Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

January 15, 2026, Reno County Planning Commission meeting to order. Staff, will you please call the role? Nisley here. Strand here. Schaefer here. Selzer here. Min here. Martin here. Gerson here. Welcome to everyone here. Uh we have uh just a little bit of annual housekeeping to do uh in this meeting. then we'll get into the cases involved. Uh first I trust that we we all had a chance to review their packets and in those packets were the minutes from our December 18, 2025 meeting. Chair will entertain a motion on those minutes. Move they be approved as presented. I second that.

Move and seconded. Any discussion? All in favor of the approval of December 18, 2025 minutes say I. Oppose. Same sign. Minutes are approved. Okay. First item of new business is the election of the 2026 chairperson floor will be open for nominations. I would nominate Russ Burton. Second. Any other nominations? Please. Move the nomination cease. Second movement seats.

Staff, will you go ahead and call the role on that? I'll abstain from the vote. Nley, yes. Strand, yes. Schaefer, yes. Seltzer, [snorts] yes. Mlin, yes. Martin, yes. And Gersonson, abstain.

Another year. You got it. All right. Last year. last year. We appreciate your work, chairman. We do do it. Good job running the show. Our my next for the right-hand man of the chair, we need to uh we need to elect a vice chair. Floor is open for nominations for the vice chair. Chairman, I nominate Jack to continue in his role as vice chairman. Second. Second. Any other nominations? staff, please make the motion for nominations to cease.

Okay, thank you that you want to call the role. Nathan, yes. Yes. Schaefer, yes. Selzer, yes. Mro, yes. Martin, I'll abstain. And then Gson,

yes. Jack, we're partners in crime here. All right, moving on to item D on the agenda. The Kansas Supreme Court has defined a reszone or conditional use permit public hearing as a quasi judic judicial function to ensure the rights of all parties of interest to provide an opportunity for each party to address the planning commission in an orderly manner. The planning commission will follow the factf finding procedure which is outlined in the handout and on each on each chair. Your attention to this procedure is appreciated. If a recommendation is made tonight, that recommendation will be based upon the record of information presented to the planning commission. The county commissioners will not conduct a separate public hearing or accept additional written documents. The county commissioners will consider written requests for additional public comments or documents based only on valid claims that the public hearing process was incomplete or based upon new new information which has become available since the public hearing. For purposes of this county commission policy, a public hearing is considered incomplete only if the planning commission failed to follow procedural guidelines which resulted in a denial of due process to a party of interest or if the planning commission failed to allow an interested party an opportunity for public comment. For purposes of the county commission policy, new information shall pertain only to germanine information. Information information which did not exist at the time of the public hearing or which was unknown or could not have been discovered with reasonable diligence. An example may be a traffic study completed after the planning commission recommendation. Planning Commission recommendation to the to the county commissioners will be accompanied by a summary of proceedings

before planning commission at its public hearing along with a report and recommendation to the county planner, letters, and formal petitions and other information constituting the record of proceedings provided to the planning commission before and during the public hearing. If the public if the planning commission makes a recommendation after tonight's public hearing, this case will be presented to the county commissioners at their next available meeting after protest period expires. Contact planning staff or visit the website for the county commission agenda items. Any party who wishes to require the county commissioners decide this case by supermajority vote can file a protest petition pursuant to KSA12-757 at the office of the Reno County clerk 125 West 1st Avenue Hutchinson Kansas within 14 days following the decision by the planning commission. The form is on the Reno County website [snorts] planning department web page. I'll now formally open uh the public hearing regarding case number 2025-11, a request by 2641 WMacher LLC, agent Andrew Garing, PE Engineering Consultants, PA to resone approximately 180 acres of land from R2 suburban residential district to agriculture agricultural district for the purpose of eliminating the possibility of establishing a highdensity residential subdivision. The parcel is located at the northeast corner of 4th Avenue and North Butler Road.

Have any planning commission members had any outside contact regarding this case? No. Do any planning commission commissioners have any conflict of interest in this case? No. No. Okay. At this time, we'll hear from the applicant. Will the applicant please come to the podium, state your name and address for the record. you have 10 minutes or the since this is a complex uh uh application we may we may have a little bit of leeway there. You have 10 minutes there 10 minutes or to present your case. Additional time may be allotted at the discretion of the chair. Planning commission members may request clarification at the end of your presentation or may have questions.

Uh I'm I'm the applicant on the application. Andrew Garing, representative by um engineering consultants PA and Hutchinson. So local engineering firm. I'm actually going to pass it off to uh Brent who's going to handle kind of the presentation side, but we're just the the local engineer and the applicant um listen on the uh the change the resoning.

Thanks Andrew. I'm Brent Hugo. I'm with CE Golf Design. Uh I'm one of the golf course architects on the project. Um just an overview. Everybody knows this is the this former Cottonwood Hills golf course. Um that was not operating uh for the last however many years. Uh the fire that came through destroyed all the trees on the site. Um since then the site has been cleared um ready for a new golf course. And our intent is to build an entirely new facility not using any of the current golf course that's there. Um, we're going to build a new, uh, two 18hole destination golf courses. Uh, a 9-hole par three course. Uh, and by destination golf course, I mean courses similar to, uh, Bandon dunes in Oregon without the ocean, of course. Uh, Land Man [clears throat] or Rodeo Dunes in Nebraska, sand val Sand Valley in Aaron Hills, Wisconsin, or the big cedar courses in Branson. It's something that we think will attract people from all over the Midwest and even the country. [snorts] Um [clears throat] the it's a big site. There's 620 acres. The uh uh we're going to have two courses. The dunes course which will be on the western half of the site. Uh and then the prairie course which will be on the eastern half of the site. Uh both course will be very natural taking advantage of the uh the sand dunes that exist out there. That's a really striking feature of of the courses very similar to Prairie Dunes Country Club that's already here in town. Um we're [clears throat] going to have a 9-hole part three course kind of up to the north tucked between the two courses. Uh just as another option for people coming in, uh staying at the

course and playing. Uh we'll even have a a nightlit putting course about 2 acres right adjacent to our clubhouse. Um let's see clubhouse and lodging. We're going to we're going to have a a large clubhouse with uh with fine dining located in the central portion of the site. We're going to have uh a cart a cart and caddy facility that will house up to 250 golf carts to service both courses. Uh we'll offer caddies as well. Um and then we're going to have lodging on site consisting of about 200 rooms when it's fully built out uh to accommodate overnight guests. that'll consist of uh about 30 four bedroomedroom cottages, four 8-bedroom owner suites, and uh two 24bedroom lodges. Uh the uh the lodges will be accessed by pedestrian and golf cart access. Parking will all be centralized in a a location adjacent to the clubhouse. Um, and then we're going to have obviously paved entry road, kind of the same entry road that or similar to the entry road alignment that was there before, but all brand new and all paved. Uh, in addition to the golf course, uh, the golf courses, the another utilization in the offse will be a a hunting lodge. the uh we'll utilize the the on-site lodging and the club the clubhouse and restaurant uh for the hunting activities, but all hunting activities would be offsite uh on lease property through local guides. Um

so that's pretty much the overview of the project right there. Any questions for the applicant? Not yet. [clears throat]

Thank you for now from the staff Mark Vonach and County Planner. So the first case before the board tonight is dealing with just the reasoner of the property, not the specifics of what's going to potentially happen on the property. So this request is to reszone the southwest portion of that acreage from R2 to A. The application was really submitted at my request uh since there's no real high density residential development being proposed with their uh operations that they're looking at putting on this parcel. So rather than have a large section of this area, zone R2, with the potential of having numerous home sites or other types of land uses with small lots out there, I requested and the applicant did agree to go ahead and petition to reszone that portion of the property from R2 to agricultural. The zoning on that property was was put in place um by the previous owner because he at that time was proposing a highdensity residential, commercial, industrial development. And the reason we left that in place was because that's where it was originally intended, but also in exchange for granting him that ability of having that highdensity residential, he agreed to vacate the original subdivision plat. So that's why that R2 zoning is in place, you know, right now. But the old plat consisted of industrial, commercial, and highdensity residential development. And so that's not part of this new development. So that's why I'm requesting to go ahead and reszone it from R2 to A. I would point out though that all the land uses that they are

proposing right now on the property could be allowed in the R2 zoning district with a conditional use permit. same thing as in the A district. So reszoning the land doesn't have anything to do with what they're doing right now. It's both permitted in both zoning districts. It's just a matter of eliminating that possibility of having a highdensity residential subdivision development in that area. And of course, as you seen with these concurrent conditional use permit application, they're not proposing to do that. Um, I would advise the board and also the audience members that any questions you have on the specifics of what is going to be potentially taking place on this property be reserved for the conditional use permit public hearing. There'll be another public hearing after a recommendation is made on that. right now. If you have specific questions on why this should or should not be reszoned from R2 to A, those are the questions that should be addressed right now before uh before me and before the the planning commission here. Um I'm going to really defer a lot of my uh staff report to what you you have in the pack here. I don't know if I need to go into a lot of specifics, although I would advise you that your recommendation to the county commission should be based on those factors that you see in my staff report and I'm certainly available to answer any questions that you may have uh with my staff report in the write up here, but um I don't see the need in this particular case to really go through the specifics of that. So, um, I certainly stand for any questions, but staff is going to recommend approval of the request to reszone the property from R2 to agricultural. It's going to be based off of the 12 factors that you see in your staff report. And I would also remind the board that you cannot place conditions of approval on a reszone request. It's either yes, we make a recommendation to approve the reszone or no, we make a

recommendation to deny the reszone based off of those factors. Uh, in conclusion, I would say that we sent letters to 54 different property owners as depicted by the dotted line on the screen and nobody submitted any kind of written response to me uh, regarding the resone request. So, with that, I would stand for any questions from the board. Mark, a little you shared just a little bit of history there. Was that zone reszoned to R2 when the subdivision was proposed back back in the day or how or was that always R2?

