Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves rezoning for 20-acre Sand Creek parcel over planning commission recommendation
Summary
After public comment and staff discussion about water and rural character, the Franklin County Commission approved rezoning 20 acres north of Pomona into four 5-acre lots; planning commission had recommended denial and staff had suggested remand to consider two 10-acre lots.
The Franklin County Commission on Aug. 6 approved a request to rezone 20 acres on Sand Creek Road north of Pomona to allow four 5-acre lots, despite a planning commission recommendation to deny the application.
Planning staff reported that Water Systems Engineering supplied a letter saying the site is suitable for domestic drilling and that a soil analysis indicated generally acceptable conditions for on‑site septic. At the planning commission hearing multiple nearby residents urged denial, citing the area's large-lot, agricultural character and concerns about overuse of the Osage Aquifer and potential impacts to older wells.
The applicant, identified in the record as Mr. Gonzales Jr., told commissioners he plans to develop estate homes and to act as the developer. "What I planned on putting there is just house, estate houses," Gonzales said. He said he would remain on a large portion of the surrounding acreage and said he would place covenants on new lots to protect the design and use.
Staff told the commission that planning staff and the planning commission differed: planning staff recommended that the board could remand the application to the planning commission to consider an alternative of two 10‑acre lots in order to better align with the county comprehensive-plan goals to preserve rural character and rural residential development. The planning-commission recommendation, however, was denial.
After extended discussion among commissioners and comments from the applicant and neighbors, a motion to approve the application "as it is in front of us" carried on a roll-call vote with four votes in favor and one opposed. The record shows Commissioner Meador voting no and Commissioners Dickinson, Soudemire (also recorded as Saldemeyer/Seldemeyer in the transcript), Wehmeyer and Chair Harris voting to approve.
Commissioners and staff discussed concerns raised by neighbors—roadway turnings, stop signs at nearby intersections and long-term aquifer effects—while also noting county review processes for driveways, lot spacing and water/septic suitability. The board did not attach conditions beyond normal permitting, and staff noted the applicant can pursue any required driveway or subdivision permits following rezoning approval.
Ending: The rezoning clears the way for the applicant to proceed with lot splits and permitting; commissioners said the planning commission may still consider related technical reviews and road-signing changes as permits are submitted.
