City Council Special Meeting

Star City Council Special Meeting Minutes April 22, 2019 A special meeting of the Star City Council was held on April 22, 2019 at 7:00 pm at LifeSpring Church, 174 N. Star Road, Star, Idaho. Mayor Chad Bell called the meeting to order and all stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call: Councilmen David Hershey, Michael Keyes, Trevor Chadwick, and Kevin Nielsen were all present. Approval of Agenda: Chadwick moved to approve the agenda, Keyes seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Old/New Business: Liquor License for Bobbie Jean's: Chadwick moved to approve the 2019 Liquor License for Bobbie Jean's, Nielsen seconded the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Public Hearing - Star City Comprehensive Plan: Mayor Bell explained this public hearing was for the proposed Star City Comprehensive Plan and explained the process for the hearing. First the applicant, which is the City, represented by Mark Butler will present, then will take comments from agencies who are present, then comments from staff, then will take comments from the public, then the applicant will address comments presented, and the Council will then have a chance to ask questions. The public hearing will then be closed, and the Council will move to deliberations. The Mayor asked the Council if anyone had any ex-parte contact or conflicts of interest to disclose. Keyes stated he had no conflicts but disclosed he had had a conversation with Sam and Carrie Rosti regarding their property, their plans and their concerns about the future land use map. Nielsen stated Keyes had talked to him regarding his conversation with Mr. Rosti. Mayor Bell declared the public hearing open and turned the time over to Mark Butler, our contract City Planner. Applicant: Butler stated he has labeled the Comprehensive Plan “Shining Bright into the Future 2040 and Beyond”. He stated they had used the process of visioning through community outreach as this promotes greater awareness of changes within the local society and deeper citizen involvement. The approach was framed by five simple questions: 1) where are we now, 2) where are we going, 3) when do we want to be, 4) how do we get there, and 5) will the plan be implemented or shelved? He suggested following adopting the plan that they go through the implementation policies and create a priority list. Butler discussed people stating “no more people” and that due to LUPA laws it gives people the right to develop their property; we have to figure out how to balance growth. Butler discussed what the Comp Plan does not do. This plan does not remove properties from Canyon and Ada County jurisdictions. Citizens address do not change nor will anyone’s school district change. This plan does not annex property. It does not change anyone’s zoning next. This plan does not grant any landowner permission to change current use of their property unless they are contiguous to Star city limits and propose and receive approval for annexation. This plan does not provide detailed site-specific plans; this is a broad overview and a guide. Butler noted about 15,00 people were notified of the plan and around 1,000 to 2,000 residents within the Comp Plan area provided input. Over 500 people responded to the survey. Butler stated he also had numerous one on one conversations with citizens. Most people indicated they wanted to work with the City. Butler noted he was able to work with Canyon Highway District No. 4, Ada County Highway District, Idaho Transportation Department, Canyon County, and Compass and they were all helpful. Butler stated that in his opinion Compass is estimating the population way to low at only 4.75%, when generally 7% is considered. He noted that Ada County did not respond to several notifications and when they finally did, they sent a letter of non-support until the City moves forward with adoption of a new impact area. He noted it was great working with the cities of Nampa, Boise, Meridian, and Eagle. Butler showed proposed boundary maps for the plan and although the plan is for 30,000 acres, they are maybe looking at developing 15, 000 acres in the next twenty-two years. Council may choose to remove these maps or leave them, but it is a good planning tool. He explained how the plan is structured into chapters and each chapter has five sections, except for transportation which has six sections. The first section of every chapter is a quote from Idaho Code regarding that component. Section two covers some history and analysis; section three are goals stated in broad terms to reflect community-wide visions; section four has the objective statements defining the meaning, purpose, aim, or element of the goals; and section five has what’s called implementation of policies and strategies, which is the teeth of the plan. The transportation chapter has a section six which is transportation system prioritization. Chapter 1 is an introduction to the plan. Chapter 2 has some basic