Planning and Zoning - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening. Welcome to the July 14th planning and zoning meeting for the city of Coeur d'Alene. I'll call the meeting to order. Tracy, would you do the roll call, please?

Ingalls.

Here.

Ward. Here. Jamtas.

Here.

McCracken. Here. Koppas. Fleming. Messina.

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance, please. I would ask the Commission if someone would like to approve a motion to approve the minutes of the February P&Z meeting.

Seems like so long ago. I motion we approve the February 10th, 2026 minutes.

Okay, motion by McCracken. Is there a second? I second it. Thank you. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? None. Thank you for that. I would open up the floor for general public comment. Any comments you might have to share that are not pertaining to the matter that is subject to the public hearing, the subdivision S-2... Okay, thank you. Could I get your name and city, please?

Yeah, my name is Suzanne Knutson. I live in Coeur d'Alene.

Okay, thank you.

According to the Coeur d'Alene City website, the Planning and Zoning Commission is a council-appointed seven-member volunteer board that plays a major role in nearly all aspects of the local planning process. The commission seeks to promote orderly growth, preserve the quality of Coeur d'Alene, protect the environment, promote economic prosperity, protect property rights, and foster the safety of its residents. Additionally, the Commission promotes the public interest by helping citizens understand planning process and providing opportunities for public comment. The Planning and Zoning Commission's duties include to recommend and make suggestions to the Council for the adoption of coordinated plans for the physical development of the municipality, to review proposed development requests according to the procedures and standards set forth in the zoning ordinance, and other municipal codes to recommend the boundaries of zoning districts and appropriate regulations to be enforced therein, make reports, hold public hearings, and perform all other duties as may be prescribed by the Idaho Code and City Code. to serve as the development impact fee advisory committee performing all duties prescribed by the Idaho code, and to comply with all city policies, procedures, and regulations. According to the Institute of Local Government, a commissioner's job is to evaluate projects critically against local laws and community goals. Their purpose is not to blindly agree with city staff. They are expected to ask rigorous questions, test assumptions, and ensure staff recommendations accurately align with the city's adopted codes and comprehensive plan. Commission serves as an independent body responsible for making thoughtful, equitable, and legal land use decisions. Asking probing questions is essential to identify potential community impacts, clarify complex code interpretations, and ensure due process. Because planning is a public process, it is standard and completely acceptable for a commission to vote differently than staff recommends, provided their decision is based on solid evidence and required findings of fact. Commissioners must listen to testimony impartially, evaluate community concerns, and use public feedback to help shape their recommendations to the governing bodies such as City Council. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone else? Okay. Before I move on, let me just ask a question. Can everybody hear? Does anybody... Yeah, I'll talk. I'll get to that, but there is a sign-up sheet there if you haven't looked at that already, but I'll touch on that in a second.

Mr. Chairman, sorry to interrupt, but I think he's asking about just for public comment. So for our commission meetings, unlike City Council, we don't have a sign-in sheet for just public comments. For the public hearing, there's a sheet at the back.

Thank you. Did you understand that? If you're here to comment on the main matter tonight, the public hearing, that's not what I'm calling for now. Just general comments. You could come talk about the weather or, you know, anything like that.

But he would sign up for the public hearing.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Can everybody hear? Quick check on nobody. Okay. Everybody can hear. Next up is staff comments, please.

All right. Good evening, commissioners. For the August 11th meeting, we have two items. One is a public hearing, an annexation request, and the other is a subdivision extension for an item you approved last winter. So that's all we have at this time.

Thank you very much. Commissioners, do you have any comments?

No.

Hearing none. Next up will be the public hearing. But first, I want to take a minute and cover a couple of notes. There's quite a few comments sent in. There's comments in Sean Holm, who's going to present here in a minute, his packet and so forth, talking about the development agreement. And I'd like to just point out, mainly for everybody, that that was entered into between the city and the developer, city council and the developer on January in 2023, and it establishes the required roadway connections and vests the property owner with development rights for Quartier Project. I point out that the Commission cannot discuss amending the development agreement tonight or address roadway connections this evening. We have really no purview there. Secondly, and Sean will elaborate on this in greater detail, but the scope of the meeting tonight is on the subdivision aspects, which is the preliminary plat approval and four elements that we're looking at is whether the preliminary plat requirements have been met, you know, the provisions for sidewalks and streets and utilities, stormwater lighting, those kind of things have been met. We look tonight at code requirements for the typical design, lot frontages and sizes and those sort of things, as well as the zoning and density has been met as well. Those are standard verifications of the subdivision requirements. Finally, I'm going to point out that this is a quasi-judicial hearing. And so everyone that wishes to testify will be sworn in. And I'm going to do that as a big group deal later on. Public comment will be limited to three uninterrupted minutes. And again, the process here is Sean Holm is going to do a staff report. followed by the applicant, and then I'll open it up for public testimony, at which point we'll do the groups we're in. Poll the commission whether there's any conflicts of interest. Seeing none, thank you. And I'd also ask that... We'd be respectful tonight. I mean, there's, I think, some passion. We're all interested in this. Whether you're the presenter, the applicant, commenter, whoever, pro, con, whichever, I'd ask that we're not going to applaud people, we're not going to boo people, we're not going to... You know, let's have some decorum and some basic respect. Last thing, again, the sign-up sheet. If you're coming in the room now and you wish to participate, there's a sign-up sheet in the back. You can indicate whether you're in favor or opposed or whether or not you wish to speak tonight. So with that, I... Pass that down. Pass it over to you, Sean, for the staff report.

All right. Thank you, Commissioner Ingalls. Good evening. Before I begin, I haven't seen you for a little bit. I just wanted to wish America a happy 250th birthday. And now we'll begin. So the subject tonight is S-226, which is a phase preliminary plat request to subdivide approximately 202 gross acres of of existing properties into 284 single family and 36 multifamily lots, which includes a public park, a public school site, and associated non-buildable tracks, which is known as core tier two subdivision. The owner-applicant is LREV33 through LREV39 LLC in care of Lakeside Companies. Connie Cougar is the consultant tonight, and she is present to provide her information following mine. So the decision points tonight are lakeside companies through the representative Connie Krueger, whose AICP is requesting approval of the core tear to preliminary plot a proposed subdivision that ends up being approximately 126.35 developable acres of the 202. And the preliminary plot would create 320 residential lots with up to 213 multifamily dwelling units in the R17 zoning districts. And then I also had mentioned the park and the school site plus the tracks.

John, can I interrupt you for a second? Can we turn these lights off so we can see the screen better? Well, I think, there we go. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. So, the decision point is that the Planning Commission and Zoning Commission must determine whether the proposed preliminary plot meets the required subdivision findings, including applicable subdivision design standards, which are found in Chapter 16.15, and the subdivision improvement standards, which are found in Chapter 16.40. So this is the subject property. The dark outline here is Quartier as a whole. The white area is the request that is before Planning Commission tonight, which is the southern end of the property. The city limits is outlined in green, Hanley Road to the north, which turns into pull line after it passes Hutter Road heading west, and then I-90 to the south. So John handled this very well. I actually put a slide in here before we begin about development agreements. So they are between the city and the developer. Both of those parties would have to agree to any sort of change because it has been signed and recorded. So that means that planning commission or the public have the authority to alter them at this level. And then we've gotten a lot of comments about traffic studies and I think there's some misconceptions out there on what a traffic study takes into account. Chris Bosley, the city engineer is here and he can speak to that in depth. I am certainly not a traffic expert. But as I understand it is that they take existing and proposed conditions into account. and increases to capacity are not based on full build out but rather incremental increases of the whole. So that's when it says that the whole area or the whole of Cortere would be considered as they build this, it's incrementally as it grows so that the roads are able to handle the traffic that would be generated by any sort of approvals as they progress. All right, so some background information. Some history, I have provided this in staff reports before. I won't read all of this into the record, but I will provide a little bit of context into prior approvals. So the Cortere project as a whole, which is 438 acres, was annexed into the city on March 21st of 2023. That annexation included a bunch of different zones from R3, R8, R17 on the residential side to C17 and C17L for the commercial side. Currently, there is the annexation and development agreement, which we have talked about a little bit here, and that was recorded, which allows for 2,800 ERUs or equivalent residential units, commercial spaces, parks, transversing trails, and sites for two public schools over a 20 to 30-year build-out period. After that was annexed into the city, the first action was a short plat, which is a four lot short plat. The name of that was Full Circle Tracks and was located on the north end of the project. That short plat provided a lot for the city's water tower, another for a future school site, a commercially zoned parcel, which was almost 11 acres that has since been sold to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and then a remainder parcel. so that full circle tracks was recorded on december 6th of 2023 then came a series of amendments to exhibit e which is the generally adhered to plan for core tear which we'll we'll discuss a little bit later but amendment number one which went in front of city council on april 15th of 2025 adjusted the wastewater utility timeline and relocated well site and that changed the zoning as well. As part of that, there was a rezone from C-17L to R-3 and in reverse, they basically swapped the sites. The council denied the applicant's zone change as a request in the northwest corner from R-17 to C-17 for approximately 14 acres of property. Amendment number two, um, was went before council on October 21st, where it was approved, uh, that was changing the cluster triplex land use designation to active adult senior living and multifamily in anticipation of the core one P or the core tear one P U D. And the last but not least, as far as amendments go, was the third amendment was a change to exhibit E for the LDS church, which was originally labeled as urban town homes and was changed to religious assembly. Finally, Quartier 1, which was heard on December 9th of 2025, was three parts. It was PUD 125 for a planned unit development in conjunction with a subdivision or a preliminary plot, much like tonight, as well as a landscaping plan for a parking lot that was in excess of 300 parking stalls. And all of those were approved. Okay, so this is also in my staff report as well, which is the application summary. I thought this was a good idea to provide, kind of breaks down what the, what the request is and how it is laid out. And so we have discussed the overall property size and how much development acreage there is. The existing zoning and the request is R3, R8, and R17. The phasing, which is interesting because addition is You would think it would be the first edition, but it is just called addition. So it's kind of a zeroed out thing. And then you have the first edition through the sixth. So there is seven total phases that are proposed. And inside of those, zoning districts. In R3, there's a total of 48 single-family lots that are proposed. In R8, which is residential at eight units per gross acre, 236 single-family lots, as well as the 12-acre community park. Last but not least is the R17, which is a multifamily zoning district, has 36 lots, which is a mix of allows for a mix of single family and multi-family as well as the future school site. As part of this too is an affordable housing element that is found in the development agreement where 5% has to be dedicated to that in perpetuity. And they listed out what those would be as far as number of units and the percentage of each. And so the grand total here would be 320 lots with up to a total of 506 units. Now what isn't in my staff report and I just wanted to provide everybody the information because I'm guessing it will probably come up is the Applicant does have development rights for 2,800 total units. Quartier 1 was 595, which was approved. So in aggregate, if this is approved tonight, would be 1,101 units in total. Right, and last but not least, there were no design deviations requested. And so before I go on, one of the things that Commissioner Ingalls had mentioned was the findings that must be made. And so when we hear hearings such as PUDs or zone changes or things like that where they're changing the underlying zone or asking for some special exception to what the subdivision code or zoning code allows, That's when you'll find findings that are, is it compatible with the neighborhood? Does it meet the comprehensive plan? Is it going to disrupt with traffic? Those sorts of things. None of those findings are located inside of a subdivision request. And that's because there are uses by right. There are definite rules that have to be met. where if you meet those rules it gets approved the wrinkle here is that there is a development agreement as well and so that's kind of a rider that sits on top that provides some of those additional elements that must be met which are handled later in in my staff report and we'll get to those but i wanted to point that out why those why those things aren't part of the findings so this is exhibit e at least the the lower part because it's such a north south linear thing i just provided the area that is subject tonight because it's very difficult to see once you put the whole thing onto a screen. So you can see that they are meeting all of their Exhibit E anticipations for single family uses, a park, elementary school, and then the multifamily R17 area over here. So the adjacencies, this has also been in a number of my staff reports. Once again, I also just zoomed into the area for this evening and what those adjacent neighborhoods are, where they're located in relationship to the request. So zoning and land use. The existing zoning here, as mentioned, so R17 is on the west side. R8 kind of traverses and wraps around the R17 and hits to the north. And then there is, if everybody remembers back to the original annexation, it took a couple of hearings to get there, but the developer acquiesced to provide R3 next to the existing neighborhood so that there would be a single family element that abutted the existing homes. And then between the new homes and the existing homes is a trail system that runs both to the north, south, as well as east, west. Then the generalized land use map. It's a big field growing stuff. All right, so the required subdivision findings. Here are those four findings. We'll move through these, each one of them separately. I wanted to read this note into the records that the Planning Commission shall base its findings on the statement of facts A1 through A21. You can find those on pages 14 through 16 of your staff report, plus the full staff report, applicant presentation, public testimony, and all other evidence received at the hearing. So... First up, finding B1 is that all of the general preliminary plat requirements have or have not been met as attested to by the city engineer. So the city engineer who's here tonight, Chris Paisley, stated that the preliminary plan submitted contain all of the general preliminary plat elements required by the municipal code. And then here are those preliminary plat requirements in a condensed version, because I didn't want to take four slides to explain all of these, but this is what those requirements are. Here is a copy of that first page of the preliminary plat. Along the edge here is that R3. The green is the R8 area, and then this darker brown is the R17. You can see the street layouts, which I'm sure Chris can speak more to than I can, but this is what it ultimately looks like. Breaking it down into the seven future areas or additions, phasing, total of sixth addition. But the southern addition is the addition, which is down here. And then the first edition, second edition, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth. It's important to note too that the applicant has asked for, and it is supported in the development agreement, is for some flexibility with what those phases may look like ultimately. The development agreement anticipates that and states that all of the requirements for utilities and connections and safety and all of those things have to be met prior to staff signing off on any change to the actual phasing of the project. All right, let me skip ahead and catch up with myself here. So this is finding B2, is that the provisions for sidewalks, streets, alleys, rights of way, easements, street lighting, fire protection, planting, drainage, pedestrian and bicycle facilities and utilities are or are not adequate. Okay, so first up is sidewalks. So sidewalks are proposed on both sides of all local streets throughout the development, supplemented by perimeter multi-use paths and mid-block walkways where block lengths exceed 600 feet. The sidewalk system provides continuous pedestrian connectivity within the core tier two subdivision request and connections to the master plan trail network. For streets, the internal street network is designed to city street standards for alignment grade, intersection geometry, and surfacing. Collector streets include Corte Boulevard and Nez Perce Road. No frontage improvements are required on Hutter Road per the development agreement. That is also the edge of the city where city limits sits. So offsite transportation improvements include a roundabout at Hutter Road Access A and northbound left turn lane at Hutter and Mullen Roads, consistent with the traffic impact analysis. Stop controlled intersections will be identified on construction plans. So for alleys, no alleys are proposed. Moving on to rights-of-way. Street rights-of-way, easements, and intersection geometry are designed to city standards. The plat identifies all proposed rights-of-way consistent with the development agreement. So easements, so minimum of 20 foot easements are centered over water mains and 30 foot for combined sewer water easements where they are required as applicable. All utility easements for public sewer shall be dedicated to the city prior to building permits. Street lighting, street lighting shall be installed to city standards concurrent with each phase of the development. The development agreement section 3.5 discusses that. Moving on to fire protection. Water distribution mains are sized to meet fire flow standards and hydrant spacing standards. Fire department access roads meet minimum width requirements. So 20 feet for buildings up to 30 feet and 26 feet wide for buildings over 30 feet tall. Hydrant placement and spacing will be reviewed prior to final plot recordation. A secondary means of egress shall be constructed prior to building permits for more than 30 single family dwellings or more than 200 multifamily dwelling units per the international fire code. And so I want to stop here just in case this gets glossed over or missed because it's not directly handled until fires comments. And then there's also a condition, but the Woodside neighborhood to the south, was originally constructed beyond the fire code requirements for a number of units. And so the fire department has made a connection there that's emergency access only, not for vehicular traffic for the public to be able to access there so that they can bring that neighborhood up to code for fire protection. Right, so for planting, street trees and landscaping shall be installed to city standards concurrent with each phase at the time of permitting. Tree setbacks of 10 feet from water infrastructure are required. Sometimes those are also required at the time of building permit, depending if it's commercial or residential. Drainage, storm water management is handled by onsite infiltration. All storm drainage shall be retained on individual lots. The stormwater management plan shall be submitted and approved prior to any construction activity. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities. So the development agreement provides for Perimeter trail systems, which are a 12-foot asphalt multi-use path on the eastern boundary and a 10-foot path along the southern boundary, trail corridors will extend to the full length of the development as development progresses by phase. So they won't build the trail all in one big swoop. That'll happen as the phasing takes place. That's what that is saying. The applicant has agreed to develop and dedicate two traversing north-south trails and two traversing east-west trails to city standards. All right, last but not least are utilities. So water systems include distribution main sized for fire flow and demand connecting to the municipal system. Sewer systems connect to the municipal systems. Via the Appaloosa trunk main, which shall be extended prior to the 454th equivalent residential unit per the development agreement, which is found in section 3.2.1.3. All utilities are designed to city standards. So that's the lion's share of that. And this is what it looks like. on the plat itself. And so I wanted to point this out for people in the audience that may not understand what this looks like, is these match lines, the dark dashed line here, and then this one right here, align with the next following two slides. So this is the northern end, this is the park right here, the R8 development, and then the R3, which abuts the existing neighborhoods. so this next slide and it also shows the water the water and sewer utilities that are proposed for for each lot so the one that we just viewed is to the north of this then this is where that matches so this is the southeast corner the Woodside neighborhood here to the south Indian Meadows to the east what that system looks like, how the street system is also laid out. And last but not least is the southwestern corner here. So Hutter Road is here, Unplanted County. On the other side, city limits on this side of Hutter. And then that connection, I'm not sure how to pronounce that, Halide, connects to Hutter. and then what that street network as well as the utilities look like. And last but not least, this is your typical street section design standards and what each one of those streets will look like, what the right-of-way looks like, crowned streets with travel lanes in each direction as well as sidewalks per city code. So next is finding B3 is that the proposed preliminary plat does or does not comply with all of the subdivision design standards contained in municipal code 16.15 and all of the subdivision improvement standards contained in municipal code chapter 16.14. So this is a statement that was provided by Chris Bosley. I don't need to really read it into the record. I'm assuming everyone is reading it right now on the screen. Suffice it to say that Chris has reviewed that and vetted the plans for compliance and that it meets those standards. All right, so the last finding is, which is finding B4, that the lots proposed in the preliminary plat do or do not meet the requirements for the applicable zoning district. So as stated earlier, there are three zones that are part of this request. I'm going to catch up to myself. So R3, which is a single family home at three units per gross acre. So there are minimum standards. They are in my staff report. Here they are. And so you have to have a minimum lot size of 11,500 square feet and 75 foot of frontage for our three single family house. Detached housing is proposed there, which is allowed by right. And in our three for our eight, the lot size drops to 5,500 square feet with 50 foot of frontage and the public recreation, which is part of the park is a use by right. And our eight, which is shown in the map. and then single family detached housing is also allowed. Last but not least is our 17 or 17 is the multifamily district at 17 units per gross acre. And it allows for different sizes of, of lots, depending on what they, what they are or for density determination. So for single family houses and an R 17, it is the same as our eight. You are required to have 5,500 square feet and 50 foot of frontage for any any lot in R17 that's residential. However, those standards do change. If you have three units attached or greater, 2,500 square feet per unit is for the multifamily. Like I said, 5,500 for a single family and a duplex requires 3,500 square foot per unit or 7,000 square feet total for a duplex. Uses by right in R17, community education, which is the future school site, as well as multifamily, which is what is anticipated there. Okay, so because there's not really a neighborhood compatibility element in the findings, I did also include this in my staff report. I wanted to show where those connections would be for future vehicle access. So this is the intersection of West Appaloosa and West Woodside, so that would be the southern connection. It was anticipated the way that it is currently built that it would generally swoop in and then head to the north. The design now is to take a harder right there to act as a traffic calming element, as well as to the north, the Nez Perce connection, which is looking west into the subject property and what the current conditions are. So the additional details, as we've talked about, there is a development agreement that goes along with this in addition to the four findings that must be made. They are broken out into the following bullet points here. They are, very lengthy and it would take me half of the night i think to read these into the record so suffice it to say that staff has reviewed these and vetted that each for compliance with the development agreement and how the the developer has proposed to meet those Staff would stand for any questions that you may have for any of these bullet points here, and I'll let their expertise speak. They're much smarter than I am in these areas.

