[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6501108,"mediaKeyId","5443861-24efa003da981aff515acb024ac5b1ba","parentId",5443861,"title","Votes at a glance: Caldwell City Council, July 21, 2025","audioSeconds",3979,"startMs",1103000,"endMs",5082000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5443861-24efa003da981aff515acb024ac5b1ba&start=1103&end=5082","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5443861-24efa003da981aff515acb024ac5b1ba/thumbnail_1103000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6501108/Caldwell/Canyon-County/Idaho/Votes-at-a-glance-Caldwell-City-Council-July-21-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6501108-72ecc379270072a933ab923d7d041525/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165587&Signature=ilp7wvogcDGSHtSijElux37zZB4M5winMvUd~pFsD1h2AGgPGaMNo5hjbKhDGjXy-ncnwTjrz8yl6h2vNAUCDNLtcLIZ3ge0M~7T3ffyD6dC5SKNsWW9HM7yfJdkKhSK9bhXFT0gPV3i-0KsLIBdvVksYPd0olPlGW099ZToS8qzoI86Nd9wSqsvrBuCfvJAzeppI1oL1FalJEudzCVCcUXBWUmCfV~FTLkKlwVMAdL-6tPJbEeT8WTKdfXawYAu987VChVSf-to6myDernk0VpMa~iM8rKxag01bC7NlOT4PS4qtiMTGSXseW6B9-MZ~7pbU-Pl9WymkuecspJlIg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Caldwell","date","2025-07-22T02:39:09.857Z","article","Here are the formal actions the Caldwell City Council took at its July 21, 2025 meeting. This summary lists each item, the motion sponsor where recorded, and the outcome.

1) Consent calendar
- Motion: Approve the consent calendar as printed.
- Sponsor: Councilor Doty (mover), Councilor Stoddick (second).
- Outcome: Approved unanimously.
- Notes: Typical consent items were bundled and passed without recorded opposition.

2) Bill 48 / Ordinance 37 \u0013 Cemetery Capital Fund (amend chapter 4, article 9)
- Motion: Passage by title only to amend Chapter 4, Article 9, establishing a cemetery capital fund and a three-year sunset taking one-tenth of the perpetual fee into a capital fund (staff described start in October and a three-year period).
- Sponsor/Mover: Councilor Denber; Second: Councilor Stoddick.
- Outcome: Passed unanimously.
- Action type: ordinance_adoption.

3) Resolution 258-25 \u0013 RBCI public-outreach scope of work for Linden & Ward Roundabout
- Motion: Accept proposal and scope of work with RBCI for public outreach and public-relations services for the Linden and Ward roundabout project; contract amount: $49,360.
- Sponsor/Mover: Councilor Dody; Second: Councilor Denber.
- Outcome: Passed unanimously.
- Action type: contract_award.

4) Annexation and preliminary plat: Peregrine East (AN25-04 / SPP25-05)
- Motion(s): Denial motion initially resulted in a 3-3 tie (Councilors Dodi, Stoddick and Register voted for denial; Councilors Williams, Allgood and Dittenburg opposed the denial); the mayor cast a tie-breaking vote against the denial. A subsequent motion to approve the annexation and preliminary plat carried after the mayor again cast the deciding vote in favor of approval.
- Outcome: Annexation and preliminary plat approved by council; action subject to staff conditions in the staff report.
- Action type: land_use/annexation.

5) Housekeeping ordinance for Peregrine East annexation (Bill 32 / Ordinance 36 84)
- Motion: Sponsor Councilor Dittmer; second Councilor Williams.
- Outcome: Passed (reported 5 in favor, 1 in opposition; Councilor Register opposed).
- Action type: ordinance_adoption.

6) Annexation and preliminary plat: Peregrine West (AN25-05 / SPP25-04)
- Motion: Approve annexation and preliminary plat with staff conditions.
- Sponsor/Mover: Councilor Dittenburg; Second: Councilor Allgood.
- Outcome: Approved 4-2 (Councilors Stoddick and Register opposed).
- Action type: land_use/annexation.

7) Housekeeping ordinance for Peregrine West annexation (Bill 33 / Ordinance 36 85)
- Motion: Sponsor Councilor Dittenburg; second Councilor Williams.
- Outcome: Passed with the same majority as the underlying action (4-2).
- Action type: ordinance_adoption.

8) Finance report
- Motion: Finance committee recommended acceptance of accounts payable $2,930,571.70 and payroll $816,582.73 for the period ending July 15, 2025, and pay period ending June 28, 2025.
- Outcome: Approved by the council as recorded.

