Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

call the meeting to order this evening and we thank you for your attendance and participation. The purpose of the public hearing is to gather information from the public uh to help the commission formulate recommendations. In order to ensure a fair and orderly meeting where everyone can participate, the commission uh requests that you act respectfully to everyone in attendance and follow the public hearing procedures. The chairperson will call the public hearing item. The planning department will present the staff recommendation. Commissioners may ask questions of staff, a presentation by applicant and or representatives. The commissions then may ask questions of the applicant and the chairperson will open the public hearing. The chairperson will call for public comments from persons in support of the items followed by the persons in opposition to the item. The applicant will have the chance for rebuttal comments. The chairperson will close the public hearing and commissioners may ask questions. There'll be discussion and then take action. Speakers must speak from the podium and state their name and address for the record. The chairperson reserves the right to establish a time limit for all speakers to ensure that everyone can speak. The designation of a spokesperson for group sharing a common point of view is encouraged. All comments and questions will be directed to the chair from the podium and not to the applicant, staff, or audience. When the hearing is closed, additional public comments are not permitted. Roll call. Rosa Kvasos here. Terry Robinson here. Janette Johnson here. Chad Ghart here. Dan Brian here. Myin

Linwer with five members present. There is a quorum. Thank you. Have there been any communications from the public to the staff with reference to this item? No communications. Have there been any exparte communications by members of the commission? No communication. But I do want to state that I know the applicant of the for tonight's agenda. All right. Thank you. Because that is the next item, the declaration of conflict of interest. Um, but do you have any problem in making a fair um decision? No. Thank you. All right. Then we call the zoning and subdivision item Z2502. Darren and Maya Godfrey requesting to amend the district zoning classification from RA1 to O and I1 on property located on the frontage road of US 40 highway and northwest Carlson Road in Dover Township. All right. Thank you. Um planning zoning administrator Harim Perez. Um we're here for case number Z2502 Darren R and Maya M. Godfrey. Um this is a request to amend a district zoning classification as stated earlier from RA1 to OI uh district. It's located uh northwest Carlson Road in Dover Township and this parcel is uh about 3 acres. Um the blue star represents the general location of the site. This parcel has historically been designated for agricultural use and has remained undeveloped. The applicant initially requested C1 district zoning, which permits a wide variety of commercial uses, some of which could generate higher traffic volumes and may

be less compatible with surrounding properties. Following some input we received and discussions with the applicant, the resoning request was downgraded to OI district. The OI1 classification limits the range of businesses allowed by Wright within the district. The applicant selected this parcel due to its location and its proximity to their residents. Um they intend to establish a small family operated business focused solely on general office functions, specifically administrative tasks. They plan to um develop a or construct a small office building on the property and they are planning to house between three and four employees there. Um this is not a hightraic operation. The proposed use is low impact with limited activity and minimal disturbance to the surrounding area. Here we have a site plan. Um the area in red is the location of the building that they're wanting to do. And then you could see the um the gravel driveway as well. Here is the vicinity map. Five letters were sent to property owners within 1,000 ft of the site and no responses were received. Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions. One, submission of a category A drainage report to public works for review and approval. Two, an entrance permit from the Kansas Department of Transportation um must be obtained and three, the applicant will be responsible for supplemental maintenance of the access road, including placing rock as needed. K dot will maintain the road only to the extent required for a field access road. And that concludes our item.

Thank you very much. Um, do you have any questions of the staff commissioners? Uh, does the applicant or representative want to make a presentation? My name's uh Darren Godfrey. Um, I live My residence is 13444 Southwest K4 Highway, Topeka, Kansas. Um, it stated on there that we were looking to create a small business, familyowned business. Um, we've been in business since 1977. Um, I bought it from my father-in-law and now my son's graduated college and is presently working for me and will take over the business as I exit. My wife is one of the uh I have a bookkeeper and then I my wife does all of my reporting. Um my daughter just graduated from case states and that is what I'm looking for her to actually take care of the bookkeeping as my bookkeeper phases out and then it becomes a totally familyowned business. um as the requests on there that you've talked about um I have spoke with KOT and Colton Jackson and I have um Is that right? Better not say his name wrong here. Yeah, Colton Jenkins. I apologize. Um and I he has helped me fill out the application for the um proper K dot um entrances and usage of the road. Um and I had agreed and I have agreed to maintain that frontage road up to my

property um to my entrance. Um along with that, when I say maintain, I don't need snow removal. Um, I have a truck and I also have a um a utility vehicle that has a blade on it that we would I would use to move that. And also if the weather's bad, I would not expect one. I probably won't be there. Neither will my wife. She probably won't go as well. Um, and then my office. Um, my bookkeeper lives in the area and is capable of working remotely. So if there were if it is bad weather, I would uh suspect there would be nobody there. Um coming in and off the property is probably less than anybody's normal home. Um on average, three cars. If my main guy comes, if my lead guy comes in, four cars, but that might be twice a week, but my wife only works Monday, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, so it kind of still I'm still at the two to three cars a day. Um, I believe I you guys might have the pictures of what I'm looking at. It looks a It looks like a home. It doesn't look like an office. I'm not building some big office building. Um, I've had the perk test done. I've made Um, I had the water company come out. Um, I have a water meter available. I've kind of stopped there. Then my next thing would be with EverG. Um, I believe that that's Everg in that area. There is a pole right there and it would be one pole on my property and then I wouldn't think that