Questions for Sean on these elements here?

Yes.

I guess I just want to clarify because we did have a couple public comments regarding additional dwelling units and they are allowed in any of these zones, but most of them with a house on the property probably will not have setbacks to actually fit an additional dwelling unit.

So an ADU is what you're speaking to. Okay. So an accessory dwelling unit, you know, that is a very good comment. The development agreement limits the property to have a total of 2,800 ERUs, and that is the maximum. So I would look to our attorney and the developer to explain, you know, how are they going to handle that to ensure that we... Well, they wouldn't be built necessarily by the developer, but, like, if someone bought the home and five years from now put an additional dwelling unit on it.

Right.

But that still counts towards our ERUs. It still counts towards the cap? So there has to be a way to take those into account and keep the number current.

Okay. Do we know if the HOA would restrict that?

I would have to defer to the applicant for that question. Great question. All right, we did discuss the phasing flexibility and affordable housing already at 5%. So there are proposed conditions. I did find an error here. I'm guessing I'm not the only one. There are two 27s by accident. I don't know how that happened. So there is one additional more than 30. There's 31 total conditions that are proposed. And so each one of those are provided here. They're also provided in my staff report. Fire department requires FDCs and PIVs. Secondary means of egress, we talked about that. Woodside Park. What the access roads need to be and no parking on roadways that are less than 26 feet wide. Planning is anticipating that 12-acre park site will be designated as a tract. We'll ensure that happens. It's labeled as a lot right now. It's just a quick oversight. We can fix that for the actual plot that would be recorded if approved. Our homeowners association is created to handle the perpetual maintenance of all of the private areas in Cortair 2. Open space and stormwater tracks will need to be bonded for or completed prior to the final plot being recorded for each phase. and the applicants still need to provide that 5% affordable workforce housing as provided.

I do have a question on that one, Sean, while you have it up. The 5% affordable housing, I see a bunch of the parts of the report, it has it per edition, and is that... Exactly how it'll be administered or how are they requiring that because I mean on the r3 lots it might be hard to Make those in an affordable category and be with what they would go on the market for yes And that is an excellent question and so the way that the development agreement handles that is that they have to be Different

They have to be different from each other in terms of number of bedrooms, whether or not they're owned or rented. And so what that is saying is the developer can't just take one corner of the development and put a bunch of one bedroom, one bathroom units in there and go, there's our affordable housing. So it does allow for flexibility. That is not set in stone the way that it's shown, it's what they anticipate. So that may change, but staff will have oversight over that to make sure that they're meeting the minimum standard in the development agreement.

Okay, thank you.

Okay. Okay, wastewater. And wastewater in parks are very long. Suffice it to say, I think they looked at the development agreement and laid out all of the requirements in water as well that are part of the development agreement. Wastewater isn't at near as as long as water but water does provide a serious amount of Conditions here at which is great because that's what the development. They're reiterating what the development agreement requires Then parks for the 12.3 acre public park that It shall be designed as a joint effort between the developer and the Parks Department and then provides when that must be completed by, which is the 199th acre of the development. And that includes it as a whole, so that includes core tier one as well. So this is 202 acres, so it'll end up coming hopefully sooner rather than later. And finally, engineering, which as described in the TIA, which is a traffic impact assessment, the developer will be responsible for adding a left turn lane on Hutter Road at Mullen Road and a roundabout at Access A, which is Halide Avenue. And that ends the conditions. That completes my presentation. So S226, Quartier two subdivision request is before planning in zoning commission tonight and you will need to consider the subdivision request and make separate findings to approve, approve with conditions, approve without conditions, deny or deny without prejudice. And with that, I will stand for questions.

Thank you for your great report. Other questions of Sean?

That's one comment. I've read a lot of these reports, Sean. That is the most comprehensive report I've seen in any development. Whether I agree with it or not is irrelevant, but it details everything from the beginning to the current time. I can't ask for more than that. I assume you and Mrs. Patterson completed that, and I thank you. It really provides a lot easier to review what we need to do.

Thank you. Hillary was instrumental in helping me rework it. It was a little busy.

Ditto that. Thank you, Sean. With that, don't go too far away.

I have a question on one of the findings or the conditions. The secondary means of egress to be constructed and accepted by the city prior to issuance of building permit of more than 30 single family dwellings or more than 200 multifamily for the fire. Do you know where the, I guess I'm just curious on the timing, like where those ingress and egress will be while construction is happening?

Right. And so, um, one of the ones that most likely will be first, because it's the addition would be here at Woodside, that would be the emergency access. And then it will depend on what their phasing ultimately is like. So fire department will pay attention to those numbers. and they can actually answer where they will be better than I can.

And that one's not going to be a permanent ingress and egress just for construction? That one you're pointing to?

It would be for emergency.

Yeah, for emergency.

Yeah, so fire department access only.

Only, okay.

Well, and pedestrians. Right.

Okay, thank you very much. Next up is the applicant, Connie Kruger. Are you prepared to come forward, please? I actually can't.

I think Melissa Wells. Let's see here.

And Mr. Chairman, do you want to, yeah, it's probably good, because the applicant team has a few members, so I wonder if we should just now do the full audience.

So in the event that any of the applicant team uh may end up uh testifying i'm gonna try to group swear you in if you'd raise your right hand please and uh do you solemnly swear and or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth the whole truth so help you god i do thank you please please proceed okay good evening commissioner staff and community members my name is melissa wells i'm the president of the kootenai county land company and your city of record please

Court Elaine. No, thank you. Okay. Thank you for the opportunity to present quarter to a preliminary subdivision within the already annexed quarter master plan. As Sean mentioned, the purpose of tonight's presentation is to walk through how this subdivision implements the zoning development agreement and the city code standards that were established through the annexation process. But before we begin, we wanted to take just a quick moment to address the public comments. And first and foremost, our comment is thank you. We are really fortunate to receive a great deal of feedback from the community. Um, we often receive a lot of positive comments and strong support for our communities. And that means a great deal to us, our team members. We all live here locally, and we're very proud of the work that we do in the communities that we help create. Now I do understand that not every decision is favorable to everyone. And from my perspective, it is important that we understand all of the opinions. both positive and negative, because public input is really an important part of this process. As you can imagine, many of the comments are emotionable and understandably so. Growth, traffic, neighborhood change and development can be personal. But just note that these opinions are definitely valued, and again, we fully agree that they're an important part of the process. At the same time, it's equally important to understand that these decisions have to be guided by accurate information and facts that are provided by qualified professionals. So today our goal is to provide very data driven information supported by professional engineers, planners, and attorneys. And while we believe it's important for everyone to be heard, we also believe it's our responsibility to help clarify the record, correct inaccuracies and provide factual context so that decisions can be made fairly and thoughtfully. We're going to start tonight hearing from Michelle Fulgham. She's a land use attorney that will begin with a short legal and procedural overview so that everyone is very clear about the process of this application and the standards that apply. Michelle is a land use attorney in a private practice. For the past 34 years, she has represented property owners, developers, neighborhood groups, and municipalities in land use cases in both Idaho and Washington. She has successfully represented clients at all levels of judicial review in the state court and federal court, including prevailing in numerous land use cases before the Idaho Supreme Court. So Michelle, I'll turn it over to you. Yeah, there we go.

Thank you.

Hi, good evening. So as I begin our presentation tonight, I want to address the legal and the procedural posture of the subdivision application. to review the status, make sure everyone understands why we're here, recognize what is and what is not at issue before us tonight. And in the past, much of the discussion about this property focused on whether the land should be annexed into the city and what conditions and what obligations should attach to that annexation. And those were made in the annexation and development agreement about three years ago. Now, the annexation decision and the development agreement were implemented in March of 2023 when the property was brought into the city. And through that annexation approval, the city established the zoning for the property and they entered into the contractually binding development agreement that defines the framework, the obligation, the conditions for the development of the land. Now that contractually binding development agreement was negotiated, debated, fully vetted, approved, signed by both parties, the city and the developer applicant. It was then recorded as against title for the property and it became a binding encumbrance, establishing development rights on the real property. So as a result, this subdivision applicant, quarter two, obtained legally binding vested and established property development rights and those rights are recorded and have permanently attached to the subject real property. As indicated, in the staff report and also by Vice Chair Ingalls, the decisions in the development agreement, they're final, they're closed, they're binding, they're recorded against title of the property, and they cannot be altered through this subdivision application process. Having gone through annexation, having implemented and recorded the development agreement, we're now here as planned, as anticipated with a subdivision application. And this subdivision application is an outright permitted use. There are no deviations, no waivers, no conditions, no changes being sought. Because the application is for a residential subdivision, the city subdivision code governs as the binding legal standard and the development agreement that's been recorded as an encumbrance against the property and granting development rights Those are the legal authorities, the parameters that warrant review. So long as this applicant complies with the applicable city code subdivision requirements and the applicant complies with the development agreement requirements, then as a matter of land use law and contract law, the applicant's entitled to subdivision approval and to move forward through the process. And that's precisely the factual and legal record you have before you tonight. The staff report indicates the application meets all the requirements. Both city planner Sean Holm and city engineer Chris Bosley have documented that the application fulfills the requirements for preliminary plan approval under both the subdivision city codes and the development agreement. The development agreement established the road connectivity and the traffic study requirements. Under the development agreement, the subdivision project, it's required to have the agreed upon street connectivity plan, the connection at Appaloosa, and the connection at Nez Perce. The applicants also completed a traffic study as required through the concurrency analysis and a licensed traffic engineer, Sean Messner, with CivTech will be here to talk through and explain that traffic impact analysis. But from my perspective as a land use attorney, it's important to point out the legally binding and applicable standards for analyzing the traffic impact and the mitigation to be imposed based upon that traffic impact. It has to be demonstrated that there is a rational nexus between the impact of the development at issue in the application and the mitigation being imposed upon that development in the application. No mitigation is required for future development impacts that are outside the pending application. So under land use law and constitutional property rights law, an applicant is not required to mitigate traffic impacts that are created from other projects, from other developments, including a future phase of the core tear master plan, such as the commercial development that may or may not come forward in the future. That's not part of this application, so that's not part of the impact being created by this application to be mitigated as part of this application. The impact and mitigation analysis must be rationally related. We look at the average daily trips, that's the impact from the subdivision application, and the mitigation, turn lane on a roundabout. And those have to be rationally related and proportionate in their analysis and comparison. If the mitigation to be imposed on the impacts is overreaching, then it's unlawful, and it constitutes an unconstitutional taking, and it could be an exaction in violation of Idaho land use law. So the rational nexus and the proportionality controls. In conclusion, with that legal framework in mind, the applicant team will now work through how Cortere complies with all requirements, including the approved zoning, the density standards, the development agreement, subdivision standards, utilities, transportation, parks, trails, all phasing and concurrency requirements, all findings through B1 and B4 are met, and the subdivision application warrants approval. Thank you, and I will turn it over to Melissa.

Thank you. Could I get your name again and city? No. Name and city, please.

Oh, hi. I'm Michelle Fulgham, and I live in Spokane, but I work in Coeur d'Alene.

Works for me. Next, please. And name and city.

