Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We'll call the April 17 Reno County Board of Zoning Appeals meeting to order. Staff, will you please call the role? Nisa. Stran here. Schaefer here. Selzer here. Mlin here. Martin here. Gerson here. Welcome everyone. I trust that you've all had a chance to review your packets and those packets were the minutes from the February 20 BZA meeting. Chair will entertain a motion. So moved. Second move and second. Any discussion on those minutes? Seeing none, all in favor of approving those minutes say I. I. Oppos. Same sign. Minutes are [Music] approved. To ensure the rights of all parties of interest and to provide an opportunity for each party to address the board of zoning appeals and order in an orderly manning manner. The BCA will follow the factf finding procedure which is outlined in the handout and on each chair. Your attention to this procedure is appreciated. All decisions by the BCA are final. Decisions may be appealed to the district court within 30 days of the decision. If a decision is made tonight, that decision will be based upon the record of information presented to the BCA. I'll now formally open the public hearing regarding case number 2025-03, a request by Jerry and Gayen Boon for a special exception from the Reno County zoning regulations to construct a 50ftx 150 ft residential accessory building with a 10tx 50 foot covered porch and permit a total of 10,50 square ft of accessory buildings. The total square footage of all accessory buildings exceeds the 5,000 square foot maximum permitted on a parcel greater than 2.0 acres in size. The property is zoned R1 rural

residential district and R2 suburban residential district and located at 3610 East 56 Street. Has any B have any BZA members had any outside contacts regarding this case? No. No. Do any BZA members have conflict of interest in this case? No. No. Will the applicant please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. You have 10 minutes to present your case. Additional time may be allotted to the applicant at the discretion of the chair. BZA members may request clarification at the end of your presentation or may have questions. [Music] Well, thank you all for joining today and making it here. I'm humbled by the presence of our little shop expansion project that we're thinking for our residential home. Um use of of this shop is something that um I and my wife have dreamt of for for most of our adult lives is to actually have some room to keep our vehicles indoors um do some of our personal hobbies which include um an art studio for her. She's a accomplished artist. I am a a tinkerer among many things in the shop and uh automotive restoration, aircraft restoration and uh other other certain things that are of interest to me in the shop. I also um have a a 100,000 square foot business here in in Hutchinson that I conduct my commercial business in. So there's no conflict here that there would be a commercial use for this building. This is all personal hobby and residential. Um let's

see. Uh length the time the property's been vacant. This has been a residential homestead for oh the better portion of 40 years or 50 years I'd say. Um, we picked this up about 10 years ago and uh we've been slowly making improvements to the property out there in the sand hills and in this area. It's a challenge to keep the the uh trees at bay and there's a lot of lot of things working in the environment on a on a 30 acre parcel uh like this. So, um, constructing this building will help us store some of our equipment that we we maintain the property as well with. Um, so that'll be in in check as well. Um, I feel the the property is suitable for what we're using it for. Um, in in our area, there's a number of buildings that are very similar to what we have in mind here that are being used as kind of a what we call a shown these days or a shop of some sort with a metal uh skin structure and and u you know used for for a large automotive garage or or storage areas for for people that erecting these types of buildings. Um, another uh plus for our building is that it's got quite a setback from many things. Um, we're over 200 foot setback from 56th Street and uh we have quite a number of trees in between the road and where the building's to be erected, which is on purpose. We we don't necessarily want it to be seen by everybody that's driving by or or whatnot. It's kind of a private area for

us and we'd like to keep it that way. So, um let's see. Um public health and safety and welfare hardship. Um we don't really see that that the shop would would cause any concern. There was a little bit of talk of concern that we have a drainage area in this section here, which in Kansas, we're used to looking at a pretty flat parcel, you know, but out here in the sand hills, this this has some waves and bumps to it. And um this area right here is about 15 foot above the average water that we have in this runoff pond over here. So, it's quite a bit higher. and it out. It's actually higher on this ridge than Tobacco Road, which runs over here as well. So, we don't see that we're really interrupting any drainage um concerns at all with it. So, also running to the north of our pond here, there's another pond behind it that's empty that's a spillover. And then further for about another 500 ft back is lowlands that also absorb water. We can uh we realize what the flow of the water is when we look at the Google Earth image from 2019. Um we had approximately 3 ft of rain in that month of March or in that time frame of 2019 which was a really excessive amount of rain. So we we really saw uh exactly what the drainage design was made for and what it accomplished during that that type of

event. As far as uh other buildings go, um this isn't the only building on the property. We've had this small little shop since that was had a building permit uh in the '9s, I believe, and erected there. Uh it's it's fairly small, maybe a couple of cars and and stuff. We're planning to uh probably take that building down and turn that into a little greenhouse. Um and then we've got another little building up here that's that's just horse stalls. We've got uh six horses on the property and um so we we take care of storing some hay in there and some feed and things. Um we've got a couple of little outuildings here which will probably go away um with the addition of the larger space to consolidate everything into one space as well. They're just small uh garden sheds and things like that. So, and uh we did uh provide uh a list of neighbors uh within 1,00 to,200 ft of the of the site um on a list for polling and hopefully hopefully we didn't have anybody that that uh had any problems with that. Um, we do plan to put a restroom in the in the shop. It's a little ways to run to the house and back. Um, so, uh, we're planning for potentially um a septic area out in this area, which we'll be talking to, uh, um, sanitary at

some point about that. Um, we'll we'll have water in the shop as well. Um, we have a a well down here that's all that's in operation and been there for some time that we'll we're planning to trench water to run up to the shop and use and install pressure tanks and things in the shop to to have a healthy well system there. Right now, there's no pressure tank. is just on a on a switch to fill our our horse uh tanks. So, um I think that's all I have for now. Thank you for hearing. You have any questions for the applicant? Yeah, I guess I see in the pictures several vehicles around there that you indicated you've been used and maintain the property. Will all of those vehicles wind up in the in the new building? I think so. The so the you know, we've got a tractor, a utility vehicle. We've we've got an RV um here, which we're planning for an RV storage section on the end of it. So, it would go in there. Um, you know, some of the some of the other vehicles, uh, you know, we we've just moved away from them and they just need to be sold. They're running. Um, this is an aircraft trailer right here that contains a a glider sail plane and I've got a couple of those. We'd like to get those inside. So, yeah. It looks like the building would be suitable for somebody to stay overnight.

Any ever any indication you'd ever you used it for that? Uh not for us. We've got a pretty cozy house and such and we just really want to do our hobbies in it. We we did include the the porch in the front here because we have such a beautiful pond to look out on that it'd be nice for when Lynn's going to do her artwork and stuff to be able to to push out onto the patio and be inspired and create things. So, it'll be really pretty. Any other questions? Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate your time. Hear from the staff on Ain County Planner. So to help orient the board here, uh 56th Avenue is running east to west across the bottom and you got Tobacco Road on the west side and then Old K61 on the east side of the property. We're just north of the the city of Hutch if you don't quite know where this is at here. Um the little area that's zoned R2, that used to be a separate parcel with a separate uh residence on on the property. that residence has now been been moved and purchased by uh Mr. and Mrs. Boon. And so it's just been kind of combined with everything that's R1. But that's kind of the reason that little area was zoned R2. It was for no other reason than it used to be a separate parcel of ground with a with a house on that. So as you heard, this is a request to construct a 50x150 building with a 10x50 porch on the front. I

didn't include the porch in the calculation, but for the fact that if in the future they wanted to enclose that for whatever reason, then there shouldn't be any issues with zoning on enclosing that. And so I noticed it as like about an 8,000 ft building. There were four other buildings that we used to come up with the total calculation of 10,50 ft. There's one building, as you mentioned, you see here in the picture, the 24x30 did receive a permit in 1996. And there's a couple of other small sheds, a 10 by13 and a 20 by 20 that I have no permit on file. And then there's another 20x40. I think we're mainly talking about about these buildings up here and then like a smaller shed. If the intent is to remove the the sheds or so, then we don't necessarily need to have a permit now on file here. And if the other buildings are strictly for a purposes, we can just get a no fee permit on file for those buildings and then that would be in compliance with the zoning regulations. location of the building as you see there will be centered in in the southern half of the the parcel. I'll have some other pictures of it here, but you'll see the approximate location of the building. Probably the oh it's hard probably 60% of the property is is woods and then the northern part of the property is what I would call like agriculture land. It's with no woods. And so they have chosen this this spot here. And again, again, their house is right here in the corner. And I'll have some better pictures of that as well. This is the proposed shed that they're looking at constructing on the property. You can see the porch out in front and you said the pond will be facing to to the left. So that's where that's located. So that's what they were looking at constructing with with the overhead doors. These I included I submitted these for the file uh by by staff. This was not submitted uh by by the applicant. It's

included in your pack. It's not the greatest uh picture, but it does help uh show what we're concerned about. Right now, this is in a platted subdivision uh filed in 1990. And the area that I calculate where they want to construct that building is located within a platted uh drainage way. And then we have a small utility easement that comes out to the highway or 061 highway right there. And so um we need to get that kind of figured out. And I've been in discussions with Mr. and Mrs. Boon on on that. And I believe that they have contacted the surveyor and they're looking into that uh to have those drainageways and that easement possibly vacated. There's several options that you can do that. You can vacate the whole entire drainage easement if it's not necessary. uh we can vacate a portion of the drainage easement enough to get get the building out of that drainage easement or they can even do a replat of that subdivision if they want. I think that right now they're still kind of weighing their their options. The other photo that I did submit and again it's not survey accurate but by my uh calculations I show at least a portion of that building being located within that drainage easement and possibly located within the utility easement. I think when the survey comes back, they're going to locate that building on the survey and then that'll give us a definitive answer as to whether it's located in the utility ement or not. And then that'll kind of give us a direction on what we need to maybe do to kind of rectify uh the concern out there because we don't want to have a building located in a drainage ement or utilities. Again, the 24 by30 building I have shown as being located in in the drainage easement, but as I noted in the report, it's no record as to whether it was just constructed there uh you know without realizing it was a drainage ement or whether staff issued

