City of Goodland Planning Commission Minutes
9/19/2023
- CALL TO ORDER:
The September 19, 2023 meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 6:02 p.m. Planning commissioners in attendance: Grady Bonsall, Dennis Snethen, Wallace Hansen and Matt McKenzie. Staff in attendance: Kent Brown, City Manager and Zach Hildebrand, Building Official. General public included Doug and April Hall, applicants for the zoning variance request and Shaun Boden from KOA.
2. Public Comment
There was no public comment
- Public Hearing-Variance Request- 811 E Hwy 24.
City Manager Brown reviewed the introduction to the topic – the Planning Commission acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals shall hear all facts and testimony from all parties wishing to be heard concerning the requested variance. In each case, the Board of Zoning Appeals shall not grant a variance unless it finds, based on the evidence presented, facts which conclusively support all of the following findings:
UNIQUENESS:
ADJACENT PROPERTY:
HARDSHIP:
PUBLIC INTEREST:
SPIRIT AND INTENT:
MINIMUM VARIANCE:
See Article 14 – Variance Procedure from the Planning Commission procedures manual that
was included in the previous agenda packet for additional information. Please remember that
the Planning Commission members will be asked to provide an explanation for each standard
which is found to be met for the variance to be approved.
The applicant, April Hall, presented to the Planning Commission. April reviewed how they came to this point. April stated that Doug and she purchased the property at 811 E HWY 24 at the Sherman County Tax sale in November 2022. They had some ideas for the lot including recreational vehicle and boat storage. We own a rv and a boat and there wasn’t anywhere in town that this was available.
April continued that they found there would be 1 ½ to 2 acres that were not going to be used. They cleaned up the property, chip sealed the entrance and made the property presentable.
There is a wonderful KOA campground and there is another campground on the other side of town. According to market research there is a need for spaces for the traveler – and not necessarily a destination resort.
April stated the site is intended to be a clean, safe and quiet alternative to WalMart or other parking areas.
April then reviewed their comments on each of the variance standards for 811 E. Highway 24.
In terms of uniqueness, the site will remain at 3 acres with the trailer business covering no more than half of the site.
The variance will not affect adjacent property owners per the owners that have been contacted by April. Tree company, rodeo owner and a vacant property are the adjacent property owners. April doesn’t see where they will be affected.
As stated previously, the hardship is the service building is not feasible for this size of the site. The cost will be substantial and about $45,000 to complete a service building.
April continued that the variance would not adversely affect the public health. There had been a public roadside previously out where the greenhouse is currently. April stated that most of the rv units are self-contained and they would not want to use public facilities. She doesn’t see the need of a service building for this size of operation – an operation of 8 to 10 stalls.
In addition, the spirit and intent of the zoning regulations would not be opposed by the granting of this variance.
Finally, the minimum variance if allowed in the General Business district. April stated that they are looking for only 8 to 10 stalls and possibly putting an additional 5 stalls in the future – maybe. She says that they can’t pencil out the cost of a service building in addition to the dirt that is needed to do the site work.
They did have to buy a transformer and a water meter for the site. City Manager Brown stated that on any property that is demolished they remove the meter and any connection to the rest of the system.
April Hall stated that they would be willing to promote other places in the community – wants to promote Goodland.
Chairman McKenzie asked if they would be full amenity spots – water,sewer, electric, etc. April replied that they would be. April stated that at campgrounds she visited that no one uses sewer dump stations until the day they leave. Commissioner Bonsall stated that the Goodland rest area on I-70 has them as well.
Chairman McKenzie asked what is the city’s policy of harvesters – or longer term stays for harvest host. McKenzie stated that when he was working harvests he never used one that had amenities. Building Official Hildebrand states that the code says that outside a trailer camp, one cannot stay at a place for a longer stay without applying to do so from the Building Official. McKenzie then asked what do you do about WalMart and the people that stay there? Also, the Welcome Center will allow a person to stay for 24 hours. Hildebrand stated that 24 hours won’t be a problem. McKenzie is trying to determine is the competitor. McKenzie stated that if it is full amenities then it starts to look like the KOA. If it is no amenities, then it looks like the WalMart. Brown stated that the definition is more a trailer camp or another section of the code which we will get to in just a bit.
April Hall stated that Goodland cannot offer too many spots. The 8 to 10 spaces in her application is not going to overwhelm the market.