You, please. Oh, again, Melissa Wells, Coeur d'Alene. Gotcha. Thanks. So Michelle and Sean already discussed the history of the project, so I'm going to just advance forward. But one thing I wanted to emphasize about our application, again, is that it is part of the normal and required city process. Each subdivision within Cortere will need to come forward for review and approval. And we just felt it was important to remind the public of this process. And the fact that we're here tonight does not mean that there's an underlying land use change, it simply just means that we're following the steps required by city code and the development agreement to move this project forward over time. All right, so core tier two is located on the south end of the property and it includes about 126 developable acres. As Sean mentioned earlier, the subdivision is within the existing R17, R8, and R3 zoning districts. We do not have any deviations proposed with this application. So it's fairly straightforward. This proposed subdivision fits within the zoning and development agreement already approved for on this property. Um, on this slide, we just wanted to, um, show all the various zoning districts that, um, are in the application. Sean covered them already. So I'll go quickly in the light green R eight zone. We have proposed 236 single family lots and a perimeter trail. We also were including the 12.3 community public park. And as was discussed, that will be dedicated to the city prior to the 199th acre of development. On the right, the light yellow, the R3 zone, there's 48 single-family lots with a net density of 2.6 units an acre. There's also the perimeter trail. And then in the light gray area, the R17 zone, we have a limited number of single-family and multi-family lots along with a donated 10-acre elementary school site and the perimeter trail. We did want to point out that throughout the whole project, we will meet or exceed our affordable housing commitment And as you can see from above, all the proposed densities are well within the approved framework. And they certainly are going to help deliver the mix of housing, parks, trails, and public facilities that were contemplated during annexation. We just showed a sample here of a gathering area and just wanted to point out that the Quartier Master Plan is not simply a lot layout. It includes very meaningful public and private amenities Our plan includes open space, perimeter trails, linear park areas, a community park, HOA-maintained areas, and future school sites. These elements all help implement the broader core TARE commitments for parks, trails, neighborhood connectivity, and community infrastructure. And just pointing out that they're not afterthoughts. Everything has been integrated into the subdivision and are part of how the core TARE meets both the code and the development agreement requirements. Next year, I just wanted to touch on the infrastructure. Sean covered it very thoroughly, but we did coordinate very closely with the city's water and wastewater departments regarding the public utility infrastructure and consistent with the city's direction. This project has been designed to connect to and extend the existing public utility systems. The proposed water and sewer improvements are intended to serve this phase of the development while also fitting into the broader utility framework established for core tear. For sewer, the project will be served by a gravity sewer mains that connect to the existing main line in Appaloosa Road. And the development agreement identifies when the future improvements to the Appaloosa sewer line are required. And then for water, we coordinated with the city water department and a water system study was completed to determine the appropriate main sizing and related improvements. And in addition, the project includes relocating an existing 12-inch water main and the associated PRV into the public street. OK. We certainly understand that traffic has been one of the main topics raised in the public comments. And again, we very much take those concerns seriously. So as part of this application, we have followed the city's concurrency analysis requirements And we did, of course, complete the required traffic study for Quartier 2. Sean Messner is a traffic engineer with CivTech, and we have him here tonight to walk through this process. He'll explain the methodology used, summarize the findings, and talk about the recommended mitigation measures from the study. Sean is an experienced and licensed civil and traffic engineer with more than 24 years of experience preparing traffic studies and traffic design. He has prepared and reviewed over 1,000 traffic studies, including master traffic studies for large multi-phase projects and their subsequent phase TIAs, and has served as a city traffic engineer for public communities implementing agency standards. With that, Sean, I'll turn it over to you.

Sean, she already mentioned your name, but just your full name again. And I don't know the city, so for the record.

No problem. Sean Messner, City of Spokane Valley. Thank you, sir. Thanks, Melissa. I just wanted to touch on what we've already completed as part of the project over the years in terms of traffic studies and then hone in on the specific Quartier 2 traffic study and talk a little bit about the process that we used. to go through that. So the master traffic study was completed back in 22 and brought forward through the development agreement in 23. We coordinated with the KMPO and had Ali take our master site plan and plug it into the regional travel demand model. The reason that's really important is when you have a really large development like this, you want to plug it into a regional travel demand model to see how it interacts with other developments surrounding it, including development within Post Falls and to the north, and take a look from a high level to see and ensure that the facilities serving the area have adequate capacity. That's the purpose of that master traffic study is to take that information and look at the roadways and see if the number of lanes are correct, determine what that capacity is, and if there are limitations to make note of that. What we found with the KMPO model and what the city concurred with was there were adequate facilities to serve not only this development, but all future development within that regional travel demand model. As part of the master traffic study, and as part of our development agreement, we are required to do a traffic study for each one of these phases, or update the master traffic study every two years. Having said that, we did do a traffic study for core tier one, that went through the city review process. And we used national standards, IT traffic manual, traffic study manual, the IT trip generation manual, highway capacity manual, manual on uniform traffic control devices. All of these are national standards that apply to regional and local items as well in terms of developing traffic studies. So we're in compliance with that. It also helps us determine what traffic data needs to be collected, how to analyze the site in terms of residential units and commercial, and then look at the study intersections for capacity constraints and for what improvements might be needed to serve the development. With quarter one, the outcome of that were two things, project improvements and then system improvements. Project improvements are improvements that are the sole responsibility of Quartier or the developer, whereas system improvements are improvements that we contribute to, but there's background traffic from other development or what's out there today, and the city collects transportation impact fees to address those. The table to the right here, in terms of system improvements, identifies what our percentage of contribution would be and helps the city to allocate or direct where the transportation impact fee funding might go to help improve the system. Skipping ahead to core tier two, let me go back. So core tier one, was the sub-piece. The master study is this big, overarching, and as each phase comes in, we hone in on each one of those developments and each one of the phases to look at, as Michelle said, the improvements that correspond with the development at the time. These aren't done in isolation. Quartier 1 was the first one. Quartier 2, which was recently approved by city staff, incorporated the traffic generated from Quartier 1 that's already been approved. So we're not discounting it. We're adding that to it and accounting for it. With Quartier 2, much like Quartier 1, there are both project improvements and system improvements. The project improvements, as you've heard, were the roundabout at Hutter and Access A and a northbound left turn lane at Hutter and Mullen. But there's also system improvements that we identified in the traffic study. And those are to the right in the table. And it also shows the percent contribution that our site has to what is needed at each one of those study intersections. Again, the city collects transportation impact fees, and this table can be used to help guide where those fees go to help improvements where they're needed. Again, we appreciate the public comment. We value that, as Melissa has said, and transportation and traffic is a very good concern for all people. I wanted to address the connections at Nez Perce and Appaloosa. Nez Perce today is a minor arterial as a classification, and we understand the city is trying to reclassify that as a collector roadway. But I wanted to share the capacities of roadways in terms of average daily trips or average daily traffic that each one of the types of facilities can accommodate. So as a minor arterial, a roadway can be expected to accommodate up to 18,000 daily trips. As a collector, it can be expected to accommodate up to 15,000. When we collected the traffic count data, the existing volumes on Nez Perce are about 1,400 daily trips. We are adding traffic to it. We have a connection from Quartier 2 into Nez Perce. And so we're increasing that traffic slightly to the total of about 5,000 daily trips. That's not overnight. That's when Quartier 2 is fully constructed, which we're assuming will happen by 2035. So nine years. That is still about a third of the capacity of what a collector can accommodate. With Appaloosa, Appaloosa will remain as a local roadway. We've gone through site plan exercises and internal roadway network configurations to really make it so that traffic will want to go to Hutter or want to go north and away from the neighborhood through Appaloosa. Gabe will talk a little bit more about that in the coming slides. But a local roadway capacity is about 3,000 daily trips. The daily volume that's there today is very similar to Nez Perce. It's about 1,200 daily trips. And we're only adding about 600 daily trips more. And that's partly because of how we're designing Cortair 2 and the roadway network. So with that, the total ADT, again, in 2035, so the total daily trips, will be about 1,800 vehicles per day, which is about just over half of the capacity that the road can handle. Gabe will talk a little bit more about some of the traffic calming and what we've done with the roadways internal, but we've heard that that's part of the development agreement and we've taken great strides through the site plan and the plat to show how that can be accommodated and where we are accommodating that. Regarding construction traffic, that was also a major comment and we are 100% agree with that. The sign to the right that's up here is a sign that we presented to Chris that we will post on Appaloosa and Nez Perce during construction activity. We're also going to direct our contractor to make sure that they don't have any deliveries and all the construction workers come in from Hutter and not through Appaloosa or through Nez Perce. With that, I'll turn it over to Gabe to talk a little bit more about some of the transportation items.

Thank you, Sean. Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Gabe Gallinger. I'm a licensed civil engineer with Kootenai County Land Company in Coeur d'Alene.

Thank you.

Although I do reside in Deer Park, Washington.

Thank you.

So I'd like to spend just a few minutes and discuss the internal street connections and layout of Courtaire 2 and the connections to the existing neighborhoods. And I'd like to begin by revisiting a key part of the annexation process. During the city council hearings, the council specifically asked us to demonstrate how the proposed roadway network would direct traffic toward Hutter Road and reduce reliance on the Nez Perce and Appaloosa neighborhood connections. So the information on the next few slides was presented to the city council in March of 2023. We thought it would be helpful to revisit this discussion because this roadway approach was an important factor in the council's decision to approve the annexation. So we'll start on the north side of the project on Nez Perce. And we proposed removing the two mid-block connections to Nez Perce on both the north and south sides. And by eliminating these connections, traffic generated in Courtaire 2 is now naturally directed south and west toward Hutter Road instead of traveling north onto Nez Perce and east through the existing neighborhood. Now moving to the south side of the site, we first eliminated the two prohibited street connections at Woodside and Arrowhead as required by the development agreement. Next, we incorporated the required connection to Appaloosa Road and proposed reconfiguring it to a three-way stop-controlled intersection. So this requires that traffic leaving Quartier 2 must stop and make a left turn onto Appaloosa rather than providing a straight through uninterrupted connection. To further discourage a neighborhood cut through traffic, we disconnected the two easternmost north-south streets and redirected them to the west. We also extended the east-west local access street all the way to Hutter and created a direct route to the arterial system through the new roundabout that's been discussed. So the result of this street network, the result is a street network that naturally encourages residents to access Hutter rather than relying on the existing neighborhood connections to the east. And now this exhibit shows the overall street connections for Cortair 2. As you can see, the subdivision includes the required street connections while intentionally directing traffic west toward Hutter Road while minimizing reliance on the Nez Perce and Appaloosa connections. So in conclusion, the application before you this evening is very straightforward. We're not requesting any modifications, exceptions, or deviations from the city's standards or the development agreement. And as confirmed in the staff report, the proposed preliminary subdivision complies with all applicable city requirements. We appreciate your time and consideration and respectfully request your approval of the application as presented. Thank you. And our team is available for any questions.

Thank you. I have a question with respect to the roundabout. Yes. Sean mentions there's seven phases. I don't know if there's a requirement somewhere. I don't think I saw anything in a development agreement of that specificity. When one of those seven phase, when would the roundabout be constructed in your mind? Phase one. Phase one, which is what they call the addition. Addition, yes. Roundabout phase one. Yep. Other question, you know. It's one thing, it certainly showed the data that Nez Perce, even with the added traffic, you're a third of the capacity and I think half of the capacity on Appaloosa. That said, that's calming. And I like the calming features, the three-way and the reconfiguration. I think that's going to make a big difference. And I think that's new information that I think I'm going to sleep better a little bit. The question I have is on the construction traffic. So even though the ultimate build-out is within capacities or whatnot, during construction that could really be ugly. Cement mixers and all this and that. It sounded like, I heard you right, there's going to be some effort put to making sure the construction traffic come via Hutter. Help me understand what you would do to really make that happen.

So as Sean talked about, the sign you see here is a sign that we intend to put up on both sides of Appaloosa and both ends of Nez Perce for the duration of construction. So it'll be a really long time that these signs will be in place. So if you're on Atlas turning onto either one of those streets, you would see this sign. And if you're a construction equipment driver, hopefully not take that route. Same with if you're leaving Cortair and you want to head east, you would see that sign and you would not go that way. Now, in addition to that, all the contractors that we hire, we will specify that they are not to go east through the residential subdivision. They are to access Cortair for the duration of construction through Hutter Road. And that's one of the reasons that we're building the roundabout construction with the first phase of the development. So we have a permanent open access to Hutter Road to facilitate construction traffic.

Gabe, can you go back to that, the bigger map? I think it was like your last slide.

Oh, yeah.

And can you kind of just maybe walk us through that? The plan on which roads will be developed when and the trails and that kind of thing? With the phasing, I mean, so you're going to connect to Hutter in the first addition or the addition?

So the first phase or addition, and in addition, that's the legal term that will be on the final plat. So we try to keep that consistent because it does get confusing because the numbers don't line up. But it goes up. To this point down, it's south of the school property, comes back, and includes the connection at Appaloosa, and then along the southern boundary of the property. So really, in that first phase, we will get the permanent connection to Hutter, we will get the emergency access connection at Woodside, and we will get the permanent connection and reconfiguration at Appaloosa.

And will the southern trail be developed at the same time?

Yeah, the southern trail and then the east perimeter up to the north boundary of that phase.

So the roads, other than that, they'll just follow the additions as they go? And then on the north-south trail and both trails, are you doing any painting or, you know, beacons or anything where the trail crosses the road? On either.

So for the north-south trail along the east boundary, it's going to be in a common area tract owned by the HOA. And within Quartet 2, it won't cross any streets. The east-west trail will cross this Appaloosa connection. I think we'll work with Chris Bosley and the city staff to determine most likely crosswalks, pedestrian crossings, We'll see what level of facilities are needed for those, but we do anticipate a lot of utilization on these trails.

Yeah, I mean, when it comes up to Nez Perce, I mean, so I live in Indian Meadows, full disclosure. But when it comes up to Nez Perce, that you're going to be coming behind homes, you know, and just to make sure that if someone is crossing up there, that it's landscaped in a way that, or if there's a way to calm the traffic. Because Nez Perce is like going to be a straight shot all the way to Atlas and that while the trail is super nice, then you get onto Nez Perce and you don't have a trail to connect into the trail on Atlas or other systems. So I was kind of wondering if there was any, you know, I didn't see anything planning for sidewalks or trail connectivity on Appaloosa or Nez Perce to get to the Atlas Trail. But I'm just wondering about that intersection of pedestrians and cars that that could be looked at.

That's a design level discussion that we really haven't had yet. We're certainly amenable to provide whatever is necessary for public safety, I think. Curb bump outs are typically done at high volume trails for crossings to shorten the distance that you're in the street. certainly something we can look at.

Yeah, I know even the one on Atlas, when you come up to those stop signs, it's easy for a bike to just go straight that way really close, and then you're likely going to have more bike riders to the school. So I just want to make sure that those intersections of pedestrian and cars are kind of thought about throughout the process, and I don't know if that – would be amenable to have a condition for that, especially with the school site. I just feel like that could be a conflict.

You know, we do trails and pathways in a lot of our communities and coordinate with city staff during the civil design review process on all of those and take staff comments, and they have the ability to give us those conditions at that time based on the particulars and specifics of the trails and the street crossings.

Okay.

And then I just have a I know we talked about it a little bit when we were up at the industrial park Edition, but how will the landscaping just for the for the people in the room? How will the landscaping be on the perimeter of the neighborhood or fencing and that kind of thing? Can you explain what the plan is for that?

We don't have a finalized landscape plan at this point, but we definitely have talked to our landscape architect about providing more natural grasses along that corridor that don't require daily watering and weekly mowing and fertilization and heavy maintenance, more dry land grasses that grow six to 12 inches and maybe get mowed down once or twice a year just to kind of keep them from getting unruly, but more of a natural escape with trees and you know, little landscape pockets.

Something like you'd see on the Prairie trail.

Yeah.

And will there be perimeter fencing on the, um,

So there will be fences on the back lot line of the lots that are adjacent to the west side on the north south and the north side on the east west trail. We really haven't decided if there's going to be a perimeter trail. I know during annexation public comment was a little mixed on that. I mean a perimeter fence. Some residents would prefer a perimeter fence and some wouldn't.

Yeah, and I know along that fence line, at least on Indian Meadows, not everyone has a fence. Right.

Yeah, Commissioner Ward.

A couple of questions, if I could, please. Sure. There were only two east roads, either Nez Perce or Appaloosa. And they talked about the distribution of traffic, PM peak being like 545, I think. What is the distribution going east of that traffic?

