Cd'A council denies request for 161-unit project

A piece of land near western Coeur d’Alene could be the next site of a new subdivision.

Coeur d’Alene city officials held a public hearing Tuesday on a request to annex and convert 9.32 acres from Kootenai County into a mix of single- and multi-family units, as well as duplexes. The parcel is near the intersection of North Atlas Road and West Prairie Avenue.

The applicant, Endura Development, plans to build up to 161 multi-family units across two parcels, City Associate Planner Barbara Barker said. Specifics on what those units could be, whether they’re apartments, townhomes or standard houses, have yet to be clarified.

To develop the proposal, the city must annex the land from the county because it is currently zoned County Agricultural, which allows only one single-family dwelling or one two-family dwelling per lot, with a minimum lot size of 2 acres. The annexation would change the zoning to R-17, which allows 17 units per acre. 

The city’s comprehensive plan identifies the area as an “Urban Neighborhood,” which lists R-17 as a compatible zone. 

“R-17 zoning provides for density that supports affordable housing stock,” said Ray Kimball of Whipple Consulting Engineers, speaking on behalf of Endura. 

After about three hours of presentations, public comments and deliberation, city officials unanimously denied the request without prejudice because they have yet to receive a concrete traffic study.

“The traffic impact is extremely negative,” Council member Christie Wood said. “And we already have Coeur Terre coming on board with Atlas already.”

David Swenson purchased the parcels in 2001, when the area was mostly rural. Since then, residential developments cropped up on almost every side of the proposed 9.32 acres. This includes an R-8 planned unit development adjacent to its eastern border.

Meanwhile, the area has been a real estate hot spot recently as city officials last month approved the Coeur Terre subdivision, which will establish up to 506 new residences between Buckskin and Huetter roads and north of Interstate 90. 

The Coeur Terre subdivision site is about 2 miles southwest of where Endura proposes to build.

Endura’s proposed subdivision would use Atlas Road as its primary access point and West Daylily Drive, which already goes through an existing neighborhood toward the east, as its secondary access point.

Tuesday’s hearing drew several public comments — most opposing the development and the increase in traffic. 

Based on estimates, 161 new apartment units could add 1,071 trips per day. This equates to 82 trips during morning rush hour and 100 during afternoon rush hour.

“I live right there in the corner,” public commenter James Lechner said. “Daylily is right next to my house, so all that traffic from the apartments will probably be going by my house every day.”

Some people argued against developing the land as an R17 zone next to an R8 zone.

“R17 abutted up with R8, that more than doubles the density,” public commenter Laura Tipton said.

Others, however, argued that the community needs more attainable housing. 

Right now, Kootenai County itself faces a housing deficit of up to 7,000 units, according to local housing reports.

“Affordable housing has always been something that I have struggled to find,” Public commenter Trevor Beeching said, speaking in favor of the proposed development. “People need somewhere safe and affordable to live while they're saving for down payment, starting a career or raising young children.”

The City Council had mixed views on the annexation. Along with Wood, council member Kenny Gabriel expressed concern for the development, saying the city “needs to look at the bigger picture.”

“Attainability is something that we’ve been struggling with for a very long time,” he said. “But we’ve gotten pummeled up here for letting things get out of hand.”

On the flip side, council members Dan Sheckler and Kiki Miller showed open support for the proposed project.

Miller said the city does not have many infill opportunities left, and that the proposal provided by Endura fits within its comprehensive plan. 

Scheckler agreed, saying Endura proposed the “lowest-intensity use” allowed by the city’s comprehensive plan.

“(This) leads me to the conclusion that this should be approved based on the comprehensive plan,” he said.

Tuesday’s denial of the annexation means the request will return to the city’s planning and zoning commission for a second review.