Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Can we just walk in? Thank you. We have two free zones.

Okay, let's call this meeting the Hazel Plenty Commission order first item of business is a roll call Mendez

Here.

True. Here. Coleman. Ager.

Here.

Morrison. Here. Reinke. Blood.

Here. Welcome, Jacob Mendez, to your first meeting. Next item of business is a presentation and approval of minutes of June 11, 2026.

I move that we accept the minutes as presented.

Second.

Second.

YOU HAVE TO TABLE THEM IF YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH.

YEAH, I NEED A MOTION. WE CAN'T EVEN MAKE A SECOND.

TRUBE AND COLEMAN AND AZURE WERE THE ONLY.

SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE IT AND I'LL SECOND IT. AND YOU AND I WILL VOTE.

OKAY? PLEASE MAKE THAT MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THE MINUTES. SECOND. QUESTION?

MINNES.

NO.

TRUBE.

Aye.

Azar.

Yes.

Morrinson.

Yes. No. Abstain. And he'll abstain also. Good. Thank you. Sorry, you can't vote on that if you were here to verify that it is. No public forum under old business. We have a table from June 11, 2026. One step final plat.

So this is a one-step final plot for 7474 and 7470 South Broadway. Together, the properties are just under one acre. The applicant wants to plot these properties so that he can build a self-service storage warehouse on it, which he got conditions approved by city council on July 13th. The plat conforms with all of our requirements of the subdivision regulations with one modification. Our subdivision regulations do require that proposed business, commercial, and industrial subdivisions fronting on arterial streets dedicate and improve sidewalks. This plat is not including a sidewalk. There isn't one on the east side of Broadway right now for platted or unplatted property, and staff assumes this is meant for larger subdivisions, not just single lot. So not just single lot flats. All comments in your staff report have been addressed, so staff does recommend this plat be approved.

Any questions?

Any discussion? I move that we approve plat 2026-002, the one-step final plat, subject to all staff and engineering recommendations.

Mendes.

Aye.

Troop. Aye. Acer. Yes. Mortenson. Yes. Blood.

Epstein. Under new business, we have a public hearing for a zone change from light commercial to single family residential for property located at 510 West Grand. Protect the rights of all parties involved in order to create an opportunity for everyone to speak their opinions and present information. The Hazel Planning Commission follows a specific procedure in reaching a decision. A copy of the procedure is available by the door. We now formally open the public hearing to consider the proposed zone change request for light commercial to single family residential for property generally located at 510 West Grand. Any members of the Planning Commission have any conflict of interest in this case? No. No. Any members received any written or electronic communication on this matter? No. No. Staff received any written or electronic communication?

None.

Please present.

So this is a zone change for 510 West Grand Avenue along Grand Avenue just west of here. The applicant is requesting to change the property from LC Light Commercial to SF Single Family. It was platted in 1967 and rezoned to Light Commercial in 1967 as well. The property has sat undeveloped since and it's currently used as the front yard for the residents at the address. There are a couple of different zone change for the properties in the past, one of which was to rezone the property to TF2 Family Residential in the summer of 2017. That rezoning was recommended for approval by Planning Commission and approved by City Council, but never officially adopted, so the property remained late commercial. There are no other zoning cases associated with the property. Staff is recommending approval of the zone change. Four out of eight of our findings are in support, with one in opposition and three neutral. The three that are neutral, the first being the suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it's been restricted. Both zoning districts, like commercial or single family, are suitable for the property. And given that the subject property is functionally merged with the rear half of Reserve A, what it is plotted as, Due to common ownership, the requested SF single-family rezoning might be more appropriate to facilitate easier development in the future, but if it's the priority of the Planning Commission to maintain the highest and best use of the property, light commercial would be better suited. Another one that was neutral was the length and time of the property being undeveloped. It has been undeveloped since it was platted. And the last one that was neutral was relative gain to the public health and safety compared to the loss to the applicant. Staff doesn't foresee any gain or loss to the public health or safety. Approving the zone change may reduce the property owner's taxes. The applicant had stated that they wished to stop paying commercial property taxes when they applied for the zone change. Sedgwick County does have the property classified as residential as well, so staff is unsure if this zone change will have the intended effect the applicant wishes. Denial of the zone change would not further limit the property owner's ability to use the subject property as it currently stands because it is functionally the front yard of the house at the address. The property can't be built on without a variance. And then the only finding that was in opposition was conformance to the comprehensive plan. One of our goals of the comp plan is to preserve our commercial properties, and rezoning this obviously does not preserve it. The comp plan also includes our land use map, which does have it designated as commercial, not residential. Staff is still recommending approval of the zone change with no protective overlay. The applicant is here tonight if you have any questions, and I can stand for them as well.

Any questions for staff? No. Any applicants and their agent present? Members to speak?

I mean, I have nothing to add. You covered it all.

Okay. You don't have to.

This is your opportunity if you want to. No, she covered everything that we asked her.

Okay. Okay. Any member of the public wish to speak? Hearing none, public comment is now closed for planning commission action. The floor is open to commissioner's comments.

UN2026-002, changing zoning from LC Lake Marshall to SF single family residential. I second. I have a motion and second to recommend approval.

Question?

Mendes?

Aye.

Troop? Aye. Azier? Aye. Mortenson? Aye. Blood?

Aye.

Under new business item B, public hearing for a zone change from light commercial to heavy commercial for a property journey located northwest corner of 79th and Broadway. We now formally open the public hearing to consider a proposed zone change from light commercial to heavy commercial for a property journey located on the northwest corner of 79th and Broadway. Any planning commission members have a conflict of interest? Any members receiving electronic communication on this matter? No. Any staff receiving electronic or written communication?

Only what's in the staff report.

Please present.

