Congratulations.

Okay, well, welcome everybody.

We're gonna go ahead and get started now.

Um I guess it uh do we need to do a roll call?

Adam Clerk.

Dean.

Copeland?

Kirkman.

Here Morgan here.

Keyhoe.

Here.

Turner.

Daffer.

Miller.

Garner.

Here.

Eight present.

Thank you.

Um I'm Matt Garner.

I'm the vice chair.

We want to excuse Commissioner Miller, who is out today, so I'll be running as chair tonight.

Um and before we get started, I just wanted to uh I guess recognize and acknowledge the tremendous loss that we've suffered this week this past week.

Um with the passing of our mayor.

Um there's I think I can say on behalf of the commissioners here, um our sympathies and our heartfelt sympathy goes out to staff and the mayor's friends and especially his wife and children and his family um and their suffering we know when our hearts go out to them, and so we just wanted to acknowledge that and recognize that and offer our sympathies.

Um so we'll go ahead and get started.

Um we're gonna change the order a little bit.

We're gonna call on um the transportation director, um Crystal Craig is going to make a presentation.

So we'll turn the time over to her for her presentation.

That is brutally short.

Good evening, Mr.

Chair and Commissioners.

Thank you for having me here today for the record.

I am Crystal Craig, Director of Transportation for the City of Nampa.

I've also brought brought Pearson DeWitt, he's the program manager for HDR, they're the consultant leading the uh raise grant.

Um gosh, it had been almost two years ago now.

We received City of Nampa received it, it was our largest transportation grant zero match to date, a five million dollar grant from FHWA to look at what we called North Nampa.

Um revitalization's um presentation.

Or North Nampa revitalization is what we were calling it.

North is highly subjective.

This area roughly is bound south of the freeway, north of the railroad tracks.

Um the west side was uh north side and the east side was Garity or Sugar right in there.

So we called it north, but it's very much so not north.

It's much closer to central Nampa.

The raise program schedule, it's a highly complex project.

There's actually eight definitive projects in that, and and one of those projects even has five sub projects out of it.

So this is five million dollars, but we're getting quite a bit of bang for our buck.

Um of the eight projects, I'm gonna have Pearson go through them a little bit more in depth to let you guys know where we're at.

We're about two-thirds of the way through our program right now.

Our estimated completion date for this is March first of twenty twenty-seven.

Um so as you can see the stars about where we're at.

These dates have slid a little bit forward and backwards depending upon which project we kind of do a crime of opportunity, so to speak.

Um something is progressing, we try and finish that off.

Um but ultimately that that hard date of March first is our plan deliverable for each of them.

So I'll pass it off to Pearson right now.

He's gonna go through the different projects and let you know which ones are planning level.

Which ones are gonna give us concept documents and then which one we'll take all the way through final design, and then I'll come back and wrap it up to talk about funding.

Thank you, Crystal.

Pierce and DeWitt, HDR Engineering.

As Crystal mentioned, I'm gonna cycle through some of the projects that are in process and have wrapped up to this point.

The first project is uh multimodal analysis and rehabilitation.

It's it's in the North Nampa area, and it's effectively uh a series of smaller projects that are gonna identify and repair existing deficiencies with curb ramps and sidewalks in North Nampa for ADA compliance.

There's a lot of curbs and sidewalks that have fallen into disrepair, and these projects are going to help revitalize and fix those deficiencies that were identified through the planning process.

The design is complete on this.

We did have five distinct projects broken out that are all in a separate package that can be delivered and uh built on independent timelines.

The construction funding is still needed, and we'll look to go for grants as those become available down the line.

The next project is more of a planning document that's tied towards transit and mobility options throughout the entirety of NAMPA.

It's a it's basically a guidebook to help inform how to place mobility transit stations throughout NAMPA based off of the type of improvements that are proposed, as you'll see here.

Um Americans with Disability Act crossings and path updates, placement of bike racks, specific lighting at locations where these may be installed, benches, seats, uh, shelter structures, and other small amenities associated with anything that you would have associated with the transit facility along the roadways.

Right now we are in the process of updating the design recommendations for the mobility hub.

It does identify site specific measures as far as roadway functional classification and other adjacent land use characteristics.

This image here is a rendering of what it could look like for a three-lane section with on street parking.

It does integrate transit into all your um facilities throughout NAMPA.

And some of the big keys associated with the bus stops are wayfinding, community bulletins, um, potential for trash receptacles, scooter parking, and then adjacent vehicle parking.

As the schedule showed, we're in the process of getting close to wrapping this up.

We are scheduled to have a third Thursday pop-up meeting in June.

Uh and that's in process right now with NAMPA's PI staff.

We've been working with Kelly and Casey, and they've been helping out a tremendous amount.

So that's been really really helpful.

Oh, I guess I should have just clicked the next slide.

So this is everything I just told you about.

So the next project is one that I think is garnered some interest with the citizens because we've done the public involvement process for it already.

It's the uh, and I know Crystal's excited about it.

It's the the widening of the Broadmoor Bridge just south of 4th Street.

It's the current bridge is only wide enough for one lane crossing right now, and it's uh it's constrained along Indian Creek.

So the design that we're doing is going to widen that to accommodate large vehicles because of the there's a decent amount of land use improvements that are taking place where the old golf course used to be, some of which are associated with the city's improvements.

I know that.

And so uh we have identified the widening of the bridge to accommodate large vehicles associated with that anticipated use.

We're also gonna be installing a uh rapid uh an RRFB rapid, what is it, rapid rectangular flashing beacon on the north side of Broadmoor on the north of 4th Street, and then a signals going in on north side and fourth with the design.

We have completed the concept design and we are in the process of advancing the environmental process to get approval for the federal dollars, hopefully, that we can obtain in the future.

And right now we're past concept and we're in preliminary design on that.

Some of the things that have happened up to this point is we've gone through an environmental assessment.

One of the big wins that took place early on in this project is there was the potential for the rocks in Indian Creek to be a uh determined to be historical, which would have required us to do some pretty extensive replacement of the rocks in kind in the creek uh through our research.

We found out that they weren't deemed historic, so we're available able to go forward without having to do that environmental process, which felt like a pretty big win for the project process, actually.

So that was that was good news.

As I previously mentioned, there was a public involvement that took place online in January.

It ran uh January 7th through January 21st on NAMPA's website.

The general sentiment of the project is everybody's very supportive of it.

They're looking forward to it getting built.

A lot of people were like, well, let's get it built as soon as we can.

And they they were in general in favor of the placement of the signal on north side and forth.

Moving on to the next project's project two, which is a project that's um in process right now, a little bit past preliminary or concept design and moving into preliminary.

It is looking to rehab 6th Street to reconstruct curb rents and install a side path from North Side all the way to 16th Avenue and down 2nd Avenue.

We do have the geotechnical engineering complete, the surveying complete.

The concept in coordination with the city of Nampus staff has been approved.

Um we did go for some grant funding through the last cycle of available grant fundings for this type of project, and we were unsuccessful, but that doesn't mean we won't try to find additional funds as time goes on.

Some of these images you're seeing here up on the screen are the basic layouts associated with some of the planned improvements that we have with respect to providing marked crossings with our RFBs and enhancing some of the crossings along the railroad.

We have been in discussions with the railroad, and we are continuing to coordinate with them to make sure that we're meeting all their compliance measures associated with the proposed crossings in concert with the city.

As indicated on the slide, we're advancing the preliminary design.

The roadway and drainage associated with this has been on the roadway, it is pretty flat.

The drainage is there's some some groundwater issues associated with the design, but we're working through that as we go through the concept design.

There is one structure that we're going to look to improve.

It's kind of that middle photo that you're seeing there that we're going to look to provide some additional width and get it up to current standards.

And we are in the process of advancing the environmental documentation on this.

The next project is the project project three, it's the 14th Avenue Railroad Overpass, Active Transportation Bridge.

This one's got a heavy involvement with the uh the Union Pacific Railroad because it would be proposing to go right over 14th Street as it would tie into the downtown core.

The alternatives we identified during scoping were to do nothing.

Uh make improvements to the existing 16th Street Bridge for ADA compliance measures.

We we did look into that and we found out that the improvements that will be required to take place to make that compliant would be substantial to the point to where it's almost a scenario where you need to just replace the bridge.

So we are no longer advancing that alternative, but we are still looking at uh pedestrian bridge at the railroad at 14th Avenue and and just recently in coordination with UP.

I know it's not showing up on the slide here, but this kind of happened in the last couple weeks.

We're considering doing an underpass because the overpass has been met with some resistance from the city of Nampa as far as placers in their right-of-way.

And so we're gonna investigate whether or not we can go underground.

There will be some groundwater challenges.

I know that one 11th Avenue was reconstructed a wise back.

Um, there was definitely some groundwater issues associated with that.

So we're gonna have to look into that.

And then we'll still consider what to do as far as um looking at overpass options as listed here with a gradual incline.

Um there is some line of sight issues associated with the existing UPRR observation tower, and they did indicate that they have concerns about like pedestrian trespassing, um, even though access is not super tight out there right now.

That's something that they might be looking to try to enhance as time goes on.

And then the vertical clearance, they require almost 24 foot of vertical clearance over that track.

So that's a lot of ground to gain as you try to get over that.

So those are some of the challenges we have.

We're still in the preliminary phase on that, and we're coordinating with NAMPA and UP on those proposed improvements.

This next project, project four, actually ties into the east side of project two, but it is being done as a standalone set of plans because of funding that has been obtained through VRT to do this improvement.

It's going to improve some of the sidewalk on 6th Street between 14th and 16th.

It will look to add a bus shelter and a pedestrian hybrid beacon near park place, as you're seeing in this image right here.

This is kind of the preliminary engineering drawing.

Sorry if it's a little too engineery for you, but this was the best thing we had for us for this presentation.

Uh, one of the things is that we have completed the concept.

We have been advancing the environmental process through VRT through the FTA.

I'm waiting to get a response back from VRT as to the status of that document, but they've been they've been coordinating with us on making those submittals to the FTA.

And we are advancing to preliminary design because we cannot go to final design until we have the environmental approvals.

Unlike many of the other projects in the RAISE program, we do have construction funding secured.

VRT has provided the funds, and we are looking to get this thing started in construction near the end of the summer, pending the environmental approval process.

So this will be the first project under the RAISE program that actually will get constructed.

Moving on to the next project is project five, it's Indian Creek Pathway Extension.

This is one that I'm pretty excited about.

We we developed conceptual alternatives to install 1.6 mile Indian Creek Pathway Extension from Second Avenue to the other side of the spur near Third Street.

We've completed that.

It's been bought off by the city of Nampa, and and we we had pretty good coordination with the parks department as well.

So they've been pretty intricately involved up to this point to help us get the concept adopted.

Um as things go forward and funding becomes available, we'll look to do improvements on a basically on a as-needed basis when fun when that funding does become available.

And then lastly, is the first and third railroad underpass improvement projects.

I don't have a whole lot to report here because we just haven't started anything yet.

Um yeah, I think the picture's worth a thousand words, right?

I know that's not the actual is that an actual photo of okay.

I take it back.

That is an actual photo of something that's happened at first and third, and we know it gets struck a lot.

So there are some geometric challenges associated with this existing and proposed.

I we do think that there might be some some groundwater issues out there as well, but this has not started yet.

Um, as you would notice on the first slide showing the schedule, we're looking to start this in June timeline, and then and then start reaching out to stakeholders and figure out what uh alternatives can be done.

Uh again, we have reached out to the railroad on this, and we're continuing our coordination on that project.

Uh at this point, I'm gonna hand this back over to Crystal so she can talk about where we're at in terms of of percent complete and money spent.

Thank you.

Thanks, Pearson.

Uh I know that was a lot to handle all at once.

Uh this is a huge, massive project, one of our largest projects here, at least on the transportation side.

Before I go into like where we're at as far as project spending, I do want to highlight why we go after RAISE grants like this.

Not only are they zero match, which we really really love, the zero match grants.

That means we're not spending any of the citizens' dollars on this.

This is all coming from the federal government, but it allows us to become to have the shelf-ready projects, so the designs that are ready to be constructed as soon as we find construction money.

Umpa has really been aggressive in trying to find grant funding to help subsidize some of our funding shortfalls that we found for our infrastructure to put it in perspective every year.

Transportation gets around five million dollars in property taxes.

In the last two and a half, three years, we've been able to get 30 million over 30 million dollars in grants for transportation.

So it really really stretches our budgets to be able to have projects like this on the shelf.

So when a grant becomes available, we could say, hey, we we've got this project, it's it's ready to go.

Like, let's start spending the money and let's get it out, and then citizens can start seeing some of these much much needed improvements.

So, right now for this program, we're about 64 of the way or 64 percent of the way complete.

We've only spent about 34 percent of the money.

Uh we are going to spend all five million dollars of this grant.

Uh, we've got a couple of huge deliverables coming up that uh the invoices will catch up, so rest assured we're gonna spend it all.

Um, but it it really highlights how having a consultant like HDR and Pearson on board like this.

We've been able to complete some of the projects under budget, and we're able to reallocate some of that money from those projects on to other projects of this so that we can get them a little farther.

Really great example.

Um, that second one multimodal, it's 99% complete.

We've only spent three quarters of the budget.

We can take that that remaining money and move it on to something else so that we can get an even better concept and explore more options where possible.

So we're really really excited for this.

Um the first project is Pearson said before that's 16th that pedestrian hybrid week, and that's they call it a hawk signal as well.

It's the the signals that can stop traffic when the pedestrians need to cross it.

That's gonna be the first one built this year.

Uh you'll see the next one in our FY27 budget.

It'll be one of the programs from the multimodal portion of it where we had those five shelf ready um smaller bite-sized sidewalk and ADA enhancements.

So we're gonna take the first nibble out of that one, and then we're really exploring grant funding.

We were unsuccessful for our first one, but just this last month or so, we applied for a 25 million dollar build grant that is also a zero match.

We were able to couple that North Side Bridge and the signal at North Side and Fourth in with another grant that we received to improve all of North Side down where it becomes Yale and then seventh all the way to 12th and 7th.

So huge, huge improvements, big projects, and we're really excited.

And with that, there's a QR code to a fancy website where you can find more information and better pictures, less engineering, as Pearson said, more graphical.

But we'd love to stand for any questions you guys have and appreciate your interest in transportation projects.

Vice Chair, I have a question.

Steve told me to make it short, so it will be.

Did you have to submit these particular projects in order to secure the grant, or did you get the grant first with the ability to then pick the projects?

Mr.

Chair, Commissioner, uh it was the first Almshed.

They weren't scoped down and specified to exactly these details, but we said what we wanted to do, and then we really tailored what we said we would do to the projects at hand.

Yes, sir.

Um is all the money you have federal money and it already can be used on projects with federal roads.

Mr.

Chair, Commissioner, this is a federal grant, so all of the money on this, the five million dollars is coming from FHWA, so from the feds.

Um it can only be spent on these projects.

None of these are federal roads, they're all local roads.

The reason I'm asking is because almost every meeting we have, and there's two tonight.

We have two applications for multiple housing projects, and everybody always talks about how once you build something they can't get out of the driveway anymore, they can't make a writer and turn anymore.

Do you have any money for those kind of projects?

Or is this uh Mr.

Shift?

Sorry, I didn't know if you were finished.

I wanted to let you finish.

Um is the short answer to that.

Uh the longer answer is this specific raise project doesn't address capacity issues.

These were more focused on multimodal safety, looking at alternative forms of transportation.

Um, some safety improvements, like at first and third, you saw the railroad bridge that consistently gets hit.

Um we also pinged that one because right now there are there is no ADA on that.

Currently, citizens have to get into the roadway, go underneath the bridge and then up a hill, basically, to try and get back on a sidewalk.

Um so there are other grants that we go after for things like that.

Um, a great example is we received a $10 million strategic initiatives grant that's state money, not federal money, um, for widening Eustick Road.

We did a corridor study that said USTIC because of state highway 16 going through was going to increase 632 percent um in traffic by 2050.

Um that that's pretty high.

So we do go after those.

Additional questions, Mr.

Chair, Commissioner.

Um if you went over this in the beginning, I I apologize, but how do these projects get picked?

Uh Mr.

Chair, Commissioner, uh it's a combination.

So we do have our transportation master plan that lays out a 30-year projection of projects that we would like to get through.

Um we also have our five-year transportation master plan, which is the ones that we have reasonable um attempt at funding in the next five years based on whatever our horizon is.

And then the rest of it, um, I tailor the projects based on what's going to score the best on the grants, which is why we've been so successful.

So having some of these that are shelf ready and have a different variety of projects, some of them are pedestrian focused, some are safety, some are capacity focused.

It allows us to be flexible and go after the right type of grant for um highest probability of funding.

So with the uh pedestrian railroad crossing on 14th, is that one that scores really well on why we had it in there?

Or I I guess I hadn't come across the demand for it, but I could be wrong.

