All right, good evening, everyone.

It is five oh two.

We're going to go ahead and uh get started.

And as is our custom, uh, we start with prayer and pledge.

Uh, this evening, uh, Deborah Curry's not um present at this time, so Councilman uh Griffin has volunteered to lead us in the invocation of pledge.

So if you would please stand if you'd like to participate.

We're grateful to live in this great city and in this great state, and to be able to gather tonight to make the decisions for the future of Napa.

Please help us be mindful about the future of NAMPA as we grow and develop.

Please bless that we'll be able to have protection over us tonight and on our way homes when we go back to see our families.

We say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice.

All right, the clerk will take roll.

Scog.

Yes.

Jingula.

Here.

Bills.

Here.

Reynolds.

Rodriguez.

Griffin.

Here.

All present.

All right.

Um.

So before we do a proposed amendments to the agenda, uh, at the risk of embarrassment, I do want to note that it's councilwoman Scog's birthday.

Oh boy.

We gotta see.

All right.

Well we can see.

Yeah, let's go ahead.

Happy birthday to you.

Woo.

Happy birthday to you.

Woo!

Happy birthday, dear councilwoman skull.

Happy birthday to you.

Woo!

That's right.

Happy birthday.

And if count former council member Darrell Bruder is watching, uh, it's also his birthday today.

That's right.

You guys share a birthday.

Yeah, I know.

We'll skip.

But if you're watching, Darl, happy birthday to you.

Um so now we'll move to proposed amendments to the agenda.

I do have one.

I would like to move um, I'd like to move the proclamation 6-1 up to ahead of staff communications after agency commission reports, which we don't have agency commission report.

So basically, after we go through our consent agenda and any items moved off the consent agenda, I'd like to do the proclamation as the group uh uh receiving the proclamation is present.

I don't want them to have to wait.

So um any other proposed amendments, and then we could just vote on them as a batch.

Mayor yes.

Uh I would like to pull item one five C for discussion.

16A and 16B.

That's 15C 16A 16B from consent.

That's in addition to moving the proclamation up.

Um any other proposed amendments to the agenda.

Okay, seeing none, um, all in favor of these proposed amendments say aye.

Aye.

All right.

Oh, sorry, there needs to be a motion.

I was presuming.

Okay, there's a motion second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All right.

Motion passes.

Very good.

Thank you.

Now we will um entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda, of course, minus the three items that have been moved off.

Is there a motion?

Second.

Okay.

Motion second, got that clerk.

All in favor?

All right.

Motion passes.

Okay, we will go in the order in which those items were moved from consent agenda.

So we'll start with one five C.

Um five C is to authorize the mayor to sign a cooperative agreement with NAMPA development corporation for the construction right-of-way procurement for the 11th Avenue South to a conversion project.

And the amount not to exceed 2,971,920.95 cents.

Uh Crystal Craig, how are you this evening?

All right.

Share a little bit what's going on.

Uh Mayor, Councilman Reynolds, or uh any questions on this.

So, as you guys recall, last council, so two weeks ago, I came before you to request authorization to award the project for the conversion of 11th Avenue between second and third um to Idaho grading and trucking.

Um at that time, I had said that the plan was for NAMPA Development Corporation to pay for the construction of this and then reimburse us for it.

Um the NDC met that morning and and made a motion to approve it.

So unfortunately, I wasn't able to get both of them on the agendas concurrently.

So this is just coming with a two-week lag to finalize that.

Any actual questions there are for it.

All right, thank you, Crystal.

Any questions, council?

Mayor, uh I just um I would I sit on NDC and I'm well aware of this.

I just wanted to um have it separate for discussion.

Um, due to what NDC is doing to fund this uh 11th Avenue and then um the dollar amount um and just recogn recognize what the commitment is from NDC to get this road fixed.

So thanks, Crystal.

Very good.

Yes, we're very appreciative of NDC.

Um their investment and thank you, Councilman Reynolds.

Um you're on NDC, and Councilman Nalie Jill is also on NDC.

So any other questions on this item.

Okay, we'll entertain a motion.

Mr.

Mayor, I would move that we approve this item as presented to us.

Second.

Okay, motion by Reynolds, second by Jingula, and when we move things off the consent agenda, we do roll call, correct?

All right, clerk will take rolls.

Scott, yes.

Yes, Rodriguez, yes, Griffin.

Yes, Chingula, yes, Reynolds.

Yes, all in favor, motion carries.

All right, thanks, Crystal.

Uh we're moving on to 16A.

Um, so stay up here.

Um six A is to authorize the water renewal staff to proceed with the purchase of UV replacement bulbs and associated parts from Trojan technologies and the amounts.

448,996 and 10 cents as approved in the FY26 operations budget.

Mr.

Mayor.

Actually, um, sorry, not Crystal.

Um, you got this, Mr.

Spencer.

Sorry.

Yes, you have a question.

My question on this one is um I don't know who can answer it.

Oh, John, good job.

Um Trojan technologies, is this a sole source?

Uh it seems like a high number.

I was wondering if we have other bids on this.

Um maybe you can enlighten us as to what all this is.

I understand the UV part of it for sterilization.

Um, but is it a sole source?

Uh John Spencer, director of water resources, mayor, uh councilman Reynolds.

Um, yes, this would be considered a sole source um based on the what was installed.

Um so the the whole UV system is the Trojan technologies, um, and uh therefore using their product um is required.

So follow-up, Mayor.

Yes.

So the um the equipment that we currently have um for UV sterilization, will it only take this brand of bulb?

Mayor Councilman Reynolds, uh I don't know specifically the answer to that.

I'd have to ask staff whether there are um third party other parties that can accept um or have product that can be uh installed.

Um I have one last question there.

So uh are we able to get a second number or have we gotten other numbers besides this dollar amount?

Mayor Councilman Reynolds, I understand that uh we've only um obtained this number at this time.

Okay.

Mayor Hogbone, yes, if I could um John, I was considering the same thing as to how many are are there other UV lights that are available that were uh for a lesser price.

Second question is number 10 uh lamp P Kit Solo R EPL Cigna Quantity 400 what thousand dollars just like 1150 and 67 cents per light, and it all seems to me like 391,227 was awful high for that amount.

Is is there something else in there that I didn't see the number?

I didn't seem to add up correctly, or is it me?

Mayor Councilman Rodriguez.

I have not done that math in my head or and I have not done that math, but that number um the UV bulbs are expensive.

Um it was expense we knew that uh we would be paying uh with with their uh upgrades.

There is a significant reduction in other uh chemicals that are a part of the water renewal facility.

They do not offset, but there was some uh reduction.

Um I can go back to staff and see if there is other once again other third party entities where we can use their products.

Um my understanding, and I don't know for sure, but my understanding is we do need to use the Trojan technology, but I can verify if you so choose.

Okay, Tom.

Uh mayor council, senior public works director.

So this we get a little time.

We could pull this and do the research that you're asking for.

Um we knew that we knew these are expensive bulbs, and um I I don't know if they're interchangeable, but it's a very important piece of uh that we need for the reuse project.

So we have to have them.

So if there's a way we can use a different one and try to bid it, we'll take a look at it.

But I'd suggest we pull it so when we can do our homework.

Mayor Hogabone.

Yes, it's a follow-up, sir.

So I don't want to hold it up uh if we need it now.

Uh but by holding it up, would it put our facility in harm's way of one way or another?

Um council Rodriguez, no.

So we can wait two weeks and it's okay.

Oh, yeah.

So I okay.

Thank you.

I'll see what the council says.

Um yeah, I have a question.

With with how long is this bid good for?

So if you were to go chase a second, the last thing I'd want is this one to expire and for the price to go up if you come back.

Mayor, I'm not certain how long it's good for.

Um typically they're a 30-day time period.

I think it does date a payment terms of of 30 days, so I would assume about 30 days.

Okay.

It would still be valid.

Yeah.

So if we're if we're within the 30 days, and once they give that, I know um it says here that you budgeted 450,000 for this and it came in at 448.

So I know it came in under budget as you anticipated.

Um I know sometimes on sole source there's a perception that they they see what we budget and they conveniently um charge us exactly what our budget is or right at it.

So I'm not trying to feed that cynicism, but I I I I can appreciate I think the questions from council to make sure that there's some due fiscal diligence, even when sole source is um justified.

If you come back in two weeks and say that there isn't another company that has exactly what is needed for this reuse project, I think um I I can't speak for council, but I think we would accept that feedback as good due diligence.

And if you came back saying that you found something that was less or more, um we have nothing to lose by waiting two weeks, if I'm hearing you right, Tom.

That's correct.

Okay.

So what's the will of council?

Mayor, yes.

Um I I appreciate your willingness to uh to do that, Tom.

I would love to see another number on this if we can, if we can't, understandable, but my other concern is typically on a on a sole source, we would approve that sole source um for public works procurement process.

Um we've seen those in the past where we sole source a boiler or something like that, and we would approve that.

Uh I would hate to have a challenge from somebody that another supplier that could provide this if we hadn't gone through that process.

It's very specifically spelled out in the law.

So anyway, I would appreciate that.

Thank you.

Okay.

Do we um if we um do we need a motion to wait to a date certain or legal?

What would be your preference for just yes?

Yeah.

I think so.

Okay, so I'd entertain a motion.

Mayor, I would make a motion that we um pro postpone this item until the date certain of the next uh regularly scheduled council meeting.

All right, is there a second?

Second.

All right, any discussion?

Seeing none, the clerk will take roll.

Yes.

Bells, yes, Rodriguez, yes, Griffin, yes, Scog, yes, Reynolds, yes, all in favor, motion carries.

Great, thank you.

We are now at 16 uh B.

Crystal, sorry, I got you confused on the last one.

Um authorize the annual piggyback purchase of chip and fog seal oils from the Idaho asphalt supply at an estimated cost of 741,975 dollars for the street division, also approved in the budget.

Hey, Crystal.

Um Mayor, Council people.

Um, this is our annual purchase for our chipseal oil and our fog seal seal oil.

We typically do a piggy pack purchase off of ITD's state um contracts.

We find a better deal on that.

Our current recommendation is for Idaho asphalt supply.

They have been our supplier for at least the last 18 years or so.

They're the main supplier in Idaho as well.

There's a couple of smaller suppliers as well.

Um we've included the bid.

Uh it also includes the amount for trucking.

We now have our own tanker, so we're not being charged for any shipping on that.

So it shows the cost savings that we get each year.

I think in 2020, we were able to purchase our own tanker, so it's more than paid for itself.

Very good.

Questions from council?

Mayor.

Yes.

Crystal, um, so this is piggybacking with only power county, or is it ITD as well?

Mayor Councilman Reynolds, this is piggybacking off of the IT.

Um it's what they use.

So they also use it from power county.

So yes, I guess that is true.

I apologize.

Not IT, it's off of Power County.

Okay.

And follow-up, Mayor.

Is this uh a state contract then for uh that they're their pricing to it's uh mayor councilman Reynolds it's a government contract, so Power County is not technically state, but we all receive similar pricing.

Do they buy a similar amount that we do?

Power County.

Okay.

Thank you.

Mayor, I make the motion to approve.

Second.

All right, there's a motion and a second.

Any further thank you for the motion.

The motion is from Jing Yield.

Thank you.

Second was from Griffin.

My ears are correct.

Yeah.

All right.

Um any other questions or discussion?

Clark will take roll.

Scog, yes, Bills.

Yes.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Rodriguez.

Yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

Jingula.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

All right.

Very good.

I believe that concludes the items we pulled off consent.

Um and before we we have nothing under agency and commission reports.

So before we go to staff communications, this is where I'd like to read our proclamation.

Um we have one proclamation tonight, and this is for national speech and debate education day.

Um those of you don't know Casey Moulton, who works as a city employee.

She was a former member of Mayor's Teen Council, and I think recruited a lot of people from team from debate team onto Teens Council.

But she also did an internship in the mayor's office briefly when I when I served as chief of staff, and then she became an employee.

And she continues to inspire the next generation of debaters.

They look like a fierce group over there.

Uh would not want to get a debate with any of you.

Just look at each of you.

Uh they're on top of their game.

And so we we do want to highlight Nampa is home to some very um competent and amazing debaters in our community, and we want to acknowledge that and celebrate the fact of their accomplishments and their aspirations.

So I'm gonna read the proclamation and then we'll um have you share maybe a few few words and take a picture together.

We also have Ben uh Smolder here as well.

So we have Nampa High, Skyview High, and Columbia High represented um tonight.

And unfortunately, Red Uh was not able to come tonight, but they're they're also included kind of in the scope of the proclamation.

All right, whereas National Speech and Debate Education Day is being celebrated on March 6, 2026, and whereas established by the National Speech and Debate Asso Association in conjunction with national and local partners.

This event serves to promote better instruction and speech and debate across all grade levels and to highlight the pivotal roles these abilities play in personal advocacy, social movements, and public policy making.

And whereas speech and debate education helps students develop important skills in communication, critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration through the practice of public speaking.

Participants learn not only to analyze and express complex ideas effectively, but also to listen, concur, ask questions, or dissent with reason and compassion.

And whereas across the country, countless educators devote in school, after school, and weekend time to supporting their students in speech and debate practices and competitions, and the example of hard work and dedication they set has a lasting positive impact on their pupils.

And whereas the skills learned through speech and debate serve students well throughout their lives, and this occasion presents a welcome opportunity to recognize such instruction as an essential component of a well-rounded curriculum.

Now, therefore, I Rick Hogabo, mayor of the city of Napa, do hereby proclaim March 6, 2026 in the city of Napa as National Speech and Debate Education Day.

So I have a couple proclamations.

Casey, would you come up and introduce the group briefly and maybe share a little bit about the program and the happenings among the group, as well as introduce Ben.

So Mr.

Mayor, members of council, uh my name is Casey Moulton.

I am assistant director of speech and debate for the Nampus School District.

Um one of many hats.

Um and I'm here with Ben Smolden, who's director of debate for the NAPA school district.

And we're here with five of our students.

Uh representing all three schools in the NAPA school district.

So the NAMPA school district is unique in the fact that all three high schools share one director and share one coaching staff, but they all compete independently.

So their harshest, toughest competition is often their best friend who sits next to them in class.

So they learn a lot about uh competing with compassion and speaking with grace and understanding the power of their words.

So we're really excited about the work that they do and the work that they will continue to do.

So this summer we are taking 12?

12.

Yeah, we're taking 12 students to the national speech and debate tournament in Richmond, Virginia, uh, which will be a good time.

Um and then we are hosting at Columbia the state debate tournament here in a few weeks.

So we're very excited.

And so I'm joined today by Ben Smolden.

He's the director of debate for the school district, and he is their in-classroom teacher as well.

So Ben.

Hey Ben, how long have you been leading the debate team?

This will be my um third year as head coach, but second year teaching the class.

Uh but I've been with these programs for several years.

Uh I competed in high school along with Casey, um, which I am happy to have her back assisting my programs.

Um, and then after I graduated, I was the assistant coach for these programs for several years.

And I believe I'm going on year seven of just coaching speech and debate in general.

Wow.

Thank you so much.

And I know Casey was nationally ranked as a debater, and I think you were as well.

Which is impressive.

Yeah, yes.

You're being a little modest and shy, but um you're the right people to be leading our youth, so um, that's amazing.

I'd love briefly to hear just each student, maybe what grade you're in, what what class you're from, and what do you enjoy most about speech and debate?

Just maybe briefly.

Um, I'm Ellery Fickle.

I'm from Skyview High School.

I'm a junior, and honestly, the most important thing about speech and debate is I have met so many amazing people that are so incredibly intelligent and always have a great thing to say.

And you learn so many different perspectives, and I'm so grateful for my coaches and my team to be here with me today.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Hi, um, my name is Carl McDougald.

I'm a senior at Columbia High School, and I've been participating in speech and debate for four years, so this is year four.

Um I've learned a lot about speech and debate in my past four years, and I think one of the biggest things that I learned is the ability to use my voice not just for speaking or talking, but for saying things that are meaningful and to advocate for what I think is right, whether it's discussing silly bills within rounds or bills that I actually think could be passed in actual legislation.

I think it's important that I've learned all this knowledge about how Congress works and how our legislation works, and it makes me more open for the world around us.

Awesome.

Hi, I'm Lucy Preebe.

I'm a senior at Columbia High School, and I think probably the most important thing about speech and debate, besides what those two already said, is that it's helped build the courage and skills to speak in um in formats that aren't necessarily speech and debate and to lead in formats that aren't exactly speech and debate because the skills bleed into like everyday life in so many ways.

Awesome.

Hi, I'm hi, I'm Celestina Bear, and I go to Napa High.

I'm a sophomore.

And I think the best thing about speech and debate, it's really helped me find myself for who I am.

But I also love getting to share my perspective on life and hearing other people's perspective and getting my opinions out there.

Hi, everybody.

My name is Mason Warner.

This is my fourth and final year in speech and debate.

I go to Napa High School.

And I think the most important thing, at least to me in speech and debate, has been how much passion I've been able to give into it.

I believe there's very few things in life that keeps you up till 1 a.m.

practicing constantly over and over and over again, just so you get every minute detail correct.

And speech and debate has been that outlet for me almost all four years.

Well, that's that's impressive.

Go bulldogs.

Yeah, these students, I'm very proud of them and the hard work that they have put in through the many years that they have done this activity.

And um one thing that I'm very proud of is their ability to advocate for themselves, um, not only now but in the future.

This activity has opened up so many opportunities for them to advance in life.

Uh many of them are going to college on a speech and debate scholarship, which is really, really cool.

Um, so I'm very proud of them and the hard work that they have done, spreading advocacy, um, engaging in projects to not only engage people in our high school, but we go to middle schools.

We've had the opportunity to um uh spread speech and debate education to middle schools this year.

And uh yeah, overall I'm just very proud of them and the hard work that they have done in the NAMPA school district.

Awesome.

Well, congratulations to all of you.

Very inspiring.

So I think we're gonna take a picture of us.

Come on up.

Here's one for you and one for Richmond.

Hey, nice to meet you.

Very impressive.

Yes.

Yes.

Yeah.

Amy will take our picture.

I think speech over the awesome.

Thanks.

Have fun in Virginia.

Okay, all right.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

We are going to move on to this point, 4-1.

And our first staff communication is from Cody Swander.

Good evening, Cody.

I'm going to recognize Tim and Scott.

Thank you.

Mayor, City Council, good evening.

Thank you for the opportunity to come before you to for Parks and Recreation Department to recognize two achievements from two of our wonderful employees.

Cody Swander, Parks and Recreation Director.

First off, um, we have Tim Zoffren.

He is our Parks and Grounds manager.

And in January, Tim attended the second year of National Uh Recreation Parks Association maintenance management school in Wheeling, West Virginia.

Uh the two-year program brings over 200 parks maintenance professionals together for one week each year from all over the country to learn from the latest trends and best practices for parks and grounds maintenance field.

Um year one focuses on change management, inspiration, culture, and innovation, ethics in government, and in uh corporating proper facility design.

The second year explores how those topics can be practically applied and accumulates with a project and presentation to a mock mayor and city council that show the development of a routine maintenance plan for a municipal park with the creation uh of an operations and a maintenance budget.

Tim guided his team to the winning presentation this year, coming in within $10,000 of the industry standard budget predetermined by the NRPA uh board.

Tim was able to rely on his knowledge of operating the Nampa Parks maintenance division as a supervisor and as a manager for the past 15 years, plus his extensive experience in the private grounds maintenance industry to uh compete uh to complete the uh accurate budget for the project.

