Okay.

Okay, I've got six o'clock.

Um I'd like to start by welcoming everyone to the planning and zoning commission meeting, January twenty sixth, two thousand twenty six.

Um and I'd like to start by welcoming Commissioner Turner back.

Good to have you.

Glad to be here.

Um I'd like to start with a roll call.

Copeland.

Kirkman?

Here.

Morgan?

Here.

Keyhoe?

Here.

Turner.

Here.

Daffer.

Nope.

Miller?

Here.

Garner?

Here.

Six president.

Thank you.

Rodney?

You mister Chair and Commissioners.

Uh for the record, Rodney Ashby, Planning and Zoning Director.

We had three um final plans go before City Council.

Um this last this last week on January twentieth.

Um and all those were recommended by you.

And the first one is Ridgeview North number one.

Second one was Swainson's Hawk Arbor number one.

And the last one is Grand Central.

And all of those uh were approved by City Council.

The next is public hearings.

We have an annexation and zoning and comprehensive plan text amendment for Prescott Creek.

This is near Eustach Road and 11th Avenue North.

And um for future development of three hundred and eighty townhouses and seven hundred and sixty m multifamily units in twenty-fourplex.

Um and eighty excuse me and a a really large building.

Um so this one was recommended for approval.

It was continued though by City Council to March sixteenth, uh at the applicant's request.

The next one was a variance.

Um this is for properties just southwest of West Flamingo Avenue and North Middleton Road.

And um this is to remove the existing home due to significant repairs needed and construct a new home on the uh lot that was just too large for our our code.

And that one was approved by City Council.

And then um the last one is annexation and zoning for Shadow Creek.

This is uh in the northwest of Lake Well Avenue and South Middle Midland Road Boulevard, excuse me, Midland Boulevard.

And this was for twelve buildable lots for single family detached dwelling units and four common lots.

And um this one was recommended for approval by you and it was denied by city council.

Well, I shouldn't say that.

It was it was uh approved with condition that it be reduced from twelve units to eight dwelling units, and then they match the um lot lines, the side yard lot lines to the ones that are just directly to the to the west.

And so that's that's how they approved that one.

And that's all I have.

Any questions?

Questions anybody?

Comments, concerns.

Okay.

Mr.

Chair?

Yes.

Second.

It's been moved by Garner, seconded by Keyho to approve the consent agenda.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Okay.

To get started this evening, um item three-two, uh annexation and zoning to RS 7, potential development agreement and subdivision preliminary plat approval for Hudson Yard subdivision uh for Bonnie Late Leighton representing endurance holdings and Thomas Murray has asked for a continuance due to some conditions and requirements placed by the city engineering, some notes and things they were unaware and unsure of.

So they've asked for a continuance based on those things.

So they say how long they need.

Uh yes, to the February 24th meeting.

Mr.

Chair, I make a motion that we move that uh continue item number two to February.

So I guess technically we need to open the public hearing on that item.

Okay.

So mayor, if you wanted, you could if you want to flip the order and take care of that now and move forward with it.

You could do that or wait until after 3-1 and then open it at that point and and make the appropriate motion.

I just I figured if we do it this way, then if there's anybody that's here for that item, they don't even stick around until yeah.

Okay, so we just open the item for that item, and now we can that's right, yeah.

Um yeah, formally take up the item, open it up for um I guess this point we would we have a staff report, but we're pending more information still, right, Rodney.

Yeah, typically we just uh ask for the continuance and then we'll do the staff report at a that date when it's continued.

We'll take care, yeah, take care of the staff report and uh public comment at that time.

So we'll go ahead and open item three-2.

Um and then Commissioner Kirkman, if you'd like to Yeah, um to formally accept the item, he doesn't have to read through that and then open it.

Okay.

No, no.

All right, 24th, you said yes, February 24.

So I'll restate my motion that we move uh action item number three-2 to February twenty-fourth, twenty twenty-six.

Or continue, continue to February twenty-fourth.

Okay, it's been moved by Kirkman, seconded by Copeland to continue this item to February twenty-fourth.

All those in favor?

All right.

Any opposed?

Okay.

Motion carries that item will be moved to the February 24th, 2026 meeting.

Okay, so we'll open uh first.

If first I'd like to thank everyone for attending tonight.

Um you your attendance is important to us.

Um things have been stated on social media lately that I've been aware of that uh I don't know, basically make it look like we don't care what you say.

And that's not at all true.

We do listen to every single testimony and read every single thing that has come across our desk, usually more than once.

Um we are given the staff report um and all these notes last week, and every one of us go through them in the evenings when we're home from work.

So it is very important to us, and I want everybody to know that we have read the staff report.

We go through and highlight, make notes, and we have to look at it from a lot of different perspectives, not just the people who live close.

So understand that we do care.

The reason that we're here is to make NAMPA better.

Um and I understand that that's why you guys are here too, because you want to see it be positive and good down the road too.

So we appreciate you.

I hope you can appreciate us too.

Um with that said, if you haven't been to one of these meetings before, um the way it works is we'll get the applicant to come forward.

Um they will have five minutes to tell us about what they want to do.

Um then we will turn the time over to staff.

They have unlimited time, and then we will open it up to public testimony.

Uh we ask that when you come up to the mic, um, give us your name and address for the record.

You have three minutes to speak once you've spoken.

That's it.

So if you think of something after you sat down, maybe ask the person sitting next to you.

Hey, go ahead and ask this.

Because once you've had your three minutes, that's all we can allow.

Um also the meeting is being recorded, so anything you say in the audience is picked up by the mics.

Um so anybody who's listening online, those the background noise from speaking in the in the audience can make that inaudible sometimes.

So we ask that you respect the people at the mic, and then we'll do the same for you.

So with that said, we are gonna go ahead and open up item three-one annexation and zoning to RD at 2102 South Midland Boulevard for Jennifer Reynolds.

The applicant here.

I have my contractor.

Okay.

It's not allowing.

Yeah, we'll we'll get staff to look into it right now and see if they can help.

Thank you.

Sorry, Mr.

Chair, quick question.

Is he struggling to get in the front door or done online?

Online.

Okay.

Sorry.

So no, he he intends to join via Teams because of just complications within his home in the hour that it is at.

So that being said, my name is Jennifer Reynolds.

Um my address is 2102 South Midland Boulevard, Nampa, Idaho, 83686.

And I'm petitioning the committee today for annexation into the city.

Um, presently my parcel resides within Canyon County.

Um, I am surrounded completely by the city.

Um in order to split the property like I intend to to build um further housing on it, I have to be part of the city.

Um, it is already um set in uh the future planning for medium residential.

So I'm requesting that I can come in as R6.

Um, so medium residential with the ability to split um and the future plan is to build four plexes.

Um we'll split into six parcels and build a total of allowable 20 units on those.

Um the first phase will include keeping the present home that is on that property and building on the remaining of the parcels after they're split, and then um phase two will be removing the present home and building the last complex there.

So um I don't I don't know what else to say.

I've never been to one of these.

So I don't know if there's any other information you need from me or anybody have any questions right now?

What one question?

Yeah, you you said your RS6.

Um yes, we're requesting to come in as R6.

Originally I was planning an R4.

They told me the correct way to do it would be an R6 when I was filing with the planning and zoning.

R agenda says R D.

Do you know how it was advertised for me?

Mr.

Chair and Commissioners, let me let me look at that and see which one it is.

I have the filing paperwork here too, is R6 for what they or I don't how big of a deal is it if it was advertised as something else.

To use a classic legal phrase, it would depend.

It depends.

Um public notice is to provide just that to the public of what the intensity of the use could be in that range.

Um as you and the public may be aware, uh a zoning can have a certain range of uses, right, that are authorized.

And so that is a very crucial piece of a public notification is that what the request is was also notified for the public.

So we'll wait for comment on how it was published and and notice.

I yeah, I don't want to make a mountain out of a molehill, but I also have the staff report, it's referred to as RD.

Mr.

Chair, yes.

Um the RD zone is what uh was advertised to the public.

So I'm gonna look back on the application and just see what they had recommended.

I also thought I heard um four plexes.

Is that correct?

They they would be um attached at one wall, they'd be a full unit as of themselves with um residing uh parking underneath it.

Um so they would all sit on their own lot to be individually.

Um just it depending, uh I think we need to hear the staff report um because depending on exactly how this is laid out, the RD zone might be the only way to accomplish that.

Right.

Um but let me uh quickly check on the application and see what was submitted on the application.

Okay.

And you're good to sit down.

We'll call you back up when we're ready for you.

And then should we should we let Damien proceed or what do you want to do?

Mr.

Chair, the application also listed RD.

So I I think there might just be some confusion about what RS6 is versus RD zoning.

I think it's it was the applied for that way, it was advertised that way, and it might be the only option for them to accomplish what they're suggesting.

So I would suggest we move forward with Damien presenting the presentation.

Okay, looks like you're up, Damien.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman and Commissioners.

One second.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman and Commissioners.

Damn Snodgrass, associate planner.

All right, so the requested action item that we had was for annexation and zoning to RD two-family residential with the associated right-of-way with a development agreement for 2102 South Midland Boulevard.

The original concept was for a future subdivision into six lots, um, maintaining that single family home and doing a town's home style development.

While this is an annexation, it is not coming in for a plat, so there's no actual plating of those lines or develop division at this time.

It is just for the annexation of the land.

So some of the property details currently, this is within the county under the MDR medium density residential residential designation.

To the north, we have RD zoning, two family residential, or it is entitled for four-plex units.

Um to the west, we have RS7 single family to the south Canyon County parcels that are undeveloped, and to the east, we have the RA and some more of those county subs.

The history is that there was a pre-application meeting held on January 2025 discussing the possibilities of development for four-unit townhouses, and there are utilities available to the property.

Currently, the RD two-family residential is one of the permitted zones under the future land use map under medium density residential.

Within the vicinity, there are some commercial districts, um single family residential, and some multifamily units that are entitled.

Here are the applicable regulations for annexation and zoning.

We'll cover those in the findings.

And the applicable regulations for the RD chapter, where two unit townhouses and three to four unit townhouses are permitted.

Here were some concept plans that were submitted by the applicant.

Um these are provided, however, these have no bearing.

A subdivision plot would have to come before the commission at a later date to discuss and go through the qualifications of code and be analyzed by staff.

All right.

Highlighted in yellow, there will be a couple things that were some mistypos for me on my end at the staff report, as well as some additional information that we wanted to add in.

