Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County adopts clearer height-measurement for structures; debates broader subdivision notice rules
Summary
Wilson County approved an amendment changing how building height is measured (from average finished grade to finished floor-to-highest point) and held an extended discussion about whether to expand mailed notice for large subdivision proposals; no notice policy was adopted.
Planning staff proposed a zoning resolution to change how the county measures building height to reduce ambiguity for builders. Under the amendment, height would be measured from the finished floor to the structure's highest point rather than from average finished grade at the building line, which staff said can be manipulated or hard to interpret.
"That gets rid of some of that, and it just makes an established benchmark that everybody is aware of," Planning staff said while explaining the change. Commissioners moved and supported forwarding the amendment to the planning commission and anticipated the earliest county commission appearance could be June or July after the required notices and planning commission review.
Separately, commissioners discussed a resident complaint about a 69-lot subdivision that did not trigger mailed notice because it required no rezoning. Residents and some commissioners argued that adjoining property owners should receive notice for large subdivisions even when no rezoning is required; other members warned about legal constraints and the need for consistent application. Suggestions included signage at the site and setting a numeric threshold for mailed notice (discussion included possible thresholds of 5, 25 or 50 lots), but commissioners did not adopt a policy at this meeting and asked staff and the county attorney to research options and legal implications.
Planning staff also raised whether accessory dwelling units should be charged an AFT fee, noting existing wording in the private act exempts accessory structures. A staff suggestion was to adjust ordinance terminology or definitions (for example, to 'alternative dwelling units') so fees could be applied going forward, subject to legal review. Commissioners asked staff to research statutory constraints and return with proposed language and impacts.
Next steps: Planning staff to post the zoning amendment to the planning commission agenda, research mailed-notice thresholds and legal risk, and return with recommended language for ADUs and any fee changes.
