Others to speak in opposition: Dustin Noble, an attorney with Hopkins & Huebner in Adel, stated he had been retained by neighbors who are not on board

DALLAS COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES The Dallas County Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order on August 16 th, 2016, at 5:00 P.M., in the Dallas County Board Conference Room at 902 Court Street in Adel, Iowa, by Chairman, Craig Walter. Members Craig Walter, Richard Beechum, Vicki Klein, Jennifer Welch and John Brummett were present. Murray McConnell, Director of Planning and Development, and Samuel Larson, Senior Planner, were also in attendance. Approve Agenda: Motion by R. Beechum to accept the agenda as presented. Seconded by V. Klein. Ayes unanimous. Motion carried. Approve Minutes of the last meeting of June 21 st, 2016: Motion by J. Welch to dispense with the reading of the Minutes of the last meeting of June 21 st, 2016, and approve them as written. Seconded by V. Klein. Ayes unanimous. Motion carried. Old Business: (None) New Business: Item 1: A petition to consider approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a venue for events including but not limited to weddings, family reunions, and graduations on Parcel #1107100007, zoned A-1 (Agricultural District) and A-2 (Agricultural/Floodplain/Conservation District) located at 25143 Sportsmans Club Road in Section 7, T79N, R27W (Adel Township) for Kendra Kasischke. Kendra Kasischke spoke presenting her request for a Conditional Use Permit to open a wedding venue in a rural setting. K. Kasischke has been working in a corporate setting, including large event planning, and she would like to come back to Iowa where she was born and raised to start a business. K. Kasishcke has three nieces that struggled to find rustic wedding venues for their weddings in the area, so she believes there is a need for these types of venues in the Des Moines area. K. Kasischke also has friends and family in the area, which was part of her reasoning in choosing Dallas County. K. The subject property was chosen based on the beauty of the site, the size (20 acres), the availability as it is difficult to find properties that match the needs required for the venue within Dallas County. K. Kasischke s main goal is to have 5,000-6,000 square foot structure built for indoor wedding events. Outdoor events would be limited, and they would not have music or loud noises. There is a home on the property, which would be used as an office, and then eventually a bed and breakfast onsite for the convenience of the wedding party and their family. K. Kasischke then addressed traffic concerns saying that traffic will only be heavy for approximately 4-6 hours a week (the hour before the events, and 2-3 hours after the events), and she has budgeted to help the county provide dust control on the gravel road for a half-mile radius. K. Kasischke emphasized that her goal is always to be a good neighbor, so she attempted to speak with surrounding neighbors. K. Kasischke stated that the two neighbors that would be most impacted seemed to be okay with the project; others would not speak with her. K. Kasischke believes a majority of the traffic will be coming from the north, which will limit the traffic by the neighbors. K. Kasischke stressed that a majority of the events would be held indoors, and there would be no speakers or bands or drunk and disorderly people outside at all. K. Kasischke mentioned that she had spoken with Dallas County law enforcement, and in the last 3 years that the Barnes wedding venue has been up and running, they have had zero calls for any instances of drunk and disorderly conduct. K. Kasischke referred to her petition application and said most of the details and information on the project were provided in the petition. K. Kasischke asked the commission members if they had any initial questions for her (which they didn t), and thanked them for the opportunity to present. Questions from the Commission: (None) Others to (None)DRAFT speak in support: Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes August 16 th, 2016 Page 1

Others to speak in opposition: Dustin Noble, an attorney with Hopkins & Huebner in Adel, stated he had been retained by neighbors who are not on board with the project. The existing neighbors were drawn to the area because it is a rural, quiet, peaceful area, and this project would have a negative impact on those characteristics. D. Noble emphasized that efforts can be made to mitigate the neighbors concerns with the project, but there is no way that all the concerns, or future concerns, can be addressed. D. Noble also mentioned that the original contract to purchase K. Kasischke had with the current property owner has expired, and he had not heard that it had been extended. D. Noble then referred to his clients who would be stating their opposition to the project. Brian Blahnik spoke stating he and his wife, Amy, own the 40 acres directly east of the subject property, and they absolute oppose the project. B. Blahnik