1
00:00:09,660 --> 00:00:15,150
Okay. We are ready to start our big city council meeting

2
00:00:15,840 --> 00:00:18,480
today on September 9th,

3
00:00:19,741 --> 00:00:21,840
and we will do-

4
00:00:23,760 --> 00:00:23,775
1st.

5
00:00:23,790 --> 00:00:24,180
What?

6
00:00:24,270 --> 00:00:25,770
1st. September 1.

7
00:00:26,131 --> 00:00:26,940
What did I say?

8
00:00:27,600 --> 00:00:27,901
9th.

9
00:00:28,201 --> 00:00:28,635
I said 9th?

10
00:00:28,665 --> 00:00:32,850
What's nine times? You just admitted it.

11
00:00:33,106 --> 00:00:35,940
I've had a long day. Well,

12
00:00:38,010 --> 00:00:42,360
don't know where that came from. September 1st. Thank you.

13
00:00:43,170 --> 00:00:45,390
And we will do a roll call.

14
00:00:46,680 --> 00:00:48,780
Council Member Podkalski?

15
00:00:49,110 --> 00:00:49,350
Here.

16
00:00:49,470 --> 00:00:50,821
Council Member Knowles?

17
00:00:50,940 --> 00:00:51,090
Here.

18
00:00:51,240 --> 00:00:52,321
Council Member Johnston?

19
00:00:52,710 --> 00:00:52,785
Here.

20
00:00:53,610 --> 00:00:58,380
Council Member Makowski, not present. Mayor Christensen?

21
00:00:59,370 --> 00:01:04,875
Present. Let's go ahead and start with the pledge of

22
00:01:04,920 --> 00:01:05,461
allegiance.

23
00:01:09,180 --> 00:01:15,090
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the

24
00:01:15,180 --> 00:01:21,030
Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible,

25
00:01:21,540 --> 00:01:23,490
with liberty and justice for all.

26
00:01:26,430 --> 00:01:31,260
Thanks everybody for joining in. And we'll go ahead

27
00:01:32,220 --> 00:01:36,211
and get started with our community input time.

28
00:01:36,391 --> 00:01:40,590
Before we start, I'd like to just go over the protocol for that.

29
00:01:41,280 --> 00:01:46,801
This is an opportunity to come up to the podium and speak up

30
00:01:47,190 --> 00:01:52,891
to three minutes. You are able to state your name and your physical

31
00:01:54,150 --> 00:01:58,410
place of residence, in addition to, this is

32
00:01:59,760 --> 00:02:05,220
not for any quasi-judicial matters, which are private land use

33
00:02:05,310 --> 00:02:05,970
matters.

34
00:02:09,090 --> 00:02:14,535
And if you have any input to share on a listed public hearing,

35
00:02:15,870 --> 00:02:21,615
you will also wait until the time for the public hearing and not during public

36
00:02:21,615 --> 00:02:22,200
input time

37
00:02:23,610 --> 00:02:27,780
or community input time. So if anybody would like to come up,

38
00:02:29,010 --> 00:02:32,610
this is the time to come on up to the podium.

39
00:02:38,700 --> 00:02:41,610
And I'll just ask that you, if you could turn the microphone on.

40
00:02:43,141 --> 00:02:43,470
Thank you.

41
00:02:43,680 --> 00:02:49,200
Okay. Hi. Okay. I'm trying to do, and if you're, actually just as a resident, 420

42
00:02:49,260 --> 00:02:52,980
Cowboy Trail, having been to a lot of these city meetings over the years.

43
00:02:53,490 --> 00:02:59,310
And a lot of jurisdictions in Idaho require people presenting testimony

44
00:02:59,370 --> 00:03:02,460
to take an oath or an affirmation, so to tell the truth, the whole truth.

45
00:03:03,000 --> 00:03:08,910
And Caldwell has adopted this practice since 1982, and they require staff,

46
00:03:08,970 --> 00:03:13,440
applicants, experts, consultants, engineers, and witnesses to do this in

47
00:03:13,531 --> 00:03:15,809
quasi-judicial land use proceedings.

48
00:03:16,260 --> 00:03:20,370
Coeur d'Alene has done something kind of similar for the last 11 years.

49
00:03:20,851 --> 00:03:25,770
Payette, Fruitland, Bonner, Bonners Ferry, Dalton Gardens, Franklin, and Melba also

50
00:03:25,830 --> 00:03:30,510
require oaths and affirmations in specific fact-finding hearings.

51
00:03:31,171 --> 00:03:35,070
And I think that this is a practice that the city should consider adopting.

52
00:03:35,220 --> 00:03:39,480
I think that there's a lot of new projects that come before you, and a lot of

53
00:03:39,570 --> 00:03:41,610
issues and fast-moving questions.

54
00:03:41,671 --> 00:03:44,490
And so I think that it would be to great benefit of the city.

55
00:03:45,390 --> 00:03:48,090
I do believe the city clerk has the authority to do this.

56
00:03:49,590 --> 00:03:54,765
5207 of the Idaho Code gives the clerk the authority to administer oaths, and it

57
00:03:54,840 --> 00:03:57,870
says, "The city clerk shall keep a correct journal of the proceedings of the

58
00:03:57,930 --> 00:04:02,101
council and shall have custody of all laws and ordinances of the city.

59
00:04:02,520 --> 00:04:07,470
The clerk may administer oaths to any person concerning any matter submitted to

60
00:04:07,531 --> 00:04:12,660
them or the city council." So I think that this is a, and this is actually also

61
00:04:12,690 --> 00:04:15,690
further codified in

62
00:04:17,760 --> 00:04:21,541
9 Section 1401, Who May Administer Oaths.

63
00:04:21,945 --> 00:04:26,265
"Every court, judge, or clerk of any court, every justice and notary secretary of

64
00:04:26,341 --> 00:04:31,470
state, and every other officer or person authorized to take testimony in any action

65
00:04:31,500 --> 00:04:36,420
or proceeding, has the power to administer oaths and affirmations." And I do

66
00:04:36,451 --> 00:04:40,050
believe that this could be a great benefit to the city. Thank you.

67
00:04:40,410 --> 00:04:41,010
Thank you, Your Honor.

68
00:04:55,440 --> 00:04:59,670
Kathleen Harris, 6987 West, 4000 North, Cetonia.

69
00:05:00,720 --> 00:05:06,451
My adult life has been about details, whether debugging software, preparing tax

70
00:05:06,480 --> 00:05:11,625
returns, coaching trampoline, or trying to save school district and staff a little

71
00:05:11,701 --> 00:05:16,410
money. If the details are correct, the results are solid.

72
00:05:17,190 --> 00:05:23,160
However, if the details are questionable or flat out incorrect, the results will

73
00:05:23,250 --> 00:05:29,025
be equally flawed. I am not an attorney or an accountant or a computer

74
00:05:29,040 --> 00:05:34,335
engineer, but I am good at finding things that don't quite make sense,

75
00:05:34,890 --> 00:05:38,130
things that don't follow from what was previously said.

76
00:05:39,091 --> 00:05:45,060
I read and I ask questions. You all were elected because the community

77
00:05:45,120 --> 00:05:50,880
trusts you. You are not expected to be brilliant or to know everything, but you are

78
00:05:50,910 --> 00:05:56,610
expected to study the laws, codes, requests, and comments and ask questions of

79
00:05:56,670 --> 00:06:02,010
city staff and your attorney and whomever else you believe might be helpful.

80
00:06:02,654 --> 00:06:07,755
And you need to continue asking questions until you thoroughly understand whatever

81
00:06:07,800 --> 00:06:13,591
it is you need to know. Your constituency does not want you to simply

82
00:06:13,680 --> 00:06:19,201
accept whatever you are told from your attorney or your staff or anybody

83
00:06:19,320 --> 00:06:24,570
else. You are the elected oversight for city staff and the city

84
00:06:24,599 --> 00:06:30,420
attorney. You were hired to judge their work. Please do so. Thank you.

85
00:06:31,770 --> 00:06:34,081
Thank you. Anybody else?

86
00:06:47,670 --> 00:06:50,311
Good evening. My name is David Harmon.

87
00:06:51,000 --> 00:06:56,100
I'm also at 6987 West 4000 North in Cetonia.

88
00:06:57,750 --> 00:07:03,240
I attended the last meeting and got to thinking about all the comments that I heard

89
00:07:03,270 --> 00:07:06,930
relevant to the subdivision, and it occurred to me to approach it perhaps from a

90
00:07:06,990 --> 00:07:08,100
little different angle.

91
00:07:08,220 --> 00:07:10,201
So I'm going to have to ask you to stop there.

92
00:07:10,320 --> 00:07:15,990
All comments to do with the subdivision that you're mentioning is to be

93
00:07:16,081 --> 00:07:20,730
saved, as I stated at the beginning, during the public hearing comment period.

94
00:07:20,970 --> 00:07:22,620
I'm sorry. I did not understand.

95
00:07:24,390 --> 00:07:25,290
Thank you.

96
00:07:32,040 --> 00:07:33,061
Anybody else?

97
00:07:41,490 --> 00:07:45,990
Okay, we'll move on to our consent agenda. Before...

98
00:07:49,651 --> 00:07:52,020
Yes, we'll move on to our consent agenda.

99
00:07:53,490 --> 00:07:57,660
Before we move on to anything else, I would just like to

100
00:07:59,280 --> 00:08:01,170
state that in the claims,

101
00:08:03,270 --> 00:08:08,760
we need to be able to pull out the item 121090

102
00:08:09,360 --> 00:08:15,180
for the airport runway repair, and we will be, if we need to

103
00:08:15,210 --> 00:08:18,600
bring that back, we'll be bringing that back at a future council

104
00:08:18,630 --> 00:08:22,980
meeting.

105
00:08:24,390 --> 00:08:28,201
I make a motion to approve the consent agenda, omitting item number

106
00:08:28,530 --> 00:08:31,831
121090 off of the claims.

107
00:08:33,211 --> 00:08:34,515
I'll second that.

108
00:08:34,515 --> 00:08:39,901
Motion to second. Any discussion in regards to the minutes from August 4th,

109
00:08:40,620 --> 00:08:42,704
August 18th, and the claims?

110
00:08:44,580 --> 00:08:46,681
I appreciate the corrections. Thank you.

111
00:08:50,730 --> 00:08:51,570
All in favor?

112
00:08:52,110 --> 00:08:52,500
Aye.

113
00:08:53,190 --> 00:08:53,235
Aye.

114
00:08:53,235 --> 00:08:53,520
Aye.

115
00:08:55,050 --> 00:08:55,681
Thank you.

116
00:08:59,100 --> 00:09:03,901
Now we're going to move on to agenda item number four for the LTCH presentation of

117
00:09:03,931 --> 00:09:04,890
road scholar

118
00:09:14,202 --> 00:09:16,272
All right. My name is Lisa Moffatt with LTAP.

119
00:09:16,302 --> 00:09:19,992
Thank you for allowing me to be here today to give an award to one of your staff

120
00:09:20,022 --> 00:09:21,792
for their outstanding achievements.

121
00:09:22,062 --> 00:09:25,707
Just a little bit about us and the program, so you understand how we go through to

122
00:09:25,722 --> 00:09:31,152
get this award. Our mission at LTAP is to advocate, support, and train all local

123
00:09:31,167 --> 00:09:35,457
highway jurisdictions. That's every highway district, city, and county with road

124
00:09:35,652 --> 00:09:40,572
authority in the state. We have a Teach 2 Center that is part of a national

125
00:09:40,602 --> 00:09:44,982
program. We provide training and technical assistance to meet the needs of highway

126
00:09:45,042 --> 00:09:49,617
jurisdictions in Idaho. So the training portion of our Teach 2 Center is offered in

127
00:09:49,617 --> 00:09:53,367
the form of classes. They're held throughout the state during the spring and the

128
00:09:53,383 --> 00:09:57,462
fall. The classes we offer cover a wide variety of topics, including safety,

129
00:09:57,883 --> 00:10:01,152
professional development, and the largest portion being construction and

130
00:10:01,182 --> 00:10:06,807
maintenance techniques. Most of the courses have an exam that requires an 80% on an

131
00:10:06,807 --> 00:10:10,422
exam to pass. So we offer three different programs.

132
00:10:11,142 --> 00:10:14,832
The first one is Road Scholar, and that's not here to present today.

133
00:10:14,922 --> 00:10:19,782
It includes approximately 80 hours of instruction, seven core classes, and four

134
00:10:19,842 --> 00:10:23,022
electives. Each student will have four years to complete this level.

135
00:10:23,922 --> 00:10:27,432
Our second program is the Road Master. It builds upon the Road Scholar.

136
00:10:27,942 --> 00:10:31,842
Includes another variety of classes, 80 hours of instruction, and four years to

137
00:10:31,902 --> 00:10:36,012
complete. And then we also offer a leadership development program.

138
00:10:36,642 --> 00:10:39,342
So at this time, we'll bring up Tanner Roberts.

139
00:10:39,492 --> 00:10:40,932
If you'll

140
00:10:40,962 --> 00:10:46,962
please

141
00:10:47,113 --> 00:10:49,977
Here's your hat. Does everybody want to meet?

142
00:10:50,352 --> 00:10:50,472
Yeah.

143
00:10:54,222 --> 00:10:55,092
Can I take a picture?

144
00:10:55,182 --> 00:10:55,572
Yes.

145
00:10:58,722 --> 00:10:58,962
Sorry.

146
00:10:58,977 --> 00:11:00,657
Can we take a picture with LTAP?

147
00:11:01,482 --> 00:11:02,022
We're going to

148
00:11:04,122 --> 00:11:05,383
take a picture.

149
00:11:05,412 --> 00:11:06,147
Okay, perfect.

150
00:11:08,532 --> 00:11:12,042
Here, jump in there.

151
00:11:14,082 --> 00:11:14,892
Mom, you should probably-

152
00:11:15,012 --> 00:11:18,762
Okay. Do you want to search on my phone?

153
00:11:19,302 --> 00:11:19,902
Yeah. Thanks.

154
00:11:20,022 --> 00:11:20,472
Oh, yeah.

155
00:11:20,532 --> 00:11:20,712
So

156
00:11:23,502 --> 00:11:29,247
you're just

157
00:11:32,292 --> 00:11:32,832
That way?

158
00:11:33,222 --> 00:11:34,332
Perfect.

159
00:11:34,422 --> 00:11:35,863
In our camera for one time.

160
00:11:42,642 --> 00:11:43,602
Cheese.

161
00:11:46,992 --> 00:11:47,532
Hey.

162
00:11:48,162 --> 00:11:49,633
If you have some-

163
00:11:56,022 --> 00:11:57,222
Wait, don't go yet, Tanner.

164
00:12:00,342 --> 00:12:05,982
Tanner, we're so proud of you, and we just really appreciate your dedication to the

165
00:12:06,012 --> 00:12:11,982
city of Driggs and taking the time to do this education for

166
00:12:12,042 --> 00:12:17,863
yourself and for the city. And it's people like you that matter to

167
00:12:17,922 --> 00:12:21,552
our town to make everything better and for all of our residents here.

168
00:12:21,613 --> 00:12:22,601
And so-

169
00:12:22,962 --> 00:12:22,977
Thank you

170
00:12:22,977 --> 00:12:24,852
... I'm just really proud of you. Thank you, Tanner.

171
00:12:25,242 --> 00:12:28,406
Thank you. It's been a pleasure.

172
00:12:33,162 --> 00:12:33,582
Aw.

173
00:12:36,702 --> 00:12:42,492
We all need a little positive, good news in our day, and it's wonderful to be

174
00:12:42,552 --> 00:12:48,326
able to have opportunities like that to acknowledge our staff, our

175
00:12:48,373 --> 00:12:51,762
hardworking staff here at the city of Driggs.

176
00:12:51,882 --> 00:12:55,722
So thank you for being a part of it here tonight.

177
00:12:58,272 --> 00:13:01,812
We are going to move on to agenda item number five.

178
00:13:01,873 --> 00:13:07,782
This is our public hearing for the preliminary plat for Corona Valley, and

179
00:13:07,842 --> 00:13:13,422
this was tabled on August 4th until tonight.

180
00:13:14,262 --> 00:13:20,233
So, a few things that I'm going to review before we start

181
00:13:20,262 --> 00:13:21,822
here is

182
00:13:23,623 --> 00:13:29,592
this was indeed tabled. And this was tabled for a number

183
00:13:29,803 --> 00:13:33,042
of reasons, which I'm going to go over here.

184
00:13:33,282 --> 00:13:38,816
The motion was to be able to have

185
00:13:38,892 --> 00:13:43,887
additional information for council and to

186
00:13:44,952 --> 00:13:48,432
further consider public comment in regards to the new information.

187
00:13:49,692 --> 00:13:54,432
The first one was regarding new information of finding number three, updated

188
00:13:54,522 --> 00:13:59,292
improvement plans that are stamped and fully accepted by public works and

189
00:13:59,352 --> 00:14:02,113
incorporate recommendations from Keller regarding water.

190
00:14:03,042 --> 00:14:08,322
Two, related to finding number four, proposed phasing is clearly shown with more

191
00:14:08,382 --> 00:14:11,442
clarity and consistency in phasing plans.

192
00:14:12,553 --> 00:14:18,192
Three, regarding finding number five, need more information on

193
00:14:18,252 --> 00:14:20,863
satisfactory mitigation measures.

194
00:14:21,762 --> 00:14:22,092
So,

195
00:14:24,162 --> 00:14:29,742
that's the new information that we will be hearing tonight.

196
00:14:30,432 --> 00:14:35,412
And so we'll go ahead and start. Will we be starting with staff or the applicant?

197
00:14:36,192 --> 00:14:37,287
I can go first, yeah.

198
00:14:37,333 --> 00:14:38,803
Okay, come on up. Thank you, Jake.

199
00:14:47,532 --> 00:14:49,272
Good evening, council. I'm Jennifer.

200
00:14:49,527 --> 00:14:54,162
Making sure everything is going on good.

201
00:14:56,233 --> 00:15:01,752
The mayor already went over the motion particularly, but it is included on the last

202
00:15:01,842 --> 00:15:03,822
page of your staff report in the packet.

203
00:15:05,892 --> 00:15:10,152
The materials that were submitted by the applicant, staff tries to clearly

204
00:15:10,182 --> 00:15:13,303
articulate, by parentheses, new.

205
00:15:14,562 --> 00:15:17,412
There are a lot of documents, so we did try to do that.

206
00:15:19,483 --> 00:15:21,942
There are some additional information

207
00:15:23,172 --> 00:15:27,432
in the mitigation sections which staff is suggesting as city council makes a motion

208
00:15:27,492 --> 00:15:31,062
this evening to incorporate into the development agreement.

209
00:15:31,452 --> 00:15:36,342
That includes the voluntary contribution to the school's growth

210
00:15:36,912 --> 00:15:37,902
contribution fund,

211
00:15:39,583 --> 00:15:44,083
which is a new fund that's starting based on essentially the impact they've studied

212
00:15:44,142 --> 00:15:47,833
from the school district. And they'll be presenting on that at your next city

213
00:15:47,907 --> 00:15:52,692
council meeting. But that's the voluntary contribution this developer has

214
00:15:53,382 --> 00:15:57,672
suggested, and has broken out by phases of the development.

215
00:15:58,032 --> 00:16:02,892
The other mitigation measure was a contribution to the sheriff's department,

216
00:16:03,702 --> 00:16:06,852
excuse me, Teton County Sheriff's Department, which would require

217
00:16:08,202 --> 00:16:13,842
a separate agreement. So those things staff would recommend be incorporated into

218
00:16:13,873 --> 00:16:16,632
your city in motion made.

219
00:16:18,762 --> 00:16:24,432
The last mitigation measure that I wanted to mention, which has been discussed, and

220
00:16:24,522 --> 00:16:29,022
is within the development agreement currently, but there were some questions about

221
00:16:29,142 --> 00:16:29,892
signage,

222
00:16:31,123 --> 00:16:36,792
local traffic-only signage on Highway Trail south of Ross

223
00:16:36,882 --> 00:16:41,592
Avenue, where the narrowing boulevard bulb-outs are proposed by this developer.

224
00:16:41,712 --> 00:16:47,262
So as an off-site mitigation. This is off the property south of Ross Avenue.

225
00:16:48,162 --> 00:16:51,852
We've discussed signage, it's in the development agreement, but if City Council

226
00:16:51,912 --> 00:16:55,557
would like further clarification, I would suggest local traffic only.

227
00:16:56,892 --> 00:16:59,141
That's the sign that we previously discussed.

228
00:16:59,172 --> 00:17:04,152
So that sign isn't specifically called out, but signage is in the development

229
00:17:04,212 --> 00:17:06,073
agreement for that off-site investigation.

230
00:17:09,613 --> 00:17:15,102
Are there any questions for... Oh, and lastly, we do have Keller Associates

231
00:17:15,192 --> 00:17:20,712
online. If there are specific questions for them, I believe that you

232
00:17:20,803 --> 00:17:25,633
can find Davis and Collier, sorry.

233
00:17:32,892 --> 00:17:37,992
Thank you. Is there any questions from City Council for staff at this time?

234
00:17:41,172 --> 00:17:45,732
Regarding anything, as in, for new information or?

235
00:17:47,322 --> 00:17:51,732
You can discuss anything related to the application.

236
00:17:54,972 --> 00:17:58,062
I'll break the ice with something simple.

237
00:17:58,122 --> 00:17:58,632
There was

238
00:17:59,832 --> 00:18:04,902
in the agenda packet, as far as dedicated park space, there was three different

239
00:18:04,962 --> 00:18:10,152
numbers drawn out. In one place, it said 6.5 acres of park space is dedicated.

240
00:18:10,932 --> 00:18:11,442
Another

241
00:18:12,702 --> 00:18:18,192
page said 5.074, and another said 6.9, and just wanted to

242
00:18:18,252 --> 00:18:19,062
clarify

243
00:18:20,100 --> 00:18:22,290
What is the dedicated park space

244
00:18:23,504 --> 00:18:23,504
?

245
00:18:23,986 --> 00:18:27,960
Well, the dedicated park space is what's being dedicated to the City of Driggs.

246
00:18:28,020 --> 00:18:32,010
It might be confusing because there's more than the required amount, but not all of

247
00:18:32,070 --> 00:18:36,690
it is going to the City of Driggs. The City of Driggs, or at least in staff's

248
00:18:36,780 --> 00:18:40,350
recommendations, to only accept the soccer field section.

249
00:18:41,490 --> 00:18:47,130
Those other small pocket parks and stormwater parks would

250
00:18:47,190 --> 00:18:49,500
be owned and maintained by the development.

251
00:18:49,861 --> 00:18:50,611
Great. Thanks.

252
00:18:53,670 --> 00:18:55,350
Before we move on, I just want to...

253
00:18:55,410 --> 00:19:00,330
If anybody is out in the gallery area, there's three open seats up front.

254
00:19:00,900 --> 00:19:04,710
I see one open seat in the middle over here,

255
00:19:06,030 --> 00:19:09,240
and I think there's one over there in the far corner.

256
00:19:11,880 --> 00:19:13,065
Sorry. Okay, any

257
00:19:14,910 --> 00:19:17,430
other questions for staff at this time?

258
00:19:18,750 --> 00:19:19,230
Yeah, this is

259
00:19:20,700 --> 00:19:20,715
Phil.

260
00:19:21,420 --> 00:19:24,330
I was just going to say same here that I do have some questions, but I was

261
00:19:24,361 --> 00:19:27,554
wondering if I can hold them until after the

262
00:19:27,554 --> 00:19:27,554
Yeah.

263
00:19:27,554 --> 00:19:30,630
Presentation. They might just be able to-

264
00:19:30,900 --> 00:19:31,440
That's fine.

265
00:19:33,720 --> 00:19:37,801
This is just something that got brought up at the previous hearing.

266
00:19:38,371 --> 00:19:42,480
In the new engineering response, it

267
00:19:43,801 --> 00:19:48,361
suggested that the lighting was non-conforming.

268
00:19:49,080 --> 00:19:54,390
But I think the point of the new photometrics plan, did that address it?

269
00:19:55,950 --> 00:19:58,320
Of the 4,000 foot candle development.

270
00:19:59,940 --> 00:20:05,070
Yes. Certainly not the only change that was made, which was adjusting the

271
00:20:05,130 --> 00:20:08,250
4,000 foot candle on the fixtures.

272
00:20:08,611 --> 00:20:09,060
Right.

273
00:20:12,090 --> 00:20:17,611
I would like to just pause us because I didn't ask, even though this was tabled,

274
00:20:18,121 --> 00:20:24,075
I didn't ask electeds if, because this is a quasi-judicial matter, if

275
00:20:24,090 --> 00:20:25,980
there was any additional

276
00:20:27,361 --> 00:20:32,070
information that you received outside of this

277
00:20:32,640 --> 00:20:34,051
information from this

278
00:20:35,580 --> 00:20:37,801
last meeting or in the packet,

279
00:20:39,030 --> 00:20:40,770
or had any additional input.

280
00:20:42,630 --> 00:20:42,810
No.

281
00:20:43,801 --> 00:20:44,340
Miles?

282
00:20:44,430 --> 00:20:44,445
No.

283
00:20:45,030 --> 00:20:45,420
Sarah?

284
00:20:45,750 --> 00:20:47,100
No, I'm not.

285
00:20:48,570 --> 00:20:54,240
Thank you. I did have a brief conversation with somebody that lives in the

286
00:20:54,270 --> 00:20:57,301
valley in regards to

287
00:21:00,330 --> 00:21:05,400
wording in our land development codes,

288
00:21:06,540 --> 00:21:07,710
and interpretations.

289
00:21:10,530 --> 00:21:14,700
Sorry, okay, so any additional questions for staff?

290
00:21:20,460 --> 00:21:24,480
During the last meeting, you had said this, "Well, the sort of haven't reached out

291
00:21:24,570 --> 00:21:28,590
for to make a comment." Is that true now the case?

292
00:21:28,770 --> 00:21:30,480
They haven't made a statement about-

293
00:21:31,470 --> 00:21:36,090
They are finalizing their written form, which will be used to respond to all

294
00:21:36,150 --> 00:21:38,340
development requests throughout the valley.

295
00:21:39,301 --> 00:21:44,264
They did not make a specific one on this application, but we did talk about it,

296
00:21:44,400 --> 00:21:49,200
they've looked at it, and I did share this mitigation proposal with them, so

297
00:21:49,230 --> 00:21:50,760
they're aware.

298
00:21:51,255 --> 00:21:51,255
Okay.

299
00:21:51,301 --> 00:21:53,940
So no formal comments, but a conversation was had.

300
00:22:02,371 --> 00:22:07,740
Additional questions before we hear from the applicant?

301
00:22:10,020 --> 00:22:11,160
Okay, thank you.

302
00:22:13,020 --> 00:22:17,730
And if you are standing up, you can feel free to stand up, or there are a couple

303
00:22:17,790 --> 00:22:18,570
empty chairs.

304
00:22:20,250 --> 00:22:23,309
Okay, so we are ready to hear from the applicant.

305
00:22:30,524 --> 00:22:34,170
Okay, hold on. Nicole, can you give me share permission? Okay.

306
00:22:36,555 --> 00:22:36,585
Hit connect.

307
00:22:36,585 --> 00:22:38,460
Is that connect to connect? Okay.

308
00:23:03,150 --> 00:23:08,040
You should get a window saying, become a panelist.

309
00:23:09,180 --> 00:23:10,111
No?

310
00:23:10,861 --> 00:23:11,880
Not happened yet.

311
00:23:13,020 --> 00:23:13,530
It said-

312
00:23:14,130 --> 00:23:14,325
It's saying

313
00:23:14,325 --> 00:23:15,480
It said you declined.

314
00:23:16,740 --> 00:23:17,910
So if you accept-

315
00:23:18,315 --> 00:23:18,510
There

316
00:23:19,320 --> 00:23:20,040
... we'll be in business.

317
00:23:21,630 --> 00:23:22,020
Okay.

318
00:23:39,420 --> 00:23:41,520
Good evening. Mike Knight with Knight Engineering.

319
00:23:42,180 --> 00:23:47,700
For the applicants, 2295 North Idaho Highway Unit 6, Idaho Falls, Idaho.

320
00:23:49,440 --> 00:23:53,250
Going over Chrome Valley again, I do have one question before I continue.

321
00:23:53,371 --> 00:23:59,340
Do-- Can I only go over parts three, criterion three, four, and five that were

322
00:23:59,400 --> 00:24:02,130
reopened, or does this apply to

323
00:24:03,570 --> 00:24:04,920
1206 as well?

324
00:24:06,301 --> 00:24:11,970
It's my understanding that this was tabled to be able to have new

325
00:24:12,060 --> 00:24:17,280
information for council as requested, which was the three, four, and five.

326
00:24:17,700 --> 00:24:22,920
Let me just confirm that that is indeed the focus of the

327
00:24:24,121 --> 00:24:24,600
meeting.

328
00:24:26,910 --> 00:24:28,410
Yeah. That should be the focus.

329
00:24:28,890 --> 00:24:29,790
Okay. Thank you.

330
00:24:30,795 --> 00:24:30,795
Thank you.

331
00:24:30,810 --> 00:24:33,885
Yeah. Actually, I don't want to waste anybody's time talking about stuff we don't

332
00:24:33,960 --> 00:24:38,040
need to talk about, but I appreciate it. So going over Chrome Valley.

333
00:24:38,490 --> 00:24:43,590
We've gone through the comments that we received from council previously, and we

334
00:24:43,650 --> 00:24:46,080
tried to address those. We addressed them in a few different ways.

335
00:24:46,139 --> 00:24:51,270
We provided a narrative that you should have for the TIS, and how we incorporated

336
00:24:51,660 --> 00:24:56,910
and used the mitigation for the traffic impact study from Keller.

337
00:24:56,970 --> 00:25:01,861
And then we also provided an updated narrative as far as criteria five and those--

338
00:25:01,920 --> 00:25:06,810
and how those mitigations are being mitigated through the development.

339
00:25:07,380 --> 00:25:10,530
And then I'll go into that and elaborate a little bit on that, touch on those

340
00:25:11,010 --> 00:25:15,915
verbally, but the real detail is already in that narrative or in those narratives.

341
00:25:16,111 --> 00:25:17,940
Additionally, with that, we've also

342
00:25:19,350 --> 00:25:25,200
drafted up two new plan sets. So in other words, we revised the master plan set

343
00:25:25,260 --> 00:25:28,320
that had been previously reviewed.

344
00:25:28,801 --> 00:25:29,371
And we had

345
00:25:31,140 --> 00:25:34,890
really just addressed the comments that we're still retaining for that.

346
00:25:34,980 --> 00:25:40,051
So from there, we drafted a whole new set, which was the phase one.

347
00:25:40,111 --> 00:25:46,095
We delineated those two to really delineate the phasing as we were asked right from

348
00:25:46,290 --> 00:25:50,325
the previous council meeting. And I'll go into a little bit of how all that is

349
00:25:50,370 --> 00:25:51,015
going together.

350
00:25:52,710 --> 00:25:56,145
So criteria we're going to go over today are three, four, and five, improvement

351
00:25:56,220 --> 00:26:01,980
plans, phasing, and mitigation. So I'm going to skip over the next slide here

352
00:26:02,670 --> 00:26:06,540
as we go into just the criteria three. We'll start here.

353
00:26:09,180 --> 00:26:11,010
So the improvement plans, the standard.

354
00:26:11,551 --> 00:26:17,010
Improvement plans approved by City Public Works, City Engineer, Teton County Fire

355
00:26:17,130 --> 00:26:21,330
Protection District, Idaho DG, and other agencies with jurisdiction.

356
00:26:21,840 --> 00:26:25,890
So that's the standard. What we-- What we were asked, and we were asked to complete

357
00:26:25,950 --> 00:26:31,620
stamp plans accepted by Public Works, phasing delineation, and incorporate Keller

358
00:26:32,040 --> 00:26:34,380
water recommendations. We submitted

359
00:26:35,700 --> 00:26:41,430
two new sets on August 12th, a full improvement set and a separate phase one

360
00:26:41,491 --> 00:26:44,280
set sealed by Blake Charlie, PE.

361
00:26:45,900 --> 00:26:50,520
The current status of the plans have been in a city review since August 12th.

362
00:26:50,940 --> 00:26:55,635
Remain-- Because there are some remaining comments, mostly on clarification for the

363
00:26:55,650 --> 00:26:59,700
new phase one plan set, and this is the initial review of that plan set.

364
00:26:59,760 --> 00:27:03,270
We only had time for one review given the time allotted.

365
00:27:04,950 --> 00:27:09,660
With that, the DQ review is still pending, and that is just part of the ordinary

366
00:27:09,750 --> 00:27:13,351
process. We can't do that until we have a will serve, which is provided after

367
00:27:13,410 --> 00:27:17,970
approval. We asked the remaining Public Works comments along with DQ review

368
00:27:18,180 --> 00:27:22,439
approval be made conditional of approval as a comment of the preliminary plan.

369
00:27:27,144 --> 00:27:28,734
Criteria four, phasing.

370
00:27:30,954 --> 00:27:36,804
So phasing is laid out as such. Phase one, we have 48 units, 14 detached

371
00:27:36,834 --> 00:27:41,184
and 34 attached. Phase two, we have 36 attached units.

372
00:27:41,725 --> 00:27:45,174
Phase three, 32, eight detached and 24 attached.

373
00:27:45,684 --> 00:27:49,554
And then phases four and five, 32 attached for each of those.

374
00:27:49,614 --> 00:27:54,204
We've also outlined these in blue or in different colors.

375
00:27:54,294 --> 00:27:55,975
You can see phase one is all in blue.

376
00:27:56,784 --> 00:27:57,745
Making progress.

377
00:27:58,134 --> 00:28:03,715
That would consist of all of Cowboy Trail, all of Comanche, the park area,

378
00:28:04,194 --> 00:28:06,264
and then all of the phase one area.

379
00:28:08,605 --> 00:28:11,245
Phase one was reduced from the original phasing.

380
00:28:11,304 --> 00:28:13,284
So it's an important distinction here.

381
00:28:13,824 --> 00:28:18,804
The original phasing, which may have caused some of the confusion, had 85 units

382
00:28:18,894 --> 00:28:20,995
in-incorporated phase one and two.

383
00:28:21,594 --> 00:28:24,294
That has since been broken down into two separate phases.

