SUBLETTE COUNTY – A group of citizens involved in county planning issues joined the Board of Sublette County Commissioners at the Sept. 19 meeting to ask questions and offer comments.

The topic – the status and timeline of the revision and amendment of the county’s current planning and zoning regulations. Several pointed out that Bondurant, at the county’s northern boundary against Teton County, is already taking the brunt of Jackson Hole’s overflow of tourism and developers.

Backstory

The Sublette County Planning and Zoning Commission began the revision process many months ago with long meetings and debates about definitions and how they apply to respective chapters. The county did not have a definition for “commercial” as one example. “Conditional use permits” will have a chapter of its own.

P&Z Commission members Maike Tan (who leaves this month), chair Chris Lacinak, Blake Greenhalgh, Ken Marincic and Pat Burroughs (not reappointed) worked steadily through the regulations over the past year; new members Chase Harber and Holly Roberts will finish it up).

The original board worked with county planner Dennis Fornstrom, associate planner Tess Soll and county attorney Clayton Melinkovich after regular monthly meetings and evening public workshops, including a special meeting on Sept. 19 where definitions were adjusted, scrapped or rewritten. Harber joined the meeting via Zoom.

The goal – to complete the draft, present it to county commissioners Doug Vickrey, Tom Noble, chair Sam White, Mack Bradley and Dave Stephens for review. The draft would go back to P&Z and at some point, possibly be shown to the public before commissioners make a final vote

When the P&Z commissioners expressed concerns about making sure their new rules were viable, Jeremy Grimm of Whiskey Rock Consulting was hired to work between commissioners and P&Z.

Timeline

However, the lack of a committed timeline “in writing” and doubts about the public’s ability to comment brought the contingent before county commissioners on Sept. 19. Burroughs, Dan

Bailey, Dan Smitherman and other neighbors voiced these concerns – at first to little response from the five at the big table.

Smitherman asked commissioners to set up a public meeting with the consultant, to see the revised draft and requested the timeline.

“The board has not decided yet about public hearings,” White said. “We haven’t made any kind of plan; we don’t know what we’re going to do yet. … Our plan right now is to get the rough draft. Then the five of us will come together to decide.”

Bradley said the public has had six to eight months to comment; Noble agreed.

Smitherman said White’s “lackadaisical response” seemed to indicate a lack of interest in public comment.

Stephens said, “I feel certain the public is going to get a chance, but we know as little as you do at this point. We’re not hiding nothing. It’s going to be out there.”

Other citizens said the county’s P&Z draft, meeting audio and even the special meeting notice required for the evening were difficult to find. Burroughs said the last minutes and audio were posted in May and June.

“That will be addressed,” White said.

Marilyn Filkins, John Carter and others said they don’t know if the P&Z office or commission ever received their comments, much less considered them.

“I’ve been submitting comments the past two years (about Joe Ricketts’ Jackson Fork Ranch) and we don’t know; our comments drop into a black hole,” Carter said.

Smitherman again requested a written timeline – “This is a complicated document. … It may not be of community interest but it should be.”

Lisi Krall said they could have “a non-adversarial relationship” so citizens did not feel “disenfranchised and you feel less embattled.”

“I know every time this group comes before commissioners, (they) roll their eyes,” Burroughs said. “When people are impacted, they do stand up.”

She referred to Pinedale residents who successfully opposed the Doyle gravel pit.

Molly Nemetz asked commissioners to remember Sublette County’s wildlife habitats and migration routes. “I hope you can direct your consultant to look closely and make sure the draft makes recommendations for wildlife.”

Special meeting

Most citizens expressed concern at an apparent lack of notice about the Sept. 19 special meeting to discuss Chapter 1 definitions. Some attended in person or online to listen to discussions about how to define “guest ranch,” “landing strip” or “incidental.”

Should a “guest cabin” have a kitchen? Will it be limited to the same square footage as an accessory unit? Can agriculture use diminish as others grow? Will people be required to install a landing strip for frequent aircraft landings?

Tan, Greenhalgh, Marincic and Harber, with Melinkovich, Soll and consistent attendees worked their way to just short of “public facility.”

