Document text
44 °F Forecast | Road Cams Monday, January 19, 2004 Today's News | Classifieds | Autos | Homes | Jobs | Tempo | Health | Community | Home Delivery SECTIONS Home Page Local News Sports Business Obituaries Life Opinion - Politics AP News Weather Classified Archives Site Map EXTRA Newspaper in Education Personals Movie Times TV Times E The People CLASSIFIEDS Find a Car Find a Home Find a Job Find a Rental Place an ad eSouthernOregon Automotive Communities Entertainment Publications Recreation Calendar CUSTOMER SERVICE Frequent Questions Advertising Information Home Delivery Employment Contact Us Media Kit Network Affiliate Email Story to a Friend December 12, 2003 Hundreds want changes to land-use regulations If you go Jackson County commissioners and the county Planning Commission will meet at 9:30 a.m. Monday at the Jackson County Courthouse to discuss land-use laws and the county’s proposed land development ordinance. By DAMIAN MANN Mail Tribune Despite four years of efforts by Jackson County to develop less restrictive land-use laws, property rights advocates say proposed regulations will hinder their ability to develop rural acreage. Hundreds of names have been gathered on a petition sent to county Commissioner Jack Walker recently asking for a change in provisions of the new land regulations that would make it easier to create subdivisions. While the new ordinance relaxes some restrictions, it doesn’t go far enough to suit everyone. Advertisement "What the county is doing is more restrictive than state law," said land-use attorney John Hassen of Medford. Hassen, who is not part of the petition drive, is drafting a letter that offers a compromise plan. His plan would allow more development of land that was improperly zoned as farmland, woodland or forest preserve. County Planning Commission Chairman Leon Hofford, who stressed he wasn’t speaking for the board, said the new county Land Development Ordinance is less restrictive than the old one. "Have we become more restrictive? Absolutely not," he said. One of the main issues is a change in the new regulations that would allow more flexibility for properties improperly zoned as natural resource land. For example, a 50-acre parcel that is zoned exclusive farm use could receive a change in zoning if the owner goes through an extensive process to show the property is not suitable for farming. "We recognize some of this stuff was zoned improperly a long time ago," said Hofford. The regulation would change the zoning to a new category, called "rural use," that entitles the property owner to build one house. Hofford said property rights advocates argue they should be able to subdivide the property into several smaller parcels. They also don’t want to go through the lengthy change process. Hofford said the planning commission and the county have a responsibility to balance the needs of property owners with preserving the rural integrity of the county. "We don’t want to end up with unsightly sprawl," he said. "We are trying to follow the basic goals of preserving natural resources." Hassen said his compromise letter will ask the county to allow more flexibility on land that has been designated "rural use." He said improperly designated farmland should be eligible to be partitioned into 15-acre lots; on forest land, he will ask for 30-acre parcels. Hassen agrees that some property rights advocates believe they should be able to do anything they want with their land, but he said, "That is not going to happen. You have to have compromise." County Planning Commission member Reeve Hennion, who noted that Hassen was part of the county’s Development Ordinance Steering Committee, said zone changes like those proposed by Hassen can have unintended consequences. "It’s going to erode the protections on farms and forest lands," he said If a 50-acre tract that was once farmland is converted into a subdivision, the new homeowners will inevitably complain about the noise or spraying on adjacent farmlands. "Every time you have residents abutting orchards, you have problems," he said. Commissioner Walker said he agrees with property rights advocates and has fought for years to make the county regulations no more restrictive than state laws. "I wanted more flexibility in what we allow people who have large pieces of land for a long period of time," he said. "Changes in the Planning Commission makeup have steered it in a direction I don’t quite agree with." Brent Thompson, president of a land-use watchdog group, Friends of Jackson County, said property rights advocates want the least possible restriction on the land, which would ultimately deteriorate the ability to farm or to preserve forests. "It is an orchestrated movement to degrade Jackson County," he said. "It disregards the fact we have a degraded county already." Reach reporter Damian Mann at 776-4476, or e-mail [email protected] Mail Tribune Home Local News | Sports | Business | Obituaries | Life Opinion - Politics | AP News | Archives | Site Map E Southern Oregon | Classified Copyright © 1997-2004 Mail Tribune. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions Website Feedback 3 WEEKS FREE! ADVERTISERS A D V E R T I S E R S RESOURCES Oregon Road Conditions & Cams SPECIAL SECTIONS Auto Finder Job Finder Home Finder Joy Magazine Homelife Magazine Tempo Readers' Choice Real Estate Showcase Since We Asked Food for Thought Wellness Connection Outdoor Journal Moving to Southern Oregon? Volunteer Opportunities Prime Times