City Council - Regular Meeting

but just wanted to throw that out there as well. So with those numbers, we kind of wanted to come up with a policy, draft policy that you guys to give feedback on. Let me see if I can scroll down here. Councilman Locke.

Can I ask just a quick question? Sure. What's your confidence level in these numbers if you don't have GIS capabilities yet? Is this self-attestation?

Mr. Mayor and Councilman Whitlock, we looked through our REC 1 software, and it took some time, but we downloaded a report that basically said who was all registered and whatever address they had on their account be divvied out. So it was us going through, and it took some time to get it, but out of all of them, We kind of export it into excel and then sort through excel so by so those that's how we got those numbers, based on their account address if that makes sense, so we feel it's pretty accurate, you know so. Is there a room for air sure but it's pretty close. So with those numbers, we kind of came up with a policy or a proposed policy. And basically what it is, in short, is for shelters, for non-resident shelters fees, we would increase it 20%. For non-resident programs for adult and senior classes or community education classes, we would increase it 10%. we were proposing not to do anything with our youth. We think our youth are vital and it's a huge benefit to our youth to have these kinds of programs to maintain a healthy, active lifestyles. They play a vital role in our community. So we wanted to not have non-resident fees for our youth programs and youth as they enter our facilities, because we want a safe place for our kids to come and play and hang out, right? So that's our proposal. 20% for shelters, 10% for adult and senior programs, classes, and those such things. And then a 20% increase to our field reservations as well. A lot of our field reservations are youth. We don't have a report in Civic Rec or Rec 1 that'll run who reserved our fields, if that makes sense. Once we have ArcGIS or the integration of that, we'll be able to run those reports to determine who's reserving them for youth or adult type of thing. So that's what we're working on there. Um, the facility day passes, this is for the pool and home court right now. We currently have this program at home court. I still included in this in the policy. So it's read that way. We don't have it at the pool. Um, and another facility, we don't have it as of the golf course. Right? So the golf course right now, we kind of looked around if we were to implement something there would be the only one in the treasure Valley that has non resident fees, which we, we didn't like, we didn't want, um, internally and then. Four Up is the program we use at the golf course. It's completely separate than our Civic Rec or Rec One software. So there's a lot more that we'd have to research and determine with that system. So with those two reasons, I haven't touched the golf course and I don't really necessarily need to or want to because of those reasons, but I'm here to get feedback and direction. So that's why we don't have it integrated into this proposal at this point. Our adult sports program, we currently have a resident non-resident player fee system. So that's already set up and done. What we didn't have because we just took on the senior wooden bat league is a non-resident fee for them, right? So it's a very minimal charge on that. It's about $750 added as a non-resident fee if we do the 10% for that program for adult sports. So that is the proposal in a nutshell. Pretty quick deal. So let's talk about costs and what that would bring to us. Revenues as well. So if we were to... Sorry, this computer is moving slow than fast on my end. So if we were to implement this proposed proposal, this is kind of on the numbers of what it would be. So in 2025, there was 2,490 reservations for our shelters. We went through and cut a lot of those out. We realized that 660 of them were non-residents. Using math equations here based on our total shelter revenues, which was $285,574 divided by reservations, we found that the average shelter reservation was about $114.69. With that, we multiplied that by the 660 to kind of get our non-resident fee proposal. And this is the easiest way we could calculate this. Then we applied the 20% increase, which is about $15,000. roughly, just for the shelters. So, obviously, just the shelters would pay for the ArcGIS system of $1,500. Okay. Now, this is FY 2025 numbers, right? So, we did increase our shelter fees from 2025 to 2026. So, 2026 numbers are going to be a little higher than this if we have the same numbers, if that makes sense, because we did increase our fees for shelters last year. So, I hope that makes sense. Um, the adult senior programs running the numbers on that. If we did the non resident fees proposal as is 10%, we'd bring in about 4 a little over $4,000 on that. The senior wouldn't badly another 892 dollars on that. For a projected if the 2025 number stayed true about almost 19,000 dollars in increased revenues by adding the system, this non resident fee policy that doesn't account for staff time. I know there's going to be a little bit of staff time with finance to help us go through some of this reporting and stuff like that. And then internally, we're actually meeting tomorrow with Rec One Civic Rec to determine what it looks like on our end and the public side and what it's going to take staff time for us to implement this program into ArcGIS as well. So staff numbers and staff time is still questionable, but we're finding that out right now. So projected timeline, if we were to implement this today, This is kind of the projected time we have on there, and the one thing I didn't have on here was that you know we do review fees annually for your guys's request so we'll continue to look at this. If this proposal were to come true we'd run numbers next year look at it evaluate it again and see kind of where we're at and come back with you guys with some feedback in our update so that's not on the timeline, but we would do that so with that i'll stand for questions if there is any.

Thank you. Council, any questions for Garrett?

Mr. Mayor.

Councilwoman Little-Roberts.

Mr. Mayor, Garrett, great report. Thank you for sending it to us in advance. That's greatly appreciated. Just curious, so how do our shelter reservations price-wise compare? I'm really surprised that we've got that high a percentage of out of the area of non-resident.

Mr. Mayor, Councilwoman Little-Roberts, good question. If when we did the fees last year, if I remember correctly, we were in the average when it came to the shelter. We weren't the lowest shelters. We weren't the highest shelters right in the middle when it comes to price point. We take a lot of pride in our parks. We think our parks are pretty cool and pretty nice and we have great amenities at our parks. So there's some of that factored into. But we did, if I remember correctly, we're right in the middle. We're not highest. We're not the lowest, but we're kind of in the middle, but kind of the upper middle, if that makes sense, and price. So does that answer that question?

It does, Mr. Mayor.

That's one of the robbers.

And just to comment regarding the golf, I think you're spot on on not touching that. A few years ago, we brought that discussion up and all the resident golfers were unhappy at the thought of that, too, because they all play. Everybody plays all over the valley and didn't want to see. They don't want to go to Warm Springs and get a non-resident and then have their buddy that is normally Warm Springs come here and be a non-resident. So I think you're spot on with leaving that one alone.

things. Councilman Kevin or.

Thanks for this, and I actually really appreciate the thought about the kids element. That's not something I initially had thought about, and I think that makes a lot of sense. I do have a couple of questions, though, for you. If we were to take this step, have the Department did the Commission talk about what is like an acceptable level of loss? Essentially, people who maybe are not going to rip from us. We're in a shelter from us are not going to participate in in something in the city of Meridian because we implement that fee. And do we have a

anticipated number a acceptable number is that something you guys have considered mr mayor councilman kevin we we we've thought about that internally it didn't come up when it came with our commission and stuff like that when in that discussion although there is a small chance of that um that's why we kind of wanted to start with a 20 and see where we're at reevaluated if our numbers are way down because of that At that point, we'd come back to you guys and say, hey, I mean, is this okay with you guys? Or do you want to lower it to 10%, 20%? Do we want you to increase it to 30? You know, that type of thing. Have that discussion. But it necessarily hasn't came up in particular with other than internally us worrying about that.

Mr. Mayor, from Mayfault. Go ahead. Garrett, how will the software work in terms of how much lead time does somebody have to be quote unquote a resident before the software is aware that they live in our community? Somebody moves here or they move from Boise, they move to a new neighborhood. How quickly is the software updating? I assume if it's with our GIS, it's probably very quickly after we grant approvals and occupancy and whatnot, but I don't know that for sure.

Yeah, great question. So that can be one of our questions tomorrow. But the way we understand it is, once you create your account, and you put your address in, and it's a we work with our IT GIS, that's the component to we get all of our addresses and input into the system. It should be immediate. Once you create your account, your address gets verified, it might take a minute or two for it to upload and get into the system, and then it's ready to go. Okay. Um, so it's almost immediate, so there's no wait period to become a resident per se. Um, if that makes.

Yeah, it does. Yeah. Mr mayor, maybe then for a, for a question tomorrow with the vendor, is there also an ability to implement, I guess, like a, an amount to be the arc fee. I guess the way I look at it is that the increase is to offset, you know, the investment that the taxpayers make that out of resident does, but there's because there's an added admin fee. My assumption would be is that non-resident should be on the hook for covering that as well. And I don't know if that's something the software supports. And a quick look at the math of users, you could implement a $2, $2.50 GIS fee that would pay for the software tool. So again, the taxpayers aren't on the hook for that. So if that's something that is doable and implementable, I'm really interested in making sure that we're adding that as well.

yeah i great feedback i considered that part of the 20 that would be charged but if i mean that that's that's why in here when i put the numbers there it was you know with the cost of the program we would still make about 18 to 20 000 so that's kind of where i in added it but if we needed to increase it or whatever we can we can look at doing that okay we can we can add add-on fees here and there i just don't know if the arc gis will allow us to do another add-on. So it's a question I will ask tomorrow.

There's just maybe one more final one. I think the vast majority of people in the Valley are honest people and recognize this. How do you guys plan to audit and make sure that neighbors aren't registering each other? We're using grandma's address. Again, I recognize you're not going to be able to audit around all bad behavior, but I assume that's also something that you guys have talked about internally is how can we make sure that we're verifying that people are using the right address?

Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Councilman Calvert, that's a great question. We know this is not bulletproof per se, right? So that's the question we are going to ask them tomorrow. But the reality of it is, too, we can always just run, you know, and see how many, if there's 18 people living under the same address, well, eh. You know that's a big house right so we'd have to review that and kind of see how we want to deal with that and if archers has a system to really allow like 10 people to certain address we don't know that yet, but that's a great question we have thought about that internally. And the reality is, if you live in meridian I don't hey Luke we reserve this for me and there's going to be some of that right so that we necessarily can't catch but that's a great question that we, we need more information on.

Mr Mayor.

Thank you, thank you Garrett I really appreciate the parks department following up on this and researching it. I really think it's a matter of fairness, you know our taxpayers have paid into a lot of parks infrastructure that. We all benefit from and then other non residents benefit from, and I think it's more than fair for them to help pay their fair share. I do appreciate some of the nuance though, around the golf course, that's not really practiced in the market. So I understand that. And also I think the kids, I understand that as well. One piece where I'm just interested to see how it would play out would be like home court and the pool. And especially the pool, because we have one facility for a city of, I think we're probably close to, if not over 150,000 people. And that to me is one area where i have more sensitivity to our residents because i feel like if our pool ever reaches a point that is so overflowing that we can't even meet the demand from our residents it seems very fair to try to use that pricing differential to to prioritize our residents um so i just i guess my comment is i really appreciate it i know some of the um increases are a little bit of a guess and we don't really know how it would play out so i think it's a pilot and i'm very supportive of pursuing it and asking those questions of the vendor but i'm just very appreciative of you guys looking at it because i think you know with the technology it's great that we have this ability yeah thank you mr mayor councilman overton

Um, Garrett, I think you've done a great job and I think this is a long time coming that we do something like this. It's already been stated, you know, we need to come up with some way that's fundamentally fair for our residents not to hoof 100% of the bill when so many people are using our parks, when we pride ourselves on the level of parks that we have and services we provide. Um, i'm okay with the youth getting the free pass i think that's great you know the one thing we got to remember that we're not able to capture here is just the amount of people that just use our parks with the numbers you're bringing forward on just on the programs i think the number of people that don't live in our city that use our parks is going to be almost an uncapturable number so i'm fully supportive of this i i think this is a great start Mayor Mrakas, i'm actually leaning towards this may not be enough. Mayor Mrakas, To have a future number, where we try to do some sort of cost recovery to benefit our citizens and residents who pay for our park services, so that it's not all on their shoulders for everyone else in the valley who comes and uses our parks so great job. Mayor Mrakas, Thank you.

Mayor Mrakas, man.

Garrett, is the Parks Department sort of generally concerned about non-residents participating in our programs and kind of squeezing out Meridianites from being able to use it, if that's the right word? Is that something you're concerned about at all, or does it seem like everything's working, we have capacity, you're not concerned?

Mr. Mayor, Councilman Taylor, we have zero concern with that. Right now, we have some capacity in our programs. We're building new programs all the time. We're all everybody's welcome type of thing. So right now, we're not necessarily worried about that with our current facilities and our current programs. We're bringing this forward because we were asked and yeah.

Thank you. One more quick question as this program goes along and I do think it's fair in some sense. You know, people have been ready to pay property taxes to pay for parks and I have no problem really with charging a higher fee for non residents to use it. Would it be your goal as you go along? Let's say the cost for the service software service goes up. Would you just be, would you be always trying to recapture the cost by maybe having to adjust the fees on non residents? Would that be sort of the plan to pay for any increased costs? Or you'll say, if we bring in a lot more revenue, would you look at a way to use this to offset other costs? You know, let's say, uh, maintenance, uh, possibly in some of our facilities.

Very well could. I think what we'd do is bring the information back to you guys and ask us or ask you guys for your feedback and, you know, direction on that. What we do, what we would do is, you know, is the 20% or 10% enough type of thing is we would start running how often are our shelters booked, for example, right? And if they're 100% capacity or booked all the time and we review it and say, oh, well, 50%. I'm grabbing numbers now. 50% are non-residents. Well, maybe we need to increase the non-residents because of the supply and demand type of thing. So those are the things we want to review every year and so on. And to kind of, Councilman Overson's comment on, you know, is 10 or 20% enough? We don't know yet. We kind of want to dip our toe in that pool a little bit to kind of see where we're at and kind of learn the system as we go through. And that's why we proposed the 10 or 20. But I think we would use the data and come back with you guys and say, what

would you propose here's our proposal get feedback kind of like i'm doing now so i think i hope that answers your question you know and maybe just you know the broader concept i don't know how many people here have tried to go book at a state park uh here in idaho recently but it's very difficult and a large portion of that is you know we're very we like our state parks are very attractive destination um And the one thing we, this does not take into consideration, and this could be in the future is, you know, we open up to Meridian residents first, a certain date, and then you have a non-resident date, secondary. If we're concerned, we wanna get concerned about our Meridian residents being squeezed out from participating in certain activities or things. So there's other tools that we can look at. And I think that, you know, this basic conversation, it's been a good conversation, but you know, is this a revenue recapturing? effort or is this a prioritization of meridian residents to access to the facilities the answer can be yes but you know is one more important than the other i think that maybe is a future conversation but this is a good start to see what impact if any this has on either revenue shelter or instead of person saying i'm just going to do it grandma's the one that is doing the rental and it doesn't produce any more revenue for us and our numbers remain the same that i think people that just tell us people found a different way to do it if that's the case but it's a good way to start yeah mr mayor councilman walk just a comment or an observation i i was thinking too how do we capture that additional 1500 and then as i'm looking at this

John Potter, i'm realizing if the total is 19,000 that we get we're not only capturing that 1500 we're capturing the 8000 that we started with so potentially those non residents could be paying for the entire system. John Potter, i'd be a little hesitant to do a non resident fee and then have another $2 and 50 cent add on would just be my preference to cover it once.

Mayor Mrakas, At Mr Eric customer like that's kind of what we thought internally, but you know we're open to feedback, and you know. Mayor Mrakas, i'm okay nickeling I don't want to nickel and dime. Mayor Mrakas, Great well, thank you for your feedback and the good comments so.

Mayor Mrakas, Thank you anything else Council. Mayor Mrakas, All right, thank you appreciate it. Okay, with that we'll move on to item four. Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Orton. I move that we move into executive session per Idaho code section 74-206A subsection 1A and 74-206 subsection 1C. Second.

Have a motion and a second to go into executive session. Do I have a discussion? If not, call the roll.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Kavanaugh. Taylor. Aye. Strater.

Aye.

Whitlock.

Aye.

Little-Roberts. Aye. Overton.

Aye. I'll ask motion carries. We'll go into executive session. And so the motion.

Mister mayor I move that we come out of executive session.

Motion second to come out of the second session on favor signify by saying aye aye those things guys have we're at the same session have another motion.

Mister mayor I move that we adjourn the work session.

Motion second journal favor signify by saying aye. Those name guys have we are adjourned. And we're just going to about a 3 minute recess before we set up the next meeting or 3 minute break before we start the next meeting. Council will call the meeting in order. For the record, it is July 14, 2026 at 6.06 p.m. We'll begin this evening's city council meeting with roll call attendance.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Councilman Kavanaugh. Councilman Taylor. Here. Councilwoman Strader. Here. Councilman Whitlock. Here. Councilwoman Little-Roberts. Here. Councilman Overton.

Here.

Mayor Simison.

Here. Next time is the Pledge of Allegiance. If at all, please rise and join us in the pledge.

but allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Next up is our community invocation, which tonight will be delivered by Sandra Ramirez. If you'd all please join us in the community invocation or take this as a moment of silence and reflection. Hello, Sandra.