I will bring Sean up to help with that question, because that is a number I'm not aware of.

Wait, one other thing.

I know the covenant says it must be minimize the accessibility to going east. Now, on the site plan up there, if I live in one of the houses that's adjacent to the greenbelt on the east, or somewhere in the middle there, what do I actually have to do to go east? Either on SPS or Appaloosa?

So if you live somewhere in this area? Yeah, exactly. So this is the park property, school property. If you wanted to go east on Appaloosa, you could go south on this street, and then you would head east, go down, stop controlled intersection, take a left on Appaloosa, and continue east to Atlas. If you wanted to use Nez Perce, you would come down. You would go west, head north, turn right on Corte Boulevard, which is the main central collector for the whole master plan, go north, take right, and head east on Nez Perce. So the portion of Nez Perce and Cortere 2 has no direct lot access or street access from the neighborhood.

And Cortere Boulevard, I know there's something cul-de-sac there. Is that intended to go due north at some point or at least? No.

Oh, from Corotero Boulevard, yes, absolutely, yes. This, I can scroll back to the overall master plan, but that goes all the way up and connects into Hanley and with a future signalized intersection that we're currently designing now and will construct in the next couple of years.

So anyone choosing to go Nez Perce or Avalisa winds up at Atlas, but there's not a whole lot there. There's not a grocery store or a gas station. They're almost forced to come back to Hutter or when the quartier is finished, possibly go north. And it just, I don't know, it kind of makes sense to me.

That's one other thing, though.

Right now and after this particular subdivision is completed, I heard the numbers now. What is the level of service on Hutter?

and atlas and what will it be after the subdivision is completed okay that is another sean question so i think i think he's prepared probably to answer the first one at this point and mr chairman i think it might be helpful to to explain like what average daily trips and what does that mean to explain like are those trips that are from the house and out and back to the house or is that My understanding is it's not, that it's trips that are even taken beyond your first point, and it might be the Amazon driver. So if you could explain that, I think that might help. Sure.

So for average daily trips, what a single-family household would typically generate is about 10 trips per day. And so that's me going to and from work, my wife going to and from the grocery store, so that would be four trips, the Amazon driver coming and dropping things off, my oldest son going to and from work, going to and from the gym, things like that. That would add up to our total trips throughout the day from our house going to whether it's employment or commercial or activity, typically a single family household will generate that. So it's total trips throughout the day over a 24-hour peak or over a 24-hour period, a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour, and then throughout the day. What the levels of service are determined by are two things. There's a capacity from a roadway perspective, the daily capacities that I was showing before. And then level of service at intersections are typically based off of AM and PM peak hours. Those are the two worst hours typically for intersections on the roadways. And so I'll answer the first part of the question that you asked about the distribution before. So we were showing that about 13% of the traffic from Cortere would use Appaloosa, about 37% would use Nez Perce, and the remaining traffic would go back over to Hutter because it's a more direct connection and it'll be a faster way to get to and from Coeur d'Alene or Post Falls and Spokane. Yes, the second question was about level of service. Let me pull that up because I don't have all of that completely memorized. So the intersection at Atlas and Nez Perce. Before our site comes on board, the northbound left is an A, the eastbound approach is a level of service C at the worst conditions, so that'd be the PM peak hour. With our site, Because it's residential, the morning traffic generates more delay and so it'll be a level service D is the worst condition at Atlas and Nez Perce. At Atlas and Appaloosa, The worst condition is the eastbound direction. There in the morning time, before our site, would be a level of service C. After our site, because we're not adding that many more trips, it's still a level of service C. But the delay does increase. At Hutter, before our site, there's no intersection. So our access point at Hutter works just fine. Everybody just drives through. straight through it. With the roundabout, there's ample capacity with a single lane roundabout. So the level of service after our site is implemented and the roundabout is constructed is level of service B. I have a question similar to the definitions.

When you're looking at the traffic study, we all had a copy of it. I mean, it's very detailed. There's lots of calculations. But on each intersection, you'll have the right turns and the left turns. you label an account for each and so if i know some people in the audience had also looked at the traffic study each count is basically when you see a traffic study that rope that goes across the road like every time that hits that's one right so like if you come home and back is that two or and and then some of them follow right so if you hit one going left onto atlas and then you hit two more going down because you're measuring it all the way they're counting that That car got counted quite a few times on your traffic count.

Right, yeah. So we typically do two types of traffic counts. There'll be the segment counts, which are the tubes that you're talking about. If you see two tubes out there, it's collecting both traffic count data and then weight and speed. So we can determine the number of trucks, and we can determine the speed of the vehicles traveling along the roadway. And then at intersections, we typically use either manual traffic counters, people out there actually counting the cars making the lefts, throughs, and the rights, or sometimes there'll be cameras or radar units that collect that data.

So when somebody is looking at the traffic city as a whole, a car traveling throughout it probably is counted A lot of times in that system, and there's not really a way to distinguish that, but I just wanted to, when you look at the numbers, they seem large, but it's kind of following it all the way through.

That's correct, yes.

Commissioner Ward. One final thing. I assume at this point it's not possible to estimate the traffic generated by the future school, particularly incoming traffic in the morning.

It's typically, it's hard to do. Mostly because it relies on the number of students and such. Thank you.

Was there an estimation for the school?

I think I did have that in there. I want to double check to see. I was pulling it up. Okay. Okay, so the reason it's hard to determine is because it's typically reliant on the number of students. We know this is going to be a public school, but the number of students help determine the number of buses and then thereby the number of people that are likely going to be dropping kids off and picking them up. But we did assume that this elementary school would have 415 students. So that traffic is incorporated within our traffic study. Admittedly, some of that traffic that's generated by the school will all be from internal trips. So somebody that lives up at the northwest might not want to walk there, but they'll drive, drop their kid off, and then head on to work. So there is some of that. But we did account for the school within the traffic study. The one thing we did not account for was the park. And I just want to address that, too. The 12-acre park. Typically, the size of the park and the facilities that are provided will determine whether we need to account for that in the traffic study. Because it's a 12-acre park, if we looked at just the trips that would be generated using IT land use codes, it would be about six trips during the peak hour. And so with that said, a lot of the traffic that's going to be used in the park because there We haven't determined the facilities yet. There's not likely gonna be playing fields, per se, but it's just, it'll be attracted, it's an attraction from the internal subdivision, and by those that are living adjacent to it that wanna walk to it. So just wanted to add that out there, too, that while you might not see that within the traffic study, the purpose of, or the reason for that was the number of trips generated are so low, and it's likely to be mostly used by the internal community.

And I noticed on your list of, you know, improvements like right turn lanes and roundabout and those kind of things, you don't have an improvement at Nez Perce and Atlas. I understand that part of that, because it is in our capital improvement plan for the impact fees, can be directed through some of that. But it isn't suggested that it is signalized even, maybe a right turn lane. Do you have, can you give us a little background? Because you said it would be a D after the study. Could that come at a later date with an additional phase maybe?

It'll likely show up as a later improvement through a different phase. So the master traffic study that I talked about at the beginning noted that Nez Pearson Atlas would need to be signalized in the future. So we're keeping an eye on that intersection. Before you install any kind of traffic signal, you want to make sure that you have adequate traffic that warrants that traffic signal and that the operations are such that you need a traffic signal to help it. Level of service D is still a fairly good operation for a stop-controlled intersection, but it's likely with the next study that we do when we get updated traffic counts because the time limits of our traffic counts are are ending, so the next study we do will have new traffic counts. We'll take a closer look at that at that time, and it's possible that with the next study, depending on which phase it is, that it could generate the need for a traffic signal.

What letter generates that?

If a stop control is lower than, so level service E, So we're right there.

So you're right at the boundary of that. Okay. Thank you.

I have a quick question. Of the 480 students, potential students, or whatever that number was, have you estimated how many of those would be coming from existing communities and how many would be coming from Corotara too?

No, typically we'll use the same type of trip distribution that we use for the overall site. So we would think about 13% or so, 15% might come from the adjacent community. And then others will, you know, within the community there will be some trips. But it's really hard to do that until we get more information from the school.

But Sarah, maybe you know, since you live in that community, could students come to the new school in Guadalajara too?

I mean, speaking from being in there, I think we've been rezoned a few times since I've lived there. So right now they're zoned Skyway. Previously they were zoned Winton. And it has a Ramsey overlay because there's not really capacity for Indian Meadows at any one particular school. So it actually has a couple of zonings. So providing a school right next door, I would imagine the school district would rezone. and pull them in because they are walkable without crossing a major intersection. And I sat on the boundary review committee for the school board for a while, and so I think that would fit in with their, what at least used to be their plan. It would likely be that the whole neighborhood would go to that school.

Yeah, would make sense. Yeah. Thank you.

Okay, other questions of the applicant team? No. Is the applicant team done for now? And you'll have a chance for rebuttal. So with that, we will start in with the public hearing. I'd like to swear everyone in, if you wouldn't mind, just kind of let me know. raise your right hand and uh if you plan to uh speak if uh you would follow me and do you solemnly swear and or affirm that the testimony you were about to give is the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god thank you for that and i'd reiterate you know whether someone comes up they're in favor they're in opposition we're not gonna boo and we take five Oh, true.

I don't care. Sarah said keep going.

Oh, well. But then he kicked me into the table.

We got a request for a quick recess. And before we recess, though, again, as soon as we get back, again, I reiterate whether someone's in favor or opposition or whatever, we're not going to clap. We're not going to boo. Let's just be respectful. Five quick minutes. We'll be right back.

Thank you. i will have to first one Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.

Everyone, if we could take our seats, we're gonna I call a meeting, call the meeting back to order. Thank you. Thank you very much. We'll begin public testimony. Thank you. We'll begin public testimony. First name, Maggie Lyons, Maggie, name and name and city please. Thank you. Please. Uh, three minutes.

Okay. Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to be here tonight to talk in favor of the core tear project. I serve as the executive director of panhandle affordable housing Alliance or Paha. Tonight I'm speaking specifically about core tears commitment to workforce housing as part of its development agreement with the city core tear made a specific commitment to provide dedicated workforce housing. And I'm here to tell you tonight, that commitment is real. We are encouraged, very encouraged, to be working with the Quartier team as they designate 5% of the homes as deed restricted, keeping them permanently affordable for local workers earning between 80% and 130% of AMI for the development agreement. And just as we do at Miracle in Britain, Paha will manage the deed restrictions that preserve the affordability of these homes every time they sell. The homeowner will build equity, but through a resale formula, the homes will never price to market. This model works. We've proven it with 28 homes in Miracle on Britain in Post Falls. Our Britain homeowners are the people we need to live here. They're nurses, firemen, law enforcement officers, teachers. We have an electrician. We have two welders. We have small business owners. We have an IT specialist and computer technicians, and the list goes on. They are young and hardworking. Many are starting families. Most grew up right here in Kootenai County. With the median home price in Kootenai County now at an all-time high of $565,000, the young people who are the very engine of our local community are priced out of the community where they want to live and work. What Cortere and the City of Coeur d'Alene are doing here is critically important. You are setting a brilliant template for what can happen when a city, a developer, and a certified organization like Paha work together to create homes our workforce can actually afford and preserving that affordability in perpetuity. The Britain model home works and Cortere is committed to making it work in this development. This is what workforce housing can look like when we stop talking about the problem, actually start implementing solutions. I believe this partnership, I'm absolutely convinced this partnership will become a model for other builders and other cities to follow. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up is Pat Taylor. Please come forward. I said your name, but name and city for the record, please.

I am Pat Taylor, and I live in Coeur d'Alene, actually in Queen Anne Estates, which is the first block south of Nez Perce for me. And I've lived there, owned my home since 94. My comment would probably be that Nez Perce is already a problem accessing Atlas Road. And the heavy traffic isn't just AM and PM. It is also school dismissal time. And that creates a lot of backlogs in which traffic is already blocked from traffic at Kathleen northbound. And it's backing up beyond Abbey and almost to the dog park at that time of day. And so if the level of service is going to be a D for that NISPRS to Atlas traffic with this phase, It's already so bad that at times I need to come out of my street access Nez Perce and meander through Northshire to get to the light at Kathleen as a means to turn left. So that's just a comment I'd like to make. I'm impressed with the level of care and concern and Effectiveness for planning everybody's shown.

Thank you for that next up Tim Bushman, please Sir name and city please good evening Tim Bushman, Coeur d'Alene.

I Live right close to the intersection of the Atlas and Appaloosa and I'm a block and a half off and when I go out there in the morning and 8 o'clock, make my right to get the Atlas to either turn north or south. It's as many as two minutes to two and a half minutes, and I'm the first car in the line. Because you get the traffic from Kathleen coming down, and that light hits, and everybody's 110 feet apart. You can't get in anywhere. And then all the roundabout coming from Celtice going north, same thing. All those cars come through, and you're just constantly going like you can't get through there. There's currently, first of all, are they doing anything about Atlas to put a center lane in? I don't know if there's enough room or not, like a left turn lane. I don't know if that's a, but the problem is is getting in and out of there. Because they will come out of Appaloosa down there, and if you come out of your driveway, and I'm gonna make a right on the first one to go, I can't even make a right out of my driveway. There'll be so many cars. So I've got a potential of 10, 15, 20 minutes just to get to Atlas. Because each of these cars are going to have to wait their turn when the traffic's bad, and that's in the morning, and when school's in, somewhere around 2.30 to 3.30, and anything 4.30 to 5.30 on is a nightmare. It's parking lot. There are cars that stretch all the way down, 50, 75 cars coming from the traffic light way. The other concern I have is there are a lot of children that play in this area. On my street, I've got neighbors with three, seven on the other side, four down the street. And they're always out riding around a little bit. And of course, they'll get out in the street once in a while to visit the kid across the street or whatever. I'm concerned, one, they're not as attentive than a driver of a car would be, obviously. But I'm concerned about their safety and that thing. The final thing I have to do has to do with something I haven't heard much about, which is real estate values. According to what I've read on AI and research is that when you have a community back there like that's currently there where there's really only one way out, pretty much, and you open it up to allow access from another large community to come through, your real estate values go down anywhere from 3% to 15%. depending on the area. Even if it was 5%, I have a $700,000 home. That's $35,000 that I'm upside down now because of traffic. If I tried to show that house when people are coming in and out at 4.30 in the afternoon, people are going to, you can't even get into your house. I don't want to buy this house. Same thing in the morning. Same thing at school time. So the traffic there is not right. The last comment is you could go out of that, go the other direction, and go west, go into Hutter, turn left, go to Celtese. That's a quarter of a mile. It takes 25 seconds. If you came out of that fertility on Appaloosa to Atlas, it takes 25 seconds. Except you have a traffic light to control if you're going to Celtice, or is there, you're stuck at Atlas. You're waiting for people back and forth constantly. Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir. Next up is Pam Holcomb and Carol Root had asked to speak together. We'll allow that. Are you coming forward? You can have, since there's two of you, we'll run the clock twice. Six minutes. There you go. She's going to do all the talking. Both the name and city.