that would be an issue. Um, other than that, um, everything that's been is correct. Is there anything that I can answer for you guys? Do the commissioners have any questions for the applicant? All right. Seeing none, we'll open the public hearing and call for any comments from persons in support of the item. I don't know if I'm support or not. I have concerns. Well, you probably would be considered in opposition then if you have concerns, but if there's nobody else in support, then we'll call for persons in opposition. So, you Good evening. Uh, my name is Susan Aken. I'm Township Treasurer. Um, our main concern with this is that it is state highway 40, which obviously should be the state's responsibility on that road. Um, in the past, we have had issues with the state wanting to get rid of these uh highway 40 frontage roads. I know I was uh worked on the at I7 and Valencia, that frontage road that goes by Carlson Auto auctions, they wanted to the state wanted to turn that to gravel and give it back to the township. We were very fortunate that uh Shauny County got to take it over and keep the asphalt and everything there. So my big concern is

um what guarantee does the township have that we're not going to be dumped this road on us in the future? Can the state give us a letter stating that they're responsible for this? I don't know what if that didn't do much good because uh they're going to do what they want anyway. But um I don't know. But that's my big concern. We do not want the road. It's not our road. I don't know if there's a way to put something in there or get something from the state that says they're going to ask. All right. Yeah, what we'll we'll move on through our our schedule here and um so do I will ask if the uh Okay, I guess if there's anybody else in opposition or not then if not then we he can do a rebuttal. So yeah, so the applicant now has a chance for rebuttal comments. I do understand your concern on that and um part of the deal with um doing the application with K is it'll actually be written in there that I maintain that road but they're only saying to they're going to maintain it as uh for rural use as it's m Um, but anything I I'm the one that's going to gravel it. Um, like I said, it

for snow snow removal and stuff like that that actually written when they rewrite the entrance and usage of the road, it's actually written in there. Now, I can't say if something else was to happen later on. I don't I can tell you that up to my road for the life of EMC2, which I hope that it goes for many, many more years, we're responsible for that. And I mean, I live in the Del community, so I would I understand the township and I wouldn't put that on on you guys. Um, can I have a question? Yes, ma'am. Um, so does it say there won't be any frontage road or just You have to take care of your access. I have to take care of the frontage road is there. I mean that's going to m that's going to stay. I understand. I mean Kot's trying to pass it off to the township. I don't know how any of that works, but I know that when I fil when I filled out the application and um they rewrite the usage of the land that it's in their verbage that I'm from Carlson Road to my entrance and there's only one I mean I would give it to you. I don't have a problem with that. I can't get it. I can't um I can't turn my stuff in until it's reszone. I have the application all ready to

go and then after it's reszone they're able to write all the verbage and then issue the permit the usage permit. I would not have a problem giving that to you at all but I would assume that the state it's actually public. Can you get I can't because they're waiting to reszone it. They're they're waiting to reszone it as that way that they can put that into their I'm going to redirect here and this if you have questions that you guys want to discuss outside, you can absolutely do that. But in in response to the questions, it's hard for us to answer those questions, Mr. Aken because we are not the ones that deal with the roads and you know it's not a question and answer type scenario that we can answer those questions but for clarification for the planning commissioners in regards to your decision that you're making tonight. Um when we send out these review memos, we do send them out to all of the various entities including KOT and they had indicated to us the comments that were put in the recommendations which is that they would maintain the road only to the extent required for a field access road and then he is going to as a part of this resoning he would maintain that as necessary with rock so that he has whatever access he needs. This frontage road has been there for a very long time and KOT has maintained it as a field access road up to this point. We have no ability to to read into the future of what other development may go out there if any or how the road could be upgraded or not upgraded. What we do know is that it will be maintained only as a field access road and that he will have the access to get to the property for this this office building.

Um if any further development were to occur out there on any other property of course any other scenarios could be brought at that time which either would be handled through the public works KOT processes or if there's something that would come here then they could be dealt with here. Uh but we have we don't have any authority to to you know order KOT to keep a road or to turn over a road. We don't have any authority to tell them that they can't turn it over to Dover Township. Those are the things that are worked out based on the logistics of how those road maintenance agreements work. And so we can only do what it is that we can do in regards to the specific request that's here tonight. I can tell you that the access that Kot has there now is has residential access. When they put in all that, um he said that there would be little very little that need to be made to the access plan except for what I've agreed to. So, there is an area that the public parks at on the ends. I don't mind picking up the trash and stuff like that, but I mean, nobody really maintains that. I believe you guys talk about I'm going to keep that cleaned up the best I can because that would be the entrance down to my road. But I'm also say people, you know, ask that nobody parks here because, you know, I don't want to take that away because it doesn't it doesn't really affect me. But I want to maintain that and keep that as cleaned up as possible. Other than that, like I said, I don't know what can happen in the future, but I can know that the deals are what I've offered to do with KO for the time being for my property.

Thank you, Mr. Godfrey. And we will now close the public hearing. Um, commissioners may ask any questions or discuss the question before us. Anybody have a question? Did you raise your hand? No. Dan, sorry. I guess I I do have a a question. I'm I'm looking at this. It's titled US Highway 40, but I take it it is not Is it an asphalt road or is it a gravel? It's a gravel road. Okay. And then I am Am I looking at it right that it ends past as it's going east past the property? Correct. It's just right there past the property. Okay. Uh, no. I I I think I can see it. Okay. And so and so at this time the state maintains this gravel road. Is that what we're hearing? To our understanding. Yes. To to your understanding. Okay. And then the only thing he is maintaining is from from this gravel road to his property line. He um so the road is there and they have created it as much as they will. They're not going to improve it, meaning they're not going to come out and asphalt it or um make any specific improvements to it so that he can have this uh office building out there. So they have it in the sense that they're that they do right now. If he wants to make any additional improvements to that and needs to regravel or do anything to maintain it, then he can do that. But but I understand he's not responsible to to do that or it's still on KOT. It's still a K dot road. It's a publicly maintained road for our regulations. Okay. So it's just at the entrance that he from from that mark K US40 to his property that he would have to maintain the gravel because that's not within his

property line. Is that I'm just making sure I'm hearing that correctly. I believe that um and the applicant can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that it's from Northwest from from the entrance of Northwest Carlson Road all the way to his property, wherever the entrance his entrance would be. So, Carlson Road here's the entrance right here. And so, this is the parking area I was talking about. So basically from there and you can see my drive right there. I think I believe it was 2003 came in all that big concrete concrete and stuff like that. So from my drive to the end right here's just a right here that I They would have maintain. All right. Thank you. Any other questions or discussion? Do I hear a motion? I make the motion to approve based on the three following conditions. Okay, I second that motion. Thank you. It's been moved and seconded to approve the request subject to those conditions. You want to call the role, please? Dan Brian, yes. Terry Robinson, yes. Myron line, Chad Gearart, yes. Rosa

