Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Landowners Split Property To Beat Laws New Regulation Raises The Minimum Lot Size To 20 Acres

Landowners rushing to beat regulation changes moved to subdivide eight square miles of Kootenai County in the past three months.

But that doesn’t mean all that land will be developed in the near future.

“It’ll take years to sell and develop all that land,” said Mike Hunt, with North Idaho Engineering.

About 50 landowners with more than 5,500 acres of undeveloped land - an area half the size of Coeur d’Alene - split their property into 537 lots between September and Nov. 17.

That’s when an interim plan adopted by county leaders to halt the practice took effect.

“It’s hard to say whether it’s too late or not,” said Jon Mueller, county planning commission chairman. “At least the changes will prevent further divisions of land on a piece-meal basis.”

For more than a year, county officials have been working to change a subdivision rule dubbed “Idaho Code Plats.” The law allows landowners to split property into lots of 10 acres or more merely by surveying the land, showing their plans to county officials and filing a record of the change at the courthouse.

Smaller lots, like those in Coeur d’Alene, must go through a costly, time-consuming public review where county officials can ensure the subdivision has adequate roads, sewage disposal and water systems.

With the code plats, county planners and planning commissioners review the divisions, but have no power to alter or deny them. Planning commissioners will rubber stamp two dozen such requests Dec. 11.

The new law raises the minimum lot size to 20 acres. Officials hope a soft market for lots of that size would dramatically reduce the number of unregulated land divisions.

County leaders had expected the last-minute rush, but were surprised by the volume. As much land was divided in the two months before the change as in the past three years combined.

“People felt they were about to lose half of what they’d planned on getting in the future,” said Hunt, who is opposed to the change in law. “Some people just did it to protect what they saw as their property rights.”

, DataTimes