Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

Okay, it is 6 o'clock. I'd like to welcome everyone to the city of Nampa Planning and Zoning Commission meeting February 10th, 2026. We'll get started by a report on council actions. Christie, I guess that's you tonight. Roll. Oh, roll call. Roll call. Okay, we'll start that way. Kirkman Copeland here. Miller here. Garner here. Staffer here. Turner here. Kho here. Morgan here. Feen here. Six present. Thank you.

Seven. Seven. Is that new math? Eight. Good. all these critical thinkers up here.

All right. U Thank you, Mr. Chairman and commissioners. Um the report from the February 2nd city council meeting. Um a subdivision final plat approval of Milwood Pines, which came before you on January 27th, was approved on February 2nd by city council. There were two variances in a vacation at city council that uh would not have come before you. So the variance there was a variance for a maximum lot size um to exceed 12,000 square ft on Chicago Street. That was approved. Um there was another variance to reduce or sorry to um measure a landscape buffer along Highway 55 from the back of the sidewalk rather than the property line. um with the widening of um the highway 55, it just created a a situation where it kind of created an unbuildable lot if they had to measure it from the property line. So that was approved. Um and then vacation of easement also on Carter Road. Um they had vacated a bunch of easements for a commercial development and they missed a tiny little sliver of one so we had to come and clean that up. And then there was a zoning map amendment from RA to RS6 also on Chicago Street uh for a property that they want to split it so that their family can build another house on that lot and that was approved as well. Any questions?

N thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes. I'll make a motion that we approve the consent agenda. Second. It's been moved by Garner, second by Kho to approve the consent agenda. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay, that carries. Uh, we have a new commission member. I would like to welcome him. If he would like to just tell us his name and a little bit about himself, I'd really appreciate it. Everybody get to know you a little bit.

Uh, name's Helmut Fi. Um, been here about 19 years. And this opportunity presented itself because of the specific seat needs to be outside of the city in the impact zone and that's where I happen to be. So, um, volunteering is something that I've done in a lot of different ways in the community and this just is another opportunity for me to serve and actually help guide this community and uh hopefully a great direction for growth. Thank you. We're happy to have you. Look forward to many more meetings and we appreciate everybody who's here tonight. Um, like you said, we volunteer and we appreciate your comments and concerns and voices because it helps us make our decisions and it helps us help shape this future for the city. We want it, we all want it to be better place for us and our children to live. So, thank you for your attendance tonight. Um, first things first, um, item 3-3, annexation and zoning to RS4 and RS6 RD family duplex and BN. zoning districts, potential development green, perennial plat subdivision for Sagewood subdivision at zero and zero Lewis Lane. Uh the applicant has requested to be continued um to March 10th, 2026 because of a condition that they need to discuss with the um developer and engineers. So start with that item. I guess open it and then entertain a motion to continue or discussion on either.

Make a motion to continue it to March 10th as requested. Second. It is this uh item has been motioned to continue to March 10th, 2026 meeting by Commissioner Copeland and seconded by Garner. All those in favor? I.

Any opposed? Okay. We will hear this item 3-3 March 10th, 2026. Okay, now we'll get started. Um for anybody you any of you who haven't been here, uh the applicant we'll ask the applicant to come forward. They'll give us a presentation. they have 7 minutes to propose the project. Um, at the end of their presentation, we may or may not ask a few questions of them. Um, at that time, staff will do give us their report. We'll ask them some questions and then we'll open it up for public testimony. Uh, when you come up to the mic, we would ask that you um give us your name and address for the record and you will get three minutes to speak. Um, at the end of that time, you've got to sit down and you don't get to come back up. So, if you forget anything, maybe ask the person next to you come up and ask that question later. Um, uh, at the end of public testimony, we'll let the applicant come back up, answer some questions. We'll ask some questions of them. We'll close public testimony, and then we will discuss and vote on a motion one way or another. So item 3-1, preliminary plat approval for the amended portion of Reflections Edge subdivision in RS4 and RS6 zoning district addressed as zero East Railroad Street for Abby Han representing Scott Curtis KB Homes LLC. The applicant here.