Brown stated that the applicant has presented. He asked if there is anyone else here willing to speak. Shawn with KCN Campgrounds which owns the KOA campground in Goodland. He stated that KCN campgrounds owns 7 other campgrounds. What applies to Goodland, with the expansion approved by the city the business has increased 20%. Before there weren’t enough long sites available for bigger rigs. With the addition of longer sites in the back of the campground that can handle 40 feet travel trailers and the 45 foot 5th wheels. Shawn also stated that the remodel of the service building due to a water leak has increased usage as well. He stated that about 60% of the renters use the service building instead of about 40% that used the service building before the remodel. The showers are bigger than what they have in their campers and also have more hot water than what they can use in their campers. Commissioner Hanson asked if KOA can live with the new campground and whether the new campground can live with the KOA. Shawn stated that a national survey stated that there is enough traffic. The number of travelers has increased since COVID started. With the expansion, Shawn stated there are about 75 spots in the KOA campground.
Commissioner Bonsall asked April Hall if they are going to be open 365 days a year or if they are going to be seasonal. April stated that is hard to say, but, would want to be open 365 days a year. Bonsall also asked if they are going to have a maximum stay or not. That is part of the discussion with the city and there would be limits on a maximum stay to meet the city code.
Shawn stated that they had received a questionnaire to answer a few items to allow the harvesters stay a longer stay at the KOA. April then described a couple temporary lots that were built in Colby.
Chairman McKenzie asked for City Manager Brown to go through staff’s findings.
Brown stated that page 30 of the agenda packet starts the staff report.
Brown stated that the definition of a trailer camp in Section 9-101 is a tract of land with five acres or more, containing sites for the overnight or short-term parking of house trailers. A trailer camp cannot be located in R-1, R-2 and R-3 districts. Brown stated that this is curious since the City of Goodland does not have a R-3 district. The part that is requested to vary from is the requirement for 5 acres.
The other section that there is a requested variance is Section 9-113 which is the requirement for a service building. Brown stated that the city attorney made a point that the Planning Commission will have to say yes or no to both variance requests independently.
Brown stated that those are the 2 questions are before the Commission. The staff comments start at the bottom of page 33 of the pdf. The application is proper. While it is proper, it does not meet the requirements of the code in being unique to this property or a hardship. The other trailer camps in this jurisdiction have had to abide by the code that require facilities for men and women to use the restroom or shower. The other trailer camp owners have also stated that their facilities get used more frequently than not.
The purpose of the lot being required to be 5 acres is to provide a separation for lighting, odor and noise. April made a good point that there is no problem for the neighbors currently. Brown stated that he reminds boards that you have to consider both current and future land uses. He reviewed the aerial map of the site and reminded the board that it is a commercial zone. Brown stated that there is about 80 feet to the residential zone to the south and about 300 feet to the nearest home which is outside of city limits.
After some discussion, Brown stated that after staff had sent the notices to the neighbors and published the notice of hearing in the newspaper – staff had found another section of code that might apply. Brown reviewed Section 19 of the code which includes a use table and a set of use standards in Sections 19-501 and 19-502. In Section 19-502 subsection T it describes a RV Park. RV Park describes the same categories of vehicles as the vehicles described for a trailer camp. In 19-502, subsection T, has a limitation of 2 acres for a RV Park. RV Park is only allowed in commercial and industrial zones – which matches the trailer camp. The maximum number of spaces is 20 spaces per acre – which is not a concern here. One thing that it doesn’t mention is a service building. It describes the following –
(5)A central office or convenience establishment with an attendant shall be provided within the recreational vehicle park to register guests and provide service and supervision to the camp for camps in excess of 5 acres.
It is interesting that it mentions camps instead of RV Parks here. Then it describes what shall be submitted for a development plan.
(6)The applicant for a recreational vehicle park shall submit a development plan to the Planning Commission for approval. Such plan shall contain the information as required below and any other information the Board reasonably shall deem necessary to fully evaluate the proposed development. The applicant shall submit the information on a sheet size not to exceed 24″ × 36″ dimensions as a proposed development plan showing:(A)General layout of development with dimensions, depths, number of spaces and related sanitation accommodations.(B)Parking area location, sizes and capacity.(C)Ingress and egress points for the project.(D)Use of structures.(E)General layout of typical recreational vehicle space showing size of space and proposed improvements.(F)Layout of roadway within the camp.(G)Net density of proposed project, expressed in terms of units per acre.(H)General landscaping plan indicating all new and retained plant material to be incorporated within the new development and layout of outdoor lighting system.(I)Plan and method of sewage disposal and water supply.(J)Location plan and number of proposed sanitary conveniences, including proposed toilets, washrooms, laundries and utility areas.(K)The development shall provide a general refuse storage area or areas that shall be provided with a paved concrete surface and shall be enclosed to screen it from view.
