, I think because you've got two different groups, which is really the ultimate question.

If I heard that this business had come into play a year ago, I would think it's different.

Operating for 10, 12 years is a different situation.

And now that a complaint has been made after 10 years of operation in Napa, I think it's who came first.

Was it the potential neighbor that moved in two years ago, or was it the business that's been here for 10 years?

And then I think you now we're calling beyond our scope.

That's where I just try and balance frankly.

I looked at it as I didn't want to see industrial placed here.

But hearing that it's been 10 years of operation for a business that's been helping, and I from what I've heard, being a good steward not only to their property, but to the neighbors and supporting them in their landscaping and things along those lines.

I think it's unfortunate that them being out of compliance could potentially give the boot to uh a business that has limited um red flags being called on the play.

So I just that's I just am trying to think.

How do we remedy?

I don't know.

Uh there was no testimony given by that said neighbor today, just that the complaint has been raised.

I can't ask that neighbor how long has this been happening?

Have they been dumping grass into your yard?

I can't stack and weigh it equally.

So that's that would be my on the spot response, I think.

Mayor.

So just a little bit of response.

So as I understood the testimony and the application uh for the what was given to us was this started out as a single family residential property used for a business.

And as time went on, it gave the opportunity to start purchasing adjacent properties.

And the property expanded.

So I'm not sure the whole I think the whole thing has expanded.

But I'm speculating in that, but that's how it seems that how that has been uh communicated to us.

That's accurate.

Is that accurate?

That's accurate.

Okay.

So uh this isn't a it may be a ten year business, but not a ten-year business on the whole property.

Okay.

It's grown and it's uh pushed against what uh codes uh would call for at this point.

I'd like to make a motion to deny the conference plan map amendment as presented on the screen.

Okay, without a second.

That motion fails.

So council, what is the will of the council?

Mayor, I move the approve the projected project as stated on the screen.

I'll second the motion.

It's been moved and seconded.

Any discussion?

Mayor, one quick question for staff.

After they're able to be annexed in to the property, what is the city's ability to re-restrict this area after the map amendment is amended or that the comprehensive map is amended.

So with the annexation, then that is your opportunity to do the development agreement that has a list of prohibited uses and potentially even um buffering around the perimeter of the property, fencing, and all all kinds of opportunities for you to put conditions on.

And I wish I would I wish I would ask this before I made my motion, but I can ask it now.

We're so I hope within our lane.

Has the applicant indicated how quickly they'll be moving to annex into the city.

Um Councilman Griffin, I I imagine fairly quickly because they do have an open co-compliance case with Canyon County.

Um, and Canyon County is watching the progress of this.

Um so I imagine that if you approve it, we will move into annexation fairly quickly.

Thank you.

Okay, we have a motion on the table and a second.

Is there any further discussion?

Roll call for the bills.

No.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Everfield.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Three in favor, one opposed, motion carries.

Okay.

So we are going to take a 10-minute break right now, and uh, we have two more uh public hearings left, so we will break for 10 minutes.

Thank you.

Yeah.

So who's bored in?

And but they won't let me bring the baby up.

So I was up there and I can get on Instagram or whatever.

See, whatever.

I was like, oh, I'll borrow.

I don't care.

I'm not risk averse like that.

Yeah, you'll put them out.

Exactly.

And I met them at the top.

And then I went down with them.

They're like, you can't do that either.

I feel like you're making up rules now.

Yeah.

So they're like, oh, that's just the world.

Well, you didn't tell me I couldn't do it.

I was saying, like, show me the rulebook.

Yeah.

It's just possible.

Oh, man.

We've made a whole thing there.

Okay, we're ready to get started again.

I know they are, yeah.

Okay, we are ready to get started.

We are going to start with item eight four on the agenda.

Eight four is an action item.

This is a comprehensive plan map amendment from medium density residential to low density residential for three parcels.

These are located at zero sixteen nineteen and eighteen thirty-five South Side Boulevard.

This is annexation and zoning to RS eighteen for single family residential on two parcels and an adjacent right-of-way at sixteen nineteen and eighteen thirty-five Southside Boulevard.

This is a zoning map amendment from RS six to RS eighteen on a third parcel, an adjacent right of way at zero South Side Boulevard with a potential development agreement.

This is for triple crown development representing Lance Lewison.

The original concept was twenty-five single family detached dwelling lots and eight common lots.

With the community, we're requesting an annexation, a comprehensive plan map amendment to low density, and an RS eighteen zoning with approval of a plelinary plat.

Our preliminary plat includes 25 single family residential lots and eight common lots with a gross density of one point two five units per acre.

Residential lot sizes will range from just over half an acre up to nearly two acres, providing spacious lots, privacy, and a rural character consistent with the surrounding area and established use within the existing site.

Two of those are currently located in the unincorporated Kenyon County, and one parcel has already been annexed into the city of Nampa, which carries an existing um zoning designation.

Within the slide, you can see that the parcels highlighted, everything in yellow is in the county, and the area cross-hatched in green is the city of Nampus city limits.

There also is an existing single home on the property with along with a few accessory dwelling units.

Our intent is to retain the home as part of the project, and it will become lot eight, block one within our new subdivision.

The subject site is currently designated as medium density residential under the city's comprehensive plan.

The properties to the north, south, and west share the same designation.