Good evening, chair, commissioners. Um my name is Scott Curtis with KB Home. I'm the director of land development over there and we're bringing our project for um the amendment to be taken care of. Let me see if I can um we've got Wendy Shrief here and Nichollet Wat with um Kimley Horn to help help me present on this. Uh before they get into all the the details on that, I just wanted to speak on who KB Holmes is. KB Holmes is a community partner and I'm very proud to say that I work here. I'm a third generation Idaho and one of the things that brought me to KB Homes was their val values. And one of the things I'm really excited about this subdivision is really what we're bringing to the city of Nampa and what we're bringing to the Treasure Valley. We're bringing affordable homes. As we know, affordability has really gone to the wayside even with people that are first-time home builders. And one of the things that KB Home strives on is building affordability. bring affordability while also bringing um options to home buyers that they can come in and they can choose their floor plan that they can choose um their cabinets, their paint, and they can really build something that they can be proud of at a price that they can afford with, you know, homes in this country starting at 3.49. That's really unheard of right now going on for the valley. And so, as KB Homes, you know, we just we make relationships the foundation of what we do. We want to build our relationship with the the city of Nampa and with all of our home buyers. Just wanted to show a couple of our our floor plans. These are what's going to be built out at Reflections Edge. Not only do we care about our our front elevations and bringing just something beautiful to the community, but we're also building something beautiful for the buyers, something that they can really bring their family and friends in that they can have Thanksgiving and be proud of proud of their home. And so, just little some examples right here. Then I'm going to bring up Nichollet with Kimley Horn and she's really going to speak to all the logistics on that.

Nichollet Wall, Kimley Horn, 1100 West Idaho Street, Sweet 210 Boise, Idaho. So shown here, you can see a vicinity map of the site. So the project is located off of um Happy Valley Road um and Bigwood River Drive. And the section that we're working on tonight is outlined here along Indian Creek. So previously um Reflections Edge reszone and pre-plat was approved in 2022. Um we met in April of 25 with uh city staff to talk about the amendments that were needed. Uh we submitted that amendment application in July. Um we worked with staff through some of the details of the creek uh crossing and we submitted a proposal in January. So we're here tonight. Um in the amended preliminary plat um this overall was submitted to better accommodate the wetlands along Indian Creek. Um, this was adjusted to include the proposed crossing that will be coordinated with Chisum Estates to the north. Um, the lot layout updates included 14 fewer residential lots, updated the amenities, we realigned the roads to reduce connections onto Railroad Drive, and we consolidated the phasing plan into three phases. So, shown here um is the previous phasing plan and the section we're working on tonight. Here's the updated phasing plan. Again, three phases. one along Indian Creek to the north of Bigwood Drive and then two uh to the south phase six and seven. Um uh shown here um is the information regarding the uh wetland issues that we're working through. So Alomar was completed by Nampa um which uh removed the uh majority of the previous flood plane designation from the site. The remaining designation um uh is the actual waterway and it won't be disturbed with this project as it lies within the wetland area. The tot lot that was previously shown is removed from the wetlands pathways, seating

areas and artisal wells are included um in that area. Um and then we adjusted the crossing to coordinate again with Chis in the States to the north. So shown here you can see the amended pre-plot um and the different lot sizes which we're happy to pull up again. Um overall we have a net loss of 14 lots. Um an increase in common lots by two. Um a gross density of roughly about the same honestly. Open space was increased obviously as we designated more areas for the wetlands. Um and then our amenities. There's been no change. Um shown here is the open space updates. The old exhibit on the left and the a new exhibit on the right. And I'll turn it over to Wendy to talk about the crossing. Good evening. Um, chairman commissioners again, Wendy Sharief. I'm the director of forward planning with KB Home and my business address is 2487 Navigator in Meridian, Idaho. Um, I want to thank staff for working so closely with us on this amended preliminary plat. Christine, Candace, and Rodney have already been great while working through um, some of the changes that we've made on this on this project. Um again really we we have constructed the first four phases of this preliminary plat the the next three phases we've had to pull those phases back um because of Indian Creek because of the flood way flood plane floodway and wetlands that we discovered during that initial construction of the first couple phases. So again we've made the project smaller. We're here with this amendment. Um, when we were here, when KB Home was here in 2021 with the original entitlements, we made a commitment to the city of Nampa to provide a crossing. Um, let's see, go ahead and to provide a crossing across Indian Creek and provide a pedestrian improvements. Um, staff, none of us had