Kavasos, yes. Janette Johnson, yes. With a unanimous vote of approval, the item has been recommended for approval and will be heard by the county commission on Monday, July 7th at 9:00 a.m. Thank you. Uh, is there any public comment on any non-aggenda planning or zoning items? All right, come up to the podium. Hi, my name is Mark up at 12:30 Southwest College Avenue in Topeka. I wanted to comment just on on the uh solar um project, solar regulations been talking about. Okay. Um well, I thank you very much for this opportunity and for the opportunity to join you and your other meetings. I wasn't here in person for a couple of those, but I did I was able to go watch the your session via YouTube and I appreciate that as well and commend you on your your work. really sticking right to this and really what I have actually are um I'd say more questions but I assume it's not my job to be asking you questions so I'll form them I guess for statement and just three really I just wonder um why uh we can't leave it to Shauny County land owners you within the current framework of county ordinances and regulations, zoning, etc. to decide uh how much of their land they might

want to lease for a utility scale solar farm. I can imagine there are maybe some land owners out there that might enjoy um the lease payments that would come their way. Um So I wonder about that. Um and I also when I think about that you know it comes to me to my mind that um well I assume any kind of large scale solar installation is going to be sort of long term but it doesn't mean that at some point that land couldn't be returned for if it came from egg use couldn't be returned to egg use. And while I'm not in any way an expert on this, I've just done a little bit of reading. It seems to me that that I have read that um that solar panels in a large scale can coexist with some agricultural land use, you know, plantings underneath the panels which as you know tilt and so they get, you know, adequate sunlight. Um, and I've even seen uh some literature about uh, you know, uh, livestock grazing in between and underneath those panels. Um, so I just that just makes me wonder even more why we could maybe give more discretion to land owners about, you know, how many acres might be involved in development. Uh I I I do appreciate uh I saw in the regulations the draft regulations I think uh there stated that the maximum size might be 240 acres which I think is somewhat higher than what we've been talking about. I wonder you know couldn't be even bigger

if that second question or state would be um you know I you know it's been said here among you that we don't know where our energy is coming from in the future and there is some question I think uh because of rapid change and because um um there's all kinds of news about the growing demand for electricity from a variety of sources, which also just kind of puts into question, where's all that going to come from? And um it just seems maybe limiting a solar farm development utility scale even to 240 acres might um prevent us from being, you know, where we need to be, wherever that is in the future. So that's another question. Um and then thirdly, you know, I think it's pretty clear that um that solar and wind, of course, we banned wind, but still considering solar in Shiny County. Renewable sources are sort of the least expensive sources from which to generate electricity, at least currently. I think that's pretty clear to most people. Certainly a lot lot written about that and said to that effect I think even you know you see that ever reports so um and I think it's you know at least regard solar I assume that's probably going to stay that way at least for a while given the sun will probably be with us I hope for a long time so I'm just worried about being um in a position of limiting you know uh what

access to what is the most efficient source for electric electricity generation. Um I just wonder if that's the wisest thing to do. Um and if I had one more it might be then I think we have what is it 350,000 I think some acres within Shauny County. I think that's pretty close to being right anyway. Um, and I wonder and I think there was been some talk here discussion about maybe it would be possible to find some places in Sha County that aren't suitable for agriculture for crop growing or maybe for livestock but might be suitable for solar panels and maybe even something as big as 600 acres or a bit And I again just wonder why we wouldn't want to limit ourselves and close that off at this point if in fact that might be the case. So those are my comments. Thank you. Appreciate I'd be happy questions. Thank you. I think a few of those items are things that we've been discussing and continue to discuss. You know, I might just say, sir, that at least in my opinion, we're not looking really to limit solar, but to put guidelines and parameters around it that best suit the general public. And there are liabilities. Uh some of the things that we're addressing in

regards to uh you know what happens when the panels are now no longer in use or uh are going to be uh there will be other panels that'll be more efficient. There's issues like battery storage and if you ever been a battery fire, it takes a lot of water because you don't put it out. You just cool it down. And so I don't from my point of view I I'm I'm not really looking to limit it. I'm looking just to put parameters around it to protect the patrons of Shauny County. So we ready for our work study work session. Thank you. Then u I'll turn it to you because you have the slides for the draft. I have I assume the draft here. Does anybody want copies of it? I'm going to pull it up on the real quick here. It may not actually I'm not going to say real quick because again mouse is always and I can't see anything in there eventually. Okay. So, I did send this to all of you ahead of time so that you could make sure and look through it.