Of the over 200 attendees, the NRPA maintenance management school instructor selected Tim as the winner of and the only winner of an all-expenses paid scholarship to attend the Toro Corporation Leadership Academy in Bloomington, Minnesota this June.

This education, uh additional education opportunity will further Tim's knowledge and leadership and the innovation of other grounds maintenance professionals from across North America.

So I felt very proud in Tim's showing for FNAMPA in Wheeling, West Virginia.

Uh we were the top student with Tim, and it was a fantastic uh accomplishment.

He received his credential here, and we will be uh hopefully sending him at no cost to the city for further education to Toro Corporation's um additional school uh come this June.

So that's a fantastic time.

Hey, congrats, Tim.

We're we're blessed to have you.

And it was good to it was a couple of weeks ago meet with you and the team, and we're we're blessed.

We have amazing employees in AMPA, and and that's just not a cliche.

And Tim, thank you.

Thank you for your dedication.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

And our second employee is Scott Nichols, who some of you guys know has been at the Ridgecrest Golf Course head professional for a long time.

Um this past December, um, Scott was awarded the Professional Golf Association Junior League Game Changers Award for 2025.

This award honors the 25 largest PGA junior league chain game changer programs in the nation, as well as the largest program in each of the 41 PGA sections.

The PGA Junior League Game Changers Award are a meaningful way to recognize the PGA junior league coaches who consistently go above and beyond to enrich the lives of our families in our communities.

The PGA junior league program consists of six matches played along with the junior club championship.

Ridgecrest golf club has been part of the PGA junior league since its inception into the Rocky Mountain section PGA in 2014.

Ridgecrest golf club has previously played host to a junior PGA junior league regional all-star matches, which can assisted of teams from Utah, Washington, and Oregon and Idaho.

In 21, uh Ridgecrest formed their own PGA junior league team and has participated in the PGA junior league all-star matches each year, where the winner of these matches advances to the regional competition.

In 2025, Ridge Crest Golf Club had 62 juniors participate in the PGA junior league program.

Since the league started, Ridgecrest has had over 400 junior golfers participate in the PGA program.

Scott's leadership in this program has been well recognized and appreciated.

For Scott, this accomplishment is personal as it is his passion to give back to the program since he experienced its benefits as a junior golfer himself.

Support of the junior league has propelled him to become the PGA certified professional that he is today, and so that he can equip the next generation of enthusiasts with the skills and love for the sport of golf.

Congratulations.

What's that?

Can I give each of these an opportunity to address the city?

Absolutely.

Mayor and Council, I'd like to say thank you for the opportunity for professional development for the parks department.

It's uh it's great to know that you know we're nationally recognized.

We know what we do when we come and stand in front of you and ask for money every year.

We we actually can back that up with uh with the data.

So thank you.

Mayor and council uh just like to thank you for your support of the golf courses.

I'd like to thank my beautiful wife for all the support over the years, and uh just for the support of junior golf, which is definitely a passion of mine.

Um, it is our next generation of golf professionals to be there for when I'm old and decrepit and barely moving and want to play nine holes and yeah, so we got to keep the junior golf going and uh just thank you for the opportunity again.

Mayor Hogbone.

Yes, I think we have a couple comments.

Uh Councilman Rodriguez.

Oh thank you.

Uh Tim, thank you, sir.

The way our parks are looking and what kind of new ideas to help our city.

That's good.

Thank you for all what you councilman Rodriguez.

Thank you.

I've following Cody's footsteps.

Right on.

Yeah, I can move where he left off and where Darren left off as well.

So thank you.

Thank you, sir.

And it's for Scott.

Scott, um uh Mayor Hogamone and fellow counsel.

Uh I have had the opportunity to play with these young golfers.

I hate them.

I mean these kids just love Scott, and uh tell you Scott is doing so well with him.

You need to take this one out there with you.

Terrible.

But these kids are are uh you're they're they're driving 280, uh 280 yards, and and and they're they're just good kids.

But you know what you do is you put NAP on the map with our golfers, our young golfers there.

You're right, they're the near next professionals.

So thank you for that beautiful program.

There's a lot of parents that are happy.

Yeah, Mayor and Councilman.

Uh we've got a great team in the golf department, and uh as you guys know, it just takes a strong team to do all those things.

But yeah, that's one of the things we try to do.

We're we're trying to put NAMP uh you know first and foremost on the golf map and you know create some really good junior players and they can go on to college and uh never know where they'll stop playing.

So thank you for all you do, Scott.

Of course, thank you.

Um yeah, I just want to say thanks, Scott.

I need to get out and probably take a couple uh practices before the mayor's golf classic because I'm gonna embarrass myself any time.

I'm actually gonna play and embarrass myself.

Um you don't want to be on my team because I'm terrible.

But um, you know, across the country when junior golf is on the decline in many communities to hear uh the participation level here.

I think this council and our city, we have much to be proud of buying those golf courses, ensuring that it stays recreational green space, and and it's doing what good municipal courses should do, which is to promote to the next generation, not just be a country club uh for the wealthy, but to provide accessibility and opportunities for the youth to play and be introduced to the game is amazing.

So thank you, Scott, for inspiring that and leaning that with the youth.

So thank you.

I think we're gonna take a picture as well, gentlemen.

Okay.

Hey gentleman, thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Congrats.

Yeah.

Last time I played golf the head of my driver went farther than the ball.

All right.

Um we're gonna move on to four-two.

Um, our library director, Jared Tolman's here, and he has uh he's gonna summarize 2025, but not in uh the time it took to go through 2025.

So I know it's it's a big task to try to briefly highlight the successes of the library in 2025, but we look forward to hearing your annual report this evening.

Good evening.

Mayor and council, thank you.

Good evening.

Um, so hopefully you have a copy of the report from you, and I'll just briefly go over that for you.

Uh the report uh starts off with a message from the director highlighting some of the new events that we brought into the library.

As you uh move to page four, we do highlight some of our impacts and improvements.

Uh I'll just highlight a couple of those.

We increased our circulation by six percent.

We increased library attendance by eight percent, and we increase adult participation at those programs by 34%.

Um we then highlight some of the new events, such as safety.

We brought new cameras in uh we also brought a health pot in, which provides a quiet space for people to be able to do telehealth visits or uh um online interview, things like that.

The report then goes to our statistics for the year.

Um we had uh nearly 500,000 people come in and connect to our Wi-Fi and be able to use that because not everyone has that at home.

We had over 274,000 people walk through the door that uh last year.

Uh they circulated over 708,000 items, um digital items such as ebooks, audiobooks.

They circulated over 203,000 items, and we had over 21,000 people come in and use our public computers.

Uh we had over 19,000 items circulate through our window.

They're on the side where you can park park along the side of the building, check out your items, and over 6,000 people utilize that service.

Um for our programs, we put on over 409 children's program and had over 26,000 people attend those.

Um we had over 600 uh adult programs and had over 7,000 people attend that.

Um for teens, we had nearly a hundred programs and had uh uh 1,300, over 1,300 come and attend that.

It's pretty impressive when you think of how hard it is to get any teenager to come out to do anything in this community.

Um we had uh over 14,000 people visit the bookmobile.

We and they checked out over 8,000 items.

Uh the bookmobile itself put on over 348 programs, and we had over 13,000 people come and participate in those, whether it's at the park or other locations throughout the city.

The bookmobile gave away over 3,000 STEM kits and other activities uh that we brought in through grants, as well as over 1,100 uh books that we also got through grants to give away to help people build their um home collections there for for youth specifically.

Uh the report then moves into our programs uh or excuse me, um actually highlights on our team council.

Uh we have 21 teens who come in and uh give their insight on how we can improve the library, what the teens are looking for.

They put in over 335 volunteer hours.

Um they put out on 14 programs throughout the years, and they applied for and received two grants to come in and support the library and the things they wanted to do.

Uh we then move into our programs and services.

We had over 3,000 people sign up for summer reading.

We had 18,000 children participate, 500 teens, and over 753 adults come and participate in that program.

The report then kind of highlights some of those events, which I won't go over, but I encourage you to look through that.

Um things such as music, theater, and even local history.

We highlighted and brought in different programs for the community.

The report then finishes it up with saying thank you to our library foundation, our friends of the library, um, obviously our library board of trustees who we brought this report to, and they approved, as well as yourself, city council, our city staff who help support us, and then a number of community partners, um, including the women's century club.

And so that is our report for 2025, and I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have.

Yeah, just uh couple things.

The Boise Philharmonic, that's that's pretty cool to have them.

I uh are you gonna get them back next year too?

Whenever they can do it, we try to bring them in and give them an opportunity because we do love know that the community loves to have them.

Yeah, I know the community really appreciated it, and and that was really cool.

Um and and just a plug, I think tomorrow there's a Shakespeare Shakespeare event going on in the multi-purpose room.

So that's kind of a sampling of Shakespeare.

And then Monster Truck is just heads up, everyone.

You're gonna see a big monster truck parked in the library plaza.

Is that still gonna happen?

March 13th, you'll see.

So when you drive around and you see a big monster truck parked there, it got permission from the city, and just make sure if it if it damages anything on the way, we gotta take record of that.

But we we looked at that and we don't know.

But yeah, the monster truck's gonna be pretty cool.

So I'm I'm thinking kids and adult kids uh like myself will enjoy seeing the monster truck.

So can it be grave digger by chance?

I I don't know which one they're gonna do.

Okay, all right, all right, all right.

I'm dating myself there.

Okay, I think Councilman Griffin, did you have a question?

I do.

Mayor, just on the numbers, thank you for this whole packet to be able to review.

The only question I have on the library is it's 274,000.

Is that across both the physical location and online checkouts, or is that the physical location?

So that's physically walking into the building.

So when you look down at the um digital circulation, that is anything that would be an e-book or an audio book, something you could get on your device.

So that was 203,000.

Thank you.

I I can't wait till we get that parking garage rock and roll in 752 people a day through that library.

We're gonna be out of the hole very fast.

I can't wait.

Thank you.

Very exciting.

Yes.

And this year, uh, what I've asked Jared to do is to figure out whether because the budget's gonna be tight again for the for the library.

And I and I know that we're looking at different alternatives to increase, maybe, or to figure out uh another alternative for the revenue that we're gonna need because we just can't handle that many people the next couple of years without increasing something.

And so, yeah, we want availability to the to the library, and and I'm I'm hoping that Jerry can figure something out.

We can move forward with it.

Yes.

Okay.

Any other comments?

Well, thank you, Jared, uh, for concisely telling us about the successes.

I know even right now people are coming in for doing their taxes, right?

Another helpful program.

There's just so much going on at the library to assist people in our community who don't have um the that availability elsewhere.

So thank you to you, the staff, all the employees at the library, library trustees.

We appreciate all of you.

So thank you.

Yep.

All right, Crystal, you're up for three.

Um raise grant update.

Hello again, Mayor and Council.

Thank you for your time.

I wanted to give you an update.

Um, when we received our raise grant back in August 28th, 2022, we committed at that time to coming before you quarterly to give you a updates um on all of the progress that we've made.

So I would like to do that today.

Um, as you recall, this was a five million dollar grant, zero match for NAMPA, which is really awesome.

We really love the zero grants.

And through that, we were able to do eight distinct projects.

I've invited Pearson DeWitt, he's our program manager with HDR.

They're the consultant running this.

I will say HDR is doing a phenomenal job.

There's a lot of moving parts with eight different projects that all have different start and completion dates.

Um, so uh he's gonna actually talk about the meat and potatoes, and then I'll I'll come and talk about on a program level where we're at and where we're gonna go.

So I'll pass it on to Pearson from right here to talk about our eight different projects.

Thank you, Crystal.

Mayor Council, thank you for the opportunity to speak on the raise program updates.

Um, as Crystal mentioned, our program schedule is tracking as shown up here.

Uh, we have had a few projects extend a little ways, um, primarily due to the environmental process.

It takes a lot of time.

And um, but we are still on schedule to try to wrap up all the projects by the prescribed end date of 3127.

Going the other way.

Uh the first project to review is the multimodal analysis and rehabilitation.

This project identifies repair, uh repair for deficiencies in curb and sidewalks in the North Nampa area.

The design is complete.

Um, there are five separate projects.

As I think most of you know, there's no dedicated construction funding.

Uh, but we are in the process of trying to track that down as time goes on.

The next project in the program is the mobility hub implementation.

This is strictly a planning document to help identify and understand what kind of improvement should be taking place for transit facilities across the city of Nampa.

It'll range from small local road mobility um facilities all the way to you know north side and and above as far as functional classifications for roads are concerned.

The process of that is effectively in what 75 to 80 percent complete.

We are in the process of wrapping up the review and um implementation of all the documents associated with the criteria associated with that, which is outlined on this here with the bike racks lighting, seating, all the fun stuff that goes along with mobility and transit facilities.

And and this speaks to kind of like I said, where we're at.

Um, it does give you some site specific information.

It is proposed to integrate seamlessly with transit and the bus stop amenities will consider uh wayfinding, trash and recycling, micromobility, and vehicle parking.

Our next steps is there is a pop-up meeting scheduled.

I believe it's the first Thursday or the third Thursday in June, and preparing the final graphics and document for review and approval by the city.

Our next project is the North Side and Forestry Intersection Improvement Project.

As you'll see here with the graphic, there's uh we're proposing to install a SIGL at fourth and um side, and then to improve the bridge on Broadmore Way that's just in the area of um where old Broadmore Golf Course used to be.

We don't get to play there anymore, but it was it was fun back in the day.

Um it's gonna widen the bridge to accommodate uh large vehicles due to the site development that's proposed by the city in the southeast corner or south yeah, southeast area of the facility.

So that'll help out with a lot of heavy vehicle turning traffic along the corridor.

Our next steps are to complete the design.

Uh we're through the concept.

So this concept layout that you're seeing with this uh imagery shown here outlines the proposed plan improvements at the intersection and for the bridge.

We are advancing the environmental process again, which is taking some time, but we're we're confident that we're uh making the right steps.

We did have a win with the environmental process.

There was the potential to have to relocate the rocks that were placed in Indian Creek, like as they were in the future.

Uh, we found out that those weren't historically relevant, so we're gonna be able to advance that without having to go through that process through the state historic preservation office.

So we're pretty excited about that.

And we are in the preliminary design phase advancing towards final design.

And here are some of the photos associated with those those rocks that were in question that were placed along the side.

I guess I jumped ahead on my slide a little bit there because I was so excited about not having to go through that process.

Um we are advancing the public involvement.

Um we had a PI presentation in January.

The public is supportive of the project.

They really just want to see it get built, and um they think the signal at Fourth and North Side is needed.

Um there was some comments about the concerns about signal progression along the corridor, um, but I'm sure the ample traffic team at the city of Nampa will be able to navigate that as we go forward.

Project two is the 6th Street and 2nd Avenue road rehab and side path installation.

We're looking to rehab 6th Street, reconstruct curb ramps and install a side path along that uh 2nd and 6th Avenue from North Side all the way to 16th Ave.

We have finished the geotechnical analysis, the surveying is done, uh, the concept has been approved.

Uh we did shoot for uh construction grant funds for the last cycle, but we were unsuccessful in that, but we'll keep trying.

Here is some imagery kind of outlining what we're we're uh attempting to improve along the corridor.

As you can see in the lower left, the the pavement condition along portions of sixth is um less than optimal.

So we're we're making sure that that we're getting that rehabilitated as we go along with the construction of this sometime in the future.

Uh we're also looking at some key crossings along the railroads and trying to make those as safe as possible.

Uh, we're in coordination with Union Pacific on these improvements, um, and it's just ongoing with them.

They're aware of the project, and they know that we're they're they're partnering with us to try to get this to move forward.

As far as next steps are concerned, we're advancing the preliminary design.

Uh, we we do have an approved concept for this.

Uh roadway and drainage is a big component to this.

There is some some drainage challenges located along here just due to the fact that the the groundwater is doesn't want to drain very well, but we've got some pretty good alternatives for that.

Um there is a cultural assessment that's being that's taking place right now, and we are advancing for the environmental aspect of the project.

The next one, project three, one of the ones I'm really excited about is the 14th Avenue Railroad Overpass Active Transportation Bridge.

Uh, we're developing a concept to see if we can place a pedestrian bridge on 14th from the North Side of Nampa into downtown.

As always, all this engineers like to say one of the alternatives is to do nothing, but we really don't want that to be the case.

Um we we are and did look at improvements to the existing 16th Street Bridge.

There's some real big challenges with ADA compliance.

Um, so we we we weren't able to identify adequate ADA improvements to advance that, so we're we're really not looking at that going forward.

We are looking at, like I said, evaluating pedestrian bridge over the railroad, and some of these SNPs on the side of the imagery kind of talk about some of the concerns and some of the alternatives that we could think about as far as ramping up and down.

There is a substantial amount of grade.

The railroad tracks are elevated, and so getting it up up and over that railroad crossing and meeting UP's requirements is going to take um a lot of incline AKA grade to get it over the crossing.

Not to say it's insurmountable, it's just gonna be an engineering challenge associated with that.

Some of the challenges that we've run into with the railroad so far, or opportunities is probably a better way to say it.

Is uh like I mentioned the line of side, well, the the vertical clearance over the tracks, and there is an observation tower um in the vicinity of where we're looking to maybe place the crossing, and that's that's something we're coordinating with them on.

Uh one of the bigger things that they have mentioned to us in the conversations we've had is security and pedestrian trespassing, even though um you know that's it's kind of unregulated to a high degree right now, they're still very much concerned about that in the future condition.

And then impact to their yard as always.

The next project, project four kind of dovetails into project two.

Um it's the eastern side of the side path installation.

It's looking to improve a um portions of the sidewalk along six from 14th to 16th on the south side, um, and add a bus shelter and pedestrian beacon near the uh park near park place on 16th Avenue.

This image kind of shows kind of the preliminary layout that we have.

It will have a median refuge in the two-way left turn lane along that portion, provide direct access to um park place.

We are doing this in coordination with VRT, they have grant funding that they've dedicated to the project, and we are advancing it through their um approval process, which is the federal transit authority.

Um, typically it would be through the uh federal highway, but we're working with them on that.

We have the preliminary design underway, and we do as a um we do have construction funds secured.

Uh VRT is providing those funds, and this is the first of the raised projects that will be actually physically constructed because we have dedicated construction funding.

Uh Project 5 Indian Creek is a is a pathway along Indian Creek.

Um it's it's about 1.6 miles that goes from 2nd Avenue uh over to 1st and third.

Uh the concept is complete, it's been adopted.

Parks and rec has been uh very involved in the project, they're supportive of it.

So it's just about finding money to advance that.

I think a lot of people are excited about a potential pathway along Indian Creek.

And then project six is has not started yet.

Uh we're looking to start that in the next couple months.

That's basically looking at alternatives to to find a way to provide pedestrian facilities and to uh minimize strikes for the underpass on first and third.

Again, dewatering the drainage out there is a bit of a challenge, but we'll uh we'll take a look at that as we get there.

And then as far as the the money goes, I'm gonna pass that back off to Crystal.

Thanks, Pearson.

Yeah, so there's a lot of data on this.

I know we threw a lot of projects at you.

I said that there was eight distinct projects, one of them had five sub-projects in there.

So this is a massive, massive program for everything.

So kudos to HDR and specifically to Pearson.

I don't think this would be going quite as well as it would be without him at the home.

Um, as of right now, we've spent about 34% of our budget.

We're about 64% complete.

That's not saying that we're not going to spend it.

We've got a few major deliverables coming up.

The design things are fairly expensive, so we'll be wrapping those up.

Our plan is to spend every single dollar of this five million dollars that we got.

Um, thankfully, when we scoped this, we scoped a little bit of flexibility into the contract that allows for some of the concepts.

