METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COMMISSION 

MINUTES

July 20, 2006

The regular meeting of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Metropolitan Area Planning Commission was held on Thursday, July 
20, 2006, at 1:30 P.M., in the Planning Department Conference Room, 10th floor, City Hall, 455 North Main, Wichita, 
Kansas.   The following members were present:  Harold Warner Jr., Chair; John W. McKay Jr.; Bill Johnson; Bob Aldrich; 
Elizabeth Bishop; M.S. Mitchell; Don Anderson; Denise Sherman; Bud Hentzen; Ronald Marnell; Hoyt Hillman; Morris K. 
Dunlap and Michael Gisick.  Darrell Downing, Vice-Chair was not present.   Staff members present were:  John L. Schlegel, 
Secretary; Dale Miller, Current Plans Manager; Donna Goltry, Principal Planner; Neil Strahl, Senior Planner; Bill Longnecker, 
Senior Planner; Jess McNeely, Senior Planner; David Barber, Advanced Plans Manager; and Lisa Estrada, Recording 
Secretary.

	--------------------------------------------------

1.      	Approval of July 6, 2006 MAPC minutes.  


MOTION:	   To approve July 6, 2006, MAPC meeting minutes. 

MITCHELL moved, ANDERSON seconded the motion, and it carried (9-0-1). DUNLAP abstained. 

			---------------------------------------------------

?	SUBDIVISION ITEMS
Items 2-1 to Items 2-6 may be taken in one motion unless there are questions or comments.  
2.      	Consideration of Subdivision Committee recommendations from the meeting of July 13, 2006. 
	
 
2-1.  	SUB 2006-46:  Final Portion of Overall Preliminary Plat -- WATERWALK PHASE 2 ADDITION, located north of Kellogg and 
west side of Main Street.  (Deferred from 6/8/06)
	
NOTE:	This final plat consists of a portion of the overall preliminary plat approved for the site and represents the second 
phase of development. The street layout is consistent with the preliminary plat with the addition of a new street – 
Waterwalk Commons. The property boundary was expanded to include Block 1. 

The site has been approved for a zone change (PUD 2005-03) to PUD, Planned Unit Development subject to 
platting. 

STAFF COMMENTS:  

A.	The applicant shall extend and/or relocate water and sewer to serve the lots being platted.
 
B.	If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning 
Department for recording.

C.	City Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant's drainage plan. The drainage plan is approved. 

D.	Traffic Engineering needs to comment on access controls. The plat denotes two openings along Main. The access 
controls are approved. The plattor's text shall state that, "All abutters rights of access to or from Main Street over and 
across the east line of the Waterwalk Phase 2 Addition are hereby granted to the City of Wichita."

E.	Reference distance and direction to the monuments used to locate the land described in the certificate of survey. 
F.	A separate symbol is needed for different types of monuments set. 
 
G.	GIS needs to comment on street names. The street names are approved. 

H.	The applicant is advised that prior to obtaining a building permit, a PUD adjustment is needed so that the perimeter of 
the proposed lots matches the perimeters of the PUD parcel boundaries.

I.	All building setback lines denoted on the PUD drawing need to be shown on the plat. 

J.	The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities that are applicable and described in 
Article 8 of the MAPC Subdivision Regulations.  (Water service and fire hydrants required by Article 8 for fire protection 
shall be as per the direction and approval of the Chief of the Fire Department.)

K.	The applicant's engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who 
acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary's signature.

L.	To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to 
meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (Phone: 316-946-4556) prior to development of the 
plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined.

M.	The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements (specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of 
Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147) for the control of soil and wind erosion 
and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant's responsibility to contact 
all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements.

N.	The owner of the subdivision should note that any construction that results in earthwork activities that will disturb one 
(1) acre or more of ground cover requires a Federal/State NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas 
Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Also, for projects located within the City of Wichita, erosion and 
sediment control devices must be used on ALL projects. For projects outside of the City of Wichita, but within the 
Wichita Metropolitan area, the owner should contact the appropriate governmental jurisdiction concerning erosion and 
sediment control device requirements.

O.	Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing.

P.	Recording of the plat within 30 days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission.

Q.	The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility 
easements to be platted on this property. 

R.	The applicant is reminded that a compact disc (CD) shall be submitted with the final plat tracing to the Planning 
Department detailing this plat in digital format in AutoCAD, or sent via e-mail to MAPD (cholloway@wichita.gov). This 
will be used by the City and County GIS Department.


MOTION:	   To approve, subject to staff comments and citing the findings in their report. 

WARNER moved, DUNLAP seconded the motion, and it carried (11-0).

			---------------------------------------------------
  
2-2.  	SUB 2005-140:  One-Step Final Plat -- TERRADYNE WEST ADDITION, located on the west side of 159th Street 
East and on the north side of Central.  (Deferred from 12/15/05)
	
NOTE:	This site is located in the County adjoining Wichita's city limits and annexation is required. The site is currently 
zoned SF-20, Single-Family Residential and will be converted to SF-5, Single-Family Residential upon annexation. 
The site is located within the 100-year floodplain. 

STAFF COMMENTS:  

A.	Prior to this plat being scheduled for City Council review, annexation of the property will need to be completed. Upon 
annexation, the property will be zoned SF-5, Single-Family Residential and allow for the lot sizes being platted.

B.	Petitions are needed for water distribution system and for water supply line extension in 159th E. Petitions are needed 
for sewer lateral and main assessment.

C.	If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the 
Planning Department for recording.

D. 	City Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant's drainage plan. A drainage plan needs to be 
approved prior to MAPC review. Lots 5 and 6 need to be located within Reserve A. Reserve A shall include "Floodway" 
as a permitted use.  

E.	If any drainage will be directed onto Kansas Turnpike, a letter shall be provided from KDOT indicating their agreement 
to accept such drainage. 

F.	City Engineering needs to comment on the access controls. The plat denotes one street opening along Central and two 
street openings along 159th St. East. The final plat tracing shall reference the dedication of access controls in the 
plattor's text. Access controls are approved. 
G.	Additional right-of-way is needed along Central. The Access Management Regulations requires a 60-ft half-street right-
of-way width along urban/rural arterials.

H.	Additional right of way is needed along turnpike for widening of turnpike bridge. 

I.	There are inconsistencies between labeling of plat and text with regard to floodway reserve.
 
J.	County Engineering recommends Wichita and Andover resolve which city will annex and maintain 159th E. 

K.	In accordance with the Subdivision Regulation the private streets shall be platted as a Reserve and be constructed to 
the public street standard. As private improvements, such guarantee shall not be provided through the use of a 
petition.

L.	A covenant shall be submitted regarding the private street, which sets forth ownership and maintenance 
responsibilities. 

M.	Provisions shall be made for ownership and maintenance of the proposed reserves.  The applicant shall either form a lot 
owners' association prior to recording the plat or shall submit a covenant stating when the association will be formed, 
when the reserves will be deeded to the association and who is to own and maintain the reserves prior to the 
association taking over those responsibilities.