Notes on voting and process: Several land-use items drew substantive public testimony and extended council discussion (Peregrine East and West). The Peregrine East action resulted in a tie and was decided by the mayor's tie-breaking vote; Peregrine West passed 4-2. All ordinance numbers, bill numbers and staff conditions referenced above appear in the staff reports and recordings for the July 21 meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","2025/7/21 - City Council Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of actions the Caldwell City Council took on July 21, including consent calendar approval, two annexations (Peregrine East and West), an ordinance amending the cemetery fund, contracting public-relations work for a roundabout, and housekeeping ordinance adoptions.","taxTitle","Caldwell, Canyon County, Idaho","taxId",4130,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6501111,"Peregrine West annexation approved 4-2; residents raise irrigation, sidewalks and traffic concerns",175,4779000,4954000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5443861-24efa003da981aff515acb024ac5b1ba&start=4779&end=4954","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5443861-24efa003da981aff515acb024ac5b1ba/thumbnail_4779000.jpg","/articles/6501111/Caldwell/Canyon-County/Idaho/Peregrine-West-annexation-approved-4-2-residents-raise-irrigation-sidewalks-and-traffic-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6501111-90480e31c8fbbdc4c26066ece96264d1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165587&Signature=bNeUWfjji5l5a4RJ03KWQhtukbLrnKoa3InoTkBXHD~U7w3YqRl6Y1Oa-PwURwiTc1QO6VbGL~e~3YYFrNXOFdN~leVuvDSx1rwtFhVSzPvn9TPnWZoAZ1ugequS4gtKLmXENwHZCfr-LRna5rC8PwPA2mFVrAVJdLsswMnwECNFnReoeuLV5qVkUcNN1LAuCCEb9qDlc5UDsTb9q2XGvXtEFI1~12ds739OpWV5cZcGCZ6letMIkpmEmczT1I~tpPNF1sPoha8w6wv1IqyVOBE3LGYW7ASFIzZcFF8GSgbsVREZB97o6BRbONWdgKS6GaYtz6agloi3XIGLVYjmEg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Caldwell City Council on July 21 approved the annexation and preliminary plat for Peregrine West (AN25-05 / SPP25-04), a 16.57-acre R-1 subdivision proposing 45 single-family detached lots and approximately 2.36 acres of open space. Planning staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval.

Project details and staff findings: City staff said the site is generally north of Orchard Avenue and east of Lake Avenue, with Ropers Street along the north edge and an irrigation canal on the western boundary that will be incorporated into a regional pathway. The applicant proposed a density of about 2.71 units per acre and said all utilities will be available or will be extended to serve the project. Staff found the proposal met parking, landscaping and dimensional standards, with a few conditions noted in the staff report.

Public testimony: Neighbors and nearby property owners spoke in opposition or concern. Key issues raised at the hearing included:

- Sidewalks and right-of-way: Several neighbors asked who is responsible for completing sidewalks and curb-and-gutter improvements in front of adjacent outparcels; a neighbor said he had previously signed an agreement with a developer and wanted confirmation that the recorded right-of-way would lead to contiguous sidewalks.

- Irrigation and drainage: Speakers reported recent low irrigation pressure and localized flooding and asked how pipeline reconfiguration and retention/ drainage basins would protect existing users.

- Industrial truck traffic: A councilor asked whether nearby commercial/industrial operations (a trucking/processing site on the east side of Lake Avenue) had been notified; staff said agencies and property owners were included on the 500-foot mailing list and no comments were received from that specific operation.

Applicant response and conditions: Bonnie Layton, representing the applicant, said the development would provide frontage improvements on Orchard Avenue and implement the regional pathway next to the canal. She said lots along the western boundary were laid out wider as a buffer next to county parcels and that the project would provide fencing and other mitigation. Staff and the applicant acknowledged there are several right-of-way and easement items to finalize; the staff report includes conditions requiring full frontage improvements along classified roadways, or lesser improvements if right-of-way cannot be secured.

Council action and vote: Councilor Dittenburg moved approval with conditions from the staff report; the motion passed 4-2. Councilors Stoddick and Register voted in opposition; the other four council members voted in favor.

