Union County delays vote on new zoning law
By Michele Linck Journal staff writer | Posted: Tuesday, July 15, 2008
ELK POINT, S.D. -- With the zoning for Hyperion Resources issue settled in a referendum last month, Union County officials turned Monday to enacting a new comprehensive zoning ordinance to replace the 1978 version now in force.
Residents got their chance Monday evening to comment on the proposed ordinance in a public hearing at the courthouse. Not many liked it.
Several people urged the Planning and Zoning Commission to delay a vote for 30 to 45 days to give the public time to read and digest the nearly 100-page draft document.
At the end, in a 3-1 vote on a motion by Dale Neely, the zoning commission delayed action at least until its regular meeting, at 4 p.m. on Monday. Member Dan Fullenkamp was absent. Chairman Bob James cast the dissenting vote. "Personally, I was going to say it needs more than seven days," James said after the meeting. "There is a lot of information here."
The major changes in the zoning ordinance came in the area of setbacks for concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, and in the rules requiring a conditional use permit and allowing just one additional home to be built on an acreage or ag land. Both were reasons for a May 2007 referendum in which voters defeated the proposed new ordinance.
The zoning commissioners also added some provisions to the proposed 2008 version, including one prohibiting the spreading in the fall of fertilizer in the zones around public wellheads, most of which are in or near cities.
The proposed ordinance was hammered out over seven months with the help of a 10-member citizens committee.
After a brief review of the new law by county land use administrator Dennis Henze, the public went to the podium.
Liz Merrigan of rural Spink chastised the commissioners for not participating more with the citizens committee. She said it resulted in "timidity." She and several others decried the provision that would allow a waiver of the three-quarter-mile requirement for a large CAFO if 50 percent of the neighbors approved. However, if there is only one neighbor, no assent is needed.
Doug Maurstad said that takes away the neighbor's rights. He was also among those who criticized the ordinance's allowed use of an "odor footprint tool" developed by a professor at South Dakota State University in devising CAFO setback allowances. He called the computer modeling program "flawed."
"The tool allows people to build hog confinements closer than they should," Maurstad said.
Stan Foltz, a member of the citizens committee addressed the section of the ordinance limiting residential construction to the owner's and one other residence on ag land or acreages. He said the fact that very few building permits are being denied means people are themselves doing a good job of placing houses.
Carolyn Harkness drew applause when she asked, "Why is a CAFO setback three-fourths of a mile and a refinery setback only one-eighth mile?" a jab at Hyperion's controversial refinery zoning.
Ed Cable, a leader of Save Union County Committee, which opposed zoning for the proposed oil refinery, said commissioners should have provided residents a summary of the zoning changes, maps of the aquifers and a public discussion prior to the public hearing.
James said citizens will have a chance to speak again at Monday's zoning commission meeting.
Residents got their chance Monday evening to comment on the proposed ordinance in a public hearing at the courthouse. Not many liked it.
Several people urged the Planning and Zoning Commission to delay a vote for 30 to 45 days to give the public time to read and digest the nearly 100-page draft document.
At the end, in a 3-1 vote on a motion by Dale Neely, the zoning commission delayed action at least until its regular meeting, at 4 p.m. on Monday. Member Dan Fullenkamp was absent. Chairman Bob James cast the dissenting vote. "Personally, I was going to say it needs more than seven days," James said after the meeting. "There is a lot of information here."
The major changes in the zoning ordinance came in the area of setbacks for concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, and in the rules requiring a conditional use permit and allowing just one additional home to be built on an acreage or ag land. Both were reasons for a May 2007 referendum in which voters defeated the proposed new ordinance.
The zoning commissioners also added some provisions to the proposed 2008 version, including one prohibiting the spreading in the fall of fertilizer in the zones around public wellheads, most of which are in or near cities.
The proposed ordinance was hammered out over seven months with the help of a 10-member citizens committee.
After a brief review of the new law by county land use administrator Dennis Henze, the public went to the podium.
Liz Merrigan of rural Spink chastised the commissioners for not participating more with the citizens committee. She said it resulted in "timidity." She and several others decried the provision that would allow a waiver of the three-quarter-mile requirement for a large CAFO if 50 percent of the neighbors approved. However, if there is only one neighbor, no assent is needed.
Doug Maurstad said that takes away the neighbor's rights. He was also among those who criticized the ordinance's allowed use of an "odor footprint tool" developed by a professor at South Dakota State University in devising CAFO setback allowances. He called the computer modeling program "flawed."
"The tool allows people to build hog confinements closer than they should," Maurstad said.
Stan Foltz, a member of the citizens committee addressed the section of the ordinance limiting residential construction to the owner's and one other residence on ag land or acreages. He said the fact that very few building permits are being denied means people are themselves doing a good job of placing houses.
Carolyn Harkness drew applause when she asked, "Why is a CAFO setback three-fourths of a mile and a refinery setback only one-eighth mile?" a jab at Hyperion's controversial refinery zoning.
Ed Cable, a leader of Save Union County Committee, which opposed zoning for the proposed oil refinery, said commissioners should have provided residents a summary of the zoning changes, maps of the aquifers and a public discussion prior to the public hearing.
James said citizens will have a chance to speak again at Monday's zoning commission meeting.
Story Comments
Read More and Post Comments 2 comment(s)
Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service
UnCoGal wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:43 AM:
DakotaCowboy wrote on Jul 15, 2008 11:28 AM:
Here is a little food for thought. All of you people that go out and buy 5 or 10 acres and want a say in what goes on out there, where do you want them to build feed lots, in the middle of town? Stay in town and let the feed lots stay in the country. "