[First....thank you for the excellent synopsis Priscilla]
[ I greatly appreciate it since I could not attend ]
> Schwam's arguements:
> (a) there is tremendous and unstoppable pressure for rural residences
> outside Moscow,
This is a meaningless speculation unless one specifies the
types and price ranges of rural residences. I suspect
there is unlimited demand for ranchettes priced at $75,000 and
very little demand at the going rate of $200,000 plus.
In addition, Latah County residents would prefer that new
housing be located in or new existing cities. This is a fact based
on tangible evidence, not speculation.
> (c) forcing people's demand into 40 acre parcels needlessly "gobbles"
> up agricultural land (he argued that 40 a parcels would be taken out
> of production and later made the point that we are protecting
> farmland, not farmers, without whom there will be no farmland ...),
Again, this is speculation. Do we have actual figures on the
number of 40 acre parcels that have been taken out of production?
...
The one area where Schwam is correct is that the Latah County
Comprehensive Map is in error...but not for this
particular area in question.
I have the SCS soil type maps for Latah County in GIS and I produced
a map for Gary Machlis that evening which showed that most of
the section that Cameron wanted to rezone is considered "prime"
agricultural land based on soil type. However, there are significant
areas in Latah County that were egregiously mis-designated on the
Comprehensive Map. If Schwam were to press this issue, he might
win. The P&Z has absolutely nothing to back up their--in many cases--
arbitrary designations. I think Comprehensive Map corrections should
be a high priority for citizen action. Perhaps we can use the
Commissioner's hearing on this proposed rezone to make this point.
> The hearing then came to a surprisingly quick resolution when Karl
> Mickelson asked for motions that first, the rezone request is
> inconsistent with the plan as adopted (the motion passed with one
> abstention), and second, Cameron Farms presented insufficient
> evidence that the plan had been developed in error (the motion passed
> unanimously).
The plan was developed in error...but the Cameron Comprehensive Map
designation is correct.
-- Greg Brown gregb@uidaho.edu http://www.uidaho.edu/~gregb Computer Services Moscow, ID 83843 University of Idaho (208) 885-2126