Uh that one helped us score higher in this specific one because the railroad, while it's beautiful and a huge aspect in in making historic NAPA what it is, it's very divisive when it comes to our city, right?

We've got the interstate that uh cuts us in half, and then the railroad again that cuts it in half.

So looking at ways to find a connectivity between those two areas allowed this to score higher, which is one of the reasons we looked at that.

Thank you.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Okay, Crystal, thank you.

Thank you for your time.

Appreciate the information.

Okay, Rodney, uh report on council actions.

Mr.

Chair and Commissioners, um council actually wasn't able to get a quorum on the 16th, and so uh all public hearings were uh can were taken off the agenda, and we have since rescheduled them, had to post them in the paper again, um, notify all the uh the residents around those again and post a new sign on the property.

So we have done that, and um those most of those will go before city council on the 6th of April, and I'll report back after that.

Let me jump into this one.

You bet, ready to go.

Um Mr.

Chair and Commissioners, this is our annual report.

I know we're a little bit later than usual.

We try to get this done in February, but we're in March and just had a lot going on.

So I'm gonna try to do my best to just stay with my written comments because I find that if I don't, I'm gonna be too long.

I'm gonna expound on the everything in these uh slides.

So I'll do my best, but if you have any specific questions, please interrupt me and and I'm happy to answer those.

So the purpose of the annual 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.

We've been doing this for several years.

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

Um, in this slide specifically, we have our population estimated at 123,220.

Um, number two is our median household income is at 82,000.

And number three, excuse me, is our age of residence is a median of 33.5, which is actually up from the past.

Um we have been one of the youngest gener um cities in the state for a really long time, and that has gone up a little bit.

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

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

The average cost of a home is 403,000, and that's about 100,000 less than in Meridian, and an average rent for a two-bedroom apartment is 1,345 per month.

If you haven't been following all of that's happening with the cost of housing, it's kind of a shocking couple of slides here.

Um excuse me, 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% being valued at greater than 500,000.

The percent of homes valued at over 500,000 has increased by 2% since 2014.

I thought that was an interesting statistic.

Our 500,000 and more are increasing proportionally.

In the past decade, the percentage of people owning or buying their home has significantly increased from 62 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, the next a townhouse, and the highest rental costs for a single family home.

All right, this excuse me.

This is um this slide is I think pretty critical that we that we consider the these numbers.

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

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

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 uh accumulate a 20% down payment and cover the cost of some services typically provided for rentals.

There are currently no stick-built homes within the 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 is 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.

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 2023.

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.

So I get a lot of questions about where is our economy going, what's happening with building permits.

I'm going to show you a slide in a little bit about building permits.

But for generally, you can see this trend is actually just slightly increasing for the number of applications we get through planning.

And that's generally because I would I would guess that generally that's because it's not as influenced by the ups and downs of the economy as like a building permit is that's happening right now.

These are planning efforts.

They put plats in place or annexations in place or a rezone so that future development can occur.

So sometimes that's just kind of mellowed out over the year.

Frankly, we used to, when I first started, we had really really busy times during like spring and summer, and um, and then we would really slow down in the fall and winter.

It's no longer that way.

It just, as you've seen, you know, our agendas are always full.

Uh 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 year than the previous year.

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

We are relatively consistent over time for the number of public hearings and final plat considerations as a total.

The number of plat applications received in 2025 was 46, which is three less than in 2024 and six less than in 2023.

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 plates and condo plats saw a decrease from 2024.

So that's again just emphasizing the difference between the two types of platts, preliminary, longer term concept in nature, instead of final plats that are current, uh happening in the near future, and more details.

Multifamily units saw a dramatic increase in 2025, but this is mostly due to an approval of a single project with many units.

That was the Murphy development off of Houston.

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

All right, this shows that final plats approved approved in 2025 were taking more land per unit than in 2024.

Final plats were less dense.

We're getting less dense overall with final plats.

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.

Just a side note here, asterisk here, two of the projects that were in the queue were denied by city council.

Overall, our density for preliminary plats in 20 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.

queue uh were denied by city council um overall our density for preliminary plats in 20 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 one point one increase from 2024 and as I said with those two that got denied that's it's not going to reach that number so it'll be lower than that on the shorter term um final plat approvals have shown a trend down to 3.43 dwelling units per acre the less dense this slide addresses the question about how many units approved through a preliminary plat have been committed through approval of a final plat.

Again this doesn't show um building permits associated with those platts and but this does show the final plats compared to the preliminary plats all right of 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 41% in 2024 approvals.

There are 1,757 units that have been approved through preliminary plats but haven't been committed through approval of a final plat.

After preliminary plats are approved a final plat must follow from start to finish a subdivision can often take seven to eight years or more to develop out all of the phases of the development and again that's why you see these developers coming in with projects even when they still have other projects out there because they're there know that this takes such significant time if they waited for all of them to be finished then they wouldn't have something in the queue ready to go right after it's finished.

So they have to just kind of cycle through that development process.

Mr Faster quick question clarification Rodney when you when you say units are you talking about obviously like single family detached homes but are you also talking about uh like apartment buildings and is that one unit or each apartment is one unit in that apartment building yeah good good question Mr.

Chair and Commissioners so the units when we talk about units in planning and zoning we're talking about each individual dwelling unit so that would be an apartment in an apartment building so yeah that's that's how we use yeah because when you're looking at these numbers 5,000 committed between in the five years but our population increase has been yeah yeah numbers make sense okay next is uh new data as a request from the planning and zoning commission and council there is a decreasing trend to uh for annexation applications but this may be due to large MPC annexation requests not necessarily less land so we have actually seen greater amounts of land that are annexed but not necessarily resulting in final plates yet it's just it just takes a lot of time when we do these large developments like MPCs master plan communities takes a long time this reflects those MPCs you can see there if all submitted annexations are approved were approved you can see that one 1,583 acres this shows some of the work that you typically don't see being conducted by the planning and zoning department in 2025 we had 44 applications reviewed for design review most of these were were for new construction just under one third of those design review applications were required to go to the design review committee and staff provided staff analysis and reports for every application so sometimes we even you know we get asked well how many of these are going to the committee the design review committee well only a third of them but we still do all the work for every single one so that's what we're doing at our desks when you come to our office all right so this is more of that this slide shows a breakdown of all the conditional use permits over time and the detailed types of CUPs.

In 2025, we processed 29 CUPs.

The bottom left corner highlights the type of CUPs that fall under other land use.

On our future land use map, the ratio of five residential acres to one commercial acre has remained consistent over time.

Of the residential zones, the acreage of RS6 remains the predominant zone, as you can see there.

In recent years, we have seen dramatic increases in the number of acres dedicated to the IL zoning district.

This information was added to the annual report beginning last year at the request of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

So this speaks for itself.

And I have no statement other than these are the numbers.

This is new this year and highlights and the hot and highlights the significant work done by the long-range planning team in 2025, including updating the comprehensive plan, developing the downtown plan and city council adoption, and many other efforts making our city better.

And then the planning and zoning team does more with less.

Go to the building team slides.

Mr.

Vitcher, while you're finding that, can I ask a quick question?

There was a slide that came through.

And it I noticed it said 50% of NAMPA has been annexed.

What does that mean?

Is like within the area of area of impact.

Yeah.

And and actually that's not true anymore.

Okay.

The uh the it's the area, the planning area.

So if you recall, the county had to go through that uh state process to reduce our our impact area, but they still allow us to plan for that area that we know we're gonna grow into eventually.

And so that planning area, we're we're at 50 percent of that.

So safe to say we're 50 NAMPA's 50 percent built out.

I mean, according to our planning area, yes.

That makes sense.

All right, so this is the thank you, Celeste.

Um, this is development services.

They had a few slides.

I forgot to ask him to show up, but they're pretty straightforward, so I'll just share um the information with you.

Um residential permit types and project amounts are listed here, and these are new single family dwelling units in um FY26.

So this is a little tricky because I just talked about FY or uh the annual year 2025.

Fiscal year 26 starts in October of 2025.

So keep that in mind, these aren't the same uh dates.

Um okay, so fiscal year again, new commercial and TI permits project value in 2026 are listed here.

Again, the the greatest number there are commercial TIs.

And then project value for new construction and uh TIs are temporary or excuse me, tenant improvements.

Uh that means the buildings are already there in FY2026.

Um by fiscal year and building permits only.

Um you can see we're pretty consistent with the last few years in 2025, except that um, and he he pointed this out that if if all of them got approved, that would be the value is 110 on top of that 526, so a little bit higher than the last two years.

Um he also indicated that we're trending about the same.

Our trends are still the same for each year for each of um these types of permits.

So maybe an easy way to look at this is to um say for commercial in uh for commercial permits, each of those are the different years and uh listed under commercial and all the way across.

Same thing.

Um review by fiscal year.

So this is um this is an indication that they're still doing a lot of work, even if the economy seemed to be turning down.

Um I was surprised at this number.

2025 showed the greatest number in the last in the five-year period.

Um 2026 is just since October of 2026.

Okay, certificates of occupancy and completion for new construction by fiscal year.

Again, 2026 is not done, so he he anticipated that it's looking about the same as 2025 at this point.

Total permit revenue by fiscal year, and then that's the estimated value with green.

And that was it.

Any other questions for me?

Any questions?

Mr.

Chair, yeah.

Rodney, I think you picked a rough night to present all this stuff, but um do you have keep data on how many projects get denied, or just what gets approved?

Um I mean, they're not frequent.

Um, but we have seen an increase recently.

Um I don't know that number, but I I'd be happy to look that up and send it out to the commission.

Sure.

I I think a lot of the people here would be interested to know if Mampa approves everything that comes across, or yeah, or if we actually are selective in what we're doing, or we're in between we will rely.

Yeah.

The other question I have is do you have any data on the length of time it takes to get a project approved?

Yeah.

Um I I don't I do have data, and I report it on the um we have a what's called a mayor's dashboard, and it's a a goal to get it done by a certain amount of time.

So I do have the data.

I couldn't tell you the exact number right now, but we are like one of the very best in the state for processing applications uh quickly and getting before a public hearing.

So what I track is how quickly does it go to its first public hearing?

And it's pretty good.

Our goal is to have 90 days when the when the application is complete and we're meeting that goal easily.

Yeah, that's great.

I think uh those two numbers would be something I would find interesting if you had them in the happy to anyone else.

Okay, thanks, Rodney.

Good information.

Appreciate it.

Um I would entertain a motion to move.

I don't know consent agenda.

Okay.

That was other than next.

Just over there motioning whatever.

We don't have to.

Consent agenda.

It's the same time every every meeting, so I figured every and I sit right next to him, so it rubs off.

So motion's been made.

We got a motion, we need to second.

All right, I'll second that.

Okay.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

No.

Okay.

Yes.

Yeah.

We actually state the motion.

Yes.

Okay.

Yeah.

So we made a motion to uh approve the consent agenda.

So Commissioner Keho made the motion and Commissioner Kirkman second.

Okay.

So now we're going to move into the public hearing portion of the meeting tonight.

Um, and the way it's gonna go, um, I would say just at the outset, just to let everybody know that the meeting is being recorded.

And so if we get a lot of excess chatter in the in the the amongst the crowd, then it kind of picks it up on the the microphones, and so it's hard for them to later on um transcribe the meeting if it needs to be so.

So if we can keep the the chatter down, that would be very much appreciated.

Um so what we'll end up doing is the applicant will come up and they'll have seven minutes to present their project that they're proposing at the conclusion of their seven minutes that they have, or as soon as they're done, staff will present the staff report and they have unlimited time to present what they need to present to us at the conclusion of the staff report.

At the conclusion of the staff report, we'll open the public testimony, and that'll give you all an opportunity to come and testify.

And so we would ask that when you come up to the to the microphone, please state your name and your address for the record.

Um and then you'll have three minutes to testify.

To speak whatever, whether for or against or undecided, whatever you want to say, that'll be your three minutes.

When everybody's had that opportunity, we'll be able to have the applicant come back up and they'll get to respond to any questions that were asked or to rebut any of the testimony that was given.

And then when they're concluded and we've asked questions, then we'll close the public hearing and then we'll deliberate and then issue a judgment or recommendation, whichever um it is based on what type of application it is.

Um and so that's how the meeting will go.

And so we're gonna go ahead and start now for our first item.

This is an action item, a pre-annexation and pre-zoning to BC, and then a possible development agreement at zero, zero and zero highway 2026 for the partial numbers that are listed in the report.

And this is for Jeff Hatch representing Shoemaker Properties LLC and Valley Pentecostal Church Incorporated.

Um is the applicant here?

I see you there.

Mr.

Hatch.

Jeff Hatch with Hatch Design Architecture.

My address is 5119 Ryercrest Drive, NAP Idaho 83686.

Good evening, Vice Chairman Gardner and Commissioners.

Thank you for your consideration of our pre-annexation application this evening.

The subject property is north of the current boundary for the city of Niampa along 2026 on the northern property boundary, and we have uh Prescott uh to the west of us.

You may be familiar with this area because Franz Witty just recently built a new facility out here, and that would be directly to our east.

The subject property um under the future land use map is designated as a community mixed use zone, which we're we're fine with that uh designation.

And the subject property from a specific area plan is you know just slightly out of the aggro business district to the east of us, and so this is considered uh a regional commercial and multifamily area.

Here's the subject property.

We have three parcels.

Um parcel B is currently the one that is as owned and dedicated to the church, and I'll stand for any questions.

Questions okay, looks like none, so we'll thank you.

Call you back up.

Thanks, Jeff.

Okay, Doug.

Yeah, um, Vice Chair uh Garner and Commissioners.

Uh Doug Critchfield, principal planner.

Um so the project uh before you this is a pre-annexation, so it's it's different than an annexation.

It does follow the same process as an annexation.

But uh the uh landowner, the applicant will be going through the county to receive their entitlements, and uh they're currently in process now to receive a rezone to CRC2 commercial.

Um the intent of the pre-annexation is to ensure that whatever is being developed on this site will align with the future land use map and future development in the area.

Uh when city limits do uh eventually abut this property or any any one of these three parcels, the entire development, all three parcels will be uh annexed into the city automatically, and um and that process will be handled by staff at that time.

Um so um the uh regulatory framework for this comes out of the uh the NAMPA City Code.

The BC zoning district will be a pre-zone, it's not gonna be zoned BC, but it will be pre-zoned BC.

And you can see that there are several um different types of uses that are allowed in a BC zoning district.

The development agreement will contain the conditions of approval and any other limitations placed on it by the council and or the applicant as we negotiate with the applicant.

And those will be captured in that development agreement.

So that'll be placed on the property.

Within that development agreement, the applicant will be asked to adhere to the regulations that are held in our planning and zoning code Title 10.

These are the primary regulations.

There are other regulations as well.

So essentially they'll be building a city type of development in this location with those requirements.

Right now, that'll be negotiated with Canyon County.

And these are the potential uses that could go out there.

The ones that are highlighted in yellow here are ones that were mentioned in the documentation.

Two of those would require a conditional use permit if they were to annex into the city of NAMPA.

But because they're working with the county, they'll negotiate those uses, and then the county will reach out to us for comment on those applications that come through for those land uses.

So it's likely very quickly that as this area continues to grow that this property could be annexed into the city relatively quickly.

They're uh bordering that that line.

That impact area really uh doesn't have much um influence on what happens on this site.

Uh it's just simply a a boundary that the county through state code has placed upon us, but we can extend beyond that boundary in the future and grow into the planning area by state statute.

Um it was already mentioned that this is all in community mixed use.

Um there are two overlays on this, the comprehensive plan and the specific area plan.

The uses within each of those designations are relatively the same.

And the applicant has indicated that they will comply with both uh the requirements of these uh overlays.

The uh surrounding property is largely agricultural, with the exception of the Franzwoody development.

Uh but again, this is all in transition, and most of this property uh is owned by development interests for future development.

Um there were some details provided in your staff report.

Uh Daniel's here if you have any questions about any of the engineering uh on this site.

Um there was um no objection from the engineering department about this development, just some comments about uh roadway access, traffic impact study that may be required and other things as the property develops as well as the utility connections uh potential for the future.

Right now, the the applicant is not uh asking for any utility connections at this point.

Um we did have some correspondence from engineering as we just mentioned, and also the um Idaho Transportation Department.

Um there's uh discussion where the access points will need to come off of Prescott Lane, and uh that they'll be open to discussing access to US 2026.

Um we did receive one late uh public comment from Darrell uh Tage.

I hope that's the appropriate pronunciation pronunciation.

Uh he mentioned that he's agreeable to the pre-annexation with the city and that it will be a commercial zone.

Um the recommended condition of approval were added to your staff report.

Um again, if you have any questions about those, I'd be glad to answer those.

Um the pre-annexation criteria.

Um we've been through this a couple of times now, so unless you'd like for me to go through it, the criteria also is listed in this in the staff report.

It's a fairly simple criteria.

Uh the facts uh for the project as well as the conclusions for approval were also included in your staff report.