been here in 2022, so we were reminded by staff. So, we are here to make that commitment um to put this crossing in. We we are working with the neighboring developer of Chisum Estates. Um we will be helping to fund for the construction of a crossing approximately in this location and will be located on the neighboring properties um on it's Lance Thusen um as a developer of Chisum Estates. will be located on his property. Um, and we have a cost sharing agreement in place with Lance Thus. Um, and we are planning on have have him construct the crossing, but we will be sharing costs. So, that's kind of so we worked with staff on the location of the crossing. These are a bit small, but these are some of our renderings um, showing we'll be putting in a pedestrian pathway on our side. Lance will also have pathways on his side and we will have a crossing in place to provide those connections between Chisum Estates and our project reflections. Um so we've worked with staff on a pulmonary plat and and the language that will be addressing this condition. And if I could have a couple extra minutes just to kind of run through this and see if you have any questions on the the crossing. I wanted to request that. Um, one of the conditions we'd worked with was staff to make sure that we that they had teeth in the agreement where we are committed to putting this crossing in. Um, this was language we'd work through with staff through the staff attorney that we would like to have um as a part of our conditions of approval. So, I'm I'm here for any questions regarding the project and we can have Nichollet back up here too. So, one question I had, um, I remember vaguely, not in detail, the original concepts and there was a lot of commercial, um, in and around Indian Creek. Is that now gone because it's wetlands or what's

going to happen with that? Um, chairman, commissioners, that that was a that was a a different developer, I think, had brought that part of the project in. It is not a part of our preliminary plat. Okay. and and everything that had originally been in that floodway or flood plane for Indian Creek, we have moved everything back and we and we've lost a number of lots, but that is not a part of our preliminary plan. It's probably across the creek and I have not worked on Chisma Estates, but there is I know that there's future apartments in that area. Um I don't know if any commercial is planned in the area. It's it's not a part of our preliminary platform. Thank you. Any other questions?

Other questions? Okay, we'll call you guys back up if we need it. Thank you, Christie and Candace or Candace and then Christie Good evening, Mr. Chairman and commissioners. My name is Candace Fry, assistant planner for the city of Nampa. The request before you this evening is a subdivision preliminary plat approval for Reflections Edge. The original concept is 160 single family detached dwellings and 24 common lots. Property details. The property is currently within NA city limits and is zoned RS4 and RS6 single family residential. The surrounding zoning. To the north is RS6. To the south is RS7. To the east is ILBC and RP. and to the west is IL and BC. Property details. The comprehensive plan designates this area as residential mixeduse. The history of the project is listed out here. One of the ones I wanted to highlight was in April of 2022. The reszone and preliminary plat was approved. As discussed previously, staff analysis of the plat. Overall site is 52.30 acres. The total proposed lot count is

160 residential lots and 24 common lots. And the breakdown between the RS4 and the RS6 zone. So the number of lots is listed here. Staff analysis of the plat. We already went over the lot sizes, so I'm not going to repeat, but qualified open space developments with a gross acreage of five or more acres requires at least 15% minimum of qualified open space. Reflections Edge is providing 8.90 acres of qualified open space, which comes out to 17%, which is more than that 15% minimum requirement. and then parking will be provided and reviewed at the time of the building permit. This is concept plan A. So this was shown in the public hearing during the previous approval back in April of 2022 showing the pathway and then the bridge. And then these next two slides show the concept of the bridge crossing. And this was also previously mentioned. The phasing plan is shown here for the next three phases. And then correspondence. We did not receive any public comments, but we did receive department and agency comments. The engineering department had comments or all of the previous comments and conditions from those prior submitts apply to the current application. The fire district had comments about fire hydrants access and general compliance with the international fire code. And

