Council keeps appeal hearing open after record gaps found in Fuller shoreline/design review case; hearing continued to Oct. 23

The McCall City Council kept an appeal hearing open and set a date to continue after appellants and staff identified documents that were not included in the council packet but were part of the Planning & Zoning record.

Attorney Jed Manwaring, representing neighbor Rick Wood, argued the underlying matter includes a “legitimate dispute over status of title” to a 10‑foot strip adjacent to the Fuller property and that Planning & Zoning’s record contained conflicting surveys and unsigned material. Manwaring told council the dispute meant the application should not have been permitted until ownership was clarified.

John Wood, a family member who said he holds family interests in neighboring lots, told the council that a public‑records pull after the P&Z hearings revealed additional surveys, emails and other records that did not appear in the packet provided to council. “We just want it to be on their property, not the city’s property,” John Wood said, summarizing the family’s central concern about encroachments into Diamond Street’s right‑of‑way.

Fuller family counsel Mary York (Holland & Hart) opposed the appeal and argued the appellants lack standing. York also said Planning & Zoning had considered the applicable nonconforming‑structure rules, that raising a building to install a foundation does not trigger the P&Z move‑structure rule as interpreted by staff and P&Z, and that the 30‑foot Davis Beach strip referenced by appellants is city property and not part of the Fullers’ application.

During argument, council and staff discovered that at least one document listed in the staff report (including a stormwater report and several survey pages) had not been embedded in the council packet due to a file transfer error. City attorney Bill Punkany and staff recommended augmenting the record to include those materials. The council voted to continue the appeal to Oct. 23, 2025 for the limited purpose of adding the missing record documents and allowing written argument from parties only on the newly added materials.

The council’s continuance order instructs staff to identify and distribute the augmented record to parties and to accept written legal argument on the new materials. The continuance preserves all parties’ rights to have the council base its decision on the complete planning and zoning record for the application.

What happens next: staff will add the omitted documents to the appeal record, notify the parties, and accept written commentary limited to those new documents; deliberation and a final council decision will be scheduled after the Oct. 23, 2025 date.

Key quotes from the hearing include Jed Manwaring’s invocation of ownership as central to land‑use permitting and John Wood’s plea that the house be built “on their property, not the city’s property.”