MINUTES

Boundary County Planning and Zoning Commission

November 20, 2008

Members present: Jake Negley, Tom Hollingsworth, Matt Morgan, Rod Barcklay, Bruce Behrman. Members absent: Doug Reoch, Henry McMahon, Jan Christenson, Barry Davis. Staff present: Mike Weland.

1. There being no quorum, Hollingsworth directed staff to call missing members at 5:30 p.m. With the arrival of Behrman, the meeting was called to order at 5:55 p.m. and Hollingsworth introduced members and called for reading of October minutes. Negley made motion to waive the reading of the October 8, 16 and 22 minutes and to adopt as presented, Morgan seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Hollingsworth read procedure for public hearing.
2. Hollingsworth opened public hearing on application 08-158. Richard Marcotte stated that he was seeking a permit to convert a portion of an existing shop into a showroom for his pellet and wood stove dealership. He stated that currently, he sells product through a catalog, and said that having the ability to actually show the product would benefit his sales. He stated that he currently used the structure as a workshop. He said that signage would be added to an existing sign on U.S. 95. Hollingsworth called for public testimony in favor, uncommitted and opposed to the application, there was none, nor was there a closing statement by the applicant. Hollingsworth closed the hearing to public testimony and called for discussion. Barcklay said the proposal had minimal impact and would be a good thing, then made motion to forward to commissioners a recommendation of approval as presented. Negley seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
3. Hollingsworth opened public hearing on application 08-160. Fra. Gregory Horton, Moyie Springs, stated that the church had been operating from an office near Bear Creek Lodge for approximately one year, and he said that while serving as pastor of the Post Falls church, he’d driven to Bonners Ferry for a year prior to that to conduct services. He said attendance currently averaged approximately 50 people each Sunday, arriving in about 10 vehicles, and stated that with a church of their own he anticipated relatively slow growth over time to about 150 people maximum. He stated that the church would be built in phases, beginning with the church proper, and as growth and finances allowed, the hall, Sunday school and offices would be added, possibly to one day include a pastor’s residence. He stated that a cemetery was an important tradition in the church for burial of members, and said the cemetery would be fenced and landscaped and maintained by a caretaker. He stated that the Mennonite Church has a small, well kept cemetery on church property. He said that in 10 years as pastor of the Post Falls church, there were approximately eight burials. Hollingsworth called for comment in favor of the application.
   1. John Schrom, Bonners Ferry, stated that the church was a big part of his family’s life, and said they had travelled to Post Falls each Sunday and having a church here would be a benefit.
   2. Hollingsworth called for comment from those uncommitted on the proposal, there was none. He called for comment opposed.
   3. Michael Bentler, Pleasant Valley Loop, said he has no problem with a church, but said the location wasn’t appropriate. He said the church would obstruct his views, the cemetery could affect ground water quality and stated he was concerned over increased traffic, especially at the intersection of US 95 and Pleasant Valley Loop. He said the church would impact wildlife, and cited concerns over a large, lighted sign as well as septic disposal.
   4. Gary Atkins, who lives adjacent to the proposed site, said he didn’t like the idea of a graveyard next door as it would devalue his property, and said he runs cattle and was concerned that a church would run him out because they didn’t like his cattle, as happened to him on Cow Creek. He said the road can’t take more traffic and said he’s already concerned as about 50 trucks a day travel to the nearby septage farm. He stated that winter access is dangerous.
   5. Dan McLeish, also an adjacent resident, said he bought his property for its rural aspect, and said the idea of a cemetery next door was morbid, saying his kids were already concerned. He said that traffic was a major concern, and said there needs to be a turn lane off US 95 if the proposal is approved. He stated that there have been at least two accidents at the intersection and said the trucks Atkins referred to ran seven days a week. He said the traffic concern was compounded because a short distance north of the intersection, the highway narrowed from three lanes to two, increasing congestion right at the intersection.
   6. Wally Barton, Pleasant Valley Loop, agreed with the concerns previously cited, and expressed concern about the cemetery. He said that when the Mennonite church and cemetery went in, there were no homes nearby and that all the homes there now were built by owners who knew the cemetery was there. He said he works for the Idaho Transportation Department, and said the concerns regarding the intersection were valid.
   7. Judy Johns, 1557 Pleasant Valley Loop, said the area is not the right location for a church and said she was concerned over a lit sign. She said that meetings would not be limited to Sunday, but that there would likely be night meetings as well. She said she moved to the area because it was quiet, and said a church would change the texture of the valley and would devalue property. She said Pleasant Valley Loop was pot holes in summer and ice in winter. She said she was concerned about a cemetery.
4. There being no further public comment, Hollingsworth called the applicant for rebuttal. Horton said he appreciated hearing the neighbor’s concerns and said that this was his fourth parish, and each strived to be good neighbors. He said the architecture of the church was designed to fit in with the community. He said traffic was a valid concern, and said he had worked with Jeff Gutshall regarding access to Pleasant Valley Loop, saying a new drive would be build, complete with curbs. He said they had discussed the possibility of widening and paving the road, and said the church was willing to work within reason to improve traffic safety. He said the sign would be no larger than 32 square feet in size, and lights were not essential. He said that the church would meet primarily on Sunday, but said there would be meetings during the week, most of which drew only five to ten people. He said Panhandle Health had approved the septic system. He said most of the development would be on the front half of the property, with the rest remaining undeveloped, and said that a well maintained church typically did not reduce