The Barton County Commission voted Wednesday morning to refer the rezoning request from Larry Marshall for his vehicle salvage west of Great Bend back to the Planning Commission in what commissioners called the most difficult issue they’ve faced in years.

The vote was unanimous. Since the Planning Commission had recommended Marshall’s application be denied for the property west of Great Bend, it would have taken a super majority of four votes to override that recommendation.

The issue had become an emotional one pitting the Larry and Sheree Marshall against the nearby residents of the rural neighborhood. While county commissioners supported the Planning Commission, they felt a compromise was still possible.

“This is a very sensitive subject, and I believe that it deserves as much consideration as it can be given,” said District 2 Commissioner Barb Esfeld. “It’s the hardest topic that I’ve had since I’ve been here. It’s not going to be a win-win situation for everybody. It’s going to be one of those that hopefully can be a compromise that both sides.”

The issue had drawn a standing-room-only crowd into the County Commission’s courthouse chamber.

How they got here

On Feb. 8., the Planning Commission held a courthouse public hearing to consider the request. Marshall sought to change the zoning from residential to industrial at 514 SW 20 Rd. so he could store abandoned vehicles for his towing business, County Counselor Patrick Hoffman said. 

The proceeding was packed and heated with the overwhelming public input the area residents being against the rezoning. They didn’t want to live next to a salvage yard, and feared declining property values and vermin infestations.

Those comments, coupled with Environmental Manager Judy Goreham’s frustration with Marshall over his years operating a salvage business at the site without the proper permits, led to the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the request.

It was also the topic of a County Commission study session on Feb. 16. Goreham spoke of her ongoing problems and those living in the vicinity vocally addressed their concerns.

Choices on the table

The County Commission had three options. 

First, with a simple three-vote majority, it could have upheld the Planning Commission’s ruling. 

Lastly, four votes could sent it back to the Planning Commission.

“I would move to return the zoning amendment request back to the Planning Commission to reconsider their original recommendation and attempt to find common ground with the Marshalls as well as the landowners within 1,000 feet,” District 1 Commissioner Kirby Krier said. “I was compelled by the people who came in here last week and talk to us about their concerns, and I listened to both sides and I think it just needs to there needs to be something done.

Krier said he thinks the Planning Commission “can make this work for both parties can make work because I think they all have good concerns.”

“There has to be some compromise here somewhere along the line because everybody involved has a valid consideration,” District 4 Commissioner Jim Daily said. “It would seem to me that putting this back to the Planning Commission would yield those kinds of compromises.”

“I’ve been here 18 years and this is one of the biggest issues that we’ve had,” District 5 Commissioner Jennifer Schartz said. “It takes such careful consideration on all parts because I can side with either one of them. It’s going to be up to us to to find a common ground.”

“I think anytime you’ve got this many people with completely opposing opinions, we should exhaust all of our resources to try to find a compromise,” said commission Chairman Shawn Hutchinson, District 4. “We’re all neighbors and if we can figure out how to find some kind of common ground, I think we should exhaust that path before we make winners and losers.”

A second item, a conditional use permit for Marshall, was moot since no action was taken on the rezoning. If rezoning takes place, the permit would be required.

What’s next

The matter won’t require another public hearing. It will be on the agenda for the next Planning Commission meeting set for 3 p.m. Tuesday, March 8, in the courthouse first floor conference room.

It is an open meeting and the public is invited. “We want people to know they’ll at least have a chance to participate in that meeting to some extent,” Hoffman said.

That recommendation would then be placed on a County Commission agenda for consideration.