It wasn't always R2. Um, prior to that, it was zoned in multiple zoning districts back in the day when this was first being proposed. It was zoned low-end commercial, high-end commercial, zone industrial, we had public zoning districts. And so there was a conglomeration of zoning districts within that portion of the development. And as you may recall in 2016 when we switched our zoning concept from the commercial industrial level to a residential agricultural and conditional usebased zoning, we don't have the ability to put in commercial and industrial zoning district. So we had to come up with a a zoning district that would fit out there. And at that time staff in conjunction with the previous owners decided that R2 is is what he requested and we granted that request. So,

so Mark, why with the surrounding neighbors are generally zoned R1? So, why was why was it zoned R2 instead of keeping in character with its neighbors?

The idea behind that was at that time the previous development was going to have a public sewer system and a public water system. So the R2 zoning district allows for loss to go from 1 acre up to say 3 acres in size subject to that public sewer and public water being available. That was the intent really at that time and it never materialized. So the the R2 zoning stayed in place. If it would be developed to that level, certainly that'd be something that we'd be looking at as as staff if if you're going to have a public sewer and or public water system serve those lots. But yeah, it was intended to be public sewer and water at that time.

Mark, were there any zoning changes when the the past golf course went in there that I should have be knowledgeable of? There was at the time that the original development was being proposed, there were a zoning change being requested at that time for various industrial, commercial, public, and residential for that matter zoning districts. So, but when we did this in 2016, there was not a a petition to reszone the property because we were doing a comprehensive look at all the zoning on the properties. And so, with that, you don't have to notify property owners for that type of reszone. Um Mark being our expert on our zoning codes [clears throat]

and thinking of R2 as it is now versus egg. Are there what if any in your opinion are possible negatives uh from putting this changing R2 to a for example I I think I'm correct that on building heights on an azoned property there's no there's no height limit there is no height limit so are there other considerations in that realm that would be maybe a negative to to that area or those people surrounding that area?

Not right now. Not that I can think of because since we're conditional use based type of zoning, if any type of land use wants to go in there other than some type of agricultural or a residential house, then it's going to come back through this board through the conditional use permit through the public hearing notification process. So, I don't see any any negatives. All I see is the one big factor of eliminating that request to be able to potentially have a a large residential highdensity subdivision in that that area, which right now they could do with just submitting a subdivision plat. Now, [clears throat] now if it's changed back to a and then concepts change and then they want to go and have more of a residential look to the development, now they got to come back. They have to reszone. We're going to notify the property owners. We're going to go back through that same process again to see if it's appropriate. Really, high density residential R2 zoning is not really appropriate without the availability of public sewer and public water. [clears throat] So, I don't really see a negative. Moving it back to egg is really more of a protection for the surrounding property owners actually. [clears throat]

Any other questions for staff? Thank you, Mark.

Thank you. If there is anyone in the audience who would like to comment [clears throat] on this case, and I'll remind you it's just strictly that this point comments on the reszoning of this property. You may have five minutes to comment. Please come forward to the podium one one at a time and state your name and address for the record before commenting. Audience members are only permitted to address the planning commission from the podium. Audience members are permitted only one time at the podium. In the interest of time, if you agree with the comments pre previously made by other audience members, please don't repeat the comments. Simply state that you agree with the previous and then present new information to the planning commission. Statements and questions should only be directed to the planning commission, not the applicant or staff. The planning commission may choose not answer questions or engage with the public. Questions regarding the application can be asked to the public commission, excuse me, the planning commission and answered by the applicant during the rebuttal phase of the public hearing. Is there anyone that would like to comment on this on the concerning the reszone? Lucas Hayden from uh 616 North Victory Road. Um, so in the uh when they first started doing this, they sent out a water rights uh

deal saying they're going to how much water they're they're planning to use when they first did the the golf course years ago. um changing it to egg, is that going to change the water rights that they filed for and water usage rights and all that? Are they going to have they going to be using more water since it's going to be two golf courses now instead of just the one? That's all I have. Thank you.

It's not going to change. changing it back zoning. It's just the overlay for the property and the use of their permit. It's not going to change anything with the the water rights that they have. Is there anyone else [clears throat] staff and [clears throat] commission? My name is Don Rogers. I own Wells Aircraft in Hutcherson. Been there 20 years and helped fight the fires on this property. and um we support tanker 95 in in the area um based at the airport based on both of these and I'll just speak this time [clears throat] I would be in support of this um concept um as the airport um operations we are bringing a lot of people to our community um that are using Prairie Dunes currently it's one of the third largest users of the airport currently that come in their lodging stays in um and they do a fine job of bringing business and we have owners now that are buying community properties and businesses because they are exposed to the operation that a concept like this will work. I don't know a lot about their concept but if it's anything similar one of our second second largest users the airport is Hurrah um which is down in King County. We get them here because of our airport can handle the traffic. Um the nice thing about that as well is they're bringing in um hunters. I don't hunt, but they bring in quite a few. And we've have two of those that have bought aircraft and are now moving to Hutchinson because of that operation. They're not going to Kingman. They're coming to the Reno County and the airport. So, I I really I think the overnight guest idea is a great concept. It brings revenue into our community.

Definitely brings revenue into the airport. And even though it's a city um owned airport, it is in our county and it is a big plus for us to have it here. And so anything that we can do to gain additional traffic um and bring in businesses that will be associated with the airport, I'm in support of the answer of uh towers too tall. I will tell you the FAA won't let them do that. Um those three towers that are out there now, [clears throat] the FA would take them down if they had a chance to. So anything that goes up above that may be permitted, they're not going to be able to get put in, which I don't know what they put in. I mean be tall enough. But to answer the question, that property is so close to the airport, it would be governed by the FAA and they don't do a lot of things. [clears throat] That's all I have.

Thank you. Is there any other public comment regarding the zoning overlay? Zoning change, excuse me. Does the applicant have any additional statements or any rebuttal statements to make? Okay. Staff, do you have any additional comments or any rebuttal? I do not, Mr. Chairman.

Okay. Does the commission have any any further questions for the applicant or staff? Seeing none, the public hearing is now closed. Acceptance or denial of [clears throat] the reszone must be based on the factors received from Lana Clark White.

The acceptance or denial of the reszone must be based on the factors that are listed in the staff report and found in on the audience chairs. This is a time planning commission can discuss this case and ask procedural questions of [clears throat] staff only. Is there any further discussion or questions by the planning commission? Seeing none, chair will entertain a motion on this case.

Mr. Chairman, I move that case number 2025-11 request by 2641 Watermaker LLC requesting a reszone of approximately 180 acres of land from R2 suburban residential district to AG Agricultural District be approved based on the 12 factors listed in the staff report and as heard at this public hearing. Second. Been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion on this motion? Seeing none staff, please call the role. Nisley, yes. Strand, yes. Schaefer, yes. Zeltzer, yes. Mlin, yes. Marson, yes.

And

yes, carries. Zone zone has changed. Okay, we'll move on to agenda item E. And now forum. I'll just uh remind the audience that the that the uh statements made prior to to the previous case regarding the rules of conduct still apply. I'll now formally open case 2025-12 a request by 2641 Wamounter LLC agent Andrew Garing PE Engineering Consultants PA for for a conditional use permit to develop a golf course resort of land on land zone agricultural district. The property is located at the northeast corner of East 4th Avenue and North Buler Road. Have any of the planning commissioners had any outside contacts regarding this case?

No. Do any planning commission members have have a conflict of interest with this case? No. No. Okay. Seeing none, will the applicant please stand step to the podium and state your name and address for the record? You've got 10 minutes or give or at the discretion of the chair. Time to to uh to describe the plan. Additional time may be allotted. Planning Commission members may request clarification at the end of your pre presentation or have may have questions.

Andrew Garing again the applicant. We're we're good with the comments previously made um as far as explaining what we have going on. There is another um exhibit that we sent which shows maybe in greater detail what the plan is um which is should be in your packet I believe. Any [clears throat] of the commissioner members have any any questions for the applicant? I've got one concern or two concerns on looking at the proposed layout of this thing. You have one primary means of entrance and exit to the facility. You know, there's a service road, I think, going out on Fourth Street, but it's a gravel narrow narrow much more narrow road, I think. You know, and this this area has been, you say, prone, but is subject to possible wildfire areas. So, have you taken that in consideration as far as means of evacuating your guests if you have to having only one road and still allowing emergency equipment in and out and as a corary to that as far as adequate water supplies for fire protection was stamped on those things have been addressed. Okay. Uh yeah, we have we have thought about that. And the the access you're talking about um off of Fourth Avenue here um comes up and we that that probably will be a a gravel road of some sort, but it will be wide enough to to uh handle any emergency vehicles that that need that uh need to access that. This will be a paved

entrance coming in here. And the this uh secondary access will be gravel road, but plenty wide enough to handle cars and and fire fire. How wide is plenty wide? Uh 20 ft. Wider than some of the roads out there. Now, I guess while we're on the topic of fire, uh there's going to be a lot of people on site there. Will any of those uh buildings have fire suppression systems or

Yeah, and we're we're in the process of designing those buildings now and and the architects happen to be here tonight, but one of the things we're talking about, all of the buildings would have fire protection, have sprinkler systems in them. On your [clears throat] plan, you have two sets of two rows of looks like lodging on either side of the entrance entrance drive. Okay. Access for emergency vehicles for those. Well, I understand it. It's those are going to be accessed only by cart path. Is that is that cart path wide enough to to accommodate an emergency vehicle? And

we plan on working with the fire department and and making sure that those are accessible by fire trucks and ambulance. Yes. And those those would be a concrete or asphalt paved surface. Okay.

In the project description from engineering consultants on [clears throat] 5B, it mentions a public water main as a possibility. Um is there any public water supply out there now? Is there any was there like a particular public water system you were had in mind? There's a there's a current petition to the city of Hutchinson for water supply and it's in negotiation now. So that's why it was posed as a as a potential. Okay. So the potential is to get it from the city of Hutchinson.

City of Hutchson would be there. I guess on the again on the same subject, water. Uh my understanding is that golf courses are heavy water users and you're proposing two and a half golf courses. So is there a a known water right amount that you're looking for? As far as Andrew's [clears throat] been working on this.