To the east, however, the character shifts to low density residential that has larger rural county parcels and city lots.

We're requesting to stretch the low density residential across our three parcels.

The request is to better align with the existing development pattern and our vision for this community.

We're requesting the comprehensive plan map amendment from medium density to low density residential.

This adjustment will allow us to maintain the larger, more rural lots that have storically defined the area.

And we believe this provides an appropriate transition between the existing county lots to the east and the existing medium density residential areas to the west.

With this comprehensive map amendment to low density, we're requesting an RS-18 zoning for all three parcels to ensure that the zoning aligns with our updated land use designation.

We're also requesting exception for lot eight block one, which slightly exceeds the maximum lot size allowed in an RS-18.

This adjustment is necessary to preserve the existing home and its accessory buildings that are already established on the site.

And by maintaining the residence and applying a consistent zone under across the remainder of the property, we're creating a seamless transition between the existing rural lots and the new estate-style homes envisioned on this development.

So to better understand how our application fits within the broader area.

Let's take a look at the surrounding context.

To the north, we have Wildflower and Sunshine Subdivisions.

Just to the northeast are several larger unincorporated county parcels.

To the east, we have Wilson Estates with additional large county lots.

And to the south is bordered by Oakhurst estates.

And the west, we have Greenhurst Elementary School.

We feel that our request for the low density comprehensive plan designation and the RS18 zoning complements this existing pattern extremely well, maintaining compatibility with larger rural-style lots to the east while transitioning naturally to the more established neighborhoods surrounding the site.

In Crosswoods, we have thoughtfully designed 4.13 acres of qualified open space, which represents 15.8% of the site.

This slide illustrates everything in green that is qualified.

And keep in mind these are going to be large lots, so the homes will have ample space in the front and the back.

Pathway connectivity and walkability is also a priority within our community.

Purple depicts our community sidewalks.

Orange depicts our micro pathways, and then green illustrates our community pathway that provides connection along the Elijah Drain that'll provide pedestrian access from South Side Boulevard to Goldenrod Drive.

Here are a few elevations of homes south of our community and locust lane subdivision.

This will be the same home builder, ashcraft construction known for their quality custom homes.

These homes proposed for Crosswood straws and inspiration of modern farmhouse style, combining clean roof lines, board and baden siding, and natural stone accents to create a timeless yet fresh and charming appearance.

And then to summarize, we strongly feel that Crosswood Estates is a thoughtfully planned, high-quality community that blends rustic charm with modern livability.

It brings a much needed diversity of larger estate lots to NAMPA, ideal for families and professionals who value both space and connection to the community.

This infill location offers kind of the best of both worlds.

It's conveniently close to downtown Nampa and I-84, yet it's tucked away to provide a quieter, more private living environment.

We believe Crosswood supports the city of NAMPA's long-term goals for thoughtful growth, housing diversity, and high quality of life for future residents.

And behalf of our team, we'd like to thank sincere thanks to City Staff for their help and guidance, and we're in full agreement with the staff report.

And on that note, I'll thank you all for your time, your thoughtful consideration, and respectively request approval of our applications this evening.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Sabrina.

Great job.

Okay, so do we have any questions for our applicant?

I think no, we'll have you back.

Thank you so much.

So, Christy, is this one yours?

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

Christie Watkins, principal planner for the city of Nampa.

As stated, there are four requests happening here today.

You can see on the map there, the area in yellow is the RS6 zone currently is requesting to be rezoned to RS-18.

The area to the west of it is enclaved and excuse me, and is requesting to be annexed and zoned to RS-18.

To be able to accomplish the RS-18 zone, the property has to be redesignated as low density residential.

So that is part of the request tonight is to make it low density.

She already talked about the area around the property, so I won't bore you with that.

This is a look at the future land use map and the different designations that are in the area.

There is a sewer main in Southside Boulevard and in Goldenrod.

There's a water main in South Side Boulevard and in Goldenrod, and there's pressurized irrigation in Southside Boulevard and in Goldenrods.

Lots of utilities available to them.

A traffic impact study is not required with this because of the number of lots that they are proposing at this time.

I believe that there is a little bit of right-of-way dedication that still needs to happen along Southside Boulevard, but everything else has been dedicated already.

So with the density in the LDR designation or RS-18 zone, the density is one to two and a half dwelling units per acre.

On this 19.94 acres with 25 single family lots, the project proposes a gross density of 1.25 dwelling units per acre, thereby meeting the requirements for that LDR designation.

The lot sizes within the RS-18 zone can range from 18,000 square feet to 36,000 square feet.

The lot sizes shown on the plat range from 18,200 square feet to 35,837 square feet, with the average lot size of 23,055 square feet.

The existing family lot can stay the way that it is.

Should they ever choose to build on it further, they would have to split it into lots that would conform to that RS-18 zoning, but uh the way they have it proposed here, it would just be considered nonconforming, and they wouldn't be able to develop it with any more houses.

All the lots proposed meet the lot width and depth required by city code.

They have met the 15% open space on 2.28 acres, which is 15.8%.

She walked through some of the amenities that were provided.

There is a 25-foot landscape buffer proposed along Southside Boulevard, which does meet city code.

These are the applicable regulations.

So we're looking at the comp plan amendment, which you have great flexibility in making a determination on.

And then annexation.