If there was cost savings on one project, we could shift it and move a concept a little bit farther.

Really, really great example is that second pull it down.

It's 74% spent, 99% complete.

We have some savings on there because HDR has done a great job in keeping the project on schedule and delivering in advance.

Um with that, we'll stand for questions.

This QR code right here will take you to a link to our RAISE website.

It gives further information on every single project, gives people an opportunity to comment and interact as we move forward.

And we'll stand for questions.

Mayor?

Yes.

On project four, you it was mentioned that uh VRT was funding or initially funding that project.

Have those dollars already been taken in and committed to?

And is there any possibility that it could be clawed back if we do not renew their contract this year?

Mayor, Councilman Griffin, we have spent some of them already.

So this is a reimbursement where we spend and then we have to get it back.

So the construction funds obviously have not been dedicated.

We haven't spent any money on it.

We have spent the design funds associated with it, though.

And is that the 557,000 that they've committed two years ago?

That's correct.

Thank you.

And no matter what, that's committed dollars.

That is incorrect.

We will no longer be eligible if we do not fund.

However, our plan is to build it this year.

So hopefully it will not be a problem, and it will be done before October 1st.

How about before July?

Can we expedite that?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Council, any other questions?

Thank you.

Appreciate the report.

All right.

Well, we are like two minutes or one minute to six, and I know there's one other staff report, and it's it's a pretty lengthy one.

And I'm I'm debating right now, council.

Do you do you want to have this try to get the staff report in or go to public hearing and then circle back to this?

Mayor Hogwall.

Yeah.

I suggest we just read what's read what's in this packet here.

Have any questions get a hold of Rodney later.

Okay.

That um is this what he's running through tonight?

Is this your presentation?

Okay.

So how long, Rodney, do you think the report would be?

Because I I know the presentation can seem overwhelming.

It might be like three hours, but I know you're not going to take three hours.

Yeah, it's it's probably uh at least 20 minutes, though.

I I think to do it justice.

I've got a couple of other things, just a report on the comp plan and the um P and Z commission's decisions that I need to do, but then beyond that, at least 20 minutes is my guess.

Okay, and I know um Mr.

Nielsen is with us for specifically for those.

So if we don't do it now, um stuff would have to wait.

Mayor, I think it's uh absolutely relevant and we should hear it.

Uh okay.

I see a couple of head nods.

So unless there's a motion to depart from I I I do ask for some patience from the crowd because we're gonna have a delayed start to the public hearings, which is scheduled for six.

We're just running a little bit behind, but part of the staff report is very much relevant to some of the land use stuff that is coming up in the public hearings.

So and I know this was something that council had asked for in the prior council meeting.

So um Rodney, thanks for being with us tonight.

Thank you, Mayor.

Mayor uh Mayor and Council Rodney Ashby planning and zoning director for the record.

Um, just a quick update on what our planning and zoning commission did this last week.

The first one was a final plat approval for Deer Flat Ranch number one, and that was uh um recommended for approval, and that was on your agenda and approved today.

Um the public hearings that were heard were a couple of conditional use permits.

The first one was for a beauty uh shop or beauty salon.

Um, and this was southwest of 13th Avenue South and 2nd Street South.

And um that one was approved.

The second one was a conditional use permit for budget tires.

They're moving into that um uh it used to be the Mona Lisa a long time ago, um just off of um uh 11th Avenue and First Street North.

And that one uh was for automobile or truck repair, and that was approved as well.

Um the last one was an annexation and zoning and preliminary plat for Hudson Yards.

Um this was the southeast of Locust Lane and Southside Boulevard, and original concept is 59 single family detached residential dwelling units and six common lots on 21.51 acres.

And this was recommended for approval unanimously.

So that's all I have for planning and zoning commission.

Quick update on our compliment comprehensive plan um process.

We are in the middle of we held our steering committee.

We're now holding uh focus groups for specific topics that were themes that we heard during the public outreach process.

Um those focus groups are gonna uh they're being updated on all of the comments that we received and those themes we heard during those public that public outreach.

And then they're tasked with making recommendations for content in the comprehensive plan.

We're gonna try to refine that and and um we have some experts in each of those different fields that are going to be helping them to understand the topic and the data behind um some of their questions, and then they'll make that recommendation.

We'll come back out to the plan the public in the summer and do another survey, um, provide them the recommendations from these uh subcommittees or these focus groups, and then we'll move into the final plan um development.

So that's just a quick update on the comprehensive plan.

All right, Christy.

Thank you.

Um I'll try to move as quickly as I can.

I actually wrote down my in my notes um uh what I should say so that I don't uh pontificate.

Um I like numbers and so I like to think about all these things, so I'll I'll just try to stick with what I wrote down.

If you have questions, I'd be happy to entertain meeting one-on-one, or if the whole council wishes, I can I can respond to questions.

Um, first of all, the purpose of this report.

There we go.

The purpose of this report is to track and record planning and development data through time and to commemorate development and planning efforts.

The information is intended to provide a broad context rather than be used for decision making for individual project proposals.

Um there's a lot of data here, so again, I'm happy to meet with you individually if you would like.

So the next couple of slides highlight some data about the people in NAMPA.

First, the population is at uh estimated at 123,220.

And um the second, the median household income is 82,000, and third, the age of the residents is shown there in that graph, and um the median age is 33.5, which is slightly up from the past, um, but it's still we are still one of the younger communities in the valley.

Our growth rate has remained fairly steady since 2018 with an average of 3.1 percent annually.

The people of NAMPA have an average household income of about 82,000.

I mentioned that before.

The average cost of a home is 43,000 in NAMPA, about 100,000 lower than in meridian.

I thought that was a really staggering number.

And and average rent for a two-bedroom apartment is $1,345 per month.

Um 63% of NAMPA's housing is valued between 300,000 and 500,000.

Fewer than a quarter of the homes are valued at less than 300,000, with 17 percent being valued at greater than 500,000.

The percent of homes valued at over 500,000 has increased by 2% since 2024.

So we have seen um more of those.

In the past decade, the percentage of people owning or buying their home has significantly increased from 62 percent to 71 percent.

The type of housing that renters are in significantly impacts the cost of their monthly rent.

Generally, the most affordable rent is for an apartment.

Again, this is the number for a two-bedroom apartment.

The next townhouse and the highest rental cost for a single family home.

This is uh an important slide for for me at least.

This slide explores one of the reasons NAMPA residents rent versus own a home.

Uh cost for renting is significantly more affordable depending on the size of the unit and the size of the home.

So it's kind of in contrast to what we just talked about, where there's more uh people buying uh a greater percentage of them are owning their home or buying their home than renting their their home.

Um I I think that there might be some demographics there that we need to think about.

Um we've had quite a few people move here who have a um a greater, you saw those age that age increase.

So that might be part of the the reason that we are seeing a greater amount of homes being purchased than uh rentals, but again, cost for renting is significantly more affordable.

In order for someone to have a mortgage at about $300 more than the average cost of rent in NAMPA, the home would have to cost $275,000 or less.

Home buyers would also likely need to be able to accumulate a 20% down payment and cover the cost of some services typically provided for rentals.

There are currently no zero stick built homes within this price point available for purchase in NAMPA.

The majority of NAMPA's housing stock is made up of single family homes.

In five years, NAMPA has approved, issued and completed nearly 5,000 single family dwelling permits, while other housing types fall significantly below that, totaling only 552 collectively.

Nampa has not approved issued or completed a single building permit for a triplex in five years.

Thought that was interesting.

The number of applications received by the planning and zoning department has remained relatively consistent with the exception of outlier years such as 2020.

In 2025, the department received eight more applications than the previous year, and one more application than in 2008 or 23.

Not included in these counts are the various other tasks done by staff, such as zoning and alcohol verification letters, deferral agreements, inspections, public record requests, pre-application requests, meetings, and the development of long range planning documents.

This slide shows that we continue to maintain relatively the same number of applications over the past five years.

This is a breakdown of each application type brought before city council or the planning and zoning department.

Of note is the increase of the number of variances, eight more than previous than the previous year.

We have seen significant increases to the number of variances in the past five years.

You can see those numbers there.

This shows a slight but consistent decrease in plat submittals.

However, the number of final plats received remains consistent.

This was likely due to larger preliminary plats being submitted that require additional phases to come, which equates to an additional number of final plat submittals.

Both the number of short plats and condo plats saw a decrease from 2024.

Multifamily units saw a dramatic increase in 2025, mostly due to an approval of a single project with many units, the Murphy development on Ewestick.

This single year accounted for 27% of the total units approved since 2018.

This is a little bit confusing, so I'll just kind of summarize it by saying this shows final plats approved in 2025 were taking more land per unit than in 2024.

Final plats were less dense in 2025.

Preliminary plats show the same trend of being less dense for those approved, but that changes dramatically if all preliminary plats in the queue by the end of 2025 were to be approved.

If everything were approved, the development in 2025 would overall be consuming less land per unit.

My guess is that we're we're not going to see that increase in density.

We're going to see either a flat line or a decrease in density.

So overall, our density for preliminary plats in 2025 increased from last year's record low density.

Out of the 14 preliminary plats submitted in 2025, only five had been approved.

If all 14 plats were to be approved, the gross density for preliminary plats in 2025 would be 3.98 dwelling units per acre.

This is slightly higher than what has already been approved, 3.43 dwelling units per acre and about a 1.1 increase from 2024.

On the shorter term, final plat approvals have shown a trend down to 3.43 dwelling units per acre.

This slide addresses the question about how many units approved through a preliminary plat have been committed through approval of final plat, of a final plat.

John Nielsen is here, and he's going to, he has a couple of slides at the end of my presentation, and he will also provide some more depth.

Of those preliminary plats approved in 2021, 79% of the lots have been committed through approval of a final plat.

But this also shows that a significant number followed quickly with a final plat approval after a single year, and that's 41% in 2024 approvals.

So again, just to word that a little differently, the the preliminary plats that were approved in 2024.

Final plats take time to develop out after approval of a preliminary plat.

And you can see that you know it can take, as you can see, from 2021 for preliminary plats to just have a final plat.

You're you're looking at 79%.

Well, it's not a hundred percent, so there's some that are still lingering out there that aren't aren't getting approved through the final plat phase yet.

Um or that haven't developed out yet.

So maybe they have their first final plat, but they have lots of other final plats that still need to come.

Um so again, it just shows you that it takes time for preliminary plats, and then it also can take time for those final plats.

It's a it's a process.

This is new data as a request from the planning and zoning commission and council.

There is a decreasing trend for annexation applications, but this may be due to large uh master plan community annexation requests, not necessarily not necessarily less land.

And you'll you'll see that in the next slide here.

Um, if all submitted annexations were approved, then our total number of acreage is significantly more than in the past.

So that's those really large master plan communities that include a lot of land.

Um, and so that's something to be aware of there.

Rodney, I apologize, Mayor, if I could.

Is that 1583 additional to 921, or it's 1583 encapsulating total total.

Thank you.

Oh, I total 1583 plus 921.

You can see on the the left-hand side there, the 2500.

So, yeah, 2500 is is what we're looking at there.

Thank you.

Rodney.

Mayor?

Yes, yes.

So there would obviously be an uptick because that was the encouragement three, four years ago was to go to master plan communities.

Correct.

So it would be in order or anticipated to have those type of unit increases because of the master plan communities.

That is absolutely correct.

Okay.

Yeah, and that's the point I was trying to make here.

It takes a long time, especially for those master plan communities.

If they come in and annex a whole bunch of acres, then we start with a preliminary plat, and then you have a final plat, but the annexation was already done.

So this is an obvious result of direction from council and um inclusion of that principle in the comprehensive plan to do master plan communities.

Okay.

Um this shows some of the work you don't see uh come before you on a regular basis.

In 2025, 44 design review applications were processed, and that includes a staff report.

Um, and you'll see on this next actually.

Let me jump back there.

Just some of the numbers up top, you can see that most of these are for new construction.

So it's it's not just a remodel or an addition, it's for new construction.

Um, and then on this slide you can see the breakdown.

If you look at 2025, 17 of the total were uh went to the committee.

But we had a total much greater than that.

So it's actually only making up a third of the of the projects going to the committee, and the rest are handled by staff.

That's for efficiency and reliability.

Um they don't they can move forward pretty quickly.

Next is just conditional use permits.

I'm almost done here.

This is a breakdown of the conditional use permits and how they were approved.

Just a on the bottom left-hand side, you can see some of those uh other land uses since we had 41 uh conditional use permits.

Um then uh the future land use map designations here.

You can obviously see our this has been the way it has been for all time.

Medium density makes up our greatest percentage of the land uses on the future land use map.

And um I think I don't need to spend too much time except for that last uh number there five uh the ratio of five to one residential to commercial property ratio.

I think that's something that we couldn't pay attention to over time that's staying fairly consistent the last few years.

Um and if we're finding that um residential development is swaying one way or another, then that number's gonna change.

If there's if you're finding that you want more commercial, for instance, you you look at that, or if you want resident more residential, you look at that number.

So we'll just continue to track that.

It's it's what we have found is there's not this great perfect number that you try to hit.

Um each community is different, and this has been pretty consistent for City of Nampa.

Mayor.

Yes, if I could.

And I just I'm doing math and writing notes as you're doing it, but I want to be sure before I solidify it in my mind.

47,000 acres within NAMPA's area plan, NAMPA's planning area.

24,000 are already committed, so that leaves the difference of 23,000 left that are in the planning area that are not yet annexed.

If we continue on the trend to 2500 a year, that means we'll fully be annexed out in nine years if all property owners wanted to move in that direction.

We continued applications in our trend.

But 2500 if we kept that uh trend moving forward.

Um I'm hesitant to give a real detailed response, Trey.

I I'd like to look at the numbers before I made a response, but I'm we can chair and we can chat more about it.

I'm just trying to I do want to highlight the enclave properties, and we have a slide in just a second.

Um I I think we can kind of skip over this.

You've seen these before.

We have um significant more IL zoned properties than we have in the past.

Uh that that's pretty dramatic.

Um, and the RS6 zone is always our number, has always been our number one residential zone.

Here's the enclave parcel data, and this was requested uh to be included last year by our planning and zoning commission and uh I think a city council member as well.

And this just shows that you have county development that are enclave, they're totally surrounded by the city.

Um my argument is they're getting the services of the community.

That's a planning perspective.

I know it's not a political perspective.

Um I I know you hold have a different hat on, um, but from a planning perspective, these people are benefiting from living within a community and not having to pay their fair share.

Again, I know that's complex and that's political.

I'm I'm just saying from a planning perspective.

Um, these are this is a new slide.

Um we've never done this before, just highlighting some of the things that our long-range planners have done this past year.

The comprehensive plan update was huge.

We did a ton of outreach, and um, so it's worth highlighting on our annual plan or our annual report.

The downtown implementation plan was also developed and adopted, and then other planning efforts you can see there, uh just a list of all these different efforts that are going on.

Uh I'm pretty proud of my staff.

Um, and you can see here we do more with less.

I mean, these numbers speak for themselves.

Uh, per capita, we are the lowest in the valley of number of planners per per capita.

So we're trying to juggle a lot.

And um, frankly, I I I speak for my team, not for myself here.

I think they do an amazing, amazing job.

And they are um doing it day after day, trying to be respectful to every person.

So again, I just really appreciate my team.

And with that, um, I'm gonna invite John up to do his part.

Thank you, Mayor, Council members.

My slides won't be as pretty or colorful, but I will move fairly quick with them.

This is comes from uh kind of a two-part deal.

Uh council member Bills asked me to get him some numbers for just kind of overall building um plan reviews, everything.

But then when there were some questions last council meeting, Rodney was kind enough to let me jump on board and come in here and present this to you real quick.

So here we have this is fiscal year 26, so four years into the fiscal year, and this is strictly residential permits.

So you can see that you know, 93% of our single family dwellings is what we have in here, and then the rest is just pools, sheds, additions, that sort of thing.

So um right now our job valuation there is 54 million dollars for the current fiscal year.

Then our new commission uh commercial and TI projects for the same four months.

Um you see here multifamily to Rodney's point.

If you look at last year's, we had three or four hundred units compared to this year of 32.

So there is a big difference on the multifamily, but our new shell and commercial TIs, they're um doing well.

Oh so with this slide though, we have 32 multifamily permits, 12 commercial shell permits, and 48 TI permits.

So to this chart here is 92 permits.

Then this one just kind of plugs everything all together.

So you can see single family dwelling units is about a third of our rest is commercial TIs and the small part there of uh multifamily.

So fiscal year-wise is five years.

Um currently we're at 163 million, so the green here on 25 was one project, but as you can see, we are actually up a little bit in 25 from 24.

So I think things are going along pretty steady.

Um if we come over here in 26, projecting maybe 652 million by the time the we get around to the end of fiscal year.

Permits issued again there with the residential.

Out of those 471, 300 and 18 were single family dwellings, so the rest was the odds and ends additions and everything.

But again, we're trending well, so it looks like we'll equal to or surpass last year's.

Again, not trying to project too far into the future, but so our building plan reviews currently we've done 24 or 2,492 of them.

Again, that's trending right along course, and I have a full staff now.

We also have St.

Al's coming in, it's gonna be a big project, but we're gonna keep those plans in-house.

So we'll save money, come uh doing third-party outsourcing our plan reviews.

There's always third party for the steel and stuff.

Um, certificates of occupancy.

This one just more informational than anything, but again, currently we've issued 460 on residential, 46 commercial.

That's trending well too.

I think we'll uh be looking pretty good when we get to the end of the year.

And then our permit revenue, the 6.8 million there at the top.

The last two budget cycles for operations, I've only budgeted 6.8, and I plan on keeping it there again.

So we should probably surpass that also, especially with um, because these numbers didn't include anything for saying owls or any other big projects that may come along.

And so with that, I'd like again thank like Rodney appreciate him letting me piggyback on here, but I'd stand for any questions and uh thank him and Xandra for getting me these numbers and charts.

Thank you, John.

Very much appreciated.

I I do have a question for Rodney, but before I ask that, any questions for John?

No, just thank you.

Appreciate getting the update.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor Council.

Um just one qu one question for Rodney.

That that slide that showed um on the future land use map.

I think percentage based on land use designation.

Know which one I'm referring to.

Yes, that one.

Um there it is.

Okay.

No, I know multifamily units.

Um, because the I just want to make sure this is acreage percent of percentage of the remaining acreage based on land use designation.

Okay.

Um did you work closely with Tischler Vice when we had adopted the impact fees or when council adopted the impact fees within the last year based on what their tenure projections were and how they calculated the impact fees?

No.

Daniel.

So Tischler Bice, when they do those evaluations, they use the um the building permit data that we our historic building permit data, um, as well as we we let them know about approved projects that are that are approved in the queue.

Um that's so the the impact fee data is typically looked at more from the perspective of the historic permits for that trending rather than the um future land use map just because we don't we don't necessarily know when projects may come in or be approved.

Um and so that's that's typically the data set that is used when they're looking at those impact fee calculations.

That that clarifies why there's a huge variance in what the impact fee report is saying, because that's backwards looking at trend as opposed to how we're actually designating our remaining land use in the future land use map.

I just think that that is is a potential cause for confusion to the public because I know that I was trying to explain um, for example, in the impact fee study multifamily, it shows it's almost doubling in 10 years.

That may occur.

But when I look at what what remaining acreage is left designated for multi-family, and it only has single family going up by 29% over 10 years, annualized is about 3%, which feels right.

But multifamily showing an annualized rate of income is 7%.

I'm just, do we even have land designated multifamily to even double the multifamily housing over 10 years?