And this is a property analysis portion of this.

This is some of what could be done on the property if it were to come through as a plat.

So it's a little bit of a preliminary before a plat actually comes in on what could actually be done with this parcel.

So under the MDR designation that you would need 2.51 to 8.01 dwelling units an acre in gross density.

Um so we'll calculate the total area that is being able to be developed, and we will divide that by the number of units going on that.

Um looking at the property right now, there's currently 1.66 acres of land.

When you subtract the right-of-way that will need to be dedicated, at least about 1.53 acres of buildable space.

Calculating the density at 8.0 dwelling units an acre, um, the max amount of units that you could put on this parcel is 12.2 dwellings, so rounded down to meet that would be at 12 dwelling units, could go on this land just by the lot size.

That doesn't take into consideration things like parking, internal roadways, frontage improvements, and landscape buffers and things of that nature.

This is just kind of how we would do an analysis of it to see if a plat would meet code.

In the proposed townhouse development that would come at a later date, parking regulations on that would be two per dwelling unit as well as 0.5 per dwelling unit for guest parking, and this would have to be in a separate location.

So while in theory, 12 dwellings could be platted.

Um it doesn't consider any of those other requirements, so most likely would have to be less unless it is able to just fit perfectly with all those being in nature.

So there's just some facts about that that we wanted to add in a little bit later to provide like a preliminary analysis of that.

For correspondence, we received a couple comments.

For the general comments, engineering has provided things along the lines of wanting to provide public road access, dedication of ride of way, frontage improvements, a traffic impact study at a later date, and the utilities engineering has requested a development agreement to obtain that right of way and have some of the conditions that they will need before this comes through at plating.

And some of the other agency comments is from NAMPA Fire District.

We received just general access and fire water supply comments.

They'll have to reevaluate this at plating.

NAMPA building department wants the original structure to have a demo permit fold and uh to meet the regular building codes of Title IV building regulations.

Code compliance sent a request to satisfy the weed removal on the property, get the property cleaned up.

NAMPA long range planning based on their analysis that this property would be in conformance with the comprehensive plan.

We did receive a late agency comment, and that was from Boise Cunit irrigation district.

Uh they were provided comment on the necessity for more information to calculate the impact.

Um this is a comment that we would normally take at time of platting, and more of that impact will be able to be evaluated if this application were to come back through as a preliminary plat or a short plat.

Here are the staff findings for annexation.

So that all private landowners have consented to annexation.

We received an affidavit, so staff found this to be met.

The property is contiguous to city limits or be enclaved by other properties, so annexed.

It is contiguous to the north as well as to the west.

The NAMPA comprehensive plan includes the area of annexation.

This is within the NAMPA area of impact.

Um, it is under the medium density residential.

Um I got this wrong in the original staff report, so I'm presenting it to you with that proper medium density residential, but it is under that comprehensive plan.

And when applicable for annexation of roadways, all partially highways lying partially wholly to be annexed with a contiguous parcel, unless by express agreement with the highway maintenance district.

Um, this is under that memorandum of understanding between the city and the NAMPA highway districts.

So the applicable regulations for zoning are that the proposed map amendments is our or would be in harmony with the city's currently adopted comprehensive plan and comprehensive plan land use map.

That the proposed map amendments is are would provide for a proposed use or set of uses that would be at least reasonably compatible with existing and adjoining property uses.

And that the proposed zoning map amendments is in the interest of the public and reasonably necessary.

And so the mixed unit, the mixed unit portion that was originally in the staff report isn't super applicable to this, so I took in the medium density residential out of the comprehensive plan, which talks about single family detached homes, duplexes, and townhomes is something that they're looking for under that comprehensive designation, as well as the code for the RD zoning district.

In the findings, the comprehensive plan is compatible as defined as the visual relationship between adjacent nearby buildings and the immediate streetscape.

Um the 2020 2040 comprehensive plan defines this as a residential area.

It's current need for housing in the Amp City limits, and there is a projected need for housing within the city limits.

The 25 foot landscape buffer is required at midland along the time of plating.

Um with that, there are city utilities available to the property.

Traffic frontage improvements will be done per city code at time of development, and the townhouse buildings of three and four units will be under design review by the city at time of development.

So, in conclusion, staff found this to be in conformance with the criteria stated for zoning.

Here are some of the recommended conditions of approval, that any on-site wells proposed on the property shall be abandoned or removed in accordance with local and state regulations, that the property be annexed into the NAMPA municipal irrigation district, that the Apple Cant owner shall comply with all city codes and policies and standards, including those necessary building permits, that the developer shall construct the frontage improvements along South Midland at time of property development.

But the developer shall construct the frontage improvements along South Midland at time of property development.

That the developer shall coordinate with the NAMPA Engineering Division regarding any traffic requirements.

And the developer shall coordinate with the Namba Meridian Irrigation District about rerouting that heron lateral canal.

The developer shall enter into a development agreement with the city for the project with the conditions added to the development agreement of the dedication of that 20-foot five-foot right-of-way and that phase two of the project which removes the existing home.

Um and the developer must resolve all the open code compliance issues with those weeds.

Mr.

Chair, yes.

Damien, in the the late agency comment was the irrigation district right.

That is uh within the Boise CUNA irrigation district uh that is there on the southwest corner of NAMPA.

Yeah, I just saw in his the conditions it had NAMPA meridian irrigation, I think, listed right.

So I just check the letter says that the Heron Lateral is a Napa Meridian facility.

All right.

I assume it's right.

Correct.

Okay.

I I have a question.

Um so Damien, I was looking at this, and I know this that I know that she's just here for annexation, but she did include these concepts one and two, and from the sizing of that, neither of these concepts would be would be approved, correct?

There isn't enough land there for 16 units.

That is correct.

Um I just wanted to make sure that that I was hearing that right.

Okay.

I can just report back on uh a little bit of research I did while while you were talking.

Um so the the application was originally for an RS zone.

However, when it came in to staff, they uh worked with the the applicant and said the RS zone doesn't even allow uh townhouses up to four units, and so it wasn't a possibility.

So in conversations with the applicant, they changed that to R D and then so I I think it was just a little bit of confusion over which zone it was, but RD is the one that was um was discussed.

It was the one that was advertised, and and it's the one that the only possible one that they could go with to do four unit townhouses.

Okay.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair, you tell me if I need to save this for our deliberation, but I'd like to ask either Damien or Daniel.

Looking at this piece of property, that canal basically bisects it.

And if that has to be an easement, how do they even use half of this lot?

It is not uncommon for canals to be rerouted with development out to the exteriors of the property lines.

So they bury it and run it along the edge.

That that is oftentimes what happens when a ground is developed that has a irrigation canal or lateral on it.

Thanks.

No.

Okay, we'll go ahead and move to the public hearing portion or public testimony portion of the meeting.

Madam Clerk, do we have a sign-up sheet?

We do.

Uh just one Jana Fed Fettinger.

Yeah.

Yeah, I only have the one.

You're good.

Nope, you're good.

My name is Jill Hallows.

I live at 603 West Crimson Loop in Nampa.

Um last year I attended Citizens Academy, and I was able to go watch the planners in action, and they helped us learn about planning.

And I have to tell you that I have great respect and admiration for what you do.

As I saw this proposal come up, I thought, oh, I think my admiration is waning.

Because this made no sense to me at all.

I I travel that way all the time to go to, you know, I live off locust there off Midland and Locust.

This proposal, although I'm all for infill, because I'd rather do that than sprawl.

Um is a little unbalanced with the neighborhood that exists.

Um I would like to see things kept to R S and keep the density down.

This property is really close to the Greenhurst Midland intersection.

And I can't imagine with the proposed number of homes that were originally requested with like 20 units.

That's putting a lot of cars in a small area right next to an intersection.

I'm really concerned about the safety of that.

It's also gonna impact the other neighbors like Sands Point people try to get out into the traffic.

And if there's that much traffic going, they'll they'll never get out of their development.

So I'm really worried about that traffic.

I was really happy to come tonight and learn that um it's kind of been talked about to go um lower density, not lower, but what do you call it?

Mid middle, middle of the road density.

Thank you for that, because I I could maybe see duplexes there, but four plexus.

Like I can't see that.

So please keep a lid on how big this gets in that bad spot.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

anybody else that didn't sign up that would like to speak for against or undecided on this proposal.

Okay.

Come back up and maybe answer some questions, Ms.

Rennie.

Okay.

Questions.

Yeah, can Mr.

Herman?

I have one question.

If the annexation is granted, um, do you still want it if you know that the plats that you turned in are not going to be approved in the future?

There's not going to be 16 units.

Um we're originally told in my very first meeting with planning and zoting, 20 units.

I'm not worried about the unit number I want to annex in.

I want to, I've already discussed with the Amper Merdian irrigation district um rerouting and burying that canal um to the edge of the lot.

And so whether that ends up being 12 units or 16, you know, whatever that I'm not worried about the number there.

So thank you.

Any other questions?

No.

Okay.

I guess that's all.

Thank you.

Make a motion we close the public hearing.

Second.

Then moved and seconded to close the public hearing.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Public hearing is closed.

Discussion.

For annexation, right?

Yeah.

Surrounded by NAMPA.

Yeah, so we will see the plot come before us at a later date.

So we make decisions on that at that time.

But this is just simply for annexation.

So Mr.

Chairman.

Yeah.

Can I ask a question?

A Rodney or Damien or the project just to the north of that that's already that's basically a development with nothing built on it yet.

What do we know what the status is on that and what was slated for that?

So I can talk about what was slated for it.

So I'll go back to it's all four plexus.

It's already gone through design review.

It's entitled.

Um it's not built out yet, but all the paperwork and groundwork on the city side is done with the exception of polling building permits.

Yeah.

Um but uh but it was roads are in fourplexes.

Four plexus.

Thank you.

Yeah, I mean it seems less dense than that one, doesn't it?

If you just look at how many units they fit on that lot.

Much less.

You know, they've you're complaining with the comprehensive plan.

You know, that's why we have that plan.

So yeah.

It felt too dense at 16, but if we were only allowing 12.

I mean, that's what code would allow is 12, right?

So and once they fit in there with their like said the easements and with the open space that's going to be required, all that stuff.

Chew up some of it.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Like I said, this is for annexation.

Sure.

That will come.

Mr.

Chair, I'll go ahead and make a motion if there's no other discussion.

I move to recommend approval.

