ZBA review of building and commercial solar development ordinances to go before the Logan County Board with no recommendation on building standards revision

[May 09, 2018] 

LINCOLN 

On Thursday, May 3, the Logan County Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing to consider several zoning ordinance amendments. The sections being amended or added to included building standards, tiny homes, and a solar ordinance.

ZBA members present were Cheryl Baker, Bret Farmer, John Fulton, Judy Graff, Derek Martin, Scott Noltensmeier, and ZBA Chairman Doug Thompson. Also Logan County Zoning Officer Will D’Andrea was present.

Guests were Bill Graff, Tom Alberts, Doug Ebelherr, and County Board member Dave Blankenship.

Building Standards

In summer 2016, the Logan County Planning and Zoning Committee decided there should be some type of review for code compliance and some standards set. They have been developing the standards over the past several months and the committee unanimously voted to bring the standards forward to the ZBA.

At last Wednesday’s Regional Planning Commission meeting, commission members also voted unanimously to recommend the ZBA approve the standards.

One change D’Andrea and the committee made is to Section 12.0 of the Logan County Zoning Ordinance, which covers permits. A section is being added for a Certificate of Occupancy and Inspection process.

D’Andrea said the proposed language has to do with single family dwellings going through an inspection process by an Illinois state licensed home inspector. New homes or additions of 500 square feet would need to be inspected.

Thompson asked whether the inspector would look over the whole house when there was an addition and said that part was not clear.

D’Andrea said inspectors would only be looking at the new addition.

Section 12.2 describes the inspection process. It says, “No certificate of occupancy shall be issued until construction has been completed and the project inspected by a qualified building inspector. The building inspector shall submit inspection reports to the Zoning Office which state that the construction meets best practice standards (ASHI Standards). It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to hire the building inspector.”

These inspections will be done at two points and shall include a pre-drywall inspection and final inspection.

The pre-drywall inspection will include foundation components; floor, wall, and roof structural components; plumbing, electrical, and rough-in components; windows and exterior doors; and HVAC systems.

The final inspection shall include exterior stairs and handrails; surface drainage; porches that are screened, year-round, or open; decks; entrance steps; and patios.

Baker asked whether it is easy to find an inspector and whether they would do it in a timely fashion.

D’Andrea said there are several inspectors in the area, but he is not sure of the timelines.

Blankenship, who is on the Logan County Planning and Zoning Committee, said they called agencies for American Society of Home Inspector Standards (ASHI) and International Association of Certified Home Inspectors (InterNACHI) and found there are numerous inspectors. He said their normal response time is 24 hours. The inspection costs would be around $150 for a new addition and $350 for a new home.

Blankenship said he feels the costs are minimal when you look at the standards imposed on new construction by outside agencies “far more stringent” than the standards the Planning and Zoning Committee developed.

Blankenship also said, “I am not big on government regulation; however, if it’s a situation that could cost the taxpayers money because of a fire risk or that type of thing, I do think that this county is better than that. I think we need to up our construction standards to more of a best practices standard.” It is about consumer protection. He said there would be no cost to the county, just to the homeowner, which would “offset risks to our taxing body.”

Martin asked what would happen if an inspection fails on an addition and what would stop someone from occupying it.

D’Andrea said if someone moves into a new place without a Certificate of Occupancy, the county can take legal action.

Logan County resident Doug Ebelherr he just put a 600 square foot deck on his house last year and asked whether the county had standards for constructions that must be met. He asked what would happen if [the new dwelling or addition] does not meet standards and whether it would just mean meeting the standard the inspector decides.

D’Andrea said there are no formal building codes in the county, so standards would be a middle ground.

Ebelherr then asked whether the standards are meant to improve the construction process. He said it seems to be more about asking someone’s opinion of what they think the construction is.

Thompson said he thinks those doing construction should know the standards and asked Blankenship whether contractors around here would know about standards.

Blankenship said the American Society of Home Inspectors’ (ASHI) standards are the oldest and most recognized standards in the nation and are upheld in a court of law. The ASHI standards are readily available online to anyone, even homeowners wanting to build their own deck.

Inspectors must have twelve credit hours of continuing education, so Blankenship said their inspection is not opinion but is based on a set of standards inspectors must follow. They look at everything from a safety standpoint and what will hold the value of the properties up to the highest level possible.

The average contractor in the county that does a good job will meet ASHI standards, and Blankenship said it is no different than what the bank requires when you sell a property. Best practices meet codes even though standards are not codes and these standards will be best practices, not code enforcements.