and his wife grew up in the country, and they purchased this property because they enjoy being outdoors and the peace and quiet of the country. The property has a rundown homestead that he and his wife have spent a large amount of time and money cleaning up, along with cleaning up the property and creating an the area for picnics, campfires, working on his equipment and planting feedlots for the wildlife. B. Blahnik and his wife do not currently live on the property, but they plan to build a home there in the future. B. Blahnik stated that his main opposition is the increase in traffic, road noise, and noise from the parking lot, which is directly across the road from the most used portion of his property. The proposed parking lot would be only 35 yards from his property, and the tree-screen that K. Kasischke mentions in her plan has large gaps in it, and the trees are immature. Even if the tree-screen was filled in, the sound carries well in the country, so he would still be able to hear all the commotion in the parking lot. B. Blahnik also mentioned how the parking lot location and activity would negatively impact the wildlife that use his wildlife feed lots and the wildlife that currently travels between the surrounding farms. B. Blahnik also stated that he often drives his farm equipment out to the property frequently, and the increased out-of-town traffic increases the risks for accidents with his farm equipment. B. Blahnik emphasized that the venue may negatively impact his ability to sell his property in the future, as well. B. Blahnik mentioned that had this venue been in place before he purchased his farm, he would not have bought the property, and their expectations were high for this location remaining a rural farming community that he, his wife, and their son could enjoy. B. Blahnik ended by saying he believes this venue is more like a commercial business operation than a conditional use, and he believes it would be a dangerous precedent to allow a commercial operation in a rural community where the neighbors clearly feel the project would be a nuisance. John Hovey spoke stating he and his wife, Chris, own the property immediately south of the subject property. J. Hovey gave a picture presentation (see attached) to clearly show the subject property and the surrounding area. Exhibit 1 showed a ravine creek which captures water runoff from the subject property and their property, and it generally has water flowing in it. J. Hovey stated his concerns on how the runoff from the proposed parking lot and front of the property and the environmental leach of the septic system that would be needed for the project would impact this ravine creek. Exhibit 2 showed the view through the trees from the north side of the Hovey s property looking at the subject property. This exhibit shows what would be the location of the parking lot and the proposed outdoor venue. J. Hovey emphasized how easy it is to see through the existing tree-screen. Exhibit 3 is the view from Sportmans Club Road looking west along the property line between Hovey s property and the subject property. This view shows the immaturity of the trees along the property line as well as the proximity of their horse barn located 290 from their north property line. The picture in Exhibit 4 was taken from the same location as Exhibit 3, but facing northwest towards the subject property. J. Hovey noted that this picture shows how close the property, especially the venue and parking lot, are to the adjoining landowners Hoveys, Brian & Amy Blahnick, and Brad & Monica Person. Exhibit 5 was again taken in the same location as Exhibits 3 and 4, but this time facing the southwest showing the Hovey s property. J. Hovey noted how this picture shows, again, the proximity of the horse barn located 290 from the north property line, as well as the proximity to their home located 775 from the north property line. Exhibit 6 shows the view looking north towards the subject property from the Hovey s driveway, which is approximately 150 from the Hovey s residence. J. Hovey explained how this picture shows the large gaps in the existing tree-screen on the property and the proximity of the property to his horse pastures. J. Hovey referred to the letter that they submitted prior to the meeting and emphasized their concerns regarding having a venue that serves alcohol located directly adjacent to their horses and electric fence. J. Hovey went on to explain that he has spoken with Farm Bureau, and they have recommended that if the venue is built, he and his wife should increase their liability insurance due to the proximity of the venue to their horses and their electric fence. J. Hovey also mentioned that the horses they have on their property are reasonably expensive race horses, so they would also need to consider increasing the insurance on their horses if the venue is built, as well. Exhibit 7 is the view from Sportsmans Club Road looking west onto the subject property to demonstrate the proximity of the parking lot and venue to the road and the immaturity of the tree-screen along that property line, which is directly across the road from Brian & Amy Blahnik s west property line. Exhibit 8 were two pictures taken of the road conditions of Sportsmans Club Road just north of the subject property showing typical road conditions after just under an inch of rain. J. Hovey emphasized that the County DRAFT Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes August 16 th, 2016 Page 2

