[ back ]
Narrower lots urged to spread utility costs
(by Joseph Koziol Jr. - November 17, 2010)
Narrower lots urged to spread utility costs
By JOSEPH KOZIOL JR.
A Burton Village planning commission member asked officials Monday to consider revising lot-size requirements.
Planning commission member Curt Johnson, who also serves on the village's board of public affairs, raised the issue as a way to offset what is expected to be huge rate increases for water and sewer services.
"Do we need 100 feet of frontage to allow for a lot?" Mr. Johnson asked. He said allowing for 60- or 75-foot frontage would open the village up for more development. That could create more homes that, in turn, would provide more users to share in the costs for maintaining the water and sewer systems, thereby reducing the costs for all, he said.
As a member of the board of public affairs, which oversees the water and sewer operations in the village, Mr. Johnson said, the board has been looking at the need to increase water and sewer rates in an effort to make the operations self-sufficient, meaning the money brought in is sufficient to handle repairs and maintenance of the system.
The village had invited officials with the Ohio Rural Community Assistance Program last summer to review the rates and had suggested increasing them by as much as 73 percent to meet present and future needs of the operation.
Mayor Thomas Blair Sr. said the village has had virtually no rate increases in the past decade, save for a nominal one last year.
Reducing requirements for lot size would mean more homes could be built and costs shared, possibly relieving the burden for those who face the steep increases.
Mr. Blair questioned whether the village benefits from the large-lot zoning it now has.
Vacant land in the vicinity of Colony Lane and Garden Street, he said, could produce about 40 homes under the village's current zoning with the 100-foot-frontage requirement. Reducing the frontage requirement to 75 feet may produce about 50 homes, he said.
Many suburbs have 50-foot-frontage requirements, he said.
When asked whether the village's sewer-treatment plant could handle the added households, Mr. Johnson said the plant is being taxed, but not by the number of users in the village. Instead, he said, the problems are associated with infiltration and inflow into the system. "It's a bigger problem than handling the users," he said.
Mr. Blair said the problem lies with the system itself and with some lines being as old as 85 years.
Commission member James Koster said other problems could arise with a reduction in the frontage requirements.
Ten years ago, he said, he built a new home in the village after getting a lot split. The split provided him with a lot that met the 100-foot requirement, but it caused the lot to narrow in the back. He said that "gerrymandering" was needed to ensure that both lots met the village requirements.
He said he also owns a 60-foot lot in Middlefield, which is buildable, because it is grandfathered. But he said he is required to meet the current setback requirements, which essentially would leave him with a "bowling-alley" type of building there.
Mr. Koster questioned whether similar problems could arise if Burton Village changed its requirements.
But Mr. Blair said the idea is worth exploring. "It is something to think about," he said.
[ back ]