384
00:28:24,774 --> 00:28:30,475
Phase one is now at 48 units. We now have two drawing sets, a stand-alone for just

385
00:28:30,534 --> 00:28:33,324
phase one and the master of all five phases.

386
00:28:35,304 --> 00:28:40,734
Orderly build-out. Phase one builds, again, the Cowboy Trail collector segment and

387
00:28:40,764 --> 00:28:45,594
the parks first. We have no direct block driveways on Ross Avenue or Hooch Way in

388
00:28:45,624 --> 00:28:46,344
any phase.

389
00:28:48,745 --> 00:28:52,674
In each later phase, again, we'll be zoned for literary and final plat.

390
00:28:52,809 --> 00:28:55,254
Total build-out is 180 units, no change.

391
00:28:57,745 --> 00:28:59,454
Criteria five, this is the big one here.

392
00:29:00,174 --> 00:29:03,654
Broken down list, this is the traffic portion and how these mitigations were met.

393
00:29:04,194 --> 00:29:08,409
Criteria is mitigations must be proportioned to impact and locked in the

394
00:29:08,454 --> 00:29:09,324
development agreement.

395
00:29:10,855 --> 00:29:16,284
First is the developer proportion of shares from the updated traffic impact study

396
00:29:16,584 --> 00:29:21,954
that was completed by builders with its 2025 TMP travel demand

397
00:29:21,984 --> 00:29:27,864
model. That is written into the DA as the proportion of shares

398
00:29:27,894 --> 00:29:30,804
that will be provided by the developer.

399
00:29:31,855 --> 00:29:37,824
In addition to those, we have the existing pathway removed and replaced with a

400
00:29:37,855 --> 00:29:42,084
10-foot asphalt pathway that was directed by Public Works along Hooch Way.

401
00:29:43,824 --> 00:29:45,624
Continuing from the previous CIS,

402
00:29:47,154 --> 00:29:49,764
zero collector driveways on Ross Avenue and Hooch Way

403
00:29:51,084 --> 00:29:51,984
for any of the phases.

404
00:29:53,394 --> 00:29:58,165
Another additional that's outside of the TIS recommendation, and it's just an

405
00:29:58,194 --> 00:30:03,504
addition, is a light at parks for crossing with marked light across walks with ADA

406
00:30:03,594 --> 00:30:06,444
detectable warning signs between the two parks.

407
00:30:08,094 --> 00:30:13,314
And then lastly is the TMP street hierarchy, as we're establishing Cowboy Trail as

408
00:30:13,434 --> 00:30:18,040
a collector, a minor residential collector, which will allow Hooch Way in the

409
00:30:18,054 --> 00:30:20,634
future to no longer be that collector road.

410
00:30:23,364 --> 00:30:27,234
With that, Cowboy Trail will build out south of Ross to calm traffic and reduce

411
00:30:27,355 --> 00:30:28,764
cut-through continuing south

412
00:30:30,084 --> 00:30:35,605
through Cowboy Trail. And again, as you spoke to earlier with the included signage,

413
00:30:35,754 --> 00:30:37,299
which is part of the development agreement.

414
00:30:39,444 --> 00:30:42,983
Second part of criteria five and how we're meeting those mitigations.

415
00:30:43,915 --> 00:30:49,404
First is water. Water rights will be transferred at 28,000 a minute per ERU,

416
00:30:50,154 --> 00:30:55,284
with a total of approximately 153 gallon per minute for residential demand and

417
00:30:55,344 --> 00:30:57,684
irrigation, as accepted by the city.

418
00:30:59,394 --> 00:31:03,834
Phases one and two, formerly phase one, as shown in figure six, which was from the

419
00:31:03,864 --> 00:31:06,144
review from Keller and Mensch,

420
00:31:07,374 --> 00:31:09,834
do not require offsite transmission improvements.

421
00:31:10,134 --> 00:31:14,245
Phase three, four, and five will require either acceptance of offsite transmission

422
00:31:14,274 --> 00:31:17,094
line or city accepted engineer findings.

423
00:31:17,665 --> 00:31:21,594
These requirements are included in the development agreement and conditions of the

424
00:31:21,609 --> 00:31:22,134
approval.

425
00:31:25,465 --> 00:31:31,254
Sewer. The Keller water memo of April 8, 2026, the gravity system has the capacity.

426
00:31:31,824 --> 00:31:34,584
Main lift station has a peak flow of 500 gallons per minute.

427
00:31:35,514 --> 00:31:41,394
We will be at with 180 units, that would be 83% of current capacity, below

428
00:31:41,424 --> 00:31:44,665
the 85% trigger that would require improvements.

429
00:31:48,894 --> 00:31:53,904
The system currently has capacity for all 180 units.

430
00:31:55,344 --> 00:32:01,194
Parks and open space. 6.5 park acres of park space,

431
00:32:01,495 --> 00:32:05,634
pathway network, including recreational fields. That's all inclusive.

432
00:32:05,694 --> 00:32:11,094
That's all of the parks together. The code requirements is 5.04

433
00:32:11,154 --> 00:32:16,225
acres. And then we are above that. The dedication to the city, plus the HOA

434
00:32:16,404 --> 00:32:19,659
maintained open space, which is the combined 6.5 acres,

435
00:32:21,924 --> 00:32:27,879
is provided within the development to include offsite

436
00:32:27,924 --> 00:32:33,745
crosswalks and the existing restroom improvements at the adjacent park.

437
00:32:34,704 --> 00:32:36,999
Workforce housing, the WHIP.

438
00:32:39,384 --> 00:32:44,995
Just real quickly, currently we are required for five restricted units.

439
00:32:45,475 --> 00:32:49,794
The developer is continuing to almost double that with nine deed restricted

440
00:32:49,824 --> 00:32:54,234
ownership with no impact fee or water right waiver assumed.

441
00:32:57,415 --> 00:33:03,084
Schools. Staff says that ongoing school revenues are expected to offset the service

442
00:33:03,144 --> 00:33:07,404
costs over time. District did not file opposition.

443
00:33:08,334 --> 00:33:13,855
Developer asked a voluntary $158,852 for the

444
00:33:13,915 --> 00:33:15,624
near-term capital during build-out.

445
00:33:16,134 --> 00:33:20,334
This would be allocated by phase proportion.

446
00:33:21,534 --> 00:33:26,574
Fees and public safety. City impact fees, parks, fire and rescue, transportation.

447
00:33:27,534 --> 00:33:32,980
The FYI planning estimate is $1,297,754, roughly

448
00:33:33,114 --> 00:33:37,915
1.3 million. With addition of the TIS share of

449
00:33:37,928 --> 00:33:40,915
$271,800.03

450
00:33:42,204 --> 00:33:48,024
and a voluntary public safety offer of $225,000 over five years

451
00:33:48,114 --> 00:33:49,975
is in the FYA revision two

452
00:33:51,355 --> 00:33:56,154
and becomes part of the DA if the council is willing to accept it as a conditional.

453
00:33:59,303 --> 00:33:59,439
And

454
00:34:01,855 --> 00:34:04,074
criteria six is not applied per se.

455
00:34:06,204 --> 00:34:11,004
So phasing three, we have provided the sample plans.

456
00:34:12,624 --> 00:34:16,944
They have only had one review from Jay, so we're going to need to continue with the

457
00:34:16,975 --> 00:34:18,954
review on that. Again, the

458
00:34:21,324 --> 00:34:26,814
points that are there are largely delineation back points as far as just being able

459
00:34:26,904 --> 00:34:32,064
to get hashings and stuff corrected to more clearly

460
00:34:32,079 --> 00:34:37,855
identify some of the splits. But everything else, no

461
00:34:37,944 --> 00:34:43,794
major shifts for that one at all, which is actually very good considering we

462
00:34:43,824 --> 00:34:45,084
had everything put together.

463
00:34:46,794 --> 00:34:52,134
Mitigation. That's right, mitigation. Staff finds that everything is conforming.

464
00:34:53,634 --> 00:34:57,264
These are the experts that we've worked tirelessly with staff.

465
00:34:57,894 --> 00:35:03,474
Again, probably to the point of we're driving them a little bit crazy.

466
00:35:04,404 --> 00:35:10,314
Big eyes here to a project that conforms, and it conforms at every level.

467
00:35:10,884 --> 00:35:12,744
And we're extremely proud of that.

468
00:35:12,834 --> 00:35:16,584
We're extremely proud of the work and effort, and we want to thank the staff for

469
00:35:16,974 --> 00:35:21,534
the effort that they've shown with us to get us to a product where we know that it

470
00:35:21,564 --> 00:35:23,154
conforms. We know it does.

471
00:35:25,105 --> 00:35:29,199
And then with that, I'll leave myself open for any questions that you may have.

472
00:35:29,994 --> 00:35:35,874
One final thing is we are asking approval today with the conditions as directed by

473
00:35:35,904 --> 00:35:37,344
council.

474
00:35:37,434 --> 00:35:38,244
Thank you, Michael.

475
00:35:38,289 --> 00:35:38,289
Thank you.

476
00:35:38,334 --> 00:35:44,214
Any questions from council of the applicant?

477
00:35:44,275 --> 00:35:50,244
Yes. Michael, what is the parcel number of the land affected by this

478
00:35:50,275 --> 00:35:50,934
application?

479
00:35:51,744 --> 00:35:52,944
I don't know that off the top of my head.

480
00:35:54,144 --> 00:35:57,263
Your narrative from April 16th says that it's parcel

481
00:35:57,594 --> 00:36:01,284
0000035625. Is that correct?

482
00:36:02,004 --> 00:36:05,589
I don't know that off the top of my head, Ms.

483
00:36:05,589 --> 00:36:07,734
Regan, I don't have it in front of me.

484
00:36:08,574 --> 00:36:12,219
Okay. Maybe you'll know this off the top of your head.

485
00:36:12,219 --> 00:36:13,689
Who is the owner of the land?

486
00:36:13,689 --> 00:36:14,814
LVM Properties.

487
00:36:15,594 --> 00:36:21,263
Okay. Your narrative says that the property is currently owned by Ross Avenue

488
00:36:21,324 --> 00:36:22,374
Holdings, LLC.

489
00:36:22,764 --> 00:36:24,564
That was the previous owner, I believe.

490
00:36:26,154 --> 00:36:29,124
Or not previous owner, but a previous name.

491
00:36:30,810 --> 00:36:31,920
That it be completed?

492
00:36:33,270 --> 00:36:33,780
Okay.

493
00:36:35,491 --> 00:36:37,455
Who is the applicant of record?

494
00:36:39,390 --> 00:36:41,265
The applicant of record is my agent, right?

495
00:36:42,930 --> 00:36:46,471
Do you have a signed and notarized letter of authorization from the owner of that?

496
00:36:47,010 --> 00:36:47,340
Yes.

497
00:36:53,400 --> 00:36:53,760
Thanks.

498
00:36:54,870 --> 00:36:56,851
Any other questions from council?

499
00:37:00,991 --> 00:37:02,145
None from me.

500
00:37:02,221 --> 00:37:06,630
Okay, thank you. We'll go ahead and start our public hearing.

501
00:37:10,230 --> 00:37:15,930
So just to remind everybody, we're going to do our public hearing.

502
00:37:16,080 --> 00:37:19,351
So we will start with for,

503
00:37:20,670 --> 00:37:25,741
then neutral, and then against. You'll have three minutes,

504
00:37:26,550 --> 00:37:31,380
and I will be keeping track of that, and so I ask that you respect the three

505
00:37:31,471 --> 00:37:33,930
minutes. You'll hear my timer.

506
00:37:38,190 --> 00:37:44,101
Just to remind everybody, we have the public hearing because we have

507
00:37:44,190 --> 00:37:49,950
new information, and so this would be an opportunity to give your public

508
00:37:50,010 --> 00:37:53,010
comment in regards to this new information.

509
00:37:55,920 --> 00:38:00,660
And when you come on up, you will go ahead and share your

510
00:38:00,780 --> 00:38:04,620
name and your address for the record.

511
00:38:05,851 --> 00:38:10,741
So if you are here and would like to come on up to the podium...

512
00:38:10,950 --> 00:38:15,991
Can you actually, staff, can you remind me, do we start with for? Yes.

513
00:38:18,090 --> 00:38:20,730
So if you are here in favor

514
00:38:22,080 --> 00:38:23,640
of...

515
00:38:32,221 --> 00:38:35,520
If you're here in favor of the preliminary plat,

516
00:38:37,590 --> 00:38:42,601
application, and master plan, this is what you are going to come up for. Yep.

517
00:38:43,471 --> 00:38:47,460
I just wanted to ask you, before we proceed with the public hearing, I do have more

518
00:38:47,520 --> 00:38:48,120
questions

519
00:38:50,101 --> 00:38:51,930
of staff and of the applicant.

520
00:38:52,050 --> 00:38:52,065
Okay.

521
00:38:52,080 --> 00:38:54,090
Would you like me to ask those before-

522
00:38:54,120 --> 00:38:54,180
Yes

523
00:38:54,241 --> 00:38:58,260
... the public hearing so the public can also take that into account in their

524
00:38:58,320 --> 00:38:58,785
comments?

525
00:38:58,950 --> 00:39:00,601
Now's the time for questions.

526
00:39:00,721 --> 00:39:00,855
Okay.

527
00:39:02,221 --> 00:39:05,340
Would you like the applicant or just first staff to come on up?

528
00:39:05,640 --> 00:39:08,340
I have a couple more for the applicant first, please.

529
00:39:09,705 --> 00:39:12,450
Michael, if you'd like to come on up to the podium. Thank you.

530
00:39:14,160 --> 00:39:17,221
Can you please pull up lot four, lot one?

531
00:39:22,320 --> 00:39:25,170
Is that something on your screen at all?

532
00:39:25,351 --> 00:39:26,130
No, I don't have that.

533
00:39:28,110 --> 00:39:30,930
Should be in set four, though.

534
00:39:33,000 --> 00:39:34,351
Can you go ahead with your question?

535
00:39:36,540 --> 00:39:42,045
It appears to be shown as a single-family lot on all the

536
00:39:42,060 --> 00:39:46,815
schematics, and yet page two of the plat has a table with the area of each lot, and

537
00:39:46,830 --> 00:39:52,815
it shows the area of lot four, lot one as being less than 7,000 square

538
00:39:52,815 --> 00:39:58,471
feet. So I'm curious, does that lot comply with the zoning to be

539
00:39:58,530 --> 00:40:00,540
eligible for a single-family home or not?

540
00:40:02,101 --> 00:40:08,010
Yes, all lots conform, and we'll be going through the review with the county

541
00:40:08,101 --> 00:40:13,290
surveyor who's expert on that. We'll be going through that after that happens.

542
00:40:13,320 --> 00:40:18,120
That review happens after city council approval. They do the county review.

543
00:40:18,150 --> 00:40:19,800
That's part of the ordinary process.

544
00:40:22,080 --> 00:40:27,030
Okay. And just to be clear, that lot is, even though it's currently shown as less

545
00:40:27,060 --> 00:40:32,580
than 7,000 square foot in the on calculations, that is counted as being one of the

546
00:40:33,241 --> 00:40:37,950
family lots for all the... When you say there's this many in this phase and this

547
00:40:38,010 --> 00:40:43,530
many in this other phase, that one's counting towards that even though it's

548
00:40:43,590 --> 00:40:46,155
not 7,000 square foot.

549
00:40:46,200 --> 00:40:51,209
It may be a minutes adjustment, and we're talking seconds or hundredths of an inch.

550
00:40:51,330 --> 00:40:56,760
I don't know. I need to see specifically what is in front of me, and the surveyor

551
00:40:56,820 --> 00:40:58,590
would need to be able to do that right here.

552
00:41:01,080 --> 00:41:03,045
And he did do that already, I think.

553
00:41:03,090 --> 00:41:04,530
Yes, we have several times.

554
00:41:05,280 --> 00:41:05,460
Well,

555
00:41:06,690 --> 00:41:09,210
page two of the plat shows

556
00:41:10,620 --> 00:41:16,351
calculated area for each of the lots, and that

557
00:41:16,410 --> 00:41:21,660
lot is not shown as what is on the schematics, and it is clearly

558
00:41:25,140 --> 00:41:28,530
We'd have to look at it and review it with the county surveyor.

559
00:41:29,700 --> 00:41:30,000
Okay.

560
00:41:30,330 --> 00:41:36,210
Well, I'm sorry. I'm Mark Yabione, too, with LJ Connect Engineering, 2299

561
00:41:36,270 --> 00:41:41,955
West Suite 6 in Idaho Falls. I would also ask if Jay and/or Jay has any comment

562
00:41:42,000 --> 00:41:46,080
concerning that, where it's been reviewed by them numerous times concerning that

563
00:41:46,110 --> 00:41:51,090
specific. I would say that there may be a slight adjustment, as Mike mentioned.

564
00:41:51,510 --> 00:41:56,160
The lot next to it could be slightly over, and this one could be slightly adjusted

565
00:41:56,174 --> 00:41:59,940
to be that, which his calculation would then be accurate according to the split

566
00:42:00,000 --> 00:42:00,210
those.

567
00:42:01,920 --> 00:42:05,851
So I would say that that is a very minor detail concerning the application.

568
00:42:07,230 --> 00:42:11,910
Okay. I did have another question about the applicant of record.

569
00:42:12,810 --> 00:42:18,375
I pulled up your Connect Engineering narrative on the project, and at the very top

570
00:42:18,510 --> 00:42:23,325
it says that the applicant is actually Corona Valley LLC of Idaho Limited Liability

571
00:42:23,340 --> 00:42:28,620
Company. So is the applicant you guys, or is it Corona Valley LLC?

572
00:42:29,730 --> 00:42:33,810
Jay, do you know if they went ahead and submitted the application correct as a

573
00:42:34,050 --> 00:42:35,940
representative of Corona Valley?

574
00:42:36,420 --> 00:42:41,070
As a representative of Corona Valley LLC, an Idaho Limited Liability Company.

575
00:42:41,370 --> 00:42:41,610
Yes.

576
00:42:43,110 --> 00:42:47,985
Yes. Okay. So I pulled up the Secretary of State's website,

577
00:42:48,930 --> 00:42:52,665
and I found no record of the existence of any such entity.

578
00:42:53,190 --> 00:42:58,949
Sarah, we're just focusing on questions in regards to what is on the agenda.

579
00:42:59,760 --> 00:43:05,430
And what is on the agenda is an application and in regards to a

580
00:43:05,520 --> 00:43:07,770
quasi-judicial land use.

581
00:43:08,160 --> 00:43:12,180
Thank you. I guess part of what I asked for at our last hearing was consistency

582
00:43:12,210 --> 00:43:17,760
among the various plans, and Jay, could you come up and speak to this

583
00:43:17,820 --> 00:43:22,351
question about the lot four, lot one?

584
00:43:26,430 --> 00:43:29,820
Um, Bruce, if you don't mind, I'd like to talk about the ownership.

585
00:43:30,540 --> 00:43:30,780
Okay.

586
00:43:31,800 --> 00:43:34,860
The property is owned by LFM Properties LLC.

587
00:43:35,340 --> 00:43:38,520
They have submitted their documentation as an LLC.

588
00:43:39,330 --> 00:43:42,690
Their record of filing is generally what we accept.

589
00:43:43,170 --> 00:43:48,241
And then the registered agent has submitted letters of authorization to Connect

590
00:43:48,330 --> 00:43:49,755
Engineering and Corona.

591
00:43:51,120 --> 00:43:53,040
And are those signed and notarized?

592
00:43:53,101 --> 00:43:53,400
Yes.

593
00:43:54,241 --> 00:43:56,370
Is there a reason those are not included for

594
00:43:57,750 --> 00:43:59,640
council to see or for the public to see?

595
00:44:01,080 --> 00:44:05,790
We typically don't include them as application items because it's internally things

596
00:44:05,820 --> 00:44:09,210
that we check on our end to make sure we have accurate representation from the

597
00:44:09,241 --> 00:44:14,280
owner of the property. If council would like to set a policy moving forward that

598
00:44:14,340 --> 00:44:18,000
they want staff to include that and to redact all the necessary information, we

599
00:44:18,060 --> 00:44:18,360
can,

600
00:44:19,650 --> 00:44:22,860
but I would suggest we talk about that as a separate policy item.

601
00:44:23,880 --> 00:44:24,241
Thanks.

602
00:44:27,601 --> 00:44:30,015
In terms of the... I see what you're saying.

603
00:44:30,210 --> 00:44:32,280
I did just go double-check the schematic.

604
00:44:34,140 --> 00:44:35,415
The schematic shows it

605
00:44:37,290 --> 00:44:40,380
as being an attached home lot.

606
00:44:41,460 --> 00:44:42,885
Which schematic? Of what?

607
00:44:42,991 --> 00:44:45,540
It was your lot four lot-

608
00:44:47,130 --> 00:44:47,460
Lot?

609
00:44:48,180 --> 00:44:49,020
Of the 211.

610
00:44:51,120 --> 00:44:56,790
I don't believe the schematic 100% represents the plat in terms of lot sizes, and I

611
00:44:56,820 --> 00:44:58,260
think the schematic is slightly off.

612
00:44:59,070 --> 00:45:00,690
Okay, and that is something that I

613
00:45:02,010 --> 00:45:05,280
think I was pretty clear about in the last hearing, that it's really hard to review

614
00:45:05,295 --> 00:45:09,120
this stuff if things aren't consistent.

615
00:45:09,195 --> 00:45:12,945
And this is one that on whichever schematic I was looking at when I reviewed this,

616
00:45:13,140 --> 00:45:18,540
it was not shown as an attached home, and the square footage is less than

617
00:45:18,840 --> 00:45:23,145
7,000, and it's not one of the common lots like the stone lot a lot or something

618
00:45:23,145 --> 00:45:28,110
like that.

619
00:45:28,230 --> 00:45:30,150
So this is just a time for questions.

620
00:45:30,270 --> 00:45:32,730
If there's a question for staff, this is the time.

621
00:45:33,150 --> 00:45:36,721
Otherwise, deliberation can happen after the public hearing.

622
00:45:36,810 --> 00:45:42,570
Okay. Jay, I was reviewing LDC Section 14.5.6.L.B., which states the name,

623
00:45:42,660 --> 00:45:48,270
address, and phone numbers of the subdivider and the owner must appear on a plat

624
00:45:48,300 --> 00:45:50,310
document. Is that information on the plat?

625
00:45:52,932 --> 00:45:55,152
I don't have it in front of me. I can go look.

626
00:45:55,602 --> 00:45:58,241
The preliminary plot has permission.

627
00:46:05,682 --> 00:46:10,302
Are you saying that the preliminary plot doesn't need to have that information?

628
00:46:12,462 --> 00:46:13,332
Typically, yes.

629
00:46:14,802 --> 00:46:17,592
You're saying typically it would include that information or-

630
00:46:17,712 --> 00:46:20,562
One moment, please. One moment, please. Nobody's at the podium.

631
00:46:41,292 --> 00:46:43,572
You asked about the address and phone number of applicant?

632
00:46:45,643 --> 00:46:50,427
I asked about name, address, and phone number of the subdivider and the owner.

633
00:46:50,547 --> 00:46:52,782
It must appear on the plat document.

634
00:46:55,916 --> 00:47:00,222
The preliminary plat does include all the information for Connect.

635
00:47:01,632 --> 00:47:05,187
But a preliminary plat wouldn't be recorded, right?

636
00:47:05,262 --> 00:47:08,202
A final plat would, and that would require the owner's certificate.

637
00:47:09,268 --> 00:47:12,643
And it sounds like that's the document that you're saying is the plat and not the

638
00:47:12,672 --> 00:47:15,462
preliminary plat. Are there any other questions?

639
00:47:17,652 --> 00:47:21,643
Yeah. Michael, could you come up to say what you were saying before, but into the

640
00:47:22,452 --> 00:47:22,617
mic, please?

641
00:47:22,662 --> 00:47:25,452
What was the question? We're asking questions right now.

642
00:47:26,412 --> 00:47:30,522
I was asking whether or not the plat complied with Section

643
00:47:30,972 --> 00:47:36,897
14.5.6.D of the LDC, which says, "Preliminary Plat Application.

644
00:47:37,482 --> 00:47:42,912
Upon completion of concept review, the subdivider may proceed by submitting a

645
00:47:42,942 --> 00:47:44,817
preliminary plat application."

646
00:47:46,393 --> 00:47:52,152
And it says that that plat must be created by a licensed surveyor and must

647
00:47:52,212 --> 00:47:57,177
not be more than a year old and must include the name, address, and phone number of

648
00:47:57,192 --> 00:47:58,677
the subdivider and owner.

649
00:48:00,012 --> 00:48:01,002
Is that not the case?

650
00:48:01,242 --> 00:48:04,212
I would defer to what Jay said. Exactly what she said.

651
00:48:04,722 --> 00:48:05,893
What I read was exactly-

652
00:48:06,012 --> 00:48:07,991
No, we're just doing questions right now.

653
00:48:08,052 --> 00:48:08,637
We're just doing-

654
00:48:08,712 --> 00:48:11,022
No, sure. What Jay says. She's the expert.

655
00:48:11,802 --> 00:48:12,792
She said it wasn't on.

656
00:48:14,082 --> 00:48:17,623
We're going to take a three-minute break. Three-minute break.

657
00:48:19,482 --> 00:48:22,123
We'll come back at 6:51.

658
00:48:25,542 --> 00:48:27,522
Doug and Sam, can I speak with you, please?

659
00:48:33,162 --> 00:48:38,952
There's nothing

660
00:48:39,822 --> 00:48:44,772
wrong with

661
00:50:34,932 --> 00:50:34,932
.

662
00:51:45,492 --> 00:51:46,362
6:51.

663
00:51:46,482 --> 00:51:46,992
It's okay.

664
00:51:47,052 --> 00:51:51,582
We're going to go ahead and get started again-

665
00:51:53,112 --> 00:51:53,503
Yeah

666
00:51:55,542 --> 00:51:57,042
... with our meeting.

667
00:52:03,732 --> 00:52:04,692
And

668
00:52:06,342 --> 00:52:09,612
thank you, Council Member Johnson, for your

669
00:52:10,812 --> 00:52:12,312
detailed questions.

670
00:52:13,663 --> 00:52:19,392
It is important to be able to have some of these details, but it's also

671
00:52:19,452 --> 00:52:25,212
important to be able to deal with the agenda item before us.

672
00:52:25,437 --> 00:52:31,092
Please make note of things that you would like to be able to

673
00:52:31,182 --> 00:52:37,092
see being added, and we can move on to any

674
00:52:37,422 --> 00:52:40,842
substantial questions focused on the application before us.

675
00:52:41,442 --> 00:52:44,562
Yep. I have three questions for Public Works.

676
00:52:44,952 --> 00:52:46,871
Okay. Jay, would you like to come on up?

677
00:52:52,617 --> 00:52:53,202
Thank you.

678
00:52:53,248 --> 00:52:53,667
Are you ready?

679
00:52:54,972 --> 00:52:58,542
I really appreciate having stamped plans in here to review.

680
00:52:58,873 --> 00:53:04,753
One thing that, different versions and stuff, I just want to make sure that

681
00:53:04,812 --> 00:53:07,452
I'm clear on and everyone else is, too.

682
00:53:07,512 --> 00:53:12,117
We don't have an updated technical memo from Keller saying how much of the

683
00:53:12,163 --> 00:53:16,676
development can be served and when, and given the phasing shifts and the revised

684
00:53:16,722 --> 00:53:20,832
infrastructure, does that conform to what their recommendations are now?

685
00:53:20,892 --> 00:53:22,782
So I'm assuming you both reviewed this.

686
00:53:23,623 --> 00:53:28,962
Do you feel that the engineered plans as supplied meet the Keller

687
00:53:29,142 --> 00:53:31,332
requirements for the water system?

688
00:53:31,452 --> 00:53:32,742
For the modeling system? Yes.

689
00:53:32,802 --> 00:53:33,972
No, for the water system.

690
00:53:34,032 --> 00:53:36,253
Yeah, for modeling of the water system.

691
00:53:36,312 --> 00:53:40,842
Yeah, Keller modeled the system, they looked at the number of units in the looping

692
00:53:40,932 --> 00:53:45,282
originally, I don't know if you served on phase one, and I feel that yes, the

693
00:53:47,172 --> 00:53:53,082
layout still works. There's some minor tweaks from the original layout, and now

694
00:53:53,142 --> 00:53:57,072
some road changes that have helped pressure busted the better line roads.

695
00:53:57,342 --> 00:54:01,633
So I thought in their recommendations that Keller had some pretty specific things

696
00:54:01,692 --> 00:54:06,478
that they had changed. They had suggested some connections, some sizing changes,

697
00:54:06,538 --> 00:54:09,942
and that they changed their model in order for this to pass.

698
00:54:10,633 --> 00:54:15,133
Did all of those changes actually happen in the engineer?

699
00:54:15,552 --> 00:54:20,082
Yeah. So one of those changes was not connecting, I believe, at Connection Road.

700
00:54:20,187 --> 00:54:22,572
There was one connection they wanted to be removed.

701
00:54:22,633 --> 00:54:26,082
That needed to be removed because that did not meet its internal pressures.

702
00:54:26,112 --> 00:54:28,302
That would be in a different charity.

703
00:54:28,782 --> 00:54:33,342
And so the looping that was requested by Keller happened.

704
00:54:33,402 --> 00:54:36,447
The connections for the transmission line into Ross happened.

705
00:54:37,242 --> 00:54:41,248
There were some other technical pieces, and I can't remember exactly what they were

706
00:54:41,292 --> 00:54:44,067
off the top of my head right now. But

707
00:54:46,512 --> 00:54:51,942
based on the Keller memo and based on modeling, phase one can be served by the

708
00:54:52,003 --> 00:54:54,552
existing structure as laid out.

709
00:54:55,482 --> 00:54:59,082
Okay. And then the next question-

710
00:55:00,582 --> 00:55:03,762
Cowboy Trail will be a collector in the future, correct?

711
00:55:04,123 --> 00:55:08,082
As part of Cowboy Trail north of Ross Ave.

712
00:55:08,442 --> 00:55:10,062
So just the new part of Cowboy Trail.

713
00:55:11,052 --> 00:55:11,742
Correct. Not south of Ross.

714
00:55:11,832 --> 00:55:12,972
Not south of Ross.

715
00:55:12,987 --> 00:55:13,003
No

716
00:55:13,032 --> 00:55:16,197
Just the part of the city's street network

717
00:55:18,267 --> 00:55:22,017
. Okay. As a connector, is it allowed to have driveway connections?

718
00:55:23,022 --> 00:55:25,288
It's allowed to have driveway connections.

719
00:55:25,452 --> 00:55:29,052
Our code says to minimize them to a maximum extent possible.

720
00:55:29,892 --> 00:55:35,232
And so what we did was try to work with the applicants, was eliminated any of the

721
00:55:35,292 --> 00:55:41,052
twin home accesses or the smaller double lots along Cowboy

722
00:55:41,142 --> 00:55:46,633
Trail, have them reconfigure multiple numbers of their lots so they can

723
00:55:46,692 --> 00:55:51,342
access off the side streets. And I believe there are seven or eight of them that

724
00:55:51,402 --> 00:55:56,413
don't have that property. Single family homes that still do access off of Cowboy

725
00:55:56,503 --> 00:56:01,062
Trail. Because our code doesn't expressly prohibit it, it recommends

726
00:56:01,182 --> 00:56:03,642
minimizing those accesses.

727
00:56:04,302 --> 00:56:08,202
Okay. Thank you for the clarification on that. And then third and final question.

728
00:56:08,712 --> 00:56:11,712
Well, there's cultural questions, but third and final topic.

729
00:56:13,242 --> 00:56:17,022
How many equivalent residential units are in this proposed development?

730
00:56:17,802 --> 00:56:20,112
That would be the same as the number of units.

731
00:56:20,623 --> 00:56:26,562
So that would be whatever the proposed number of units, like it's 186, 187, I

732
00:56:26,592 --> 00:56:29,712
can't-- Off the top of my head, that was the total number of units that would be

733
00:56:29,728 --> 00:56:30,762
186 or 187 proposed.

734
00:56:31,242 --> 00:56:36,133
Okay. And then the current city, inter-city agreement, says that any single

735
00:56:36,163 --> 00:56:40,527
connection in excess of 10, major trunk line or connection system outside and

736
00:56:40,603 --> 00:56:41,623
inside the city limits of

737
00:56:42,942 --> 00:56:45,913
Durango may only with expressed written consent of both cities.

738
00:56:45,972 --> 00:56:49,603
Does Durings have expressed written consent from Victor for this connection?

739
00:56:51,357 --> 00:56:51,357
No.

740
00:56:51,432 --> 00:56:54,672
Has Durings requested expressed written consent for this connection?

741
00:56:54,913 --> 00:56:55,123
No.

742
00:56:59,682 --> 00:57:02,728
Okay. Did the staff report say if they would ask them, they didn't oppose it, but

743
00:57:02,802 --> 00:57:03,133
I'm assuming

744
00:57:03,492 --> 00:57:03,522
No,

745
00:57:04,902 --> 00:57:07,062
that was the staff report for the slug drive.

746
00:57:08,802 --> 00:57:11,322
Oh, I thought I saw this. Thought this one was done, correct.

747
00:57:11,832 --> 00:57:13,228
No, we're waiting for a council.

748
00:57:14,592 --> 00:57:17,292
We will typically resubmit plans to TQ.

749
00:57:18,133 --> 00:57:24,087
We typically have them doing inter-agency submittal between subdivisions, city of

750
00:57:24,087 --> 00:57:27,192
Durings and city of Victor. That's a recent occurrence the last.

751
00:57:29,112 --> 00:57:30,582
We haven't submitted to Victor.

752
00:57:31,633 --> 00:57:33,133
Okay, thanks for the clarification.

753
00:57:35,202 --> 00:57:37,753
That's all the questions I have again.

754
00:57:37,812 --> 00:57:38,202
Great.

755
00:57:40,032 --> 00:57:40,452
Okay.

756
00:57:42,133 --> 00:57:46,032
Any other questions from council at this time?

757
00:57:49,092 --> 00:57:52,603
Oops. Okay, we're going to move on to the public hearing.

758
00:57:53,623 --> 00:57:57,492
Like I said before, we're going to start with four.