The project is stays on the screen with those recommended conditions and proposed findings.

It's been moved by Kirkman, seconded by Kehhoe to approve this item.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed.

Okay.

Motion curious.

Move to item 3-3.

Annexation and zoning to RS4 and RX RS6 and BC zoning districts at zero Franklin Boulevard with corresponding road and canal right-of-way potential development agreement.

And subdivision preliminary plat approval for High Line Estates subdivision for anyway.

Didn't want to butcher it, so all good.

Thank you, Chairman Miller.

Can I lift this up?

All right.

Thank you, Commission.

My name's Connor Lindstrom.

I'm with KM Engineering, uh 5725 North Discovery Way in Boise.

Uh here representing the property owner on Highline Estates subdivision.

So this is an annexation zoning and a preliminary platform that we've submitted to the city.

We have included a traffic impact study with our application that has been accepted by the city.

Here you should see a vicinity map on your screen of the property in question.

We're just north of Ridgeview High School or Hawk Elementary on Linden.

And Madison Road on the west.

There's also a as you can see, a large ditch that runs through the middle of the property.

That's the uh both the 15 mile creek and the high line uh feeder canal, hence the name High Line Estates.

So that circumnavigates the property and kind of cuts it in half, but it is technically all one large parcel.

That's the pioneer irrigation district that owns and maintains that.

So here I mean you can see this property um outlined in yellow there is within the highway 2026 specific area plan.

Um the city has adopted.

Uh they're looking for uh residential uh mixed use, so mix of single family, um, you know, they're looking for live work commercial, there's a wide range of different uses that can go within this area.

Um we are proposing um uh three different zones, a mix of single family um you know housing districts as well as a commercial districts.

So on this next um slide.

Well, here I'll go forward and then come back.

But uh we have the RS6 um up in to the north, and that that area is more of our um our larger lots.

These are gonna be average around 6800 square foot lots, um ranging from about 62 to 65 feet wide.

Um we're looking at 3.55 dwelling units per acre in that brown area.

Now you can move to the south across 15 Mile Creek and then to the southeast there.

Um actually on the north side of 15 Mile Creek over there, that's the RS4 zoning district that we're proposing.

This is a total acreage is about 66 acres, and you're looking at a dwelling um dwelling units per acre at about 4.48, so a little higher density as you move to the south.

These lots average about 4800 square feet, um, roughly 40 to 50 feet wide.

And so then we have in the uh the southwest corner at the Madison and Linden intersection, BC zoning district.

So this is a commercial area.

Um it is eight, just over eight acres for the zoning, but the lot itself after right-of-way dedication takes place is um just I think it's just over six acres.

Um yeah, six point five acres after dedications take place.

We'll go back to this slide here.

So this is the existing zoning map on those areas outlined in yellow, and actually that small parcel there is in blue is BC.

So this is all annexed property in the city of Nampa.

We have a range of RS 8.5 and RML down to RS4, and then directly across the street to the south is the high school that is also been annexed and zoned.

And then directly across the street to the south is the high school that has also been annexed and zoned.

Those areas that are not highlighted in color, those are still in the county, as is this parcel.

Moving ahead, so this is a rendering of the proposed layout.

In total, 355 buildable lots.

As I stated before, we have the RS4 RS6 and the BC within the RS4.

There's 244 lots and the RS6, 111.

We have multiple access points proposed with this project.

We have a few over on Madison, I believe three in total on Madison.

Yeah, one, two, three there.

And then we have one to the south on Linden, and then one to the east on Franklin.

There will be some right-of-way dedication that has to take place.

And as outlined in the TIS, there are some turn lanes that'll need to be provided.

And the intersection of Franklin and Linden needs to be upgraded as well.

And Daniel and his staff report and his conditions made sure those are conditions and the overall staff report for this development, and we are amendable to all those conditions of approval.

Moving forward, as part of this application, we are required to have at least 15% open space, which we are meeting.

We're providing a couple different amenities here.

So we have a tot lot, uh pavilion and seating area on the southwest side of the canal, and then on the east side, we have another pavilion and seating area as well as some open space.

We have various pathways connecting throughout the development.

Then our hope is to have a bridge across that canal.

Um we will have to work with the irrigation district to achieve that.

But that is our hope so folks can get from you know the the north side of the development, they can walk across to get to that top lot and then further down to the commercial area.

So it's one cohesive development.

We do have a phasing plan proposed with this.

Um right now we're showing six phases in total, um, roughly 60 lots on average in each phase.

Our first phase would be centrally located, and and this will be all dependent on sewer and water service.

But as we're showing it now, a phase one would be more centrally located.

Um that does include the top lot and pavilion area, so I know that's some feedback that often developments get where they you know shove all the amenities to the end.

Um, having that uh amenity in the first phase, I think would be beneficial for those early residents to the development.

And here's some conceptual building elevations.

Obviously, these are conceptual, but these have been taken around the area.

Um the hope is to have uh a wide range of housing types going from smaller uh single story homes on up to two-story homes.

Um, and like I said, this is conceptual, but this gives you an idea as to what the development could look like.

There are no builders plan at this time.

Um, the goal is to get through you know these applications before we can move forward with final plot.

So that's all I have for you.

If you have any questions, fire away.

I got I got one.

Um I noticed on the ITD report that they said that there may be some with proximity to 2026.

There may be some something that's needed to be done up there for traffic after they review the traffic impact study, but it doesn't sound like they've got it yet.

Are you aware of there might be something up there that you have to do with ITD?

Yeah, Commissioner Turner.

So I did speak with ITD on the phone.

Um, I can't remember her name.

It's a new galots over there, but she said she didn't have any concerns with the project as a whole.

Um she had just they have some new turnover IT, and um she was delayed in getting uh the the TIS, I guess.

So she just said they need further analysis of that report before they can give us clear guidelines as to what they might require given the distance from highway 2026.

I would be surprised if there were any um you know improvements required, but who knows?

This would make sure you see that too, because it started to have to do something on 2026.

It could get really expensive.

Absolutely, absolutely.

That I'm say that again, sir.

I'm asking whoever's got the heat us.

Oh which slide slide before this one or after this one.

Yeah, that that's fine.

Um on that upper left-hand rendering.

Yeah.

It says multi-use pathway.

How is that going to be constructed over the over the uh canal?

I I wish I knew the answer to that, sir.

Um, at this time, you know, that that is a goal of ours to have that pathway cross the canal.

We don't know how it'll be constructed, but uh the property owner would like to work with pioneer irrigation district to make that happen.

Um we would hope that maybe that could be something required in the development agreement to have some sort of pedestrian pathway across there.

But obviously it's not our jurisdiction or the property owner's jurisdiction is pioneer irrigation district.

So the irrigation district doesn't prohibit you from building a pathway across there.

Well, it's it is an easement, so they absolutely would have to sign off on that to achieve that kind of construction.

Do you style it and then just cover and level it to the ground?

Yeah, and that is an option.

I I know with this application there is a floodplain development permit that'll be required.

Um this, even though it is a canal feeder, um, there's also the 15 mile creek.

So this area is technically within a floodplain, and so we have to do a flood study to determine that area that can or cannot be developed and potentially have to add some grading and fill to the site with the conditional letter of map revision.

So through that process, uh there might be some alteration to the the ditch itself, and at that time perhaps there would be construction that could take place for the pathway.

But once again, this is more preliminary, uh more conceptual in nature and and a goal of of the property owner in the development.

I have one more question, come to think of that.

Um, it is in that that floodplain.

Are you gonna make sure to bring up those houses that are gonna back up to that high enough that you can get away from the flood insurance so the property owners don't have to be stuck with that down their own?

Yeah, um, Commissioner Turner.

So um there's a couple different options that we've explored thus far.

Obviously, we're still doing a flood study.

Um we have a consultant working on that, but yeah, you could bring in Phil to lift um these properties out of the floodplain so that they could avoid having to pay flood insurance.

Uh the other option is uh we have and I'm sure Daniel can speak to this further, but I believe it's upstream or or downstream rather to the north.

There is a the crossing under uh Madison, I believe, is not up to standards, and so uh a lot of this flow, you know, during a flood event cannot navigate through there like it should.

And so I think there's some other improvements that could take place to alter the floodplain and bring them back within the canal.

So we're still looking through that, and uh we'll have to provide a flood study and go through uh a letter map revision with FEMA to achieve that other questions.

Okay, we'll call you back up.

All right, appreciate it.

Okay, Rodney.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, Rodney Ashby, Plenty and Zoning Director.

Um the applicant has shown a lot of the same material that I was gonna show, so I'll probably just skip over a lot of it.

Um please let me know if I need to slow down here.

But uh the original concept, uh 355 single family homes, 33 common lots, and one commercial lot.

And you've seen this uh already.

Um you've seen those.

Um this one.

Um I'm I've asked Daniel to to be here to talk about traffic, and then also I've got another slide about ingress and egress.

Um so he's gonna speak to that and I'll jump back on.

Mr.

Chair Commissioners, um the the applicant was correct.

We have reviewed the traffic impact study.

Uh there are just a couple of uh mitigations that are triggered by the development.

Um, those being an eastbound right turn lane and to two-way left turn lane on the or left turn lane on the uh north approach of Linden and Franklin.

Um and then that turn lane, that two-way left turn lane would extend up to their site access um heading north on Franklin.

Uh so those are the project triggered improvements.

The traffic study does identify other improvements in the area that are background traffic issues, not generated or not triggered um by this development, but are there based on previous developments and other just general growth within the area.

Um in addition, talking about the um access and layout, um, they will be required to do to dedicate right of way for both all three of their frontages, so Linden, uh Madison, and Franklin.

So Linden, Madison, and Franklin.

And for the collector roadways, Madison, they will have to do full widening, so curb gutter sidewalk pavement widening on Linden and Franklin.

They will have to do their sidewalk improvements or side path, that 10-foot side path along there, do borrow ditch improvements, and then any turn lane improvements that we talked about.

But would not be required to do full widening, and that's based on city code.

The other comment that I had on access and layout, their uh collector road that they are placing at the north of their project has there's a house in line with that, and so with previous applications we've worked with to shift that to the north at their west or at their east boundary, and so they will need to make that modification to the plat, but it's not significant and doesn't impact any of the lots that they would be proposing.

Um for the floodplain uh analysis that is something that they are required to do by code.

Um the other um flood studies that we've had come in on the 10 mile and the 15 mile.