Uh these would be the conclusions if you decide to approve the project or recommend approval of the project, and if you recommend denial, then um you would have to declare what those conclusions would be.

And with that, uh, here's the potential motions, and I would stand for any questions.

Okay.

Thanks, Doug.

Yes, Commissioner Morgan.

Um probably explain this.

But so the intent is to build some storage units.

Open air storage on part of it, which would require a CUP.

Is that C UP part?

Like we're not, but I don't see a C UP as part of this approval.

Is that part of the agreement?

Development.

So um so Vice Chair Gardner and um uh commissioner, there's uh interest uh by the uh applicant to do that, but they would receive those uh entitlements through Canyon County and not through us.

If, for example, uh the property became adjacent to city limits and the applicants had not developed or received entitlements to build storage units in that area, uh then they would have to come through the city to obtain a conditional use permit to do that.

Now what will happen is if they do apply to Canyon County for that land use, uh Canyon County will notify us about that and we'll provide comment back to the Board of Commissioners through our joint powers agreement, then they have to weigh a heavy consideration on those comments that they receive from the city.

Okay, so if they don't build them before the annexation happens, then they'll come before us for a new CUP.

If they do build it before the co it gets annexed, is it just legal non-conforming or what do they then it becomes a yeah, uh legal non-conforming grandfather didn't, if you will.

Mr.

Chairman, I got a quick question for Doug while we're talking to him.

Um so I think I read in there that they were talking about use a part of the back partial parts of parcel C as a RB storage, but a church is supposed to go on parcel B.

If I hate to see this piece right along highway 2026 being storage units.

I mean that's gonna be prime location.

Is there any way we can put in there that the any storage units or storage facility needs to stay on the back south portion of parcel C and it cannot be out against 2026?

Yeah, chair and commissioner, you certainly can make that recommendation to the council as one of the conditions, and we would note that.

I just don't hate to see that.

I mean it's got two of them right down the street, and it's like that's prime commercial you put storage units on it, you've waste you've lost it.

At the same time, like it's RV storage.

If there was one thing that's easy to tear down and build something else, it's a parking lot, right?

Yeah, but I'm I'm thinking if they if if they're if they were gonna build like the storage units right down the street right out to 2026.

I I would hate to see that because I think that's prime that's some good tax-based dollars right there that if storage units is not a lot of tax base.

Yeah.

Additional questions.

Okay, seeing none.

We'll go ahead and open the public hearing.

Um, any sign-up sheet?

No, not for this item.

Okay.

Is there anybody here that would like to speak for or against or undecided on this application?

Anybody online?

Okay.

I'm sorry, what?

I was gonna ask uh Mr.

Hash, do you have anything to add or Jeff when you said Jeff?

I was probably sorry, I was too informal.

I'm sorry about that.

Chairman Gardner and Commissioners, thank you again for consideration of our pre-annexation and pre-zoning uh application.

I appreciate the the dialogue and considerations, comments for the commission.

Um I think we'd be fine with uh Commissioner Turner's consideration for any of these potential uses uh similar to to the comments made by uh Commissioner Daffer.

It's likely this is gonna be something that's renovated as soon as it can be annexed in into the city um to a use that's that's more suitable for what the city's needs are.

Um with that said, typically if this was to be used for kind of a low density uh RV situation, you you would need a fire engine access on to 2026, and so um if I take it at face value, I'm getting cut off from fire emergency access.

So um I'm I'm fine with uh consideration from Commissioner Turner with the caveat of you know just general life safety for for fire department access.

Other than that, I'll stand for any questions.

Okay, any additional questions?

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Second.

Okay.

Been motioned by Commissioner Morgan, seconded by Steve, but Mr.

Kehoe, excuse me, to close the public hearing.

All those in favor.

I post.

A motion carries.

Deliberation.

Sounds to me like they just want to do something with it until they can pull utilities to it and do something else.

That's what it feels like to me.

Well, it really is a good spot for RVs.

Right there on 2026 can be halfway between the Caldwell freeway access and highway 16.

Rather have it there on 2026 than closer in town.

Well, really, all we're doing today is saying when it gets annexed, it's going to be BC.

Right.

So that's what we want it there.

So I don't.

All right, I'll make a move to recommend approval of the pre-annexation and pre-zoning to BC and development agreement zero zero highway 2026 for Jeff Hatch representing Shoemaker Properties LLC and Valley Pentecostal Church with all proposed conditions and findings and the conclusion for approval.

Second.

Okay, it's been moved by Commissioner Morgan, seconded by Dapper.

Commissioner Daffer.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed.

Okay, so the motion carries that'll go on to city council.

Thank you.

All right.

Our next application is for a conditional use permit for an automobile or truck repair at 408 North Franklin Boulevard in a community business zoning district located in the northwest quarter of section 23 Township Third North.

Um this is for Justin Feist representing Feisty Commercial LLC requesting the permit to be tied to the address in the owner instead of the tenant or an auto repair shop.

Terry, or let's see, is the applicant here?

Yeah.

Okay, come on up.

And again, if you could state your name and address for the record.

Good evening.

Uh Justin Feist, 6813 North Willowside Avenue in Meridian.

Um so the subject properties on the corner of North Franklin and 10th Avenue.

Um and a little clarification.

Um the subject property has been used for an auto repair shop since 1990.

There was a original conditional use permit that expired March 1st of 2000.

And so what I'm doing in seeking um, so I'm purchasing the property uh and during our due diligence, we saw that the CUP expired in 2000.

And so what I'm doing is requesting a new CUP uh to be initiated for uh auto repair uh business as it's currently used uh for that property.

Okay.

Is there another business that's operating in the end of that?

Does it seem like there was a some kind of a boutique for home goods?

Yes, and they will they remain there as well?

Correct, yeah.

So one of the sides is a retail uh location, and the other side, Tim's auto repair is a uh auto repair shop.

Okay, perfect.

Yeah, any other questions?

All right, thanks, and we'll call you back up if there's additional questions.

Thank you.

All right, Terry.

All right, thank you, Vice Chair Gardner and Commissioners.

My name's Terry Friend, associate planner for the City of Nampus Planning and Zoning Department.

Um, as we just heard, the risk the requested action today is for a conditional use permit for automobile or truck repair at 408 North Franklin Boulevard.

That's a 0.52-acre parcel in a BC or community business zoning district.

And um our plan here tonight is to continue operating as an auto repair shop, but the applicant has specifically requested that the permit be tied to the address and the property owner instead of an individual tenant.

Um the applicant is Justin Feist of Feisty Commercial, and our file number today is CUP00402 2026.

The property lies in the future land use map designation of commercial.

It's zoned BC or community business.

To the south is community business.

To the west is community business and light industrial.

And to the east is community business and single family residential.

So just a little bit of history on the property.

In 1990, a CUP was issued for the development and operation of a new 6,000 square foot shop for an auto repair business at this location.

That's CUP was specifically granted for 10 years from the date of issuance.

And at the end of the 10 years, a new CUP would be necessary to continue operation as an auto repair business.

Now the that type of sunsetting clause we don't generally use anymore, and part of that is because we struggle to track it, which is kind of hints the reason we're here tonight where a business has been in operation for a total of 36 years.

26 of those years were without the without the CUP to do it.

So here we are making this legitimate, and we won't have that sunset clause again.

When the CUP was approved in 1990, the commission found that the auto repair use would be compatible with the neighbor neighborhood if the conditions were adhered to.

The current city code related to landscaping for a commercial development requires 20-foot wide landscape buffer along local collector and arterial roads.

The location of the existing parking and the building itself would prohibit this from being practical on the site.

But the site aesthetics would be greatly enhanced by the addition of landscaping in conjunction with installation of curb gutter and sidewalk improvements along 9th Street North and 10th Avenue North, in addition to those landscape planter areas being renovated with appropriate landscape plantings and repair or replacement of whatever irrigation parts that would need would be needed to maintain that over time.

That's between the business lot and the residential lots behind.

Current code substantially limits the use of fencing at commercial locations.

Although fencing is allowed to screen and secure outdoor storage, which they do have.

So these are three are just for the auto repair business.

So it exceeds the amount of signs that you can have under current code.

Two of the three signs are in poor condition, exhibiting aged and deteriorated materials, and collectively, the concentration of signage really clutters up this area.

It's visually unappealing, and it's really detached from the aesthetics of the property and the surrounding area.

So current code for the BC zoning district allows one freestanding sign on the street, and applicable sign code regulations related to prohibited signs and requirements for sign maintenance would support the removal of the two outdated signs.

That would be the reader board and the tune-up sign as a condition of approval.

There are three currently being displayed really in proximity to the three existing freestanding signs.

Temporary sign code says you can have one temporary sign displayed per business at any given time, and that it needs to be on your site, not on public right-of-way, which is a little bit sketchy right here at that edge of Franklin Boulevard.

And that they would need to be spaced a minimum of five feet from any permanent sign.

So we've got a couple issues there to deal with.

The vicinity of the area is commercial in character with the variety of commercial retail and service businesses, and with residential behind that commercial corridor.

The site improvements which would benefit the success of this businesses on the property would also impact the overall appearance of the surrounding area, which would be beneficial to the community and can be conditioned as part of your approval.

The proposed property sorry, the property is already served by uh city utilities and it's within the NAMPA and fire district boundary and the city police service area.

And uh any concern regarding um noise, fume, flare, and odors are generally um handled through building code um uh to which they would have to comply.

We did not receive any agency department or public comments um about this project.

The current condition of the site has several deficiencies that negatively impact the overall aesthetic of the site and undermine the intended community benefits associated with development.

Um those include the landscape being not being maintained in healthful condition.

Uh it also includes the lack of the completion of the one requirement, which was installation of curb gutter sidewalk adjacent to the property along 9th Street North and 10th Avenue North.

Um there's no existing landscape buffers or landscaping along arterial and local roads.

There's nothing along 9th Street North, nor 10th Avenue North.

Um the appearance of the property has some maintenance or compliance concerns that includes um really the parking lot needs to be repaved and restriped.

Uh the fencing adjacent to the north parking area should be removed.

The permanent freestanding signs should be brought into compliance as well as the temporary signs.

The listed on the screen and in your staff report is a total of eight recommended conditions of approval for this location that would address the the concerns that were brought forward.

There's the first five, there's the last three, and then anything addition you might want to impose.

Um and here are some potential motions.

Okay.

Thanks, Terry.

Any questions for staff?

Yeah.

Um Mr.

Vice Chair, quick question on the fencing.

So that fencing um if they remove it, will they have to replace it?

Um according to the code.

No.

Ideally, it wouldn't exist because it would go from the parking lot to a landscape strip to the curb gutter sidewalk to the street.

So you have that natural transition that looks really nice for everybody.

I think right now what that fence is doing is giving this dividing line to what's unimproved street and then the neighbors.

Uh so if they if they were to leave the fence but fix it, would it be out of compliance with our current fencing code?

Correct.

Okay.

Chairman.

Mr.

Keegel.

Um, Terry.

We've had a lot of gas stations and businesses like that in the past, but with very sale alone.

Do I recall having one where they have a moving storage?

Um tell me a little bit more about how that works.

Uh portion of the business.

That appears to be new.

Um, it can be an accessory use to an existing business.

I did double-check the parking calculations based on what I saw in the pictures or when I took the pictures.

They had four trucks there, and with four trucks there, they had enough additional parking to meet their minimums.

So there's no extra requirements for them to have that kind of a business.

As I understand it, no.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Someone's got to be able to do that.

Oh, okay.

I I don't have any questions, but I have some context for the discussion of curb gutter sidewalk on 10th and 9th.

Um when I look at our data, it does appear that a deferral agreement was granted for that property back when it was originally done to defer those improvements until something was done with the entire those roads on both sides and that.

And so that is still in place.

And if and when the city chooses to do improvements to 10th Avenue or 9th Street and put curb gutter and sidewalk in, the property owner would be obligated to fund those portions, their portion of those improvements.

So that deferral agreement it was approved by council and and put in place back at that time.

Okay.

So that conditions doesn't need to be uh so yeah, that that agreement is still in place.

Um ultimately that would be a decision for you guys if you thought that now was the time that that needed to happen.

Um at that back when it was originally granted.

Um it was determined whether uh likely after the fact it was determined they came back and said, okay, there's nothing else around there.

Can we just defer that into the future until there are more global improvements to this area?

And council granted that.

Umer or later.

It's at some point in the future.

It may happen.

Well, it's been 30 years and it hasn't been done.

That's another question for you, though, on that.

Um curb and guttering that has nothing to do with the parking lot itself, but so you still need to do the parking lot.

No, so so the curb gutter sidewalk, that would all be outside of the public outside of the private property, it would be within the public right-of-way.

Um, and so it that would not be related to anything done within the parking lot make any difference in the landscape or that type of stuff.

Would it make any difference in expenses to him if he did it the same time he's doing his parking lot?

Um I mean there's always economies of scale on something this size.

How much that might be, I I don't I don't know that that's gonna make a huge difference one way or the other.

How do you feel about not having the curb and gutter to just let it go?

Um I I don't know that anything has changed between now and then that would make me feel strongly differently than what council determined back then.

Okay.

As long as you're happy.

May note of that.

I tried to make you happy.

Any other questions?

Okay.

We'll go ahead and open the public hearing.

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

We do, we have Dre Campbell.

Okay.

I tried to get my three and a half year old to come up here and talk with me, but he rejected me.

Um let the record show first.

Rest in peace to Rick Hogaboum.

Tonight, tonight was his memorial, and he was a good man and a lot of good memories in here, so just rest in peace to him.

Uh I would just say that this this site's been we kind of dug this up this CUP issue through our due diligence.

I've been representing Justin on the acquisition of this property.

And I we dug it up, you know, and it's just one of those NAMPA properties that tends to have a has a use that's been going on for a long time.

And the CUP, like for some reason, once upon a time they were time stamped, and it sounds like that wasn't the common case, but we went to acquire it.

I said, Hey, this is something you need to pay attention to.

Like if you were going to acquire this property, you don't want to come in and then have this upheld where you lose a tenant or you lose the opportunity to lease to a tenant where the site has already billed out for that tenant.

It's been a good use for an automotive use if you're familiar with NAMPAM and NAMPA native for a long time.

That row right there, there's auto uses, and it seems to fit the bill to speak to the curb and gutter if you've ever been behind that shop, those roads have not been approved for a long time.

So it it does not seem like it would make sense to require someone to put in curb and gutter at this time to to adhere to the standards around that property.

So I kind of aligned with the city in that report.

And um overall, I just think it's uh it's a continued use.

The business has been there, has been there for a long time.

The CUP is it needs to be in place for them to continue to operate at this time, and it's a family business, and so I think promoting the use of the CUP without conditions, so it just continues operating like it has for a long time would be a good thing.

And as time goes by and a new owner takes over and a new tenant, and there will be improvements and it'll be made to look better as most buildings do in our city when the new owner takes interest and new tenants come in, as you saw in the last the first presentation.

Tenant improvements were a substantial amount of the income from the city.

So they tend to happen when new ownership takes over spaces anyhow, and new tenants are moved in so over time.

So I appreciate you guys' time, and that's my comments on the matter.

Okay, thank you.

Is there anybody else here that would like to speak for or against or undecided on this application?

Okay.

Seeing none, uh Justin, do you want to come back up for a second?

So uh just want to clarify we are in the process of purchasing the property.

Um there's been a lot of deferred maintenance on it, not only externally but internally, and so we have a plan together to uh put a lot of improvements into the property as well.

Okay.

Um I'm assuming you got a copy of the staff report, so you are familiar with the conditions that Terry was outlining the conditions of approval.

Yes, I have a copy.

And you're good with that?

Um I'll need to go through them one at one at a time.

Yeah, just make sure.

But okay.

Yeah.

Okay, just want to make sure.

Um any additional questions?

Um yeah, because I I mean there's there's quite a bit, and if we take off the requirement for the curb and sidewalk on 9th and 10th, like it would make sense.

Um do you know if there's irrigation out of those two landscaping spots?

Because it's not gonna it's not gonna do any good to put plants in there and expect the mechanic to go out and water them every day.

Right.

Yeah, yeah.

So um and you know, one of the requests is to resurface the parking lot and restripe it.

So maybe run some irrigation lines out to those two spots before that, you know.

But if we remove those other two eye the curb and sidewalks, are you good with taking care of all the rest of it to get this thing?

Remove the signs and the CUP is part of the like the condition of us purchasing the property, and once the CP gets approved or denied, we'll look at the financials on all the requirements and make a decision if we're gonna purchase the property.

Okay.

Yep, because there's a bunch of other stuff that needs to be done as well.

And if it doesn't make sense for us, then we're just gonna not go through on the purchase.

Yep.

Because I'm okay with to get rid of those curb and sidewalks.

But yeah.

Any other questions?

Oh, yes.

Uh Vice Chairman, if I may, and talking with Rodney here, it I think it might be helpful and respectful for the applicant to walk through these conditions.

It sounded like maybe some of them you were aware of, but maybe not to a level of detail.