And after Bailey and others requested the written timeline, Soll said, “Okay.”

Definition shifts

The Sublette County Planning & Zoning Commission met for its regular meeting Thursday, Sept. 21, at 6 p.m., in the commissioners’ meeting room to review an application and continue with Chapter 1 Definitions.

In the process, with realtor and Chase Harber present, the dynamic of defining a “guest ranch” lost the “incidental” association to agriculture the commission had previously considered essential, 3-2, with Tan – at her final meeting before resigning – and Lacinak voting to keep agriculture in the equation and Greenhalgh, Marincic and Harber voting to delete it, 3-2.

Bailey and Krall asked them to reconsider that decision, saying removing ag as a relevant use to acquire a guest ranch conditional use permit (CUP) goes against the Sublette County Comprehensive Plan, written in 1990. It takes away the traditional sense of a guest ranch without a focus on the “ranch” aspect.

“I woke up in the middle of the night,” Krall said. “Given the trouble that ‘guest ranch’ (for Jackson Fork Ranch on Bondurant) caused with the CUP last year. (The guest ranch definition) should read incidental and subordinate – what a guest ranch is supposed to be. A resort should be a rezone. You’re trying to make a fundamental change in the county. If you want resorts, rezone them. At least to get a resort on agricultural (A-1) land. Think about it. Help the whole process become clearer. If we can’t do this right, what are we doing?”

Instead of being a traditional guest ranch, Bailey added, these would become new hotels and motels away from town centers. “Ag would lose its value as ranch land. … I would like you to reconsider ‘guest ranch’ when we had two major contentious public hearings (for owner Joe Ricketts’ property).”

“Every time I hear a public comment, it is always insightful,” Tan said. “Honestly I don’t think Lisi could have said it better. … Who decided it wouldn’t be a change of zoning?”

Fornstrom said it is up to the applicant to decided what approach to take. He could see the difference between a resort and a guest ranch.

“Moving forward there are two avenues here (rezone and CUP) with more discussion at that time,” he said.

Lacinak said he wanted to keep the “guest ranch” history, culture and use of ranching and agriculture. “I still have hope in the use of agriculture as incidental.”

“That language could change – the (county) commissioners could change it,” Greenhalgh said.

Cryptic crypto

Crypto-mining falls under a “home business,” Lacinak said, with huge vibrations from its computer-cooling fans. It isn’t included in “home occupations” because of the noise, Fornstrom said. It could call for a CUP where location and noise are addressed.

The county does not have a nuisance ordinance, and enforcement would be a problem, several members agreed.

“You can say you can’t have dust and noise,” Melinkovich said.

They decided to ask Grimm, who did not attend any of these reported meetings, for language to address complaints.

Landing

For now, the commission is keeping the county’s “landing strip” terms that allow 14 or fewer private aircraft landings a year.

Greenhalgh explained that historically, “commercial” meant an airport and flight tours and ag uses “could be hashed out as a CUP.” The current rule was developed many years ago to allow private pilots “to land once a month and twice for holidays.”

The commission debated how to limit landings on contiguous properties owned by the same entity, such as the Upper Hoback, where Jackson Fork Ranch employees use a different property for its 14 potential landings – and takeoffs – in a very rural setting.

“My main thing is the wildlife migration corridors,” Tan said. “Because to me that’s more disturbing than (vehicle) traffic. There’s a major resort coming in and people are not going to drive and it’s a major disturbance to wildlife. Can we protect the neighbors?”

Harber, Tan and Lacinak agreed to limit landings to 14 or fewer within Sublette County. For more, the owner could seek a CUP.

And more...

Lacinak proposed defining a “public facility” as government supervised and open to the public; a “private facility” could provide services funded, leased or operated by a private entity. A “public utility is essential to the general public.”

The public and planning and zoning commission expressed concerns that more citizens aren’t involved in drafting new regulations.

To see the current and working draft P&Z regulations, audio files, calendar and agendas, go to https://www.sublettecountywy.gov/123/Planning-Zoning.