states that the road can handle the traffic, and while he is sure it can, the road is a mess when it rains. Exhibit 9 showed two aerial photos of the other venues that are located in Dallas County, the Keller Events Barn and the Barnes Place. J. Hovey pointed out the lack of surrounding buildings (homes, barns, outbuildings) to the Keller Barn. The closest property with structures is a bus barn used by a local school district, so there is no real neighborhood around the barn. J. Hovey continued to the aerial photo of the Barnes Place and again pointed out the absence of buildings surrounding the property. J. Hovey then referred to the subject property and stated how you will see many buildings such as houses, barns, and potential building sites for future homes around the property. J. Hovey ended by stating that they do not feel that it s appropriate to have a business located in such a rural setting. Bill Main spoke stating his property adjoins the subject property on the north, and he opposes the project. B. Main stated that most of the reasons had already been brought forth, but wanted to point out that the area could be a very neat area in the future for equestrian purposes. B. Main explained that if we allow one commercial property, the surrounding properties may be forced to convert to commercial purposes to get the value of their property back. B. Main brought up light pollution in addition to the aforementioned concerns. B. Main also questioned the economic feasibility of the project for both K. Kasischke and Dallas County when including all the costs for maintaining the road. B. Main stressed that the main objection is the impact of this venue on the value of the surrounding properties, and mentioned that he was planning on building a home out in the area, as well. B. Main explained that he is also the president of Byers & Main LLC, which owns the property adjacent to the subject property on the west side, and Byers & Main LLC is also opposed to the project. B. Main concluded by stating he believes it is obvious that this is not a commercial area in the future of Dallas County. Brad Person spoke stating that he owns the property southwest of the subject property across the street from John & Chris Hovey, and he opposes the project. B. Person read from the letter he had previously submitted to the commission. B. Person began by explaining that he first fell in love with the property and the area in 1991, and he is proud to be the owner of the property now. B. Person explained the beauty of the property and the wildlife in the area. B. Person and his wife put time, effort, and money into the wildlife on the property, and they hunt the grounds and live off the wildlife in the area. They recently put their land in CRP. B. Person and his family built their home on this property because of the natural peace of the area, and the building of the event center would undermine all the reasons why they invested in their property. B. Person began to outline his concerns with the project, with a main concern being the traffic. B. Person pointed out that the dust control ends on the south end of the subject property, and he believes there is going to be much more traffic to the south than K. Kasischke anticipates. B. Person explained that he believes more people will take the south route when going to and leaving the venue to avoid cops when driving under the influence. B. Person went on to explain that there are dangerous S- curves, one of which does not have a guardrail, on that route, as well as two I-beams sticking up out of the ground left from the bridge construction which could be a possible liability for Dallas County if someone were to go off one of the curves. B. Person also stated that Google Maps actually takes you to the property using the south route, not the north. B. Person s wife and children do a lot of walking and biking along that road, and with venue holding events at various times of day, there will be no way for them to safely use the road to avoid the increase in traffic. B. Person pointed out that there will be noises on the property, even if it s not from outdoor bands or speakers. B. Person went on to explain that he hunts a portion of his property near the road and feeds his family with that food, so the venue s location would render approximately 10 acres of his property completely useless. B. Person also expressed concern with the water main from Xenia Rural Water, since it is a pretty small line, and despite the fact Xenia has said that they would provide a larger line if something