So, staff is going to have a situation to suggest an amendment to the code to address this difference between the 2 definitions – trailer camp and RV Park. But, the variance request is about Section 9 – not about this Section 19 regarding the RV Park. Brown stated that he is glad that this variance request has brought this to light – the complications with the code. After talking with the city attorney and staff, we still want to proceed with the variance request. Applying as a trailer camp requires a variance in both instances. Applying as a RV Park, there would not be a need for a variance.
Brown stated that the variance for the 5 acres is less problematic than the variance request for no service building.
Brown suggested that the Board needs to consider each variance separately.
Variance request on the size of the property less than 5 acres.
FINDINGS OF BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ON EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Approved Denied
- Uniqueness xx
Given the physical surroundings and shape of the lot, there is plenty of space to put the camp at this site.
- Adjacent Property xx
Given the location on Highway 24, it will stay commercial. Adjacent Property is not affected per the testimony given.
- Hardship xx
It will make it difficult to move forward with the project without the variance.
- Public Interest xx
Don’t see any adverse affects from the site.
- Spirit and Intent of Regs xx
It is still in a well established commercial zone. Like interests next to each other.
- Minimum Variance xx
It is the least amount of variance for the site size requirements.
Brown stated that there is a recommended motion in the packet – – –
RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to approve the variance for allowing the trailer camp to be
on a lot small than 5 acres based on the following findings:
- A lot being smaller than 5 acres due to the limited amount of customers they can serve.
Bonsall motion, Snethen seconded, to approve the variance for allowing the trailer camp to be on a lot smaller than 5 acres based on those findings.
Brown asked the Board to do the whole variance review again regarding the service facilities. Brown stated the Board would review each item again in reference to service facilities.
Chairman McKenzie stated he could see it both ways. He can see the density or lack of density meets the need for a variance. But, the code calls out for a service building. He doesn’t think it is unique to the property. Commissioner Snethen stated that the applicant can make the lot wide enough, but, it will still limit the size of the lots dedicated to the RV’s.
FINDINGS OF BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ON EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Approved Denied
a. Uniqueness xx
Given the number of people and rv’s – that is where it is unique. Other campgrounds have quite a few more customers.
b. Adjacent Property xx
Hanson asked if staff had heard any comments from the neighbors. Not having a facility may be more beneficial for the neighbors.
c. Hardship xx
Not feasible to move forward with the project without the variance. Cost alone is not a reason alone to approve the variance per Manager Brown. However, the staffing of the service building is an additional reason.
d. Public Interest xx
Don’t want to see the creation of a roadside park.
e. Spirit and Intent of Regs xx
It is still in a well established commercial zone.
f. Minimum Variance xx
Brown stated that Building Official Hildebrand had included a suggested motion for an alternative to the full service building in the staff report.
McKenzie stated that the extra wording in the alternate motion is looking for middle ground. McKenzie stated that the minimum variance is just on the service building itself – no other requirement for the site.
Brown stated that since the Planning Commission has reviewed and made findings on all these factors on the variance request for a service building, there is a recommended motion in the packet.
McKenzie stated before we have a motion he wanted to have a clarification on the language within the two different sections. McKenzie stated that also the applicant could withdraw the application and resubmit based as a RV Park. Brown stated that staff knows this is a deficiency in the code to have 2 definitions for the same term and use standard. Brown stated that staff will draft an ordinance to address the deficiency between the two sections. However, there is no guarantee that the ordinance will be approved. There is too much confusion with trailer camps, mobile home parks and rv parks and have much more clarity between the different definitions.
Brown stated that the easy way for a variance request is to have the applicant withdraw. But, the notice was already sent and that this would allow the discussion to occur to set up the foundation for the ordinance to change the code.
McKenzie stated he is hesitant to grant a variance because of the discrepancy in the wording of the definitions in the code. The applicants could withdraw and resubmit as a RV Park and be approved in the code. So, McKenzie stated it is better to vote against the variance and allow the applicant to resubmit as a RV park. If the variance is granted and the site is successful, he could see it snowballing a bit and having multiple applications occurring because of the successful variance.