However, that's the methodology on which we adopted our impact fees.

And mayor, one other thing to note is that there is some multi-family that can be developed within that multi within that medium density residential.

Um and so the high density residential there that we're looking at is not the only multifamily that can happen.

Um that that is uh there are multifamily situations that a duplex or something like that that would fall under from an impact fee standpoint, multi-family, but would not be in in the high density residential land use mayor.

I just to add on to that, exactly right.

Um community mixed use is another one of those that we require some of that multifamily density in it.

Um can't be more than the 49%, but um that can.

And commercial can have a conditional use permit for BC zoned property.

So um that's a potential as well.

Yeah, thanks for pointing that out.

And I think this binder, just council, this binder that's been provided is sort of a uh summary of what's allowed in all the codes.

And this is just to assist when we make land use decisions because in the BC zone, for example, like homeless shelter is an entitled use, which is a residential use within the BC.

So I'm not gonna go over every hypothetical, but I know that that can cause some confusion because something can be zone BC, but it actually can allow a uh congregate housing sort of mix within the BC.

So um those are some nuances, so I appreciate that.

Um the industrial and commercial does sort of link with I think the impact fees hoping for about 60% increase over 10 years.

Um based on land use type.

So I but like you said, some of the commercial could actually be housing.

And I know that that's confusing from a land use designation, because they look at commercial and think solely commercial, not housing when residential can be in the commercial.

So I appreciate that.

All right, any other questions before we move on to publicing?

Yes.

Could we John and Rodney, could you either council as a whole or me separately?

Can you email me both your presentations?

I think they're very well done, and I like to print off a copy and have a copy in my drawer.

They're in the packet.

I I have had uh in the pack, I'm saying separate from the packet.

I yeah.

And and I did make some slight adjustments to a couple of numbers when I looked at the data again.

So I will send that out.

I think that's worth a booklet printout, frankly.

But I'll be the only one to take a copy of that, I guess.

Thank you so much, and thank you to the staff.

Um you're doing an amazing job.

And as you noted, the amount of applications you're handling with the number of employees.

Um you do an amazing job.

And you lead an amazing group, Rodney, and thank you for your leadership.

Yeah, thank you.

All right.

Um that concludes our staff reports.

And we're gonna move to is council okay with just moving moving into the maybe we can do one public hearing and then take a break after that one.

All right.

So let's uh let's go to our first public hearing item.

So we're gonna open up the public hearing part of our agenda in 8-1 is an action item to confirm assessment role for a local improvement district 176 for city utility extensions and connections, and the first reading of ordinance confirming the assessment role for LID 176.

Um Daniel Badger.

Mayor and Council, this is a um local improvement districts for for those of you that may be new and not familiar with local improvement districts.

Uh the we we call them LIDs.

Um, an LID is a financing mechanism that the state has uh provided for the cities to finance uh various projects.

The typical use of an LID for the city of NAMPA is for um utility connection fees for existing homes that may be on wells and septics or not on flood irrigation that want to connect to city utilities but would like to finance those costs um for the city fee portion of that.

And that is what this LID is for.

Uh other uses are sidewalk replacements, repair and replacement projects, or if we have a neighborhood that has um an old county neighborhood that needs utilities actually constructed through the neighborhood, those are kind of the main uses that LIDs have been put in the past.

Um this particular LID for the um utility connections.

Uh so process-wise, we create the LED once we have all those that um have requested to connect.

Um we do allow those connections to happen um at the time they sign up, and then after the fact we come in and do the LID and finance that for them.

Um for this LID, the total cost um is eighty-three thousand four hundred and seventy-seven dollars and sixty cents.

Uh, there are 25 uh property owners that have requested to participate.

There was a 26th, um, but when they got the letter, they came in and paid that off, and so we took them off the list.

Um the breakdown uh for the costs are between the sewer connection fees, water connection fees, and irrigation connection fees, and those are the 29,570 for the uh sewer, 28,40, 28,404 for the domestic water and 25,503 and 60 cents for the irrigation fees.

Uh in this type of an LED, there are no out-of-pocket costs for the city.

It is just financing fees.

Um and so the when the LID is created, those amounts will be then assessed over a 10-year period to the property owners, one payment a year in the spring or or in the spring, their first bill will be due next year.

They do have an opportunity to come in and pay any portion of this off within the first 30 days after um it is approved by council, and those letters will be sent out as soon as the uh ordinance is recorded and uh UB handles that portion of things.

Any questions?

All right, thank you, Daniel.

Um is there anyone from the public that is signed up to speak on this?

Okay, is there anyone present who wishes to speak on this?

Uh sir.

I notice your hand is.

No, I'm I go I'm on it on the okay.

Yeah, so j just on this one, 8-1.

Any anyone here wishing to speak on this one?

Mayor.

Just a quick question.

Uh and after this public hearing, are we going to open it up for the regular non-business item public hearing?

Are we doing that at the end?

Yeah, um, slightly out of order.

I know councilman Jangula had asked, no one is signed up, but that doesn't mean someone did wasn't present who intended to speak during that time.

Apologies.

Um during the public form.

So after we close this, I'll I'll uh I'll ask if there was a member of the public who intended to speak but didn't sign up.

My preference though is that the public signs up for that to know as we go through the order.

But um yeah, we we do have um people who aren't signed up, however, to speak on a public hearing item have a legal right to be heard.

So I just anyhow thanks for expressing that.

Sorry.

All right.

Um no one no one is here to speak on this item.

So I would um Daniel, there's you have anything else that you need to say.

The only thing I would note is that there are two actions.

The first is confirming the assessment rule, which is what I have on the screen in front of you, and then once that's confirmed, it would be passing the ordinance.

Um, and we typically do do that under suspension of rules.

Okay, thank you for that.

So two council motions, but before we get there, uh do we have a motion to close public hearing?

Okay, all in favor.

Okay.

Sorry, I didn't get a second.

Second.

Okay.

Yeah, we supposed to multiple people motion.

So just okay.

All right.

Um, what's the will of counsel on these two items?

Mayor right, mayor.

Go ahead, Dale.

Yes.

I move that uh we um pass the uh to confirm the settlement rule.

Second.

All right, we have a motion, a second, any discussion.

If not, the clerk will take roll.

Scog.

Yes, gingula, yes.

Bills, yes, Rodriguez, yes, Griffin, yes, Reynolds.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

All right.

What's council's will in the second part?

Eric, move the we'll we'll have her read it first.

I'm sorry, and then a motion to uh suspension under suspension of rules.

Okay.

Would you like me to read it now?

Okay.

An ordinance of the city of Napa, Idaho confirming the assessment rule for local improvement district number 176.

Mary move the approve under suspension of rules.

Second.

Okay, motion and a second, uh roll call.

Gog.

Yes.

Bills, yes, yes, Rodriguez.

Yes, Jingula, yes.

Griffin.

Yes.

All in favor, motion carries.

All right.

Um council, before we go to A2.

If if there was someone under public forum, I know if this is where citizens have an opportunity to uh speak on three minutes on any item that's not on the agenda or on the agenda.

So no one is signed up.

Did someone uh come who wishes to speak for three minutes on a non-agenda item or an agenda item that's an action item?

Okay, there's not um we will move on to eight two.

Okay.

Um eight two.

Do we need a break?

Are we good with moving on to A2?

Okay, no, no one's asking for a break, so let's let's move on.

Eight two.

This is uh an action item for a zoning text amendment to repeal and replace city code title 10, chapter 23.

Signs basically to eliminate redundant language, remove unnecessary definitions, provide clarity, reorganize the chapter and align standards with building code.

I believe does Terry have the staff report on this.

I do.

I'm ready when you are.

All right, yes.

Why don't you uh go ahead and explain what all is being asked?

Right.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

My name is Terry Friend, associate planner for the city of NAMPA.

The action before you this evening is approval to repeal and replace the entirety of Title 10, Chapter 23.

That's the code that contains the sign code um which applies to most of the city.

Just for clarity, chapter 23 does not include the sign code for the newly defined central NAMPA zoning district.

Um the sign code for that zoning district is included in the recently adopted form-based code and is detailed in chapter 15, section nine.

So in addition, there are some specialized sign code requirements related to our specific area plans that are found in chapter 31.

Those aren't included in tonight's discussion either.

We're only looking at things in chapter 23.

Chapter 23 was last repealed and replaced in 2021.

This was the year that the planning and zoning um department reviewed and rewrote the entire zoning code.

Ordinance 4617 repealed all the chapters within Title 10, and new code chapters were adopted across the board.

Since that time, we've made a couple of additional minor revisions to the sign code.

In May of 2022, um minor code changes were um kind of sporadically adopted throughout the chapter.

May of 2024, two code lines were added, which um implemented prohibiting signs advertising illegal activities and controlled substances.

And then in June of 2025, we added a provision for allowing for additional height of certain freestanding signs within 600 feet of the center line of I-84.

So I've been responsible for administering NAMPAS sign code since September of 2024.

I was given that responsibility because of my experience in the sign industry.

So just for context, I'll share that I worked for seven years for a Treasure Valley based sign company that specializes in signage for national change.

During my time in that position, I literally read hundreds of city sign codes from all across the country.

And so with that background, I can confidently say that our assigned code allowances are generous and they're business friendly.

And in my experience, processing sign permit applications here, it's only on a rare occasion that the applicant isn't allowed their design desired sign.

However, I do regularly receive calls asking for clarification and understanding of the details of our sign regulation.

And in addition, frankly, I have difficulties reading and interpreting our code.

So the real problem is that the code is hard to navigate and it includes some really difficult code language.

So the goal of this sign code rewrite is to reorganize the chapter for easier reference.

We've revamped the charts so that they are easier to read and provide more information all in one location, a little bit of one-stop shop there.

And in addition, we went through the code word by word, identifying redundant code sections, unnecessary definitions that could be removed, as well as code sections that needed to be clarified and simplified.

The actual revisions that alter any sign code requirements or allowances are super limited.

One thing to keep in mind as we discuss revisions to the sign code is the sign regulations are viewed through the lens of the First Amendment, right to free speech.

So it's critical that our sign code is content neutral.

However, time place and manner regulations are allowed, which means that the code can govern the dimension of signs, assigned placement, the number of signs allowed on a property, issues of construction, and that sort of thing.

But I am asking you to repeal and replace an entire sign code chapter.

So let's hit on these fast.

Building code requires any freestanding structure over seven feet in height to have structural engineering, but the sign code currently specifies that that happens at 15 feet or higher.

So we're just aligning this to current building code.

That occasionally happens when there are special requirements related to a specific area plan or an overlay district or a comprehensive sign plan.

So we want to make sure that people are aware of that.

This code specifically will make those prohibited, which will allow our park personnel to remove them if that happens.

This adds a code that addresses drive-through signage, which has historically kind of fallen in a murky gray area because it's not really advertising and it's not really intended to be viewed from the street.

So traditionally, this type of sign is only viewed, only reviewed by the building department.

So this code section actually codifies how we have been handling the drive-through signage by formally adding it under the exempt sign section.

Removing the limit of number of directional signs.

Directional signs are an important safety, are important for safe navigation throughout our properties.

The current sign code recognizes that purpose and considers directional signs exempt, but it does limit the number of signs to two per property.

We have a lot of pretty complex commercial commercial properties being developed, and more wayfinding and directional signs are necessary for safe navigation.

So our intent here is that we remove the limit to this to the quantity of directional signs while still restricting the sign area for each of the signs, and part B added there regulates the maximum sign height for any freestanding directionals.

But a typical lawn sign is um that's available is 18 inches by 24.

That's three square feet.

So this code just aligns the our sign allowance with the type of signs that are typically available to somebody to purchase.

Hold on with me for a second, because I'm gonna show you a picture.

Um so it makes sense to have a distinction for counting sign area when sign faces are not parallel, like for example, in this picture, but a five-degree not parallel is too small an angle to be really noticeable, or on a sign that's of any substantial size.

So this code revision um changes that offset measurement to be 15 degrees or more, which would create an angle that would be more noticeable, and it makes sense that maybe those would be counted as two sign faces instead of one.

And uh the existing code includes a code section that specifies that a permanent reader board sign is um shall be non-illuminated, but that directly contradicts other portions of the code that um allow for illumination.

So this code change just deletes this section, which seems to be an unintended outlier.

And lastly, you'll recognize this style of temporary sign, which is very prevalent now.

Um the current sign code does not include a definition for these nor any standards.

So we're going to identify these as feather banners, and this is the definition that we will use.

And here are the allowances that we'll give for those feather banners.

Um, the zones where they will be allowed, uh is the same zones where other self-supporting temporary banners are allowed.

The sign size allowance proposed here is a mid-range of signs available in this style from local and online resources.

Yes, we have a question over here from Councilman Bills and then Rodriguez.

So are we specifying a time frame?

None of our temporary signs.

Well, sorry, very few of our temporary signs have a time frame specific to them.

So no, this one does not include one either.

Well, then the definition of temporary.

How are we defining that?

Temporary is based on the material and the sign type.

When it when it falls off the pole, it's no longer temporary, it's just still kind of there though.

When it takes temporary, I think that's the one area that is a frustration to a lot of residents and so forth.

Uh is uh the signage being able to carry on month after month, year after year in some locations, uh tattered and torn.

Um times set for a temporary use.

And yet they didn't get removed and they just end up staying there.

Um I I think our sign ordinance has been really good.

I think uh we've been very gracious on the temporary far as flag poles and and the signs that you have shown on the screen.

Uh in all candor for those who are who are setting out that once you've seen it enough times, your eyes don't see it any further, but it's still a it it moves from a sign and marketing to a nuisance from my perspective.

And I'm not sure the other feelings on council, but I I feel like this issue we still need to tighten up.

So thank you.

Uh um councilman Rodriguez?

I was gonna say the exact same thing.

So thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right, you can resume or you can respond or or resume and then maybe wait till the rebuttal phase.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'm happy to respond now while we're in the conversation if that's okay.

Um I absolutely agree with the statements that Councilman Bills um noted.

There has been a resistance to any sort of additional permitting requirement.

Um in terms of increasing regulation.

Um our sign code does already address torn um faded all of those type situations.

We can request that those be removed.

We just have not hit on that code compliance wise.

Um and there is um not wanting to permit them means that we aren't able to regulate a time frame.

Well then we need to look at the aspect of permitting them, and or we need to put in the code that we have the right to remove them.

And so when they get torn and and tattered and they're an eyesore and not an enhancement, they certainly aren't helping the marketing side.

Uh it just shows the laziness of the business, but more so it also shows a uh a downward trend for the community.

And uh I think it's uh an affront to those who do try to keep their storefront and their property looking well, and then you have somebody beside you otherwise.

And uh so somehow I think we need to make a decision and have a future forward on the issue.

Mayor.

Yes, uh Mayor, uh Councilmember Bills.

Uh I do want to make one point is that uh we do not allow tethered or worn signs in in the city per municipal code, and that is a code enforcement issue, uh, which we can and will enforce it.

Well that'd be great then.

I look forward to not seeing some of the tattered and torn signs as I drive.

Do you do you have an anonymous reporter hotline?

I think I know our first thing for the most enforcement is complaint driven, just so you know.

Um I I Terry, I did have a question um to maybe clarify the the political signs.

They're gonna be coming here in a couple months.

We're gonna be seeing a lot of political signs.

Um the 18 by 24 is the most common political sign.

That's kind of the small one, and technically the two by four.

But but the small one was technically in excess of the two square feet, and I had heard from some HOAs trying to enforce per our code that the small campaign sign was literally against our our sign code law.

Is that correct?

Was that a correct understanding?

It limited uh Mayor.

Um it limited it to two square feet.

Correct.

So it was I think you can get a 12 by 18 in there.

Yeah, I'm talking about no one was putting 12 by 18s up.

But 18 by 24 is just the foot and a half, it's the standard campaign sign.

That's in excess of two square feet.

And so this is going to allow you to allow that.

However, there's a lot of two by threes, three by four campaign signs.

Um is there a distinction between uh uh home residence or a commercial property on a main arterial that is putting up that two by three sign, which is six square feet, and of course anything bigger than that is in excess.

So I'm just wondering what direction we're giving candidates and and how their signs or the property owner might be subject to removal of this.

I I would I would entertain uh a larger square footage allowance, but with a time frame.

60 days um as sort of the compromise on this, but that's just me kind of sharing some thoughts because I don't expect code enforcement, code enforcement will be busy during campaign season just doing non-stop sign removal if if if if so called upon to do that.

Mayor especially it would be well if we included the pick up all legislative incumbent legislative uh signs would be probably a good move.

There's all signs over a certain duration of time.

But I'm just I'm just offering a few.

I just want to understand that the three square feet, that is the hard cap.

Two by three on lawn signs.

Um but here the three square feet is what you're proposing.

Three square feet.

Thank you, Mayor.

This is for residential zones.

Okay.

So if somebody is opting to display a temporary political sign on their business related property or their commercial property, then the banner requirements for commercial properties would come into play.

Does that require a permit?

Can you remind me on that section of the code?

It also does not.

It does not.

Okay.

Thank you for clarifying that.

So Mayor, that yes.

Terry, along the same vein, I thought there was a Supreme Court ruling in Idaho that said that people could put whatever they wanted political signage-wise in their yard, and they choice couldn't say anything to that regard.

That's what I've been told.

I'm not the lawyer at the bench.

Uh I don't know how that factors in, but my opinion that I've given and that I've also used in my own yard is I can put whatever political sign I want, and code enforcement can kick rocks.

And that's not what I'm echoing or advocating for here.

That's just what I have heard is the statute and the code and the law of the land from the Supreme Court side.

And Mayor, if I may just chime in on that.

I I think what you're getting at, if I remember right.

Um it used to be the HOAs would regulate signs in their community, but then the uh legislature passed a lot, I believe, in 2024 that expressly stated they cannot do so.

And that was litigated.

Um what I'm hearing here is nothing that would be in violation of that.

So I know if there's more further questions that are we can look into it more.

I think just for us creating and drafting this, does it is it a mute point if somebody puts a two by four, a two-foot by four foot with Debbie Scog for city council in their front yard.

Is that going to get ripped out because it's political signage that the Supreme Court has said she has a right to put in her yard?

Could be a billboard for all she cares, but I yeah, mayor.

Overarching all this is the federal legislation uh and case law um with time, place manner restrictions by our federal jurisdictions, Ninth Circuit as well as Supreme Court, and they do allow governments to regulate the time, place, and manner, so some dimensions.

It can't be suppressed unduly suppressed.

Um there's case law on that, but here that we're within the bounds of our authority to do these type of regulations.

Thank you.

It's a good question.

Yeah, I think if I hear you right, the size is still an allowable, that's not viewed as total prohibition.

That's right.

It's one of the manner you can regulate.

Yeah.

Now, if it was two by three inches, that might be another thing where there's no effective speech there.

Uh but here with we're within the confines.

Okay.

So is it the opinion of legal counsel that we establish time?

We have place and we have manner and sizing.

Do we need to establish time for those for all these signages, including political?

Mayor, it's a good question.

Um these are ones that are received strict scrutiny.

You're in the First Amendment world, and it's not one that just kind of pounce around up here.

It would take a little more careful analysis on that.

Um it needs to be reasonable time place manner restrictions.

Um again, if there are some specific ones here that need to be addressed and and fleshed out, we can look at those.

I would not advise shooting from the hip, so to speak, here on that very heightened um right of first amendment.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um you got a few more sections to cover.

I am uh sorry.

Yeah.

This is the code that allows us to uh thank you.

Um this is the code that allows us to amend city zoning ordinances.

