Planning commission recommends denial of John Kane rezoning at Bone Dry Road over lack of secondary emergency access
Loading...
Summary
After multiple hearings and public comment, the Jefferson County Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously Feb. 12 to recommend denial of a rezoning that would allow a 30‑lot conservation subdivision at 2132 Bone Dry Road, citing the absence of a required secondary emergency access to a collector road.
The Jefferson County Planning and Zoning Commission on Feb. 12 recommended denial of Z240056, a rezoning proposed by developer John Kane that would have changed property at 2132 Bone Dry Road to a PR7 conservation development for 30 residential lots.
The commission’s recommendation — adopted by roll call following public comment and extended questioning — was based on the county engineer’s and commissioners’ concern that the proposal lacks a required secondary or emergency access to a collector road for fire and emergency response. Chairman Ken Lowry called the motion; the commission voted unanimously to forward a recommendation to the Jefferson County Commission, which will make the final decision.
The issue returned to the commission for the fourth public hearing after the developer repeatedly reduced density, Kane said. “We went from 99, 77, 46, 30,” Kane told the commission, describing successive reductions in lot count to address concerns. Kane said his team believed the smaller footprint met criteria in the 2024 fire code that could reduce secondary-access requirements and described prior engineering and bonding used on adjacent phases.
City of Kimberly representative Dwayne Wally, the city clerk, urged denial and warned the commission about infrastructure and public-safety impacts. “Gross should not create situations where responsibility and authority are separated from cost and accountability,” Wally said, saying the city has not coordinated with the applicant on roadway capacity or long‑term maintenance and asking that, if approved, any decision require Jefferson County to assume written responsibility for maintenance of city‑owned ingress/egress roads serving the development.
Staff reiterated earlier recommendations that a secondary or emergency access to a collector road be provided and that sprinkler systems be required because the area is not served by a fire department. Commissioners noted that a 46‑lot plan had received approval earlier (now reheard due to a procedural error) and that approval in the past was conditioned on a secondary access; several commissioners said they were unwilling to approve a 30‑lot plan without resolving the access question.
The commission’s recommendation is advisory; the Jefferson County Commission will take final action. The county engineer and permitting staff will be the likely points of contact if the developer seeks to resubmit changes addressing secondary access or to appeal the recommendation.