There are four criteria for that, and then there are three criteria for determining the zoning of the property.

So in this case, um, these are the facts for the comp plan amendment that are listed out in your staff report.

These are the facts for annexation.

So the property um the applicant that is making the application has signed an affidavit of legal interest that says that they are approve of the application.

The property is contiguous to the city limits on all four sides.

The property is located in the current NAMPA area of impact, and it is the all of the right-of-way around it.

This is kind of an interesting one.

All of the right-of-way around it is already owned by the city.

So that fourth criteria for annexation doesn't really apply to this because we don't have to enter into an MOU with the highway district at this time.

So the facts for rezoning.

It is in harmony with the comprehensive plan with the request for the RS-18 zoning.

It would provide a proposed use or set of uses that would be reasonably compatible with the existing adjoining properties.

And it is in the interest of the public and reasonably necessary to develop this property because it is considered to be in fill, and it would provide services to the area.

So the correspondence that was received from Nampa Parks, they would like the permanent easement for the pathway along the Elijah Drain, which they are proposing.

Um GIS has requested some revised legal descriptions, which we can get from them.

The fire department does not oppose this application.

They're stating that it would increase personnel demand of 0.07 firefighter positions, and the engineering division uh has completed a review of the preliminary plat application and has provided comments in regards to traffic access layout and utilities.

These are the conditions of approval as listed in your staff report.

These are your potential motions, and I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yes, Councilman Griffin.

Apologies, Mayor, my light doesn't work, so I have to tap to see whenever I'm on.

On the outset of the property, are they planning to have connectivity via sidewalk?

I hadn't heard that discussed.

Is there sidewalk in that area that it'll tap into and connect all the way up to the next one?

Um Councilman Griffin.

On the areas that are in the city, there is already sidewalk.

There are a couple of parcels that still remain that are in the county that wouldn't maybe leave a small gap.

Not part of this project, though, the properties up to the north at our Enclave.

Correct.

So this property already has sidewalk running through it.

No, they will be building sidewalk.

Thank you.

Yes.

Any other questions?

Yes, Councilman Haverfield.

Uh Christy, uh, there appears to be um fire engine access onto Goldenrod Drive to the west.

Is that true?

That is correct.

Is that a gated um access?

Um Councilman Haberfield, I have not looked at the construction drawings, so that might be a question for the applicant.

Okay.

I just didn't know there's uh less than 30 lots, so they don't need the second access.

So just wondering why that's there.

Probably just for convenience, but you'll I would recommend asking them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any additional questions for Christy?

Okay.

So this is a public hearing, and we'll move to that.

Madam Mayor, no one has requested to provide public testimony on this item.

Thank you.

Is there anyone here that had intended to testify on this particular application?

Seeing none.

Sabrina, you can come back and provide an answer to that question and any others.

Thank you.

Um, Madam Mayor, um, council members.

Um, to answer your question, um, Councilmember Haverfield is that my understanding was that the block link was too long and that um engineering department asked for the additional um fire emergency access.

And I believe um bollards is um your fire chief's preferred method of blockage, so we will propose those in our construction plans.

Okay, thank you.

I was just wondering if that was intended to be uh another relief uh access to these lots or not, and it doesn't sound like there's no you're correct that it will not be.

Thank you.

Do you have any other closing comments that you'd like to make?

I don't um first everyone looks fabulous in their sweaters, by the way, and happy holidays.

And thank you, Mayor, for everything that you've done.

We've already talked, so I don't wait to tear you.

So thank you again.

Thank you.

Council, do you have any additional questions for our applicant?

Mayor, and just one last one.

I apologize.

I saw the path is designated there.

Are you going to be building out that path as well along Elijah Drain?

Yeah, Madam Mayor.

Councilmember Griffin, yes, we'll be building out that pathway.

Yes, and it'll be dedicated to the city in the easement.

Thank you.

Merry Christmas.

Thank you.

You as well.

Thank you.

Oh, thank you so much.

Mayor, move that we close public hearing.

Second.

Okay.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Mayor, I make a motion to approve the conference reply map amendment as presented.

Second.

It's been uh moved and seconded to approve the project as stated on the screen.

Is there any discussion?

Seeing none, roll call.

Kingula.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Hammerfield.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Phil's.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

If I could just say, Lance, it is so refreshing to see this.

Yes.

Larger lots and to see this here.

It's wonderful.

It's really refreshing to see it.

So thank you.

It is so good.

Yeah.

I think we I think we all agree.

Wow, that's great.

So thank you.

Appreciate it.

Okay.

You know what?

We are ready for our last public hearing.

It's been a long wait, huh?

Yes.

Okay, so 8.5.

Maybe the same will tell us.

8.5 is an action item.

It's annexate annexation and zoning to community business, multifamily residential, RS4 single family residential, industrial park zoning districts, and master plan community with a development agreement for district 16.

This is addressed as 4188 Cherry Lane, Zero Eustake Road, 5059 Eustake Road, 5033 Eustack Road, 1787 3 Star Road, Zero Eustach Road, Zero Cherry Lane, Zero Cherry Lane, 5465 Ewestick Road, and we've got a let's see, and zero Eustake Road and Zero Eustake Road and Zero Cherry Lane.

I think we got them all for Idaho Holdings LLC representing multiple landowners.

