Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust MinsPage 1 of 9 LINCOLN COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, August 23, 2023 6:00 P.M. Locations: Video Conference between the following locations: Lincoln County Courthouse, Commissioner Boardroom, 925 Sage Avenue 3rd Floor, Kemmerer, WY & Afton Planning & Engineering Office, Conference Room, 61 East 5th Avenue, Afton, WY I. CALL TO ORDER Karen Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:02 pm. A quorum was established. II. INTRODUCTION OF PNZ MEMBERS Planning Commission Members: Karen Anderson, Chair Allen Smoot, Vice Chair Tom Crank Chad Jensen Pam Price Lincoln County Staff: Robert Davis, Planning Director Emmett Mavy, Planner II Katie Gipson, Development Administrator Mikayla Hibbert, Office Assistant (Absent) Amy Butler, Engineer Austin Dunlap, Attorney Stephen Allen, Chief of Staff III. AGENDA INTRODUCTION BY PLANNING DIRECTOR Robert Davis welcomed everyone and thanked them for attending. Robert stated that the agenda would follow as outlined. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Karen questioned if anyone had any proposed changes to the July 19, 2023 meeting minutes. Chad stated that he had one proposed change. Allen made a motion to accept the minutes as amended. Chad seconded. Motion carried. V. DEVELOPMENT REPORT Katie presented the Development Report for June 26, 2023 to July 23, 2023. She stated that there were 18 Residential Use Permits in North Lincoln County, 10 Small Wastewater Permits, 1 South Lincoln County, and 0 Zoning and Development Permits. VI. 101 RZ 21 STAR VALLEY SPRINGS REZONING AND MASTER PLAN Robert presented the project. Robert explained that tonight the commission will be voting to allow the 30 day advertising process for the proposed project. Robert explained the advertising requirement that a rezone has to go through. Robert stated that project is a request to rezone in conjunction with a Conditional Use Permit Application, File # 108-MP-23, to subdivide and Master Plan a 49.5-acre property into 38 lots with 34 multi- family lots, four (4) commercial lots and one 1.52-acre park/community area connected by a .59-acre pedestrian pathway for property located at the northwest corner of Muddy String Road and Lost Creek Road approximately one mile north of the Town of Thayne, Wyoming. Robert stated that the rezone request would change approximately 31.1 acres from Rural Zoning to Mixed Zoning. Robert stated that approval of the Master Plan is Page 2 of 9 contingent upon the approval of the rezoning application. Robert discussed some concerns pertaining to the project’s Master Plan. Brett Bennett, the developer’s representative, gave a presentation outlining what the full buildout of the Master Plan would look like. Brett stated that the Chapter 23 Study was done for 226-bedroom equivalent rooms that would not have a negative effect on the nitrate levels. Brett stated that there has been discussion about joining the Bedford Water District and doing the appropriate annexing into that District. Dave Kennington, with Sunrise Engineering, who conducted the Chapter 23 Study spoke stating that the primary concern with septic systems is the level of nitrates. Dave stated that when doing the study, they first looked at 266-bedroom equivalent rooms and the nitrate levels would exceed the 10 milligrams per liter for this amount. Dave continued stating that in hopes of getting this number down more to 1 milligram per liter there would be a max at 195-bedroom equivalent rooms. Dave stated that the Bedford Water and Sewer District have been discussing centralized water with the developer. Dave stated that the sewer systems in the area would have to be enhanced septic systems. Chad questioned Muddy String and how that could expand to include turning lanes and who would be responsible for that. Robert stated that there is a 60 foot right-of-way that Muddy String could expand into. Robert stated that the developer is responsible for any road improvements. Chad questioned if this developer would contribute to improving Muddy String. Robert answered that yes, if the improvements were needed for this project. Chad asked for clarification on what they were approving tonight. Robert stated that tonight the Planning and Zoning Commission would be voting on if this were a complete application and if they could move forward advertising for the Rezone. Chad questioned what the Bedford Water and Sewer District’s capacity was. Robert stated that he does not have that information. Chad questioned who would do a traffic study. Robert stated that the developer would pay for a traffic study for the portion of Muddy String that they would be affected. Amy, the County Engineer, stated that the traffic study would have to be completed by a licensed Engineer in the State of Wyoming and the study would have to include a corridor study area, and that is determined by how many housing developments they have. Allen questioned who was going to keep track of the 195-bedroom equivalent room max. Robert stated that this would have to be determined. Karen asked Robert to explain leapfrogging to the audience. Robert explained that leapfrogging is when a development skips over greenfield or agricultural lands further away from roads or utilities thus leaving huge areas empty in-between. Tom questioned the Findings of Approval item C that talks about not overburdening existing roads, utility and service infrastructure. Tom