I'm going to click plus sign. Is there a plus sign? Okay. I didn't used to have bad eyes. I think with age that tends to go downhill. I mean, I've always had bad eyes, but not this bad. Um, okay. Does anybody need a copy of the d in front of them or do you all have? Okay. So, in essence, I took the conversations that we've had over the last couple of months and laid a bunch of stuff out in written form so that we could discuss it. And I tried to narrow down topics that we felt were really important and uh and include those. And then I also added items that we hadn't really specifically discussed but that I had pulled from other counties. Um I did look at several other county regulations uh drafts or approved whatever they may be and you can see while they're all written a little bit different that a lot of them have a very common factors involved. Um, and I felt like we could instead of totally rewriting everything, utilize some of the things that they had captured and pick and choose how we felt it fit for Shaunie County. Now, I laid this out a little bit different than we had previously been talking and I will explain why. What I did here is the first few items on the first page are things that would be required. So if you were to approve this, if you were to consider it, approve it and it go on to the BCC. In essence, what would happen is we

would put a line item under three zones, well, four, RA, RR, I1, and I2 saying that solar energy conversion systems would be allowed upon approval of a conditional use permit. And then there are some exceptions with flood hazard within a urban growth area and we can talk about that just a little bit. Um the only other things that I really put as requirements are that the project would not exceed 240 acres and that the project area boundaries would not be closer not nearer than two miles to any other project area boundary. and then the setbacks. I felt it was important to go ahead and lay the setbacks out there and say here's what the setbacks have to be. Um but then what I did and then I I I put a review period in there after the first year of operation and then every five years thereafter. Uh then what I did is I put this clause. The governing body may vary or wave the minimum requirements set forth in these regulations upon a written request of the applicant and a determination of the governing body that said waiver or modification is consistent with the purpose and intent of these regulations. So I want to point this out because we'd had some discussions about how many acres do we do 50 acres do we do 100 do we do 240 acres Mr. What happens if we want 600 acres? Well, if you have an applicant that comes in and they say, "We found the perfect spot. It's far away from everybody. It's right next to a transmission line. It's all rock and there's no way anybody could farm it. They can't build on it. They can't do anything. And it's 600 acres and it doesn't fit within these parameters. We think that this is a

great situation to put 600 acres of solar farm." Well, maybe in that situation, the planning commission and the governing body would say, "You know what? You're right. Let's let's wave that 240 acre minimum." Um, there may be a situation where there's a residence on, you know, say for instance, you have two or three parcels that all fit within that 240 acres and there's a residence in there and we have a hard recommendation or or hard requirement that you can't be within so many feet of a residence. Well, what if that resident says, "Well, I I don't care. I want the solar panels all the way up. You know, let's allow them to wave it." So there are situations that we may not be able to take into consideration right now in setting hardcore rules that we want the governing body to be able to wave. And so I added that as an option. They can come in and and make a modification. Um okay. So those were the only requirements that I had. And then in essence the next set of requirements on page two are just the application part of it. You have to fill out an application. You have to submit a site plan. You have to prepare and present us with the project narrative and business plan. And that should include all of the information about phases and um the the project itself. And you would have to have a drainage report so that we can have public works review that. Now, everything else following that is something that may be applicable, could be recommended as needed, or on a case-by case basis, the planning commission could say, "This is a scenario where we are going to require you to do the following things." And I I did it like this because we've talked a little

bit about how we do quaries and how we have 25 conditions that we aren't part of our regulations, but we add them on to pretty much every query. Now, are there some scenarios where not all 25 are going to be applicable? Sure, probably. So, maybe we don't put them all. This would be similar. So, I I I did it like this because I felt like this is a way for us to be educated, have it in writing, have some knowledge about what it is that we may want to consider, but not necessarily make it a requirement so that we don't have 50 pages of requirements that we have to follow up and, you know, all these plans and then special third parties that have to review and implement those. And I I think that we don't really know how one of these projects is going to go until it comes in front of us and we can take that into consideration once it comes before us. Um, a couple of things that I thought about as I laid it out this way. We could put this into the regulations and say, "Hey applicants, so you know when you come to us, here are the things that we may want to see. So be prepared." Or in the alternative, we can use this kind of like we do with queries where it's just I I cut the regulations off right here and then all of these items that may be applicable are for internal use only. When we receive an application as part of the preapp meeting, we review it and see if there are things that we may need. When it comes before you, we just add all of these things on. You know, there there's so many ways that we could do this. We

can have a really complete full set of regulations laid out or we can keep it a little more basic and have the rest of this in the background. I think they need to know if I can comment here um what might lie ahead. So I think it it's a good idea to have it here. I mean even though it says may be applicable, at least they know that that's a possibility. Well, and so we don't do that with other items. I I'm not I'm going to play devil's advocate with you. I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm not disagreeing. But with the with the um quaries, now some of this is a little bit different because it's plans that they need to put together. Glare plans, vegetation plans. If those are things you're not going to wait until you get to the planning commission to say, "Hey, we're going to require you to do this. I mean, we could, but then it's going to delay development because they would come and say, you may be conditionally approved, but you're going to have to provide us all these plans." And so it could send us back and forth a little bit, but I and this is where I went down this route because we don't have extensive regulations like this for any other type of project. And so as I was writing them, I was like, do we really want three to five pages or 10 pages of requirements when we don't do that in any other scenario? What makes solar farms different? And and it's not that we don't deal with other complicated or dangerous activities, landfills, quaries, uh what would be I mean, think of the other things that we may put a bunch of regulations on. I mean, those are probably two of the ones that I can think of off the top of my head. Solar farms are another one, but do we do you want to have them all laid

out in writing? So when it comes to the quaries, you say there's some specific things they got to do. Then they got the list of could apply. When does if someone wants to develop a Corey, when do they find out which of those are going to apply to them? Kind of kind of the same situation here. When when would they find out? They have to come here first. So we know we when we get an application we have a preapp meeting and then we do staff reports and recommendations and we send those with all the conditions over to them. Now I will point out again that some of the difference in this is that they do involve things such as plans that may need to be reviewed by varying departments to be implemented. Um, so a soil erosion plan, we don't necessarily need to see that ahead of time. They just have to have a soil erosion plan in place so that in a few years if we go out and do a check, we can see, well, you have or haven't implemented this plan or a vegetative and landscaping plan. We do that with uh like subdivisions or housing districts. It's just laid out on the master plan. It's not that they have to tell us what the trees are or the bushes and then we're going to say yes or no to each of them. They just lay out the plan on the site plan. Um something like the decommissioning and reclamation plan, we may want to have a little more input on how that gets put into place or the financial assurance bond. I did include in here that they have to receive bids from three different licensed professionals and then you know laid out it can't include the possible salvage value estimated cost would have to be recalculated every five years but then the governing body is the one who gets to pick out of those three bids who to utilize