I I assume that water is probably a big reason that people are um concerned. the uh the water rights at the golf course um currently include both the residential and what was going to be planned for Cottonwood Hills irrigation. Um all those are under the same property and so they're um as far as what they've already been allotted none of that is is expected to change at least not with this conditional use permit. So the amount of water rights is remaining the same as it is on the current property. Um with the the usage um it's all uh yeah it's a matter of it's not a legal matter as far as they've already been given the rights. The property has the rights to pump a certain amount of water. It will change compared to what they're pumping now. Um but the rights are already on the current system and are [snorts] not um being pursued to change right now. So

you know what the what the rights are in the current

Yeah. Um just a little bit behind the curtain is u in this particular area there's quite a bit of uh unused water rights as well. So above [snorts] even what is permit. It's not at its max permit. Um and we do have we have copies. The the water rights haven't been perfected because the golf course obviously never got built out. Um they weren't able to pump at the rate that they had acquired the rights for. But on top of that, there's also significant amount of water rights um available to this this area of um the way that Department of Water Resources does, they do like a quarter mile radius and within the radius of the golf course, there's quite a bit of water rights still unclaimed um above even what they are currently um allotted. So um it's a it's a water plentiful area. Some places in Kansas are not that way, but according to the the best records of um Department of Water Resources, it is a water plentiful area. So,

and do you know what that a lotment is? Um I would have to check the numbers exactly um on what what they are, but yeah, we it is permitted through uh and can be checked on the water resources websites. You can find per per parcel just like you could any uh residential what they're allotted. So after the water after you applied for the water rights, don't you have a period of time to perfect the water rights? And what is that time? Yeah, so there's a the current water right that is um coming up at the end of its perfection and then the other two I think still have I'm in a ballpark 20 20 years on their perfection rights. Um and so that's kind of where they're at is one of them is is is am I right on that Brent? I think last we had talked.

Yeah, I [clears throat] I believe it. Yeah. So, um, so they're still they're still in that that period where they can, um, be perfecting their water rights, trying to get up to their maximum. And so, that works well with a golf course that may or may use more water. Um, needing to perfect those rights. They still are in that period where they can do that legally through received from 3265. Again, I probably should have I probably should have gotten more information on that um for you all, but that's all public um public documents as far as the the permitting process through the Department of Water Resources. [clears throat]

Yeah. um the hunting lodge part. I know I understand that the actual hunting is going to be offsite, but uh will there be any uh discharging of firearms on this property? Um we we don't plan we don't plan on any uh hunting or or ski shooting or anything like that on this site. Target practice. None of that is none of that is planned on this site. any any uh firing of guns would be offsite at least leased hunting property.

How much if you're planning on leasing property for hunting? Do you have any idea how much what kind of a size you're looking for? Um I I think that the owners have been in discussion with some uh people about 5 to 6,000 acre tracks. I think that's here in Reno County or I don't I'm not 100% sure where that is, [clears throat] but that will be offsite from here. Uh there was some mention earlier, I think maybe you mentioned it about a uh putting area lit at night. Uh can can you flesh that out a little bit more?

So

from the perspective of neighboring properties being impacted? So, and and that I could just point out to you real quick that that that activity would be right here, right adjacent to the clubhouse, right in the middle of the site. Um and and in those instances we all we usually use very low lighting like almost ballards and it's targeted throughout the green so that um so basically you can see where you're going on the putting green but it's not uh creating a lot of uh light pollution u and being in the center of the site most of the neighbors wouldn't even notice it was there. And I guess the same question for the driving range. Although I did not hear any any description of a driving range that would have lights that

we have no plans of lighting the driving range. No plans of lighting anything other than the entry road, you [cough] know, the and the buildings and then that putting course is the only things we plan on lighting. You mentioned fine dining. Is that going to be open to the public?

The whole facility will be a public access facility. Um it's it's going to be a high-end um the the golf courses will be, you know, in the area of $250 to $300 green fees. Um, and the the uh dining will be open to the public, but obviously the the golfers and the people staying on site will have first access to that. our uh emergency manager director had some comments and he he did not uh mention tornado shelters but again thinking to potential of two plus 100 people on site. Do you have that factored into your plan? something we've been discussing today with the uh the architects and we're going to have basically everybody's going to be in that central location and we'd like to do a tornado shelter possibly in the cart storage facility or in the clubhouse. But yes, we have talked about that. Other questions for the applicant?

I have a couple, Mr. Chairman, if the board's done. Uh, so Brent, somebody yourself or on your team. Um, we've discussed water uh somewhat. I think we have a pretty good idea on on that. Uh, is there any update on the sewer aspect of it? I know that this is going to be way beyond the county's ability to permit on sewer. So, is there an update you can provide with KDG like maybe Andrew or

Yeah, I can [clears throat] I can do that. Um, yeah, and the the facility actually treating it similar to other um part-time housing, so like a hotel or something where people are out on the golf course, they're not um doing dishes, they're not washing laundry, the things that really produce a lot of sewer runoff, um they're using bathrooms. Yeah, it

the lagoon I was sizing it just earlier this week is um coming out about 200 by 200. So it's it's still not a giant facility at the end of the day. Um I don't I we didn't pursue permitting through the county just for protection of the county to not have to even guess if it was in their wheelhouse. We're going to go through KDH just to make sure that the state knows what's going on that we follow all their regs rather than trying to sneak it through the county and and any uh shady business like that. So, we're going through KDH just at the start because it is a little bit bigger, but it's not so huge that it that um that warrants really a bigger study than that. Um similar to other Yeah. other uh facilities that that have temporary housing or things like that that people are using. So, if that answers your question,

so you're in commun basically, yeah, you're in communication with them and they're going to be helping you and it'll have to it'll have to operate under their small systems. um permit. So

my second question had to deal with the uh pipeline easement. I don't know if that's going to be you or somebody else on on the team here. Um I know in our previous conversations we talked that you were going to be working with the pipeline representatives and they're aware of this project. Uh at one time I had requested you know something in writing from them and I know they they may be hesitant to provide something but basically for the record could you just you know talk about you know the project and their acceptance of it because when I measure it looked like maybe from the pipeline ement maybe those lodges are about 100 foot from the pipeline ement and is the pipeline companies are they satisfied with the the layout right now

they are uh and we we've met with them on site uh several times And basically [clears throat] they said anything outside of their actual easement is fine. Okay. Um they said we can cross with golf holes and we can cross with the entry road and they're okay with that. We're going to work with them. They said that there's uh some areas where that pipeline's a little more shallow than they would like and we're going to work with them to get fill over the top of those areas as well. Very good. That's all I have. Mr. Chairman, thank What kind of pipeline is it? Is it

It's a petroleum or Oh, no. It's a It's a crude oil pipeline. I believe there's a there's actually a petroleum pipeline on the east side of the property there. Um but we we don't cross that with anything. So, but it's not high pressure gas. [snorts] I don't know for sure that it's for them. I'm not sure. Don't know. [clears throat]

Any other questions for the applicant? Seeing none, we'll we will now hear the planning staff report. [clears throat] I

think we've had some very good discussion between uh the applicant and the board. So again, I think um rather than go through the majority of my report rather lengthy, I think I'm going to try and hit a lot of the highlights, you know, here. Uh we've talked about the various uses that are going to be occurring, you know, on that property. Um I would mention and and and clarify for the record that all the roads that are going to be accessing, they're going to be private private roads. They're not going to be township roads maintained by the township. They're not going to be county roads. They're going to be private roads. So, the maintenance is going to be strictly with the the applicant there. Now, we as a board can can review like we've done here, you know, the width of the roads here and I've made comments on that as well as emergency management and Hutcherson Fire District. in Hutcherson Fire has also commented, you know, on that making sure that there is a wide up access to pass say two uh fire trucks and I've made comments and I've noted that in my staff report that they have they're involved in this. They've approved of the the write up of what they were doing right now and they're going to continue to work with the fire department on the access route. We want to make sure that, you know, there's a way to get to the property. And so, just wanted to make sure that everybody's aware that the main entrance will be off of of Ber Road. The secondary access will be off of 4th Avenue. You see where the maintenance building is. The maintenance building is going to be on the on the south side. That will provide a secondary exit to uh to and from that property. Won't be the main entrance, but it can be used in case it's needed here. um talk a little bit about parking, paving, loading requirements as we always do with all conditional use permits. Uh actually in our regulations, uh the number of parking stalls uh for a clubhouse is really left up to this

board and the county commission. So it's it's at your discretion whether you believe 200 parking stalls is uh sufficient for this type of development here. uh my conclusion in that that it was uh if you feel like there needs to be additional parking is certainly within your right to request that the maintenance facility also does require you know some parking because it is an actual forsighted structured building here. You see in my staff report that the plan shows about 25 parking spaces here. One of those is going to be mainly just offices for the the maintenance workers here. The other one is going to be more of of a storage facility. So, uh, the number of parking stalls that the re regulations require, which is 40, uh, will probably be way too much. And so, you would need to, uh, issue a waiver for that requirement here. So, they don't have to put in that many parking stalls. Some of the lodges up on on the northern part of the property, they're going to be accessible according to their uh, documents by car. Majority of them are not going to be accessible by car, but the larger ones will have the ability to have vehicles driven to them. And so that's also going to require parking. And as you can see, the site plan that I have showed uh about two of the eight bed lodges are going to share eight parking sts. Regulations again will require more than that. And so if you feel that the aid is sufficient, then that would be another waiver that this board could consider and potentially recommend issuing here. And then lastly on on the parking, our regulations again require a loading space. The the applicant does not need an actual loading space with uh their development and so they've actually requested a written waiver of that requirement as well. here. Um, erosion control permit through KDHE may also be required due to the amount of of land that they may be disturbing. So, that's something that they will have to contact KDH on. And we've already

been approved. So, they've already done, you heard that? They already done that.