Why it matters: The decision advances construction of 45 new single-family lots in an area that is being actively developed. Neighbors asked for contiguous sidewalks, better assurances on irrigation continuity and traffic mitigation. City staff said the project will be required to construct frontage improvements and to coordinate final engineering and irrigation work before final plat and building permits are issued.","Council approved annexation and preliminary plat for Peregrine West (AN25-05 / SPP25-04): a 16.57-acre R-1 subdivision with 45 single-family lots and roughly 2.36 acres of open space; opposition focused on sidewalks/right-of-way, irrigation pressure and traffic from nearby industrial uses.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6501115,"Council approves Peregrine East annexation for 48 lots after tie, mayor breaks deadlock",2835,1896000,4731000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5443861-24efa003da981aff515acb024ac5b1ba&start=1896&end=4731","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5443861-24efa003da981aff515acb024ac5b1ba/thumbnail_1896000.jpg","/articles/6501115/Caldwell/Canyon-County/Idaho/Council-approves-Peregrine-East-annexation-for-48-lots-after-tie-mayor-breaks-deadlock","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6501115-2ae901d2ae000540c6c937b93fa78e4b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165587&Signature=M6RYTnZkYDILZVFmbOCch5TobAr1UAUGntCW5HS3lD5OonFCoWix43SQyKT0RtxYCWGHx-K-wlymt3aUuiWvLL2YoHTtKs3hkeWc7G2djErJmlsIOKhCAWmi9OQneqiQ0nrl0HXWwALsAnxTbeZd1CElZMfnnePPX86Uz5YlUW92tW7T4YZfxi1-w2jKO1d52yHOWGZHdbEwhr8Wz86YuzorEg273twztqv9R-bvOrgeysB2mXrhynMoMWsPR8C1lweJEchGMW7eYMyhqXo9R~qJtvjpeWQ3~dpjj~Mgpyx5SkUO0GGmBKo-j0TFYuQsCZaohCqyiKeYz0ed~4fykA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Caldwell City Council on July 21 approved AN25-04 / SPP25-05, the Peregrine East annexation and preliminary plat application, after public testimony and a split council vote that required the mayor to cast a deciding vote.

Project summary: City planning staff described the proposal as an annexation of a 20.38-acre site (generally north of Orchard Avenue, east of Lake Avenue) with a requested R-1 (neighborhood residential) zoning and a preliminary plat for 48 detached single-family lots. The applicant proposed about 2 acres of qualifying open space with a central park that would include a shade structure, playground and a pathway along the irrigation canal. Staff reported the proposed density of 2.36 units per acre is at the low end of the City's Neighborhood 2 comprehensive-plan designation.

Public testimony and agency comments: Several residents and nearby property owners spoke in opposition at the public hearing, raising issues including traffic, concern about replacing acreage lots with denser development, irrigation and drainage/flooding risk, and long-term school capacity.

- Valley View School District provided a written comment saying it can accommodate the students but warned that some schools (generally in the district) may reach over-capacity in approximately four to five years if trends continue.

- Highway District No. 4 supplied engineering-related conditions requested by the city's engineering department; specific conditions were included in the staff report.

Applicant and staff response: The applicant's representative, Bonnie Layton of NV5, said the design was intended to remain at the low end of the land-use density range as a transition to surrounding development and said the project will provide Orchard Avenue frontage improvements and regional pathway connections. Staff told the council that the project complies with most code requirements and that remaining landscaping items could be addressed as conditions of approval.

Council deliberations and outcome: Planning and Zoning had recommended unanimous approval. During council deliberations a motion to deny the annexation was moved by Councilor Register and seconded; that motion resulted in a 3-3 tie (Councilors Dodi, Stoddick and Register voted to deny; Councilors Williams, Allgood and Dittenburg opposed the denial). The mayor announced he would cast a tie-breaking vote to oppose the denial, so the denial failed.

A subsequent motion to approve the annexation and preliminary plat was made and seconded; council again produced a split vote and the mayor cast the deciding vote in favor of approval. The council then closed the public hearing and directed staff to proceed with conditions of approval listed in the staff report.

Why it matters: The decision adds over 20 acres at the southern edge of Caldwell to the city limits and advances construction of 48 single-family homes. Neighbors who testified asked the council to prioritize larger lots and mitigation for traffic and irrigation impacts; the council's approval includes staff-recommended conditions meant to address technical concerns but does not change the underlying R-1 density requested by the applicant.

Key project details
- Applicant/representative: Bonnie Layton, NV5
- Location: ~20.38 acres, north of Orchard Ave., east of Lake Ave.
- Zoning requested: R-1 (neighborhood residential)
- Proposed lots: 48 single-family detached
- Proposed open space: ~2 acres (play area, shade structure, pathway)
- Proposed density: ~2.36 units/acre

