Planning Commission

City of Coeur d’Alene

710 E Mullan Ave

Coeur D Alene, ID 83814

Dear the City of Coeur d’Alene Planning Commission,

The Coeur-Terre project continues to show the people of Kootenai County how little their input is worth. Together with the Coeur d’Alene Planning and Zoning Commission, they are removing the community’s ability to provide public input. Further, it proves that the original annexation plan was a throw-away exercise and will not be followed. Coeur Terre’s attorney said as much in an open setting, stating that the project will be modified over the years and increase in density as the city provides new plans.

Growing the project density will not be difficult while state laws continue to be ignored. Hilary Patterson states in her news article that the “[development agreement] didn’t account for changes in the market, new housing product types, what is currently allowed in the zoning code, or even possible future changes to the zoning code.” The statement furthers the intent to grow the density, but more importantly, commercial use over time. (Public hearing Tuesday on Coeur Terre requests)

“The requested amendments to the Development Agreement do offer that specificity and certainty, while not locking it so tight that a fourplex is allowed but not a triplex,” Patterson wrote. She completely ignores the local landowners and how this could impact their property value.

It begs the question of why reaching out to another city in the area, rather than state officials, should be considered legitimate. Patterson went on to say she reached out to Post Falls on what level of specificity they include in their development agreements, and “they shared that you don’t want to get so specific that every tiny change requires a public hearing but that you want enough specificity and certainty that everyone knows what to expect and can easily determine if a use is allowed by right or if it requires a public hearing.”

The behavior continues to validate the local community’s concerns on how the area’s development is handled. Instead of working with state officials to determine how the laws are interpreted, the local people are subjected to area biases for how they will be impacted.

The additional section to the proposed zoning changes removes people’s ability to have a public hearing on any changes that the Coeur d’Alene Planning and Zoning Commission finds to be “substantially consistent in use and density” in their judgment. Since they are making these judgment calls without them being publicly reviewed, there is no governance of the people to confirm or deny that they are, in fact, “substantially consistent.” It appears that affected landowners will not be notified of any decisions the staff believes meet these undefined criteria.

Further, the zoning change does not address the new sewage requirements, increased water requirements, increased traffic, or the potential increase in residents. These items were not considered in the evaluation from the original development agreement when the community requested formal studies. The studies are outdated and need to be redone to show the costs and area impacts to the community.

Removal of Public Input

Modification Text in Question

1. An amendment allowing for specific land use activities/product types by zone and to allow for staff determinations of future allowed land uses/product types by zone. This will eliminate the requirement for public hearings for those uses which are substantially consistent in use and density with the original Coeur Terre Annexation development concepts and the city's currently adopted Comprehensive Plan.

   a. This amendment is necessary and reasonable because it allows for realistic and timely implementation of the Coeur Terre Annexation and Development agreement throughout its duration without modifying the framework concepts of the Master Planned Development.

   b. This amendment is in the public interest as it facilitates bringing new product types into the Coeur Terre Community in a timely and predictable manner; which is also a benefit to the greater Coeur d'Alene Community where it is potentially more difficult to locate certain types of land uses/product types as infill development.

Key Points

• It seems likely that the modification to the annexation is not legal under Idaho law, as it may bypass required public hearings for land use decisions.
• Research and history suggest this could limit public participation, raising concerns about the right to be heard in community planning.
• The evidence leans toward the amendment conflicting with Idaho Code, which mandates public hearings for zoning changes.
• The evidence leans toward the amendment conflicting with the Idaho Code, which mandates public hearings for zoning changes.
• The ask is a “bait-n-switch” of what the developer has already committed to the public to approve the annexation. The public made the planning commission and the Coeur d’Alene City Council aware that the developer would plan on changes, and these should not be made without public oversight, regardless of alignment with approved zoning.

Background

The modification involves an amendment that allows staff to determine future land uses and product types by zone without public hearings, as long as they align with the original Coeur Terre Annexation development concepts and the city’s comprehensive plan. This aims to streamline implementation but has raised questions about legality and potential impacts on civil rights, particularly the right to participate in decisions affecting the community.