N.	For those reserves being platted for drainage purposes, the required covenant which provides for ownership and 
maintenance of the reserves shall grant, to the appropriate governing body, the authority to maintain the drainage 
reserves in the event the owner(s) fail to do so. The covenant shall provide for the cost of such maintenance to be 
charged back to the owner(s) by the governing body.

O.	GIS needs to comment on the plat's street names. GIS has requested Pineview be labeled adjoining Lots 7-13, Block 2, 
Pinehurst should be replaced with Belle Terre Cir. 

P.	The platting binder indicates a party holding a mortgage on the site. This party's name must be included as a signatory 
on the plat, or else documentation provided indicating that such mortgage has been released.

Q.	The MAPC signature block needs to reference "Harold L. Warner, Jr., Chair".

R.	In accordance with the Subdivision Regulations, maintenance access easements have been platted for development of 
the zero lot line dwellings. The easements shall be referenced in the plattor's text with the language as follows: "The 
maintenance access easements as shown are hereby platted for the purpose of pedestrian emergency access, 
construction, maintenance, the extension of the footing and a 2-foot overhang of the structure on the adjacent lot." 

S.	The plattor's text shall include language that a drainage plan has been developed for the plat and that all drainage 
easements, rights-of-way, or reserves shall remain at established grades or as modified with the approval of the 
applicable City or County Engineer, and unobstructed to allow for the conveyance of stormwater. 

T.	The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities that are applicable and described in 
Article 8 of the MAPC Subdivision Regulations.  (Water service and fire hydrants required by Article 8 for fire 
protection shall be as per the direction and approval of the Chief of the Fire Department.)

U.	The applicant's engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who 
acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary's signature.

V.	To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to 
meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (Phone: 316-946-4556) prior to development of 
the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined.

W.	The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements (specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of 
Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147) for the control of soil and wind erosion 
and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant's responsibility to 
contact all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements.

X.	The owner of the subdivision should note that any construction that results in earthwork activities that will disturb one 
(1) acre or more of ground cover requires a Federal/State NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas 
Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Also, for projects located within the City of Wichita, erosion and 
sediment control devices must be used on ALL projects. For projects outside of the City of Wichita, but within the 
Wichita Metropolitan area, the owner should contact the appropriate governmental jurisdiction concerning erosion and 
sediment control device requirements.

Y.	Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing.

Z.	Recording of the plat within 30 days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission.

AA.	The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility 
easements to be platted on this property. Westar Energy has requested additional easements. 

BB.	A compact disc (CD), which will be used by the City and County GIS Departments, detailing the final plat in digital 
format in AutoCAD. If a disc is not provided, please send via e-mail to Cheryl Holloway (E-Mail address:  
cholloway@wichita.gov.  Please include the name of the plat on the disc. 


MOTION:	   To defer for two weeks. 

ALDRICH moved, HILLMAN seconded the motion, and it carried (11-0).

			---------------------------------------------------

2-3.  	SUB 2006-29:  Final Plat -- TURKEY CREEK 3RD ADDITION, located on the north side of Pawnee and on the east side 
of 135th Street West.

NOTE:	This is an unplatted site located in the County adjoining Wichita's city limits and annexation is required. The site is 
currently zoned SF-20, Single-Family residential and will be converted to SF-5, Single-Family Residential upon 
annexation.

STAFF COMMENTS:  

A.	Prior to this plat being scheduled for City Council review, annexation of the property will need to be completed. Upon 
annexation, the property will be zoned SF-5, Single-Family Residential and allow for the lot sizes being platted.

B.	Petitions are needed for water distribution system and for water supply line extension in Pawnee. Sewer petitions are 
needed for sewer lateral. The property was in a previous Sanitary Sewer Main Benefit District. 

C.	If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the 
Planning Department for recording.

D.	A flood study is requested from County Engineering. City Engineering has approved the drainage plan subject to 
conditions. Lots 36 & 64, Blk H should have a min. pad elevation listed on the plat.
E.	County Engineering has requested that 135th St. W. be paved adjacent to the plat. Traffic Engineering has requested left 
turn lanes along Pawnee into Liberty. 
F.	The plat proposes two street openings to both 135th St. West and Pawnee. The final plat shall reference the 
dedication of access controls in the plattor's text. Access controls are approved. 
G.	County Public Works requests that the City of Wichita should annex 135th St. W. and Pawnee. 
H.	The plattor's text should contain language that owners of the reserves shall bear the cost of any repair or replacement 
of improvements within said reserves resulting from street construction, repair, or maintenance. 
I.	The Applicant shall guarantee the paving of the proposed streets. The guarantee shall also provide for sidewalks on at 
least one side of all through, non cul-de-sac streets.  

J.	In accordance with the KS Wetland Mapping Conventions under the Memorandum of Understanding between the 
USDA-NRCS; USEPA; USACE; and USF&WS, this site has been identified as one with potential wetland hydrology.  
The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) should be contacted (316-322-8247) to have a wetland determination 
completed.

K.	Since a Reserve includes a swimming pool, a site plan shall be submitted with the final plat, for review and approval 
by the Planning Director. The site plan shall include the information indicated in the Subdivision Regulations. 
Otherwise a conditional use and public hearing will be needed in the future. The design for the pool must be 
submitted to Environmental Services for review prior to issuing a building permit for the pool.

L.	Provisions shall be made for ownership and maintenance of the proposed reserves.  The applicant shall either form a 
lot owners' association prior to recording the plat or shall submit a covenant stating when the association will be 
formed, when the reserves will be deeded to the association and who is to own and maintain the reserves prior to the 
association taking over those responsibilities.

	This covenant shall also provide for the Homeowners' Association to maintain the "parking strip" located between 
this site's south property line and driving surface for Pawnee.

M.	For those reserves being platted for drainage purposes, the required covenant that provides for ownership and 
maintenance of the reserves, shall grant to the appropriate governing body the authority to maintain the drainage 
reserves in the event the owner(s) fail to do so. The covenant shall provide for the cost of such maintenance to be 
charged back to the owner(s) by the governing body.

N.	The applicant shall submit a covenant, which provides for four (4) off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit on each 
lot, which abuts a 58-foot street. The covenant shall inventory the affected lots by lot and block number and shall 
state that the covenant runs with the land and is binding on future owners and assigns.

O.	GIS needs to comment on the plat's street names. New street names are needed. 

P.	"Lots, Blocks, Reserves and Streets" shall be referenced in the plattor's text.

Q.	Lot 22, Block A needs to be included. 

R.	Ownership information needs to be updated for AT&SF line. 

S.	The plattor's text shall include language that a drainage plan has been developed for the plat and that all drainage 
easements, rights-of-way, or reserves shall remain at established grades or as modified with the approval of the 
applicable City or County Engineer, and unobstructed to allow for the conveyance of stormwater. 

T.	The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities that are applicable and described in 
Article 8 of the MAPC Subdivision Regulations.  (Water service and fire hydrants required by Article 8 for fire 
protection shall be as per the direction and approval of the Chief of the Fire Department.)