759
00:57:58,182 --> 00:58:03,642
This the Corona Valley Phase 1 preliminary flat application and master plan.

760
00:58:04,332 --> 00:58:10,272
If you would like to speak in favor of this preliminary plat, now's the time to

761
00:58:10,332 --> 00:58:11,652
come on up to the podium.

762
00:58:21,312 --> 00:58:22,572
Yeah. Thanks. Brad-

763
00:58:22,633 --> 00:58:24,253
Wait till you're in the microphone.

764
00:58:25,722 --> 00:58:25,797
Thank you

765
00:58:25,797 --> 00:58:28,692
Brad Sims, sometimes the County Council of Northville.

766
00:58:30,222 --> 00:58:34,603
I'm a builder. I've been a builder in the valley since 1988.

767
00:58:35,832 --> 00:58:40,106
And about every two weeks, I have young families, young people leave my office in

768
00:58:40,123 --> 00:58:44,413
tears because they cannot get in front of the inflation cycle that's coming.

769
00:58:45,522 --> 00:58:50,457
This proposed development offers a lot of different on-site styles that looked,

770
00:58:51,702 --> 00:58:57,177
be desirable to a lot of young families just starting out. First time he's...

771
00:58:57,253 --> 00:59:02,157
Second house moving up. So it, it also makes perfect sense because it's

772
00:59:02,202 --> 00:59:07,526
close to schools, it's close to shopping, it's close to healthcare, public parks,

773
00:59:07,572 --> 00:59:11,067
and public transportation. And a lot of people in this room like the idea of a

774
00:59:11,082 --> 00:59:15,853
15-minute cities. What do we do? Let's have that, because if you want to add in my

775
00:59:15,883 --> 00:59:19,797
assistant county, out in the county, then I'm all for it, because I'm the builder

776
00:59:19,812 --> 00:59:21,762
who's going to pick that up once you write your lots.

777
00:59:21,792 --> 00:59:25,587
And I'll have water gardens going in like state flowers everywhere.

778
00:59:25,603 --> 00:59:28,392
This makes sense and it's smart. You should take it up.

779
00:59:28,452 --> 00:59:28,512
So-

780
00:59:28,812 --> 00:59:29,952
Thank you. What was your name again?

781
00:59:30,133 --> 00:59:30,972
Brad Sims.

782
00:59:31,092 --> 00:59:31,512
Thank you.

783
00:59:43,392 --> 00:59:43,962
Evan Howard.

784
00:59:45,762 --> 00:59:47,022
752 Creekside.

785
00:59:48,612 --> 00:59:50,607
I'm for development growing.

786
00:59:52,332 --> 00:59:55,512
I also see the need for affordable housing,

787
00:59:57,103 --> 01:00:02,142
housing for people that are employed in this valley to service the valley.

788
01:00:04,092 --> 01:00:06,312
See a lot of people traveling from other areas.

789
01:00:06,942 --> 01:00:11,742
See this problem where us, a lot of us traveling from here to Johnston to up there.

790
01:00:12,253 --> 01:00:17,952
You'll see the same issue in Idaho Falls and Rexburg travel here because housing

791
01:00:19,512 --> 01:00:25,332
is expensive here as well. So I'm in favor of it because it gives the

792
01:00:25,392 --> 01:00:31,228
opportunity for people to attain some sort of housing value, as well

793
01:00:31,302 --> 01:00:36,508
as the proposed employee housing for teachers.

794
01:00:36,582 --> 01:00:40,992
I have young kids that are in school, and I've seen numerous times where teachers

795
01:00:41,022 --> 01:00:44,503
would have to move on to other places to afford a home.

796
01:00:44,892 --> 01:00:50,172
That's really sad to see those very qualified people leave the valley to work, to

797
01:00:50,202 --> 01:00:50,741
listen.

798
01:00:52,452 --> 01:00:53,187
Yeah.

799
01:00:53,592 --> 01:00:56,442
I'm also a mechanical training designer

800
01:00:57,972 --> 01:00:58,242
and

801
01:00:59,442 --> 01:01:04,003
when I look at design, I look at the experience that people have with a thing, a

802
01:01:04,152 --> 01:01:04,782
product.

803
01:01:06,282 --> 01:01:10,286
And when I see this, I see a product that's been fully fleshed out.

804
01:01:10,332 --> 01:01:15,282
It's been examined, it's been tested, it's been modeled.

805
01:01:17,082 --> 01:01:22,512
It's gone forward in front of a lot of people to have it reviewed.

806
01:01:23,682 --> 01:01:27,971
It seemed like a great product, especially for people in this sort of starting out

807
01:01:28,332 --> 01:01:29,862
time in their life.

808
01:01:31,633 --> 01:01:37,542
Also, a lot of us, if we moved here earlier on, we obtained a home when

809
01:01:37,572 --> 01:01:43,482
they were affordable. So I'd like to just, I'm for it again because it

810
01:01:43,512 --> 01:01:48,702
allows some people to get into affordable housing, where some of us were able to do

811
01:01:48,762 --> 01:01:52,152
that before. A lot of our younger kids.

812
01:01:52,362 --> 01:01:56,652
I hope my kids can live here someday, and this would provide hopefully a pathway

813
01:01:56,712 --> 01:02:00,897
for them in the next few years so they'd be able to live at home with me as well.

814
01:02:00,913 --> 01:02:01,753
So thank you.

815
01:02:02,112 --> 01:02:03,672
Thank you, Evan.

816
01:02:07,362 --> 01:02:12,883
Anybody else like in person like to speak for the preliminary plat for now?

817
01:02:16,272 --> 01:02:21,913
Seeing none, moving online. If you're online, click raise hand to be able

818
01:02:22,182 --> 01:02:26,082
to share your public comment for.

819
01:02:32,052 --> 01:02:33,222
Philip, go ahead.

820
01:02:34,182 --> 01:02:37,692
Hi, my name's Philip. I'm a mic guy. I'm for this.

821
01:02:38,112 --> 01:02:42,837
Now, I understand we've had a lot of issues when it comes to concerns with

822
01:02:42,883 --> 01:02:45,522
transportation and things along those lines.

823
01:02:45,582 --> 01:02:49,947
But in my time in the valley, the underlying and most prevalent argument and

824
01:02:49,992 --> 01:02:52,873
concern has been access to affordable housing.

825
01:02:54,387 --> 01:02:59,907
The unfortunate fact of the matter is, right now, you can't find a single

826
01:03:00,042 --> 01:03:02,142
family home of--

827
01:03:04,482 --> 01:03:07,812
or I should say, they're going to be very, very few and far between to find

828
01:03:07,873 --> 01:03:13,722
anything less than $700,000. If you find anything at 700, likely it'll be,

829
01:03:14,832 --> 01:03:18,042
it's hard to get into. And again, few and far between.

830
01:03:20,532 --> 01:03:22,812
I know the developer. I know what their plans are.

831
01:03:22,932 --> 01:03:26,142
I know what we've discussed at length what they'd like to put in.

832
01:03:26,862 --> 01:03:30,732
And frankly, from the beginning, and this isn't the first time they've tried to

833
01:03:31,003 --> 01:03:32,623
supply affordable housing for the valley.

834
01:03:34,962 --> 01:03:39,222
They are working hard to provide accessible housing

835
01:03:41,022 --> 01:03:43,812
for people, for regular people in Teton Valley.

836
01:03:44,982 --> 01:03:48,792
You-- I mean, around this area, there are at least

837
01:03:50,142 --> 01:03:54,942
one, two, three, four homes that are well above

838
01:03:54,972 --> 01:03:59,322
$800,000. The fact of the matter is that's not affordable, that's not accessible

839
01:04:00,732 --> 01:04:01,182
for

840
01:04:02,862 --> 01:04:03,432
most

841
01:04:04,812 --> 01:04:05,982
two-earner families,

842
01:04:07,272 --> 01:04:08,847
let alone a single earner family

843
01:04:10,182 --> 01:04:14,202
So, if we want to see a change and see an opportunity for the people and our

844
01:04:14,262 --> 01:04:14,772
children,

845
01:04:16,152 --> 01:04:19,932
and we talk about teachers, we talk about hospitalists, we talk about police

846
01:04:19,992 --> 01:04:21,822
officers, we talk about firemen, firefighters.

847
01:04:22,542 --> 01:04:27,042
In order to have a functioning city, we need to provide housing that is accessible

848
01:04:27,133 --> 01:04:31,272
for people on state and city wages.

849
01:04:31,362 --> 01:04:33,822
If we continue to push these developers out,

850
01:04:35,383 --> 01:04:39,492
we will continue to see prices that are in excess of a million dollars on homes,

851
01:04:39,972 --> 01:04:41,022
and we will have...

852
01:04:42,672 --> 01:04:46,422
The biggest fear that we hear is, we don't want it to become another Jackson Hole.

853
01:04:46,633 --> 01:04:50,532
If we continue to push these developers out, that's exactly what we'll have on our

854
01:04:50,562 --> 01:04:53,682
hands. So again, I'm in favor of this.

855
01:04:54,163 --> 01:04:55,603
I'm in favor of,

856
01:04:57,103 --> 01:05:02,982
let's get out of our own way and make it possible for us to achieve what we

857
01:05:03,072 --> 01:05:05,772
want to in our cities. Thank you.

858
01:05:05,892 --> 01:05:09,672
Thank you, Philip. Anybody else online?

859
01:05:10,152 --> 01:05:11,982
Feel free to click raise hand.

860
01:05:15,462 --> 01:05:18,762
Seeing none, we'll move in person to neutral.

861
01:05:18,883 --> 01:05:24,762
If you would like to speak neutrally in regards to the Crona Valley

862
01:05:24,792 --> 01:05:29,082
Phase 1 Preliminary Plan Application and Master Plan, please come on up to the

863
01:05:29,142 --> 01:05:29,592
podium.

864
01:05:35,503 --> 01:05:39,402
Seeing none, if you're online and would like to speak neutrally, please click raise

865
01:05:39,432 --> 01:05:41,112
hand and we'll promote you to speak.

866
01:05:47,442 --> 01:05:52,498
Okay, we'll move against. If you would like to speak against the Crona Valley Phase

867
01:05:52,633 --> 01:05:56,802
1 Preliminary Plan Application and Master Plan and you're in person, please come on

868
01:05:56,832 --> 01:05:57,702
up to the podium.

869
01:06:05,682 --> 01:06:13,512
David

870
01:06:13,572 --> 01:06:17,142
Hart, 6987 West, 1000 North, Etown.

871
01:06:18,792 --> 01:06:23,758
According to the website Census Reporter, the 2025 data for Griggs, Idaho, notes a

872
01:06:23,832 --> 01:06:29,292
footprint for the city of approximately 3.6 square miles with a population of

873
01:06:29,472 --> 01:06:34,767
2,925 and 941 households. It states a density of

874
01:06:34,932 --> 01:06:39,582
805 people per square mile and 3.1 people per household.

875
01:06:39,657 --> 01:06:45,642
It also notes that 59% of the dwellings are single family, 35%

876
01:06:45,702 --> 01:06:48,853
are multifamily, and 6% are mobile homes.

877
01:06:50,532 --> 01:06:56,217
The proposed subdivision is 38.8 acres containing 180 dwellings,

878
01:06:56,322 --> 01:07:01,633
158 of which are detached houses. Assuming the same ratios as the

879
01:07:01,782 --> 01:07:07,542
2025 data, that equates to an additional 558 people with a

880
01:07:07,572 --> 01:07:13,422
density of 9,270 people per square mile, which is an increase in density by

881
01:07:13,512 --> 01:07:16,392
more than an order of magnitude compared to the rest of the city

882
01:07:17,652 --> 01:07:21,072
and an increase in the city population of almost 20%.

883
01:07:22,152 --> 01:07:26,982
For the website Demographia, the average city density within the US is

884
01:07:27,253 --> 01:07:33,012
3,100 people per square mile, and the city center region is

885
01:07:33,342 --> 01:07:39,192
7,700. Clearly, the density of this proposed subdivision exceeds that

886
01:07:39,253 --> 01:07:44,307
of most US cities. People in our valley live here because it's not a densely

887
01:07:44,383 --> 01:07:49,272
populated city. We have animals, trailers, snow machines, boats, 400 bikes,

888
01:07:49,302 --> 01:07:51,612
motorcycles, campers, RVs, and pickup trucks.

889
01:07:52,272 --> 01:07:57,356
Such a density cannot avoid significant impacts to traffic, parking, snow removal,

890
01:07:57,373 --> 01:08:00,897
animal control, waste management, utility infrastructure, maintenance, and

891
01:08:01,003 --> 01:08:06,163
conflicts between neighbors. Numerous sections of the land development code are

892
01:08:06,222 --> 01:08:11,442
violated in at least some portion of that plan, like the ratio of single family to

893
01:08:11,472 --> 01:08:16,692
multifamily, the 20% ratio limitation on pavement to front lawn, about the traffic

894
01:08:16,782 --> 01:08:21,883
analysis and minimum lot size, and much information is missing.

895
01:08:21,942 --> 01:08:25,302
For example, snow removal, housing footprints, and housing designs.

896
01:08:26,052 --> 01:08:31,346
Where the city and the developer somehow concluded that this proposal complies with

897
01:08:31,362 --> 01:08:36,822
the RS7 zone is both wrong and irresponsible. Thank you.

898
01:08:36,853 --> 01:08:40,228
Thank you, Dave. Next.

899
01:08:50,862 --> 01:08:55,032
Kathleen Hart, 6987 West, 4000 North, Etownia.

900
01:08:56,472 --> 01:09:02,142
At the August 4th meeting, after the public comments, the project manager for Crona

901
01:09:02,232 --> 01:09:06,942
Valley pointed out that the independent reviewer of the traffic study, Aaron Van

902
01:09:07,003 --> 01:09:11,712
Egeren of Heath Associates, was not a registered engineer in Idaho,

903
01:09:12,432 --> 01:09:16,333
suggesting that Van Egeren was not qualified for Idaho standards.

904
01:09:17,383 --> 01:09:22,093
The National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying provides the same

905
01:09:22,123 --> 01:09:25,182
professional engineering test to all states.

906
01:09:25,902 --> 01:09:30,042
Comity with another state is generally an administrative matter.

907
01:09:31,392 --> 01:09:36,343
Further, beyond his standard professional engineer credential, Van Egeren holds a

908
01:09:36,402 --> 01:09:42,042
professional traffic operations engineer designation, which requires additional

909
01:09:42,103 --> 01:09:47,833
testing and 25% more professional development each year than does

910
01:09:48,042 --> 01:09:49,932
the Idaho PE license.

911
01:09:51,282 --> 01:09:55,362
At that same meeting, the city's attorney declared that the word primarily was

912
01:09:55,422 --> 01:10:01,093
throat-clearing language, which WordRake defines as empty openers that

913
01:10:01,152 --> 01:10:03,462
delay the presentation of your argument.

914
01:10:04,152 --> 01:10:09,462
WordRake recommends that you ruthlessly revise to cut out these plotting space

915
01:10:09,522 --> 01:10:15,462
wasters. If we cut the word primarily, as well as the word intended, based on

916
01:10:15,492 --> 01:10:20,982
the same logic, the Drake's Land Development Code reads, "RS7 accommodates

917
01:10:21,133 --> 01:10:26,442
single-family detached houses with a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet,"

918
01:10:26,772 --> 01:10:32,307
period. No attach. Privately, Mayor Christensen explained that

919
01:10:32,322 --> 01:10:37,603
primarily referred to the city as a whole, not to individual subdivisions, which

920
01:10:37,692 --> 01:10:42,162
negates the attorney's statement, as well as the common reading of code.

921
01:10:42,837 --> 01:10:48,146
This would create chaos. Early developers could build higher density housing, and

922
01:10:48,162 --> 01:10:53,922
latecomers would be faced with more restrictive conditions within the same zoning.

923
01:10:53,982 --> 01:10:59,758
Balancing each subdivision is easier to manage, is more fair, and creates a

924
01:10:59,802 --> 01:11:03,792
better balance of housing types within the cities.

925
01:11:03,853 --> 01:11:09,597
Finally, the school contribution is only about 10% of what

926
01:11:09,642 --> 01:11:13,752
will actually be needed for any new construction. Thank you.

927
01:11:15,072 --> 01:11:15,612
Thank you.

928
01:11:17,892 --> 01:11:18,883
Anybody else?

929
01:11:25,902 --> 01:11:28,152
Anna Trevithan with Trevithan Law Office.

930
01:11:28,242 --> 01:11:32,112
I'm here as a Griggs resident who lives on Highway Trail, and also I'm representing

931
01:11:32,172 --> 01:11:34,332
several neighboring property owners.

932
01:11:34,722 --> 01:11:40,362
It is black letter law in Idaho that you are not bound by

933
01:11:40,482 --> 01:11:43,812
staff reports or the staff's interpretation of ordinances.

934
01:11:44,232 --> 01:11:47,771
Their reports are merely advisory. They are not binding mandates.

935
01:11:48,282 --> 01:11:53,097
In fact, you are legally, affirmatively required, independent decision-makers, to

936
01:11:53,383 --> 01:11:56,202
weigh the evidence and reach your own conclusions.

937
01:11:56,262 --> 01:12:00,522
The worst kind of decision you could make in a situation like this is to just say,

938
01:12:00,612 --> 01:12:04,902
"Well, I go with what the staff recommends." I would caution you against making a

939
01:12:04,932 --> 01:12:10,212
decision based on that. At the last hearing, the developer's engineer raised two

940
01:12:10,272 --> 01:12:13,422
novel legal arguments on rebuttal, and I'd like to address those.

941
01:12:13,872 --> 01:12:18,462
The first is he said that, well, base density determines the controlling factor

942
01:12:18,492 --> 01:12:22,332
here and that additional housing can theoretically be built on the single-family

943
01:12:22,392 --> 01:12:25,962
lots, so long as it doesn't exceed the base density.

944
01:12:26,008 --> 01:12:29,472
And the second theory he would put forth is that the primarily language we're all

945
01:12:29,502 --> 01:12:32,802
fighting over is really only the character of the neighborhood.

946
01:12:33,192 --> 01:12:35,383
I do not agree with those contentions.

947
01:12:35,442 --> 01:12:41,292
First off, their argument basically paves the way to say we can put duplexes

948
01:12:41,383 --> 01:12:43,452
on the single-family lots as well.

949
01:12:43,482 --> 01:12:47,412
And if that's the case, you don't know what the final unit count is here, and you

950
01:12:47,442 --> 01:12:50,892
don't know if your traffic studies and water studies have taken any of that into

951
01:12:50,907 --> 01:12:55,228
account. There are allegedly 22 single-family lots in this development, so you're

952
01:12:55,242 --> 01:12:57,972
talking about an additional swing of 22 more units.

953
01:12:58,722 --> 01:13:03,492
Secondly, if the character of this neighborhood is supposed to be single-family

954
01:13:03,522 --> 01:13:08,772
lots over 7,000 square feet, there's no way to conclude a neighborhood primarily of

955
01:13:08,832 --> 01:13:14,593
duplexes on lots that are 45% smaller than even what is on Bush

956
01:13:14,622 --> 01:13:17,142
Way is the character of the neighborhood.

957
01:13:17,742 --> 01:13:21,627
Idaho has adopted what we call the plain meaning rule, and that means you are

958
01:13:21,642 --> 01:13:27,117
supposed to read your ordinances as a whole and implement the plain, ordinary

959
01:13:27,252 --> 01:13:32,052
meaning of the words that are before you. And I think the choice is very stark.

960
01:13:32,844 --> 01:13:38,064
Now regarding criteria four and five, what I heard tonight is that they reshifted

961
01:13:38,094 --> 01:13:42,954
phase one and two, but it's still the same number of units, and that the conclusion

962
01:13:43,044 --> 01:13:47,184
is there's really only enough water for the first number of homes in phase one.

963
01:13:47,694 --> 01:13:53,274
Your ordinance, 1212, has a standard zone requirement that each phase must be fully

964
01:13:53,334 --> 01:13:57,864
freestanding and be able to supply all the necessary infrastructure and services.

965
01:13:58,254 --> 01:13:59,844
How can you make that finding here?

966
01:14:00,264 --> 01:14:05,079
And secondly, this clearly doesn't comply with the R7 zone or the transportation

967
01:14:05,154 --> 01:14:09,684
master plan. I have submitted findings for denial.

968
01:14:09,774 --> 01:14:12,354
I hope you've read them, and I hope you will consider them.

969
01:14:12,414 --> 01:14:16,269
One of the findings in there is that I have completed the calculations using the

970
01:14:16,314 --> 01:14:20,844
help of a neighborhood engineer, and we looked at how many lots would violate the

971
01:14:20,904 --> 01:14:22,764
lot coverage standard for driveways.

972
01:14:23,094 --> 01:14:24,054
Your ordinance says

973
01:14:25,314 --> 01:14:29,334
driveways and parking areas cannot take up more than 40% of the front yard.

974
01:14:29,694 --> 01:14:34,224
Twenty-one lots will exceed that standard, and by my count, there would be nine

975
01:14:34,314 --> 01:14:36,414
driveways emptying onto Cowboy Trail.

976
01:14:36,714 --> 01:14:41,035
And if we go with that, if we put a duplex anywhere in theory, it could be 18

977
01:14:41,064 --> 01:14:41,754
driveways.

978
01:14:42,054 --> 01:14:42,624
Thank you, ma'am.

979
01:14:43,014 --> 01:14:43,794
Thank you.

980
01:14:43,914 --> 01:14:46,554
I don't have how many

981
01:14:46,569 --> 01:14:50,214
times.

982
01:14:53,754 --> 01:14:54,624
Next. Anybody

983
01:14:54,654 --> 01:14:59,964
else?

984
01:15:01,674 --> 01:15:04,014
Mark Law, 500 Parsons Road, Trace.

985
01:15:04,149 --> 01:15:04,704
What was your name?

986
01:15:04,914 --> 01:15:05,844
Mark Law.

987
01:15:06,234 --> 01:15:06,624
Thank you.

988
01:15:07,285 --> 01:15:08,303
500 Parsons.

989
01:15:09,504 --> 01:15:12,414
I'm going to keep my comments short and to the point, and I'm going to try to boil

990
01:15:12,444 --> 01:15:16,164
them down to really basic so they seem simplistic.

991
01:15:16,404 --> 01:15:22,285
But the issue that I see here is we have a developer that wants

992
01:15:22,344 --> 01:15:27,024
to stretch the boundaries of what is permissible in Trace under the way the city

993
01:15:27,054 --> 01:15:31,344
has been set up in the past. If he gets his way, he takes the money, and the money

994
01:15:31,404 --> 01:15:36,474
leaves the valley. People that are left get stuck with infrastructure build-out,

995
01:15:36,564 --> 01:15:37,644
water build-out,

996
01:15:38,904 --> 01:15:41,964
all services that are going to need to be provided for this high-density

997
01:15:42,894 --> 01:15:46,194
subdivision. I just don't see that as being fair.

998
01:15:46,914 --> 01:15:51,549
So, he takes the money and leaves, and I think that the town seems justly what it's

999
01:15:51,549 --> 01:15:55,944
saying up there. Those are my comments, and they weren't too simplistic.

1000
01:15:56,035 --> 01:15:56,304
Thank you.

1001
01:15:56,319 --> 01:15:56,439
Good

1002
01:15:56,439 --> 01:16:03,954
evening.

1003
01:16:13,134 --> 01:16:14,814
Tom Ryan. I live in Teton County.

1004
01:16:17,094 --> 01:16:19,134
You guys got some guidance from your counsel.

1005
01:16:19,164 --> 01:16:21,144
We asked for it, and yes. Thank you.

1006
01:16:21,504 --> 01:16:21,789
691

1007
01:16:23,094 --> 01:16:23,109
Remode.

1008
01:16:23,589 --> 01:16:23,589
Thank you.

1009
01:16:24,174 --> 01:16:25,824
Guidance from the counsel at the last meeting.

1010
01:16:26,004 --> 01:16:28,974
I got some respects on that I'd like to share with you.

1011
01:16:30,864 --> 01:16:35,109
There was talk about findings and a motion being based on specific facts and

1012
01:16:35,154 --> 01:16:39,054
evidence. Absolutely true. But you need to look at your criteria.

1013
01:16:39,474 --> 01:16:43,314
Some of them are very factual. Criteria one speaks to a plat that's been prepared

1014
01:16:43,374 --> 01:16:47,004
by a surveyor that's licensed and stamps the plat.

1015
01:16:47,694 --> 01:16:50,694
That's factually what-- That's factious.

1016
01:16:50,724 --> 01:16:55,434
Criteria five of six, subdivision design says satisfactorily mitigates for effects

1017
01:16:55,464 --> 01:16:58,344
of development. Number, uh, number five.

1018
01:16:58,404 --> 01:17:02,274
Number six, plans substantially conform to underlying zoning and land code.

1019
01:17:02,904 --> 01:17:07,794
Those are highly judgmental, and those judgments need to be based on a factual

1020
01:17:07,824 --> 01:17:13,734
basis, but they're judgments. One of you may react one way, the other another way.

1021
01:17:13,778 --> 01:17:15,234
It doesn't mean one of you are wrong or right.

1022
01:17:15,324 --> 01:17:19,448
They're judgments that you need to make based on the evidence presented to you, and

1023
01:17:19,464 --> 01:17:23,499
you weigh that against the criteria in the code when you evaluate this project.

1024
01:17:24,174 --> 01:17:26,814
Review process allows for your opinions. That's fine.

1025
01:17:26,829 --> 01:17:30,535
You have five, six times four because we all have different perspectives at your

1026
01:17:30,564 --> 01:17:32,604
regular table in making a decision.

1027
01:17:33,144 --> 01:17:36,564
You're the decision-maker, and in doing so, you can, you should, and you will

1028
01:17:36,714 --> 01:17:41,109
hopefully make judgments regardless of what you've been told, the staff and their

1029
01:17:41,154 --> 01:17:41,874
recommendations.

1030
01:17:43,194 --> 01:17:47,064
You heard repeatedly, the staff are the experts.

1031
01:17:48,384 --> 01:17:49,914
They're professional. They know what they're doing.

1032
01:17:50,304 --> 01:17:54,354
This call has nothing to do about Jade, and Jade, it has to do with all the staff

1033
01:17:54,384 --> 01:17:57,144
and all the council. But what you heard last time,

1034
01:17:59,154 --> 01:18:03,084
this is from a transcript of me, "My recommendation would be if you're going to

1035
01:18:03,144 --> 01:18:06,144
find that the project does not conform with the criteria, make sure you state

1036
01:18:06,204 --> 01:18:10,314
specific facts under five to six, where you think it does not meet the criteria

1037
01:18:10,374 --> 01:18:15,144
because in the event that it's challenged, I think this is exhibit A of the core

1038
01:18:15,219 --> 01:18:18,894
challenge for something. Would be attachment F from the staff, where staff goes

1039
01:18:18,924 --> 01:18:22,419
through a detailed analysis that finds everything conforms to the land development

1040
01:18:22,554 --> 01:18:22,794
code."

1041
01:18:24,474 --> 01:18:28,314
Further, and so when you have experts like Jade, and she consults with city

1042
01:18:28,344 --> 01:18:32,304
engineers, and she consults with public works and fire, and they all come through

1043
01:18:32,334 --> 01:18:36,324
and they say, "Yes, it conforms," council, you'd have a pretty good reason and some

1044
01:18:36,444 --> 01:18:38,874
evidence as to why this is not conforming to the code.

1045
01:18:41,214 --> 01:18:45,384
As you say, you're not compelled to follow what the staff says.

1046
01:18:45,834 --> 01:18:47,574
You need to consider what the staff says.

1047
01:18:48,084 --> 01:18:51,774
But what this reads, you read between the lines, it's basically saying if you take

1048
01:18:51,864 --> 01:18:53,739
action, it's against what the staff says.

1049
01:18:53,785 --> 01:18:57,954
Well, you're not the offensive legal counsel, and that's not the way to handle land

1050
01:18:57,984 --> 01:19:01,779
use process. You need to base it on your review and verification of how the product

1051
01:19:01,824 --> 01:19:04,344
conforms with the applicable criteria.

1052
01:19:06,354 --> 01:19:10,239
Lay this out. Does this mean that every time the staff says recommendation this,

1053
01:19:10,285 --> 01:19:12,894
that, or the other, that that is what council needs to do?

1054
01:19:14,184 --> 01:19:20,019
This is very stimulating, foundational stuff that I think lies at the base of how

1055
01:19:20,094 --> 01:19:22,674
the development process should work.

1056
01:19:24,204 --> 01:19:28,434
This notion presented first by your applicant and supported by your attorney that

1057
01:19:28,495 --> 01:19:32,589
the primary single family, take it literally, means the duplex cannot be built on a

1058
01:19:32,634 --> 01:19:37,583
duplex lot. First of all, it's absolutely absurd. Pardon me. It makes no sense.

1059
01:19:38,004 --> 01:19:41,964
Secondly, it can be addressed simply by the plat stating which lot is a duplex,

1060
01:19:42,054 --> 01:19:44,424
which lot is single family, but the pilot doesn't even do that.

1061
01:19:44,544 --> 01:19:44,814
Thank you.

1062
01:19:44,874 --> 01:19:45,594
Super.

1063
01:19:49,644 --> 01:19:52,719
My name

1064
01:19:52,734 --> 01:20:03,294
is

1065
01:20:03,323 --> 01:20:07,704
Carol Smith. I live at 351 Palestine Trail in Riggs.

1066
01:20:09,384 --> 01:20:13,074
This is something I was not planning to speak to, but after listening to when you

1067
01:20:13,134 --> 01:20:18,294
talk about affordable housing, you're talking about nine homes,

1068
01:20:18,834 --> 01:20:24,024
nine residences. Just because they are done as

1069
01:20:24,054 --> 01:20:28,854
duplexes, twin homes, whatever you want to call them, does not mean that they are

1070
01:20:28,884 --> 01:20:34,495
affordable. If you talk to the people who live, who are here, who live on Bush Way,

1071
01:20:34,944 --> 01:20:40,899
that have bought one of the twin homes on Bush Way and find out the prices that

1072
01:20:40,914 --> 01:20:46,794
are being paid for those, they do not qualify as affordable housing.

1073
01:20:46,854 --> 01:20:52,464
Most of them are in the $100,000 range from ones that have been

1074
01:20:52,524 --> 01:20:55,164
purchased. So that is not going to solve the problem.

1075
01:20:58,404 --> 01:21:03,535
And I also want to say that this subdivision does not conform to the zoning code

1076
01:21:03,684 --> 01:21:09,549
R7. The code states that dwellings must quote, "primarily be single

1077
01:21:09,624 --> 01:21:15,594
family detached housing." And Idaho Supreme Court

1078
01:21:15,745 --> 01:21:20,919
in Nelson versus Peppies in 2020 stated that the

1079
01:21:20,934 --> 01:21:25,734
objective statute word language begins with the literal language of the statute.

1080
01:21:26,124 --> 01:21:30,654
The statute should be considered as a whole, and words should be given their plain,

1081
01:21:30,864 --> 01:21:35,169
usual, and ordinary meanings. It should be noted that the court must give effect to

1082
01:21:35,754 --> 01:21:41,394
all the words and provisions of the statute so that none will be void,

1083
01:21:41,874 --> 01:21:44,245
superfluous, or redundant.

1084
01:21:45,504 --> 01:21:48,924
According to the American Webster dictionary, primarily means mostly.

1085
01:21:49,944 --> 01:21:55,434
Also, according to Merriam-Webster, mostly means mainly or largely.

1086
01:21:56,004 --> 01:22:01,614
The plat being presented does not allow for primarily or mostly

1087
01:22:01,944 --> 01:22:04,914
or mainly detached single-family houses.

1088
01:22:05,754 --> 01:22:09,384
Primarily is not probe-clearing language.

1089
01:22:09,745 --> 01:22:15,370
It is a word that is commonly used, and its meaning is easily

1090
01:22:15,370 --> 01:22:21,294
understood. I ask the council to live up to responsibilities.

1091
01:22:23,364 --> 01:22:26,694
You make the final decision. That is your job,

1092
01:22:27,894 --> 01:22:30,834
not the staff. The buck stops with you.

1093
01:22:31,614 --> 01:22:33,954
And thank you for giving us the regimen of my comment.

1094
01:22:34,914 --> 01:22:35,394
Thank you.

1095
01:22:48,069 --> 01:22:52,539
Good evening, Mayor, city council members. My name is Jen Calder.

1096
01:22:52,599 --> 01:22:55,779
I reside at 962 Dusty Trail in Driggs.

1097
01:22:56,679 --> 01:23:02,410
While others tonight are addressing specific concerns regarding the proposed Corona

1098
01:23:02,469 --> 01:23:08,094
Valley development, such as traffic, safety, environmental impacts, I want to share

1099
01:23:08,139 --> 01:23:10,269
a few thoughts on the role of the city council.

1100
01:23:11,739 --> 01:23:15,969
I want to emphasize that you three council members are the ultimate

1101
01:23:15,999 --> 01:23:21,474
decision-makers, not staff, not the Planning and Zoning Commission, and not the

1102
01:23:21,549 --> 01:23:27,339
contracted city attorney. While city staff does outstanding work, no denying that,

1103
01:23:27,729 --> 01:23:32,229
the recommendation in a staff report is simply that, a recommendation.

1104
01:23:32,559 --> 01:23:37,389
It does not dictate the only path forward, nor must it be followed.

1105
01:23:37,959 --> 01:23:42,999
The council always retains the authority to vote against staff recommendations.

1106
01:23:43,809 --> 01:23:49,779
This is precisely what occurred in April of 2022, during my

1107
01:23:49,870 --> 01:23:55,524
tenure on this council, when we voted unanimously to deny approval of the Rivers

1108
01:23:55,599 --> 01:24:00,953
West development, despite recommendations for approval from both planning and

1109
01:24:01,059 --> 01:24:06,459
zoning staff and commissioners. I highlight this history simply to

1110
01:24:06,489 --> 01:24:11,410
illustrate that the final authority rests with you.

1111
01:24:11,469 --> 01:24:14,319
Thanks for your time, your service, and your consideration.

1112
01:24:14,379 --> 01:24:14,919
Thank you, Jen.