D’Andrea said contractors must specify which codes they work with.

Ebelherr asked whether the county would impose that a problem be fixed on the contractor’s dime or whether the homeowner would have to negotiate this addition on his house that he cannot get occupancy to.

Blankenship said it would be up to the homeowner, then asked “would you not want to know if you had an egregious violation that could cause you potential death or risk to your family?”

Thompson said you would have a contract with the contractor to say that he “will meet those standards” and if he does not meet those standards, you have something to fall back on.

D’Andrea said a homeowner enters into an agreement with a contractor about what codes they are using.

Commission member Judy Graff asked if decks or porch additions would be included and said, “I see you putting two new inspections on ones that weren’t there before [and] I think it’s going to be a burden for the homeowners.”

D’Andrea said the question about decks came up at the Regional Planning Commission meeting and they thought decks should be included.

Bill Graff spoke as someone who has built home additions, hog buildings, and cattle sheds; he worries about “more regulatory burden and costs on people who want to do things to improve their properties.”

Graff said it is a detriment to the homeowners and while he is not totally against the standard, he feels the language is way too “expandatory” (it expands too much) as written and it should be easier from a regulatory and cost perspective. Graff asked how far down we would go at regulating and said he has always consulted with friends who are carpenters about how to put plumbing and electrical in right.

Logan County resident Tom Alberts of the Albert Brothers (heating) business said he applauds those who want to do their own work. He has spent many years doing Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC). Alberts said HVAC is the number one failed business and he wants to see the trend turn.

Alberts said he wants some stopped before someone gets hurt and wants to slow down dishonest contractors. He has seen ductwork taped together with newspaper.

Noltensmeier said the county does not have many homes for sale. If you have an inspection and it passes, but then there are problems, it would be helpful to know if the home was built to standards.

Ebelherr said maybe the county board needs to regulate contractors if there are ones doing poor jobs.

Martin said if the contractor is bad and the report says they need to meet standards, maybe the contractor should foot the bill. He asked how the standards would be enforced.

Blankenship said if the county were to regulate contractors, we would need to have a licensing board and code inspectors and “that’s policing.” He said this is a soft way to bring up standards to the point where we can maintain property values, have safer houses, and have less of a drain on public services at a very minimal expense.

Blankenship added that one research study he has read said that within two to three years of a new home being built approximately $1,700 in repairs are needed. He said most of those problems could have been avoided if found in an inspection, corrective measures that would take 10 to 20 minutes of additional work could avert costly repairs later.

Ebelherr asked about changing the 500 square feet [for an addition] to 750 square feet. He also said the county board should consult with the State’s Attorney’s office to see if they can legally bring in standards “in the back door.” He believes there may be “a legal issue about a homeowner having to meet a standard that has not been adopted by citizens through the county board.”

Judy Graff said she has an issue with having two inspections on something that is only 500 feet because it seems “burdensome.”

Martin said he sees a hard time following through on some of the standards.

Noltensmeier said if you spend a lot of money on a house and find out several years later something is “screwed up because it wasn’t done correctly, that’s a big deal.”

After more discussion about standards and additions, the ZBA voted.

Commission member Cheryl Baker motioned to approve establishing a Certificate of Occupancy and inspection process for new homes and additions with the recommendation that the addition size of 500 square feet be increased to 750 square feet area.

Commission member John Fulton amended the motion to only require a single inspection for non-enclosed structures such as decks.

The amended motion to only require a single inspection for non-enclosed structures such as decks passed 4-3. Cheryl Baker, John Fulton, Derek Martin, and Doug Thompson voted yes. Bret Farmer, Judy Graff, and Scott Noltensmeier voted no.

The main motion to approve the certificate of occupancy and recommendation to increase the square footage to 750 square feet failed 5-2. Bret Farmer, Judy Graff, Derek Martin, Scott Noltensmeier, and Doug Thompson voted no. Cheryl Baker and John Fulton voted yes.

Due to the failure of the main motion, the ZBA will not make a recommendation to the county board.

Tiny Homes

D’Andrea next discussed changes to the mobile home park ordinance with several amendments. One amendment includes modifying the mobile home parks to tiny home parks. He amended the mobile home regulations in Appendix B by deleting language related to mobile home parks and adding language regulating tiny homes.