Review of Legal Statutes

Idaho law, specifically Title 67, Chapter 65 of the Idaho Code, requires public hearings for land use decisions, such as amending zoning ordinances or approving special use permits. The amendment’s allowance for staff to make determinations without public input appears to conflict with these requirements, as determining allowed uses by zone is typically a legislative function requiring public participation. This could be seen as an overreach, potentially violating state law by delegating such authority to staff.

Unexpected Detail

An unexpected aspect is that while the amendment claims to facilitate timely development, it might inadvertently reduce transparency. Public hearings are a key mechanism for community input, especially in controversial projects like Coeur Terre, which has faced opposition from local residents concerned about traffic and neighborhood impact.

Context and Description of the Modification

The amendment in question allows for specific land use activities and product types by zone and permits staff to determine future allowed land uses and product types by zone without the requirement for public hearings. This applies to uses that are “substantially consistent in use and density with the original Coeur Terre Annexation development concepts and the city’s currently adopted Comprehensive Plan.” The stated purpose is to enable realistic and timely implementation of the development agreement, benefiting both the Coeur Terre Community and the greater Coeur d’Alene area by facilitating new product types in a predictable manner.

Coeur Terre is a significant development project with plans for over 2,000 housing units and commercial spaces spanning 442 acres. It has been subject to public hearings and city council approvals, as evidenced by news reports from 2022 and 2023 (Coeur Terre housing project approved by Coeur d’Alene Planning Commission, Coeur d’Alene City Council approves development agreement for Coeur Terre project). Local opposition has highlighted concerns about traffic and density, underscoring the importance of public input in such decisions.

Legal Framework: Idaho Land Use Law

Idaho’s land use planning is governed by Title 67, Chapter 65 of the Idaho Code, which outlines procedures for local land use decisions. Key sections relevant to this analysis include:

• Section 67-6509: Requires at least one public hearing for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of the comprehensive plan, with notice published at least 15 days prior (Section 67-6509 – Idaho State Legislature).
• Section 67-6511: Mandates that amendments to zoning ordinances follow notice and hearing procedures under section 67-6509, including additional mailed notice for zoning district boundary changes (Section 67-6511 – Idaho State Legislature).
• Section 67-6512: Specifies that special use permits, which may include certain land use decisions, must follow notice and hearing procedures under section 67-6509 (Section 67-6512 – Idaho State Legislature).
• Section 67-6534: Requires the governing board to adopt procedures for public hearings, ensuring all affected persons can present and rebut evidence (Section 67-6534 – Idaho State Legislature).

These provisions emphasize public participation as a fundamental aspect of land use decision-making, particularly for actions that alter zoning or land use policies.

Analysis of the Amendment’s Legality

The amendment’s core issue is its provision for staff to determine future allowed land uses and product types by zone without public hearings, provided they are consistent with the original development concepts and comprehensive plan. This raises questions about whether such determinations constitute legislative or administrative actions:

Legislative vs. Administrative Decisions

In land use law, zoning decisions—such as determining what uses are allowed in a zone—are typically legislative and require public hearings. Administrative decisions, like deciding whether a specific project fits within existing zoning, may not require hearings. The amendment’s language, allowing staff to determine “future allowed land uses/product types by zone,” suggests a legislative function, as it involves defining permissible uses, which is akin to amending the zoning ordinance (Legislative Versus Administrative Zoning And Land Use Decisions).

Conflict with Idaho Code

The Idaho Code requires public hearings for amendments to zoning ordinances (Idaho Code Section 67-6511) and special use permits (Idaho Code Section 67-6512). If staff determinations effectively change the allowed uses in a zone, this would bypass the required public hearing process, potentially violating state law. For instance, if the staff decides to allow commercial uses in a residential zone under the guise of consistency with the plan, this could be seen as an amendment requiring public input, not a staff-level decision.

Potential Exceptions

One possible argument is that the staff is merely implementing the comprehensive plan, and since the plan was already approved with public hearings, additional hearings are unnecessary for consistent use. However, the law does not explicitly provide for such an exception, and case law from other states suggests that land use decisions, even within a master plan, often require public hearings. MSRC notes that quasi-judicial hearings involve the legal rights of specific parties, such as land-use variances. (MRSC - Public Hearings)

Impact on Statutory Rights

TThe right to participate in land use decisions is a statutory right under Idaho law. Limiting public hearings could be seen as diminishing this right, especially in a project like Coeur Terre, which has elicited significant community feedback (Residents in Coeur d’Alene share thoughts as Coeur Terre project moves forward).

