Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Zoning Change Floodplain 1809 W 20th topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City and county vote down joint rezoning for 1809 West 20th Street South in Brookings floodplain
Summary
The City of Brookings and Brookings County denied twin rezoning ordinances that would have changed a one-acre parcel at 1809 W. 20th St. S. from agricultural to single-family residential after staff and commissioners raised floodplain, utility and policy concerns.
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Zoning Change Floodplain 1809 W 20th topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City of Brookings councilors and Brookings County commissioners on Tuesday rejected matching ordinances to rezone a one-acre parcel at 1809 West 20th Street South from agricultural to R-1A single-family residential, a change staff and planning officials said would conflict with the city's future land-use map and pose floodplain and utility-service challenges.
Mike Struck, Brookings' development director, told the joint meeting the request covered the east half of a previously platted two-acre lot and that the parcel lies within the floodplain. "The request is to rezone 1 acre from AIG to a residence R1A," Struck said, and added that if approved the applicant would be required to meet floodplain-development standards "as far as elevating the property out of the floodplain, as well as providing compensatory storage." The development review team and the City Planning Commission recommended denial, with the planning commission voting 5–3 against the rezoning.
The development review team (DRT) and several council members framed their opposition around policy and consistency rather than only this site. "We did not support the rezoning request more from a policy perspective of rezoning isolated small tracts," Struck said, noting DRT's concern about setting a precedent that could complicate orderly future growth in areas mapped as open space and wetlands on the city's 2040 comprehensive plan.
Thomas Chandler, who identified himself from 410 Twentieth Avenue and as the applicant, spoke at the hearing and said he was available to answer questions. Questions from councilors and county officials focused on prior building eligibility on the lot, the timing of the removal of the former house, and technical requirements for floodplain development. Bob Hill, identified in the meeting as community development director, summarized local eligibility rules: the city treats a nonconforming residential use as discontinued after one year if not reestablished; county rules tied to pre-1975 platting were described as allowing one residence per platted lot but removing eligibility when lots are subdivided. Hill said Brookings County has applied a 50-year rule for buildability tied to historic plats and that subdivision after 1975 generally removes prior building eligibility.
Councilors also raised practical concerns about serving the site with municipal utilities and fire protection. Struck said base flood elevation would need to be established by civil engineering survey, structures would have to be elevated two feet above that elevation, and compensatory storage would be required on-site. On the question of hydrant requirements, staff said emergency response in rural areas would rely on tanker trucks if hydrants were not present.
Council member (City) Duran framed the denial as a policy consistency decision: "City council has demonstrated a pretty conservative, safety-oriented stance around floodplain development," she said, and said piecemeal rezoning in floodplain areas risked setting an undesirable precedent. Other council members — Tiltonburn, Hager and Specker — voiced similar concerns about floodplain risk and municipal-service feasibility.
The roll calls recorded during the joint hearing resulted in denial of both ordinances. The City of Brookings council recorded five "no" votes (Doran — no; Niemeyer — no; Hager — no; Specker — no; Tiltonburn — no) on city ordinance 25-013. The Brookings County commission roll call on county ordinance 25-004 showed two "yes" votes (Post, Miller) and five "no" votes (Wendell, Avery, Vanderwall, Hasler, Jensen). Both the city and county ordinances failed.
With the joint rezoning request denied, staff noted that the property remains under its agricultural zoning in county jurisdiction; any future building eligibility or separate applications would follow county procedures. The joint session then adjourned and the governing bodies resumed the regular meeting agenda.