history on the City. Chapter 3 is the vision he believed he heard from the citizens, “As development occurs the community wants to protect, preserve, and enhance open spaces, the Boise River, and the steep slope areas generally to the north. The community does not want Star to become a stack and pack metropolitan city but wants to strive to retain its small-town family friendly character while growing a strong commercial base and vibrant downtown”. Chapter 4 covers property rights and covers the regulatory takings act. Chapter 5 covers population and Butler reviewed the chart with the City’s annual growth rate from 2000 to 2018. He felt the City should be planning with an annul growth rate of 7%, not the 4.75% projected by COMPASS. When you underestimate the City hurts itself on the need for road projects, for vital infrastructure and underestimating impact fees charged to developers. Chapter 6 covers school facilities and the chart showed that many schools are at capacity and the district is working to build another high school. Chapter 7 covers Economic Development and he noted the goal is to enhance and develop Star’s economy which will build a stronger community. Chapter 8 deals with land use and encourages development of a diverse community, a mix of land uses, housing types and a variety of employment options. Butler reviewed the chart of land use designations and recommended doing away with RT zoning and using RR zoning instead. The plan is proposing more mixed-use areas which has allowances for high density but with a lot of criteria, increase in commercial and open space and some agricultural areas. There is also some language to adopt an A-zone or agricultural zone where you can annex in and not develop right away but can become a part of the City. Butler shared two proposed land use maps, one (dated 3/22/19) that was posted on the City webpage and the second (dated 4/22/19) with some changes brought to him from property owners. Propose changing property south of the Boise River to neighborhood residential but allowing property owners to continue farming. Proposed changing the floodway area land use designation north of Floating Feather near Highway 16 to the adjacent land use designation of residential due to an error on the map. Discussion held regarding the zoning proposed for the Rosti property bordering Highway 16 and off Floating Feather Road. Butler recommended changing the map from light industrial to residential or mixed use which would give opportunity for some neighborhood commercial and residential. Butler reviewed the zoning compatibility matrix noting several new land use designations. Butler reviewed the slide on Land Use Implementation Policies and explained many citizens asked what will happen to our Central Business District along Highway 44 and that it is hard to have a CBD with a five-lane highway through it. He is proposing a Heart of the City sub area plan which includes the CBD, an area from Highway 44 to Chinden from Highway 16 to CanAda Road. He pointed out that due to some citizens concerns with infringement through their property for river access he has added the wording “understanding that existing property owner property rights are not to be infringed”. He also noted due to citizens concerns he modified the bullet point regarding until the Sub Area Plan is adopted development will be permitted in accordance with the other sections of the plan. Chapter 9 deals with natural resources and he reviewed the natural features map explaining they need to consider the constraints of the land when planning. He explained the updated map dated 4/15/19 has removed the floodway area north of Floating Feather Road. Butler stated chapter 10 dealt with hazardous areas and chapter 11 with public services, facilities and utilities and did not go into any details. Chapter 12 covers transportation and he explained he had held numerous meetings with local transportation agencies, and he felt Star’s opinion was to be more proactive than some agencies. He shared the street classification map and noted it took into consideration Canyon County and Ada Count functional class maps. Butler reviewed the existing traffic volume of service map and the different levels of service with A, B, C, & D usually being acceptable. State Street is at level F where the street is over volume capacity. He shared maps of COMPASS projections and the City’s projection as it affects our roads and COMPASS is using lower numbers and showing more service at the F level. Butler went over the slide regarding potential alternate routes in the future and a proposed solution map. They are looking at Kingsbury Road extending south and crossing the river; and he pointed out this is a dream and there is no funding, but you need to plan for it. Plummer Road is another road of concern and he is trying to keep it to three lanes with lower density. The signal light is going in and it is planned for three lanes. He also noted that Star Road is a concern. Chapter 