1113
01:24:24,789 --> 01:24:30,699
I know we do have many people in person and online, and so just want

1114
01:24:30,759 --> 01:24:35,949
to remind you, feel free to come on up back to back, and

1115
01:24:36,939 --> 01:24:42,609
feel free to remind us that if you agree, and move on so that we can make sure to

1116
01:24:42,669 --> 01:24:44,499
get to everybody's comments. Thank you.

1117
01:24:45,160 --> 01:24:49,179
Hi, my name is Susan Fence, and I live at 430 Cowboy Trail.

1118
01:24:50,949 --> 01:24:53,919
I guess I want to address a few things.

1119
01:24:54,639 --> 01:25:00,189
First of all, the process of allowing developers to submit new

1120
01:25:00,249 --> 01:25:01,929
information whenever they want,

1121
01:25:03,279 --> 01:25:08,199
it just hugely and unfairly limits meaningful engagement from your

1122
01:25:08,259 --> 01:25:11,289
constituents, and so I have a problem with that.

1123
01:25:11,379 --> 01:25:14,259
For example, tonight, we had a new PowerPoint.

1124
01:25:14,589 --> 01:25:18,279
Could that PowerPoint have been posted online on the Drake City website?

1125
01:25:18,699 --> 01:25:19,538
Absolutely.

1126
01:25:21,249 --> 01:25:26,979
But that process rewards developers with open

1127
01:25:27,039 --> 01:25:31,569
access to all information, and it gives them the ability to make last-minute

1128
01:25:31,629 --> 01:25:36,370
changes and additional time and opportunity to engage the council.

1129
01:25:36,729 --> 01:25:39,639
And then limiting public comment to three minutes,

1130
01:25:41,109 --> 01:25:44,349
in this way is akin to saying, "We don't care what you have to say.

1131
01:25:45,699 --> 01:25:50,949
What the developers say is more important." So, I want you to think about that

1132
01:25:50,979 --> 01:25:56,799
perception. Okay. So, the next thing that I'd like to address

1133
01:25:56,889 --> 01:26:01,449
is this huge assumption that because we're going to have small lots and small

1134
01:26:01,479 --> 01:26:03,549
homes, that they're going to be affordable.

1135
01:26:04,133 --> 01:26:08,559
The homes on Steephill Road, I think last year, were around

1136
01:26:08,589 --> 01:26:12,309
$550,000, and as a former teacher, it's not

1137
01:26:12,339 --> 01:26:15,549
affordable. Okay.

1138
01:26:17,769 --> 01:26:21,219
We haven't been given specific home plans at the neighborhood meeting.

1139
01:26:21,309 --> 01:26:26,859
I asked the developer if the homes that were presented in that meeting were the

1140
01:26:26,889 --> 01:26:31,059
plans that the homes that were to be on those lots, and he said, "No, not

1141
01:26:31,120 --> 01:26:36,714
necessarily. It's just a rendering." We don't know how much the lots will cost.

1142
01:26:36,729 --> 01:26:39,669
We don't know how much the homes will cost. Okay.

1143
01:26:39,729 --> 01:26:43,854
So we've had people stand up here and say, "This is affordable housing," but that's

1144
01:26:43,899 --> 01:26:49,269
an assumption. You don't know that. You don't know where that price tag will land.

1145
01:26:54,609 --> 01:26:59,874
I'd also like to address the word "primarily," and I know you've heard some of

1146
01:26:59,979 --> 01:27:04,449
this. I am a senior technical writer, editor, and an analyst.

1147
01:27:04,779 --> 01:27:10,359
I work with Department of Energy engineers, and I can tell you

1148
01:27:10,389 --> 01:27:14,799
that not paying attention to that word would be

1149
01:27:14,919 --> 01:27:19,120
negligent in my job.

1150
01:27:20,620 --> 01:27:24,069
Okay. It has to be exact. Right? It should be precise.

1151
01:27:24,249 --> 01:27:29,049
It should be exact, and your land use development code is written that way, and you

1152
01:27:29,079 --> 01:27:30,370
need to adhere to it.

1153
01:27:32,049 --> 01:27:32,469
Thank you.

1154
01:27:34,059 --> 01:27:36,549
Thank you, Susan.

1155
01:27:42,429 --> 01:27:46,389
Hi, my name is Amy Cutting, and I live at 910 Powder Valley Lane.

1156
01:27:47,049 --> 01:27:51,429
And I'm here tonight to ask the council to deny further approval of the Corona

1157
01:27:51,459 --> 01:27:57,429
Valley subdivision, primarily because I believe that there are many issues, but

1158
01:27:57,489 --> 01:28:00,489
I also believe that the traffic issues around this development are still

1159
01:28:00,549 --> 01:28:06,519
unresolved. There was nothing addressed, I think, that I could tell in the

1160
01:28:06,579 --> 01:28:10,959
comments from the developer about a new traffic impact study, which was promised

1161
01:28:11,019 --> 01:28:13,479
when this was tabled, I believe back in April.

1162
01:28:15,189 --> 01:28:19,419
As a Powder Valley resident, I see firsthand what the effect of large numbers of

1163
01:28:19,479 --> 01:28:21,204
homes being built at one time,

1164
01:28:24,519 --> 01:28:25,479
what the effect is.

1165
01:28:26,889 --> 01:28:31,719
And in a subdivision this size, which is way bigger than what's currently going on

1166
01:28:31,779 --> 01:28:37,239
in Shoshone Plains and in 2 1/2 and in Bellevue, and a number of subdivisions that

1167
01:28:37,269 --> 01:28:39,473
are going on right in that exact same area.

1168
01:28:41,019 --> 01:28:45,039
And there's been a huge change in the traffic pattern.

1169
01:28:45,429 --> 01:28:50,799
The 2025 Driggs Transportation Plan openly acknowledges a severe lack of through

1170
01:28:50,859 --> 01:28:52,764
routes in the area

1171
01:28:54,129 --> 01:28:59,139
where this subdivision is planned, the northeast quadrant is what that was referred

1172
01:28:59,199 --> 01:29:04,120
to. Yet the long-term solution is meant to solve this problem, like the La Grande

1173
01:29:04,209 --> 01:29:08,664
Gear extension to Steephill Road, remain completely stalled at an estimate of $4

1174
01:29:08,799 --> 01:29:14,410
million. Forcing high-density growth onto an incomplete

1175
01:29:14,559 --> 01:29:18,609
road network directly contradicts orderly municipal planning.

1176
01:29:19,299 --> 01:29:24,489
It also forces traffic out small neighborhood roads, such as Powder Valley, roads

1177
01:29:24,519 --> 01:29:27,849
that were never meant to handle large amounts of traffic.

1178
01:29:28,209 --> 01:29:31,689
In fact, Powder Valley was intended to be a private road.

1179
01:29:31,749 --> 01:29:36,789
It still has a sign that says private road that is largely ignored from what I can

1180
01:29:36,849 --> 01:29:41,799
tell. The roads are narrow, there are no sidewalks, and the exits

1181
01:29:42,729 --> 01:29:43,749
from our

1182
01:29:45,549 --> 01:29:48,910
townhome units onto Steephill Road are completely blind.

1183
01:29:50,049 --> 01:29:54,474
Yet people drive down there and expect to go out onto Steephill Road without a

1184
01:29:54,519 --> 01:29:58,239
problem. Since the increase in building in Shoshone Plains, there's been a

1185
01:29:58,269 --> 01:30:03,219
noticeable increase in all traffic, especially construction-related traffic.

1186
01:30:03,279 --> 01:30:07,959
There are huge trucks that roll down those roads, and there are kids out there,

1187
01:30:07,989 --> 01:30:12,174
people with dogs walking. It's a recipe for disaster.

1188
01:30:13,269 --> 01:30:17,964
And I believe until the northeast quadrant traffic access issues get resolved, I

1189
01:30:17,979 --> 01:30:22,089
think it's premature to approve a development of this size.

1190
01:30:22,120 --> 01:30:26,919
I'm not saying that a development of somewhat of size might not be okay in the

1191
01:30:26,979 --> 01:30:30,910
future, but at this point, I think it's premature to approve this development.

1192
01:30:30,999 --> 01:30:31,299
Thanks.

1193
01:30:32,739 --> 01:30:34,239
Thank you.

1194
01:30:46,299 --> 01:30:50,289
Christina Hileman, 545 Bouche Street.

1195
01:30:51,219 --> 01:30:55,599
I am going to keep this short and sweet, and I want to start by saying that I

1196
01:30:55,629 --> 01:31:00,084
appreciate all the hours that everyone has put into this application and

1197
01:31:01,899 --> 01:31:03,819
decision, and that the effort is real.

1198
01:31:04,959 --> 01:31:09,144
And the effort also deserves to be met with the kind of verification that lets this

1199
01:31:09,160 --> 01:31:13,569
whole community trust the outcome. I'm going to go to my handy.

1200
01:31:14,319 --> 01:31:18,759
This is not about being against growth, it's about developing responsibly with a

1201
01:31:18,819 --> 01:31:23,439
traffic study that is up to date and relevant, and an application that honors our

1202
01:31:23,499 --> 01:31:27,729
land and development code. It's also about the size of what's being decided,

1203
01:31:28,179 --> 01:31:33,910
increasing the size of Driggs by about 25% with 180 units next to our schools

1204
01:31:34,209 --> 01:31:39,654
for decades to come. Decisions this big deserve due diligence and maybe even

1205
01:31:39,654 --> 01:31:44,019
outside eyes. I do believe city council members have the right to bring in its own

1206
01:31:44,079 --> 01:31:47,199
independent counsel on a decision of this size.

1207
01:31:47,859 --> 01:31:51,999
I stand with my neighbors on this, so please just deny this application tonight.

1208
01:31:52,089 --> 01:31:52,660
Thank you.

1209
01:31:53,079 --> 01:31:53,439
Thank you.

1210
01:32:06,774 --> 01:32:12,684
Dawn. Excuse me. I'm Dawn Smith, and I live at 916 East

1211
01:32:12,774 --> 01:32:17,394
Ross. That's Calabasas Valley, directly across the street from the subdivision.

1212
01:32:18,474 --> 01:32:22,524
I am not opposed to this parcel being developed.

1213
01:32:23,544 --> 01:32:29,364
I am opposed to upzoning this parcel, I'm opposed to non-compliant

1214
01:32:29,574 --> 01:32:34,674
development of this parcel, and I'm opposed to poorly planned development of this

1215
01:32:34,704 --> 01:32:35,274
parcel.

1216
01:32:37,974 --> 01:32:43,854
I live in the RS-7 zone. My density is 2.84

1217
01:32:43,944 --> 01:32:47,995
units per acre. That is my RS-7 zone.

1218
01:32:49,614 --> 01:32:54,984
I, in my professional opinion, do not believe this is actually a preliminary plat

1219
01:32:55,104 --> 01:33:00,924
for RS-7 zoning. I feel that, by definition, it is either an

1220
01:33:01,044 --> 01:33:01,614
rezoning

1221
01:33:03,114 --> 01:33:08,844
or a PUD. It is not a preliminary plat for RS-7 zoning.

1222
01:33:10,854 --> 01:33:11,454
Thank you.

1223
01:33:25,794 --> 01:33:29,844
Good evening. I'm Patty Leisure. I live at 685 Bouchoux Street.

1224
01:33:31,285 --> 01:33:33,864
I agree with everything that's been presented already.

1225
01:33:34,854 --> 01:33:39,294
I just want to add another angle to the RS-7 intent.

1226
01:33:41,214 --> 01:33:47,154
The other uses that are presented in the matrix are presented in the

1227
01:33:47,214 --> 01:33:47,995
definition

1228
01:33:49,314 --> 01:33:54,474
as additional, not other alternative,

1229
01:33:55,854 --> 01:33:57,624
other options. They are additional.

1230
01:33:58,285 --> 01:34:04,254
So really, it's in addition to the primary percentage of

1231
01:34:04,404 --> 01:34:05,245
51%.

1232
01:34:08,694 --> 01:34:10,074
That's one perspective.

1233
01:34:11,274 --> 01:34:12,144
The other thing

1234
01:34:13,914 --> 01:34:16,014
I wanted to mention is

1235
01:34:18,144 --> 01:34:22,404
mitigation measures for traffic issues on Bouchoux.

1236
01:34:23,364 --> 01:34:28,224
I don't think those have adequately been figured into the costs

1237
01:34:29,364 --> 01:34:30,204
to residents.

1238
01:34:31,404 --> 01:34:37,074
The park that's back there, it has wonderful parking, but not

1239
01:34:37,224 --> 01:34:37,794
located

1240
01:34:39,204 --> 01:34:45,024
where it will be used. Human behavior

1241
01:34:45,054 --> 01:34:47,124
will go the path of least resistance.

1242
01:34:47,634 --> 01:34:51,654
People are going to try to park on Bouchoux or that soccer field.

1243
01:34:52,314 --> 01:34:57,894
It's sort of zig and zag to get to Chili Street to access that parking.

1244
01:34:59,785 --> 01:35:05,693
That Chili Street doesn't connect North Ward to the East West Road, North

1245
01:35:05,785 --> 01:35:06,864
and Pinkney's Valley.

1246
01:35:09,234 --> 01:35:14,274
There's a missed opportunity for making that more obvious, if this goes through.

1247
01:35:16,313 --> 01:35:20,844
So I think just a little more consideration of mitigation measures for the Bouchoux

1248
01:35:20,859 --> 01:35:23,754
issues if this happens. Thank you.

1249
01:35:23,814 --> 01:35:24,234
Thank you.

1250
01:35:35,754 --> 01:35:38,874
Name's Wendy. I've been down at the 14 Cowboy Trail.

1251
01:35:41,064 --> 01:35:46,914
Thank you for your time. If you have lived in the valley over the last 20

1252
01:35:46,944 --> 01:35:51,444
years, which most people here have, we've all experienced the boom and bust of the

1253
01:35:51,474 --> 01:35:56,664
real estate market, the recession of 2008, where many of us were probably able to

1254
01:35:56,724 --> 01:35:58,224
buy homes here.

1255
01:35:59,574 --> 01:36:05,004
And we're talking about the phase one infrastructure and the ability to

1256
01:36:05,064 --> 01:36:07,014
support phase one with water.

1257
01:36:08,274 --> 01:36:13,824
Last meeting, the developers talked about the build-out of all five phases to

1258
01:36:14,124 --> 01:36:19,314
be about five years. If we only have the infrastructure to support phase one, are

1259
01:36:19,344 --> 01:36:23,649
we going to be able to upgrade our infrastructure within five years to support all

1260
01:36:23,694 --> 01:36:28,314
of those phases? Because I think usually infrastructure takes a while.

1261
01:36:28,389 --> 01:36:34,374
So what is the chance that we're going to sit with phase one build-out and

1262
01:36:34,464 --> 01:36:40,299
two through five, this empty like little ghost subdivision, which we've seen for

1263
01:36:40,299 --> 01:36:46,269
the last 20 years? This is an important piece of property and a very critical

1264
01:36:46,285 --> 01:36:48,414
location, and it deserves a thoughtful plan.

1265
01:36:49,524 --> 01:36:53,754
This decision will have ripple effects within our community for years to come, and

1266
01:36:53,814 --> 01:36:57,204
it sets a precedent for every other subdivision behind it.

1267
01:36:57,954 --> 01:37:03,384
So this is a lot to weigh on you guys, but this is a very important decision that

1268
01:37:04,285 --> 01:37:09,954
shapes the way our community looks, feels, its safety, the way people move through

1269
01:37:10,014 --> 01:37:10,224
it.

1270
01:37:11,514 --> 01:37:17,454
And for those of us who have given and invested in this community, it feels a

1271
01:37:17,514 --> 01:37:22,884
bit like we're being thrown with like the baby with the bathwater just for someone

1272
01:37:23,064 --> 01:37:26,574
to make a business transaction. So please consider that.

1273
01:37:26,904 --> 01:37:27,864
And thank you for your time.

1274
01:37:28,344 --> 01:37:29,394
Thank you, Ms. Wendy.

1275
01:37:42,594 --> 01:37:48,384
Hello. My name is Kim Bailey. This is Holland, and we live at 480 Cowboy

1276
01:37:48,504 --> 01:37:51,504
Trail, which is on the corner of Cowboy Trail and Ross.

1277
01:37:52,194 --> 01:37:57,324
So we're right across the street from all of this and particularly concerned about

1278
01:37:57,354 --> 01:37:59,544
the effect that this will have on Cowboy Trail.

1279
01:37:59,874 --> 01:38:03,745
I do not believe the build-outs are a solution to this problem.

1280
01:38:03,954 --> 01:38:09,024
I do not believe that a sign that says, "Local traffic," is going to make any

1281
01:38:09,084 --> 01:38:12,984
difference whatsoever to someone who's trying to get to work quickly, does not want

1282
01:38:12,999 --> 01:38:16,779
to go down past the high school. So that's just not going to work.

1283
01:38:16,914 --> 01:38:21,414
We need a subdivision that is recognizing that we cannot extend Cowboy Trail.

1284
01:38:21,474 --> 01:38:26,814
And I'm sure that in rotation we can find something. And that's all I say.

1285
01:38:26,829 --> 01:38:30,189
In addition, I agree with everything that everyone said, but I won't say it again

1286
01:38:30,234 --> 01:38:32,634
because you got it. So thank you.

1287
01:38:33,924 --> 01:38:36,144
Thank you, Holland and Kim.

1288
01:38:43,824 --> 01:38:45,594
Okay, we'll move online.

1289
01:38:51,594 --> 01:38:54,564
Hi. Sherry with Robbie, 1487 Hoshi Bank.

1290
01:38:55,014 --> 01:38:59,544
My question is, what is the definition of affordable housing?

1291
01:39:00,324 --> 01:39:05,289
Every developer that comes through our valley and wants to build subdivisions and

1292
01:39:05,364 --> 01:39:10,584
condos and apartments, it's going to be affordable. Affordable for who?

1293
01:39:10,660 --> 01:39:14,874
The square footage now, I think, in the average home is like 450 a square foot.

1294
01:39:15,834 --> 01:39:19,554
Don't quote me on that, but that's what I heard recently.

1295
01:39:20,124 --> 01:39:23,064
So I would like to ask Philip, who is online there,

1296
01:39:24,714 --> 01:39:26,289
how much are these houses going to cost?

1297
01:39:26,394 --> 01:39:31,914
Because 7 to $800,000 is not affordable for a majority of the people that I've

1298
01:39:31,944 --> 01:39:36,459
known for the many years that I've lived here and all these young people that want

1299
01:39:36,474 --> 01:39:41,785
to come in cannot afford that. People that come over from Jackson can afford $7 or

1300
01:39:41,814 --> 01:39:47,394
$800,000, but they want to live there, but they can't, so they come over here.

1301
01:39:47,454 --> 01:39:52,584
But the average young person that comes in here today cannot afford 7, $800,000.

1302
01:39:52,674 --> 01:39:56,514
So my question to the developer, how much are these houses going to cost?

1303
01:39:58,554 --> 01:39:59,604
Can I ask that question?

1304
01:39:59,934 --> 01:40:00,639
No, but thank you.

1305
01:40:00,639 --> 01:40:03,114
Well, I want to throw that question out there because I'd like to know.

1306
01:40:03,504 --> 01:40:04,285
So thank you.

1307
01:40:16,584 --> 01:40:19,149
Thank you, Sherry.

1308
01:40:19,164 --> 01:40:23,964
My name is Dirk Leisure. I live at 685 Bouchoux Way.

1309
01:40:25,074 --> 01:40:30,144
And as you might be able to guess, I'm going to talk about the unsatisfied

1310
01:40:30,264 --> 01:40:33,114
mitigation of the traffic impacts.

1311
01:40:33,684 --> 01:40:38,094
I'm very disappointed that Keller hasn't been asked questions.

1312
01:40:38,724 --> 01:40:42,174
The process, I understand, is that after the public hearing,

1313
01:40:43,464 --> 01:40:46,104
you move immediately into deliberations.

1314
01:40:46,734 --> 01:40:52,495
And I was really candidly looking forward to hearing Keller explain a lot about

1315
01:40:53,245 --> 01:40:59,214
this. I myself am very skeptical of what Keller might say

1316
01:40:59,274 --> 01:41:03,474
in their one and a half page letter, and I recommend you be skeptical as well.

1317
01:41:03,564 --> 01:41:06,894
I'm going to take a minute to remind you why

1318
01:41:08,286 --> 01:41:11,886
Everything I show you has been in the public record, has been in the record for

1319
01:41:11,976 --> 01:41:15,636
this since August, so well over a month.

1320
01:41:18,366 --> 01:41:23,901
I think Keller has a confidence that you should be well aware of.

1321
01:41:23,946 --> 01:41:29,796
When Keller received the traffic impact study, they wrote a

1322
01:41:30,636 --> 01:41:36,456
two-and-a-half-page letter that you have seen, and in it,

1323
01:41:36,696 --> 01:41:38,076
they say, quote,

1324
01:41:40,145 --> 01:41:42,606
"It was not feasible

1325
01:41:43,956 --> 01:41:49,836
to meaningfully compare data and scenarios through the report." This is in

1326
01:41:49,926 --> 01:41:51,786
comment 10. You've seen this, I'm sure.

1327
01:41:52,446 --> 01:41:57,876
And then they go on to say comments nine and 10 are addressed to TIS preparers

1328
01:41:58,176 --> 01:42:04,147
for future submittals. So they didn't require it for the 2022 or

1329
01:42:04,206 --> 01:42:10,116
2023 submittal. They then

1330
01:42:10,176 --> 01:42:15,696
went ahead and gave their approval on a cursory basis,

1331
01:42:16,176 --> 01:42:20,946
recommended approval to Drake's in the final TIS.

1332
01:42:21,846 --> 01:42:24,066
But that final TIS is very interesting.

1333
01:42:24,157 --> 01:42:24,951
If you look at it,

1334
01:42:27,426 --> 01:42:33,036
in the very early pages, starting on page seven, there are numbers which are

1335
01:42:33,126 --> 01:42:37,626
inconsistent between the paragraphs and the

1336
01:42:38,256 --> 01:42:43,357
tables. And these are very important

1337
01:42:44,346 --> 01:42:45,157
intersections.

1338
01:42:46,866 --> 01:42:52,776
The problems were brought to Keller's attention prior to the March

1339
01:42:52,836 --> 01:42:57,006
P&Z meeting. They were asked if they wanted to withdraw their approval.

1340
01:42:57,426 --> 01:43:03,096
They didn't. They let P&Z rely on that approval in March, in May.

1341
01:43:03,186 --> 01:43:08,091
They let you rely on it in August. And as far as I'm aware, I don't think they've

1342
01:43:08,107 --> 01:43:13,147
taken their approval out yet. Finally, they've given a one-and-a-half-page letter,

1343
01:43:14,407 --> 01:43:17,391
and they basically say, "Trust me." I'm sorry.

1344
01:43:18,126 --> 01:43:22,776
After this history, that's too tall an ask for me, and it should be too tall an ask

1345
01:43:22,866 --> 01:43:24,982
for you. Please deny the application.

1346
01:43:25,446 --> 01:43:29,016
Thank you, sir. Can you take your poster with you?

1347
01:43:29,136 --> 01:43:29,346
Yes.

1348
01:43:30,756 --> 01:43:32,227
Anybody else in person?

1349
01:43:42,936 --> 01:43:46,326
I'm Nikki Van Trease at 876 Easy Street.

1350
01:43:47,346 --> 01:43:53,227
I'm not against the development. I think having a nice development close to

1351
01:43:53,256 --> 01:43:59,167
the schools for families with children is a great idea, but I don't think that

1352
01:43:59,227 --> 01:44:02,407
this amount of density is good for us.

1353
01:44:02,857 --> 01:44:07,836
I don't think it fits our city codes, and

1354
01:44:08,647 --> 01:44:13,806
I'm concerned about the water being there for phase one but not for phases two,

1355
01:44:13,897 --> 01:44:19,401
three, four, and five. And if we approve this one, what happens to all the others

1356
01:44:19,446 --> 01:44:24,485
in the pipeline behind it that also show similar problems but then get approved?

1357
01:44:25,446 --> 01:44:30,006
So I'm against this particular development. Thanks. Thank you, Nikki.

1358
01:44:31,566 --> 01:44:32,736
Anybody else in person?

1359
01:44:40,536 --> 01:44:44,946
My name's Tracy Hall. I live at 710 Buffalo Trail.

1360
01:44:45,696 --> 01:44:48,486
I've grown up here my entire life. I'm a school teacher here.

1361
01:44:48,621 --> 01:44:52,657
This is my 18th year teaching. I teach at Drake's Elementary, and I'm just going to

1362
01:44:52,686 --> 01:44:55,746
echo all my friends and neighbors here and say, please deny this tonight.

1363
01:44:55,986 --> 01:44:56,346
Thank you.

1364
01:44:57,096 --> 01:45:00,397
Thank you, Tracy. I can't believe you've been teaching for 18 years.

1365
01:45:00,651 --> 01:45:03,306
Oh, me either.

1366
01:45:03,426 --> 01:45:04,551
You were just a mom when I first--

1367
01:45:05,766 --> 01:45:05,782
I

1368
01:45:07,296 --> 01:45:08,151
know.

1369
01:45:08,227 --> 01:45:12,966
Hello, my name is Paige Chensky, and I live at 1270 River Trail.

1370
01:45:13,776 --> 01:45:17,977
I just want to agree with all my neighbors here and for all the same reasons, and

1371
01:45:18,397 --> 01:45:22,086
ask you to deny this. Thank you.

1372
01:45:24,951 --> 01:45:24,951
Thank you.

1373
01:45:24,966 --> 01:45:28,147
I'm Kelly Waller, and I live at 650 Easy Street.

1374
01:45:28,686 --> 01:45:32,346
I agree with the opposition to this development.

1375
01:45:32,766 --> 01:45:33,816
I'm

1376
01:45:35,136 --> 01:45:40,506
unconvinced that it is not going to impact our infrastructure beyond

1377
01:45:40,566 --> 01:45:46,042
possibility, and I really hope that we can make the decision for Spartan

1378
01:45:46,206 --> 01:45:51,486
Valley, grow our infrastructure at the same pace that we're growing our homes.

1379
01:45:52,866 --> 01:45:58,446
And I also feel like this development is maximizing the land use

1380
01:45:58,506 --> 01:46:04,386
code density in a way that it just doesn't feel that's the

1381
01:46:04,417 --> 01:46:07,116
right thing to be doing in our community.

1382
01:46:07,176 --> 01:46:07,477
Thank you.

1383
01:46:14,046 --> 01:46:16,776
Hello, Brian Millican, 445 Cowboy Trail.

1384
01:46:17,227 --> 01:46:18,246
I'm here to

1385
01:46:19,926 --> 01:46:24,006
show my opposition to this development, in particular with the water issue.

1386
01:46:24,696 --> 01:46:29,736
As we all know, water scarcity this year in particular is most likely going to get

1387
01:46:29,766 --> 01:46:35,256
worse. We have over-allocated water in all of Idaho, all up here

1388
01:46:35,316 --> 01:46:39,306
northwest, and where is the water going to come from the next phase?

1389
01:46:40,536 --> 01:46:42,456
Again, thank you for your time, and that's it.

1390
01:46:43,116 --> 01:46:43,956
Thank you, Brian.

1391
01:46:55,296 --> 01:46:57,486
Okay, let's move online.

1392
01:46:58,746 --> 01:47:03,607
If you are online and you would like to speak in opposition to the Canyon Valley

1393
01:47:03,667 --> 01:47:09,621
Phase 1 Preliminary Plat Application and Master Plan, please click Raise Hand, and

1394
01:47:09,667 --> 01:47:12,381
we'll promote you so that you can share your public

1395
01:47:12,426 --> 01:47:16,536
comment.

1396
01:47:22,716 --> 01:47:25,446
Robert Anderson, you can go ahead and unmute.

1397
01:47:27,036 --> 01:47:30,336
Yeah, that's Robert Anderson. I live at 1050 East Ross.

1398
01:47:31,746 --> 01:47:33,126
I'd like to just look at the big picture.

1399
01:47:33,756 --> 01:47:39,006
The infrastructure roads do not support this at all,

1400
01:47:40,147 --> 01:47:44,706
and the whole boondoggle with the wastewater thing is still up in the air.

1401
01:47:46,026 --> 01:47:50,376
The roads do not support the traffic. You denied it before.

1402
01:47:50,496 --> 01:47:54,126
I don't understand how you could approve it with more people.

1403
01:47:54,157 --> 01:47:54,261
And

1404
01:47:55,776 --> 01:47:59,526
you serve the citizens of this valley.

1405
01:47:59,616 --> 01:48:04,206
Just look into your hearts and say, "Most people here do not want this," and what

1406
01:48:04,236 --> 01:48:07,686
is right for the citizens, what's going to be good for their safety.

1407
01:48:08,316 --> 01:48:14,196
This area around the schools and Bush Way is so congested and dangerous currently.

1408
01:48:14,256 --> 01:48:18,996
This would be ridiculous to increase that.

1409
01:48:19,026 --> 01:48:24,681
And all these details about the lots and the whatever. Look at the big picture.

1410
01:48:25,236 --> 01:48:30,036
See what serves the people of this valley and the people that live in this

1411
01:48:30,096 --> 01:48:30,667
neighborhood.

1412
01:48:32,167 --> 01:48:37,746
I don't see how you'll be responsible to make any other decision other than to deny

1413
01:48:37,806 --> 01:48:38,136
this.

1414
01:48:39,576 --> 01:48:40,147
Thank you.

1415
01:48:41,376 --> 01:48:42,095
Thank you, Robert.

1416
01:48:53,647 --> 01:48:55,026
Robbie Crouch, go ahead.

1417
01:48:56,886 --> 01:48:59,526
This is Robbie Crouch. I live at 700 Buffalo Trail.

1418
01:49:00,157 --> 01:49:02,032
I agree with everything that's been said already.

1419
01:49:02,256 --> 01:49:05,766
No new comments, except I don't think that the traffic study includes everything

1420
01:49:05,826 --> 01:49:11,556
happening on Ross, including the high schoolers dragging sofas down the street and

1421
01:49:12,426 --> 01:49:17,331
the traffic impacts that we have during lunchtime and when school's getting out,

1422
01:49:17,376 --> 01:49:18,711
and all the bus traffic that's around.

1423
01:49:18,756 --> 01:49:22,026
I think that the traffic study is inadequate. Thanks.

1424
01:49:23,466 --> 01:49:25,206
Thank you, Robbie.

1425
01:49:33,336 --> 01:49:33,696
Yeah.

1426
01:49:33,786 --> 01:49:33,996
Hi.

1427
01:49:38,256 --> 01:49:42,126
That's my husband. Hi, this is Jay Pence.

1428
01:49:43,446 --> 01:49:43,551
Hi.

1429
01:49:43,551 --> 01:49:44,586
Hey, Jay. Go ahead.

1430
01:49:45,036 --> 01:49:47,346
Hi. I'm sorry. I'm a fire complex in Oregon.

1431
01:49:47,376 --> 01:49:48,516
That's okay.

1432
01:49:49,056 --> 01:49:53,346
Hey, I live at 440 Cowboy Trail. I really want to thank you guys for what you do.

1433
01:49:53,736 --> 01:49:56,436
I'm not opposed to this development of the parcel.

1434
01:49:56,526 --> 01:49:59,196
I'm just opposed to this development.

1435
01:49:59,256 --> 01:50:04,206
I feel that you lack the information to make an informed decision tonight, as it

1436
01:50:04,236 --> 01:50:09,336
doesn't meet the RS-7 zoning. As a minimum, please get a plat that fleshes out the

1437
01:50:09,366 --> 01:50:14,466
driveway widths in the homes and sizes, ensure that it'll accommodate the

1438
01:50:14,482 --> 01:50:17,136
residents' vehicles, snow storage.

1439
01:50:17,151 --> 01:50:21,276
I can't even see how kids can have a trampoline in some of the yards on the lots

1440
01:50:21,336 --> 01:50:26,676
just due to the density scale of this large subdivision.

1441
01:50:26,736 --> 01:50:30,336
What's being proposed- is an answer to affordable housing.

1442
01:50:30,397 --> 01:50:35,602
That's what everybody's saying. You got those tiny homes on Skeel Road are like 500

1443
01:50:35,647 --> 01:50:39,636
to 700 square feet, and they're selling for $500,000.

1444
01:50:39,696 --> 01:50:41,676
These are not going to be affordable houses.

1445
01:50:42,426 --> 01:50:44,826
And so this is not the answer to affordable housing.

1446
01:50:45,336 --> 01:50:47,107
We have thousands of lots in the

1447
01:50:48,486 --> 01:50:53,196
county, and just adding to that thousands is not going to make it any better.

1448
01:50:53,676 --> 01:50:53,946
So,

1449
01:50:57,006 --> 01:51:02,977
please add traffic calming measures to Cowboy Trail in the form

1450
01:51:03,006 --> 01:51:07,776
of humps or dips in the existing Cowboy Trail in Down Howard, especially by the

1451
01:51:07,806 --> 01:51:13,026
hospital. And if you approve this subdivision, you're making those streets

1452
01:51:13,357 --> 01:51:16,715
collectors in violation of your traffic plan that you...

1453
01:51:17,107 --> 01:51:17,346
And

1454
01:51:18,786 --> 01:51:21,607
I guess that's about all I have to say. Appreciate it.

1455
01:51:22,326 --> 01:51:22,956
Thank you, Jay.

1456
01:51:27,696 --> 01:51:29,286
Ron Becker.

1457
01:51:33,036 --> 01:51:33,756
Hello, Ron.

1458
01:51:35,766 --> 01:51:36,096
Hello?

1459
01:51:36,786 --> 01:51:38,346
Hi, Ron. You can go ahead.

1460
01:51:42,066 --> 01:51:43,086
Hi, Ron. Are you there?

1461
01:51:45,876 --> 01:51:47,706
We can't hear you if you're talking.

1462
01:51:51,336 --> 01:51:54,036
Try one more time. We heard you once.

1463
01:51:54,276 --> 01:51:56,706
Yeah, we heard you say hello. We know you're there.

1464
01:51:57,667 --> 01:52:01,417
Okay, we're going to move on. If you can

1465
01:52:03,486 --> 01:52:06,456
try again, go ahead. Anybody else?

1466
01:52:06,576 --> 01:52:07,026
Yes, can you-

1467
01:52:07,686 --> 01:52:08,811
Oh, yes. Now? Yes.

