Commission stands by tiny homes permit

The city of Lewiston’s Planning & Zoning Commission is standing behind its approval of a conditional use permit for a proposed dozen-unit tiny home village for young adults at risk of homelessness.

Linda Glines, who lives near the proposed housing development, filed an appeal of the decision containing more than 45 signatures of residents affected by the commission’s decision.

But this week the commission affirmed giving the green light to the conditional use permit in a decision that can still be appealed to the Lewiston City Council.

Lewiston City Attorney Jennifer Tengono instructed the commission to weigh if its decision violated state or federal law, exceeded the authority of the commission, was made through procedures that were unlawful or inconsistent with city or Idaho code, was not supported by substantial evidence or if the evidence supporting it was so weak no reasonable person would have been convinced by it.

The commission had ruled in late August that the proposal of the LC Valley Youth Resource Center met the criteria for the conditional use permit in the M-1 or light industrial zone such as filling a community need, not creating hazardous conditions and not causing additional nuisances.

Backers of the village proposed for 2207 E. Main St. believe it will provide homes for children aging out of foster care or the LC Valley Youth Resource when they turn 18 years old who have no established place to go.

The homes would be constructed on land once used as a city park adjacent to a Twin County United Way building that would be sold to the LC Valley Youth Resource Center and remodeled into a community room for the village.

The drug- and alcohol-free village would be for 18-, 19- and 20-year olds who were working toward financial independence through employment or education. The residents would be supervised by staff members 24 hours a day.

But Glines’ appeal outlined six issues about the village and the process the commission followed.

Among them were the adequacy of the water and sewer lines; increased traffic and a climb in trespassing; verbal confrontations; property theft; and vandalism, according to the appeal.

“What happens if theft incidents start to climb?” according to the appeal. “The village will have absolutely no control over what these young people can do once they step outside the fence of the village.”

At the same time, the appeal states neighbors would like to see the city land return to its former use as a park.

“The city made the decision to quit taking care of the park,” according to the appeal. “Usage will return if the park is maintained with basic playground equipment, picnic tables and kept green. We deserve our child friendly park as much as any other area of the city.”

The appeal also raises questions about the time allowed for public comment at the public hearing on the conditional use permit.

Citizens were allotted three minutes, but Michelle King, a founder of the not-for-profit LC Valley Resource Center had no time limit on her remarks, according to the appeal.

The commission stated Wednesday that it based its decision on information provided by city staff and King.

The village, for example, the commission stated, has created a safety and security plan in cooperation with the Lewiston Police Department following city codes and has established procedures to handle issues such as substance abuse, criminal behavior and mental health crises.

The decision to stop maintaining the park, according to the commission, was outside the scope of the request for the conditional use permit.

According to the commission, citizens had avenues to express their views outside the first round of comments at the public hearing on the conditional use permit, including a second invitation to speak and written comments.

Williams may be contacted at ewilliam@lmtribune.com or (208) 848-2261.