happens, they have made a lot of unfulfilled promises before so there is no way to be sure that would really happen. B. Person concluded by stating that he is also concerned that the increased number of people seeing his property could lead to people parking on his property and an increase in the possibility of theft of their belongings. DRAFT Bill Renfrow spoke stating he owns a property about a quarter mile from the subject property, and mentioned that most of the reasons he is opposed had already been stated. B. Renfrow said, My house is only about 75 feet from the road, so if I get 200 and some cars by there one direction, 200 back the other way I m 84 years old, and my temper gets short, so I don t know what. B. Renfrow stated again that he is opposed to the whole project, especially the liquor license because he has had drunk drivers on his road in the past, and the signs around his property have been shot. B. Renfrow expressed his concerns with the possibility of drunken individuals having guns on his property, and again stated his opposition to the project. Chris Hovey spoke stating she is opposed to the project and expressed her concern in the lack of adequate shelter for all the guests at the venue in the case of inclement weather. D. Noble spoke again closing out the oppositions by emphasizing that there should be some sort of guarantee that K. Kasischke will be able to purchase and own the property before issuing any sort of permit. D. Noble concluded by pointing out that the Barnes Place and the Keller Barn are both on or near paved roads and neither had any neighbor opposition. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes August 16 th, 2016 Page 3

Additional Comments: K. Kasischke responded to the comments in opposition of the project by stating she did make an effort to find a better property, and her goal is always to be respectful of the neighborhood and to be a good neighbor. K. Kasischke stated that she did put in a new purchase agreement, and the sellers are aware of the conditional use process and, she believes, are in agreement with the petition. K. Kasischke defended her choice to obtain a liquor license by stating that it is necessary in order to run a venue of that type, and you have more control over the sales and distribution of alcohol if you have your own liquor license as opposed to using a caterer or third party. K. Kasischke explained that this is a million dollar venture meant to bring revenue to Dallas County. K. Kasischke said she would look into working with the local law enforcement by possibly barricading the roads to the south to avoid traffic on the dangerous S-curves, and she plans to put mature trees in the tree-screen mentioned by many of the opposition. Comments from Staff: M. McConnell began by referring to a spreadsheet that S. Larson had created comparing previous applications (see attached). M. McConnell went through each application that was approved. The first approval was a five-year permit that has expired and the owner has no interest in extending that permit. The next approval was the Keller Barn, which was an existing building that was renovated, and the only homestead passed when traveling to the main access for the venue is owned by the owner s daughter who operates the venue. The Barnes Place in June 2012 was the only one that has been approved that was new building, and the building permit that was approved for that was for a storage building. It was after they had built the building that the county found out they were going to use it for their daughter s wedding and then decided they wanted to keep using it as a venue. It is a 5,200 square foot building, but the cost of that building is nowhere remotely close to K. Kasischke s proposal, and M. McConnell believed it was under $50,000. The last venue approved was Baldner-Shank, which was a century farm owned by the familiy, and they had planned to use an existing barn. They later determined it wasn t feasible to use that barn, so the existing barn was torn down, but no new venue has been built, and it has not gone forward since then. M. McConnell stated that the important fact in all of these approved petitions was that there was no opposition. Miner s petition was denied, and it was very similar to K. Kasischke s proposal in that it was meant to be used as a commercial operation with a brand new building, and there was significant opposition. M. McConnell stated that his views for K. Kasischke s petition are similar to the Miner application because it is a significant investment and an intense commercial use, and it is allowed in Dallas County in commercially zoned properties. M. McConnell pointed out that there are commercial properties available in the county, and also pointed out that it is not Dallas County s responsibility to have an appropriate property available for this use. When the petitioner first started, it was looked at as a conditional use, but due to the demand of similar petitions since then, M. McConnell would like to look into amending