Speakers and testimony: Opponents included residents Scott Tillamont (flooding, sprawl), Charity Jensen (quality and lot-size expectations, school capacity), Betsy Cermak (traffic/speed and lot-size concerns). Joe Dodson, city principal planner, presented the staff report and noted conditional compliance with city code.","After public testimony raising traffic, irrigation and school-capacity concerns, the council approved annexation and a preliminary plat for Peregrine East (AN25-04 / SPP25-05): a ~20.38-acre R-1 subdivision proposing 48 single-family lots and roughly 2 acres of open space; the measure passed only after a tie and the mayor's deciding vote.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6501120,"Local sign businesses, industry group urge changes to Caldwell—s new sign code",722,362000,1084000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5443861-24efa003da981aff515acb024ac5b1ba&start=362&end=1084","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5443861-24efa003da981aff515acb024ac5b1ba/thumbnail_362000.jpg","/articles/6501120/Caldwell/Canyon-County/Idaho/Local-sign-businesses-industry-group-urge-changes-to-Caldwells-new-sign-code","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6501120-88e69c613fe57e0b27dc60e09178e5af/orig.mp4?Expires=1771165587&Signature=TblDShnSi-X~BW5mE3fHwRhIh0ZoTrBMi-~IrlYdSKNfAP9vfTSxLyGYo4OqzHa38AUgaIj9FrAgBssMA-PHggttrVIvX2PZLeI9raqgc1fH7fr951FIVNEF45dAKzKXFaPDM7q4yDSqt164YDkQ~yfL7NogIsd7-hNof7H31KvY08AMKKpu9mpZtfNXmBVlOhyI6zgmTXCtJHWDm4ax7eMI13cL0L57dWyYkuHo6I32Ne4iAt7H7e-l32FoCrtVHeUKGvhP24jIUl8m0KP3xJdf44-0g4lnmHd1JHNwFm9FRZmJVgDmZ6m1962V617FjOqQ8Vr3f7RediddJHu84Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Aaron Vance, a Caldwell sign-shop owner, and James Carpenter of the Northwest Sign Council told the Caldwell City Council on July 21 that the city's April rewrite of its sign regulations will create hardship for local businesses and make many existing signs nonconforming.

Vance said his family has operated signs in Caldwell since 1972 and that he and his permit staff were surprised by the new rules when they tried to permit two identical school signs earlier this year. \"We have been informed on the code change before it happened, and this specific code change, we were not. It caught us blindside when we tried to put in a permit,\" Vance said.

Carpenter, who described himself as a consultant who helps jurisdictions write practical sign ordinances, told council the new code conflicts with the city's comprehensive plan goals to attract regional investment and support small businesses. He cited specific provisions he said are problematic: reduced allowable freestanding monument sizes (24 to 60 square feet under the new table), a limit that would make many existing ground signs nonconforming; an electronic message center (EMC) allowance of only 25% of permitted square footage that yields very small EMC areas in most districts; and an illumination standard set at 750 nits rather than a foot-candle approach he said is easier to enforce.

\"These new standards for freestanding signs will result in many of the existing ground signs that become nonconforming,\" Carpenter said. He recommended allowing pole signs with pole covers (as in the previous code), permitting a larger share of EMC face area where appropriate, switching to a foot-candle standard for brightness, and removing special-use-permit requirements that give excessive discretion for EMC approvals.

Planning staff, represented in public remarks by Robin (planning staff), said the sign-code rewrite followed two workshops, a four-hour workshop with the Planning and Zoning Commission and two public hearings that were advertised on the city website and social media. Staff said there were no recommended amendments to the sign code introduced at those public meetings.

Councilors and staff discussed next steps. Multiple councilors suggested a workshop format that would gather sign companies, property or business owners, planning and zoning, and residents for an informal discussion before any rushed action. \"I think a workshop is probably better for us right now so that we can bring everybody together and get all those questions answered a little more informally,\" one councilor said.

What happened next: Council did not take a formal vote on the sign code at the July 21 meeting. Several councilors and staff signaled willingness to schedule a focused workshop and to consider referring the code back to the Planning and Zoning Commission and to affected stakeholders.

Why it matters: Several local businesses said they are already losing potential work because signs that are legal in neighboring cities became nonconforming in Caldwell after the rewrite. City staff said the code change was advertised and heard but that targeted follow-up with sign-industry stakeholders could help resolve practical conflicts without further surprise to businesses.

Requests and clarifications: The sign-industry speakers requested (1) that pole signs with pole covers be allowed as before, (2) that EMC allowances be increased or measured differently, (3) that brightness be regulated by foot-candles rather than nits, and (4) that EMCs be permitted by right with objective standards rather than by special-use permit. Planning staff did not commit to changes at the meeting but said a workshop or referral to planning and zoning was an option.

Speakers quoted in this article spoke during the audience participation and new-business discussion at the July 21 meeting; their remarks are recorded in the meeting transcript.","Sign shops and a national sign-industry consultant told the Caldwell City Council the April sign-code rewrite will make many existing signs nonconforming and hinder new businesses; they asked the council to refer the code back to planning and zoning and to hold a stakeholder workshop.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Caldwell City Council, July 21, 2025

Peregrine West annexation approved 4-2; residents raise irrigation, sidewalks and traffic concerns

Council approves Peregrine East annexation for 48 lots after tie, mayor breaks deadlock

Local sign businesses, industry group urge changes to Caldwell—s new sign code