um you know payment in lie of taxes if they you know have an agreement in that we may need to have some discussions question about those. So yes, they would have it wouldn't be necessarily just coming in here. We do provide them a staff report to some degree. A lot of the companies who are going to be coming in are already going to know. We could have a set of, you know, a packet of stuff that says, you know, these may not all be required, but here are things that we want to see from you. Um, or we can just lay them out in the regulations and say they may or may not apply or you say they all apply. Just because I put in here may may apply doesn't mean that they have to. You guys can pick and choose how you want to do it. But right, that doesn't happen until this level. Till this level. Yeah. And I'm just think these are major year-long years long developments. you know, they get all the way to this level, then we find out we're going to stick six or seven more on there. I just I don't like the idea of moving them into regulations, but they would they would at least know ahead of time our our May add-ons so that they could at least get in here quickly to find out we do want soil erosion and decommissioning and get back to work on it without a lot of delay. last month the discussion to at least as I recall the financial assurance was I mean everybody was going to have to do that have a reclamation plan and I I did move some stuff down. So there I had the there were items that I kept up on the required which was and so you know this is a fluid project. What I did was I kept the size the um setbacks and areas that by which uh they could not occur. I kept those in the requireds and then I kept everything

else because I mean how do you pick and choose which ones are required and which ones aren't? And so I moved everything else down to allow you guys to discuss and and choose. So, if you look at number one, personal solar conversion systems are continuing to be allowed. They're just not included on this. Um, number two is that they're allowed upon approval of a conditional use permit within zones RR, I1, and I2, but I did put that they would not be allowed within a special flood hazard area. So, none of the flood plane. Um, if they want to fall within the urban growth area, they have to obtain prior consideration and comment by the city of Topeka. And then if they fall within 1,000 ft of any other incorporated city limits, then they'd have to obtain prior consideration and comment from that city. Uh, the total project area shall not exceed 240 acres. The project area shall be no nearer than two miles to any other project area boundary. And then the setbacks are laid out as 500 from any existing residence, 150 from any other building or accessory structure, 50 feet from um property lines, 150 ft from roads or unimproved road rightways. And then those setbacks. You could add require some additional setbacks to mitigate sight specific on a case- by case basis. Um then a reporting review after the first year and then five years thereafter. And then I wanted to include that all other zoning regulations apply because there are things that we have within our conditional use permit

uh section that lays out how you go about doing a conditional use permit or things that you have to do to obtain one. And I want to make sure that they understand that this doesn't wave the requirements of any other regulations unless we specifically modify it within here. And then for our purposes of processing cases, we have to have the application. Um we have to have the site plan so that we can see where and what is being laid out and then the narrative so that we have information about what the project is going to do and then the drainage report. And out of the remainder of those, it is very difficult to pick which ones would be required or not required. So I put them all on that they may be applicable in each case because frankly all of them could be applicable or should be. But the question is is do you want to have a list of all of those items as required? And I felt based on conversations that some people wanted more requirements and other people wanted fewer. And so this was a way to kind of meet halfway. Are you are you looking now for some comments on this? Absolutely. Okay. My big issue with all of this is is not to limit solar. My biggest concern for the population of Shauny County is in a technology that is continually

changing. I think we should have uh they should require a decommissioning plan and financial insurance assurance. And the reason why is is what's going to keep somebody from basically abandoning another project, a built project, and going to another area and building a more updated project. And the other thing that I'm terribly concerned about is because as a builder and developer, anytime you put transmission lines to a project, Janette knows, Lord have mercy. uh you're going to be flooded in here with folks. Uh so uh those are the things that I think are we should really consider to be moved up because an interconnection agreement is I think is is critical because we want to know how what it's going to take to uh make the connection to the power grid. What exactly are you looking for on transmission lines and inner connection agreements? I think in in some of our discussions we have discussed that the locations should be near current transmission lines. Well, it's in general you typically find them closer to transmission lines and they are attempting to connect to the grid because of the if they don't connect close to a substation or the

transmission lines at least you're losing power as you transmit it further and further. And so in general, you would probably see them closer, but we don't have any requirements, and I'm not aware of any county that's put requirements that they be located in a specific area to be near those transmission lines. The if they're not near a transmission line, transmission lines would be public use entities. So EverG or you know Free State they have the substations they have transmission lines they're allowed by eminent domain to put in transmission lines any sort of interconnection lines or distribution lines that connect to the transmission lines or to get it across to other locations. me if I'm wrong here, Kyle, if you I think those are then private lines whereby that cannot be done by imminent domain. They have to have lease agreements for the those lines to go through. And some of what I've seen in the regulations of other counties is that if there are any interconnections, distribution lines, whatever, those have to be underground. They they require them to place them underground. If they're transmission lines, they have to fall within a rightaway. So that they are legit transmission lines within an easement right away by a utility company. And I could see that might be out of even our purview, right? Okay. But so let me let me ask this because when I was reading through this, it I guess I had the understanding that when they submit their conditional use permit, they're part of that is going to