the permit incorrectly. There's no there's no nothing in the records that indicates uh how that happened. But uh it looks like that building could possibly be in that drainage way. the the extent of that is is this line that goes uh east west right here. So the existing house is not in that drain. It's just everything to to the north. So it's kind of interesting how they developed this subdivision back in the 1990s and why they had that whole entire area as as a drainage way in that parcel. Uh this is a u a picture of the property. As you can see, probably over half, at least 60% of it is is going to be in the woods. Again, you can see the two ponds that Mr. Boon alluded to right here. And then the building would be situated in in this area. Little bit closer shot. You can see their existing house, the existing building, and then their new building would go up just right to the north of that existing shed, according to what their site plan has showed. Again, a little bit closer shot from that. This is I just took this uh shot of the aerial looking to the west. So, Tobacco Road is up on the top of the screen and 56th Avenue is to the left here. Just kind of showing you some of the size of the parcels that would be uh looking at it from the the west. And then of course we got one parcel here that's on the south side. Mark, what is the kind of general drainage for that pawn? It seems like a sizable body of water. I do not know the the drainage on on that. This is a picture from Google Earth

taken from June of 2024. So you can see the existing building way way in the background right there. So that the new building would be behind that. This is taken from old 61. Again, several several trees here. Um doesn't mean that they will always be there, but that's be like the existing conditions right now. So, you know, the building should be pretty well hidden from that versus if you would put the building on the northern part of the property where it's mainly an open pasture agricultural area right there. Um, in reviewing all the characteristics I think of of the property, I think uh the location that they had chosen is really probably the best location to provide the most, you know, coverage of that of that building versus having it out in the in the open land. These are all houses that are up and up and down Tobacco Road. So, um, as I noted in the report, you know, I I do have some concerns about, uh, the current and potential future use of the building being turned into a commercial. You did hear testimony from Mr. Boon that is not the intent of them to turn this into a commercial building. U, but I think I'd like to remind the board though, you know, that this procedure helps to uh clarify that and put that on record that it's going to be for a a residential purpose only. future use of the building. They would have to come in through the conditional use permit process uh that we have in place right now to to convert that building from a residential use into a a commercial use. And certainly by the looks of it, it could be of some value potentially for a future commercial use. But, um, that's just something that we'll have to, you know, monitor and hope that a future owner of that property, uh, visits with staff before they go and try and open up

any kind of business there out of that building in the future. Um, so with that, staff is is recommending approval of the request. Uh, approval is to not exceed a 50x 150 with a 10x 50 foot covered porch or 8,000 square feet. So, what that means is if they for some reason want to change the dimensions a little bit, they can do that as long as they stay under the 8,000 square foot uh limit that's in here. Uh the accessory building shall only be used for non-commercial and non-industrial purposes without a conditional use permit. Uh the accessory building shall not be used as a single family dwelling except in compliance with the regulations. And then I did add a a fourth one uh stating that no zoning permit shall be issued for the building if it is located within the platted easement. And so your consideration I should you choose to approve that would be to allow them to put that building practically anywhere on the property so long as it's in compliance with the zoning regulations. So if by chance you they would want to move it somewhere else on on the property that's not in a drainage ement or not within a utilities, they'd be permitted to do that unless you have a certain condition attached that says that no, they have to build it in that particular spot. So if they choose, they could put it up in the northern part of their of their property that they own. So with that, I would stand for any questions. What is the process for getting a variance on the drainage easements? It wouldn't be um a varian situation. The better option would be really to just vacate it. It's the same type of process. We've done many vacations, you know, in the past and there would be certain asurances that we would need to have and the same ones would go through any type of of variance situation. So, the better option really is to to vacate it, to have an engineer be able to look

at that, decide that that drainage easement is is no longer needed, no longer of value, and then we can go through that uh vacation process and get rid of that. And with all the proper documentation, I would say it should be, you know, a fairly uh simple process, although it is lengthy, you know, that go through. [Music] In one of your pictures, it showed that there's potential of it there. The their property is a is a is a combination of two like in that far and you have the blue outline. Yes, it looked like the building was going to encomp going to slide over that boundary. That's going to be a problem in the future, I would think. Has that been rectified? It's been combined. So, yeah, it it shows it as being like a separate parcel. They have combined it right now for for taxing purposes. If you look at the um at the zoning map on here, it shows it uh as being combined. So, what I know is that that's the that's the partial that they own right now. So, it's combined now, but you've got two platted lots and then the little third unplatted lot, right? So, is there a possibility that a future owner could come and break this property back up and then you have a large building right next to a small lot? They could. Yeah, cuz it's unplatted right now, that little lot. So, if they chose, they could just take that legal description and sell that legal description to somebody else and and then yeah, we would have a situation where that building could be potentially encroaching on that that property or be right next to a future property on it. But as is right now, it's all one big big parcel. So when they would come through and do a lot split, that's something that I would look at and be able to verify that that building will meet the setback of the new parcel line

that is being created. And so if it is close to there, then they may not be able to take that legal description. They would have to adjust that adjust that down. They'd have to come through you to know that, right? Yeah. So, like a future owner could buy this whole big property and then take that little R2 corner, sell it, file a deed at the courthouse and then you've got a big building right on a fence line. Yeah. But but that future owner should obviously be aware of that type of situation though. But yeah, it would have to come through me do that. Is there a way to prevent that? Plat it. They could replplat. They could replat everything that they own right now and then add that in there as part of their replat and then that would fuse that together so that if they would ever want to sell a corner of that to somebody else, then they'd have to come and do a lot split. do me. I think uh in verbal conversations I think one of their options and probably the best option for them is to even vacate the whole entire plat and just turn this all back into a a tract of ground instead of uh four separate lots, you know, but uh if they vacate the entire plat, then they're going to need the signatures of the other owners as well. So that's I think that's one option that they're weighing and they may be able to explain where they're at on that process during a rebuttal if you want. Any other questions for staff? Thanks, Martin. Hey, thank you. If 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 BZA from the podium. Audience members are permitted only one time at the podium. In the interest of time, if you agree with comments previously made by audience members, please don't repeat the comment. Simply state you agree with the previous and then present new information to the BA. Statements and questions should only be directed to the BZA, not to the applicant or staff. The BZA may choose not to answer questions or engage with the public. Questions regarding the application can be asked to the BCA and answered by the applicant or staff during the rebuttal phase of the public hearing. There anyone would like to speak. Okay. Does the applicant wish to to uh rebut any statements being made? Have any additions? Let me do it. You're in trouble. I'll tag. Yeah, he's he's the city boy on the ranch person. You've got you've got two you've got two you've got two minutes of time. This um at an auction for a ranch for my horses. Um it wasn't until after we bought it we discovered it had been platted into a subdivision. Um the north section of the sub divivision is 12 acres. Um I've tried to buy it from Greg Lackey who inherited it from his mother. He has now combined it with their storage unit place across the way. They also would like to remove the entire platting of the subdivision. Unfortunately, the little section number 21 that's out is it was in foreclosure. We went to the auction two weeks ago at the courthouse to try to buy it and solve this problem. And just as they were going to put the hammer down, they canled the auction because it's five years behind on taxes. So, I cannot find a person

because it's mortgage company to get the signature on that. So, we are going to buy it if it comes up at the tax auction so then we can vacate everything. Um, but that's October. We thought we had this taken care of, but in the meantime, we would like to remove as much of the platting as possible. There is no utilities within any of the easements. We had gas stuff. We have garbage survey looking into it right now. Um, and we should have all that done. And oh, by the way, the drainage thing, it bisects the property when it does flood. We've had that flood. It goes from this pond through here and across over to that property. It doesn't even come up towards our houses. And we are not going to do anything with them that is not either livestock or fun personal. It's not going to be business. I'm trying as much as possible to turn all this area to a ranch. Any additional questions? No. Thanks. Thank you. Staff, do you have any results? Just one bit of information not necessarily relevant to the special exception. Uh statute will allow the county commissioners to conduct the public hearing on any type of of vacation. And so that would help speed up that process a little bit if they can get all the signatures. Typically we take it through the planning commission and then with a recommendation up to the county commissioner. But in talking to the county counselor, if they can get all the signatures and if there's no no concerns uh with that, then we could potentially take that to uh directly to the county commissioners. And so uh but like like you heard they're kind of there's an issue with parcel 21 out there right now. So as I understand this appears, this process of vacating it may take a while. I don't know what their

construction schedule is, but you know, they probably can't begin construction until they've worked out some of these details as far as replacement of the building, you know, with the easements and the drainage and whatnot. Right. Right. They're they're working on some of those details right now. I I believe here just to kind of see is it a possibility you you heard testimony that, you know, there are no utility ements in there. So, that's one big hurdle to find out. Yeah. Are there any utilities in any of those easements? Do any of the utility companies have a concern, you know, about that? The other thing would be the drainage. We need to make sure that that the drainage plan, if there was one, put in place at that time, are there any concerns if we vacate that and essentially do away with that drainage plan? And that's what we're working on right now. So if there isn't, then we can probably move forward with some type of vacation of the plat or at least a vacation of the drainage so we can get them a permit if this is approved tonight. Uh you also I saw somewhere in there there's an abandoned septic system and an abandoned well. Yeah. And in the comments I think health sanitation department or whatever. I don't know if it's shown wasn't shown might have been on another uh another document that's on the the comments from the environmental specialist that would be taken care of you know should be taken care of any time it would definitely be taken care of like say during the permitting process should that be made a condition of approval or not my opinion no that's something that environmental is is aware of and they'll they'll ensure that that that takes place. I don't I don't think that's necessary. Yeah, that's my opinion. You can if you want, but yeah, good question. That was right on my mind, too.

Got it. Thank you. Does the BZA have any further questions of the applicant or staff? None. I'll declare the public hearing now closed. Acceptance or denial of the special exception must be based on the public hearing record of information and in its opinion. As a matter of fact, such special exception will not adversely affect the uses of adjacent and neighboring properties. This is a time for BCA to discuss the case and ask procedural questions of staff only. Is there any further discussion on this case? up for me. Seeing none, chair will entertain a motion on this case. I'd move the case number 2025-03 the request by Jerry and Gaylin Boone requesting a special exception from the Reno County zoning regulations to permit the total square footage of all accessory buildings on the parcel to exceed the 5,000 square foot limit in the R1 rural residential district and R2 suburban residential district at 3610 East 56th Avenue would be approved allowing a building 50x 100 foot 150 foot with a 10T by 50ft covered porch and size for a total of 10,50 square ft of total accessory building square footage as requested in the application and subject to conditions listed above based on the based upon the reasons stated in the staff report as heard at this public hearing. Second move and seconded. Is there any discussion on that motion? Seeing none, staff, please call the role. Strand, yes. Schaefer, yes. Zeltzer, yes. Mlin, yes. Martin, yes. Yes.