April Hall stated that until the ordinance is cleaned up; it could make it difficult based on the timing of the approval of the ordinance. She said she doesn’t disagree about the clarification on the language. But she is concerned about the timing. McKenzie stated that a RV park could be submitted tomorrow. April then asked if the RV park is submitted and then the permit application is completed. Could a new ordinance have any effect on the permit application. Building Official Hildebrand said a building permit is good for 180 days and can be renewed for another 180 days. Further discussion centered on the building permit.
McKenzie stated that the options are for the applicant to withdraw or the Board can finish the review of the variance request.
April Hall stated that Doug and April Hall will withdraw the variance request application. Building Official Hildebrand stated he would send the requirements for a RV Park – and how it is different from the trailer camp. The site plan review would be at the next planning commission if the RV Park would be submitted quickly.
McKenzie stated that the second variance request was withdrawn.
- Site Plan Review – Douglas & April Hall 811 E. Hwy 24
To avoid redundancy, Chairman McKenzie stated that they would just table the site plan review since it is over the same topic.
- Reports
- Planning Commissioners
Chairman McKenzie asked if Commissioners Bonsall and Hansen had anything to report. Commissioner Bonsall had nothing to report.
Commissioner Snethen had nothing to report.
Commissioner Hansen stated that people keep asking him when are they going to construct 8th Street. City Manager Brown stated that the tax was just starting to be collected in July. The plans and specifications for the project are being worked and created by EBH Engineering. Brown stated that they are finishing plans for the Industrial Park – which is through a grant that needs to be spent within a designated period of time. Brown stated that the tax for 8th Street is for 20 years. The city will have to borrow money and then pay it back with the tax.
Commissioner Bonsall asked if there are going to be walkways along 8th Street. Brown stated that there is every intention of the City Commission to have sidewalks on 8th Street. Now, for the cost share grant for Caldwell only includes the drive lanes. So there is nothing specifically set aside for sidewalks. Commissioner Bonsall asked if the sidewalks would be on both sides of 8th Street. Brown stated that the sidewalks would at least be on one side. The question would be whether a part of the street surface would be used to add sidewalks. Commissioner Hanson said where he used to live on 8th Street hardly anyone parked on the street. Brown then reviewed briefly the width of sidewalks.
Chairman McKenzie stated that there is an update from SCCF tomorrow evening at the Wolak building. Strategic Doing from 5 to 7 p.m.
- Staff
City Manager Brown stated that the KOA is asking staff about having long term stays over the winter at the KOA. In the trailer camp portion of the code – there is no provision for long term stays. In the RV Park portion of the code – there is a provision based upon an application to the Building Official. The KOA would not open it for regular business. Just for the participants for the long term stays. There would need to be parameters of the long term stays. City Manager Brown asked for an initial response of the Planning Commission. Chairman McKenzie stated that he didn’t see any problem especially in the situation of the KOA that has the management in place to handle the situation. He stated that it is needed here. Building Official Hildebrand stated that there would need to be safeguards for the approval.
City Manager Brown also reported that sidewalks have become an issue. The code says where they should be put, how they should be built; but, there is no code section that says they can’t be removed. There are also sidewalks that need to be repaired. It can cause issues for developing a pedestrian plan for around the city. We have a lot of sidewalks in town compared to a lot of cities; but, we also have sidewalks that don’t match each other or are need in repair. There is also the issue where a property owner put a sidewalk in; why wouldn’t they be permitted to remove that sidewalk.
Chairman McKenzie stated that he doesn’t walk a lot; but, when he does, the sidewalks are a mess. Especially on the really busy streets. Commissioner Bonsall agrees with Chairman McKenzie. The city needs to focus on sidewalks, pedestrian pathways, whatever you want to call it. On some streets like Caldwell, the street is wide enough to put a sidewalk. City Manager Brown stated staff is just looking for something consistent that at least connects the main things like the schools, hospital, the college, Main St., etc. But, it is expensive to build sidewalks. Brown stated that there are a couple items to clean up within the code on sidewalks and staff will present a recommended code change to the Planning Commission at a future meeting. One thing Commissioner Bonsall notices is that the sidewalk is in people’s yards and not next to the road. Commissioner Snethen stated that in front of his house there are 3 big trees and they cause significant damage to the sidewalk that he might have to take out the sidewalk. Building Official Hildebrand stated there is a city code on how close the trees can be planted to the street.
Building Official Zach Hildebrand had nothing to report.
- Minutes
- August 16, 2023 Minutes
Chairman McKenzie moved, seconded by Commission Hansen, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
- Adjournment
Chairman McKenzie motioned to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Bonsall. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m.