[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6598946,"mediaKeyId","3021389-7f43ef1c8d28c05956b517f49e09dc52","parentId",3021389,"title","Sandpoint staff previews parking‑management plan: passes, paid parking on congested blocks and in‑lieu fees proposed","audioSeconds",5539,"startMs",3157000,"endMs",8696000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3021389-7f43ef1c8d28c05956b517f49e09dc52&start=3157&end=8696","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3021389-7f43ef1c8d28c05956b517f49e09dc52/thumbnail_3157000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6598946/Sandpoint/Bonner-County/Idaho/Sandpoint-staff-previews-parkingmanagement-plan-passes-paid-parking-on-congested-blocks-and-inlieu-fees-proposed","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6598946-92b949bff9ff805c77aec15eebb62a88/orig.mp4?Expires=1771160113&Signature=IgszjhlAT8WdcEzp5ceNIye8HNEAEBTKJRSmGzSDFfyYtYGcMcE9~wW9jv3HK-yVqUz0vb12IZiHNT~VKQUGW1l0i4EIj0jXNEnRzGbGjY8OMbq7nF3MNLe43XyVfZoiMRfuZz0RLfVtWCFPp0pd0qjNZAUxs8d4mTXCIoj-hPhlhlv1fLCvEeXGYOGbRXh1MjAGD~l2O9Z740fwy0qkqoMI6VyuQqSODpjUxFTd4TaTknh80zl2YB~GlePqnBXJ3Mgo97-f~BOI9uc-79uXNs0CdAJNaR7g9F8jv5awlxDjsQMzePKkVq5s9XIgEStw3N9RDxbw3jxLBA4Mb5cleQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Sandpoint","date","2025-04-16T15:24:17.963Z","article","City planning staff presented an updated parking management plan to the Planning and Zoning Commission on April 15 that proposes targeted paid parking on the busiest downtown blocks, a $40 monthly downtown resident/business employee pass, boat launch fees, and a change to how residential parking requirements in the downtown parking‑exempt zone might be handled.

Jason Welker, the city planner leading the effort, framed the proposal around a planning concept called effective capacity — the industry rule of thumb that a parking facility is operating efficiently when roughly 85% of stalls are occupied. Welker said the city’s 2022 parking study (conducted during a summer week) showed large variances in utilization across lots and blocks. He reported that downtown on‑street stalls were about 57% occupied at the noon peak, while the city parking lot reached 83% occupancy at the same time. Welker said staff’s analysis shows roughly 296 additional street‑parking vehicles could be accommodated at peak hour before reaching the 85% threshold in the downtown study area.

Key proposals staff described:

- Time limits and passes: revise free parking durations for pass holders (current draft: 3 hours in downtown lots for resident/business passes and 6 hours at the city beach; nonresident passes: 2 hours downtown and 3 hours at the city beach). Staff proposed a combined downtown resident/business/employee monthly pass at $40.

- Paid parking targeted to congested blocks: staff asked the commission whether limited paid parking should be reintroduced on the most overused blocks (the “orange/red” areas in staff’s maps) to increase turnover where businesses most need short‑term parking.

- Boat launch fees and parking for waterfront areas: staff proposed boat launch fees modeled on practices in nearby jurisdictions.

- Residential parking requirements and in‑lieu fees: staff proposed changing the exempt‑zone rules so new residential development would have parking obligations based on unit square footage rather than a flat approach. Up to 50% of the requirement could be satisfied through an in‑lieu payment administratively; larger reductions would come before the commission. Staff said in‑lieu funds could be used for future public parking projects.

Welker summarized public outreach: a community survey received 1,811 responses (about 935 self‑reported city residents) and staff met with downtown business groups and the Chamber. He said survey responses indicated that 72% of respondents were neutral or satisfied with downtown parking availability, while 58% rated off‑street parking condition as fair or poor. Welker also noted that a short‑term experiment — closing the city lot for repaving — displaced about 100 vehicles to on‑street spaces and that staff saw substantial available street parking during the noon hour on the day they sampled.

Commissioners asked about enforcement costs and technology options, the likely public reaction to paid parking, and how an in‑lieu fee would be structured so it does not deter development. Welker said kiosk or pay‑by‑phone systems are options; estimated hardware costs for a station are roughly $3,000 each, though service models vary. He also told the commission a public parking structure downtown (if the city chose to pursue one) would carry a high capital cost — roughly $30,000 per stall based on current estimates — and that paid parking and in‑lieu fees would be necessary revenue sources to support such a facility.

