County P&Z to revisit comp plan
|
|
February 28, 2013 |
After re-electing proud new father Matt
Cossalman chair and John Cranor co-chair, and by
unanimous vote to stay with the long-established
meeting schedule, the Boundary County Planning
and Zoning Commission agreed, also unanimously,
to revisit a document long in the making, the
Boundary Count Comprehensive Plan, so as to
amend it.
By Idaho code, every county and municipality in
the state is required to draft a comprehensive
plan, looking objectively at the resources of
the jurisdiction and drafting goals to guide
land use law by which to attain them. It is a
document deemed so essential that state law
requires its review every 10 years.
Boundary County set out on the process of a
comprehensive review in 2005, after booming land
prices proved the plan adopted in 1997, which
seemed good for neighbors, but proved
ineffective in staving off speculators, many
drawn by our neighborly laws, but who didn't
come to be neighborly. Residents expressed
outrage.
With the dedicated help of more than 100
citizens of Boundary County, facts were gleaned
and conclusions reached.
Because we are a contentious bunch, it was a
process that took three years ... and it didn't
make anyone happy; it was, county commissioners
deemed, the best we could do at the time.
In the way of the State of Idaho, a
comprehensive plan review is not a light
undertaking; after hearing the facts and the
voices of citizens and adopting the plan, a
resolution, the elected board of county
commissioners has to consider whether or not the
law it guides, the Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance, is sufficient.
In our case, it wasn't.
It would take an additional four years of work
and controversy to adopt a new law of land.
A lot had changed in between. The county sued in
a land use decision regarding a gravel pit,
learned by an Idaho Supreme Court ruling that
Boundary County's land use law on "special
uses," allowing consideration of anything, was
not proper; it didn't offer sufficient
protection or certainty to a land owner
that what I put here shan't be damaged by what
my neighbor might put there.
That decision pretty much negated much of the
two subjective chapters of the Comp Plan; 13 and
14; Land Use and Implementation, both of which
tell how land use law should be structured.
In response to the Supreme Court decision,
Boundary County did away altogether with the
"special" use, something the comp plan is
predicated on, but never looked back at the Comp
Plan, the "constitution" on which the ordinance
is founded, a plan outdated, in its legislative
parts, not long after it was adopted. The
ordinance was written to account for new
state law.
The planning and zoning commission isn't
launching a comprehensive plan review, but an
amendment to bring it in better line with the
ordinance adopted and to bring it in better line
with new court land use rulings.
"It would be wrong," they said, "to put a fair
county land use decision at risk because our
ordinance isn't in line with a comp plan that
was outdated even as it was adopted."
The county planning and zoning commission will
hold a workshop at 5:30 p.m. Thursday, March 7.
to begin the process of writing amendments to
the legislative sections of the Comp Plan,
Chapters 13-14.
While the special meeting will be public, it
should not be confused with a public hearing;
you can sit and watch, but unless you have
something to say that the commission agrees to
hear, your voice will remain silent. Written
comment is and will be accepted.
Before anything can change, though, your voice
will be heard; once P&Z finishes writing the
application for amendment, public hearing,
during which all who would speak will be heard,
will be held.
If P&Z stands behind the application, it will be
forwarded to count commissioner, who will hold
at least one additional hearing.
To find out more, call (208) 267-7712. |
|
Questions or comments about this
letter?
Click here to e-mail! |
|
|
|
|