Okay. My name is Pam Holcomb, and I live on Nez Pierce Road. This is Carol Root, and she lives on Tamarack. So my neighbor and I have collaborated on this statement, and I will be presenting. So my family has lived on Nez Perce Road for 34 years, and what I'd like to focus on tonight is the impact that Cortere traffic will have on our neighborhood, review some of the discussions from the last planning and zoning meeting in December of 2025, and discuss solutions for east-west traffic from Atlas to Cortere. I'm requesting that phase two of Cortere be denied tonight and brought up to city council. I'm requesting that phase two of Cortere be denied until using industrial loop as an arterial is approved. I request that phase two of Cortere be denied until there is a plan for pedestrian safety for our roads. And I also request that Phase 2 of Cortere be denied until the developers are financially responsible for the road improvements needed for Nez Perce and Appaloosa roads. They are both aging and deteriorating roads, but they can handle our current traffic. They can't handle the increased Cortere traffic from 1,100 to 11,000 cars per day on Nez Perce. We as taxpayers should not be responsible for the road improvements caused by courtier traffic. So these are my requests and here's why. In the current 2026 traffic impact analysis, Nez Perce Road is designated as an arterial road. Arterial roads are not compatible with neighborhood roads that have driveway approaches as this creates unsafe conditions. Our driveway is one of 16 driveways. that exit directly onto Nez Perce Road. And in addition, there are two driveways from the Children's Park and the Pickleball Courts onto Nez Perce. Examples of other arterial streets in Coeur d'Alene are Seltice, Government Way, Atlas, and Kathleen. Our rural road should not be in this category. Using Appaloosa and Nez Perce as connecting streets to Coeur d'Alene affects our neighborhood's safety, quality of life, and property values, as the last speaker really told us. And any road upgrades needed due to increased court air traffic are not covered in the developer's agreement. There are also five school bus routes traveling through Indian Meadows, making a total of 24 daily stops on our streets. Most of these children walk to these bus stops, and I'm concerned about their safety if traffic is diverted into our neighborhood. The Kootenai Metropolitan Planning Organization projected that Nez Perce will have an increase from 11,000 cars per day to 11,100 cars per day to 11,000 cars per day. Now this was based on the master traffic study in 2022. This was not limited to the phase two numbers that were given tonight. The TIA at that time showed that 85% of the vehicles on our streets speed. So when Nez Perce is connected to Cortere, the number of speeding vehicles will increase from 935 to 9,350 per day. Nez Perce does not have any sidewalks. In the core tier development, sidewalks are proposed on both sides of all local streets to meet safety requirements. So where is our pedestrian safety? How can the safety rules for the subdivision not apply for our existing neighborhoods? So increasing the distribution of traffic by using industrial loop is part of the solution. At the December meeting, we learned that in December of 2022, the developer purchased the parcel of land, which was privately owned to connect industrial loop to the quarter development. The purpose stated by their engineer was to improve traffic distribution and emergency response times. We also learned at the last planning and zoning meeting that industrial loop is not classified in the federal functional classification system where Nez Perce is classified as an arterial. Industrial Loop was never studied or considered by our city planners with the Master Traffic Study because at that time there wasn't a connection. After Phase 1 of Cortere was approved, Chris Bosley stated that Industrial Loop could be classified in the future as an arterial ore collector. So one factor for us not appealing the approval of Cortere Phase 1 was the understanding that Industrial Loop could be reclassified later. So the main factor for not using industrial loop is money for road repair. Because industrial loop doesn't have a classification, the city cannot apply for grant funds. My husband and I had a meeting on July 8th with Chris Bosley and Todd Fusier. We learned that the water department is replacing old water lines on industrial loop. The water department and the street department are splitting the cost of repaving after the water lines are replaced. This will occur somewhere in the range of 2027 to 2028. So in conclusion, Industrial Loop will now be repaved, funded by the Water Department and the Street Department. Classifying Industrial Loop will make it eligible in the future for grant funds, which would decrease the cost to us taxpayers. Atlas is especially congested south of Kathleen, and if Industrial Loop is used as a main east-west connector, it will reduce some of that congestion. As a developer's engineer said, industrial loop will improve traffic distribution and emergency response times. So once again, I request that phase two of Cortere be denied tonight and brought up to city council. I request that it's denied until using industrial loop is approved as an arterial. I request that phase two of Cortere be denied until there is a plan for pedestrian safety for our roads. And I also request that Phase 2 of Cortere be denied until the developers are financially responsible for the road improvements needed. And I want to say that I realize that this committee is a voluntary position, and I thank you for your time and your service.

Thank you. Next up, Ethan Holcomb.

Sir, name and city, please. Hi, my name's Ethan Holcomb. I live with that lady on Nez Perce Road. Might have guessed. Thank you. My only deal is on the construction the restrictions for construction going through our neighborhood. I would like this to be denied until the city council can look at this because there is no enforcement for that. Putting a sign at the end of the street and the developer asking their contractors not to is not going to apply in five years. A semi from Ziggy's with a load of lumber is not going to drive all the way around. He's going to come down Nez Perce or Appaloosa. And I would like an enforcement clause put into this development deal that there is some form of enforcement to keep the semis, the cement trucks, the dump trucks off of our street. Our street can't handle it. It is not stable enough for that. It wasn't built for that kind of traffic in the first place. It doesn't have the bed underneath it to handle that. So I would like this to be denied until there is some form of enforcement to keep the contractors coming through our neighborhoods because With the traffic that's going out right now, contractors are going to have the same problem that we do getting out. You can't get down this pier. You've got to cut down Tamarack. You've got to cut down Buckskin to get down to somewhere else to get out. There's going to be contractors going up and down all the side streets, not the big semis maybe, but all the electricians, all the painters, All of those folks are going to be in, and none of that traffic is included in the traffic deal. There's nothing in there except for the people living there getting in and out. It has nothing to do with the first 10 years of this build-out when all this construction is going on. So for the safety of the people that is up and down those streets and the kids walking, getting to school, it is not safe for the semis and all the big equipment coming in and out of there. So I think we need some kind of enforcement that the city can use, the city should be, and I don't want our tax money, I don't want your tax money, her tax money, she lives with us, but all you guys from Fort Grounds and Midtown, all that, it's your tax money going to fix our roads when they screw them up. So I think there needs to be some kind of enforcement applied. Thank you, I'm done.

Thank you. Next up, Brenda Nearpass. Brenda, are you out there? She's not here. Am I pronouncing that right? Brenda Nearpass. Next after that would be Will Cushman. Are you out there? Will, rather? Naaman City, please.

Will Cushman, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. I request that the planning and zoning here deny their request for phase one and phase two. In 2022 and 2023, Cortere had stated that they were going to start building their layout on the north end of the property and they wouldn't hit the southern end of the property for approximately 20 years, which I thought was okay, well, we can live with it till then, that'll be fine. This added traffic is going to be a nightmare. You can't get out on Appaloosa. You can't get out to Atlas Road at all from any of the corresponding intersections associated with Indian Meadows and Nez Perce. It's just a nightmare. There's been times where I have to sit for 10, 15 minutes to get out onto Atlas because the traffic has backed up so far. The roundabout at Celtice failed, is failing. Traffic backs up there constantly. You know and how long is it going to be until somebody gets run over on one of the bike paths? Because they don't stop like they're supposed to all the vehicles have to stop their stop signs on all those pathways and nobody stops They just keep going. They don't care. They they take their life in their own hand well How long is it going to be till one of them gets hit by this added congestion? this added traffic that they're adding to our existing neighborhood that the roads can't handle and And also because it's going to drop my property value too much. That just absolutely disgusts me. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Keith Pila. Did I pronounce that right? Keith Pila. Okay. Tom Santer. Tom Santer.

34, okay, no, Tom Bill Todd Name and city please Thank you, I actually live on Appaloosa I live directly across the street from where I They're going to be putting the three stop signs I just hear. Anyway, I've got a few comments to make here. I concur with most everything people said. The traffic on Atlas has gotten... Well, it's just getting worse all the time. But heading north, if you come down Appaloosa and you want to go north, it's very difficult to get out. You've got people barreling up Office LTs up the hill there, and it's hard to get out. It's just going to create a big dangerous situation there when you add all the additional traffic in there. A little disappointed with the traffic. Analysis, nothing's been said about Atlas. What are we going to do with Atlas? Nothing's been said about Appaloosa that has clear coats over the, you know, the street is not made for the traffic that is going to happen there. It's just a little bit disappointing there. The other thing I wanted to talk about is on the summary of facts, the subdivision, on A13, it states that the proposed street system is designed to align with the master plan and the development agreement. The internal street network avoids creating a direct route through the subdivision to discourage through traffic, okay? That's exactly what it says. Well, here's the map. If you don't think that that's through traffic, that's pretty through. I mean, that's straight through. You're gonna put stop signs in there and some calming, things to slow people down. Well, it's not going to. 13% of the people are not going to be coming down Appaloosa. It's going to be much greater than that. Nobody's looked at, I know this is not in that stage yet, but nobody's looked at when you add that school in there, how many more trips are going to be going down Appaloosa. I can guarantee you that people are going to take Hutter as a shortcut come right down and there's the straight path to Appaloosa Road and then on to Appaloosa they go and down. So I myself would like to have this denied and have it go to council. I feel like the development itself is great. I have no problems with the development. Arcaterra is a great builder. I think they're going to build great homes in there. But I think a lot of things have not been thought of completely. And I appreciate you guys' time.

Thank you. Thank you. Jack Doherty. Amon City, please, sir.

Post Falls, Idaho. A little different angle. Probably need to apologize for the people that live in these communities for taking three minutes of your good time. I apologize.

And the traffic.

And I heard the traffic report from the engineer. And I kept hearing, Hutter, Hutter, Hutter, Hutter, Hutter. And then Mullin once in a great while. I'd be interested, and I know I'm selfish, I admit it, how much of this traffic is going to get pushed down Mullen, and that would be towards the golf course that's just been bought by the developer. A developer, excuse me. And as any study has been made, when they start building on all those alfalfa fields, remember, Hunter splits Coeur d'Alene and Post Falls, Is that going to come and all flow down through you guys? I don't know. But it's going to be built out there. And so has that been taken in, or is Post Falls, that's their problem? I ran all these routes to get to the specialty hospital and Walmart and the doctors and all of that. The fastest way is to run up Mullin. shoot through Inverness. I live on it. Dump off the hill, and right down you go. And so again, I apologize to these folks. But I'm hoping, or is that city's problem their problem, and you're fixing yours? I just wished we'd cooperate. And I think you've got a lot of sincere people here. And plans are good. Plans are important. But sometimes they look good on that screen, But they don't drive good. And so thank you.

Thank you, sir. Kevin McClellan.

How we doing? Cayman City, please. Kevin McClellan, Coeur d'Alene. So I was reading this traffic study, and I was trying to parse it over the last couple of weeks. And then I actually reached out to Chris I think he was here and had a conversation with him the other day, trying to understand what was down on paper there. And I guess I think that maybe the traffic study, even though it was only 15 months ago, seems a little bit out to date. And there's models, I understand the KMPO has a model to try to grow whatever that data was from 2025 to make up for what we've seen as recent congestion. But I just ask you to use your own eyes and take a look. So this is exhibit, this is on page 161, I think, of the packet tonight. This shows the build out of the plan and of course, we're not allowed to think about the other parts of the plan, just this plan tonight, but the amount of traffic that's gonna flow to Nez Perce is a problem. And I think it's a safety problem for pedestrians, right? We've had, if you just look at what's happened to Hanley and Pole Line in the last year and a half when that's opened, I mean, this city is starved for east-west corridors, right? And as soon as Nez Perce, Appaloosa have an outlet to Hutter, they're going to explode. That's just a fact. And it's not even Cortere's fault, just other people, other neighborhoods that are accessing those roads to get through. That's what the Hanley-Pole Line corridor has shown us. I think it's fine to review the traffic study, but also use your own eyes and say, well, maybe these models could be wrong, and what we know to be true is likely going to be true. So I'm concerned with traffic, but really, it's safety. I think we need housing, and I'm glad that the developer has accommodated some traffic calming measures. I think that's all great. But at the end of the day, Sarah, you live in the area. And Vice Chair Ingalls, I know you've talked about driving up and down Atlas. You guys ever see what's going on with Pickleball? It's crazy.

It's popular.

Right? We've got like three days a week, there's like 40 cars in Nez Perce. And it's great. It's welcoming. We've got the new faith park there. All of that means more pedestrian traffic, people walking through. What we don't see in this submittal is a pedestrian impact analysis. And I would ask that you deny or delay approval of this phase until that is complete so that we all, again, I think it's part of the comprehensive plan that we are thinking, forward thinking about the safety of our residents. Yeah, so be a good neighbor. Let's work together on asking for accountability from the developer for solving pedestrian problems before they become an issue.

And that's it. Thank you. Thank you. Next, Nate Dyke. Amon City, please.

Nate Dyke, I live on Appalachian Road in Coeur d'Alene. Thank you for hearing us out here. So when Corte was annexed, the city council approved it under a critical condition. Traffic was to be directed away from existing neighborhoods. That protection was enshrined in section 4.3 of the development agreement. Traffic must be directed to Hutter and Hanley and through traffic discouraged to the greatest extent reasonably possible. However, this mandate does not align with their road network. The traffic study projects 50% will go through Hutter and 50% will go through our neighborhoods. This proves it is not discouraging neighborhood traffic, it is sending it through by design. Beyond the street issues, phase two has more problems. First, the traffic study's 2030 build out timeline is unrealistic. By shortening the build-out date, it reduces background traffic values, making failing intersections pass on paper. This effectively reduces the fair share of infrastructure costs and shifts those burdens onto the public. If the data shows 50% is directed on our streets in the best-case scenario, what happens when the 20-year build-out is complete? KMPO projections show that Appaloosa will exceed 3,000 trips a day with regional development. Second, phase two has been segmented to hide commercial impacts. The application strategically ignores the commercial area, which is projected to produce another 11,000 trips a day. They assume that avoiding a direct connection to the commercial area will limit through traffic, but the C-17 zone is specifically excluded from the traffic model, so we don't know that. This assumption also ignores the elephants in the room, the extension of Quartier Boulevard that will connect Nez Perce to Hutter, and the developer's other 600 acres, which could have even more apartments and commercial land uses. You can't claim through traffic will be discouraged when phase two leaves the groundwork for cut through routes from Atlas to the commercial hubs on Hutter. Once the roads are built, you can't change them later. In conclusion, the 50-50 split shown in the traffic study is proof of failure, not compliance. As a result, this subdivision clearly does not fulfill the contract's promise to direct traffic away from our neighborhood. The subdivision findings, specifically B2 and B3, have not been met. Additionally, ADUs have not been counted in the concurrency analysis nor the TIA. This application must be deemed incomplete. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Rob Knutson.

Good evening, commissioners. Rob Knutson, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho.

Thank you.

I knew what question you were going to ask me. I've had to redraft my thoughts tonight, so I will apologize in advance for my extemporaneous manner of speaking, but I want to go on the record in a complaint about the process that we're going through. You've probably heard of the butterfly effect where A butterfly in South America will flap its wings and a hurricane will form in Texas. This is not on that scale, obviously. And there have to be certain limits, boundaries that can be drawn around a problem that's trying to be solved. So take that into account. However, I find it troubling that with the emphasis that's been placed on the development agreement, has to be completely removed from the discussion that's happening tonight. So for example, the project proponents have mentioned how the development agreement overlays and casts this umbrella over this particular phase of the development. And that's true, but at the same time, through the education that has been given tonight, this process almost by mandate has to ignore the development agreement. And the reason I think this is a problem is because the findings don't give any sway to the development agreement. In other words, the problem before you, the one that you're trying to solve, you're trying to decide whether or not to approve this particular phase, you don't get to consider this overarching umbrella. So just by way of example, We've heard from several of my neighbors the issues associated with traffic. That's been a constant theme. The transportation safety and so forth. But I think what I'm hoping, the question that I want to pose is if this body is not equipped to speak to the development agreement, Which body is? And I'm asking that question, I know the answer to that. However, I think in approving the subdivision tonight in ignorance, and I'm not using that word in any derogatory way, but in ignorance of the development agreement and the requirements of the development agreement, I'm concerned that a certain part, a very important part of the process gets left out. And in 18 seconds, I just want to call out section or condition 6.4 of the development agreement, which requires that the city, each phase of the subdivision request shall be accompanied by a concurrency analysis of the development as a whole as well as the phase. And I think we're hearing about the phase tonight, but we can't consider the whole. And I think that's a problem that perhaps the city and municipal code in the future can look to resolve. So thank you for the time.

Appreciate that. Thank you. Suzanne Knutson, next up.