Well, good evening, Mayor and members of the council. Once again, it's great standing before you and just delivering this prayer. And I just ask that you join me in prayer and bow our heads and close our eyes if you wish. Father God, we just thank you for today, God. Thank you, God, for your mercy, your grace, Lord. Thank you, Lord, for each one of these council members and Mayor, God, that you have appointed to be in these seats, Lord God. And Lord, I just pray, God, that you would show them favor tonight. as they make hard decisions, Father, and decisions, God, that some may agree with and some may not, Lord. But God, you, Father, have appointed them in their positions and in these roles. So I just ask for favor over them, protection over them, Lord. And God, may they just continue to serve this community, Lord God, in such a wonderful way that they already have. Lord, bless them, bless the decisions that'll come out of tonight's meeting.

and we just thank you and praise you in jesus name amen amen thank you thank you sandra next up is adoption of the agenda mr mayor councilman overton there are no changes to tonight's agenda i move that we adopt it as published

Have emotional second to adopt the agenda is there a discussion, if not on favor signify by saying aye aye opposed nay guys have it in the agenda is agreed to counsel anything under announcements recognition. Okay squirk anyone set up under public forum.

Mr Mayor nobody signed up okay.

Well, with that, we'll move on to our public hearings for this evening. First item up is item one, public hearing for Vanguard Village, number H2026-0021. We will open this public hearing with staff comments.

Thank you Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The first application before you tonight is a request for a vacation of easement. This site is located on the south side of West Grand Mogul Drive midway between South Ten Mile Road and South Black Cat Road. The applicant requests City Council approval to vacate the southerly five feet of the 26 foot wide street buffer landscape easement along the south side of West Grand Mogul Drive on lot six block one Vanguard Village subdivision number one. The easement is graphically depicted on the plat and described in plat note number 18. A 20-foot wide street buffer is typically required along collector streets, planted with trees and other landscaping as required by the UDC. Due to the location of a utility easement within the required street buffer area that prohibits trees, an additional five feet was provided outside the easement to plant the required trees. After the plat was recorded, it was discovered that the required trees could be accommodated in the parkway, the area between the curb and the sidewalk, which lies outside of the easement area. Therefore, the additional five feet of the recorded easement isn't needed, and the property owner would like to vacate the easement so that the area can be utilized for development of their site. A legal description and exhibit map of the portion of the easement proposed to be vacated is included in the staff report. The area shown in red here on the plat is the easement location that's proposed to be vacated. There has been no written testimony received on the application and staff is recommending approval. Staff will stand for any questions.

Thank you. Council, any questions for staff? Okay, would you like to come forward? Good evening.

Evening Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. I'm Justin Fredin, F-R-E-D-I-N, with Alquist 1144 South Silverstone Way, Suite 500 here in Meridian. Here representing the applicant as well as the property owner. Um, staff has has done an excellent job of laying this out for you and I don't want to belabor the point at all. We appreciate all the work that they've done and feel that this is a fairly straightforward matter. Hopefully there will still be enough. room remaining, where there will still be in excess of 20 feet of landscape buffer. So it's not as if we are looking to reduce the size of the buffer in any way. I will run through a few slides here, if I can get the mouse to cooperate.

Maybe some of you, if you're able to, yeah, are you able to queue it up?

Okay, again, you've seen this depiction already. There are other portions of the easement that have already been reduced in width as well. So we are bringing it this, seeking to bring this portion in line with those that were previously approved through separate applications for reduction. Here's an aerial view to the extent that's useful for you. Again, just to quickly run through the background on this, 20 feet is required and that is what we're going to maintain. At the time of platting, it was believed that due to a utility easement, we needed to go to up to 26 feet to avoid any conflicts between trees and utilities uh however was subsequently determined that that's not that issue and so we are just requesting the vacation of that southerly five feet uh of the easement along the south side of grand mogul drive uh on lot six and uh if you're familiar with it this will be the lifetime fitness facility and they're just uh seeking to use that additional five feet uh for their parking lot and pickleball courts And here's just for your benefit, a approved landscape plan showing the location of those trees that they can, in fact, as Sonja said, be fit into the parkway. And with that, I'm happy to stand for any questions you may have.

Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant?

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Very good. Mr. Quirk, anyone want to sign up on this item? Mr. Mayor, there are no signups.

Mayor Mrakas, Is there anybody present who would like to provide testimony on this item, either if you're online raise your hand or if you're in the audience go and come forward. Mayor Mrakas, See no one coming forward, no one raising their hand does the applicant wave any final comments how can we have any final comments. Mayor Mrakas, Because we'll share.

Mayor Mrakas, We close public hearing on this item.

I have a motion second to close the public hearing is there a discussion, if not on favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay, the ayes have it, the public hearing is closed.

Mr. Mayor.

Ms. Wilmshader.

It's pretty straightforward after considering all staff applicant and public testimony I move to approve file number H2026-0021 as presented in the staff report for today's hearing date. Second.

I have a motion second to approve item one is there a discussion, if not call the roll.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor Kavanaugh. Taylor. Aye. Strater. Aye. Whitlock. Aye. Little-Roberts. Overton.

Aye. All ayes. Motion carries. The item is agreed to. Thank you very much. Next item up is item two, public hearing for Trevino subdivision, SHP 2026-0006. We will open this public hearing with staff comments.

Thank you Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The next application before you is a request for a short plat. This site consists of .98 acres of land. It's on CG and it's located at 1788 West McMillan Road. This property was previously platted as Lot 2, Block 1, North Point Commercial Subdivision. The future land use map designation is Commercial. A short plat is proposed to re-subdivide Lot 2, Block 1, North Point Commercial Subdivision, which consists of 0.98 acres of land, into two building lots. The two building lots are proposed to develop with two commercial office buildings consisting of a total of approximately 5,850 square feet, as shown on the concept plan on the right. Access is provided to this site through a cross-access ingress-egress easement via South Abruzzo Way at the north boundary with a driveway extending along the west and south boundaries of the site, providing access to the properties to the south. A 25-foot wide buffer to adjoining residential uses is required in the CG District along the west and north boundaries of the site adjacent to existing residential uses. A 15 foot wide landscape buffer exists along the West boundary the applicant is requesting Council approval of a reduced buffer width of 25 feet. To 15 feet along the West boundary and eight feet along the north property line West of the access road, and that is in this area right here, you can see my pointer and then along the West boundary there. The proposed structure will be 76 feet away from the west property line, providing a large separation between it and the back fence of the residential lots. The reason for the request is that due to the reconfiguration of this lot and then s turn access road that runs through it. They are unable to meet the minimum 25 foot wide buffer requirement in those areas, additionally, there is an eight foot. excuse me, eight inch sewer main that runs along the 25 foot mark, which would put a curb over the sewer main. The UDC allows the buffer width to be modified by city council at a public hearing with notice to surrounding property owners if deemed appropriate. A reduction to the buffer width doesn't affect building setbacks. All structures are required to be set back from the property line a minimum of 25 feet. As a provision of granting a reduced buffer width, if determined appropriate by City Council, staff recommends additional landscaping is provided in the buffer, if necessary, to result in a barrier that allows trees to touch within five years of planting in accord with UDC standards. A 25-foot wide landscape buffer should be provided along the northern boundary east of the access road and landscaped in accord with UDC standards. written testimony has been received from travis butterfly butterfield morehouse commercial the applicants representative, he is in agreement with the staff report and staff is recommending approval staff will stand for any questions.

Thank you can also any questions for staff. Councilman governor.

So he thinks the these other I guess adjacent lots have they been developed and do they have the same reduced landscape buffer they not been developed. That's I'm concerned about this one. And so I just, I want to get a flavor about if we're being consistent.

I believe they have developed. I'm not sure about the buffer. If you'll give me a moment, I'll check on that. The applicant is here to present tonight. So I can check on that in the meantime.

Thank you.

Mr. Mayor.

Mr. Taylor.

Um, really quick. Is that, uh, that roadway kind of that funny ass looking, is that a private road in the applicant right there on the left side?

The access road right here.

Is it a private road? What is that?

It has a public street name. It is in a lot owned by the HOA with an access easement to these lots, these commercial lots. So yes, it's private to answer your question, but it wasn't necessarily approved as a private street so far as the city standards. It's an odd deal. It was part of the previous subdivision.

And it exists.

It does exist. Yes.

Any additional questions for staff?

Or the upcoming to come forward.

Good evening. My name is Travis Butterfield at 17438 North Newell Avenue, Napa, Idaho 83687.

Did you have a presentation, Travis?

I did not. I'm just available to answer any questions you guys might have.

Do you want to start with the questions Council had? Do you know about the adjacent properties setback? Are you matching? Yes.

So the property to the south is already developed. It's 10 roof tacos and The whole strip right there. They do have the wider landscape buffer, but where this lot to the north takes over, the landscape buffer has been reduced from 25 feet down to 15 feet. And right at 25 feet, they put utilities underground. And so if we did the 25 feet, we would have a curb right over those utilities, which is not ideal. Additionally, that S-turn is different, but it's working for the people that are using it. And if we are to put in a 25 foot landscape buffer, either on the west and or on that northwest corner, it would cut that off. We are not totally opposed to cutting that off, but we would kind of like to leave access for the neighbors so that they can come enjoy and use the commercial development that's there.

Mr. Mayor?

Mayor Mrakas, Cosmo share um.

Mayor Mrakas, Are you in agreement, if there was a condition for enhanced landscaping are you in agreement with that condition.

Mayor Mrakas, we're okay with enhancing landscaping if that. Mayor Mrakas, We obviously want to be good neighbors and if that makes them happy then we're happy to do that.

Mayor Mrakas, Mr mayor as material.

So you kind of already answered my question a little bit with that sort of shape road, but it looks like you're trying not to disrupt that and so it's kind of giving you a awkward property work within which is partially why you're asking for the.

That is correct yes. And we're just trying to work with what's already there and so we're just asking if we can just leave it as is it's working.

Council additional questions for the applicant at this time. Okay, thank you, thank you. square can one step on this item, Mr Mayor no. Is there anybody present who would like to provide testimony on this item either come forward now or use raise your hand feature online. Seeing no one coming forward, does applicant waive? Any final comments? Council? Mr. Mayor. Councilman Malak.

I would move that we close the public hearing on this agenda item.

Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. The ayes have it, and the public hearing is closed.

Mr. Mayor. Councilman Malak. Again, this one seems pretty straightforward. Don't know that we've required many people to put a curb over an 8-inch sewer main. I think also with the applicant agreeing with the recommendation to enhance the landscaping that we've found the best solution that we possibly can for this parcel. So after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move that we approve file number SHP 2026-006 with the added requirement to enhance the additional landscaping.

um as presented in the staff report for today's hearing date second have a motion a second is there a discussion on the motion if not call the roll thank you mr mayor kavanagh taylor straighter with lock hi little roberts over to all right allies motion carry that i'm as great too good luck Okay next item up is item three a public hearing for 2026 city initiated future land use map amendment H 2026-0006 will open this public hearing with staff. Comments from Carl.

Carl Anderson, Good evening, Mr Mayor members of the Council, my name is Carl Anderson long range associate planner here at the city tonight i'm going to present the city's city initiated a comprehensive plan feature land use map amendment case file H 2026006. Tonight's request is intended to reflect 2 primary task here. The 1st is to reflect existing and anticipated. Ada West data school districts school sites by many of the flim to require to reflect a civic land use designation. Redesignate as well as redesignate multiple city Meridian owned properties to civic land use. There are some minor associated amendments with this request, which I'll detail during my presentation. The total area included in this request is 77.1 acres, more or less. The first site is located at 335 Locust Grove, is owned by West Ada School District and is anticipated to be a West Ada School District CTE center. It's anticipated that the applicant will be submitting the necessary applications to establish the use at this location during which time all necessary standards and requirements will be evaluated. This designation is modifying the plan from industrial and mixed use community to civic. The next site is West, excuse me, Meridian Elementary School. The modification here is from Old Town to Civic. And the next site that we have here is located on Linder and is the Meridian West Ada School District future site for Blue Valley Elementary School, modifying the high density and medium high density future land uses that are there currently to a Civic designation. Next, we have property owned by West City School District located south and west of Chinden and Black Cat and modifying the Future Land Use map from medium density residential to civic Future Land Use designation. Now we're getting to city Meridian properties. This one's a cleanup of the Bear Creek Park. And the modification here is to align the Meridian properties from the, follow the boundaries of Meridian properties from the low density residential to civic land use, including the Meridian owned pathways into the neighborhood. And there's some minor cleanup here where there's civic designation that encroaches upon the residential neighborhood lots there and modifying them to all be a low density residential as well. And next we have. Property on a white storm meridian fire station and Northwest meridian police station fire station number eight I believe modifying the designation from medium density residential to civic as well. And the last one that we have is the fire station number seven modifying the designation from medium density residential to civic. And all notification requirements for this application have been met and no public comments have been received all agency comments are included in the record and no agency responding has indicated opposition to the request. This application was heard by the planning and zoning Commission on may 7 2026 and they have forwarded a recommendation to City Council for approval and with that i'd be happy to answer any questions that the Council may have. You can counsel any questions for staff.

Mayor Mrakas, that's one lock Thank you, Carl I noticed there, or at least I didn't see a comment from West data school district, are they fine with the changes that are being proposed.

Mayor Mrakas, Yes, thank you, Mr Mayor Council member Whitlock. Mayor Mrakas, We have not received a comment from West data school district on the request, we have reached out, but we did not have a comment in the record. Mayor Mrakas, Mr Mayor.

Mayor Mrakas, I can't imagine that they would have a problem with moving it from industrial to civic but surprised that they didn't come.

And correct me if I'm wrong, I think that's an important move for that is actually important for them for what they want to do on that property.

Yes, Mr. Mayor, I believe that's correct.

Any other questions for staff? Thank you. Mr. Clerk, you want to sign up on this item?

Mr. Mayor, there are no signups.

Is there anybody present that would like to provide testimony on this item? Either online, raise your hand, or you can come forward. See no one coming forward, no one raising their hand. Council, what's your direction?

Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Locke.

We close the public hearing on agenda item number three.

Have a motion to second to close the public hearing on item H2026-0006. Is there a discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay. The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed.

Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Willock.

After considering all staff applicant and public testimony, I move to approve file number H2026-0006 as presented during today's hearing date.

have a motion a second to approve item h2026 0006 is there discussion if not court call their own thank you mr mayor kavanagh taylor hi reader hi woodlock hi the roberts over to you all right allies motion carries the item is agreed to next item up is item four which is public hearing for durango subdivision h 2025-0017 we will open this public hearing with staff comments