The original concept is a master planned mixed-use development of single-family detached and multifamily residential, commercial, and industrial uses on approximately 405 acres.

So I think our applicant is here, and we have agreed to give you 15 minutes so that because this is a major project.

So thank you for running us through it the entire thing.

And Deb, I think you know the yeah, your name and thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, members of the council.

My name is Deborah Nelson.

My address is 601 West Bannock Street in Boise.

And I'm here on behalf of the applicant team.

And here with me tonight, I also have Emily Mueller and Mark Bottles who are also in support and available to answer your questions.

We really appreciate the time they've put into it and the thoughtfulness.

And we are in full agreement with the staff report and the commission's recommendation of support of this project and all of the conditions of approval.

Where do I point this, Rodney?

That way?

Okay.

Thank you.

Um, so it didn't.

Thank you.

Not just me.

My system.

I'll get started while he works on it.

Um your system just timed out too.

Okay, so it might be on that end.

Is it via Teams?

No, not mine.

Yours isn't.

Okay.

Madam Clerk, would you mind if I ask if you pause the time?

Yeah, we'll start over in my process.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah.

She will start again at 15 minutes.

It was just, yes, you yeah.

Your system wasn't letting you do it now.

I understand.

Okay, great.

Let's turn this.

There we go.

Thank you.

All right.

So District 16 is a mixed-use planned community.

Um, and it encompasses 405 acres along NAMPAS State Highway 16 corridor.

It has approximately 291 acres on the west side of Highway 16 and 114 acres on the east side.

There are two applications that we have before you tonight.

The first is annexation with initial zoning, and the second is a master planned community.

And we've also presented a development agreement to accompany those applications to help guide and ensure that what you see is what you get.

Um, and it will create the development uh vision that you already have stated in your specific area plan.

There is no specific development project that's presented tonight.

Um future applications will be brought before the city for preliminary plat for design review, and that's when particular developments can proceed with each phase.

With each one of those, there will be an additional traffic impact study, um, analysis of utility connections and all of those details that go along with preliminary plats.

Once the first preliminary plot is approved and development proceeds, we expect the build out to take approximately 15 years.

The district 16 master plan community is located within that city's uh highway 16 corridor specific area plan.

The city adopted this plan in 2023.

I'm sure you all remember it well.

Um, this accompanied the state's funding of the extension of highway 16 from State Street south to 84.

Uh the that is underway already, that's extensions underway, and it's expected to be complete in 2027.

So, as part of that specific area plan that the city adopted, you also adopted a future land use map that is basically a sub-area plan from your standard comprehensive plan.

We've got a zoomed-in portion of that plan for this particular area.

The proposed zoning that you see before you tonight mirrors this these land uses and these designations exactly.

All of these land uses that are designated within this the State Highway 16 specific area plan are then reflected in the compatible zoning that's before you.

Upon annexation, we request zoning to accommodate the mix of planned uses, RS4 for single family residential, which is shown in orange, RMH for multifamily residential, shown in tan, BC or commercial commercial business for neighborhood commercial that is shown in pink, and IP for industrial park, which is shown in the darker gray.

Again, each of these zones matches the designations within your future land use map for the State Highway 16 corridor.

And by doing that, by matching that exactly, we are ensuring that our development is compatible with your plans and with existing uses and planned uses in the area.

This proposed zoning facilitates smart growth, just as your plan does for the area, because it allows a variety of housing options, walkable commercial uses, and centralized open spaces.

Focusing in on those zones for the RS4 zone, we propose 168 acres to support the medium density single family residential uses.

This is again proposed on the same area as you can see there, comparing on the left and the right at the bottom, exactly the same areas as shown in your plan.

And the city has already determined for those designations within the plan which zones are appropriate.

You've set this forth in two places, both in your zoning code and in the specific area plan.

You have included the RS4 zone as a compatible zone with the medium density residential designation.

These properties will have a minimum of 15% open space with amenities, including sport courts, pools, playgrounds, and large greened up open spaces to serve a variety of outdoor recreation activities.

With each future subdivision application, specific development items will be addressed, including traffic mitigation, utility connections, and other site specific issues, including application of the city's adopted transition standards to existing development.

You have already codified in your subdivision ordinance the appropriate transition where you're building next to adjacent subdivisions to make sure that your lot sizes are compatible.

These are not required by your code, but they are volunteered by the applicant to ensure that quality and cohesiveness.

Also consistent with the city plans, approximately 80 acres are proposed to be zoned RMH to support future multifamily development, which serves low to medium incomes.

This is proposed again on the same areas you can see at the bottom two maps and to compare the exact same areas as shown for high density residential.

Both the city code and the specific area plan recognize the RMH zone as being appropriate for high density residential designation.

And these uses together, the multifamily together with the single family are going to provide that housing diversity that's near employment, near shopping, near dining opportunities that's contemplated in your specific area plan.

Each of these projects will include on-site amenities, including a pool, and will meet the enhanced standards of the master plan community.

And each of these multifamily projects will also have to go through the city's design review process.

The community business zoning is also consistent with the city's plans.

It's planned for 38 acres to support neighborhood commercial uses along Eustach Road.

This is a really important corridor for the city, and you knew that when you designated this area here.

This is just one of four interchanges along State Highway 16.

So it import it provides really important frontage for this type of development.