Uh they have been able to adequately um identify the improvements that are needed.

He is correct, there are some improvements at the uh Franklin crossing uh that uh another development, Haltham Heritage uh will be addressing that will take care of issues there with the floodplain.

Um this is an unnumbered A zone, so it has a general area of where the floodplain may be, but that's why they have to do the specific flood study to identify exactly where which lots will be affected and um address that through the final plotting process.

Thank you.

All right, so just a couple of project details.

Um is currently is zoned agriculture in the county um zoning map.

And um in NAMPA comprehensive plan, it's designated as residential mixed use.

You saw that it's also in the uh North Nampa 2026 um specific area plan.

But the um what they've proposed can uh is consistent with that plan uh for residential mixed use, the the land uses that they've proposed.

Um so surrounding zoning.

You can see the zoning here to the northeast is Canyon County Ag farmland owned by Silver Star Development LLC, and I'll I'll show you some applications we've received for um pre-application meetings, just meaning these are um meetings that they can hold with with staff to explore development of those properties in the future, and so I'll I'll share that in just a minute.

But existing is is AG to the west is Canyon County Ag Farmland, large lot single family silvery event center and material storage to the south is RS 8.5, single family residential, Ridgevie High, and Warhawk Elementary School, RS6, single family residential, ridgeview north number one, single family detached residential, and to the east is RML zoning, that's limited multifamily residential, that's for Haltham Heritage number one, and those are for townhouses, and then Kenyon County Ag Farmland, large lot, single um single family residential as well.

Um the history probably don't need to cover too closely, but here's um sorry, I've got a screen not letting me see it.

So to the east, there's that Cherry Grove single family PUD subdivision that was approved in 2022.

Um then we had okay.

Well, my screen is frozen.

There we go.

Um 2023 Haltham Heritage mixed use and MPC is a pretty large development, and then 2023 also resting rock single family homes for annexation were denied, and that the reason that they gave was because there was no commercial, which was inconsistent with what the specific area plan had said along 2026.

So because there weren't the commercial that was provided, that was denied.

Um in December of 2024, there was a pre-app for single family homes on this lot, and 2025, uh Ridgeview North single family and townhouse subdivision was approved.

And 2025, Ridgeview North single family and townhouse subdivision was approved.

And then in November, just a couple months ago, there was a pre-application meeting for single family homes on these two lots.

So a lot a lot of interest in this area.

Just want to give you the context of that.

Utilities, in you've got those in your your staff report, but there's utilities in the area, primarily to the um well, you can see there, 27-inch sewer trunk at the intersection of Madison and Linden, a 21-inch sewer main in Linden Road, and 18-inch sewer main in Franklin Boulevard, 12-inch water main in Linden and Franklin, and a 12-inch pressure irrigation main in Linden and Franklin.

So sometimes there's a little confusion from the general public seeing these advertised for a certain acreage.

But 93.75 for the subdivision, one commercial lot at 6.5 acres, uh 29 common lots, plus the four common driveways equals 17.20 acres, 355 residential lots at 44.74 acres, and an internal public roads at 0.21 acres, the qualified open space totaling 15.3 acres, and that's 16 percent of the site, and then total residential gross density of 4.14 units per acre.

Um the zoning in this location for um RS is a permitted use for um single-family dwellings.

This is the plat that's in your packet.

I'm sure you've seen that.

Um here are the lot sizes and the minimum widths required.

Um generally they are in compliance with this.

However, I just want to make a quick note that there were I saw two lots that were exceeding the 8,000 square feet maximum for the RS4 zone.

So they'll need to correct that in order to comply with code.

Um both of those situations they were next to open space, so it probably just means a little bit of an adjustment on a property line to add a little additional open space, and they would be flying that way.

Lot sizes within the RS6 zone, the proposed lot sizes range from 6,358 to 9,799 square feet, and um that is within the the range for RS6.

Um the density, as I've said before, 4.14 dwelling units per acre, so that's right in the middle of that medium density residential lot width and depth.

All lots proposed meet the lot width and depth required by city code.

Uh this is the the landscape plan and they've highlighted the areas that are being proposed for the open space, uh qualified open space requirement.

And again, it's at 16 percent with the additional uh amenities that they've highlighted.

25 foot landscape buffer is required along Linden and Madison Road for residential portions of this development, and a 20-foot landscape buffer is required for the commercial portions of the development.

Um parking will be assessed at the time of the the final plat, but they'll need to comply with this code, which is two two per dwelling unit on a single property.

And um comments.

Umgineering comments on the plat, combine the street.

We we've heard that the property is located within a defined floodplain.

I I think we've heard that too.

They'll have to go through that floodplain analysis, uh, the study, excuse me, the flood study.

Uh NAPA Forester made several comments about tree species that will need to be revised and and resubmitted.

Um then provide a list of minimum of five trees to be selected for the for the lot trees.

Uh that's just because we get a lot of um trees that just have diseases or don't do very well in our AR area, and so that's an encouragement to use the appropriate type of trees.

Nampo police department gave their analysis.

They indicated that when this is fully built out, they will need 1.18 additional officers and 0.62 additional support staff.

Just a note there.

If if the development is approved, then we don't have a funding source to cover this expense.

But what we need to keep in mind here is that subdivisions pay impact fees, which can't go to police officers, but it can go to equipment and facilities.

And then, second of all, we have taxes that are accrued for the development as they occur.

So it's inappropriate to say that new development doesn't pay for itself.

But taxes currently cover the police services.

So property taxes right now go 100% could go to police services that we provide in the city.

So again, just a reminder that as buildings come in, they get on the tax roll and we start collecting taxes to provide these kinds of services to these to these departments.

And then it's a city council decision as to how to budget those needs.

And that's what they're doing here is they're just providing some context for when they request additional officers at budget time to say, hey, we've been telling you all along, as growth happens, we need to have additional officers, and that's a city council decision.

I hope that's clear.

Again, it's just sometimes really confusing.

And they indicated in their comments that often the police officers are patrolling and they're gonna be closer than that at the time of a call.

NAMPA Long Range Planners, uh they indicated that the project appears in compliance with the NAMPA 2040 comprehensive plan and the associated future land use map.

And um I talked to them about that specific area plan as well, and they said that that's accurate.

Um Valley View School District made comments if approved students living in the High Line Estate subdivision would attend Warhawk Elementary School, Summit View, Middle School, and Ridgeview High School, and then they expressed concerns that the school district isn't keeping up with the approved growth that's happening.

Um staff note several projects the school district listed as being approved by NAMPA were actually considered by the city of Caldwell, and at least one was denied by the city of NAMPA.

So it's it's complex.

Um this and I know this is tough.

Um you have to balance the needs of the school districts regardless of what city the the students are coming from.

But it is complex, and sometimes they're looking at data that may not be exactly accurate.

So they listed again one of the projects I looked at was just it was denied, and so it's not on their list of projects, or it shouldn't be on their list of projects that are coming to that area.

Um this was a little bit complex too.

Um Compass, our transportation metropolitan planning organization.

Um they analyze these projects and they give a like a score sheet.

You saw it in your staff report, and um then they rate how good the project is according to certain criteria, and some of those criteria are based on is there infrastructure in place to serve this property.

Well, if you're going out to a agricultural property with no development on it yet, the will the rating for um you know pedestrian connectivity is zero because there's no there's no development, right?

And so I I struggle a little bit with these because they're not they're not designed for um new development, it's more like existing development.

Does it make sense to redevelop this property?

Um, however, it's it's in your packet, and I've provided all of that detail uh and a kind of a summary here.

Um I'll just go over their fiscal impact analysis.

It stated that the city and the school district will break even with costs to service this new development within seven years.

Um and this is just my comment.

The taxes collected from the properties will cover the expense of providing new service services and facilities to the residents.

Um that's again that seven-year window.

That's what they have indicated.

And then parks.

Um, they made a comment about it not being a good location because of not access to public schools, but there's a high school and an elementary school across the street.

So I I don't know.

I I'm I need to work with them and try to figure this out because it doesn't seem accurate.

Um I am committed to to talk with them and just get some clarification on why why these comments are the way they are.

Um, I did express my concerns about these types of comments in the past, and they they agreed that other communities have expressed similar concerns and that they need to relook at this.

So I'll keep working with them.

Highway district number four um listed several comments.

First, city shall assume maintenance of Madison Road between Linden and 2026 prior to commencing construction of these utility extensions.

Number two, the existing Madison Road asphalt is in fair condition.

They give the the rating for that.

Um the pavement and base sections of the roadway shall be replaced full width following utility work within the roadway.

Uh, again, a lot of these comments are just according to our agreement already in place.

So because we have an agreement in place, when they cut into the roadway, we're going to require that they make the improvements.

Um I didn't see anything significant that I need to point out in detail except to say that we have those things in place.

And if you have any questions, uh Daniel is ready to respond.

Um, excuse me.

Uh the last one is just a traffic impact study shall be conducted.

And and again, just for all comments related to traffic, they whatever the traffic impact study says they have to do, that's what they have to do.

So it'll address the ITD comments, it'll address highway district four, and it'll address our comments from the city.

Um again, there's transportation department.

Nampa Fire District outlined their um three point, let's see, yeah, 3.1 miles from the NAMPA fire station number three with an approximate response time of five minutes, which is in within that range that they'd like to have, and then one additional firefighter position when this is fully built out, will be required.

Uh NAMPA engineering.

I've already talked about the utilities there.

Um conditions of approval, those are all in your packet, but address those all those concerns that he's brought up.

So I'm not going to spend too much time there.

I just included all the conditions from all of the different agencies.

You can see those here.

Um I indicated that they need to revise that plates the lot size appropriate for the zone.

And here's the proposed findings.

Um the property owners have consented to annexation.

The property is contiguous with the city limits, and and I've indicated where it's contiguous.

Uh the NAMPA comprehensive plan includes the area of annexation, it's in our impact area, it's on our future land use map.

When applicable for annexation, we have that agreement in place with the Nampa Highway District number four.

Proposed findings for zoning are that the proposed map amendment would be in harmony with the city's currently adopted comprehensive plan and comprehensive plan land use map.

The proposed map amendment would be would provide for proposed use or set of uses that would be at least reasonably compatible with existing adjoining property uses.

And the proposed zoning map amendment is in the interest of the public and reasonably necessary.

Obviously, this is where it gets a little more subjective, and you have to weigh all the facts and decide whether it meets those criteria.