Thank you, Mister mayor members of the Council. The next applications before you are request for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plan. This site consists of 35.88 acres of land. It's owned RUT in Ada County and is located at 5630 West Eustick Road off the northeast corner of West Eustick Road and the McDermott Road bypass. The comprehensive plan future land use map designation for this property is medium density residential, which calls for three to eight dwelling units per acre and office along the frontage. This shows a future land use map and the current designations I just outlined. The applicant is requesting annexation of 37.08 acres of land, With our eight, which is 29.53 acres and LO which is 7.55 acres zoning for the development of 127 single family residential detached homes at a gross density of 4.48 dwelling units per acre, six office buildings and associated common area. A conceptual development plan was submitted as shown, depicting the residential development and anticipated site layout for the office portion of the development along the frontage adjacent to Ustick Road, consisting of approximately 51,255 square feet of office uses. The comprehensive plan states future land use map designations are not parcel specific and that an adjacent abutting designation when appropriate and approved as part of a public hearing with a land development application may be used, but may not apply to more than 50% of the land being developed. The applicant proposes to extend the office designation at the southeast corner of the site further to the west along the frontage of Eustick Road for an additional approximate 3.24 acres or 16% of the development area. And again, I'll go back to that so you can see what they're requesting. So this is the boundary of the Durango property. And they're just asking to shift that over to this area right here. Staff is supportive of this request as approximately half an acre of the site designated office is encompassed by the SkyPilot drain easement and cannot be developed. And an additional 1.7 acres of office designated land to the east will not develop as such with spring day subdivision due to the location of the collector street and remaining area not being large enough to develop with office uses. And that is this area right here. So they're just essentially asking to shift this area here to the other end. And the proposed density housing types and office use is consistent with the medium density residential and the office future land use map designations for the property. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 127 residential lots, six commercial building lots, and 14 common lots on 35.87 acres of land. A minimum lot size of 5,547 square feet is proposed with a maximum lot size of 8,687 square feet and an average lot size of 5,864 square feet. The plat is proposed to develop in three final plat phases as shown. There is an existing home and accessory structures on the site that will be removed prior to redevelopment of the property. Access is proposed via West Eustick Road and North McDermott Road bypass. Cross-access is proposed to the adjacent properties to the west and east. Cross-access easements are required to be granted to these properties and internally within the LO zone lots. Direct lot access via Eustick Road is prohibited by the lots. Landscape street buffers are required along internal and adjacent streets in accord with UDC standards. A minimum of 15% or 4.4 acres of the residential area is required to consist of qualified open space. A total of 7.63 acres is provided, which is 25.41%. exceeding the minimum standard by 3.23 acres. Site amenities are required, totaling a minimum of 6 points. A dog waste station, open space commons, and pathways are proposed for a total of 11 points. Although amenities exceed the minimum standard, staff is recommending an additional amenity, such as a covered shelter, is provided in Lot 9, Block 3 for the open play areas as a provision of annexation. The eight mile lateral runs along the northern boundary of the site in a 50 foot wide easement and is proposed to remain open. The sky pilot drain also runs through the site and is proposed to be rerouted and piped. The 100 foot wide easement for the drain will provide a separation between residential and commercial land uses. The eight mile lateral that I mentioned that's proposing to remain open will require a waiver from council for that to remain open. So please include that in your motion tonight. Sewer service is not yet available to this property. A cooperative agreement exists between the city and the developer of Spring Day and Dayspring subdivisions to the east and south to extend the McDermott trunk line south down McDermott Road to Eustick Road and east to serve these subdivisions. which will also provide service to this site. Development is not allowed to commence until sewer service is readily available to the site. The development is subject to the Oaks Lift Station and West Ada School District reimbursement agreements. Water service exists in Eustick Road, which can provide service for up to 50 lots, and beyond that a second water connection is required. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown that demonstrate the quality of development proposed in the residential and the office portions of the development. Final design of the office buildings is required to comply with the design standards in the architectural standards manual. I'll go through a summary of the Commission hearing. Connor Lindstrom, KM Engineering, testified in favor. There was no one testified in opposition. Greg Larson and Corey Thacker did comment on the application. Key issues of public testimony. Mr. Larson had concerns pertaining to the location of the proposed access driveway via North McDermott Road bypass. and site distance with the curve of the bypass to the north. Request for the access to be shifted further to the south near the Skypilot drain and his north property boundary. Mr. Thacker had concerns pertaining to water rights, eminent domain, and desire for cross access to be provided to his property for redevelopment purposes through the subject property. The applicant is in agreement with staff's recommendation to provide a shelter on Lot 9, Block 3, but not in favor of extending North Del Norte Avenue as a stub street to the out parcel to the south, since access is proposed via a cross-access easement from North Dayspring Way. Staff agreed and retracted the recommendation for the stub street to be provided. Key issues of discussion by the Commission more as follows the provision of a step street del norte to the out parcel of the southwest corner of the site. The provision of a shelter as an additional amenity on lot nine block three is recommended by staff and the request for the office designation to be extended further to the West along the frontage of used to grow to allow for additional office use. The Commission modified condition number 1A to specify cross-access ingress-egress easements are required between all commercial lots as requested by the applicant and agreed upon by staff. No additional written testimony has been received since the Commission hearing. And the Commission did recommend approval of this development with the requirement of a development agreement. Staff will stand for any questions.

Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff? Okay, with the app I'd like to come forward.

Thank you, Mayor, Council. My name is Connor Lindstrom with KM Engineering, 5725 North Discovery Way, Boise, 83713, here representing the property owner on this application. Thank you to Sonia. We've worked with her on this application for quite some time now, so it's great to finally be here before you. Sonia did a great job of presenting. I'll try to be fairly brief and then, you know, stand for questions. Here's just kind of our our main you know requests here is to to plat this property so with that we have our R8 zone you know the within the medium density residential area we have 127 residential Lots then we have our six commercial Lots along the frontage of you stick working with the adjacent property owners has been it's gone very well we've come to an agreement with Hawkins at the southwest corner there, which you'll hear next after my presentation on the McEustick subdivision. We work with them very closely to make sure that we're providing each other cross access with the service drive coming off of Dayspring as it runs west, which is this guy right here. And in doing so, in working with Hawkins, we also had to work closely with the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District because of that sky pilot drain currently You know, transects the site kind of at a diagonal, and it made it very difficult to develop that area without rerouting and piping that drain. So they allowed us to travel north with that drain before going west, and they are allowing the service drive and some parking to be within that easement. we also work with achd to get their permission to cross dayspring way as it goes west so a lot of moving parts here we're also working with toll the property owner has come to an agreement with toll brothers to you know get sewer service to this site because they need that sewer extension to happen hence why this project has been on hold we were waiting for that to get approved and obviously it did go through the council and then lastly um kind of the the last property owner that we've worked with would be mr larson who was here at the last hearing with planning and zoning he owns the property to the west so we wanted to make sure that our access point would align with his property with and also meet achd and itd standards which everybody seems to be on board with. And at the end of the day, it's a I think it'll be a great project that melds well with the comprehensive plan. Here's that conceptual building layout just for the office area. I like to speak to the additional condition about the open space amenity. We are in agreement with that, along with any other conditions that were approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the removal of that Del Norte way connection, which was right here. That was that original condition to have a But vehicular access, which is not necessary just given you know that they spring way with this future service drive to the West will provide enough connectivity we're trying to limit the amount of traffic right through those those residential lots. i'm thinking that's all at this point if there you have any specific questions you'd like to ask i'm happy to answer them at this time, thank you. City Council Chambers.

City Council Chambers. Any questions.

Mayor Mrakas, Thank you great Thank you.

Mayor Mrakas, Correct women set up on the side of.

Mayor Mrakas, Mr Mayor, we did not.

Mayor Mrakas, Is there anybody present, though, like provide testimony on this item here in the room or online, you can raise your hand. Mayor Mrakas, See no and raising their hand or coming forward. Mayor Mrakas, SAP can wave any final comments at this time.

um connor lindstrom again km engineering i just wanted to make it clear too that we are in support of the mckay stick commercial development at the southwest corner um i know i said we've been working together but they will be before you next and i would rather not sit through their hearing so i'd like to just say that now that we are in support that's all i have thank you thank you

Mayor Mrakas, Mr Mayor. Mayor Mrakas, i'm sure I just had a question for sonia. Mayor Mrakas, You were mentioning to please include something in emotion, was it the elimination of the connection to North del norte sorry I don't know if I caught that.

Thank you, Dean. It was the waiver for the eight mile lateral to remain open along the northern boundary. The other Del Norte connection was not included as a condition. Thank you.

Mr. Mayor. Council Chair.

Sorry, a follow-up question on that. And I just don't recall from the application, but will there be fencing then along that lateral? Is it one of the ones that's pretty deep and regularly flowing? Give me a sense for that. If we have to, we can call the applicant up.

I need to double-check that, or the applicant may be able to answer that real quick. Not sure if you closed the public hearing already. Did we close it?

No, it's still open now.

Um, comments from here is applicant. Yes, there will be fencing along the lateral and there will also be a multi use pathway that's required there. I think there's a fencing plan that Sonya had up earlier. I don't think I have one in my presentation, but that might show it.

Thank you.

Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Lillock.

Sonia mentioned in her report that You can't begin until sewer comes to the property. Do you have a timeline on when that will happen?

You know, I don't think we do. Councilman Whitlock, you know, at this time, it is a phase project. So we have three phases, you know, in working with toll. There is an agreement that has been signed between the property owner and toll when that sewer is available. I think that's probably the soonest we could develop. Obviously, I um my understanding is it's not going to be until next year at the earliest so that the sewer would be available to even start development so that would be the soonest but i don't have a crystal ball unfortunately sorry yeah mr mayor that's what share i move that we close a public hearing on this item second

A motion second to close the public hearing. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay. The ayes have it. The public hearing is closed.

Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Schroeder.

I'll go ahead and make a motion, but I wanted to add that I think eliminating the connection to North Del Norte makes a lot of sense. You can see that that would have easily become a shortcut for people trying to get into the bypass. So I really applaud the applicant and staff pointing that out and removing that condition. With that, after considering all staff applicant and public testimony, I move to approve file number H 2025-0017 as presented in the staff report for today's hearing date with the following modifications and just including the elimination of the requirement to connect to North Del Norte and also allowing for the eight mile lateral to remain open with the fencing and multi-use pathway.

Second.

I have a motion and a second. Is there a discussion? If not, clerk, call the roll.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Kavanagh, Taylor, Strainer, Woodlock, Little-Roberts, Overton.

Aye. All ayes, motion carries. The ayes agree to. Have a good evening. Next item up is item five, public hearing for use of commercial H2025-0059 and H2026-0007. We will open this public hearing with staff comments.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. The next applications before you are a request for a comprehensive plan map amendment, annexation and zoning, and a preliminary plat. This site consists of 4.31 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada County and is located at 5900 West Eustick Road. The comprehensive plan future land use map designation is medium density residential. The applicant is requesting approval of a comprehensive plan map amendment to change the future land use map designation on approximately four acres of land for medium density residential to commercial. The existing feature land use map is shown on the upper on the top and then the proposed Land use designation is on the south there, on the bottom south. Let's see here. So a traffic impact study was submitted to ACHD for this development at the request of the city that includes trip generation information for the current MDR designation and the proposed commercial designation as shown there on the right. The average daily trips for residential use is 467 compared to 3,703 for commercial, which is an increase of 3,236 trips daily. Staff was not in support of the proposed map amendment for the reasons listed in the report. However, the commission was supportive of the amendment and recommended approval of the request to city council. A concurrent annexation request was submitted to annex 4.31 acres of land into the city with a CC zoning district consistent with their proposed commercial future land use map designation. A conceptual development plan was submitted that shows how the property is proposed to develop with primarily auto oriented uses, including a convenience store and fuel facility, coffee shop with a drive through and an oil change facility. A preliminary plat application was also submitted as shown, consisting of for commercial lots on four acres of land in the CC zoning district. Access is proposed by a one full access from North mcdermott road bypass at the north end of the West side of the property and one temporary right in right out access is proposed by you stick road at the southeast corner of the site. The mcdermott road bypass is currently under it these jurisdiction, but is anticipated to transfer to a ch D in the future it has stated that they will not support access via the mcdermott road bypass. Staff is not supportive of the proposed access from Eustick Road. ACHD stated that the traffic impact study did not demonstrate a need for the driveway. Additionally, ACHD consistent with city policy requires access to be taken from lesser classified roadways, which would be the McDermott bypass once under ACHD jurisdiction as a collector roadway. Drive aisle stubs are proposed to the property to the east. No vehicular connectivity is proposed or required to the future residential development to the north. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown for the proposed convenience store, fuel canopy, coffee shop, and the oil change facility. All structures are proposed to be a single story in height. I'll go through a summary of the Commission hearing. Ethan Mansfield, the applicant's representative, testified in favor. There was no one in opposition. Connor Lindstrom, Corey and Rachel Thacker commented on the application. There was no written testimony. Key issues of public testimony are as follows. The impacts current road improvements have on surrounding residents and traffic congestion in the area. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were as follows, hours of operation for the proposed commercial development, the number and types of drive-throughs proposed for the, excuse me, commercial development, temporary access to Eustick Road, and landscape improvements within and adjacent to the Sky Pilot Drain Easement. Commission made the following changes to staff recommendation. The Commission overturned staff's recommendation of denial. Staff prepared a memo for the Commission that addressed development agreement provisions and conditions of approval, which were included in the staff report. There are no outstanding issues for city council tonight and no written testimony has been received since the Commission hearing the Commission recommended approval of the with the requirement of a development agreement staff will stand for any questions.

Thank you, can also only questions for staff. Mr man that's one share.

just interested in some context around our comprehensive plan and how things have kind of evolved. So when we originally did our comprehensive plan, we understand the extension and kind of huge changes with Highway 16. And how have we adjusted our land uses around these kinds of interchange areas as we went along? I mean, it's been A while since that plan was approved, so I just kind of wanted some context for. If we're if we've been keeping up with those plans and modifying as we go, or if this is a departure, just help me understand that.

Mr mayor, council, administrator, council. Yes, the comprehensive comprehensive plan has been amended as you see here. We do have the mixed use interchange area now, and that was. based on the changes to State Highway 16 and the interchange plan in that area. We are trying to keep uses that have a lot of trips per day away from that interchange area.

Mr. Mayor.

Council President.

Help me understand that a little bit more. What is driving that thought process? And I get it that this is a pretty residential area. How much of it's really built out? Is it concern for existing uses and residents being disrupted by really auto-oriented? I mean, I read the application, so I understand that that was part of your opposition, but I'm also trying to be realistic about

we also have a giant interchange here now and those so those facts have changed a bit so just give me a little more flavor for that um yeah there are existing residential uses if you look at this map right here to the north this area here is all developed with residential uses as is this area here there are multi-family residential uses in the development process on the west side of the State Highway 16 and then more commercial uses going in here. I'll let Bill maybe chime in on that a little more and see if he has anything to add on that.

Mayor, members of the Council, I think Council Administrator, I think you brought up some key elements here. When we updated the comprehensive plan in 2019 one of those developers were in front of you on the other side next to other side of state highway 16 and they asked you to change the future land use map to mix use regional and that application was annexed and I think you guys acted on that application in 20 or 21. And they got commercial approved with some multifamily. And then on the other side of the interchange, in Sonya's exhibit here, you'll see some mixed employment and some more residential. So the reason why we put mixed use interchange around this area is because we knew it would be highly visible. But we knew at the same time, because this is the interchange and this is where people are going to get on and enter and exit, we knew it was going to have a lot of trip generation. And you'll hear from the applicant tonight that you usually want commercial where you're going to have a lot of traffic. But at the same time, we recognize that that's going to be a highly congested area and to try to minimize those impacts as best we could. We felt that we could still allow for some commercial in the area, which is allowed in the mixed use interchange. But it would have a lesser impact on the transportation network based on the uses and the described in the plan for the mixed use interchange. So.

the applicants right out of that sphere of that impact.

The other piece that we took under consideration during our review of this application was the fact that we have some commercial plan for the area, but it's still vacant. Um, so with the days day spring subdivision, which is just across the street, the South side of you stick, there's a commercial node there that has not even developed yet. And I think the council understands the reason why it isn't developed is because it's waiting on sewer and the sewers coming because is going to widen you stick and you got to get the infrastructure in me so that you can be so the road can get built to its ultimate location. So. That's where really staff's position was on the recommendation for denial. It wasn't the fact that the primary concern was we were already adding to an overly congested area. We know it's going to get busier. We felt like the plan set it up properly. And so it was on the applicant to justify why they thought commercial made some sense here. and so that was our difficulty was well we have vacant commercial it hasn't been realized yet you have another application after this that has commercial component that has to develop as well so we're starting to get some of those those pieces in place but at the time that this came before you mixed use interchange was there but nothing else was contemplated other than the medium density residential so that's why they applicant usually these things happen After there's things are as they start no one realized when state highways was going to happen it actually got expedited a lot quicker, so I think the development community is trying to respond to that and that's why they're here tonight.

Thank you, Mr. Councilman camera.

What I think staff is trying to avoid is like what we see on the northwest corner of Meridian Road and Overland, like where there's the gas station and the restaurant, right? That is with the ride in, ride out. And again, they were there before the interchange occurred. But I think what I try to take is that you're trying to avoid those types of situations where the development kind of locks in the access in and out of these types of businesses. Is that kind of what you're trying to avoid?

Mayor members of the Council that's that's part of it, yes, you can see when it gets have those peak hours, you can even see it on 10 mile yeah on the interstate cars are backing up and that's an interstate coming off onto an already. Over congested arterial so that's what that's why we tried to plan these less impactful land uses around those interchange so we don't replicate those types of situations okay thanks.

Councilman Taylor.

Sorry about that, Dean. Just a quick question about the access to make sure I'm understanding it. So the access onto McDermott, what do we call that? The bypass. ITD originally wasn't supportive of that, but have we worked through where access onto that road is acceptable by ACHD when at some point they take John Pimentel, jurisdiction over that it's want to make sure i'm understanding the access point and then, while you're talking about it, could you just re comment about why the right in right out is does that. John Pimentel, Why that's not acceptable from staff point of view, and I understand Councilman camera kind of address that, but could you just clarify a few of those points.

Yes, Mr. Mayor, Councilman Taylor, Council. So as I mentioned that McDermott Road bypass is currently under jurisdiction by ATD. They are not going to approve the access. ACHD will approve the access once they take over because that will be a collector street, which is a lesser designated street than Eustick Road, which is an arterial. So we believe that ACHD will approve that access eventually. We are not staff and ACHD is not in favor of the access via Eustick. They will have cross access to the east for access from Dayspring to the east through the adjacent commercial property.

Mr. Mayor, a quick follow-up. Do we have any sense of timing when ACHD will take over jurisdiction over that? I do not.