Um, we talked about lighting and the type of lighting that's going to be on the facility. [snorts] You're not going to be having huge light poles on the property to have any kind of light pollution. I believe that they've sufficiently answered uh that. The next part of my report talks about the factors and these factors are different than the reszone factors, but these are the factors that we review for every single conditional use permit. And so again, uh I'm happy to answer questions if you need any kind of clarification on my staff report. Probably what I will do is just reference uh the comprehensive plan and how I believe that this development does comply with our comprehensive plan. There's many goals that I've listed. I'll highlight three of them. One of them was to promote business and industrial development consistent with the overall quality of life within Reno County which would benefit the county's economy and not adversely affect the environment. The second one would be to ensure that new private development in rural Reno County does not negatively impact the existing transportation system nor place demands for major upgrades to the transportation system in a timely manner. Again, all of their development is going to be private private roads, not maintained by the township or the county. And [clears throat] then lastly is to ensure that the future development occurs in a timely fashion and is adequately served by roads and other public facilities and services. So that's what I'll mention with the comprehensive plan. Again, if this board has questions about any of the other factors, I am I'm happy to answer. Again, I'd like to state again that, you know, Hutch fire department has received this application. I've been in communication with them on the width of the [clears throat] roads and and the surface of the roads. They have essentially reviewed that and reviewed comments that were submitted to me in writing by the developer and they are satisfied with the widths of the road right now as it stands. I think you

heard testimony here, especially with the road to the south. They're looking at going to to 20 ft. That's something new that's come out at this public hearing. Uh wider is always better I think in this particular case here, but u Hushfire was satisfied with the 10 to 12t original proposed access road. [snorts] So with that, staff is recommending approval of the request for the conditional use permit for the golf course resort. Um, it's going to be based off of the 10 factors that you see listed [clears throat] in my staff report and then I have attached eight conditions of approval. And for the record, I'd like to go over those with the board and kind of explain uh what some of them mean. The first one will be that the conditional use permit application is approved further submitted site plan and plan of operation dated December the 11th, 2025 and the county response quote unquote document dated December the 9th, 2025. That's the supplemental questions that I had submitted to the applicant. Number two is the surface of the access driveway off of North Beer Road and main golf course parking lot shall consist of asphalt or concrete as described under question number two of the county response dated December the 9th. Again, since the development is off of a paved county road, the main one, then the parking lot and the access drive must be paved unless a waiver is requested and granted by the planning commission. And so they are planning on paving that and so there was no waiver that is needed. The third one is in order to accommodate the two-way passage of emergency vehicles, the driving width of the access driveway off of North Beer Road shall be a minimum of 24 ft as detailed by the owner and an email submitted to me on December the 16th, 2025. Number four is the secondary entrance off of East 4th Avenue shall be

constructed of gravel and be a minimum of 12 feet wide as detailed by the owner in an email dated December the 16th, 2025. Again, this was all submitted to Hutchfire as well and they've agreed to this. Uh number five is all construction is subject to the approval under the requirements of all public works divisions, codes, policies, and regulations. Number six is any changes to the character, intensity, or use of the parcels not capable of being discerned by the planning and zoning division as being consistent with this approval must be brought back before the planning commission for additional conditional use permit review. So, little question, a little clarification on what's what that means is as we go through this development, they're going to be permitted to build potentially everything that you see on that site plan. They come back to me in a year or two and they say, "Well, we'd like to have another, you know, 20 by 20 maintenance shed, for example, or we want an additional smaller golf court, golf cart storage building." I would have to determine is that really consistent with your approval and potentially a county commissioner approval. If I say yes, then I can give them a zoning permit for that building. If I [clears throat] believe it is not, then they would have to come back before this board. So in reverse, another example, we're looking at potentially 36 lodge buildings there. If all of a sudden they want to do 50 lodge buildings, uh that's probably not really consistent with your approval. So then they would have to come back before this board for additional conditional use permit review. So that's what that is trying to say here. If I believe it's consistent with what we're approving potentially tonight, then we can give them. If not then they have to come back before this board. The seventh is the applicant shall meet all applicable federal, state and local regulations. So this would fall into play with like say KDHE the erosion

control permit the permit for the sewer system. So if we discover through them that they're not in compliance with that or there's concerns then that is grounds to have the conditional use permit revoked. Then last one is is talking about that such as well is that the county reserves the right to resend the conditional use permit upon any violation of the county regulations or conditions of approval [snorts] and so on. Um again we sent letters to 54 different property owners in addition to the reszone and we did not receive any uh written responses in favor or against. So with that I would stand for questions from the board. question mark. Uh on parking, you said around the park maintenance storage shed they had 25 spaces. I believe I'm assuming those would primarily be for employee parking. Uh is that going to be adequate considering you know the the number whatever estimated number of employees they might have?

I I think that would be a question that the applicant answer. I believe probably it will be uh but I think you know they can certainly talk about that like in the next rebuttal phase on on that but I uh I made the the call the determination that yes it would be adequate for something like that. Mark, has there I haven't seen much discussion about uh traffic changes like uh you know, do we have any idea like how many additional cars per day or month we're going to be adding to Four Street Buer Haven Road with this project?

Nothing's been submitted on on that. As you know, you know, dealer roads a highly traveled, you know, road here. uh we don't know what kind of traffic we could potentially get, you know, from this type of development here. Um something in the future, you know, we'd have to potentially revisit. I was like, I didn't know if there was any concern, you know, you're in the middle of a of a section there, you know, if you have lots of left turning traffic, say out on a 55 mph blacktop or even right turning traffic where they're going, they're slowing down. Yeah. Do you need do you need turn lanes, I guess, would be the question. [clears throat] Don, would that be Do you have an opinion on that?

Look into it. I don't know. The entrance is already I guess I would think of Prairie Dunes on 30th Street, which would have maybe a similar traffic count. I mean, I know they've got 18 holes instead of more than 18 holes, but is the is the speed limits to 55 up to the I can't remember. Okay. It changes to the west of there. Okay. Yeah. I just don't have a feel for the if there's any difference in traffic. Yeah. And I don't know are there more like are there more cabins like people staying overnight traveling in and out here? Yeah. But dunes you have you know res day stuff. So yeah

a couple other streets that they're pulling into for the residences around. There's more cabinets proposed here than what's at prairie dunes right now. [cough] It's not like they all come at the same time. [snorts] No, be all spread out during the day. [clears throat]

Any other questions for staff? Thank you, Mark. Thank you.

There is anyone in the audience who would like to comment on this case, you may have five minutes to comment. Please come forward to the podium one at a time and state your name and address for the record before commenting. Audience members are only permitted to address the planning commission from the podium. Audience members are only permitted one time at the podium. In the interest of time, if you agree with the com comments previously made by audience members, please don't repeat the comments. Simply state you agree with previous and present the new information to the planning commission. Statements and questions should only be directed to the planning commission, not the applicant or staff. Planning commission may choose not to answer questions or engage with the public. Questions regarding the application can be asked the planning commission and answered by the applicant during the rebuttal phase of the public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to make comment on this? My name is Pete Hayden. Uh my uh my concern is the uh uh they took all the trees down and made that place beautiful out there. Dug holes and put them in the ground and burned them. Now when water goes over ash, it permeate the the soil around it permeated with lie. Now, is that going to affect the water quality around that area in the time or are we safe?

That's all I have. Are you saying that's been done already? Yes. Yes. Yes, it has.

My name is Jeffrey Grant. I live at the end way up there on victory. Um I just want to know since they still have all these water rights and everything and they're going to talk about bringing public water in, how they're going to keep the pressure up because it's at the top of the hill, one of the tallest hills in Reno County. And when it comes to the fire mitigation, are we going to put fire hydrants out there for the fire trucks so they don't have a 40-minute round trip in just driving? That's all I have. [clears throat]

My name is Cliff Bailey and my concern is they've got one small lagoon for 36 cabins and a clubhouse and all these people are going to be in there. And that lagoon is only going to set about 50 or 100 feet from where they're irrigating at. That is a irrigation pond right there that's already been rubber lined and I've seen that whole section half of it underwater when we get a lot of rain. So if any of that floods over into that, they're pumping raw sewage back out. There should be the KDH should be approved of all of that before they get approved to build anything. Evening. My name is Corey Caulkins. I live off of Victory in Fourth. I would like to state that developing another golf course is a terrible idea. There isn't a need for one when we have multiple golf courses already. If you don't like the fact that they're failing, consider investing money in them in in contrast to new course. Sorry, excuse me. As I see it, Mr. Kman just wants a rural place to play golf and avoid being taxes, which is the developer. He is not and never has been a resident of Reno County and doesn't understand the history behind that land. As most of you know, that plot of land burnt down about four or five years ago. It rehomed multiple families, killed a man, and m all of their pets. It It's a tragedy, and it still is a tragedy. As someone who watched a family suffer due to that, I find it appalling that the second the land is usable again and families can start returning to their lands, some random businessman saw cheap land and decided he wanted a golf course. To me, it feels like a spit in

the face. Especially when he started demolition, leaving screws and nails along the fourth, causing multiple people to have to get new tires fixed, new their tires fixed or new tires, however you be. And not to mention them doing multiple controlled burns during a fire ban. which started that fire. If you would really like to do something with that land, consider a hiking trail or something that any member of society can enjoy, not just something for rich old men. I hope that you can see that this would be an unwise decision to let happen with the following factors in mind. Mr. Clausman owns a lot of owes a lot of money in taxes and doesn't have any care for the residents here in Reno. We don't need another golf course. and that despite being half a decade, the residents of that neighborhood are still hearing healing and deserve their respect. Have a great day.

I've got something a little Oh, my name is Clint Bailey, by the way, and I I lived at 406 Palibino before my house burned down. But I've got a little different perspective. I want to know if the planning commission has done any kind of study. There's a tower right here. I don't know of any other golf courses around a tower that's that big. [snorts] Being familiar with that, what the fallout zone is for the ice to come off of that tower as a safety

of around it. I just want to know if they've done a study on that or not of the ice falling off the tower and it does happen and it's landed out in four street before. There was actually a building over here. Previous skull scores people had that was over here was a maintenance building and ice went through the roof on that metal building. I just wonder if there's any kind of study that's been done on the ice coming off that tower. Thank you.