Good evening. Suzanne Knutson, Coeur d'Alene, Appaloosa Way. Appaloosa Road, West Appaloosa Road. Just a little bit of history from this project. October 11th, 2022, the application for annexation and zoning was heard before planning and zoning commission. The commission voted unanimously 6-0 to recommend approval of the annexation zoning and development agreement as presented at the public hearing originally at 5,000 homes. We were then told it would go to city council. We were not told that we could appeal the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision. We were told to wait for council, which was incorrect information. And then in February 2023, the public hearing with the city council and the council took place. And the council disagreed with the commissioner's unanimous decision and voted to table the annexation until they could back down on that density. And they backed it down to 2,800. So that was a big difference from 5,000 to 2,800. March 21, 2023, under a questionable and possibly illegal hearing process, council approved a lower density from 5,000 to 2,800. It's not as simple and clear as the packet portrayed tonight. Continuing with what Rob was saying about section 6.4, it states that future approvals must be accompanied by a concurrency analysis addressing both the individual phase and the development as a whole. And I would think that that would include the commercial. But we heard tonight that it doesn't. I'm sorry that the three minutes that we're allowed doesn't allow us time to give you all of our credentials. We're not allowed to have a land attorney. We're not allowed to have our own private traffic study entered. But these things matter to us because whether the roads and the public, a concurrency analysis explains that whether roads and other public infrastructure can support development without reducing services below acceptable standards. And this will reduce the acceptable standards. The traffic study that was presented tonight that I didn't see all of that before said 18,000 car trips are expected on Nez Perce. That means that's Is that 20 car trips? I mean, that's a lot of car trips. And there's not 1,400 car trips a day on Nez Perce right now, and there's not 1,100 or 1,200 on Appaloosa right now. So I think what we're looking at is if that 18,000 car trips is over 24 hours period, we're looking at one car every five to six seconds. And if it's over 18 hours when people are actually sleeping for a few hours at home, that's one car trip every five seconds or every one second. So that's a lot of cars. And if there's no way to get out onto Atlas, where are those cars going to stack up? In front of our homes, in front of our driveways. So this matters because traffic impacts can't be accurately understood one phase at a time. Every phase contributes to cumulative impacts on Appaloosa and Nez Perce, Atlas Road, and surrounding neighborhoods. Reviewing each phase in isolation risks understating those impacts and not considering them is faulty at best. Thanks.

Thank you very much. Madeline Knutson, please. Amon City, please.

My name is Madeline Knutson. I live in Coeur d'Alene and I live on West Appaloosa Road. I just want to lend my voice to all of the great points and evidence my neighbors have brought forth tonight. I would like to bring forth an additional piece of information about this plan here. specifically towards traffic. The trafficked impact analysis in the phase two documents assumes full build out at the year 2030, yet it does not evaluate road network for additions one through four with only Appaloosa connected. It only looks at the development with Nez Perce and Appaloosa both connected. It doesn't account for ADU development based on new Idaho state legislation, Senate Bill 1354, which went into effect on July 1st of this year, that anyone in a city of 10,000 or more people, no matter their lot size, has the right to build an ADU on their property. They did say it counts zero trips to the park. I won't go over and rehash everything my neighbors have stated already, but I do want to say that there have been no other internal road options explored, ignoring industrial way when we were ignoring the development agreements in phase one regarding looking at traffic as a whole in each phase. I would just really, really urge you to look closely at all of this being presented tonight. would like this to be denied and taken to city council for all of the reasons my neighbors have stated. Phase two is not following the city council's direction and the development agreement requirement to discourage through traffic and consider traffic as a whole in each phase. It is really nice that phase two provides adequate sidewalks and streets and pedestrian and bicycle facilities for Cortere. Um, but it sucks that if this phase is approved without following city council's direction and the development agreements requirement, uh, you are sacrificing the adequacy of our neighborhood streets and the sidewalkless safety of our pedestrians, the kids who are already waiting on the bus route. the kids who will be going to this school, I would agree that a pedestrian impact analysis would be fantastic. There are some things that might not be required by law, but are required by decency. And I would ask that you would join us in being good neighbors to our community. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Mike Fitzsimmons. Mike.

Name and city. Excuse me, I'm a little slow.

Name and city, please. At the legs, nowhere else. Name and city, please.

Mike Fitzsimmons, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. I live in the Indian Meadows area. Statistics, human nature, and the 800-pound gorilla in the living room. We heard a lot about statistics. A lot of it. Oh, and the average is this and the average is that. I'm reminded about the statistician who drowned in the river because he thought, statistically, it was only three feet deep. We've got to be careful about those numbers. The human nature part. I watch cars go up and down in front of my house on Broken Arrow all the time. I've got a camera that captures them and I've done a little bit of a study over the last few years since we started this discussion and came to the conclusion that the one element that none of this process even addresses is human nature. Definitely concerned because a lot of kids in my neighborhood that somebody's going to get killed and soon on those roadways now And that will only be aggravated in the future Because we have not solved the traffic problem That's the 800 pound gorilla in the in the living room and the 800 pound gorillas name is Atlas Road all right all problems exist in Atlas Road that is a as we speak a That is an obsolete thoroughfare. And we're putting lipstick on a pig to try to figure out how to make it look like we're providing safety and mitigation issues. We're not doing that at all. We really aren't. And we're going to just kick the can through phase, phase, phase, phase, phase, until eventually we're going to have to realize that we've got to fix Atlas Road. We've got to do it. It's not just because of this development. It's because of a lot of development that's going on that is affecting it. But the very first time it effaced itself was when we finished the mill project down here. And then we put the rotary up there. The traffic has just gone through the roof. Statistically, we can handle almost twice as much as there is. You and I both know that's not true. We cannot do that. That's just an asinine punt because we haven't got the ability to fix it. And remember, statistics are about never having to say you're certain. Let's go back and stop doing this process until we fix the 800-pound gorilla. I think the city council needs to deny any further phase development with this operation until such time as the traffic issues are truly resolved instead of kicking the can down the road. Thanks.

Thank you. Next up is Jerry and Barbara Beck. You both signed up. Are you going to go one at a time, or what do you want to do? Jerry and Barbara Beck, are you here? Never mind. I'm going to do my best here. Greg Keim? K-E-I-M? Is there a Greg in the house? In case I can't... Chris Husek. Husek. Chris Husek. David Clow. Name and city.

David Clow, Coeur d'Alene. Thank you, Board, for letting us have a chance to speak, even though I know a lot of this is kind of a dog and pony show. I'm kind of going through the paces because we have to do this to approve anything through planning and zoning. And congratulations on your presentation. It was very good. But as Sean put it in his traffic study, that 1,500 to 5,000 cars on Nez Perce is just a slight increase. If my math is right, that's close to triple the amount of cars coming down Nez Perce. All right. My neighbors have all said things. I live on Nez Perce at the corner of Tramarack and Abbey facing the new Faith Walk Park, Pickleball Court, and the playground right there. My office is there. I'm a disabled veteran, so I work from home instead of going to an office. My office faces the road, and I look right at the sign that says Nez Perce and Abby. I see the people and the kids walking across the street all day long, taking their dogs to the park, playing in the playground, or going to a new faith walk. It's not a matter of when it's a matter of how soon it'll be before some kid is killed. We already have speeders going up and down that road on a ridiculous amount. I sit in my desk eight to 10 hours a day, looking out the window on this Pierce, I have a front row seat to everything that happens. You know, the, the study says a lot of things. And like Mr. Holcomb said, you know, we're not accounting for all the plumbers, electricians, and all the other kinds of structure guys is not counting the big cement trucks and all the lumber trucks. We're talking about all the little guys that work in construction. They're going to be on site. The foreman and everybody else, that's added traffic that's not counted in the study. The two schools that are proposed are not adding any traffic for those either. So the numbers don't add up. Atlas, we know can't handle it. There's no way to get in and out. There's no turn lane to get in. And it's right. Sometimes it's backed up to the dog park just to get through Kathleen. The roads don't handle it. My biggest concern is safety. There's no sidewalks because the sidewalk ends at my property line. on Nez Perce. There's not a sidewalk on the other side. It ends right where Abbey Street is. The kids have a bus stop on Nez Perce. They get off and walk down Nez Perce to go to their adjoining roads or to their homes. There's nobody protecting them. Nobody protecting the hundreds of people I see every single day walking through the neighborhood, going to play pickleball, take their kids to the park, or going to the new faith walk. That burden does not belong to the Dream Team over here. Their phase of their presentation was brilliant. Loved it. And they did a great job. No doubt about it. And this is eventually going to be approved. I'm sure it is. But I'm asking that it be denied until that impact study is actually completed. I have not seen a traffic counter. I've not seen any hoses across the road counting how many vehicles are going across. I've been there three years. I haven't seen any of that. And having a traffic study done by the developers like hiring your uncle to appraise your home. You know, if you pay them, hey, I need a certain value, you're going to get it. It's a little bit conflict of interest. In my case, I think a third-party, you know, inspection or report should be done. And that's my time. I thank you for listening.

Thank you. Rhonda Bowling, next up. Rhonda? And it says also, looks like Aaron Boulding, Rhonda, Aaron. How about Roger Ruddock? Yes. Name and city plan. Yes, sir.

Roger Ruddock, Coeur d'Alene. So we've heard a lot from people who aren't experts tonight, but they're also wise. They're residents. They can see what's going on and they can anticipate what will happen with a development like this. It's not just Indian Meadows that would be impacted. Any community that had a development next door or traffic was going to pass through and affect the surrounding streets would be impacted just like Indian Meadows. We're no different. I noticed you have a mission or vision statement on your on the agenda here tonight and it says that you seek to promote orderly growth and I think that's what's happening is we're kind of getting the cart before the horse. You hear people talking about the safety risks, you hear people talking about the traffic problems. Why don't we fix those, address those issues before we build the houses and put the residents there that caused the problem? So I'm just asking that you would, Delay this, reconsider until we address the issues that have been laid out very articulately by the people here tonight.

Thank you. Thank you. Bridget Sundahl.

Bridget Sundahl, Coeur d'Alene. Thank you. Thank you for your service. Thank you, neighbors. A couple key things. It's a beautiful development. It's beautiful. We got some calming features. We have trails. We have things that we will eventually enjoy. But what we don't have is that was pretty and colorful, and then our neighborhood was all gray. There's nothing calming anything. Nobody's addressing, how about that westward traffic? barreling down to get back to Cortair. Are we gonna calm our streets right now? How will that, what's gonna happen with that part? Or the right turn off of the arterial of Nez Perce, Moccasin, every street is open for business. There's nothing to protect this historic neighborhood. It's a couple houses. I know it's a fair amount, and it is what it is. We don't have sidewalks. We're okay with it, and the roads are crumbling. And we've heard over the years, we'll deal with that, Liz. We're going to deal with it when it all comes and happens. But if this is in play, and it wasn't supposed to be, You're going to start at the water tower. This is going to be a long time from now. We know when the Audubon was opened up, when Hanley opened up, and Post Falls and Coeur d'Alene joined together in the fastest, most popular road right now, and Atlas is there for the taking. So when the roads are bad and the snow is falling and you're trying to go right, left, north, south, you're in trouble. We're talking about fire trucks, police trucks. If you want to get to and from our neighborhood in bad weather and traffic's there, it is impossible. We all know it. And anyone who lives in that area knows it. So to your point, Hutter, has no traffic right now. I'm sorry, Post Falls. But right now, it doesn't. So we're barreling through on this beautiful development, but there's nothing. It's like, yeah, it will work itself out idea. But we said in the plan, you're supposed to work it out before you Start building. So let's work it out and figure out what to do. We have a beautiful community. We are welcoming our arms to everyone who should be here. It's wonderful. We want housing, but we want to have it be safe. If you can't ride your bike on Atlas, and you can't, And God help you if you're on the trail stopping at every street and how many times? How many times have you almost hit a cyclist or has a cyclist almost hit you? There's not enough visibility. So you can't bike on Atlas. You can't go on the road. There's no ditch. There's nothing. There's nothing safe. It's an outdated model. So let's wait a figure out everything and then give them the green light because it's going to be beautiful but let's plan for it please thank you thank you uh natalie mercousia natalie natalie how about renee scott

Name and sit, name and sit.

Renee Scott, Coeur d'Alene. I'm coming as a supportive neighbor, honestly. I think everything I've heard tonight has been wonderful, great plan, beautiful community, and all the passion from the neighbors. I will say I live on Evergreen Drive, which is in Fairway Hills. Moved to Fairway Hills as a teenager 50 years ago with my parents. They picked it. It was a beautiful, calm neighborhood around the golf course. Fast forward through college and all that. Moved back 23 years ago to be with my dad when he had cancer. Lived near them. Stayed there. Love it. But I will say we've called before because traffic races down Evergreen. There's no way to get from Atlas to Ramsey. except cutting through fairway. I mean, I would prefer Celtis or Kathleen or one of those. Best laid plans, you put some arterials in and you hope people will use them. They don't. We've called about putting in speed bumps and speed dips and all that because Evergreen is the only one. It's the one with the island in it. Off Atlas, it's the only one that goes straight through to Fairway to get to Kathleen or Ramsey, and people use it all the time. I've counted as many as 350, 400 a day on my security camera, bracing down. That's a concern to me. I work at the hospital. I go to Atlas. I want to turn left and go down to Celti's, which is the quickest way to get to work. I can't turn left in the morning, so I have to go through the whole entire neighborhood to get out. Not only can I not turn left, people are cutting quickly onto Evergreen to cut through off. And it's not the core terror problem, but I would agree with everything that everybody said to date. And I would also say that Atlas is dilapidated. It's an old road. It's narrow. There's not a lot of room. It should be expanded. So I would really hope you deny or delay until that can really be looked at because We always do infrastructure last in Coeur d'Alene. I've been a resident here a long time. Our infrastructure never keeps up with what we need and it's always like, oh my god, afterwards. We can't stop growth. It's a beautiful place. People will keep coming. It will grow and grow and we will develop, but what we can do as a community is guide it so that it is the most functional and most community so people don't start turning and hating Coeur d'Alene because of Bad access. And right now, Atlas is bad access. There's not a really good way. And I agree with everybody. It does back up quite a ways down between the Celtese traffic circle and Kathleen. It's a problem. I had to raise my kids in my backyard. They couldn't be on the street on their bikes and that because Evergreen was too fast. There was too many cars coming down too fast. And mainly because they were non-residents using it as a cut through. So that's it. Thanks for your service.

Thanks, Renee. Next up, I have Lori Dobb and Jody Dobb. You want to come up and go together or are you going to go separate? Are you here? I don't think they're here anymore. Next one I can't begin to make out. Looks like the initials of S, first name B, last name, who lives on Buckingham Road.

Buckskin, I think. Buckskin?

Buckskin Road?

Oh, Buckingham.

Buckingham Road.

Sabrina?

Is it Sabrina?

I just got to...

if i missed you somehow you can come back up later uh loretta stratton loretta on here how about keith wells scratch is that you keith you don't want to speak okay oh you didn't indicate whether you wanted to you said no you didn't want to testify my apology patricia martin Name and city, please.

Patricia Martin, Coeur d'Alene. I'm on Broken Arrow. There's one house between me and Nez Perce. The traffic on Atlas getting in and out is also a great concern of mine. I left home early tonight to come to this meeting. I got here late because I couldn't get down to the traffic circle from Atlas to Celtese. I waited for over a dozen cars for myself to get to the circle and then had to wait for a couple dozen more coming down Celtice before I could get out to come up here. Also, I believe this traffic study was done last March, which was before the Faith Walk Park opened. which also has generated more traffic on Atlas. Trying to get onto Atlas from Nez Perce, if I'm trying to turn left to go up to Kathleen, I have waited three and four times for that light to turn green before I got to Kathleen to the light. As someone else mentioned, a playground for the kids, there's a pickleball court, there's a dog park on the corner, and now the Faith Walk Park. People who play pickleball don't have enough places to park, so they are in the median down the middle of Nez Perce. So I don't know where they're going to go or what's going to happen in terms of safety, the traffic. To me, it's scary, and it's completely disrupting our neighborhood. Speaking about 30% of the traffic coming from Cortere to come down Nespers, that's one-third of their traffic coming through our neighborhood, coming down our street, coming through our front yards and our backyards. We have quite a few new neighbors with children. Down the street from me, there are two families now, one with five kids, one with six. They're out on their bikes, they're out on their scooters. I have a 10-year-old grandson that lives with me. that I don't let go to the playground by himself anymore already because of traffic that's coming down there. So that's all.

