Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident James Hughes urges clearer organization of planning and zoning ordinance; council reviews landmark commission wording
Summary
A resident asked that a long list of business types be moved from the main body of a draft planning and zoning ordinance into an exhibit to improve readability; staff and council also reviewed proposed wording for the landmark commission and clarified that a historic-property tax exemption requires annual application and the exact exemption amount was not specified.
James Hughes, a Marion County resident, told the workshop on June 16 that a draft planning and zoning ordinance would be easier to read if a roughly 12-page list of “types of businesses” were moved out of the main text and placed instead in an exhibit or appendix.
“There's about 12 pages of different types of businesses that [are] stuck right in that little area,” Hughes said, arguing that placing the list in an exhibit would let readers find the ordinance’s substantive provisions more easily.
Council members and staff acknowledged the readability concern and said they would consider the suggestion. A council representative also told Hughes that his separate building-permit dispute could not be discussed by the full workshop because it was not on the posted agenda, but offered to meet with him and staff individually to resolve outstanding permit questions.
After closing the public-comment period, staff led the workshop review of the draft ordinance’s Article 2 (Administration). A staff member who guided the discussion said he had circulated a packet and pointed the group to page 18 as the focal point for the evening’s review.
On the landmark commission provision, staff reported meeting with the Marion County Historical Commission and said John Kelsey of that commission had attended and that the commission agreed to provide timely advice to planning and zoning when a historic-property matter required review. Staff proposed language to formalize that consultation so it could run in parallel with permit processing and not delay applicants.
Council members questioned one sentence that mentioned “tax relief” as an available outcome of landmark-commission recommendations. A council member asked whether that phrasing was necessary; staff replied it was included because a property that qualifies under the tax code can be eligible for an exemption but said the phrase could be removed if the council preferred.
On the size and mechanics of the tax exemption, staff cautioned that the workshop did not have a definitive figure. “I don't remember honestly if it's 20 or $25,000,” the staff member said, and explained that, under the current practice described to the workshop, owners of eligible historic homesteads must petition each taxing entity annually to receive the exemption rather than receiving an automatic credit.
No formal motions or votes on the ordinance language were recorded during the workshop. Staff said the draft would be revised to incorporate public comments and the committee aimed to hold another public meeting and complete the ordinance review by early fall.