So this is a zone change for the property at the northwest corner of 79th and South Broadway Avenue. The property is just over 11 acres and is an undeveloped farm field. It's an island annexed to the city of Hayesville, so all of the surrounding properties are outside city limits and the property is also unflatted. There are no other known zoning cases associated with the property. The applicant is requesting this zone change with plans to build a gas station slash convenience store on the property. They've also expressed interest in a liquor store and a strip mall development in addition to the gas station. I will note that the applicant can address questions related to this proposed development, but that is not what this review of this zone change is for. This review is only for evaluating the suitability of the subject property for the HC Heavy Commercial Zoning District. If the property was successfully rezoned, any use that's allowed in the HC Heavy Commercial Zone District could be built on the property. Staff received multiple public comments, all of which have been included in your staff report. For analysis, staff is recommending that this zone change be denied, and that is because we've had three out of eight of the findings in opposition and only two in support with three neutral. The zoning and uses in character of the neighborhood is in support of the zone change since the majority of the land is either large lot residential or undeveloped. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which has been restricted is in opposition of the zone change. Light commercial zoning districts would be more appropriate than heavy commercial zoning districts. If Planning Commission is in favor of the heavy commercial zoning, a protective overlay could be considered to exclude some of the higher uses allowed in heavy commercial. The extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property is in opposition of the zone change. For the public comment staff that many neighbors were concerned about traffic, noise, light, groundwater pollution, and home values. Development is likely to increase noise in the area since the property is undeveloped and is a farm field. But that is regardless if the zoning district is approved. Groundwater contamination could be mitigated by requiring any gas stations built on the site to be located a minimum of 500 feet from any wells and streams. And home values can be protected by requiring a higher standard of development for this property in conformance to our South Broadway corridor plan. The relative gain to the public health and safety compared to the loss in value to the applicant is in opposition of the zone change. Approval of the zone change request would allow the applicant to use the property to the full extent of their intended use, but denial would not limit the applicant's ability to use the subject property for a different approved use in the light commercial district in comparison to all of the negatives that could be seen to neighborhoods. However, the zone change is in conformance to our comprehensive plan. Heavy commercial zoning is a commercial use, and that is what has been designated by our land use map. The South Broadway corridor plan also reflects that commercial land use designation. The impact of the proposed development on the community facilities is neutral. City sewer would need to be extended to the property, and the development may require some sort of traffic mitigation if it has enough traffic generated to it, but both improvements would be at the cost of the applicant. So staff is recommending this zone change be denied. If Planning Commission finds the zone change should be permitted, there is a list of conditions for protective overlay in your staff report.

Thank you. Any questions for staff?

No.

Does the applicant wish to speak?

Yes.

Do you wish to speak?

So is this in regards to the heavy commercial?

To the zone change, yes.

So we sent out a form. One of them was for a heavy commercial understanding that the city, they had questions regarding what was being built and what was not being built. We were very transparent with what was being built was a gas station, but understandably in a heavy commercial, right, we have different uses. Anything else can be built in heavy commercials. So we sent in another form for conditional use. and for the conditional use of a gas station and a convenience store. As far as protocols, we will take all the protocols necessary from the city of Hayesville. We will work closely with you guys. We'll sit down. We'll, you know, make sure the city, the citizens of Hayesville, they're all, you know, not affected in any negative way. So we intend to take all safety measures and go from there. Okay. And yeah, if anyone has any questions, I can try to answer at the best of my abilities.

Well, are you the agent? Yes, I am. Yes. You want to speak separately? I do. OK. Now would be that time.

Hey Nikhil, thanks for joining us today bud. He's not there from out of state. My name is Will Harmon. I'm representing the Hatcher family here. I'm heavily involved in Hayesville. Love this town. This town is great as far as things the city does for development and growth. I grew up in the country. I understand why people don't want things to be improved because you move out in the outskirts and you want to be the country you don't want things built next to you I understand that same time city wants to grow I believe the heavy industrial request was probably driven to them on when they asked like what does a gas station fall under and so that is the reason why they requested that they have no they have no need for heavy industrial we were fine with that Thank you. There's a lot of things that could go in under that category, but the only thing they're trying to do is a convenience store and a gas station. They don't need the heavy commercial. The conditional use is perfectly fine for this, so they don't need the heavy industrial zone change. um that was probably gone down the wrong path from the get-go so the conditional use to approve for the convenience store would be great and i mean it's right there on broadway it's on the way it's on the way to the casino people are passing all the way all the time it's a good spot for a convenience store i think it'd be a good amenity for the city also a good tax revenue we're going to come from this still in city limits They also have under contract the land across the street that's not in city limits. So there's options if it's denied. But we don't want to go that way. We want to give the tax money to Hayesville. There was one condition in the list of requirements for the conditional use that I thought was silly. There was something that said that pumps have to be behind the store. I've never seen a gas station in my life that has pumps behind the store. That's seems, I feel like maybe someone accidentally wrote that in there and it was a mistake. Um, it's not an unconvenient store. It's a convenience store. Um, so I would, I would ask me strike that, um, and then approve the conditional use, not the heavy commercial, just a conditional use for a convenience store. Uh, the hatchers have been in the city for eternity. Um, it would help their family to sell this land. This land doesn't sell without this going forward. They're great people. I'd love to help them. And I think this is going to be a great thing for the city of Hayesville. So I would hope that people would approve a conditional use, not a heavy commercial, but a conditional use for a convenience store there in the corner and help the city, help the hatchers. And I think it would be a great thing for the community.

Okay. Now's the time for any member of the public to speak. Uh, I want to remind all of you that you will be given five minutes that can be extended by vote from the majority of the commission, but also we are right now discussing the zone change. Only the conditional use is a separate item. That's the next item that we'll get to next. But right now we want to hear public comment on the zone change only. So Most of you didn't indicate in here which one you were for, just the property and the items. So if anybody would like to speak on the zone change only and not the