Um, would hate to have you come back if there was one that was a hold up here, and this is the time and place to address that.

Um okay, would it be okay if we had Terry run those through one more time?

Yeah.

I've got them up on the screen to help a little bit.

Um, so the first one is just uh complying with city codes policies and standards that are in place at the time of building permits.

Um the second installing the curb gutter sidewalk along 9th Street North and 10th Avenue, south sides of the property.

Sounds like there's a deferral agreement already in place on that.

I didn't get clarification from Daniel, but whether or not that moves with the land, like with change of ownership.

That might be something we think about.

Um the property owner shall submit and receive NAMPAS planning and zoning department approval for landscaping and irrigation plans for improvements to the two existing planters along Franklin um boulevard.

So those are the empty ones now, and any additional landscaping in conjunction with the curb gutter sidewalk to be installed along 9th Street North and 10th Avenue North.

Um and those would be landscaping and irrigation uh to meet NAMPAS standards.

Um and prior to the issuance of the CUP, the property owners shall remove the sections of fence that extend north from the building.

So that's the area that's in the fencing in front of the parking area.

Um prior to the issuance of the C UP, the property owner shall have the reader board freestanding sign and the tune up freestanding sign and the related above ground structure part um removed prior to the issuance of the CUP, the property owner shall comply with codes related to the allowable number of temporary signs, so just getting that under code requirements.

Um the property owner shall resurface and stripe the parking lot, ensuring that the required number of parking spaces and ADA compliant parking is maintained, so they have enough parking now.

Um that's always something that can accidentally change during restriping.

Um and the last one that the permit be granted to the current owner of the property and the location during the duration of um use not transferable to any other owner or location.

Thanks, Terry.

All right.

So Justin, those are the conditions that you would agree to for us to issue the conditional use permit.

So I just wanted to make sure that you were aware of those and that you didn't have issue.

And like Commissioner Turner had talked about, they they do have this curb gutter and sidewalk deferred.

It's still in place.

And you know, so if we took that away, there's still a good bit of stuff that you would need to do.

So yeah, I think the planters was something that I had my eye on because it's uh has a lot of deferred maintenance on the the property.

Let's put it that way.

Yeah.

Um and then for number seven.

Uh are you uh requesting just a resurface or like a full parking lot redo?

I assume I got a quick question for you.

Um here it says to the current owner.

From the sounds of things, he's not the current owner yet.

If we were to issue this CUP, can we issue it to him if he becomes the owner?

And if he doesn't, the current owner then has to come in and clear up this 26 year issue.

Can we get back pay and we get back pay?

Because I just I just want to clarify because on the on this it says current owner.

Yeah.

We could chairman maybe wanting to do that.

It's uh change out current owner to the applicant.

Um the owner applicant is probably a motion.

Yep, just in a motion, just um amending is that condition eight.

Yeah, owner applicant.

So Mr.

Vice, I have a question too.

Could you go back one slide?

Uh number three there with the curb gutter and sidewalk.

It states the addition of landscaping in conjunction with the curb gutter and sidewalk along ninth and tenth.

So if there's no if there's no curb gutter and sidewalk going in on those in that area, would they would the applicant be required to still put in landscaping?

Because it wouldn't be in conjunction with the curb gutter and sidewalk.

I'm not sure where the fence line is in relation to the property boundary.

Uh definitely, you know, the code allows us to do landscaping in the right of way.

I'm just not sure if we're not doing any improvements in the right-of-way, if there's actually a landscape area they could even attend to.

So if the commission decided to to remove that particular thing, that would also remove the requirement to put any landscaping until add it add it to the deferral.

Yeah.

I think that would be smart.

I guess that's my question is the does does the deferral include the landscaping and or would it could it include uh let me jump in here uh Mr.

Chair, Commissioners.

Um so those are two separate um sections of code and and I I know that the deferral agreement doesn't typically have a landscaping attached to it.

So I would recommend that if you have a condition like that that you maybe change the condition for when it would be appropriate for that to happen.

That is uh as she said, as Terry said, that is tricky for us to follow, but if it's like you know, I I don't know.

I I guess it it's hard for us to follow up on that.

But it's it's possible.

The word conjunction there is what made it of just a little bit confusing.

But yeah, we can address that in whatever motion is made.

Uh Mr.

Chair, I got a question on that then.

It's been a while since I've been on that little piece of road, but I think that's pretty that parking lot and that road are pretty level.

Yeah, so if from ninth and tenths, so if you take that fence out and you put any kind of landscaping in there, people are just gonna drive over it and completely destroy it anyway, I would think.

Because I'm I mean if without the curb and gutter there, you have nothing to separate the parking lot from the road and that little piece of dirt.

I think it's dirt back there.

Yeah, and that might have been the original idea with the building.

Is it all the way asphalt all the way?

So at least in the image that it is on Google Maps, it's um looks like it's just asphalt straight from the road all the way up to the building.

And the back of that building is all used for storage, it looks like if we remove all that fence, are we just talking from the end of the building out, right?

Yeah, and so the asphalt just goes right up to the fence up to the building.

So I think it would be a challenge.

I think I I would think we remove number three entirely for remove number three entirely or just the portions about ninth and tenth.

Well you're not gonna my recommendation would be not to put in the curbing sidewalk and there's no place to put or landscaping.

But there's also Franklin.

Right.

Yeah.

We need to, yeah, the Franklin planter beds need to stay, obviously.

Yeah, the Franklin planter beds, but the other stuff I think we need to remove.

Because I think it's I think we need to close public trend first.

Well, we got to finish up with Justin.

So okay.

Um here.

Mr.

Chairman, I do have a question.

And I don't know if it's for Mr.

Price or for the staff or for the attorney.

But this is says requesting permit to be tied to add to address an owner instead of tenant for an auto repair shop.

So I'm really sort of confused how I I realize you're looking to do your due diligence to buy it, but you are not the owner yet.

Correct.

So I guess I'm confused how somebody can come and ask for a condition of approval on property that they don't own or they don't reside in, and how that works.

We did get a like affidavit or signature from the owner to represent the property.

That helps.

Okay, yeah.

I mean I'm just I guess I'm confused confused on that.

How like could somebody come in and get a conditional use permit on a house?

Yeah, Mary.

You know.

Mr.

Copeland, so in in the application packet, and correct me if I'm wrong, there's typically an app limit of legal interest, correct?

And so if they fill that out, the owner has to fill it out and sign it.

That basically says that Justin can come in and apply for a permit regarding this piece of property.

Okay.

And so that's part of the application packet that would allow them to do that.

Thank you.

Okay.

So do we go ahead.

Good.

Okay.

No more questions for the applicant?

Okay.

Did that clarification you have?

So uh prior to that um I believe there's three signs up.

How many are you wanting removed?

So, Justin, you have the sign that says Tim's.

Right.

That they're saying leave that one and take down the tune up and then the other reader board sign.

Take those two down as well as the temporary banner things that are flying out there as well.

Except for one.

Except for one.

Yeah, the temporaries are easy, but the the other two that good?

Or I mean you could take down the small one and just change what the top one says since it's taller.

Yeah.

Yeah, you're you're allowed to have one sign, and I think that there was some something said, Terry, about the condition of the signs, and so is that did you have a reason for choosing the ones that you did or I did.

Um thank you.

The tune-up center sign and the reader board sign look antiquated and out of date because of the type of materials that they use.

And as you can see in the picture in the upper right, you can see how the tune-up center sign post all the way down is rested.

It appears that these two signs have been linked together, and I don't know whether that's electrical or or why they're linked together.

Um, but definitely the Tim's auto repair and service sign is the one in the best condition.

So, Terry, if he decided that he wanted to keep the old looking sign as part of his aesthetic, can he do that and have it maybe just repaint the post and re refurbish it?

That would be an option.

Okay.

Well, I think that's something we can address in the in the motion to as far as the conditionals.

All right.

Any any additional questions or anything from you, Justin?

Mr.

Chair, we need to put that in the mic.

Yeah, so um, do you want to come up or do you want to restate what he asked?

Okay.

Does the landscaping is the landscaping?

Okay, go ahead and yeah, give us your name and address the East Kingsgate and Amp Ido.

Does the landscaping approval um that would need to be required for just the two potential um landscaping planters in the front have to go through a separate hearing process and approval process?

And then what's the time limit on that?

If so.

That's the staff approved of it.

I check me if I'm wrong, Terry, but I believe that the answer would be that you would have to meet the city's requirements, is what uh according to the code for that zone.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Yes, that's correct.

It would be part of the permitting process.

It wouldn't require a public hearing.

But she had and she had said it was unfeasible, right?

With current the with the current site plan, the current required landscaping requirements wouldn't be.

You wouldn't be able to meet that just the 20-foot setback is what's required, but you don't have the ability to do that because you don't have the 20 feet, otherwise you'd lose your parkings uh lot.

So there would be an additional public hearing in order to approve a landscaping.

No, okay.

No nothing else no additional public hearing.

Yep, it would just be through staff approval.

Landscaping plan for the front.

And I think part of I think part of the excuse me, Mr.

Chair, I'm sorry, but I think part of the reason they want to review it is because of site problems right there, too.

Make sure you don't put something in that's gonna block any any site.

So I think that's the main reason they want to see what you're thinking of doing.

I just wouldn't want to see Justin have to come in and do a $50,000 landscaping plan on a little thing when it looks like you could add some nice shrubs and a couple of things.

Yeah, I believe the intent is is that you would just add the irrigation to the existing beds and then clean up the existing beds that are already there.

Yeah, you guys can spell that out.

That would be a good thing to have spelled out, potentially.

Yeah, and I think I think that it's in the conditions here, but we'll make sure.

Yeah.

Okay.

Is that good there, Justin?

Do you you have any additional questions?

No.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Transferable.

Okay, I didn't entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

Moved.

Second.

All right.

It's been moved by Commissioner Keho and seconded by Commissioner Morgan to close the public hearing.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed.

Okay.

Well, I think we've done enough deliberating already.

Chairman, I have a question.

The number eight, he really here, and just when he was walking away, I heard him say he really wants this to be transferable to a new owner.

Not tied to one owner, but tied to the new list.

Is that to a new tenant?

So that they can have somebody else move into the shop and not have to get a new CUP because it's tied to the owner, not the tenant.

Okay, but that says shall not be transferable to the owner or location, right?

Right.

Which is typical.

Okay.

As long as he owns the building and the C UP is under his name, he can he can transfer, he can move tenants in and out.

But he can't if he sells the property, he can't that C UP doesn't go with it to the new owner.

So if it's okay, I'll try to make a motion amending the conditions as said and remember the and then you guys just check.

Okay.

Can you go back one slide, please, Terry?

Um I'll bring up the motion on just trying to bring up the length of the motion, make sure I get it right.

But I want to leave the conditions on the screen.

Or can you just reuse the conditions on your screen and then I can find either one?

Do you have the thanks?

Okay, Terry, if you can put the motion up.

Well, I got it.

Okay.

All right.

Leave it here.

Yeah.

I I move to approve the conditional use permit for an automobile or truck repair 408 North Franklin Boulevard in a BC zoning district for Justin Feist representing Feisty Commercial Properties LLC.

Um, with the recommended conditions and proposed findings with the commit conditions modified as follows.

Um condition two is removed.

Condition three, the second half regarding landscaping on 9th and 10th is removed.

Um recommend we amend to meet current sign code rather than prescribe which signs need to be removed, and then number eight modified to say um applicant instead of current owner.

Okay.

We have a motion by Commissioner Morgan and a second by Commissioner Daffer.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, so that motion carries.

And now Justin, if you can hold tight, I will read this.

This CUP will become effective 15 calendar days from the date the written decision and reason statement is provided to the applicant unless an appeal has been filed with the planning and zoning department with the appropriate fee.

No action should be taken on this CUP until the appeal period has concluded.

I made a motion.

No, he's coming up the ramp right now.

Did he go home?

Sorry.

Yeah, I know.

Feeling a little pickish.

Okay, we're back on now.

We got one?

We do.

Okay, we're ready to get going again here.

Um for this next application.

Uh the company that employees me has a vested interest in this project, and so I will refuse, and uh Commissioner Turner will be the chairperson for this item.

Do you have to go sit in the car?

No, I gotta go sit in the green room.

Okay.

Uh action item number three, conditional use permit to a multifamily residential sugar district apartments at twelve thirty-two North Galleria Drive, and a conditional use permit to allow multiple or multifamily residential apartments in a townhouse style sugar district town homes at Zero Stam Lane.

Both parcels in a BC zoning district.

And you're here.

We have the first application related to 284 apartments in the center of the sugar district, the former uh NAMPA Gateway, replacing the movie theater.

And we had talked about that when we were here six months ago.

Additionally, we're back with an application for townhomes on the eastern parcel of 77 townhomes.

If we can proceed to the next slide, as you know, this area is zoned and has been developed pursuant to a master plan and a master development agreement that had been uh undertaken with a prior developer.

And Gardner acquired this property in 2020 uh during the depths of COVID as we went forward with trying to repurpose and reutilize this.

We were before you on a modification uh in 2022 to the master development agreement and site plan as the at the time we'd contemplated removing 50,000 square feet of retail space.

Well, we did not remove that, and we came back to modify that to take it out because as you know, we found a user that did not exist at that time.

Uh, and we now have 50,000 square feet of pickleball and other recreational activities going on inside of those buildings.

The sugar district, if we can go to the next slide, is designated as community mixed use.

Uh, it supports both commercial and residential development, and in your comprehensive plan, your comprehensive plan contemplates a residential element within these types of uses.

Now, when this project was originally developed, it was contemplated that there would be office use on that eastern portion.

And as we have gone through this process and been back and presented to you, we believe that in light of the changes that have happened in the retail market and office and other things that to truly capture the vision of community mixed use is in your comp plan, we it needs a robust residential element.

So if we can move to the next slide, as indicated, in 2022, we were here with a modification to the site plan uh as part of the development agreement, and you approved the townhouse application at that time for a conditional use permit for 77 units with a 30 to 35 foot buffer along the east side, and we had reconfigured those units so that they were oriented away from the larger lot single family residential property on the east.

Additionally, in the fall of 2022, uh this body had approved an apartment application that involved two four-story apartment buildings that were up against what was then the House of Design building, but is is known as the Macy's building.

It was north of the theater, and we had two four-story units that were approved at that time.

We did not proceed with either of those applications due to a variety of economic considerations as we worked through repurposing.

Gardner spent much of the last four years trying to find a an appropriate reuse for the theater.

So a demolition permit has been issued, and our new application for multifamily will go on that site.

So to briefly cover each of these applications, as indicated, the townhouse application we have before you is for 77 units, which is the same amount, same number of units as we'd proposed in 2021 that you approved in 2022.

It's a mix of two and three bedroom units between 1,100 and 1,300 square feet.

But the configuration is largely the same with the sides of units being oriented towards those backyards with Mews between units, and also the consideration that as we locate those, we have relocated some roadways so that there's better connectivity with the apartment application and elements to the east.

We retain the setbacks that were approved in 2022, the existing eight-foot masonry wall, we retain the the elevation and the height that you all had previously approved.

With respect to uh this area and this component, we just want to remind everybody that in the BC zone, we would by right be able to pull permits to do much taller commercial buildings with much less setback, and that was one of the considerations that we went through hearing the con concerns of the neighbors to address.

And that was one of the considerations that we went through hearing the con concerns of the neighbors to address.

With respect to the apartments, instead of two four-story buildings, we're now proposing one four-story building and ten three-story buildings for a total of 284 units that are a mix of studio one, two, and three bedroom.

The project amenities for the townhouses and for these apartments will be contained within the town within the apartment elements.

It kind of goes in that space right there.

So the four-story building has been centralized.

It's in the location just to the south of where the four-story building had been done before.

We've oriented it to where it is so that there is proximity for all of those joint amenities between the two elements to be utilized.

All parking has been internalized on the site, uh, not towards the street, not toward properties on the south, and these apartments will park with both surface parking and garages.

Those ten three-story buildings have garage elements that are available to tenants in those spaces.

Um the conditional use permit standards are applicable to both applications.

First, the proposed use must be supported by the NAMPA comprehensive plan.

Because it is community mixed use, it contemplates that five to fifty percent element of a multifamily higher density residential.

It also promotes the true mixed use where that we can can meet people's needs without people necessarily having to get in their cars and go down the street.

Element two is that the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the property and project have to not adversely impact the general vicinity.

We own and continue to develop and operate the commercial elements of this, and we'll continue to manage and operate them jointly uh with an integrated maintenance of all of the exterior things, and we have paid great attention to the configuration and orientation of the buildings.

The proposed use will be served by adequate public facilities.

We have our traffic consultant here tonight to address any questions that may arise.

But as this is an adaptive reuse and a redevelopment of an existing commercial site and the infrastructure that was invested in previously by DDR when the site was built, we have purposefully sized this so that it replaces and there is no net impact on those commercial uses we're removing.

And finally, Mr.

Chair Time.