Um I gave a whole bunch of facts related to that to show what is being proposed here.

And this is the conclusion.

The proposed zoning is in harmony with the comprehensive plan because it establishes an RS and BC zoning that provides single family housing that will be compatible with the future zoning in the area.

And the proposed zoning districts are permitted zones under the comprehensive plan and future land use map.

And then the BC zone is also a part of the residential mixed use as well, being being a total of 7% of the total subdivision size over the required 5% minimum.

The future land use map was established after thoroughly analyzing land uses for compatibility, and it helps to create that compatibility by transitioning through land uses.

The application provides a set of uses that would reasonably be compatible to adjoining properties because the proposed uses are determined to be compatible according to the definitions in the comprehensive plan.

The new uses will be required to comply with the uses listed in 1032, our schedule of uses and the structures are subject to design review standards.

It will provide open space and amenities to the future residents, and it will make frontage improvements that will buffer it from long larger road frontages.

It is the public in the public interest and reasonably necessary because it provides development that will be will provide housing that complies with adopted city codes.

It has city services and utilities readily available, and three traffic infrastructure improvements will be required as described in traffic in the in the traffic impact study.

Then the preliminary plat, I've covered all of this material already, but this is just the facts that I listed, and then based on the above findings, the preliminary plat is compliant with city codes and policies.

And a couple of motions for your consideration.

Sorry, it took me so long.

Thank you, Rodney.

Questions?

Chairman.

Yes.

Rodney, since you brought up the police department.

Like to ask you a question, please.

According to their report, there was 144 calls for service to the police department for things like battery traffic hazards, noise complaints, burger alarms, parking dogs, property damage accidents.

144.

There were 231 call for service for juvenile problems, juvenile drug offenses, juvenile school time.

231 to 144.

Why is such a disparity?

Is it because there's so few homes in this area?

Yeah, um, that's great question.

Um I have asked the police department about these numbers before, and here's the answer that I've gotten.

Um they divide their areas up into districts.

And um, so when they provide these numbers to us, it's just within that district, it here are the numbers, right?

And then I asked them, well, are they equal in population?

The answer is no.

Are they equal in area?

No.

So it is really hard for me to compare one district to another and say, well, this is more than an than that one because the districts are different size and they're different population.

Yeah, well, the school is right next to this particular property we're talking about, but there's no other homes around it.

Yeah, so that really skew the numbers.

Agreed.

Yep, and that is another factor that goes into it.

When you're including an area that doesn't have a lot of development, yeah, those numbers are gonna show differently than an area that's fully developed out.

So, yeah, I I think you're right.

I think you've hit on a point that I've struggled with too.

Thank you.

Okay, other questions?

Yeah.

Rodney, I'm just curious, uh, how long do these subdivisions usually take to start building?

I mean, there's so many up there that are just laying in wait.

So it seems like is that a normal thing?

Mr.

Chair and Commissioner, yes.

Um, that is kind of a normal thing.

Um we've said before that a preliminary plat can take upwards of seven years or more to develop, um, especially when they're large like this and they have phases.

I would ask the applicant when they come back up for rebuttal about that question when they think that it would be developed out.

I just looked at some numbers today that said um in the last seven years, we have developed uh or we have actually pulled permits on less than half of the properties that were approved to be developed.

So in the last seven years, all those that have been approved for development, only less than half have have gotten a permit to actually construct them.

So it's it's a tricky scenario.

It takes time.

Development takes time, especially on these really large developments.

Thank you.

Okay.

We'll go ahead and move to our public testimony portion of the meeting.

Madam Clerk, do we have a sign-up sheet?

We do.

Our first speaker is Robert Montclair.

Okay.

Good evening, Mr.

Chair and uh the rest of the uh council men and women.

Uh my name is Robert Montclair.

I reside at 19721 Madison Road in Nampa or Caldwell Impact area, however, you want to look at it.

Um I'm glad you guys brought up the comprehensive plan.

Um, because the comprehensive plan is a guiding document used by city leaders and staff that in that encapsulate encapsulates the vision of the city is referred to when making decisions about growth, reservation, and other changes the city may, and I highlight heavily may face over the next 20 years.

So when I looked at the comprehension plan of 2040, the projected rate for NAMPA's population was gonna be 120,000, 679 people.

I mean, that was updated in 2023.

Of course, you guys probably think that it's gonna get big.

COVID happened, all the Californians, Washingtonians, Organians, everybody wants to come in because this is a great daggone state.

It's an awesome state.

Reminds me of my home state Virginia.

Lots of mountains and hunting and outdoors, and it was just a really great place to live.

So that was in 2023.

Then I decided to look at further on because I was like, man, that that number don't sound right.

So I looked at the 2050, I guess, plan that y'all have out that got approved or or publicated uh January 14th of this year, and the projected population for the city was now 1, 123,350 people.

So I was like, okay, that's a lot of folks.

Kind of nice for taxes and and all that good stuff.

So then I looked at the census.

I went to three different sites on the internet to include the city of Napa.

And I asked, what's the current population of NAMPA 2025?

Pretty sure you all probably already know it's 117,000.

That's 4.8% lower than what was projected.

5,128 people less.

So if you take a four-person family, that actually only comes out to 1, uh 478 homes needed to be developed to go ahead and fulfill that population.

So if Corey Barton and Esmond Holdings LLC, they have all these things that are already pre-approved down south, and then you want to put 344 homes.

The impact is is great.

And I challenge the applicant to go ahead and get on Madison Road, not Madison Avenue, as it states up there.

It's a typo.

Um Madison Road at 7:30 in the morning and try to get out on Chinden.

I I I challenge you.

You live in Boise, just come on up this way.

See how we live.

Um, but that is all, and I do appreciate your time, and I do appreciate what you all do.

Have a good evening.

God bless.

Thank you.

Our second is Bo Bonds.

Good evening, Council.

Bo Bonds, 880 East Drinkard Lane, Nampa Idaho, lifelong Nampa resident, fourth generation.

So I've been here a long time, see a lot of change.

And um I'm north of this project, and there are a lot of projects that have been approved that have not started south of this project.

Um I called Valley View School District this morning to get numbers.

Currently, our bridgeville high school has capacity of 1800.

They're at 1702 today.

Uh Sage is at 1,200 capacity there at 921.

Uh, Summit View is the other middle school.

Their capacity is 1200 there at 869.

Uh Warhawk capacities 825, they just opened this year, they're at 425.

Birch, which is south, is uh capacity 625 there at 616, and East Canyon is 625 and they're at 482.

Currently, there 3600 homes already approved in in this area.

They're in different stages of of uh building or planning, and there's also 3200 apartment townhouse units already approved.

So I'm kind of doing the math, and it isn't uh it doesn't look good for Ridgeview High School.

We I know there's plans for maybe more more elementary schools, smaller capacity.

Ridgeview high school is 98 short of capacity today.

Um my thoughts, my hopes is that uh you guys deny this project.

I know it'll come, but I'd like to see things get uh get into place a little bit better.

I'd like to see all this development that's already been approved filled before we start sprawling to the north.

Um like Rob said, 2026 Chinon Road is a nightmare.

There's a lot of serious accidents out there, people on Franklin and Madison, especially.

And also 11th and Canada.

This is a project that um this section right here, ITD is two years behind what their schedule was, and they are hinting they might put a shit back another year.

So this project on uh 2026 is not on schedule.

Um we can't count on this to be finished in the original timeline set.

And uh when school gets let out at the high school, it traffic is really bad.

Madison, Lyndon, Madison, Eustach, Franklin, Linden, Franklin, Eustack.

They're just they're jammed up.

7 30 and at 3 30.

And uh I just uh I appreciate what you guys do.

I know you guys uh you know have a lot of tough decisions to make, but I really ask that you uh really look at the uh what's what's in the best interest of the citizens in this area right now, and I'm and I'm talking just right now because I know it's gonna it's gonna happen eventually, but I think right now we just need to hold off a little bit longer.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Shelley Montclair.

Hello, my name is Shelly Montclair.

I live at 1972 Madison Road, Nampa, 83687, and the gentleman kind of stole some of my stuff, but with all due respect, Daniel, this gentleman and ITD lady do not live on Madison Road, and they do not deal with the traffic.

So when you asked about, I forget who asked about Chinden and Madison.

Yeah, there was gonna be something that needs to be done there.

Um I know you just heard from them, but I would like to tell you a little bit about what I see every day.

Um I am a stay-at-home mom and work from home, and our traffic in the morning, as I mean, as expected, right?

We live next to Ridgeview, is very, very full at the morning time and the and the let out of school time, as well as Chindon being very full in the morning time and in the evening time when you get off work.

That being said, what we see almost every day, definitely at least once a week, are cars that are no longer patient and they zip around on a two-lane road around the cars.

So let's say we're going south on Madison to get to the school or to get somewhere else because they're no longer patient.

They don't want to wait.

So they go on the wrong side of the road.

We've witnessed almost accidents.

Thank God there's not been any accidents at that time recently at least.

Um it does.

There have been tons, tons of accidents in the last three months.

Now I didn't we did try to call the police department, they didn't give it to us, but in the last three months, I know I have witnessed and seen the lights of police for at least five accidents.

Some being at the stop sign at Ridgeview and or sorry, Linden and Madison, most of them being Chindon, Madison, and Chinden Franklin.

The ones that are at Chindon Madison, I can witness, I have witnessed some of them, and my daughter's almost experienced one, where the people are turning off of Chinden, turning right onto Madison, and they end up in the ditch because the people behind them do not want to wait for them to turn.

My daughter is 15 and a half, and th this last week she came home crying because a gentleman was behind her.

She could not see his headlights.

I asked all these questions.

I've taught her when there's someone behind you, you put on your blinker way ahead of time.

So she did.

She slowed her car down to turn onto Madison, and the guy was flipping her off and cussing her out.

To turn on her own street.

Like, are you kidding me?

So we've witnessed a fatality.