U.	The applicant's engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who 
acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary's signature.

V.	To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to 
meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (Phone: 316-946-4556) prior to development of 
the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined.

W.	The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements (specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of 
Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147) for the control of soil and wind erosion 
and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant's responsibility to 
contact all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements.

X.	The owner of the subdivision should note that any construction that results in earthwork activities that will disturb 
one (1) acre or more of ground cover requires a Federal/State NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas 
Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Also, for projects located within the City of Wichita, erosion and 
sediment control devices must be used on ALL projects. For projects outside of the City of Wichita, but within the 
Wichita Metropolitan area, the owner should contact the appropriate governmental jurisdiction concerning erosion and 
sediment control device requirements.

Y.	Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing.

Z.	Recording of the plat within 30 days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission.

AA.	The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility 
easements to be platted on this property. Westar Energy has requested additional easements. 

BB.	A compact disc (CD), which will be used by the City and County GIS Departments, detailing the final plat in digital 
format in AutoCAD. If a disc is not provided, please send via e-mail to Cheryl Holloway (E-Mail address:  
cholloway@wichita.gov.  Please include the name of the plat on the disc. 

MOTION:	   To defer for two weeks. 

ALDRICH moved, HILLMAN seconded the motion, and it carried (11-0).

			---------------------------------------------------

2-4.  	SUB 2006-54:  Final Plat -- STONEBRIDGE COMMERCIAL ADDITION, located on the southeast corner of 37th Street North 
and Maize Road.  
	
NOTE:	This is an unplatted site located within the City. The site has been approved for a zone change (ZON 2006-07) 
from SF-5, Single-Family Residential to LC, Limited Commercial. The Stonebridge Community Unit Plan (CUP 2006-
06, DP-295) was also approved for this site.

STAFF COMMENTS:  

A.	In lieu of assessment fees are due for the connections to the existing water lines in Maize and 37th N. A petition is 
needed for sewer laterals. The property was already in a SS Main Benefit District. A utility layout is needed. An off-site 
easement is needed for the sewer extension.

B.	If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning 
Department for recording.

C.	City Engineering has approved the drainage plan subject to conditions. The ponds shall be included within a Reserve or 
Reserves. The proposed stormwater sewer between the ponds shall be located in a public drainage easement. Offsite 
drainage easements are required.

D.	In accordance with the CUP, the applicant shall provide a guarantee for center left-turn lanes and right-turn decel lanes 
to all full movement approaches. 

E.	Access controls have been platted in accordance with the CUP approval. The plat proposes two access openings along 
Maize Road and two openings along 37th St. North. Additional openings may be permitted if in accordance with access 
management standards. 

F.	The access easements shall be established by separate instrument. Initial construction responsibilities and future 
maintenance of the driveway within the easement should also be addressed by the text of the instrument.

G.	In accordance with the CUP approval, a cross-lot circulation agreement is needed to assure internal vehicular movement 
between the lots.

H.	The City of Maize and City of Wichita need to work out agreement for annexation of 37th St. N. An annexation 
agreement has been established which assigns maintenance responsibilities of 37th St. North to the City of Maize. 

I.	The applicant shall meet with Traffic Engineering regarding the need for coordination between the City of Maize and the 
City of Wichita for paving improvements to 37th St. North. An annexation agreement has been established which 
assigns maintenance responsibilities of 37th St. North to the City of Maize. 

J.	Provisions shall be made for ownership and maintenance of any proposed reserves as requested by City Engineering. 
The applicant shall either form a lot owners' association prior to recording the plat or shall submit a covenant stating 
when the association will be formed, when the reserves will be deeded to the association and who is to own and 
maintain the reserves prior to the association taking over those responsibilities.

K.	For those reserves being platted for drainage purposes, the required covenant that provides for ownership and 
maintenance of the reserves, shall grant to the appropriate governing body the authority to maintain the drainage 
reserves in the event the owner(s) fail to do so. The covenant shall provide for the cost of such maintenance to be 
charged back to the owner(s) by the governing body.

L.	In accordance with the KS Wetland Mapping Conventions under the Memorandum of Understanding between the USDA-
NRCS; USEPA; USACE; and USF&WS, this site has been identified as one with potential wetland hydrology.  The US 
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) should be contacted (316-322-8247) to have a wetland determination completed.

M.	A CUP Certificate shall be submitted to MAPD prior to City Council consideration, identifying the approved CUP and its 
special conditions for development on this property.

N.	The Applicant is reminded that a platting binder is required with the final plat. Approval of this plat will be subject to 
submittal of this binder and any relevant conditions found by such a review.

O.	The MAPC signature block needs to reference "Harold L. Warner, Jr., Chair".

P.	The plat title and plattor's text should be revised to replace reference to Maize with Wichita. 

Q.	The plattor's text shall include language that a drainage plan has been developed for the plat and that all drainage 
easements, rights-of-way, or reserves shall remain at established grades or as modified with the approval of the 
applicable City or County Engineer, and unobstructed to allow for the conveyance of stormwater. 

R.	The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities that are applicable and described in 
Article 8 of the MAPC Subdivision Regulations.  (Water service and fire hydrants required by Article 8 for fire protection 
shall be as per the direction and approval of the Chief of the Fire Department.)

S.	The applicant's engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who 
acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary's signature.

T.	To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to 
meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (Phone: 316-946-4556) prior to development of the 
plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined.

U.	The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements (specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of 
Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147) for the control of soil and wind erosion 
and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant's responsibility to contact 
all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements.

V.	The owner of the subdivision should note that any construction that results in earthwork activities that will disturb one 
(1) acre or more of ground cover requires a Federal/State NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas 
Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Also, for projects located within the City of Wichita, erosion and 
sediment control devices must be used on ALL projects. For projects outside of the City of Wichita, but within the 
Wichita Metropolitan area, the owner should contact the appropriate governmental jurisdiction concerning erosion and 
sediment control device requirements.

W.	Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing.

X.	Recording of the plat within 30 days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission.

Y.	The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility 
easements to be platted on this property. 

Z.	A compact disc (CD), which will be used by the City and County GIS Departments, detailing the final plat in digital 
format in AutoCAD. If a disc is not provided, please send via e-mail to Cheryl Holloway (E-Mail address:  
cholloway@wichita.gov.  Please include the name of the plat on the disc. 


MOTION:	   To approve, subject to staff comments and citing the findings in their report. 

WARNER moved, DUNLAP seconded the motion, and it carried (11-0).

			---------------------------------------------------

2-5.  	SUB 2006-49:  Final Plat -- ROYSE ESTATES ADDITION, located west of Meridian and south of 69th Street North.

NOTE:	This is unplatted property located in the County within three miles of the City of Wichita. It is in an area designated 
as "Small City 2030 Urban Growth Area" by the Wichita-Sedgwick County Comprehensive Plan. It is located in the 
Valley Center area of influence. 