Finally, condition four uh are just your typical no excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fume, glare, and those really aren't applicable to a residential use.

And with that, I'd stand for any questions.

Any questions for the applicant?

Yes, sir.

Um, when you build a four-story unit like this, obviously you have elevators for people to go up and down, right?

Correct.

Do you build a commercial grade uh extra large side for moving furniture between floors?

Uh Mr.

Chairman, I'm gonna defer to the design team, and if you want to come up and address that.

Name and address two for the record, please.

Uh Preston Dean, uh 5413 West Stonehades Drive in Harriman, Utah.

Um made the trip today.

So yeah, we we have elevators that are gurney sized and oversized for moving moving in.

Is that answer your question?

Sorry, simple question, but yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Yes.

I'm uh Weston, do you want to handle that?

Commissioner Wood uh uh West and Arnell, uh 800 West Main Street and Boise.

Uh menada packages include a club room, uh workspace area, fitness room, uh dog cleaning area, dog kind of dog park area, uh pool, spa, those types of thank you.

The other question?

All right, thank you.

Not for now, we'll probably bring you back up though.

Who's got this one?

Good evening, commissioners.

My name is Candice Fry, assistant planner for the city of Nampa.

The request before you this evening is for two conditional use permits for multifamily apartments and townhouse style apartments at the Sugar District.

The original concept is 284 units in 11 three to four-story buildings and 77 town home style apartments and 17 two-story buildings.

The property details, the property is currently zoned BC, community business.

The surrounding zoning to the north is BC to the south is Canyon County and RP residential professional to the west is BC and to the east is Canyon County.

The comprehensive plan designates this area as community mixed use.

So the purple boundary line is showing where the apartments will be, and then the red boundary line is showing where the townhomes will be.

Apartments on parcel number are 3049 and then five zeros at the end.

Here are the applicable regulations, the conditional use permit criteria.

More applicable regulations in 1032 for schedule of land uses in order to do multifamily dwell dwelling developments in the BC zone.

A conditional use of permit is required.

And then there is also a footnote, and that footnote is here on the screen just enlarge so you'd be able to see it.

And then we are mainly talking about section two, multifamily residential development in a BC zoning district that is not within 300 feet of Caldwell Boulevard, Gardy Boulevard, 12th Avenue South, 12th Avenue Road, Idaho Center Boulevard, Franklin Boulevard, North Side Boulevard, and Carter Road shall be limited to a height of 30 feet maximum.

And we will go into this more later on in the presentation.

The staff analysis.

Parking will be provided on site with surface parking areas for the larger apartment complex and enclosed and include enclosed individual garages for the townhouse style apartments.

All parking will be calculated and reviewed according to 1022 6.b.

And then the amenities were just touched on, so I won't go into those again, but those are on the screen as well.

Landscaping, the development will need to conform to the landscaping requirements outlined in chapter 33.

In addition, they will also need to follow the regulations outlined in 10167.

And then building height.

1032 restricts multifamily buildings in a BC zone, not within 300 feet of a gateway street to 30 feet in height.

The proposed development is up to 56 feet in height and is not within 300 feet of Garratty Boulevard.

This requirement may be waived by the commission as stated in 10254A.

If the if this requirement is not waived, future multifamily development will be restricted to 30 feet, and we measure that from grade to the ceiling of the top floor of the structure.

And then that footnote again is here bolded.

And then 10254A is also included, and then that high that bolded statement of provisions of the zoning ordinance unless lawfully waived or modified by the authorization of the commission.

So that was something to bring to your attention.

Comment typically a conditional use permit is granted if it meets the criteria listed in 1025 4A, follows the zoning ordinance and the NAPRA comprehensive plan.

Applicants have the option to request a waiver to code requirements by authorization of the commission.

And again, this project is proposed to go over the 30 feet in height, and they are currently proposing a height of 42 feet at the highest point for the three-story apartment buildings, and the highest point for the four-story apartment building is 56 feet.

For correspondence, we did not receive any public comments.

The fire district said that this development is located approximately 1.3 miles from Nampa Fire Station 5 with an approximate response time of four minutes.

And then the staff report has the full fire district comments.

The NAMPA police department also had comments, which was not in the staff report, but I wanted to bring it to your attention.

Nampa PD is recommending a commitment to fund 1.08 additional officers and 0.56 additional support staff if this project is approved to maintain current police service levels.

And the closest police department is 3.5 miles away, and developments near this reporting district have a call volume of 2,257 service calls annually.

And then the proposed findings.

So the existing zoning is BC community business and is a permitted zone under the comprehensive plan land use map designation for community mixed use.

Creating high density residential meets the goals and strategies for economic development in the NAMPA comprehensive plan.

According to section 5.6.7 in the comprehensive plan 2040.

Projects like this should be located on a major transportation corridors, arterials, collectors, and gateways with commercial elements oriented to a corridor, a frontage road, or a local access road.

While this multifamily development is located within a larger commercial complex, the entire complex is adjacent to Happy Valley Road, Stan Lane, Garrity Boulevard, and I 84.

Parking landscaping signage will be reviewed at time of building permit and will need to follow all of the appropriate code sections that are listed here.

And in conclusion, weighing the facts and department agency input.

The project meets the criteria as outlined by 1025-4.

The proposed use is supported by the comprehensive plan because it is in a commercial designation with appropriate zoning and near major transportation corridors and meets the goals and strategies for economic development.

This project will not adversely impact the intended character and appearance of the general vicinity through design, construction, operation, and maintenance, and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community because there are other multifamily uses in the vicinity, and it will be adding dwelling units to an area adequately served by transportation jobs and educational opportunities.

Here is the one recommended condition of approval.

Here are your potential motions, and I will stand for any questions.

We do.

We have five.

Our first one is Inus Alderton.

All right.

Our second one is Samantha Cross.

Remember to give your name and address, please.

I'm Samantha Cross, 1207 North Autumn Wind Drive, Nampa, Idaho, 8368.

Might need to speak up or pull that mic down.

Sorry, I am kind of mic up if it's easier.

Thank you.

Do you want me to repeat?

Okay.

1207 North Autumn Wind Drive in Nampa, Idaho.

You got three minutes.

All right, I'm just waiting for it to flash at me.

All right, thank you.

Um I am the Autumn Wind Subdivision HOA president, so I am mostly here in congruence with that as to speak for the people within my neighborhood.

Um the Autumn Wind Subdivision is the neighbors so kindly referred to by the Gardner Group, um, which I appreciate are concerns being taken into account when doing the replanning of the 77 townhomes that are against our um abutting wall.

Uh well, I do appreciate those notes taken into account.

ID out I and the people I represent have concerns about the traffic and infrastructure impact of the number of dwellings that are being added.

Um rough calculations.

I'm thinking 750 cars, two cars per dwelling, 77 townhomes, and then 284 apartments times two.

Um there's just concern about that area being heavily impacted.

Specifically, Stam Road is a two-lane road.

Um we currently already have issues with bus pickups getting jammed, but I understand that these will be addressed later on if this motion gets approved.

Um I also have concerns as well as the people I represent for um not having public access or public infrastructure for the already existing high density um dwellings that are in the area.

So there's a an apartment complex area, townhome like on Stam and Happy Valley.

They already have parking issues where they are parking on the road of Happy or of STAM, um, which is something to deal with, but I'm personally more concerned about the kids playing on the sidewalk area that is allotted at that intersection.

I personally, the last time we were here in October brought up having some kind of public recreational area on in the lot of the sugar district.

I don't personally mind where, um, but I do think I see a need for for the high density um individuals and impact needing a public resource.

Um again, I understand that it is a private domicile or to be used for commercial use, whatever that may be.

Um I think mostly everybody in the neighborhood is appreciative of the concerns taken in place.

Um I think that is all.

Are there any questions?

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Next is Sarah Hanson.

Sarah Hansen, and my address is 12860, Venezia Court, Nampa, Idaho.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um I'm opposed to this.

Um, one of the reasons I'm opposed is when they built the apartments at Carcher Mall.

We were promised high-end apartments.

And it would bring in businesses.

In fact, it made businesses leave.

The only business that really came in was the semi-park truck parking that is now there, and the apartments are really run down now and are kind of an eyesore, and I'm afraid of that happening here.

And also um that business park, there are businesses in there that would die if that apartment goes right behind them.

There's not enough parking for those businesses.

They have to use the parking that where the theater was.

Um at night, there is a swimming, like a kid's swimming place, a D1 training, there's a gymnastics plus Italian-esque, plus now Flying Pickle, who did just open and invest a lot of money.

They would lose almost all of their parking.

Flying Pickle would have no parking because if you look at the building where Flying Pickle is right next to it, is where all those big apartments are.

And they would take all of the parking.

And really, I think as a shopper, I wouldn't even want to go in there.

If there's a thousand cars coming in and out from the apartments, and there's no parking, I'm not even gonna go there, which is I think what happened at Carter Mall.

They thought all these businesses come in, we'll have this great high end apartments, and what we got was an ISO.

And I think it's the traffic already at that intersection is horrible.

If you're ever there in the morning trying to get on to Garrity, add a thousand cars to that coming out right there.

The traffic is gonna be impacted because there is not that much traffic that goes in and out of that complex every day, even when the theater was there, as what those apartments would bring.

That's it.

Next is Earl Stanton.

Catherine Stowe.

Hi, Katherine Stow, 8121 Swiftwater Drive, Nampa, Idaho, 83686.

Um, I actually don't have much to add.

Um the pictures depict everything for me as a member of Flying Pickle who has waited as the applicant indicated that they lease this area to 150 members, um, and that parking is going to be completely annihilated.

So you have no place for the people that you just rented space in this complex to park and participate in the activities that you've put in that space.

Um my grandkids go to the goldfish swim school and to the uh gymnastics place, and the parking in that center area is impossible.

Um, there is no place to park at all for any of the key time of day.

And for anybody who does travel through there, as Sarah alluded to, there's a jig jog on Garridy from Happy Valley.

So it all backlogs at that left turn where the Popeyes and the wing code sit.

So we all have to wait for a signal to make the left to make the right to get on to Garrity to actually get on the freeway.

It's a nightmare.

Um add that to the amount of cars that have been calculated, and you're setting us up for a disaster.

Thank you.

Christy Stewart.

Christy Stewart, fifth uh 5305 Stam Lane, and we're right across from where the proposed 77 townhomes are scheduled to go.

Um I find it kind of ironic that we were here about three to four years ago is what I was thinking.

And the movie theater manager was at this meeting, and she said that they hadn't renewed their contract because they were asking an even higher amount for rent.

And she said, mark my words, they're gonna knock down the theater and want to put in apartments.

And I thought, no way, there's no way they're gonna demolish that building to put in a bunch of apartments, and three to four years later, here we are.

Exactly what she predicted.

Um I was more conservative on the number of cars.

I figured maybe half of each of like half of the apartments and half of the townhomes might only have one car.

Probably not, but maybe 541 additional cars on the conservative side.

Um all of the um housing in that area are at least half acre or larger, and we bought in that area with those larger properties for a reason and paid them extra money to have that type of property.

So high density housing in this number does not make sense for that spot.

With as backed up as Stan Lane gets, I invite all of you to come and drive Stam Lane at those peak hours, which is when all of these apartment people and town home people would be traveling just as us homeowners do.

You've added you've added a huge apartment complex on the southwest corner of that intersection, and then you've added the town homes to the southeast corner of that intersection, and then maybe a quarter of a mile down, you added a bunch more town homes with a business in front of it.

I mean, just that number, which is nothing compared to the number that they're proposing, but that number, the effect that it had on those that intersection of like StAM, Happy Valley, trying to get off of Garrity to get into that area, this would be a complete nightmare.

I I can't even imagine.

Um it just seems like we're more focused on tax revenue and what what this is gonna generate for the city rather than taking care of the existing people who paid a lot of money to live in that area and have the type of property that they do to just be like bombarded by hordes of people.

So I I appreciate you taking the time to hear.

Thank you.

No other sayings.

Is there anybody that wants to speak for or against or undecided on this that didn't sign up, that would still like to speak.

Nope.

I'm sure you were taking notes.

Absolutely.

Uh commissioners, again, Jeff Wardle 251 East Front.

If we want to have a conversation about traffic, I have my traffic engineer Sonia DeLeiden here.

But I want to be clear about some things that you've heard tonight.

First of all, this development in the original master development agreement made the improvements to Garrity, made the improvements to Flamingo, invested and made those improvements.

Now, as we build new buildings, we continue to come in and pay impact fees to contribute to that.

But the fact of the matter is the infrastructure that is there was built and developed in furtherance of this mixed-use project by the original developer, where tens of millions of dollars of infrastructure investment was made for this use.

Now we hear these objections and concerns, and they're the same ones we've heard every time we're here.

But the fact of the matter is it is Gardner Company that owns the retail, that has the leases, that has done those elements.

It is Gardner Company that owns the parcels where you have JCPenney or you have Chipotle, where we have these other users.

We have to know and understand our tenants and our obligations under the leases.

We were the ones that went out and got the pickleball facility to come here because they wanted to be here in this location.

So what do we want to do for our tenants, our users, our hotel, our other retail users?

We want people there.

And how do you get people there?

Well, you get people there when we follow the comprehensive plan.

Because the comprehensive plan designated this area as community mixed use, and your comprehensive plan specifies that five to fifty percent of it has to be residential, high density residential.

So the fact of the matter is you've made those decisions.

This body 20 years ago, when DDR came in with the original development agreement that you recommended for approval to the City Council, which was done, had the development agreement that required the tens of millions of dollars of investment in infrastructure as part of this, with the improvements to the sewer, the water, the other systems, the investment that was made to the improvements that you did get on STAM, the improvements you did get on Flamingo, the improvements you did get on Garity, and we continue to pay the impact fees that will be paid to fund the cost of new growth.

Now as you note from our site plan, we have identified the need that, yeah, people need green space.

People need space for them to go run with their kids.

That's why, as you look at the townhouses, we have set out mews, we have set out pathways, we have set out landscaped buffers both to the east and to the north.

And the same thing with the other residential elements.

The last thing I want to talk about is what do we want in a community?

Do we want surface parking lots?

Or do we want a vibrant community?

I would posit that our comprehensive plan that's been adopted here in NAPA calls for a vibrant community.

And a vibrant community is not fulfilled by large surface parking lots, which get used occasionally.

It's fulfilled by people who can walk from their apartment after they get home from their job over to play pickleball.

Or who don't have to make that extra trip out to do the things that we do on a normal basis.

I would also posit that when we look at the amount of traffic as set forth in our traffic plan from the very beginning, we have always ensured you that we are going to design so that there is no net increase in traffic beyond what was approved as part of the master plan.

That's a commitment we've made.

That's a commitment we've kept.

That's a commitment that Kittleson has validated with the information that they provided to you and that your engineers have evaluated.

So, commissioners, we respectfully request your approval of both of these items.

Last thing I want to talk about is just and this is a conversation I've had with your staff repeatedly.

I appreciate the fact that yes, your code provides that you can deal with height via a waiver that's consistent with Idaho code, you've done it before.

We don't have a problem with that.

When we look, though, at that footnote, that footnote is something that's confusing because it talks about zones, not parcels.

And while this parcel is more than 300 feet away from Garrity, the zone where this is as a mixed use intensive BC zone is a gateway, contemplates that.

So there's some confusion there.

But you've approved it before.

We're in line with the heights that we've talked about before.

And we appreciate as well staff's clarification as to how that is measured, because these may look considerably taller than what is contemplated, but that's because you have roof elements and you have screening elements for those items up top so that you have some definition and design.

We think it's an appropriate use, we think it's consistent with what your vision is under the comprehensive plan, and we request your approval of both of these conditional use permits.

Any other questions?

Questions.

Thank you.

Hold on just a sec.

Oh you almost made it.

So I I've got one for you because I know I know they you know some of them mentioned you've got some new tenants in there, which I appreciate because some of those buildings have been sitting vacant forever.

Um as Gardner owns the property and takes care of the leases with those tenants.

I'm sure they took into account the amount of parking these new apartments are going to bring and not drive business away because then that's people are just gonna move out and you've now you're back to empty buildings.

So I'm I'm sure Gardner's uh taking that into account.

And uh Mr.

Chairman, absolutely.

First of all, in most of our leases, we do have certain obligations to provide parking to our commercial tenants, and we're consistent with that.

Second of all, we have to comply with your standards.

And as seen in the packet, our design teams have gone through and done that evaluation.

I think what is important to note uh is from a parking standpoint, both the townhouses and the apartments, not all of the apartments, but ten of those buildings have garages, which we're not talking carports, we're not talking drive, you know, drives, we're not talking open fields.

There is open parking, but we have garages in these units.

And where we have garages, especially in the townhouses, you also have drives and you have the other areas.

So great attention has been paid because the last thing that we want to do is, especially where this has to be a for-rent product, is to damage either our residential users or damage our commercial users.

Okay.

So uh first, the house of design, is that owned, is that parcel owned by Gardner, or is that a separate parcel?

