Changes to county regs approved by planning board
Members 'stick to guns' regarding density issue
Staff reporter
Proposed changes to the county's zoning and subdivision regulations were approved as published by Marion County Planning Commission Thursday despite opposition from Marion County Commission.
The planning commission already had published the proposed changes for public hearing when additional changes were requested by the county commission.
The proverbial ball is now in the court of the county commission when, after a 14-day protest period, the county commission can accept or recommend additional changes to the regulations.
Part of the changes were "housekeeping" issues with clarification of definitions and correction of typographical errors.
The real controversy still remains about the size of lot splits for residential use and the number of houses allowed per section.
The proposed changes limits one residence per 40 acres or on legally-created five or three-acre lots.
Three-acre lots would be allowed on farmsteads with an existing residential structure or if it was a residential site in the past.
It also allows growth areas around the City of Goessel of three-acre parcels but cannot exceed one unit per 40 acres or 16 per section.
Hillsboro and Marion city officials declined participation saying it could hinder development.
Lot split guidelines with the subdivision regulations were approved as proposed and provisions were made for those undeveloped areas without roads.
The county commission would have the ultimate power to assess improvement costs to home builders on rural secondary (RS) or maintained roads.
For lots on gravel, non-RS roads, an assessment of $500 could be implemented. For lots on dirt, non-RS roads, $500 plus an additional $500 for each quarter mile of road to be graveled, not to exceed a total assessment of $3,000 could be charged.
A letter from the county commission to planning commission requested the following changes:
— A minimum acreage of three acres countywide for rural home sites, provided sufficient area is available for water wells and lagoons.
The county commission's rationale: proposed five-acre minimum for new home sites as compared to three-acre minimum for previous home sites has no justification other than to encourage building on pre-existing home sites. If three acres are acceptable for previous home sites, there is no reason three acres should not be acceptable countywide.
— The commission desires 16 home sites per section instead of one home per 40 acres.
Rationale: With one per 40, there would be 16 odd-shaped lots that could cause easement and accessibility issues for the four middle lots if the section was divided into 16 equal lots.
The one per 40 option limits the ability to take advantage of available wasteland and use farmland or be excluded through Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) process.
If 16 sites per section are permissible in certain areas, there can be no justification for not using this standard countywide, said the commission in the letter.
Planning commission chairman Eileen Sieger disagreed with the accessibility issue and said there would not be a problem with accessibility of lots.
Bob Maxwell, planning commission member, said there is justification in restriction because there would be "little villages" throughout the county with 16 homes per section, when the development is designed to be near cities.
The county commission also wanted a "grandfather" clause included in the regulations to allow lot splits on parcels less than 40 acres that existed prior to zoning.
The letter concluded that the commission also understands the comprehensive plan will need to be modified to mirror proposed zoning changes.
"The modifications required are considered minor and not having any detrimental effect on the overall comprehensive plan," said the commissioners in the letter.
David Brazil, zoning administrator, said the county commission's request for changes to density would require changes to the comprehensive plan.
Sieger asked if the planning commission was aware of an "overwhelming" sentiment from the public for changes to the regulations?
Maxwell and Sieger responded they had not heard any.
Planning commission vice chairman David Mueller said he had comments that people don't want the required 40 acres for home sites and was in favor of three-acre splits for existing home sites.
Planning commission member Willis Ensz and Sieger said they would like to have five-acre lot splits.
Ervin Ediger, planning commission member, said he has a neighbor with a home on a three-acre site and was crowded with the necessary setback requirements for septic and drinking water.
Sieger said that was her concern with three-acre sites — there not being sufficient room for a lagoon.
"If they can afford to buy three acres, they can afford to buy five," said Ensz, "to have a quality home site."
Maxwell said he talked with real estate agents in Marion and Hillsboro and heard various opinions regarding larger and smaller parcels.
A motion was made by Mueller to make a statement to the county commission regarding the planning commission's opposition to changing net density of residential housing of one house per 40 acres to 16 per section. The planning commission concurred and passed the motion in support of the current policy of one house per 40 acres.
Following the 14-day protest period, the county commission can revise and change the county's zoning and subdivision regulations as it desires. However, changes to the county's comprehensive plan must be in place prior to increased density changes in the county's subdivision regulations.