STAFF COMMENTS:  

A.	Since neither sanitary sewer nor municipal water is available to serve this property, the applicant shall contact County 
Code Enforcement to find out what tests may be necessary and what standards are to be met for approval of on-site 
sewerage and water wells. A memorandum shall be obtained specifying approval. 

B.	In conformance with the Urban Fringe Development Standards, for individual domestic wells that are proposed, a water 
availability evaluation must be provided to Sedgwick County Code Enforcement to assure the availability of an adequate, 
safe supply of water that does not impair existing water rights. Easements shall be dedicated for potential future 
extension of public water.

C.	In accordance with the Urban Fringe Development policy, since this plat is located within the Valley Center 2030 Urban 
Growth Area, the subdivider shall contact the City of Valley Center, to determine the financial feasibility of connecting 
the proposed subdivision to the city water system.  If financially feasible, then the subdivision shall be connected to the 
city's water system in accordance with that city's standards.

D.	If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning 
Department for recording.

E.	County Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant's drainage plan. The drainage plan is approved. 

F.	Sedgwick County Engineering requires dedication of a 10-foot street right of way. 

	The street dedication has been platted as requested. 

G.	Sedgwick County Fire Department advises that all access drives shall be in accordance with Sedgwick County Service 
Drive Code.  

H.	The applicant shall submit a copy of the instrument, which establishes the pipeline easements on the property, which 
verifies that the easements shown are sufficient and that utilities may be located adjacent to and within the easements. 
Any relocation, lowering or encasement of the pipeline, required by this development, will not be at the expense of 
Sedgwick County. The applicant will be confining the pipeline easement prior to City Council review. 

I.	The Applicant is reminded that a platting binder is required with the final plat. Approval of this plat will be subject to 
submittal of this binder and any relevant conditions found by such a review.

J.	The plattor's text shall include language that a drainage plan has been developed for the plat and that all drainage 
easements, rights-of-way, or reserves shall remain at established grades or as modified with the approval of the 
applicable City or County Engineer, and unobstructed to allow for the conveyance of stormwater. 

K.	The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities that are applicable and described in 
Article 8 of the MAPC Subdivision Regulations.  (Water service and fire hydrants required by Article 8 for fire protection 
shall be as per the direction and approval of the Chief of the Fire Department.)

L.	The applicant's engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who 
acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary's signature.

M.	To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to 
meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (Phone: 316-946-4556) prior to development of the 
plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined.

N.	The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements (specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of 
Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147) for the control of soil and wind erosion 
and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant's responsibility to contact 
all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements.

O.	The owner of the subdivision should note that any construction that results in earthwork activities that will disturb one 
(1) acre or more of ground cover requires a Federal/State NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas 
Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Also, for projects located within the City of Wichita, erosion and 
sediment control devices must be used on ALL projects. For projects outside of the City of Wichita, but within the 
Wichita Metropolitan area, the owner should contact the appropriate governmental jurisdiction concerning erosion and 
sediment control device requirements.

P.	Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing.

Q.	Recording of the plat within 30 days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission.

R.	The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility 
easements to be platted on this property. 

S.	A compact disc (CD), which will be used by the City and County GIS Departments, detailing the final plat in digital 
format in AutoCAD. If a disc is not provided, please send via e-mail to Cheryl Holloway (E-Mail address:  
cholloway@wichita.gov.  Please include the name of the plat on the disc. 

MOTION:	   To approve, subject to staff comments and citing the findings in their report. 

WARNER moved, DUNLAP seconded the motion, and it carried (11-0).

			---------------------------------------------------

2-6.  	SUB 2006-66:  One-Step Final Plat -- BOLAIN ADDITION, located on the east side of Meridian and south of 53rd 
Street South.   
	
NOTE:	This is an unplatted site located within the City.

STAFF COMMENTS:  

A.	In lieu of assessment fees are needed for connection to the existing water line in Meridian. A petition is needed for 
sewer lateral and main assessment.

B.	If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning 
Department for recording.

C.	City/County Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant's drainage plan. City and County Engineering 
have approved the drainage plan. A 20' drainage easement should be shown on the plat along the south and east 
property line.

D.	Traffic Engineering needs to comment on the access controls. The plat proposes one opening along Meridian. The 
access controls are approved. 

E.	"County" needs to be spelled correctly in the plat title.

F.	Approval of this plat will require a waiver of the lot depth to width ratio of the Subdivision Regulations. The Subdivision 
Regulations state that the maximum depth of all residential lots shall not exceed 2.5 times the width.

G.	The Applicant is reminded that a platting binder is required with the final plat. Approval of this plat will be subject to 
submittal of this binder and any relevant conditions found by such a review.

H.	The plattor's text shall include language that a drainage plan has been developed for the plat and that all drainage 
easements, rights-of-way, or reserves shall remain at established grades or as modified with the approval of the 
applicable City or County Engineer, and unobstructed to allow for the conveyance of stormwater. 

I.	The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities that are applicable and described in 
Article 8 of the MAPC Subdivision Regulations.  (Water service and fire hydrants required by Article 8 for fire protection 
shall be as per the direction and approval of the Chief of the Fire Department.)

J.	The applicant's engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who 
acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary's signature.

K.	To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to 
meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (Phone: 316-946-4556) prior to development of the 
plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined.

L.	The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements (specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of 
Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147) for the control of soil and wind erosion 
and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant's responsibility to contact 
all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements.

M.	The owner of the subdivision should note that any construction that results in earthwork activities that will disturb one 
(1) acre or more of ground cover requires a Federal/State NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas 
Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Also, for projects located within the City of Wichita, erosion and 
sediment control devices must be used on ALL projects. For projects outside of the City of Wichita, but within the 
Wichita Metropolitan area, the owner should contact the appropriate governmental jurisdiction concerning erosion and 
sediment control device requirements.

N.	Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing.

O.	Recording of the plat within 30 days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission.

P.	The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility 
easements to be platted on this property. 

Q.	A compact disc (CD), which will be used by the City and County GIS Departments, detailing the final plat in digital 
format in AutoCAD. If a disc is not provided, please send via e-mail to Cheryl Holloway (E-Mail address:  
cholloway@wichita.gov.  Please include the name of the plat on the disc. 

MOTION:	   To approve, subject to staff comments and citing the findings in their report. 

WARNER moved, DUNLAP seconded the motion, and it carried (11-0).

			---------------------------------------------------

?	PUBLIC HEARINGS
	ADVERTISED TO BE HEARD NO EARLIER THAN 1:30 P.M.

3.	Case No.: CON2006-09  - Snook Trust Agreement (James K. Snook); Milo M. Unruh, Jr. and Catherine Rocky 
(agents) Request Sedgwick County Conditional Use for C & D landfill and extension of CU-403 for rock crusher and 
continuation of CON2002-12 for sand and gravel extraction, property zoned "LI" Limited Industrial on property 
described as; 

TRACT A: Lot 1, Block 1, The Broad Street Addition to Sedgwick County, Kansas.