be they're going to have to lay out, you know, battery storage or transmission. They're as part of the project, they're going to want to connect this to the to the grid. They have to connect it somehow. So, we don't need to say give us a report on transmission lines. It will that'll be part of the conditional use permit because what would make the sense of putting solar panels in? Well, they do it without telling us. We would just want to make sure in the site plan that they've identified and in their business plan they've identified how it is that they're getting the energy that they're collecting. But that's not inherently part of the conditional use package that they put together for us. So then we would want to lay that out because that is probably one of the more sticky points of getting one of these approved. And then to second that at what he was saying, I I had the same thoughts when I was reading that the decommissioning plan I think should probably be mandatory as well as the financial assurance um and then I guess transmission line if it's not inherently part of a conditional use permit. But those were the three that I was reading through that kind of stuck out to me. I was just may not be necessary in all cases because depending on their proximity to like a power grid they may not need and and they may not but I guess somewhere I don't know exactly where it fall I would want them to say here's where we're putting the panels here's how we're getting the power off and out to the public use they they need to be able to spell that out to us so we're not surprised that we think they're going to run transmission lines and then we find out they put some massive battery storage on site. Yeah. And that would be part of what so items that we do require would be the site plan that has to identify all of that and then a detailed project narrative that should include power capacity, acreage, manner in which the project will connect. Okay. Bas implementation. So to a degree, yes, they they will have

to give us that. The the way that I've seen it in other counties, they they have a separate if you're doing these interconnection lines, they do have a requirement that they be put under line underground. Um, and they have to fall within the project area. And so I think it's a little up in the air and that's why that one's red, the battery and the interconnections are read because I hadn't delved deeply in because those are huge topics in and of themselves. Um, and so it's not something that I had gone enough into detail on those items. We don't have so once you get past the transmission which has to I don't know. Yeah. Yeah. So, the transmission lines that all falls with KCC and the utilities and we wouldn't have the ability to regulate a lot of that, but we would have the ability to how they get to Okay. Yes. Yeah. However they get to the transmission lines if I mean and some of these could be not attaching to a transmission line, maybe not attaching to the big grid. What if you have a subdivision that wants to put in a solar farm that supports their specific subdivision and they have some sort of battery storage facility and it's all kind of on site. They're not putting it onto the big grid for sale. There are other different types of energy conversion systems that are not just like single residents or single business use. Those are the ones that we

had kind of identified from the get-go as a community a limited scale or community scale solar farm. And so they may not go into a transmission line and the battery storage still I I'm not a huge fan. It's hard for me to go down the the depths of those because I want to be careful that we don't get into a big battery storage facility. But if you're collecting the energy battery and and if it's not going directly into the transmission lines, it may be that battery storage is a good method of helping to gather until it can be transferred over. Um but battery storage has higher risk to people living near them and with fires if they're out in the country. What happens if we have a wildfire? What happens if we have a controlled burn that gets out of control? Um, you know, they're a lot more dangerous to to deal with. I I think especially with battery uh storage, we we may want to get some expert consultation. I the problem with solar in my mind is it we're trying to look in our little crystal ball to try to see where this technology is going because it's changing rapidly. And I don't think we can we I don't think we can control anything. But if you've added anything that helps, it's that little that little uh sentence that says we can we can review all this. And

so that that eases my mind a lot, but I still do not want the citizens of Shauny County to be responsible for a reclamation project where, you know, and and that way if they have a bond and we're involved in it, we we do that. we escape that liability. I you're correct. The it's the transmission lines is out of our purview, but it's kind of interconnected in a way that makes this kind of difficult. So maybe we just we just allow uh the applicant to make sure that they've detailed with with whatever grid they want to hook up with in advance for the property, which I'm assuming they would do because they're going to have a lot of money in this project even before they bring it to us. So I I guess I'm I guess I'm with what you've said, Joanie. I'm kind of good with with allowing them to kind of figure that out. I think we don't have a legal standing there to to create too much of a liability on our own in regards to transmission battery storage. The only thing I would request is that there is ample water and water pressure available. So I have in here a fire safety and hazardous materials plan. So I think you know in some degree depending on the scenario if a battery storage facility is associated then we would need to know that ahead of time and also require that they have a fire safety plan. Um not all of our rural water districts have enough water pressure or significant enough water lines to handle some of these. And so, you know, I think that ensuring that our rural water districts know what's happening and the

type of equipment is going to be important um in regard to battery storage facilities. Yeah. And and as part of your as as part of what we're writing into this, we wouldn't have to say you need alarms on it. They would have to just show us that they have like fire alarms or something that that would whatever it is that so they would create the plan and they would have to tell us what that plan is and as we look at it if we feel like it's not enough then we could require we could require it. Yeah. Yeah. I've I've seen some big fires out in Shauny County. Yeah. Well, and so, you know, I look at some of these requirements or recommendations and I think that some of them keeping them on a case- by case basis, like a soil erosion plan, that one I'm a little more willing to move up to include that with the drainage report. Most likely when they submit a drainage report, we're going to have to have them do a soil erosion plan. part of that anyways. But things like glare prevention, vegetative and landscaping, depending on the location of it, if it's out in the country somewhere, we may not need it because it may not impact roads or people surrounding them. Um, and so those, you know, I think the soil erosion plan could go either way. Vegetative could probably stay as a recommendation, glare prevention as a recommendation. We could require the decommissioning require the financial assurance. Um, this power purchase agreement or interconnection agreement. I think that that's more what you're talking about needing to know. They need to provide us that requirement if they're going to have it. Um, the

payment in le of taxes. I think that that kind of depends again on the location of it. Traffic impact analysis may not be necessary for a solar farm unless it's in a heavily residential area or something that's a little more heavily traveled. Uh same with construction management plan. um a plan for the collection or removal of damaged panels that we could actually even just make a requirement that they're not allowed to have long-term outdoor storage of equipment and materials and damaged items have to be removed within so many days instead of making it a plan of action. It just needs to be a requirement that they can't do such a thing. again the hazard airport hazard zone only if it's within the hazard area does that matter when it comes to environmental assessments and testing of soil um that one I was a little more unsure about we we hadn't really talked much about it where do you guys feel that fits in what we're attempting to do you want them to be required to test soil and submit those tests. Do you want it to just be in case of an emergency prior to decommissioning? Then we don't have a baseline. So I I don't really know where to go with the environmental stuff. Feels like there should be a baseline test at least.