Motion carries. Is there any other business that needs to be brought before the BZA? I do not have anything, Mr. Chairman. Board, any any new business? Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn the BZA. So moved. Second. Been moved and second. Any discussion? All in favor of adjournment of the BZA say I. I. Oppose. Same sign. BZA is adjourned. [Music] Okay, we'll call the April 17 Reno County Planning Commission to order. Staff, will you please call the role? Eisley, Strand here, Schaefer here, Selzer here, Mlin here, Martin here, GS here. Uh again, I'll I'll uh trust you if you had a chance to see the to review the minutes from our March 20 meeting. Chair will entertain a role entertain a motion on those minutes. Second. Move to second. Any discussion on those minutes? Seeing none, all in favor of approval say I. I. I. This approval say the same sign. Minutes are approved. Okay. Kansas Supreme Court has defined the conditional use permit public hearing as a quasi judicial function to ensure the rights of all parties of

interest and to provide an opportunity for each party to address the planning commission in an orderly manner. The planning commission will follow a factf finding procedure which is outlined in the handout in 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 documents for additional public comment or documents based only on the valid claims that the public hearing process was incomplete or based upon new information which has become available since the public hearing. For purposes of this public of this county commission policy, the public hearing is considered incomplete only if the planning commission failed to follow its 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 gerine 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 county commissioners will be accompanied by the summary of proceedings before the planning commission at its public hearing along with the report and recommendation of 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 the public hearing. 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 the protest period expires. Contact planning staff

or visit the website for the county commissioner agenda items. Any party who wishes to require the county commissioners to decide this case by a supermajority vote may file a protest protest petition pursuant to KSA 12-757 at the office of Reno County Clerk 125 West 1st Avenue Hutchinson Kansas within within 14 days following the decision by the planning commission. The form is on form is on the Reno County website planning department web page. I'll now formally open, get my stuff in the road here, case number 2025-04, a request by Rocky and Dana Smith for a conditional use permit to place a 1995 or newer manufactured home on a parcel of land zoned R1 rural residential district. The property is located at 6605 East 4th Avenue. Have any of the planning commissioners had any outside contacts regarding this case? No. No. Do any of the planning commission members have conflict of interest with this case? No. No. Will the applicant please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record? You have 10 minutes to present your case. Additional time may be allotted to the applicant at the discretion of the chair. Planning Commission members may also request clarification at the end of their year pre presentation or may have questions. Good afternoon and as previous applicant, I appreciate all your time. Sorry for my voice. It's about gone. I was at track meet yesterday all day long yelling at grandkids. So if I lose my voice, it's because of that. Uh my name is Rocky Smith. Uh I've been in this area my entire life. I've uh lived uh on the river bike dealer on 43rd Avenue for the last 27 years with my wife Dana and

uh so we're from we're both from the area and uh we're uh home home people here. But anyway, to make a long story short, I uh needed a place to move my mother-in-law to. And I bought this trailer. It's a manufactured 1995 CHAM CAM mobile home. It's a nice peak roof, shingled roof trailer. It's got good sighting. It's It's a really nice trailer. I bought it from Jim Heert. And uh the the the price included setting it up and leveling it and putting the AC in it and everything. And I I had 5 acres of land that belonged to my stepson. And we were getting ready to put this land put it on this land. And that all fell through. So, I've owned this trailer for over a year now, and I've been trying to find a place to put it, and this little parcel of land came up for sale. Well, it didn't actually have a for sale sign on it. I seen the a preferred roofing sign out front and a and a little excavator out there and a little skid steer out there. They were working on cleaning it up. And I stopped and talked to him and ended up making a verbal deal to buy it from him. and we finished cleaning it up and just the cleanup uh this thing was covered with cedars and SM and uh just nasty and you couldn't even tell that there was wellhouses and and uh electrical hookups in there. You didn't even know it until we got it all cleaned up. And just cleaning it has raised the property value of that area tremendously. So, it looks real nice now. Uh but anyway, we uh I bought it knowing because I've already made the verbal deal and I called Mark after I kind of did that and he said, "Well, it's been reszoned in 2016." because I know from growing up in the area that

there was two trailer houses on that short acre in the 70s and 80s when I was going to school and it being just knowing the knowing the area and so I didn't think there would be a problem of putting a trailer on there, you know, but anyway, Mark informed me that yeah, I was reszoned in 2016 and you're going to need a conditional use permit. So, this is the process and I really appreciate all Mark's help. He's he's done a lot of ground work for me. He helped me a lot. So, I appreciate that. Um, but anyway, that's my plan is to put this uh uh 1995 mo uh manufactured home on here. I know all the uh distance rule. There's plenty of room there to put this home back there in the back uh away from the fences and away from the east and west fences, away and to the south is nothing but 80 acre pasture. Uh, and I'm good friends with Mark, uh, Mike Groves, and him and I have talked about it, and he's not got an issue with it, and he the the neighbor to the, uh, east, which is right on next to it. Uh, I just met him and he was the actual his wife was the actual owner that lived in the trailer houses right by it. And when her mother passed away in the yellow house there, they moved into it and then sold off the trailer houses and then let that land go. And I don't know how they lost it or sold it or whatnot. He didn't really go into that. And uh anyway, I ended up purchasing this land to put the trailer house on it. Um, it's already got two wells and it's got a septic system on it and I will have those inspected and make sure that they're good to use because if they're not, I will get it reperment and put in something. I don't want to have to be out there messing with the the septic and the well. Um, like I said, I've been in this area for my whole life. I own property on uh 43rd. You can drive by at any time. It's always kept. And my wife

and I will keep this property just the same. I own property on uh Green Acres Road, which is just down the street from there. And that property is kept nice. Uh this is not going to be a rental. It's going to be for my mother-in-law. She's ailing and aging, and we need her a place to go. We fought the section 8 deal as long as we can fight it. And I don't know if you're aware of it, but you know, you're in the system. They give you a one-year contract and then it's monthtomonth. And if they find somebody that can pay more, they kick you out. That's just the way it is. But anyway, I'm tired of it. We've moved her four times. I'm going to put something permanent in that we can take care of her in and uh it'll look nice. It's not going to be an eyesore to anybody. I can uh attest to that. And you can drive by my properties and attest that my wife and I will take care of it. And we're not we don't live that far away. I'm within 5 minutes of this property. I'm I just recently retired from Sonokco after 45 and a half years and uh I'm going to have time on my hands. So that's what I'll be doing. Um I entertain questions. I may not have all the answers, but uh like I said, it's uh Jib Heert's going to set it up. It'll be set up right. We'll put the pads in and uh I'll make sure that the septic and the wheels have been inspected and are good to use. And if they're not, I'll go through the proper procedures to get them in properly. I don't know if I left anything out. I'm kind of just winging it. Any questions for the applicant? Should I ask a personal question? Yep. Was your father Bob Smith? Yep. I grew up with Bob. Did you? High school. Yeah. Yeah. I probably look like him because I I've got all these pictures up there and I look just like

him. That's probably how you recognize me, huh? You've used the term trailer and several different terms. So, I had in my mind that this was a manufactured home. So, I'm just wanting to It's It's a mobile home. Okay. Yeah. And how will that be will be set on a foundation of any kind or No, it'll be set on a pads. I'll I'll pour two pads that are 30 in wide by uh 75 ft long, 6 in deep, and uh then he'll anchor it to those two strips and it'll be skirted and and nice. Only plans for this one mobile home on this property. One. Yeah. Any other questions for that? I have one, Mr. Chair. Rocky, just for clarification, in the application, you said uh 1995 or newer. So, the pictures you submitted uh with the application, that is the manufactured home, and it is a 1995. I got the title here if you need to see it. We'll eventually need it if this was approved for the permit stuff, but I just didn't know if you were looking at something different that newer when you wrote that. Uh Jim's looking for me a nicer double wide and uh if I can find one before we make final plans, I'll get with you and make sure that that cuz it I won't buy something that's uh less than what I've got. Right. And I'll use this to maybe just swap him out, trade in for the price of moving the other one. I just soon have a nicer double wide as to the the other one, but it will have an attached garage so that she can go inside and go in the back door and be inside when she goes in the house. So, it's going to it'll be set up to where

for it'll be nice. Okay. So, it's a true statement that it could be a newer one. It could be. So, you may not use the one you submitted the pictures with. That's why I said it like that because I'm still looking. Yeah. Okay. Any further questions? Seeing no further questions, plenty of difficult not hear from the staff. This property is East 4th Avenue, just a little bit outside the city Hutchinson. uh zone residential and residentially zoned properties when they are vacant, they do require a conditional use permit to place a manufactured home on their regulations. We'll also say that the manufactured home has to be newer than 1994 to be placed in the zone area of the county. And so if this is approved at the time of the permitting, we'll require the title bill of sales, something that proves that what he is moving in on the property is going to be allowed and it's going to be comply with the year. Um, one question about another manufactured home on the property. The property is only about 088 acres. So it is a legal non-conforming parcel of ground because 3 acres is the minimum in our residential one zoning district. And so two manufactured homes would not be able to be placed on on this property as it is right now. Um, as you'd heard that there is an existing accepting well on on the property from previous uh manufactured homes. Uh, in in your packet, you do see the pictures of one option that he has with the manufactured home. You heard testimony that it may be something newer. maybe like a double wide, but your focus should be should we allow this property to be used for a a

manufactured home? It still has to comply with our with our regulations again 1994 or newer. So, you're not necessarily limiting it to a 1995. If he does find something newer, then he could certainly bring that in to that property. Uh, what your focus on is should we allow a manufactured home to be placed on on this property here? kind of going through some of the the pictures here. Uh this is the sipeline he show he he provided here uh of that 088 acres. It's just taken off of the website. This is a current picture that was submitted with the application showing what the property looks like right now. Um, if you haven't been by the property, it uh was severely overgrown with with trees, tall grass, weeds, and he's done a significant amount of work on that property to clear it out with hopes of being able to place a manufactured home on the property. Again, uh parcels in the area, the one in question is highlighted in blue. Uh the other parcels in the area are highlighted in red. Uh to the south and the west is a a large um pasture farm field if you will. Uh to the east is a few other smaller parcels with with single family dwellings on them. On the north side of the road you have some larger parcels kind of intermix some other smaller parcels. Uh it is strictly a residential area. And so the question that you would have one of them before you would be, is a manufactured home an appropriate uh land use for this area of of the um county? A little bit closer view. Again, these pictures were taken probably prior to his cleaning up of the property. Uh numerous trees are on the property or were. Uh this is a gooer shot from taken

from 2023. You can see how overgrown the the property was. Again, I went back and did some research and I did not see any manufactured homes, you know, on the property. The appraisers office had it as listed as vacant in 2012. So, that kind of corresponds with his testimony that back in the 70s and 80s there were two manufactured homes on the property. I did not see any evidence as far as aerial photographies that that there was uh any manufactured homes. I might have saw one manufacturing back in the in 2006. I think you could see one that was in the trees. And so I I believe what he's saying that yeah, there were probably one at least one if not two of them out there at one time. They since long been been removed. So current regulations do require that to be a uh conditional use permit. This is a picture of the uh the house that is to the east. It's very uh hard to kind of see, but it is like a stick bill house. And then further to the west, there's another one that is a a stick belt house. And so reviewing this, I think, you know, you need to kind of take into consideration what the surrounding area is like, but also the fact that this property has been vacant for for many years. I would note on uh page six at the top, there is a an error in there. Um on the second paragraph I said the staff concludes that the proposed land use which would be a single family dwelling um is considered compatible with the surrounding area. So the word B should be removed in case you were wondering if you didn't catch that. The word B should be removed from that sentence. So it should be the staff believes that the single family dwelling land use is compatible with the area but maybe a manufacturer home may not be considered a a compatible land use in the surrounding area. Looking on the length of time that uh the properties remain vacant. Again

we discussed that you know previously uh the highest and best use of this land though should be a a single family dwelling. Uh Mr. Smith does have other options to place a single family dwelling. We would allow a shed house to go on there without a permit uh without a conditional use permit. We would allow a modular, you know, we would certainly allow a a stickb house to go on there without a permit. And he has chosen to uh place his manufactured home on the property. Um, but again, then you would have to weigh the fact that this property for several years has been overgrown and probably even considered a blight on on that neighborhood area. I also want to call to your attention though the um the comprehensive plan. Uh I believe that this does comply with our comprehensive plan and the number one reason being that uh we want to recognize the use of manufactured homes as an affordable housing solution. Uh and that I think is one of the most important things we need to consider in this situation. This parcel is not amongst a a small residential subdivision. It's not uh intermixed with a lot of other parcels that uh have houses uh of manufactured nature. But the fact that you know we we have a parcel here that is vacant, I think a manufactured home in this particular case uh is not going to be a concern for that neighborhood. as you heard testimony, you know, he's he's he's already cleaned the property. He's going to take care of it. It's for a family member. It may not always be, but I think one of the things to keep in mind is it's not within a residential subdivision that we are placing this manufactured home on. The other correction I'd want to bring to your attention here is uh on page 10 under number 10 um the paragraph that starts with even though staff believes a manufactured home is not compatible with the other housing types in the neighborhood the

parcel is not within a residential subdivision or a highly concentrated residential area. It's the last sentence there. No comments were received from the public which could suggest no concerns with Mr. Smith's proposal. The comment that you have in your packet uh was submitted the day that I had mailed this out and so I did not get a chance to remove that comment. We did receive one comment from the public that was against this petition. So I just want to bring that to your uh concern here that we did receive one comment and so it was a conflict with my staff report. Um looking at all the factors in play here with this proposal here. Uh staff does recommend approval of the request based off of the nine factors. And then we do have two uh conditions of approval be placed on there pretty much that the applicant needs to meet all state, federal, and local regulations which would include the setting up of the manufactured home. And then we reserve the right to resend the conditional use permit should there be something uh on the property that is not in conformance with our approval. And tonight, uh that could be something that he decides to bring in a uh a 1986 manufacturer, for example. That would be something grounds where we could resend the conditional use permit. So with that, are there uh questions for me? Is there two driveways off of Fourth Street in into that little property? There are two driveways. Uh it appears to be. You can see the the one and there's one that's right up uh right up here. I have been in talks with Mr. Smith on that if he'd be willing to potentially have that driveway removed. It's existing now. Um it's he wants to keep it, he can certainly keep it. I think staff and and maybe Don would maybe agree if if he would like to have that removed, we

would like to remove that because I believe it's a non a non-compliant driveway right now. And so if he wants to remove it, I think our staff would do that, but um he doesn't have to if he doesn't want to. Well, I just I think I heard him say he was going to add a attached garage on the for one end and I thought that's the driveway that's going to be used. It's pretty close to the east boundary and I assume that the setback requirement would be okay there. It would have to be it 10T. So you're looking at 30 ft off the road right away, 10 ft off the east and west and 20 foot off the south property line plus being in compliance with uh septic and well setbacks as well with that. So, um, he'll have to note that on on the permit how far he is from that so we can review that. So, that little strip of [Music] land just to the east of it belongs to the land to the south. Correct. The way the parcels are drawn, even though the driveway goes to the house. Yeah. Yes. So, don't know the history on that. Yeah. Yes. But I think you're right. So the I was confused too because your colored outlines is that the actual boundary lines of the parcels. This is the parcel boundary as depicted by Beacon. Not about the one on the other side, the red one. The red one. This is the other parcel. And then there's a strip of ground presumably to get to the farm field. Okay. Plus all this over here. Yeah. So I done probably many many years ago and I did not know the history of that the driveway into that other house. Yeah. The driveway goes off of here and then into into that house. You said something about the two driveways were too close together. Mhm. These Yes. Okay. But yeah, looks like that's the

problem to the guy that lives to the east. Crossing somebody else. So there's his driveway is right here and then the then the one to the other house is right there. So, I had visited with him about possibly removing that if he doesn't need it. Mark, hypothetically, if one of those old mobile homes was still physically there, like abandoned, derelict, whatever, like could somebody place a new a newer manufactured home by right or do you still have to go through the conditional use permit? You could do that. Yeah. If it was there, it was if it's newer than 1994. Okay. So, you couldn't replace it with a 1975, for example. It'd have to be proven that it's newer than 1994. Yeah, we've allowed that in the past. So, so once it's there, if you have an old If you have a 1970s or so, you can't replace it with a 1980, for example, if you can upgrade it to a modern. Yeah. because this was vacant. It's been b vacant for more than a year, then you lose any kind of grandfathering, if you will, with that. You have a year. So, but if we approved this tonight, then later on they could go and swap it with a newer manufactured home by Right. This is approved tonight and it is the 1995 and it turns out to be not not working for them for whatever reason, needs more room, they want a double wide or they need a newer one for some reason, it's beyond repair, then yes, he would be able to swap that 1995 out with a 2020, for example, and it would just be a permit. It would not become before the board. No matter the footprint. No matter the footprint. Yeah. because you're you're approving a manufactured home. Yeah. We're not we're not approving a a single Y manufactured home or strictly a double Y. We're approving a manufactured home subject to our

zoning regulations, which is 1994. Yep. Thanks. So, what's so golden about 1994? 1994 is the year uh that HUD changed the way manufactured homes were constructed. So built to a higher standard or higher standards higher stand before 1994 they were constructed to a different standard not necessarily worse but 1994 is when they made the switch and so when we adopted the regulations uh we wanted that higher higher standard and so that's what we said in the zone area of the county. yet. That's what we want to put in. Any other questions for staff? Mark, if there's 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 permitted only one time at the podium. In interest of time, if you agree with the the comments previously made by audience members, please don't repeat the comments. Simply state 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 to answer questions or engage with the public. Questions regarding the application may can be asked to the planning commission and answered by the applicant during the rebuttal phase of this of this public hearing. Is there anyone that would like to comment on this? Just a

minute. Seeing none, do you have any any additional comments you'd like to I just wanted to clarify that that's a that's an easement right here to get into here. If they ever somebody ever did something back here, I just talked to this guy just just this last week and he told me that that's an easement that there was an easement back there for whatever reason. So, I didn't I didn't since it's on his side, I didn't think it mattered to me at all. And as far as the driveways, as soon as I figure out, you know, whether we want a Circle Drive or we want to put where we want to put the garage, blah blah blah, then I'll make that decision on the on the ex driveway. There any other questions for me? Thanks. Staff, do you have any additional comments? I have no comments. Does the commission have any further questions for the applicant or staff? No. The public hearing is now closed. Acceptance or denial of reason of the conditional use permit must be based on the factors that are listed in the staff report and found in the audience chairs. This is the time for the planning commission in can discuss the case and ask procedural questions of staff only. Is there any further discussion? I did drive by the Smith's other two properties and I did find them to be wellkept and uh in good very good condition and I know that was one of the concerns of the in the comment that you know uh there's properties around that have junk vehicles and what have you and I saw nothing even close to that. And I I appreciate them investing in

some affordable housing. It's certainly something our county is uh in need of and and I second that. You know, the the applicant has stated he has every intent to keep it looking good and his offers his property as indication and That makes him wait. Any other comments? If none chair will entertain a motion on this case. Mr. Chair, I move that case number 2025-044, the request by Rocky and Dana Smith requesting a conditional use permit from the Reno County zoning regulations to place a manufactured home on a parcel of landz zoned R1 rural residential district be approved based on the nine factors and two conditions of approval listed in the staff report and as heard at this public hearing. I'll second. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion on that motion? Seeing none, staff, please call the role. Stran, yes. Sha, yes. Selzer, yes. Mlin, yes. Martin, yes. And Gson, yes. Okay. Thank you, Rocky. Appreciate it.

Okay. Statements pre previously read for the previous case will still stand. I'll now uh formally open public hearing regarding case number 2025-05, a request by Inland Ocean Vineyards LLC. Applicant James Lmore for a conditional use permit to construct a 40 foot by 80 foot building for the purpose of establishing an event venue for community gatherings and a retail sales store in inside an existing winery building for the sale of products not produced on site on a parcel of landzoned a agricultural district. The property is located at 4704 East 43rd Avenue. Have any of the planning commissioner members had any outside contacts regarding this case? No. No. No. Do any of the planning commission members have any have a conflict of interest in this case? No. Will the applicant please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record? You have 10 minutes to present your your case. Additional time may be allotted to the applicant at the discretion of the chair. Planning planning commission members may request clarification at the end of your presentation. Thank you. Um, Dr. James Larore. I've been in Hutchinson since 2020, working at the Hutchinson Clinic. In 2018, I purchased um this parcel of land uh in conjunction with uh Doug Baker who's here tonight. Uh and we arranged to have him have 30 acres so I could have 40 acres. And we he had an existing fence here. He didn't want to move. So, we had it surveyed to accommodate that 40 acres for both of us. In 2018, um cleared out a lot of thousands of dead cedar trees that have been burned and put a vineyard in this area right here. You can kind of

see it on the outline. There's 2 acres. There's 1,400 plants. We harvest about 16 to 18,000 lbs a year. and we have about 50 apple trees that we're bringing along. So, one thing led to another. We started a vineyard and then we started a winery and we started to get busier. We started getting a lot of requests from people even as far as Witchah who wanted to have a wedding and we couldn't really accommodate weddings where we were. We have nice metal buildings and a nice winery, but it's really not a wedding venue. And then we had people who wanted to know whether we could accommodate 50 or 100 people for Christmas parties and etc. And so we decided well maybe we should put a venue up in here and uh that's pretty much the impetus. Um I won't go into a lot of long-windedness. Mark wore out a computer finishing up this document for you. So I'm happy to take any questions that you have regarding a couple of other things. um retail. We're talking about not a grocery store. We're talking about Inland Ocean Vineyard Cups, Inland Inland Ocean Vineyards T-shirts, things like that. Um things that we manufacture uh in addition to that. But in terms of outside stuff, we're not really bringing anything in. It's not trademarked for our or pictured for our the vineyard. Um been in business since 2018. 19 actually was our first finish. And so I'm happy to answer any questions. Um, and one last thing, Mark is an extraordinarily complete guy. And so he's like, you know, Jim, if there's anything in here that you think you might do, put it in here so we can have it in here. You know, if you want to do DNA testing on willy mammoths or something like that, but you don't. But there is an area in here about live

music outside. And I want to stress, I have absolutely no interest in rock bands or loud music outside, but we may on occasion have a guitarist or somebody like that or a vocalist. Um, nothing extraordinarily loud. U, I am uh concerned for the surrounding area of which really it's Doug and his wife Kim uh are the only ones that could really hear that, but we're going to try to do a better job than Kansas State Fair in terms of limiting noise. So questions. You are able to sell your own product on site though. Huh? Yeah, we do now. We have since 2020. 20. Yeah. 2020. Any other questions for the applicant? When when I reviewed this with with my wife telling she to me they asked what are they going to do about that road going out there that bubble road. So I I it's her question I've asked her. In fact I stopped the road grader today and said you know if you got some asphalt hiding somewhere we could sure use it. Um but they grade that road about three times a week. It seems like putting asphalt on it might be a little bit more cost effective than grading it all the time. And the truckers do complain about they have to slow down because it does get bumpy, but they grade it about three times a week. And so when it's graded for at least half a day, it's pretty decent. Well, she gets an opportunity, she'll come out there again, but even though she will remind me about the bumpy dusty road. It is a bumpy dusty road. Despite that, we get a lot of people out and we sell a lot of wine and they have a lot of fun. We tour the vineyard and teach people how to make wine and explain how

wine is tasted, etc. We would like to we would like to have a nicer area even for the tasting room. I mean, if you've ever been to a really nice vineyard, they've got and winery. They've got nice big open areas uh inside with a bar and places for people to sit and look at their laptops and so forth. We're not going to be a bar. We're going to sell our wine and Sand Hill Brewery beer. And that's all that's our plan. Any other questions for the applicant? Thanks gentlemen. Thank you from the planning planning staff. Again, we're located a little bit north of the city of Hutchinson uh east of old K61 highway. Everything you see here in the purple is the Hutchinson city limits. All these parcels here have the potential to have houses on. We did have uh a permit issued on uh number 13. So there is a house that is under construction or maybe completed by now on parcel number 13. The way the um agricultural operations and exemptions work, just for your information on this is the win area is considered an agricultural venture if you will. It's exempt from zoning regulations just like any other type of agricultural operation. You can operate a winery without a conditional use permit. So that's why this is under um operation right now. Um buildings associated with that are exempt from zoning regulations as well. Just a no fee zoning permit is all that is is required. And so he's

perfectly legal in the book to be able to do the winery, make his own winery onsite, bottle it, and even sell it. That's all exempt. That's not part of this case tonight. When you start getting into products that are not made on the site, such as, you know, so coffee cups, you know, cork screws, keychains, all that kind of material not made on site. that is not exempt from zoning regulations and requires a a conditional use permit. So that's why we have the conversation, look, if we're doing an event venue proposal, then if you're planning on even if it never happens, a retail store, then you need to put that in the conditional use permit. It's one hearing and we will take care of that that type of land use as well. So, I just kind of want to give you some background on why we're not having a public hearing on the winery operation and stuff. So, um again, the proposal, the main proposal is to have an event venue. You heard heard him provide testimony on the type of of events that are going to be occurring potentially on the property. I would point out that this uh property is within the city of Hutchinson's what we call notification area or or area of influence. You may hear that. So, we were required to send the city of Hutchinson notice of this uh public hearing as well as all the documentation with that and the city of Hutchinson as of today have not submitted any kind of comments uh regarding this case. Uh if they did and if they objected then what that does that actually triggers a supermajority vote by the county commissioners to uh potentially approve this land use here. Again, haven't heard anything uh from the city on that. So again, this is the the parcel he owned. It's a 40 acre parcel of ground.

There is a house that is located right over in this parcel right here. I'll have better pictures of that later. This is the site plan. Doesn't show up too good on the screen, but if you refer to your drawing, you'll see that he's got one main drive that will enter into the property and then it'll circle around and lead into a a main parking lot. for the event center and presumably also for uh winery and the customers for the retail store. There is a couple of auxiliary or overflow parking areas. I believe I refer to that in the site plan. They're located south of the pond and right up against the west property line regulations uh in the parking we had to compute all that. required, I believe it was 52 parking stalls. Uh the applicant uh in his site plan has provided 66 parking stalls. So it's really your your job to determine is 66 parking stalls adequate for a a venue that could potentially hold 150 people. Um I have reviewed that and I believe at this point in time uh that the 66 is probably adequate. The good news is that there is additional room on on the property for additional parking should that uh be needed here. A little bit closer closer view again. Main parking lot is right here. The existing winery building is right here. We do have two permits on file. He built the original one then built an addition on here. The proposed venue is is to the north and the east there. And we've got an existing building here, plus another greenhouse there. And then further north of the pond, there is an observatory. Looking at aerial photography, you can see it's 40 acre

piece of ground. As you get closer back to the west, partial start getting a little bit smaller. As you go further to the east, you'll see that the parcels are a lot larger. You may have noticed that on the on the zoning permit part of Prairie Dunes golf course is right here. So that's obviously a very large large parcel where there won't be any houses both now or in the future. Um there is a subdivision further to the east probably half a mile away consisting of 3 acre lots roughly 3 to 5 acre lots. Uh everything else is large parcels. little bit closer view. You can see the existing winery here. We've got an existing building here, a greenhouse, and then the observatory further north. The uh the grapes are growing up in that area. You can kind of see the lines up there. So, they're north of the pond. regarding the the parking and you saw some reference to it in my my staff report. I did have some concerns with the overflow parking area and the potential for headlights shining on the neighbors neighbor's house at certain times of the year. So, you'll see in my staff report that I I recommended a fence or some type of what we call live screen or trees be planted to kind of help uh shield that area here. Um you can ask those questions of of Mr. Lmore if you wanted to. You certainly have the ability if you don't feel that that is necessary to uh issue a waiver of that requirement because it is in the regulations that we have to have some type of shielding and then if you so choose then you could also remove that condition of approval that's in my [Music] recommendation again a little bit closer closer view. So main driveway here, you'll come, you'll circle around this area here, and then the parking lot will be located in this area. And again, the overflow

parking is going to be up in in this area somewhat close to the house to the west. Mark here indicated that there was potential for additional parking areas in the event those were needed. If they needed more than the 66 spaces, where where would those cars go? Do you have any idea? Well, that'd be up for him to decide. You know, he can go along the pond potentially or further to to the east. Got to remember, I think he's looking at an additional septic system and he's he's working with environmental on that whether we have one big combined one or have a separate one. But there there's room on the part. It may not be, you know, right near the winer, but you can go on the other side of the pond or you can go further to to the east if you so chooses. Uh this area may not be the greatest. You can see there it's a little bit of a hill right there they have to work on, you know, cutting down or you could put additional parking along there potentially if if he needed to. Um this picture is looking uh to the to the south just to kind of give you an idea of what uh it looks like across the street and you can kind of see the the raised area like the sand dunes here. It's kind of it's not probably completely shield the parking area, but it'll it'll assist in that. But, um, the one new house is going over here at the corner of, uh, Jupiter and and 43rd. Mark, the property to the east, I I'm not sure what's happening to it. It looks like a war zone right now. They were Yeah. done major tree clearing there. Is Is there going to be any development that that we know of? Not that I know of. I I do not know what the um plans are for that other than maybe just clearing cedar trees for fire

prevention. I think it's well beyond that, but yeah, we know that, but I I do not have any idea what the plans would be for for doing something like that. This is the uh the entryway. You see, it's a little bit of a raised area in front. You can see the the winery in the background. The parking would be in front of that. Little bit different view kind of looking to the to the north and northeast. The side only two sides on the property right here. And then of course painted on the building. This would be the location of kind of where the the event center would go. winery building right here. So often behind that to like the north and the east would be the new building. In the background here, you can see the the observatory. So that's what it would look like from the road. That'd be your view as you're driving down 43rd. So in reviewing all of the factors, staff in the end um has looked at that and has recommended approval of the request. based off of the 10 factors that you see listed in the staff report and I did have six conditions of approval. Should you choose to have the uh solid solid fence with the live screen, I would note again on condition number three that there is a typo. Um it's the last full sentence here. It should be live screening not leve screening. So, should you choose to leave that condition in, um, that needs to be changed to live screening, but my conditions are approval for the record, parcel shall be developed as described in the site plan in the plan of operation dated March 10th. Uh, any

lighting of the parking lot area or building shall be shielded and directed on the property. Uh, no lights directed onto the adjacent property. again talking about installing a a 4ft fence or a live screen to kind of assist in shielding headlights from shining on the property to the west. And again, that's that's also found in in our regulations. Uh applicant shall meet all federal, state, and local regulations. Uh again, we reserve the right as a county to resend the conditional use upon uh any kind of violation of the regulations. And then the other way. If there's any kind of changes in the uh character or the intensity of the parcel and not capable of being discerned by staff, then they may need to come back for another conditional use permit. So, if they, you know, are exceeding what we believe was the intent of this conditional use permit, then we may have to have another conditional use permit to allow them to expand beyond what the original intent. So for example, if they have a a capacity of 150 people for the building and now all of a sudden it wants to grow to say 300 that may be an additional conditional use permit because of say parking and other factors. It could be septic and well and that so that's the six conditions that I have recommended to this board. So you got further questions? Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to make a comment on this case? You may have five minutes to comment. Please come forward to the podium at one at a time. 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 previously

made by audience members, please don't repeat the comments. Simply state 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 to answer questions or engage with the public. Questions regarding the application can be asked to the planning commission and answered by the applicant during the rebuttal phase of this public hearing. Do you have anything more to add? Quote comments. Come on for My name is Doug Baker and I we live right next Kim and I live right there. But if you could take and put that back on the the area. My one of my concerns is the one that just had the dotted line around it. The very first one. Oh, okay. that one. One of my concerns is this and then if we're going to put in if their venue is going to be put in over here and you know listening to how big it could be um is there a chance that they could move this city limits in and incorporate this into the city. Maybe I'm asking the wrong group of people, but I'm worried about that. worry about the city of Hutcherson like annexing that area. Yeah. Um I mean that's certainly potential. You're right. Adjacent to the city limits that would be their their right to be able to annex that in. That would be something that you know this board definitely would be able to you know assist on. But yeah, I mean that that's one of my concerns. Then the the other one is funny you brought up the road because I've heard it from multiple people. I think if we're going to have that type of traffic out there, we're going to have to do something. At least put speed

um limit signs in because those kids from Buler come through there and sometimes they're going 80 miles an hour. I mean we've pulled people out of the ditch, gone through fences, and uh they need to slow it down there because that is a terrible road. It's rough. That's those are the main things I wanted to talk about. I don't know if Kim's gonna come up and say anything either, but thank you for your time. Thank you. You want me to or not? Kim Howard and again I'm the house to the west. This is really tough because we are friends with the applicant being next door to him. I just when we moved out there 20ome years ago, we like the solitude. We like the privacy. Um I feel like we're going to lose that. You know, when you're talking about the parking up against our property, you know, we're like I say, we're outside a lot. I just feel like we're going to lose our our privacy. I mean, right now they have um wine tastings and tours of the vineyard. So, yes, we have people walking through there, but um that's just my concern. Like I say, it's it's hard because we're friends with [Music] them. Don't know whether this, you know, bears any anything or not, but just my opinion. Thank you. Sorry. Is there any other comment?

Yep. Hang on just a second. We'll make sure there isn't anybody else that wants to go and let's go. Can you put up the zoomed in Um, you know, honestly, I share all of Kim's concerns. Um, you know, where I would like to put this building is is over here, but we're not going to we're going to try to hide it behind these pumps and it's going to kind of go out this way and hopefully be shielded by these buildings to the extent possible. my plan. I apologize. Uh, you know, I drew I drew the parking over here because I thought I got 40 acres. I could put parking anywhere I want. And and it never occurred to me then that Mark would catch this and go, "Wait a minute. The lights are going to shine onto the neighbor. I have no interest in doing that." And would not put any parking lot along there. And Doug probably wouldn't let me put a foot fence up there anyway. So, I would move the parking to whatever adequate parking was required to include it into the parking lot that's going to sit here. And I'm going to take this dirt to to shield as much as possible the parking from the street. So there's plenty of room there to put in a lot of parking spots. And so I have no need to really put them in the other places and and honestly won't be. Uh but I can put them back here on this. We can put them over here on this. I'm not going to put them up against Doug's lot. Um, the other thing is we probably have on any given week five to 15 people come through and occasionally we'll have, you know, groups of nurses or teachers or whatever. It'll be 15 or 20 that'll come for an hour or two. Um, usually early afternoon. And I anticipate that our biggest events, if we can get them, will be the

weddings that some of the brides have asked us about. And those will be fairly infrequent. Probably we'd like to have 30 a year, but that's 30 days out of 300. And uh we're going to try to keep this shielded away from Doug and Kim as much as possible. I I respect their their her concerns. They're also my concerns. Um, and to the extent possible, we're going to try to address those. Um, with regard to the city limit question, I mean, I don't want to be at the city limits either. So, is it possible that because I put a building out there, that's going to make the city go out there and grab that property? That's that's not reasonable. They could do it, but they wouldn't do it because I'm putting a building out there, right? Yeah. They they cannot annex you because you're greater than a 21 acres. They'd have to have your consent to annex your parcel as well. No, not they could take his Well, his parcel's 40 acres. Yeah. Well, I was looking at I was looking at parcel eight separated even though he owns both tracks. Yeah. Okay. Um that that question I don't know. That'd be you know up to see. Yeah, they may not be able to take his either. Could he get around that by replatting that or changing that zoning on that to be a with the rest of it or not? Not changing the zoning necessarily, but if it's if it's considered a 40 acre track, then potentially you could potentially do that. Um I don't know how they would look at it if it's two separate tracks. Yeah, like that. Um, but yeah, being right outside the city limits, I mean, that's that's a possibility. Well, they did it to me. I mean, I I I live here, right, and 21 and we were in the county for a long time and then we got to have the increased taxes and no additional

anything, but I'm complaining. Thank you, Joe. Any other questions? Any other questions for that? So I So are you consenting to relocating your overflow parking? I I don't I'll put that overflow parking uh anywhere on there except up against that fence. I don't I don't really want to be there. Honestly, Mark, the the lot that I had, I don't remember how many spots it had, but 40 40, you know, and that only came to about here. I could extend that lot down and put those other 16 parking spots or something in there, and I probably would prefer to do that anyway. Okay. So, so then I would need a revised site plan if if this board accepts that revis that revision that you're considering or consenting to then because I I need the most up to date. Okay. Thank you. Do you have any additional comments? Um, no, not as a rebuttal. Okay, we can discuss plan forward after you you have your discussion. All right. Does the commission have any more any any other comments or questions for the applicant or staff? Was the township contacted because I I had people mentioned the road as well. Yes, the township's always sent a notice of the public hearing and I did not receive anything from the township. They didn't they didn't have any feedback one way or the other. Rarely does the township respond. Yes. Yeah. Okay. But we tried. But we tried. Any further questions? The public hearing is now closed. Acceptance or denial of of the conditional use permit must be based on the factors that are 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. Question. If we approve this, can we approve that subject to resubmission of the site plan? Yes. So the board has the option then if you accept Mr. Larore's proposal to relocate that parking. Then obviously condition number one does not apply. You don't want to accept the conditional use permit with that site plan. You want a revised site plan. And then also based on that then condition number three could also probably be removed from any type of recommendation of approval by this board. So then three dealing with the fence over the live stream along the west property line. Okay. Oh, you got two threes. You don't have a five. Two threes at a four or no five. Okay. That's why I'm confused. That's why you're confused, Mark. The first number three. Oh, look at the second number three. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Don't look at the second. That should be four. That should be four. Okay. Been a long week. Okay. So, the first number three dealing with the live screen and the fencing could be considered for removal if he's consenting to relocating the overflow parking lot. So then if you would then you have the option of continuing this public hearing to next month. So you can review the

revised site plan or you can recommend approval subject to him submitting the revised site plan to staff. That would be another option if you like what he has now proposed to combine the overflow parking and add on to the existing parking lot. You could require a new site plan be submitted to me for my approval before it goes on to the county commissioners for their approval. So, it's strictly up to this board whether you want to see the site plan uh that's been revised and review it. You can you can continue this hearing to to May or you can put it in my hands and say submit the new site plan to me. What's your wishes? You say if we want to approve it, I would just suggest we make it subject to submission of a new site plan mark. Yeah, we don't need to come back. I would agree this on the agenda again. So, do we need to have a do we do we need to do have an official motion to change the change the change those conditions? Yes. Okay. Yeah. We need to discuss how you want to do it. But that has to just read into the into the into the into the whole holistic motion for the case and that we don't need to have we don't need to vote on the changes to the conditions. No, that's that was my question. If the consensus is to move to approve, then somebody can make that motion and then they would just state the in their

motion eliminate the first number three and then make the motion to uh require the owner to submit a revised site plan. Okay. Wording to that effect. That that sounds that sound all right with the rest of the board. Yeah. Okay. And the second subject's the live screen. whether you want that as part of this or not. Yeah, that was that was in three, wasn't it? Yeah, it's all that would be deleting. This is a bit of a side comment, but I would like to thank the property owners uh for the dialogue um in making uh zoning things work out. I think it's a it's an important precedent for us to keep in mind for property owners to have this venue that they can u be honest about their concerns and be willing to to be part of the solution. Uh so it's not it it's just nice to see that there's options to just hard and fast regulations that that common sense can prevail. So thank you. One other comment or question to Mark. If we make this motion, you know, in your canned one you get you sent out, you indicate six conditions. Can we say conditions one, two, four, five, and six? Even though four and five are misnumbered. Yes. Yes. Would that be all right? Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. Yes. Yeah. Any other discussion? Chair will entertain a motion on this case. Okay. I would move that case number I'm going to try this anyway.

25-05 request by Inland Oceans Vineyard LLC advocate James Lairmore requesting a conditional use permit from the Rio Countyy's zoning regulation to establish an event venue for community gatherings and a retail sales store on a parcel of land known to egg. agricultural district be approved based on the 10 factors and conditions one, two, four, five and six uh uh as listed in the staff report and heard at this public hearing. Also, the approval would be subject to submission of a revised site plan uh relocating the overflow parking uh subject to the approval of of the planning department. I further move to approve a waiver from article 11-101 to not require the installation of the loading space based on the reasons listed in the staff report and it heard at this hearing. I second the motion that work. Okay, got moved and second. Is there any discussion on the motion? So as I understand it then just to clarify for my records then conditions one two four five and six are recommended correct for approval plus an additional submit a revised site plan relocating the overflow parking enlarge existing parking you want relocate overflow or enlarge existing parking to accommodate accommodate the additional the additional parking Okay. Good. Yes. Any other comments, discussion? Please call the role.

Stran, yes. Schaefer, yes. Selzer, yes. Mlin, yes. Marlin, yes. Gerson, yes. Then who made the second? I thank you. Hey, next item of business is item C, discussion on proposed text amendment to article 13, district uh district height, area, and bulk regulations of the Reno County zoning regulations regarding minimum setback requirements, minimum lot requirements, and minimum lot dimensions. [Music] If you want to see if you if you want if you're curious, you can stay. This is really exciting stuff. Thanks, Mark. I'd like to have some conversation with you because I knew Bob when he was little kid high school was in the same same boy scout troop. I do apologet back after these messages.