13 addresses parks and recreation and Butler noted the goal is for the City to develop and manage its park system. He put in criteria recommending they put in tree lined streets for a higher quality product. Also recommended they increase the open space requirement from 5% to 15 or 20%. He noted the National Park Standards suggest park land of five acres per 1,000 people and currently the City park land exceeds that standard. He also created a pathway network trying to have connecting pathways throughout the City. Chapter 14 is for special areas or sites in town and the surrounding area. Chapter 15 is the housing section and Butler reviewed the breakdown of the building permits per City calendar year. Chapter 16 is community design and he stated the goal is to create complete and integrated communities containing housing, shops, workplaces, schools, parks and civic facilities essential to the daily life of the residents. In Chapter 17 it talks about agriculture and how we support agriculture and adhere to the Right to Farm Act. Chapter 18 deals with implementation – how to implement the plan through zoning, through the approval process, through development agreements. Chapter 19 addresses national interest electric transmission corridors. Chapter 20 is public airport facilities of which Star does not have one; the closest being in Boise. And the last chapter is the glossary of terms. Butler then exhibited a map showing the Rosti property, as he expects testimony tonight regarding it, and explained the area around it in regard to future roads planned. They are looking at Floating Feather going through to Highway 16 and Moyle Lane becoming a backage road. Public Testimony: Timothy Richard, 115435 Highway 44, Caldwell, Canyon Highway District No. 4, stated they had provided written comments and appreciated staff including it in his report as well as the changes in the function classification map. He stated they support Star’s transportation goals and developing a master transportation plan by coordinating with local jurisdictions. He stated he believes the traffic volumes on the Canyon County side within the Canyon Highway District are significantly lower than what they can anticipate based on the uses and is concerned with the traffic on their roads. He would like to see the Council make it a priority to work on the master transportation plan, especially on their side and to evaluate intersections. Jay Gibbons, 101 Willis Road, Middleton, stated he is a Commissioner with Canyon Highway District No. 4. He noted they have a joint agreement with the City to manage and care for the roads in Canyon County and they are committed to continue working with the City. He had a couple of issues he would like addressed, the first being it is important that a master traffic study be done. His second issue was that they need to work at getting impact fees in place to improve and fund transportation issues. Caleb Lakey, 3311 W. State Street, Boise, Idaho Transportation District No. 3, commended the City and their consultant for the efforts put into the Comprehensive Plan. He noted some of the decisions made in the past has put them in a conundrum and they are hoping some concerns can be avoided moving forward with this plan. He stated they do have some concerns regarding State Highway 44 and State Highway 16 as regional routes and maintaining the mobility of those routes as a regional connector north of the Boise River. Lakey stated they have things in the works to address the traffic on Highway 44. He stated they are looking at projects from Eagle Road to Star Road; pieces of Highway 44 to Highway 16 in 2023 followed by Highway 16 to Star Road in 2024. He noted some of the recommendations in the traffic memo could be in conflict with what they’re trying do accomplish and could jeopardize some of the environmental assessments and plans. It was noted they had completed a traffic study in February and many of those numbers are not incorporated into the traffic memo currently drafted and asked the Council to consider that. Chadwick asked if their traffic numbers were more stringent than the ones they have or are projecting. Lakey stated they show higher numbers in some spots and lower number in some spots. Another big concern is the difference between what they have and the City has regarding intersections. He stated they appreciated Mark looking at a bypass route but doesn’t feel citizens will like the additional mileage and didn’t feel it would happen. It also would change the downtown area. He noted they had provided written comments with more detail for review. Lakey asked the Council to consider the comments regarding the Highway 44 route, the difference in the numbers for traffic production, and the detour of the bypass route. The meeting broke for five minutes and reconvened at 8:30 pm. Chris Todd, 53 N. Plummer Road, Star, Idaho, stated he thought the plan was a great route forward. He passed out written comments to the Council and stated