Boundary County Planning & Zoning Commission

MINUTES

February 19, 2009

-- NOT OFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED --

Members present: Jake Negley, Henry McMahon, Doug Reoch, Bruce Behrman, Steve Shelman, Rod Barcklay, Matt Morgan, Matt Cossalman. Members absent: Jan Christenson. Staff present: Mike Weland.

1. Reoch opened the meeting and called for a reading of the January 15 minutes. Barcklay made motion to waive reading and approve as presented; Negley seconded and the motion carried, with Shelman not voting. Reoch called for a reading of the January 28 minutes. Staff advised of the letter from Steve Tanner contesting the minutes, then read the minutes into the record. Barcklay made motion to add to the minutes the decision of counsel regarding the validity of the January 15 voting, and to correct the spelling of “Capurso,” Negley seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Shelman requested to see the minutes of the January 15 meeting, saying he’d been informed they reflected that the commission had effectively eliminated the airport overlay and accompanying height restrictions. After review, he found no such language and said he had no problems with them.
2. Reoch read the public hearing procedure and opened public hearing on application 08-181.
   1. Harold Wedel, 315 Echo Drive, read a prepared statement, saying that the proposed facility was intended for those 55 years of age and older, that all outside maintenance would be provided for the residents. Barcklay asked if Three Mile Water could provide sufficient water; Wedel stated that he had not yet heard from the association, but estimated that two to three hookups would be sufficient for the proposed use, less than would be required if single family residences were built to the allowed density. Cecil Wedel, a member of the Three Mile Water board, said that based on preliminary information, it appeared favorable that water could be provided, he said that many memberships are currently being sold in that area. Matt asked if sprinklers would be provided for fire suppression, Wedel stated that his understanding is that no sprinklers would be required in 16-unit facilities, but would be if more units were provided in a single building. Shelman asked if there was sufficient land area to provide parking for 100 vehicles, Wedel stated there was. Cossalman asked if access would be provided on Daybreak Road; Wedel stated that Daybreak was a private road and that he had no plans to connect the facility to that road.
   2. There being no further questions for the applicant, Reoch called for staff report; staff stated that no additional written material had been submitted beyond what was sent to members.
   3. Reoch called for public comment from those in favor of the application, there was none.
   4. Reoch called for public comment from those uncommitted; Dean Schwenke, Echo Drive, asked if plans were available; Cossalman gave him the drawing from the application. Schwenke asked about the parking arrangements, Wedel showed him on the diagram. Schwenke said his only concern was regarding light, saying he was concerned about light pollution, and said he would prefer to see soft lighting. Fred Nystrom, Daybreak Road, said he felt his concern had previously been answered, but stated that he was concerned over increased traffic on Daybreak Road. Wedel stated that he did not plan to provide through traffic from the facility onto Daybreak Road. Cecil Wedel asked if it were too late to speak in favor; Reoch said no, and Cecil said that such a facility would have a positive impact on the community.
   5. Reoch asked for public comment from those opposed; there was none.
   6. In closing, Harold Wedel stated that he didn’t want to close or block Daybreak Road as a matter of convenience, but reiterated that he had no plans to provide access via Daybreak. Barcklay asked about street signs, Wedel stated that there were signs at both ends indicating that the road was private and the speed limit was 15 miles per hour. Negley asked about the septic system and the letter provided by Panhandle Health, Wedel stated that he was working with Panhandle Health to meet requirements.
   7. There being no further comment, Reoch closed the hearing to public testimony and called for discussion among members. Barcklay said he though the proposal was a terrific idea; in answering an earlier question, staff stated that, as a special use, the commission could propose terms and conditions to mitigate adverse impact on adjacent properties, to include lighting, access and parking. McMahon said he felt it necessary to require fire suppression; Morgan said that such requirements would be established by state code. Behrman pointed out that a centrally located fire hydrant was included in the plans; staff stated that in most cases, it wasn’t the county or the state that imposed strict requirements, but the insurer of the project.
   8. Barcklay made motion to recommend that the application be approved with the condition that lighting be considerate of neighbors and that other agency approvals, including water and fire, be provided prior to the onset of discussion. Negley seconded.
   9. Cossalman made motion to amend the recommendation, striking the latter condition of requiring other agency approvals; Behrman seconded and the amended motion; to recommend approval with the condition that lighting be considerate of neighbors, carried by a vote of five “aye” to two “nay.” Cossalman thanked the applicant for making a proposal that would do something good for the community.
3. Reoch opened public hearing on application 09-002.
   1. Applicant Dave Jurgensen, owner of the Log Inn Motel, 43 Tobe Way, stated that the sign proposed would benefit his business by capturing traffic south bound on U.S. 95. He said that with the economy the way it is, this was the worst year he’d experienced in the 12 years he’s owned the business, and said he commonly received referrals from the Kootenai River Inn when they were full, and often heard guests say they’d driven right past the motel without noticing it was there, as the motel was not readily visible to traffic passing by at 60 miles per hour. He stated that the proposed sign would alert potential guests of the motel in time for them to slow and stop. Cossalman asked how far the sign would be from the highway, Jurgensen said it would be on his property approximately three inches off the highway right of way, and estimated that to be approximately 75-feet from the highway centerline. Barcklay asked if the sign could be made smaller and maintain its effectiveness; Jurgensen said that at 60 miles per hour, smaller signs were difficult to discern.
   2. There was no staff report, nor public comment on the proposal.
   3. In discussion, Behrman noted that the Log Inn Motel was very well maintained and an asset to the community; Morgan pointed out how well maintained the applicant’s sign on the south hill was maintained and stated that business such as his were the type we wanted to keep in the community. Jurgensen was asked what signage facing north bound traffic would be; Jurgensen said the sign was solely for on-premise business and would advertise only a business sited on that parcel.
   4. There being no further comment, Reoch called for motion. Cossalman made motion to approve the application as presented, Morgan seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
4. Barcklay said that he had no objection to the sign approved, but said he was concerned about the proliferation of such billboard signage. Staff said that current ordinance provisions in that zone district allow signage up to 60-square-feet in size as a permitted use, but anything larger required approval by planning and zoning; he stated that off-premise signage was strictly regulated by the state, and that the new comprehensive plan established a ban on off-premise billboards within county jurisdiction.
5. There being no further business, Barcklay made motion to adjourn; Negley seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting ended at 6:40 p.m.

NOT OFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED