Boundary County Planning and Zoning Commission
Minutes December 21, 2017
|
|
Attending
|
Names
|
|
Public |
Tom Davies, Lisa Jarrell, Kurt Pavlat |
|
Planning & Zoning |
Caleb Davis (Chairman), Wade Purdom (Co-Chair), |
|
Absent |
Tim Heenan, Counselor Tevis Hull |
|
Staff |
John Moss |
At 5:30 pm Chairman Caleb Davis opened the meeting and presented the evening agenda. After identifying the presence of a quorum Davis asked if there were any changes or corrections to be made to the Minutes of the November 16 2017 meeting. There being none, Davis asked for a motion to approve the November 16 Miinutes. Ron Self so moved, seconded by Rob Woywod, and there being no further discussion Davis called for a vote. The votes were as follows:
John Cranor - Aye, Tim Heenan - Absent, Scott Fuller - Aye, Marciavee Cossette - Aye, Wade Purdom - Aye, Adam Isaac - Aye, Rob Woywod - Aye, Ron Self- Aye, Caleb Davis - (tie-breaker);
Tally: Nay (0), Recused (0), Aye (7), Absent (1)
The motion to approve the November 16 minutes was unanimous.
[Planning & Zoning minutes are transcribed from the conversation that takes place during the meeting. Topics are condensed, eliminating verbatim comment in order to condense the material. Key points are included in this extraction and all votes taken are recorded.]
Next on the agenda was a Conditional Use Hearing regarding application 18-002 by Tom & Lisa Davies. This hearing was tabled on 11/18/2017 to provide time for the applicant and neighbors to discuss mitigating issues associated with strangers (vacation renters) use of the property. Chairman Davis reopened the hearing and asked the applicant for an opening statement.
Tom Davies said that because they live next to the rental property, this cannot be understated. He said they sent mail to their neighbors and their neighbors, Jeannie and John Wallington, sent an email in approval of their plans to rent. Mr. Davies reiterated that if any issues arise he and his wife are right there to resolve them. He said that at the last meeting he and his wife indicated they are willing to plant shrubs or trees to delineate the property line, or put up a fence, or whatever works to satisfy their neighbors regarding the safety of their property. He said that subsequent to that meeting no neighbors have approached them; that they sent the same letter to their neighbors as was sent to the Planning and Zoning Commission and that they welcome any suggestions put forth by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mr. Davies finished by saying that it was awkward at the last meeting to have our neighbor in uniform, that it is sort of imposing. He said he understood that Mr. Jarrell was on his way home from work, but still – since he (Tom Davies) had been himself in law enforcement for years, he appreciates the effect a uniform has on influencing opinion.
Self said this is Idaho, and we know the situation. Chairman Davis asked if there is any problem with Planning and Zoning imposing terms and conditions requiring the placement of a fence and Mr. Davies said no, not at all.
Lisa Jarrell was asked if she wanted to make a statement. She said her husband was NOT representing the Sheriff's office at the last meeting but was just getting off work and happened to not have a change of clothes available. She said at the last meeting it was asked if we (the Jarrells) could work out any differences (with the Davies). She said they expected to receive a letter addressing this and no letter was received. Ms. Jarrell said they were waiting for the Davies to reach out to them and that this didn't happen.
Ms. Jarrell continued to say that using Google Earth they took pictures of their property which they had just had surveyed and the pictures show that there is a shop on the property line.
Wade Purdom suggested that Google Earth provides an approximation of property boundaries. Ron Self said that a survey would be definitive but that an aerial view does not show the survey lines so it looks very close, that's all you can say.
Staff suggested that a parcel line adjustment, where the parcel line is shifted away from an existing structure, would be the way to resolve boundary issues. Since the shop is not the proposed rental structure it was unclear if the shop was related to the Jarrells' protest regarding the applicant's request. He said that a 20 foot setback from the property line is required for any structure but that if there is a dispute concerning this distance a parcel line adjustment can be requested to ensure the correct distance is maintained. Staff also said that the purpose of this hearing is not to resolve a parcel line dispute, that this can be handled in a separate process.
Ron Self said that the setback is a consideration because of the option of placing a fence on the parcel line. Staff responded that the hearing is not related to a parcel line setback question but rather the question is whether the cabin on the property can be used as a vacation rental. He said the privacy concerns regarding the placement of a fence can be mitigated under Terms and Conditions but that the actual location of a structure such as this shop has no bearing when considering the question of vacation rentals. Mr. Self acknowledged that this would be a legal issue.
Lisa Jarrell stated that they are concerned about their privacy and how to retain their open space while not having strangers on their property.
Scott Fuller said there is a need to look back further to see that both properties were owned by the same person and at the time the shop was built there was no issue with the property line. He suggested that at the time the parcel was split the shop may have been close to the setback limits.
Chairman Davisthen closed the meeting to public comment and told the Commission that in their consideration they have an option of setting Terms and Conditions. Wade Purdom said he believed it would be detrimental to require a fence but that it would be in the best interests of both parties to decide if a fence is an option. He said he was not speaking specifically about these people but people in general when facing a similar issue.
Self said the hearing was adjourned last time to let these people come to a decision but they've done nothing. Davis said that he understood Purdom to say that a decision to put up a fence can be made by either side. Self responded by saying the issue he remembered had to do with water access from the river being more attractive from the Jarrells' property and water access was the issue. Davis suggested opening the meeting to public comment and asking the applicant what has taken place there.
The Commission agreed unanimously to reopen the meeting to public comment. Mr. Davies acknowledged he had made inquiries and that a seawall was recommended to create a safe approach. He said they were willing to do whatever was necessary in this regard so their guests would not trespass on the neighbor's property.