That is why the city is currently in the process of widening and improving Eustach Road in this area.

There will be additional improvements.

I've got a slide to show you what some of those are.

That accessibility and frontage is also what attracts the commercial uses, the actual development that will come to this site with this zoning.

In addition to being immediately adjacent to residents, they will have the supporting residential rooftops to support those and really bring in those vibrant commercial uses that the city planned in this area.

Also consistent with the city's plans, 119 acres are proposed for industrial park zoning to support both industrial and business and office uses in a campus-like setting.

The specific area plan describes this area as providing for a variety of industrial flex and business uses that include single or clustered building structures of one to three stories and a campus-like atmosphere with uniform building standards and open spaces connected by pedestrian walkways.

So in total, 156 of the 405 acres will be zoned as BC and IP.

And these acres will provide well, they'll comply with the city's design review standards.

They'll incorporate the materials and the colors that are called for in the city's specific area plans consistent with the heritage theme.

They'll include the landscaping and the amenities, public art, raised planners, outdoor seating that's connected by pathways, and all of this will serve to create that sense of place and a quality walkable development adjacent to residential.

Through the development agreement and the master plan community approval, this conceptual site plan will guide the future development of the property.

This promotes the walkability.

The housing is designed to promote the efficient use of the land and provide more public open space, all while complying with the future land use map.

Similarly, the landscape plan provides that guideline.

So future development as it comes in will meet the open space and amenity standards that are called for in the plans and part of this approval.

We do request as part of your master plan community as allowed by that ordinance a reduction just in one portion of the landscaping requirements, and that's for the industrial park area, so that we can really maximize the economic development opportunity of that land as it straddles the State Highway 16 corridor, efficiently use it to maximize that frontage and the tax base to support economic growth of the area.

Your code allows through a master plan community reduction in certain standards.

This is the only one we're asking for, and that's uh to reduce the bulk standards for that section only.

We are still providing quality open space, not only throughout the rest of the development, but in this area in particular, and so we are going to focus as is called for in your code and the plan on connectivity with with walkways, plazas, and um and landscaping that really creates that campus atmosphere rather than just large areas of quantity there.

The signage plan will also help to create that cohesiveness throughout District 16, consistent with that heritage theme, and creating that integration between uses.

Um, which is before any district 16 buildings would be brought online.

Applicant has also prepared a master traffic analysis in coordination with city staff to identify the potential impact of this development and to work with city staff on what improvements may be needed in the area.

That will also serve as the sideboards when we get into individual preliminary plots that have specific TISs associated with them, and the traffic mitigations are identified.

As the city knows well, you are facing a housing shortage.

Um, your demand is exceeding your supply, so are other cities in the valley.

You're not alone there.

And this development helps to fulfill your plans to bring on some of that density and the variety of housing that you're looking for.

And this will help to bring up you know to help close the gap on some of those units that are needed, in particular, focusing on some units that will serve low to moderate incomes.

In addition to the housing, we provide other benefits to the city.

We understand that you have additional considerations that you have to take into account with legislation such as the 389 legislation that impacts your budgets.

We know that you still have budgeting decisions that will impact that, but at least this gives you a an idea of the valuation based on area assessed values so that you can see that this is bringing in the scale of development that you contemplated when you planned this area and supports the services that the city is also planning for this area to meet this plan.

There's significant impact fees that we will be paying as well.

And this applicant team is contributing to the city's Pertham trunk sewer that will serve these properties and other properties that applicant team owns in the area.

But perhaps you know, most importantly, again, we're building out the city's vision.

We're partnering with the city to bring in the zones and the type of development that you call that you have called for in your plans.

It is rare to get a developer that can assemble such a large piece of property that in 400 acres can bring forward a master plan community that meets your plans.

And it won't build out all at once, but you'll get the guidepost for it to build out consistent with what you have already planned.

You've got the development agreement and the master plan community to help guide that.

So for all of these reasons, we ask for your support.

We appreciate the support of staff and the planning commission and um and would stand for any questions that you may have.

Thank you so much.

Council, do you have any questions?

Yes.

I have a couple.

First off on the single family portion, and it was the zone in slide.

Uh all these are showing RS4.

The neighborhood to the west of the to the west of one of the properties and to the north of the 10 Mile Creek property.

What is the zoning of that property?

Right there, smack dab, a little below center off to the left.

I believe the properties that are in the city are RS8.

I'm looking at Emily just to confirm.

Yeah.

Seven or eight.

Is that the same for the northern property as well?

In this, there's that dash line going through the center of the screen.

There's a neighborhood to the north and a neighborhood to the south.

Yeah, and you've got some county development down there in the south.

Do you know what size those lots are in those two projects?

So for the county development, of course, they'll be subject to your future land use map, the same as we are if they're ever redeveloped into the city.

And so I would point you to your comprehensive plan for that area that would call for a medium density residential.

Um for the existing RS7 or 8.

I think your staff is probably better equipped to address that.

I'd point to Damien to respond to that question if you don't mind.

It'll give them a heads up.

With regard to the bike trail, it goes straight to highway 16, but it doesn't show parting out left or right to take the sidewalk.

Is there intention that connect those two projects underground, above ground, going up the sidewalk to the light and back down?

What's the intention there?

Yeah, Madam Mayor, Councilmember Griffin, that's a great question.

We will have an underpass pedestrian corridor there.

