Elko New Market City Council — Transcript
Tuesday, June 30, 2026
Boulder Heights South Concept Plan Review
City Hall Property Acquisition for Municipal Campus Expansion
Citywide Code Enforcement Sweep Recap
Discussion on Future Community Amenities
Votes (2)
Boulder Heights South Concept Plan Review number two, KJW Walk Incorporated
Dissent: Casey expressed a personal dislike for the placement of townhomes/apartments but voted in favor of the overall motion.
Moved by Brad [00:56:55] · Seconded by Unknown [00:57:48]
The planning commission reviewed revised concept plans for Boulder Heights South, incorporating an additional 10 acres. Key topics included differing alignments for Beard Avenue (Concepts A, B, C) to address safety issues at County Highway 86, the immediate development of 72 single-family lots not affected by road realignment, and future plans for multi-family units. Staff emphasized zoning consistency, utility connections, and park dedication requirements. Commissioners expressed preference for Concept 3 due to its significant realignment of Beard Avenue, with a suggestion to adjust a specific road connection. One commissioner voiced personal disapproval of multi-family housing in the area.
Review property acquisition for conformance with comprehensive plan B and enterprises property
Dissent: None
Moved by Unknown [01:03:52] · Seconded by Unknown [01:03:55]
The planning commission reviewed the proposed acquisition of four acres of vacant property from BN Enterprises LLC, located directly north of City Hall. The acquisition is intended to consolidate land for the ultimate city campus, aligning with the 2008 Public Facilities Master Plan. This plan envisions expanding City Hall, police, and fire facilities, and facilitating a future north-south roadway (Riley Road) connection. The acquisition would complete the planned 20-acre municipal campus. The property is currently zoned Urban Reserve and guided to Town Center in the comprehensive plan, which allows for institutional uses.
Notable Quotes (3)
Yeah. And you'll you might have seen on a couple of maps, it's kind of intersecting right at a horizontal curve, but it's not only the horizontal curve, there's also a vertical curve that kind of crests just west of that. So, it's coming uphill. So, it's it's really a thing of sight lines as well and just making sure we're putting that in a proper spot that we have proper sight lines from both directions. Um, and that's what that analysis is doing right now is trying to find that sweet spot of where does it make sense to have that actually intersect the highway.
I was interested to see that we require irrigation for connected housing and then also this last legislative cycle um there were some changes to the HOA and CIC. um with regards to that and that cities can't require them. I guess my maybe it is a question are we not implicitly requiring an HOA or a CIC uh if we're going to require irrigation because that also requires then the community um a homeowners association of management company. Um, so I'm kind of curious what you thought thought about that.
I'm not a fan of the town homes or the apartments being down there. Sure. But yeah, that's personal. Yeah, it's okay. But absolutely have to relocate beard. That's that's a bad spot.
Ordinances & Resolutions (11)
The specific development application being reviewed by the planning commission.
City's guiding document for land use, density, and development, referenced for both business items.
City's long-range growth boundary, defining areas targeted for future development.
City's long-term plan for the provision of sanitary sewer services.
City's plan identifying major collector streets, right-of-way requirements, and future road extensions.
County's plan classifying County Highway 86 as a principal arterial roadway, creating a conflict with Rice County's classification.
County's plan classifying County Highway 86 as a minor arterial roadway, creating a conflict with Scott County's classification.
Manual used to project daily and peak hour traffic volumes for proposed developments.
City code requiring park dedication or cash in lieu, and tree preservation.
Resolution proposed for adoption, affirming the property acquisition's conformance with the city's comprehensive plan.
Long-range plan evaluating future space needs for city facilities and identifying the preferred municipal campus location.