Uh, Mr.

Chairman, Commissioner Kirkman, there are multiple different parcels there, but that is a gardener entity that owns the House of Design parcel.

Okay.

Um I get asked this question a lot.

Sorry, I'm pulling my mic up so you can hear me.

I get asked this question a lot, so I'm glad Gardner is here because I'm going to ask this.

What the theater?

Yeah.

Did that just become not viable anymore as a theater?

Because that's a question I get constantly.

So, Mr.

Chairman, uh, Commissioner Kirkman, I'm going to give you some background.

That movie theater was built by DDR, who then entered into a management agreement with the theater operator to try to draw tenants to the property, try to draw interest, try to draw the public.

So from the very beginning, it was a very, very unique arrangement that had been done because DDR built a movie theater and went and got an operator.

Now, the problem with that operations agreement that we discovered is that when the operator, and notwithstanding testimony that you've heard about what people have heard, that is not accurate.

But what happened was they got to the end of their management contract.

We were in COVID, and the movie theater operator exercised their right under that contract to remove all of the equipment, destroy the screens, and take anything that another movie operator could do, because that was what the agreement was.

So everybody goes, well, why don't you just put another theater in there?

Because we couldn't.

We had would have had to make that big investment.

And so Gardner has spent four years talking to community artistic groups, uh churches, businesses.

And the problem is that your traditional 18-screen big box theater is obsolete.

That's the re that's the reason I give when I get that question.

Because everyone's got Netflix and everything else.

Everybody's got Netflix and an 80-inch TV.

So okay, so thank you.

That and we have it on the record, so I'll just direct them to the record if they ask that question again.

Um and again, why why are you requesting a variance to the height on one building, correct?

Uh Mr.

Chairman, Commissioner Kirkwin, the apartments.

The apartments.

The apartments are 40 feet to the top of the three-story buildings and 56 feet to the top of the four-story buildings.

And that 56 four-story building is consistent with the type of design and height that was approved in 2022.

Let me rephrase my question.

So I I I understand why you're requesting a variance because it's required because of the height restrictions, but why not have those buildings at three-story to meet the rather than four-story?

Well, I'm we'll have the design people come up.

Because part of it too, and they're gonna answer this, but part of it too is that everybody complains about flat little boxes.

And if you want design elements, if you want roofs, if you want to screen the elements on the roofs, we've got to have some height.

So and and and while you're there, the reason I'm asking this question, I guess, is because when you were talking about your very emphatic about meeting the comp plan and how the city of Nampa has developed a comp plan, and that's what it is, and you're conforming to that and so on.

But then you request a variance in height.

So that that's kind of the the gist of my question of where that's coming from.

Yeah, I why not why not comply with what's already there?

I I I think we I think we thought we were applying or complying more than we really are, and maybe just a point of clarification on how the building height is measured.

Because I think I heard that it was measured from grade to the high the ceiling of the highest floor, which would mean all 10 of the three-story buildings would comply because the 46 or whatever number, that's to the roof.

But if you go to the ceiling of the highest floor, we're under 30 feet in the 10 buildings.

So but it's just the four-story when you're requesting the.

So then when you look at the floor four story, we were we were intentional because we knew you know we would have a kind of a suburban look for the for the three-story that would have pitched roofs, and that would have a certain height uh there.

The four-story are intentionally mostly flat roofs, so where we were trying to make them so that they seemed like they were more compatible to each other when you measured to the roof line.

Um but measuring to the ceiling of the highest floor, even in the four-story building, it's like 42 or less less feet.

So that one we are asking for a little bit more to get the density that makes the project work.

But um, well, it sounds like you're asking for more to get one more story in there.

Yeah, get more apartments in there.

Yeah, yeah, to get more apartments, but then also thinking thoughtfully about the design that they're not that much different in in height between the three and the four-story.

Just because of the roof design.

And then this might be a question for staff, but I'll ask it to them.

You guys chime in.

Oh, did you have something, Rodney you wanted to Mr.

Chair?

Um Commissioners, I I just wanted to answer his question.

So we do measure from top from floor to top plate.

So that is exactly what he's just described.

The 30-foot would be at the ceiling of that top floor.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um the five to fifty percent residential in a mixed use zone was was this a requirement back when in in 2022 when they came the first time, or is this a I can't remember when that changed.

Okay, I I think I might be the only one who has that answer.

Um Mr.

Chair and Commissioners.

I so we recently when I say recently, like within the last couple of years, there was a there was a push by our council to not have taller um apartment buildings away from those major corridors.

So they directed us to put that into code.

So I believe we'd have to go back and look at that, but I believe that they were in compliance at that time uh when they first came in uh with the existing or with the code at that time.

Okay.

Uh Mr.

Chair, Commissioners, just wanted to add also when you look at that building that you have in question, that the tallest building, that one single one that's over.

As you look at the layout of the overall design of the residential that's being added, that building is in the center of all those buildings.

So it's it's not an ask at the perimeter or anywhere that would conflict.

It's in the center, and so it kind of gives that hierarchical step up that you often see often see in a master plan development.

Just wanted to share that with you as you're understanding the heights and the stepping there.

Thank you.

Very good.

Thank you.

And just the final comment on that.

Why is it taller?

Well, we are trying to do something that is distinct.

We're not trying to come in with you know 13 more suburban type apartment buildings are configured around.

That we wanted something that was central to the apartments and to the townhouses and reinforce the theme and the design that we had done there.

And so, you know, we there are a variety of ways that we get the same density without going four stories.

But you lose green space.

You lose amenities.

And again, uh, and just to clarify, as I recall that you've recodified that section, but that footnote today is the same as what the footnote is when we had this discussion about the two four-story buildings in 2022.

So there are trade-offs.

Do we want a better design?

Do we want a better design and more green space and more mews?

Or do we want more surface parking and carports and garages?

That's the trade-off.

Another question if I could.

You're on a roll.

The the renderings that you had uh of the apartments or not apartments that I can't even remember what they were, but they all look like town homes or uh not town homes, like brownstones, like just they're all the same.

They're attached.

Are they all is that what you think the final product is gonna look like?

They're all the same.

That's where I'll ask TJ to come back and talk about the townhouses.

You would have to do that.

Row houses, that's the that's the term I was thinking of, row houses.

Okay.

I mentioned last time, sorry about that.

Brownstone.

My mistake, sorry, Mr.

Chair.

Uh Commissioner.

Uh yes, that uh that design's intent there is to add to what uh Mr.

Wardle was sharing about that diversity in product type and market sector and renting uh kind of profile ability to hit different people in the market and in the sector.

And what we're trying to do there is bring in a modern interpretation of a traditional home and a brown stone look like you're seeing there.

And the look there is very intentional, yes.

So I and forgive me, it's brownstone wasn't the term I was thinking of, it was row houses.

Just like but it seems like that and forgive me, I don't mean to be rude here, but it seems like that's just kind of boring.

Is there any way that you there is there any I mean if you're looking for a unique design element in a place like this, putting a bunch of row houses that all look like this that all look the same there just doesn't seem it seems counter to what it the intent might be.

It might seem that way.

I think when people look at the Clara, for example, they look at that product out there and think that's a nice project.

And I would say that's a very similar design uh standard as this one here.

And what we have in this project is that there is an element of that, it's not the entire project as a whole.

So uh we did bring that in to create that visual interest and bring that up.

Okay.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

Of course, thank you.

I think that's it.

Any other better move on quick if there's any before Jeff starts thinking again?

Any other questions for the applicant?

Looks like we're good to have a motion to close public hearing.

Second move by Kehoe, second by dafford to close public hearing.

All in favor?

I opposed chair, can I ask Daniel some questions?

You sure can wait for you.

Can you remind me who owns Stam Lane?

Is that ours?

Um there are portions that are the cities and there are portions that are the highway districts.

Um the portions up adjacent to the sugar district properties are within the city, and then as you go beyond that, it's a highway district road there.

Do you have any plans for further improving that beyond what's already done with the original development?

Um there is nothing that I have in the five-year plan.

There are some other projects that are in the area to the north of the freeway that uh trigger some improvements at the intersection of StAM and Robinson.

Um there are other projects that the city does have that we are working with ITD on in that area of Garrity, Stam, Flamingo, Happy Valley, um that are we have been working on for a number of years to get approvals and funding and that with um ITD.

Um we have some grants and some projects are proceeding, um, but I don't have a specific map of what exactly there's a number of things going on there that help address some weaving movements and that that cause um some accident concerns and that type of stuff.

There are safety things in that that are going on out there um currently.

Okay.

As I look at this map, I feel like if I lived in most of these apartments, I wouldn't get on Stan Lane.

I'd either go up the I don't know if that yeah, commerce and around and turn right onto whatever it is between Happy Valley and Garrety.

What's the I don't know what the question is?

I would agree that that's the likely movement.

Now people go where people go.

Um but I I would agree that that is um but my my follow-up is an even shorter route is to go straight through what used to be Macy's and the the retail, which is all parking lot.

Correct.

So you don't design parking lots, right?

Or through ways, or like how do I compare how safe it is for people to be moving through that parking lot and a and uh does that make sense what I'm asking?

I mean, so so we we look at those parking lots and and the designs of them as they were approved.

Um and they're they're designed per, you know, standards that um have the appropriate dry aisles and all those types of things.

Um and so you know it's they they're not public streets.

We don't do you know, they're not treated the same, but they are certainly dry vials that are uh it would not be inappropriate for them to be used for ingress egress to the site.

Okay, so if they worked for the amount of parking that was there before, you're confident they should work for the amount of parking that's there now.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Chairman, sir relation to the parking.

If if I was the owner of one of those businesses, retail businesses like Winco or one of the other ones, or just even the manager.

This would be like having heaven dropped in your lap.

All these people are gonna be living in these buildings, they can walk to your business.

They could ride their bikes to your business.

So don't be feeling bad about the people that own these businesses, like they will be losing out.

They're gonna be making plenty.

Was there a question there?

It was just a statement that you follow out of his own.

Certainly that is something that as we look at residential adjacent to commercial.

Um, there is capturing of trips that happens in there that um is beneficial to the roadway networks around that, that you have less, you know, we the the length of trips if they have to drive are much shorter to get to those services versus having to drive a couple miles and that.

So, yes, there is certainly benefits to um services adjacent to residential and residential at density.

All your thoughts, all my thoughts that I can repeat.

Have any thoughts?

Um the need for housing as was shown in the beginning of this meeting is pretty high.

Like we got cost of housing is rising, and I I want to keep that down.

Um we're gonna put it somewhere.

This is a good place to put it.

Um I understand how bad Stan Lane is, why there's no turn signals on that light as Stanley and Happy Valley is beyond me.

Um how are you ever gonna turn left on a Robinson?

I I do my best to avoid those two intersections if I can help it.

I get it.

Well we got to put housing somewhere.

Um I'm gonna address this to Mr.

Worrell.

Um I'm probably the most pro-growth commissioner on the council here.

Um and I I like the project, but I would encourage you to work some empathy into your responses because you've got people with concerns.

And it sounds like you've even addressed some of them.

Um emphasize that.

Don't walk up and just say why you're right and they're wrong, because that's not the way to go about it.

It's hard to build good relations with others as a as a development community if we don't understand and emphasize.

You have valid points and you're really intelligent in presenting them.

But I would encourage you to figure out how to work some empathy into that.

Uh as it stands, I'm I'm for this project with you know reservations, but I'm I would vote for it.

Did you say you oppose it?

No.

Okay.

I think one of the the big disconnects is people comparing the potential traffic of this development to what is there, not what is already entitled to be there.

You know what I mean?

Because yes, it's going to increase traffic, but is it going to increase traffic more than to what they could build without even coming before us?

And in fact, I think it they found it reduces it if you get a nod from Kittleson.

Yeah.

Um that that helped me with the traffic understand the traffic issue better.

Um I'll second what Commissioner Daffner is saying.

If we're going to build housing, let's build it right next to the freeway, right next to other services.

Um I'm in favor of the project too.

Yeah, I'd say, I mean, you can't get much closer to the freeway out entrance.

I wouldn't say it's going to be easy to get on the freeway, because it's certainly not at Garrety in the morning, as most of us know, but uh but it is but we could be adding it two miles down, yeah.

And then and then it's backing up the whole way rather than just yeah, yeah.

Yeah.

So I am worried that this uh part of town is gonna turn into another carcher interchange pretty quick.

Well, that's that traffic pattern is terrible.

But that's my concern is that this this Gardy interchange, this whole area turns into another carcher marketplace fiasco where you're revising the you know the traffic and the roads and everything every other year.

ITD's on its seventh over plan on that, and I think they might get it right eventually.

So but to that point, Jeff, uh Commissioner Kirkman Kirkman.

You can call me Jeff, I don't care.

There's too many Jeffs here tonight.

Um it's gonna be we could the other option is to sprawl out, right?

If we sprawl out south southeast of town, this is still gonna be a clogged point, but now we're just clogging the rest of the way to get there too.

I think I may have given you the impression that I was opposed to this project.

Just want to address that concern.

No, it it's a concern.

And I think uh, you know, one of the it's not gonna alleviate the traffic concerns, but good grief.

Why can't we put a turn signal on all four StAM and Happy Valley?

And and I'm not even gonna talk about Happy Valley.

I think we only get five million dollars a year in front of roads.

It might be part of my motion.

And and those are those are things that as we are planning our projects out there that will get addressed.

I don't have a it's gonna happen on X date, but those are we have lots of planning things and and projects that we are working towards out there as the funding availability becomes available.

Well, if I have to, I'll start a petition, but we need we need some turn signals there.

Um but the project, the location, I I like the location.

I think it's it's sad to see things go that our our community has been you know going to the movie theater and all that other kind of stuff.

And you know, but things change, and if the market doesn't support it, the market doesn't support it.

And I I do appreciate Gardner Company looking at other options to keep that area viable because the worst case is that it would go into disrepair and become a derelict area that we don't want.

So I do appreciate the you know the applicant looking at options.

We do need the housing.

Um if we're gonna be at uh high density housing, if that's what we're looking at, which this is a good spot for it.

Um I really do feel for the neighbors that are there because when they moved in.

This spot where that we're talking about used to be a zoo.

Yeah.

That dates me a little bit.

I don't know if even Rodney remembers that.

I don't know if even Rodney remembers that, but used to be a zoo there.

I couldn't believe it.

You come off the freeway, there's a zoo right there.

And so, you know, when this when the other neighbors moved in, that's that was the feel of the area out there.

So I I do understand that and I feel for that, but I I think this is a good project and a good location.

Let's get that place built out.

I think I'd also like to emphasize that the project is all addressing the people who are going to live there and how they are going to use the surrounding businesses.

But the entire NAMPA community also needs to use those businesses.

And and they've been waiting for that area to be developed to not necessarily for housing, but they've been waiting for like hey, can we have something like the village or something like that?

Can we have some businesses?

Can we something restaurants?

And so to just hopefully the residential element, the the full residential element doesn't discourage businesses.

And I understand there it's kind to me, uh the the Gardner Group is a little bit split.

Yes, they're they're concerned about their tenants, but they're also concerned about this.

And there could be possibly some conflicting avenues with these two things with parking with people address with people coming to those businesses.

I'd like to know what the um what the uh vacancy rate is right now on the on any of the retail space.

Is it 50%?

Is it I don't I don't know, but if it's 50%, then that means you've got if it's 50%, I'm just saying, then you've got 50% of business if it fills up that's gonna need parking.

So just a concern of mine.

I think those are good points.

I think I would say this place has had more activity than it has in almost 20 years.

Yeah, true.

In that spot.

Except when the zoo was there.

Yeah.

I don't think that was a legal zoo.

Um from what I remember.

You don't remember the zoo.

I remember you could play with tigers.

I don't think you could do that at most zoos.

Um I think I I like that point, and I think that's why it's good that Gardner owns both, because they have an incentive to not have that conflict, you know, to keep both happy.

So if I mean maybe they could sell off part of it in another time, but uh the other point was they were gonna tear down some retail because they couldn't fill it.

They didn't because they could fill it.

You know, I just I think options.

Yeah.

I that's what I would add to your comment.

Mr.

Mr.

Chair, just add to what something commissioner Morgan was saying about the parking lot and the cars moving through that.

I I was thinking about how dangerous that could be because you you know that they're gonna take the the the shortest route possible from point A to point B.

Point A being the apartment, point B being Flamingo.

Yeah, and it's gonna go right right past the house of design, right past right up to and so I don't know if there's a way because that I mean there's gotta be some traffic mitigation in this parking lot, otherwise it's gonna be people blowing through there, and that is a safety concern, and it's not regulated by the city because it's private property, so we you know we don't is your citations.

So I that is a concern, and and parking lots are built to encourage traffic to move slow.

I mean, that's why they have the you know going in and out and all that kind of stuff.

But so I don't know if that's something that maybe we consider in this conditional use permit as a condition is to maybe look at the flow of traffic through that whole the whole area there as far as parking is concerned.

