A Stitch, In Time, Can Cost You Nine
Developers Tom and Linda Janson got what they deserved. Under Kootenai County zoning laws and today’s lax moral standards, they probably have a right to build a nudist resort in a rural area near Worley, Idaho. It was poetic justice, however, that the project suffered a costly delay. By originally hiding their true intentions for Sun Meadow Resort from Kootenai County, the Moscow couple invited a court fight that shelved the project for a year.
That’s one of the things opponents won from their unsuccessful fight to stop this strange venture. That, and tough conditions placed on it by county commissioners, who OK’d the Jansons’ request on a split vote Wednesday. The conditions, which include a state-certified sewage system and extensive screening, should protect the environment - and keep nudists out of sight, if not out of mind.
It’s hard to fault Commissioners Dick Panabaker and Dick Compton for voting to approve Sun Meadow Resort, on its planning merits. Last year, the commission unanimously OK’d the rural development. It’s equally hard, however, to fault Commissioner Ron Rankin for voting against it this time, on moral grounds and its effect on property values.
The Jansons plan to build a 160-acre development that includes 43 recreational vehicle hookups, 10 rental cabins, a lodge and a subdivision with 16 residential lots, on Conkling Road, 3.7 miles east of Highway 95.
At best, a nudist resort next door is a live-and-let-live thing. At worst, it’s the butt of community jokes that hurt neighbors. Rankin made that point: “I believe because of the public perception of this (nudist colony) being a nuisance that this would have an adverse effect on values of the surrounding property.”
Neighbors and the Coeur d’Alene Indian Tribe opposed the project, even before the issue of nude recreation came to light. They protested that the rural development would harm wildlife habitat and strain public services. “Our main concern was Mother Earth,” said Chuck Matheson, a tribal council member. “If you put a couple hundred people out there, obviously, deer and elk won’t go there. The only problem we had about the nudist aspect was that they weren’t up front with everybody.”
On appeal, the Jansons’ lack of candor about “potential intended uses” for their land prompted a judge to remand the matter to commissioners. The omission validates neighbors’ fears that this project is harmful. It’s also an admission that nude recreation deviates far from the norm.