continued that until a traffic study is done, he does not believe this can be a Finding of Approval until we know the results. Discussion followed about if there was evidence of overburdening. Karen questioned Amy on Condition of Approval # 10. Amy stated that as she understands that right now these Conditions of Approval are to verify it’s a complete application and that we can start the 30-day advertisement, and that the Master Plan may have different Conditions of Approval when it comes forward. Karen opened up the Public Hearing and called for comments. Pat Factor, a resident near Lost Creek, stated that she has concerns of the 30-day noticing being approved without a lot of the specifics of the project being outlined. Eric Robinson, who owns the adjourning land, stated that he does not believe the project would maintain the rural character of the land and have a low impact on the neighbors as it states the Rural Zone should have in Lincoln County’s Comprehensive Plan. Eric continued stating that Mixed Use property is generally assigned around incorporated towns or community areas and that this property does not apply to either or those areas. Eric stated that when people buy land, they look to see what the zoning is and rely on those different zones to see what will be allowed around them. Eric also stated that he does not agree with the Planning Director’s opinion that this will not overburden the county road. Eric stated concern about the water on the proposed project property stating that there are three springs that come up on the west side of the property that do not vary seasonally. Sam Titensor, a neighboring property owner, stated that there is ground water 3 to 5 feet underneath the surface and shared concern of the amount of septic systems and influx of bedrooms in this area that could contaminate the ground water. Sam had a water test done on the ground water in this location on August 15, 2023, and it came back as not drinkable. Roger Page 3 of 9 Smith, a neighboring property owner, stated that he had talked to Bedford Water and Sewer District and was told that water prices would increase if they have to pump up the water from a well. Roger also stated that he is concerned with emergency services, traffic on Muddy String, and that the possible commercial buildings were not included on the sewer report. Keith Wicks, a neighboring property owner, asked what enhanced system would be needed for this property and if one enhanced system would be called out for the project. Alisha Strobel, a neighboring property owner, stated that she would like to see more information before the thirty-day review process moves forward. Aleshia shared concern about this area being called an urban transition area, and the definition given of overburdening a roadway. Robert stated the report called the area urban/ rural transition. Shawna Titensor, a neighboring property owner, shared concern about affordable housing and the speeding happening on Muddy String with the amount of traffic already using Muddy String. Carolyn Titensor, a neighboring property owner, stated that the Mixed-Use zone opens up a lot of possibilities for different businesses and that she is already having her rural lifestyle affected by a storage unit in the Mixed zone with their lights on her property. Carolyn emphasized that she does not want to have her rural lifestyle affected anymore from other businesses surrounding her property. Julie Olenslager, a neighboring property owner, shared concern over the traffic in the area and unsafe driving that is occurring. Karen closed the Public Hearing. Chad questioned the number of septic systems that would be put in, and if there is more then one septic system per lot. Robert replied that it would be one per lot but the number of bedrooms increases the size of these septic systems. Chad questioned if in the subdivision phase we do dictate what type of enhanced systems will be used. Robert answered that we do not at the subdivision phase. Tom clarified that the proposal before the commission tonight is to determine if it is a complete application and if it is to allow it to be advertised for thirty days with a Public Hearing scheduled at the end of those thirty days. Robert answered that is correct. Tom questioned what the next step would be if the Commission determines it not a complete project. Robert stated that the applicant could appeal at that point. Allen questioned if they were to do a traffic study if it would be conducted during this thirty-day period. Robert stated that when the project comes forward for Preliminary Plat in it would have the Traffic Study included. Karen asked Stephen Allen for his input at this point. Stephen stated that at this point the Planning and Zoning Commission would be making a motion on if this is a complete application and allowing the thirty-day notice; however, if the Planning and Zoning Commission do choose to deny to deny with conditions so the applicant knows what to do in order to come back and get an approval. Robert stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission is obligated to allow the project to have a thirty-day advertisement period. Karen questioned why it is brought before the Commission at this time if they are obligated to allow it. Discussion followed about how to make a motion that the Planning and Zoning Commission is comfortable with. Allen made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Commission find the rezone application, 