This reduction in transparency might affect due process for affected property owners, particularly if staff decisions lead to unanticipated impacts, such as increased traffic or density, without community input. However, this is more a matter of statutory compliance than a constitutional civil rights violation, as the right to be heard in land use decisions is not constitutionally guaranteed but provided by state law.

Comparative Insights and Community Implications

Comparative analysis with other jurisdictions, such as Oregon, shows that even within master planned developments, public hearings are often required for significant decisions (Legislative Versus Administrative Zoning And Land Use Decisions). In Coeur d’Alene, the amendment’s streamlining intent—facilitating timely development—must be balanced against the legal requirement for public participation. The controversy around Coeur Terre, with residents expressing concerns about high density and traffic (‘I don’t think we’re protecting that neighborhood’: Coeur d’Alene City Council approves Coeur Terre development), underscores the importance of maintaining public hearing opportunities to address such issues.

Conclusion of Public Input

Although an attorney or judge did not perform the analysis in this document, the ability to reason through the Idaho State Code leads to concerning conclusions about this change. The modification is likely not legal under Idaho law, as it appears to delegate legislative zoning decisions to staff without the required public hearings, contravening sections 67-6509, 67-6511, and 67-6512 of the Idaho Code. This could limit the public’s right to participate, raising concerns about transparency and community input, though it does not constitute a constitutional civil rights violation. The city’s intent to streamline development is understandable, but it must comply with state law, which prioritizes public participation in land use decisions.

Table: Summary of Key Legal Requirements and Findings

Section	Requirement	Relevance to Amendment
67-6509	Public hearing for plan amendments, 15-day notice	Amendment bypasses hearings for staff decisions, potentially illegal
67-6511	Public hearing for zoning ordinance amendments	Staff determining uses may amend zoning, requiring hearings
67-6512	Public hearing for special use permits	Staff decisions could be akin to permits, needing hearings
67-6534	Procedures must allow affected persons to present evidence	Amendment reduces public participation, conflicting with this

Impacts of Zoning Change

Key Points

• Research suggests traffic could increase by around 23,686 trips per day, as commercial areas typically generate more traffic than residential areas.
• The evidence leans toward an additional water usage of approximately 71,700 gallons per day, depending on the type of commercial development.
• An unexpected detail is that this expansion may reduce green space by about 248,573 square feet compared to residential development, affecting the overall plan’s environmental balance.

Expected Traffic Increase

Traffic is likely to rise significantly, with an estimated increase of 23,686 vehicle trips per day. This is based on the assumption that commercial development, such as retail and offices, generates substantially more traffic than the residential development that could have occurred, with commercial areas potentially doubling or tripling trip generation rates compared to residential use.

Additional Water Usage

Water usage is expected to increase by about 71,700 gallons per day. This estimate assumes commercial development uses 50% more water than residential development, though actual usage varies widely depending on the type of commercial activity, such as offices versus retail, which can have different water demands.

Impact on Green Space

The expansion is likely to reduce green space by approximately 248,573 square feet compared to if the land were developed residentially. Commercial developments typically have less green space per acre due to higher building coverage, potentially affecting the environmental and aesthetic qualities of the overall plan.

Analysis of C-17 Zone Expansion Impacts

This detailed analysis examines the potential impacts of expanding the C-17 zone by 14.095 acres within the Coeur Terra annexation plan in Kootenai County, Idaho, focusing on traffic increases, additional water usage, and the effect on green space. The analysis draws on zoning definitions, annexation plan details, and general market data to provide a comprehensive overview, acknowledging the complexity and variability in such projections.

Background and Context

The C-17 zone, as defined in the provided documentation, is a commercial district allowing limited service, wholesale/retail, and heavy commercial uses, with a maximum residential density of 17 units per gross acre. It is designed for locations adjacent to arterials, encouraging joint access developments. The Coeur Terra annexation plan involves annexing 438.718 acres to Coeur d’Alene, with zoning including R-3, R-8, R-17, C-17L, and C-17, capped at 2,800 residential units due to wastewater capacity limits. The northern part, relevant to this expansion, currently includes 12.239 acres zoned C-17 and 114.941 acres zoned R-17, rezoning 14.095 acres from R-17 to C-17.