We've um I've had two very, very near horrible, horrible accidents, and we just see a lot of racing down the street.

taught her when there's someone behind you you put on your blinker way ahead of time so she did she slowed her car down to turn on to Madison and the guy was flipping her off and cussing her out to turn on her own street like are you kidding me so we've witnessed a fatality we've um I've had two very very near horrible horrible accidents and we just see a lot of racing down the street it's just like why are we gonna add more homes and more cars when we can't even deal with what we have now and by the way our road does need new payment okay thanks thank you Stacy Driscoll I'm Stacey Driscoll I'm at 8249 East Strinkard Lane Nampa Idaho basically everything everybody said is would I agree with the infrastructure I kind of questioned too how can we have to have so many neighborhoods that are pushing in such high density which I feel like is also taking down our values of our property for all of us who've been there before but um these are just my concerns what everybody else has said too so that's what I just want to propose with thank you more sense is there anyone else that would like to speak on this item okay just go ahead and come up one at a time good evening my name is Jim Blake I have six points to ask to tell you about they tried to do this song and dance yeah oh I'm sorry Jim Blake 19593 Madison Road this north of this property that they want to do they wanted to do this song and dance five six years ago and the schools and the fire department the highway district they all said there's not enough infrastructure we can't put 400 houses out there so they squashed it nothing has been done since then same problem there is no infrastructure nothing has changed except now we have a high school and an elementary school which makes traffic terrible on those times that they were talking about it will take you literally 15 minutes to go a quarter of a mile that's no lie now if uh my other points uh want to talk to you all about it is what is the city limit is city limit stops at the high school yes they said they were gonna annex some but they don't have annexation on other property so where are they gonna get the water from are they gonna drill wells and deplete all our water that's another issue that there hasn't nobody's even talked about plus it is great agricultural land we're losing land right and left doesn't anybody care where we're gonna eat from from now on if this project goes through the people on Madison all have acreage we all have five to ten acres if you bring subdivisions in you literally will take our property values down so if this property goes through please make them have a requirement of three to five acres on each property that way our property values won't go down and you'll still get your taxes thank you for your time thank you yes Tom Hartley 19225 North Franklin you've got a lot of thinking about this piece of property what's gonna happen to all the wildlife that use that to eat where you get in the water that you're gonna supply all these houses with the water is not there I don't care what kind of reports you get from your government agencies they're not right and the police department is not what they say it is before that subdivision went in across the street from me during the day I seen at least four county cops come down the street therey day now I'm lucky to see a county cop once a week I see no city cops whatsoever now what are these city cops doing that supposedly patrol in the area to keep the theft and all the other stuff down you tell me no up the damn fee to start with 2550 thousand dollars a lot so that you can pay for the people to do the job you're not doing it if you can't do it then get out

Now what are these city cops doing to supposedly patrolling the area to keep the theft and all the other stuff down?

Can you tell me?

No.

Up the damn fee to start with.

$55,000, $50,000 a lot.

So that you can pay for the people to do the job.

You're not doing it.

If you can't do it, then get out.

Hit the road and get out of state.

That's the way I look at it.

And I really don't care whether you like what I gotta say or not.

Good evening.

Will Spite 7981 Timberline Drive?

I'm just southeast of this property.

I've been in front of you folks a few different times.

Uh zero success.

I mean, again, I I really don't have a lot different to say than's been already said.

Uh there's so much that's been approved in this area.

I I really fear for you know our environment.

Uh, you know, the uh uh Pioneer District uh came and tore all the trees and all the wildlife along the you know nine mile creek that's right next to me uh in preparation for all these lots.

So that was uh unexpected bulldozer and a tremendous loss of of you know wildlife just along that canal because they had to prepare for that subdivision that was just you know approved just north of where I live.

Um I what Bo said I think is exactly my sentiment.

Let's let some of the you know currently approved construction go through.

Let's see how this lays out.

Uh traffic's gonna be it's gonna be terrible.

I'm gonna really have a hard time getting out of my, you know, off of my driveway because I live right off of Franklin Road.

Uh last time I was here, I asked for you know, a roundabout at Linden and Franklin because it's it's it's gonna get terrible just with what we have.

You had another 400 houses, 300, whatever.

Um, it's gonna it's gonna really impact our lives.

And uh there's there's a lot out there already.

Um, yeah, so let's uh use some you know prudence and think about how quickly we want all this stuff to go in, you know, spread it out a little bit.

Again, I get it's gonna grow.

I knew that moving in there, but it's all seems like it's coming right at once.

So thank you.

Thank you.

My name is John Wong.

Uh I live at 825 East Trinkard Lane, Knapp Idaho.

Um, I'm here today.

Uh concerns just in, I guess a way to look forward is a way to look back.

And looking back, the last subdivision that went in across the street from where my driveway is off of Franklin uh was the Cherry Grove subdivision.

And within that, the proposal was made in June of 2022.

Uh show that the first phase uh approved and platted in February of 23.

Uh at that time the estimation was seven phases over approximately five to six years.

Uh they're in phase five currently.

Uh and it's I mean the run, I guess my point is well ahead of schedule.

So obviously there are many people eager to purchase houses in our area.

It's a nice area.

I get that.

Uh as they said, the roads are getting very busy.

Um they talked about the IT corridor at that time, and this was back in in 2022 that it would be completed in 29, and now uh hearsay or discussion is it's probably gonna be 3132.

Uh the roads are getting very at the uh busy at any intersection onto 2026.

Uh I've raced NASCAR for over 25 years, and it's a risk and reward thing, you know, as far as driving goes.

Uh, there's a saying that you win some, you lose some, and you wreck some, and I've done it all.

But I won't turn left, and this is a risk reward in the morning.

There's about a two-hour period of of time, and I go to work uh back towards Caldwell on 26.

I won't drive on that road to go to turn left off of Franklin onto 2026 because it's highly dangerous.

So I take the Linder route around and come back out down on Smead.

I guess my point is there it is terrible.

And as these new homes that are being built, and we've got uh 3600 homes, I think they said already approved, and/or in the plat stage in 3200 units apartments, the same.

If half of those get done, I mean I can't imagine adding more traffic to the road systems until that 2026 corridors completed.

Because my belief, I mean, anytime I've driven in construction area, it's going to have less movement of vehicles as they're widening that road.

Once that's done, it'll be significantly different.

I mean, uh, we could already use stop lights, but that would probably impede other flows of traffic upstream.

So my largest concern is just seeing people get hurt in wrecks.

Um we just need to think about that.

Mr.

Chair Time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh David Steis, 18285 North Tree Line, uh, just south of uh Warhawk uh high school.

Um I concur with uh the traffic is very, very bad.

Uh in the surrounding areas in the morning with buses and parents bringing their children to school both morning and evening.

Um then when the children get frustrated, they cut through on our street, which is tree line to get to Warhawk.

And 45, 50 miles an hour.

They're just young kids, but they're ripping down the street.

Uh we have a project being developed right now across from us by um CBH.

We've endured trucks, um all the trades and crafts.

I understand what they're doing, has to be done.

But uh I think this project that is coming right now, it's we don't need it right quite yet.

We need to um work on the outside infrastructure, the streets surrounding.

Um I'd like to find out how many years it's gonna take to get the streets of this stuff around our neighborhood and through the truth the valley here.

We we've got a lot of work to do in uh surface streets.

Um you can go down Franklin and about spill your coffee up on the ceiling and hit you in the lap with some of the boat the bumps there.

So um there's a lot of work that needs to be done beso besides putting more houses in.

So thank you all for your time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Everyone.

I am Jonas Parsons at 10473 Baker Lake Street, and I'm a student at Ridgevie High School.

So I experience all the a lot of these issues everyone's talking about firsthand every day.

I drive down Linden to get to school, and occasionally I'm sitting there for quite some time.

But you know, having 355 units across the street from you know where I go to school every day, that's probably gonna be about 700 car trips that everybody's making every day, you know, coming to and from, which traffic already there is not great, and you know, having all those elementary school kids there as well, it's kind of a safety hazard.

We also run in the afternoons for across country on those streets, and it's just crazy.

Like the possibility of getting a hit by a car just makes it quite dangerous.

But I am also about like wanting to build a better community here where I don't think that having a sprawling suburb is the way to do that.

It kind of isolates everybody with their own box and makes them have to drive miles and miles to get anywhere.

So I'm gonna do something a little different here and propose an alternative to zoning this as a giant suburb.

That would be making it smaller and denser, but also putting more uh commercial small business type things.

So now what would that do and make it so that instead of people having to drive everywhere to go get their groceries or drive to school, drive to work, they can now walk to the school, which reduces you know the amount of time they're spent driving the cars, bumping up traffic, or they walk to a small business to get their groceries.

And that in turn makes it so that the people are living miles away, eventually, you know, Valley View is gonna catch up with demand and build more schools.

They can go to schools over in that direction, where people in a walkable community nearby Richview High School can walk to that school.

So that would actually reduce traffic in the long term.

If we focused on building a safer, denser community there instead of one that's gonna be sprawling, just expand traffic everywhere.

I'd also like to talk about like the environmental impact of that.

If you build something smaller rather than a massive suburb, you're not just tearing up all that land everywhere.

You can actually focus on just one specific section.

And then also like to address the property value concerns that everyone had.

If we build it like this, it just kind of maintains the status quo with just having sprawling suburbs.

If we make it a denser, more small business oriented, kind of like a community center having the school there, small businesses, that actually raises the property values of everybody's houses nearby because they have all those amenities nearby and that walkability and that safety, it makes that area much more desirable, even though the housing is a little less traditional.

So I'd ask the developer to consider this alternate plan instead and just reconsider building this sprawling suburb like we've been doing for the past 80 years here in America.

And just try and make our community of Napa more walkable, more safe, and just a community that we all want to live in for decades to come.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Yep.

Come on.

Good evening.

My name's Mark Albright.

I live at 1829 North Tree Line Avenue.

It's just uh south of the high school.

Um up there.

I mean, geez, it's just packed with traffic at the wrong times of day, and I will not turn left to get on to Madison.

You're taking your life in your own hands, or there's not even a turn lane there.

And that meant uh gentlemen said earlier that the transportation department didn't seem to think there was any need for change of to the roads to this project.

And we are looking at probably 700 more cars, and they're all gonna be coming out onto Madison, and they ain't all gonna be going to school.

Some of them gotta go to work for crying out loud.

I think you need to poo-poo this project till they finish that highway.

The other gentleman said they're already behind schedule, they haven't finished their highway project up there yet.

So I think this is a project that could easily wait until they can handle traffic up there better than they are right now.

That's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, um, I'm uh Ruben Assamendi, 23032, highway 20 26, farm Idaho.

Um, I understand all these guys' concerns about traffic, but uh we are I am currently a fourth generation farmer there.

I do farming property.

Um when these guys talk about the traffic, I definitely understand the traffic.

