Boone County’s Board of Zoning Appeals on Oct. 22 approved a special exception and recommended that the Area Planning Commission approve a two-lot minor residential subdivision splitting a 16.97-acre agricultural parcel into two roughly 8–9 acre lots.

The petition, 25WA7M188, proposes that Lot 1 retain the existing residence and Lot 2 be designated for a family member to build a single-family home, an in-ground swimming pool and a pool barn. Staff and the technical-advisory committee reviewed site conditions and recommended approvals with specific highway and drainage commitments.

John Cross, attorney for the petitioner, told the board the petitioners agreed to all staff recommendations and technical comments. Staff reported a soil report supporting an above-ground sand-mound septic system for Lot 2, but said a perimeter drain would be required because of a seasonally high water table; basements were not recommended. The county surveyor asked for a first-floor elevation 15 inches above the center line of the road and a six-inch subsurface drain in the drainage easement to provide an outlet for Lot 2.

The highway department supported the subdivision provided the petitioner convey 40 feet of right-of-way along the northern road frontage, trim lower limbs on mature trees along the east side of Lot 2 to improve visibility, clear and shape vegetation "ground to sky" on the western half of Lot 2 for visibility at the driveway, and reshape slopes and ditches to a minimum 3:1 backslope and 4:1 slope in places. The planning department had no outstanding concerns; the application included a drainage permit and a proposed minor plat.

A member of the public who farms nearby said he was familiar with the site and questioned the degree of detail in the highway department’s slope and vegetation requirements; the board and staff noted the requirements related to drainage and sight-distance for future driveway locations.

After public comment, the board voted to approve 25WA7M188 with the highway and surveyor commitments to be satisfied as conditions of the minor residential subdivision. The motion passed on a voice vote with all members answering aye.

The board noted that future subdivision would require return to the BZA and APC; staff added a right-to-farm statement and a limit on further subdivision as part of the conditions.

The petitioner indicated there will not be a shared driveway for the two lots; staff noted the highway department had asked the petitioner to consider driveway location in the event of any future subdivision but that no shared drive is proposed now.