letting me speak my name is Ben Haggard my family and I live directly across the street from this proposed rezoning and we are urging the council to deny this rezoning we noted in the notes tonight that only 11 people contacted City Hall and there wasn't an opportunity to correlate enough residential information to understand what the residents needs are or desires are I conducted a survey of residents living within 1,000 feet of the proposed site. I spoke to residents in 36 houses representing just over half of the land. Overwhelmingly, 33 households, 92% of those surveyed are against a zone change or conditionally, I'm sorry, are against a zone change. Two households had no opinion and only a single household desired a gas station. I have a petition prepared to submit following this meeting, recording these residents and their adamant rejection of this proposal. It is clear that those directly affected by this zone change do not want a gas station, convenience store, liquor store or strip mall to be built on this site. Furthermore, it's not just my opinion, but it's written into the city code as well. Code of City of Hayesville, Chapter 16A, Zoning Regulations, Section 101E states, the explicit legal intent of the city's zoning code is to protect property values. And in Section 101B, to establish compatible pattern of land uses and buffer areas which enhance the value of each zone. Independent real estate data shows that high intensity commercial uses like gas stations built adjacent to homes could potentially depress surrounding property values by 10% in their first year. The proposal is intended to build a gas station or possibly a liquor store or strip mall as well. However, maintaining the land as light commercial still allows for robust, profitable, neighborhood-scale economic use such as professional offices, medical clinics, or boutique retail. There is already a legal right to build on the land based on the established zoning. There is not a need for heavy commercial designation to thrive in this area. There is, however, a permanent danger to rezoning, and it is not just about the potential of a gas station. This is a permanent alteration of the land. If the gas station closes in the future or is not built in the first place, any number of high impact, high volume commercial applications could be built. We understand Hayesville should continue to improve and do not push against such improvements. However, we are saying that there should be a denial of a rezoning to heavy construction. It is also noted that such adequate measures might be taken to say that the gas station should be built 500 feet from any private well. However, this will not be accomplished, be accomplishable in the simple fact that they are less than 500 feet from my personal well. My well is 139 feet to the south edge of 79th Street. In order to reach 500 feet from that private well, the underground storage tanks would need to be an additional 361 feet from the south edge of 79th. Even with changed setbacks or landscape improvements, there will be an increase in public nuisance, especially from idling vehicles, which create hazardous fumes, from light and noise pollution, and increased traffic. Therefore, we are asking the council to deny this zone change. Thank you for your time.

Yes. Jean loser. I'm probably the shortest term resident of the area representative here tonight. However, um, just intuitively, I don't have all the stats that Ben hasn't done the research, but at a glance that property be in farmland today is ideal. we're losing farmland right and left and sooner or later we're going to run out of farmland to feed ourselves. I realize it's a small plot for that. However, a gas station or heavy commercial just doesn't suit the area. Most of the area with the exception of Tracy electric is residential. You've got a park nearby that you've been developing and now you want to plop something heavy not eco-friendly environment right on the corner. We already have three gas stations in Hayesville. Are we trying to run one out of business by adding a fourth? We seem to lose more businesses than we gain. I'm not against light commercial and some business improvement. I just don't think what's proposed is reasonable for that area. I don't think we need a fourth gas station convenience store a third liquor store, we're not that big a town. I think what we have is sufficient. I would much rather see something more family friendly than a gas station. don't agree with the argument that there's a lot of traffic through there that the gas station would be ideal. My personal experience, most of the traffic heading to the casino that is not local to the area is going down the turnpike. They're not going to get off the turnpike to get to this gas station. Locals are probably already gone to the others. or get their gas elsewhere, their liquor store, a mile up the road is not very far. I think there's other entities that would be much better suited without a zoning change with the existing zoning change that would benefit all in the community. Thank you for your time.

Anybody else on this item? Yeah.

BUT I THOUGHT MAYBE I COULD CLEAR UP A FEW THINGS. I OWN THE PROPERTY.

YEAH, THIS IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION, SO THERE'S A SECTION FOR YOU NEXT.

OKAY.

ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WISH TO SPEAK? CAN I READ THAT? NO, NOT YET. THAT'S COMING UP NEXT. I GOT TO FOLLOW THE SCRIPT, YOU GOT TO FOLLOW THE SCRIPT. SOUNDS GOOD, BOSS. NOBODY ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC?

My name is Tammy Halsey and we reside on 80th Street South. We probably have maybe closest to the biggest chunk of property down in that area and we have livestock. I don't believe that it would behoove us as residents for that to be rezoned. I have great concerns with the development so far as the waterway that comes through there. I want that. We have flooding because we all are in a flood plain. We have the dry creek that runs that used to be the old cow skin that they've rediverted. So I have huge concerns if we're already having flooding in our pasture and they go in with a convenience store with all the blacktop, et cetera, where's that water gonna go? Is it gonna come in on us? Several of us down there have, still remain on well so that what Ben had talked about the contamination, we are one of them. I heard a lot about it benefits the city and it benefits the owners of this property, but I hear nothing about the, issues that we're going to have as landowners if this changes again I have livestock down there you know if we have lights 24 7 as we've watched the rooftops grow towards us we get it it's going to happen but light noise has come in I think that would just add tremendous amount of additional light but the flooding is absolutely a concern of mine because I already have where that water runs off and runs right the county Sedgwick County would not let me even build a barn on that six acres back there because it would implic peed water flow so I won't be aggravated if this goes through, just to be honest. Okay. Thank you for your time.

Yeah.

You got to come up to the podium, state your name, state your address. Sorry.

okay so i don't want to speak on that that's why i was asking okay i just want to speak on the conditional use which is what that's that's next that's what i thought that's why i was asking anybody else want to speak about the zone change all right any questions of the public from the commission

No? Does the applicant wish to respond to anything in the staff report or public comment? Will? You want to speak still?

Thank you. I understand all the concerns. They're valid. At the same time, I mean, it's 2026. You know, it's not 2050 or 2000, you know, 1950, whatever, when there's, you know, stores that dump all their stuff into the rivers and ravines. The floodplain, it's in the floodplain. They're going to have to fix that, and that happens with civil engineers that approve the process and the plats and things like that that you can't do, can't build it. We've gone through that before with the City of Hayesville. We did the copper tail development here. We had to move the entire thing 100 foot back to allow for drainage. The drainage from the blacktop that's going to be allowed is going to be the same drainage that's going to run off that farm field. The field hasn't actually been farmed in the last three years. I mean, is it more cars coming through? Are there any more cars that are already going to the intersection? Like idle cars or, you know? They do what they do. They sit there. They fill up with gas. Property values would be helped by development of the area. So I'm a real estate guy. I know that. I'm not sure where the information came from or what Google search said that gas station is going to lower the price and the value, I'm sorry, conveniences, increase values of properties. So this goes in, properties around it will increase in value. That's how it works. And the flooding is taken care of by the civil engineers of things that are approved by the city. And nothing happens without their thumbs up. so those things go through the normal process of any kind of development and that costs lots of money but they you know they're like oh you gotta raise it two feet okay when that water from the black tops gonna go in the drain just like it does from the farm field it goes in the goes down the side of the street um but i just want people to know that this will not hurt property values this would be good good for property values conveniences people look for that I know you've got Jumpstart down the street. I'm not the biggest fan of their gas. An option would be nice for me if I was coming through town. But everything runs through the city. And everything that's going to happen, the drainage, Cars going by make noise at the stoplight, whether they're stopped or they're idled. I'm sure your ruler is accurate, sir. But contamination is, these are things of the past. There are so many things that convenience stores do nowadays that are so much far beyond what they were 50 years ago. you don't, you don't hear about, you don't hear unless when's the last time you heard about a quick trip, you know, sued for contamination down the street. Like this aren't things that you hear in the news. So I understand the concern. I'm a country farm boy. I get it. Um, at the same time that processes and how they handle their their supplies and their materials and their fluids are so much better today than what they were 50 years ago we don't we don't we don't have these contamination processes you know like you just you don't hear about it right there's a thousand gas stations in wichita you know you don't hear anybody lawsuits about oh well philip 66 has got you know contamination problem down the street you know it's because they're contained and they're we have better Methods these days so I would say I wouldn't I wouldn't worry about contamination Just because our our processes these days are really good. So The property values will go up. It will help the city.