TRACT B: A tract of land in the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 28 South, Range 1 West of the Sixth 
Principal, Meridian, Sedgwick County, Kansas, Described as follows: that part of the Northeast Quarter of said 
Section 14, lying Wes of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way (as Established in Deed Book 964, page 39 and 
in Deed Book 1230, page 340), EXCEPT the North 933.00 feet thereof, and EXCEPT that part taken for the 
Wichita-Valley Center Floodway Condemned by Case A-30410 and EXCEPT that part Platted as The Broad Street 
Addition to Sedgwick County, Kansas.

TRACT C: That part of the West half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 28 South, Range 1 West 
of the 6th P.M. Sedgwick County, Kansas lying east of the Wichita-Valley Center Flood Control Right-of-Way per 
Condemnation Case A-30410 and west of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way as established by the Deed 
filed in Book 1230, page 344, TOGETHER with that part of the East half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 14, 
Township 28 South, Range 1 West of the 6th P.M., Sedgwick County, Kansas lying west of the Missouri Pacific 
Railroad Right-of-Way as established by the Deed filed in Book 1230, page 342.  

TRACT A: Lot 1, Block 1, The Broad Street Addition to Sedgwick County, Kansas.

TRACT B: A tract of land in the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 28 South, Range 1 West of the Sixth 
Principal, Meridian, Sedgwick County, Kansas, Described as follows: that part of the Northeast Quarter of said 
Section 14, lying West of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way (as Established in Deed Book 964, page 39 
and in Deed Book 1230, page 340), EXCEPT the North 933.00 feet thereof, and EXCEPT that part taken for the 
Wichita-Valley Center Floodway Condemned by Case A-30410 and EXCEPT that part Platted as The Broad Street 
Addition to Sedgwick County, Kansas.

TRACT C: That part of the West half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 28 South, Range 1 West 
of the 6th P.M. Sedgwick County, Kansas lying east of the Wichita-Valley Center Flood Control Right-of-Way per 
Condemnation Case A-30410 and west of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way as established by the Deed 
filed in Book 1230, page 344, TOGETHER with that part of the East half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 14, 
Township 28 South, Range 1 West of the 6th P.M., Sedgwick County, Kansas lying west of the Missouri Pacific 
Railroad Right-of-Way as established by the Deed filed in Book 1230, page 342.

TRACT A: Lot 1, Block 1, The Broad Street Addition to Sedgwick County, Kansas.

TRACT B: A tract of land in the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 28 South, Range 1 West of the Sixth 
Principal, Meridian, Sedgwick County, Kansas, Described as follows: that part of the Northeast Quarter of said 
Section 14, lying West of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way (as Established in Deed Book 964, page 39 
and in Deed Book 1230, page 340), EXCEPT the North 933.00 feet thereof, and EXCEPT that part taken for the 
Wichita-Valley Center Floodway Condemned by Case A-30410 and EXCEPT that part Platted as The Broad Street 
Addition to Sedgwick County, Kansas.

TRACT C: That part of the West half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 28 South, Range 1 West 
of the 6th P.M. Sedgwick County, Kansas lying east of the Wichita-Valley Center Flood Control Right-of-Way per 
Condemnation Case A-30410 and west of the Missouri Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way as established by the Deed 
filed in Book 1230, page 344, TOGETHER with that part of the East half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 14, 
Township 28 South, Range 1 West of the 6th P.M., Sedgwick County, Kansas lying west of the Missouri Pacific 
Railroad Right-of-Way as established by the Deed filed in Book 1230, page 342.  Generally located East of Wichita-
Valley Center Floodway and approximately 1,000 feet south of MacArthur Road (south of Broad Street/Oak Street 
intersection).
	  
Background:  On June 7, 2006, the Board of Sedgwick County Commissioners (BoCC) reviewed Conditional Use 2006-
00009, which requested approval of a construction and demolition landfill and an extension of the deadline to cease rock 
crushing and recycling activities.  The action of the BoCC was to deny the request for the construction and demolition 
landfill, but to refer the rock crushing and recycling activity question back to the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission 
(MAPC) for further consideration.  At least two of the Commissioners' commented that since most of the MAPCs discussion 
focused on the landfill, it would be appropriate for the MAPC to have additional discussion regarding the rock crushing and 
recycling portion of the request.

Currently, CU-403, General Provision J., limits the use of the site to the recycling of rock (concrete and asphalt), and 
"borrow excavation" or soil mining.  Rock crushing and recycling is currently limited to an area that is approximately the 
northern one-third of the current application area, while soil excavation is permitted on the entire application area. These 
activities are scheduled to stop 10 years from the date of approval, which was August 28, 1996.  In addition to other 
conditions of approval, CU-403, Borrow Excavation, Item E prohibits the placement of foreign matter, such as rubbish, trees, 
car bodies, etc., on the site or in the excavation area, and stockpiled recycled material may be stacked up to 25 feet in 
height.  

Initially the applicant was requesting a six-year time extension, to 2012, for the rock crusher and recycling.  The applicant is 
now requesting (1) the deadline for crushing and recycling activity be extended ten years from the current deadline of August 
28, 2006, to August 28, 2016, and (2) to delete from CU-403 the current prohibition regarding the recycling and stockpiling 
of trees.  

The applicant would also like to maintain the 25-foot height for stockpiled material, but will commit to having a water truck 
on-site, dedicated to dust suppression, every day the site is open.  He is also willing to eliminate crushing activity on 
Saturdays.    

Analysis:  At the earlier hearings, comments dealing with rock crushing mostly dealt with fugitive dust.  According to records 
supplied by the applicant the rock crusher was on the site 14 days in 2004, 42 days in 2005 and four days so far in 2006.  
Based upon the limited time the crusher was on site, it seems that the actual crushing of rock may play a limited role in the 
creation of the dust.  If that is so, then vehicle traffic around the site and the stockpiled material may be a more likely source 
of most of the dust.  To bolster that supposition, the applicant produced for staff's review copies of several recent years' 
crusher inspections that state "the crusher was operating in compliance with existing standards" or "that no violations were 
found."  It is difficult for staff to evaluate the dust situation since both the applicant and County Code Enforcement both 
stated they had not received any complaints regarding the site's operations but most of the neighbors' testimony regarding 
the crusher dealt with what they identify as excessive dust.  

In the original recommendations of approval, General Provision A of CU-403 states "the applicant shall be responsible for 
maintaining all operational roads in a sand or graveled condition and shall apply water or other acceptable dust retardant so 
as to minimize blowing dust."  Since that provision only applied to the roads, and presuming the applicant employed effective 
dust control measures on the roads, that leaves the stockpiles as the primary dust generator.