But when you're trying to farm over there and you're trying to pull a piece of equipment on 2020, 26 at 8 o'clock when these guys are talking, it's uh not very uh suitable.

Uh John, you guys farm out in Wilder, a lot easier to farm out that way.

Um this property is in the limbo of agriculture and development.

Um we just we we uh keep seeing it less feasible to farm.

You know, our guys go to airgate, they are spending you know an hour a day in traffic to go irrigate one little field and then an hour to go check that water an hour to just go do that just in traffic.

Um all our costs and just keep adding up and our feasibility of farming in that area, just keep going down.

Um I totally understand.

I everybody, you know, we're fourth generation, I'm fourth generation, and to ag I we farm out in you know, all the way across the valley, and uh we will keep expanding to farm out where there's less people.

That's just kind of our plan to keep going.

Uh, but it's just not suitable to farm in that area anymore.

So thank you, Council.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Okay.

Back up.

Thank you, Chairman.

Um, did you have specific questions or did you specific questions for them?

Looking.

I can I can add some context.

Um, hopefully answer a few questions.

Um so I just wanted to reiterate um and one of the gentlemen to talk about phase project, how uh one of the I think it was Cherry Grove, if I'm not mistaken, was approved as a phase project, and that it's actually um been built faster than what they even thought.

But uh I will note that this is also a phase project, six phases, the general timeline for development.

I think generally you have two years from approval of the pre-plot to get your first phase in Rodney can clarify if that is not correct.

I will also note you know I understand the traffic concerns I cannot speak for ITD we cannot you know require them to to do what they need to do.

They will review the TIS and they will come back with any improvements that they would want to see in the meantime but it does sound like they do have future plans to to you know update highway 2026 and speaking with the property owner we hope that that happens sooner rather than later as well as for the property itself and the surrounding roadways that are there is a requirement that right of way is dedicated to improve those roadways to widen them and we have specific outlines in the traffic impact study that require um franklin and linden to be to have that intersection improved with turn lanes as well as an additional turn lane into the development so if this application is approved there will be immediate um improvements to the roadways surrounding the property next um just wanted to touch on the comp plan again um I I know it is a guiding plan it is not law but it is the vision of the city uh based on what has been approved by council men and women before you and that is the the guiding tool that uh the property owner is looking to develop under um it meets the code and the comp plan as outlined by staff and we're providing a medium density residential project um one gentleman even wanted higher density perhaps um so uh we feel that we are right within the bounds of what uh that specific area plan is visioning for this area and unfortunately it'll it'll for this neighbors it might change their way of life but that is how the city sees um the city growing further to the north towards Chindon and lastly um just wanted to touch on uh the utilities um this will be fully connected to city services as it would be annexed so um sewer water would all come from the city infrastructure um no new wells or anything like that with this project would be installed I hope I answered a few of the the comments is there anything else that you wanted me to address anybody I I have a question about the river and the canal um nobody's asked anything about this but how close do you put the houses to that because I saw that they back up on both sides.

Yeah so great question um there are actually two so you have the the 15 mile creek and then you also have the high line feeder canal they run next to each other um the the creek itself it's actually within 130 foot wide easement and then the uh feeder canal is within I believe 85 feet wide at its longest width so together you're looking at over 200 foot width and then from that we're also proposing a pathway on the south side along the property line um the north side the plan is to build right up to the property line but what's unique about the canal and and the creek in this area oftentimes they'll just be within an easement and the property owner will own actually act to like the center line in this case pioneer irrigation district excuse me they actually own that chunk of property so there is we can't build anywhere within that easement at all we have to stay outside of the property line.

So hopefully that answers your question.

That does thank you okay I think that's it thank you.

Okay thank you take a motion to close public hearing second it's been moved by Kihu second by Morgan to close the public hearing all those in favor?

Aye any opposed the public hearing is closed Mr Chair quick question for Rodney you mentioned um the 50 percent of the approved developments actually haven't even started being developed something to that effect so Mr Chair correct maybe let me clarify a little bit so subdivisions that have been approved in the last seven years and not that they haven't been developed but every lot hasn't been built a subdivision not every lot of every subdivision has been has a a home on it yet right so less than 50 percent of the homes on um all those lots that have been approved excuse me less than

So subdivisions that have been approved in the last seven years.

Not that they haven't been developed, but every lot hasn't been built.

Not every lot of every subdivision has been has a home on it yet, right?

So less than 50% of the homes on all those lots that have been approved.

Excuse me.

Less than 50% of all of the lots that have been approved in the last seven years have a home built on it.

Okay.

So it's not necessarily the development.

It's actually you're talking about the loss there.

Yeah, and just that the reason I share that is because it just takes time.

There's a lot of effort that goes into developing a subdivision, and it just takes longer than we think a lot of times.

Yeah, so here's the more difficult part of my question.

Of that number, what we just talked about or explained and clarified, do you know how much of that is in this area?

I don't.

No.

Dang it.

Mr.

Chair.

Yes.

Better just come up, Daniel.

Be ready.

How is 2026 going?

Or do you have any?

I know it's not your roads, but 2026 is a state project, so I am not as familiar with that.

Um I was reviewing their documentation that they have out there publicly available.

It shows that the um section that we would be talking about there at Madison.

Um their plan for that would be uh there would not be a signalized intersection, there would be turn lanes added, but it would restrict Madison to right in, right outs, so there would be no left turning movements from 2026 on to Madison, either north or south.

Um they show construction of that section starting in 2029.

Am I remembering correctly that uh Franklin will be signalized?

For yes, the mile section, the mile sections, so Franklin, Midland, those would be signalized, and the half mile sections would not.

Are all the half mile sections gonna be right in, right out?

Uh in this area, that's what they are showing.

So Madison, Knott's, Prescott, those ones, yeah.

And that is very consistent with ITD's um process on most state highways that are in urban areas is that they signalize at the mile sections and and do not allow the lefts or restrict the movements in some fashion at the median or at the half mile section roadways.

Okay, so the Madison and the highway is scheduled for 2029.

What's Franklin?

So that's all within that the so the section we're looking at would be Middleton to Star Road, and that's where they're showing construction starting in 2029.

Not starting till 2029.

Correct.

Thank you.

Daniel, can you speak about other improvements in that area that are scheduled, planned?

So there are improvements that will happen with um other developments to Franklin and Linden.

Um one of Haltham Heritage will extend Linden.

So currently Linden at Franklin terminates and you jog north onto Elm.

Uh with the Haltham Heritage Development, uh, we have a plan to extend Linden up to Elm, starting there at Franklin and then going over Prescott and beyond would then line back up with Elm.

Um they have turn lanes and that that the school district and Haltham Heritage are working together on to in place there.

Um and so those are under design currently.

Um some of those require some improvements to the um culverts and stuff for um the 10 mile and the nine mile or five mile and ten mile creeks that combine into the 15 mile right there west of Franklin.

Um so there are improvements there.

Um those are the the main improvements that that we're looking at that are are tagged right now.

Thank you.

Other questions you know, I think that for me, if if this was coming in for preliminary plant right now, I would probably vote against it just because of what's happening and because of the traffic because it is it's bad out there, Mr.

Chair, just to clarify this is a prolific plant.

Yeah, so it is it is preliminary.

Oh, is it okay?

Yeah.

Do you want to revise your comment?

Yeah, let's revise.

But actually, well, do you want to continue your thought then now that now that you know it's a process?

No, I don't.

I I'm waiting to hear what you want to do.

I want to hear the rest of your thoughts.

What's the rest of your story?

Well, I mean, for me, it just it feels too dense.

And like they like they're saying, there's there's a lot that's been already approved out there, but I think that the 2026 in those intersections are what really get me because there it is really really hard to get out on the 2026, and so many people need to you know they utilize that because it doesn't make sense to drive all the way back down to the interstate if you live right there, you know.

And so um for me, it's just a lot more to add out there right now.

Um when there's already so much that's already planned.

I guess I look at you know, if if best case scenario this starts in year and a half, a year and a half, two years, yeah.

Two years, then we're looking at twenty-eight, maybe a little later road project starts in twenty-nine.

I'm not saying it'll be done in a year, it's gonna take them a while.

Um but so is this this development.

And I understand, you know, the last gentleman spoke.

Um the property owner, it's you know, feasibility to farm, and I think that's what a lot of people need to think about is don't just think about yourself going to work, but if they expect the farmers to farm in the middle of the night, then neighbors are gonna complain that this guy's out there all hours of the night making noise and up and down the road, and but do they really have any other choice?

And is it fair to ask them to work in the middle of the night when everybody else works during the day?

So I understand that point of it too.

It's it's tough getting a plow, getting a disc, getting spraying equipment, any of that kind of stuff into a piece of property like this is not easy, especially if you're depending on where your equipment's located.

So um so much to think about.

And then what's it gonna take for the rest of the properties around there to develop?

I mean, you know, obviously they said one of them's ahead of schedule.

So the other ones I don't think have started, right?

Yeah.

And then we've got to think about too, you know, uh development pays.

I mean, we can't fix and improve roads without taxes to pay it.

And the only way that can happen is through development or to raise the taxes for all the citizens.

Nobody wants their taxes raised, so if you don't have development, nothing gets improved.

So it's it's tough.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I'd love to see all the roads at Nampa rated at A, but that's not reality.

Um and it's it's not just in your area.

I drive all over Nampa and Canyon County for work every single day, and I have yet to drive down a road that's great.

It's just not how it is.

The roads are horrible, traffic is horrible, and I don't know, I don't know the right answer.

But I think once things start to develop and start to get more contiguous, um, those tax dollars start to come in, then some improvements can be made.

And some of the improvements that are forced by the city on those developers to make at time of development help.

And then, like I said, once those tax dollars start coming in, then further improvements can be made.

Um it's tough.

I mean, it fits, right?

I mean, you go down our checklist, and they're doing everything that's asked by the city.

So um, yeah.

And two, I know that you guys would like to have grocery stores and stuff there.

They're not coming until you have the rooftops.

They just won't.

They spend too much money studying this stuff to put a store out there that's they don't have the rooftops to support it.

So until you have the rooftops, you're not gonna get stores any closer.

I did see a deal week or two ago.

Fred Myers is uh gonna put a new one um middle to or yeah, Middleton and 2026.

So that'll that'll help.

And I thought I seen something about a winco going up on 2026 as well.

So that'll help.

