Commission approves Evergy zoning change, sends Youth-Front request back to planners
- Charlene Sims, Journal staff
- 2 days ago
- 6 min read
By Charlene Sims, Journal staff
MOUND CITY – At the Monday, Feb. 2, Linn County Commission meeting, Linn County Planning and Zoning Director Jenny Cummings presented two cases of rezoning to industrial that the planning board had approved unanimously.
However, Commission Chair Alison Hamilton and Commissioner Jim Johnson only approved one of them. Commissioner Jason Hightower was absent from the meeting.
Evergy Kansas Metro was the first application presented by Cummings. Evergy was requesting that 596.17 acres of agriculturally zoned land be changed to Light Industrial zoning for the purpose of using it as public utility and public services.
Melissa Vancrum of the law firm of Rouse, Frets, White, Goss, Gentile, Rhodes, represented Evergy in the meeting. She told the commissioners that Energy’s intent at this point was to build a substation which would use about 7 to 10 acres of the land.
Hamilton asked if the land was being used for row crops at present.
Vancrum answered that there was a portion of the property that was being used for agricultural but this current proposal for the substation is for 7 to 10 acres so the remainder of the parcel would not be affected.
The commissioners voted to approve the rezoning but failed to make a resolution, which is required by county regulations for changing zoning, to do so.
YouthFront, also known as Kansas City Youth for Christ, a Kansas City, Kan.-based organization, was up next with a request to rezone 257.3 acres from Agricultural to Heavy Industrial. YouthFront’s land extends north of 2400 Road to the Miami County line on the east side of U.S. Highway 69.
Johnson said that he wanted to know if there was any idea what the location was going to be used for.
Topher Philgreen, the executive vice-president of Youthfront’s board, explained that the board wanted to renovate that camp on the property and has elected to make use of that property by getting the zoning changed so that the highest and best use could be found for that property so as to allow the organization to make money either through leasing or selling the property.
And so the highest and best use is to take it to this,” Philgreen said. “We do not have anything in play. We do not, we are not under contract or anything like that. We just have been advised that the highest and best use we can get to is heavy industrial for whatever we are able to. It’s purely just to get money for the organization through either leasing or selling.”
Philgreen pointed out that the land was bordered on one side by heavy industrial and a quarry, the south side by another quarry and on the third side by a berm and a four-lane highway.
Hamilton said that she did not have any further questions for Philgreen, however, she pointed out that not enough effort was made to contact property owners in the area.
“I have a concern with mailing of the letters that were sent out to the residential property owners regarding the certified letters that were sent out. According to policy, are we supposed to send them from the border of the entire 257 acres? So if you have 257 acres would it be a thousand feet no matter which way you slice it from the border?”
Linn County Counselor Jacklyn Pqletta said she would need to reread the code.
Cummings, who is new in her position, said that she did the measurements from the main entrance not the border.
So the county just went off of one location when it should have 1,000 feet from the borders of the tract, Johnson asked.
“That’s what I feel like we did incorrect,” Hamilotn said. “I do not feel that we notified the proper amount of neighboring residential properties.”
Cummings answered, “I was not clear on that and I apologize.”
“I understand your concern that’s a pretty major thing,” Philgreen said to the commissioners. “It would be interesting to see who that would be though, because I think I know where everything is 1,000 feet from us and I don’t think there’s anybody else but us. We own on the north side of the county line all the way up for a quarter mile.”
.
Hamilton suggested, “I’m willing to take a recess and look into the properties.”
Johnson said we just want to make sure.
Philgreen replied, “Sure, no, I got you. I completely understand. But I’m just saying I know where I think everything’s us or Linn Valley. Which they would have been notified because they would have been within 1,000 feet.”
Hamilton said that when she looked at the certified list Linn Valley was notified. But she said that she felt like the commission needed time to verify who received letters before actually taking a vote.
Philgreen said, “Okay I’m willing to recess.”
Hamilton asked Cummings to bring the certified mail receipts and the commissioners took a 10 minute recess to see if letters were mailed to all property owners within a 1,000 feet. She said the attorney would also be looking into the requirements during the recess.
When the commissioners, Cummings, and Paletta came back from the recess, Hamilton asked Paletta to speak to some concerns regarding the Youthfront application.
Paletta said that upon further review all of the requisite landowners within 1,000 feet of the property were actually not notified.
“So at this point my recommendation is to send it back to planning and zoning to ensure that everybody receives statutorily required notice,” said Paletta.
Hamilton and Johnson voted to send it back to the planning commission to have all of the residents or residential property owners notified according to Kansas statute.
Philgreen asked, “Obviously a disappointment, did they do this for the Evergy property as well? Did we confirm that because that was a bigger parcel than ours?”
Hamilton said she had looked at Evergy’s prior to the meeting and they had been notified.
Philgreen asked, “You did? OK. So everybody got notified for that property too? OK, I was just curious how can someone help me with, like, how this all happened? As far as did somebody complain that they weren’t notified or was it my responsibility to make sure that it got to the right place? Like, I want to know if I made a mistake.”
Hamilton replied, “It’s on Linn County.”
Philgreen asked, “Is there any way for me as a landowner to know who didn’t get notified?”
Hamilton answered “Yes, we have that information. I don’t know if that’d be up to our attorney if we can release that information.”
Paletta said that the information about who did and did not receive the letters was public information that is available through a Kansas Open Records Act (KORA) request. She said that part of the discrepancy is that some of the landowners that did not receive a notice did not have a house on their property. However, the notices should go to all landowners whether there is a house there or not.
Paletta told Philgreen the county could notify him of which property owners had not been properly contacted.
“So, let me ask you this question since we’re having to start the process over again,” Philgreen said, “which I’m assuming is now going to be another month away and then another two weeks. That we’re talking about another six weeks to two months before we can get this done is that correct?”
Hamilton said, “So, roughly probably yes.”
Philgreen asked if the application was going through the whole process again. He asked if the hearing was for the people that did not get notified or does everybody get notified again.
Hamilton said that everyone would be notified again.
Philgreen asked clarification that the mistake was staff’s and not his.
Hamilton answered, that it was Linn County staff’s mistake, so obviously any charges that are incurred would be on Linn County. She said there would be no additional application fees or anything for Youthfront.
“It’s quite damaging to what we are trying to do,” Philgreen answered.
Comments