Mayor, Council, if I can just elaborate a little bit more on that specific topic. So the reason why the applicant, I think they're going to ask for a temporary write-in, write-out access to U-Stick this evening, at least that's been their intent when we've had our conversations. The reason is ITD still controls the McDermott bypass right away. You heard from Durango don't know when they're going to develop. So technically, this property doesn't have access at this moment. And so if they were the commercial were to go 1st, they would need to have access to a roadway. And so the applicant is going to. lease proposed if they get a temporary right in right out and then when they get access to bypass or cross access with the adjacent property owner then they would close that access put in the landscaping and the sidewalk the 10-foot multi-use pathway and remediate that and remove that from being part of it Um, so I think that's part of the discussion and the reason why we're adamant against the access is just because as what Sonia mentioned, it's our requires that they take access from the lesser classified roadway and we require cross access. And so that's why it was important for you to see Durango 1st. This evening, so you can see how this related to that particular project. So you could see. how that that backage road to Ustick is going to function and funnel out not only to a local street that Durango will build, but also the McDermott bypass, which is that future collector.

So bill maybe to follow up on that how common is it for a parcel to not have any established access. That we would. develop. If you like, because everything else could go away everything else could never ever ever ever ever happen. So. How common would this be to approve something that doesn't have any access.

Mayor runs the Council it's it's not very common it's just in this particular case it's it's a timing issue. Like I said state highways expedited the roads bill. ITD does not build complete streets. They build the 30-foot pavement section, and then at some point, they turn it over to ACHD. And in my conversations with the highway district, it could be quite a while before that is turned over and accepted by them.

So maybe a different question. Where is existing access on this property currently? Does it have access currently?

It may or does to you, Stick. That is correct. The property owner testified at the hearing how it's very difficult to get out of a site when school is in session, so I do remember that that conversation very clearly at the Commission hearing. So cars do back up quite a bit in front of their driveway.

Just maybe just one more question down that road literally. How often is it that you would take away an access point for development?

Mayor counsel if annexation we typically book in that and and put parameters around that in this particular case, we do have a da provision that says no access to use that currently, so this is our time to make sure that we address that and. address that at least the access with a dilemma whether it's you can have something today but in the future it goes away or council on occasion has said no you get to have that in perpetuity there has been instances i worked on a subdivision off a black cat where uh achd in the city did grant a temporary access to black cat and it was remediated i know three or four years later it was removed and converted to fire access only when another road happens. So it's not very common, but it has happened on occasion.

Mr. Mayor. Councilor Schroeder.

I just have one more. And I just don't remember with the McDermott bypass, is that a two-way street or is it a one-way street going on to Highway 16?

Mayor, members of the council, that is a two-way. That was some of the question that the Planning and Zoning Commission had as to how that intersection would be reconfigured too. And I believe the applicant may have some of that details in their presentation to show you how that will be reconfigured in the future.

Thank you.

Council, anything for your staff at this time? Okay, would the applicant like to come forward?

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Ethan Mansfield, representing Hawkins Company's 855 West Broad Street, 83702 Boise, Idaho. And it looks like Sonya is going to pull up my PowerPoint. Before we get there, I just want to be very clear about access. You know, we weren't even going to ask for a temporary write in, write out at this hearing. The only reason we would is because we were concerned about the delay between ITD transferring it to ACHD. We've spoken with both agencies extensively and feel very comfortable that that transfer is going to occur before we develop the property. When I spoke with Kendra at ITD, she mentioned a three to four month process and that was a month and a half ago. uh i'm happy to check back in with her but we have great relationships with both itd and achd here and a great relationship with mark hess the developer of durango subdivision and km engineering who's actually working on our plan too so you know we feel extremely comfortable we we have i mean it's a condition of durango to provide cross access um and achd has very clearly stated that when it becomes theirs they'll You know, give it to us, give us access there. We would, of course, love temporary right in, right out access. But we don't feel we really need it. We're comfortable with our access. And they have written a letter saying they will approve it. In ACHD staff report, it is stated they will approve it. So just to clarify before we move too deeply into this. So I'd like to just start, you know, by talking a little bit about why commission recommended approval because I feel like there might be a little confusion there. There was a lot of discussion about why staff didn't want it. I feel like we could talk a little bit about why Commission did want it. So on May 28th, Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval with updated development approval conditions 1, 5, 9, and 10 and the removal of condition 2.2. We'll talk about those in a second. You know, as Sonya mentioned, this represents the most likely scenario for the tenants that would be on this parcel. We actually have interest from many more commercial users than we can fit on the parcel. There's a bunch of interest on this corner. And so this represents kind of the most likely mix here. I should mention it was interestingly not in staff's presentation, but we are proposing a landscape buffer per the UDC along the north side of this. So we're not asking for any waivers here. And of course, the request before you is a comprehensive plan amendment to commercial annexation and zoning to community commercial and a preliminary plat for four lots. We've also coordinated significantly with the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and KM Engineering and Mark Hess to the east to identify a location to underground the Skypilot drain and this access drive would actually replace the current access road for that canal. That was a big point of coordination and I think that actually is a great use, a really efficient use of space. So let's talk a little bit about this auto-centric use concept here. I like to think about it like this. We just spent over $600 million of public money to create a thoroughfare that delivers up to 110,000 vehicles from the north side of the valley to the south side of the valley and back again every day. ITD kind of narrowed that down for us. That's about 76,000 at the Eustick Road interchange. Similarly, Ustick Road is undergoing a transformation to five lanes with a signal at Ustick and McDermott, a larger signal. That represents, just that section is a $10 million investment in widening roads so that more vehicles can get from point A to point B. um that's expected to be up to 35 000 vehicles per day past this site so really quickly i like to think about it as like if we invested 600 million dollars in infrastructure for an office park we would expect office uses there we wouldn't expect other we wouldn't expect residential uses there we would expect office uses um so similarly we've invested 700 650 700 000 700 million in transportation infrastructure, we would expect vehicles to go past this site and thus auto-oriented uses to occur here. Interestingly, neither ACHD nor ITD actually requested a traffic study for this project. The city of Meridian did. So we obviously provided one. ACHD approved this project with standard conditions. We are paying for frontage improvements through ACHD. Those will be constructed concurrently with the UStick widening to match the, you know, planned improvements on UStick. And ACHD also said no mitigation is required and no alternative mitigation is required. And we agree to all of ACHD's conditions of approval. Let's talk about why these sorts of sites are actually great places to put auto-oriented uses, because for two-thirds of the customers visiting this site, these uses will actually reduce vehicle miles traveled across the network because they're pass-by trips. They're already traveling along the corridor, and them stopping here actually just prevents them from stopping in another location on their trip. And if there's not another location on their trip to stop, they go somewhere else farther away from their planned trip. Only 33% of these trips are either diverted trips, that means they're on their way somewhere, they go a block off, come a block back, continue on their way, or truly new trips that are actually getting generated just to go to the gas station. So the grand total new trips onto the system is just over 1,000. It's a third of what, so that's the real impact to the network. And we can kind of prove that out by looking at the impact fees that ACHD charges for these sorts of developments. So an impact fee is a one-time charge assessed on new developments to fund the construction of a new or expanded roadway infrastructure needed to accommodate the new traffic, right? Impact fees measure the proportional cost of the roadway capacity that a new development is expected to consume. And they do this by removing the pass-by and the capture trips, and they only count new and diverted trips. So you're not double counting trips that already are happening on the roadway. So let's take a look at how our proposal actually stacks up per acre to the Durango commercial, which is a shopping center use, no drive-through specifically mentioned here, no auto-centric uses, and Dayspring commercial. Again, shopping center use, no drive-through uses. Per acre, our impact... on the transportation network in Ada County is half of what those others are. Half of what those other centers are per acre. So what that means is from a network perspective, this is the absolute right place to put a gas station, right? I mean, it's math that ACHD is doing for us. Similarly, we can compare our proposal to the existing medium density residential land use designation. So you could put 32 single family homes, that's eight units per acre on that, and you have roughly the same impact on the network as our proposal. Sure, there's more cars going in the driveway for sure, but those cars are passing that site anyway. So what that means is within this box, any resident living in this box and trying to get onto Highway 16 to travel on Highway 16 would have to drive farther, add vehicle miles traveled to the network to access any of these commercial uses than if we had something right here. So everybody in this box is going to have increased vehicle miles traveled as they go to highway 16. And that's because there's not a gas station within this box. There's very few of any drive-thrus within this box, right? So if you're getting on the highway 16, you're going past our site, which means the network has reduced vehicle miles traveled, reduced impact. That's just what all this pass by stuff's kind of all about. So let's talk about the specific impacts of residential development on a corner here. So there's a concern noted in the staff report that there's a negative impact that commercial uses along Eustick could have on the residential uses to the north. Think about if residential uses were right on Eustick. 35,000 vehicles per day going past Eustick Road. There's 4,500 vehicles per day maximum traveling along the service drive here. and it's buffered substantially. So substantially more than what would be buffered along Eustick. So for these reasons, these are all reasons that the commission recommended approval of the commercial use here, because you're gonna have either a house 35 feet from Eustick Road, or you're gonna have a house 35 feet, well, we'll actually talk about it, about 100, I think it's like 100 feet from the driveway. It's actually 61 feet, so double the distance from a driveway with 10% of the vehicle trips, or you're gonna be right up on Ustick. You're gonna have your house right up on Ustick with 35,000 trips going past your front door. You're gonna be 35 feet away from that. So this is kind of, you know, you were asking about a fence. You were asking kind of how the landscape buffer looks. This is a cross section of the landscape buffer here. So you've got the, our development is on the left. You've got a six foot planning bed, five foot pathway. 5-foot landscape buffer, 26-foot service drive, sky pilot irrigation, 50 feet of open space, 5-foot pathway, 7-foot planning bed, and then a residential fence. So how does this compare to other buffers in the area? So McKustick subdivision has three times the distance between the nearest homes and the nearest commercial use as the Dayspring subdivision does. So McKustick has 180 feet. Dayspring has 64. Here's a bunch of other examples. At Pine and Ten Mile, there's 84 feet between the Jackson's Car Wash and the residential across Gray Cloud Way. McMillan Locust Grove, 38 feet between the nearest residence and the coffee stand there. Fairview and Venture, there's 70 feet between the back door or the back you know side of the house on congressional drive and walmart mcmillan and linder 60 feet between the gas station and the uh multi-family there and another gas station or car wash i guess 140 feet away but the drive aisle is you know within that 140 feet So overall, this is actually far more buffered than what we might expect out of other interactions between residential and commercial uses. So in conclusion about the impact of residential development, residential units adjacent to Eustick Road would be far more negatively impacted by noise, light, and odor than where they are currently proposed. If homes were developed on the subject site, there would be a dramatic negative impact on quality of life of future residents. And most of the traffic to the site is passed by trips, so at times when there is minimal traffic on you sick, there will be even less traffic into the site right since two thirds of the trip generate trip traffic is just people driving on you stick anyway, so if you take that away very little traffic goes into that drive through. So because of that you know we've asked. that the future tenant of lot one block one be allowed to operate 24 hours a day seven days per week right what is proposed as a fuel center um it's pretty common right to roll up and get gas maybe after 11 pm i'm driving home from the ford idaho center i've done that a couple times um and so we're requesting that and the again commission was supportive of that request Because the site is currently a single buildable parcel, we also request the ability to complete site work associated with the commercial uses and receive a single building permit prior to recording the final plat. So the conditions 9 and 10 can be updated as shown here to reflect that. And then, you know, we kind of talked about how this was removed in Durango's. I just wanted to touch on it here. This is the cross access off of Monte Vista Street. to our development. Again, Durango conditions don't require this. So if it was a required condition of us, there would be a stub going about six feet north to our property line and stopping. So in summary, auto-oriented investment drives auto-oriented uses. This shouldn't come as a surprise. This happens fairly often. The uses that we are proposing are less impactful to the roadway network than other commercial uses and similar in intensity to residential uses at eight dwelling units per acre. Residential units adjacent to Ustick Road would be far more negatively impacted by noise, light, and odor than where they're proposed. And we have interest from more tenants than we can support on this site. And notably, each of these users performs an extensive amount of market analysis to optimize site selection. So they're not just picking the only piece of available land. They're picking this corner because it's a good corner. For these reasons, CPAM, To accommodate our proposed use benefits current and future residents and meridian and on May 28 as a reminder, the Commission recommended approval. With the three updated conditions with that we're respectfully requesting your approval of age 2025 59 and age 20 2607 with updated da condition 159 and 10 and the removal of condition to to thanks very much and i'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Council, any questions for the OPCM?

Mr. Mayor. Mr. Overton. Just a real quick one, Ethan.

I know it's a temporary right in, right out off of Eustick until such time as ACHD takes over the McDermott Bypass. Remind me what that access is going to look like on the McDermott Bypass.

is that also a right in right out uh mr mayor um council member overton it would be a full access and achd has approved that access as a full access and that's because there would basically be one full access off of you stick through the durango subdivision which basically connects to the other full ice cuts off of mcdermott so we can just take a quick look maybe helpful and while he's looking at mr mayor follow up

Mayor Mrakas, Even by the way, and maybe staff can help with this, the description of the mcdermott bypass if i'm not mistaken, is it going to be three lanes with the Center turn lane. Mayor Mrakas, Is this.

Mayor Mrakas, whoever's got the answer, Mr American Council member over 10 yeah so it'll be one lane in either direction, with a Center turn line, thank you.

Mayor Mrakas, That's been blocked.

Thank you. You mentioned that ACHD is requiring you to make some frontage improvements on Ustick. Tell me what that entails. I think you had the picture of the trees and the five-foot path, but I'm also interested in the McDermott bypass. I don't recall if there's even curb or gutter or sidewalks that's part of it right now.

Mr. Mayor, Councilman Whitlock, you're correct. Currently, there are no improvements on McDermott Bypass. And as part of our application, ACHD is asking for a road trust deposit, similarly to Eustick Road, to cover those improvements. And that actually doesn't go all the way up. But after that, we actually are required to make a small amount of frontage improvements. So really quickly on you stick road. I'm sorry I don't have a diagram of it but it will be a small I think it's a five foot landscape buffer, a 10 foot multi use path along the length of you stick and then there will be our internal landscape buffer within that. on McDermott bypass, there would be a detached five foot sidewalk. ACHD may opt for a seven foot attached. I think that's their collector standard. So because we're paying a fee in lieu for those improvements, I'm not actually sure exactly what they look like, but there will be a sidewalk curb gutter. Thank you.

Mr. Mayor. Chancellor Taylor.

Ethan, I just want to go back to the access on McDermott. You mentioned you are highly confident in your discussions with ITD and ACHD that this transfer of the jurisdiction from ITD to ACHD is soon almost sounded imminent. I mean, You can stand here and say, hey, it's going to happen, but we don't have any assurance or guarantees. I'm not inclined to want to give you the temporary right in, right out. I'd rather just say, hey, let's do that. But I also don't want to prove something where you don't have access. And so is there anything more you can offer in terms of like helping me feel like this is actually going to happen in a time frame that is reasonable?

Yeah, Mr. Mayor, Councilmember Taylor, we actually have a letter from ITD that's in the staff report. It's after section six, I believe, or five. It's actually on page 17 in your staff report, if I'm not mistaken, of this project. And it actually specifies the amount of time ITD believes it will take, and the letter's dated. That's, aside from conversations, we hoped that that would satisfy the... the amount and we i mean we're confident enough in that to understand that look you know if we can't get that we don't develop we're we're like very eyes wide open about that um and there's no reason that ach achd also feels comfortable that they're going to accept it because if you read their staff report the language they use there and i should have snipped them out i'm sorry i didn't but the language they use there is know once this is transferred to achd we will approve a full access in this location it's just one of the conditions of approval mr mayor council shader so you're totally fine if we can't give you a right in right out on you stick sounds like you're prepared to take that risk that would really be uh you know on your shoulders uh yeah mr mayor um councilwoman strater we obviously would prefer if we had our druthers to have a ride in right out we did our traffic analysis and it actually improves uh traffic flow at this intersection um that is mcdermott new stick however We totally understand that you know, a temporary right in right out as a special ask so if that's a deal breaker absolutely yeah.

Thank you.

Council anything additional for the up in at this time.