For Appendix B, the Planning and Zoning Committee had discussed what went into the different sections such as density requirements, secondary access requirements, and water and septic requirements. For the septic requirements, they checked with the Logan County Department of Public Health to see what would be adequate for these requirements.

Tiny homes developments and subdivisions are also being added as amendments to Section 3.41-4 of the ordinance on Agricultural District Conditional Uses and Section 3.51-3 on R-1 Single Family Residential District and Conditional Uses.

D’Andrea also amended language regarding the process of approval. References to the Zoning Board of Appeals are being struck out because they will not review the preliminary plat for a subdivision. The ZBA will just look at the conditional use part.

D’Andrea said tiny home parks must be on five-acre tracts, which is the minimum lot size in an agricultural district. The tiny homes shall be between 200 and 800 square feet on a permanent foundation, and not on wheels.

There is no one definition of a tiny home and D’Andrea said many run from 50 square feet to 250 square feet. The Planning and Zoning committee wanted to find “some kind of common ground” without going as small as 50 square feet but allowing a range.

The Regional Planning Commission recommended allowing an attached garage. Right now, the ordinance requires a ten-foot separation between the tiny home and the garage.

The parks will have sewer and water and a community septic system.

Ebelherr asked why they are eliminating mobile home parks.

D’Andrea said since the 1970s, there has only been one mobile home development in the county.

Ebelherr said leaving out mobile home parks [from the ordinance] just because of no demand is taking away an option and asked why they could not allow both mobile home parks and tiny home parks.

Noltensmeier motioned to recommend adopting the regulations for tiny homes except section 10.4. This section would be amended to say, “separated from a tiny home by a minimum of ten feet except for the attached garage.”

The ZBA unanimously recommended approval of the regulations for tiny homes.

Solar Farms and Solar Gardens

The last item discussed was amendments to Section 3.41- 3.44 on Agricultural District Conditional Uses to include adding solar farms as a conditional use and adding a new Appendix F with regulations for solar farms.

D’Andrea had been getting calls for several months from companies asking if the county allowed solar farms for commercial developments. He had to tell them no but talked to both the County Board and Planning and Zoning Committee about developing a solar ordinance.

The Planning and Zoning Committee researched solar ordinances in other counties and found they ranged from few pages to many pages.

D’Andrea said solar gardens require less acreage and may possibly be for personal use or used to power something like a tiny home subdivision. Solar farms require more acreage and are often for commercial use.

The ordinance also makes provisions for setbacks, fencing, height requirements, and decommissioning.

Thompson said he did not see anything in the ordinance about damage of drainage tiles and wants to see that.

Martin asked about minimums greater than five acres as he would rather have large solar arrays than several dispersed.

Thompson said he would like to see the solar gardens in smaller sections not taking up a lot of farmland.

Baker said she was told that if the solar farm went in as a commercial use, the tax base would change and “real estate ground” would now be taxed as commercial and the taxes would triple.

Bill Graff said 40-acre solar farms produce more electricity than two wind towers on forty-acres and the footprint per acre is less than the wind farms.

Thompson asked why two engineers, a professional engineer and an independent engineer chosen by the board, are needed.

Blankenship said who is to say the solar garden or solar farm would do things “up to snuff.” The independent engineer would help ensure that we get something safe. It could say “may” require the board to choose an independent engineer.

Martin asked about why setbacks are only 30 feet from a property, which seems very close. Martin said he wants them further away.

D’Andrea said currently in the Agricultural District, the setback is half the size of the structure, so a twelve-foot structure could have a six-foot setback.

Thompson said the first sentence in the section about a 30 foot setback is confusing.

Before voting, the ZBA discussed a few additions to the solar ordinance:

1. Care shall be taken to avoid damaging drainage tiles.

2. Change “shall” hire an independent engineer to “may” hire an independent engineer.

3. Delete the first sentence [in the section] on setbacks for clarity.

Baker motioned that the ZBA recommend approval of the solar farm and solar garden ordinance with the three additions.

The motion passed 5-2. Cheryl Baker, Bret Farmer, John Fulton, Judy Graff, and Doug Thompson voted yes. Derek Martin and Scott Noltensmeier voted no.

All the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance will be brought forward to the Logan County Board for discussion at the Workshop on Thursday, May 10, at 7 p.m. and voted at the Regular Board meeting Tuesday, May 15, at 7:00 p.m. Both meetings are at the Logan County Courthouse.

[Angela Reiners]

Past related

05/03/2018 - Building and commercial solar development ordinances pass Logan County Regional Planning Commission