The other complicating issue is the site is zoned "LI" Limited Industrial, which permits a number of "by right" uses such as 
"construction sales and service," "warehousing," "freight terminal," or "vehicle storage" that could generate considerable 
dust due to vehicle traffic.  The only measure of dust control for such "by right" uses is contained in the "LI" district's 
"environmental performance standards," which states that "uses and activities that are in violation of the Sedgwick County 
or the City of Wichita Code or that are out of character with ordinary and customary standards and practices for a permitted 
use to such an extent that the use or activity is obnoxious, offensive or a nuisance due to odor, dust, smoke, noise vibration 
or other similar causes, are prohibited in the LI district."    

Length of operations:  The current deadline for crushing and recycling activities to cease is August 28, 2006.  The applicant 
is seeking a ten-year extension to 2016.  Conditional Uses are approved subject to the conditions the MAPC and/or the 
governing body think are appropriate for each individual situation.  The applicant has been aware of the deadline since the 
conditional use was initially approved, and could have been making alternate plans for this site's use and for the crushing 
equipment.  However, as stated at the initial hearing, at the time he filed the application, he had not received any complaints 
regarding his operations, it would be logical for the applicant to conclude that a request for a time extension would not be 
met with neighborhood opposition.  From his previous zoning requests, the applicant may have been aware the MAPC has a 
policy of generally being supportive of requests that allow an existing business to continue or expand.  But, with the increase 
in the number of new residential subdivisions, the character of the larger area is beginning to change from an agricultural and 
industrial district to a mix of uses that now includes or is proposed for substantial urban scale residential uses.  It is 
anticipated that this trend will continue.  Given all the residential activity that has and/or is being developed, a ten-year 
extension may be too long a time given the level of neighborhood objection and the changing character of the larger area.               

Tree Recycling:  As indicated above, the depositing of trees on the site was specifically prohibited.  The applicant would like 
the ability to have a tub grinder on-site and mulch woody plant materials.  Recycling of trees should potentially produce less 
dust than rock or concrete recycling, but would add additional stockpiles of material that may be viewed as objectionable by 
neighbors.  Piles of mulch would be more of a fire hazard than crushed rock and might provide more of a habitat for vermin 
than rock or masonry material.

Recommendation:  As indicated in the original staff report, the larger area appears to be transitioning from a primarily 
agricultural/industrial area to an urban scale residential neighborhood.  Therefore, based upon the findings stated in the 
original report, the recommendation is denial of the request for an extension of time for those uses permitted by CU-403 
(rock crushing, recycling of rock or concrete and soil excavation); and denial of the request to permit the recycling of trees or 
woody plant materials.

If the Commission feels that the request is appropriate, the following conditions of approval should be imposed:

1.	In addition to uses permitted by the base zoning, the applicant is permitted to operate a rock crusher to recycle 
rock, asphalt, concrete and other material suitable for a rock crusher, and a tub grinder to recycle trees and other 
woody material.      
2.	Within 30 days of final approval, a revised site plan shall be submitted depicting how the various areas of the site 
are to be used.
3.	Uses permitted by the Conditional Use shall cease on August 28, 2011.  
4.	The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining all roadways in an all-weather condition and shall have a water 
truck on-site when the site is open for use that is dedicated to the suppression of dust from the site, especially 
with respect to roads and stockpiled material.  The applicant shall apply water or other effective dust retardant to 
stockpiled materials and any other areas of the site creating dust so as to minimize dust escaping from the site.
5.	When operations cease at this location, all materials and equipment permitted by the conditional use shall be 
removed from the site within 90 days.
6.	Within 60 days of approval, the applicant shall obtain all applicable county, state or federal permits or provide proof 
that applications for such permits have been made and are in the approval process.
7.	All on-site water and sewer facilities shall be approved by the agency charged with administering the applicable 
codes.  Any on-site storage of fuels or chemicals shall be in compliance within code requirements, and must be 
approved by the appropriate regulating agency.
8.	The rock crusher shall be operated in compliance within applicable air quality standards.
9.	Material stockpiles shall be limited to 15 feet in height.  Stockpiled materials shall be stored and handled in a 
manner to minimize infestation by vermin and to avoid fire hazard.
10.	The rock crusher and the tub grinder shall be operated only during the hours of 7:00a.m.-6:30p.m. Monday through 
Friday.  The rock crusher and tub grinder shall not be used on Saturday, Sunday or official Sedgwick County 
holidays.
11.	In addition to any other enforcement measures available, the appropriate code enforcement officer and the director 
of planner, after a determination that a violation of the conditions of approval has occurred, may render this 
conditional use null and void and order the uses authorized by this permit to cease.          

DALE MILLER Planning staff presented the staff report. 

MITCHELL asked if the time limit for the northern portion were not extended, how would the applicant get to the southern portion until 
2012?  

MILLER said he assumed that an accommodation would have to be made.   He said typically driveways are included as part of a 
Conditional Use (CON); however, when the CON was granted for the southern property parcel, no consideration was given to the fact 
that the CON on the northern parcel might expire prior to 2012.  He said technically someone could raise the issue that once the CON 
expires on the northern parcel; the applicant would no longer be allowed to travel across it to do soil excavation on the southern 
parcel.  

MITCHELL asked if permission for a driveway were granted across the northern parcel, how would dust suppression be handled?  

MILLER said the current CON required the applicant to perform dust suppression on roadways.  

ALDRICH asked if the applicant could apply for a temporary waiver on the tree mulching operation, if the City had another serious ice 
storm in the future?   

MILLER said the applicant could apply for an Administrative Adjustment, which takes about ten days.  

GISISK asked how many cases has County Code Enforcement had on the property in the last ten years?  

MILLER stated that there was no record of any complaints to County Code Enforcement, as reported at a previous MAPC Meeting.  He 
said the applicant also reported that he had not received any complaints.  He added that staff discussed the possibility that people 
might not have known how to file a complaint.  

MILO M. UNRUH, JR., ATTORNEY, ARN, MULLINS, UNRUH, KUHN & WILSON LLP, 300 WEST DOUGLAS said he represented the 
applicant JAMES P. SNOOK and that they were present to seek extension of the rock crusher portion of Mr. Snook's business.  He 
clarified that they were willing to reduce the time of the requested extension back to May 2012 to make it concurrent with the 
southern parcel.  He clarified that the rock crusher was a portable unit; that it crushes and recycles asphalt and concrete to be used by 
contractors to build bases for streets and roads in the City and County.  He said the purpose of the rock crusher was more than 
adequately explained when the rock crusher site was approved in 1996.  Referring to the staff report at the time of the approval, he 
said the report stated that the current site was well buffered and already zoned Light Industrial (LI).  He noted that the rock crusher 
had been in operation for ten years without any complaints being submitted to the owner or County Code Enforcement.  He added that 
every year the site must pass an inspection and receive approval from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) to 
continue operation.  He said the site must also comply with Federal Regulations on air quality in order to receive the permit from KDHE.