he would like to highlight a couple. He noted he would like to see added some industrial areas along Chinden for employment and economic development for the City. Todd talked about high-density not being able to be located next to the Boise River. High- density is not just apartment complexes; it also includes townhomes, condos, and senior living. Possibly consider areas near the river as mixed use/commercial/dense residential. In discussing pathways, he pointed out the pathways they are showing in Hillsdale are actually streets, not pathways. They do not have sidewalks or bike lanes. He suggested making alternate routes other than the north-south connection that goes to the BLM. When looking at uses in the CBD they may want to encourage a mixture of commercial uses if possible, to encourage more diversity. Could include commercial retail on the bottom floor and have professional or residential on the upper floor. Todd discussed a mirror component, which would allow applicants to mirror what is next to them without having to go through a comp plan amendment. Bill Bond, 1303 N. Meadow Hills Avenue, Star, Idaho, stated he had attended the open house and talked with Butler and is enthused by some of the goals. He stated he was very interested in the development of the central business district along Star Road going south to the bench. He believes Star Road could become the main road for Star instead of State Street and would like to see opportunities for businesses to develop there. Additional business would generate job opportunities and people not having to travel outside of town, thus reducing traffic. He noted transportation is a real concern to him. Sam Rosti, 1460 N. Pollard Lane, Star, Idaho, noted he is a fourth-generation farmer and has farmed in this area over forty years. Farming is becoming harder as they can’t get around as the roads are too narrow. They have been presented with an opportunity to sell their ground for residential development. As stated in their letter addressed to the Council, he asked the Council to consider changing the designation of his property from light industrial to mixed use (MU) so they can have something to work with. He felt it would be best for both him and the City. His property is contiguous to the City and abuts land to the west that is already annexed into the City and zoned R-3. He noted he really hadn’t planned on this opportunity and therefore hadn’t thought of plan to address it sooner. Nielsen stated as the Comp Plan is today it says that the light industrial matrix, as Butler presented tonight, shows the mixed-use zone is allowed in that designation. Butler stated he had made a mistake and read the matrix backwards. The light industrial would allow if somebody wanted to keep ag there they could. But when you slide over you see C-1 and C-2 commercial and light industrial. There are no open areas there that would allow residential. Nielsen stated if they were to check the box there to allow mixed-use that could potentially give Rosti the residential options he is looking for. Nielsen pointed out with Rosti’s property being along one of the City’s major highway corridors, that they have been looking at it as prime commercial property; but not necessarily light industrial. He asked for Rosti’s opinion on a transition from commercial or something of that sort up along the highway back to residential going towards the Moyle property. Rosti stated you have to be in the right spot at the right time for commercial and didn’t feel light commercial was a good fit with rural. Mixed-use would give them more opportunities. He is concerned as there is no ingress or egress onto the Highway and this is a stumbling block. Chadwick asked if they were talking about the thirty-nine acres up against Highway 16 to be mixed-use and then the other acreage to be residential. Rosti stated that was correct and what he is concerned with when looking at the map today is that they are proposing a very large portion of his property as light industrial and would like to see it reduced with mixed-use. Deborah Nelson, 601 W. Bannock, Boise, Idaho, stated she is an attorney representing the Rosti’s. She stated she appreciated the clarification on the matrix on what light industrial would allow. The mixed-use designation would provide the most flexibility not just for the Rosti’s, but for the City. By checking the mixed-use designation on the matrix, it will provide both business opportunities and residential. It’s not clear if that is the right area but with the right designation in the plan, they can see what presents itself coming forward with opportunity in the market. She stated they appreciate all of Butler’s work and asked the Council to change that area to a mixed-use designation. Ryan Cantlon, 950 W. Bannock Street, Boise, Idaho, stated he is a real estate broker in town and had the opportunity to represent the Rosti’s on their properties as well as other property in Star. They are currently working with a