Planning commission rejects mobile home overlay
Proposal would have given group authority to allow 'overlay' zone over parts of town
Mobile homes and screens were just two of the topics discussed at last Thursday's meeting of the Hillsboro Community Planning and Development Commission.
For the past several months, commission members have been discussing the role of manufactured housing within Hillsboro. And for Thursday's meeting, they were prepared to take action.
The commission was ready to approve a manufactured home overlay district policy that would be added to city zoning regulations. It would give the commission authority to map out a specific area of town where individual single-wide mobile homes could locate among other houses.
Thursday's action would not have done the actual mapping — just given the commission the authority to do so in the future. Currently, single-wide manufactured housing can only go in designated "mobile home parks."
However, before approving this plan, the commission wanted to know how the public felt via the community-wide survey.
They found out: When responding to the statement "Should manufactured housing including mobile homes be allowed to locate in," a whopping 62 percent of respondents said "manufactured home parks only." Only 32 percent answered with "certain residential areas," and six percent said "all residential areas."
City Administrator Steve Garrett said that he interpreted this response as something that the city didn't want to do.
Also at the meeting was Darrell Driggers, representing the Hillsboro Development Corporation. Driggers said that he's had 15 years experience in the manufactured housing industry, and he's seen that a single-wide mobile home usually depreciates over time. That depreciation might overlap into surrounding homes, he said.
Mayor Delores Dalke was also at the meeting, and she said that in her years as a real estate agent, she's owned eight mobile homes. Over time, all of them depreciated in value.
"I believe if we even consider this we are going to go backward," she said.
Consulting engineer John Riggs said that the commission had been considering the overlay to help provide affordable housing for low- to mid-income families.
But Dalke said that the city was already taking steps toward affordable housing. It's pursuing low-income housing duplexes, bringing homes up to code with the housing rehab program, and demolishing homes beyond repair.
Dalke urged the commission to hold off on the overlay decision.
"If we start doing this, I'm afraid we're going to be sorry," she said.
Riggs said that there was no reason to implement the overlay if the city didn't want it. It can always be added later, he said.
According to Garrett, there have been no requests to move in individual single-wide mobile homes.
After discussion, the commission unanimously agreed to wait on the overlay district.
The first item on the night's agenda dealt with a Hillsboro family requesting screening from a nearby business.
The area in question near the new storage units recently built by Doug Wright, owner of Wright's Chrysler. The units are situated just east of South Main Street, which has residential homes.
According to city code, screening must be put up between a commercial business and a single-family dwelling that is in a residential zone. City code 1-8.06 says that these businesses include "institutional, office, commercial, or industrial uses."
Three homes are located west of the storage units: 504 S. Main, 506 S. Main, and 508 S. Main.
Since 504 S. Main, which is located on the corner of D and Main, is a part of the commercial district, the screening code doesn't apply to them.
The owners of 506 S. Main, Roger and Helen Hagen, would like the screening to be put up behind their property. Screening usually takes the form of some kind of fence.
Wright was concerned because the Hagen's backyard and his storage units are on different levels. As things are situated, a fence would have to sit in a low spot between the two properties.
During a rainstorm, water would drain right into the fence, possibly rotting a wood fence, Wright said.
"I'm not going to run a fence through the drainage," he said.
According to city code, the home owners are entitled to a screen that's up to 10 feet tall, but no higher. Wright said he felt that even a fence that high wouldn't cover up the view of the storage units for the Hagens.
Roger Hagen was also concerned about rain — or the possibility of a rainstorm washing down rock from the drive alongside the storage units.
Hagen said he was worried that people storing things at the units could "come day or night."
"I feel like we should have our privacy," Helen Hagen said.
Wright said that customers aren't allowed on the premises at night.
Both parties had not met to discuss the issue before Thursday's meeting.
After further discussion, commission chairman Gaylord Goertzen said that according to city code, screening must be put up — in fact, there has to be a reason given not to put it up, he said.
Roger Hagen said he wanted the fence at the property line. His neighbor to the north, at 504 S. Main, has a wood fence that is set back three feet from the property line, but Hagen doesn't want to align a future fence with that one.
Wright said that he would put up a "cyclone fence," or a metal chain-link fence with wood slats through it. This kind of metal fence wouldn't have the potential problem of rotting if water collected at its base.
The Hagens agreed to this kind of fence.
Wright also said that he didn't prefer a 10-foot fence, but that a six-foot fence might not completely screen the storage units from view for the Hagens.
Helen Hagen said that her main concern was people at the storage unit not being able to look into her backyard. She was less concerned with the fence blocking her view east.
After more than an hour's discussion on this topic, the commission agreed to table the issue until both parties could agree on a fence height.
Also, the commission voted to waive the screening requirement for 508 S. Main. This waiver is permanent, even for future homeowners.