1468
01:52:10,266 --> 01:52:10,506
No.

1469
01:52:11,616 --> 01:52:12,426
Lost you. Sorry.

1470
01:52:12,816 --> 01:52:14,196
One more time. Can you hear us, Ron?

1471
01:52:15,786 --> 01:52:16,611
Yeah, can you hear me?

1472
01:52:17,542 --> 01:52:17,977
Yes.

1473
01:52:19,446 --> 01:52:21,456
Okay, great. I'm sorry for that.

1474
01:52:23,196 --> 01:52:24,246
I'd like to just echo

1475
01:52:25,776 --> 01:52:30,426
what the other community members have said regarding the RS7 thing.

1476
01:52:31,536 --> 01:52:34,296
I don't want to bore you to tears. You heard that number probably.

1477
01:52:35,616 --> 01:52:37,417
You might wish you never hear it again.

1478
01:52:38,977 --> 01:52:44,511
I would say, however, that at the very least in the building code document, it

1479
01:52:44,526 --> 01:52:47,076
would be helpful if you have a definition of terms section.

1480
01:52:47,826 --> 01:52:52,266
So when you see a term that's obviously a key term, like primarily, that it would

1481
01:52:52,296 --> 01:52:57,607
be defined in the way that it apparently has been by decision-makers up to this

1482
01:52:57,667 --> 01:52:57,951
point,

1483
01:52:59,286 --> 01:53:03,006
meaning that they don't necessarily see it as meaning majority of

1484
01:53:04,417 --> 01:53:10,296
or more than 50%. I'm not a mathematician, but 15%

1485
01:53:10,417 --> 01:53:15,426
I don't believe equals 50%. So there is a problem, and I understand where people

1486
01:53:15,456 --> 01:53:20,556
are coming from. Some other comments, and this has been the big picture comment

1487
01:53:20,647 --> 01:53:23,107
that was just made, and a couple other folks have made it.

1488
01:53:23,766 --> 01:53:24,816
I live over here in,

1489
01:53:26,676 --> 01:53:30,861
LSA Trail 426, LSA Trail with my wife.

1490
01:53:30,876 --> 01:53:34,536
We've been here for almost a decade, so that's almost 10 winters.

1491
01:53:35,917 --> 01:53:39,876
Come on over if you don't live in this area and see what's going on, on a winter

1492
01:53:39,907 --> 01:53:45,576
day when there's snow on the roads and without sidewalks, when people are

1493
01:53:45,636 --> 01:53:50,136
walking dogs and trying to play, do whatever they do.

1494
01:53:51,246 --> 01:53:55,417
I try to visualize more cars on these roads when people have nowhere to walk their

1495
01:53:55,446 --> 01:53:59,376
dogs, et cetera. So you can kind of fill in the blanks on that.

1496
01:53:59,496 --> 01:54:04,746
I just feel like the density that's proposed, the number of people that would come

1497
01:54:04,836 --> 01:54:10,116
in if they do a build-out in five years, it's going to be chaotic over here.

1498
01:54:10,176 --> 01:54:12,772
Most people run their dogs. They don't walk them on leashes.

1499
01:54:12,786 --> 01:54:15,246
Of course, that's in violation of city code too.

1500
01:54:18,397 --> 01:54:22,641
And we've already had a dog mauling over here in this part of town a few years ago

1501
01:54:23,136 --> 01:54:28,357
of a young kid playing in his yard. I hate to bring those things up, but the

1502
01:54:28,386 --> 01:54:32,886
traffic impact study obviously didn't stand over there on Powder Valley Road when

1503
01:54:32,946 --> 01:54:35,256
people want to go skiing over here on a powder day.

1504
01:54:35,647 --> 01:54:40,866
I have all that traffic coming up Bouche Way and up

1505
01:54:41,796 --> 01:54:44,661
Ross Avenue. What's the path of least resistance?

1506
01:54:44,796 --> 01:54:48,366
Straight through Shoshone Plains over to Ske Hill Road.

1507
01:54:48,486 --> 01:54:51,907
I made an inquiry a while back about when are they going to finish Grand Pierre

1508
01:54:51,936 --> 01:54:56,286
through to Ske Hill Road and found out it's in the 6 to 10-year plan.

1509
01:54:57,157 --> 01:54:59,826
Well, 6 to 10 years, the show's over.

1510
01:54:59,886 --> 01:55:03,036
There will already be lots of folks over here, and they figured out where they want

1511
01:55:03,066 --> 01:55:08,840
to go. What do we do for that interim until we get an intersection there from

1512
01:55:08,840 --> 01:55:10,536
Grand Pierre on Ske Hill Road?

1513
01:55:11,857 --> 01:55:16,626
These are things that I think need to be considered because we're living here now,

1514
01:55:17,316 --> 01:55:18,786
not in 6 to 10 years.

1515
01:55:20,766 --> 01:55:23,736
So again, I appreciate the time and effort that you folks put in.

1516
01:55:24,352 --> 01:55:28,176
I know you're all not making six figures doing what you're doing here tonight.

1517
01:55:28,776 --> 01:55:31,116
So I appreciate that, and I know it's a lot of work.

1518
01:55:32,556 --> 01:55:36,006
But these are serious concerns, and I sure hope that they're taken into

1519
01:55:36,036 --> 01:55:38,586
consideration. Thanks a lot for your time.

1520
01:55:38,616 --> 01:55:44,227
Thank you, Ron. Anybody else online? Click raise hand and we will promote you.

1521
01:55:46,566 --> 01:55:50,766
Seeing no more, we will go ahead and close the public hearing at 7:56.

1522
01:55:52,926 --> 01:55:55,986
Now is the opportunity for the rebuttal from the developer.

1523
01:56:04,176 --> 01:56:08,857
Michael from Pegas Engineering, 2295 North Hills Highway, Boulder.

1524
01:56:09,366 --> 01:56:13,866
We do have several points to rebut here and several

1525
01:56:15,036 --> 01:56:20,046
personnel to address those rebuttals. I'll hand it to engineering.

1526
01:56:20,136 --> 01:56:20,542
We have

1527
01:56:22,386 --> 01:56:26,272
others that can handle some of the other aspects and other rebuttal.

1528
01:56:26,346 --> 01:56:31,055
I'll just ask that everybody keeps to the rebuttal instead of having new

1529
01:56:31,357 --> 01:56:32,016
information.

1530
01:56:32,496 --> 01:56:32,796
Right.

1531
01:56:34,686 --> 01:56:39,876
So first is the water rights. There

1532
01:56:39,936 --> 01:56:45,816
are enough water rights for this project

1533
01:56:45,936 --> 01:56:50,766
to account for all the water necessary for the homes.

1534
01:56:50,796 --> 01:56:55,641
There's 153 gallons per minute. It's in an area, this was also shown again here

1535
01:56:55,686 --> 01:56:56,526
this evening.

1536
01:56:58,266 --> 01:57:02,886
So that water may engage in the water rights. There is water for this.

1537
01:57:03,006 --> 01:57:04,926
The property has those water rights.

1538
01:57:05,647 --> 01:57:05,886
So

1539
01:57:07,296 --> 01:57:11,496
that is really a non-question of is the water available.

1540
01:57:12,036 --> 01:57:17,556
The question then goes into how can the system service the 180

1541
01:57:17,676 --> 01:57:22,266
units right now for this phase, plat one for division one?

1542
01:57:22,866 --> 01:57:25,596
Yes, it can. For phase two? Yes, it can.

1543
01:57:25,686 --> 01:57:31,026
Two, three, and five, there needs to be an update to the transmission line.

1544
01:57:31,086 --> 01:57:33,352
In the development agreement, it

1545
01:57:34,566 --> 01:57:37,536
stated that within the development agreement that

1546
01:57:39,006 --> 01:57:44,016
those conditions, that has to be updated prior to either by the city or the

1547
01:57:44,076 --> 01:57:48,996
developer, right? To update that transmission line in order to service three, four,

1548
01:57:49,131 --> 01:57:55,116
and five. So there is a plan in place to ensure that the water line has the

1549
01:57:55,236 --> 01:58:00,426
capacity to build, so that was done through the guidance from Keller and

1550
01:58:01,147 --> 01:58:01,596
staff.

1551
01:58:03,246 --> 01:58:08,706
Secondly, sewer, again, we have the capacity at

1552
01:58:08,946 --> 01:58:14,766
83%. It does not trigger the 85% threshold that was sent out in the Keller memo.

1553
01:58:17,826 --> 01:58:23,751
And then from the TIS, all of the TIS questions, I would

1554
01:58:23,796 --> 01:58:29,227
defer to staff and to Keller so that they can speak directly to their traffic

1555
01:58:29,316 --> 01:58:34,986
impact study. The traffic impact study was requested by the

1556
01:58:35,046 --> 01:58:38,736
staff for us to pay for, for the developers to pay for that.

1557
01:58:39,036 --> 01:58:44,241
However, they sourced the engineering firm to do that and to take care of that

1558
01:58:44,256 --> 01:58:48,157
study. The developer simply just paid for that.

1559
01:58:48,456 --> 01:58:53,407
And that was for the updated from Keller, and I would refer those questions to

1560
01:58:53,466 --> 01:58:59,107
staff and to Keller specifically, as it's their

1561
01:58:59,796 --> 01:59:02,946
report. Other than that, I'll leave it to Jared.

1562
01:59:03,456 --> 01:59:05,706
Thank you.

1563
01:59:08,796 --> 01:59:10,431
Hi, good evening. My name is Jared Flutie.

1564
01:59:10,746 --> 01:59:15,996
I'm an attorney for the applicant, and at 109 North Arthur, fifth floor in Boulder.

1565
01:59:19,986 --> 01:59:24,292
I made numerous notes of comments that were raised tonight, and I just want to

1566
01:59:24,366 --> 01:59:25,431
mention a couple of them.

1567
01:59:28,902 --> 01:59:31,572
Michael just mentioned the water concern.

1568
01:59:32,202 --> 01:59:35,562
The one thing I would have to say about that is that is the developer's

1569
01:59:35,593 --> 01:59:41,562
responsibility. You're only considering phase one tonight, and the site report

1570
01:59:41,652 --> 01:59:43,752
tells you that the water's there for phase one.

1571
01:59:44,593 --> 01:59:47,772
You'll have to approve subsequent phases as they come up.

1572
01:59:47,892 --> 01:59:52,287
And as far as future development of the infrastructure for the water system, there

1573
01:59:52,303 --> 01:59:56,322
was a comment about concern about can we really get that done in five years.

1574
01:59:56,593 --> 01:59:59,742
Well, again, that's the developer's problem, not yours.

1575
01:59:59,803 --> 02:00:04,182
If he doesn't get it done, the next subsequent phases don't come along.

1576
02:00:04,512 --> 02:00:08,382
I'm sure you understand that, unless the city's done it on their own anyway.

1577
02:00:15,822 --> 02:00:18,312
I think somebody else is going to talk, there were some comments about the

1578
02:00:18,343 --> 02:00:22,452
affordable housing and pricing comments of these units, and somebody else, I think,

1579
02:00:22,482 --> 02:00:26,622
is going to address that more than me, but I would just mention it's a basic

1580
02:00:26,652 --> 02:00:30,222
economics, it's a supply and demand situation.

1581
02:00:30,282 --> 02:00:33,882
If there's more inventory, prices will reflect that.

1582
02:00:34,843 --> 02:00:39,282
Obviously, the shortage of inventory now is why the prices are so high.

1583
02:00:39,762 --> 02:00:40,032
So

1584
02:00:41,622 --> 02:00:45,613
can I promise you that these units will be affordable based on median household

1585
02:00:45,673 --> 02:00:49,423
income? No. But will it help that problem? Probably.

1586
02:00:50,442 --> 02:00:53,803
I think more inventory is going to improve prices.

1587
02:00:55,452 --> 02:01:01,392
I want to address the numerous concerns that came up

1588
02:01:01,512 --> 02:01:07,001
about the R7 zoning and then the length of term primarily language.

1589
02:01:09,673 --> 02:01:15,582
I agree with the city attorney's characterization of that term last month.

1590
02:01:17,742 --> 02:01:21,432
And I remind you that this application at certain tonight is not a variance, it's

1591
02:01:21,492 --> 02:01:25,001
not a rezoning request, it's not a special use permit.

1592
02:01:25,542 --> 02:01:29,772
The applicant is not requesting anything different than what's already allowed

1593
02:01:29,803 --> 02:01:35,772
under your current zoning code. And

1594
02:01:35,832 --> 02:01:39,042
the applicant's not the one that set the zoning for this property here.

1595
02:01:39,162 --> 02:01:45,072
That was done before them. So the question for the council is whether

1596
02:01:45,132 --> 02:01:50,502
this preliminary plat satisfies approval of the criteria in the LDC under

1597
02:01:50,517 --> 02:01:54,222
14-56. The staff has concluded that it does.

1598
02:01:54,432 --> 02:01:57,702
The planning zoning commission has concluded that it does.

1599
02:01:58,423 --> 02:02:01,482
And there's been multiple hearings, additional technical review.

1600
02:02:02,832 --> 02:02:07,452
The applicant has accepted conditions addressing the remaining technical issues.

1601
02:02:08,322 --> 02:02:13,062
Public testimony is certainly relevant, and it does deserve consideration, but

1602
02:02:13,182 --> 02:02:16,782
opposition to development is not an approval criteria.

1603
02:02:18,553 --> 02:02:23,472
If the council concludes that the application should be denied, Idaho law requires

1604
02:02:23,502 --> 02:02:27,972
that that decision be based upon identified applicable criteria and supported by

1605
02:02:28,062 --> 02:02:30,942
findings resolving the relevant dispute facts.

1606
02:02:34,062 --> 02:02:37,722
I think that the better reading and interpretation of that primarily language is

1607
02:02:37,782 --> 02:02:43,062
that it is one of-- and I also think it's one that the court would arrive at in

1608
02:02:43,121 --> 02:02:46,962
reviewing that, is that the word primarily describes the intended character of the

1609
02:02:47,082 --> 02:02:52,363
R7 zone as a whole, rather than a numerical requirement that each individual

1610
02:02:52,932 --> 02:02:58,152
development must itself contain a majority of detached single-family homes.

1611
02:02:59,593 --> 02:03:04,512
There was a comment that said that this doesn't meet the specs for density because

1612
02:03:04,542 --> 02:03:08,442
the ratio is not compliant. There is no ratio listed in the LDC,

1613
02:03:09,762 --> 02:03:13,093
not that I'm aware of. Please stop me directly if I'm wrong with that.

1614
02:03:16,242 --> 02:03:20,952
And there's nothing in the R7 zoning or in the LDC that says that this is

1615
02:03:22,482 --> 02:03:27,372
each development or project specific application, each subdivision, each phase.

1616
02:03:27,702 --> 02:03:29,682
It doesn't specify any of that.

1617
02:03:31,512 --> 02:03:35,892
The same provision that gives that familiar language does authorize, outright

1618
02:03:35,952 --> 02:03:41,053
permitted five different types of structures, besides and including single-family

1619
02:03:41,142 --> 02:03:41,472
homes.

1620
02:03:43,242 --> 02:03:48,522
So theoretically, it would be possible to have as little as 21% of one type of

1621
02:03:48,582 --> 02:03:52,722
structure to be primarily if you were applying it that way, if you had a mixed

1622
02:03:52,872 --> 02:03:54,792
development that used all five types.

1623
02:03:57,103 --> 02:04:02,997
There is nothing in the code that draws a line about 50 or 51%, and

1624
02:04:03,132 --> 02:04:08,053
I think the plain language of that code is the strongest evidence of that

1625
02:04:08,082 --> 02:04:08,952
interpretation.

1626
02:04:10,272 --> 02:04:14,082
The fact that all those other building types are outright permitted.

1627
02:04:15,912 --> 02:04:16,798
I think that the city,

1628
02:04:19,062 --> 02:04:23,593
when they adopted the LDC, if you did intend that primarily language to impose a

1629
02:04:23,652 --> 02:04:29,022
project-level threshold, I think that I would have expected the code to say

1630
02:04:29,053 --> 02:04:33,027
something explicit about that, something that's at least 50% or something along

1631
02:04:33,072 --> 02:04:36,673
those lines, and it simply isn't there. It's not in the code.

1632
02:04:36,762 --> 02:04:42,553
So it's difficult to reconcile the argument that

1633
02:04:43,482 --> 02:04:49,392
when it permits all those other structure types that simply

1634
02:04:49,423 --> 02:04:54,597
because a developer might propose too many of a certain type, that it doesn't

1635
02:04:54,613 --> 02:04:55,932
comply.

1636
02:04:56,142 --> 02:05:02,863
Another

1637
02:05:02,952 --> 02:05:07,347
evidence that I see in the code about that is that the code leaves unanswered

1638
02:05:07,692 --> 02:05:11,007
fundamental questions about what primarily is measured against.

1639
02:05:11,412 --> 02:05:15,912
Does that mean number of lots, number of structures, number of acres developed?

1640
02:05:18,042 --> 02:05:23,307
Acreage occupied, frontage? There is no clarification in the code that if primarily

1641
02:05:23,502 --> 02:05:26,292
means something, what is primarily being measured against?

1642
02:05:26,682 --> 02:05:29,832
There's no denominator and no percentages given in the code.

1643
02:05:30,432 --> 02:05:36,012
And I think that omission is significant in characterizing that language as its own

1644
02:05:36,072 --> 02:05:39,553
purpose rather than a project-level numerical requirement.

1645
02:05:39,613 --> 02:05:42,582
Thank you, Jared. Do you have any additional rebuttals that you'd like to?

1646
02:05:42,642 --> 02:05:44,532
I just want to make sure that we get to everything.

1647
02:05:46,332 --> 02:05:47,292
Yes, I do.

1648
02:05:50,562 --> 02:05:54,792
Just to finish on that topic, I'm not suggesting the term primarily has no legal

1649
02:05:54,822 --> 02:05:58,272
significance. It does. Rather, I'm suggesting it's zone-wide planning,

1650
02:05:59,472 --> 02:06:03,762
and not an individual project. And I would call to your attention,

1651
02:06:05,803 --> 02:06:11,772
a project that I found on your website, this is in the R7 zone

1652
02:06:11,863 --> 02:06:17,412
also. And this was approved in 2024, and this is on

1653
02:06:17,652 --> 02:06:22,062
Teton Avenue Development. There were 15 lots developed, and every one of them was

1654
02:06:22,212 --> 02:06:27,432
duplexes, 100% duplexes. And maybe I wasn't involved or around when that happened,

1655
02:06:27,553 --> 02:06:31,662
so you probably are more familiar with that than me, but Teton Avenue Development

1656
02:06:31,812 --> 02:06:33,492
LLC, represented by Jace Holt.

1657
02:06:35,532 --> 02:06:39,912
I drove over there before I came to this hearing, and I see two new duplexes going

1658
02:06:40,032 --> 02:06:41,187
up on that already.

1659
02:06:43,272 --> 02:06:48,207
So as far as I know, from what I can see on the website, there was never any

1660
02:06:48,222 --> 02:06:53,097
discussion about the primary language in the R7 zoning when that application was

1661
02:06:53,113 --> 02:06:59,007
being reviewed. So again, that shows that the city is not maybe applying their code

1662
02:06:59,113 --> 02:07:03,012
consistently between developments in the R7 zone.

1663
02:07:08,262 --> 02:07:14,232
There were several comments tonight about your responsibility as the city council,

1664
02:07:14,292 --> 02:07:18,762
what you're required to find tonight. And I don't disagree with those.

1665
02:07:19,062 --> 02:07:24,507
I agree that you have the ability to reach a different conclusion than what the

1666
02:07:24,507 --> 02:07:29,442
staff has. You are the ultimate decision-maker, and we respect that, and we respect

1667
02:07:29,472 --> 02:07:31,902
the public's right to be involved and be heard in the process.

1668
02:07:33,072 --> 02:07:37,272
But again, the legal question is not whether this project has opposition, it's

1669
02:07:37,332 --> 02:07:40,722
whether the application meets the criteria.

1670
02:07:43,992 --> 02:07:49,272
If you determine that your city staff and the other experts that have been hired,

1671
02:07:49,303 --> 02:07:50,127
that they're wrong,

1672
02:07:51,822 --> 02:07:56,863
you can reach that. But me, as an attorney, who potentially is going to have to

1673
02:07:56,892 --> 02:08:02,832
deal with this on review in the future, I would just ask you to carefully identify

1674
02:08:02,863 --> 02:08:07,662
the particular approval criteria that is not met, and the evidence and the record

1675
02:08:07,678 --> 02:08:12,822
that establishes that deficiency, and why that evidence outweighs the technical

1676
02:08:12,882 --> 02:08:18,222
analysis that has come from the experts that have weighed in on this.

1677
02:08:18,372 --> 02:08:24,222
And if you believe there is a legitimate remaining impact that can be

1678
02:08:24,252 --> 02:08:28,932
addressed through an appropriate condition, then I would ask you to consider that

1679
02:08:28,992 --> 02:08:33,282
as well, because this applicant has demonstrated repeatedly that it's willing to

1680
02:08:33,312 --> 02:08:36,642
work with the city to resolve concerns and address those things.

1681
02:08:41,880 --> 02:08:45,451
I just want to bring it-- this has been 12 minutes now, so I just want to be able

1682
02:08:45,510 --> 02:08:48,420
to wrap up the rebuttal so that we can move on. Thank you.

1683
02:08:49,425 --> 02:08:52,951
Okay. Well, there's someone else that has to speak, somebody I'll talk to, so I'll

1684
02:08:53,040 --> 02:08:53,640
turn it around.

1685
02:08:59,730 --> 02:09:04,020
Thank you. My name is Mike Allen. I'm an attorney here representing, uh, LKM and

1686
02:09:04,830 --> 02:09:05,639
Ruben Corona.

1687
02:09:05,910 --> 02:09:06,720
What was your last name?

1688
02:09:06,901 --> 02:09:07,590
Mike Allen.

1689
02:09:08,250 --> 02:09:08,670
Allen?

1690
02:09:08,730 --> 02:09:09,720
Allen. A-L-L-E-N.

1691
02:09:10,080 --> 02:09:10,679
Thank you.

1692
02:09:10,860 --> 02:09:16,395
Um, uh, yeah, Jared covered most of the substance of staff, I would probably say.

1693
02:09:16,470 --> 02:09:17,401
I won't repeat that.

1694
02:09:17,430 --> 02:09:17,820
Thank you.

1695
02:09:18,180 --> 02:09:22,035
I mostly just want to stand up because there were some, I guess, comments or

1696
02:09:22,170 --> 02:09:27,901
questions concerning LKM's involvement, so I can address those as needed.

1697
02:09:28,680 --> 02:09:31,980
LKM is aware of this project. They are...

1698
02:09:32,100 --> 02:09:34,829
They have signed off on it, they are supportive.

1699
02:09:35,910 --> 02:09:41,701
They were aware of and are aware of the zoning property when they acquired it, and,

1700
02:09:42,330 --> 02:09:48,045
uh, again, to echo what Jared just said and what the application

1701
02:09:48,360 --> 02:09:52,800
says concerning the appropriateness and of this-

1702
02:09:52,860 --> 02:09:53,265
Thank you

1703
02:09:53,265 --> 02:09:53,265
...

1704
02:09:58,140 --> 02:09:58,425
application.

1705
02:09:58,785 --> 02:10:04,531
Thank you. Okay. So we have had a rebuttal from the applicant.

1706
02:10:04,620 --> 02:10:06,240
We've had our public hearing.

1707
02:10:07,770 --> 02:10:13,380
We've had our questions for staff and applicant, and now is the

1708
02:10:13,441 --> 02:10:18,720
time for council to deliberate.

1709
02:10:19,320 --> 02:10:24,870
Um, as per our council following Rosenberg's Rules,

1710
02:10:25,830 --> 02:10:31,531
um, if we have any other questions, then feel free to make a motion,

1711
02:10:32,070 --> 02:10:35,340
and then you may be able to start deliberating.

1712
02:10:35,701 --> 02:10:37,080
There's Albert Still.

1713
02:10:41,040 --> 02:10:42,090
Uh, let's look.

1714
02:10:46,680 --> 02:10:47,955
Who was with us from Keller?

1715
02:10:49,290 --> 02:10:49,395
Ben.

1716
02:10:49,395 --> 02:10:50,220
Ben, are you on?

1717
02:10:50,895 --> 02:10:50,895
Yes.

1718
02:10:50,910 --> 02:10:53,730
We're waiting for you. Oh, can you hear us?

1719
02:10:54,060 --> 02:10:54,300
Yep.

1720
02:10:55,140 --> 02:10:56,430
Okay. Thank you, Ben.

1721
02:10:56,550 --> 02:11:02,475
Seeing as the developer, uh, deferred to, uh, speaking about the TIS, and

1722
02:11:02,490 --> 02:11:08,250
wanted... Keller might be able to speak to it, wherever you are,

1723
02:11:09,270 --> 02:11:09,406
Ben.

1724
02:11:09,600 --> 02:11:13,410
So yeah, no, good, good questions and discussion on that.

1725
02:11:13,531 --> 02:11:18,645
So I want to be clear, we did not prepare the initial TIS.

1726
02:11:18,750 --> 02:11:24,211
That was done by HLE, so any questions regarding that initial TIS need to be

1727
02:11:24,240 --> 02:11:29,880
diverted to that professional engineer. Keller worked for the city to review that.

1728
02:11:30,691 --> 02:11:34,290
We reviewed that for just general conformance, standard practice.

1729
02:11:35,475 --> 02:11:40,980
And after our review, we were asked, um, by the city to

1730
02:11:41,010 --> 02:11:46,276
prepare what the proportionate share cost allocations were, and this was based off

1731
02:11:46,320 --> 02:11:51,570
the original 2022 study. Um, as a result of the development, what were the

1732
02:11:51,600 --> 02:11:57,599
proportionate share for the traffic impacts based on the transportation master plan

1733
02:11:57,630 --> 02:12:01,770
projects, impacts to intersections, roadways at that time.

1734
02:12:01,830 --> 02:12:07,260
And then more recently, um, since this has evolved, Keller

1735
02:12:07,276 --> 02:12:10,320
has been involved with the transportation master plan.

1736
02:12:11,010 --> 02:12:12,420
Obviously, that's been approved.

1737
02:12:12,510 --> 02:12:16,920
As part of that, we did an extensive traffic model of the entire city of Driggs.

1738
02:12:17,580 --> 02:12:22,920
So the city and the applicant actually asked us to update the proportionate share

1739
02:12:23,160 --> 02:12:26,941
allocations based on the more current modeling.

1740
02:12:27,810 --> 02:12:33,586
And so we used that to, um, compare, uh, prices,

1741
02:12:33,930 --> 02:12:39,660
impacts, and come up with a recommendation for what we saw as a appropriate cost

1742
02:12:39,720 --> 02:12:44,385
allocation for the impacts caused by the development, um, based on the current

1743
02:12:44,490 --> 02:12:48,360
modeling, current pricing for 2026, et cetera.

1744
02:12:49,050 --> 02:12:54,031
So that's really the work that, that we did. Um, hopefully that makes sense.

1745
02:12:54,090 --> 02:12:59,550
And I do have someone on too that, um, did all, all the modeling

1746
02:12:59,640 --> 02:13:02,850
specifically for this, if there's any questions specifically about the modeling.

1747
02:13:03,810 --> 02:13:08,430
So we didn't do, nor were we scoped or asked to do a entire TIS

1748
02:13:08,520 --> 02:13:12,870
update. Our work was specific to the proportionate share amount.

1749
02:13:18,000 --> 02:13:20,730
Thank you, Ben. Are there any other questions for Keller?

1750
02:13:21,540 --> 02:13:27,464
Yes. Thanks, Ben. Um, did Keller check the TIS assumptions,

1751
02:13:27,630 --> 02:13:29,070
inputs, or calculations?

1752
02:13:30,211 --> 02:13:35,910
We did just for general conformance, but the level of our scope is more of a

1753
02:13:35,970 --> 02:13:39,330
cursory review in nature. So we are, we're spot-checking.

1754
02:13:39,390 --> 02:13:43,695
We're not actually going into the model and triple-checking every single thing, if

1755
02:13:43,740 --> 02:13:44,461
that makes sense.

1756
02:13:45,240 --> 02:13:46,170
I thought I saw-

1757
02:13:46,201 --> 02:13:49,785
That's, that's standard practice for a TIS review when we're scoped from the city.

1758
02:13:50,880 --> 02:13:56,670
So I thought I saw a letter from Keller saying specifically that the inputs were...

1759
02:13:57,630 --> 02:14:01,800
or that the, the Keller review assumed that the inputs and the calculations were

1760
02:14:01,860 --> 02:14:02,730
correct and then-

1761
02:14:02,760 --> 02:14:08,490
That's correct. Yeah. We, we rely on the other, the professional engineer that put

1762
02:14:08,520 --> 02:14:13,110
together that modeling, that they did their due diligence to quality control and

1763
02:14:13,170 --> 02:14:15,901
check all of that that's going into the software.

1764
02:14:16,800 --> 02:14:17,326
Mm-hmm. And then-

1765
02:14:17,340 --> 02:14:22,170
So our, our review is more spot-checking the actual TIS, making sure that this is

1766
02:14:22,290 --> 02:14:25,649
up to, you know, general conformance with your code, et cetera.

1767
02:14:27,031 --> 02:14:32,010
Thanks for clarifying that. And then, just so I understand what then triggers the

1768
02:14:32,070 --> 02:14:37,260
next thing, did the original TIS identify which off-site

1769
02:14:37,350 --> 02:14:42,660
mitigations were needed that then went into your allocation model?

1770
02:14:43,350 --> 02:14:48,300
Uh, yes, I believe so. And then we ran that with, um, current cost numbers at that

1771
02:14:48,360 --> 02:14:53,640
time to determine an appropriate cost allocation that the developer would, would

1772
02:14:54,000 --> 02:14:56,130
provide to mitigate such impacts.

1773
02:14:56,656 --> 02:15:01,830
And then we further updated that based off of our travel demand model for 2026

1774
02:15:01,890 --> 02:15:06,211
conditions. So this is fast-forward to now, and that work was done in April.

1775
02:15:07,739 --> 02:15:13,230
Okay. But did that re- did that reopen the question of

1776
02:15:14,220 --> 02:15:17,010
where, where are off-site mitigations needed?

1777
02:15:17,281 --> 02:15:21,495
Or had you already identified the where's, and then it was just a question of how,

1778
02:15:21,810 --> 02:15:23,010
how much allocations?

1779
02:15:23,445 --> 02:15:27,826
A, a little bit of both. Because we had went through the transportation master

1780
02:15:27,990 --> 02:15:33,840
plan, um, the city's priorities were more specifically identified in that

1781
02:15:33,901 --> 02:15:38,701
master plan. So we were actually able to-- Some of the intersections, for example,

1782
02:15:39,360 --> 02:15:44,879
that were identified in the master plan had impacts from this development.

1783
02:15:45,300 --> 02:15:50,550
So we were able to take a project that is in your capital improvements plan with a

1784
02:15:50,640 --> 02:15:55,350
cost that's in your capital improvements plan and provide a proportionate share

1785
02:15:55,410 --> 02:15:58,890
based off of the traffic impact contribution for that project.

1786
02:15:58,920 --> 02:16:03,420
So it's a little bit of both, where we had some that were still the original from

1787
02:16:03,451 --> 02:16:09,180
2022, but we looked at it more holistically, folding in that, um, transportation

1788
02:16:09,240 --> 02:16:13,410
master plan and your actual approved capital improvements list, if that makes

1789
02:16:13,470 --> 02:16:14,550
sense.

1790
02:16:14,610 --> 02:16:19,770
Yeah. My understanding with that model and what council authorized, uh, initial,

1791
02:16:20,130 --> 02:16:25,441
additional services or at some point was to include in that model not just this

1792
02:16:25,500 --> 02:16:29,370
development, but other proposed developments in the pipeline so that we were

1793
02:16:29,401 --> 02:16:30,870
getting a more holistic view.

1794
02:16:31,260 --> 02:16:31,830
That's correct.

1795
02:16:33,930 --> 02:16:39,901
And the, the allocations were informed by that original

1796
02:16:39,961 --> 02:16:42,750
TIS that is part of this allocation.

1797
02:16:43,290 --> 02:16:47,640
But we, we updated it based off of the more current model.

1798
02:16:47,670 --> 02:16:51,750
But yeah, we, we actually, in that letter that we submitted, we provided all of the

1799
02:16:51,840 --> 02:16:56,370
original allocations from the original TIS and showed where we changed.

1800
02:16:56,430 --> 02:17:02,265
The result, actually, it, um, led to about an additional 100 extra thousand

1801
02:17:02,265 --> 02:17:04,531
dollars going to the city for your improvements.

1802
02:17:09,870 --> 02:17:13,201
And do you feel like that is adequate to keep up with inflation?

1803
02:17:14,910 --> 02:17:16,951
Inflation does factor in, surely.

1804
02:17:17,340 --> 02:17:21,600
But, um, a- and that's part of the reason we wanted to update this.

1805
02:17:21,901 --> 02:17:25,770
I, I believe that the city wanted us to look at this again as this has evolved over

1806
02:17:25,830 --> 02:17:29,580
the last, what, four or five years. Inflation's real.

1807
02:17:29,701 --> 02:17:32,326
We have more updated projects. We have a more recent model.

1808
02:17:32,401 --> 02:17:36,540
So yes, inflation is included in those numbers, that's safe to say.

1809
02:17:37,800 --> 02:17:40,290
Thank you. That's... I can just-

1810
02:17:40,441 --> 02:17:42,090
Any other questions for Keller?

1811
02:17:45,510 --> 02:17:47,370
Thanks for being with us, Ben.

1812
02:17:47,490 --> 02:17:48,240
Yeah, 100%.

1813
02:17:52,500 --> 02:17:56,490
I move that we take a five-minute recess for bathroom break.

1814
02:17:56,520 --> 02:17:58,260
Mm-hmm.

1815
02:17:58,680 --> 02:17:59,340
Awesome.

1816
02:18:00,120 --> 02:18:05,340
Okay. We will come back at 8:23.

1817
02:18:14,490 --> 02:18:20,281
It's 5:23, so we're going to go ahead and get back from our break, and

1818
02:18:20,370 --> 02:18:24,060
we are ready for the next step for council.