Um but they you gotta have the rooftops and you also gotta have the rooftops to get the taxes and for you know the poor farmer is losing money or getting close to losing money on trying to farm this, and if he doesn't farm it, he doesn't make any money.

But you know, like he said, he's looking at property farther out away from the growth and to move his farming out that way.

So I feel bad for the farmer because it's cause it's a pain and trying to get around and get your equipment up and down and harvesting and everything.

It's it's terrible.

So with that little bit of farm ground still there.

And the one nice thing is it's right across from the high school and the elementary school, so that would possibly help with traffic, you know.

People get I don't know what the heck happened to school buses, but nobody ever rides the darn things anymore.

It's like I don't know why everybody has to take their kids to school, but you know, but in the school district, yeah, they're getting close to full, but as it as more people move in, they'll get approved for more taxes and be able to build more schools.

So they kind of go they don't build new schools until they're overgrown and run it flowing out the doors, and then they finally build new schools, they get enough tax base.

So I I struggle.

I I know there's a lot approved out there that is what we uh having the plan for the future out that way, and the farmer is struggling to farm it.

I have a hard time telling the farmer that he can't do what he wants to do with his own property that fits into our future land use map.

So I want me to make a comment.

Any other thoughts?

Just looking down at that.

This is the this is the hardest, this this is the most painful growth of a city, I think, is when farms start to become less feasible, and so that the farmer has to think about developing it.

It's their property, like Tom just said, it's hard to say.

Uh you can't do like I get real nervous about telling anybody what they can and can't do with their property.

We have planning guidelines for a reason.

So they I mean we're already limiting them by those guidelines, and they're following them.

It's a rough the roads are rough out there, and I'm I'm with Matt that I'm really worried about the highway.

That's my reluctance there.

I mean it's not easy, but I'm I'm leaning towards recommending approval just because they meet the comp plan.

There is a plan to improve 2026 on a similar timeline as construction of this property.

But the the the concerns that have been raised, especially ground traffic are valid.

Oh, absolutely.

I just I just uh man, I'm I'm really leaning towards more of uh against this and on it very softly against this.

I I like the project, I I like where it's at.

I just don't necessarily like the timing.

Um because I'd like to see what's already been approved out in that area develop a little bit more.

I mean throughout the city, if there's 50% of the the lots that haven't been built on yet, there's 50% of tax revenue the stitch city's not getting yet.

And so I'd like to see those also build out a little bit more and and kind of see how this area right here develops once star gets moving, or not star, but once uh 2026, I'd like to see 2026 an elevated freeway from from 84 all the way into Boise, but that's just a pipe dream.

Um but yeah, I think the fantasy.

Yeah, no kidding.

Um I like I like the project.

I think it's a good place for this.

I just don't think the timing is is right on until things build out a little bit more there.

There is a reason there is a reason that the that Ridgeview put a high school in that location, even though there's really no houses around, so they're expecting that growth.

And that is another concern of mine also is this is the school district, and give them a little bit of of time and let things build up out there a little bit more.

And maybe at that point might be the timing might be a little bit better.

It's a Mr.

Chairman.

I mean, but why haven't any of only one of those places is even started?

So how is that?

Yeah, that I don't know.

Yeah, how is that fair to tell the farmer that he can't have his until they're done and we don't even know when they're gonna start.

So that could be a good idea.

It's not necessarily that I'm I'm singling out the one farmer, this one's a little bit of a one problem.

This particular applicant.

It's basically what's left in that area, right?

No, there's all kinds of room out there.

I mean, we just don't know, but what's already been approved out there is what I'd like to see kind of develop more and see what kind of I guess maybe see how fast that growth is out there.

So everything here that says pre-app is not real yet, right?

The cherry, whatever which one, Jerry up in the except for that one that was Terry Grove is the only one that's the resting rock up there too.

The and and also And he's completely surrounded by growth, Mr.

Chair.

I would note that both Haltham Heritage and Ridgeview North.

Um they have final plots that are in and working through the approval process to to start construction.

Okay.

And they're doing some improvements to Franklin and Lyndon, so that'll help.

And you got some that are pre-ap that are pre-app meetings, but to me this works a lot better because it's right there next to us, the high school and the elementary school.

That cuts down on a lot of traffic because as it starts to grow and they got to build another high school, another elementary school.

The pi people that are driving to this one won't be driving to this one anymore once this all starts to build up around it.

And two, even though the other ones, there's some other stuff that is in the pipeline.

They've done pre-app meetings and stuff, they may or may not ever move forward.

Some approved developments, you don't know what the developers' funding is, and so you know that might be part of the problem that some places aren't building yet, and the market of course is what drives it all.

So it I don't know if this is an appropriate question to ask, and I guess the only way to find out is to ask it.

So Mr.

See did you see the attorney sit up?

He's like, okay, well, I'm glad I gave you the the heads up.

You want to pass them a note to you can be before making it out loud.

Does um the applicant I was trying to see the applicant is um is it the developer or is it the Asamande holdings, correct?

That's who owns the property right now.

Okay, so they're the ones okay.

See, it wasn't.

What was the question?

I was I wanted to know if if the individual who owns the property, what I want to know is if she has already sold it to a developer and then the developer is here to develop, and that's him.

Yeah, I know.

That's what yeah, he's right back there in the red shirt.

Yeah, I know.

I'm putting one and two and three and four together.

I've got it now.

I guess my question would be um, you know, if if timing's wrong, when is timing right?

How does what does that look like?

I know.

Are we able to define timing?

I said that maybe the right thing.

If if 2026 was completely built out yesterday, would there be anybody that would be against this?

And I I guess that's my question is is there's always gonna be people in opposition, and I understand.

Don't get me wrong, I completely understand.

But like I said, the only way for things to improve is development.

Unless we just completely stop all development and don't let anybody else come to our town.

But that's not reality either, because if that were the case, we'd still only have 35,000 people like when I graduated from high school.

Yeah, so your property values would be in the toilet.

Yeah.

So and there'd be some property rights issues.

Yeah, yeah, exactly.

So I yeah, go ahead.

Well, I was just gonna say it's I'm it's my thought is that it's not incumbent on 2026 being completed.

It's the totality of the areas where I'm is kind of what I was looking at.

And and the things that the projects that have been approved are in the pipeline or whatever stage of polling building permits or whatever that might be, see that build out a little bit more along with 2026.

So if you're if you're asking when is the timing right, well, no one knows.

Well, no one knows when the timing is wrong either.

So that but that these are just things that I was looking at is the totality of the picture there taken into account those projects that have already been approved around that area.

I think Commissioner Copeland's question was are we now holding this development hostage to other developers that they have no control over?

Is that kind of what you're getting at?

And that's what I think.

Yeah, kind of, but like we telling them to wait on other people that we don't have a that don't have a firm timeline, you know.

We can't say that they're gonna be finished, we can't force them to finish their projects and say you have to be done by 2028 so that the other people can do it.

Well, it's if that's the case, every developer that comes in and wants a developed piece of land, we just say yes to because under that same well, no.

Logic.

You just have to take each one into it, but here you we want the development out there.

We want the businesses out there because doesn't each one of these developments have the have to have the BC on them?

Does this one have the BC on it?

It does, doesn't it?

Yeah.

So then we're gonna get those small businesses that they were talking about and start building that up, but those aren't gonna come until the houses come.

So I don't know.

I just really I actually worry about the property because of the canals and kids.

So for me, that's that's like a personal thing, like, oh my gosh, that's a lot of people houses to have around all that water.

But I just think that it meets all the criteria that he was supposed to meet, and it just seems unfair to tell the person who owns the property when he's having trouble farming it and doing making a living with it to say no, you have to wait until we can't we can't make a decision for you until we see what other people do.

I guess that's just what I'm saying for this specific piece of property because of how many are around it.

It's not just one, it's not just two.

I mean, it's almost except for on the left-hand side where I think the schools are no, the schools are right there.

On the left-hand side, I mean it's it's completely surrounded.

Mr.

Chair, just just to clarify there, a pre-app meeting just means that they came in with to talk with the city about potential future developments.

So we all the ones that you see that are colored are the ones that have been approved for development.

Yeah, one, two, three.

So the other ones we don't even know they we don't know, they just know that they're thinking about it.

We have no guarantee that's correct.

Okay.

So Daniel, real quick, the subdivisions on Franklin that are across the street from this.

Yes.

When those are improvements are done, what will the road look like?

Is there any road improvements or just is this just borrowed?

So they sidewalk.

They will have turn lanes at the intersection uh on all legs of the intersection of Franklin and Linden.

So it will have left turn lanes on on all legs.

And then up and down Franklin.

But in all honesty, the the traffic volumes at this point and and from what the traffic studies show don't trigger the need for a full five-lane facility there at this point.

Um that will come in the future um as it's truly warranted.

Can I ask uh follow-up to that?

I know you've probably answered this before, but when does when does any road improvements, if a project is is approved, at what point in that do they start those, do they do the road projects first, improvements first, or do after everything is built out?

So the traffic studies when we when they do traffic studies, one of the requirements that we have is that they look at those project triggered improvements and identify where within the um development they are triggered.

So some come at the start, there are times where they come in the middle of the project.

Um there are times where they are triggered by the project after the full build out, and then that we require those to be done prior to that full build out before we sign off the last phase.

So it really depends on what the traffic impact study identifies.

It varies between improvement when those levels of service are passed and the trigger is uh or the improvement is triggered.

Appreciate that.

And I knew you were gonna use the word depends, but we've reserved that for the attorney.

It's conditional.

But I like that look at this optical.

Mr.

Chair, I'll move to recommend approval of the annexation and zoning to RS4 and RS6 and BC zoning districts at zero north Franklin Boulevard with corresponding road and canal right-away and subdivision preliminary plat approval for Highline Estate Subdivision for Azumendi holdings with all conditions listed in the staff report and adopt with proposed findings of approval.

Second it's been moved by Morgan, second by Keyho to approve this project.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Very, very soft.

Aye.

For opposed.

Okay.

Motion carries.

That was a voice vote.

Yep.

Okay.

Just for the record so we can get the votes clear.

Turner?

Aye.

Keyho?

Aye.

Morgan?

Yes.

Garner?

Hi.

Kirkman?

No.

Copeland?

Hi.

Miller?

Hi.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you, Preston.

Is that it?

That's it.

Mary, do you I make a motion to close the meeting?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to close the meeting.

All those in favor?

Soft no.

No, I'm just kidding.

Hey, meeting is adjourned.

I got a couple of things.