Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Polk County commissioners deny plan changes to allow duplexes on septic in Indian Lake Estates
Summary
After extended debate about septic density, the Board of County Commissioners denied a staff-initiated comprehensive-plan amendment and matching land-development-code changes that would have allowed duplexes and up to four dwelling units per acre on septic in parts of Indian Lake Estates.
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Polk County commissioners voted to deny a comprehensive-plan text amendment and a companion land-development-code change that would have allowed duplexes and densities up to four dwelling units per acre on septic systems in parts of Indian Lake Estates (ILE).
Shonda Bennett, Land Development Division staff, told the board the county-initiated amendment would allow duplexes in the ILE area designated “OC area of concern” and permit up to four dwelling units per acre on septic where sewer is not available. Bennett said the request resulted from two property owners who asked staff for clarity and that duplexes and higher densities existed historically in parts of ILE.
Commissioners raised environmental and precedent concerns during debate. Commissioner Scott asked whether allowing widespread duplex development on septic would “fly in the face” of state goals for water quality and noted the environmental sensitivity of nearby Basin Management Action Plan (BMAP) areas. Other commissioners said the change could open the door to many more septic systems on small half-acre lots and questioned whether applicants could instead pursue sewer connections.
Bennett said the lots in question are about a half acre and that parish water is available but not sewer. She also said existing duplexes predate the 1994 maps and that the ILE land-use designations were updated in 2009 with the expectation of future sewer. The planning commission had a majority vote recommending denial; the board ultimately moved to deny both the comprehensive-plan amendment (P1) and the land-development-code amendment (P2). The motions to deny were seconded and passed; the record shows at least one opposing vote during the roll call on P1 and P2.
The denials leave existing rules intact: where sewer is required by policy, higher densities remain contingent on sewer availability or separate discretionary approvals. Bennett said phases of potential duplex approvals would have required level-3 (planning commission) reviews even if the board had approved the text change.
Speakers in the record included staff planner Shonda Bennett and multiple commissioners who debated environmental impacts and policy consistency. No applicant representatives spoke at the hearing, though staff said one landowner had preapplication inquiries and another was prepared to file for level-3 review if the text amendments had passed.
The board’s action preserves the county’s current policy that limits higher densities in ILE unless sewer is available or specific planning reviews are granted.