Um it requires that city council shall find and conclude that the proposed amendments are reasonably necessary and in the public, sorry, in the interest of the public and in harmony with the goals and policies of the adopted comprehensive plan.

Um the comprehensive plan has about three paragraphs in it related to signage.

I think the most important point to bring forward or the most important recommendation is highlighted there in blue in blue.

Um properly designed in place signs should provide an easy and pleasant communication between people and their environment and avoid visual clutter.

Um in addition, there's two additional um points to be made.

We want to ensure that signs are designed, constructed, installed, and maintained to assure public and traffic safety.

And we want to allow adequate and effective signs without dominating the visual landscape.

We're indicating that the proposed ordinance are appropriate because they're reasonably necessary in the interest of the public and in harmony with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan.

And the proposed amendment is in harmony with our comprehensive plan.

And here are the potential motions.

Okay.

Seeing that there's no public testimony um on this, uh staff rebuttal.

Any final questions for staff from council?

I move that we close the public hearing.

Okay, there's a motion second to close public hearing.

All in favor?

I move that we approve the new city ordinance as presented.

Second.

Okay, there's a motion and a second to approve the new ordinance um recommendations as presented.

Any discussion?

Okay, seeing none, the clerk will take roll.

Scott, yes.

Jingula.

Yes.

Rodriguez.

Yes.

Griffin.

No.

Reynolds.

Yes.

Bills.

Yes.

Five in favor, one opposed.

Motion carries.

Okay, that concludes eight dash two.

Uh thank you, Terry.

Um before we move to eight three, um I recommend a short five-minute break.

Okay.

Okay.

So let's take a recess and then we'll resume about five minutes.

All right, City Council, um please please get re-gather if you can hear me.

All right, council.

We are all assembled, and I have the thumbs up.

We're back on live stream, and so we are resuming with um eight dash three, and I just want to thank the public for being patient with us tonight.

Um, but we are on eight three, and we are allowing the applicant um twelve minutes on this one, as P and uh uh Rodney recommended on this.

Yeah, this is an annexation of zoning for thirty-seven point seven four acres into BC, RD, RS4, and RS six zoning districts with corresponding right-of-way potential development agreement subdivision preliminary plot approval for regatta crossing subdivision at zero Eustach Road.

This is for endurance holdings LLC.

As uh I believe the applicant is here this evening.

Good evening.

Um you know the drill, you'll give us your name and um address, and then after that, we're we're allowing twelve minutes for your presentation tonight.

So thank you.

Now I would like to welcome you into our main entrance into Regatta Crossing, which offers a kind of a gentle nod to the community's primary monumentation and overall design theme.

The entry is intentionally welcoming but understated, creating a smooth transition from public roadway into the neighborhood.

With Regatta Crossing, we're requesting an annexation, a mix of zoning, and a plelinary plat.

We have five commercial lots, fifty-four townhomes, ninety-nine single family, and twenty-one common lots.

Our gross density will be 4.08 units per acre, with our diverse residential lot sizes ranging from 2,600 square feet up to 8,205 square feet.

Regatta Crossing is designated as a residential mixed use in the City of Nampa's comprehensive plan.

This designation envisions well-designed connected communities that provide long-term value to residents in the broader community.

This division is delivered through a mix of housing, walkable connectivity, access to jobs and services, as well as design gathering spaces supported by quality architecture and landscaping.

Regatta Crossing embodies all of these long-term planning goals I just described.

The site is uniquely positioned along the Eustace Corridor, adjacent to existing and planned industrial areas to the west and south, and one of the last remaining residential opportunities in this area for the city of Nampa.

Regatta Crossing plays a key role in meeting the housing needs for nearby workforce.

Consistent with residential mixed use designation, Regatta Crossing is requesting a diverse tiered zoning pattern that provides appropriate transitions across the site.

First, we have our business corridor, business commercial, excuse me, located along the Eustace Corridor, supporting neighborhoods serving commercial uses and corridor activity.

Next, we have RD, nestled adjacent to the commercial area, allowing for attached townhomes that serve as a transition from the commercial to the residential uses.

We then have our RS4, located at the center of the development, that provides traditional single family residential homes, and then finally our RS6 along the outer edges of the site, creating larger lot, single family homes that provide compatibility and buffering to the surrounding areas.

This step-down zoning approach creates a logical land use transition, supports walkability, and aligns with the city of Nampa's long-term planning goals for residential mixed use.

So, to better understand how the site fits within the broader area, it is important to look at the surrounding context in detail.

The properties located in the area experiencing steady residential growth and expanding employment opportunities.

To the north and east, established approved single family neighborhoods, including Heartland Subdivision at 4.04 dwelling units per acre, Sweetwater Glen at 3.8, Fall Creek at 3.5, Magnolia States at 4.24, and Kinghorn Place at 3.43.

This reflects an average density of approximately 3.8 dwelling units per acre, establishing the prevailing character for the area.

To the south, land is designated for future land uses, supporting long-term employment growth and economic development.

And to the west, planned industrial mixed-use properties have already emerged as a growing employment hub.

Major employers include Knife River Construction, Stowe Manufacturing, JTS manufacturing, Convoy Supply Inc.

and Project SPUD.

This anchors this area and reinforces the evolving live work character for this corridor.

Regatta Crossing represents orderly growth with a proposed density that aligns with the surrounding neighborhoods to the north and east while providing an appropriate transition to the expanding industrial employment centers to the south and west.

Eustake Road is a plan to be expanded to a five-lane arterial to accommodate future traffic demands and reduce congestion.

As part of the city's adopted corridor improvement strategy, a roundabout is planned at the intersection of Eustack and Northside Boulevard to enhance safety and long-term mobility.

These corridor improvements are scheduled for completion by 2030, with construction already underway.

To proactively support these improvements, Regatta Crossing is dedicating approximately 582 feet along North Side and 1,115 feet along Eustack.

This dedication is critical to accommodating the future roundabout and arterial widening.

The total value of the right-of-way dedication is 417,000, representing a significant infrastructure contribution towards the city's long-range transportation vision and overall functionality of the corridor.

This project will occur over time and be developed in three phases aligned with market demand.

Phase one occupancy is anticipated in late 2028, phase two in 2030, and phase three in 2032.

This measured approach coordinates infrastructure delivery with a development activity and aligns with the planned Eustach Road improvements, ensuring road capacity and residential growth progress together.

Emergency services and public safety are a top priority for this community.

This commitment is demonstrated through two dedicated fire emergency access points coordinated with the City of Nampa Fire Chief.

The first access point provides an additional emergency connection to Eustach Road, proving response time and redundancy.

And the second access point onto North Side Boulevard is fire-only emergency access bridge, restricted exclusively for emergency response use.

Together, these access points enhance our site safety, emergency response efficiency until other future access connections are available.

We understand and are sensitive to the city council's concern that development must pay for itself.

Based on the analysis of the current building permit impact fees and considering only the proposed 154 residential homes, not the commercial, the estimated total impact fees generated by this project will be over $2 million.

Northwest of Regatta Crossing, approximately 1.5 miles near Highway 2026.

CBH Homes has entered into a memorandum of understanding with Valley View School District to donate approximately 12.4 acres of for a future elementary school.

This commitment demonstrates the applicant's proactive response to district needs in a long-term investment in serving future students for this growing area.

This commit uh commitment is valued at 2,294,000.

So we recognize the importance of maintaining a strong commercial presence along Eustace Corridor, a key gateway and economic corridor for the city of Nampa.

To support this vision, we have 3.86 acres across five commercial lots that are reserved along Eustach Road.

You can see that the commercial areas carved out within the slide.

With our tiered zoning approach, we then transition from commercial to our attached townhome product.

These homes are provide a worry-free and low maintenance upkeep.

Our next step down, we have our four single-family homes highlighted in purple.

These homes provide all the comforts with an open concept layout, chef's kitchen, and ample backyards.

And then our final step down is the site's tiered zoning approach consists of 9.6 zoned single-family homes highlighted in blue on this slide.

These spacious residences are situated on larger lots, allowing for generous front and rear yards, and providing the opportunity for three-car garages.

Additional overflow and parking has been incorporated throughout the development to accommodate special events and peak parking demand.

As shown on the slide, three strategically located parking pads are distributed across the site and are connected by an internal pathway network, ensuring convenient and safe pedestrian access.

Regatta Crossing provides 5.77 acres of qualified open space at 15.3%, with additional landscaping areas, including our northwest corner.

Our grand total is 11.81 acres for 31.29%.

Pathway connectivity and walkability is also a priority within Regatta Crossing as seen in our pathway exhibit.

Purple depicts our community sidewalks.

Orange depicts our micro pathways that fan out throughout the site for a total of 3,585 linear feet.

And green illustrates our eight-foot community pathway that provides connection along our two laterals for a total of 1,870 linear feet.

So the central gathering area serves as the heart of Regatta Crossing and is intentionally designed to foster community connection, recreation, and everyday interaction.

Centrally located within the development, this provides a shared space where residents of all ages can gather, recreate, and engage with one another.

The many clues of multi-use open lawn, sport court, shaded pavilion, ping-pong table, volleyball court, barbecue pits, and seating areas all connected to be integrated to the pathway network, creating an active yet comfortable space for everyday use and gathering and community gatherings.

Central gathering areas supports walkability, quality of design, and neighborhood livability consistent with the net city of Napa's mixed use vision.

And finally, our regional multi-use pathway offers passive recreation with landscape seating areas that create inviting places to rest, gather, and enjoy the outdoors for the public to enjoy.

And to summarize, Regatta Crossing is a thoughtfully planned mixed-use community designed to provide a balanced plan of housing options, generous open space, and intentionally designed gathering areas.

The development also incorporates neighborhood serving commercial uses, creates a walkable environment that supports daily needs within the community.

Overall, Regatta Crossing embodies the key principles of a well-planned mixed-use development, aligning with the City of Nampa's comprehensive plan by promoting connectivity, livability, and appropriate density integration and long-term community value.

And on that great note, I would like to thank you all for your time, your thoughtful consideration, and opportunity to present our project to you this evening.

And with that, I'll respectfully request um approval of our project this evening, and I'll stand for any questions that you may have.

Thank you again.

Thank you.

Oh, it was just under.

All right.

Questions?

Yes.

So you have a road.

I've got to probably increase the size of the screen in order to tell you, but it's the one that uh is along the diagonal of the drain, and you're showing a road going to the drain or a crossing going in.

I was trying to confirm that you're putting in that physical crossing.

Oh, the um mayor, um, council member bills.

Are you talking about the emergency crossing that we're going to be providing?

Mayor, councilman bills.

So our typical standard on that is we would have the them do a cost estimate for the full installation, and we would collect a payment in lieu of construction of the actual where they own to the center, we would collect half of that, uh, plus typically a 10% on that, and keep that in a payment in lieu of um fund, and then when the adjacent development goes in and they put that in, we would pay that to the developer for that.

That's how we've been handling in recent years those canal crossings where they own to the center.

Okay, so um so the property that's then to the southwest of that stub street.

When it develops, it would install that crossing in full, and we would pay their payment in lieu of construction money to that developer.

But if that property went more commercial than residential.

At that point, if if that were not constructed when that develops there to the south, um, we would then return the can payment in lieu of to the original payer of that.

But we don't have enough exiting for this project at this point in time, do we?

Is where the second exiting so so there are three stub streets uh on this project.

There is the cul-de-sac there at the south, the um stub street there to the north of the cul-de-sac that goes out to the east, and then the stub street across the drain.

Um if the one across the drain were not to be completed in the future, um we would still have adequate um a code perspective with those existing stub streets to the east when that ultimately develops.

So help me out.

The you said an access off the cul de sec.

I'm trying to so is it is this part of the staff report or embedded within the staff report?

Not specifically so I'm just trying to get gain perspective of what the plan here is.

It seems like we're we got one entry and we're stubbing, so I'm trying to sorry, I'm trying to with the mouse so you can see.

So there is a stub street here at the north end of the project.

And so stub street at this location, the cul-de-sac here, the right-of-way comes and would allow for that to continue on there, and then the stub street across the drain.

So they've provided three stub streets per the city's direction as we've looked at this.

So at a certain point in time, those connections are gonna need to actually go to something before they can keep going.

Is that correct?

So they are providing uh emergency accesses that will um yeah, on here.

So they've provided emergency access, one to Eustach and one to uh North Side that would allow for the full development of this project with those in there prior to any connections from adjacent properties.

So on the property to the south west.

I what I'm trying to ascertain or figure that is that stub street if it's in the right location for how that property may develop one day in terms of ingress, egress, et cetera.

So is there a reason it's put in that location or right now?

It's just a stub street.

Right.

Um mayor, um, council member bills.

Right now it's just a substreet.

I think we'll we definitely have the flexibility to move it if um that's the direction.

If especially when they um that site gets a development plan or it they decide what they want to do with the site, um, we'd be happy to work with them on finding the correct location.

So okay.

Uh those were I guess that's that's really the issue that I was uh focused on at the present.

So the only other part I didn't quite understand it said something about fencing a pond, or there was a neighbor comment that was provided about fencing a pond that apparently fills with water at different times of the year and then drains back out.

Is that anything that you guys are familiar with, or do you know?

Yes, yes, yes.

Mayor, council member bills again.

So um that's the farmland to the east where we're providing those two step roads, and it sounds like I've already talked to the farmers and it during the planning and zoning commission, they did I believe um put a condition that we need to be fence our entire um side of the property, um, which we already are planning to do.

But um to alleviate the neighbors' concerns, we definitely don't want anyone um entering into their um property, um specially if um with the pond.

So um we agreed to um put fencing up on the east side of the um property boundary.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Mayor.

Yes.

Thank you.

Am I understanding this correctly that the green space, the common space that you have presented is going to be in phase three in 2032?

Um mayor, um, councilwoman.

Um that is our plan.

Um if you feel strongly that you would like to see it in earlier phase, um, we would be happy to accommodate that as well.

I'm just looking at it.

Some people would be living there two to four years without a common space.

Sure.

Um that's a great idea.

That space on the um the northwest corner.

Is that included that frontage there?

Is that included in your 15.3% green space?

Um, Mayor, councilwoman, no, it's not.

Okay.

And then on the North Regina Crossing Avenue, are you planning to put any speed bumps in there at all?

Oh, that's a great question, Mayor.

Um, councilwoman.

Uh you know, if there traffic mitigation requires it, I know that there um is specific requirements for the um speed bumps, um, but again, we would be happy to if um for any traffic mitigation concerns um to include those if the city um engineering department agrees with it, so well I'm just looking at as a mom of teenage that's no that's like one giant racetrack.

No, mayor, councilman Jangula.

We we would support um and likely require um some speed mitigation, traffic calming mitigation along that long stretch of that road.

Daniel, what are those?

What does that include?

Uh there are there are a number of different options.

Typically, uh speed humps are the one that are selected, or the other common one would be um bulb outs within the roadway to narrow the roadway at locations that help manage speed.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah, you're so welcome.

Thank you.

Mayor, if I could Daniel, is there a specific preference that the city has?

The only reason I bring it up is in my mother's neighborhood in Napa, they have the speed bumps, and you can go 35 right over them, and it's just an up and down.

But I know in Fall River they have those narrow pathways.

Is there can we give a preference on what is inputted in there?

I think you aesthetically the the carve outs are nicer.

I think they're more effective, but I'm not an engineer.

Either can be effective when designed pro appropriately, and if you have a preference, that is certainly within your discretion to call for.

I think speed bumps are ugly, but I think those carve outs can be aesthetically uh pretty nice if you have landscaping or anything else done with them.

Absolutely, Mayor and um council member member.

Um I agree.

Um, and obviously safety is an utmost importance for our development.

So um traffic calming will be um incorporated in the design.

Thank you.

So thanks the applicant.

Um you'll have an opportunity as you know to come back up at the end.

And so um we'll go to staff.

Damien has a staff report on this.

Damien.

Um mayor, if you would like I can go up to the dais, or if you no, you're good.

You're you're good if as long as we can hear you okay.

Okay, all right.

Yep.

Thank you, Mayor and Council, Damian Snodgrass, associate planner.

Um the applicant's request today is for the annexation and zoning of 37.74 acres into BC community business, RD two family residential and RS4 and RS6 single family residential.

The original concept.

This has changed a little bit from the time it went through the planning and zoning commission to now city council, and we'll cover some of those changes a little bit later.

Um to now 54 single family attached townhouse dwelling units, 100 single family detached, five commercial lots, and 20 common lots.

I have provided a slide for Daniel to talk about traffic specifically since this was a larger concern within the planning and zoning commission hearing.

Mayor and council.

Um we have received a traffic impact study on this uh project.

Uh it is an update of the existing study that was prepared with their first application back in 21.

Um, they have updated it to current traffic numbers and current um development uh approvals within that.

Uh it did not change the um results of the study.

The only um project triggered um improvements that are required at this um uh at this development would be an eastbound right turn lane and a westbound left turn lane at their US Tick approach.

And if there are no other questions, I'll turn it back to uh Damien.

Thank you, Daniel.

So for this next slide, going to be covering some of the things that were changed and some of the conditions that were altered from the time of the planning and zoning commission hearing to the city council hearing based on direction from the commission.

Um the commission recommended this for approval with two conditions that the commercial space be increased to the 5% of the gross parcel area and an additional fence uh the addition of a fence along that eastern front of the property per the uh request that we see received from the public from one of the nearby property owners.

So the original plan for this property only had four commercial lots, and it was just shy of the five percent that's necessary for the residential mixed use due to some of the BC zoning being right of way that was zoned.

So it was determined by long-range planning that it wasn't the intent to have that be zoned commercial and not usable commercial space.

And since then, the increase of commercial space came from the applicant to add that additional parcel.

With this, they lost some of the residential attached units and they lost some of the common lot space.

However, they still meet their qualified open space and their common space elements as defined.

And as well as other conditions that were moved, the applicant was able to change out their tree species as defined by the city forester to get ones that fall within that speci specified tree diagram and contact the NAMPA Fire District regarding emergency access.

They originally provided a comment saying they wanted to have a discussion about the emergency access and go through changes like that.

Um if it comes to specific questions along the emergency access, I will defer that to the NAMPA Fire District.

Um and that commercial space was increased to have more of the intent of the five percent of commercial space within the residential mixed use.

So more of the property details.

It's under the residential mixed use designation and is currently within the county.

To the north we have RP residential professional zoning.

To the west, we have some Canyon County parcels that are undeveloped, followed by Springshores and some industrial right there.

And to the south, we have some undeveloped county partcels, and to the east we have undeveloped county parcels.

History on this project, it's come through uh one time in the past, and that was in 2021.

It was requesting an annexation and zoning to RD, but there was no path of annexation.

So to the north, um, we have this RP and RS7.

And at the time it was waiting on another application to come through, and that one wasn't approved, so it had no path of annexation, was denied based on that criteria.

Um and in 2023, this was brought in for a pre-application meeting to discuss uh multitude of multifamily and single family uses, and then it came back in 2024 and a request for annexation to RP for some floorplex units, and that was denied due to density concerns.

So more of those property details.

The proposed zones fall within the allowable uses under the residential mixed use designation, and it was it is within access to a couple services such as a high school within two miles and an elementary school.

Comprehensive plan seeks to provide compatible design and visual relationship, and within this zoning designation, commercial is an aspect of that, and we have received now comments from long-range planning.

So you'll be seeing more of that within these kind of staff presentations within these mixed-use zonings.

Here are the applicable regulations for annexation and zoning, and we will cover these in the findings.

Well, some other applicable regulations regarding the subdivision code, the RD chapter, the BC chapter, the RS chapter, and some of the permitted uses.

This development has some three to four unit townhouses as well as single family dwellings.