101 RZ 21, complete and begin the official thirty-day notice period and during this period we need to see a traffic study, study of the water issues, hear from the school district about what they see impacts are and clarification from the Planning Director on Section 1.1.A in the Comprehensive Plan. Tom seconded. All in favor. Motion carried. Discussion from the public about missing letters of opposition in the packet followed. VII. 103 MP 23 ETNA NORTH RV PARK- MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION Emmett presented the project. Emmett stated that this project is a Master Plan Modification request for the RV Park section that was part of a 92.37-acre Master Plan File #102-PZ-19. Emmett explained that the modification is requesting that the east 24 of 50 RV spaces to be used as year-round use. Emmett continued that it is also requesting to allow RV’s, Campers, Park Models, and Tiny Homes on the 24 spaces in the east half of the RV Park. Emmett stated that this modification is also finalizing the RV Park layout, site plan, phasing schedule, buffering, and landscaping plan for the RV park section of the Master Plan. Emmett clarified that this request is not affecting any part of the Master Plan outside of the RV Park. Emmett stated that this project is 2.5 miles northwest of the Town of Star Valley Ranch. He stated that the proposed phasing schedule is: Phase I – Spaces 1- 12 with landscaping to the west of the RV sites, Phase II – Spaces 13-24 with landscaping to the east of the RV sites, Phase III – Spaces 25-37 with landscaping to the west of the RV sites, and Phase IV – Spaces 38-50 with landscaping to the east of the RV sites and east side of US Highway 89. Emmett discussed the buffering plan and landscaping plan. Emmett stated that based on the request for spaces to be used for RV’s, Campers, Park Models, Page 4 of 9 and Tiny Homes, staff feels it is important to define these uses for a clear understanding of what is being proposed. Emmett gave definitions to the different uses. He stated that there was correspondence from a neighbor, and WYDOT. Bill Neeb, the developer, stated that the septic and electrical were designed to include tiny homes. Bill stated that the intent of this development is to provide housing for the workforce in Star Valley. Bill gave examples of other RV parks that do allow tiny homes, park models, as well as RV’s and campers. Bill stated that they are doing buffering, that the neighbor in opposition is 1,200 feet away and the development is not in immediate view of the neighbor. Chad questioned Bill about 10x20 parking space, and where if anywhere there is room for more vehicles. Bill answered that these are single bedroom homes, and that with the campers there is room for the vehicle in front of the camper. Bill stated they have not had any issues with lack of parking yet. There were questions on the different areas for the different types of housing. Allen questioned what the four black boxes in the layout were. Bill answered that these are housing for the employees. Karen opened up the Public Hearing portion of the project. Julie Johnstone, a neighboring property owner, stated that there was no landscaping, berms or anything originally put in and that she can see all the tiny homes from her window. Julie stated that the grass is higher than it has ever been due to the rainfall, and due to the grass being higher at the time those pictures were taken it does not indicate how well she can regularly see the neighboring property. Julie shared concern over where parking for extra vehicles would be, snow removal, and influx for emergency services and schools. Karen closed the Public Hearing. Karen questioned Bill if he was in compliance with the lighting regulations. Bill stated that all of his buildings are in compliance. Karen questioned if there was any signage proposed for the property and stated that there is regulations for those. Karen questioned Emmett why the berms were bigger for other areas than this. Emmett answered that in our Land Use Regulations it gives the minimums of what these berms will be but not maximums, and so different developers go above the minimum. Emmett clarified that contrasting uses have to have a buffer. Karen questioned if there was enough room for snow removal. Emmett stated that Staff does think there is enough space. Chad questioned where ATVs and other vehicles will be stowed and if there will be regulations for them. Emmett stated that because this is a RV Park there are park rules that govern those living in the park, and that the owner can change those rules as needs arise. Bill stated that he does plan on having some storage. Tom questioned if Lots 18 and 19 can be split and sold off from the other lots. Emmett stated that this would be determined in a Preliminary Plat phase and how they are platted. Discussion continued about the RV Park layout and the possibility of Lots 18 and 19 being sold later. Chad made a motion to send a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners for File# 103 MP 23, a Conditional Use Permit with Findings of Approval A-D and Conditions of Approval 1-10. Allen seconded. All in favor. Motion carried. VIII. 105 CUP 23 STAR VALLEY SHIPPING CONTAINER STORAGE Robert presented the project. Robert stated that the proposed project is to establish a commercial storage facility comprising 162 shipping containers with 112 units being 8 feet wide, 40 feet long, and 10 feet tall and 50 units