prospect on this project. He stated he felt light industrial was problematic for a variety of reasons including the size, the location, access, and the fact there is residential surrounding this property. He stated he supports the proposed designation on the map to mixed-use. Nielsen asked if his potential client had plans for more than just residential for that piece of property. Cantlon stated he hadn’t seen their plans; they have started rough plans. He stated he doesn’t represent them, doesn’t work for them; he works for Sam and Carrie Rosti. His concern is the size of this for commercial viability. Nielsen asked if they had looked at the land around this, other than Legacy. Cantlon stated they had. Steve Young, 906 N. Pollard Lane, Star, Idaho, stated his ten acres is sandwiched between Moyle and Rosti. He noted he is a retired executive with Albertsons and has dealt in many situations where land is involved. He stated there was no way the property justifies being designated light industrial as it has no access, you would be driving through or abutting residential. He stated he is supportive of other types of tax bases, but this is perfect for residential as there is no access onto Highway 16. It may have access to Moyle Road and eventually to Floating Feather. He felt designating it as residential or mixed-use would be appropriate. Mary Jane Marlow, 485 S. Winslow Bay Way, Star, Idaho, stated she had sent her comments previously to the Mayor and Council. She stated her concern is tree lined streets. Currently the City’s subdivision ordinance doe not include tree lined streets. She asked if there was anything they could do in the interim to ask developers to find ways to put in tree lined streets before approving the new ordinance. She showed them the current Treasure Valley Tree Selection Guide and asked if Butler could put it in the Comp Plan as a recommendation for builders to use in choosing trees for livability and viability. She suggested having copies at City Hall for sell to developers and builders. Gary Smith, 258 S. Langer Lake Way, Star, Idaho, passed out a comment sheet to the Mayor and Council. He stated he wanted to speak about the elephant in the room and that is the growth in the City. He reviewed the growth rates from 2000 - 2018 and noted it shows there is no guide for the City and the City needs to have one. He noted per the chart with 10.83% growth the City could have a 100,000 people by 2040; Compass says 24,000 people, and Butler is proposing around 45,000 people. He shared a sample of Kuna’s 2015 Comp Plan projected growth to 2040. It is Smith’s recommendation based on State Code 67-6535 that the City of Star can pass an Ordinance that would set the future population growth at 4.75% per COMPASS projections. City could set criteria for the ordinance and Comp Plan that would insure the health, safety and welfare of the community by not over taxing or adding undue burden to the community; have the City hold to the COMPASS 2040 plan; guarantees future Councils follow the COMPASS 2040 plan by a City ordinance; and to manage the number of permits issued to the 4.75% rate annually not to exceed the COMPASS 2040 growth projections. He noted federal funding for roads comes through COMPASS and if the City ignores COMPASS rules we could be at the bottom of the pile for funding. Sara Keyes, 338 S. Long Bay Way, Star, Idaho, stated she has been a part of the whole committee thing working with Brian Cole, Jennifer Salmonsen who heads up the Economic Development Committee, and attending the workshops and has seen all the effort you men and women have put into this trying to plan our future and the growth of Star. There has been a lot of effort put into planning this comprehensive plan and what she finds most valuable is it starts putting some restriction on development. Keyes stated she agrees with Marlow that we need to look at the trees and steer developers in a direction that helps our community look nice in forty years. She requested approval of the plan as it is a really good start. Mayor Bell asked Butler if he would like to respond to anything. Butler stated they have his land use planning report with recommendations dated April 19, 2019 and he would recommend they include those changes and include the change in designation to the Rosti property. He recommended they approve the red line map dated April 22, 2019 with regard to ITD’s language. Butler recommended they take out the estimated traffic numbers as it may reduce confusion, but it won’t hurt to leave in the existing traffic numbers. ITD said some of the City’s objectives were not in line with theirs and he stated the objectives were based upon reaching out to the public. Chadwick stated he is working on a regional transportation plan and that could iron out those goals and objectives. Butler stated he had written some language in regarding trees but did recommend adding the 2019 Treasure Valley Tree Selection Guide. He liked some of Todd’s comments but didn’t