Critics of a proposal to allow greater density in rural Clay County housing subdivisions took aim Wednesday at presumptions that more housing will expand the tax base.
Rural residents opposed to the higher density development cited a list of studies that consistently found that isolated rural subdivisions cost more in expanded services than they bring in through added taxes.
"What about infrastructure, emergency services, roads, school busing, natural resources and water issues?" asked Greg Hoch, a resident of Cromwell Township northwest of Hawley. "What about costs to the townships and county?"
Hoch's comments were made in a public hearing before the Clay County Planning Commission. The commission is drafting its recommendations for a new county development code.
The new development code would increase the allowance for non-farm rural residences, now restricted to four in a 160-acre quarter section of land. Under the proposal, the cap would increase to eight homes for a cluster development and 16 for a subdivision.
ADVERTISEMENT
The higher density cap has generated the most criticism in a broad revision of the county's development ordinance, which hasn't undergone widespread change in more than 20 years.
Laurie Winterfeldt Shanks, deputy mayor of Moorhead, presented a variety of suggestions, many dealing with so-called urban expansion districts - areas likely to someday become part of a city.
She also asked for more specific ordinances on rural development, including spelling out what government body will provide services in rural subdivisions.
"At a bare minimum, the county may wish to create a clear, presumptive and de facto basis rejecting such 'urban services creep,' " Winterfeldt Shanks said.
Tim Magnusson, Clay County planning director, said he hopes a revised development code, reflecting some of the public comments from Wednesday's hearing, will be forwarded to the County Commission in mid or late July.
Readers can reach Forum reporter Patrick Springer at (701) 241-5522