being 8 feet wide, 20 feet long, and 9 feet tall located on approximately 2.2-to-2.3-acre portion of a 5.489-acre lot in the Rural zone. Robert stated that the applicant requests the existing 12 units be approved with this proposal as they may be rented in the future. Robert stated the property is located approximately .75 miles north of the Town of Thayne, WY off of Fawn Lane and surrounded by Rural as well as Mixed Use Zoning. Robert stated that the applicant proposes a 24-hour self-storage operation and does not propose an office for the site. Robert summarized a survey that showed a market area population of at least 20,000 to 30,000 people currently support roughly 18 self-storage units in Lincoln County. Robert continued stating that seventeen of the 18 storage units surveyed provided for 1,233 units with 1,208 or 98% being utilized. Robert stated that there is at least 1,600 square feet will be reserved for snow storage and there is also a 7,200 square foot area reserved as a snow storage removal area. Robert stated that the units will have low intensity exterior lighting with very low lumens and motional sensored for brightness contributing to dark sky concerns. Robert stated that the area has good drainage. Robert stated that planning staff has received two letters of opposition. Page 5 of 9 Austin Dunlap, stated that Emmett Mavy, the applicant is also a part of Planning Staff. Austin continued asking Robert what role, if any, did Emmett play in processing the project. Robert stated that Emmett was not involved in any meetings besides the pre-application meeting, and was asked not to discuss this project with other staff or Robert at work. Robert continued that Emmett had nothing to do with processing this current project or the Star Valley Springs Rezone and Master Plan. Emmett restated that he followed the same format as any developer for this project and did not help with any Staff Reports or other materials used to process the permit. Emmett shared a PowerPoint Presentation with the Commission that discussed what the shipping containers would look like, the buffering that would take place, the life expectancy of a One Tripper Shipping Container, the benefits of shipping containers when it comes to creating a cleaner way to store household items, traffic generation, and the need of these units in Lincoln County. Pam questioned Emmett if his plan was to have the shipping containers on a cement pad. Emmett responded that he does not intend on paving the driveway, but he will do at least a foot concrete walkway along the front to make everything uniform. Pam clarified that they will be sitting on the ground. Emmett stated that that is correct but only the four corners will be touching the ground. Pam questioned if these are permanently fixed. Emmett stated that they are purchased as mobile units but set up as a permanent facility. Pam clarified that once these mobile units are set it is a permanent situation. Emmett stated that was correct. Pam questioned how these were viewed by the Lincoln County Assessor, as mobile personal property or real property taxable units. Emmett stated that according to the Assessor they will be taxed under a business asset tax. Tom questioned if these are tied down or have some sort of foundation. Emmett stated that each unit weighs around 9,000 lbs empty, so they are pretty much immovable and that he believes they would withstand 200 mph winds. Tom stated that he would like to see these meet a safety building code. Emmett said that would be a part of the process. Chad questioned the Condition of Approval regarding non-combustible material and how he would enforce that. Emmett stated that this will be in the rental agreement. Emmett stated that these units also act as a natural fire wall, that a fire would be secluded to just the one container instead of spreading. Chad questioned Robert what Lincoln County’s policy is regarding shipping containers. Robert stated that there are no design guidelines in place. Chad questioned that this is a commercial storage facility within a Rural Zone and if this was an allowed use. Robert stated it is an allowed use with a Conditional Use Permit. Chad shared concern about allowing a commercial use on a Rural Zone and the precedent it might set moving forward. Emmett stated that there are a lot of storage units that are permitted in the Rural Zone. Karen questioned the developer if there could be possible hours of operation to help reduce the headlights and disturbances from the neighbors. Emmett stated that it would be the first storage unit that would be required to have fixed hours. Emmett stated that he does live by a lot of these other storage units and that they do not see a lot of light during the night due to the buffering that has to take place surrounding these properties. Karen questioned the lighting. Emmett stated these lights would be 3.5 inches by 3.5 inches and they would be placed over the padlock. Karen questioned if there would be a road base. Emmett stated that there would be a road base. Karen questioned the drainage and how that would work. Emmett explained the drainage plan and how snow would be removed. Karen opened up the Public Hearing portion of the project. Roger Smith, a neighboring property owner, stated that with the amount of storage units in the area are affecting the property values. Georgette Harmon, a neighboring property owner, stated she sent in a letter but has concerns about the traffic and the