We get taxes Thank you, Jerry Yes, Pete please and we're past that it's his turn now and ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT FROM THE COMMISSION?

I HAVE. YEAH. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY THERE'S A REQUEST TO BRING THIS UP TO HEAVY COMMERCIAL WHEN IT'S NOT REALLY NEEDED. AND I REALIZE WE HAVE A SEPARATE DISCUSSION ON CONDITIONAL USE, BUT WHY THE NEED TO REZONE AT ALL IF WE CAN DO IT AS LATE COMMERCIAL?

IT'S NOT NEEDED. was never needed it was wrong path heavy commercial is not needed i think they were instructed to go that route because that's one of the things that when you when you google under the city stuff like yes a gas station fault under that under that zoning but also can be a conditional use that's all they needed they needed the LIGHTEST USE THEY COULD POSSIBLY USE TO GET THE COMMUNITY STORE. THE HEAVY COMMERCIAL IS NOT NEEDED. I WOULD REQUEST WE DENY THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

PUBLIC COMMENTS NOW HAVE CLOSURE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS. DISCUSSION?

I recommend we deny the zone change to have a commercial.

Second. The motion is second to recommend denial. Question?

Mendez? Aye. True?

Aye.

Ager?

Yes.

Mortensen?

Aye.

Blood?

Aye.

for clarification will you state that to everybody in the crowd what just happened just so they understand so the motion failed it will not be changed to heavy commercial now we're going to talk about the conditional use within light commercial thank you so item c public hearing for a conditional use to operate a convenience store had a properly generally looking at the northwest corner 79th and broadway We now formally open the public hearing to consider the proposed conditional use to allow a convenience store in the Light Commercial District for property generally located at the northwest corner of 7th and 9th and Broadway. Any members of the Planning Commission have a conflict of interest in this case?

No.

Any members receive any written or electronic communication on this matter? No. Staff receive any written or electronic communication on this matter?

I got an email earlier today from a Michelle Hartline. A copy of her concerns should be on your benches. Have you all had an opportunity to read over that? Yeah, yes. After she sent this, there was a little bit of more communication. She asked whether there was public record for the 911 calls for the intersection. There are. Our chief of police found that there were seven traffic-related intersections at that traffic-related incidents at that intersection, two of which were DUIs, and then 45 total police reports. That includes the seven traffic incidents, and then the others were for animal control, welfare checks, disturbances, checking the condition of the intersection lights, fire department calls, and general traffic stops, like speeding tickets.

Over what duration of time?

The last six months.

Thank you.

So this is a conditional use to operate a convenience store slash gas station in the Light Commercial District for the same property that was for the zone change before. The staff is recommending approval of this conditional use application subject to six different conditions, and that is all based on our findings that review access, traffic load and flow, noise, light and odor, screening and security fencing, parking, services, public health and safety, the adequacy of the facility and lot size, signs, and some other considerations like landscaping and proximity to residential uses, building aesthetics, and the location of other convenience stores and gas stations in the city. PEC is recommending, our city engineer, PEC, is recommending that we table this conditional use until a site plan is presented just because it would be easier to review these findings. A site plan requirement is not in our city code, but I wanted to put that out there. For the conditions for this conditional use, staff is recommending that dedicated pedestrian and bicycle access circulation and amenities be provided consistent with our South Broadway corridor plan. And that the Sedgwick County Access Management Policy and the KDOT Access Management Policies recommendations are included when it comes to platting and access control. Staff is also recommending that the aesthetic conditions be consistent with the South Broadway corridor plan so that no buildings are metal-sided. The preferred siding materials are EIFs, stucco, fiber cement board, or masonry. We're also requiring a condition that a gas station must be located at least 500 feet from any wells and streams to mitigate the risk of water contamination and that the signs be consistent with the South Broadway corridor plan. Billboards and off-premise signs wouldn't be permitted and monument and pylon signs would be preferred. And then for the last condition, exterior lighting fixtures be shaded away from the residential adjacent property and the gas station canopy be located behind the building to reduce light pollution.

To be clear, you mean north of the building?

Behind the building, so the building is between the canopy and the intersection.

Okay, so the question that Will asked about was correct. You're recommending that we put the canopy north of the building farther from the intersection.

That is a recommended condition.

Okay.

Regarding the 500-foot rule, when you say the gas station has to be 500 feet from the nearest well or stream, is that the property of the gas station? Is that the building of the gas station? Is that the fuel storage tanks?

I guess that condition isn't super clear. We could expand on that. It could just be the site of the gas station. This is an unplatted property, and it could be that the lot for the gas station has to be 500 feet from any wells or streams, or we could write it that the gas storage tanks have to be 500 feet.

Well, the purpose of my question he was his well was 137 feet or something like that from the property so is it possible to be within that rule and still do this so I'm not aware of all the locations of the private wells in the area there is a little map on page five of this staff report that shows a

300 foot separation from all the residential properties um and there still is a substantial part of the property that is able to be built on for a gas station with a 300 foot setback and with a 500 with a 500 foot setback i'm not entirely sure how big that would be but the 500 feet would be from the wells not necessarily the property line and that would be on the site plan though at some point we could require that to be added to the cycling

The applicant's agent wants to speak again. Yes, please.

