Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves minor subdivision final plat despite neighbor’s septic and fence concerns
Summary
Supervisors approved the final plat for a roughly 100‑acre parcel west of Gear Avenue to split into three lots. A neighboring property owner urged caution over a historic septic drain and possible fence and access disputes; planning and health staff said the drain appears to remain the adjoining owner’s responsibility and recommended private legal remedies where needed.
Des Moines County supervisors voted May 19 to approve the final plat for a minor subdivision of roughly 100 acres west of Gear Avenue, splitting the land into three lots while addressing a neighbor’s concerns about septic drainage and fence placement.
Planning Director Jared Lassiter presented the "5 Period Inch Farm" final plat, describing two farm tracts and a 12‑acre lot containing an existing house. He told the board the plat had passed West Burlington’s two‑mile review and that internal reviews were completed by secondary roads and the health department.
A neighboring property owner raised concerns about a surface drain tied to an older septic installation that appears to cross property lines. The neighbor said the drain has existed for decades and warned that future fence placement or tree removal by the adjoining buyer could trigger disputes. The speaker asked whether the county could require easements or take other preventive steps.
Health and planning staff reported they examined the permit history and concluded the surface drain was installed historically and that, under the county’s administrative code governing septic systems, the drain’s responsibility likely rests with the adjoining property owner. Planning director Lassiter said a replacement septic installed about 10 years ago was tied into the same drain and that current code would have required containment within the owner’s parcel, but because the system predated current practice it is not straightforward to revise through the plat process.
Supervisor discussion included whether to delay approval pending resolution; one supervisor said the county should not become the arbiter of private disputes and moved to approve the resolution as presented. The motion carried after recorded votes. Planning staff advised that private legal counsel and civil court may be needed to resolve property disputes around fences or trespass, and that minor‑subdivision procedures do not require a public hearing unless the proposed subdivision introduces new roads or utilities that would make it a larger development.
The board approved the final plat with direction for planning staff to note the neighbor’s concerns in the record and to continue to consult secondary roads and the health department on any follow‑up.