1819
02:18:27,060 --> 02:18:32,670
I move to deny the proposed Corona Valley Subdivision preliminary plat phase

1820
02:18:32,850 --> 02:18:38,220
one and master plan, based on finding the application as presented

1821
02:18:38,760 --> 02:18:44,701
does not meet the criteria for approval, number one or number two or number

1822
02:18:44,850 --> 02:18:50,820
four or number five or number six, as listed in the staff report and

1823
02:18:50,850 --> 02:18:56,490
in article 14.5.6 of the Graveland development code.

1824
02:18:59,281 --> 02:19:00,361
We have a motion.

1825
02:19:03,240 --> 02:19:03,691
Awesome.

1826
02:19:05,250 --> 02:19:08,520
We have a second. Time for discussion.

1827
02:19:12,060 --> 02:19:13,800
Can you go over reasonings?

1828
02:19:14,490 --> 02:19:14,670
Yes.

1829
02:19:14,701 --> 02:19:15,270
Bring it up.

1830
02:19:15,691 --> 02:19:20,760
Absolutely. First of all, though, I wanted to thank staff.

1831
02:19:23,461 --> 02:19:28,965
Thank you so much for organizing this staff report and the attachments in a logical

1832
02:19:29,070 --> 02:19:33,420
fashion this time around. It made it so much easier to navigate, and I really

1833
02:19:33,451 --> 02:19:38,370
appreciate the attention to that detail. That really, really helped.

1834
02:19:38,520 --> 02:19:43,560
And I also wanted to be clear,

1835
02:19:43,800 --> 02:19:49,470
Mayor, that for the record, I have been encouraged on many occasions to

1836
02:19:49,530 --> 02:19:54,615
discuss applications like this with staff prior to the public hearing, and I want

1837
02:19:54,660 --> 02:19:58,620
to be very clear, both for the applicant's benefit and for the public's,

1838
02:19:59,940 --> 02:20:05,881
I want to be crystal clear that all the information I am basing my decision on is

1839
02:20:05,940 --> 02:20:09,270
the same information that we have in common.

1840
02:20:09,420 --> 02:20:15,151
I chose not to discuss this application with staff because I did not want my

1841
02:20:15,180 --> 02:20:19,919
decision-making today to be biased either way by information the staff shared with

1842
02:20:20,010 --> 02:20:24,780
me in private conversation. So, thank you for letting me explain that.

1843
02:20:25,110 --> 02:20:28,170
And then to jump into these individual criteria for approval.

1844
02:20:28,890 --> 02:20:33,540
Number one, the plat has been created and stamped by a licensed land surveyor of

1845
02:20:33,631 --> 02:20:37,590
the state of Idaho, and it includes the minimum requirements set out in the Idaho

1846
02:20:37,711 --> 02:20:43,651
statutes. When I look in the land development code section

1847
02:20:43,711 --> 02:20:49,200
about this, it is very clear that a name and address for the

1848
02:20:49,860 --> 02:20:52,200
submitter and the owner need to be part of that.

1849
02:20:53,490 --> 02:20:56,355
I don't think that's included. I don't think it meets that criteria.

1850
02:20:57,450 --> 02:20:58,530
Criteria number two-

1851
02:20:58,620 --> 02:20:59,970
So hang on a second. So,

1852
02:21:01,440 --> 02:21:02,790
when here it says,

1853
02:21:04,170 --> 02:21:07,651
"Created and stamped by a licensed land surveyor"?

1854
02:21:08,925 --> 02:21:13,651
"And meets the minimum requirements." And so I have my

1855
02:21:13,740 --> 02:21:19,665
copy of the Graveland development code right here for review reference, and

1856
02:21:19,950 --> 02:21:25,711
on page 14-16, it says, "Preliminary plat application.

1857
02:21:26,550 --> 02:21:31,680
Upon completion of the concept plan review, the submitter may proceed by submitting

1858
02:21:31,711 --> 02:21:37,245
a preliminary plat application for review by the P&Z and the council." And then it

1859
02:21:37,381 --> 02:21:42,990
lists various requirements. Plats must not be more than a year old.

1860
02:21:43,080 --> 02:21:47,520
It must be prepared by a licensed land surveyor, which it appears that they are.

1861
02:21:48,870 --> 02:21:53,520
But identification and descriptive data are variously missing.

1862
02:21:54,480 --> 02:21:54,990
And that-

1863
02:21:55,006 --> 02:21:58,560
And that's in Idaho Statute 50-1304?

1864
02:21:59,340 --> 02:22:02,820
I am not familiar with that statute. I am not a licensed land surveyor.

1865
02:22:02,940 --> 02:22:04,050
That's what it says here.

1866
02:22:05,490 --> 02:22:11,461
It says, "The minimum requirements set out in Idaho Statute Section 50-1304."

1867
02:22:12,030 --> 02:22:16,575
I have not reviewed that, and there has not been a review to me for that, so I

1868
02:22:16,680 --> 02:22:21,135
can't make that finding. In reviewing the land development code, the requirements

1869
02:22:21,360 --> 02:22:24,120
for a preliminary plat are not met.

1870
02:22:24,211 --> 02:22:27,810
There is no name, address, or phone number of the subdivider or the owner.

1871
02:22:29,100 --> 02:22:30,030
Furthermore...

1872
02:22:33,330 --> 02:22:38,461
Here. Find the next section.

1873
02:22:39,870 --> 02:22:43,920
I'm just trying to go by number one, and it doesn't talk about the land development

1874
02:22:43,980 --> 02:22:44,401
code.

1875
02:22:46,740 --> 02:22:50,370
It doesn't say minimum requirements of the land development code.

1876
02:22:50,881 --> 02:22:51,780
And I want to

1877
02:22:53,340 --> 02:22:58,560
hear what you have to say, but I also want to make sure that I know that

1878
02:22:59,100 --> 02:23:04,381
in Idaho, that it is very important that the

1879
02:23:04,410 --> 02:23:06,840
requirements be very clear

1880
02:23:08,190 --> 02:23:10,290
to why something is denied

1881
02:23:13,020 --> 02:23:18,510
because there are lots of private property rights in the state of Idaho, and Idaho

1882
02:23:18,631 --> 02:23:21,360
State Statute makes that clear.

1883
02:23:21,600 --> 02:23:21,615
Okay.

1884
02:23:21,961 --> 02:23:23,010
So I want to make-

1885
02:23:23,131 --> 02:23:23,205
Can you-

1886
02:23:23,205 --> 02:23:28,800
I'm talking. I want to make sure that we are talking about the same thing here.

1887
02:23:29,310 --> 02:23:34,140
Number one does not say the minimum requirements of the land development code.

1888
02:23:34,560 --> 02:23:39,270
It says the minimum requirements set out in Idaho Statute

1889
02:23:39,660 --> 02:23:41,250
50-1304.

1890
02:23:44,370 --> 02:23:50,100
So, I just want to make sure that council is understanding what number one

1891
02:23:50,190 --> 02:23:56,131
says and making clarifications on understanding

1892
02:23:56,160 --> 02:23:57,360
that.

1893
02:23:57,480 --> 02:24:02,220
I want to be clear that I do not have the state statute printed out in front of me,

1894
02:24:02,520 --> 02:24:07,320
and none of the review from staff addressed the state statute on this specifically.

1895
02:24:08,610 --> 02:24:14,490
And the page I'm looking at in the LDC does reference State Statute

1896
02:24:14,881 --> 02:24:20,610
Title 50-1304, Essentials of Plats, and it

1897
02:24:20,669 --> 02:24:25,830
then goes on to outline what the essential items of plats shall be.

1898
02:24:26,010 --> 02:24:29,310
I would hope that our LDC is in conformance.

1899
02:24:30,961 --> 02:24:31,980
But either way,

1900
02:24:33,360 --> 02:24:38,940
this is not in conformance with our LDC, which is part of approval criteria

1901
02:24:39,180 --> 02:24:44,550
number six. So even if it is in conformance with state statute on this

1902
02:24:44,640 --> 02:24:45,660
particular point,

1903
02:24:47,430 --> 02:24:53,370
it doesn't affect my final decision one way or another if it is not

1904
02:24:53,475 --> 02:24:57,901
in conformance with the LDC that I have in front of me.

1905
02:25:01,020 --> 02:25:04,980
Does anyone else have anything to say about approval criteria number one?

1906
02:25:09,360 --> 02:25:15,211
I just need to say, you talked about not being biased and not

1907
02:25:15,240 --> 02:25:20,910
wanting to ask questions, and I find it very valuable myself to

1908
02:25:21,901 --> 02:25:27,720
talk to staff when I'm allowed because I never feel like my

1909
02:25:27,750 --> 02:25:32,100
decision-making is swayed. I feel like I could ask questions that could be

1910
02:25:32,220 --> 02:25:38,160
answered. I'm not meant to know everything, and I'm aware of that, so I

1911
02:25:38,220 --> 02:25:44,010
feel the valuable tool for us as council, and I fully respect your position

1912
02:25:44,100 --> 02:25:45,840
because that's how I feel about that.

1913
02:25:47,520 --> 02:25:49,410
Thanks for addressing that.

1914
02:25:49,440 --> 02:25:49,740
Yeah.

1915
02:25:52,980 --> 02:25:57,000
For approval criteria number two,

1916
02:25:58,680 --> 02:26:03,735
it says, "The plat contains an owner's certificate specifying ownership and

1917
02:26:03,870 --> 02:26:08,789
maintenance responsibilities with respect to roads, parks, open space, and other

1918
02:26:08,850 --> 02:26:14,430
public refined facilities or areas." This plat does not have an

1919
02:26:14,490 --> 02:26:17,580
owner's certificate block, period.

1920
02:26:21,360 --> 02:26:23,940
So I cannot make that finding.

1921
02:26:27,211 --> 02:26:28,950
I have the plat pulled up in front of me.

1922
02:26:30,810 --> 02:26:33,870
I don't see an owner's certificate on there.

1923
02:26:41,490 --> 02:26:47,370
Approval criteria number four says, "Any proposed phasing is clearly

1924
02:26:47,461 --> 02:26:53,340
shown on a development master plan and provides for orderly development of the

1925
02:26:53,401 --> 02:26:56,610
land conforming at all times to this land development code."

1926
02:26:58,320 --> 02:27:03,300
So again, looking to the LDC plat

1927
02:27:03,690 --> 02:27:04,350
process,

1928
02:27:05,850 --> 02:27:11,640
section 14.5.6 in the process overview says that when we're

1929
02:27:11,700 --> 02:27:16,950
dealing with phased development, the master plan for future phases must be

1930
02:27:17,010 --> 02:27:21,405
submitted with the first phase, and then each phase must have

1931
02:27:22,619 --> 02:27:28,199
a standalone preliminary plat and final plat that are approved

1932
02:27:28,290 --> 02:27:29,220
independently

1933
02:27:30,660 --> 02:27:34,290
from the rest of what's covered by the master plan. So there's two.

1934
02:27:34,381 --> 02:27:38,939
If the development is not phased, you only need one of these things.

1935
02:27:40,500 --> 02:27:44,580
You only need the plat. But if it's a phase development, you have the plat, or you

1936
02:27:44,640 --> 02:27:49,080
have the master plan, which shows the whole thing and breaks down the phasing, and

1937
02:27:49,110 --> 02:27:50,970
then you have what's called the plat.

1938
02:27:51,060 --> 02:27:56,445
And the plat is only for the current phase that is being platted and

1939
02:27:56,820 --> 02:28:02,744
approved in this meeting. And this application does not

1940
02:28:02,790 --> 02:28:08,640
have both of those documents. What is labeled preliminary plat seems to be

1941
02:28:08,700 --> 02:28:14,010
a master plan that is improperly labeled and does

1942
02:28:14,070 --> 02:28:19,800
not show a phasing breakdown, but there is no

1943
02:28:19,920 --> 02:28:25,890
independent preliminary plat document for phase one at all, at least not that I

1944
02:28:25,920 --> 02:28:31,620
could find in the packet. So I don't think we can make that finding

1945
02:28:31,711 --> 02:28:32,280
at all.

1946
02:28:34,440 --> 02:28:37,651
Approval criteria number five is

1947
02:28:39,211 --> 02:28:41,850
the longest and

1948
02:28:43,230 --> 02:28:44,490
the most complicated.

1949
02:28:45,870 --> 02:28:51,660
It reads, "The development agreement and subdivision design satisfactorily mitigate

1950
02:28:51,720 --> 02:28:56,461
for the effects from the development and phasing timelines on the ability of

1951
02:28:56,490 --> 02:29:00,615
political subdivisions of the state," Centerton would be a political subdivision of

1952
02:29:00,631 --> 02:29:05,550
the state, "including school districts," so the Centerton School District 41, "to

1953
02:29:05,610 --> 02:29:11,190
deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to

1954
02:29:11,220 --> 02:29:16,890
current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current

1955
02:29:16,980 --> 02:29:20,310
residents to accommodate the proposed subdivision.

1956
02:29:21,000 --> 02:29:26,820
Delivery services include, but are not limited to, transportation systems, public

1957
02:29:26,910 --> 02:29:32,205
utilities, highways, law enforcement agencies, services, waste, water," on and on.

1958
02:29:34,440 --> 02:29:39,660
I think all of these are very important, but to me, the biggest

1959
02:29:40,080 --> 02:29:45,901
glaring thing that I cannot make this finding or even

1960
02:29:45,961 --> 02:29:50,461
seriously consider any of the other portions is the traffic.

1961
02:29:53,280 --> 02:29:58,950
LDC section 14.5.11.8.1 requires a traffic

1962
02:29:59,040 --> 02:30:05,010
impact analysis. This requirement is not negated by the fact that staff asked

1963
02:30:05,040 --> 02:30:08,580
for traffic modeling from the city's consultant or that the applicant paid for

1964
02:30:08,640 --> 02:30:14,580
that. The TIS in the application packet that is in front of us

1965
02:30:14,640 --> 02:30:18,330
today is riddled with irregularities.

1966
02:30:18,390 --> 02:30:21,735
The traffic impact study should be current.

1967
02:30:21,780 --> 02:30:26,790
It should name and represent this development. It should be accurate.

1968
02:30:26,865 --> 02:30:30,720
It should be transparent. It should identify the existing infrastructure,

1969
02:30:32,131 --> 02:30:37,740
or it should identify if existing infrastructure can indeed support the

1970
02:30:37,770 --> 02:30:41,881
development and what off-site improvements are necessary.

1971
02:30:43,110 --> 02:30:43,290
I

1972
02:30:45,300 --> 02:30:46,140
have huge

1973
02:30:48,631 --> 02:30:54,570
qualms with making that finding, that this existing road network

1974
02:30:54,600 --> 02:30:59,100
can support it. One thing one of the public commenters said, the roads do not

1975
02:30:59,160 --> 02:31:03,660
support the development. It's up to the applicant and their documentation,

1976
02:31:03,780 --> 02:31:09,660
including the traffic and impact study, to prove otherwise, and despite multiple

1977
02:31:09,720 --> 02:31:12,060
opportunities, that has not been done.

1978
02:31:14,850 --> 02:31:20,730
The information I have reviewed makes me deeply skeptical of this road network

1979
02:31:20,760 --> 02:31:25,560
being able to support this development in a way that is safe, and here I'm quoting

1980
02:31:25,620 --> 02:31:30,885
from approval criteria number five again, "and does not compromise the quality of

1981
02:31:30,990 --> 02:31:36,211
service delivery to Centerton residents or impose

1982
02:31:36,420 --> 02:31:42,256
substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the proposed

1983
02:31:42,300 --> 02:31:48,165
subdivision." Maximum densities are just that, maximum, not an entitlement, and all

1984
02:31:48,211 --> 02:31:53,865
other requirements must be met. This approval criteria is simply not

1985
02:31:53,940 --> 02:31:55,560
met by this application.

1986
02:31:57,090 --> 02:31:57,990
The final

1987
02:32:00,360 --> 02:32:02,190
approval criteria number six

1988
02:32:03,660 --> 02:32:09,480
says, "The plat and development plans must substantially conform with

1989
02:32:09,510 --> 02:32:14,640
the underlying zoning and applicable provisions of

1990
02:32:16,020 --> 02:32:21,780
this title and conform with the city's comprehensive plan and other applicable

1991
02:32:21,870 --> 02:32:27,060
plans and policies, such as the transportation plan and recreation master plan." So

1992
02:32:27,151 --> 02:32:29,220
ours, if you're uncomfortable with

1993
02:32:31,410 --> 02:32:36,975
approval criteria number one, I could amend my motion to drop that because the same

1994
02:32:37,050 --> 02:32:39,270
problem of it's not complying with the LDC,

1995
02:32:41,160 --> 02:32:44,370
approval criteria number six says has to comply with the LDC.

1996
02:32:44,700 --> 02:32:48,901
So I can route that into number six.

1997
02:32:50,760 --> 02:32:56,490
But in addition to that, there are several other conformance issues with the LDC.

1998
02:33:00,151 --> 02:33:05,850
One is that the phases, which was already talked about.

1999
02:33:08,940 --> 02:33:13,770
But the LDC goes on to say more about the master plan.

2000
02:33:13,860 --> 02:33:17,280
It says that, "There will be multiple phases.

2001
02:33:17,401 --> 02:33:21,901
The master plan of the subdivision with the necessary attachments in accordance

2002
02:33:21,930 --> 02:33:26,220
with the definitions and requirements shall be recorded and shall be binding upon

2003
02:33:26,280 --> 02:33:29,160
the applicant and subsequent owners of the property."

2004
02:33:30,810 --> 02:33:36,269
This is required by our LDC. It is non-negotiable, and we don't have it.

2005
02:33:36,570 --> 02:33:42,330
We can't hold the applicant and current and future owners to a master

2006
02:33:42,390 --> 02:33:45,030
plan if we fail to require it in the first place.

2007
02:33:48,540 --> 02:33:54,060
And the LDC also addresses parking and says that combined--

2008
02:33:54,300 --> 02:33:56,970
So LDC

2009
02:33:56,985 --> 02:34:03,360
8.18.1.A.2

2010
02:34:03,450 --> 02:34:08,820
says, "The combined parking and driveway area cannot constitute more than 40% of

2011
02:34:08,881 --> 02:34:14,670
the frontal corner yard." LDC 11.1.3.A

2012
02:34:14,760 --> 02:34:19,680
requires single-family detached housing to provide two off-street parking

2013
02:34:19,740 --> 02:34:25,080
spaces. And as depicted in the application

2014
02:34:25,170 --> 02:34:31,020
materials, block 2, lot 5, block 8, lot 8, and block

2015
02:34:31,320 --> 02:34:35,790
1, lot 6, along with many others, do not appear to comply with

2016
02:34:35,820 --> 02:34:37,560
that.

2017
02:34:48,631 --> 02:34:54,330
So I cannot make a finding that the application is meeting

2018
02:34:54,600 --> 02:34:58,470
criteria number 6. All right. So how do you feel about number one?

2019
02:34:58,740 --> 02:35:00,120
Would you like me to amend my motion?

2020
02:35:01,170 --> 02:35:06,765
So you're saying number six, you're saying that the LDC is not

2021
02:35:06,780 --> 02:35:11,850
compliant because of the phases and parking for the specific

2022
02:35:12,390 --> 02:35:15,151
lots that you mentioned?

2023
02:35:17,640 --> 02:35:21,000
Approval criteria number six says that the plat

2024
02:35:23,070 --> 02:35:28,740
and associated development plans substantially conform with the

2025
02:35:28,800 --> 02:35:34,410
underlying zoning and applicable provisions of this title.

2026
02:35:34,500 --> 02:35:35,625
So this-

2027
02:35:36,600 --> 02:35:42,435
I'm asking what your-- You said

2028
02:35:42,540 --> 02:35:48,090
two things. You said that it didn't comply in the LDC from

2029
02:35:48,180 --> 02:35:52,680
phases and parking of the specific lots that you mentioned.

2030
02:35:52,740 --> 02:35:54,390
Are those the two that you're mentioning?

2031
02:35:55,950 --> 02:35:57,870
I also mentioned the-

2032
02:35:59,340 --> 02:36:02,850
One related to approval criterion number one,

2033
02:36:04,050 --> 02:36:09,480
which is where the LDC says that the preliminary

2034
02:36:09,540 --> 02:36:13,590
plat must have the owner and developers-

2035
02:36:14,370 --> 02:36:16,230
No, I'm just talking about number six right now.

2036
02:36:16,590 --> 02:36:16,890
Yes.

2037
02:36:19,140 --> 02:36:24,780
So approval criterion number six says the development has to be in compliance with

2038
02:36:24,810 --> 02:36:30,450
the LDC, and the LDC says that... Hang on, let me get to

2039
02:36:30,465 --> 02:36:31,756
that page again.

2040
02:36:31,890 --> 02:36:34,500
That's okay, you already mentioned it before.

2041
02:36:34,620 --> 02:36:39,810
I'd like to ask staff some clarifying questions when you come up to the podium.

2042
02:36:51,901 --> 02:36:57,720
And if somebody's standing next to the temperature, can you push the button so

2043
02:36:57,810 --> 02:37:00,600
that it's not so freezing?

2044
02:37:00,674 --> 02:37:00,705
Sorry.

2045
02:37:00,765 --> 02:37:02,790
I know you're probably hot in the audience-

2046
02:37:03,180 --> 02:37:03,195
Yeah

2047
02:37:03,211 --> 02:37:07,890
... but it comes directly here, and I feel like I'm having back pain because I'm so

2048
02:37:07,980 --> 02:37:08,670
cold.

2049
02:37:08,760 --> 02:37:10,290
So how high do you want it?

2050
02:37:10,560 --> 02:37:10,695
It's very hot.

2051
02:37:10,695 --> 02:37:11,760
To like a comfortable.

2052
02:37:12,690 --> 02:37:13,381
Okay.

2053
02:37:13,395 --> 02:37:13,830
Okay, thank you.

2054
02:37:16,350 --> 02:37:20,100
So one of the questions that I have

2055
02:37:21,930 --> 02:37:27,510
is one that was mentioned earlier in regards to specific lots

2056
02:37:28,020 --> 02:37:33,390
being of one size of another. And

2057
02:37:33,840 --> 02:37:35,700
in a

2058
02:37:38,820 --> 02:37:43,680
phase one preliminary plat application and master plan, is now the time

2059
02:37:45,060 --> 02:37:46,890
to be able to

2060
02:37:51,480 --> 02:37:57,120
show by fact that they have to be meeting the,

2061
02:37:57,990 --> 02:38:03,660
not that the parking and driveway meet not more than 40% of the front

2062
02:38:03,720 --> 02:38:04,050
yard?

2063
02:38:05,100 --> 02:38:07,140
That would be at the time of the building permit.

2064
02:38:07,560 --> 02:38:11,790
Every lot would be required to meet the standards of the LDC related to parking and

2065
02:38:11,820 --> 02:38:12,840
driveways.

2066
02:38:12,930 --> 02:38:14,910
So that's at the time of building permit?

2067
02:38:15,151 --> 02:38:15,660
Correct.

2068
02:38:17,881 --> 02:38:18,540
The time

2069
02:38:19,950 --> 02:38:24,360
what's in front of you now should be ready to confirm that the lot size is

2070
02:38:24,390 --> 02:38:26,040
conformed to the zoning district.

2071
02:38:27,540 --> 02:38:30,915
Thank you. And then in regards with

2072
02:38:33,211 --> 02:38:34,560
the phasing

2073
02:38:36,090 --> 02:38:37,110
and

2074
02:38:40,230 --> 02:38:46,080
with number six, complying with number six and the phasing

2075
02:38:46,170 --> 02:38:50,430
of what's present in the application, can you

2076
02:38:51,750 --> 02:38:52,381
give your

2077
02:38:54,000 --> 02:38:55,020
perspective on that?

2078
02:38:57,450 --> 02:38:58,336
I'm not sure I understand the question.

2079
02:38:58,381 --> 02:39:00,450
I know. I don't know if I understand my question either.

2080
02:39:03,180 --> 02:39:07,170
Oh, this doesn't?

2081
02:39:08,640 --> 02:39:10,260
This is to do-

2082
02:39:12,029 --> 02:39:12,044
This one.

2083
02:39:12,090 --> 02:39:15,060
Right. With what was the map... Yes.

2084
02:39:16,620 --> 02:39:17,580
You want more information?

2085
02:39:17,850 --> 02:39:23,520
Well, Sarah was saying that she didn't, that you didn't see or find a, was phase

2086
02:39:23,610 --> 02:39:24,780
one of the master plan.

2087
02:39:24,840 --> 02:39:29,820
Well, they did, with the revision, they did a much, much, much better job with the

2088
02:39:29,881 --> 02:39:33,660
improvement plans. So the improvement plans have standalone improvement plans for

2089
02:39:33,690 --> 02:39:39,330
phase one and then a master plan for the whole development improvements.

2090
02:39:39,870 --> 02:39:43,140
That should be mirrored in the plat.

2091
02:39:43,230 --> 02:39:48,390
There should be a plat for phase one, and there should be a plat master plan

2092
02:39:49,020 --> 02:39:54,329
that shows the phasing of the whole development, and that is not complete.

2093
02:39:54,810 --> 02:39:59,054
So this is a preliminary plat, so let's hear from

2094
02:39:59,190 --> 02:40:05,131
our staff of what here

2095
02:40:05,160 --> 02:40:09,435
at the City of Driggs and the State of Idaho that we need to be able to have at

2096
02:40:09,480 --> 02:40:11,250
this time.

2097
02:40:11,520 --> 02:40:17,310
Yeah. I see what Councilwoman Johnston is referencing, and I would agree.

2098
02:40:17,370 --> 02:40:21,690
It does appear that plat just for phase one is missing detail.

2099
02:40:22,440 --> 02:40:28,214
In our stats review, there's quite a lot going on in this application, and we've

2100
02:40:28,230 --> 02:40:31,470
certainly focused on the master planning component and the phasing plan.

2101
02:40:33,570 --> 02:40:39,285
But the plat is, and the owner certificate is something I would

2102
02:40:39,285 --> 02:40:42,961
suggest that you would ask to see in another review,

2103
02:40:44,220 --> 02:40:49,920
and not rely on those two specific components for a motion of approval on that.

2104
02:40:53,131 --> 02:40:56,115
Reviewing state statute 15-1304,

2105
02:40:57,810 --> 02:40:57,961
the

2106
02:40:59,220 --> 02:41:04,860
master plan as presented met those components, but Sarah Johnston was correct

2107
02:41:05,340 --> 02:41:08,580
that the application requirements of the LDC are different.

2108
02:41:10,110 --> 02:41:13,800
Not in an illegal way, but just that they ask for more information up front.

2109
02:41:19,290 --> 02:41:19,651
Okay.

2110
02:41:21,570 --> 02:41:22,200
So

2111
02:41:23,730 --> 02:41:29,640
you mentioned that the owner certificate is something that can be referred

2112
02:41:29,730 --> 02:41:30,090
to.

2113
02:41:32,910 --> 02:41:34,470
That should be included, yes.

2114
02:41:34,500 --> 02:41:39,720
Sorry. That's fine. I'm like, again, the tense from the cold is

2115
02:41:39,780 --> 02:41:41,625
making me go a little off right now.

2116
02:41:41,640 --> 02:41:47,190
What about the condition of approval, or is that typically just something that

2117
02:41:47,520 --> 02:41:47,790
happens?

2118
02:41:49,200 --> 02:41:53,100
It would, it will happen on the final plat because that's what is going to be

2119
02:41:53,131 --> 02:41:56,490
recorded. The city council could initially approve.

2120
02:41:56,550 --> 02:42:00,870
They could table this application a second time to see something.

2121
02:42:01,920 --> 02:42:04,410
It's up to their decision.

2122
02:42:06,180 --> 02:42:08,190
Okay. I'd love to ask a few questions.

2123
02:42:10,950 --> 02:42:11,520
So

2124
02:42:13,950 --> 02:42:21,285
can

2125
02:42:21,660 --> 02:42:26,461
you share a little bit more information about

2126
02:42:27,480 --> 02:42:32,850
number five and in regards to

2127
02:42:33,000 --> 02:42:35,370
the

2128
02:42:38,370 --> 02:42:43,470
traffic impact study

2129
02:42:44,790 --> 02:42:50,490
and the aspect that was mentioned about inaccuracies in addition

2130
02:42:50,580 --> 02:42:52,170
to

2131
02:42:53,640 --> 02:42:57,540
the quality and cost on residents for roads?

2132
02:42:59,610 --> 02:43:04,860
Because this is a large-scale development subdivision, Article 14-511

2133
02:43:04,950 --> 02:43:08,970
has specific requirements for anything of this scale.

2134
02:43:09,300 --> 02:43:13,950
And I'll just read the version one, and it states, "A quantified analysis of

2135
02:43:14,010 --> 02:43:18,330
impacts on public services that would be provided to the development, including the

2136
02:43:18,390 --> 02:43:24,030
traffic impact analysis." And that is the extent to which we talk

2137
02:43:24,090 --> 02:43:28,170
about the requirements of our traffic impact studies in our development code.

2138
02:43:30,180 --> 02:43:36,151
There's no requirement for when it's expired, when it's

2139
02:43:36,240 --> 02:43:37,200
still valid.

2140
02:43:39,211 --> 02:43:43,711
We're relying on best practices and our third-party consultants to really do those

2141
02:43:43,770 --> 02:43:49,200
reviews for us. So I can't comment on any irregularities

2142
02:43:49,651 --> 02:43:55,215
or anything like that. But you're also welcome to ask other staff

2143
02:43:55,260 --> 02:43:56,100
questions, too.

2144
02:43:56,881 --> 02:43:58,770
Not just Joe? Thanks.

2145
02:44:03,961 --> 02:44:12,045
Ask

2146
02:44:12,211 --> 02:44:12,256
the question.

2147
02:44:12,300 --> 02:44:12,930
Yes, go ahead.

2148
02:44:13,590 --> 02:44:13,890
Sam,

2149
02:44:15,480 --> 02:44:19,140
has your position changed on the definition of the word "primarily"?

2150
02:44:20,280 --> 02:44:25,860
I'm happy to discuss and have lengthy debates about that word, but I don't think

2151
02:44:25,920 --> 02:44:30,570
the motion addresses that, so I don't know that it, was it part of the motion?

2152
02:44:33,030 --> 02:44:36,030
No, but I'll add. Would you like to hear my input?

2153
02:44:36,180 --> 02:44:36,195
Sure.

2154
02:44:36,300 --> 02:44:41,640
Okay. This has been a really interesting part of this

2155
02:44:41,670 --> 02:44:47,340
aspect, and I know that a lot of people have commented on this part of it

2156
02:44:47,730 --> 02:44:51,510
and even hinged all their weight on this word.

2157
02:44:53,160 --> 02:44:56,790
This is our code for a zone.

2158
02:44:59,220 --> 02:45:01,890
It is not for a piece of property.

2159
02:45:03,631 --> 02:45:08,670
The land development code that's being talked about is for

2160
02:45:08,850 --> 02:45:11,340
RS-7 zone

2161
02:45:13,044 --> 02:45:18,504
It is not talking about RS-7 for a single piece of property.

2162
02:45:20,394 --> 02:45:25,435
So if we were doing it for a single piece of property, there are

2163
02:45:27,924 --> 02:45:33,714
many, many, many individual properties in Shoshone Plains that are in this zone,

2164
02:45:34,854 --> 02:45:37,074
and one piece of property has a duplex.

2165
02:45:40,074 --> 02:45:43,765
There are others. I'm just using that one as an example.

2166
02:45:44,814 --> 02:45:50,094
Now, if we took the description of this primarily

2167
02:45:50,154 --> 02:45:55,959
word in the RS-7 zone, and we put it to a piece of

2168
02:45:56,004 --> 02:45:56,560
property,

2169
02:45:58,074 --> 02:46:01,824
like in Shoshone Plains, it would not conform.

2170
02:46:05,019 --> 02:46:09,894
This specific subdivision or proposed subdivision that we have before us is one

2171
02:46:09,955 --> 02:46:10,779
piece of property.

2172
02:46:13,254 --> 02:46:15,084
It is not flat out.

2173
02:46:17,724 --> 02:46:21,834
This is for a definition for a zone and not a piece of property.

2174
02:46:22,644 --> 02:46:27,955
And that is very clear because this is a RS-7 zone.

2175
02:46:29,034 --> 02:46:31,435
It's not for a single piece of property.

2176
02:46:31,494 --> 02:46:36,234
And we would be able to understand that, again, whether there's any individual

2177
02:46:36,294 --> 02:46:40,074
property in the RS-7 zone that has a duplex.

2178
02:46:41,214 --> 02:46:45,624
Well, and the reason I bring this up is because for me personally, I think my two

2179
02:46:45,955 --> 02:46:51,265
issues with this development, and then is this the appropriate use of RS-7

2180
02:46:51,624 --> 02:46:53,634
according to the land development code?

2181
02:46:53,664 --> 02:46:58,794
And, is the traffic impact study correct in

2182
02:46:59,484 --> 02:47:02,874
that do we have infrastructure to support this development?

2183
02:47:03,444 --> 02:47:04,104
And,

2184
02:47:06,114 --> 02:47:09,685
to the second question, we have Kelly here.

2185
02:47:09,804 --> 02:47:14,814
I've read through that 160-page document again, and I

2186
02:47:16,705 --> 02:47:21,234
believe, I think that their conclusions are correct.

2187
02:47:21,324 --> 02:47:26,904
And I don't want anybody to be confused by my seconding Council Member Johnson's

2188
02:47:27,594 --> 02:47:31,524
motion here, and that I support it necessarily as is.

2189
02:47:32,484 --> 02:47:36,714
We just need to make second in order to continue the council discussion per

2190
02:47:36,804 --> 02:47:40,869
Robert's Rules. But as it stands now, I don't

2191
02:47:41,935 --> 02:47:45,444
see myself supporting this motion.

2192
02:47:45,474 --> 02:47:48,144
Can I-- Miles, I didn't mean to really dodge that question.

2193
02:47:48,205 --> 02:47:48,714
Let me just-

2194
02:47:48,984 --> 02:47:49,884
Sure.