I don't know what that's what would that condition.

I don't know.

I would I I would go back to the what you just mentioned that Gardner owns all of it.

They're gonna own the residential and they're gonna own the commercial.

Well, the commercial people start complaining that the traffic is uh is causing issues, I think they'll come in and take care of it.

But I don't I'm not sure we want to start trying to design it.

Well, no, it's not necessarily that that particular issue with the commercial, it's just people going from point A to point B.

Point A, the apartment to get out to the freeway, they're gonna take the shortest route possible.

So if I think with Gardner also being the property owner for the businesses, if the businesses start to complain to Gardner, they'll do something.

I I I don't know if we're we're the ones not being engineers that we should start trying to figure out how to I I never want to put my place in the in the place of an engineer, though.

So um because there's too many numbers involved, but yeah, it was just something I was thinking about as far as that traffic moving through that parking area.

Yeah, I get it, but I just I mean you can see it now.

People going to JCPenney, you can go two different ways to get to JCPenney and racetrack.

Anyways, yeah, just a thought though.

Any other thoughts, concerns?

Well, if there's nothing else, I don't know.

You make a motion, go ahead.

I might as well I move to approve the project to state it on the screen with recommended conditions and adopt the potential findings.

Kehle, yeah.

Motion by Kirkman, second by Keho to approve it.

All in favor.

Any opposed motion carries.

Thank you, everyone.

All of the sorry, thank you for reminding me.

I know you've heard this before, but gotta read it.

This CUP will become effective 15 calendar days from the date the written decision and reason statement is provided to the applicant.

Unless an appeal has been filed with the planning and zoning department with the appropriate fee, no action should be taken on this CP until the until the appeal period has concluded.

The applicant must confirm with planning and zoning staff that there have been no appeals.

Thanks, sir.

If somebody sees our coach here sleeping out there someplace, you can send it back in.

Is it coming?

I think I'll let him handle the last one then.

Did you get a good map?

No random grab burner.

Oh, if it wasn't for Morgan and Kirkman down there, you wouldn't have been able to come back a half hour ago.

Oh, yeah.

I can rely on this end of the diet.

Oh, yeah.

You'd be surprised though.

Kehoe has been very quiet tonight.

I don't know what it's probably.

Sounds like a challenge.

Uh that will not deter me whatever you say, but it's not okay.

Thank you, Commissioner Turner, for filling in your um our final agenda item tonight.

A subdivision preliminary plat approval for Tierra Bellow subdivision in the RS6 and RD zoning districts.

Addressed as 11342 and 11690 and zero Orchard Avenue for Bonnie Leighton with NV5 representing Corey Barton.

Uh for 146 single family, 60 foot wide detached lots, 127 front-loaded town home lots, and 99 alley loaded town home lots.

Is the applicant here, Bonnie?

Yes.

Good evening, Vice Chairman and members of the commission.

My name is Bonnie Leighton, uh 5561 East Hoot Owl Drive in Boise, Idaho.

I'm no longer within V five, um, but I'm still representing this application tonight.

I'm here to request your approval of Tierrabello subdivision.

It's a preliminary plat application.

It's following up from the master plan community uh application that we had approved.

Oh, about a year ago, I would say.

Um and so uh with that I'll just jump right into this.

Uh just quickly the vicinity map.

So we are north of Orchard Avenue and south of Flamingo, um, east of Midway and uh west of Middleton Road.

Um I've sort of grayed out the area that makes up the rest of the master plan community that was uh a DERA master plan community that we had brought forward and received approval on with the city.

Um so tonight we're looking at the eastern half of the project uh and requesting approval of that uh area to be platted.

So there's surrounding development, of course, in the area.

And um, as I mentioned, it's part of the ADARA master plan uh master site, and so in the blue dashed line is the area that we are looking at this evening.

Um so we've already um received approval for uh the master plan phase one that went forward with the original uh master plan community.

We had brought forward a preliminary plat.

Now we're into phase two.

And so initially we had broken that up into two separate phases.

And so initially we had broken that up into two separate phases, but our development team decided that it would be prudent for us to bring forward this entire project, or this entire half of the project as one large plat.

So just this just rotated again.

We've got the open spaces, and actually let me go back.

The north-south connector, there's a new connection Rhone Avenue that'll connect Flamingo to Orchard.

So here's the illustrative site plan, consistent with what we had presented in the master plan community application.

This plat has a total of 77.32 acres.

39.25 of those acres are residential in nature.

We have an overall density of 4.81 dwelling units per acre, and an overall number of dwelling units of 372.

And that is made up of both single family detached and single family attached, meaning townhome units.

We've just throughout the site, we've got 18.85 acres, and of that 18.85 acres, the qualified open space that we have for this project is 14.2 acres or 17.81%.

So we exceed the required qualified open space for the project.

This is quickly the phasing plan.

So we look to start in what would be the northeast corner of or the northern portion of the plat.

So we've got six phases.

So we'll start with phase one and then move over to phase two.

Phase two is where we have a large open space and part of the community amenities for the entire master plan community that we had brought forward before.

Phase one, we connect off of Flamingo and also into the existing subdivision.

There's a stub street there that we're required to connect to.

Excuse me, till we get to the southern end of the plat.

Excuse me.

This is just a diagram of where the different product types will occur throughout the project.

So what we did as you can see along the our eastern boundary, which would be kind of the top of this map if you're looking at the screen.

Yep, right where Rodney's got the little hand tool.

Once we transition down along the southern part, there's an actually a canal that runs up from our southeast corner, which is the top right of this image.

There's a buffer already with the existing subdivision.

And then we've got a canal that runs.

Thank you, Rodney, that runs through there.

So quite a bit of buffer.

Obviously, we've got connections that are required to be made that we're adhering to.

And then transitioning some density more into the center of the site again, trying to put some of those smaller lots adjacent to the larger open spaces and amenities.

And just as a reminder from the ADERA subdivision, we showed some images before of or the pardon me, the DARA master plan community, we showed some images of what these large open spaces and community amenities would look like.

But again, for use for the entire community.

So really our plat, and again, these were some of the images that we showed in the master plan community.

That plan has not changed.

Again, this is what we had presented in the MPC application.

Uh we've got some front-loaded townhomes here, just illustrations of what uh the character of the architecture will be in the area.

It'll be consistent with what you see in the surrounding communities.

Um so we've got some standard lot homes, and then just a little bit about um CBH who will be developing the community.

So again, we're consistent with what we had shown in the master plan community.

We're consistent with comprehensive plan, the zoning.

Um we've reviewed the um staff uh report and the conditions of approval, and we're also in agreement with those conditions, and with that I'm happy to stand for any questions.

Any questions for a question on the amenities?

Um you have like a swimming pool and you have a clubhouse, does that is there a staff on duty?

Or do they just Vice Chair Garner, Commissioner Keo, um I don't believe those are staffed.

Most of the communities that uh we we provide those amenities.

Um there's probably like the HOA management team would have um some oversight to make sure it's maintained and clean and stuff, but there typically isn't a person on staff.

So if somebody wanted to find a new ping pong ball or something, you had to bring your own.

Uh potentially, or there would be reserves.

I'm it I don't know the details of uh exactly how they can do it.

Right.

Um so typically in like in the sports courts, people bring their own rackets and balls.

Um the swimming pool if people want to bring uh floating devices or um other type of water sport amenities, they would have to bring those themselves.

I mean that's well typically that's managed by the HOA and the signs are posted and it's noticed.

Typically that's frowned upon.

Yeah.

I know, but but I have where we live, we have a so many pool, and people are the dogs in there.

Oh, that's terrible.

I mean, I mean, maybe they don't think so, but yeah.

I mean m most I would live with the only the dog, not the dog.

Yeah, most HOA uh facilities that I've ever visited have pretty pretty big signs of what the rules are.

Um signs, they don't pay any attention.

Yeah, I I you know I guess the other drive by every hour just makes it not Bonnie's fault.

Mr.

Chair, can I there's Commissioner Morgan?

Go ahead.

Kind of on the topic of amenities.

There was some comments about bike paths.

Did you see those comments?

And you would you like to address that?

I did see those comments.

So we are following, let me just get back here real quick, and um Rodney can probably speak uh more about this.

There was a lot uh uh when we develop our site plan, we look at the regional pathways, what's required.

Um obviously we have micro pathways and and pocket parks that connect um the north uh south connector, the new one that we are um building that's amarone.

I don't know why this isn't going back, Rodney.

The remote fell asleep, it's late, I guess.

Um yeah, Amarone, excuse me, in your in your packet, you'll see that there's a uh street section there, and we've got 10 foot wide uh paved pathways on either side of that.

So that should um intended to be a bike lane, like have room for bikes and pedestrians and a multi-use path, yes, that's correct.

So yeah, and Bonnie, before I was so rudely interrupted.

I was trying to save you, Steve got interrupted.

I want to correct like you because this is you're continuing your applications with open space and lots of open space, and I appreciate that.

Uh it makes up a little smaller lot sometimes when you have a lot of open space, people can decide whether they want the smaller lot and something to play in or have activities in or not.

So I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Plenty of room to set up a sprinkler for the dogs.

Yeah, actually, good idea, yeah.

Yeah, I get a dog park.

Rodney, did you have something?

I can handle it in my staff.

Any additional questions for the applicant?

Yeah, just a quick question.

I know I notice as we're flipping back through the slides.

Maybe if you can go cut forward a couple to the streetscape.

One more thing.

Probably one back one.

Well, anyways, you can see the right there.

Yeah the the buffer there between the street and where the sidewalk is.

Is that a design element, or is that something that's that's required by the city to put in now, or is that the swell?

Yeah.

Park which is that what it's called, a swell parkway strip.

Pardon me, yeah.

So detached sidewalks, the the city allows for either attached or detached blocks, and that is typically an aesthetic, you know, what they want within the development, and uh either is allowed.

Okay.

Just curious because uh I have some grief.

Takes away six feet of my driveway.

Okay, okay.

Thanks, both.

All right, thank you.

Rodney Thank you, Mr.

Chair, Rodney Ashby Planning and Zoning Director.

Um this a lot has been covered, so I'm gonna go kind of quickly.

Um the comp plan zoning has already been established.

You've got the RS6 in the RD zone.

Um there's a little closer view of that zoning, an aerial view.

The history on the project uh October 7th, 2024.

The NAMPA City Council approved the annexation master plan community in the first preliminary plat request, which has already been identified to the to the um west.

And then June of 2025, we had to pass a corrected ordinance for annexation and zoning and the development agreement that includes conditions including restrictions on specific land uses for the BC zone that was in that master plan community, that larger master plan community.

So this um I I just wanted to point out this in bold and at the bottom there.

A decision to approve or deny a subdivision is a quasi-judicial decision that is eligible for judicial review.

Approval or denial decisions are strictly based on compliance with codes and standards.

Very uh a lot less discretion on these type of projects.

It's already been annexed, it's already been zoned, they're entitled, they already have a master plan community.

So we're trying to look at this and say, is it consistent with city code and is it consistent with the master plan community that has already been adopted?

So those are kind of your two guiding principles for for this project.

Um engineering provided some correspondence regarding compliance with the master plan community, the plat, the traffic, access, utilities, and irrigation.

They also requested the standard conditions.

Those are all in your packet.

I didn't feel like they were critical that we bring those to the forefront.

Um, but they are uh I've incorporated them into the conditions of approval.

Uh NAMPA Fire District also in identified how far away they are, 1.1 miles from the NAMPA fired station four with a response time of three minutes, and then um they identified codes that they'll have to follow.

NAMPA GIS identified a whole bunch of different um names that need to be changed for the plat.

That's just they we have a list of names of streets, street names that um you depending on where it is and depending on if it's um already being used in the county, they they track that to make sure that we're not doing repeats all over the place.

So um they've recommended that Valley View School District, they gave their their comment about um the schools being crowded in the area.

Um just as a reminder, the master plan community has been approved, the annexation has already been approved.

We've already heard those comments on those annexations and the master plan community.

It I I would just caution not to use that as a reason to approve or deny this because it's it's quasi-judicial, right?

This is not discretionary.

Umpa police department gave their distances 1.12 additional officers and 0.58 additional support staff is what they're requesting.

NAMPA building department did not oppose the proposal with the recommended condition that any existing structures be removed and obtain a demo permit and call in inspections prior to removal.

Uh NAMPA City Long Range Planning identified that this is consistent with the comp plan and with the um the proposed subdivision meets the density threshold limitations and um identified that it is consistent with the master plan community.

We had two public comments.

So we probably couldn't get an approval for that situation if it's the canal that he's talking about.

Then I I better not try to pronounce that uh Schmidt.

Uta.

Yeah.

I know her.

Yeah, it's Utah.

Okay.

Oh, great.

Thank you.

Um they were opposed due to the density and the impact to the traffic on Flamingo Road and Orchard, making it difficult to merge onto the roadway.

And she also asked the following question.

Is it possible to decrease the amount of homes?

Even forego the townhouses requested Nampa City consider a smaller buffer in the form of a walk or bike path between the Eagle Stream subdivision, a small buffer.

I shouldn't have said smaller stream subdivision and this new planned subdivision.

So again, that references that pathway that would be along that irrigation canal.

There is a section that's to the north here that there is no proposed open space, but I believe the canal the the request for the pathway is is kind of here.

Okay, so this is just the analysis of the plat.

There are 49 common lots, 372 residential lots, the single family detached.

There's 146 single family uh 60 foot wide detached lots, um single family attached or townhouses, 127 front-loaded townhouses, and 99 alley loaded townhouses lots.

Um they're in three or four unit clusters or buildings.

Uh internal public roadways, 19 acres, qualified open space as has been mentioned or exceeds the standard.

Uh total residential gross density is 4.81, which is within the the density range.

Um the uses are permitted.

So lot sizes, I've already talked uh with the applicant about this, and just wanted to identify that there's um the smallest lot is actually less than what is permitted by code, and so they're gonna need to make some adjustments to their lot sizes to comply with city code uh for both the three unit and the four-unit townhouse.

Um this is all for the RD zone.

And other than that, the densities are meeting standards, the lot width and depth are meeting standards.

It's just the smallest uh the minimum lot size that needs to be adjusted.

And there's there's several four-unit townhouse lots.

Uh when I say base, I I say base lot because you're combining if it's a four-unit, you're adding all four units lots into one, and it has to meet that standard.

So four-unit townhouse base lot has to be a minimum of 12,000 square feet, and the um the the minimum here is 10,698.

So they have to bring that up to the 12,000 square feet.

Yeah.

May I please it pertain just to this?

Does this mean that they look that they can reduce their um open space?

So there's there's a couple of ways to do that.

Um, Mr.

Chair and Commissioners.

You can either decrease your open space just a little bit.

It doesn't take much, or you can um take those lots that are bigger already, and you can um make them a little bit smaller in order to give off each one more or less.

Say that again.

Yeah, exactly.

Yeah.

So you they typically can find a solution to this problem.

They just uh I didn't want that to be a underhanded way of going back to reducing.

Yeah, but she's shaking our head no.

Thank you.

Um and then this is for the RS6 zone and the standard uh required lot sizes, and um as you can see here, the proposed lot sizes range from 6,050 square feet to 13,800 square feet.

Block one, lot fourteen is the only lot in the R6 zone that exceeds the maximum square footage allowed by code.

This lot will need to be adjusted to not exceed 12,000 square feet.

So same situation, um, just a little bit smaller.

So then there you gain your uh open space back.

Yeah.

Uh lot width and depth and and densities are all consistent with code.

Um here's the qualified open space.

You you we've already talked through this quite a bit, um, but uh on the plat itself, they're showing these amenities, whatever that is, is it's just a sports court, it may be a half-court basketball, or I think they showed some pickleball potentially, um, so some kind of sport court and then the dog park as well as pathways and just grassy areas and picnic shelters are kind of scattered in several places.

And um, of course, the swimming pool.

Okay, so parking, um, just as a reminder, we we do have standards for parking for both commercial and residential.

They have to meet those standards.

Um so in this situation, um they will need to be they will need to provide that the detail for us, maybe at the final plat stage, but uh at ma at minimum they need to provide it for us to approve a uh a building permit.

And so we analyze this at a different time, but I'm just putting this before you just so you know.

We do have standards for um for parking, and then uh specifically for townhouses, we have guest parking spaces that must be provided.

So I just uh nod to the last project that came forward, those standards are in place for that as well.

Um relevant development agreement conditions.

Um the landscape plan does not show a berm along Flamingo Avenue that I could see.

This landscape plan needs to be revised to comply with this condition in the development agreement to provide a berm along Flamingo Avenue.

And then uh the next one, staff analysis pedestrian ramps are provided at this the intersection of Flamingo and Amarone.

If additional treatment is needed, it will be addressed at the final plat phase.

So if there's any requirement for a any kind of added crossing, we'll we'll address that at final plat.

Uh next one, residential dwellings shall provide a variety or diversity of design elements and shall not appear to repeat designs and floor plans within a close proximity to one another throughout the development.