The 500 foot thing I don't think is a problem. Plenty of room there for it. Storage tanks could definitely be 500 foot away from any other well. I was just getting on my little measure app that's geo, whatever.

What are the rough dimensions of the property?

The property is 11 acres. It's going to be subdivided to probably two acres for the gas station on the corner. And there's plenty of room to go. I just went to the nearest house across the street. 500 foot is the middle of the property. That's not a problem. obviously why the storage tanks couldn't be 500 feet away from every single well around that area there's definitely enough depth in that property it came up to like i went to the back to it from like i said across the street so you're okay with that requirement yeah yeah okay yeah and there's plenty of room to make that happen the 500 feet rule not a problem and they can run you know lines from tanks to the pumps You know, it takes them back, or it pumps them back is silly, but it takes them back is not silly. That's perfectly, and I don't see why that couldn't be perfectly fine. But I think we could make all of that stuff happen to make people happy on the 500 foot rule. as far as any kind of tanks or storage units or whatever from 500 feet away from any well it's not I think the closest point that I saw in the neighborhood and 500 foot is easily done I mean we're 80 foot from the corner in the corner of this room I mean yes talking about 11 acres we can what about the other requirements being The only other condition I thought was unrealistic was not putting, not actually having the gas pumps in front. It's a convenience store. It's not an inconvenient store, like I said. It could be on the side, if you wanted to put it on the west side, maybe, instead of the east side. But I mean, every gas station on the planet has their gas pumps in front of the building. I guess it would be neat to be the first city that ever does it different.

you have the 500 foot rule i don't see a problem with that whatsoever they can make that happen and thank you thank you now may i speak please now is the time for any member of the public to speak again you have five minutes can be extended all right my name is richard morgan i live on 80th street south

The first thing that comes to mind when he talks about pollution, about setbacks and all that, first of all, I was involved in that contamination from the dry cleaners that was coming down that plume, the pollution plume that was coming down and I was put on county water because of it. They talk about engineering, engineers make mistakes. so they if you if you're just talking about 500 feet that dry cleaner was in town clear in town and that plume come right down the old cow skin down there so back to engineering he keeps using the word engineering we do this we do that engineers make mistakes and you're not You may engineer where that gas station's gonna be, but that's not gonna help the rest of the property owners around there. If you got runoff from the parking lot, what if a tank leaks? It's gonna contaminate the ground to begin with, and you're not gonna be able to do anything about it, because it'll be there. Otherwise, you would've taken care of that plume from the dry cleaners. And also the traffic down there. way to begin with, going down the casino. I wasn't in favor of that casino, but I wasn't able to say anything about that. So I live out of the city limits because I don't want the traffic. And if you're really set on putting a gas station in, there's a piece of property right next to the VFW down there that's been empty for years and years and years. So, I mean, if you really feel like you need economic advancement for a gas station, there's your property right there, right next to the VFW. Personally. That's the way I feel. I don't care to have all that population down here on that corner. Because there's enough as it is. I'm not sure what else I can say. I'm certain I'll go to my seat. I'll figure out something else. But for right now, that's what I got to say. Thank you for your time. I

I'M GOING TO RESTATE MY FAMILY AND I URGE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS WELL. AGAIN, UPON OUR SURVEY, WE DID DISCUSS CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AS WELL AS THE ZONING CHANGE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DISCUSSION. WE STILL HAD THE SAME 92% OF ALL RESIDENTS SURVEYED SAID THEY WERE NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS. TO ANSWER ANY CONCERNS, WE Mr. Harmon was gracious enough to give us some of his opinions, which we appreciate. He said whatever we Googled regarding property values, we did not Google this. This came directly out of the Journal of Sustainable Real Estate. This is not a made-up piece of information. Property values dropped 10% within the first year. It's not a made-up piece of information. Another question that was raised was this will be tax money brought into the city. This will not help the city if property values drop and property taxes drop. I would love to have lower property taxes, but this is not the way to do it. Additionally, Mr. Harmon said this is 2026 and not 1950. I would agree with Mr. Harmon on that. According to the EPA, even a small amount of petroleum or hazardous substance leaking from an underground storage tank can contaminate surface water, soil, or groundwater, which is the primary drinking source of water for many people living in the United States. Nationwide, directly from the EPA, more than 581,000 underground storage tanks releases have been confirmed. To date, 54,000 contaminated sites still need cleaned up. Many of the families in this area, including my own, rely on private well water. When our drinking water is tainted, our livestock, our families, our farms all take a deficit. Even a low probability event deserves careful consideration. They are called accidents, not on purposes. No one's suggesting this may happen, but there is not a 0% chance that it does. Additionally, floodwater is still a concern. Floodwater is affected around outside areas based on a lack of rainwater absorption. Covering a large plot of land in concrete or blacktop will not allow rainwater to be absorbed into the ground. Thus, runoff is a serious problem. Raising the area does not help this. In fact, it hurts the area residents around it. Additionally, He said cars make noise. We should be used to it. I would agree with that. Cars make noise. So do trucks. So do tanker trucks pulling in to the neighborhood to deliver tanks of fuel day in, day out, all hours of the day during the night as well. We cannot adequately say that this would not affect the residents around us. And we especially cannot say that it would be beneficial for the residents around us. To be clear, we do not want a gas station, a convenience store, a liquor store, or a strip mall to be built in this area. Setbacks such as those that have been proposed to push back 500 feet would help. We do not deny this. Those conditional uses would be beneficial. However, they would still, any improvement in this area with an area such as a gas station would still be an increase in public nuisance. I can appreciate the idea of Hayesville wanting to expand. I can appreciate the property owners wanting to sell. However, this is not the way to do it. I want to make one last point before I am done. Spills do happen. In June 25th of this year, less than a month ago, in El Dorado, a tanker truck spilled on its way to deliver fuel to a gas station. It is assumed that 8,000 pounds of ethanol were spilled with less than 5,000 pounds of that being recovered. This means it may not be an underground storage tank that leaks, although the EPA has confirmed that is a problem. A tanker truck spilling destroys the local community just as bad, and we are seeing it in El Dorado as well. Thank you for your time.