adjacent property values. Hollingsworth raised the issue of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, and staff read the excerpt included in the staff report for the benefit of those in attendance. Barcklay said he normally didn’t support a conditional use application when those around it opposed, as those people were there first. He asked the applicant how difficult it would be to hold off on closing the purchase of the property so as to find an area where there wasn’t so much dissent, Horton said that the church had been looking at property for a considerable length of time and said that where ever the church was proposed, it would meet opposition. He said that depending on the outcome of the hearing, plans were to close on the property the following day. Barcklay said he believed he was speaking on behalf of everyone on the commission in saying that the church was welcome and wanted in the community, but said he felt there had to be a location elsewhere more appropriate. Horton said he couldn’t answer on his own, but needed to confer with members of the church council who were in attendance. Hollingsworth called a five minute recess to allow discussion. Upon return to session, Horton stated again that the search for property had been going on for awhile. He said that there were several vacant parcels in the area that would be developed. He said the council was willing to work to mitigate but they wanted to mitigate rather than renew their search for property. He reiterated that the church would be built in phases, beginning with a 1,500 square foot church proper, with additions coming in time as the church could afford. He said they weren’t an affluent church, and could not afford property in the city or a higher density area traditionally more conducive to a church. Discussion was held on the road safety issue, with the commission noting the reduction of one lane immediately north of the Pleasant Valley Loop intersection, no turn lane, the fact that Pleasant Valley Loop does not intersect US 95 at a right angle, and limited visibility from Pleasant Valley Loop south on US 95. There being no further public comment, the hearing was closed to public testimony and discussion was held among members. Behrman said that the traffic concerns were a safety issue that needed addressed. Barcklay suggested tabling a decision and requesting an ITD study of the intersection. Morgan cited the federal act, but agreed that traffic safety was a concern and said the cemetery seemed to be a problem as well. Discussion ended, and Hollingsworth called for a motion. Barcklay made motion to approve the application without the cemetery and with a non-lit sign of the minimum size necessary to meet the needs of the church, and said his reason for that motion was to reach a compromise. Concern was raised that the motion did not address the key issue of traffic safety. Barcklay withdrew the motion, and moved to table a decision pending receipt of additional information, to wit a safety analysis of the US 95/Pleasant Valley Loop intersection from ITD and county road and bridge. Behrman seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Staff advised the applicant that he would send letters to both agencies on behalf of the church requesting such a study, with the results from those agencies to be sent to Horton for submission to the administrator so as to reconvene the hearing. Staff said he would send Horton a courtesy copy of the letters when mailed, and also advised Horton of his right to appeal.
5. Hollingsworth opened public hearing on application 08-162. Michael Youngwirth stated that he was seeking to rezone his property on Oxford Road so as to be able to provide his daughter and her husband one acre upon which to build a home. He stated that his wife was ill, and their daughter would be there to help. Staff said that he wasn’t made aware of those circumstances at the time of application, and said that those special circumstances could qualify the applicant for a variance, which could be limited to the specific request, rather than a zone map amendment, which could not be limited except to the extent allowed within that zone. The applicant was advised as to the ramifications, and he agreed that if a variance could be granted, he would be happy with that. Members reviewed the ordinance and agreed that special circumstances existed sufficient to warrant variance. Hollingsworth called for public testimony from those in favor and uncommitted, there was none. He called for testimony opposed.
   1. Kenneth MacDonald, Oxford Road, questioned how the area was entered into the comprehensive land use map as one-acre density, as the area sat over an aquifer and the Three Mile Water System well head was in that area. Staff explained that area residents had requested the designation and county commissioners concurred when adopting the map in July. Staff explained the process for adopting a new zoning map to codify the zone districts, and said that just because it had the designation on the comp plan map, it did not necessarily mean that the zone district would be changed. He stated that, when a zone map was proposed, it was his intention to notify all property owners in areas where zone districts were proposed for change so as to allow them ample opportunity to comment. MacDonald stated that he had no problem with granting the applicant a variance, but said he was against a zone map amendment allowing higher density.
   2. John Lozier, Oxford Road, said he, too, was concerned about the comprehensive plan map designation, and agreed that a variance fit the situation better than a zone map amendment.
   3. Jeff Devorak said he moved to the area for its rural qualities and said he was against an increase in residential. He concurred that a variance to enable the applicant’s daughter to assist with his wife’s care was warranted.
6. There was no rebuttal from the applicant, and Hollingsworth closed the hearing to public testimony. Following brief discussion, Barcklay made motion to approve the variance as presented in the application, with the condition that no additional access onto Oxford Road be added. Negley seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
7. Discussion was held of setting special meetings for zone ordinance review in January, and staff stated that currently, there were no applications or business scheduled for December. Because several members had plans for the holidays, increasing the possibility of lack of quorum, it was agreed that no meetings would be scheduled in December. After discussion, staff agreed to set the January special meeting schedule and notify members.
8. There being no further business, Negley made motion to adjourn, Morgan seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8 p.m.