Star council approves Trailmark Station annexation with conditions after safety, floodplain and fencing disputes

The Star City Council voted to approve the annexation and preliminary plat for the Trailmark Station community — a proposed 293-lot subdivision on roughly 129.5 acres north of Joplin Road — after a public hearing that stretched more than three hours and focused on traffic, floodplain risks and neighbor buffer fencing.

The motion to annex and zone the property to R-3 (with a development agreement) and to approve a preliminary plat was moved by Councilmember Nelson Hershey and carried by roll call vote (Hershey Aye; Wheelock Aye; Salmonson Aye). The council said it would adopt specific, written conditions agreed between the applicant and neighboring property owners and ordered staff to draft the final development agreement language for a subsequent ordinance and final-plat steps.

Toll Brothers’ attorney Jeff Bauer presented the revised plan, describing two development areas: a 40-acre neighborhood-residential east side averaging about 2.9 units per acre, and a 90-acre estate-residential west side averaging about 1.98 units per acre. Bauer said the project removes the previously proposed PUD and private streets, will provide more than the code-required open space (he said roughly 40 acres, with 32 acres qualifying under city code), and anticipates phase 1 final plat in 2027 with first occupancy in 2028. He also described transportation commitments including dedication of Joplin Road right-of-way, construction of an east–west collector called Bush Wren and multiuse pathways along irrigation canals and planned streets.

Residents and adjacent landowners raised multiple objections. Carrie Gilstrap, a nearby resident, said the project’s traffic analysis was incomplete and that Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) had asked for additional trip-generation information; she urged the council to delay approval until traffic mitigation and utility capacity are plainly confirmed. David Clayton and others argued the plan did not adequately address floodplain density and asked for clustering and limits on lots within flood-prone areas. Several neighbors from the Joplin Road corridor described narrow shoulders, blind hills and a school bus stop and asked the council to restrict construction traffic on Joplin Road west of Canada to protect safety.

Toll Brothers and its consultants responded that the traffic impact study (TIS) covered the corridors required by the transportation agencies (Canada, Star, Joplin and Chinden) and cited an ITD letter in the record stating ITD had no further recommendations. The applicant also said Star Sewer & Water had reviewed plans and indicated capacity to serve the development. On floodplain questions, city staff and the city’s floodplain manager said only a small portion of the site — approximately 4.5 acres — lies in FEMA’s special flood hazard area and that those areas are consistent with the city’s floodplain intent and the proposed lot sizing.

To resolve neighbor concerns, the council required and the applicant accepted several on-the-record conditions to be formalized in a development agreement, including: perimeter fencing along the western boundary (applicant agreed barbed wire would be located on the county side/property line where applicable, plus privacy vinyl fencing on the city side), a three-foot landscape buffer to be maintained by the HOA, signage and gates every 100 feet along that fence, and a condition that the developer obtain Eureka Water Company’s written permission before any construction affecting ditch/drain structures. The council also imposed a construction routing restriction prohibiting construction traffic on Joplin Road west of Canada; the applicant agreed to restrict contractor routing away from that segment and to install signage where neighbors have property rights for it.

Councilmembers discussed whether the three-foot buffer should be a common HOA lot or an easement at the back of individual lots; staff and the applicant agreed to work out precise, enforceable language so access and maintenance are practical and to record the approach in the development agreement and CC&Rs. The applicant also agreed to coordinate bollards or temporary barriers on a stub road (subject to Ada County Highway District or ACHD approval) to limit early through-traffic until future road connections are warranted.

The council’s approval was conditioned on final development-agreement language prepared by staff and reviewed by the parties. City staff said the drafted agreement will be returned to council for adoption as an ordinance and will be recorded with the final plat.

What happens next: staff will draft and circulate development-agreement language that incorporates the hearing record conditions and the negotiated technical wording; the council will consider that agreement as part of subsequent ordinance adoption and final plat review. The applicant indicated it expects phase-one construction documents and permitting steps to follow the ordinance and final plat process.

Key quote: “If ACHD were supportive of a bollard or some type of temporary restriction there and that’s what the council wanted to see, we would be amenable to that,” Toll Brothers’ Jeff Bauer said, summarizing the applicant’s willingness to coordinate temporary measures with transportation agencies.

Votes at a glance: the annexation, zoning and preliminary plat motion carried on a 3–0 roll-call vote among members present (Hershey, Wheelock, Salmonson); Councilman Nielsen was excused.

Authorities cited in hearing: South Of The River neighborhood plan, the city’s Unified Development Code, Idaho Code (reference to floodplain and annexation statutes raised by neighbors), ITD and ACHD review letters, and FEMA flood-mapping guidance.

Next procedural step: staff to draft the development agreement reflecting on-the-record conditions and return to council for ordinance adoption and recordation prior to issuance of building permits.