Are property owners' rights heard at planning hearings?

In February we went to a Planning and Zoning meeting in regard to an annexation and subdivision proposal. The applicant made his proposal by starting with the statement that the city has given it's OK for him to hook up to city water and sewer, whether they annexed property or not, and therefore the county told him he could put the proposed number of houses on approximately a 6-acre parcel since he would have city water and sewer.

Excuse me maybe I missed something along the way but isn't it a waste of time to have a hearing when supposedly the developer already has the OK to do the subdivision. What happened to adjoining property owners' rights to have their voices heard?

Not long ago Ray Miller(the mayor) stated there would be no water or sewer hook-ups outside of city boundaries but according to the applicant there are special waivers to this statement. How do you turn down the next request for hook-ups when you have set a precedent?

At the next meeting that was for the approval of the subdivision the Planning and Zoning members were told by several people how dangerous the road is, according to the developer he is going to widen the road in front of the property to the railroad underpass. What about the piece between the underpass and the bike path at Travers Park? There is no shoulder on that roadway and it is barely wide enough for two cars. The development will potentially put 30 kids walking and biking on that road, after being told how dangerous it is now if the city OKs the subdivision. Aren't they open to liability? It seems the Planning and Zoning and the city need to look further ahead than just approving another annexation and subdivision, if they want to acquire the tax base than they had better be ready take the responsibility of improvements before putting people at risk.

DOTTIE YERKES

Sandpoint