You just did. Jason [clears throat] Tedar. I live on Fourth Street on the other side of the county. I just have a question. So, we just approved to change this back to agricultural. Do we need to have another meeting to change it to commercial and industrial before we issue a permit to build something? That'll be a question we'll address in the rebutt.

Yeah, my name is Richard Woolly. I have a question about the total cost and the associated amount of money that might be what's what is the estimated total cost and construction is great for the county. We need all the construction all the new labor that could be provided but is there a cost estimate on the whole development as far as what your expectations are? Also, is there ever a construction bond that might be set aside to make sure fulfillment is occurred as far as all the planning? Maybe a construction loan bond by some insurance company that make sure everything is paid for or they adhere to the rules and regs. Do they have a does the commission have any idea what the exact estimated cost will be on the development? Thank you. My name [clears throat] my name is Kesha Bina. I live at the N66006 North Victory. And as much as I want to support something like this in our county because I am a small business owner in Reno County, the project has not gotten off to a great start with me. I was first informed that um [clears throat] that all those land all the properties were marked as abandoned and were not even

supposed to live there as the guys were invading my land to rip things apart. Um we've picked up 37 nails in two vehicles in a month to where we have had to detour our path just so we can make it into town. We are I got up last week to 100 foot long flames that were taller than my house. And yes, we have PTSD. We lost everything three and a half years ago. That is a traumatizing day. Our neighbor passed away trying to get out of those 12 foot wide roads. And that it brings me to another thing. Victory is not considered a road. So all the damage they've done, my husband and I are footing the bill to repair that road because we are the only ones that deal with the road of victory. The township doesn't send their big tractors down that road. My husband bought a skid steer just for the sole purpose. So we are repeatedly having to take care of this now. So there has been ongoing issues that I do not support this.

Any other comments? [clears throat] [clears throat] First off, I agree with the question on the sewage and the fresh water there next to it. And then on the Can we have your name, please?

Wayne Anderson. I'm sorry. Uh the next thing on uh your turn off off of Beer Haven 313 lets out about 3:00 and there'll be a traffic from 4:00 which that probably won't be near as much as at Prairie Dune. So, I don't know be a problem, but in case some of you aren't close, I know you and president used to live up my neighborhood. But I I don't really appreciate how they went to inform us about the water usage. He sounded to me like they was out after every ounce of water they could get and they was going to get it one way or the other. And two of you have lived in the sand hills and I imagine more of you have. Uh they need to rethink it. I hope you rethink it very deeply on the water usage and how they use it. [clears throat] Any other comments? Does the applicant wish to rebut any of the statements that were made?

Technical side things. [snorts] Yeah. No, we're good. All right. Okay. Staff, do you have any any additional or any rebuttal?

No rebuttal on on the staff report or any some of the comments here. Uh I was trying to address I think here uh regarding the the comment about another hearing to change the the zoning to commercial and industrial. We we do not have commercial and industrial zoning districts in Reno County. And so this is the public hearing to permit potentially all of the land uses that they are proposing right now. There is no uh reszone to to commercial or industrial districts in in Reno County. Everything is strictly agg or it's going to be zoned residential and you do a conditional use permit. Uh, regarding the other comment, uh, the total cost of development has not been provided to staff. Uh, nor is it really any of our business. We're in the business of of land use. Uh, we don't get into how much a project costs. That's something that's private and we don't need to know that. We're interested in the land use. Uh, construction bonds, there's really no public infrastructure going in. It's all private private roads and and so there's no need for for those either. So, um, that's all the comments I have on on that, I think.

Thank you. Does this commission have any further questions for the applicant [clears throat] thing, you know, is, you know, 25 spaces around the cart storage, like I said, I assume that's for employees. And is that do you have an estimate of the number of employees that will be on site at any one time? Yeah, we feel that um we have we have sufficient parking at the maintenance facility for all the employees that we'll have near the clubhouse is there or well I think the 25 is referred to down here and that that's not the cart storage building that's the maintenance facility.

Okay. And we feel that's sufficient. Yeah, that's sufficient. And then any overflow of employees would be up where your guest parking is. Correct. Correct. So the staff at the clubhouse will have parking somewhere surrounding the clubhouse. The 200 stalls just in those 200 stalls will satisfy that. Okay. All right. [clears throat]

I'm sorry. Could I ask is there So, you're building something along the pit there, like a maintenance building or something. You said where the parking was? Yeah. Off of 4th Avenue. Where that pit is? You're going to have buildings there? No. No. Along the road there. And there's not going to be any other I'm sorry, Sandy Brooks. I live out there across on Four Streets. No uh entrance east of the tower area. There's no entrance into the place that way. No, no, no entrance past the tower property. Is that golf course there? Is that what that is? Golf course that goes all the way down there. [clears throat]

The guys that work on the builders and stuff. That's

Any other questions for for the applicant or staff? I [clears throat] guess I would just have one observation that they might consider doing a better job of uh working with their subcontractors to maintain the roadways around the construction area. It sounds like, you know, people are talking about a lot of flat tires and thing and I know that's very very aggravating and whatnot and you know any of these large brush pile burns, you know, I've seen those and I know they're they can be disturbing and just maybe providing the neighbors that there's going to advanced notice of that so they're not alarmed would [snorts] be a good neighborly gesture, so to speak. Well, I've got one last minute question. Um, down there on Fourth Street, there's that area for employee housing, but I think in the written testimony, it's not planned on being built at this time.

Correct. It's not we we have no plans to build that. Okay. So, if we if we approve the site plan as it stands tonight and hypothetically you want to go back and fill that in later, um like what size of a building or or how many people do you expect to be living on site?

Well, we hadn't even got that far. We we had it in there as a placeholder if if that's something we thought uh that we may want to do, but the owner has indicated this time that not something that he wants to pursue. Got [cough] [clears throat] a question for the applicant on the KDHE. Are they aware of I think there was mention about the flooding possibility. Are they aware of that making provisions? [clears throat]

Yeah, they they would make a make us at least show that it's not in a flood plane. If it's localized flooding, that's sometimes difficult. But the uh the lagoon should have bmed burnmed edges so that water does not get in. Uh no rain water enters the facility. It also can throw off all of the things that a lagoon is trying to do with your uh bod trying to treat the water. If rain water is getting into your system, then usually your cultures and everything get thrown off. So that's a big deal to say to allow it to get flooded. So we're going to uh KDH is going to require us to basically prove without a shadow of doubt that it's not being flooded. um or else it doesn't function.

Uh a suggestion for the applicant, you do need to figure out the ice pattern fall off of that tower. Yeah. Yeah. And I I grew up at 15 North Victory, so nearby. I was on I I guess I think that the property line would kind of try to encompass that, but I guess I don't. Quarter mile radius of the tower. Well, I mean just for the protection of anything you're building around. That's probably a good thing. But thanks, Don. Any other questions for the applicant or staff? You have a I don't know if it's a good question. Do you have a time frame uh established at this point yet or? [clears throat]

No. Uh no, we have some goals, but we don't have we don't have the entire time frame laid out yet. We we do plan to start construction soon uh this year, this this or winter and spring uh to start construction on the first golf course. [snorts]

Well, I would uh I would like to thank those who made comments. I thought there were some really uh good comments made and I hope that the developers ears were listening. I thought there were some some really important [clears throat] uh suggestions. [snorts] Uh water is is on my mind. I know a couple of you mentioned water. Uh I I have lived in the sand hills and water in the sand does not behave like water elsewhere. And so, uh, I understand the concern about the the compromising of the sanitation, uh, holding pond there as well as other areas. I don't know what the, you know, that's a beautiful property and it's got highs and lows and, uh, sand is quite interesting when it comes to water. So uh but the use of the water I guess [clears throat] I have to defer to the experts in that field and is that the Kansas Department of Health and Environment the Department of Water Resources or Department of Agriculture? There's they're kind of they both kind of handle water. It's a double check, but [clears throat] KDA or DWR would be your two contacts. And we've already been in contact with them to confirm the existing water rights and make sure we're understanding uh our usage and what we can legally

and again sand and trying to have nice I can't imagine trying to to groom a golf course in these sand hills and the amount of water that it's [clears throat] going to take. So, I do have that concern. I really do. and uh you know the a community has started learning about water and and how to manage it. So uh I I hope I I'm just relying on the experts in the field to make sure the water rates are used correctly.

You said you'd contacted the city about possibility of city water. Is that a quantity issue or a quality issue? uh to speak to

I think it it's a combination of things. Uh we we would like it for fire protection uh to come out to the site. Um we'd like it for backup water in case uh you know in in a drought period uh for the golf course and [snorts] uh but also that we we don't want to manage uh drinking water on site for for guests and we'd rather that that was uh treated city water. Don, is that a is that a common thing in Reno County where the city's providing water to a large customer out what five miles outside of the city limits? Uh, I don't know that it no, but but they're in negotiation on how that would all work, too. So, I don't it's possible the city can provide water wherever they want to. Whether annexed or not annexed. I'm sure that part of the negotiation is the cost of a very expensive line running out there, but that's between them and the city. [clears throat]

Is there any rural water out there? How far away is the nearest?

I don't know of any rule water out there. Nothing at all. Water. Any other questions? Alan Harland Steve. [clears throat] Okay. Seeing none, the public hearing is now closed. Acceptance of or denial of a reason of this conditional use permit must be based on the factors that were listed in the staff report and found on the audience chairs. This is a time the planning commission can discuss the case and ask procedural questions of staff only. There a lot of information this evening about this case. Is there any any any other discussion we need to have about this? I I guess the the thought that entered my mind was the entrance there and the viewer Haven Road and the traffic going out there and being able to safely enter the road from this new property or safely enter the road, exit or enter it. And uh you use the word turn lanes to get turned in there. I I don't have an opinion. I just say that enters my mind as a possible concern.

This guy next to you is expertise. Well, I don't know if that'd be any greater than Prairie Dunes, and it surely is not going to be as much as the school coming out on 30th on the east side of 61. And that's too lane, [clears throat] but that's something we need to see what it's going to prevail. I don't know.