Anybody else wish to speak?

Yeah, I'm... I live at 7730 South Broadway. And I don't know, I'm assuming many of you live in the Broadway area as well. My concern with this is actually what kind of traffic are we wishing to attract to Hayesville. You mentioned, I think, 75, 95 police encounters in the last six months. If you live in that neighborhood, it's pretty intense. It's almost like every night there's sirens going off. I believe earlier this year we had even a homicide on that road. Between us and the casino we have free bars, two of which I believe are strip bars. I don't see putting a gas station on that corner right there with another liquor store or strip mall would be beneficial to public safety. I think in the 2012 South Broadway proposal, there were 53 residents that were surveyed and were, there were a certain number of surveys, residents surveyed and 53% of them wanted a place to walk and ride bikes. I don't know if you've tried to walk or ride bikes on Broadway when the speed limit's 50 miles an hour. It's pretty intense. My wife almost got hit checking the mail because there was an accident, there was almost an accident just right there and they came flying into our driveway. I don't think increasing the traffic to this area is in the benefit of any of the residents in the area. So thank you for your time.

Hi, my name is Heather Heigard. I'm at 79th and Broadway at 211 East 79th. One of the things I wanted to talk about was from the family perspective. So when we consider violent crime, which is what we were talking about, where we have traffic violations, DUIs, When there is an increase in alcohol, when there was a survey that was run in the National Library of Medicine, not a Google search. Okay, guys, this is a study. It was found that there was a 10% increase in alcohol access, and when we saw that, there was a 4.2% increase in violent crime rate. So when we consider the pedestrians that are walking down the street, they are going to Dorner Park. I see people walking constantly, all the time, every day in the beautiful weather. When we add traffic, when we add vehicles, what's going to happen? We're going to have an increase in pedestrian fatality. We're going to have an increase in accidents. And we're going to have an increase in the need on Hayesville's police department. ultimately as a family member as a mom who has i have 10 kids if i consider my kids playing outside and walking to the park i can't send them if there's an increase in traffic when we consider the idea of alcohol sales and the increase in that my kids playing outside on the street or even just in our front yard we can't consider that idea either this demonstrates that the impact on families is is catastrophic. I mean, when we're raising our families, we want our kids to play. We want them to be safe. It doesn't increase when we have, like that safety doesn't increase when we have access to alcohol and access to things that can increase violent crimes and DUIs. Thank you.

Yeah, let's see. Good evening. My name is Drew Boath. I live at 224 West 79th. So my property is going to be the closest adjacent property to this next to the Hatchers. The ground out there has not been like it was touched on. It hasn't been farmed in three to four years because it's not economical anymore. That's just the fact of the matter. The ground there is going to be developed There's an opportunity to see what it develops into right now. So the runoff, I agree with a lot of that. But if a housing addition goes in there or a bunch of duplexes, that's going to take up a whole lot more land mass than gas station on the corner with the runoff as far as the wells are concerned most of the wells that i know of to the west are already contaminated and they have testing wells at dorner park and as soon as those test hot the properties to the east will get put on city water which is already established right there so for people that are concerned about their water city water is already on 79th street highway 81 which is a state highway it's it's rather reasonable in my opinion to think that a gas station would be established on a state highway at some point south heading out of Wichita for a lot of people I know everybody thinks they use a turnpike but there's people that don't and don't want to run 75 miles an hour I would disagree with putting the pumps behind the building and not adjacent to 79th Street or Broadway I think they should be out in front because That's what the corner is for. And it would also, if you move those to the back, it's going to affect different property owners in a different way. It just depends on who's going to get affected by the lights. Um, Oh, walking. I agree. Walking is terrible down Broadway. It's also terrible down 79th street. Um, I have five kids. I have another one on the way. I wouldn't let my kids walk to Dorner Park from our house down 79th Street already. I wouldn't let them walk down Broadway. I wouldn't let them walk over there with a sidewalk either just because of traffic. And I don't see a gas station increasing the traffic there as much as, I could be wrong, as much as people would think. lot of so we knew that property when i bought my house in 2018 i did my due diligence and i knew the property on the corner was already zoned commercial so i knew that there was potential for a commercial property to come in there at some point in time i don't know if anybody else did that or if people have been there previous to that time but using it as commercial with stipulations on it, I think it's quite easy. Okay. I think that's all I have. Thank you.

Anybody else wish to speak? Yeah. You're the applicant, right? We're not ready for that yet.

Can the public just ask a general question? Sorry about that.

You still have to state your name and address, but yes.

evening my name is Bob McBride property owner at 8130 South Broadway I just have a quick question for the applicant And maybe they're not in a position to disclose this at this time, but is there a gas vendor that you're in talks with? Because, you know, there would be a significant difference, or in my opinion, between Joe's discount fuel and Quick Trip. uh the level of how the real estate's developed uh you know perhaps the the clientele i mean a to z in terms of the development and the production and sales and retail sales of that unit between a quick trip and joe's xyz so the whole time i'm thinking who's the potential vendor that that may not change a lot of the residents which all make very valid points and here i am an absentee owner and they live here so very sympathetic to that but that's a big question i have why i'm here i guess i'd also just be concerned that in fairness the property owner hands are kind of tied in my view they have a property that the words were used highest and best use earlier when we were talking about the single family residential zoning change on Graham and so you know this person is potentially their hands are tied they can't sell their property or develop their property to its highest and best use on with state highway frontage it seems like that track goes two ways here. Now, we have to be considerate to the residents and such, but I'm also thinking the whole time, well, it sounds like these people can't do anything with that. And we know the highest and best use is not agriculture, not in that location. They already said it hadn't been farmed in three or four years. It's only 11 acres. So, you know, the economic viability in terms of agriculture is not there by a long shot, even if it was four times that size. Anyway, just a couple of thoughts I have. Appreciate it.

I've got one more card for Todd Murphy, if he'd still like to speak. Hi, Murphy. I'm on 1431 East Berlin.