feel they needed to amend the plan as they were minor changes. From surveying people, they do not want high density (11 units per acre or more) along the river. In the comp plan on page 61 item D it says high density residential should be located close to commercial centers near highway corridors or on upper floors in the CBD. They have the option to change the wording. There does need to be pathways in Hillsdale and he was showing along the roads for planning purposes. He stated he felt Todd was referring to Section 8.5.5 in regard to the CBD which should allow for a mix of commercial office uses with a specific provision for residential. That is mirroring, you don’t want CBD encroaching with residential, there should be some transition. Keyes asked for clarification on what the current proposal is for the comp plan designation for the Rosti property. Butler stated in his recommendations dated April 19, 2019 he recommended it being residential and now believes taking out industrial and making it a mixed-use zone is a good compromise and would not be a material change. Chadwick stated he wants to make sure there is wording that they will work with the regional transportation agencies to come up with a regional master plan. Butler stated it is in there somewhere, but in their motion, they could say to assure that that language is in there and if not add it to the appropriate location. Mayor Bell closed the public hearing and moved to deliberations. Hershey thanked everyone for their participation. We have come a long way with where we are and where we’re trying to go. He stated he believes the mixed-use designation is appropriate for the Rosti property for future development. He would like to see the tree plan added. He felt Mr. Todd had a lot of good ideas and would like to look into them more as they progress. He stated he is for where they are going with this. Keyes thanked the City staff, Butler, and everyone who’s been a part of the plan. He stated he felt it is a great first step and hope they don’t wait another eleven years to do another update; maybe a light update in a couple years. Would like to look at amending the map so the land use plan does not encroach into an adjacent city. Recommended including ITD and ACHD redline on the map. He recommended they change the light industrial to mixed-use on the Rosti parcel and remove the estimates of the traffic numbers. Chadwick thanked all the citizens for their participation, it has been an awesome process. He stated he felt this plan will bring the City to a point where it can properly grow to make it an economically viable City. He concurred with all the changes recommended and would like to investigate some of what Todd talked about. He stated he wants to make sure they include, if it’s not already in the plan, that they will be at the table for a regional transportation study and encouraged them to be a leader in it. Also wants to encourage adding they are to work with all agencies. Chadwick stated he was in favor of approving the plan tonight as discussed and removing light industrial from the Rosti property and designating it as mixed-use. Nielsen stated his thoughts were similar to what the others on the Council have already expressed tonight. He stated he is pleased with the process they’ve undertaken to develop the plan. While the plan may not be perfect, it does address many of the pressure points they’ve been trying to operate under. He stated he is concerned a bit that changing the comprehensive plan map is a material change and instead would like to propose they use the zoning compatibility matrix to include mixed-use as a zone allowed in light industrial. And in agricultural that we include R1 to R5 as compatible zoning in that one as well. The Mayor stated he had spoken with Legal Counsel and he was informed if we were to change the actual zoning designation on that land it would constitute a material change and we would need to schedule another public hearing. He agreed with Nielsen that it would not be a material change if they leave it light industrial on the map and change the matrix to include mixed-use. Keyes stated he disagreed. He understood if they did not make it more restrictive it would not be considered a material change. In the matrix mixed-use does allow light industrial, so it’s not like we’re going to change it to mix-use and say no more light industrial. He stated he believes by designating it as mixed-use it defines what they intend to put there. Keyes stated he is in support of Ag to include R1 to R5 as an allowed use. Following discussion and questions from the public, Mayor Bell re-opened the public hearing for public testimony. Deborah Nelson pointed out there is a very big difference between a mixed-use plan designation and having mixed-use zone allowed within an industrial plan designation. If you look at the matrix and look at what’s allowed in a mixed-use plan designation, all of the uses going across would include three categories