All right, we're back. We will uh discuss item uh item C should be the uh height area bulk setbacks. Article 13. We touched on it last month. I guess you want me to start? Yep. Just I I had it on the tip of my tongue at this marker and you just jumped in there. So, you're great. Um, last month here we we started the discussion on potentially revising the setbacks, potentially revising width to depth ratio, minimum loss size. And this is all in conjunction. There's going to be two parts. There's the potential amendments here plus also the amendments in the subdivision regulations dealing with the maximum acreage for an a lot split, which is 7 acres. Right now, you're only looking at the first part, but I feel like we need to get this squared away first before we tackle the other parts because they have to mirror each other because subdivision and zoning regulations work together even though they're separate. handle all of that at some point with one hearing. Yes, we would all we would potentially handle it all at at one hearing is what we would do. So I kind of easier because I feel like this we need to we need to sit down. We need to decide what are the minimum acreages going to be for the parcels, what are the setbacks going to be. Are we going to include width to depth ratios? Are we going to include minimum frontage requirements? These are all issues that we need to have a discussion on and it's up to this board how long of a discussion you want to have uh today. Next month we do not have any public hearing cases. So we could devote as much time as you want next month. Um, I had on the agenda tonight

because we we were starting the discussion on that. I don't know uh if this board has any initial thoughts on what they want to see that I can bring forth to you next month as a as a draft. I hope to have more time between now and next month. So, what do you see as the order of operations here? We do we need to is one do we need to do we start I could we could this is a pretty like you said it's a pretty broad subject and everything is interlocking what what do you see as the first piece that we need to go and then second what what what do you believe is the order and which we need to discuss and I I guess I want to keep it organized so we aren't just going going here and there and yonder I can I can give this board more of an overview as to what all goes into boundary adjustments, a lot splits, lot split applications, because those are all procedures that this board doesn't review. That's all done internally by by me. And that way that would give you the background information on, okay, well, what do we do? What are the roadblocks potentially that we're running into with with some of the stuff that's contained in in article 13? And I can do that. Trying to keep it brief uh as brief as I can here um tonight to give you that information. Then you can go home and think about that and come back maybe a little more prepared next month on what we should be doing with with some of this stuff or we can start discussing you know setbacks and and fronties requirements and all that. I don't know if the the background information would be of value to this board or not. I know we're wanting to move quickly isn't the right word. I want to do systematically. I think that

would be give a little background would be helpful as far as the overall picture that we're I think it's more than just background. It's general education recognizing that we have an absent commissioner that is needs more education than most. Yeah, that's why Yeah, it's unfortunate that he he's he's unable to attend tonight and stuff. Um yeah, I can I can give you I don't think we need the whole process. give it give it give us a highlevel overview and then maybe next month we d we kind of start with that review of that overview and then dive into the nuts and bolts. How does that sound? Okay. And I guess I will rely on this board to uh stop me if it's too much or I'm hungry. Let's know. How about if we give you five minutes? Five. How about how about 15? Okay. Five. You get you get you get 15 minutes. be 5:15. So, I thought maybe five was too much. If the pizzas show up, it's too long. Gotcha. I follow you. Speak now. So, uh, so anytime in the fully zoned area of the county, somebody wants to divide their land, sell a portion of their land, and that division is less than 40 acres in size. That requires one of three processes by me. It requires a submitt of an agricultural lot split if you're zone agricultural. It will require a lot split if you're zone some type of residential. Those two processes are for if a person would want to sell a portion of their land for a new house, a new building site. If your

neighbor would like to purchase, you know, 10 feet of your land for whatever reason, maybe his driveways too close to your land, you'd like to have a little separation, you know, whatever the the point may be, then that's called a boundary adjustment. So, you know, hey, I'd like to purchase 10 ft of your land 10 ft by 500 ft long because I'd like to be able to build this building and I've got a setback issue. So, hey, uh, Mr. Strand, can I can I interest you in purchasing a portion of your land for for that purpose? If the parties agreed, then they submit it to me and it's a boundary adjustment. Well, is there a maximum of you said 10 feet for an example, but what if I want 100 feet? No, there is no maximum. And I can tell you that I've I've done boundary adjustments for agricultural ground, believe it or not. So they 80 acres or what have you is in a in a trust and they're dismantling the trust and this this adjacent person over here wants 35 acres of that and the other farmer over there wants to have 40 acres or 36 acres of that. The other guy only wants 20. Those are all boundary adjustments because they're not creating a brand new parcel to build on. They're just adding far ground to their existing farmstead. So and on a boundary adjustment, if you're not involving an exchange of land, purchase a sale, can you use that to reconfigure a parcel? So you have an existing a square parcel and you say, "Well, I'd rather have it longer and narrower." Can you do a boundary adjustment to reconfigure that coming up with the same area? So you you've got a 40 out of a

quarter and you've got exactly square but you'd want to cut that. You want right you want to change the to a long 40 instead of a square 40. Yeah. Something like that. Okay. Yeah. It would be that' be a boundary just because you're not creating a new tract of ground that's going to be built on changing the the boundaries of the existing track. you have 10 acres around your house and the person adjacent to you has, you know, 35 acres for whatever reason. Maybe you want to take in a a large stand of trees that's just to the north of your property line and and this person maybe there you're getting into two parties. I'm saying this is all just one party. He has one. He owns 100% of the ground and he wants to reconfigure that parcel from say a square parcel to more of the Well, he would have to buy additional No, if he owns the land already. I don't know how that scenario. So, you have you own two tracks of land and one of them is a is just a square tract of Xapers. two two separate the land surrounding it also. But can you take that say that that's 10 acre tract and it's a square. Can you move that to say it's a 10acre track but narrow it and make it longer in a boundary adjustment. It's changing the parcel size. It's changing the It's changing the parcel size. No, not the size. Same changing the the length and the depth. The length and depth. Yes. or the length and the width of it. Yeah. Yeah. Would that be a boundary adjustment? I I No, I I guess not. I don't know why would why would a person want to do that then? I don't like Well, that's what I mean. That's why it's going in my mind why you would want to. Are they doing

that to sell a property? Huh? Are they doing it to sell a property? Yeah. I mean, a partial illegal. Well, if they're wanting to sell a portion of that, they have to change subscription. You'd have to have reserveyed or something. Yeah. Yeah. If you're wanting to potentially sell a portion of that, then yeah, you could do that. Yeah. Then you can do that. I mean, like maybe there's a pond on it or something and they want to get and then that pond all on one, right? Mhm. parcel or the other. Yes. So then that would be a boundary adjustment. Mhm. And what we're looking for in lot splits or boundary adjustment is that the two parcels or three parcels, however many involves, all of the parcels still remain in conformance with uh the minimum acreage requirements. So, for example, if you have, you know, a 5 acre residential one parcel and you want to sell 3 acres of that to your your neighbor that is also zoned R1, that's going to leave you with 2 acres and he'll have 9 acres. Well, he'll be in conformance, but now your parcel is now not in conformance with the minimum acres requirement. So that type of boundary adjustment in that case would not be approved because you're you're dropping your parcel below. And that's what you're saying is in in the in article 13 the minimum lot area in square feet. That's where where that's described. Lot area or if he takes a portion of that and drops the width or the depth below those numbers. That would be another type of scenario where you would not be allowed to do that. The other thing that we look at both in the environmental side and the zoning side is that you're not

making a building a wastewater system a well now non-compliant with those setbacks. Environmental has setback requirements for waste waters and wells from property line. It's issued. It's in. It's perfect. But then now when you're going and you're going to change that parcel battery now you could potentially make that system nonconforming and that's another scenario where that would not be approved by environmental. So every one of these reviews goes through through me and also through environmental especially when you're involving uh structures on a property. If it's just somebody splitting off vacant ground and another person has vacant ground, then that ne necessarily go through environmental, they don't have anything to worry about on that sense. It just goes through me. So So the boundary adjustment has no minimum and no maximum. No minimum, no no maximum. And so when you adjust that, does that make any of those you're adjust you're you're you're playing with two part two parcels. When you're doing a boundary adjustment, you're playing with two parcels. Does that does any adjustment create a noncon legal non-conforming? Then you can't do that. Then you can't do the adjustment. So, it's got to stay within that both both the adjustments both. That's what you were saying about about the minimum minimum uh square feet. I got you. Now, now I'm starting to understand. So, if you've got So, if I've got an egg and I want uh and and the R1 I've got an R1 that I'm going to that I want to adjust the boundary to. I can't go less than three acres, right? Yeah. So, yeah, you could have 15 acres. You're going to be zoned R1. Say, I don't want that back pasture anymore. I'm getting out of the farming business, whatever. I just want my little three

acres. I'm retiring, whatever. And I don't want the rest of that. But my neighbor, he wants all of that and you're going to sell off 11 12 acres of that and that's going to leave you with 2.5 acres R1 with a with a house. No, that's that's that I understand that. Now, so those are the types of of situations that we review here inhouse that doesn't come before this board. The only thing that comes before this board is what we call the homestead split. We've done two of those where somebody wants to split off their um their house and can't meet the requirements of article 13. And so they're going to do like an easement that leads out to the road. That's the only scenario where we can approve something. But that actually takes your review and county commission approval to be able to have somebody split off seven acres in the middle of an 80, for example. Yeah, we've done a couple of those in the past. Um, lot splits have to uh meet certain requirements. If you're in the agricultural district, you're limited to a 7 acre maximum split. When we first adopted these regulations, we really set the goal of two houses per 40 acres in the agricultural district. So, somebody has a 40, they can put a house on it and if they have uh relative or not, you know, and they want to sell off some other land for another person to build a house, they're limited to 7 acres maximum. And then that's your two two houses per 40 acres that you're allowed without going through a lot of planning process, a lot of, you know, review process by us and this board. doesn't say that you can't have a third house or a fourth house or what have you on on that 40. It just means that if you

want to now you're going to reszone and now you're going to plat and you're going to go through the subdivision regulations. So you need to really think about whether seven acres is the right number or not. How was the seven acres arrived at originally? That's been the the million-dollar question. Um, I I can tell you as I recall, I think I'm probably the only one here that was in place. You weren't here. And you did the comp plan, but you didn't do the rags, did you? No. Yeah. And so the issue is always uh a farmer does not want to settle off say 10 acres. It used to be 10 acres in the egg. A lot of farmers or people living out in the agricultural district did not want to sell 10 acres to be able to split the existing house off. It had to do with the existing old farmhouse. They want to keep the land but didn't want to didn't want the house anymore. 10 acre there's a 10 acre minimum in the A. Or you could petition to reszone. Both options to some weren't very good. reszone is a three-month process to go through. That's not necessarily good for anybody. 10 acres wasn't good because they want to keep as much farm ground as they can. They just want to cut a little box around the house. Still had to be like say a minimum three. So discussions amongst former planning commission members, our consultant at the time, we we settled on seven acres. That way they can keep more of the farm ground as income. I don't think there's a scientific reason why we we chose 7 acres. It was just something that was less than 10. We knew 10 acres was an issue with a lot of people. So, we settled on on seven and still had a minimum of three in place and that