Commissioners and staff debated whether to eliminate 4‑hour time limits in peripheral downtown streets to encourage employees to park outside the core (staff suggested this would provide a free alternative to a $40 monthly pass and reduce employee turnover pressure). Views diverged: some commission members said removing those limits would reduce turnover near businesses, others said employees should be encouraged to park further out or buy a pass. Several commissioners recommended more analysis of enforcement costs and of how parking revenues would be used before adopting paid parking.

Staff signaled an implementation timeline: additional code changes and an ordinance (Title 9, Chapter 5) would be prepared and brought to the commission at a future meeting (staff indicated May 20) and to City Council (tentatively May 21). Welker asked commissioners for feedback on policy direction, boundary definitions for the parking‑exempt zone, the proposed pass and fee structure, and the residential parking requirement options.

Jason Welker said the plan aims to improve utilization (move supply toward the effective capacity target), address funding for maintenance of public lots and potential future expansion, and provide predictable rules for developers downtown. As Welker noted during the presentation, the parking‑management choices are tied to the city’s broader goals for downtown form and housing mix; in the planning materials staff cited the comprehensive plan guidance to “explore alternatives to parking requirements to encourage a variety of housing types.”

Next steps in the record: staff will refine the draft ordinance and return to the commission with legal language and recommended conditions; council consideration is scheduled as part of the mayor/staff calendar noted in the public packet.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City of Sandpoint | Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting | 04/15/2025","oneSentenceSummary","City planners presented an updated parking management plan April 15 proposing targeted paid parking on the busiest downtown blocks, a $40 monthly downtown pass and in‑lieu fees for residential parking in the downtown exemption area.","taxTitle","Sandpoint, Bonner County, Idaho","taxId",52019,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6598952,"Sandpoint commission approves Samuelson Avenue multifamily conditional‑use permit, grants two waivers",4503,213000,4716000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3021389-7f43ef1c8d28c05956b517f49e09dc52&start=213&end=4716","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3021389-7f43ef1c8d28c05956b517f49e09dc52/thumbnail_213000.jpg","/articles/6598952/Sandpoint/Bonner-County/Idaho/Sandpoint-commission-approves-Samuelson-Avenue-multifamily-conditionaluse-permit-grants-two-waivers","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6598952-cd84f5bfa1354b18d063dcfb4548255c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771160113&Signature=ALxBylOnHzuv8IceoNWRYTs7ZAcCca~73PgngXTaPbIiGzPyLaZnB-wqrR-3itXXHzbocibpCfs2EJy40d1mxpe4Wz93bdjmuprr8mu7vukPF-itieO78as1xO5Cpovz3rIS-LpdDs2~fTL1rcZh5UH3rzLfHL2t3pOACwbpx3~pQaD4ciWFEAA28c-qKZa38U8dJsLA2PIdX-G5DG40PdPrw0ssDf-UsxSgDADkqbRiRSiW9t~zB09NiGnzJz4rFYiRoBcDLBGONLohBD4RlMF5Q-xv60SVcLbavM5huMyU2IHypv27jPaHSXGGb1POb3qgmJxtTSwB4fI9xuz~7w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Sandpoint Planning and Zoning Commission on April 15 approved a conditional‑use permit for a multifamily development at the terminus of Samuelson Avenue and granted two waiver requests allowing reduced bicycle parking and a smaller building‑to‑parking landscape buffer.

The vote, taken after a staff presentation, an applicant presentation and public comment, was unanimous (Commissioners Benner, Weber, Mitchell, Torpey and Chair Moe Dunkel voted yes). The motion recorded in the meeting minutes identifies the application as PCUP24‑0004 and says the approval was for 56 units in four buildings on a roughly 6.53‑acre parcel; however, staff and the applicant repeatedly described the project materials as a 156‑unit proposal earlier in the public hearing and in submitted documents. The commission’s motion as read and adopted uses the number “56.” The discrepancy appears in the public record and is noted here rather than resolved by this article.

Why this matters: the project would extend Samuelson Road, add a new apartment complex adjacent to existing multifamily and near the fairgrounds and airport, and includes requests to relax two development standards that apply to the site.