When this first came up, I did a little research on the property that's just to the north of it, and it looks like it's owned by a school company. If the block to the south were to have a liquor store put on, would that then negatively impact what they would be allowed to do with their property that they already own? And then my other concern is the conditional use with the canopy at the back. I completely understand it benefits you because you're on that side, but it negatively impacts everyone who's on the south side of Broadway, or Berlin Street, which is where my house is. IT HELPS ONE SIDE BUT DOESN'T HELP THE OTHER AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE WOULD BE A HAPPY MEDIUM THAT COULD BE MET THERE. BUT GENERALLY I WOULD LEAN TOWARDS SAYING I AM OPPOSED TO THE CONDITIONAL USE. THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE PUBLIC FROM THE COMMISSION? NO? THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID, SIR. If he's the last one, I don't have any more cards. My only question is, you've got to do it from the podium. And you've still got to state your name and address.

David Halsey, 106 East 80th Street. The only comment I've heard on this that makes the most sense right now came from PEC. And that's the table this whole thing, they can do an engineering study of the area figure out what we're going to do with drainage what we're going to do with water and everything else and then I guess my question is once they do that engineering study is that available to the public and I don't know if it GOING TO BE AVAILABLE. I ASSUME BECAUSE 81 IS A STATE HIGHWAY, GETTING A DRIVEWAY OFF OF IT IS PROBABLY NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE. SO EVERYTHING WILL COME OFF THE 79TH, RIGHT? SO IT JUST ADDS MORE TRAFFIC TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA. THANK YOU.

So just to clarify that, so the recommendation from PEC was just for a site plan. The drainage plan and everything else that you're asking for would not come before Planning Commission until there was a platting of the property because the property is unplatted. So that would not come until later.

So what happens if you plat it? and then it comes back, there's no way to get rid of the water.

So that's part of the platting process. So there's a drainage plan and everything that has to be submitted with this planning process. And I hate to say that there's steps and that's not we're too early for that, but that's not until the next steps that you have to look at.

Does the applicant wish to respond?

My name is Pat Hatcher, and I built my house back in 1975. And my father died 10 years ago, about 10 years ago. He was 94 when he died. And he had bought that property to try to do something good for Hayesville. And we had went to the Wichita, because it used to be county. It wasn't Hayesville. And some of the guys from here went with me there, the zoning guys. And we kind of walked out of Wichita just like stunned because they told me to put a pig farm. They didn't care. Hayesville could put a pig farm as far as they were concerned. That's what I was told. Because I don't want to hurt anybody. So Hayesville was nice enough. to annex the piece of property in so that I didn't have to sell it and put something horrible there. And so we want it because we want to do something good for Hayesville. I don't want a liquor store either. But I would like a country store, a gas station, or something that we could all use on the corner there. I'm older. And none of us know how much time we have left here. And I don't want to hang on to the property and have it go to the state. There's nobody that I can hand it down to in my family. And so I want to do something for Hayesville. I'm sorry I'm kind of emotional, but I'm not a good speaker either. But I do want to say that I want the best for Hayesville. And I want something that benefits everybody here. And I think that's all I have to say. I just, I hope you know that you will put it through, that they can put something in there. If you have overlays, maybe you can restrict what they do put in there. Maybe you can tell them that they can't put a liquor store in there, you know, have an overlay. I don't know if that's possible or not because I don't know a whole lot about the way it works. But I do want to sell the property and I want to benefit and pay my house off that we've been paying on since I was in high school. And I just want everybody to know I'm not here to hurt anybody.

That's all. Thank you. Any questions for the applicant from the planning commission members? Public comment is now closed for planning commission action. The floor is open to commissioner's comments.

especially showing that 500 foot set off from there as well and how they're going to conform to all the other things that were required by staff. I have a motion to that effect.

Is there any more discussion?

I personally agree. I think it would be nice to see a site plan and see more details before moving on to the next step.

um i'll take that as a second but as a matter of discussion i just want to point out that we can get a site plan that shows a gas station but this is for a conditional use for a gas station on that property so there's nothing holding them to that site plan as part of the conditional use most of that will come with the plat that comes after the traffic requirements in the study the drainage requirements in the study everything kdhe is going to require of this property all of that is the next step and what we're talking about is allowing a gas station on this property that's zoned light commercial already as a conditional use and we can put conditions on it And we can make those as restrictive as we would like to make them, but it's not that we're considering a specific even gas station vendor. They could tell us that it's going to be a Buc-ee's, but there is no mechanism to hold them to that. once we either approve or deny. So I understand your question and I agree with it, but if they tell us that it's gonna be a quick trip and it ends up being a jumpstart or a Joe's fuel outlet, there's no mechanism that the city has to say, oh, well, you told us one thing and now it's another, it's still a gas station. So I wanna make sure everybody understands that also. So we have a motion and a second to... Any other discussion?

Yeah, just as far as related to that, I'd like to just see a full inventory of all the mapped wells within 500 to 1,000 feet of the site so we can see the impact from a drainage standpoint. So I'd just like to see, related to that, a full inventory of all those.

Yeah, that was my concern, too. I want to see it sponsored. Okay.

Any other discussion? Question?

Mendez?

Aye.

True.

Aye.

Adrian?

Yes.

Mortensen? Yes. Glenn?

Yes. Okay. Sir, could I ask you a question? Yeah, let me make the statement. It might answer your question. True. So what we just did was we're not making a decision on this tonight. We're going to require a site plan before we make a decision. So we will have another meeting in the future when this happens. We have completed the public hearing portion of this. So I don't know that we'll have to do it again, Caitlin.

We have closed the public hearing.

So that means there's no notification requirement. No. But it's our agendas and our meeting minutes are posted on the city's website. They put it in an email every week. It's on channel eight, I assume. The intent here is to make sure that you're all still at the next meeting to be part of that discussion. So I urge you to pay attention to that schedule. and come to that meeting so that you can be a part of that process. We don't know when it will be. We don't know how long it will take to put a site plan together. It could be next meeting. It could be two months from now. So I would encourage all of you to pay attention to the schedule that we have and come to that next meeting.

Anyone who is on the notification list for the public hearing notice will get a letter in the mail for when the meeting is scheduled to. you signed up to speak, you can be contacted by your email.

Now that that item is done, if you would all like to stay, you're more than welcome, but you're more than welcome to leave. All I ask is if you are going to leave, please exit quietly because we're going to continue on with our meeting.