of residential and mixed-use zoning. None of those are allowed currently in the light industrial. When you come down to light industrial and just add an X under mixed-use to allow that one zone, it doesn’t pick up any of the residential zone designations, it is only allowed with a conditional use and is treated differently. Nielsen wondered if what she was saying is that you can zone mixed-use and then this matrix no longer applies. Once it is zoned mixed-use you get all the benefits of mixed-use including the residential uses. Nelson stated she understood the plan is a guide, but it tells you within this guide the zoning designation that you have already determined that you are going to allow. If you designate it light industrial, residential isn’t an option. Nielsen stated that once your zone is mixed-use the compatibility matrix is no good. You have to look at the unified development code which does allow residential uses. The Mayor stated if you come to the City with a plan and you request mixed-use and it’s zoned light industrial, but we go to our matrix and it says under there we can grant mixed-use and once you are granted mixed-use you should get the full use of mixed use. Nelson stated the matrix only applies at the time of annexation and zoning and then it goes away. What this allows you to do is have all the opportunities for those zones to be requested when someone comes in later. Mayor Bell asked City Planner, Shawn Nickel, to comment. Nickel stated Nelson was correct; that her concern and the concern of the Rosti's is that if you zone it mixed-use all residential uses are allowed only through a conditional use process as opposed to if it was a mixed-use designation then it would reverse and allow R-2, R-3, R-4 uses outright. Nielsen asked if they are saying the comprehensive plan can override the unified development code on residential use. Nickel stated they have to go by the zoning and the mixed-use zoning only allows residential as conditional use permit which limits their use of residential as opposed to outright allowing it through those residential zones. Chris Todd stated when he was talking about mirroring in Sections 8.5.9 and 18.4, that mirroring is allowing a comp plan designation next to your land-use map. If someone has a large piece of property with two different zoning designation, and they can produce justification for it to be only one of the designations, they wouldn't have to go through a comp plan amendment to have it changed; that would be mirroring. Mirroring is not just for the central business district. Todd is only asking the City to consider mirroring of a comp plan designation upon justification of that applicant; it doesn't mean that it'll be approved. Gary Smith stated the point he was trying to make before is whether the City would consider an ordinance to put before the Council for a vote to set a growth rate by setting a limit on building permits. Smith used an example from a city in South Carolina that did such an ordinance. He asked they consider making it a part of the comp plan, an ordinance setting a limit of possibly at 7%. Chadwick stated he would prefer to have case law in the state of Idaho and asked for some case law he could look at. He stated this is not something that they are going to put in the comp plan but would be willing to look at case law at what has been done in other cities or counties in Idaho and that is not a moratorium and is reasonable. Chadwick pointed out the point of this plan is to set a pathway of success for the City and he would be willing to look at anything Smith would send. Mayor Bell closed the public hearing for a second time and moved to deliberations. Keyes moved to adopt the proposed Comprehensive Plan with the following recommendations: staff recommendations that were submitted, change the future land use map so it no longer encroaches on any adjacent city, adopt the ACHD and ITD red lines that staff furnished, remove estimated traffic numbers from the plan, they work with transportation agencies on appropriate area plans, they amend the compatibility matrix to allow for R-1 to R-5 residential zoning in the agricultural land use designation and keep the agricultural land use on parcels south of the river, amend the map on the Rosti parcels from light industrial to Mixed Use, and adopt this by Resolution at their meeting on April 30, 2019, Nielsen seconded the motion. Hershey asked them to consider the tree plan. Keyes added to amend his motion to include the guidelines within the 2018 Treasure Valley Tree Selection Guide, Nielsen amended his seconded to the motion. All ayes: motion carried. Mayor Bell stated they will have a Resolution for approval on April 30th at a special meeting to be held at Star City Hall. Adjournment: The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 9:45 pm. Approved: Respectfully submitted: _____________________________ Charlten Bell, Mayor _________________________________ Kathleen E. Hutton, Deputy City Clerk