worked good for a while. But now it seems to be turning into more of an issue with with people. So, um are people wanting smaller splits? No. No, they're actually one larger now. Wanted larger larger reception of ground and there was a house on it and he had somebody that wanted to buy the house and 20 acres but he couldn't he could only buy the the house was 7 acres. So So the the idea is what is the minimum acreage? Are we going to allow one split in the egg? And that can be a 10 and a 30, a 20 and a 20, a three and a 37, or or whatever you want. Or do we still want to have uh a maximum acreage for a split? Instead of seven, make it, you know, 20. I mean, that's that's going to be the task. I think internally we discussed about maybe getting rid of that. And there's and still permit only one split in the A and that's the person's choosing whatever they want to do with a minimum of three acres with a minimum of three. That makes sense. They can go up anywhere from 40 to three acres. Right. So something to consider is is you can only split a 40 once. Yeah. But you can split it any way you want to as long as one of them is not less than three acres. Yeah. I think that makes sense. So then Yeah. But once that's occurred, that ford can't be split ever again without being platted or something like that. Right. It protects that. Right. Right. Now you're running into the the concerns about we have with the depth ratios embedded within this article here

where you can't do a flag lot. That's not going to meet the requirements. you know, they have to be squares, rectangles. The the frontage along the road and the depth or the width that you create can't be greater than a 3:1 ratio in the residential. It's 4:1 in the agricultural. So, that sometimes prevents somebody from uh acquiring a 10 acres or taking a split all the way to the property. I like if you have a a/4 mile long parcel, you know, you can't get to that 1320. It's going to it's going to be short unless you give me more more road frontage and there's been parcels out there that that doesn't that doesn't work because you're running into another another parcel that's out there. So So So there's there's flag lots out there now that I assume old old ones splits. What's the What are the problems we have with flag lots? Well, a lot a lot of the problems. You're on the You're under the gun, aren't you, Mark? A lot of the problems, you know, is the fact that it's a it's a road frontage thing. It It's a road frontage thing because used to be you had 60 foot of road frontage required in the county. You give me 60 ft of road front, you give me three acres, you can get a permit. So, you know, a lot of people will have 10, 15 acres with a 800 foot long driveway. Well, is there an issue with that? Well, I no, if it's just one if it's one house, I mean, who are we to say you it's it's all right. You can do that. You can have a 800 foot long driveway and one house. The issue comes into play when you want to split that. I got 15 acres. I don't need 15 acres. I can't maintain 15 acres, so I just like to sell off five or 10 of that to

somebody else and I'll give him an easement to use my driveway. Well, regulations don't don't permit easements. You have to have road frontage. Well, he doesn't have any road frontage. He's got 60 foot. It's not practical to buy land from somebody else to create, you know, a um initial frontage. And so now that guy is kind of stuck with 15 acres forever. Remind me, I can I can show you a development that has done that series of 60 foot long driveways and I'll bring that next month and you can decide if that's a good development idea or not because that's what would happen potentially. So that's why in 16 we increase it to 165 ft to make sure that at least there's adequate road frontage for a parcel of ground and even the potential to split that without going through the platting process. Something next week, next month is to show us some examples of how you calculate the ratio. I mean the three to one four to one the three to one four to one how that how I'm a visual guy so I'm gonna I might have to bring my crayons and and play a little bit but how it's calculated or how how it's done or yes because it's it's quite I can't for some reason I can't visual the when you say well it doesn't beat the 3:1 ratio I I'm it's got to be 100 ft wide and 300 ft long there you go three times as long It is very if you got 200t of road frontage, you the match you're going to have would be a 600t uh depth parcel. And if those two numbers don't equal the minimum acreage for that zoning district, then you got to give me more more frontage. So, how much of how much of that just what you just described, how much of what you just described gives you a heartburn

like you wouldn't believe? There's a lot there's a lot with that. I mean, I see the I see the reasoning behind it. So, how can All right. So, I'll challenge you coming coming next next month. What would ease that pain? You just eliminate it. It's quite simple. Just eliminate that requirement. If we don't care how a parcel looks, then we can just eliminate that requirement. I say I can show you other examples here where, you know, you start out like as a as a 20 acre parcel with whatever the depth of that's going to be and the parcel they want to cut out stops a couple hundred foot short of that say east property line or west property line it stops short so now you've got like an L that's created and is that good development but they couldn't get all the way to the back of that original parcel that property line because of the width and depth so then what's happening is Okay. Well, I'll do my, you know, 10 acres, five acres here and get that and then I'll do another illegal division of land for the additional three acres that I wanted that to gets me to the original back property. I know it's hard to to visualize that until you see an example in front of you. So, if that gives you heartburn then would you have more heart just as much heartburn trying if somebody wants to put in a long skinny leg, you know? Yeah, that was going to be my next question. I mean that's the other issue I mean is you're asking for I think you're asking for more issues. We do away with it. We do away with the the ratio the ratio. Yeah. I think it's something that or we can look at discussed amongst us and amongst you is well is is it is it a

concern is it a concern of this board or is it if we look at amending those ratios you know you know is it that's way it used to be you know we did not we had subdivision regulations but they weren't as strict as what these were and the subdivision regulations were just kind of there in case somebody wanted to follow them during a subdivision process. process and now there's a lot more strict and I always knew that going into these regulations that it wasn't necessarily going to be the zoning and the conditional use permit process that people had to go to. It would be on the subdivision side which would create the heartburn to use your word. You you have many issues that come that come up in real life with these ratios where people are trying to do something and run up against them. Oh yeah, all the time. You say issue. Is there something that can't be done? I mean, people come to me and they want to do this. The regs don't don't permit that, you know, and so if that's what you mean by me having an issue. Yeah. Okay. Going back to like those requests that you get that you have to say no, are those reasonable requests though if you didn't have the ratios? Yeah. I mean, where would it would it just wind up with an irredulous I mean, somebody that wants 7.8 8 acres. You know, they want 7.8 acres because it it takes it back to a fence line or it takes it back to a tree row or or some other natural feature, but yet it's8 acres too large. The ratio won't allow it. Or the ratio won't allow it. Yeah. They're they're hemmed in where they can't just give me an extra 50 foot of frontage to get the extra 50 foot of depth that they need to take in that pond or take in that tree row or or that fence line. I mean, yeah. So, how can we write some common sense into this? Yeah, because these are all residential lots we're talking about with these ratios and so on. But it

applies Well, yeah, but it affects the egg in the sense that when they want to split split that egg parcel and and do something smaller than 40 acres as well. Yeah. So, because then you're looking at going into R1 situation. Yeah. Well, yeah. So then okay so then you say okay let's let's reszone it you know down to a 3 acre minimum well when you reszone from a to residential now you have to develop a subdivision plat and develop a minimum of eight residential lots because now you're telling me that this this agriculture ground is no longer a viable land use. It's more suited to residential use. So then there that you got to develop a subdivision plan. Show us, show the county how this is going to be laid out. Similar to what we did with the subdivision down down south. How is this land going to look developed out once you get all through? We want to see that to make sure every lot is buildable and we're not going to have issues with issuing permits and not going to have drainage issues, not going to have road issues, all that type of stuff. So if you're looking at situation where the land owner retires, wants to sell off the the house, keep the farmland, does a lag lot split, then the tract with the house. How is that zoned? R1 still zoned a still zoned egg. Still zoned egg. Okay. Still zoned a and it's a conforming. It's considered a conforming parcel. Even though it's zoned a and it's only seven acres, it's still conforming because we have that a lot split approved and on file. Yep. Mhm. So, so those those ratios would not apply in that situation. The ratios do apply to

the seven acres because in the regs it it treats it as a residential lot. So, it's still the 3:1 ratio. Still zone, right? Even though it's zone A. So, well, and I put that in place because it didn't say anywhere in the regulations before we adopted it. Like, how is this treat? Is it a 4:1? Is it a 3:1? What are the setbacks? Are the setbacks 50 ft or the setbacks 30 ft? I mean, there's all these these questions. For practical purposes, it's treated as an R1 because it's residential. It's not a anymore. Even though zone A is a residential house. Okay. Clarifies that. Thank you. Yep. Food for thought. There's 15 minutes up yet. [Laughter] Long. I will try and bring this board next month more of a discussion on on this and see where we want to go. and thoughts on your setbacks. Yeah. You know, I mean, are they what are what are the problems with the existing setbacks? They're a problem. They're a problem. Yeah. I assume we're talking about what we do to fix it. What are your recommendations? I mean, should they be uniform? I mean, yeah. Tell tell us where your heart where your real heartburn is and then we'll try to find a solution until we've had discussions. One or two maybe. Well, and I think some examples cuz like Russ Russ mentioned, I'm a visual person. It's Sure. Yeah. Okay. If I can get these cases on the agenda, then Yeah. You can put on the overhead. Maybe the next meeting we need to rearrange the tables and he can have the chalkboard. There you go. And you like to play on the chalkboard. Yeah,

we can sit on that table. Really? Yeah. Yeah, if you don't mind, that way that way we can we'll just take that center out. You can use this on the whiteboard and we can draw you can put a you can you can put a parcel on there through this and then we'll draw lines across it and play. We don't have any cases. We don't have an audience. Yep. Well, if it's available, I like the historical uh perspective to so we don't have to redebate something that somebody already did 10, 15 years ago. I think that we're smarter than they were. Yeah, we are. I just don't know how much of that is available. Is is there anybody still around back then? Mark that adopted the rags. Yeah, Ken might still be. I have to look Lisa. Lisa was there. Lisa was there. Yeah, Ken. Yeah, there might be a few. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know if they would recall or not but yeah we can one quick question off the subject we got this in our packet this table of contents that just to put in our books that's to put in your book yeah that's even though we don't have the updated regulations in the books we can put these in you have the updated rags do you not in in the complete set of new regulations like from that book we got once upon a time no I don't think you'd have to was at your desk last month, right? Article 26. I probably do. Yeah, cuz I just got mine tonight. Yeah, you guys were absent. Everybody else had theirs last. So, do you not have it? I probably do. If you sent it, did you send them out? Mail

them? No, I just I had it at your desk last month. We'll look and see if you have it. And if you don't, I'll be happy to get you. Okay. And can you count to four? Yeah. 135 home. I was absent the last meeting late. No, I felt Yeah, only Allan and G were gone. That was February. Take a look. Meetings. I'll look. Take a look. Let me know. Yeah, seriously, let me know. I'll I can get that to you or whatever. If I can't find it, I'm sure I have it. Yeah, people out of your book. Okay. Because one's smart enough to put it where it belongs that way. Yeah. I move we journ. Yeah, I'll second there. Been moved and seconded. own favor. Say