SANDPOINT — After over 14 hours of hearings related to a proposed cell tower, Bonner County commissioners moved to deny the application, determining there was insufficient evidence demonstrating a need for the tower, among other findings.  

In denying the conditional use permits, commissioners concluded that the proposal did not align with the area’s rural character and that the applicant failed to demonstrate a significant gap in wireless coverage.  

Public comment was not accepted during the Thursday hearing, as commissioners focused solely on deliberation and decision-making.   

The denial cited conflicts with the Idaho Code 67-6512 and Bonner County Revised Code, which commissioners determined that the proposed cell tower would not preserve the rural character of Bonner County.  

“For me also, the proposed cell tower is not visually similar to the power lines that exist on the subject parcel or in the surrounding area. Instead, the proposed CUP will negatively impact the rural character of those parcels by introducing a new and unique commercial infrastructure that is inconsistent and out of character,” Commissioner Brian Domke said. 

Domke said the comprehensive plan requires commissioners to consider impacts on neighboring properties, citing testimony from licensed real estate agents in the record who expressed concerns about potential impacts to property values. 

Commissioners agreed that the tower negatively impacted surrounding properties, with Commissioner Asia Williams saying that the project applicant did not show any evidence that there was no impact on properties in rural areas.  

“They presented evidence resulting from urban areas, not rural areas, to say that there was no negative impact. They didn’t bring evidence to show that there’s no impact on the county’s properties in a rural area,” Williams said. “I do not find that cell towers complement the rural character of the county; it’s not something that people want to see.”  

Commissioners further identified that the project applicants did not demonstrate a significant coverage gap that would necessitate a cell tower.

“They state that this is increasingly important as the number of homes without landline phones increases, but I don’t have any information to prove that, so I cannot find a reason for that,” Commissioner Ron Korn said. “When they were speaking about the significant gap, I asked them what the definition of that was, and they could not give me an answer. It’s not defined, so we don’t even know what that is.”  

Domke added that the applicant did not define “significant gap” as it pertained to cell coverage, and that the applicant made claims that filling the significant gap in cell coverage was necessary for the surrounding areas. He also cited inconsistent data shared by the applicant, “indicating a prejudice by the applicant for mid-band coverage,” according to Domke.  

The permit would have allowed construction of a 140-foot cell tower on a 20-acre parcel on Cindy Lane. The application was originally approved by the county hearing examiner in 2023 before being appealed, reconsidered and ultimately vacated through judicial review.