2195
02:47:49,974 --> 02:47:55,464
So RS-7, the wording in our code, it says RS-7 is primarily intended to

2196
02:47:55,524 --> 02:48:01,104
accommodate single-family detached houses with a minimum lot size of 7,000 square

2197
02:48:01,164 --> 02:48:06,594
feet. It goes on, obviously, to talk about building types allowed, and then it

2198
02:48:06,654 --> 02:48:09,939
lists out the four or five different categories of building types allowed, which

2199
02:48:09,984 --> 02:48:11,274
include the duplexes.

2200
02:48:12,774 --> 02:48:17,634
That initial wording of primarily intended carries over to RS-5.

2201
02:48:18,474 --> 02:48:21,804
It carries over-- RS-5 starts exactly the same way.

2202
02:48:22,374 --> 02:48:26,649
RS-5 is primarily intended to accommodate single-family detached houses with a

2203
02:48:26,694 --> 02:48:28,868
minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet.

2204
02:48:28,884 --> 02:48:31,164
The difference there is the lot size changes.

2205
02:48:31,914 --> 02:48:37,824
And then some of the densities change because of that. Same thing in RS-3.

2206
02:48:38,124 --> 02:48:43,794
And so I look at that wording and think that a court would interpret that to

2207
02:48:43,854 --> 02:48:49,330
say that overall, the city is talking about, clearly intends to talk

2208
02:48:49,404 --> 02:48:52,254
about single-family detached houses.

2209
02:48:52,344 --> 02:48:57,938
However, other uses are listed, and any time you have a general phrase at the

2210
02:48:57,938 --> 02:49:03,669
beginning of a statute that is then qualified by more specific words or phrases,

2211
02:49:04,794 --> 02:49:09,834
my belief is the court would interpret that the city needs to apply the uses under

2212
02:49:09,894 --> 02:49:14,304
the building types allowed, which include the duplex and the side-by-side front and

2213
02:49:14,334 --> 02:49:14,814
back. So,

2214
02:49:16,494 --> 02:49:16,705
yeah.

2215
02:49:19,794 --> 02:49:23,124
So that's what I think. I think if a court were to look at that, the court-- and if

2216
02:49:23,154 --> 02:49:26,455
we denied it just based on the word primarily, I think the court would look at that

2217
02:49:26,469 --> 02:49:29,874
and say, "No, you've got to apply the more specific provisions in that code section

2218
02:49:29,904 --> 02:49:34,374
and allow duplexes because you specifically called them out for use." And I think

2219
02:49:34,464 --> 02:49:38,664
the applicants, one of their attorneys made a good point, that if we have approved

2220
02:49:38,694 --> 02:49:42,054
this Teton Ave Subdivision, I hadn't gone back and reviewed that ahead of this

2221
02:49:42,084 --> 02:49:44,034
meeting, where it was all duplexes.

2222
02:49:44,094 --> 02:49:49,705
It seems as though in the past we've probably applied that wording to allow

2223
02:49:49,765 --> 02:49:53,258
duplexes in a RS-7 situation. So anyway.

2224
02:49:55,794 --> 02:50:01,178
Yeah, I agree, and I think the developers' attorney spelled it out correctly on the

2225
02:50:01,224 --> 02:50:07,044
slide, noting that precedent had been established,

2226
02:50:07,314 --> 02:50:13,104
but in that if we want to restrict greater density in

2227
02:50:13,224 --> 02:50:18,084
RS-7, I think be more specific in how to phrase it.

2228
02:50:22,164 --> 02:50:26,379
Thomas, could I follow up to your questions with

2229
02:50:26,754 --> 02:50:29,034
Jake?

2230
02:50:29,064 --> 02:50:29,723
Yes.

2231
02:50:31,824 --> 02:50:34,765
Jake, please come back up. Sorry.

2232
02:50:43,974 --> 02:50:49,944
So it sounds like you were saying that a sphere phasing plan and a properly

2233
02:50:49,959 --> 02:50:54,234
shared master plan are not really required in the full final plat because none of

2234
02:50:54,294 --> 02:50:56,214
that's something you reported?

2235
02:50:56,904 --> 02:50:57,714
I said the opposite.

2236
02:50:57,834 --> 02:50:58,134
Oh.

2237
02:51:00,654 --> 02:51:01,314
You said that again?

2238
02:51:01,674 --> 02:51:06,265
That we're doing a survey, a technical survey review is done with the final plat.

2239
02:51:06,324 --> 02:51:08,935
The kind of surveyor who's able to do that.

2240
02:51:09,024 --> 02:51:13,134
So that's really when we're deep diving into that analysis.

2241
02:51:13,194 --> 02:51:17,455
But you did call out that a preliminary plat should have been provided to you to

2242
02:51:17,544 --> 02:51:18,654
just show phase one.

2243
02:51:19,644 --> 02:51:20,348
Okay. And then,

2244
02:51:21,685 --> 02:51:23,694
obviously, it does say the master plan.

2245
02:51:23,784 --> 02:51:28,374
So again, I'm just looking under the preliminary plat application section.

2246
02:51:28,435 --> 02:51:33,864
It says, "The master plan of the subdivision with necessary attachments

2247
02:51:34,705 --> 02:51:39,955
shall be recorded and shall be binding on the applicant and subsequent owners." So

2248
02:51:39,969 --> 02:51:42,594
I was discussing that under phase one or under

2249
02:51:43,944 --> 02:51:49,794
preliminary plat as though both the phase one and the binding master plat should be

2250
02:51:49,824 --> 02:51:54,984
drafted and presented to us for consideration at this stage in that whole process.

2251
02:51:55,374 --> 02:52:00,999
Right. When the final-- We would record the development agreement with those

2252
02:52:01,044 --> 02:52:05,364
attachments. And the master plan can be changed in the future.

2253
02:52:05,394 --> 02:52:11,154
We've seen several master plan developments change recently with future

2254
02:52:11,185 --> 02:52:15,294
phases. They're able to do that so long as they meet the other requirements of the

2255
02:52:15,354 --> 02:52:15,834
LDC.

2256
02:52:16,884 --> 02:52:21,024
Okay. And then when you were talking about the driveways and lot coverage being

2257
02:52:21,084 --> 02:52:24,984
addressed at a building permit, that totally makes sense.

2258
02:52:26,034 --> 02:52:31,164
And I am very hesitant to approve

2259
02:52:32,214 --> 02:52:34,374
a plat and

2260
02:52:35,574 --> 02:52:41,154
associated documents where the supporting documents clearly show

2261
02:52:41,214 --> 02:52:46,584
driveways and clearly show lot coverage that is

2262
02:52:46,705 --> 02:52:48,774
not in conformance with the LDC.

2263
02:52:51,114 --> 02:52:52,464
Could you speak to that?

2264
02:52:52,884 --> 02:52:55,314
I can't be referring to that schematic.

2265
02:52:55,449 --> 02:53:01,374
The desert is not adhered to the full lot coverage of 60% or

2266
02:53:01,435 --> 02:53:05,664
the 40% driveway coverage. It doesn't show me where the parking really is.

2267
02:53:06,174 --> 02:53:10,734
It doesn't show me how big their units are. I don't have any concept.

2268
02:53:10,779 --> 02:53:12,564
They look like pretty small units.

2269
02:53:13,584 --> 02:53:17,769
I broke out my scale bar, and some of them, according to my scale bar, they

2270
02:53:19,015 --> 02:53:20,274
don't look very big ones.

2271
02:53:20,964 --> 02:53:26,724
I think that's a question of the applicant, but I think if you needed to see

2272
02:53:26,784 --> 02:53:31,015
something with an updated schematic, that's something you could ask for.

2273
02:53:31,554 --> 02:53:36,384
It's hard when it's a subdivision of lots that are being created without--

2274
02:53:36,894 --> 02:53:40,765
They're not pulling building permits for that phase tomorrow.

2275
02:53:41,004 --> 02:53:46,104
This is just phase one. So they may not have home plans for that section drawn up.

2276
02:53:47,754 --> 02:53:53,274
Do we have to have schematics to scale in preliminary plats?

2277
02:53:53,664 --> 02:53:55,164
No, it's not required.

2278
02:53:56,724 --> 02:54:02,499
And so if they're approved, and this is very much a question for you, not for the

2279
02:54:02,515 --> 02:54:07,854
applicant. My hesitation here is I feel like if we approve

2280
02:54:08,784 --> 02:54:10,015
something showing

2281
02:54:11,274 --> 02:54:15,504
these driveway configurations that then when they come in to get building permit

2282
02:54:15,564 --> 02:54:21,399
aren't actually possible to do for us with the code at the time of building

2283
02:54:21,564 --> 02:54:21,774
permit-

2284
02:54:23,394 --> 02:54:27,354
We're going to be in an awkward spot where we approved it, and then later,

2285
02:54:28,884 --> 02:54:32,364
after the horse has left the stable, we're trying to deny the building permits

2286
02:54:32,544 --> 02:54:35,904
based on it not complying with the LDC requirements.

2287
02:54:36,024 --> 02:54:39,714
I think it's very problematic to have...

2288
02:54:41,664 --> 02:54:46,854
And when I say semantic, I'm talking about like... Let me pull up an example here.

2289
02:54:47,633 --> 02:54:52,464
I think I was meaning the development landscape plan because it was the most clear,

2290
02:54:52,584 --> 02:54:55,614
but I think the same background

2291
02:54:56,874 --> 02:55:02,304
is in many of the improvement plans, but where it shows

2292
02:55:02,994 --> 02:55:07,015
driveways and building footprints is I think what I'm looking at.

2293
02:55:07,494 --> 02:55:09,084
And some of those

2294
02:55:10,674 --> 02:55:13,074
do not appear to comply in, so

2295
02:55:16,734 --> 02:55:22,494
I feel like it would be a bad faith to approve this and then turn around and

2296
02:55:22,705 --> 02:55:28,374
deny building permits for attached homes because some of them just can't even

2297
02:55:28,435 --> 02:55:32,904
meet the driveway parking requirements of the LDC based on configuration.

2298
02:55:32,994 --> 02:55:36,968
I think that is something that should be hashed out in preliminary plat, and that

2299
02:55:37,015 --> 02:55:42,984
we should know that all these lots that we're creating are able to be developed as

2300
02:55:43,104 --> 02:55:48,534
intended and depicted in the project plans for the LDC.

2301
02:55:48,685 --> 02:55:54,324
I understand that, Sarah. This is not the phase for it, though, here at the City of

2302
02:55:54,414 --> 02:55:55,839
Driggs. And-

2303
02:55:56,334 --> 02:55:58,254
This is not the phase we're figuring that out.

2304
02:55:58,435 --> 02:56:01,674
I just said that I really think it is the phase for this.

2305
02:56:01,884 --> 02:56:07,554
You can think it is, but it's not part of the application and what was

2306
02:56:07,584 --> 02:56:10,374
required in this application.

2307
02:56:10,614 --> 02:56:15,504
It's my understanding, right, that you're looking at lot size as far as the plat,

2308
02:56:15,594 --> 02:56:15,984
correct?

2309
02:56:16,794 --> 02:56:17,455
Lot size-

2310
02:56:17,604 --> 02:56:18,429
That's what it says

2311
02:56:18,429 --> 02:56:23,185
... and driveway access to Cowboy Trail is the main components that

2312
02:56:23,199 --> 02:56:24,714
we're-

2313
02:56:24,804 --> 02:56:27,354
I think it's just really important. I'm going to pause this here.

2314
02:56:27,444 --> 02:56:32,544
I think it's really important because we can want to have certain things, and we

2315
02:56:32,604 --> 02:56:38,154
can want to have these, but Idaho Law is also very black and white,

2316
02:56:38,844 --> 02:56:44,589
and we need to be aware of what are we making decisions on that

2317
02:56:44,784 --> 02:56:50,754
are before us and part of this process versus

2318
02:56:51,654 --> 02:56:55,314
wanting to have certain things or thinking that it should be part of this

2319
02:56:55,344 --> 02:57:00,953
preliminary plat right now. And I think that it's important for council to be

2320
02:57:01,134 --> 02:57:05,334
aware of the different aspects of it and

2321
02:57:05,844 --> 02:57:10,674
trying to remain within the balance of that.

2322
02:57:11,604 --> 02:57:11,935
Um,

2323
02:57:14,544 --> 02:57:18,909
Miles or Jason, do you have additional questions for staff while

2324
02:57:20,574 --> 02:57:21,624
they're up at the podium?

2325
02:57:23,034 --> 02:57:23,964
I do not.

2326
02:57:24,774 --> 02:57:25,344
Jason?

2327
02:57:27,924 --> 02:57:30,414
This isn't regarding

2328
02:57:32,214 --> 02:57:36,533
any of what Sarah talked about, but I did want to talk about phasing.

2329
02:57:36,685 --> 02:57:42,384
And I guess when I hear a timeline from the applicant of five to

2330
02:57:42,444 --> 02:57:46,164
six years for such a large development,

2331
02:57:50,185 --> 02:57:52,944
I feel like it's somewhat of a red flag.

2332
02:57:53,574 --> 02:57:57,459
When you really look at the big picture of the safety of the community, safety of

2333
02:57:57,504 --> 02:58:03,384
the neighbors, you're looking at construction of infrastructure, you're looking at

2334
02:58:03,774 --> 02:58:07,734
construction of the units, and that's 30 units

2335
02:58:09,744 --> 02:58:13,944
a year on top of the park space, landscaping,

2336
02:58:15,864 --> 02:58:20,094
building. And I feel like, is there a way in council that you could

2337
02:58:21,114 --> 02:58:24,144
require a timeline as far as phasing

2338
02:58:25,944 --> 02:58:27,955
that reflects

2339
02:58:30,234 --> 02:58:33,685
a safe process? I feel like it's next to schools.

2340
02:58:34,374 --> 02:58:40,284
I imagine trucks and construction workers, and when it first came

2341
02:58:40,314 --> 02:58:45,504
to us five to six years, it felt like it was unrealistic.

2342
02:58:46,104 --> 02:58:51,234
And as far as safety, is that something that council can

2343
02:58:52,765 --> 02:58:58,705
require as far as an approval? And maybe that's something for Sam question as well,

2344
02:58:59,455 --> 02:59:00,804
because Jay looks over.

2345
02:59:02,274 --> 02:59:03,744
Jay wants to pawn that off on me.

2346
02:59:03,894 --> 02:59:03,909
Yeah.

2347
02:59:04,705 --> 02:59:07,404
Is there anything, Jay, that you're aware of in our land development code that

2348
02:59:07,464 --> 02:59:09,144
talks about timing for phasing?

2349
02:59:11,754 --> 02:59:16,944
Yes. There are... The approval criteria does talk about it, but it would need to,

2350
02:59:16,974 --> 02:59:21,234
in my review of this, the specific impact would need to be directly tied to the

2351
02:59:21,294 --> 02:59:23,603
phase that you're concerned about.

2352
02:59:24,144 --> 02:59:26,515
I think it's complicated to get it so-

2353
02:59:26,634 --> 02:59:27,369
Each stand on its own

2354
02:59:27,414 --> 02:59:33,144
... each does stand on its own, and each is reviewed at a building and

2355
02:59:33,234 --> 02:59:35,515
final plat phase with city council again.

2356
02:59:36,924 --> 02:59:41,394
And I just, as a general matter, would be uncomfortable with the city attempting to

2357
02:59:41,424 --> 02:59:46,944
impose either a time maximum or a minimum for completing phasing.

2358
02:59:46,974 --> 02:59:50,319
There are so many components that go into that from an owner's development

2359
02:59:50,334 --> 02:59:53,784
perspective, including just financing and construction.

2360
02:59:53,844 --> 02:59:59,739
But to impose that feels arbitrary, and we have to avoid arbitrary and capricious

2361
02:59:59,844 --> 03:00:00,924
decisions of the city.

2362
03:00:02,574 --> 03:00:06,968
I just haven't heard evidence in the record suggesting one way or the other that

2363
03:00:07,044 --> 03:00:10,974
there is some evidentiary basis to impose that.

2364
03:00:11,874 --> 03:00:16,749
Each phase of development under construction is how to the standards within the

2365
03:00:16,765 --> 03:00:21,564
development agreement, which does have specifications for, it must be constructed

2366
03:00:21,624 --> 03:00:27,144
within seven, eight years, or there are some specific provisions in

2367
03:00:27,504 --> 03:00:32,154
case something happens. Always can ask for an extension, but each phase does have

2368
03:00:32,185 --> 03:00:33,324
that for construction.

2369
03:00:35,544 --> 03:00:40,314
Thank you. Okay, council, I'm going to encourage you to

2370
03:00:41,274 --> 03:00:47,004
either move on your motion or have continued deliberation or make a new

2371
03:00:47,019 --> 03:00:47,604
motion.

2372
03:00:51,744 --> 03:00:57,564
Is any of the information or concerns you have, Sarah, is anything would

2373
03:00:57,594 --> 03:01:02,513
be more suitable for a table if you just need more information? Or do you...

2374
03:01:02,574 --> 03:01:06,984
I feel like denials, you need to be solid, and it should be concise.

2375
03:01:07,464 --> 03:01:07,734
Yep.

2376
03:01:08,994 --> 03:01:12,744
No, thanks for asking. That is exactly what was on my mind right now.

2377
03:01:12,804 --> 03:01:18,504
And I wanted to be really clear that some of the things I brought up are very

2378
03:01:18,654 --> 03:01:24,534
easily fixed with a tabling and additional information, with

2379
03:01:24,624 --> 03:01:28,254
the exception of criteria number five.

2380
03:01:29,634 --> 03:01:31,015
Criteria number five

2381
03:01:33,504 --> 03:01:34,944
requires that

2382
03:01:38,185 --> 03:01:43,074
the city is capable of providing all the services

2383
03:01:43,674 --> 03:01:48,999
without imposing substantial additional cost of current

2384
03:01:49,134 --> 03:01:55,074
residents to accommodate development or compromising the quality of serve, delivery

2385
03:01:55,104 --> 03:01:59,394
service. And again, a delivery service includes the transportation system.

2386
03:02:00,504 --> 03:02:04,599
I think several of the other things in this list, if we were satisfied with the

2387
03:02:04,614 --> 03:02:08,229
traffic, it would mean to dive deeper into these other pieces as well.

2388
03:02:10,614 --> 03:02:15,444
But I feel like the traffic situation is a fatal flaw of this development.

2389
03:02:15,714 --> 03:02:18,624
I think this application should be denied,

2390
03:02:20,214 --> 03:02:25,224
on the basis of criterion number five not being met, and

2391
03:02:27,564 --> 03:02:32,964
maybe that's something that the developer wants more time to

2392
03:02:33,084 --> 03:02:35,574
address, and that they would address.

2393
03:02:35,814 --> 03:02:35,964
I

2394
03:02:39,265 --> 03:02:43,734
really think that... So the traffic impact study, Jason pointed out that there are

2395
03:02:43,765 --> 03:02:48,624
no specific requirements about what that has to be in the LDC.

2396
03:02:48,714 --> 03:02:52,494
There are, however, industry standards and

2397
03:02:53,844 --> 03:02:59,185
criterion number five, which says we as decision-makers have to feel confident

2398
03:02:59,814 --> 03:03:05,784
that there are no unmitigated risks, that we're not compromising quality of

2399
03:03:05,814 --> 03:03:10,134
service, and that we're not imposing additional costs on the current residents.

2400
03:03:10,689 --> 03:03:16,644
And the traffic impact study, as presented, does not meet industry standard in my

2401
03:03:16,674 --> 03:03:22,599
opinion, and it does not give me enough information as decision-maker to make this

2402
03:03:22,614 --> 03:03:24,265
finding. So-

2403
03:03:26,658 --> 03:03:30,739
I don't want to keep just kicking the can down the road and then having these

2404
03:03:30,798 --> 03:03:36,438
little Band-Aids applied. I would want to see a much better

2405
03:03:36,558 --> 03:03:42,528
application, and documents. I would rather-- And because of

2406
03:03:42,588 --> 03:03:43,308
the whole...

2407
03:03:47,958 --> 03:03:51,618
Things get complicated to review when there's revision after revision, after

2408
03:03:51,633 --> 03:03:53,928
revision, and people get lost in the versions.

2409
03:03:54,228 --> 03:03:59,569
I would like to see this bring-- If we don't deny it outright,

2410
03:04:00,348 --> 03:04:04,728
I'd want to see it go back to planning and zoning and come back to us with a clean

2411
03:04:04,788 --> 03:04:05,239
brush

2412
03:04:06,768 --> 03:04:10,158
application. Not really sure if that's possible.

2413
03:04:11,868 --> 03:04:15,918
Maybe it would have to have the prior versions in there, but hopefully,

2414
03:04:17,328 --> 03:04:21,528
very clear what all the different stuff is so that there's not confusion between

2415
03:04:22,158 --> 03:04:26,118
old versions. But I really think this is a good law.

2416
03:04:26,239 --> 03:04:27,618
I think this-

2417
03:04:27,678 --> 03:04:28,128
Thank you, Sarah.

2418
03:04:29,418 --> 03:04:33,918
Let's tidy it up. I want to make sure that we hear from multiple people-

2419
03:04:34,338 --> 03:04:35,328
Can you let me finish, though?

2420
03:04:35,778 --> 03:04:37,158
If you have some new information.

2421
03:04:37,548 --> 03:04:43,188
Yes. I think this part of Drake's, as the public commenter pointed out, that is

2422
03:04:43,278 --> 03:04:48,618
bottlenecked by the schools and the airport runway configuration.

2423
03:04:50,358 --> 03:04:55,938
I am not convinced that this area can support

2424
03:04:56,058 --> 03:05:00,948
additional development, and especially at the scale.

2425
03:05:01,368 --> 03:05:01,922
It-

2426
03:05:01,922 --> 03:05:02,268
Thank you

2427
03:05:02,283 --> 03:05:04,788
... does not seem like a good idea.

2428
03:05:04,878 --> 03:05:05,148
Thank you.

2429
03:05:05,298 --> 03:05:10,653
Are you advocating for a new traffic study or set aside back to planning and say,

2430
03:05:10,788 --> 03:05:13,608
"Collect the information, and we will get it provided?"

2431
03:05:17,388 --> 03:05:20,838
My personal feeling is that

2432
03:05:22,608 --> 03:05:28,278
I am very uncomfortable with the idea of the infrastructure

2433
03:05:28,368 --> 03:05:32,283
around this area, the road network, being able to support the development of this

2434
03:05:32,283 --> 03:05:38,088
scale, period. The burden of proof is on the developer to prove otherwise, and

2435
03:05:39,168 --> 03:05:43,623
repeatedly, they've been asked for an updated traffic impact study, flag PC,

2436
03:05:43,683 --> 03:05:47,358
anybody else, and that has not been provided.

2437
03:05:49,578 --> 03:05:55,158
I can't answer that. I don't know that it wouldn't or that it would,

2438
03:05:55,758 --> 03:05:56,118
but

2439
03:05:57,858 --> 03:06:03,528
an updated traffic study that's done properly and includes the schools and, yes,

2440
03:06:03,588 --> 03:06:07,203
addresses those concerns brought up by the residents and

2441
03:06:08,808 --> 03:06:09,378
the public

2442
03:06:12,468 --> 03:06:17,298
would need to convince me that criterion number five is met by the law.

2443
03:06:20,808 --> 03:06:24,228
Okay, I'm going to encourage... Yes?

2444
03:06:24,558 --> 03:06:25,819
Can I chime in on one point?

2445
03:06:26,058 --> 03:06:26,343
Yes.

2446
03:06:27,588 --> 03:06:33,288
Just to your point, that last comment that you made, Council Member Johnson, on you

2447
03:06:33,319 --> 03:06:38,239
didn't know if that area, considering its configuration, could support this kind of

2448
03:06:38,268 --> 03:06:40,638
development. Right? Did I get that roughly correct?

2449
03:06:42,708 --> 03:06:47,748
Just make sure when you articulate the decision, it's important under Lupo, in

2450
03:06:47,808 --> 03:06:53,463
addition to stating the ordinance and standards used in evaluating and making your

2451
03:06:53,508 --> 03:06:57,468
decision, which I think you've done on your motion, and the reasons for approval or

2452
03:06:57,528 --> 03:07:01,788
denial, the Idaho Code Section 67-6519

2453
03:07:03,258 --> 03:07:07,968
says that you should also state the actions, if any, the applicant could take to

2454
03:07:08,028 --> 03:07:12,588
obtain approval. And sometimes we talk about those in terms of conditions for

2455
03:07:12,648 --> 03:07:16,698
approval, but even if you're going to deny it, I think stating the actions, if any,

2456
03:07:16,728 --> 03:07:20,073
that the applicant could take to obtain approval are important.

2457
03:07:20,868 --> 03:07:26,163
And I just think as a thought process that, if the decision-maker cannot

2458
03:07:27,828 --> 03:07:33,588
declare what those are and just gets back, "It's just not going to work," let's

2459
03:07:33,888 --> 03:07:34,938
question whether or not

2460
03:07:37,308 --> 03:07:38,268
we're just telling them no.

2461
03:07:39,378 --> 03:07:43,952
Yeah. Thanks for bringing that up and saying it that way. That's really helpful.

2462
03:07:44,208 --> 03:07:44,508
And

2463
03:07:46,608 --> 03:07:52,218
let me just say it as clearly as I can, and you can tell me if that makes sense to

2464
03:07:52,338 --> 03:07:52,638
you.

2465
03:07:56,388 --> 03:08:00,319
I feel like the burden of proof is on the developer for their application materials

2466
03:08:00,468 --> 03:08:05,508
to support the development and support the decision-makers in making the findings

2467
03:08:05,598 --> 03:08:08,448
and are these criteria met. And

2468
03:08:10,878 --> 03:08:16,788
these impacts to the level of service and additional costs

2469
03:08:16,908 --> 03:08:18,078
on current residents,

2470
03:08:20,358 --> 03:08:24,648
I'm hearing from the residents that they think there is going to be a loss in

2471
03:08:24,708 --> 03:08:30,108
delivery of service. I'm hearing that they think it's going to cost more.

2472
03:08:30,258 --> 03:08:30,708
And

2473
03:08:31,908 --> 03:08:36,828
the traffic impact study in front of me, I cannot rely on to

2474
03:08:38,448 --> 03:08:40,788
be able to make a finding

2475
03:08:42,798 --> 03:08:48,678
that matches what the LBC says that this criteria needs to

2476
03:08:48,768 --> 03:08:49,338
be. So,

2477
03:08:51,768 --> 03:08:54,828
I don't know that an additional traffic study would.

2478
03:08:55,548 --> 03:09:00,048
I know that if I was going to make this finding, I would need to have a complete

2479
03:09:00,258 --> 03:09:04,819
traffic study that I felt like I could trust and rely on, that the conclusions of

2480
03:09:04,878 --> 03:09:05,989
that said that there

2481
03:09:08,478 --> 03:09:13,158
is capability. The city of this place is fine for this much development, and the

2482
03:09:13,218 --> 03:09:18,438
roads can handle it. I don't know if someone can write that traffic study or not.

2483
03:09:18,558 --> 03:09:22,173
I don't know if it's possible because I don't know if our roads are capable of

2484
03:09:22,218 --> 03:09:23,538
that.

2485
03:09:23,628 --> 03:09:24,768
Thank you. Okay.

2486
03:09:24,782 --> 03:09:26,702
Is that quick of what you were getting at, Sam?

2487
03:09:27,108 --> 03:09:30,378
Yeah, I just wanted to make sure you're aware of that provision in the code, that

2488
03:09:30,438 --> 03:09:34,489
that's something that the statute says we should do, is state the actions of any

2489
03:09:34,548 --> 03:09:36,843
that the applicant could take to obtain approval.

2490
03:09:38,658 --> 03:09:43,878
Okay. So we're going to move on. We have other agenda items as well tonight that we

2491
03:09:43,908 --> 03:09:48,948
need to get to. So, council, now's the time to be able to-

2492
03:09:49,428 --> 03:09:54,168
Sorry, just real quick. Sorry. I guess I might as well ask Jay, from your

2493
03:09:54,198 --> 03:09:57,123
perspective with the public works,

2494
03:09:58,817 --> 03:10:02,433
is the city capable of providing service with this development?

2495
03:10:03,739 --> 03:10:08,058
Based on the traffic impact study, the mitigations, and our transportation master

2496
03:10:08,118 --> 03:10:13,983
plan, yeah, the network is designed to handle the transportation that's added

2497
03:10:13,998 --> 03:10:15,678
for development in this area.

2498
03:10:16,998 --> 03:10:17,388
Thanks.

2499
03:10:29,808 --> 03:10:30,588
Next motion.

2500
03:10:30,708 --> 03:10:31,128
Please.

2501
03:10:31,698 --> 03:10:35,928
I move to approve the proposed redeveloped subdivision preliminary plat based on

2502
03:10:35,989 --> 03:10:39,888
the master plan and based on the finding of proposals presented meets the criteria

2503
03:10:40,008 --> 03:10:44,808
for approvals listed in the staff report and are for 14.5.6 of Drake's land

2504
03:10:44,928 --> 03:10:45,468
development code.

2505
03:10:48,888 --> 03:10:54,378
So I have denied my fair share of applications here on council,

2506
03:10:55,248 --> 03:11:00,558
all on very legally defensible grounds with maybe one

2507
03:11:00,918 --> 03:11:04,968
reasoning of on comprehensive plan that I think it might even have been Corey

2508
03:11:05,028 --> 03:11:05,658
Tamsan.

2509
03:11:07,548 --> 03:11:13,188
I understand the community's concerns with this development, and I don't

2510
03:11:13,278 --> 03:11:18,708
see any legally defensible criteria in which to deny this approval.

2511
03:11:19,278 --> 03:11:20,898
I also think this development,

2512
03:11:22,218 --> 03:11:25,038
having been on council when the previous

2513
03:11:26,298 --> 03:11:32,088
Rivers West development was being proposed and denied, this is

2514
03:11:32,178 --> 03:11:37,278
a substantial improvement with a lot of benefits for the community.

2515
03:11:37,608 --> 03:11:41,598
Is it going to be tricky to mitigate the impacts? Absolutely.

2516
03:11:41,688 --> 03:11:46,518
Are there also positive benefits that the community can see? I believe so.

2517
03:11:47,778 --> 03:11:50,239
So that's why I'm with the group.

2518
03:11:53,118 --> 03:11:56,283
I agree, Miles, that there is some important conditions-

2519
03:11:56,628 --> 03:11:57,048
Oh, sure

2520
03:11:57,978 --> 03:11:59,328
... that need to be addressed.

2521
03:12:02,508 --> 03:12:02,958
Oh, yeah.

2522
03:12:04,908 --> 03:12:06,078
One, I'll remain-

2523
03:12:06,408 --> 03:12:08,913
Wait, say that you're going to amend your motion.

2524
03:12:09,018 --> 03:12:11,058
I'll amend my motion to include the following conditions.

2525
03:12:11,569 --> 03:12:14,913
One, I'll remain executive of all the works comments to be addressed in these

2526
03:12:14,989 --> 03:12:18,558
amendment and improvement plans prior to submission to DQ for review.

2527
03:12:19,398 --> 03:12:24,348
Two, a navigation easement be executed and referenced on the final plat.

2528
03:12:24,768 --> 03:12:29,687
Three, developer to provide one additional ADA parking spot to the ADA compliant

2529
03:12:29,748 --> 03:12:31,819
with the workspace. Four-

2530
03:12:32,970 --> 03:12:36,270
Staff incorporate the additional mitigations measures into the development

2531
03:12:36,300 --> 03:12:42,015
agreement. A, developer agrees to voluntarily contribute $158,852

2532
03:12:42,420 --> 03:12:45,961
to offset directly capacity impacts to Teton County School District.

2533
03:12:46,125 --> 03:12:49,860
This will be proportionate by phase and unit and paid to the school district prior

2534
03:12:49,890 --> 03:12:52,080
to the recognition of each phase's final plat.

2535
03:12:53,881 --> 03:12:54,211
Talk to

2536
03:12:55,500 --> 03:13:00,540
the units. Okay, phase one units, 14 detached plus 34 attached,

2537
03:13:00,840 --> 03:13:04,830
45,988. Phase two units, 36 detached,

2538
03:13:04,980 --> 03:13:10,230
29,808. Phase three units, eight detached and 24 attached,

2539
03:13:10,620 --> 03:13:15,060
$30,064. Phase four units, 32 attached,

2540
03:13:15,225 --> 03:13:20,355
$26,496. Phase five units, 32 attached,

2541
03:13:20,595 --> 03:13:22,350
$26,496.

2542
03:13:23,580 --> 03:13:29,310
And B, developer agrees to contribute 45,000 annually for five years from the first

2543
03:13:29,520 --> 03:13:31,920
building permit to the Teton County Sheriff Department.

2544
03:13:31,980 --> 03:13:34,560
A separate agreement will be negotiated in that situation.

2545
03:13:36,300 --> 03:13:37,110
I'll second.

2546
03:13:41,160 --> 03:13:45,000
Okay. So this is our second motion, and

2547
03:13:46,711 --> 03:13:48,390
it was seconded.

2548
03:13:50,940 --> 03:13:52,230
Is there any discussion?

2549
03:13:59,401 --> 03:14:05,370
Miles, do you feel that approval criteria five is met, that you can say with

2550
03:14:05,401 --> 03:14:08,010
confidence that

2551
03:14:09,479 --> 03:14:12,901
the quality of service of

2552
03:14:14,790 --> 03:14:20,430
the transportation system, law enforcement, emergency services, healthcare,

2553
03:14:20,910 --> 03:14:25,410
schools, et cetera, will not be compromised?

2554
03:14:26,160 --> 03:14:31,260
I do. And if I take admission with that and would ask questions of our

2555
03:14:31,290 --> 03:14:36,600
associates that we previously asked for, I feel that is being

2556
03:14:36,631 --> 03:14:39,211
met.

2557
03:14:41,310 --> 03:14:44,131
Any other discussion?

2558
03:14:44,160 --> 03:14:47,040
I just want to say into the record that I disagree.

2559
03:14:47,190 --> 03:14:47,280
I

2560
03:14:51,720 --> 03:14:57,540
do not feel that approval criterion number five is met with the

2561
03:14:57,570 --> 03:15:02,220
information we have in front of us and the incorporation of those conditions of

2562
03:15:02,250 --> 03:15:04,620
approval. Don't think we're there.

2563
03:15:09,030 --> 03:15:11,070
We'll call the vote. All in favor, roll call.

2564
03:15:12,256 --> 03:15:13,620
Council Member Popilski?