then they also said that this development is located approximately 1.9 miles from NPA fire station 5 with an approximate response time of five minutes. NPA code compliance had listed out violations regarding debris and weeds and this will need to be remedied. And then Nampa Parks and Recre requests the developer to give the city 20 feet on the south side of Indian Creek for the purpose of the Indian Creek pathway as indicated in the City of NA pedestrian and bicycle master plan. Here are the recommended conditions of approval. And then here again is a proposed change to condition number nine which was discussed between the applicant and staff. Here are your potential motions and I will stand for any questions. Anybody?

No. Okay. Madam clerk, do we have a signup sheet? No. Is there anybody who would like to speak for, against, or undecided on this item? Okay. Does your group want to come back up? Does anybody have questions for him or do you have anything you want to add? No. Okay. I move to close the public hearing. Second. It's been moved by Daffer, second by Kiho to close the public hearing. All those in favor? I I Any opposed? Okay, public hearing is closed. So, what do we think?

Yeah. Yeah. Maybe Tom things that are kind of out of their control, so they roll with it. I think they could added more density to it. I'm just kidding. It is wildlife. Ah, yeah. Mr. Chair, I move to approve the project as stated on screen with recommended conditions and adopt the potential findings as stated in the staff report and all conditions of approval with presented changes to condition number nine. I'll second. Okay. It's been moved by Commissioner Daffer, seconded by Garner to approve this item. All those in favor?

I I.

Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries. Next item on the agenda, 3-2, pre-anexation and prezoning to BC zoning district at zero highway 2026 and development agreement approval for Steve Theon Hatch Design Architecture representing Moxy Investments LLC. See applicant here. Good evening. Jeff Hatch with Hatch Design Architecture. My address is two uh 5119 Brier Crest Drive, Nampa, Idaho 83686. Good evening, Chairman Miller and Commissioners. Thank you for your consideration of our pre-annexation. Um this evening subject property is on the northwest corner of the intersection of Highway 2026 and North Franklin Boulevard. Um so this is within the annexation area of Nampa, but we're not, you know, that close yet. So the future land use uh for this area is commercial. What we're proposing is complementaryary with that. In addition to that, highway 8 2026 has a specific area plan and we fit into a unique category which is the aggro business uh category. And so in working with predominantly Doug um we were able to establish that the you know the company that wants to work here can complement that aggro business feel that it's a good use for this area.

Here's our proposed site plan for uh the future project. Um, so currently we'd be proposing to uh establish the the building with a septic system and a well on the site until public uh services from Nampa can can uh be available and then we can annex formally into the city. Time for any questions. Anybody? Simple. Thanks Jeff. We'll call you back up. Yep. Thank you.

Hey, Doug. What do you got for us?

Good evening. Um, Chair Miller and Commissioners, Doug Critchfield, principal planner for long range planning. Um so um the project this evening uh I will try not to duplicate what Mr. Hatch uh told you here about the project. Uh the size of the lot is 1.84 acres. Um in the narrative the applicant indicated that they're planning on constructing a building of about 22,000 square ft. Uh the primary use will be a print a screen printing shop that produces marketing and promotional materials largely for the agricultural agricultural supply and farming industries um of the area. There will also be a caretaker quarters on the on the property. Um so the pre-anexation process is is different. Uh it's the same uh same steps, but pre-annexation, what that provides the the applicant is if approved by the Nampa City Council, it allows us when the county sends us the review materials to provide a letter to them indicating that the county or the city has approved that project and supports the project. And that's essentially what it it gets them. It also uh they enter into a development agreement and in that development agreement are conditions which u were in the staff report. Those conditions have to do with u the type of development that will go there and the codes that they agree to follow. This is something that we discussed uh over the past uh couple of years with the applicant and uh had good meetings and good interactions with them about following those conditions. If the request is denied by the council, the city will ask that the project be denied.

