Jefferson County Council Delays Lionstone Development for Additional Traffic Review
Council members want county engineering and legal staff to take another look at the proposed 237-home development before a final decision.
By The Jefferson Review
HILLSBORO — A proposed 237-home development in Imperial will wait at least two more weeks for a final decision after the Jefferson County Council voted Monday night to seek additional review of the project's traffic study and previously approved conditions.
The Lionstone development would cover approximately 91 acres at 3890 Lions Den Road and includes plans for 237 single-family homes. The project previously received a 5-4 recommendation for approval from the Jefferson County Planning and Zoning Commission.
Several residents and representatives connected to the project attended Monday's meeting and spoke in support of moving the development forward.
But before the council reached the project, members voted 6-1 to postpone consideration until the county engineer can take a closer look at traffic conditions near Lions Den Road and Old Highway 21.
The council also wants county attorneys to review conditions added to the development earlier this month.
Traffic Study Raises Questions
Much of Monday night's discussion centered on whether the county's own engineering staff had sufficiently reviewed the traffic study submitted for the development.
Council members questioned whether the county engineer should have a larger role in reviewing traffic studies before development proposals reach the council.
Councilman Tim Bennett questioned why the county would maintain professional staff if those employees were not routinely asked to review studies submitted with major developments.
“Why would we spend the money on staff when we're going to get these studies done and staff isn't going to review them?”
Tim Bennett
Councilman Bob Tullock said the additional review was important because of the potential financial impact on taxpayers if a road improvement is later determined to be necessary.
“We've got a responsibility to the taxpayers in all of Jefferson County to make sure that we do things right.”
Bob Tullock
Tullock said he had supported the project two weeks earlier but now wanted additional information from county staff before casting a final vote.
Council Debates Whether More Review Is Necessary
Not every council member agreed that delaying the project was necessary.
Councilman Billy Crow questioned whether seeking additional interpretation of the traffic study after the public hearing process had ended could create legal concerns for the developer.
Crow also pointed out that the traffic study had been conducted using a larger number of homes than what is currently proposed.
“The traffic study was done with fifteen percent more houses than were on this.”
Billy Crow
He argued that continuing to seek information after the study had already concluded that a turn lane was not required could create concerns about property rights and due process.
County Counselor Jalesia Kuenzel pushed back on the idea that the engineering review would introduce new evidence into the record.
“It is clarifying the evidence that is already in front of the council.”
Jalesia Kuenzel
Council members supporting the delay repeatedly emphasized that they were not attempting to stop the development.
Council Chairman Tim Brown said the additional time would allow staff to examine the issue before the council makes a final decision.
“I've not heard anybody up here saying, ‘Let's squash it. Let's kill it. Let's deny it.’”
Tim Brown
The council ultimately voted 6-1 to postpone the project and plans to take it up again at its next regular meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 13.
Broader Questions About Development Review
The Lionstone discussion also turned into a broader conversation about how Jefferson County reviews development-related traffic studies.
Council members suggested that the county engineer could become more involved earlier in the planning process, particularly as Jefferson County continues reviewing and rewriting its Unified Development Order.
One council member noted that the county engineer previously served on the Planning and Zoning Commission and suggested restoring that involvement could prevent similar questions from arising in the future.
Another member said the county should establish a consistent process if engineering review is going to become part of future development decisions.
Traffic studies were also raised during public comment, when a resident questioned whether current studies fully account for existing traffic, delivery vehicles, trash trucks, service vehicles and other everyday trips associated with residential developments.
The discussion suggested the county's ongoing UDO rewrite could extend beyond zoning classifications and development standards to include a closer look at how traffic impacts are evaluated.
County Tax Rates Approved
While Lionstone dominated much of the discussion, council members also unanimously approved the county's property tax rates.
Before the vote, one council member said he had previously questioned how the rates were calculated but had received additional information from the County Clerk's Office.
The discussion also returned to an earlier audit involving portions of the county's tax calculations.
Brown said the county has received revised numbers but he still wants a clearer report showing what was identified during the review and what changes followed.
“We've gotten the new numbers. We've seen that it's been recalculated, but I don't think we've really seen, ‘Here's what we found. Here's what we've changed. Here's our recommendation,’”
Tim Brown
The tax rates were approved 7-0.
Telecommunications Tower Approved
The council also unanimously approved a conditional use permit for a 190-foot telecommunications tower in Council District 7.
The proposal sparked a short discussion about the county's rules governing development within the potential fall radius of telecommunications towers.
Council members suggested those regulations should be reviewed as part of the ongoing UDO rewrite to make sure the rules are consistent.
The tower was approved 7-0.
Barnhart Property Rezoned for Residential Use
Council members also unanimously approved a rezoning request for approximately five acres at 7879 Old State Route 21 in Barnhart.
The property had been commercially zoned but was being used as a residence.
The owner sought residential zoning in order to construct an addition to the home.
That discussion prompted questions about the difference between how a property is zoned and how it may be classified or taxed based on its actual use.
The rezoning received final approval 7-0.
What's Next for Lionstone
For now, the Lionstone development remains unresolved.
The county engineer is expected to review the project's traffic study, including questions surrounding the approach from Lions Den Road to Old Highway 21. County attorneys will also have additional time to review conditions previously added to the development.
Unless the timeline changes, the proposal is expected to return to the council on Oct. 13.
That meeting could determine whether the 237-home development moves forward as proposed, moves forward with additional conditions, or faces another round of changes.
Stay connected to what’s happening in Jefferson County
The Jefferson Review delivers the local government decisions, development updates, and community stories shaping our county every Thursday and Sunday.
Don’t miss what your neighbors are talking about.
Stay connected to what’s happening in Jefferson County.
The Jefferson Review delivers the local government decisions, development updates, and community stories shaping our county every Thursday and Sunday.
Don’t miss what your neighbors are talking about.