2565
03:15:14,010 --> 03:15:14,370
Aye.

2566
03:15:14,520 --> 03:15:15,810
Council Member Knowles?

2567
03:15:15,930 --> 03:15:16,080
Aye.

2568
03:15:16,290 --> 03:15:17,610
Council Member Johnston?

2569
03:15:18,151 --> 03:15:18,510
Nay.

2570
03:15:19,350 --> 03:15:19,800
Thank you.

2571
03:15:21,151 --> 03:15:24,060
Thank you for being here and for coming.

2572
03:15:25,350 --> 03:15:30,090
I would like to say publicly that I have heard many of you in your public comment

2573
03:15:30,600 --> 03:15:34,920
make comments about not going along with our staff.

2574
03:15:36,270 --> 03:15:40,200
Our staff, our residents, they are dedicated,

2575
03:15:41,520 --> 03:15:47,009
they are neutral, and they follow our Idaho

2576
03:15:47,610 --> 03:15:53,280
code and law, and I appreciate the dedication

2577
03:15:53,730 --> 03:15:58,381
of our staff every day. And thank you to the

2578
03:15:59,970 --> 03:16:05,580
three remaining public that stayed to hear me say

2579
03:16:05,640 --> 03:16:06,360
that. Thank you.

2580
03:16:06,631 --> 03:16:08,280
Thank you so much. I appreciate your time.

2581
03:16:11,160 --> 03:16:12,901
Well, Dave wants to say something.

2582
03:16:14,520 --> 03:16:15,854
You can comment on it.

2583
03:16:16,500 --> 03:16:17,700
Yes, we'll take a break for 10

2584
03:16:17,730 --> 03:16:27,930
minutes.

2585
03:16:28,184 --> 03:16:28,184
Yes.

2586
03:16:36,090 --> 03:16:36,540
Just

2587
03:16:38,040 --> 03:16:43,530
to mention it to Jennifer.

2588
03:16:46,260 --> 03:16:48,240
It

2589
03:16:48,270 --> 03:17:07,290
doesn't,

2590
03:17:08,640 --> 03:17:10,620
no.

2591
03:17:11,340 --> 03:17:15,600
Okay, it's 9:22. We are back

2592
03:17:18,330 --> 03:17:19,950
from our one-minute break,

2593
03:17:21,570 --> 03:17:24,270
and we will move on to

2594
03:17:24,330 --> 03:17:30,030
action items number

2595
03:17:30,720 --> 03:17:33,930
6A. We have a will serve for the slide drive-in.

2596
03:17:36,390 --> 03:17:39,180
I have a potential conflict that I want to disclose.

2597
03:17:39,510 --> 03:17:40,470
Okay, go ahead.

2598
03:17:42,151 --> 03:17:43,230
Is now the time for that?

2599
03:17:43,320 --> 03:17:45,090
Yes, at the beginning of the agenda item.

2600
03:17:46,200 --> 03:17:50,700
I am... Sorry, my bad.

2601
03:17:52,500 --> 03:17:57,930
I am employed by a company that is employed by the applicant, and I feel I

2602
03:17:58,080 --> 03:17:59,401
have a likely

2603
03:18:00,961 --> 03:18:04,860
conflict of interest due to that. So I would like to recuse myself.

2604
03:18:05,700 --> 03:18:06,420
Thank you.

2605
03:18:09,030 --> 03:18:14,070
With recusal, we will not have a quorum.

2606
03:18:16,230 --> 03:18:21,750
And so we will need to table this item until we have the full

2607
03:18:21,840 --> 03:18:26,910
council so that we are able to address this item.

2608
03:18:29,760 --> 03:18:31,620
So we will table this until-

2609
03:18:34,440 --> 03:18:34,920
9:15

2610
03:18:35,280 --> 03:18:41,010
... 9:15, where we hope to have a full council present.

2611
03:18:42,870 --> 03:18:45,990
And 9:13. I know.

2612
03:18:46,950 --> 03:18:48,840
Made a difference.

2613
03:18:48,930 --> 03:18:49,560
October.

2614
03:18:54,631 --> 03:18:55,050
Okay,

2615
03:18:56,370 --> 03:18:56,715
6B.

2616
03:18:58,139 --> 03:19:01,950
We have a motion for the proposal selection for administrative services for

2617
03:19:01,979 --> 03:19:03,870
wastewater facility improvement project.

2618
03:19:06,180 --> 03:19:11,580
So this is hiring an administrator to oversee funding,

2619
03:19:12,510 --> 03:19:13,230
as well as

2620
03:19:16,020 --> 03:19:19,920
many other tasks that were outlined in the

2621
03:19:20,100 --> 03:19:25,470
RFQ for the wastewater treatment facility improvement

2622
03:19:26,100 --> 03:19:30,961
projects. And we received two proposals, one from Great West Engineering and one

2623
03:19:31,020 --> 03:19:36,600
from Altura. We had a committee of three review those,

2624
03:19:36,990 --> 03:19:42,660
myself, James Slusky, and Maggie Manos, treasurer, and

2625
03:19:42,840 --> 03:19:47,820
we all agreed that Altura was the higher-ranked

2626
03:19:48,211 --> 03:19:49,440
candidate on

2627
03:19:50,760 --> 03:19:56,550
experience, project experience, team qualifications, as well as their approach

2628
03:19:56,670 --> 03:20:02,640
and on schedule. So it really wasn't much of a contest looking at the proposals.

2629
03:20:02,700 --> 03:20:06,300
But we have attached the two proposals as well.

2630
03:20:07,485 --> 03:20:10,920
And happy to answer any questions or discuss our story.

2631
03:20:11,250 --> 03:20:13,756
Director, any questions for staff?

2632
03:20:14,881 --> 03:20:16,860
Yeah. Do either of these

2633
03:20:21,780 --> 03:20:22,065
firms

2634
03:20:24,120 --> 03:20:26,461
have a professional relationship with the city of Victor?

2635
03:20:28,350 --> 03:20:34,260
Altura provides, they're kind of a quasi-governmental organization that provides

2636
03:20:34,290 --> 03:20:38,610
community development and economic development services across region seven of the

2637
03:20:38,700 --> 03:20:44,685
state. And so they would provide services to Victor with the treatment

2638
03:20:44,685 --> 03:20:46,500
facility and such.

2639
03:20:49,200 --> 03:20:50,160
That's Rick Miller, right?

2640
03:20:50,730 --> 03:20:51,000
Yeah.

2641
03:20:51,060 --> 03:20:52,260
Altura is Rick Miller?

2642
03:20:52,381 --> 03:20:52,890
Yes.

2643
03:20:52,980 --> 03:20:53,220
Yeah.

2644
03:20:58,530 --> 03:21:04,050
Is that who provides our grant, helps us identify grants and funding?

2645
03:21:04,290 --> 03:21:04,770
Exactly.

2646
03:21:05,220 --> 03:21:10,200
And does he provide the same service to Victor regarding their potential future

2647
03:21:10,260 --> 03:21:11,520
wastewater treatment plant there?

2648
03:21:12,000 --> 03:21:16,470
Yeah, generally, block grants, the SRF

2649
03:21:17,461 --> 03:21:23,340
funding, that kind of funding is available, assistance with

2650
03:21:23,370 --> 03:21:28,920
applications, Altura provides that as a service to all communities in District 7.

2651
03:21:31,230 --> 03:21:32,715
Okay

2652
03:21:35,388 --> 03:21:37,819
Was that the accounting department as well?

2653
03:21:38,628 --> 03:21:43,368
It was not. It was not part of the criteria that was published.

2654
03:21:44,239 --> 03:21:48,888
Okay, but that criteria wasn't included here, so it's not what it is.

2655
03:21:51,708 --> 03:21:57,003
My personal feeling is that there's a potential conflict there, and I would rather

2656
03:21:57,108 --> 03:22:02,688
work with an outside firm who does not have a relationship with Victor regarding

2657
03:22:02,718 --> 03:22:04,323
wastewater treatment plant and everything.

2658
03:22:04,578 --> 03:22:07,728
So now it's the time for questions for staff, and then after a motion is made,

2659
03:22:08,058 --> 03:22:09,648
we'll look to deliberate with council.

2660
03:22:10,548 --> 03:22:12,888
Thanks.

2661
03:22:13,008 --> 03:22:14,463
Any questions for staff?

2662
03:22:21,739 --> 03:22:23,418
Hearing none, I'll call for the motion.

2663
03:22:24,108 --> 03:22:28,473
I'll move to select Alta Community Consulting for consultant to push a negotiated

2664
03:22:28,548 --> 03:22:31,653
contract for administrative services for the wastewater treatment facility and

2665
03:22:31,668 --> 03:22:34,728
group project, as described in the published request for proposals.

2666
03:22:35,358 --> 03:22:36,048
I'll second.

2667
03:22:36,768 --> 03:22:38,808
Motion and second. Any discussion?

2668
03:22:40,848 --> 03:22:41,718
I believe that

2669
03:22:43,158 --> 03:22:46,489
we have had a relationship with Rick for how long?

2670
03:22:46,908 --> 03:22:47,418
A long time.

2671
03:22:48,378 --> 03:22:53,928
That is. It's my understanding that he's one of the few specialists in this area,

2672
03:22:54,228 --> 03:22:59,343
and I don't know if we had talked about going outside, but I am now under the

2673
03:22:59,358 --> 03:23:02,538
impression that there isn't a lot out there.

2674
03:23:03,078 --> 03:23:06,108
And I don't know, I feel like I've

2675
03:23:08,898 --> 03:23:10,548
had a positive

2676
03:23:11,538 --> 03:23:16,819
experience with the city working with him.

2677
03:23:20,208 --> 03:23:23,088
Bill, any other input?

2678
03:23:25,248 --> 03:23:26,358
You want me to repeat my-

2679
03:23:26,748 --> 03:23:27,558
Yes.

2680
03:23:27,648 --> 03:23:28,337
Okay.

2681
03:23:28,398 --> 03:23:29,268
I mean, if you want to.

2682
03:23:30,888 --> 03:23:35,388
I mean, other than not repeat it, my stance is that...

2683
03:23:35,418 --> 03:23:40,278
Or just my initial feeling is that I would rather work with different consultants

2684
03:23:40,518 --> 03:23:44,643
than Victor so that there's no conflict of interest there regarding the wastewater

2685
03:23:44,643 --> 03:23:45,739
treatment plant.

2686
03:23:45,858 --> 03:23:50,718
I know they would talk with us about the subject with Rick specifically, and I know

2687
03:23:50,778 --> 03:23:51,048
that

2688
03:23:54,258 --> 03:23:58,878
he is open to have the competition.

2689
03:23:58,938 --> 03:24:01,038
Yeah. I really feel that

2690
03:24:03,618 --> 03:24:09,408
some of the consultants stand to earn more money

2691
03:24:09,588 --> 03:24:09,798
if-

2692
03:24:10,458 --> 03:24:14,837
They are non-profit, so they're not for profit.

2693
03:24:15,378 --> 03:24:19,998
They still have a budget. They still need to have income.

2694
03:24:21,618 --> 03:24:27,243
Just they earn money if Victor builds its own plant versus stays with Drake's, and

2695
03:24:27,319 --> 03:24:30,918
so I feel like there's an inherent conflict in using the same consultants,

2696
03:24:33,048 --> 03:24:35,688
and I would rather use different consultants.

2697
03:24:36,468 --> 03:24:38,658
I think that's about my...

2698
03:24:40,788 --> 03:24:45,168
The difference, what was the difference in the proposals?

2699
03:24:46,758 --> 03:24:49,489
Base, are you asking about cost?

2700
03:24:49,818 --> 03:24:50,118
Yeah.

2701
03:24:50,328 --> 03:24:54,228
There's no cost yet. It's just a review of-

2702
03:24:54,318 --> 03:24:54,978
Qualify.

2703
03:24:55,068 --> 03:24:56,147
Yeah, gotcha.

2704
03:24:58,848 --> 03:24:59,659
But, I mean,

2705
03:25:01,218 --> 03:25:07,143
I feel like the... I mean, if things weren't moving in a positive direction,

2706
03:25:07,489 --> 03:25:08,522
seemingly, Victor,

2707
03:25:10,248 --> 03:25:15,948
I think I would express more reservation, as you have.

2708
03:25:18,318 --> 03:25:23,659
I think the experience that he has working with us is a very positive thing.

2709
03:25:23,748 --> 03:25:26,239
I don't know anything about

2710
03:25:28,248 --> 03:25:29,239
Rick last,

2711
03:25:30,708 --> 03:25:32,058
other than they're not doing.

2712
03:25:34,998 --> 03:25:39,198
Could we table this, and could you bring it back at the next meeting when Allison

2713
03:25:39,288 --> 03:25:45,168
is here and include the criteria that we used, like the

2714
03:25:45,198 --> 03:25:49,968
criteria that was advertised and then the scoring that was applied to these

2715
03:25:50,029 --> 03:25:51,438
applications and the results?

2716
03:25:52,128 --> 03:25:52,458
Yes.

2717
03:25:54,168 --> 03:25:59,298
So in that case, I move to table this to our next meeting so that staff can add

2718
03:25:59,313 --> 03:26:02,838
this additional information, and so that Allison, he has it to deliver.

2719
03:26:03,378 --> 03:26:05,478
I'll second.

2720
03:26:05,568 --> 03:26:08,358
Motion and a second. Any discussion?

2721
03:26:09,708 --> 03:26:13,833
Will that two weeks derail anything on wastewater treatment plant, Rick?

2722
03:26:14,178 --> 03:26:14,748
I don't believe so.

2723
03:26:15,918 --> 03:26:16,489
Not at all.

2724
03:26:16,608 --> 03:26:17,149
Thank you.

2725
03:26:21,978 --> 03:26:26,388
Hearing none, I'll call below all in favor.

2726
03:26:29,388 --> 03:26:29,463
Aye.

2727
03:26:29,463 --> 03:26:29,808
Aye.

2728
03:26:30,678 --> 03:26:31,128
Cool.

2729
03:26:32,628 --> 03:26:32,913
Thought-

2730
03:26:33,168 --> 03:26:33,498
Oh

2731
03:26:33,513 --> 03:26:34,233
... it's not a conflict

2732
03:26:34,279 --> 03:26:36,649
Not for table.

2733
03:26:39,739 --> 03:26:40,698
Did you respond, sir?

2734
03:26:41,088 --> 03:26:41,897
I said aye.

2735
03:26:42,618 --> 03:26:48,588
Okay, the next item is 6C, the lease purchase agreement at 108 Harmony

2736
03:26:48,678 --> 03:26:53,358
Creek Acre, DBA, You and I Fibers.

2737
03:26:57,198 --> 03:27:01,728
This is a tenant moving into an vacant space in Depot Square.

2738
03:27:02,149 --> 03:27:04,938
It's a great business idea.

2739
03:27:07,548 --> 03:27:09,678
I don't think we need any further questions.

2740
03:27:09,739 --> 03:27:14,223
I move to authorize execution of lease agreement with You and I Fiber, LLC, for

2741
03:27:14,239 --> 03:27:18,138
Depot Square Unit 108. Pass with those.

2742
03:27:19,698 --> 03:27:20,298
I'll second.

2743
03:27:20,779 --> 03:27:24,018
Motion and a second. Any discussion?

2744
03:27:28,009 --> 03:27:29,718
Hearing none, all in favor, vocal.

2745
03:27:30,529 --> 03:27:31,848
Council Member Johnson?

2746
03:27:32,239 --> 03:27:32,463
Aye.

2747
03:27:32,598 --> 03:27:33,904
Council Member Knowles?

2748
03:27:34,098 --> 03:27:34,338
Aye.

2749
03:27:34,368 --> 03:27:35,598
Council Member Hopkins?

2750
03:27:35,989 --> 03:27:37,817
Aye.

2751
03:27:37,968 --> 03:27:43,458
Thank you. We have 6D, a motion for the joint grant

2752
03:27:43,518 --> 03:27:48,348
target EIS objection resolution request letter to Teton County, Wyoming.

2753
03:27:51,498 --> 03:27:56,928
This is a request that we got from Teton County, Wyoming,

2754
03:27:57,288 --> 03:28:00,828
Chair of Board of County Commissioners, Mark Newcomb,

2755
03:28:02,237 --> 03:28:07,909
asking if we wanted to be able to sign on with them for

2756
03:28:07,998 --> 03:28:08,418
this

2757
03:28:11,989 --> 03:28:13,098
request letter.

2758
03:28:16,188 --> 03:28:20,538
And I wanted it to come before it comes

2759
03:28:20,568 --> 03:28:25,848
home. This is in regards to the EIS,

2760
03:28:27,078 --> 03:28:32,328
decision of the Forest Service

2761
03:28:33,649 --> 03:28:34,953
for grant review.

2762
03:28:36,798 --> 03:28:37,998
This is not

2763
03:28:39,409 --> 03:28:42,318
a lawsuit. This is

2764
03:28:45,588 --> 03:28:46,938
a meeting in person.

2765
03:28:47,178 --> 03:28:51,529
Right. And so requesting an in-person meeting with the Forest Service to review the

2766
03:28:51,588 --> 03:28:54,948
objection and propose mitigation.

2767
03:28:55,788 --> 03:29:01,009
And they have asked if we would be a partner because having multiple agencies has

2768
03:29:01,159 --> 03:29:01,548
more

2769
03:29:02,868 --> 03:29:03,918
power or-

2770
03:29:05,928 --> 03:29:06,259
Exactly

2771
03:29:06,318 --> 03:29:09,498
... united front.

2772
03:29:11,208 --> 03:29:17,149
I'm in support of it, but again, I wanted it to come before council

2773
03:29:17,239 --> 03:29:20,598
for a decision, instead of just me deciding.

2774
03:29:21,978 --> 03:29:26,538
I move to authorize the mayor and/or the city administrator

2775
03:29:28,159 --> 03:29:28,489
to

2776
03:29:30,409 --> 03:29:36,259
add the City of Drakes to the attached letter in support of convening an in-person

2777
03:29:36,438 --> 03:29:38,748
objection resolution meeting.

2778
03:29:42,918 --> 03:29:44,358
There's a motion. Is there a second?

2779
03:29:44,659 --> 03:29:45,228
I'll second.

2780
03:29:45,348 --> 03:29:47,598
Motion and second. Any discussion?

2781
03:29:49,279 --> 03:29:52,759
Does that help our meeting, authorization meeting?

2782
03:29:52,909 --> 03:29:53,418
Yes.

2783
03:29:53,509 --> 03:29:57,858
Oh, fine. Was there any discussion, please?

2784
03:29:58,038 --> 03:30:01,308
I'll call for the vote. All in favor will call.

2785
03:30:03,288 --> 03:30:04,728
Council Member Johnson?

2786
03:30:05,029 --> 03:30:05,358
Aye.

2787
03:30:05,388 --> 03:30:06,572
Council Member Knowles?

2788
03:30:06,678 --> 03:30:06,948
Aye.

2789
03:30:06,978 --> 03:30:08,509
Council Member Victoria Smith?

2790
03:30:08,779 --> 03:30:09,739
Aye.

2791
03:30:09,828 --> 03:30:15,587
Thank you. Next, we have 6E. This is an agreement to amend

2792
03:30:15,649 --> 03:30:21,168
the Hall Engel and Associate City Attorney retainer agreement rate

2793
03:30:21,649 --> 03:30:22,308
increase.

2794
03:30:24,259 --> 03:30:27,558
Can I discuss this for a moment? Can I present?

2795
03:30:27,618 --> 03:30:28,698
Yes, come to the

2796
03:30:28,713 --> 03:30:34,909
podium.

2797
03:30:36,402 --> 03:30:39,822
I just want to briefly describe what this change is.

2798
03:30:39,852 --> 03:30:43,197
This is the agreement that I entered into with the city five years ago in June of

2799
03:30:43,213 --> 03:30:47,713
2021. It sets forth the rates that you guys pay me on flat rate to come to council

2800
03:30:47,772 --> 03:30:52,272
meetings and give advice to city staff. I'm not changing that rate.

2801
03:30:53,083 --> 03:30:54,642
It hasn't changed since I started.

2802
03:30:55,392 --> 03:31:01,137
But I am changing the rate at which we charge the City of Driggs for work that's

2803
03:31:01,213 --> 03:31:03,162
done outside of the retainer agreement.

2804
03:31:03,297 --> 03:31:08,532
So this is when we retain my law firm to do defense of pieces of litigation.

2805
03:31:09,822 --> 03:31:14,502
The rate was previously at $250 an hour for me, and something less for associate

2806
03:31:14,532 --> 03:31:18,432
attorneys. I need to raise that. The primary reason I need to raise that is I have

2807
03:31:18,463 --> 03:31:20,112
to be competitive with my associate attorneys.

2808
03:31:20,157 --> 03:31:22,692
I need their help defending these pieces of litigation.

2809
03:31:22,722 --> 03:31:25,092
And rates have changed in the last five years.

2810
03:31:25,152 --> 03:31:29,458
And to the extent that I have to divert them away from other work that pays at a

2811
03:31:29,458 --> 03:31:31,422
higher rate in my law firm, I just can't do that.

2812
03:31:31,572 --> 03:31:36,583
So, I'm bumping that rate up by $25 an hour so I can give my associates a

2813
03:31:36,642 --> 03:31:40,662
corresponding bump in rate and pay within my law firm, and hopefully keep them

2814
03:31:40,722 --> 03:31:42,972
happy doing defense work for the City of Driggs.

2815
03:31:44,232 --> 03:31:48,882
I would point out just by way of comparison on a couple things, just so you know,

2816
03:31:50,022 --> 03:31:53,412
just using the Parsons Behle numbers.

2817
03:31:53,622 --> 03:31:57,342
They were the attorneys that represented Driggs out of real estate and the lawsuit

2818
03:31:57,372 --> 03:32:02,217
they filed against us. It'll just give you an idea of what rates are going out in

2819
03:32:02,262 --> 03:32:07,722
the rest of the world. John Sandquist, an attorney with 20 years of experience very

2820
03:32:07,782 --> 03:32:11,472
similar to me, is charging $435 to $525 an hour.

2821
03:32:12,252 --> 03:32:15,463
Courtney Sawings, his associate who's been out of law school for four years, is

2822
03:32:15,492 --> 03:32:20,742
charging $350 an hour. Sam McHash, out of law school

2823
03:32:21,522 --> 03:32:23,472
eight years, is charging $300 per hour.

2824
03:32:24,043 --> 03:32:26,713
John Cover, out of law school for a few years, is charging

2825
03:32:29,022 --> 03:32:33,342
$435 an hour. Oh, excuse me. Yeah. Yeah, he's $500 an hour.

2826
03:32:33,732 --> 03:32:37,182
But anyway, just some of the rates in the area for this stuff.

2827
03:32:37,842 --> 03:32:42,793
If I can't use my law firm as the city attorney, I would simply recommend that we

2828
03:32:43,032 --> 03:32:47,563
engage other law firms to do this outside litigation, and it would be Parsons Behle

2829
03:32:47,622 --> 03:32:51,267
or Holley Drocel, or Davis, Durst, Overbye in Boise or Dreier St.

2830
03:32:51,402 --> 03:32:53,532
Clair when they represent Victor.

2831
03:32:53,578 --> 03:32:58,842
I don't want them, but we've been looking around for land use specialists in that

2832
03:32:58,902 --> 03:33:02,501
area, and I just know that their rates are in that $300 to $400 to $500 an hour

2833
03:33:02,592 --> 03:33:06,762
range. I really just want to represent council. I do try to keep those rates low.

2834
03:33:06,897 --> 03:33:10,918
I try to do that in the context of my overall profitability practice, and I'm

2835
03:33:10,963 --> 03:33:15,822
trying to be respectful of both entities, so I would mind crunch us something.

2836
03:33:15,838 --> 03:33:17,442
So much to touch on that.

2837
03:33:19,182 --> 03:33:21,162
Thank you. Does council have any questions?

2838
03:33:22,122 --> 03:33:25,813
Thank you for spelling that out. I really appreciate it.

2839
03:33:27,012 --> 03:33:30,703
It is not very easy. And I heard

2840
03:33:30,793 --> 03:33:35,742
everything, and I would feel wonderful

2841
03:33:36,912 --> 03:33:39,972
thinking about this at our next meeting with Allison.

2842
03:33:41,232 --> 03:33:47,052
So if I move to table this item to our next meeting for

2843
03:33:47,293 --> 03:33:52,932
further discussion of the council and hopefully a full council.

2844
03:33:52,977 --> 03:33:55,992
Is that going to set back any of the associates, Sam, in the wave?

2845
03:33:56,682 --> 03:34:00,252
No. If you want to do that, that's fine. We can manage for a couple more weeks.

2846
03:34:00,372 --> 03:34:01,482
Yeah, cool.

2847
03:34:01,543 --> 03:34:01,992
I'll second.

2848
03:34:04,032 --> 03:34:05,682
Motion and second. Any discussion?

2849
03:34:08,622 --> 03:34:12,642
Hearing none, all in favor will call or all in favor of just tabling.

2850
03:34:13,992 --> 03:34:15,612
Aye.

2851
03:34:15,672 --> 03:34:17,922
Great. Okay, we will table that.

2852
03:34:21,132 --> 03:34:25,872
Okay, we're on to mayor and council updates. I have a couple things.

2853
03:34:28,302 --> 03:34:29,713
One is

2854
03:34:31,092 --> 03:34:36,313
for the 250 anniversary, there's a Liberty

2855
03:34:36,328 --> 03:34:39,552
Bell in the state of Idaho

2856
03:34:41,022 --> 03:34:46,872
that is going to be on a truck and coming around to not every single

2857
03:34:46,932 --> 03:34:50,742
town, but Driggs is included. I

2858
03:34:52,453 --> 03:34:55,002
just looked up the date. Oh, it's like next week.

2859
03:34:55,482 --> 03:34:57,552
Anyway, I'll try to get all the details for you.

2860
03:34:58,722 --> 03:35:04,662
I have need to choose a specific address for it to go, and they're

2861
03:35:04,722 --> 03:35:10,333
waiting for this. I just found this out this afternoon or right before our meeting.

2862
03:35:13,152 --> 03:35:18,612
So anyway, I wanted to see if the address could go to our schools and if teachers

2863
03:35:18,642 --> 03:35:24,043
would be willing to be able to take the time and bring some of the classes out to

2864
03:35:24,102 --> 03:35:29,668
that. But I'll update you. Just wanted to let you know that that is an appeal and

2865
03:35:29,742 --> 03:35:34,032
that the Liberty Bell of Idaho will be in Driggs.

2866
03:35:34,362 --> 03:35:36,942
Yeah. Who's bringing this around?

2867
03:35:37,063 --> 03:35:37,932
It's the

2868
03:35:40,992 --> 03:35:41,802
Idaho-

2869
03:35:44,293 --> 03:35:46,272
America 250 in Idaho

2870
03:35:46,302 --> 03:35:50,442
... and the Idaho State Treasurer's Office.

2871
03:35:50,472 --> 03:35:51,402
It's a replica.

2872
03:35:51,882 --> 03:35:54,072
It's a replica. It's not the actual one.

2873
03:35:55,106 --> 03:35:55,106
What?

2874
03:35:55,782 --> 03:35:56,892
No, sorry.

2875
03:35:57,162 --> 03:35:58,032
Sorry, kids.

2876
03:36:01,032 --> 03:36:06,642
Okay, just kidding. And the other one that I did want to

2877
03:36:06,762 --> 03:36:12,552
touch on is just wanted to make sure that all council

2878
03:36:12,612 --> 03:36:16,813
members are checking their council emails on a regular basis.

2879
03:36:17,502 --> 03:36:18,912
This may mean

2880
03:36:20,713 --> 03:36:23,502
daily. This may mean every day.

2881
03:36:24,882 --> 03:36:27,252
Sometimes you'll get emails, and sometimes you won't.

2882
03:36:27,852 --> 03:36:30,282
And it's important to be able to

2883
03:36:32,142 --> 03:36:35,442
be responsible for your duties as a council member.

2884
03:36:37,063 --> 03:36:40,152
Thank you. And otherwise,

2885
03:36:41,802 --> 03:36:44,412
let's go into executive session for legal.

2886
03:36:44,592 --> 03:36:45,282
I have a quick one.

2887
03:36:45,432 --> 03:36:46,782
Oh, one second. I did want to ask.

2888
03:36:48,192 --> 03:36:50,907
But there's a graduate researcher out of

2889
03:36:52,392 --> 03:36:56,352
University of Idaho in Moscow that's gathering information on...

2890
03:36:57,432 --> 03:37:03,072
This doesn't usually come, but River Access in the lower Teton, MEES

2891
03:37:03,252 --> 03:37:08,592
partnering with the BLM to gather information on what the public wants for

2892
03:37:08,652 --> 03:37:14,352
access and how they feel about the access and stuff to start a management plan the

2893
03:37:14,382 --> 03:37:16,362
BLM is going to work on.

2894
03:37:16,857 --> 03:37:16,857
Mm-hmm.

2895
03:37:16,872 --> 03:37:17,563
And I feel like

2896
03:37:19,002 --> 03:37:24,882
it's a good step to create awareness of that section of the Teton,

2897
03:37:25,152 --> 03:37:29,502
because you never know, there could be a dam over there.

2898
03:37:31,063 --> 03:37:31,362
Yeah.

2899
03:37:32,892 --> 03:37:38,412
So I feel like it's good awareness of our natural beauty

2900
03:37:38,772 --> 03:37:44,172
and the value of that lower Teton, which is rarely used, but quite

2901
03:37:44,412 --> 03:37:49,002
amazing. So if anyone wants information or if anyone listening wants more

2902
03:37:49,063 --> 03:37:52,122
information on how to get ahold of them, I have that.

2903
03:37:52,182 --> 03:37:55,063
You can email me if you're listening-

2904
03:37:55,213 --> 03:37:55,512
Thank you

2905
03:37:55,572 --> 03:37:56,203
... otherwise.

2906
03:37:56,352 --> 03:37:57,252
Thank you, Jason.

2907
03:37:57,342 --> 03:37:57,583
Yeah.

2908
03:37:57,852 --> 03:37:59,817
Could you forward that to all of them?

2909
03:37:59,817 --> 03:38:01,333
Sure. Yeah.

2910
03:38:02,622 --> 03:38:03,583
Do you have an update-

2911
03:38:04,002 --> 03:38:04,662
Oh, okay

2912
03:38:05,472 --> 03:38:09,192
... about 5th Street construction with LJ?

2913
03:38:10,512 --> 03:38:11,772
I live in that neighborhood.

2914
03:38:14,142 --> 03:38:19,842
Well, maybe I should back up and say when they first broke ground, I

2915
03:38:19,872 --> 03:38:24,762
asked Jay about how notification, because I asked him some specifics, and he said

2916
03:38:24,822 --> 03:38:29,338
that it was the contractor, not the city, that would be alerting the residents in

2917
03:38:29,472 --> 03:38:30,703
that neighborhood.

2918
03:38:32,142 --> 03:38:35,907
And I thought, "All right, gee, not big of a deal." And got busy and did not, and

2919
03:38:35,922 --> 03:38:40,422
then decided that I would just wait and kind of see how that was as a resident as

2920
03:38:40,512 --> 03:38:46,362
opposed to reaching out. And fast forward to today, they have not contacted

2921
03:38:47,172 --> 03:38:53,127
my household at all. And I went to leave for work today and got to the end of

2922
03:38:53,142 --> 03:38:58,092
my driveway, and there was the drop-off this big that I could not navigate in the

2923
03:38:58,122 --> 03:39:03,896
vehicle I was in. And I went back and parked it and got in my

2924
03:39:03,942 --> 03:39:04,272
truck

2925
03:39:06,072 --> 03:39:11,412
and was able to get out. But I was not given any advance

2926
03:39:11,563 --> 03:39:17,262
notice of that or warning that my driveway would not be accessible

2927
03:39:17,322 --> 03:39:19,302
unless you had a large clearance.

2928
03:39:22,333 --> 03:39:24,807
Thank you. Any other updates?

2929
03:39:28,662 --> 03:39:32,622
Hearing none, we'll move into executive session for legal.

2930
03:39:34,213 --> 03:39:35,532
Somebody wants to make a motion.

2931
03:39:36,567 --> 03:39:41,307
Move to enter executive session pursuant to Idaho Code 7-46-260E.

2932
03:39:42,342 --> 03:39:43,422
I'll second.

2933
03:39:45,492 --> 03:39:47,833
Motion and second. All in favor, will call.

2934
03:39:48,402 --> 03:39:49,963
Council Member Popielski.

2935
03:39:50,622 --> 03:39:50,787
Aye.

2936
03:39:50,802 --> 03:39:51,912
Council Member Knowles.

2937
03:39:52,092 --> 03:39:52,302
Aye.

2938
03:39:52,333 --> 03:39:53,713
Council Member Johnston.

2939
03:39:54,282 --> 03:39:54,612
Aye.

2940
03:39:57,583 --> 03:39:57,852
Yeah.

2941
03:39:59,427 --> 03:40:00,043
Please.

2942
03:40:01,362 --> 03:40:01,842
Do you want to-

2943
03:40:03,043 --> 03:40:04,032
Can you take off-

2944
03:40:04,632 --> 03:40:05,607
We'll take off-

2945
03:40:06,432 --> 03:40:06,762
Recording

2946
03:40:06,822 --> 03:40:07,422
... everyone.

2947
03:40:08,172 --> 03:40:08,862
Yes.

2948
03:40:11,112 --> 03:40:15,222
I was waiting to see if you wanted to say anything to the folks online.

2949
03:40:17,083 --> 03:40:19,333
But no, we are going to be taking you off.

2950
03:40:24,012 --> 03:40:38,802
We

2951
03:40:38,892 --> 03:40:40,932
are out of executive session,

2952
03:40:42,192 --> 03:40:44,322
and I'll entertain a motion.

2953
03:40:44,652 --> 03:40:45,507
Motion to adjourn.

2954
03:40:46,063 --> 03:40:46,392
Second.

2955
03:40:47,262 --> 03:40:51,342
Motion and second at 9:59. All in favor?

2956
03:40:51,822 --> 03:40:52,182
Aye.

2957
03:40:52,632 --> 03:40:52,767
Aye.

2958
03:40:52,767 --> 03:40:53,083
Aye.

2959
03:40:53,922 --> 03:40:59,142
Okay. Thanks everybody. 10:00.