County hearing on conditional use for oil and gas drilling near Haysville highlights groundwater concerns

A conditional-use request to allow oil and gas drilling on property zoned RR (rural residential) and SF-20 (single-family, 20,000 sq. ft.) near the southwest corner of South Broadway and W 50th Street South drew extended testimony at the April 3 Sedgwick County planning hearing, with local planning bodies split and residents expressing concern about groundwater contamination.

Planning staff described the site as immediately south and east of the Wichita city limits and within Haysville's urban growth area; the property contains multiple historic wells and some plugged wells. Scott Weidl of the county Planning Department said the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission (MAPC) recommended approval subject to conditions, while the Haysville Planning Commission recommended denial (vote 3-1-1). Because Haysville recommended denial, the transcript shows any county approval would require a supermajority (four of five votes).

At the public hearing, residents raised questions about odors, possible contamination of private water wells and whether current or future drilling might cause subsurface problems. Commissioner Bubaugh relayed concerns from Haysville officials about groundwater contamination and asked staff what would reassure residents. Weidl said state permitting and inspections are designed to prevent contamination and that the Kansas regulatory system oversees well construction and casing.

Attorney Chris Steinkamp, representing Bexar Petroleum (the applicant's agent), argued the area has a long history of oil production, dating to the 1920s and the Gladys Field. "Oil well drilling started in this area in the twenties," Steinkamp said, and he told the board that state regulators require casing to protect freshwater zones. He also said the productive formation is more than 3,000 feet below the surface.

An on-site operator and landowner, who identified himself as Jeff Blood, described past activity on the property, said multiple wells had been drilled and plugged, and provided local tax-payment information for a small well that paid almost $4,000 in 2024, including nearly $1,963 to one school district.

Planning staff noted the case drew limited public comment at the MAPC hearing but did record one resident's opposition and concerns about odors and well contamination at the Haysville hearing. No protests were filed for the county case. Samantha C. Yang, assistant county counselor, and other county attorneys addressed questions about the interplay between county zoning authority and state oversight for oil and gas. County staff said zoning decisions are distinct from the state's technical regulation of drilling and that the board retains land-use authority.

The transcript does not record a final county decision on the conditional-use application. Weidl and staff explained the options if the commission wished to override the Haysville Planning Commission recommendation: an override would require four affirmative votes; alternatively the commission could deny the application or remand it back to the MAPC with instructions.

Members of the commission asked procedural and substantive questions about the site plan, the potential for additional wells, required site screening, and whether environmental health staff should be consulted; staff said KDHE and the Kansas Corporation Commission handle technical compliance but recommended county environmental health could be consulted for local concerns. The record shows the two planning commissions were split: Haysville recommended denial (3-1-1) and MAPC recommended approval (14-0), leaving the county board to weigh competing recommendations and neighborhood concerns.

No final vote on the conditional use is shown in the meeting transcript.