the ordinance to say if a new event venue is being built for intense commercial use it needs to be zoned commercial. M. McConnell referred to Polk County s definition of conditional use, which is that events in agricultural zoning are allowed if there will be 14 events or less per year and anything above 14 events is not allowed in agricultural zoning. M. McConnell mentioned that the main issue with the venue is the frequency of the events. M. McConnell also brought up that if dust control is used on the road, it cannot be bladed, and as shown by the opposition, the road can get very muddy, and it would be a significant cost to the county to keep the road maintained. M. McConnell then recommended to the commission that Dallas County amend the ordinance to do something closer to Polk County s conditional use permit. M. McConnell concluded by saying when an investment of over $1 million is being made, which is on par with what the Miner s proposal had, it is locked into a commercial use because if the need for this type of wedding venue fades, the investment will still need to be maximized, so anything of this magnitude needs commercial zoning. Comments from the Commission: DRAFT R. Beechum spoke stating that when people move out to the country, they are trying to avoid commercial locations. R. Beechum questioned why a commercial operation would want to go where the people really don t want them, and he suggested finding a different location. V. Klein spoke in agreement with the neighbors because it appeared there weren t any neighbors in agreement with petition, so that would be an indication that K. Kasischke should look elsewhere. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes August 16 th, 2016 Page 4

Comments from Others: K. Kasischke spoke in response to the comments from the staff and commission and stated that she heard different things from the neighbors when she spoke to them directly, so she was getting mixed messages throughout the process. K. Kasischke did say she heard from some that were against, and some would not speak with her, but she did have some neighbors say they were okay with the project. K. Kasischke stated that it is difficult to have a rustic venue in a commercial location because it defeats the purpose of what she is trying to accomplish. K. Kasischke explained that she understood that it is not Dallas County s responsibility to have appropriate properties available, but the citizens of Dallas County are going to other counties to find these venues, so she is trying to bring that revenue to Dallas County and meet the needs of the citizens. K. Kasischke said she looked at commercial properties with the Planning & Zoning office, and she was told those properties wouldn t work for her use either, so she felt stuck on what to look for in a location. K. Kasischke stated that the whole reason for a conditional use permit is to allow a business on agricultural land, so she went to with the opportunities and tried to use that knowledge to make the venue work. K. Kasischke stated that the location may not be perfect, but she did the best she could with what was available to her. Comments from the Commission: C. Walter thanked K. Kasischke for the time and effort she put into her petition, and pointed out the scope of the investment. C. Walter mentioned they would like to see K. Kasischke succeed, maybe even in Dallas County, and thanked her again for her time and effort. Comments from Others: B. Main spoke up saying that all the adjacent landowners have put a lot more effort into their properties than K. Kasischke has with her petition. Comments from the Commission: C. Walter recognized that the landowners had all put a lot of effort into their properties and homes, but pointed out that K. Kasischke is trying to do something new and different with this venue. Motion by R. Beechum to recommend denial of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a venue for events including but not limited to weddings, family reunions, and graduations on Parcel #1107100007, zoned A-1 (Agricultural District) and A-2 (Agricultural/Floodplain/Conservation District) located at 25143 Sportsmans Club Road in Section 7, T79N, R27W (Adel Township) for Kendra Kasischke. Seconded by V. Klein. Ayes unanimous. Motion carried. Motion by R. Beechum to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by J. Brummett. Ayes unanimous. Motion carried. Kate Davies Planner An audio recording of this meeting is available upon request from the Dallas County Department of Planning & Development. STATE OF IOWA ) ) COUNTY OF DALLAS ) DRAFT Craig D. Walter Chairman, Planning & Zoning Commission Date Signed or attested before me on, 20 by. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes August 16 th, 2016 Page 5

NOTARY PUBLIC (SEAL) STATE OF IOWA ) ) COUNTY OF DALLAS ) Murray McConnell Director of Planning & Development Signed or attested before me on, 20 by. NOTARY PUBLIC (SEAL) DRAFT Date Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes August 16 th, 2016 Page 6