The City of Nampa Planning and Zoning Commission met on June 23, 2026, at 6:00 PM. The meeting covered updates on recently approved projects, a report on City Council actions, and public hearings on two development applications: Lake Wool Estates (annexation and preliminary plat) and a short plat for 805 Park Center Way. Key discussions included density, water capacity, infrastructure costs, and the role of Canyon County on properties outside the city's impact area. Both applications were approved by the commission.
Okay, we ready to go? Okay, it is six o'clock. I would like to start by welcoming everyone to the City of Ampa Planning and Zoning Commission meeting uh June 23rd, 2026. Uh can we start with a roll call, please? Garner here Miller here, Turner Keyhoe here. Morgan here. Kirkman, Copeland, Fiend. Here. Seven present. Thank you. Mr. Ashby. Mr. Chair and Commissioners Rodney Ashby Planning and Zoning Director for the record. Um first of all, I just want to thank you for those who participated in the comprehensive plan review of what the steering committee came up with, and several of you were active participants in the steering committee, so I appreciate that very much. Um we didn't get anything back from City Council, and so we are going to go to them on a on in their regular city council meetings and um just take a couple of topics at a time. Uh I think the goal here is to have to the point where City Council understands, knows the the comprehensive plan content and can support it, whether you know whether they agree with everything in the comp plan or not, that they can support the plan. And so that's why we're we're doing this to make sure that they they understand that. I'm happy to do presentations to this group, but I I think you know it's it's essentially what we've shown you already and what most of you have commented on already. So and we thank you for your work. Thanks. Appreciate it. Um so just a report on the city council meeting on June 15th. Uh first one was a subdivision final plat approval for Cherry Grove number four number six, excuse me. Uh that's northeast of Elm Lane and Franklin Road, and that was for sixty-one single family detached units and seven common lots. Um and that you recommended approval and they approved that. Uh next one was a subdivision short plat approval for Middlebury Middlebury South, number one. And this was for 50 single family uh detached dwelling lots and seven common area lots. Um this is um this was recommended for approval by you and approved by city council. Uh now the public hearings was uh annexation for Highline Estates uh to RS4 and RS6 and BC community business. This was on Franklin Road, um northeast of Linden Road and Madison Road. And uh this was for three hundred and fifty-five single family detached dwelling units, thirty-three common area lots, and one commercial lot. And um this was continued. It's it's been a while since you've heard this. This was on January twenty-seventh of this year that you had recommended approval unanimously. Um City Council continued that at this last uh the the first hearing that they had um because they wanted to see a little more detail in the public open space um and see w how that open space would be used rather than just be drainage basins and um just open space without any amenities. Um they so this went back to them and um with added amenities that they they included it was approved. Uh so that was um it was a close vote, it was three yeses and two no's and so uh it did get passed. It was three yeses and two no's and so uh it did get passed. Um they also gave us some direction to come back with some um some well they they would like to revisit the idea of those drainage basins and whether they should be used as qualified open space. I provided the um the language in code and uh haven't heard anything back from them. So they that was the direction they gave me, provide us the language, and then we they would respond, and I haven't seen anything. So we may be revisiting that in the future. And then the the next one was uh NAMPA City Ordnance uh text amendments. A lot of these were pretty simple. You heard this on uh May 12th and recommended approval unanimously, and um we this one was also approved on a um three to two vote. Um I think there was some confusion by one of the uh people in the audience about just some of the language in there, and so um there were a couple of votes against it, but it did pass, and then comprehensive plan text amendment to remove language. Oh, I'm I'm sorry, that one was the one I was referring to. Um the comprehensive plan text amendment was to remove language recommending development of five dwelling units per acre or more be required to get approval of a planned unit development or master plan community. That's the one I think was just a little confusing to the public.