Talus Rock hearing continued

DOVER — The City Council suspended its efforts Thursday to try and summit the matter of Talus Rock.

The council is slated to continue its ascent on Thursday, Oct. 7, when opponents of the forest retreat will outline the route by which the city should and can deny a special use permit for the business.

On Thursday, project representatives and supporters began fixing lines and setting anchors for their position that the city shouldn’t and couldn’t deny permit approval of Talus Rock.

Council members took in about three hours of presentation and testimony before agreeing to continue the hearing so they would have ample time to deliberate. The council also sought more time to study the contours of the mountainous written record.

Neighbors of Bruce and Heather Pedersen’s overnight guest lodge, which is being operated out of their 8,300-square-foot home, have raised repeated objections over a commercial use in their neighborhood. But project reps emphasized that the city’s development code allows such a use in suburban zoning districts.

“A residential lodge is allowed in suburban zones. The Pedersens’ house is in a suburban zone,” said Brian Kasbar, a land use consultant.

Kasbar argued that the proposal complies with city land use standards and there are more than 20 conditions of approval designed to mitigate concerns over traffic, noise and other impacts.

Five people testified in favor of the Pedersen’s lodge. They pointed out that bed-and-breakfast establishments typically draw upscale and low-key clientele who are known to spend money at local restaurants and shops. They also urged the council not to thwart entrepreneurial efforts that bring economic benefits to the community.

“I don’t see how this project would be a detriment to the community,” said Jason Funk.

Opponents, however, counter that they have firsthand experience with excessive noise and boisterous gatherings that has diminished enjoyment of their forested neighborhood. Talus Rock was being offered for commercial use before a permit was sought and some opponents allege it’s still being used for commercial purposes.

Project proponents maintain that allegations of prior violations are not germane during the review process and cannot be considered, while opponents assert that a Kootenai County case that went to Idaho’s Supreme Court holds that compliance violations can be factored into the deliberations.

Janet Robnette, legal counsel for some of the opponents, cautioned that Kasbar’s analysis was overly simplistic because it suggested that a commercial use is allowed by right instead of being conditionally allowed.

Robnette also urged the council to ask the applicants a basic question.

“Are you in fact still renting rooms?” she said.