Um the and the regulatory framework then for this um in the BC zoning district, it does allow the type of business that's being proposed as well as a caretaker unit on the property. Um, the planning and zoning code regulations that would have to follow would be those in the in chapter 16, the community business zoning district, as well as off- streetet parking, landscaping, and fencing and screening. Uh, they'll be working with the county to implement these codes. So, it will largely be up to the county as to uh the depth of compliance. Uh, these are what we'll be requesting the county per our joint powers agreement. So the property is about a half mile from current city limits. Uh there are utilities working their way up Franklin Road. So we anticipate that in a a relatively short period of time uh as development continues up Franklin and over 2026 that these utilities will be available to the property. Um just so that you're informed of what's happening right now with the current impact area. Uh the county uh back in November made a decision to eliminate this section from uh the impact area. Um we're still working uh with that process and uh but that's currently recorded. This property location is just inside an area that the county left in our impact area uh that follows Franklin Road um up to the Boise River. Um and the applicant pointed out both that this is commercial as well as aggra business in our planning documents. Um so let's skip that. So in the BC zoning district uh printing and publishing follows under the BC categories of permitted land use. So there would be no conditions or conditional use permit

required for them to operate. Um the surrounding property is largely a large lot and agricultural. There's a gas station across the street across Highway 2026. Um and the property is about um in Canyon County's jurisdiction. It's about a half mile. I mentioned that it's a half mile from city limits. Um there's details about the engineering requirements in the uh in the staff report. Uh a uh they the traffic uh impact study is required for a project generating generating more than 100 vehicle trips during any any peak hour. Um it's likely that that won't occur on uh due to the nature of the business on this property. Um then if city utilities become available to the lot prior to annexation um the home own the owner chooses to connect to those utilities. There will be higher monthly billing rates for those utilities until such time that the lot annexes into the city of Nampa. Um we did receive correspondence from highway district number four. There's some discussion about access to the property being that it borders Highway 2026 on one side and there's no other uh connection to Franklin Road. There's some discussion about being able to do some type of an an access agreement with the adjoining neighbor to access Franklin or to work with ITD on an in andout access off of 2026. The applicant will be working with Highway District 4 and ITD to determine uh how that access will occur. The fire district indicated that it's about a a six minute response time given that fire station number three is about 3.6 miles from the from the property.

There were no uh public comments received for this project. The conditions of approval were stated in your staff report. I'd be glad to review any of those if you have any questions about the conditions of approval. Uh the findings uh for the property, there are four criteria uh that this has to meet generally having to do with annexation and meeting city standards and code requirements. Uh stated the facts in your staff report. Again, these are up here in case you have any review questions about the facts that we came up for the project. And then uh the conclusion for approval uh essentially uh since no utilities have been made uh to the city of Nampa, recommendation from the board of appraisals is not necessary for the proposed pre-anexation and given all the factors uh as we reviewed this report. The proposal does meet the criteria for pre-anexation and is therefore approved. that would be the condition that the um uh commission would have to find in order to approve the project. So here are the prop potential motions and I would be glad to take any questions.

Yes. Um the building is 22,000 ft and they're going to have a caretaker located in the building. change. Do you know what the size of the caretaker resident will be? Have to defer to the applicant. I don't know. Okay. And also, do you know what the job is going? I mean, we've had lots of buildings built. They don't have caretakers. Why doesn't have a caretaker? Um, yeah, Commissioner Miller and and Kho. I um I don't know the answer to to that question. um it how it functions in terms of their operations.