Any other discussion? I see a bunch of different road widths in the staff [clears throat] report and kind of what we've heard tonight and testimony. Is there is there any feeling from the other members of the commission on on where we should go as far as defining access? Are are we happy with the minimums provided? 24 piece I think is probably adequate. Yeah, because I guess that'll handle two-way traffic with emergency equipment. Are we happy with a 12 or 20 for the secondary access? 12 in the in there's 12 in here. And then we heard

20 20 verbally would probably be better for me than would be the 12. That's what I was thinking that service road basically is what you're talking about, right? Yeah. Yeah, I agree. I think would probably be better. Well, because we have had comments tonight about access to other developments out in the sand hills and I think that's a concern. It's something that we could take care of now instead of having to worry about 10 or 20 years down the road. I was in one item four of the conditions. Do we need to amend that? Make that make that a 20 for the secondary. 20 white. Yeah,

I would be okay with that. Is that the consensus of the board? this factory.

Okay. [clears throat] Any other discussion? Seeing none, uh, chair will entertain a motion on this case. Mr. Chairman, I'll make the motion. Uh, do I need to to refer to the 12 to 20 foot change that we've proposed? I'd say that you could probably bring that up as as one of the changes of the conditions of item 4 to 20.

Okay. I would uh move that case number 2025-12 the request by 2641 WMaker LLC requesting a conditional use permit from the Reno County zoning regulations to establish a golf course resort on two parcels of land zoned a agricultural district be approved based on the 10 factors and eight conditions of approval listed in the staff report and as heard at this public hearing. I further move to grant a waiver from the loading space requirement and the parking stall requirement for the maintenance facility and lodge buildings and would note the change in condition number four uh changing 12 ft to 20 ft.

Second.

Been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? I guess I felt like there was there are a number of things that are not exactly nailed down and I don't know that it's different than in any other large development, but it makes me a little nervous as someone who who made a motion to proceed uh knowing that there's some wiggle room and So, I guess I'm uh uh saying this to um [cough] staff that I think uh there's some need for a little uh a fair amount of followup to make sure that uh what has been spoken here tonight and committed to actually happens. I would guess I would just ask that, you know, this is a a major project that is going to have a, you know, an impact on the surrounding property owners for some time during its construction. And I ask that the applicant be mindful of that and do what they can to mitigate uh any impact on those neighbors.

Water seems to be a big on the mind. Yep. It is uh agriculturally they're they're tied to the deepest of of requirements to be good stewards of that natural resource. And I admonish to the developer that they they hold to those same standards that they don't they don't waste that drop of water because it is a very very critical resource that goes into golf course designation methods and like farmers are putting in underground irrigation system [clears throat]

whatever. So it's a you can do the minimize the usage is good. Nobody wants to drive. Nobody wants a drive. Well, nobody wants one second either. [clears throat]

I guess I would be remiss if I didn't uh say thank you to those who are investing and working on this project. This is a gentleman from uh Wells mentioned it's a substantial impact to a positive impact to Reno County in terms of uh money and money turning over. So, we appreciate uh the willingness to make an investment in Reno County and we want it to be the best that it can be and for those who come here to use it to be safe and enjoy Reno County and for those who have to live around it. Uh I would ask that you be good neighbors.

Any other comments on this motion? I call for the previous question. Staff, will you please call the role? Nisley, [clears throat] yes. Stran, yes. Schaefer, yes. Seltzer, yes. Mlin, yes. Martin, yes. And Gson, yes. Motion carries.

Okay. Thank you for all that presented. Thank you for all those that have commented. Appreciate your time. Appreciate your opinions. We're going to take a short break in between the next few items. Next item. We going to return. We will return in five minutes.

pull her back all we'll rain her back in and we'll go back to work. Uh we've got uh

one more item on the on one item on the agenda is uh item F case 2025.10 a proposed zoning text amendment to amend or create articles regarding telecommunication towers additional units manufactured homes shipping containers and there's a list of proposed text amendments. I'll just I won't read through every one of those. We we've worked through all of those ourselves so we kind of know where we're at. staff, you want to kind of give us background and go go from there. It's been a few months board since we discussed this, but as you recall back in November's meeting, we uh felt these text amendments were sufficient enough to set a public hearing date and you set the public hearing date for tonight. After we reviewed this document and after you conceptually approved of it, I was going back and reviewing it and I noticed a what I believe was is a conflict as I had noted in my short memo to to the board regarding the uh shipping containers and we had a lot of discussion on shipping containers in the A and in the residential and I think we finally landed uh upon you we're going to allow uh for shipping containers but in looking at that the board said that they wanted to do a conditional use permit if you go beyond four shipping containers in the egg. I don't believe that that was the intent o of the board and nor do I believe that we should maybe burden the county commission with having to approve a conditional use permit to go above four shipping containers. I believe it's better served if we leave it at the BZA level where the BZA will review if somebody wants to have additional shipping containers and what's permitted by the regulations and the fact that if you go and turn to the section in the regulations in the

residential zoning district it does reference BCA. So I believe there's a conflict. I changed it against what you had initially approved because I felt like you initially wanted to do the BCA, but I missed it and I think the board maybe missed it as well. Um, I can certainly change it back if it's the will of the board to have it as a conditional use, but I [snorts] believe that uh staff should have it as a BCA case and not if you want it back as a conditional use, but then we got a change in the residential zoning issue. But as you had said, Mr. chair, you know, this is a um a request on telecommunication towers where if you meet certain criteria that we have established in the regulations, then cell towers will be permitted by right and not require a conditional use permit. That was based mainly on the fact that state legislature and has really taken a lot of our review authority away. That the only thing that we have to review anymore are setbacks and fencing. you know, lights, collocation, um, need, all those things that we would typically review are now not in our realm to be able to review. Question.

I thought the gentleman's comment about the ice falling was pretty valid. Yeah. And and I don't recall that we ever had that thought.

We don't do a lot of guide towers, but yeah, we don't have anything with um in the regular discussion about ice or so. But to say that though, that's why we have the 1:1 setback ratio height of the tower to a property line. So if there is, you know, a situation where you have ice falling off the guy towers or even at the top of the tower, the the goal behind that would be that it would fall on the person's property. If it's falls on his own buildings, well, that's something that that property owner has to to take into consideration when he's allowing a cell tower company to put a tower on his property. They're not 1200 ft tall, right?

Well, fault. Yeah, those those are some pretty uh unique circumstances in the fact that how those were placed. I think too, what in the previous case,

how they how they did not have how close they are to the road, those types of things. The ice situation did come up, I believe, many years ago with actually that tower out there and the Cottonwood Hills development because ice is is a valid concern, a very valid concern on on guy towers. They they accumulate on on the guy wires out there and then start melting then wind eventually blow it off. It could blow off several large sheets, you know, that could do damage to a person's property. Um the one other the one other uh situation that I I wanted to bring up um it was I'm getting more and more calls about doing ADUs and I've told them that we are actually proposing an amendment to allow an additional dwelling on a property and I had a situation come up somebody's interested in at I tried to find I'm not quite at that regulation yet, but the the wordage talks about the ADU has to be adjacent to or behind the primary residence. Yeah. So question and you know and I discussed this with Don a little bit too so he knows what I'm going to going to say is is there a distance the ADU has to be from the primary residence or can adjacent be 300 500 600 ft away from the primary residence or was the intent of the board to say adjacent to needs to be 100 ft or less 200 ft or less [snorts] or like you know picture your own properties for example you know if you've if you've got a a property with a lot of of frontage

your house is on the west side of your property and you got 900 ft of frontage can the other house be on the opposite side of the property then is that considered adjacent to you know even or behind I was thinking you know adjacent in my mind and I you're right we probably need a number and that's going to be a hard one to that's going to be a hard one to nail down. But adjacent to me was it kind of played into health and environment if that new if that ADU needed a separate septic. Yeah.

That the that the health environment could could help us determine that if it's on a certain size lot and if they were tying into existing septic, it would also determine adjacent. So [snorts] you you're throwing you're throwing us a curveball.

I am I am throwing the curveball and and I apologize to the board for that. And the reason I'm doing that because this actually occurred after I even wrote the memo and sent this to to the board, you know, for and I would say most cases, and correct me if I'm wrong, you know, the the ADU is going to be for, you know, a family member and they're going to want to share the wastewater system and not put a separate in. This is a situation potentially where the cabin, the ADU is going to be five, 600, 700 feet away from another wastewater system. So, they're not going to want to run a line all the way to the other one. They may want to just put their own waste water in. So, I just want to make sure that I'm clear and that this board is clear on what adjacent. Now, as it reads, adjacent to is unlimited distance. you know, adjacent to could be 50 feet or adjacent to could be 700 feet so long as it's even or behind the existing primary residence.

So, in this case, it may be 700 ft behind, but it's sharing utilities with the principal dwelling, single single electrical meter, single single meter. Yeah, there's and there's that consideration too because I think that would provide a natural limit if you have to share an entrance and share utilities and share a street address. Right. Now, does uh does emergency management have a problem with a residents being 700 ft away from a different residence and sharing the same street address? It could be a bike path to there for all we know. Yeah, it could. Well, and if you have So, if you have a 911 call come in to 123 East 43rd. Yeah. But you know, you're plus or minus 700 ft. Yeah.

If we're sharing an address, sharing driveway, the whole sharing the driveway, sharing an address, they're pulling in, somebody's having a heart attack, but knocking on the wrong door should be the other door. And the door is an eighth of a mile or a quarter mile away. So that's I I guess in my mind if it has to share utilities, entrance, and address that there should be a a natural limit to how far that sharing goes.