Darren Fluke, the city’s consulting planner, summarized the staff report and the standards the commission must find to grant a conditional‑use permit and waivers. Fluke said the property is zoned RM (residential multifamily) and described the site layout as four buildings arranged around a central motor court, a 5,300‑square‑foot clubhouse, a pool, and a maintenance building. Fluke noted the application requests (in the staff report) are for a conditional‑use permit and two waivers from the zoning ordinance.

Applicant representatives described the project and justification for the waivers. Norris D. Boyd of Boyd Wilson Company said his firm has built multifamily projects since 1985 and plans to remain the owner‑operator. Nicole Costello of Clearwater Engineering highlighted site details, including an extension of Samuelson Road of approximately 816 feet and two access points off the extended roadway. The applicants told commissioners they propose 196 car parking spaces and 237 bicycle parking spaces, with 80 of those bike spaces located in secure indoor rooms (20 per building).

The commission approved both waivers: (1) a 25% reduction in required bike parking (the applicant argued the city code’s 2 spaces per unit requirement would yield 312 spaces for a 156‑unit buildout and that indoor secure storage and the site layout justify fewer rack spaces); and (2) a reduction of the required 15‑foot landscape buffer between buildings and parking to 10 feet, to allow medians and mail kiosk locations to remain and to accommodate an existing 20‑foot drainage easement that constrains the parcel. Commissioners discussed flexibility in how the 15 feet is apportioned between landscape and sidewalk as part of building‑permit review.

Commissioners and staff questioned several technical items during deliberations: snow storage locations, dimensions of drive aisles and parking stalls relative to the city’s 23‑foot maneuvering requirement, whether the north entrance can serve as a hammerhead fire turnaround under the International Fire Code, and whether an official traffic impact study (TIS) would be required. Staff and the applicant said a TIS will be performed as part of later reviews as required by the city and that the northern entrance is intended to serve as a hammerhead turnaround meeting fire apparatus dimensions; staff said any private property element that would serve as a public turnaround should be protected by easement or similar mechanism so a future owner could not block it.

Public comment during the hearing was brief. Donna Griffin, executive director of Selkirk Pend Oreille Transit, urged the commission and applicant to consider transit access and vehicle size in design, noting the agency currently provides paratransit and curb‑to‑curb service to nearby complexes and that bus ingress/egress should be considered. Griffin said, “we get called to provide our most expensive service,” and asked the commission to account for transit access in planning.

The commission approved the conditional‑use permit and both waivers by roll call. After the vote, staff noted the commission will receive a written decision at a later meeting that will contain the findings and the conditions of approval.

Project components and conditions recorded in the public record: extension of Samuelson Road ~816 feet; four residential buildings with a central clubhouse and pool; 196 vehicle parking spaces (applicant‑stated); 237 bicycle parking spaces proposed (80 enclosed indoors); proposed mechanical underground stormwater treatment system (applicant cited proprietary treatment units such as “Storm Scepter”/ConTek‑style systems); an existing 20‑foot drainage easement on the western edge of the property that constrained setback/landscape layouts; and a requirement that any private property element used for fire turnaround be protected so it cannot be obstructed in the future. Final engineering details, a TIS if required by staff, and building‑permit level revisions will be handled during subsequent city reviews.

The commission’s vote was recorded as: Wayne Benner — yes; Reed Weber — yes; Will Mitchell — yes; Scott Torpey — yes; Chair Moe Dunkel — yes. The minutes show the motion was moved and seconded, and commissioners instructed staff to prepare a written decision consistent with the hearing record.

What’s next: staff will finalize the written decision and conditions of approval and post them in the public record. Any site plan or building permit submittal must meet the city’s code standards, the conditions adopted by the commission and the required technical reviews (stormwater design, fire access, TIS if required).

(Reporting note: the meeting record contains inconsistent references to the total unit count for the approved application — the staff and applicant materials repeatedly referenced 156 units, while the motion read into the record and adopted by the commission refers to 56 units. That inconsistency appears in the public record and should be clarified in the written decision.)","The Sandpoint Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously April 15 to approve a conditional‑use permit for a multifamily project at the end of Samuelson Avenue and granted waivers reducing required bike parking and the landscape buffer. The record and staff materials contained inconsistent unit counts.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Sandpoint staff previews parking‑management plan: passes, paid parking on congested blocks and in‑lieu fees proposed

Sandpoint commission approves Samuelson Avenue multifamily conditional‑use permit, grants two waivers