The three to four unit townhouses within the RD zone are permitted.

They are single family attached, and so this does not require a conditional use permit.

Correspondence, we received some correspondence from the engineering division.

And this was regarding the annexation of ride-of-way along Eustach Road, Northside Boulevard, and a traffic impact study.

And this was addressed by Daniel.

As well as the available utilities within Eust.

And the recommended conditions will be in the recommended conditions of approval.

NAMPA Fire District provided comments that it does not oppose this application and due to compliance with following the code requirements of approval and providing those 20-foot-wide emergency access points along North Side and Eustach Road.

NAMPA GIS provided some comments regarding the change of street names and addressing, and this was attached.

We received a comment from the Valley View to school district providing concerns over the capacity of schools to hold the influx of students in the valley, as well as listing some developments in the area within NAMPA, as well as called well that affect their school district.

NAMPA Parks and Recreation is requesting that the developer grant a permanent easement of 20 feet along top of bank for multi-use pathways and on that Pradam Gulch drain and requests that construct pathways of easement as indicated by the NAMP NAMPA bicycle pedestrian and master plan community master plan development.

Then that comment along providing an alternative tree species, and this was fulfilled.

We did receive one comment regarding the irrigation pond to the southeast and the request to build a fence between now and this last hearing, as well as a comment from a the CEO of Adler Industrial, who has some commercial industrial partials within the area supporting this application regarding growth and economic benefits of the development stating it is the long-term growth and employment opportunity discussing the balance of employment opportunity and attainable housing.

And these are the new comments that we receive for public comments before at the planning and zoning hearing.

We received some comments with concerns along density and within this development.

Sorry, take a little breath there.

And here is the proposed plates showing that green space and open space.

Going over the lot sizes allowable, it is 6,000 to 10,000 for single family for duplex or two-unit townhouses or three to four unit townhouses goes up ascending within the graph.

The proposed lot sizes are between 2600 square feet and 3200 square feet, and this can be tripled or quintupled to find the size of the townhouse lots, and all of these were found within the allowable regulation.

And then the staff analysis for RS, the density requirements must fall within that 2.51 to 8 dwelling units per acre.

The lot sizes within the RS4 and RS6 zone fall within the allowable size requirements within those zones.

For the open space analysis, the provided open space plan provides the adequate 15% open space of the gross parcel area, 15.26% of the site qualifying per city standards.

Here are the recommended conditions of approval.

Um that the prior to the reading of the annexation developer grant that right of way and address any mitigation measures for the traffic impact study, any on site wells or septic systems be abandoned or removed in accordance with local and state regulations.

Any domestic and irrigation and service groundwater rights will be transferred to the city at the time of individual property or development or redevelopment.

Utility shall be constructed through the site with the listed below, and the applicant owner shall comply with all city policy standards at time of property development, shall address the street name as defined by NAMPA engineering and GIS within the final plates, construct the pathways and dedicate the easements on that per dam, gold strain, and Mason Creek.

That a solid fence be installed along the eastern line of the property down to the collection pond and confirm any new legal descriptions with the change of the commercial zones with NAMPA Engineering Division, as well as any other that the council may impose.

Here are the findings for annexation that all private landowners have consented to the annexation.

Um staff found this to be met through the affidavit of legal interest.

The property is contiguous, it is contiguous to the north where abuts RP residential professional, that the NAMPA comprehensive includes the area of annexation.

This is located within the area of impact under the residential mixed use designation.

And when applicable for annexation of roadways are all portions of highway, so on and so forth.

Uh the proposed annexation complies with the memorandum of understanding between the city of NAPA and the NAMPA Highway District.

Here are the applicable criteria for zoning, that the proposed map amendments is 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 or would provide for a proposed use or set of uses that would be at least compatible reasonably compatible with existing adjoining property uses, and that the proposed zoning map amendment is in the interest of the public and reasonably next necessary.

Here is the codes for those chapters that fall under the that are allowable under the residential mixed use designation.

Um the residential mixed use designation seeks to provide low impact commercial options while combining medium density residential neighborhoods and defines the the visual relationship between adjacent and nearby buildings and the immediate streetscape.

Um the structures within the BC zoning will be subject to design review standards.

Um there is a current need for housing within Nampa city limits and a projected need for housing.

A 20 25 foot landscape buffer is required along the Eustach corridor.

And city codes are written to protect the public interest by providing guidance of development, therefore is presumed to be in public interest for any development if it meets city standards.

There are available services to the property.

Um the traffic access and frontage improvements to be addressed by the construction standards for city specifications.

Um the townhouse and single family houses, duplexes, and live worker units, and all residential, retail, and commercial are seen as compatible under the intent of residential mixed use.

The development proposes a necessary 5% of gross zoning area to be commercial.

Um townhouses and single family homes are defined as compatible within the NAMPA 2040 comprehensive plan.

With all that, um, it is found that the proposed zoning map amendments and so on and so forth for the zoning met the criteria.

And I'll stand for any questions.

Thanks, Damian.

I I have a question.

Can you can you show on the map uh where the the five percent commercial is?

That's the BC part.

Sorry about that.

Mayor and council.

Okay, gotcha.

Thank you.

That um that helps.

That was my my one question.

Also, planning zoning.

See the recommendation that they recommended at least five percent commercial, which the applicant is your noting is is more than meeting that with this proposed presentation.

Mayor, um, counsel that is correct.

The the addition of this lot right here too that I'm circling on the screen, uh, was the addition that met that intent and increased the commercial area.

Yeah.

Um I will um maybe reserve comments for others because the as noted earlier as Rodney pointed out, the BC zone allows under conditional use permit, multifamily housing, prison jail, transition home, uh, homeless shelter, other types of housing arrangements that I would um maybe want council to chime in on because I think the intent was to not allow those those uses within the BC because the emphasis on commercial, I think it would be more related to traditional commercial uses, not residential uses.

However, that's not specified.

Um it I think the intent is five percent commercial.

I think it would it would be up to this council's potential conditions of approval to clarify within the BC what is wanted or not wanted.

Um but that's just my more my my concern, I think, about confusion within the BC.

So Mayor and Council, it is also um uh was advertised and is under your purview to require a development agreement that may restrict uses within that BC zone.

Yeah, it could always be added.

Yeah, thank you for clarifying confirming that.

So clarification that was added, the development agreement and the ability on the you have that.

So annexation and mayor and councilman bills, uh annexation and zoning always leads a has a bit of verbiage um and the way we advertise it that says a potential development agreement that allows to it to be added within your purview, but not necessary for this development.

Understand, but in your conditions, I didn't see a specific request for a development agreement.

Mayor and councilman bills, at this time we don't have a specific condition, but it can always be added within this hearing.

So if there's a motion to affirm we need to add the issue of development agreement.

I just want to have the clarity for council as well as the audience.

Yes, okay, thank you.

Thanks.

And Councilman Bills, I think partly why I asked for them to print this out is I I don't want to question planning zoning, but when they emphasize the desire for commercial, BC could mean lots of things that include residential, and so I think it's it's up to this council within the DA to be very clear on what your intent is as a potential condition of approval.

So you have this in front of you and you can look at the list.

Um I think councilman Rodriguez, then councilwoman um chingula.

Um can you tell me how many how many subdivisions current projects or future projects surround this project?

And I see I counted seven, and there are all RS seven.

Can you confirm that?

Or do you know the amount of residences in each of these subdivisions?

I know I kind of just threw that at you, but Mayor population and density in this area.

Mayor and Councilman Rodriguez, uh, I at this time I do not have the specifics of the surrounding neighborhoods.

There is some RS7 within the surrounding area, RS6, and that RD zoning, kind of a mix of uh what is allowable under the residential mixed use and medium density residential uh designations.

Okay.

No, that's that's right.

Thank you.

Councilman Cingula.

Thank you, Mayor.

Damien, is the required amount of green space 15% Mayor and Councilman Jingula?

The required 15% is the required qualified open space, so you can have an excess of the amount of green space or green area, but there are certain requirements as defined by code to what be qualified open space.

And so they're meeting that qualified green space threshold within this, but there are some areas that would not be considered qualified green space.

Okay, are the walking paths considered green space?

The walking paths would fall under uh an amenity uh for that green space so it meets the amenity criteria defined within the subdivision code, not just the green space.

Um but it but it is part of the uh qualified open space.

Okay.

And then is there any of the green space that is less functional, like a runoff or anything like that?

Mayor and councilman Jangula, uh I'm not sure how to specifically uh address that.

It it I'm gonna leave this one up to Rodney.

Um Mayor and Council.

So we do allow it.

I I'm not sure either.

I I we'd have to look at that, but we do allow for like drain fields for storm drain runoff to be included in that calculation if they meet a certain uh engineering criteria.

So it can't be really deep, it can't contain water for long periods of time.

If you have a storm, then it runs into that, it drains pretty quickly.

But that if they meet those criteria, then it can be included in that um in that calculation per code.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Um I think we are moving to public testimony.

Does the anyone pre-signed up?

Mr.

Mayor, uh, we do have approximately six people signed up.

Our first speaker is Jay Snyder, and on deck is Brian Person.

You want to give who's in the hole, the third person?

There's the third person is Marcus.

Okay.

So Mark Hass is in the hole.

Brian, you're on deck, so um good evening, Mr.

Snyder.

You know the drill, your name, address, and you'll have three minutes.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor.

Jay Snyder, 524 9th Avenue South in Nampa.

Thank you for the opportunity here this evening, Mr.

Mayor and Council.

Um I'll start tonight by admitting that I'm a transplant to Idaho and ANAPA.

I moved here about 44 years ago.

Um purchased my home, raised my family here, and I've been uh pretty involved in the economy or in the community since then.

And I would like it noted for the record that I moved 2,500 miles west, not 900 miles north.

But I'm here tonight to speak in support of uh the regatta crossing subdivisions.

Um I'll admit the nautical terminology is a bit ironic given the lack of navigable water in the high plains desert setting.

But nonetheless, I think this is a type of subdivision that we should be approving.

NAMPA's growth isn't something that started recently, it's something that our community has been experiencing for decades.

Over the years, I've watched new neighborhoods come in.

I've seen families arrive, and I've seen new businesses established.

And each wave of growth has contributed to the city as we know it today.

That growth has definitely impacted us as citizens.

It's impacted me personally.

But uh and as a senior citizen, I um I'm paying taxes on an assessed value that have increased 800% since I bought my property.

And during conversations with uh folks about development, I often hear concerns from residents who have arrived in Niampa within the last five to ten years.

Um I respect their concerns.

Growth does bring challenges, particularly when it comes to infrastructure and safety planning.

But I think it's important to remember something that the homes built over the past decade are what made it possible for most of those residents to live here in the first place.

And when their homes are being constructed, many of us who had been living here for decades did not stand in opposition of the opportunity for them to move here.

And we welcome them as neighbors.

In my view, that same spirit of openness should guide us today.

If we truly value that tradition, we should be careful not to adopt the mindset that opportunity ends for others once we've found ours.

So I would encourage you to approve the annexation and zoning for this subdivision.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Snyder.

Mr.

Mayor, our next speaker is Brian Person, and on deck is Mark Hess and Robert Simpson.

It's all right, you're tall.

Just go ahead and just sorry for that sounds.

Um Mr.

Mayor, members of the council, my name is uh Brian Pearson.

I'm at 17754 Polaro Way in Napa.

Uh an omission during the uh applicant's presentation that uh subdivision immediately to the west that was shown on the map that wasn't discussed, and that's north side of states, and that's about 0.6 households per acre, 0.6, not four, not three, like some of the others.

Um another point that we sort of glossed over, it was about two years ago that this um very similar proposal was brought before the council, but it was denied on the basis primarily of the density.

Um it is not changed much.

It's 96 or 97 percent of what that was.

We were very, very grateful that uh that the council saw then it just simply wasn't appropriate for the area, and it was denied, and boy, respectfully request that you reach the same conclusion tonight.

Because while within the boundaries hasn't changed much, everything outside it has changed markedly.

Just think of the development that's occurred in the last two years.

The numbers, uh, Councilman Roger is with this in the immediate vicinity 858.

And that's from the applicant's own um narrative that they sent, and that's within about three stone throws of that inch intersection, 858.

To the east, two to three miles, 1500 in uh apartments in Murphy, I think it is.

If you take this 858, add the 1500, and then you you you do an amalgamated uh traffic count per day multiplier using the traffic institute of nine, you're at 20,000 trips, vehicle trips per day on the Eustach corridor, and that doesn't account for anything to the west.

Eustake, when it's open, occasionally it is, is backed up a mile between uh between four-way stops.

It's getting widened, but not at the pace subdivisions are coming in.

It's gonna take Knife River till September just to get the sewer line in for a three-quarters of a mile section.

It just it just simply isn't keeping pace.

This subdivision with one point of ingress egress.

If you do the math, 100 uh single family residences, and with the multiplier of of uh 10 basically, and then you multiply by eight for the others, it's just under 1,500 vehicle trips per day, and that doesn't count the commercial spaces.

The the three commercial spaces maybe ought to be a school, a hospital, and a grocery store.

Because from most of the morning and most of the afternoon, you're you're not gonna get out.

You're not.

So I just uh the pace of of development of infrastructure, the pace of this growth, including this one in the timeline proposed, I just it just doesn't fit.

The schools have spoken up, I won't speak for them.

The Bailey View finally found their voice that they're full.

The comprehensive plan is what got us here.

It is the density has been cited a number of times in the comprehensive plan to the east of Northside Estates.

That's where we come up with the fours and threes.

It's as if the comprehensive plan tells us to do this because it's sacrosanct.

Let's let's move over to the west side of Northside Estates.

The comprehensive plan talked about industrial development.

Comprehensive plan also talks about compatibility of adjoining uses.

And it talks about avoiding abrupt or severe uses.

That's what the comprehensive plan says.

No, it's just a guide.

Look at Rock Placing Company right next to us.

So thank you, sir.

Those my points.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you.

I know the three minutes goes fast, but thanks for your points.

Yeah, thank you.

Yep.

All right.

I think Mr.

Hess is next.

Then who's on deck?

On deck is Robert Simpson and Nicholas Delalow.

Yeah.

Good evening, sir.

Name, address, and then the clock will start.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

My name is Mark Hess.

My address is 12243 Orchard Avenue Nampa.

I'm a lifelong nap been born here in Napa.

And have lived within the proximity of this uh area growing up my entire life.

Um there's a lot of things that brother I'd like to say.

I don't have the time to say it, but I would suggest that you take in consideration all the boxes that the applicant has checked off and plan the zoning, and for their um request to grant this to forward up to you as a body.

And also, if you can consider what property rights are as American citizens to be able to do what we want with our properties, and when we have an applicant that desires to do this type of development and has the support of the city staff and their finance zoning commissioners, I think would be a betrayal of the applicant to deny him the best use and purpose of his property.

You know, this has come up a couple times before, and I've not been involved, but as the Hess family, we have about 70 acres that we need infrastructure for.

Uh CBH is the pathway for that infrastructure.

I want to uh since I've been here all my life, I want to give you a little bit of history.

36 years ago, there was no development north of I84.

Okay, that was the that was the line of the city.

The reason that was the case is there was no sewer and infrastructure beyond I-84.

Um my father was fortunate to keep a company called Edge Technologies, the precursor to Micron Computer to go to Boise.

And so he he uh talked him in a building on 60 acres that he had here in Napa, and that changed the dynamics of Napa.

Some people might not like it.

And I want to say that I've got a lot of lifelong friends in this room that I'm I'm sure disappointed in my testimony today.

But regardless of what happens in the way you vote, uh I hope you take those things in consideration.

I've also seen the idea that we need to slow the growth.

Um we hear a lot about the traffic.

I hate it as much as anybody, but if we slow the growth of homes, the homes are gonna get higher.

They're not gonna get cheaper.

So with that, I hope that you uh approve this uh measure and and go forward with it.

It'll open up a lot of opportunities for our family.

Thank you.

Um yeah, Mr.

Hess.

I I'd like just to clarify on the record your um kind of you you referenced it at the beginning of the testimony at the end, you said it would open up opportunities.

Can you clarify?

Well, what I mean by that is that it's expensive to do the sewer, and just like this previous gentleman spoke of the construction going down Eustach, the reason it's taking so long is deep.

I mean, it's like 40 feet deep, and eventually it'll go clear to Canada.

But when you have someone paying the infrastructure like Mr.

Barton, you know, he's got some big costs.

He's got to bring that sewer under Eustach Road.

Uh he's got to take it up to uh Mason Creek, which will allow a pathway to our property.

And I'd also like to say that Mike Adler, uh, who's a big player in the commercial, the Hess family sold uh Adderson property in December, and our intent was to get him involved because it takes people with deep pockets to develop the infrastructure it takes, and we like the idea that Adler brings jobs in his capacity as a developer in the commercial side.

So, you know, if this wasn't a good thing for residential, it should have never been approved for that.

It should have been approved for commercial of Mr.

Mr.

Chapman had third R property, which is all commercial.

So it's the last vestige of residential in that area.

All the rest of it is commercial.

So I really don't think, and you know, the other thing I'd have to say, if you deny it based on traffic, I think you'd have to deny every application that comes in here because there is not a uh west east, you know, boundary that is not a cluster during rush hour.

You're gonna find that every intersection is is really terrible.

So it's really not fair to pick and choose who gets approved based on bad traffic or uh crowded schools.

But when you have an applicant that's willing to give 15 acres to build a school, I think that's commendable as well as giving right-away.

Our family homed on the corner of Eustach, or excuse me, uh Carcher and Franklin.

ITD bought right away from us.

Obviously, we took it.

They didn't use very that wasn't very impactful, but it's very expensive to buy right away.

And we have an applicant willing to give that much right away.

It's foolish to turn it down in an age where things are so expensive.

So I appreciate the time and I want to congratulate uh the new council members that won it.

You as uh Mr.

Mayor, uh you know, I appreciate the dedication to all of you to stand in here as long as you do, because my butt's going numb sitting down here.

Okay, thank you, Ms.

Hess.

Mr.

Mayor, our next speaker is Robert Simpson, and on deck is Nicholas Delamo and John Chapman.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Robert Simpson, 8713 Eustake Road, NAMP Idaho 83687.

Uh thank you for the discussion that's come across, especially with traffic mitigation.

Uh however, you know, and I think this is a beautiful plan they have out there with a roundabout and all the traffic going through.

But in 2010, I attended a meeting by the highway district, and they said that we would have a five-lane road from Boise through Napa Caldwell Boulevard by 2020.

So excuse me for being cynical, but I don't know when that roundabout will really take place.

More traffic on that road.

How long is it going to before they do that?

And so I think we get the cart before the horse sometimes in these matters.

One of the things they required that the developers do, they had to put in the infrastructure before they built a house.

Coming out on USEC, that's the only access point.

The emergency exits, they can't really use them.

Who knows?

Could be 50 years in the future.

So coming out there, it's it's a problem.

Sweetwater Glen, just across from the street, has five in and outs for their subdivision.

And it's just twice as large as this one instead of just one.

One other thing I think should be addressed is school children.

There's a school just north of there, and elementary school, and it's closed, and all those subdivisions around there have kids can bike to there.

They can uh access it by walking.

But this subdivision, they got a cross Eustake Road, and go along the road, and there's no access along the road uh at all.

So it's gonna be a dangerous situation if school kids try to walk or ride their bike, and I think that should be addressed also.

So my time is up.

I thank you.

And I think this should be approved, but not now.

Thank you, Mr.

Simpson.

Mr.

Mayor, our next speaker is Nicholas Delalow, and on Doug is John Chapman.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor.