Thank you.

So that's everyone that I have on the sign-up sheet. Is there anyone that got missed, or is there anyone else that would like to provide testimony? Sir, come forward. If I could get you to sign up on a sheet afterwards, please.

I'm signed up. Apparently, I missed the call out. My name's Chris Husick.

Oh, I did call you.

Yes.

And your city, sir?

Coeur d'Alene.

Please proceed.

You know, it's a hard act to follow, being the last at night. Everything's been covered that's been on my sheet, so I don't want to be redundant here. I will say this, though, for you folks. I believe our mandate as a community is clear. Future growth must be managed proactively through rigorous planning, comprehensive traffic analysis, and robust financial mechanisms like impact fees. This is essential to ensure that our existing neighborhoods are protected. We must treat traffic infrastructure as a prerequisite for growth and not an afterthought to be dealt with later. That's all I got. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your service.

Thank you. One last chance. Anyone get missed? One last chance. Public testimony is closed. Applicant, you will get a chance to come offer any rebuttal. I'd share with everyone that, you know, Some of you asked some questions while you're looking at us. We don't really engage. It's your testimony to us. And so perhaps some of those questions, some of them were kind of rhetorical and some of them specifically kind of wanted an answer. And so this is an opportunity maybe for the applicant team that might want to touch on those. So Connie, you and your team have an opportunity to come forth.

Okay, thank everyone for your thoughts and comments tonight. As discussed earlier this evening, planning and zoning's decision tonight should focus on whether or not our subdivision complies with the city's adopted codes, which already take into account things like public safety and also, of course, the development agreement established through our annexation. Through very, very thoughtful planning and supported by factual analysis from an independent third-party engineer who, by the way, is not employed, by our organization. We have definitely responsibly designated road networks to direct traffic away from the existing neighborhoods and towards Hutter. The new connections, in fact, within our development will help provide additional routes to Hutter, giving direct alternatives to traveling east. And from the people that are currently going east on Atlas, these new connections are going to help. They're going to definitely help distribute traffic across the roadway network rather than carrying it out on the existing routes. We have followed the roadway connection requirements specifically directed to us by the city's fire and emergency service professionals. We are required to connect Nez Perce and Appaloosa Road. These locations were not selected by us and they're not arbitrary. The city designated that these two connections take place. Not one connection, not three, not five connections, but these specific two. based on the access, connectivity, and emergency response needs identified by public safety professionals. We have developed a clear plan supported by signage and contractor negotiations to discourage traffic from construction through the nearby neighborhoods. As the traffic engineer explained, the traffic volumes, they are expected to increase over the next nine years. But even with that projected growth, the roadway system will continue to operate within acceptable level of service with average daily trips below capacity. And again, please, like we've stated, traffic conditions will not be simply evaluated once and then forgotten. With each phase of development or with the two-year requirement, we will update traffic studies. And as they identify necessary improvements, we will be required to address the appropriate needs in mitigation. And with that, I just would state that again, we're not requesting any modifications, exceptions or deviations from the plans and commitments that were presented at annexation. The city staff report confirms that the subdivision complies with all the applicable standards and satisfies the conditions. And for these reasons, we are respectfully requesting that you approve our

application as presented thanks again I'm Michelle Fulgham the land use attorney and I want to talk about your decision has to be based and supported by substantive evidence. That's what land use law requires. And the substantive evidence as presented by the licensed professionals, by the traffic engineer, indicates that the traffic impact analysis is being mitigated. That's the substantive credentialed licensed traffic engineers data. And I know people want to talk about their personal experience and their personal opinions, but when they say ignore the numbers or be suspicious of the data, that's contrary to relying upon substantive evidence to support a land use quasi-judicial ruling. And so The substantive evidence in the record is really unrebutted in terms of, as I indicated at the beginning, the staff report indicates the application meets all of the legal standards and all of the requirements. Sean Holm and the city engineer Chris Bosley have documented in their staff report that the application fulfills preliminary plat requirements under city code and the development agreement. And if we look at the staff report on page 15, category A8, the project meets the density requirements. Category A9, the project meets lot size zoning frontage. Category A10, no design deviations are being requested. It meets the legal requirements. Category A11, subdivision design standard checklist indicates compliance with each applicable standard, including street and path conformance, continuity of street network, local street design, pedestrian connectivity, and all other applicable design standards. It is being addressed. It's being met. And that evidence is documented in the report. Page 16 of the staff report checklist items A12 through A21 are fulfilled. It states, quote, the matrix confirms each term is satisfied for core tier two consistent with the development agreement. So all of the categories A12 through A21. public utilities, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, the community park, phasing, affordable housing, concurrency, all of those the staff has analyzed and indicate they meet the standards. And so that substantive evidence really weighs and supports a land use decision by a quasi-judicial ruling for approval. On page 17 of the staff report, Chris Bosley, the city engineer, wrote, the preliminary plan submitted contained all of the preliminary elements required by the municipal code. It's met. On page 23 of the staff report, Chris Bosley documents that engineering has vetted the plans for compliance and the preliminary plans meet both subdivision design standards, city code 16.15, and improvement standards, city code 16.40. On page 28 of the staff report, city engineer Chris Bosley wrote, all proposed roadway sections meet or exceed city design standards. So I know people have opinions and personal views that they don't like some of the traffic issues, but it's uncontested based on the substantive evidence that they meet the design standards set out in city code. On page 28, City staff senior planner, Sean Holm, documented what you've heard numerous times, which is that the development agreement requires the connections be Appaloosa and Nez Perce. Previously, the applicant had proposed numerous other connections, and that was rejected because the neighborhood didn't want seven other connections. Those were taken away. to protect the neighborhood. So we're following through with what we've been trying to respect the neighborhood, eliminate the seven previous connections that were proposed, follow the two connections that are binding in the development agreement, and also in the staff report it indicates that The additional vehicular connection to and through the industrial park in quarter one will not replace and does not allow for removal of the access for Appaloosa or Nez Perce roads. The signed development agreement specifically governs these as allowed and they cannot be altered by the subdivision request. Finally, on page 29, Chris Bosley, indicates under traffic the streets and engineering department agrees with the mitigation measures identified in the traffic impact analysis. There you have it. That's the substance of evidence that supports an approval. The traffic impact analysis sets out the impact, sets out the mitigation. That helps the city avoid an unlawful regulatory taking by trying to impose a mitigation that exceeds the rational relationship and the proportionality of the impact of that application. The traffic impact analysis looked at the impacts, it came up with mitigation, it's scientifically sound, and the city engineer agrees with those traffic impact mitigation measures. So there really is no basis to deny, to delay, or not follow the city subdivision code or staff report recommendations. Do you have any questions or thank you? Questions?

I have a handful, but I want to apologize because I live right by here, so I probably have more than you guys. I probably have my unfair share of questions tonight and some of the comments we've heard. One is for, I guess I have a couple for the traffic guy. So can I borrow you again? Just to clarify. Sean. Sean?

Yes, Sean.

Okay. I have a couple times I've heard like 11,000 or 8,000 or 10,000 cars on Appaloosa. And Nez Perce. So do you have the number of current, without the development, daily trips on those two streets?

Yeah. So on Nez Perce, there's 1,400 daily trips approximately. And this can fluctuate daily, right? So Nez Perce is 1,400. Then with the development, looking into the future at the year 2035, it's going to go from 1,400 to 5,000. On Appaloosa, it's about 1,200. Again, daily fluctuations, right? And then in the future, with our site, again, nine years into the future, 1,800.

I just want to clarify those because we have lots of numbers. And then with the phase, I guess, or I guess with the Nez Perce connection, In the future, and we've already talked about this, I think it was with the master plan, eventually there will be a light at Atlas and Nez Perce. And right now we're a D, nine years from now. And could you kind of explain how far we are from an E? Because I think the traffic study is about 15 months old. And if we're really close to an E, and I'm just... I might propose an additional condition that when that connects, that that light be done at that point, which looks like the fourth edition, when that road would pop through. Because I feel like the traffic study is, you know, over a year old. And it sounds like we're hovering between that D and E. And I'm wondering if that's a reasonable ask, a good faith effort to calm that traffic.

So I guess I'll start with the traffic study was just submitted this year, right?

The date of the counts, though, were March 2025?

Right. And we grew those with the growth rates. So typically traffic counts have a shelf life of about two years, no more than two years. And that's what you can use the traffic counts from a previous year as long as you're growing those up by the by the typical growth rate. And how we determine that is taking those counts at this point in time and looking backwards at what the growth trends are and using that growth rate to apply it.

And you did apply that year of growth.

We did, yes. So we're accounting for some of that residual growth that has happened due to development surrounding the area and so I want to start with that but also on Atlas I might have to have Chris come up and talk about the timing but in the future the city already has an improvement project for Atlas to add a turn lane on it and so that was accounted for within our study knowing that in the future in 2035 there would be a turn lane, a left turn lane, a two-way left turn lane included on Atlas. The other part on Atlas and how we've heard today about additional traffic backups and such, part of our improvements in that table was Atlas signal timing coordination. And so that's something that cities often don't have staff to go out there and do it constantly. And so it's usually a a couple of years in between looking at signal timing and making changes. And it's just purely staff time. It takes a lot of data to collect it and adjust signal timing. But that's something that we've included as those mitigations that need to happen as development continues to occur. With the signal timing adjustments, that'll help traffic flow for both Atlas and for the side streets that come in. but back to your question let me pull that up real quick because you were asking about the delay at Atlas and Ms. Pierce right?

Yes I mean I'm kind of curious how close we are to that E and then my related question but for Chris to answer which I guess you're welcome to answer Chris but I know there are some improvements planned for Atlas how do those line up on the timing I mean I've I've lived off of Atlas for 20 years, so I feel like every other year we have it closed for some reason, a roundabout, you know, all these things, chip sealing or whatever. And I'm wondering if there's a way to communicate those improvements together with the improvements on Atlas and kind of time that where it makes sense, I guess. I don't know if that has a deadline yet or has funding yet, you know, that kind of thing, so.

I'll have to have Chris answer that.

And that's a Chris question.

Maybe what we should do is... And so I don't want to mix them, but... Let's close out our public hearing. Final comments or the questions of the applicant. We'll close public hearing. And if you have questions of Chris Bosley, we'll handle that later.

Okay. That... Most of my applicant, well, my applicant questions would be related to an ask, but it might be related to Chris's answer. So I guess just, I'm just curious from the applicant if there's three things that I kind of wrote down that I feel like would be worthwhile. One is timing. that Atlas and Nez Perce intersection with, um, with improvements on Atlas and when that road actually punches through, I don't know what year you guys are looking at, but it looks like the fourth edition is when that road will come through so that if the light comes through with the road. So once kind of like everybody said, when Hanley opened up, you know, everybody figures it out. Um, the, the, the light is concurrent with that. Um, and that's, Probably my guess would be like at least five years out Which could possibly depending on Chris's answer time with the Atlas improvements and might make sense to do together anyway and then the other asks that I would just like to test the waters on I guess our sidewalks on Appaloosa and Nez Nez Perce and I know that is in not a requirement but with the schools and And you're connecting multiple parks. So you're connecting a trail system. I think it would be a benefit to your neighborhood as well that they could access the pickleball courts and the dog park and those types of things. Connecting trails or a sidewalk on those roads would make the safety of Indian Meadows better. That's a total flat-out ask. I know it's not required. And then I would like to put, I know they'll probably have the discussion, but I would like to just document it as a condition that the crossing of the North South trail and the two connections on Appaloosa and Nez Perce be, have some mitigation measures or striping or flashing, but that, that be worked with without the city just for safety because there's two schools there and I have kids that would just zip down that trail you know and actually speaking of kids zipping down the trail on Atlas one of them slammed into my car once when I was at the stop sign just not paying attention so I think those would be important and something you'd probably do anyway but I'd like to document it so Those are three things that I think maybe the applicant can address if something's a hard no or if they would consider it depending on Chris's answer kind of thing.

I'm going to have one of them come up without some of them.

Do you care to respond to that?

I guess you don't have to respond either.

I can respond back to your question about the timing of D to E.

Yeah.

And if we use the same growth rate, it would be probably four years going from 2035 to 2039.

So there's some buffer in there from the D to the E. And that's probably about when you'll get to the fourth edition, it seems like. Possibly. Possibly. OK.

I think at this point in time, things like addressing the striping and flashing or whatnot that we would do for pedestrian safety, I mean, that's certainly something that we would definitely take into consideration. In terms of front-loading a signal or whatnot, I just don't think that's really an appropriate action to do at this point in time. With every phase of construction, we are going to be looking at the traffic and the mitigation, and the traffic doesn't warrant it now, and so I don't think it's an appropriate ask, and so we wouldn't necessarily agree, at least at this point on the spot, to front-load something because it wouldn't be normal protocol

Could we make a condition that just that intersection is evaluated before it's opened up? I guess I don't know.

Is that from a traffic perspective?

It's like four years from now. Before you open it up, just spot check that.

We'll be doing concurrency analysis every two years or with every new phase.

Should we have Gabe come to the microphone to...

So we will be doing a concurrency analysis as required in the development agreement every two years or with every subdivision or application that comes forward, whichever is sooner. So in four years from now, at a minimum, there would be two more concurrency analysis that would look at the study intersections and evaluate how they are functioning versus what's been proposed or shown in the current study.

So could I propose it as if before the intersection of Atlas and Nez Perce is open to go through, that the latest concurrency analysis be reviewed, and if you've migrated from a D to an E, a signal be put in. Would that be a reasonable ask?

Yeah, and so a signal at that intersection at Atlas and Nez Perce would end up being a system improvement in the traffic study, meaning that we would have a proportionate share, the proportion of the traffic from Corte. Yeah, and it would follow all those rules. Yeah, and then the actual improvement, the signal installation, would be a city project utilizing traffic impact fees from Corte as a proportion.

But it would be expedited if you moved from a D to an E before. Okay.

Could be. That would be the city's decision to do that based on available funding and other priorities that they have within the city. So you could talk to Chris more about that.

I'll put it back to Chris. Thank you. And then I guess the sidewalks, did you want to address that or?

I think they said that's beyond the scope. I think I heard that that would kind of be beyond the scope.

Yeah, I think at this point, without knowing what is the right-of-way, what are the impacts, what does the construction look like, how much sidewalk are we talking about, I don't know anything off the top of my head.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Further questions of the applicant? Public testimony. Hearing is closed. I wonder, Chris, if I could impose on you, though. It seems like Commissioner McCracken had certainly some questions. A gentleman called it the 800 gorilla in the room and whatnot. I live on Atlas. I drive Atlas all the time. I know it's not perfect. There's times in the previous hearing we talked about, you know, there may be a right turn lane that would maybe benefit northbound onto eastbound. Kathleen, for example, you heard, you know, some of us go through three light cycles trying to get through there and et cetera, et cetera. And I thought last time you'd mentioned, you know, there's a grant in works for, uh at least getting a center turn lane you know because i think roughly from kathleen you know down to the freeway it doesn't have three lanes atlas functions very nicely from kathleen north my opinion uh and we might see something like that in the future i just think for everybody's benefit while we're all gathered here would you mind sharing just a little bit of your view and vision for atlas going forward

Sure, yeah. So we have Atlas Road as a project on the State Transportation Improvement Program. We were awarded $4.7 or $4.8 million to reconstruct that project, or that roadway from Celt East to Kathleen. It is to include one lane in each direction, center turn lane, bike lanes, pathway improvements, a couple rectangular roads, rapid flashing beacon crosswalk areas to get pedestrians over to the west side from the fairways subdivision. With that we would look at putting in a signal at Nez Perce because it'll probably be warranted by then. We do have traffic impact fees that would cover that. We've also identified improvements that could be made to the roundabout at Atlas and Seltice with a right turn slip lane going southbound. That's been identified in at least one, maybe two traffic impact analyses that have been completed over the last couple of years. We would also look at putting in right turn lanes like you suggest in areas where it would be warranted With federal funding, of course, it takes a while for all this to happen. The design is programmed for 2029, so three years from now, we'd be getting into the design on that. The construction year right now, is 2033 or four, I'm not sure which one it fell into. These things often move ahead as funding becomes available. For instance, Ramsey Road project that we're going to be starting, It's going to go to bid soon where we'll be upgrading signals from Hanley to Prairie, including a new signal at Wilbur. That one was slated for next year. It's going to bid this year. It'll be spring when that actually gets started, but they moved money forward because it became available as another project didn't make it. And then, as Sean mentioned, there would be signal improvements, coordination between the signals that we can incorporate into that project at that time as well. We do have plans, it just takes time.