safety on Muddy String. Georgette stated that it is an eye sore, and that she does not want to see more. Julie Olenslager, stated that she is concerned how they are being transported into the facility. Julie also mentioned that she is concerned about the traffic and also the drugs that these will bring in. Alisha Strobel stated that she is concerned with the lighting as she is already dealing with adverse effects of lighting on storage units nearby. Alisha stated that she believes Lincoln County needs to reserve their Rural Zoning. Carol Titensor, a neighboring property owner, stated that she is in between two storage units and that there is a lot of disturbance at night from people accessing their storage units. Carol stated that she is concerned about the flammable material that are in storage units such as snowmobiles. John Backer, a neighboring property owner, shared concern over the open space that is being taken away and being replaces with commercial storage units. Justin Roth, a direct neighbor, shared that he is at the end of Fawn Lane where the entrance to the Shipping Containers is and his view from his property would be Page 6 of 9 completely taken away by the shipping containers. Justin shared concern from dust, traffic, and the potential decrease of his property value. Karen closed the Public Hearing portion of the project. There was one more additional comment asking for the Commission to postpone the project until a traffic study is done. Emmett stated that he believes that Muddy String should have a lower speed limit and that he anticipates that happening. Emmett stated that he does not believe that a lot of traffic will be generated from his project. Emmett answered that semi-trailers will not be delivering these shipping containers, but that a Dodge 3500 with a gooseneck trailer will be doing the delivering. Chad shared his opinion on shipping containers and that he believes they are an eye sore and does not want to see them all over the County. Amy stated that she would recommend that Fawn Lane be brought up to County Standards and that the road should be widened. Amy stated that the new recommendation for road width is 24 feet wide with 1-foot shoulders and that Fawn Lane is an 18-foot-wide road. Discussion about the recommendations of county road width followed. Allen made a motion to send a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners for File #105 CUP 23 a Conditional Use Permit with Findings of Approval A-F, Conditions of Approval 1-8, with an additional Condition of Approval to improve Fawn Lane to the current standard of 20 feet. Pam questioned if it was 20 or 24 feet. Allen responded that the current standard is 20 feet. Motion failed. Chad made a motion to send a recommendation of denial to the Board of County Commissioners for File #105 CUP 23, a Conditional Use Permit, based on that it will substantially impair the use of neighboring properties. Motion failed. Karen stated that this project will move forward to the Board of County Commissioners with no approval or denial recommendation. IX. 101 PZ 23 LUR AMENDMENT- MODIFICATION TO CHAPTER 4.3 & 6.2 Allen stated that he would be abstaining from this matter due to the fact that his subdivision still needs its signage. Emmett presented the land use amendment proposal. Emmett stated that the proposal tonight is to approve a thirty-day notice to accept the adoption of 101 PZ 23. Emmett stated that the first amendment change would be regarding Chapter 4.3. Emmett stated that the State Legislature passed a subdivision law stating that any subdivision would have to have a legal fence on the perimeter of the subdivision or to have the neighbors waive the requirement to have the fence along the perimeter. Emmett explained that when this passed it gave County’s the leeway to waive that requirement for subdivision up to five lots. Emmett stated that the amendment proposed tonight is to waive the requirement for the new fencing laws to Simple and Minor Subdivisions. Emmett stated that in Chapter 6.2 they are proposing a change to signage. Emmett stated that it now reads that Planning Staff will install signs for a subdivision, and that the proposed change is that Developers will install with the direction from Planning Staff. Chad questioned why Planning Staff wants to change the fencing requirements. Robert stated that he believes the fencing requirement is nebulous and extensive for Simple and Minor Subdivisions. Chad stated that he has conflict with the wording at the earliest convenience. Chad followed up stating that he would rather see an exact amount of time. Emmett stated that that is addressed by the Development Agreement and has to be done by Final Plat for Minor and Major Subdivisions. Emmett explained the process of ordering signs. Robert stated that Planning Staff has to order in bulk often to help with shipping costs which then in return makes it hard to dictate an exact timeline to have signs installed. Amy wanted to clarify who would be ordering the signs due to some confusing language in the proposal. Discussion followed. Robert stated that Planning Staff will order and then the developers will install. Marlowe Scherbel stated that it has to be done by the time of Final Plat, so there is already a timeline. Amy stated that this is not just for subdivision roads, but also Private Road Names that are existing but needing names. Discussion on how to amend the proposed change followed. Marlowe stated that he believes