Good evening, Council members.

My name is Nicholas Delalouy.

I live um 8767 Eustach Road.

Um, my property is right beside this new development.

Um I am very concerned at the moment.

Uh the traffic on Eustach Road for start off at the moment is ridiculous.

Uh between uh Madison and Northside, the in the morning heading east, it is solid traffic.

You they and they won't let you out.

Heading um west in the evening, it is solid traffic, and they won't let you out.

You can't get out into the traffic, they just won't let you.

Just um just uh east of where they're planning this exit road, there's a hump in um Eustach, and you it's very hard to see traffic coming.

If you put in a subdivision like this before that road is fully developed, there's gonna be major disasters guaranteed.

Um I mean, that amount of houses, these people are beginning going to work in the morning, and a major uh part of them are gonna be heading east.

Any traffic coming heading west, uh they're gonna run into each other.

I mean, it's dangerous as it is at the moment.

And by the way, I've lived here since 1990.

My son was a week old when I moved here, and this is all orchards and abundant wildlife.

Uh we had beautiful water, and before they put the subdivision in on the other side of the road, um, our water was abundant and it was sweet.

Since they put the subdivision in on the other side of our the road, the water table has been damaged, and our water now has a bit of taste to it.

Uh that's just something which can't be helped, I know.

But my major concern is the traffic.

Um my major concern is the traffic and the support, the local support for that community.

Uh opening up that road.

I mean putting up subdivision at the moment.

It'd be dangerous.

With the way the traffic isn't too used to can be developed.

I've lived here quite a long time too, even though I have a funny accent.

But anyway, thank you for the beautiful accent, sir.

Okay.

Yes.

Mr.

Mayor, our last speaker is John Chapman.

Good evening.

I'm John Chapman at address is 17706 North Side Boulevard, Nampa, Idaho.

I've had a cold a little bit, so I try to talk as I can.

Um our families have been there west of that area.

And previously owned the property too.

Had to sell it under an estate deal.

So we just didn't couldn't keep control of it that way.

But uh we've been there a hundred years, since 1920 or more.

And uh we got a third and four generations live in there.

So we don't plan on subdividing or do anything to the West.

We've um we felt like the density that's there just uh south of Eustick has started to develop in the uh north side of states as a larger development with larger lots that should continue a little bit, I think.

Um I think the high density that they're trying to put in here is not conducive to people who would come to a neighborhood that would that would want to stay.

They just have to move every time their family grows.

And so the buildings are not big enough and the lots aren't big enough.

The uh I've met with the Bailey Engineering Company over the years and and met with Corey Barton and uh try to work out a deal where they could get an access off of uh North Side.

And uh their contention is I have to give up something, and I don't know what I have to give up because I'm not the one that's developing.

And so we discussed with the representatives that they need to reduce their lots uh site or the number of houses they put in there.

So I went to an engineering firm and got a design that's not the design, it's not the perfect design, but it's one that would use North Side as an access.

Because the one that they have designed into there now will never happen unless they uh reduce the number of houses they put in there.

It's just not conducive to that area.

The housing density gets higher.

If you look at everything from U State South, all of that that's not being developed in the industrial is still gonna be or has been already in the bigger lots.

And uh I think this would be out of place.

I think that there'd be something they could do differently and still make it look nice.

I know it's not Corey's probably designed the way he builds, and maybe that's something he needs to change.

But I don't think it would match with anything that's going on, especially with the way the north side estates have been developed and the way all of the independent housing along Madison's been done on the on the west side.

And so anyway, so we've done a lot of work with the group and got no response.

And so this is their response is we're not gonna listen to what you want us to do, we're just gonna do what we want.

And it's too bad.

I've been involved.

Thank you.

Um I just want to clarify for the record.

Did you did I hear you saying that you you offered up uh is it a schematic on an in-grass e-grass on North Side?

Are you a I have one?

I usually put this with the packet, but I didn't realize that the packet from Planning Zoning didn't come to you, so I didn't present it again.

But I put a packet with the zoning commission.

And then you know, they turned it down.

Um didn't turn it down because hold on, real quick, sir.

I just want to make sure give staff an opportunity to respond on that point.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

Uh we did receive it uh in the packet for the planning and zoning commission hearing.

It should be in your packet under just comments generally, but it wasn't brought forth as a new uh if you'd like, just so it's on the record and there's not papers being passed around.

I can pull up that original graph that was submitted and scanned in.

Um if that's yeah, just if if you can pull that up maybe after um if you need a second, we can we can circle back to that after public testimony.

I just you're just referencing something.

I just want to make sure that we understand what you're referencing, sir, just out of respect.

I just want to make the point.

We've worked with them for a long time.

It's not anything new.

It's just that they refuse to respond.

I got you.

Okay.

Um appreciate your testimony, sir.

Thank you, Mr.

Simpson.

Oh, wait, is this Mr.

Chapman?

Sorry, sorry.

Mr.

Chapman, thank you.

I hope you I hope you feel better too for me.

All right.

We have one more.

Okay.

Um, an opportunity for public testimony that's not signed up.

I see four or five hands pop it up.

So how about um Margie?

You're you're already standy there, so what else you just go ahead and um give us your name and address, and then if you're um also wanting to testify, you can go ahead and kind of line up behind her so we'll we have an idea of how many people are up and we'll just go on the order in which you line up in front of Margie.

All right.

All right.

Margie Potter, 1811, North Cowboy, and apologize for not signing up.

I was on my way back from Boise, and you know how that goes.

Uh I want to mention I do pick up my grandson from uh high school there three days a week.

So I'm pretty familiar with the area.

My daughter lives in that area as well.

Uh I think I am in favor of this project.

Uh it's exactly what we've been asking for in mixed use projects.

It addresses that missing middle.

It's not um multifamily and it's not high-end houses.

It's uh pretty much workforce housing, you know, housing that people can afford.

And yeah, people do go in there and they get something that they can afford, and then they hopefully progress in life, and then they move into something else and they open up that housing for somebody else to go in there and um be able to own a home as well.

Uh it's it's just got everything um that we've been asking, and it's in the right area, it's in our comprehensive plan.

It's right where the map says it's supposed to be.

Some of you um attended uh the Healthy Impact Nampa um meeting, and you saw what that missing middle is.

Uh, and they're not proposing either one, you know, the multi-family or the high end.

So I think this uh will address a lot of the uh housing that we're needed for the industrial that's in that area as well.

That's all I have.

Thanks.

All right, thank you.

Good evening.

Janna Jones, 3308 West Catalina Lane, Boise, Idaho.

Okay.

Um I'm here on behalf of Adler Industrial.

Um we think this is a very important project for what we are doing and in NAMPA.

Um we are in support of the proposed annexation and resent residential mixed-use zoning for regatta crossing project on Eustake Road.

Um Adler Industrial, as you probably know, has been actively investing and developing industrial real estate throughout NAMPA, and we own more than 400 acres in this very this general area within a few miles of the Regatta Crossing.

In this corridor, we have constructed 15 manufacturing facilities.

Um called out earlier the Stowe building, the JTS Um Keller Supply REM RME Um Electricals building a building as well as convoy.

We have another number of other projects that are looking at that area.

And the new project SPUD, which is tractor supply.

I mean, they obviously have a lot of uh workforce in that area.

Um the growth that we are seeing in industrial and manufacturing in that area needs workforce housing, and that's what this project will supply in that area.

People like to live close to work, so we would try to keep people off the roads as much as much as possible if they were living close to where they were working.

Um this is a we believe that this represents a long-term investment in employment opportunity in that area, and we are um hopeful that you will support the regatta crossing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, I know there's a few more hands up.

Good evening, sir.

You're up next.

Thank you.

Uh my name is Brian Patterson.

I live at 9173 Eustach Road.

I'm just to the west of the property here.

From everything I'm hearing and some of the things that I've I've seen, I think I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that this is going to be approved.

There's a couple things I would suggest.

One thing that hasn't ever been brought up in any of these meetings is in the north west corner of the property.

There's actually a an intermountain gas regulator station that sits there.

There's a 12-inch line and an eight-inch line.

The 12-inch line is a 500 PSI line.

The eight-inch line is a 330 PSI line.

Those those things need protected.

There's a couple of things that happen with them.

First, you have the hazard of them being uh hit by traffic accidents, whatever.

They're the only protection they have currently is a chain link fence.

Basically no protection at all.

The other thing that happens that nobody really is aware of is that that uh regulator station actually whistles.

Um when there's a lot of uh natural gas being used, there's a whistle that comes from that property while I'm out working and in uh my shops and such.

I hear it on a pretty regular basis.

If they could do some type of mitigation to make it more safe, and the second part is is to try to contain that sound so that the folks in the townhouses don't have to listen to that.

That would be uh amazing.

Uh the second part that I talked about earlier is that the on the southeast corner of that property, there's about nine of those uh parcels that are actually in the floodplain.

Um developing the floodplain to me is a little bit on the insane side.

Um the first thing is is that the cost of flood insurance is about between 150 and 200 a month, um, between roughly 1200 and or 12 and 2,000 uh a year for flood insurance.

If we can keep those, you know, raise them the property, whatever it is to avoid that, that would be uh an amazing uh thing.

Keep those those homeowners from uh being blindsided because most people have no idea what flood insurance is, don't know what the floodplain is, and then they buy the property and they're stuck with this bill that they couldn't afford the house hardly to begin with, let alone another two hundred dollars a month on top of that.

Um the third thing is is uh some disturbing things that I I guess I experienced in the planning zoning meeting.

One of the the principles that was uh brought up uh numerous times was this is their property.

Uh we have no right to tell them they can't do this.

And I look at it from the perspective of uh before I go get my car to leave my property.

I look out to the roads so that I can see whether I can even get on the road.

Um we have traffic backed up miles in both directions.

A roundabout will help some.

The problem is is that that traffic goes through the roundabout at Northside, now they're stuck at Madison.

If you get something fixed in Madison, now you're stuck at Franklin.

We're not resolving the problem fast enough, and literally you make it to where you can't get there from here, especially all the construction and closed roads.

But I I would again I think you're gonna approve it.

I don't think there's any question that's what's gonna happen, but I would ask you to mitigate those two things and try to look at the the traffic in the future, try to slow things at least a little bit, let some of this be developed.

Thank you.

Mr.

Mayor, time.

Thank you, sir.

All right.

Actually, um, I'm sorry, hold that real quick.

Sta staff, can you can you reference the floodplain remark?

Mr.

Mayor, um the floodplain in that area, there the floodway, which is the challenging portion to develop, is confined in the channel for um the those there, and so they would be able to fill and remove the the lot areas that would have homes um from the floodplain um with their development, and that would be a typical thing for them to do as part of their development.

Okay, can you also refer to the the gas there is a gas facility there and they will have to um work around that and work with the gas company to to deal with that.

Um, but those are things that would be more at the time of actual construction drawings and how that is dealt with.

Um they'll have to meet all applicable codes and regulations regarding that uh and work with the gas company to address that.

Do you is it is it our practice to ask the gas company to provide comment on something like this when you're aware that it's nearby if they would want the city to have some conditions.

My experience with the gas company is that any modifications that will be necessary, they will require the developer to pay for those modifications.

Um and they typically locate these, they know where our future right-of-ways are and how far out they are.

And so they do typically locate those outside of where the public right-of-ways will be in the future so that they they can minimize the impacts when they put those in.

Um, I have not reviewed this one specifically, but it that is much more of an administrative thing as we go through the design process um that we would address.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions related to the prior testimony?

I just wanted to clarify on the record while it was fresh.

Okay, good.

Thank you.

You're up, sir.

Thank you.

My name's Jim Stewart.

I live on 3115 South Happy Valley Road here in Nampa.

So I was here during the planning and zoning meeting on this, not for this project specifically, but the traffic thing obviously was mentioned, and one thing that was mentioned by one of the commissioners was there was multiple things that seemed like we were kicking the can down the road, so to speak, which again has been kind of addressed this evening.

So I just bring that back up for consideration on that.

But Mr.

Mayor, I had a question.

You mentioned something about the BC zoning and being a little bit vague on some things, and one of your concerns seemed to be inappropriate facilities that I while they're not specified, and so I just wanted a little clarification on that because we also just dealt with orchard acres or whatever it was over on Happy Valley Road that had a a BC area if I remember right, and there's also another hearing coming up here relating to something in that area again, and so that's the same.

Yes, sir.

I can still help.

Yeah, briefly I I um I'm just speaking for myself, but there's lots of entitled uses in the BC.

So once an approval for a BC is given, there's not additional permission sought for a long list of uses.

The BC is quite liberal in its allowances to allow for a multitude of uses.

There's also um permitted conditional uses that would require an additional approval.

The multifamily housing, for example, in the BC would require conditional use permit um that would go before planning and zoning, in which hypothetically the BC entitles someone to at least seek that application, but conditional use.

But some of the uses that are entitled uses are gas stations to homeless shelters to hookah lounges, to lots of uses that um again, there's there's a long list in the BC.

There's also a BN zone neighborhood business that seeks to be more compatible with with like a neighborhood.

Since this is on Ustick, I think the BC is allowing lots of uses.

But since I think the intent of planning and zoning was for commercial to mean what we mean by commercial, um I I would be concerned that it not pivot towards residential, if that makes sense uses.

But that's again me just speculating and trying to protect what I think the intent is because BC could allow gas stations, markets, hair salon, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

But it also allows some surprising uses that I think sometimes when an applicant comes in, well, after the fact to exercise that entitled use, the public sometimes in an uproar say, How come you allowed this?

And and council sometimes says I I wasn't aware BC allowed that and it was an entitled use.

So I just want to make sure we're careful when there's a BC.

Okay, yeah, I appreciate that.

Because so I I guess in consideration that'd be one of my definite um concerns is that maybe you are able to spell something of that out.

And again, because it has a a bit of a relationship to my area and some of the things that are going on with uses that just really wouldn't be consistent.

So I just asked you guys to consider that.

Yes.

And just keep that in mind for our next testimony that's coming up as well.

Gotcha.

Thank you very much.

All right, thank you.

Appreciate it, sir.

Just on that note, can we for staff and for our own internal purposes re-review the BC zoning allowable uses?

I in all our time on council, I don't think we've ever approved a hookah lounge, and I just don't know why it's I don't know uh legal can speak to it.

I don't know why we even allow it in the first place as a CUP or allowable.

Uh I think it's time we just go through and scratch off some non-desirable uh establishments if we could.

Sure.

I think at the next time we do a uh zoning map uh zoning update, we can do that.

So the thing is you wouldn't have to approve a hookah lounge because it's already an entitled use.

Well, and that's that's the problem.

I feel every meeting that we have an approval like this.

Yeah, what all of us I think have raised flags of we want this strike, we want this strike, and I know six consistently that we strike every time.

Gotcha, yeah.

So I think we can consider that.

Thank you.

All right, we still have a few more people not signed up, but ready, ready and eager to speak.

So um good evening, ma'am.

How are you?

All right, take it, Brad.

Give us your name address again.

Uh my name is Ellie Lyons.

I'm uh I live at uh 8848 East Hyacinth.

Um, and I'm um in a subdivision that's directly across from where this development will be at.

Um, with all due respect, the people that have spoken before that have given their addresses in favor of this live nowhere near where we're at.

They don't at the end of the day, we are living out the problems that we're dealing with here with the overcrowded roads and the overcrowded schools.

And I know that um Mr.

Barton has said that he's going to you know donate a plot of land for an elementary school, which is fantastic and easy for him to do, but it still has to have a bond that gets approved, and we all know how difficult it is to get bonds approved, which is I think why the value of school district is raising some concerns about the school system being overcrowded.

Um, and on a on a more personal note, um, I know that Idaho, Idaho gives the cities uh Idaho Code gives the cities the right to um uh to determine what what gets developed when um but part of the responsibility is to protect property rights and property values.

Um we've lived in our home for just short of four years, and because of the developments that the council has approved right adjacent to us, our property has declined in value over the last four years.

As of two weeks ago, our property is still not worth what we paid for it four years ago because of the developments that are going in.

So that personal note, I'm just asking you to listen to the pleas of the people who are living in this area who are who are directly affected with this day in and day out.

Please protect our children from the the traffic is atrocious there already, and now you're talking about adding even more.

Please protect our children from it and the crime rates in our in these two in the in these few subdivisions that are right there on the on on that intersection.

The crime rates have already increased in four years because of the the multifamily dwellings that have gone in and the lower um income housings that have gone in around us.

It is directly affecting all of us.

So please listen to our pleas and do not approve this right now.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, ma'am, I just want to make sure your address you said is it immediately to the north?

I just we're across Eustach to the north from where this development's going in.

Gotcha.

Okay, thank you.

Mayor Gabon, what was what was your address?

8848 something.

Uh Madam Clerk, do you have it?

The address we just want to confirm it.

Was it can you 48 East Hyacinth?

8848 East Hyacinth.

Thank you.

High Ascent.

Hyacinth, yeah, it's like the flower.

There it is.

Yes, highest synthesis.

Okay.

S I and T H.

Okay.

Very good.

Hello, sir.

You're up.

Hello.

Hi, my name is Mark Mitchell.

I live at 12355 Landow Way, Napa, Idaho.

Um, to be sympathetic with everybody, yes.

Traffic is bad, but it's a bad period.

I don't care where you live in Nampa.

Um, 12th Avenue is an absolute zoo.

South Nampa can be crazy.

Everything is nuts around here.

Um first and foremost, I am for this development.

Reason being is like Mr.

Hess said, you know, you gotta go 40 feet deep.

Corey's gonna cut that bill.

Um bottom line as time goes on in our city grows.

And with what's happened not only with the city but with the state and the tax cuts, we know our taxes are have to go back up to cover some of these expenses.

But at this point in time, we've got highway 2026 that is gonna be going in.

They're already uh dedicated to that, putting things through there, which will make that flow a little bit easier.

They are doing some things.

I have traveled that corridor many, many times.

You do have to be careful on what street you pick to go up and down north and south on.

Um it's a good laid-out community.

I think the big thing is the townhouses.

We've complained so many times about affordability for our young people.

That's where it's going.

And if you remember over two years ago, I stood up here and said that is where it's headed for people that want to buy a home because it's the only cost-effective way to build and get home buyers in.

But it's not just them, it's also our seniors.

They have over 10,000 people turning 62 a day and retiring, getting close to retire.

Some of them want to sell and downscale.

Some of these communities could be nice for them.

There's the green pass, there's I know it's a basketball court, probably will turn out to be a pickleball court.

But it those are the kind of things that we need to remember in these these developments that we're approving or not approving.

I mean, we just turned down a beautiful master plan community last council meeting.

I would hate to see somebody that put the effort and time into build what you said was your comprehensive plan.

And then tell them no.

Much like last council meeting.

That was wrong.

They put a lot of money into that.

They put a lot of money and effort into that.

And I think you need to take accountability for that, Ms.

Jangler.

You had enough people from your district.

I will applaud you.

You stood up for them on that one.

But it is one of those things that you as a city council are our voice.

Thank you.

You did your voice for your for your constituents.

But this one here, it is what it is.

And our taxes are going to go up and have to pay for things as things go on in the future.

We all know it.

We're all going to complain about it too.

That's just human nature.

But I thank you for your time.

And it does not go unnoticed.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, I don't see anybody standing up.

Does anyone does anyone else intend to testify before we close public hearing?

Just want to make sure.

Going once.

Going twice.

Okay.

Um at this time, actually, not closed public hearing.

We're gonna have the applicant come up.

And we'll allow, I know a lot was said.

We usually keep this the five minutes, but out of respect for all the things that you as you're responding to the issues you heard.