I mean, you know, I mean, a caretaker could be somebody mows the grass or it could be somebody that's an armed guard that make sure nobody breaks in the middle of the night. So, I'll ask the applicant. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um I'm still getting used to the pre-anexations and especially in a specific area plan. Um so, this aggra business is a special overlay, but I'm asking this the right way. So, we're zoning it BC. Is that does that aggra business stay once it's

Well, I guess we're not zoning it, are we? Um, I guess what I'm worried about is I'm looking at this list of things that can be allowed in the Aggra business and I to be clear, well, I guess I won't impine on the thing right now. I want to make sure that what they're doing, they don't have a problem later. Can we just call this retail or like what? You know what I mean? I want to make sure that what they're trying to do, we can fit this on their list in however many years down the road when they have to annex. Does that do you understand what I'm trying to ask?

Yeah. No, chair chair Miller and Commissioner Morgan, thank you. Um so we asked that question uh when they initially came in a couple of years ago. We were trying to find the nexus between what Agra business is calling for and what the business that they're providing. Uh they've assured us that the the vast majority of the work that they do in this printing business is to to serve the agricultural community. Uh and they do that all over the valley and and in other parts of the country as well. It's a a fairly large printing operation. Um and uh so we we determined that that made that because they're providing a service to the agricultural community that that would fit underneath that definition in the comprehensive plan.

So to follow up, um if if we make that judgment today and agree with that, does that give them any protections for when they do actually annex? Uh or could a future could a future commission say ah that's not really agricultural so we're not going to allow this. Yeah. So so a pre-anexation what that's an agreement that we have with the land owner um the property owner that when they become contiguous they'll automatically annex in. So so this is an this is the the recommendation that you're going to give is for an annexation and then that development agreement says we'll allow it. Yes.

Okay. So, this is the decision and it's not like putting them in a tough spot down the road if somebody else. Correct. Okay. Thanks. Thank you for those questions. Anybody else?

Okay. Uh, do we have a signup sheet? Okay. Is there anybody who would like to speak for, against, or undecided on this item this evening? Hatch, would you like to come back up? Chairman Miller, uh, Commissioner Kho, I was going to start by answering your questions if that's okay. Okay.

We had a question in regards to the nature of the caretaker dweller or dwelling as well as square footage. approximate square footage is is still kind of up in arms and will be somewhat determined by the Southwest District Health on the size of the dwelling in relationship to the operations in relationship to the septic. So the septic will drive the size of the dwelling. Is this a separate building or it's inside of the 22,000t building? It's within the 22,000t building. There be a separate entrance exit for him to go out. It would correct. And what is his duties going to be?

The intent of the caretaker dwell dwelling is the owners and operators of the facility want to live there. And if they so choose to leave, their intent would be to have that as employee housing, but they intend to operate and live there. That is their current intent. Okay. So, it's not really a caretaker per se. not going to be mowing the grass or Well, I mean, they're they're fairly uh thrifty people, so they will probably be mowing their own grass. Okay. Thank you.

Uh in in general, um really honored with this process of the annexation, the pre-annexation. I think it's nice to be able to set expectations. Doug's been uh very good about especially the aggro business and making sure we navigated that made making sure that the owners were aware of those obligations that they're signing up for. Um wish we we could just annex. Uh but in the meantime, I think that it's a great business and and wonderful service to our community. Um and really appreciate your time and consideration. So I'll stand for any questions. Okay. Thank you.

Make a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Been moved by Garner and seconded by Daffer to close the public hearing. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay, public hearing is closed. What do we think, folks? I don't see a problem with it. I don't either.

Pre-planning, they're right. It's not going to be a whole long time and this will be all annexed in. So, I'm mad. Mr. Chair.

Yes. I make a motion. I move to approve or recommend approval of the pre-annexation and prezoning to BC Community Business Zoning District as zero highway 2026 and development agreement for Steve the Hash design architecture representing Moxy Investments LLC with all the proposed conditions and findings and the con conclusion for approval. It's been moved by Garner, second by Turner to approve this item. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Make a mo motion to close the meeting. The public, right? Ajourn.

Adjourn the meeting. Second. I'll get it. It's been moved by Copelan, second by Morgan to adjourn the meeting. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Meeting is adjourned.