We do have funding for the light there.

We do have traffic impact fees that we've accumulated over the years and we have not spent yet, but that is one thing that we certainly can spend it on.

Um, and so it sounds like they might line up relatively close.

They very well could.

Okay. So now I have a couple for you. They're just for you, Chris. But, but, um, on Nez Perce, when you go, um, there's, you know, North Shire and Indian Meadows, but the, the connections in the middle don't line up with the streets. So some people have to go take a U-turn or go the wrong way for a And like a lot of people have said, on Saturdays when there's pickleball, they're all parked in the middle. So is there any thought of improving that chunk of Nez Perce to line the streets up a little better and stuff because it'll be more used and not have people park in the middle?

That has not been looked at, but it's something we can certainly look at.

Because I do think for the safety of it, I mean, a lot of homeowners, there's some homeowners that live, on that street, the park in the middle, and then especially using the dog park or the pickleball, that lot's really small and a bunch of people park in the middle. And I think, I mean, we have a few years out before that would connect, but could be maybe looked at.

concurrence or would that be something that the city could put on the radar we certainly can yes I do have to say there is some benefit to having those things offset sometimes like on Celtice Way where there's no direct left turn across now you have to when you take a left turn there's a couple cut throughs on Celtice Way And it's so that you turn around and come back the other way and make a right turn so it's not really a left turn across traffic. It's safer, often referred to as a Michigan left. But that is definitely something we can look at to see if there's.

Just to analyze the pedestrian safety of that before it gets opened up for a lot more through traffic.

For sure. Before you take off, can you also enlighten us if there are plans ahead already thought about and funding in place to do any improvements along Appaloosa and Nez Perce that would address the safety issues that have been much of the conversation

There have not been any plans set yet for either of those roads, other than the fact that when the developer has to upgrade the sewer on Appaloosa when that time comes, that'll be an opportunity where we could look at further improvements there, whether it's widening the pavement or whatever to give people more room. Appaloosa is a tough one because there isn't much shoulder, drops off into people's yards pretty steeply in some areas. Nez Perce has a lot more right-of-way and the ability to do that, even in the median, but that definitely needs to be looked at in the future.

And we anticipate Nez Perce to take more share than Appaloosa, correct?

Correct, yes. And like was mentioned earlier, it has been classified as an arterial. Long ago in the federal functional classification system, it was identified as an arterial. That is going through revisions right now, and I had requested to downgrade that to a collector because I don't see it moving that much traffic. But for example, Looking at a roadway and knowing whether it's an arterial or a collector isn't so easy because 15th Street south of I-90 is an arterial, but then north of it where it's wider, it's a collector. So it's a little counterintuitive.

Go figure that one out. Yeah.

Yeah, I think it'd just be nice to evaluate those or even put curbing. So I've heard, and I heard this from Hillary, but there's no trees being removed for anybody who thought that because I asked. But even some curbing around the middle so there's not parking in the middle, and then you add that traffic. So just some little things that might, you know, make that a better fit.

Thank you, Chris. We appreciate it. Yeah. So with that, we've closed testimony.

Before you close the testimony, I had an idea when I was listening. Again, Michelle Fulgham, land use attorney, and I worked on and negotiated the development agreement. As I was listening to the city engineer, I remembered in the development agreement, the developer paid a $2 million annexation fee. And that annexation fee, the parties agreed the annexation fee was for city services, including but not limited to public safety and similar services. So there's $2 million. We don't know what the city has used it for or where it's gone, but That $2 million annexation fee is in addition to the impact fees that we pay and the physical improvements that we make to mitigate traffic and to make public safety. So because the $2 million annexation fee was paid a couple years ago and City Engineer Bosley was indicating part of the improvements are delayed because of federal funding or because as funding becomes available, That $2 million has been with the city for two years, so maybe that could be something.

And then as you do development, you're going to be paying impact fees on each building permit.

$2 million was paid two years ago, and we do impact fees as we go, and we do physical improvements, turn lanes, roundabouts, those sorts of things as well. So because that's a potential public safety source, I wanted to jump up here and encourage you to maybe... get the city to push that money for sidewalks.

So my ask might be more just communication on the timing to allow everybody to, you know, work together on that. But it sounds like the fund, and then Chris kind of concurred that there is funding there for that traffic light.

And for sidewalks and for, you know, whatever they want to do with that money.

Thank you for that. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman. Yes, please.

I'm not sure I understood what counsel indicated, but the exact language in paragraph 5.1 of the annexation agreement says the negotiated $2 million fee as provided for in this agreement is deemed by the parties to be a reasonable annexation fee for city benefits and services provided to the owner's property, including but not limited to public safety and other services. So it was not designated to make public safety improvements off-site.

Thank you very much. Okay, again, public testament. The hearing is closed for testimony. The matter is now before you, commissioners. I would open it up, I'm sure, a little discussion. At some point, I'd like to hear a motion. And we have to make findings, so don't all jump in there at once. Commissioner Ward.

You know, I think it's important to understand why, We have a good developer here. Now, that's not a reason to approve the site, but it lets you know that going forward, that there are people who are trying to do what is right. They've given park sites, school sites, trailways, provided affordable housing, probably the most important thing any community can do right now, and they're doing it voluntarily. Now, beyond that, at any public hearing across this country, When you have a zoning application, you can generally figure 60% of the attendees will be in opposition to the application, even though the same 60% may say, we really need more housing. So, I mean, I understand the issue that people have. If I was living in Nespas, I'd be a little apprehensive as well, but knowing that I can, to the extent possible, trust the developer to do it right is really important. When you look at the site plan, The developers have done everything possible in planning to minimize any type of cut-through to Nez Perce, to Appaloosa. In fact, the streets within their own development are designed to eliminate anyone cutting through to Hutter or from Hutter to Atlas. And that's really important. It's hard to do. to develop a plan that lets your own people's traffic circulate and get where they need to go. But they're doing that, and that's really important too. Prior to this, the industrial loop road they put through to get access of the northern part of the property over to Atlas, but close to Prairie. It brings the traffic north, not further south on Atlas. A couple of times I've mentioned about accessory dwelling units. Well, there's a covenant on this property that says these will be single-family homes per lot. That's in the covenant, and I know what the state law said, but there's a covenant that I must abide by if I'm going to live here. And therefore, I don't really see that as an issue now or even in the future. And we're looking at a development that is probably, what, 20 years before it's even close to built out. It was approved four years ago. I haven't seen anything built lately, so I say they're not right on track with getting everything done. I guess, you know, apart from that, we all live here, too. Traffic's our concern. you know, what's going on next door? Is someone getting too close, whatever? So it's not like we're sitting here and thinking, oh, we like the developer. I don't even know these people. But I think what we're saying is that we feel the same things that you feel, and we work hard up here to look out for the interest of your community. And I think we're doing that tonight. Thank you. Anyone else?

Yeah, I'd like to... go forward with the same concept that it seems like a very a great developer is has built and designed a a very functional plan they've listened to the city council saying do everything we can to prevent any adverse impacts for the existing communities and I think the work that they did in designing the roads and adding the stop signs are are commendable and I and I think the plan is uh is i think the developer has done what they need to do i think the problem is a city problem and that problem being that we've got appaloosa and nez perce roads that have a lot of traffic today they're going to have a lot of traffic a lot more traffic in the future even though we know the capacity of the roads will handle that that added use it's already unsafe It sounds like in certain places today. So there's a problem. And I think it's not the developer's problem. I think it's our problem to solve in the future. And I think we should be talking about that as we talk about future phases of what is the city going to do to help mitigate the additional usage of those two pretty rural roads that are going to be connected to a beautiful community that I think is going to be of great value To our city. So I think we've just got that kind of a dilemma. I don't know how you'd address it in this, because I think it shouldn't be. But in the future, we should be talking about what we can do to solve the safety issue.

Commissioner McCracken.

Did we make it, the finding?

No, we're still discussing. I'll throw in some thoughts, though, before you do that. I echo Commissioner Ward. I think it's a good developer that's done well. uh that's immaterial it's also kind of immaterial i i guess that we're getting a park and a school and we certainly need the housing especially affordable housing the density of this thing is less than they could push for we see that you know at the end of the day this is comes down to what we heard here some hard evidence this is a permitted use we heard that uh it's really permitted by right As long as a few conditions are met, you know, the plat elements and such, and the utilities are there and whatnot, largely this effort here is to check and make sure that those requirements have been met, that Sean Holm pointed out, findings B1 through B4. And I believe... that the facts in this matter support that the findings have been met completely. I would add, again, you say we live here too, and we do, and I use Atlas almost every day. I'm going to go there on my way home. Someone called it the elephant in the room or the gorilla or whatever it was. It's good to hear that help is on the way. It's the city's, and we're going to get help from development in the form of impact fees and such, and grant money from the feds and everything else. I believe there will be a day not too far out there that South Atlas, Kathleen to the freeway, will approximate what you see from Kathleen north to Prairie and beyond. And that part, it functions pretty decently. So I hope there's help on the way. One last comment before... Certainly. I'd say... With respect to this construction traffic, I would really emphasize, you know, work with the city on that. I don't want to sign this big. I want one like this with those emphasis flags and, you know, beacons. And let's really work on that.

I know. I was thinking about that. I was like, could we put load limits? But then if somebody wanted to build in Indian Meadows, then they wouldn't be able to drive that. So I would echo what a lot of my commissioners said. I think there's been a lot of thought in this. And I know when I first, I mean, I'm very familiar with this area because I live on Buckskin. But when I opened my packet, I was like, oh, like I can see how the traffic, would be moving, you know, you're already 80% of the way to Hutter. Why would you turn around and go all the way back to Atlas? So I see the intention with the roads. Um, and I, I understand we just have to have two connections for fire safety. And if you're unfortunately in the situation where minutes matter, you will appreciate having less response time or quicker response time. So I, I think we're doing what we can here. I want to remind my fellow neighbors that that R3 zoning along the fence and the perimeter, like that's a big win that we got with the first round of public comment. Instead of having multiple neighbors along your back fence line, most of them have, some only have one, some have two and a little bit. So I think instead of having six neighbors on your back fence line, those are nice big lots there. I don't think those will probably be the affordable housing ones, but they will be really nice for someone to live there and a nice neighbor behind you. I really appreciate the trails to Hutter and North. when one of my neighbors put a heat map in their comments and I was like, oh, Buckskin's the busiest street because it was one of the darker ones. But then I realized that was the trail was darker than Buckskin. So I know how many people walk that and enjoy that trail. So I'm super glad you kept it. I'm putting the ball in Chris's court to hopefully keep that connection with maybe some sidewalks or, when these Atlas improvements come along that we find a way to really hone in on that pedestrian piece, because I think everybody enjoys that walkability. And if we can connect them well, I think that that's an advantage for the residents of Indian Meadows to be able to connect into those trails safely. Sounds like there's funding for a light. Sounds like it's on the radar. That's also great. And you guys have met the conditions of it. I have just, I had three. Now I have two, two extra conditions. And I would be happy to read the findings unless somebody wants to. But my two asks are the crossing connections at the trail. just coordinating with the city to make those, you know, calming measures and mitigated for safety because I know it's so well used. I just think that's important. And then the other one, coordinate with the city as reasonably possible, so I'm going to leave that a little vague, but as reasonably possible that the timing of Nez Perce's opening to Atlas is be timed as close to possible as the light going in. And I know we don't know what the future is on that. It sounds like they might be pretty close. And before that, if it was still barricaded, maybe it's all built and barricaded, the traffic looks like it can go to Hutter until that point. So that there's not... Multi-years where everybody's frustrated that there's no light there, that that timeline is limited. But just as reasonably possible, work with the city on opening it relative to that light going in.

Something like work in good faith in coordination with the city.

Yeah, to make a reasonable effort to open those when the light goes in. And if it doesn't make sense, a best effort would be appreciated just so that Because I do know, until they fix a right turn lane on Kathleen, there are times a day where you're like, three, four lights already. And it is already backed up past where a light would go. It's already backed up past Nez Perce today going north. And so if there's no light, you're going to be one car at a time every three lights.

So why don't you proceed with a motion, if you'd like. So I'll proceed with the motion. And add those conditions.

And I will try to word these as best as I can. Let's see. This matter, coming before the Planning and Zoning Commission, July 14, 2026, in consideration of S2-26, a matter requesting for approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide plus or minus 202 acres into 284 single-family and 36 multi-family lots, a public park, a public school site, and associated non-buildable tracts, known as Quartier 2 subdivision. The applicant is Connie Krueger. The owner is lrev 33 through llc through lrv lrev 39 llc lakeside companies the property is located in the southern portion of the courtier master plan community north of west woodside avenue south of the future west nez perce road extension east of north hutter and west of north buckskin road the findings of fact the planning commission finds that the following facts a1 through a21 have been established on a more probable than not basis, as shown on the record before it and on the testimony and exhibits presented at the public hearing. The testimony was conflicting, and the commission determines that more credible and convincing evidence established the following facts, A1 through A21. And these refer to, we've had this before, we're not going to read them all individually, but public noticing to the neighboring properties, and the property location, the description, the zoning density, the subdivision's applicant checklist, that there were no design deviations, a traffic study, internal street network, their ability to meet the development agreement, a community park, a school site, and then the different phasing, identifying the different phasing, affordable housing, and then the concurrent analysis that's required by the development agreement. Does any Commissioner have any other effects they would like to add? Okay, I Guess I might add that the traffic study we clarified that it has been updated for the year 2026 Just to have that in there the conclusions of law based on the foregoing findings of fact the Planning Commission takes the following conclusions of law that the That all of the general plat requirements have been met as attested to by the city engineer. That the provision for sidewalks, streets, alleys, right-of-ways, easements, street lighting, fire protection, planting, drainage, pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the limits of this request are adequate. That the proposed plat does comply with all the requirements of the subdivision design standards contained in municipal code 16.15 and all other subdivision improvement standards contained in municipal code 16.40. and that the lots proposed in the plat do meet the minimum lot requirements for all applicable zoning districts. The Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, has determined that the replat does comply with the required evaluation criteria and requests it to be approved with conditions. We have conditions 1 through 31 as renumbered. with the 227s. And then I would like to add condition 32. At the crossing of the trails at Appaloosa and Nez Perce for the north, south, pedestrian trail that the applicant work with the city on crossing mitigation and calming measures for traffic near those intersections and 33 that the applicant coordinate make a best best best faith effort to coordinate with the city as reasonably possible to open the connection on the Nez Perce side when the light at Nez Perce and Atlas has been installed. And that's a best-faith effort as reasonably possible. And that's my motion.

So that is the motion by Commissioner McCracken. Is there a second?

I'll second that.

second by Commissioner Jamtas to adopt the foregoing findings in order with the adjusted conditions to approve roll call Tracy Ward yes Jamtas yes Ingalls oh I didn't yes sorry

McCracken. Yes.

uh so the motion to approve with the uh amended conditions has been approved uh and with that they have the right to appeal they have the right to appeal so with that this is a final decision of the planning and zoning commission and please note that uh this decision is appealable within 15 days of the decision pursuant to section 17.09.705 through 17.09.715 of Title 17 of the Zoning Code. Thank you. So with that, is there a motion for adjournment? Motion to adjourn. How about a second? A second? Second by, yeah, second motion by McCracken, second by Commissioner Jamtoff. Yes.

All those in favor?

Aye. Aye. Thank you, everyone, for your...

Thank you for spending the evening with us.

Fine.