I had in here that um notification requirements that notice should be provided in writing if there are specific uh emer extraordinary For instance, there's a hail storm and a bunch of panels get ruined. Um, that they would have to notify us and that that could trigger a circumstance that would require additional soil testing. You know, say for instance, any of the potential contaminants are able to run off after a hail storm that we would want them to to have some soil testing after that. I had in here also a notification requirement in case you had one applicant or operator apply and then thereafter sell to someone else that they would have to notify us of the transfer so that we can ensure that we are aware who the operator is and that they have to acknowledge acceptance of responsibility. Other comments, questions, things that I didn't include at all. Sorry, this is weird. Um, just one question, I guess. Um, I've been reading a lot about the 3D homes and um, how those are being made and manufactured. Is there anything that just thinking ahead on materials because materials are seem to be this everchanging presence and with solar panels? Is there any thing that we

should put into place that would talk about the materials that are being used or maintained with the solar panels if they came out with 3D solar panels? If there was um the batteries were stored in a 3D construction proof with um that's supposed to cause less fire damage on a place. I'm just wondering like how do materials that these items are made out of could also be addressed or is that of concern? I don't know the answer to that. I have no idea. I mean, I think the one thing that we know is that the solar farms that we see now are probably not the solar farms that we're going to see in the future. and that as issues arise, people are going to figure out ways to address those issues because they want to keep be being able to manufacture and sell products. Um, I don't know much I mean honestly I don't know much about the actual products that are potentially out there right now and the differences. I know that there's I mean there's any number of different products out there. I don't know how we would limit it or address it without it almost immediately becoming out of date. I I I don't know if you have recommendations or have any input on that. I'm happy to listen to it. I don't know. I just see that the 3D homes are being approved in areas and if there are any more or less liabilities than the homes that are currently being put up and and what if any potential um factors

that could cause um I mean we had a big article about it just a couple of weeks ago as well and we have 3D homes that are starting here and so it just sparked my interest in how that could play into effect with the solar panels. Have no idea. So, here's an interesting question that just occurred to me as someone whispered it to me, but uh Terry didn't want to be the one asking all that. No, no, I just No, it's interesting question. I'm sitting there wrestling with it. What is the benefit or drawback of taking all of that moving above the line and saying we can wave any of these that we don't think apply versus keeping it below the line and saying we can apply any of these we think apply. Is there any difference to that? Okay. I just wanted him to have the glory for that or or look stupid. Well, no. I s I couldn't think of any reason waving or applying. I mean, it's the same thing either way. Um Okay. Okay. Well, if there's no difference, so you know, we have to do some level of professional evaluation on this before it comes to you. So, as they do their preapp meetings and say for instance, we have a case come in that's way out in the country, not near any farm. It's on a great road and we don't have to worry about, you know, so it's just the perfect location. Um, we would then in that scenario, if they were all required, we wouldn't necessarily have the ability at that level to say you don't need to worry about submitting this stuff. It would be a requirement until it got to you and at that point it's too late. They would have already had to have done it, right? You got to go through all the steps before. So, making them jump through more hoops than they would need to. Yes. And so I guess my thought process on

that is sure that makes sense because if they are items that we as an ad, you know, administrative office have the ability to look through based on their application and say, I mean, maybe it needs to say the administrative office has the ability to require these specific things as a part of the application because that's really kind of what we do now in any other case. you know, if they come in and we see that there's going to be it's right off of a major highway, we're probably going to want to see a glare report. And so, I think that some of that has to fall to the ability of our office to to to utilize our common sense in in regards to requiring it. Yeah. Well, I like the way you have designed. Um, I just had one other kind of a bigger picture question. I like that because we we discussed for a long time how to restrict this without killing off big projects. So that part you put without restricted. Yeah, that that part you put in italics was was you like that really well done. I I will not take credit for that. That was I took that from another county. Hey, steal heavily. It's awesome. Uh my question is though, does that open up any legal liability as we tell one developer, no, you can't even though we're following all of our rules, but then someone else comes along? It it's like so we've crafted one set of rules, but we may choose to let someone not play by those rules because it makes sense. No, because they would have to request that and we would consider it on a case-byase basis and it would be no different than us considering any reasonzoning on a case-byase basis. You don't take each one into the same consideration. Uh golden factors would still apply to all of this. And so if they apply to wave something, it would be very similar. We would look at the specific circumstances of the case and if it made sense based on that, if we've considered all of the

golden factors and done all the things, then we could make that modification. So, no, I don't think so. I just wanted to get the lawyer involved. And and that was really this your your little paragraph there is really the reason for my whispering in his ear in regards to if if that's in there, could we move everything up and you wave? Yeah. Um, in that case, we're talking about the the governing body versus the county commissioners there. Yeah. And and so the governing body, I put it put that because the BCC would be the governing body. You have the hard work of making the recommendation to them and kind of weeding through everything and you take our review and recommendation and so it's a threeprong process. We review make recommendations and then you review and make recommendations and then they have to make the final decision. Um and so I I think ultim you know ultimately having everything above the line and requiring it on everybody just I think that puts us at a bigger risk because if we then say well you don't have to don't worry about it. I would want to make sure that we have in there something that allows us administratively to make those decisions to not require because I don't want someone to be like, "Oh, you don't need to worry about doing a decommissioning plan." You know, you know what I mean? Like where do we draw the line? Okay. Okay. Are the commissioners okay then with moving D, E, F, and maybe J to required and then changing that paragraph where it says the following

