Middleton, Idaho ' On Dec. 17, the Middleton City Council voted to approve a modification to the development agreement for the Quarry East subdivision (M3 Idaho Woodland LLC), adopting a compromise that requires a more substantial private-street road base, removes an age-restriction in the original agreement, and leaves the city engineer's six-month completion-packet review period unchanged.

The action came after more than an hour of technical presentations, public testimony and council questions about long-term maintenance, road durability and how shortening the city's review timeline could affect construction schedules. Council members and staff agreed to the developer's request on several items but rejected the applicant's ask to shorten the engineer's review window from six months to two months and to include a "stop-clock" provision that would pause the timeline while the developer responded to city requests.

The modification affects the 640-unit, gated Quarry East community approved in 2022. Staff told the council the project includes single-family and duplex lots, 52 acres of lakes and private streets that would be maintained by the developer and, later, by a homeowners association (HOA). The applicant sought a set of changes to the original agreement, including an updated concept plan, elimination of "cluster pack" homes from the master plan, changes to bonding timing for irrigation/landscape/fencing, adjustments to traffic-improvement timing and the deletion of a 55-and-older restriction.

"We're very excited to get this project off the ground," said Mark Kidd, the applicant's representative, who described market conditions that the developer said make removing the 55+ restriction necessary to sell homes and accelerate construction. Kidd told the council the project would remain "age-targeted" and that amenities and home sizes make it unlikely the community would become a starter-home neighborhood.

The key technical dispute centered on the private-street structural section. City code requires a more robust road base than the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) minimum; the developer proposed a lesser section consistent with ACHD standards but agreed to add geotechnical review and to increase the pit-run depth in negotiations. In the council compromise the developer agreed to a minimum pit-run of 12 inches and to submit designs approved by a geotechnical engineer. Counsel and staff acknowledged that the streets would be private and that the HOA (backed by a reserve study and ongoing dues) would be responsible for long-term maintenance.

City Engineer Amy Woodruff addressed technical questions about inspection timing and geotechnical review. She told the council that geotechnical reports are typically prepared at the design phase and that the city does not maintain comparative failure-rate statistics for different road sections. Woodruff also described the city's current process for completion-packet review and said staff typically circulates a punch list within days of a walk-through, with resolution times varying by the complexity of the defects.

Council members repeatedly raised the risk that an HOA could fail years after the developer leaves. "I have seen HOAs in this community fail already," a council member said, recalling a prior subdivision where the city had to replace a water line after an HOA dissolved. The applicant responded that the developer conducts reserve studies and can transfer a substantial reserve balance to the HOA at turnover; Kidd said some comparable communities turned over with more than $500,000 in reserves.

The council also discussed traffic improvements. The developer offered to construct extended frontage improvements to Middleton Road and to build the project's roundabout early if the city secures necessary right-of-way; otherwise the developer would build an interim signal at no cost to the city.

After deliberation, a council member moved to approve the DA modification with these exceptions: retain the six-month city-engineer review timeline (rejecting the proposed two-month window and stop-clock), require a 12-inch pit run for private streets, and accept the applicant's request to remove the 55+ restriction. The motion was seconded and carried on a roll call; Council President Kiser/Krysler, Council member Romer and Council member Jansen voted yes; no recorded opposition was announced and the motion carried.

Looking ahead, staff said they will use the applicant's offer of technical assistance to study whether Middleton's completion-packet/process requirements can be streamlined more broadly. The council then closed the public portion of the meeting and moved into executive session.