And and I agree. Uh, I think that is a natural maybe limitation, but I just want to be as transparent as I can with the board here and say this is the scenario that's come up. Yeah. You know, you're going to have two dwellings 500, 600 ft, 700 ft away, share an address. Um, if they don't want that situation, then it's not classified as an ADU. It's classified as a second dwelling, in which case you need to do a lot split and meet all those regulations. But sorry for the curveball as you as you had said. I just wanted to point that out that that's another scenario that maybe I hadn't thought of. So, we maybe should have better defined it, but So, we can we can put that in the into the into the regulations tonight, can we? Can we not? We

still can that that's why I brought it up because we still have that opportunity, you know, to do that if we feel there's a need. I like Allen's points a lot where I think there might be enough u regulation in place where it would prevent [clears throat] that scenario potentially. You say the same utilities though that include septic. Mhm. No, it would be like mainly gas or whatever. So, are they laying a 700t water line from their well or from the house to the second house? I haven't heard back from the I was actually talking to the surveyor about that. So, I have not had communication with the with the owner, but this is just a scenario that

it is it's kind of like the last one. They're talking about going 5 miles for public water here, like 700 ft to a private well. These are all very large numbers with large price tags. Right. Right. So, I I don't know if it's going to be an issue. I just want to make sure you're clear and I'm clear that adjacent could be 50 ft be 500T. Are there county regulations on addressing? No, we have no address ordinance whatsoever that that guides me on how to assign an address or or when to assign an address.

So in that case then you got your two houses 700 ft apart on a parcel. All right. What's the address and where does the point go for the pap? Way I do it is right now the address is based off of your driveway [snorts] and then I put the address point on the house where it is. So So in this case it would be on the principal house. Principal house. So if you got a call for service from guy 700 ft in the bank there might be you have to be able to be able to direct them to direct to the other house that has the same address. They want a separate address or separate utilities that's not ADU. So

what about the restrictive deed issue? Can the ADU cannot be sold separately? Uh can you talk through that? That's just I mean, if we allow something to be a long way away, it seems like it almost would invite being sold off as a separate uh residence.

Yes. Uh in the scenario that I'm I'm thinking about though, uh this person would not be able to split the ground because they don't have enough acreage to create a new parcel with a new address. So that's one of the things where it got me to thinking, okay, this person has 4 and a half acres, zoned R1, minimum is 3 acres, and so this person is unable to split their ground off under that zoning district and create a separate buildable parcel. So his only option is the ADU. And so then at that point in time, what is adjacent? adjacent is where this person say would want his additional dwelling could be 5 6 700 ft away.

My my shop is adjacent to my house and it's about 75 ft away. Mhm. Yeah, that's what I think of as I'm I'm I'm thinking okay put a qualifier in 150 ft max. Yeah. Yeah. Why? I don't know just for a number. Well, well, the issue that

one Well, the re one reason, Don, is I think just to Mark's point, you're protecting that land owner from a sellable parcel there. If they put that ADU out there, that parcel becomes pretty big that they that the I mean, if they of course this one is non-separable anyhow, that doesn't play in. Is there like a topographical reason why in this hypothetical maybe not so much scenario that the distance is so great or is it just a desire to be together separately? It's just from what I was told where they wanted the second dwelling was a pretty substantial distance away from where the principal

they've got they've got a pond in the pasture that they want to put an ADU around and it's 700 ft from the greenhouse cabin up you know like you said and I don't I would think I would think as a practical matter it would be challenging and cost prohibitive to meet the regulations as we write it. Yeah. Yeah. [clears throat] Like you said, money is no object. That is true. Do we I guess do we really care? Do we care if they have a 700 ft water line running from their well? No. And they have a personal sewer lift pump that shuts their sewage.

We do state that the ADU cannot be sold separately from the principal dwelling. So they're they're create they're creating their own their their own piece of ground. So adjacent might be a good enough definition because all of a sudden we start writing about adjacent to ADUs. Then we're going to say adjacent to shops and then we're going to stay adjacent to barns and we're going to say adjacent to

100 ft and then somebody for whatever reason they want to be 125 and now we're doing a variance. Yes, because they want to put it behind a shop instead of, you know, I'm thinking of my place. You know, if I if I would I can't think of a place close within 100 ft of my house that it would work. I'd have to be I'd have to be outside of that. Then we got to come in for like you say for variance and that creates a whole different can of worms. and we're doing we're back to you know special exceptions for sheds like we did and so you know that'll happen I just want to make sure I have seven people on this board that understand what that regulation is and you

well I I think you know where we we've got that covered down there where it says you can't sell it separately unless you go ahead and do subdivision yeah and then I mean that share and the water and electrical will have to goes away goes away that [clears throat] goes away then cut it put your own in and the two and the single drive goes away. Yeah, they'll have to figure a different but that's a whole but as long as they're following these regulations, we're not adding driveways. We're not adding utilities. We're not we're just putting a tea in the water line and add another junction on the water. And if somebody wants to leave 700 ft of water line and put their own sewer lift pump in there,

I think Jason probably defines it good enough for me. Before I think about it, I'm going, "Yeah, Jason's fine. It's in my mind." Okay, because I'm like, "Okay, what's the definition of adjacent?" It's like, I went to him. We had a discussion. Now, come to you. That That brings a different thought. Do we need to do we need to define adjacent in the definitions? No, I don't think because it just can't be in front of the house. Can't be in front of

Because we've already done that somewhat, haven't we? Yeah. Done. And see, I think you're doing what I do. In my mind, adjacent is a fine a defined number 100 foot. You know, it is something adjacent to another thing if it's 700 ft away. You know, in my mind, no. I had this discussion and argument with Don here and it's pretty lengthy and stuff. So, but the way it reads, I think we've got enough natural limitations and it's just going to be one parcel. An ADU by definition is one parcel, right?

So, we can I do too. I just wanted to make sure that I was I was doing your intent here and stuff. It always comes up, you know, you never know if the regulation is good until you start putting it in action here when somebody requests something and then you start looking at it, you know, deeper. Um, to your question, go ahead. Uh yeah, I'm thinking back to our golf course people and we had concern expressed by the fire department about access to, you know, road with access to these lodges. Well, in essence, we've got the same situation here. Uh if if I'm trying to get a fire truck to the ADU, which is 700 ft back in the pasture, do we do we need to try to address that?

That's really a property owner. They need to be aware of that of that situation. I mean, I know we can't bring everything. Would that be part of your conversation you have with them when you do the when you give them the permit? Sure. As long as I'm here. Yes. I mean, I I bring stuff like this up all the time to people and because they don't think about that that scenario if they're putting a small cabin on their pond way in the back. You they don't think about what happens if I have a situation, you know, and getting a fire truck, an ambulance back there. And so I have those conversations with with people. You had talked about

the um what the deed restriction. the deed restriction is as like an added safeguard to future owners of that property that's okay I like this property here and I like the house but you know on down the line I don't want to uh necessarily you know have a second residence on my property and pay those property taxes so I'd like to be able to split that off well if they're doing the research you know at the deed's office and they see that type of deed restriction hopefully that'll generate a a conversation with me uh to say, "Hey, do I have the ability to split this house off?" And at that point in time, I'll be able to discuss with that owner whether it's possible or not possible and help them make that decision on whether to purchase that property or they, you know, for lack of a better term, stuck with two houses on that property. So, that's why we we go that route. Let's go back to the shipping containers. Thoughts on that? Leave it with the BZA and leave it as I have written.

That's good. Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. I I think we just wanted to set a limit before where it's applicable by right right now. I I think it's appropriate to have the DZA. I don't want to burden the commission, county commission, you know, with a conditional use permit to have six shipping containers instead of four. Are they hopefully we have few and far between something like that, but that I believe is something that can definitely stay down at the BZA level and not rise up to the county commission.

How many shipping containers can the Salt Lake golf course have? egg. And so they could have their four. They want more than four once this is passed. Now, right now, if if we're talking the here and now, we don't they can have stack them in like court would.

Yeah. They can have as many as they want. If this passes as as presented, then they can have four if they want more for some reason than BCA. But yeah, we don't regulate them in the egg district. It's only in the residential districts. Is there something in there about temporary use of ship containers? There is not a construction project of some kind a temporary use. Okay.

Yes. Then the R1 R1 R2 one shipping container is permitted by ride more than that has to come through. [clears throat] You don't like temporary stuff. It's like, oh, I just want a temporary building on my property. Well, what's the definition of temporary and how do you monitor that? And temporary is forever and it never goes away when like Yeah. Before you know it, we're going to be we'll be wanting to regulate the big red boxes nicely set on the property to do, you know, the [snorts] big trash container. Yep. Yep. So, why do we want to do that? Why do we want to do two?

It's either yes or no. If it if it goes away, great. If it doesn't, it's permitted to stay there forever. Well, and if they want to have a large amount for construction purposes, that's probably something that should come up during the conditional use permit process, shouldn't it? Yeah. for a for a business. Yes. For a business. For a business. Correct. Like the previous public, you know, if they're going to stack a hundred construction trailer and containers alongside all their neighbors, that's probably something that we got. Very good. Okay. I think you're done. All right. Good. Put it up for audience comments.

Yes. You got any audience comments? Come on. Do I have to go up there? Yes, you do. We're We We play by the rules every chance we get here. We We don't always play by the rules, but we got it in this one. Like, uhoh, she's not at all.

We're not here for the previous Yeah. Okay. Uh Margie Westfall. Um, even I I may have missed this, but it I and if it's in there, just I apologize. Is there a a definition for shipping container anywhere in your new Yeah, there was. Okay, I believe interotal freight containers constructor. Yeah, interotal freight container. I think that's what it was installed. Yeah.

We may not have had an official definition, but that's what the regulations say. It's in if it's in our definition section. Have you It would be in article one of the definitions. I don't see an interal. Do you have a Greg's? I didn't bring mine.

Alan's looking. I I can look it up. It'd be quicker if you do it. I don't know if it'll be quicker if I do it or not. Article one under the definitions. Let's try to find it. I'm digging. See who's ask my book out. All right. So, that's that's right at the beginning. I know. Well, the problem is somebody's thrown years of notes just randomly in here. [laughter] You don't have binder like Russ does. No, I'm not a pro. I'm just an on That's a good That's probably a good catch, Maral shipping container. I do not.

