Huntington planning commission moves to modernize conditional‑use rules; schedules public hearing

The Huntington Planning & Zoning Commission opened a detailed review of proposed revisions to Section 9‑8‑2 of the municipal code on Sept. 11, focusing on how the city treats conditional uses such as home‑based businesses, small neighborhood commercial operations, childcare and livestock confinement.

Commission members expressed frustration that the existing conditional‑use process often duplicates staff review and a City Council hearing. Unidentified Speaker 2, who led much of the discussion, said the goal was to make the code workable and to avoid forcing routine activities into a multi‑step process while keeping higher‑impact uses subject to formal review. "If we're supposed to be improving all of them, we want to make the exception for a home based business or a confinement of livestock, and that makes it so that it's a police it yourself situation," the speaker said.

On home occupations, the commission leaned toward removing vehicle‑size limits (previously a 1‑ton metric) and instead tying regulatory thresholds to employment: members discussed exempting home occupations that have fewer than five full‑time‑equivalent employees, reserving conditional‑use review for larger or higher‑impact activities. Commissioners noted this would reduce repetitive review steps now handled by the zoning administrator and recorder before council review.

Members also examined small neighborhood commercial activity conducted in accessory buildings. The group debated whether to keep a firm square‑foot cap or a rear‑yard percentage; one compromise discussed was increasing a hard size cap (from 2,000 to 3,000 square feet) and removing the 30% rear‑yard percentage to reduce ambiguity.

Daycare and preschool language was another focus: commissioners proposed replacing mixed age bands with a simpler "18 or younger" threshold for supervisory ratios and discussed moving opening hours earlier to 6 a.m. to accommodate parent work schedules. The commission also considered increasing the maximum number of children tied to staff ratios so staffing incentives are clearer for providers.

The commission devoted substantial time to livestock provisions. Members reviewed the living‑unit table (e.g., one horse or cow = 1 unit; three sheep/goats = 1 unit; 10 chickens = 1 unit), discussed lowering the minimum lot size to 10,000 square feet with additional units per 5,000 square feet, and debated temporary versus continuous confinement. After extended discussion members expressed a working consensus for a 10‑unit maximum on most lots while directing staff to draft clear language and exemptions for short‑term events such as stock shows.

No ordinance was adopted on Sept. 11. Commissioners asked staff to prepare a draft reflecting the group’s preferences and to circulate it before the next meeting. "We have to do a public hearing before we can send anything to city council," Unidentified Speaker 2 reminded the group; the body set a public hearing for the next meeting and discussed forwarding a revised draft to council after public comment.

The commission’s direction was procedural: staff were instructed to prepare revised code language and a timeline for public notification and a hearing; final legal adoption will require subsequent hearings and council action.