I heard some of this conversation tonight on another project as well.

Um the applicant has submitted examples of a variety of building elevations for single family detached housing, but only one elevation for a four-unit townhouse and none for a three-unit townhouse.

Building placement next to others of similar appearance will need to be analyzed at the building permit stage.

The variety could also be assessed at time of the building permit, but is difficult to track.

Um I should have said uh this should have said uh the final plat stage.

Um when they submit their final plat, I I really appreciate seeing those at that point, and um the applicant is indicated that they have those ready to submit.

So we'll we'll take a look at those.

And then the last point is open space and recreational amenities shall be designed and installed to meet code requirements in each final plat phase until the last phase where all phases together shall ultimately provide the required open space and amenities as shown on the approved preliminary plat.

This is how we guarantee that all the open space will be um be given and I've already identified where that we're meeting, they are meeting that standard.

So here are the proposed conditions.

Um I've got several pages here, so three pages.

And oh yeah, the elevations can be provided there.

And then the last one is the um roadways will need to be done by the final plat stage.

The names of the roads.

And they've already shown you this uh phasing plan, and here's a potential motion for your consideration.

I stand for questions.

Okay, thanks, Roddy.

Questions?

Mr.

Chair.

Yeah.

Good morning.

Uh for my information, just on the process here.

So we have a preliminary plat and then a final plat.

It seems like there's an extra step here where they have to come back and why do they have to do us like a new preliminary plat within 60 days rather than just fix it before the final plat?

It was that one of the conditions.

I call on the first two conditions or something about that.

Oh, oh.

So yeah, uh revised preliminary plat shall be submitted to the planning and zoning department within 60 days of the decision letter date.

That just means they're they're showing us that they're going to comply with these standards of law sizes.

That allows me to look at that and say, okay, are they reducing their open space significantly?

Like was the cons one of the concerns.

But it's giving them a timeline too on that.

Yeah.

So what why are we worried about them doing it?

I don't like what's the typical timeline between a preliminary plot and a final plot.

I don't know.

59 days.

Is that is that is that depends, years, weeks, um it depends.

We have um a requirement in code you have 18 months, the first preliminary plat to file a final plat, but then we request a lot of them request extensions.

So um, and you can do I think three or two, two extensions.

So it could be a couple years before we see the final plat comes.

And again, I'm just revealing my naivete on the development part, but I I guess I always assumed it was we do the initial approval, then they bring a preliminary plat to make sure it's following the guidelines.

We give them these kinds of comments, and then they come back and fix it all in the final plat.

It doesn't seem it seems like there's more than that I IS there that is an option.

You can use the final plat to confirm all those details.

It's just nice to have those details worked out up front.

So uh and this is just a staff level, it's not not coming back to you, it's just saying, okay, you submitted it, you made those changes that the commission recommended, and it's come consistent with our code.

If we don't do that, I guess my concern is it doesn't comply with code.

It slips through the cracks because it's been 18 months since we talked about it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Any other questions?

Okay.

We'll go ahead and open up a public hearing.

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

We do.

We have um Inez Alderton.

Okay.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Oh, okay.

Okay.

So what we'll do is if you want to, if you want to speak, then we'll have you come up one at a time if you feel like speaking, and uh just making sure that you give us your name and your address for the record, and you have three minutes to talk about it.

So um whoever wants to come first, come on up and okay, come on up.

Um is right on our side, and my I just is one five two one nine, no fishing Greek NAPA.

Um I I just want to compliment a lot of concerns that we have in our neighborhood that people that we kind of you know would talk about what's going on with the uh development there.

So the most of the concerns that I hear tonight was being addressed.

Um we just wanted the uh uh the for the process of development to uh to consider our concerns and some of our views uh that we enjoy in our neighborhood.

And um I want I want to say that obviously most of them I've heard tonight they are taking those concerns into uh consideration.

So I do appreciate uh them doing that.

And um one of them was the traffic because that's right there on the carcher when you get out there in the morning, six o'clock, it's bad.

Um so we wanted those to be addressed and like that's one of the um um concern that they are addressing.

And um another thing also is um we have such a beautiful view about from about six o'clock or seven o'clock at night to about nine p.m.

You step out there, you'll see a lot of young kids and a lot of adults with cameras because we like the sunsets, and we just want them to um if they can have buildings up there to consider that the view and allow us to have some space so we enjoy the sunset um every evening that a group of us can step out and and and enjoy.

Um another thing um was the uh school issue, and again that was addressed.

And uh and another also another thing was the environment of open space.

And we're pretty pleased with those.

And uh, like I said, I've heard them over tonight, and we're pleased with that.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Wayne Smith, one five four one one North Chickaway.

And my house backs up to what's getting ready to be built, and that's not my biggest concern, it's traffic.

I mean, uh for Middleton and or uh flamingo right now, it's already a nightmare.

And you're gonna add all you could add what another 300 cars or vehicles to flamingo and you get to school down at the other end, it gets crowded in the afternoons and the mornings.

I don't think they're addressing what the traffic is gonna be like.

And like he says too, when you get out the crotcher, that's they haven't even gotten the traffic from the apartments being built behind Mavericks.

So you're gonna have that's gonna be a whole nother nightmare.

They don't think they're looking at addressing any of those issues.

That's really all my concern is traffic and flamingo.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Yeah.

Um Andrew Chamberlain, 11580 West Rupert Street.

Uh the community just north of what's being built.

Would you be able to pull up the slide with the dog park real quick?

Um I meant to stand up earlier with the apartments as well.

Um he made a comment regarding the apartments, the high density apartments about the Clara as inspiration for their design.

I used to live half a mile from the Clara and I had lots of friends in the Clara.

Everyone who lives there hates how it looks.

So if you can encourage them to make it a little prettier, those high density apartments, they'd be appreciated.

Um it's just an eye store.

It's it's very blocky and boring.

But more to this topic.

Um to clarify what they mean by the path, that top right road leading into the community.

If you were to have a walking path through the dog park, jump the canal to that little grass strip that's in like that diagonal in the middle right, and then follow the road south, that would satisfy what people are talking about when they mean a new path, a bike path, right?

They want to be able to go north and south through these neighborhoods without having to zigzag and double back and all over.

They don't want cars doing that because they go too fast and it's dangerous.

But when you're on foot and on bike, it's really annoying to have to go around seven corners to get to your friend's house.

Right.

So uh more access across the canal um for pedestrians and bikers is what they're asking for there.

Um and then um I guess my only other comments are I I'm confused on whether the townhomes are for purchase or for rent, but I would highly prefer if they were for purchase because everyone that's renting a town home just wishes they were paying a mortgage on it.

I know because I was living in a town home two years ago before I bought my home.

Um so um when you're considering these high density options, townhomes people can buy is probably the number one choice for the people buying, right?

Um and it would get you closer to that number that you suggested.

I can't remember we suggested earlier.

Um that 275,000 dollar mark, right?

That's what people would hopefully be able to afford.

A town home might hit closer to that ballpark than the the mid-300s that we're seeing from from pole houses.

Um my only other comment is when you get to these neighborhoods and they're only 60 feet wide, everyone hates it.

Um the number of people in my community that wanted to put an RV garage on the side of their house and couldn't is uncountable.

People want to be able to park their boat or their trailer on the side of the house behind the fence because it complies with HOA.

Um when the bots are super narrow and HOE says you can't have a boat on the road, then you don't get to own a boat, or you have to go park it somewhere three miles away and pay pay a fee every month to have a park there.

So I would say in the future, a little more R7 zoning would be great.

Or just change the rules on R6 to say the lot top be wide and not so deep, but let them be a little more than 60 feet wide.

Um so people can have some side parking on on their lots.

So I think that's about all I have to say.

Okay, thank you.

Appreciate it.

Anyone else would you like to speak on it?

Okay.

Bonnie, why don't you come back up?

Thank you again, Vice Chairman and members of the commission, and thank you for um the folks that showed up and stayed late tonight again.

Um it's fun, isn't it?

I sign up for this.

No, but um think so.

Uh I I do hear your concerns about traffic.

That was a large portion of our master plan community application and the approval process.

Uh, we submitted a preliminary traffic impact study, and there were conditions along the way that we have to update that traffic impact study.

How far out do they go?

Did they go any goal in the media?

Um to answer the gentleman in the in the audience's question.

Um what was that scope?

It was pretty extensive.

I don't have a copy of it with me right now, but it was a pretty expanded view.

We knew that this area was growing.

We worked with staff to review and and do a scoping um a scoping document to make sure that we captured not just right at our um project, but a little bit further out, and also to account for other growth that was happening.

It's a fairly typical process.

Um that we uh I think we may have even had ITD's input um, or they had the opportunity to provide input.

We're looking it up.

Okay, thank you.

Um so and I believe it was mentioned in one of the conditions of approval that uh there's an update that's required for our project.

Um so we're fully aware of that.

Um, and as we get further down the road, I think it's a I can't remember if it's the certain number of lots or certificate of occupancies that trigger that, but that was all outlined in the previous um approval for the master plan community, and of course we're still in agreement with that.

Um let's see.

Um yeah, but mostly traffic, that was that was a big one uh for folks last time as well.

And then um just the pathways throughout the community.

We're developing the road standards.

There are some sections.

Uh there was some question about detached sidewalks.

In our preliminary plat uh documents, we're showing uh the trip typical street sections that we're proposing for this project.

So there are some detached sidewalks in there to provide some green space.

So Bonnie, can you tell me is the uh we have the detached sidewalks?

Is the parkway strip is that part of the drainage?

Is are they gonna be swales, or is there rolled curb in gutter?

Um vice chairman, let me look that up.

Mr.

Chair, I can take that one.

We no longer allow the swales.

Okay, um, there will be rolled curb and and a flat landscape strip.

Perfect, thank you.

Mr.

Chair, I have a question too.

Um the gentleman brought up that would during public testimony about the pathway through the tip of the dog park and just having maybe another crossing over that over that canal.

Um would that be a I mean it made sense to me what he was talking about if just having another access point to cross that canal rather than just the one.

I don't know if it's feasible or um the cross is already there, it's just put a path on the bridge.

Yeah, so um so we already are providing for the one crossing there.

Um it line it helps us connect that northeast corner and folks can cross that as uh Rodney said we can't really do a pathway along that canal.

I don't know if we were to put another pathway where we would do that to make it make sense.

Is the dog park down there is a connection, there is a bridge over the canal already?

Is that what you're saying?

Yes, there's one right in the center of this, yeah, right there is what we're proposing.

Perfect.

Okay.

Well, I'm I'm addressing what the individual testified to, and one of the concerns was is that is that the dog park right down there in the corner?

Or is the dog park right there in the middle where the bridge connects and boom there you are?

Bottom right corner.

Is that the yeah, is that the dog park right there?

Yeah, um Commissioner Kirkman.

I want to I want to pull up our landscape plan for that area.

I think that's what the gentleman's referring to is that area and maybe having a bridge across at that point too, just a second access across Mr.

Vice Chair and Commissioners.

Um ultimately the the irrigation district will determine what they allow there.

They have reviewed the preliminary plat and did not provide, did not and didn't have an issue with what is being proposed.

Um it could be requested to add another one, but that doesn't obligate the irrigation district to allow it.

Um they have reviewed what has been was has been reviewed here and submitted and said that that's okay.

Um there's no guarantee that they would allow for another one through there.

Um Mr.

Vice Chair and Commissioner Kirkman.

Um in our original master plan community, we had not shown a connection there.

Okay.

Um so we're just staying consistent with what we've got to do.

And that's great.

I'm not suggesting that there should be one there.

I just the gentleman brought it up in testimony, and I just wanted to make sure that we address that the applicant was addressing that concern.

And if that's it, then I'm good with that too.

Yeah.

I mean, I can mention it to the team and they can take a look at, you know, maybe there's another area that has a bit more of a dog park or something in there.

One of the things that we want to be careful about is that's that's a pinch point area that's um can become an attractive nuisance at times.

And so while it's accessible for the folks that are in the community, you kind of want to be careful about how how inviting an area like that can be sometimes.

So we designed it as a dog park.

It'll be a nice amenity for um for the folks in our community, and especially on that side of the canal.

Um they've got the pedestrian connection that gets them over to the larger amenities of our project.

Very well.

That's all I have.

Just want to make sure his concern was addressed.

All right.

Any additional questions for the applicant?

You you can't, you had your three minutes.

Thank you, though.

Appreciate it.

Well, I'll ask it.

Who decides whether or not the canals get buried?

Is that you or the irrigation district?

Uh Vice Chairman, Commissioner Morgan, that would be the irrigation district.

We this was planned to be open and remain open.

So there'll be some fencing to secure that off, but it has to be outside of their um right of or easement and uh so that they can operate effectively.

And then the bridge will have safety stuff all incorporated and everything.

Yep, there will be standards that the city requires us to uh maintain for that in our design.

How does the irrigation curious just how does the irrigation district decide?

Is it safety driven or the irrigation districts?

Um, you know, it depends on the location, the volume, the size of the canal, whether or not they elect that they want to have them tiled or not.

Um it's I I don't know all the things they consider, but those are some of the things they would consider as they look at these, their maintenance access and ability, that type of stuff.

Um they're set up to maintain ditches, not pipes.

And so they, you know, that is and the irrigation districts, railroad irrigation districts, God.

So that would be the hierarchy we're talking about here.

So city cities are down here.

That makes sense.

Um thank you.

Can I just my last question of the night?

And again, this is something that the gentleman just brought up during public testimony is that the width size of the lots, because that does make a lot of sense if they were wider in the front and the ability to park an RV, it would be uh it would seem like it would be more attractive to some buyers who would be able to park the RV on the side of the house.

Is that a uh city compliance?

You know what I'm saying?

It's too late.

I can't even think of it.

Just read my mind, Rodney, what I'm trying to ask.

Um Mr.

Vice Chairman Commissioner Kirk.

It's more wide, so is uh yeah.

Um what we you know we develop uh projects all over the valley, obviously.

Um, and so folks that maybe don't have an RV or don't mind storing it off-site, want something a little bit more compact, maybe a uh a home that's more of a lock and leave type of situation, not a lot of yard maintenance.

So in this master plan community, we were required to provide a variety of housing types and lot sizes, and so really that becomes uh a buyer's um you know decision.

I know that I've done some other projects in the area for this developer that does have larger lots, it's dependent on the zoning and the location.

Um this isn't that project, um, but it's one that will provide much needed housing, you know, hopefully more on the affordable end of the scale.

Um not everybody can afford to purchase or maintain um a larger lot.

So it's not necessarily uh a requirement that the dimensions are what they are, but it's more of just market driven.

Is this the product that the people have gotten?

Rodney, go ahead.

Yeah, Mr.

Chair, just to add to that, we did we used to have no additional well, we used to have only a five foot setback in the rear yard, and that changed within the last couple of years because council felt like they really wanted 15 feet of landscaping in the back.

And so that that changes things a little bit because those scenarios where you want to go wider are now it now gets harder to meet the standards of maximum lot sizes sometimes if you go wider because you already have a deeper lot.

So it's it's a little bit challenging.

I've expressed that concern in the past.

Um and I'll probably express it again.

Um the lots are challenging.

Uh if you put a 20-foot setback in front and a 15 foot setback in the back, then and you put your house in the middle there.

There's only so much you can do and still meet the standard lot sizes.

So it's it is tricky, and they are required to meet that standard, and so these do meet the standards in in city code.

There's your answer.

Another consideration.

That's all I had.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Uh any additional questions for Mr.

Chairman.

Another consideration is we look at those lot depths versus width.

As the wider you make those lots, the less uh as you make them less deep and wider, you end up having to install more roads.

So your ability to um optimize the the layouts in that versus the the development costs, so the cost that the lots will be that can affect that as well.

So there are they look at all those things as they're laying those out to make sure that they're they're being as efficient as possible to keep their costs down for those, and that obviously comes plays into the cost of the homes ultimately as well.

Makes sense.

Okay.

Any additional questions for the up?

Okay, thanks, Bonnie.

Thank you very much for your time this evening.

Are we have we we have nope we haven't yet?

You're good.

You can go.

It's been so long.

Uh make a motion we close public hearing.

Okay, we have a motion by Kirkman to close the public hearing, seconded by Daper.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Motion carries deliberations.

Based off of all the requirements that we have, I think that it meets the two that Rodney laid out.

I don't see any reason to down.

Yeah, not a whole lot of discretion on this one.

No, but I think it's you it also is very responsive, right?

So, you know, where it backs up to that neighborhood.

The lot sizes are very similar, and so I think if you kept all that major density towards the center, um, I think is really well thought out, so I think it's good.

Great.

Then I'll make a motion we approve the project as stated on the screen.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion by Kirkman to approve, and a second by Dapfer.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, motion carries.

Mr.

Chairman, I make a motion to adjourn the meeting.

Second.

Okay.

We have an motion to adjourn by Copeland and a second by either Daper or Dapper.

You got it first?

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Motion adjourned.