Okay, thank you, then.

can we have anybody set up on this item mr mayor we did not okay is there anybody present who would like to provide to go and come on up and if you're online you can use the raise your hand feature we come on up if you say your name and address the record please can be recognized for three minutes uh corey thacker 5900 west you stick the property in question

I'm going to try and do two things. I'm going to give you a little bit emotional, which the decision should be based on that, but also a little bit of just let's call it factual look. I mean, this is a commercial property. I bought this place when it was nothing but farm ground, nothing but farm ground. And it was my dream house, right? Plenty of property, no one around, traffic was just nothing. And then all of a sudden, development, development. I get it. I mean, one man cannot stand in the way of development. I mean, it must come. But nevertheless, it's kind of one of those things that, okay, so you have ITD and ACHD that put in the bypass at 232 feet next to my driveway. That doesn't meet code. The state itself did not meet its own code. And so now I sit there and on a school day, you know, my children have to sit there and wait and wait and wait, right? And that's not just on a school day, but even on a regular day, I think it was last Saturday, I went to go out and it's like, oh, well, there's one, two, three, 12 cars right in a row. What the heck? I can't hardly get out of my own driveway. So if this doesn't change the commercial, I'm not moving my driveway. It's one of those things that you're condemning me. Not to mention, it's like, all right, no one's going to want to live on that corner. I developed for residential.

That's not a residential corner.

All the traffic that's going to be captured. It's... A year ago, I was here when we were kind of addressing the Durango stuff a year, not a Durango day spring a year ago. The council talked about more commercial in this area. There was so much residential and they said, well, what are we doing to develop the commercial? Well, here it is. We're providing an access. We're providing basically a convenience to the people that live in the area. As it was pointed out, these other people are going to have to drive other places to find their gas, to find their coffee, to find their everything. It only makes sense. Personally, it's one of those things that I've had to sit there and witness not only the increase in traffic, but I've got horses. and my horses have been impacted. I've had somebody randomly come in and just clip the tails of my horses at night. I wake up and I've got, it was like, what the heck? Don't know where it went. I've had a horse that basically I can only assume was a gunshot overnight. I had to nurse that horse back together. I've had a horse that was hit by a car because of the increased traffic. Okay, I've got kids that I gotta worry about. I got plenty of things to worry about. But when you sit there and you think about it logically, all right, they're talking about it right in, right out, clear out over on the corner. And that's like, okay, that makes sense. That's all over the place. You go all over in Meridian, tons of right in, right outs. All right. McDermott, full access. It's been granted by a TD and ACHD. I mean, it seems like it's a no brainer. Personally, it needs done. It's not a residential lot anymore. I need to leave. And the only way I can do that with housing markets and prices and all that other stuff is if we do what we're doing. So, questions?

Thank you. Council, any questions? Mr. Mayor. Councilman Kavanaugh.

I just want to say thanks. I followed your testimony, your letters, and your testimony at Planning and Zoning. I appreciate how passionate you are about our community and how passionate you are about your home. And just, it's one of the reasons why I really appreciate public testimony. You really painted pictures to what you're experiencing. And I appreciate you sharing it with us, Mike.

Thank you. Is there anybody else would like to write testimony on this item. Okay, well, the app can like to come up and make any final comments. That becomes waves any comments so cancel your direction. Mr. Mayor. Councilman Schroeder.

I'm happy to just maybe start a discussion. I think that this is not a residential area.

That's my feeling.

I agree with that thought process. I think this corner does not work well for single-family residential. I'm also very sympathetic to staff's concerns about traffic piling up. We already know there is an issue here, and so I wouldn't be supportive of any access on Ustick. I think... the applicant is feeling confident in their business plan and taking access off McDermott and I think that's a that's a path that assumes a lot of things happen with other agencies and that's out of our control and out of their control but they must have the assurances that they need I think on that basis I'm more comfortable proceeding I'd hate to give the right in right out on you stick and then just see a bad situation get worse But I do think like for better or worse, the reality is that the first time we made our comprehensive plan and everything, I don't think we had, we have a little bit of a bubble plan ourselves, right? We thought there was going to be some commercial to the south of this. I don't know if that's the order it's going to go in. It feels like there's a lot of interest here. This feels like what belongs here at some point. So I don't know. That's kind of just how I'm looking at it so far.

Mr. Mayor. Councilman Overson.

Go right on top of Councilmember Strader's comments. I just naturally looked at this corner as it has to be commercial. I wouldn't want to put residential there. And if I lived in one of those residential areas close to that, that's why I'd want my gas station. I seriously want to have it on my way, on my trip, not having to go out of my way. That's why gas stations aren't located in the middle of subdivisions. We put them out on those corners, we put them out on those main arterials for a reason, we wanna make it convenient. And I don't know how you make it more convenient than having this location. I do wanna follow up and I wanna read this right out of the report because the applicant brought it up and that's page 17 of the report, the report from ITD. It paints that comment from ITD in a slightly different fashion. And you may have already read this, but the McDermott, this is from ITD. The McDermott bypass is under ITD's jurisdiction until it is accepted and transferred to the county highway district. While the department will not currently grant new access to the bypass, we will continue coordinating with the applicant and ACHD. The timeline for the transfer is uncertain, but efforts are underway. It certainly looks like everything we're hearing is there is a working partnership in process. They know this is going to happen. They know it's going to be turned over. And At some point, you have to have faith in how that process works everywhere that I TD and a CHD have to work together. I think it's the right commercial project for the corner, I think it fits well I think it's going to be a very successful fuel station, whoever it is, and I would support it.

Mr mayor.

that's what they are.

I was actually looking at the letter as Councilman Overton was reading it. And also of note, they said ITD does not have concerns with the proposed development. The fact that they acknowledged efforts are underway is a big acknowledgement by an entity like ITD. So, yeah, it seems like it makes sense. I think this is a good project. I'm not inclined. I don't support the ride in, ride out on Ustick, but it looks like there's really good access on McDermott and the cross-access with Durango. So I think it was a good project. I'm going to support it tonight. I do have a question, though, for staff, Mayor, if I may ask. Just to clarify, some of the conditions that Ethan brought up, Um, for the 24 hour day, I think that's condition one, five, modifying that, um, the conditions nine and 10 and, uh, removing condition to I, which I think planning and zoning made those exact same motions. Do we need to restate those in any motions tonight? Or are those considered already part of the staff report?

Mayor, members of the Council, 2i was removed already, so that is not in the staff report. So that was per the Commission's action. The 24-hour use is already addressed in the DA as well. And there's, although it's a little different than what the applicant was expecting, We do have a da provision that allows them to get a building permit prior to recording the plot. So that will still allow the applicant. He showed you the 2 different 9 and 10 don't need to add that. The 1 condition satisfies that he'll be able to submit what's called a certificate of zoning compliance application. Begin the site work, start getting things pad site ready and then when he's ready to get a building permit, he'll get 1, which. uh indications was that maybe the C store maybe the first building permit and then as I mentioned the commission did recommend the 24-hour use on lot one block one so that's all of those things are already in place for you to move forward tonight so there's really is no nothing that you need to modify as part of your your approval this evening Mayor that's metallic

With that unless I'd like to make a motion to move close the public hearing on item 5 H dash 2025 dash 0 0 5 9 and H dash 20 26 dash 0 0 0 7.

Have a motion to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay. The aye 7. The public hearing is closed. Mr. Mayor. Mr. Taylor.

uh unless there's no further comments I move that we approve item 5 uh H-2025-0059 and H-2026-007 uh as make sure I'm getting this right If I can just put a quick pause. I'm just looking at the agenda here. We have A, B, and C. So I want to make sure. There's nothing we need to do to stay. We just need to. Okay. All right. So let me start that over again. I'm thinking out loud. Move that we approve items H-2025-0059 and H-2026-0007 as stated in the staff report dated July 14th, 2026. Second.

I have a motion and a second. Is there a discussion on the motion? If not, call the roll.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor Kavanaugh. Taylor?

Aye.

Dr. Rader?

Aye. Woodlock?

Aye.

Little-Roberts? Aye. Overton?

Aye. All ayes. Motion carries. Hammonds? Agree to. Council, let me ask you, do you want to take a break before we start the next one? Okay let's go and take a 10 minute break we'll try to restart at. 750 if I did my math correctly. all right council will go and come back from our break and we will continue on with item six which is the public hearing for the fields h2025-0057 we will open this public hearing with staff comments good evening mayor and council

So tonight we are here with the fields. So the site consists of 480.26 acres of land is zone RUT and it's located south of McMillan Road, north of Eustick and between Canada and Owyhee Storm Avenue. So they are proposing annexation, a comprehensive plan map amendment and a preliminary plat. So a little history on the property. So the project is located within the Fields Sub-Area Plan, which is, again, bounded by Eustick Road, McDermott, Chendon Boulevard, Canada Road. The Fields Sub-Area Plan was adopted on December 21st, 2021 by Resolution Number 21-2302. The field sub area encompasses approximately 4 square miles in the Northwest portion of Meridian and represents 1 of the city's final major growth areas. The plan provides for a framework to guide development in a manner that is consistent with the vision of Meridian comprehensive plan by supporting expansion of the employment base. while integrating high-quality neighborhoods, parks, pathways, and school. The area is adjacent to the City of Star's impact area to the north and the City of Nampa's impact area to the south and west. The vision for the field sub-area is to create a series of interconnected community-oriented neighborhoods organized around a central mixed-use activity center. This center is planned at the intersection of Star Road and McMillan Road and is envisioned as a pedestrian-oriented main street. environment featured in a central green integrated civic and commercial uses and direct connections to the Five Mile Creek pathway, a variety of residential types including vertically integrated live work and medium to high density housing will support and activate this core area. The plan emphasizes connectivity through an enhanced greenway and pathway system. Several waterways, including Five Mile Creek and its feeder, the Phyllis Canal, the West Tap Sublateral, and the Skypollock Drain are anticipated to include pathways along their corridors. These improvements will allow the field subarea to connect to broader meridian pathway networks with regional linkage extending west into Nampa and north into Star. and the Boise River system. In addition to the central mixed-use core, the field sub-area plans identifies the field business parks at the northeast corner of Canada Road and Eustick Road as the hub for light industrial and flex uses. This area will benefit from access to State Highway 16 while incorporating walkable connections to surrounding neighborhoods and regional pathway systems. Mixed use areas are planned along Eustick Road and Chittenden Boulevard to take advantage of high visibility locations. These areas are intended to generate lower traffic volumes and more intense commercial corridors and provide uses that complement rather than compete with the smaller scale neighborhood services located within the central mixed use core. And along in this area, we have the Williams pipeline. There's a high-pressure natural gas pipeline that runs through the northwest and southwest areas of Meridian. This pipeline, which is operated by the Williams Pipeline Company, carries pressurized natural gas.

Excuse me, I lost my line.

There is typically a 75 foot wide easement that is associated with the pipeline. Future development is required to comply with the Williams Pipeline Director Handbook. And coupled with this gas transmission pipeline, there is an existing intermountain liquefied natural gas plant located in the northwest part of the area of the City of Impact at 014 North Canada Road. The storage tank, which was constructed in 1974 and underwent maintenance in 2022, has the capacity of 7.35 million gallons. The facility continues to operate at its design capacity. The area within the Intermountain Gas Facility and safety buffer has a future land use destination of industrial so that residential uses aren't allowed within the buffer area of the Therefore, residential dwellings should not be permitted within 1500 feet of this tank to address the worst case scenarios elevated in the 2005 Fire Safety and Prevention Plan. And as you can see on this map, this is the buffer safety area and no residential development is allowed in it. This is just a picture of the tank. And there were some council members that kind of did a field trip out to that area. There was a traffic impact study that was submitted. The traffic impact study evaluated development impacts on the study area intersections and roadways for the build-out year 2040. The traffic impact study also provided an evaluation of what improvements may be needed beyond those planned in ACHD's capital improvement plan. So the tables that are shown include the intersection and roadway segments and the traffic study and note existing travel lanes and intersection configurations, what improvements are planned in the CIP and Master Street maps, and what improvements would be needed beyond those in the CIP and the Master Street map to mitigate the total traffic impacts of the fields area in 2024. I mean, 2040. So the annexation and zoning that is being requested. Again, the annexation and zoning of 480.26 acres from RUT in Ada County to the proposed zoning districts of Community Business, CC, which is 42.87 acres, Neighborhood Business, CN, which is 45.64 acres, acres, medium density residential R8, which is 194.44 acres, medium density residential R15, which is 100.63 acres, traditional neighborhood residential, which is TNR, which is 45.05 acres, and light industrial, which is 51.64 acres. As part of the annexation, the applicant is proposing design guidelines for the development of the proposed annexation area. All future development of the proposed annexation area shall be guided by and required to comply with the specific project specific design guidelines. This guideline will be incorporated into the current and future development agreements. The design guidelines will adhere to UDC design requirements while ensuring development of the project embodies the modern rule thematic vision of the field sub area plan the design guideline manual states the guidelines are intended to ensure high quality commercial and residential buildings along with thoughtful thoughtfully designed site development and landscaping that embraces the area's history using enduring high quality building materials and design practices foster pedestrian friendly connection environments that support a vibrant mix of businesses living and recreation and enhance long-term investment and property values for residents and businesses. So this is the design guideline that the applicant submitted that will be part of the requirement for any development in the area. So the comprehensive plan map amendment that the applicant is requesting. The applicant is proposing a comprehensive plan map amendment to change 40 acres from general industrial to civic.

What is this?