So, so I have a definition. You do? I mean it typically if it's not in I looked it up. If it's not in the regulation, we would just defer to Webster's dictionary. I I did I is that what you have? Okay. That's that's usually the way it work. If something isn't defined in the reg, we just refer to the common definition in the west area. So getting back to that what Google and Duck Duck Go said. Yeah,

it's a large standardized reusable steel box used to transport goods globally via ship, rail and truck enabling seamless interotal freight movement without unloading the cargo but you know whatever. Now, the reason I was asking that, um, I'm going to try to be real delicate about this because I don't want to throw anybody under the bus, but I'm going to use this as a scenario. Um, the railroad cars that you've probably seen around the county.

Yes. Those would be shipping containers, right? Okay. So [clears throat] I was going to say would they if they're not a if it's like a rail car because it's not a standard inter modal. Well if that your definition unless you change the definition I mean I would be very specific on your definition of a shipping container. That's because would a if it's a rail car that is that considered a vehicle? I mean, they were built with wheels. Well, if they take the wheels off, take the wheels off. So, the wheels the wheels are off of these. Well, it's a big metal box, right?

Well, I think the inner modal design is to me is the break point because those those are specifically designed for use on on multiple platforms, rail, car, ship, [snorts] highway, ship. Yeah. That's kind of why we added that that inner modal instead of just saying shipping container like everybody thinks what a shipping container is. That's why we added the inner modal freight containers. Disagree. I I'm just bringing this up. Yeah. No, that's good. So, good point. You know, yeah. So, is a shipping container than anything that is a box that you can ship stuff in. That was built to ship stuff in. Semi-trailers. Semi-trailers.

Yeah. If you take the wheels off, take the wheels off. Or semi-trailers, they just jack them up on blocks and set them out there or turn them into an Airbnb. Turn them into an Airbnb. Railroad cars. Yeah. Yep. Is that a shipping container? Not at that point because it's a house. At that point, it'd be a house. If it's going to be a if it's going to be if you're going to reside in it. Yeah. I know there's some out there cuz you can build a house out of anything right now. containers, but an Airbnb is a rental for Yes. temporary rental. So that that is just that's a commercial use. So it's got to be [laughter]

you want to build an Airbnb out of shipping containers, Margie. No, we've got too much crap in ours [laughter] and they were there long before I came on the scene. So they're they're No. Right now we don't regulate Airbnbs. a lot of counties and or cities are, which I don't know how we would do. We don't regulate it right now. Well, when when you were talking about shipping containers, I thought, okay, does that are the railroad cars that are being turned into Airbnbs? Are those your shipping containers?

Well, those are going to fall under other regulations though for temporary lodging. you know, they're rented out, you know, I can't remember what the regul rented out so much then they have to meet certain requirements, right? You know, it's more stringent as the more they're rented. Do we have short-term rental regulations? We don't have anything like that. So, a residence is a residence in Reno County. Residence is a I mean, a lot, like I said, a lot of counties and a lot and more cities are beginning to regulate and I've had calls from cities and counties want to know what our regs are. And right now, we don't regulate Airbnbs. I mean that there's thousands of them. So once that rail car gets turned into a house, it's treated the same as a house built

ranch, right? [snorts] There's bedrooms and kitchens and bathrooms and Yeah. You take three shipping containers, make them into a house. They're not shipping containers anymore. Right. Another house. That That's I was just asking what the definition of your Okay. Very good. I didn't. That's it. Thank you, Morgan. [clears throat]

Any other discussion? No more comments. Last chance. Any other comments on the text amendments? Chair will entertain a motion. Chair, I move that case 2025-10, the request by the planning commission requesting a series of text amendments to articles 1- 6, article 9, article 14 to 15 of the zoning regulations be approved as presented in the staff report and as heard at this public hearing. Second.

Moved and seconded. Is there any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, staff, please call the role. Nicely. Yes. Gran, yes. Baker, yes. Yes. Mlin, yes. Martin, yes. Motion carries. Are there any other items of business need to be brought before this board? staff or project. Well, that's a good question. Mark and I were talking about that earlier prior to the meeting. There are there aren't any any cases to be heard in February.

No public hearing scheduled for February. We could potentially have a couple more cases for March if they uh get their materials to me. Nothing in February at this point in time. Definitely. So, so one suggestion would be to revisit the list that we made in December. Just kind of brush that up and determine a priority. I don't know if we want to meet just for that or if there's some discussion that will ensue. If you want to wait till March to do that, do you want to do you know what's what's the what's the flavor of the board here?

Does staff have a preference of a burning topic that we need to get going on sooner rather than later? Um, they're all burning topics, I guess. I No, I I don't like I' I've mentioned before, you know, home occupations, uh, subdivision regulations and answering the question of private road or public road and the requirement that you develop eight residential lots when you reszone from a to residential. I mean, that's something that I think in my mind, I guess if I have to declare, I would say that's probably my hot topic right now. We just did three waiverss for parking and loading dock requirements. You know, again, we always do those. I'm tired of putting them in staff reports. I know you're tired of granting them and stuff. And so that's something that I think we can also look at. But uh and then whatever else this board wants to discuss. But I mean if you want we could have a hourlong discussion and start that topic. I don't know if I'll be able to get you any kind of draft in time since I have three cases I need to get going. But uh we can certainly try. Why why don't if that's all right with everyone, we'll meet in February and we'll get our priority list done. Okay.

And that will give you kind of the marching orders because right now you're just kind of shooting at the wall with a shotgun. You kind of want to get a little bit more laser focused with what you want to work on. So let's let's get a let's meet briefly on in February. Okay. Get our priority list. Maybe short discussion on what that list looks like, what we're what we're thoughts, what our initial thoughts are, and then you've [clears throat] got direction for future meetings. Maybe we can keep that list down to three or four time items this time instead of, you know, 10 or 12 like we just did. [laughter] There you go. Uh, yeah. So, what does this board need from me then for February? I think just that list. You might just share the list that we Yeah, please

share that list again. I know I've got notes. I've got to go back and review them, but it would be it would be good to have your official list and then we could work off of that. I have a hard time finding what my other Okay. Yeah, I didn't send it the last previous time we started discussion, but I can certainly I have it. I can share it. Okay.

So, it'll be a short packet this time. We're in February, so we do have a few quick comments. Um, I was struck on this golf course project going through the information and we have regulation about how wide the strip should be for a parking spot and how big the parking spot should be. But we've got 30 people sleeping in a a lodge and we have no requirements for any kind of safety issues. that that really bothered me. I asked a question and I hope that the answer is true that they they will have fire suppression. I don't know if that comes from the state fire marshall or or who if there's any such a thing, but it did strike me that we care about the width of a stripe on a parking lot, but

uh not 30 people. a lot of has to do with building codes, which we don't have building codes in in the county. But, you know, also then just because there's no building code doesn't mean that they don't have to meet other state requirements such as you mentioned fire marshall. I can tell you there's a few projects that we've done in the past where here's your permit, go ahead and start building and all of a sudden the fire marshall shows up at at the door and say you have to do X Y and Z for your commercial building for example. So there are some state fire regulations that people have to uh abide by especially for commercial development or places of assembly. So there's things like that and that goes through Hutch fire department. So when I send notices to these hearings, they get a copy of the things things that you get and so they're able to make contact with those property owners and and do inspections meeting state fire code requirements. But other things like that, we don't have it in our zoning regulations to be able to to mandate sprinklers or other types of safety issues, unfortunately. And that that comes with codes. So, and my other comment is I mentioned it uh at the end of the public hearing. Uh I did feel like there's a a lot of wiggle room in this project as presented and as I read through uh the developers report that, you know, we're working on this, we're considering this, uh there's a lot of that uh commentary in there. And I know that you are pretty much a a one-man band when it comes to zoning. And so, okay, who's going to who's going to go check on this these wiggle room things and make sure that this is the way we talked about tonight? Yeah, I mean I I know you have limited

capacity, but if we're going to do these large projects, I feel like enforcement or at least checking on progress ought to be happening somehow. Well, that's why you see some pretty general conditions of approval and and something that you can quantify like paving of the road, paving of buler that's in the regs now. Okay. Uh now you you've mandated that you want a 20 foot wide access road on the south side. Those are easy to to be able to check and verify. So, um, but part of it is they, this is obviously a huge project and we don't care about dollar amount. It's obvious that this is going to be, you know, big for them. They don't want to go forward too far until they have some asurances that they have the approval to do that project, you know, as well. You're not going to start investing. You're not going to go and and get an approval from KD for this giant lagoon system here that's thousands of dollars in design until they have some assurances that the project can now go forward. So, there's some of that.

I understand that. But then after tonight, it feels like we're just relying on their personal credibility and trustworthiness to follow through on what what we talked about. It goes back or maybe just a, you know, from a complaint basis if they put up a we're approving a land use without overseeing it, right? You know, saying that that that land use is suitable for the zoning and everything else that's there.

I mean, we'll rely on other staff, county staff, you know, emergency management people, our environmental staff, you know, they they'll keep tabs on that, I'm sure, here. and the conditions that were put in place, you know, the must meet all applicable federal, state, and local regulations. If I get word from KD, KDA, they don't have the right water rights or the water rights are forfeit or whatever the case may be. Well, they're going to have to figure that out or that's grounds to resend the conditional use permit. So there's there's some protections, but it's not really specific, but we have those those boilerplate statements that we always have as conditions of approval to help us make sure that this project is going to be developed as they testify tonight.

We're relying on KDH and State Department of, you know, who what or whoever, and they're thinking, well, you you our local guys, boots on the ground. We're relying on you to at least call us and say, hey, we don't think this is right.

Right. And we do that. we communicate with them, but they they'll communicate with us as well and stuff. They'll say, "Hey, yeah, we don't, you know, we don't have a permit for this yet." So, yeah, I don't I don't I I understand the concern, but yeah, I don't think it's something to be too terribly worried about. I mean, they know what they they know what they have to do, and there's people who will be following up on that. So, because I I'm going to hold the permits until I have something that I know is tangible. Yes. Okay. Yeah. We've made application to KDH. Yes, we've been working with KDA. So, thank you. Thank you.

Any questions? Anything else? Chair will entertain a motion to adjurnn. So, move a second. Second. All in favor say I.