Lines are drawn, defenses up at planning meeting
Staff reporter
The purpose of a special meeting Thursday evening, called by Marion County Planning Commission, was to clarify whether a consultant was still retained, activities of the county zoning administrator, and question the lack of activity for the board.
Instead, it was a "he said, she said" exchange of words between a planning board member and a county commissioner, and a struggle between the planning board and the current administrator.
Chairman Eileen Sieger began discussion by asking if Jim Kaup still was retained as the planning board's consultant.
"We are due a consultant and have had one," said board member Bob Maxwell.
The contention of the board was since it was never notified of any changes, it assumed Kaup was their consultant.
"I believe you have been told there is no need for an attorney," said Bobbi Strait, county zoning administrator. She continued that she had informed Sieger of the change.
"I assumed I would be notified by the county commission," Sieger said.
Maxwell asked Strait if this was her decision or the commission's. Strait responded it was hers and the commission's.
"David Yearout is now the board's consultant," Strait said. She added that Yearout was a certified planner, Kaup was not.
Board member Mary Avery said if there had been changes, everyone should have been notified so "all would have the information at the same time."
In other business:
— The board discussed changes to the county's zoning regulations as proposed by Marion County Commission and decided not to approve the changes.
Among those changes would be the abolition of LESA (Land Evaluation and Site Assessment) system which is used to determine if agricultural land can be sold for development or should remain only for ag use.
"Commissioner Randy Dallke had stated that LESA isn't fair because it is only for small acreage," Maxwell said. "LESA is an assessment, not a hard line that determines approval or denial."
Maxwell said that in his opinion, if a landowner wants to sell a portion of land, LESA will determine the use.
"Farmers are not going to build on a prime piece of farm ground," Maxwell said. "I think LESA is a good tool to work with and should remain in the regulations."
"LESA serves as a conscience," said board member Glen Unrau. "It forces the applicant to think about the proper thing to do (regarding the sale of land)."
— Other proposed changes to the county's zoning regulations that were voted down by the planning board was the change of net density of residential properties from one house per 40 acres to 12 houses per section.
"This opens up all kinds of problems," said board member David Mueller. "It will encourage cluster development. I would prefer the net density to remain at one (house) per 40 (acres). I think it (net density) can be increased by another means to be successful."
"It could cause haphazard development," Maxwell said. "There could be 12 houses in one little area with no order or symmetry to anything."
Sieger said her concerns were when the maximum net density is met, there would be no more development in that section.
Maxwell said he had heard three people say they were in favor of net density increases and three against.
Mueller said it was time to take action which led to the 8-0 vote against the changes.
— The board received information from Strait regarding alternatives to rezoning.
Yearout also gave a presentation regarding his zoning experiences and ideas.
He said he's been a zoning consultant for 34 years and he was the only one who has written and practiced zoning regulations.
"The purpose of the planning commission is to protect agriculture land," Yearout said. LESA was tried in Johnson and Butler counties and it didn't work.
"It places all of the value on crop land," Yearout said, and allows development on prime pasture land.
The assessment typically ends up in mid-range with no definitive answer, he said.
The consultant made numerous suggestions.
"I'm a firm believer that regulations should favor landowners," Yearout said, "and (landowners) should be able to accomplish development without being run through the bureaucratic wringer."
Maxwell asked Yearout if he had been retained by the county. Yearout responded he was here at the request of the county commission.
Commission chairman Dan Holub said he had met with Yearout who had some unique ideas and invited him to the meeting. Holub added that Yearout had not been "officially" retained by the commission.
"We're looking for solutions without being confrontational," Holub said.
— The board then discussed the interpretation of wording in the county's zoning regulations regarding requirements for lot splits.
Strait said she interpreted the regulations, with the last amendment, would allow lot splits of three acres from 40 to be an administrative decision. Maxwell said Strait's interpretation was different from the previous administrator.
Sieger asked Strait if a new house could be built on three acres. Strait said she would allow a permit. Sieger said that previously that would not have been allowed.
"In the past, there were a few applications brought to the board of zoning appeals," Sieger said. "A few were granted variances because the split wasn't caused by property owners."
Maxwell said in his mind, there is a difference in interpretation. Strait responded it was going to have the same outcome.
"It's always come before the board if there was any question," Maxwell said.
Avery suggested Strait administer lot splits the way they have been done in the past until clarifications can be made.
"The words 'purpose, intent, and precedence' keep coming up," Sieger said. "This is a total turnaround of what has happened in the past."
Sieger said she was concerned about past applicants being denied and now coming forward because of the change of interpretation. She added the planning commission's purpose is not to interpret differently than the administrator.
"It's either an administrative decision or a rezone," Strait said. "If it's not approved, it goes before the board of zoning appeals."
"We need to work with the county commission to present a united front," Mueller said.
Maxwell asked Strait for more information on monthly reports from her office.
Since Strait has been with the county, the board has not seen as much activity and questioned whether some of the permits Strait has issued should have had variances or rezones.
"I want more information from the director. I'm not aware of her activities," Maxwell said. "This information should be provided automatically and I shouldn't have to drag it out."
"I'd be happy to sit down with you and go over it," Strait said.
Sieger commented that the board still didn't have the minutes from the July 27 meeting. Strait responded she was still working on them.
"The bylaws state that the secretary does the minutes," Sieger said.
Strait responded it was important for all of the information to be included in the minutes.
"Margo (Yates) does an excellent job of recording minutes," Strait said, "but there was some pertinent information left out."
Strait added it costs less for her to do it than to pay Yates.
Strait also said she would not take any minutes that have not been approved to the county commission, therefore no resolutions for variances and zoning changes would be approved.
The commission asked if the word "draft" could be on the minutes until such time they are approved.
"We need to notify applicants that the process will take longer for the commission to approve," Avery said.
Strait said she had never done it that way, taking draft minutes to the commission, but was willing to do it.
The board approved the motion to request the county commission support zoning regulations as done in the past.
The board also requested a work session with the county commission at 7:30 p.m. Sept. 28 in the courthouse.