This is a future parkland for the city. Mm hmm. The parcel is owned by the City of Meridian and staff believes the civic designation is the most appropriate and consistent classification for public parkland and will better reflect the intended long-term use of the property. The proposed amendment is aligned with the field sub-area plan requirement that this area will be within the safety buffer of the Intermountain Gas Facility be developed only with non-residential uses. The site is planned for development as a large community park designed to serve both nearby neighbors, and broader Meridian community. The park includes sufficient acreage to accommodate a variety of recreational needs, support community gatherings and events, and provide amenities that contribute to a high quality of life. Adequate on-site parking will be an essential component of design to ensure accessibility for all users. The applicant is also proposing a comprehensive plan map amendment to change 45 acres at the northwest corner of Eustick Road and North Owyhee Storm Avenue from medium density residential and mixed use community to medium high density residential and commercial. The applicant states the amendment creates the amount of commercial area necessary to support a larger anchor tenant and a functional mixed use of commercial uses to serve the planned residential development in the area. The site is located directly across from Hawaii High School and has immediate access to Euston Road and the new State Highway 16 interchange. These factors make it a strong fit for regional focused commercial and other commercial compatible uses. The applicant believes this amendment supports the City of Meridian's planning goals by expanding commercial services on major transportation corridors, The amendment also enables the 15 acres north of the commercial shopping area to be developed for multifamily housing, promoting efficient land use, providing opportunities for housing near schools, employment and major transportation routes. These are the areas that are being proposed for the COMP plan amendments. And then this is the preliminary plat that the applicant is proposing. Westvale subdivision, their preliminary plat. The applicant is proposing a preliminary plat with single-family detached and attached dwellings, which are listed as the principal permitted use in the R8 and R15 zoning districts in the UDC. The future land use maps identify this area as medium density residential. This designation allows for dwelling units at a gross density of three to eight dwelling units per acre. All proposed lots and public streets appear to meet the UDC dimensional standards per the submitted preliminary plat. This includes a minimum lot size of 2000 to 4000 square feet and require street farmages of at least 40 feet. The subdivision is proposed to develop in seven phases development of the subdivision. is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards within our UDC. The applicant is proposing a minimum lot size of 3,984 square feet, maximum lot size of 10,610 feet, and an average lot size of 5,725 square feet. There are 15 common drives that are proposed with this subdivision. The APNIC has provided common drive exhibits that demonstrate that no more than three lots are served where a maximum of four lots are allowed. The common driveways meet the minimum requirements width of 20 feet and does not exceed the maximum length of 150 feet. Solid fencing adjacent to these common driveways is prohibited unless separated by a minimum five feet of landscape buffer. So there are some existing structures on a couple of the lots and those structures are proposed to be removed and any existing wells and septic systems will be abandoned as required. The site shall be designed to meet the requirements of the UDC for R8 and R15. And again, the applicant did submit their own design guidelines, which will be a requirement of approval as well as the field sub-area plan, the UDC and our architectural standards manual. These are examples of the street layouts. This is their phasing plan. And these are your pathways and sidewalks, pedestrian connections throughout the proposed So access to this site is via Malibu Ridge Drive and Bear Creek Street via North Star Road, West Black Butte Street, West Achievement Street and Echo Ridge Street via Owyhee Storm Avenue and Echo Ridge Street via West Ustick. A 10 foot wide detached pathway is reflected along West McMillan Road, North Star Road and North Owyhee Storm Road. West Eustick Road is consistent with the alignment on the master pathways plan. There is a 10 foot wide detached sidewalk along Eccles Ridge Street, Skypollock Drain, and the Teeter Drain, which connects to various pathways throughout the development. There are several, again, there are several micro pathways. are reflected providing connectivity to internal portions of the development as mentioned in the comprehensive plan analysis of the improvement to improve more direct pedestrian activity staff is record. We're not recommending any additional pathway connections, but we feel that they have provided fairly good pathway connection. So And as far as open space amenities, based on the standards in the UDC, a minimum of 40 amenity points are required to be provided. The amenities proposed are clubhouse, picnic area, fitness course, open space commons, open space commons shelters, dog park, dog way station, outdoor firing, swimming pool. The applicant have exceeded the open space amenities, but the applicant does need to work with the irrigation district and enter into a license agreement to provide some type of landscaping other than gravel and the open space area on the southern part of the property. The applicant will need to revise a portion of their landscape plan accordingly with the understanding that trees will not be allowed in the area, but grass and shrubs may be allowed to be negotiated within the agreement if maintained by the homeowners association. if they cannot get if landscaping is not allowed within the irrigation easement the applicant will provide five feet of additional landscaping outside of the irrigation easement and this has been related to the applicant and they have no objection to this and again this is more of the layout and the amenities within this development post development Several of the roads exceed the 750 block length that is required. But the block face length does not exceed the 1,000 feet in length. So staff has no issues with the ones that are over 750 feet. They also have several roads that exceed the 1,000 foot block length, but include pedestrian connections per the UDC. and staff has no objection to those block face that have been proposed but there is West Achievement Street does exceed the 1200 foot block length and it requires council waiver for that and we are asking for traffic comment along that so that is a waiver request by the applicant to exceed the 1200 foot length for West Achievement Street There are several waterways running through the area. The applicant is requesting Council waiver to keep the Teeter and Skypilot drains open to provide a natural amenity with adjacent pathways as irrigation easements wider than 10 feet shall be included in the common lot that is a minimum of 20 feet wide and outside of a fenced area unless otherwise waived by Council. The Five Mile Creek, which bisects the entire field's development, is proposed to be left open and used as an amenity when possible. So the applicant did provide building elevations. Staff is proposing a DA provision for the homes along the collectors and arterials. Incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following modulation, bays, bands, porches, balconies, material types, and other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes, roof lines that are visible from adjacent public streets. Single story homes will be exempt from this. design review will be required for the attached, for any attached and townhome buildings, but this is not required for single family, singles, for the single family detached structures. So we received a letter from West Ada school district after our plan and zoning commission. And so West Ada, so they clarified the schools that were related to the proposed development. We have Ponderosa Elementary Star Middle School in Hawaii. Basically, the district stated that they have experienced significant and sustained growth in student enrollment during the last 10 years based on current enrollment data specific to the area surrounding this proposed development. They estimate the development consistent of 901 single-family units and zero multi-family units, could house approximately 442 school-aged children. So you showed that the middle school and the high school are over capacity, but the elementary school still has capacity. These are just pictures of the properties that have existing structures on them. So I've listed a couple of DA provisions that I just wanted to kind of bring to your attention. Just want you to know that all other areas that are part of this annexation and the comprehensive plan map amendment prior to any future development and once sewer is readily available at the site, they need to submit the following for review and approval. a development agreement modification to create a new development agreement, a preliminary plan to further subdivide the property if required, and amend the concept plan to be consistent with the field subarea plan, the field design guideline, comprehensive plan, UDC, and architectural standards manual. No development shall commence on the property until sewer is readily available at the site and meets one of the following criteria. The connection to the city's sewer collection system is actively being installed by the applicant or sewer has already been stubbed to the site. Future development shall comply with the Williams Pipeline Developer's Handbook. A TIS shall be required with all development applications that include a change to the field's master plan planning area that may alter traffic impact projections at the sole discretion of ACHD. The final plat shall be recorded prior to the submittal of any building permit application for the commercial or residential portion of development and prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy within the commercial portion of the development. They need to provide a road trust development for half of the crossing for the future extension of the Mapleton Street Stub Street across Five Mile Creek Feeder and Five Mile Creek. The exact amount of the road trust deposit will be determined during plan review. They need to install PBH with intersection lighting at the Hawaii storm achievement intersection. They'll need to enter into a signal agreement with ACHD to ensure that the PBH is installed. The signal agreement shall note that the applicant is responsible for all costs associated with the hardware design and installation and that this improvement is not eligible for reimbursement by ACHD. The applicant will need to order and purchase the signal hardware as ACHD does not have these materials available for this project. And again, the only thing that is actually being approved tonight is the preliminary plat, the comp plan amendment, and the annexation of the 480 plus acres. The other areas, this is just a concept plan is for illustration purposes only just to see how the area could develop. And when these areas come back in, they will have to go through review. And depending on the type of development may be back before you will, they will have to come back in with a new development agreement. So you'll see this again, as we go through this process. And as stated, sewer is not readily available at this time. Sewer should, they are installing the new Canada lift station and they're extending the sewer infrastructure along McMillan Road and it's anticipated to be completed at the end of this year or early next year. So the community development director and the public works director determined that even though the property cannot be served by the city sewer, that we can annex it due to it being contiguous and the city is currently constructing the sewer truck line in McMillan Road. And with that, I know it was long. I just want to make sure I gave you enough information. I'll stand for any questions you may have.

Thank you, Linda. Council, any questions for staff?

mayor councilman taylor are we so i understand tonight there's three basic things right there's the preliminary plat for west vale the comprehensive plan map amendments and then annexation of the entire 480 acres are we also with that annexation are we um approving the zoning requirements as well on the entirety of the acres or just on the acres like the Westvale property.

Those are the zones that they have requested with this annexation.

Council, any additional questions for staff at this time?

Okay.

Invite the applicant to come up, see what they can get done in 15 minutes.

Mayor Debra Nelson 601 West Bannock Street. May I ask for 20 minutes?

Sure.

Thank you. We do have a lot to cover. I'll try not to be too repetitive because Linda was very thorough. And she's pulling up our presentation now. So I'll just go ahead and get started. So I'm here on behalf of the applicant team. I've got with me tonight Emily Mueller with Mark Bottles Real Estate and also Mark Bottles is planning to join online from his vacation, which is maybe he may have some spotty service, but he really wants to be here. So if you have any questions for him, he will be available. The applicant represents eight different landowners whose assembled land really provides the opportunity for this master plan community. We are grateful to the staff in the planning department and other departments that have participated in multiple meetings for a couple of years on this application set along with representatives from achd and itd and west data school district the applicant has met with them several times as well so and the neighbors of course as well so there's been a lot of input that helped shape this application along with the city's adopted plans We appreciate the Commission's and staff's recommendations for approval, and the applicant is in agreement with all of the conditions of approval that are included in the staff report, which incorporates all of ACHD's conditions of approval as well. So Linda already covered the three applications that are pending tonight. So I think we can jump in. And before I get into some of those application details, I do want to touch on, you know, why are we annexing such a large area? And the reason is that master planning at this scale has many benefits. A large-scale approach enables this coordinated, long-range planning for public services. That includes transportation and parks, utilities, emergency services, and public infrastructure. The scale also facilitates a better community design. If you've got all the land under control within a large development, you can have that cohesive land use pattern, the coordinated access points, and shared design principles that really can foster a sense of place. And finally, but importantly, a master plan approach supports predictable private investment. And so the approvals that are before you this evening help provide some market certainty. that's needed by builders and retailers, employers that need to plan around the future population that's coming here, the rooftops and the demand and know with some certainty what's coming forward. The applications also serve private homeowners because they get more certainty about where apartments will be located, where a restaurant or a park is located, not just immediately next to them, but a few streets over as well. We can look to other master plan communities and meridian like paramount as success stories that have proven this concept works well here, where the city can absorb large master plan communities successfully with good planning. And the basis of that planning starts with the field sub-area plan. So that master plan community approach works especially well where the city has already gone through this extra step to establish a comprehensive vision for this area. And I know several of you participated in shaping that plan along with your long-term planning staff and many members of the public, including the applicant team who has been involved throughout this process and continues to share the city's vision. The field so very plan is preface by stating that the measure of the plan success is its ability to direct and bring about actions that implement the plans articulated vision. So we're here tonight to present the applications to help implement the plans vision, bringing it to reality for meridians residents and business owners. So in alignment with the comprehensive plan and the sub area plan we are requesting a total of six different zones across the development area this mix of zoning provides that truly comprehensive master plan, including commercial industrial housing diversity opportunities and civic uses. Our application does include the conceptual plan to guide future development applications within the entire 480 acres, and this is broken down into 18 different planning areas. And Emily is actually going to hand out a physical piece of paper that has this map on it, so that when we refer to planning area numbers, you have that in front of you and not just that slide. So the entire 480 acres that's being annexed and zoned will be governed by a development agreement. This will incorporate the conceptual plan and the city's conditions of approval. 200 acres that are outlined in green represent the current preliminary plot application for the westvale subdivision and build out will be governed by the development agreement and the specific conditions of approval for this area the remaining 280 acres that are in blue are expected to generally build out in accordance with the conceptual plan but as linda noted they cannot proceed with any actual development until the city approves future applications, development specific applications that will at a minimum include a development agreement modification to ensure that whatever specific plans come forward are consistent with the city's plans. And if any adjustment needs to be made to this master conceptual plan, then that would be made at that time with the city council's approval of that DA modification. There will also be any specific conditional use permits that are required for conditional uses And any plots that are required for future subdivision and when each one of these future development application phases come through, they will also be subject to requirements based HD for updating the master traffic impact study for site specific areas. So that we have updated traffic counts were appropriate any additional mitigations that are specific to that development phase that would be required at that time. So I'm gonna start by introducing all of the areas that were outlined in blue, which is really all the future development phases. So the industrial zoning is on the Southeast corner of Canada and McMillan and planning area 18. And the location and the size of this area is designed and intended really to serve the smaller industrial users and employers. That is in such demand here, it provides this key employment area that's consistent with the field sub area plan future development applications would be required here. The applicant is very excited about their work with the city parks department to make this large Community park a reality, the park consists of just over 40 acres the city has not planned exactly what the facilities will be here, yet, but expects to have large Community amenities like sports fields playgrounds and sports courts. So one of two planned commercial centers is the McMillan center and planning area 12 at the southeast corner of McMillan and star roads, this includes 14 acres of Community commercial development. We envision this Center to include a neighborhood sized grocer and other retailer office pad users. The southeastern portion of this site was inspired by East Boise's bound crossing. The attached image, which is to scale, shows a pedestrian-oriented commercial main street with generous landscaping and extended sidewalks that provide that destination shopping feel. Our conceptual plan on the right incorporates these same design elements. And this is an important area for the field sub area. And so this site design will be revisited in future DA modifications and preliminary plot applications. As this concept plan is refined further applicant does accept and agree with staff's condition that there will be no drive throughs along this north south main street concept or along the east west commercial road so that we can further enhance that pedestrian feel. And here you can see a conceptual rendering of that mini Main Street concept. The second commercial center is the Owyhee Center, and this is in Planning Area 1 at the northwest corner of Owyhee Storm Boulevard and Eustick. So this location near the interchange of Eustick and Highway 16 and walking distance from Owyhee High School is a really important area for commercial use. The why he center is envisioned to provide multi tenant buildings along its eastern boundary perfect for medical office users or small fitness studios. The western boundary of the site and along you stick is where we envision some casual and drive through restaurants. The site design will be revisited in future da modifications and preliminary plot applications and likely conditional use permits for conditional uses. We do envision that the larger building here would be a large anchor that will really center this development. concept plan includes three multi-family locations in planning areas 5 11 and 13 with r15 and tnr zoning we've provided conceptual layouts of the multi-family developments which are planned to be two or three story garden style apartments with pools and other desirable amenities these multi-family developments are planned in areas that are conveniently located near commercial services walking paths and transportation corridors And finally, the concept plan includes four planning areas that are not being plotted right now, but are proposed to be zoned for single family residential development. These areas will be plotted in the future along with a development agreement modification and updated traffic studies. These areas include detached single family homes and attached townhomes with densities consistent with the specific area plan. And they will be developed subject to the proposed design standards and continue to build out those planned pedestrian pathways providing connectivity to the area. As staff summarize, we're applying for two comprehensive plan map amendments. The first is in planning areas one and five. Our request to change the MUC designation to commercial is intended to support commercial zoning and that strong anchor tenant presence. Commercial zoning also allows more land to be available for commercial use than the MUC designation, which is consistent with the comp plan goals and maximizes this key commercial location next to the Highway 16 Eustick Interchange Area and Owyhee High School. The request to change MDR medium density residential to medium high density residential supports our requested R15 zoning and is intended to support multifamily use here, which is a nice transition between the commercial and single family residential located next to transportation corridors and schools. The second area for comprehensive plan map amendment is planning area 17. As staff noted, this parcels owned by the city of Meridian and plan for a city park. So the civic designation is the best aligned designation for the planned use. So, turning to the Westvale subdivision, this covers 200 acres and proposes a mix of housing sizes and types with single family detached in the R8 zone, single family attached in the R15 zone. The average density is just under four and a half units per acre. The plat will include 23% qualified open space, which is a significant increase over the 15% required. It includes a variety of desirable amenities, including a pool, a clubhouse, and an extensive pathway system, including 10-foot pathways along the Williams Pipeline area, the Five Mile Creek, and Teeter Drain, along with additional micro pathways throughout. And we'll also have amenitized pet stations along the pathways pollinator gardens, seating and outdoor fitness stations, the drains will be left open to provide natural amenities as well. The architecture will follow the sub area plans traditional and modern farmhouse style with gable and slanted roofs, neutral colors and boarded batten siding. Our students will attend Ponderosa Elementary, Starr Middle School, and Owyhee High School. We anticipate that Westvale will add approximately 440 students by the time it is fully occupied. Phased out over the expected seven years, this would be approximately 4.8 students per grade per year. So with some variation around four to six students per grade per year. Roadway improvements for the preliminary plot area include widening Star Road and Owyhee Storm Road, installing a pedestrian crossing light near Owyhee High School, and constructing a new east-west collector through the middle of the site that will provide additional connectivity and trip distribution in the area. We will also make proportionate share payments to ITD for intersection impacts and pay ACHD's impact fees. significant additional roadway improvements are anticipated with future phases, this slide just shows the expected improvements, based on the master traffic impact study that was accepted by a ch D and it. But the specific mitigations will continue to be refined and updated traffic studies with future development applications. The field's applications involve significant private investment in public infrastructure. The applicant is donating land for the city sewer lift station and well site. The applicant already donated half of the value of the 41-acre park site, a contribution that is valued over $3.6 million. The development will also pay impact fees consistent with city and ACHD policies. For the Westvale portion alone, this is over $16 million in impact fees. So with that we're excited to bring forward this application that is the result of long planning and we are appreciate the staff support and the support that we've received from the all the agencies we've been interacting with we're happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you, you really didn't need all that extra time glad I was able to move quickly Linda did a thorough job.

Yes, okay. Emily Mueller 839 South bridgeway place with the applicant team, I did want to just make sure in case I needed it for the record, the two waiver requests that we would like one is for. The block length waiver for achievement that's the collector road that goes east. to west that will stub to the current oahe high school site um and then the second is to keep the skylight the sky pilot drain open we would like to utilize that as a natural amenity have those pathways so i know that those were waiver requests and i just wanted to make them for the record um there yeah thank you council any questions for the applicant mr mayor councilman taylor

Thank you for walking us through that. That was a lot, and you did it very efficiently. I guess more of just kind of a question about timing of the different types of zoning, and when you're going to bring them on board. The West Vale is all residential. Right. There's a lot of other, you know, there's some commercial multifamily. Is there any particular reason why you're not wanting to bring on any other types of trying to plat of any of the other use types tonight at this point instead of just all residential? Is it just timing with the market infrastructure? I'm just trying to get a sense for as much as that's happening here, why we only are looking at doing a preliminary plat on residential only.

Mayor Councilmember Taylor, yes, it is just residential with the two different housing types that will come forward with the detached and the attached. And the reason is the availability of services as well as bringing in those rooftops that that will then support the commercial. We need to have some residents there to further entice those retailers, commercial developers to come in.

Mr. Mayor? That's what I'm sharing.

Hi, welcome, Deborah. It's nice having you here. Love master plan developments generally because there's a lot of visibility into what we're going to see. Tends to work out well when it's done well. A question I have for you, you guys are making a... pretty good contribution in terms of public infrastructure appreciate that um the school thing is huge i i know you've calculated with your phasing plan and kind of i'm assuming divided it by 12 grades and kind of figured that all out certainly west ada's incoming kindergarten classes are lower now than some of the older classes but Is there any visibility as to like a private school or a charter school or something else being located in this master planned area? I'm just wondering if that's a possibility that you foresee. And part of the reason is, you know, there's not a school site here being donated. And I just want to understand, like, how are we thinking holistically about access to education in this area? How far are the kids going to be bused because they're having to redraw boundaries? I did notice that West Ada had two different letters, I think, at different points in time where they were Redrawing their boundaries, trying to figure this out. One letter was really detailed. The other letter was much shorter. Help me understand how to think about this holistically from an education perspective.