Referring to a map of the area, he noted that LI zoning was dominant.  He said the 2003 Wichita Functional Land Use Guide, which 
was revised in May of 2006, specifically said the site was appropriate for the processing industry.  He said Planning staff was reluctant 
to approve the application due to some developing residential areas west of the Wichita Valley Center Floodway, which was over ¼ 
mile from the site.  He said they agreed that some areas were transitioning, but the larger picture lacked changes over the last ten 
years.  He briefly reviewed the buffer surrounding the parcel citing the railroad on the east and the Wichita Valley Center Floodway on 
the west.  He said other uses in the area included residential, commercial and agricultural to the North; agricultural, commercial and 
industrial to the East; the Floodway and the Sedgwick County Maintenance Yard to the South; and the Floodway, residential, a church 
and vacant ground to the West.  He said they felt the area was clearly dominated by LI Zoning.  

He said his client proposed adding an additional step to help reduce the dust issue, but added that there were many dirt roads, plowed 
agricultural fields and other sources of dust in the area that they had no control over. He said traffic on MacArthur Road, which has 
gravel shoulders, exceeded over 7,000 vehicles per day.  He said truck traffic that enters their facility is less than ½ of 1% of the daily 
traffic.  He concluded by saying that his client was making an effort to address the concerns that were expressed at the last meeting 
about dust control.  He reiterated that the rock crusher was tested annually for air quality and had passed ten years in a row.        

JIM SNOOK, BERGKAMP CONSTRUCTION, 3709 S. WEST STREET, responding to a question from the Commission, explained that the 
rock crusher was an "impact" crusher that used internal spray nozzles to contain dust.  He said most of the dust from the site came 
from the flat road surfaces in the area and driving around the site.  He mentioned that a 40-45 mile wind in the area would also cause 
dust to blow.  In addition, he clarified that he did not want to open the site up to the public to compost green waste.  He said they 
wanted the grinder to dispose of material from Bergkamp Construction sites only.  

BOB KAPLAN, ATTORNEY, said he was appearing on behalf of Gray Construction.  He commented that he did not hear anything today 
that he had not heard at the previous MAPC meeting and that he believed the record was complete.  He said, in his experience, when 
an application is denied, an applicant generally adjusts or amends the application to make it more palatable to the decision makers and 
to try to accommodate the problems that were experienced when the application was denied.  He said this applicant is not asking for 
less, but for more.  I also commented that he had made several attempts to set up a meeting with the Mr. Snook, his legal counsel and 
the neighbors.  He said the operation of the rock crusher wasn't the real issue; it was the stockpiling and moving around of materials 
on the site that was causing the dust problem.   He said he saw no reason for the Commission to change their original recommendation 
to deny the application.  

BILLY GRAY, GRAY CONSTUCTION, 204 Woodchuck commented that he has bought material from Mr. Snook, and that there has 
never been water sprayed in the grinder.  He said the rock is ground up; rolled out on belts and piled in piles and the dust just flies.  He 
said he has been to the site with a Global Positioning System (GPS) and that the piles of material have reached 35 feet in height at 
times.  He said the neighbors have had to put up with this issue for ten years, and they are tired of taking it.

PAT YORGENSEN, 7121 W. 35TH STREET SOUTH stated that she was also principal at Oatville Elementary School located at 4335 S. 
Hoover.  She admitted that although they had heard about the rock crusher prior to its establishment; they did not know how to 
complain about the dust and debris created by the operation.  She said they are taking the opportunity to come to the Planning 
Commission and County Commission to express the negative impact the business is having on their school and neighborhood.  She 
said the area has been changing from a rural area to a more urban area.  She said she would like to see the Planning Commission 
support the neighborhood and growth of the community to the south and west.   She also said she was concerned about the dust that 
blows around the Oatville playground.  She encouraged the Commission to take staff's recommendation and deny the application.  

VICTOR LEIS, 4601 S. WEST STREET said he was one of the residents that lived north of the area and has farmed the area all of his 
life.  He said he was concerned about trees and tree debris falling off of the trucks using Broadmoor Street.  In addition, he said the 
rock crusher operation can be seen from the MacArthur Road Bridge and it looks like a whirlwind of a dust storm.  

FRANCIS WHITE, 4548 W MacArthur said he takes the direct brunt of the dust windstorm that is created from moving materials 
around the rock crusher site.  He said he has already shown the Commission pictures of the dust at a previous meeting.  He mentioned 
the condition of his residence and how he has to constantly spray wash the outside of his home to remove the dust.  He suggested 
that the Commissioners drive by the site to verify the conditions. 

JIM SNOOK, BERGKAMP CONSTRUCTION said there is dust present at the site at times; however, they did provide water trucks.  He 
admitted that there were not perfect, and they did not claim to be.  He invited the neighbors and Mr. Gray to come to the site and 
view the operation.  He said he did not feel that the bulldozer pushing the rock into a pile was the cause of most of the dust.  He 
concluded by saying that no one has ever called Bergkamp Construction or him to file a complaint.      

SHERMAN asked if the application was denied, what will happen to the Mr. Snook's business?

SNOOK replied that he did not have a direct plan for that; and said he wished he knew.   

MOTION:	 To deny the application.

ANDERSON moved, BISHOP seconded the motion, and it carried (9-3-1). MARNELL, SHERMAN, 
JOHNSON opposed. MCKAY abstained.  

MARNELL said he was voting against the motion because he thought the application was flawed.  He mentioned the three separate 
conditional uses.  He added that most of the opposition at the previous meeting was directed towards the landfill and that the rock 
crusher just got dragged into it because the application was filed at the same time.  He said he felt there were adequate provisions to 
shut the rock crushing operation down if in fact, the rock crushing and moving of the rock is causing the dust problem.     

			---------------------------------------------------

4.	Case No.: ZON2005-18  - John E. Dugan Family Partnership, LP (owner); Robert W. Kaplan, Kaplan, McMillan & 
Harris (agent), Baughman Company, PA, c/o Terry Smythe (agent) Request Sedgwick County Zone change from 
"SF-20" Single-family Residential to "LI" Limited Industrial on property described as;

RE: The South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 28 South, Range 1 West of the 6th P.M., 
Sedgwick County, Kansas except the East 60 feet thereof for road.    Generally located Approximately 1/2 mile 
south of 31st Street South on the west side of Maize Road.
 	  
BACKGROUND: The applicant requests "LI" Limited Industrial zoning on an 80-acre unplatted site that is currently zoned "SF-
20" Single-family Residential. The application area is approximately one-half mile south of 31st Street South on the west side 
of Maize Road (103rd Street West).  The property currently is in agricultural use.  Also a salt-water remediation well is located 
on the site.   The applicant has requested the zone change to offer additional large-scale shovel-ready industrial property 
available in proximity to the airport and K-42.

Two distinct areas surround this site; Maize Road is the boundary between them.  West of Maize Road, the land located both 
to the north and west of the site is zoned SF-20 and is mainly in agricultural or low-density residential use.  The land south of 
the site is being developed as Harvest Ridge Addition, zoned "SF-5" Single-family Residential with 165 single-family lots in 
the first phase and another 245 approved as part of a preliminary plat on the western edge of the site.  As of June 30, 
2006, 38 homes were completed or under construction.  The unincorporated community of Schulte is located to the 
southwest of Harvest Ridge Addition.  St. Peter the Apostle Catholic Church and school is located in this community.  