The Chairman thanked Mr. Davies and said that the use of the river is not a 'right' and that if the Davies wished to make it more accessible they can do so, that the value of the rental is enhanced if there is river access available.
He then asked if the Commission is in agreement that the application meets the standard of Ordinance 9B18LOV1. He referred to the Staff Analysis and the description of recreational hospitality in both the Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan, pointing out that specifically the Comprehensive Plan relates to the area in the north along the Moyie River as being recreational property. He said the Suburban zone specifically provides for a recreational cabin rental and that if this is located less than 500 feet from any residence then a Conditional Use Permit is required. The question is whether there should be Terms and Conditions attached to this application. The structure in question that may be on the property line is outside the scope of this decision. That being said, Davis asked if there were anyone wishing to make a motion?
Ron Self said he agrees regarding the structure on the property line and it was good strategy to have the property surveyed so they know just where the property line is; the two parties can get together and if need be do a parcel line adjustment and split the costs. Self made a motion to approve cabin vacation rentals as requested. This was seconded by Rob Woywod.
The Chairman then asked if anyone wished to entertain adding any Terms and Conditions to the motion, at which point Lisa Jarrell interjected, asking just what is the criteria for Terms and Conditions.
Davis then read aloud the Considerations from the Ordinance, Section 7.7. and stated that in the opinion of the Planning and Zoning Commission none of these considerations required establishing Terms and Conditions for this application. Lisa Jarrell said she disagreed with this conclusion.
Wade Purdom enumerated each of these again, and specifically focused on 7.7.7. which states "Whether specific concerns aired through the public hearing process have validity and whether those concerns can be adequately addressed."
Lisa Jarrell said that her concern is that if it were she and she wanted to do something like this it would be her responsibility to go to her neighbors and present her plan and see if there are any objections and if so try to work this out. However, this did not happen. Instead, here we are and I don't want my privacy threatened by the presence of unwanted strangers and we did not get a letter or contact at all.
Scott Fuller said that the job of the Commission is to weigh the law and that the Commission cannot take sides. Wade Purdom suggested that maybe running a hot wire (OK, maybe not 'hot') to define the boundaries would be acceptable? (Not agreed to by anyone.) Chairman Davis called for a vote and the voting was as follows:
John Cranor - Aye, Tim Heenan - Absent, Scott Fuller - Aye, Marciavee Cossette - Aye, Wade Purdom - Aye, Adam Isaac - Aye, Rob Woywod - Aye, Ron Self- Aye, Caleb Davis - (tie-breaker);
Tally: Nay (0), Recused (0), Aye (7), Absent (1)
The motion to approve cabin vacation rentals (with no Terms and Conditions) was unanimous.
Next on the agenda was a Conditional Use Hearing regarding application 18-016 by Carolyn Hill.
The applicant was not present and application 18-016 is a request for a Conditional Use related to placing a 4-1/2' by 10' sign on their Agriculture/Forestry Zone parcel. It had come to staff's attention that ITD approval is required for the approach to the applicant's property. The Planning and Zoning Commission decided to table the hearing until 1/18/2018 in order to allow time for the applicant to receive ITD approval for the approach.
Next on the agenda was a Zone Amendment Hearing regarding application 18-029 by Charles Timmons representing Caribou Creek LLC. Chairman Davis read the general Chairman's Script followed by the Legislative Script for application 18-029, a request to change the zone on his parcel from Prime Forest to Agriculture/Forest.
Pursuant to that script there was no member of the Planning and Zoning Commission having ex parte contact and no members of the public wished to speak in favor of or neutral to the application. Chairman Davis asked the applicant(s) if they wished to give an opening statement.
The applicant was not present. Staff shared that the zone Prime Forest is identified in the ordinance as being owned or managed by agencies of state or federal government (Section 15.7.1.). The applicant, Caribou Creek LLC, is requesting this zone be changed to reflect private ownership and to allow dividing the property into parcels less than 160 acres.
Representing BLM, Kurt Pavlat attended the meeting to ensure the applicant did not presume to have ingress/egress across the neighboring parcel owned by BLM. Staff suggested that gaining egress/ingress easement is not a part of the applicant's request; that easement issues will remain with the applicant regardless of the zone associated with the parcel. Chairman Davis commented that the Commission does not wish to create 'postage stamp' zoning but that the zone definitions are clear concerning ownership of Prime Forest lands being under state and federal ownership and that the Commission recommendation is based on this fact alone, and would make the same decision regardless of who applies for a zone change in similar circumstances.
Wade Purdom made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the request for rezoning be approved, recognizing that there is currently no ingress/egress easement to the subject parcel. This was seconded by John Cranor, and the voting was as follows:
John Cranor - Aye, Tim Heenan - Absent, Scott Fuller - Aye, Marciavee Cossette - Aye, Wade Purdom - Aye, Adam Isaac - Aye, Rob Woywod - Aye, Ron Self- Aye, Caleb Davis - (tie-breaker);
Tally: Nay (0), Recused (0), Aye (7), Absent (1)
The motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the request for rezoning be approved, recognizing that there is currently no ingress/egress easement to the subject parcel, was unanimous.
Chairman Davis then asked staff for an update on Application 17-135, the Comprehensive Plan proposal recommending the approval of the 2008 plan to be retained for 2018. Staff said the County Commissioners have approved the reccommendation and that the Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Plan Map had both been retained for the 2018 version. In addition, the recommended naming convention was approved. The existing Comprehensive Plan was renamed to 9B18CPV1, the Map to 9B18CMV1, and the existing Ordinance was renamed from 2017-1a to 9B18LOV1.
John Cranor moved to adjourn, Ron Self seconded, approved unanimously at 7:30 pm.
John B. Moss