Mayor, Councilmember Strader.

Yes, that is how we calculated the phasing. You're exactly right. The applicant has had many meetings with the West Ada school district to talk through what this this area looks like. West Ada did not desire a school location within the property boundaries and so that's why we don't have a donation of land to the school district because they didn't need one, want one. And the location of Owyhee High School next door is obviously convenient. Ponderosa is the appropriate school based on their current districting from recent line drawing that they've done to allocate students within their boundaries. And so that's also convenient for us just down Ustick. So as far as the anticipated students from our development, yes, as you noted, West Ada does have declining, population coming into its schools. They also have schools that are over capacity, some that are under capacity. So even though they overall have a declining enrollment, we still recognize that there are schools that have a need to implement short-term and long-term measures to address development as it occurs. And in our discussions with West Ada, we understand that that will certainly be happening here with the middle school and the high school. The high school in particular, they have a plan immediately for some interim measures. They're converting a shop space into two classrooms now that'll open up another 50 spaces there in their design capacity. And then they have other programmatic changes and physical changes that they make while the enrollment numbers finally justify the expenditures for a new school or they lead to redistricting to really utilize the resources they already have throughout the district. And I know you're familiar already with a lot of those interim measures, but they include you know, creative allocation of classroom use so that you don't have empty classrooms. Instead, you rotate and move classrooms, use of portables, creating classrooms where you have available space. Owyhee High School does have a lot of space on site. They have a future trade school planned on the property and a lot of other available space there to use. They also long term do expect that a lot of their enrollment will go down when Star High School is ultimately built. They're optimistic about the new legislative tool that's been passed with House Bill 636 to give new funding opportunities throughout the district to not have to turn to voter approved bonds. um for property tax increases so they they have a lot of hope that that's actually going to bring schools like the star high school which where the land's already owned to fruition sooner but in any case we recognize that's a long-term plan for them does that answer all of your questions mr mayor that's what i'm sure it's super helpful detail actually um just curious about star high school i just don't recall what is the timing of that Mayor, Council Member Strater, my understanding is that they have acquired the site, but have not pursued the funding yet for constructing the school. And so that's why I think West Ada is hopeful that the new tools from the legislature could come into play there.

Yes. Awesome. Mayor and Councilwoman Strader, I also wanted to note your earlier question about other charter schools and private schools in the area. There is an interested charter actually that is looking to develop on Ustick. which is within the fields area. There's a church and then a charter school that would like to locate. And then additionally, and that's a little bit more speculative, but they do own the land. The sewer is just gonna take a little while to get there. The other school that is planned for the area is Coal Valley Christian is planning their large campus. They're still in fundraising efforts, but we've been talking with them a ton, trying to help brainstorm sewer solutions. Sewer's just expensive, as the city itself realized. So I'm trying to help them get open as soon as they can because everyone's really excited for that school as well.

Mayor Mrakas, Mr Mayor i'm sure Thank you know that's helpful I thought there were a couple that we're looking out there so that's great to hear you know always love to support the West side of school district, but other solutions help to so it all just really helps the effort, thank you.

Mayor Mrakas, And thank you for now.

Thank you.

Mayor?

Yes, Linda.

Got a little excited when I was presenting here. Just wanted to finish up something for you guys, some information on the commission hearing. So the commission did approve this with no changes to staff's recommendation. We did have people commenting at the public hearing. Most of the comments were based on the traffic school overcrowding and insufficient infrastructure. And those were the issues discussed by the Commission and also the loss of industrial property. We did receive a couple of comments after the hearing, one from Carolyn D. Hart, and she stated, please consider what you will be doing to all of us residents in this area by not putting the infrastructure and roads needed before building all the projects Projected homes, this is not good planning. You can do better Lindsay Madison. She says she lives in the area where all these proposed homes will be set to be built. We do not have the infrastructure most to accommodate that many houses. The traffic is already bad. Now, the roads need to be taken care of and widen first before any new buildings take place. We need to be proactive and not reactive. If housing companies want to build and they need to help pay for the infrastructure to support them, thank you for listening and not letting them build yet. And then one of the letters was resubmitted that was submitted for the planning and zoning hearing. So just wanted to get that in.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mayor? Council Chair.

Just a quick question. I just wanted to double check. Or I guess it's, I don't know what we're calling it area 18. That that's, I believe that was light industrial, but I just wanted to make sure that we're all aligned that that will in fact be light industrial. This is a very big difference. Yeah, thank you. Yes.

Everyone's sent by testimony.

Mr. Mayor? Yes. First is Benjamin Gardner.

Okay, when your name's called, you come forward and you recognize for 3 min. Say your name and address for the record as well.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Benjamin Gardner, 3041 South Alfani Way for the record. I'm here. in favor of this i'm a good fan of master plan communities they're great as the applicant was saying they're a good way for large landowners to plan out the whole area instead of piecemeal by piecemeal but the difference it's great their plan but from what i've from the map sorry The map that they've put in so far there's a lot of pathways but they're not contiguous and interconnected. If you've ever been to the started pathway in Nampa, not to be confused with the chartered route down the road, but. It's a big pathway from an old railroad right away that the city turned into a pathway in the middle, not connected any street, but it runs straight through. There's no twists and turns, but it's really, it's a really good way for pedestrians to pass through all the residential areas. What the pathways in this area don't do or give that clean straightaway through neighborhoods, so I would respectfully request that we're in Council to not approve the plants. But the annexation and everything else. For that and question for the developers, if they have time is part of the initial drawings because. On page 17 of the. Mayor Mrakas, The staff report there's looked like a hand drawing for their initial plan had roads coming all the way through, and I think it was on there was a different one, but similar on page two of their presentation today approach going straight down wondering why they. Mayor Mrakas, They got rid of those going north and south, because the Greek activity going east, west, but not so much arts and that's that's it me for question.

Mayor Mrakas, counseling questions.

Thank you. Mr. Mayor, next is Garrett Post.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor and City Council. It's a pleasure to meet you guys. I testified at the Zoning Commission about this. I'm not in favor of how they're doing it, but I do respect that they put a lot of time and effort into their plan. My counterproposal is that they add a lot more commercial space to this area because we just don't have any. I understand they're going to put some south of Ustick, but for us, if we're going to go to do anything, we either have to go to 10 Mile or we have to go down by the Fort Idaho Center. If you figure over the next 50 plus years, all of the farms in the area are gonna get sold between us, Star, and Nampa, that's gonna be a ton of homes that are gonna get put into this area with the same issue of the overcrowding in the schools and not having anywhere to go between us, right? Like 900 homes, you figure that's 1800 cars to this area. And again, we don't have the infrastructure. Oh, sorry, I forgot to state my address. I live on 6600 West Windshire Street, So the little access road off of Ustick that goes into those neighborhoods right there that's just getting opened, that goes right into my garage. So one quick selfish request would be that you guys put some speed bumps on that before you open it, because I would love to not have teenagers Tokyo drift into my garage. um and the other one is uh on achievement in a wahi storm we really need a stoplight put up there even if it's just a temporary one before school starts the traffic going down there is just horrific even as polite as drivers are out here um it just gets really bad in the morning and it that area really needs a light um i imagine it would get one if they're building if they're going to add that road to be an entry into their community assuming this plan would get approved but We just don't have the infrastructure for 900 homes. And plus again, I think it would serve our community and the city a lot better if we built something like the village, beautiful outdoor mall, that all of the community that's there, plus all of the communities that are going to be there there. I mean, it's an entire city block that is available on this plan. Plus there's just that RV storage unit. That's that little kind of grayed out carve out on the star roadside about, A little over halfway up the block there, so that could be very easily incorporated as well. If there was an outdoor mall here. I mean, even if they added, like, half as much space, like, took half of the South half of it, where it was the star and then you stick on the bottom, just take that whole half at achievement and turned it into commercial. My opinion is that would much better suit the community than what's proposed here. And I'm not against master plan communities. I like that. It's not going to be piecemeal like my side of the. The my side of whatever the street is a while he storm is because it is clearly piecemeal together, but I think if they did more commercial it would benefit the Community, a lot more than what's being proposed.

Thank you counseling questions. Council trainer.

Thank you. Is it Mr. Post?

Yes, ma'am.

Great. It's interesting. So your comment is that we need more commercial. And at least in my conversations with people, what I've always heard is that you need the rooftops and the population to support a commercial center. I like that. in this master plan community you have a visibility into some commercial this area and going back a long time when the city council was coming up with an idea for this district we really wanted like this main street kind of a pedestrian feel similar to the village kind of that idea but a smaller scale It looks like they're planning in, I think, and I got to go find it, but there's this McMillan Center area, which I think might be number 12. Thank you. And so that's going to have kind of a street-oriented, Main Street kind of feel with commercial. And then there's a lot more of a traditional commercial area being planned in this area number one, which, you know, that's going to include some kind of big commercial tenant and then fitness centers and drive-thrus and things like that. they at least have mentioned a possibility of a grocery store. Who knows, right? No one knows what will happen. Is your comment that that is inadequate? You feel like more is needed? And what is the sort of rationale of how could we foster more commercial here without having the residential around it, I guess, would be my question. Yeah.

Well, the other side of the fields to the west of star is going to be built. I mean, if they build more homes there, plus you figure when the farmers that haven't sold will sell will get incorporated into what they're doing. Plus, the way I'm looking at this, too, is we have the big freeway off ramp that's going to be there with starting out 80,000 plus cars a day. that's a ton of traffic coming through the area you have the durango development and i can't remember the smaller one associated with it the one that was before us they're building a gas station and some more commercial in there so we're already going to have a ton of people in the area so why not bring some more jobs here Why not bring more industrial, like not big industrial stuff that's to the south, but you're going to have those. When those are open, you're going to have probably a few hundred people that are going to need places to go eat. So there's going to be a lot of local traffic plus the nine months a year school's in. All the kids can just walk across the street there. My wife and I and everybody that lives in our neighborhoods can walk across the street as well. I understand you need people in the area to support business, but we already have quite a lot of people. Plus, on McMillan and Oahe Storm Road, that top corner there, they're just starting another development that's probably going to have 70 houses i think i'm not sure there's gonna be a good amount of homes that are up there plus you'll have cole valley coming in as they mentioned as well for this middle school and elementary school i think so there's gonna be a ton of people in this area and it'd be nice to have especially for all that most of us will be local in the area be nice to have more to do right like i'm not against master plan communities i'm not against them developing the area i want to be clear about that my perspective is It'd be, I think it would serve the community better to have more to do in the area instead of having to go all the way to the village, which is 25 minutes or go into Nampa or go all the way to downtown Boise or Eagle where there are kind of some stuff to do. I just personally think it would serve us a little better to have more closer. And that's even with 10 mile crossing coming in, which itself is right off the fair.

Mr. Mayor. Council Chair.

I think that's helpful. It sounds like it's really not necessarily just like immediate needs, but recreational opportunities as well is kind of what I'm hearing from you. Is that right?

A little bit. It is that, but it's just, in my opinion, the community would be better suited having like little shops, I understand they're gonna put some fast food restaurants, a grocery store, maybe a gym is gonna go in there and that's all wonderful and great and I appreciate them doing that. And again, I do appreciate all of the time that they've spent, that they're gonna donate a park across Star Road there between Star and Canada and the infrastructure money they're gonna contribute. I'm grateful for that, I appreciate that. but I just think it would serve the community better if there was more commercial space. And I do appreciate that they're going to leave that irrigation way open because I think that's really cool that I get, you know, when I drive by that every day, it's a really cool little greenery. And I appreciate that they're going, they're planning to add to that as well.

Thank you. Hopefully the applicant will address your concern when they rebut. I think that it sounded like this area 12 might end up with a lot of little shops and things, but we'll find out. I wish development worked that we could like wave a magic wand and then boom we have this whole thing built out the way everybody wants it simultaneously but unfortunately you know it it's going to be pretty chaotic here for a while while a lot of development is all happening at once and you've got this huge highway 16 thing going on i mean it's it's going to be really busy thank you though for coming and um sharing your your views yeah

And I mean to that point, I understand it to catch 22 right there's not exactly a perfect solution is we bring a bunch of residential and and everyone complains about it, or you build a big mall that attracts a ton of people and everyone complains about it right no guarantees in life, except death taxes and making everybody unhappy with urban development.

Thank you, thank you, thank you very much. Mr next is Denise fever.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Denise Lefevre, 6706 North Salvia Way.

Denise, can you pull the mic down?

Thank you.

There you go. I'm not here to support or oppose this application. I'm here to speak about the importance of following the plans we adopt. Several years ago during the comprehensive plan process steering committee members and I encouraged the city to prepare a site-specific plan to Meridian's remaining large growth area we believe the plans planning these areas before they developed would produce better neighborhoods better transportation better parks and ultimately a better meridian i was pleased to see that the city embraced the vision and adopted the field sub area plan the plan represents years of work by the city staff council consultants property owners stakeholders elected officials and residents it reflects a shared vision not as simple for where growth should occur but how it should occur as i reviewed this application i appreciate the city's staff evaluating against the adopted field sub plan and identified areas where additional refinement is needed including the mixed youth center commercial integration pedestrian orientation and implementation of the plan's design vision. Those are not minor details. They are fundamental elements of the adopted plan. The field sub plan was adopted to guide development, not simply to describe it. Development agreements, future approvals, and conditions of the approval are valuable implementation tools, but they should not become substitutions for demonstrating consistency with the adopted plan. Whatever decision you make tonight, I respectfully ask that you record clearly, demonstrate how the application fulfills the vision, principles and design intent of the field sub area plan. Residents invest hundreds of hours participating in planning. Because they believe the plans they help create will guide future decisions. Development invests based on those plans. Future residents and future council rely on those plans to provide predictable, consistent fairness. Plans matter only if they influence decisions. If they become documents that can be reinterpreted, adjusted or accommodate development, the planning process risks becoming an exercise in aspiration rather than implementation. Tonight's decision is about more than one development. It's about whether Meridian's adopted plan will continue to guide development or whether development will begin to guide the plan. Thank you for your time and your service to our community. And yes, I do have concerns about this, but due to time constraints, I will stop there and stand for any questions.

Thank you. Council, any questions?

Mr. Mayor, I think we were willing to give Ms. Nelson additional time. And I will just ask you, what are your concerns if you want to take a couple of minutes to talk about them? I would love to.

First of all, this was a really exciting plan because this is the one I got behind and that drawing that's on the face of it, that's because I asked the consultant to design it free of charge for Meridian. So, I really like the fact that this plan is done. My greatest concern is ensuring that the adopted field sub plan remains the governing document as this application moves forward i encourage the council to avoid conditioning approval in a way that effectively modifies or relax the intent of the plan simply to accommodate the proposed development areas of concern ensuring that star mcmillan center achieves the pedestrian oriented integrated mixed-use vision envisioned in the sub plan rather than evolving into a more conventional commercial center, maintaining the integrated relationship between commercial, residential, civics, and public spaces envisioned by the plan, preserving the plan's emphasis on walkability, building orientation, streetscape designs and public gathering spaces ensuring roadways improvement pedestrian facilities pathways multi-model transportation are implemented as coordinated systems consistent with the adopted transportation framework using development agreements and conditions of approval to implement the adopted plan not to subsidize for or redefine its intent avoiding incremental amendments or conditions that override the substantive unaltered the original vision without a transparent public planning process continue requiring roadways utilities parks and other public infrastructure be provided in step with development preserve the importance of the park civic gathering place and community amenities at in integrated components of the overall plan apply the field sub area plan consistently throughout the future planning phase of this development so the years of planning invested in the city and the public are reflected in the completed area my concerns isn't should this develop my concern is is to make sure it develops within what the vision of the plan is so thank you for the opportunity to express my concerns i'm like i said i'm i'm excited that you guys did the plan so thank you

Thank you.

Mr Mayor, that was everyone.

If there's anybody else would like to provide testimony on this item, you either raise your hand online. Or you can come forward at this time. See no one raising their hand or coming forward with the upcoming like to close.

Thank you, could I pull up our presentation again i'd like to use the pathways exhibit or if that's easier to pull up in yours that's fine too.

Is it.

