Commission approves conditional‑use permit for private go‑kart track after complaint prompted hearing

5830291 · July 18, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning and Zoning Commission approved a conditional‑use permit for a private go‑kart track on a 15‑acre rural residential parcel after staff received a complaint; the applicant began construction before learning a permit was required.

The Williams County Planning and Zoning Commission approved a conditional‑use permit allowing a private go‑kart track to be installed on a 15‑acre rural residential parcel. The permit application (LUDash0047‑25) was filed by property owner John Hoffman for a track the applicant said he is building so his daughter can “safely drive her go‑kart without being on the public roads.” Planning staff told the commission the applicant had started construction before applying; staff processed the permit after receiving a complaint so neighbors could voice concerns. Planning staff described the property as Sub‑Lot 3 in Judson Township and said the property sits within the rural residential zone. The township recommended approval. After a brief public hearing with no speakers, a commissioner asked why a CUP would be required for a private activity on private land; staff replied that the complaint prompted the formal public‑hearing process so grievances could be heard. Commission action: The commission voted in favor of the staff recommendation to approve the conditional‑use permit on a roll call that recorded affirmative votes from Commissioners Barry, James, Mark, Cheryl, Eric, Brett and Dan. Discussion vs. decision: The record shows limited public discussion; the commission’s formal action was to approve the CUP. No conditions beyond the standard staff comments were recorded in the transcript. Why it matters: The decision formalizes a previously unpermitted use that began before the application and resolves a neighbor complaint through the CUP process. What’s next: The permit approval allows the applicant to continue operation consistent with any conditions in staff comments; the transcript did not record follow‑up inspections or enforcement steps.