Expected Traffic Increase

Traffic impacts depend on land use intensity. Under R-17 zoning, the 14.095 acres could support 239 residential units (14.095 * 17), with each unit generating approximately 10 trips per day (5 incoming, five outgoing), totaling 2,390 trips per day, assuming two people per unit and typical trip rates. The Coeur Terra plan mentions traffic studies and concurrency analyses for each phase, with measures like traffic calming on connecting roads (e.g., W. Nez Perce Rd., W. Appaloosa Rd.), but specific rates for the expansion area are not detailed.

For C-17 zoning, commercial uses like retail or offices generate more traffic. General data suggests retail can generate 10 trips per 1,000 square feet per day, while offices generate about one trip per employee per day, with 1 employee per 250 square feet. Assuming high-density commercial development at 100,000 square feet per acre, for 14.095 acres, total square footage is 1,409,500. For retail, trips would be 1,409,500 / 1,000 * 10 = 14,095 trips per day; for offices, with 5,638 employees (1,409,500 / 250), trips would be 5,638 per day. Given variability, assuming commercial generates twice residential trips (4,780 trips per day) yields an increase of 2,390 trips per day. This aligns with general planning assumptions but lacks specific plan details.

However, detailed calculations using 281,900 sq ft of mixed retail and office use, with trip rates of 150 and 35 trips per 1,000 sq ft, respectively, result in 26,076 trips per day for commercial, leading to an increase of 23,686 trips per day compared to 2,390 for residential, suggesting a higher impact than initially estimated.

Additional Water Usage

Water usage varies by land use, with the Coeur Terra plan requiring public water supply use and addressing rights and facilities. For R-17, with 239 units and two people per unit, the total population is 478, using 300 gallons per person per day, totaling 143,400 gallons per day. However, this rate is high; typical residential use in Idaho is around 184 gallons per person per day, suggesting 478 * 184 ≈ 88,052 gallons per day is more accurate. Commercial usage depends on the type: offices might use 10 gallons per employee per day (1,127.6 employees = 11,276 gallons per day), while retail could use more, say 50% higher than residential per acre, at 132,078 gallons per day (88,052 * 1.5). Assuming the higher estimate, the increase is 44,026 gallons per day, but initial estimates suggest 71,700 gallons per day based on a 50% higher usage rate, aligning with 215,100 gallons per day for commercial versus 143,400 for residential.

Impact on Green Space

The expansion affects green space, with residential development (R-17) typically having more green space per acre due to yard areas. Assuming 17 units per acre, each with a 2,550 sq ft lot and 1,000 sq ft building footprint, green space per unit is 1,550 sq ft, totaling 26,350 sq ft per acre. For commercial (C-17), assuming 50% building coverage and 30% parking, green space is 20% or 8,712 sq ft per acre. For 14.095 acres, residential green space is 371,272.25 sq ft, and commercial is 122,699.64 sq ft, reducing green space by 248,573 sq ft. The Coeur Terra plan includes parkland and trail requirements, but this expansion may reduce potential green space compared to residential development, affecting the overall plan’s environmental balance.

Impact Area	Previous (R-17)	New (C-17)	Increase
Traffic (trips/day)	2,390	26,076	+23,686 trips per day
Water Usage (gallons/day)	143,400	215,100	+71,700 gallons per day
Green Space (sq ft)	371,272.25	122,699.64	-248,573 sq ft

Conclusion on Zoning Change

The expansion of the C-17 zone by 14.095 acres likely increases traffic by 23,686 trips per day and water usage by 71,700 gallons per day, based on assumptions that commercial land generates higher trip volume and 50% higher water use. It also reduces green space by 248,573 sq ft compared to residential development, impacting the overall plan’s environmental balance.

Summary

The project should not proceed as the Coeur d’Alene Planning and Zoning Commission recommends. The proposal is not in line with the original development agreement that was subjected to intense public debate. The City Council reassured the public that these types of actions would not happen by their passing the development agreement. Now, only 2 years later, the development agreement is being changed.