Um and this this development is building out over a mile of pathways along these facilities with 10 Mile Creek that will eventually connect through and the Northwest Pipeline pathway there.

Thank you.

And my final question was just in regard uh to the builder.

Has there been a builder selected for the housing types or that is planned on developing the uh single family home portions?

Madam Mayor, can uh council member Griffin?

No, not at this time.

That'll come forward when we come forward with plates.

You'll get more specifics there.

Thank you.

And the only reason I asked that question is just because I know there was attachment of units or designated units that are expected to be built out.

I didn't know if there was a builder specific to those that was going to complete the project to look similarly, or they are just examples for future builders.

Those are concepts for future builders, but they're also consistent with the residential design guidelines that would bind all developers to this prop project.

So whatever whoever the builder is that they would have to meet the residential design guidelines.

And do you have something to add?

Yeah, okay.

Thank you, Mayor and Councilman Griffin.

Um one of the properties is owned by Corey Barton.

So those came from him.

So he will just be developing 30 acres on the corner of Eustach and STAR, that southeast corner there.

Um we were excited to bring him into this application because again, we were able to put on design standards.

Um you get heightened amenities and those sorts of things.

So really it was an opportunity to have property he already owned by bringing him into the master plan community.

We have the design guidelines and we have those heightened open space requirements.

So it was just kind of an add-on that will help, even though there will be different builders for all of you know, a lot.

We've talked to a lot of different builders for all of these different areas, um, will still produce a cohesive feel, again, even though it's different builders.

Thank you.

Yes.

Mayor, if I could just one more for either of you at this point.

Is there a first right of refusal or any kind of um designation for the properties in between the Corey Barton property and the Ten Mile Creek property that will anticipate is owned by y'all, or could that potentially be a lacart that another developer comes in and does something totally different to this plan in those areas?

Yeah, uh so sorry, one more time, um, mayor and councilman Griffin.

You're talking about the um, yeah, the out parcels north of the uh so the um yeah uh I think I know we're talking about south of Eustick between Oahe and Storm.

Uh uh O'Wahi and Star.

Um those we don't have any right of first refusal on those.

Um there is an existing storage facility there, and one of them.

So one of them is an existing storage.

Um, but no, we don't have any right of first refusal.

And maybe we're looking at the same piece.

I can't see the the road crossings at the very bottom of the screen in the center is the 10 mile creek.

Mm-hmm.

Correct.

Corey Barton's projects on the bottom right-hand side.

I'm looking in between the state highway 16 and 10 Mile Creek, those two square properties, are those the storage facility properties you're talking about?

Um, mayor, councilman, no, those um and and sorry, just to back up, um, the Corey Barton pieces at the north end of this.

Um, so there's two 40s there.

And his is the easterly 40 acres.

So there will be 30 acres.

You're saying the eastern portion.

So there's two portions.

The roadway is the half point, he's on the east, you're on the west.

Okay.

Correct.

I'm talking about the south east.

I apologize.

I thought that's when you said southeast, I was referring to the southeast of this map.

No, there is no right of first refusal or any discussion there with regard to what those properties will develop.

Thank you.

That's as far as we know.

Councilmember Griffin, I would just add that, but they will be subject to your conference of plan and your specific area plans.

You know, that's that's you know, the the only thing we would know about how they might build out, and we will be subject to those plans and also your code requirements that I mentioned about transition standards.

And so, regardless of what the intervening existing development is, we have to uh match those lot lines within the standards that are outlined in your code, which have parameters in them about when you have to meet 80 percent, and that's very specific set forth in your subdivision code that we would also have to meet.

Thank you.

Any other questions at this time?

Yes.

Um quick question, thank you for this.

I love master plan communities, and I appreciate you bringing in the other developer in here as well to get those heightened standards.

That's something that we're very interested in.

So thank you for that.

Um I apologize if you had already stated it, but that IP zone, what do you plan on putting in the IP zone and then what phase is that in?

So um, starting with the what's in the IP zone.

So I mean, we'll at this point nothing specific is planned, so you'll get a chance to look at that with design review applications that'll come in.

But your um specific area plan does have standards that you've got, you know, where you lay out what you think you want there.

And it's a mix of light industrial, commercial, office buildings set out in a campus setting.

That's that one to three stories that I mentioned.

You've even got a height limit in there in your specific area plan of 50 feet.

Um, and the idea there is to create a campus, and your landscape standards um call for that as well with the use of plazas and connective pathways, and those are the uses that we anticipate exactly as you've called for.

So you'll note that we didn't ask for you know heavy industrial or light industrial zoning.

We asked for industrial park exactly like it's called for for the compatible zone with your designated um commercial and business campus there, or commercial industrial campus there is your specific designation.

So we picked the zone that will match that entirely, and the uses that we expect are exactly as you described them in your specific area plan.

We could get a zoo.

Just getting it's in the joke, but I would love to see a zoo in NAMPA.

It's our ongoing joke.

I mean, we we'd love to see uh you know, lifestyle center or other interactive walking type environment, but you know, that's what we'll have to try to develop and bring back before you with a specific application.

Oh, and then we can get taken.

Yeah, uh Mayor and Councilwoman.

Um, with regards to the phasing, this is a this is the area of the project that we're really excited to bring forward as soon as possible.