I think it'll it it is time um well you so I'm I'm if we have to go a little over five as long as you're responding.

I just want to make sure you're responding to everything here.

So we'll go ahead and start.

Yeah.

Yes, absolutely.

Um thank you again for your time.

Um, and um I really would like to thank and acknowledge the neighbors for their comments.

Um before I respond to their comments or really quickly, I kind of want us to take a step back and talk about the big picture and why this project really matters for this area.

It's a key component for the development of the dedication of the right-of-way along Eustack Road.

This right-of-way is critical to long-term vision.

A lot of the traffic issues that we heard.

This um roundabout, the expansion of the five lane will help the traffic in this area.

Um, this also provides essential sewer infrastructure that Mr.

Hess has testified this evening that will open up a dead area for the proposed industrial uses to the south of the site, which will bring jobs.

Another big court big picture consideration is the proximity to the planned emerging um industrial area.

A considerable considerable amount of industrial um development has occurred in this area with additional phases and title for more development plan to come.

These employment centers will bring hundreds of jobs over time, and with growth comes a clear and increasing need for workforce housing, providing housing options in your major employment areas that people can live closer to.

This reduces regional traffic, supports local businesses, and creates a more balanced and complete neighborhoods.

This project directly helps meet the need for placing housing in an appropriate location, close to jobs and services.

And now taking a real close look at the site.

Um, our since our last application, our team has worked extremely hard to address the concerns that were raised during the previous application a couple years ago.

And we truly listened.

I don't even want to have to admit how many times I watched um the hearing minutes unfold, um, but we really wanted to fully understand the feedback and expectations.

So we worked diligently to deliver a special high-quality development where the details truly matter and meet your comprehensive plan.

We feel it's compatible with the surrounding development, thoughtfully designed, attractive, and functional, and a place that um future residents will um love to call home.

Now, with that said, let me address some of the key concerns of the neighbors.

First, um, Mr.

Chapman.

Um, I have met with Ms.

Mr.

Chapman multiple times and his brother, and they're both wonderful to talk to.

It was truly interesting to hear their stories about growing up in the area, farming this land with the family and gradually watching it transition over time.

They sold key portions of their family farm over the years, along from Carcher Road to the subject site to various industrial developers, including Adler Industrial.

Um, at this time, Mr.

Chapman sold the properties CBH homes.

It was understood the site was intended for recher future redevelopment.

Mr.

Chapman has expressed a desire to see the development developed with more with one acre lots, as he's previously testified.

Well, we respect that perspective.

Large estate lots really are not compatible with sites adjacent to or close proximity to planned industrial uses like ours to the south and west.

And the proposed elevat instead reflects a more appropriate transition and land use pattern consistent with surrounding residential employment growth.

One of the other things was discussed was affordability.

For the townhomes, they're going to start in the low 200,000 dollar range.

They're going to range from 14 um 1,471 to up to over 2,000 square feet.

The R4 lots will start around 400,000, square footage ranging from fifth 1,500 nine and up to 2300.

And then for the RC RS6 lots, it will be 482,000.

They're around 1800 up to 27.

As we mentioned, we revised our commercial to make sure that it's meeting the 5% with the GERCOMP plan is needing.

Other than that, oh I only have four more seconds, but um I just want you to know how hard and much time and thought and really heart we I put into this development, our team put into this development.

I really think all those thoughtful details that it's gonna make a beautiful, beautiful project for this area.

And with on that great note, um, I'll again thank you for your time and your consideration.

And I'll stand for any questions that you may have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mayor Yes, uh Councilman Griffin.

I've got a few just in terms of a development agreement.

Sure.

One of the concerns was talking about a gas line and a whistling issue.

Is there plans to remedy that problem?

Yes, um, Mayor, um, council member.

So I know about the gas line because I don't like it.

It's right next to my beautiful monumentation for our um, so we're gonna be working with the inner mountain gas.

I think that we'll be using um different fencing, um, obviously some landscaping mitigation, so it's not such an eyesore.

As far as the sound, I'm not aware of that.

I've been out to the site multiple times.

I'm sure the um the neighbors uh have heard it, um, and then we're more than welcome to work with Intermountain Gas because that would not be um something favorable for our future residents to have to hear.

Thank you.

The school site uh was it committed to Valley View School District or is it committed to be a school?

And the reason I bring that up, one of the comments was the difficulty with bonding, and I wouldn't disagree, and I know uh that there are a few other programs similar to Deer Flat Ranch, the reason that they had that outlined as a school facility, whether it be for the NAMPA school district or public charter school or private school outright, uh, is that something that the applicant would be interested in dedicating that 15 acres to a school period?

Or is it specifically for Valley View?

Um my mind, I just think the sooner the build out for students the better, rather than so uh mayor, council member, that that's a great question.

So my understanding is that they're under in a memorandum of understanding and agreement that was signed by Joey at Valley View School District and Mr.

Barton for it to be dedicated to a school site.

I'm I know that we have discussed opening to other charter schools and possibilities, but I was not involved with the agreement, so I don't know how finite and what the um you know what the regulations and what they agreed upon.

So um, but I think that is a great idea to look at different possibilities since I know bonds can be very um cumbersome.

And Joey at the Valley View School District, he I just I think the world I he's got in a tough place, and it's so hard.

And so I think that anything that we can do, even if um providing um land is uh is a great starting point to help for the Valley View School District.

And I appreciate that.

And whether it be this site or future sites, I know there's an appetite in definitely the private space and the charter school space for uh having those locations where they are built out.

So uh that's great to know.

Maybe conversation for later on.

Thank you so much.

The child care, the child and pedestrian crossing across Eust.

I know that's more of a R stuff and engineering's requirements.

Is there any plans or expectations of the developer to install those hawk beacons or anything like that in order for them to get to their schools?

Um so the the city with our roundabouts, we install um not hawks but RRFBs at all of our roundabouts, and so when those roundabouts go in, um those would be installed at that time.

Um until that time, I don't think it would necessarily be appropriate.

Um likely with the volume of traffic there, um the district would likely bust that um probably even after those improvements are in.

Um and we could certainly have those conversations with them, but that would be the likely outcome.

Thank you.

And then the last question is the applicant willing or open to the idea of making that park an open space in phase one rather than phase three.

Mayor, um, council member, I think that would be a fine condition to place.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

And then once again, we see a lot of CBH in future applications.

I think uh we would all appreciate in phase one, just so it's a uh convenient accessible amenity, not at the end of five ten year development.

Mayor and council member, um, I super appreciate the feedback.

I I will not be handling all of CBH products, but I will make sure the any projects that I do, I will make sure that those amenities are in phase one for you.

Thank you.

Any other questions for the applicant?

Mayor.

Um a couple things.

Yes, phase one, that was one of my things.

And then the the property that's on the very south end that's oh yeah, and thank me for not bringing a taut lot.

I no, I yes, I agree with you on that.

I like functional green space and um those are always great.

A thorn in my side.

But um I I do appreciate this that has been developed here, but that very southern piece of property you have in that um little cul-de-sac.

I don't know.

The low point um like page 550, yeah, yep, that thing.

That's a that's a home, correct?

It mayor, councilwoman, it yes, it is at a home.

Okay.

For me, I I live in a very similar, I live in a loop like that, and I am the corner piece.

So for my kids, it's fantastic because we have a lot of front yard that nobody else uses.

But when I look at this and I look at functional green space, knowing that I just feel like if if this piece was gone, they had all of this amenity space to use, and it would be really great if we could make the pathway go all the way around so everybody in the development can utilize that pathway.

So like instead of just having it on one side, if that lot was gone and it was all the way down and then it came up this other side, it just would create such a better space for everybody to use.

I just don't know how anyone's gonna use this little corner spot where we're counting it as green space behind somebody's house.

Oh, I I see what you're saying.

Okay.

Um yeah, I think that's where um mayor um councilwoman we have some of the open space, um, some of the pathway connection points.

Um I guess I don't understand where you're wanting the pathway to be um moved over onto the other side of the development, uh bordering the east property line.

I love I love it on the on the west side, but if it came back up the east side as well, so it kind of just cornered the whole outer space of it of the entire lot.

That is correct.

Yeah.

Um I think you know, on I would have to look at see if we have enough room to sh um to move over the lot, but I I think that would probably be uh we could accommodate that.

Okay.

I think that was uh yep, thank you.

I have a question for staff.

Um might be relevant for the applicant to remain.

Any other questions for the applicant though, before I go to staff?

Okay.

Um can I get clarification on the egress ingress egress off USTIC?

There's an emergency access point to North Side, but is that not a recommended ingress egress because it would be too too close to the roundabout?

Correct.

Yeah.

With a project this size, would you generally recommend an ingress egress to generally due to the shape of this project?

That would be very challenging just because of the short frontage there on North Side.

If it were a rectangular project like Sweetwater Glen that was referenced, absolutely it would have you know additional full access points or public roadway accesses.

With the shape of what they have, um I would say they have they have provided what we will allow under our code as well as with the substreets provided for that future interconnectivity that will allow for the ultimate um distribution of the traffic as those other neighborhoods develop adjacent or other properties develop.

Gotcha.

Okay, thanks, Daniel.

I and as I another thing I will note is that um you know, as we review these from a staff perspective, we are looking at um the the ultimate build out of how, and that's why we place those stub streets.

Oftentimes, you know, the neighbors that come in after those stub streets have been put in, the the neighborhoods are are unhappy with them being connected to.

Um but there is a purpose and it does allow for a better distribution of the traffic when we when we utilize those stub streets in the future.

Is there a deceleration lane on Ustick approaching this?

Or would there be a dedicated left turn lane off Usted?

So there yes.

So they they are their traffic study calls for a dedicated westbound left turn lane and a dedicated yes, dedicated westbound left turn lane and a dedicated right bound east turn lane into the development.

Okay, thank you.

Mayor, yes, I move to close public hearing.

There a second, second okay.

We have a motion, a second.

All in favor?

I alright.

Mayor?

Yes.

For a motion.

Yes, motions in order.

Mayor, I move to approve the annexation and zoning as presented on the screen with the conditions, recommended conditions of approval and proposed findings as well as and in addition to the following additional development agreement.

Uh conditions, first off, the open space park area being dedicated in phase one.

Um there sounds like there's already a commitment to have that 15 acres for a valley view school.

If there is the possibility a school, but it's already a dedicated land.

I won't require that it'd be to any school.

Uh I would like to strike the following uses on BZ zone allowed and make them conditional use, permitted zoning or um businesses, homeless shelter, hookah lounge, hotel motel, liquor store, mobile home park.

Can you sl can you slow down for the clerk?

Sorry.

I apologize for it over.

Homeless shelter.

Okay.

Hookah lounge.

Hotel, motel, holiday in liquor shop.

Mobile home park.

Mobile home sales.

A nursing home.

Tattoo parlor.

Tobacco shop.

Vape lounge store, etc.

And there was one that I wrote out starts with the letter M, but I don't know what it is.

And I'm not going to require you to put that down unless somebody else can find it.

You say the letter N as in M as in Mary.

Mortuary and Mortuary, thank you.

Also, Mayor, if we could add to the list would be petroleum storage.

Yeah.

Uh hold on.

We we have a motion.

You're you're recommending that he add to his motion.

I agree to the substance.

I agree to that.

Yeah.

Point and patrolling statement station.

Point of order.

A CUP for petroleum storage or not allowed at all?

Not allowed.

Okay.

So I think Councilman Griffin's motion was to move all the time.

Otherwise, it's not a commercial.

You could have a fueling station, a normal gas station, but not tank storage, not bulk tank storage.

I'm fine having it being not allowed.

Not allowed.

Petroleum storage.

The others I had as a conditional use permit.

I don't want to bind future councils.

Okay.

Maybe somebody wants a hookah lounge there.

I don't know why, but maybe they will.

So how about we how about we take the motion the second and then during deliberation we can at the end of the motion?

Unless you have other conditions you'd like to do.

I think just from a point of order, I think you're inviting that's my motion.

Okay.

We have a motion, we have a second.

Now is there discussion on the motion?

Mayor.

Yes.

I'm mostly in agreement with uh the exclusions on the BCE.

With the exception of the uh tattoo shop.

If a market wants a tattoo shop, I think they should be allowed to have a tattoo shop.

These are not I feel like we're being way too legalistic or whatever.

Um vape shop if the market drives a vape shop.

I don't vape.

But um of the things that I feel like we're getting too uh off in the weeds about um being restrictive.

Um I would add a planned nursery that doesn't fit there if uh that would be agreeable to add to the motion and um a veterinarian doesn't seem to fit there either, but uh maybe a small vet shop would work uh but uh the rest of them I agree with I would be amenable to adding the um nursery as a listed or a limited condition.

I think a vet shop would be okay, a little one, not necessarily a full-blown boarding s boarding for vet, but I don't know how we limit that to a certain size veterinarian clinic.

Okay, so we have a motion second.

If I if I hear councilman Griffin right, um your preference is to allow tattoo and before that is not my preference.

No, no, okay.

Um but I will allow adding the but add planned nursery and veterinarians as a C UP.

That's correct.

Okay.

So we're not amending the motion right now, we're just discussing the original motion.

Is there any other discussion or feedback comments from council?

Mayor, I'm still needing that a lot gone, and then I want that walkway on that other side.

And I think that that would also assume uh assuming that this eventually will be another subdivision abutting this, that walkway would help prevent a little bit of the.

I know you're putting your screen in some people in the council might know what you're referring to, some might not.

So can you can you just respond on the east side?

Okay.

That lower asking about.

Yeah, that lower lot gone to allow that to be a more functional green space, and then to allow for the walkway to go up the east side, and then that would also create a buffer to an adjacent subdivision in the future.

So uh if I hear you right, um you would prefer for that lot, which is a single family detached home, I think, to be removed and converted into green space part of the green space with the pathway standing on the east side.

Is that clear to council councilwoman Jangula is stating?

That's clear, but I don't I respectfully I understand the pathway at the cul de sac and the potential of that cul-de-sac becoming roadway.

Um, but adding a pathway to the backyards uh for me in experience uh becomes a blind area, blind alley.

Uh I don't think it creates a safe zone.

And so I think the pathway coming back to the cul-de-sac and folks using the sidewalks is a much safer neighborhood, not knowing what's going to happen on the east side.

Uh so I understand the greenscape and the pathway connecting back to the cul-de-sac, which may turn into an ultimate you know drive aisle.

The other part I I think we're reaching and potentially creating a uh future nuisance.

So just having the with the park or which with which portion the pathway or the park with the pathway north of the cul-de-sac going north-south.

And I would I would be in agreement with that.

I think placing an additional pathway along the back side.

And I don't I just don't know how they would be able to fit their lots in that way either if you have a 15-foot path all the way along the back.

But I would I personally would like to see that lot removed as well, made that a green space in the bottom southern portion of it, but not necessarily the pathway.

It's not my motion, but yeah.

She can move on still ask them.

All right, so we have a motion and a second.

I understand the motioner uh stated uh willingness to amend to include plan nursery and veterinarian, if I understand that right.

Um does the motioner and seconder want to amend their original motion to include those as conditionally used permits permitted uses.

Yes.

Okay, that's fine.

Okay.

Okay, what was that again?

So um based on the comments that you offered up, Councilman.

Uh I think you mentioned planned nursery and a veterinarian.

So those were um added to the list, however, tattoo and vape lounge were not removed from the motioner.

Mayor, um follow-up yes, there again.

I'm just gonna say this.

I'm a very conservative person, but I believe in our rights as well.

It's like I like firearms.

We had one hearing a few years back where they didn't want any gun shops in there.

I'm like, no, I like guns.

Some people like tattoos.

If um we're not the morality police in city council, and um I think that I I think this project's great.

I will support this project, but I would like to see those uses added to the CUP at least.

Otherwise, I can't support it.

They they were originally going to be added to as a C UP, not an outright.

Yeah, so I understand the motion that um they're not prohibitions, they're added to conditional use permits.

So that I think the request for those uses would go before planning zoning.

Is that right, Rodney?

Okay.

Um so they're not prohibited uses, they're just conditionally conditional uses.

And I just want to make sure the motion's understood.

Yes.

Well, part of the difference is to understand the commercial is inside the community.

Uh where if it's a commercial center and access is from uh the traffic roads into the commercial center, there's a difference in terms of what's offered.

When when you pull into the community, uh then it can be an affront to those who purchase and then find out uh there's an offering of of different uses that they didn't realize was was possible.

And I think what the mayor has raised as far as being cognizant of the community business side is for us to err on a little bit of uh making it community friendly.

Uh if it was a straight shopping center, it would have a com commercial use with minimal restrictions.

That's my comments and input.

So I would also like to amend my motion to include councilwoman Jangula's request to have that southern portion lot removed and turned into green space.

I hope one lot doesn't kill full project.

Thank you.

So I would second that.

Okay.

So did you get that another amendment?

Yeah.

Mayor question for staff.

Yes.

When is the timeline for this um this road improvement here on Ustick for the five lanes?

Following the US D corridor.

Yeah, do we have a timeline for that section though?

So currently um it's not within the five-year funded plan.

Um and so we don't have a specific uh funding and construction year identified for this section.

The roundabout there has unfortunately waterways on three legs of it, and so it will be a relatively expensive uh improvement.

Um it is in the things that we are considering, but we have not I there is not an identified funding year for that.

Um the focus on U Stick is obviously coming from uh Highway 16 heading to the west.

Um and so this will come, um, but we don't have a specific funding year within the five-year plan right now.

Okay, thank you, Daniel.

Uh so we're planning on putting this in before any widening on this road.

So pretty much this almost this entire thing or this entire thing will be here prior to those road improvements.

Thank you.

All right, so we you're gonna have your emotion again.

No, okay no, not unless I'm asked at this point.

Uh a question for Crystal.

Crystal, I believe the roundabout at Carcher Northside is complete in 28, 27.

Mayor, Councilman Griffin.

The roundabout at Carter and Northside will start at the beginning of 27 and should be complete halfway through 28 or so.

Hopefully by the end of 28, but or 27, but will that cause a complete shutdown of that intersection or will there be rerouting and portions of it?

I I already know the answer, but just for the sake of the intersection of Northside and Karcher will stay open during construction the entire time.

There will be a closure for the widening of Northside between Kartcher and Birch.

Thank you.

All right.

Um Madam Clerk.

Um I just got it on the make sure you have it on the screen.

Look at that.

Or or planning uh staff wrote that out.

Okay, thank you.

I I get the thumbs up.

So um Mr.

Mayor.

Yes.

Sorry to interrupt you.

I have one last thing.

Um Councilman Griffin.

I don't I don't really think that I think that should be C UP based off of if we go to uh um like somebody building a two-story business and they're living upstairs like a restaurant owner or something.

But other than living in your business, I think that's kind of sketchy.

Um would you be willing to add that to the CUP list as well?

What is what's under D dwelling with the business?

Is that a multi-use?

Dwelling combined with the business.

Yeah, like a law office and someone lives in the back or the business in the front.

But would that so the only hesitation I have with that would that then exclude any sort of businesses if somebody I have a funny situation in my neighborhood, somebody sells couches out of their garage.

It's called like I don't even know what it's called, but it comes up on Google Maps.

I don't know.

Would we outlaw that?

Can you please pass that address on to us?

Uh no, no.

If you look on Google Maps there, we'll set up a different but I think that's what this would be excluding, correct?

Is somebody I don't understand what the point of it being there is if it's not allowed to happen anyway.

Mayor and and counsel.

Uh um so I think it is allowed in the BC zone, and and what they're suggesting is not to remove or to remove that or condition it or something.

So what what this is is primarily a commercial business with the option of a residence.