Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezone topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends rezoning of 12.3 acres to R‑1‑15, with trail contribution
Summary
The planning commission voted unanimously to recommend that the county commission rezone about 12.3 acres from A‑1 to R‑1‑15 to allow roughly 30–32 single‑family lots. The applicant agreed to a $7,500 per‑lot parks and trails contribution; commissioners flagged east–west pathway access and school district gate timing for the development agreement.
The Green County Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the county commission approve a map amendment to rezone roughly 12.3 acres from A‑1 to R‑1‑15, a move staff said would allow a 30–32‑lot single‑family subdivision consistent with the county general plan.
Charlie York, the planning division presenter, told commissioners the applicant’s concept plan shows two north–south pathways and proposes a $7,500 per‑lot contribution earmarked for parks and trail connections. York said utilities and emergency services letters are on file but that the exact parcel boundary is still being finalized with the landowner and that the development agreement should preserve flexibility on how the contribution is used.
Applicant representative Valerie Kaufman said the rezoning aligns with the general plan and would produce a neighborhood compatible with surrounding development. She reiterated the applicant’s willingness to direct the $7,500 per‑lot volunteer contribution toward nearby trail improvements where feasible.
In public comment, resident Henry Stoddard urged care on trail stubs and objected to a path that would run adjacent to his property, raising traffic and safety concerns. Another commenter pressed officials about water availability and the loss of rural character as the area densifies.
Commissioners discussed pathway placement and whether an east–west connection could be secured on the northern property boundary or must wait for adjacent landowners to develop. Staff noted the school district has not agreed to install a gate that would create a direct connection to school property, and that the development agreement can specify how long the county waits for such a connection before funds revert to other feasible trail projects.
The commission moved to forward a positive recommendation with standard development‑agreement language, a requirement to update the concept plan to reflect commissioner requests, and wording memorializing the $7,500 per‑lot parks and trails contribution and flexibility for off‑site use. The motion passed unanimously in roll call.
The county commission will make the final decision at a subsequent public meeting; next steps include finalizing the development agreement language and verifying utility and road improvement requirements during future subdivision review.