Um, so one of the constraints to that is getting the sewer out here.

Um, you know, as as mentioned earlier, we're helping pay um, you know, for this area over four million dollars, and that just gets it to Canada.

So we are working to get it over here.

Um, one of the things that staff has been really helpful planning with us are some potential interim solutions.

So the subdivision right in the middle here actually stubs sewer that would enable this industrial park commercial area to sewer faster if there is some capacity that frees up.

So, because that's really the area that we hope would develop very soon.

And um, you know, and and by soon I mean the highway is gonna be done in 2027, the U Stick roadway improvements are gonna be done in 2027.

Um, there's a lot of interest in this area, and and to make this a really amazing gateway in into the city.

So that's that's an area that we're hoping some interim solutions for sewer could um more quickly.

Perfect, thank you.

Okay, are there any other questions right now?

Great presentation.

Thank you, and you'll be back.

Thank you very much.

Okay, staff.

I can try.

So Damien, they did a an absolutely excellent job going through this project.

So don't feel like you need to repeat.

We can see how you can shorten yours since we've got a really good idea of what this is.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

And we will do my voice is a little raspy today, so it action item as stated is annexation and zoning for BC, RMH, RS4, and IP Industrial Park for 405 acres.

So property details, it's around that state highway that is coming in and is in the state highway 16 specific area plan.

Um currently there's a lot of farm field out there that's within the county, as well as some pre-existing neighborhoods and county subdivisions.

And currently working on utilities out there, as well as with this, we will have to have a development agreement.

It has currently been reviewed with Preston and will be in the conditions of approval to have that development agreement so we can get a lot of these locked in.

It has to follow the guidelines of a master plan community as well as the regulations of the specific area plan for highway 16.

Here is that map.

And here's the proposed zones.

It does meet that map head on.

They're asking for no changes from that.

15% to 17% to 15 to 7% within the IP zone industrial park zone, and this is allowable per the allowances of the master plan community.

Here is their proposed open space and zoning again.

And that conceptual plan that was shown in their presentation.

All right, for correspondence.

We did receive a variety of comments from a lot of organizations to go through them.

Nampa Code Compliance said annexation is not recommended until the issues of the weeds are destroyed throughout the property.

NAMP fire district provided general comments and water supply comments since there's no plat at this time, and this is just getting the zoning in the master plan community.

We'll provide more comments at the time that these areas are platted.

Nampa Parkson Rec has reviewed the annexation request and requests for a 20-foot wide permanent easement on the top bank along the 10 mile creek to be given to the city of Nampa and to be part of the NAMPA's bicycle pedestrian and master plan community.

And they request that it is constructed to the standards.

NAMPA Engineering provided a variety of comments regarding legal districts descriptions and working on that predam trunk sewer line as well describing the roadways and providing some conditions that will be the recommended conditions.

This does not currently about the state highway system, but it will be once the state highway 16 is uh completed in 2027.

Uh traffic generation numbers weren't provided for this application because there's no current platting, um, so that'll be something they'll have to come back through at the time of plotting.

We did receive a con uh comment from COMPASS, and this one was a little bit interesting, so they do an analysis of these kinds of projects on connectivity and like availability of sewer and services and things that nature, and they give it a score.

Uh so I spoke with the people at COMPASS about their rating.

They did not provide uh with their survey, they tried to provide weight on an application, but we didn't have all the information at this time.

Uh, because there's no sidewalk out there, there's not currently sewer.

The the application is a little bit too early to get this analysis done.

So we spoke about it, and they are going to provide further analysis at the time of plotting.

We did receive a variety of public comments.

They were regarding traffic, fear of lowering property values, water capacity, and not wanting to live in your apartments.

These are all provided in your staff report.

Here are the applicable rank regulations for annexation.

We'll cover these in the findings.

So that all private landowners have consented to annexation, that the property shall be contiguous with the city limits, not only through shoestring connection or strip of land compromising of highway or right-of-way.

Um, staff found these to be met.

That the comprehensive plan includes the area of annexation.

This is within that and within the SAP.

And when applicable for annexation of all roadways, are all portions of highways, so on and so forth.

The right-of-way will be annexed as part of this application.

So staff has found these to be met.

Here are the findings for zoning.

Um, that the proposed map amendments is our or would be in harmony with the city's currently adopted comprehensive plan and comprehensive plan future land use map.

Uh the proposed annexation follows the specific area plan and the comp plan.

So staff found this to be met.

That the proposed map amendments is our would provide a proposed use or set of uses that would be at least reasonably compatible with existing or joining property uses.

This follows the plan that was set forth through the state highway specific area plan.

So staff found this to be met as well as being along the Eustach Road corridor.

And that the pro map amendments is or would be in the best interest of the public and reasonably necessary with the development of the state highway 16, um, and being under that specific area plan.

Staff found this to be met.

Here are the recommended conditions of approval and highlighted this was not in the staff report, but after reviewing the development agreement with Preston, um, this was added to it under the condition of the development agreement is required to be reviewed by the city attorney.

This just provides a couple specific uses that wouldn't be allowed in those zones that were in the development agreement.

It's just a lot easier to have them under the conditions.

So in the future, when people are reading decision letters that they can be read.

And here are your potential motions, and I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you.

That was he went through that very well.

Good job, Dave.

Any questions from council?

Well, that was easy.