Can you make conditions on the sorry can the city make a condition of the development that would sort of in a left-handed way sort of make it maybe near impossible for a discount vendor to develop that property so i know you said There's no way they could tell you, to quote you, they could tell you it's a quick trip and then it could be whatever they want after the fact. Could the conditions of development be tailored in such a way that it would sort of force out a low-budget type development?

I think what you're trying to ask is can we require the nicest gas station possible? that is partially yes if you looked at the staff report at all and i don't know if you were given a copy or not but there are requirements in there about the facade of the building requirements for landscaping requirements for lighting requirements for the sign itself all of which are intended to make that site the best possible we can make those requirements anything that we feel is necessary to ensure that it is the best fit for the neighborhood so limit the store size increase the fence for screening put in trees for screening we can make sure that the lighting is facing away from all other homes things like that to try to mitigate any downside for the adjacent residents as best we can but as far as dictating a specific user, like Quick Trip or? Buc-ee's. Buc-ee's, sorry. Yeah, Buc-ee's. guide them towards the requirements for the building and the site that make it look as nice as possible.

So I don't know if that's what you're trying to get at. Yeah, we're closer. Yeah, I would just, I would ask a better question. You don't actually, just a statement. If you could just make the bar high enough that it would, it would self-serve.

Yeah. The developer. Right. Yeah, and I think that's what, If we go that direction, I think that's what the intent will be. But it's also a fine line. We don't want to require 15 foot fences all the way around that are brushed aluminum and price the whole thing out so it can't be built profitably. There is a line in there where If we go too far with that, then it can't be done and nobody's going to do it. I don't know if they have anybody that's already ready to sign and close on that lot if the zoning is changed. It may be that no gas station wants to go in there and this whole thing goes away. I don't know what the situation is, but from where we sit, what we're here to consider is do we want a gas station on that hard corn? So...

if we do then we can require all of those things to make it as best for the neighborhood as possible fair enough okay thank you thank you any conditions we put on the property have to be specific to a harm that's going to be caused to the surrounding properties so putting conditions on it where it would limit who could build on it is would probably be considered a taking

ask another question regarding sure so would you do that yes sir microphone picks you up no you're good sorry drew both 224 with 79. um so regarding all the residents that surround it so all residents would get like within the 200 feet of the property the notification ones would get the same treatment Because putting the pumps behind, like we talked about earlier, it benefits some and is a negative to others. So how would you navigate that by putting that type of stipulation in? The direct neighbors that are close. So if you put the pumps behind the building, it's going to affect people on the back, but the pumps on the front, it's going to be adjacent to the state highway and the county road. i think that's what we're going to look at at the next meeting well that's what i was asking was does everybody get the same consideration because if that's the case i don't see how you could put that stipulation in and not just let it fall where it may when they build the property i think that's why we want to see a site plan yeah and maybe you know a couple of different options yeah sure oh there is money down on the property okay so i'm sure we'll cover that the next time i know but you you said that so i was just it just didn't come up so okay thank you for your time thank you moving on item b further review amending and restating the zoning regulations are you there yes yes are you wanting to stay um zoomed in for the rest of the meeting

So I just wanted to know so it wasn't accepted or denied they want to see a site plan?

It was tabled and asked for a site plan which includes my general consensus and Kaylin will be able to get from they want the location of the wells within the 500 feet And then I think they also want a, I think it would help to have a, what you're thinking of an area for a building or location of a building.

And all the staff recommendations.

And all the staff recommendations, how you would accommodate those.

Yeah, we want to see if it's possible.

So, I mean, is this one of those things that we can like talk about? Because I, just off the top of my head, right? Like, let's just say we do all of this, but this takes money. This isn't anything that's free, right? We got to go at it. Let's just say we do all of this. We come back and they reject it. It's... The owners aren't a big corporation that they have money to spend. These are a couple of partners. So they have to be very strategic about how they do things. So I understand what you guys are coming at. But how does that work from our end? What kind of detail of a plan?

You guys can have this discussion.

So this is a discussion that you'll have with Kaylin afterwards. So as far as the Planning Commission, that's what their motion was, and they tabled the item, and this is what they asked for. So Kaylin will relay this information to you in the next day if you want to call her tomorrow, and you guys can go over and review that process and decide what your next steps are.

Okay, perfect.

Okay? Thank you. All right, thank you.

Go ahead.

Amending and restating the zoning regulations.

This is back from Council, clear?

Yes, this was presented to Council on July 13th and they made a motion to send it back for further review because staff has changed their interpretation of SB 418. When we first saw these zoning regulations and recommended approval, we were interpreting SB 418 to require that all land zoned for any type of residential land use be zoned for single family and two family. since that meeting we have heard from other cities in the area and that is not how they're interpreting it so we are going to follow their lead and only require that that land be zoned for single family so all residential zoning districts all mixed use zoning districts have to require a single family but do not have to require two family two family would only be allowed in two family enough per our zoning regulations So we've made some changes to Article 4, the use chart, to scratch two-family from the single-family zoning districts. Changes to Article 5 for how they reference the buy-right housing appendix and Article 6 for how they reference that appendix. And then just removed that requirement that single-family and two-family be allowed in all residential zone districts from the appendix.

Any questions for staff? No.

Any other discussion? No. Motion. I move to recommend the approval of the amended and restated zoning regulations as presented.

Second. Motion and second. Any other discussion? Question?

Mendez? Yes. True.

Aye. Azier? Yes.

Rinke? Sorry. Mortensen? Yes.

Go ahead. I think she was trying to trip you up. Item E, election of officers. Are there any nominations?

Have there been any nominations up to this point? No, this is it. Feel free to nominate whoever you would like. I would nominate you to continue as chairperson.

You want to nominate an entire slate at the same time? Sure.

I will nominate everybody to retain their existing positions.

Second. Any other discussion? No. Are you sure? No. Okay. I have a motion and second to retain the existing slate. Question?

Mendez?

Yes.

Troop?

Aye.

Azier?

Yes. Mortenson? Yes. Blood? Yes. That was a lot easier than I thought it was going to be. No correspondence?

None.

Off agenda?

Our next meeting date is August 13th.

Do you have items on that other than the table item from today?

No. And if there is no public hearing scheduled, I'll likely reschedule it to August 27th. Okay.

Item nine, move to adjourn. Second. Motion and second to adjourn. All in favor?