Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables town‑initiated rezoning of rural parcels to AG district after heated public comment; staff to re‑notice with setback options
Summary
After extensive public testimony from landowners concerned about private property rights, setbacks and process, council voted to table and re‑notice a town‑initiated rezoning of undeveloped rural‑residential parcels to an AG Zoning District and asked staff to prepare a January briefing and a February P&Z/council schedule for revised text and setbacks.
NorthlakeTown staff presented a town‑initiated plan to rezone undeveloped rural‑residential parcels larger than 20 acres to an AG Zoning District to better align the zoning map with the comprehensive plan and to create a lower‑density holding zone. Nathan explained the AG district's minimum lot size (20 acres), permitted uses and how it differs from the current rural‑residential district.
The public hearing produced multiple speakers both supporting and opposing the change. Ray Callahan said he favored the amendment and described himself as "very much in favor of this amendment." Long‑standing local landowners and residents — including Rena Hardeman, Michael Savoie, Micah Kidwell, Kevin Bridal and others — expressed strong opposition, citing perceived loss of private property rights, uncertainty over setbacks and potential targeting of large landowners. Hardeman asked whether the comp plan is binding and said, "You're forcing me to lose the number of structures I can put on my property." Michael Savoie framed the proposal as "targeting certain citizens" and urged caution.
Staff and counsel responded that the change is intended as a holding zone consistent with the comprehensive plan, that schools retain certain constitutional powers to site in residential areas, and that the action being considered was map rezoning (not immediate changes to AG district standards). After deliberation council members proposed returning the item to Planning & Zoning and running a separate UDC text amendment to consider setback and other AG‑district standard changes. The council voted unanimously to table and re‑notice the rezoning so staff can prepare options and additional public input; staff indicated a briefing in January and a potential February schedule.
Why it matters: the rezoning would change base zoning for large tracts and could affect where and how property owners can place structures; residents said the timing and notice were insufficient and called for alternatives that preserve current lot usage or provide clear pathways for affected owners to request changes.
Next steps: staff will return with clarification on setback options, proposed AG‑district text amendments and additional P&Z review; the item will be re‑noticed and brought back to council for action in a later meeting cycle.