Okay, no questions at this time.

So this is a public hearing.

I think we do have a couple of people signed up.

Madam Mayor, we have four people have requested to provide public testimony, and our first speaker is Michael Murphy.

Good evening, Mayor Mayor and Council.

Nice to be here.

This will be very brief.

My address is 1087 West River Street, suite 150 in uh Boise.

Um I think the 405-acre project is terrific.

I am here in support of it.

And I'm supporting it for a couple of reasons.

Number one, we need the residential, and it's going to supply residential.

But number two, we have significant industrial areas.

And this project and properties are at the absolute gateway to Northeast Napa.

But more importantly, if you look at the entire Persia Valley, and you want to put a pin on the map right in the middle, that's what this gateway is.

So it's great for Napa, number one.

But number two, we have all these bright young kids getting out of Boise State, and all these young people that are moving here because it's a great place to live.

This is a phenomenal job opportunity for us to bring to this location, RD, and tech and high end industrial, and maybe some life science companies because of the freeway on and off Rampant VST and the gateway it's gonna create.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Oh, sorry.

Sorry.

One moment.

Our next person, let's go ahead and give that name and they can be walking up while we fix it.

Yeah, I okay.

I couldn't get out of this.

Um our next speaker is Anna Bottmiller.

Okay.

She was um in support of this project.

Our next speaker is Julie Barnes.

Hi Julie, thank you for giving us your name and address, and you'll have three minutes.

Julie Barnes, um, 4957 Golden Spur.

And um, when he when Councilman Griffin was asking about the one area in the middle, that's where I live, and they're acre lots.

So they'll be bordered by two of those yellow um sections.

Um so part of my concern, well, let's see.

I would came to the planning and zoning meeting that was like a a month ago, and one of the commissioners said that they weren't familiar with this part of NAMPA, and that really kind of surprised me, and I've thought about that several times, thinking if they're not familiar with the area, it would be good to go and check it out and drive it and see the traffic problems that are already there before this development comes in.

Um, when she asked me, do I am I against or for this?

I really didn't have an answer because I know growth and development is going to happen.

I just think we it would be good to do it responsibly responsibly and planning for the traffic before the traffic is way out of control.

Um, like I noticed on Star Road.

I live off of Star Road, and um two of the developments north of us, they did require city council must have required them to do right turn lanes, and that's great and wonderful for for them, but getting out onto star turning left, even well, turning left is almost impossible at some times of the day, and those right small right turn lanes didn't don't help a mile down the road, they help traffic to get off into their subdivision.

Um so I think we need to address these three country roads that are three sides of this um square mile that are just two-lane country roads.

We're putting a lot of cars, a lot of traffic on those little teeny country roads.

Um let's see.

So and you know they've talked about traffic study.

Does that happen by their request of the company, or is that an independent independent um company that does that that doesn't have a vested interest in it?

And um yeah, I would just hope that we would consider fixing the problem before it's an out-of-control problem.

And there was another question that was asked.

Oh, in um planning and zoning is what butts up to this well, the McDermott on the Meridian side, and it's a it's a farmhouse and farmland.

It isn't Madame Maritime or anything like that.

So thank you.

Thank you very much.

Our next speaker is Drew Eggers.

Hi, Mayor Kling, City Council.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak today.

Um my home address is 2256 North Waggle Place, Marinian, Idaho.

My wife and I, we own 70 acres, uh 4437 West Cherry Lane, which is wet east west of the new highway 16 and south of Cherry Lane, 70 acres.

Um I was involved with the planning process of this whole area a few years ago with uh uh interested people and city staff, and it's it's uh fun for me to see future plans that will probably happen out there.

Uh we are in favor of of this process, and uh uh think it's a a great thing for the area.

You know, the land uses out there the last 30 years have changed, and we accept those changes.

Uh I thank you very much.

Mayor Kling, I want to say thank you very, very much for your leadership in the city of Napa.

Uh I think you'll be missed.

And uh thank you.

And I'm sorry, I missed a memo about my the Christmas letters.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Madam Mayor Madam Mayor, we do not have anyone else signed up.

Is there anyone?

Yes.

Okay, so we have two people in the back first, and then we'll go to you next.

And thank you so much.

Good evening.

I'll just be brief.

Um I never thought I lived out there my whole life, Drew and I are sort of the last comment.

Name and address.

Excuse me.

Sorry, that's I'm Doug Thurgood, and I live at 17245 Canada Road.

Um Drew and I have farmed out there all of our lives, and so we're very familiar with the extreme change, which we probably never thought that we would see in our lifetime.

But I am in support of uh this project.

We are very anxious to get the gravity sewer down Eustach Road.

Uh we are needing that at our place in particular.

Um the widening of Eustach Road is really emphasized the uh inability to move equipment around.

And uh one thing that I would request that as we put the sewer in that we try not to get all the intersections closed at once, starting at Franklin Road, going back to Star Road.

Uh that has been a big concern for us, and so I hope there's some coordination with all of the highway districts on that.

Um I have really felt that personally as we've closed down McMillan Road all summer and it's gonna be closed down another year yet, and then the widening of Eustach Road.

But that's my only request is do we have coordination on when we put the sewer in.

Thank you.

Thank you for being here.

And Crystal Craig is here and heard I wanted to thank you for your service to the community as well.