the fencing should be required for both Minor and Major Subdivisions. Discussion followed. Chad made a motion to start the thirty-day notice 101 PZ 23 with the modification to Section 6.I. F to read once the cost of the sign post system is received by the Department of Planning from the applicant, the appropriate signs will be ordered by Planning Staff and installed by the developer prior to final plat approve for subdivisions. Private Road signage shall be ordered by Planning Staff and shall be installed within 30 days upon receipt of the sign by the property owner at the direction of Planning Staff. Pam seconded the motion. All in favor. Allen abstained. Page 7 of 9 X. SKETCH PLANS a. Major Subdivision, Valley of the Burm Third Filing Emmett presented the Sketch Plan. Emmett stated that the proposal is for a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application proposal to subdivide 36+/- acres (Lots 1 & 7) into eight residential lots ranging in size from 2.00-7.55 acres. Emmett stated the average lot size will be 4.5 acres. Emmett stated the proposed location is in the Rural Zone and gain access off of County Road 126 and share a private subdivision road. Emmett stated that the subdivision is surrounded by agricultural/residential uses, with a gravel pit located just north of the subdivision, but it is shielded from view by topography Emmett stated that each lot will have individual wells and individual septic systems. Emmett gave information on the background of the subdivision stating that Valley of the Burm original subdivision filing was created on July 3, 2019 and consisted of 5 lots and the Second Filing of Valley of the Burm was created on December 9, 2021 and created one additional lot, making a total of 6 lots. Emmett stated the Sketch Plan for tonight will result in a total of 12 lots total in all three phases. Emmett explained that Lot 1 is becoming Lots 8, 9 and 10 and Lot 7 is becoming Lots 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15. Emmett showed the Commission the proposed lot configurations and shared concern about the shared driveway that would be connecting to the subdivision road. Emmett stated that there are three driveways that will be coming to the subdivision road in the cul-de-sac. Emmett stated that if the cul-de-sac would be moved further down then it would not have the multiple driveways accessing off of the cul-de-sac. Tom stated that the flag lots with a shared driveway are just ways for the developer to not build a complete road. There was discussion on flag lots and long driveways. b. Major Subdivision, Refuge West Fourth Filing Robert presented the Sketch Plan. Robert stated that this Sketch Plan is being presented and its preliminary plat will be approved on the condition that a rezoning from Rural to Mixed for Lots 1, 2 and 6 will be approved. Robert stated that a notice for the rezoning was not created in time for the August 23, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and as such the request to approve the notice will not be presented at this time. Robert stated that there is a need to rezone to Mixed in order to accommodate the 2.0-acre lot size having less than a 5-acre average for a subdivision which is not allowed in Rural. Robert stated that the site is surrounded on most sides by Mixed zoning. Robert stated that this proposal represents an update of a master plan that if approved by the county would allow by the CCR rules one (1) acre lots, and as such, this Sketch Plan represents the master plan as well as what will be presented as a preliminary plat. Robert stated that Planning Staff stated that they do not see any issues or constraints at this time. Chad asked if this is within the Town of Alpine. Robert stated that it is not. Chad questioned if they would have individual well and septic. Robert stated that they would hook on to Alpine Water and Sewer District. Chad stated that he would like the developer to look at Lot 5 and the utilities easement surrounding it. Discussion continued. XI. OTHER PLANNING MATTERS Robert asked the Commission if they had time to look at a date and time for an hour workshop. Discussion about possible times and dates followed. Karen stated that she would like an update on what occurred at the Board of County Commissioners meeting concerning the 5-acre minimum. Robert stated that Commissioner Connelly had concerns of the 5-acre average and that it was put into place for severe topography issues and use the average as a way to include those lots with severe topography. Austin stated that the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law is hard to find something that is factual when it has to do with the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law. Chad asked for the issue of the 5-acre minimums to be brought back for discussion. Karen asked for the new fencing laws to be given to the Planning and Zoning Commissioners so they can update their Land Use Regulations. XII. ESTABLISHMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BYLAWS The new bylaws were passed out for the Commission mem Page 8 of 9 ADJOURNMENT Chad made a motion to adjourn. Tom seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 11:05 P.M. Page 9 of 9 The minutes from the August 23th, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting were approved on the _____ day of _________________ , 2023. _____________________________________ _____________________________________ Chair Dated Director Dated