Great, thank you. Mayor, members of the Council, I just want to address the comments we heard. So Mr. Gardner talked about the pathways, so wanted to have this exhibit up in front of you and staff walked through this so we didn't spend time on it, but we are connecting really everywhere that the landowner controls. And so there are gaps where we don't control property around us, but that's kind of the benefit of having so much property that we do control. In particular, you can see there along the Five Mile Creek that builds out the city's 10 mile plan corridor there and extending those pathways. it really does create that strong east-west connection. We've got all of the pathways that are shown in red, by the way, are 10-foot multi-use pathways. All of the blue are micropaths, so that could be six or eight feet, depending on the city's desires. And so we've got connectivity running north-south, east-west, through a lot of the open space corridors with the Williams Pipeline, along each of the drains with the Skypilot drain and the Teeter drain. And so we have tried to really bring in that exact pathway connection and pedestrian connection that he's asking for. We do desire the same thing to connect from micropaths to get to the uses and then back to the more significant pathways. As for Mr. Post's comments, really wanting more of that village concept here or all commercial, the specific area plan wasn't intended or designed to be that regional draw for commercial, the transportation-oriented destination shopping. That wasn't the vision that the city had at that time based on a whole lot of feedback from the public, even though I appreciate that he may have a different desire for this particular use we do want commercial here to be integrated just like the subway plane calls for so that we've got not just the rooftops to support it that's absolutely essential but also so that it is and it's truly an integral part of how people live that they are able to get on one of these amazing pathways and get over to that neighborhood commercial use, or if they are driving as destination, they've got the kind of pull up on street and the mini main street elements here, or they're at least consolidating trips. And if they're going down to this larger, why he center, then they're able to really capture trips within their development because they don't have to go as far. I mean, he talked about how far they have to go to get to the village. And so by integrating it around the needed housing, we're really trying to limit that problem that he's experiencing. With our commercial too, we don't want to just build commercial for commercial sake. We want it to be vibrant and in use and within the market capacity so that It is built out and actively supporting the vision and our future residents here. And we are increasing the amount of commercial slightly above what was called for in the specific area plan through that comprehensive plan map amendment that we're requesting here. As for Ms. Lefevre's comments, you know, we are following the sub area plan. We appreciate her comments and the comments we received from staff that have helped us already make some adjustments. cutting out the drive-through uses. I want to just highlight some of the language that's in that McMillan Main Street concept area from the sub-area plan that talks about having that pedestrian-oriented streetscape, generously sized sidewalks, outdoor seating that all enriches the pedestrian experience, a centrally located and highly connected park. These are all things that we are incorporating into our overall conceptual plan. and will be finalized in more detail when that area comes forward. And a follow-up to Councilmember Taylor's question about sequencing, the applicant is anticipating that the commercial areas will come on as the next phase after this preliminary plat. And so that will bring in some of these concepts sooner rather than later to help fulfill that vision as well. I would stand for any additional questions that you may have. And also invite Emily. Okay. Is there anything to add?

Mr. Mayor. That's probably more for Emily because she brought it up and this was a lot of information tonight. But there's 1 thing I just don't remember the answer being given, which was having to do with the requested waiver for the excessive block length. I believe in the presentation there was a request from staff for traffic calming measures.

along that street but i don't know that i heard you mention traffic calming only that the request was there for the length of the block mayor councilman overton yes we um plan to do traffic calming um i'm not exactly sure what those measures are i would need to chat with our engineer but i think that there's a list of things that we can work through for traffic calming on that let's make just quick follow-up so you're in you're in agreement with the request from staff on what we would do

on that street for traffic calming. We just don't know. All of us don't know what that looks like tonight.

Mayor and Councilman, yes, we are in agreement with staff.

Mr. Mayor.

Councilor Schroeder.

Just curious, what do you think your timing would be to come back with like preliminary plats for some of the other areas like especially the I think the biggest one which I think Denise touched on in her comments and I could tell we will be really keyed in on is this little kind of mini Main Street area in area 12. Like what is the timing of that and kind of the vision for when that's going to come together?

Mayor and Councilwoman Strader. So I think probably the next plat would be that Oahe Commercial Center. The main driver for that is going to be the opening of Highway 16. U-Stick is being expanded tremendously right now. So we have a tremendous amount of interest for commercial development there. So sewer will be at Star and McMillan. and it will be brought down pretty far within the residential subdivision, within a realm that a developer, a commercial developer could go and get it and bring it, and that would be justified. So, you know, I would say the next couple years um that one would come online um or we would have another uh hearing another application within a year or two um and maybe then a year after that for the other uh macmillan center um yeah that one is um yeah gonna be a really important part of of this i absolutely agree and um i i don't know exactly the timing on that and i don't know the exact timing on that but i would i would expect that to be then another maybe year out after the the oahe center that's helpful mr mayor catholic um thank you for this this is very helpful just to

get the full picture of it. It's very one-dimensional for me though. So when I hear things in testimony like this will be similar to Paramount or Bound Crossing or the village as a destination, then I can start to picture things. I've been there, I've seen it, I've experienced it. It's hard to do on a one-dimensional map. So kind of an open-ended question. We've heard about the comprehensive plan. We've heard about the subarea plan. We've heard concerns from our constituents who've talked about, you know, maybe more commercial here, something to drive people here. In your mind, what is the signature piece of this 480 acres that we're talking about annexing tonight? What's your signature piece that someday people will be saying, like Paramount, like Bowne, like the fields? Because what I see is a southeast corner I see something up toward the north, I see a potential regional park in the West, but what is what is the fields that people will be talking about in the future.

Mayor and Councilman, I'm going to say that I think that the signature thing is that it will feel like one community. I think people that live there will feel a sense of identity of just being in the fields for a number of reasons, for the park, for the mini Main Street, and for the pathways that enable them to get everywhere. So I do, it kind of like, you know, I wouldn't say I would say kind of like in East Boise where you kind of feel like you're in a whole separate section. The highway is going to be that kind of natural divider where you feel already like you're in a different area. So I think really the signature thing is just really the community as a whole and the shared design principles that everything will have some shared design concepts. So I think the scale of it is what's going to make it feel that way. that we can design it all together with these integrated pathways, with integrated design. And so, you know, I think the signature part of it will be just the feeling of being in your own unique community.

Councilman Cameron.

Probably for, I'll invite either one of you to chime in, just because you touched on the pathways piece and the testimony that did at least spark an interest as to how we are best going to connect people kind of from the southeast part to the northwest part where the park is, recognizing there's big chunk of land there that you don't connect, but you do have an opportunity to kind of lay that foundation. And I look to the Sky Pilot Drain, which part of it is listed as a multi-use pathway, and then it kind of dog-ears into a micro path and then kind of just terminates before it gets to Star Road. And I'm just curious, what's... What's driving that termination there? And why not connect it up to the point where the multi-use path and that other micro path that kind of converge? And I don't know if I can control screen or not.

I see what you're talking about.

It's not bad. It just seems incomplete. And I look at where those all three paths could converge as almost as a trailhead that could help kind of, I don't know, plant a flag for future connections that would get folks to our park.

think maybe that's not accurate i think it does mayor um council member kaffner we're trying to see on the on the map and we think we see what you're talking about where the sky pilot drain angles up um and so i'm not aware of why that couldn't be a 10 foot it sounds like emily isn't either and so we're certainly amenable to that assuming that works with the agreements with the drainage district And Linda may have more to offer.

Linda, don't bring the wet blanket.

Reality. She may offer reality.

I would never do that. Mayor, Council, in the revised conditions for the Parks Department, that will be a 10-foot multi-use pathway that connects up to that sidewalk. Okay.

Cool. Our Parks Department, as always, doing a much better job than you. Thanks, Deb. Appreciate you guys.

Thank you, Linda.

Mayor Mrakas, I'll just say this while the all the public hearings open. I I often struggle um with developments that have big impacts on our roads and our schools. I know you've heard my comments that before um the longevity of this project. The the master plan of it gives me great confidence that we are again. You're planting a flag in this area for the school district and for the highway district. It's been a long time project. Um those concerns that I typically voice I think are satisfied because of the plan that you have put together I just don't want to commend the entire team for really working diligently look at this from all different angles not just from the city I just think that this is going to be a really unique part of our community and I just I want to thank you for that truly thank you Mr Mayor councilman little Roberts

Mr. Mayor, Deb, great presentation. I just want to commend you all. When I started the first round on council in 2016, the fields district at that point was already being discussed and even included scarily like a working farm. And so this is just, I mean, years ahead and I think that it's just a great example of how things can evolve and just thank you i know there's still a whole lot of work to be hit had and ahead but yet just commend you on where we are sitting tonight so thank you mr mayor councilman

i have a few thoughts um number one is i just want to commend the council in the past when we looked at this park space for doing a lot of due diligence and something that the public would never even see because it was in executive sessions of field trips and like five meetings with the williams pipeline people because i flipped out that i thought there would be a mushroom cloud of natural gas that was going to like wipe people's neighborhoods out that was my number one fear about the fields district to be honest before even like vision or anything was just safety um so i i just appreciate everybody um humoring me and and digging in on that so that we could just take that concern and put it aside at this point that that was at least as well thought through as as humanly possible so i i feel really good about that i to me the vision for this area has always been a tiny city within itself it's never going to be able to be a regional draw because of its size it was meant to be a place that would at least be cohesive and a place where people could meet their immediate needs in terms of shopping, retail, access to a park. And that was all because of this huge transportation project coming that was going to bisect our city. And that was a major piece of work that the public and Denise and other people put their feedback and hearts into helping to craft a vision for this. I think this goes a long way toward meeting that vision. It's not going to be... exactly the way it was laid out and part of the reasons for that i could speak to at least with the location of the park we had originally started with kind of a different concept of a huge park that would kind of meander through here and what became obvious to us was based on our concerns about the williams pipeline and wanting to have a really good buffer around that and availability of land that this made the most sense for the regional park so there was a change there but i do feel like it's been offset somewhat by this beautiful series of pathways, I would love to see a trailhead. I think Councilman Kavanagh made a great point about this opportunity where we could see our 10-foot multi-use pathways coming together and seeing another trailhead because the trailhead that we have in town that we just built is a huge amenity that people love. So heads up to the parks department about that. But I really think that this goes a long way toward meeting the vision. My biggest concern is going to still remain around our mini main street because I could see that going sideways very easily. I appreciate that you're very amenable to lack of drive-throughs and stuff in that area. That's completely appropriate for that area. I don't think we want to see that there. uh to really create that community feeling it needs to be super pedestrian oriented i you know i know the council will be looking out for that and i wanted to commend staff because these are some very broad conditions of approval um quite masterful i have to say in terms of giving us a lot of flexibility to really look at these components as they come in so i have a lot of support for this project of course i still have concerns but i think we're going to iron them out as as things come through um So I want to compliment you. I think you all have done a good job getting us started here. I think there's a lot of heavy lifting that will remain to be done in different phases. But I think it's a great start.

if i could just add on but for me it's like i want to see what's not here unfortunately and that's what if to get the full fields you need to see north of macmillan and how that connects and how that hopefully fulfills the the full vision that you're striving to accomplish and i think on this map i mean it's a big map and this is one of the challenges frankly i feel like this As a city, I don't want to say this council, but as a city, we can overanalyze a five-acre development to no end and sometimes when you see something this big it's really hard to get into the details about all this and if you if we just zoomed in and only worked on 10 acres at a time i think that there'd be a lot more conversation about every aspect of what this plan is um but i think to me when i look at this what we call the mini main street bounty yeah well on this plan it looks really mini and i'm like i don't think that's enough But there's going to be an opportunity to have that conversation. And again, it's as much as how it connects to the north of this project that it is to anything else. And we don't get that conversation today about that. And I think that's going to be the interesting part. As you do move forward, what else comes in is going to greatly impact every part that we're not talking about tonight. You know the the the vision for the plan might get eaten up by the area between 915 and 17, and you're going to be sent back to the drawing board on certain parts of what you what happens when other people bring their plan in. So it's it's interesting that we're really only talking about this residential portion tonight. yeah it's great but everything else is going to be redesigned rethought re re figured out as they come in as other things happen around you that you may not control is going to impact what the actual what actually gets built out in this area so you know my my main thing is Does the residential component that we're looking at tonight meet the intent of the plan? Everything else is great in theory, but it's who knows what will actually be considered at the future time. At least this is how I look at this. And it's master plan, but more master planning the residential part tonight. And all from my reality. And if someone comes into the north with another part of this, how's it going to work? Is it going to integrate? Who's going to get there first? uh to to develop with the plan these are just words I'm saying at this point in time but um it's trying to put it into perspective about it's a great start to a vision but I I'm excited to see what's not here and I'm going to answer Councilman Whitlock's question from my perspective it's actually what's not even on this map yet in my opinion what we don't see here is what is still going to be the future of the fields um and you know whether that's the park or something else it's going to really I think define this area in a way that we don't know yet but it's definitely not going to be just the residential section we're talking about tonight in my mind

Mayor Mrakas, Mr mayor, I would just add if it's all right at the quick comment that we are listening to all the comments from the Council and you about what you want to see as we bring forward these future development applications so we're certainly taking note of that.

Mayor Mrakas, Mr mayor. Mayor Mrakas, There's no other comments i'd be ready to make a motion to close the public hearing. And I will do so. I move that we approve. Excuse me. I move that we close the public hearing on file number H 2025-0057. Second.

I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there a discussion? If not, I'm favoring by saying aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Guys have it. The public hearing is closed. Mr. Mayor. Councilman Taylor.

I'm going to make some comments and I'm happy to make a motion at some point, but I'll give others if there's more comments that want to be made. But I remember I was on the steering committee for the comprehensive plan in 2018-2019, and I remember looking at this area thinking, and I remember distinctly looking at the natural gas. facility there and thinking there's just no way we're ever going to be even out here. Why are we even wasting our time? It just seems so far away and middle of nowhere and in a relatively short amount of time where looking at something like this is actually quite astounding when you consider how cities grow and how they're planning. So I'm not sure if that's good or bad, but that's where we are. But I do remember thinking that I also think we ought to add a subtitle that says the fields meridians last great frontier, because it kind of is what it feels like we're looking at. Not just what we see here, but to your point there, and there's a lot more to go here, and i'm pretty sure many of us that are sitting here tonight won't be here when we're still looking at a lot of these parcels that will be approving and to that point. I think as I look at this tonight, 480 acres of annexed land, yet we're going to get a lot of bites at the apple, as it were, as we kind of start looking at these different, more in-detail specific development agreements that we want to look at with the different parcels, with the multifamily, the commercial. So I think that gives me some level of confidence that even though this is a big thing we're doing tonight, we're going to be coming back time and again, looking at the details and there's going to be a lot of work and it's going to be a lot of A lot of years, so I I think that's that's good. I'll just say one last comment about with schools. I think my confidence in West data has gone up a lot in recent years with their ability to manage in a very fiscally responsible way. One of the best. I think it's the best run school district hands down in the state of Idaho with what they do. And so and and looking at the trends in education, I mean. We're not losing a lot of kids. We're just seeing a lot more options and and we're always finding ways to do it. I was actually when I learned that West Ada didn't request to have a school in this area that spoke a lot about their their planning. They know this is coming. I think they're accommodating it, so I think this is a good project. I think it's a good start. Excited to see what we have here, so I'm going to be like I said, I'm happy to make a motion. When that time is up, if anyone else has any other comments. Hearing none, Mr. Mayor?

Councilmember Taylor.

After considering all staff and applicant and public testimony, I move to approve file number H 2025-0057 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 14, 2026, and also include a waiver for the block face length on west achievement street and to provide some traffic calming measures i believe that was part of the request and also to the second waiver to allow the sky pilot drain to remain open have a motion a second is there discussion on the motion mr mayor do we need to add the teeter train Yes, and is that that's right, because we have the to drain, so I would add the teeter drain to remain open as well, thank you, I can concur second concurs yeah staff anything more that you feel like you need based on.

No, again, a lot of these are coming back before you so we can condition that that time.

Mayor Mrakas, Okay, then we have a motion in a second and staff feels it's adequate for the purposes is there discussion on the motion. Mayor Mrakas, that's whatever.

Mayor Mrakas, open Linda could go over staff report, maybe just one more time for all of us to make sure we got it right. Mayor Mrakas, Just get Mr. Mayor.

Mayor Mrakas, With that quick call the roll.

Mayor Mrakas, Thank you, Mr mayor governor. Mayor Mrakas, I Taylor. Mayor Mrakas, I reader.

Mayor Mrakas, I would lock. Mayor Mrakas, I Roberts. Mayor Mrakas, I over to.

Mayor Mrakas, I. Mayor Mrakas, All eyes motion carries yeah I miss agree to. Thank you all for your comments and being here and effort onto that thing. Council, at the end of future meeting topics?

Mr. Mayor.

Councilman Cameron.

either a topic or a memo at the appropriate time in preparation for tonight's meeting. I read about West Ada convening their long-range planning committee in September. So just to put on the radar, either a report from them or an update maybe from West Ada as to what was covered in that. I think the information that they cover in that meeting is going to be very pertinent to us and our decisions. So either an update from them or a presentation from them, whichever you and the council president think is the most appropriate.

Okay. if not anything else then do I have another motion Mr mayor I move that we adjourn second motion second adjourn all in favor signify by saying