Dawn Rye| Writer
During last week’s Turner County planning and zoning meeting, a motion was made to table a request from agricultural district to rural residential.
Ed and Angie Poll requested three acres of the property to continue construction on a second single-family home in Centerville Township.
Angie explained the reason for the rezoning because they started a project that is a “shouse.” She said before the project; the duo was given incorrect information.
Chairman Eric Meyer commented that he received an email from neighbor Bill Hansen who supports the rezoning.
Ed noted that all the neighbors are in support of the project.
Meyer said Richard and Bonnie Erickson that farm the land across support the project.
Board member Tony Ciampa asked was there a building permit application?
Angie said yes they applied for a building permit.
Ciampa questioned what the building permit application states?
Ed noted a shop with a breakroom.
Angie said a heated shop with storage and wash bay.
She explained they spoke with a building company and informed them the shop could be turned into a “shouse.”
Planning and Zoning Administrator Faye Dubbelde noted she when she spoke with the building company, that information doesn’t match. She explained the building company told her; they would build anything the client wants but needs specifics from the county first.
Board member Steve Schmeichel questioned Dubbelde if the board made the change would taxes affect values?
Dubbelde said it would assess as a non-ag building. According to the building permit, she explained it was a shop; however, she was informed it was a garage with living quarters.
Ciampa asked if they have given Dubbelde an updated plan of how the shop has changed?
Ed noted Dubbelde and her staff came in and took pictures.
Dubbelde commented the structure is the same; it doesn’t match the building permit. She explained they do have the measurements of a garage and how much is living quarters.
Ciampa asked what the estimated value of the first building permit?
Dubbelde said it was $75,000.00.
The duo commented they are right on target until they finish.
Ciampa believed at the end of the project; the estimated cost would be more than $75,000.00.
The couple disagreed with Ciampa.
Ciampa asked if there was a stop order on the project?
Angie said yes.
Ciampa questioned if there was a plot on the three acres?
Dubbelde said there is no plot, just a drawing of 24 acres.
She noted if the board would like it plated, it could be.
Ciampa commented the three acres is the only part that is zoned rural residential.
Angie commented they have no intent on selling, hence the three acres.
Ciampa explained no plat states the exact three acres zoned rural residential.
For example, he said that if the next person comes along and purchases the 26 acres, three acres are rural residential.
Meyer noted the board is not pinpointing those specific three acres.
Angie asked if the 26 acres were purchased, would the buyer need eligibility to build something?
Ciampa explained they would need eligibility because three acres in the 26 are zoned rural residential.
Ed noted they have already built two homes on those three acres.
Ciampa said right now the board is authorizing that three acres within that 26 acres are zoned rural residential. He noted the board is not stating where those three acres are located.
Meyer noted they have to get a certificate survey or do a plat that would create a new legal description.
Meyer explained they tabled the decision to allow the three acres to be plotted out before making the county commissioners’ recommendation.
Angie said they were told by the lawyer they didn’t need to plot it off.
State’s Attorney Katelynn Hoffman explained she has to have the plot for part of the ordinances. She said the board recommends a rezone to the county commissioners; then, the county commissioners look at the laws to either agree or disagree with rezoning.
Hoffman commented on the concern without the plot; at any point in time, any part of the 26 acres could be rezoned.
“Nobody trusts anybody anymore,” exclaimed Ed.
Ed asked what does the couple need to do “screw” all this and sell everything?
Hoffman commented the only reason that this meeting is happening is because the board found out about their permit was not in compliance.
Ed explained that they understood they received terrible information; however, they did fill out the building permit with accurate numbers.
He noted they were not trying to not paying taxes and they will pay a lot more taxes when the county comes out and accesses.
Angie noted the couple has been sitting here for seven weeks.
Ciampa said everybody is going to sleep better if the project continues and the board moves forward legally.
Hoffman explained with the stop order in place; an appointment needs to be made with Dubblede to lift the injunction.
Dubbelde commented to Ed and Angela to think about their decision before moving forward to stop the project altogether.
The board made the motion to table their decision until the meeting held in August.