items may be applicable. Um saying something about the administrative office may require or Planning Commission staff scanning commission staff may or or this body may you said D through DF. So D is decommissioning. Y yeah financial is the financial assurance. Yeah. F is that power purchase agreement interconnection agreement. Um Jay, I mentioned that I could change that so that instead of it having a plan, it's just a requirement that you're not allowed to store junk on and old panels. Um M we discussed having a baseline soil test at least as a minimum and groundwater probably. Yeah, yeah, both of those things. Soil and ground water. And then we could so we could separate that out where you have a baseline and then we could require additional testing if necessary. Um and then some of the others like the fire hazard plan may be applicable only if there's battery storage. What was there another one? No. Well, I just said that the ones that may be applicable that planning staff or this body may require those. That way you'd have the ability

if you saw in a particular case that you know definitely this proposed area is going to need something more. My only concern with that would be that sense can only delegate certain functions to legislative functions outside. Well, it wouldn't be we can talk about that, but the the I don't think it'd be legislative then. it would be all written out. And so we already have in our regulations items that planning staff or planning director has the authority to make decisions on. And as long as that's laid out in I don't think it's a legislative function then but look into it and see. Yeah. Yeah. I like the way it is here just because then it would work similar to what we had with the rodeo where they came in and said here's our plan and they said no we want to take it no I would have the ability to say look based on my experience you consider doing this ahead of time and being prepared to address. We I mean right now when plans come in to us, we always require a business

plan, but if there are things that um those those recommendations, we would say, you know, you're going to need to have a a glare plan. You're going to need to have I mean, we we do that already. We tell them here are the things that you're going to need to provide us based on the review and the expertise of reviewing entities whether it be environmental health, public works, us. Um we require them to do stuff to submit. Now it could be then that when it comes down to the final conditions they just don't have a requirement to do a certain action that can be over like the planning commission in BCC can then override things that we've requested or recommended. Right. I was more addressing I think I was kind of trying to address Janette's concern. You're still doing what she does. We do that all the time. [Laughter] We require them to provide us those all the time. Um, I know what you're trying to say whether but I think that that's part of the professional staff recommendation in any of these cases that we if if they're laid out that the following may be applicable in each of the these cases. We take a case and based on the circumstances of that case say these are things that are going to need to be seen as a part of your final consideration. and so provide those to us. If they don't, we're still going to bring it here and we're going to make a recommendation that it be required. We don't have any

authority to say, "Well, we're not going to take it to the planning commission because you haven't provided us these documents or these plans." Yeah. Yeah. Right. Yes. We would never Correct. We would never deny bringing a case forward because they items that we've asked for. We may recommend to them that they defer action until they've gathered everything because if so, the way that we do it now is if they come in and we say, "Here are the things that you need to provide." If they don't provide us everything, we'll say, "Your meeting is only in so many weeks. We have to have time to be able to review this. If you don't provide it to us, our recommendation is that you postpone it or we're going to recommend denying because you haven't provided us the things that we need to see to move forward, which is how we handled it with the rodeo. And so we still bring it to to the commission unless they voluntarily pull it off and defer action. Um, and then the other alternative would be they say, "Well, we're going to move forward anyways. We don't think we need it." Then when we come here, we've made a recommendation to you that they have these specific plans. And if they haven't provided them, then we say, well, we feel like this shouldn't be approved until these plans are reviewed. Um, and then if the planning commission elects to override us, then Yeah. Right. And I I took and I may putting words in Janette's mouth, I took her recommendation to be that you have the ability to Gotcha. Does that make sense? Anything further? Any questions or

is there other this this is sent out to a whole bunch of other agencies within the county, correct? For their consideration. Not yet. No, no, no, no, no. Once we create a Once we create it and there is an application. Yep. Every time we get an application, depending on the case, we send it to fire districts, uh, a city, we send it to public works or whatever, road maintenance facility, environmental health, um, school districts, water, water, township, townships. So, my question is, is there things that we could take out of here because it would be fall under the purview of another county agency? Um, so yes, anything in regards to environmental health could be a requirement by environmental health. They say we want you to do soil testing, but if they don't, then we don't have it in there. Um, soil erosion plan, that would be probably recommended by public works. I mean, same with the fire prevention. Fire prevention. Yeah. The biggest thing in having it in writing as it may be applicable is that it helps if the fire district says to us, well, we'd like to see a fire plan. At least we have something a little more already set out in writing so that it's easy to just kind of click click here are the things that you It gives the applicant a heads up. I mean, they they know ahead of time. And this does not limit I mean, it could be that when send it. Especially with fire districts, we never know what we'll get back from a fire district. Depending on the specific district, they may come back with a very set of specific rules or recommendations. And so depending on if you see something in Shauny Heights versus in Mission, those two fire districts, they treat something very differently.

So am I correct that about the only things we have to discuss maybe for next month is the battery storage systems and the well the QRNs on here. So the battery storage um to be clear those battery storage that we would be discussing would only be those associated with solar farms not we're not talking battery storage as a separate entity um that I think we need to just keep separate although it'll be very similar um it would just be if there's battery storage associated with a solar farm Does staff have anything else for us at this point tonight? Commissioners, do you have anything else to bring before the body? If not, then let's adjourn the meeting and we'll see you next month and we'll all do a little work on battery storage systems. Is there is there anything else we'll hear next month or just work session? We have a conditional use permit for a quilting retreat at 45th Engage. Quilting. You said retreat. Retreat center. Yep. A center where people can have weekend or weekl long retreats to do quilting and sewing. And then on the time frames where they're not hosting retreats, they could have sew sessions like daily sew sessions for people who like to gather and do sewing new clothing together and a plat Rodney Rodney Robertson's window design flat will also be heard.

So, we did the resoning already which got approved today by BCC. And so, then they have to do the PL. Well, you never know what's coming, do you? You never know. I didn't see that one. I didn't see that one. All right, we'll adjourn till next month. Thank you all. Thank you. Are you sure nobody wants a paper copy of the solar regulations? I printed a few. Oh, yo, I would take