Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Meeting Votes Roundup topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Votes at a glance: committee approves pool and setback items, declines ZHO denial on chicken coop

Education County Development Committee · June 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At the June 16 Education County Development Committee meeting the panel approved a conditional use allowing an existing pool to remain, approved reduced front and corner setbacks for a new home, and rejected a motion to accept the Zoning Hearing Officer’s recommendation to deny a chicken coop setback variation.

At its June 16 meeting the Education County Development Committee recorded three formal actions on zoning items.

DCO 18-26-70-26-11: The committee approved the Zoning Hearing Officer’s recommendation to grant a conditional use allowing an existing pool and pool equipment to remain less than 10 feet from the rear property line because it had been on the property for at least five years. The ZHO recommendation was accepted without substantive discussion; the ZHO’s packet included a conditional-use finding and a time-limited condition was referenced for a different pool case discussed later.

DCO 19-26-70-26-14: The committee approved a request to reduce the front setback from 30 feet to 19 feet and to reduce a corner side setback from 30 feet to 20 feet for a new single-family home. The motion passed with no recorded debate.

DCO 20-26-70-26-15 (chicken coop): The committee considered the ZHO’s recommendation to deny a variation that would reduce interior side and other setbacks for an existing chicken coop. After questioning and a staff explanation about permit history and county grandfathering practice, the committee voted "No" on the motion to approve the ZHO’s recommendation to deny; the chair declared the motion failed. The transcript does not record an alternative final disposition of that variation at the meeting.

Vote tallies beyond those recorded in the transcript are not specified. Where members’ votes were recorded verbatim, they are noted in the minutes; other aye votes in the meeting were called without member-by-member roll call in the transcript.