The area east of Maize Road is zoned LI and is a large industrial area, anchored by the Wichita Mid-Continent Airport and 
Cessna Aircraft.  A freight terminal is located on the northwest and northeast corners of K-42 and Maize Road (103rd Street 
West) and the remaining land north of K-42 is vacant.  The land located south of K-42 area is zoned LI and SF-20 and 
developed with industrial park types of uses.

The subject tract is one-half mile west of the property owned by Wichita Airport Authority and over one-half mile west of the 
area labeled 'Airfield, Approach Protection (AO)' of the "Airport Land Use Legend"  (Airport Layout Plans for Wichita Mid-
Continent Airport, Sheet 16 of 17).  The property lies beyond the boundaries of the area identified for acquisition by the 
Airport.  It is within the Airport Airspace Conical Surface with a height limit of 1482.5 feet, which is about 150 feet above 
the site elevation of 1,340 feet.  The Wichita Airport Advisory Board briefly discussed the zone change at a meeting on 
March 6, 2006, with respect to future airport expansion plans and/or protection plans.  The board indicated a preference 
against homes; schools and churches near airports and a desire for large industrial tracts ready for development, concluding 
by recommending the City of Wichita purchase the parcel and approval of industrial zoning.

When the application was filed in 2005, it was speculated that a sewage treatment plant was going to occupy a larger 
portion of the vacant industrial land east of Maize Road.  Since that time, the Wichita City Council has selected a different 
site.

While the applicant has requested LI, a zoning district that allows a wide range of institutional, commercial uses and 
industrial/manufacturing uses, the Commission may want to consider an alternate zoning district, "IP" Industrial Park.  The IP 
district eliminates some of the institutional and commercial uses that would be objectionable to residents, as well as restricts 
the industrial/manufacturing uses to those with higher performance standards and site development standards.  Uses allowed 
in LI but prohibited are in IP are listed below.   Conditional uses in LI that are prohibited in IP are denoted with an asterisk.
  
(1) 	Institutional: church or place of worship; convalescent care facility; correctional facility; correctional placement 
residence; day reporting center*; golf course; hospital; school, elementary, middle and high; and

(2) 	Commercial: funeral home; hotel or motel; kennel; marine facility, recreational; medical service; microbrewery; night 
club; nurseries and garden center; parking area, commercial; pawn shop; recreation and entertainment; retail, 
general; secondhand store; service station; sexually oriented business; tavern and drinking establishment; vehicle 
and equipment sales, outdoor; vehicle repair; and

(3) 	Industrial: asphalt or concrete plant, general*; gas and fuel storage and sales; landfill*; mining or quarrying: oil or 
gas drilling*; rock crushing*; solid waste incinerator*; transfer station*; vehicle storage yard; wrecking/salvage 
yard*; and

(4) 	Agricultural: agricultural processing; agricultural research; agricultural sales and service; grain storage.

Site development standards in IP are higher for setbacks, storage and screening.  Building setbacks in IP are 50 feet for front 
and street side setbacks, 15 feet for interior and 10 feet for rear; the only setback requirement in LI is 20 feet for front 
setbacks.  Maximum height is 60 feet rather than 80 feet.  Outdoor storage is prohibited in the front setback or the required 
off-street parking or loading spaces, and cannot be visible from adjacent non-elevated street or ground level view of any 
adjacent lot.  Screening of outdoor storage would be most beneficial for the single-family residential dwellings abutting the 
proposed industrial zoning tract.

CASE HISTORY:  The property is unplatted.

ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE:

NORTH:	SF-20	Agricultural 
SOUTH:	SF-5	Single–family residential, church and school
EAST:	LI	Industrial
WEST:	SF-20	Agricultural

PUBLIC SERVICES: Maize Road (103rd Street West) is a two-lane paved county road designated as an urban minor arterial.   
Traffic counts were approximately 5,000 cars per day in 2005.  Projected traffic volumes for 2030 are 14,500 vehicles per 
day.  No future capital improvements projects are programmed for this segment of Maize Road.    

Municipal water and sanitary sewer service are available to the site.

CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES:  The "2030 Wichita Functional Land Use Guide Map, as amended May 2005" of the 
1999 Update to the Wichita-Sedgwick County Comprehensive Plan visually portrays this area as appropriate for "urban 
residential" use and within the "Wichita 2030 urban growth area".  Urban development mix comprises predominately urban 
residential use with concentrations and/or pockets of major institutional uses, local commercial uses and park and open space 
uses.  Residential Locational Guideline 1 recommends low-density residential uses be separated from adverse surrounding 
uses such as major industrial uses with appropriate buffering including open space, water bodies, abrupt changes in 
topography, and landscaping treatments.

In contrast, the property east of Maize Road (not included in the application area) is visually portrayed as 
"employment/industry center", which is defined as centers or concentrations of employment in industrial, manufacturing, 
service or non-institutional sectors.  Land Use-Industrial Strategy IV.A1 recommends protecting industrial areas "from 
encroachment or expansion of residential land uses by requiring appropriate buffers for expansion of the residential use when 
a nuisance situation is likely to be created."  The Industrial Locational Guidelines recommend:

(1)	Industrial areas should be located in close proximity to support services such as major arterials, truck routes, 
highways, utilities trunk lines, rail spurs, and airports and as extensions of existing industrial uses.
(2)	Industrial traffic not feed directly into local streets in residential areas.
(3)	Located away from existing or planned residential areas, and sited so as not to generate industrial traffic through 
less intensive land use areas.   

The requested site conforms to the industrial locational guidelines for close proximity to major arterials, belt highways, 
airports and connection to industrial land to the east of Maize and along K-42.  The requested site conflicts with the 
industrial locational guideline of locating industrial uses away from planned residential areas (Harvest Ridge Addition) and 
sited to prevent traffic through less intensive land use areas by channeling traffic from the proposed site onto Maize Road 
(103rd Street West) that then must travel south past Harvest Ridge to K-42 or north through developing residential areas to 
Kellogg.

The Unified Zoning Code (UZC) would require a 25-foot compatibility setback between non-residential and residential 
development, and screening/buffering next to residential development.  The Sedgwick County Access Management Policy 
would limit the number of access points and regulate the spacing along Maize Road. The requested LI zoning provides fewer 
site development safeguards to buffer the impact of industrial use on nearby residential use than the IP district. 

RECOMMENDATION:  The requested change is not in conformance with the "2030 Wichita Functional Land Use Guide Map, 
as amended May 2005" of the 1999 Update to the Wichita-Sedgwick County Comprehensive Plan adopted by the Sedgwick 
County Board of County Commissioners and by the Wichita City Council.  It conflicts with the residential and the industrial 
locational guidelines for separating and buffering low-density residential use from industrial use, but conforms to the 
industrial locational guideline of proximity to airports, expressways (K-42) and other industrial uses (land zoned LI east of 
Maize Road). It would reverse the policy set by the zone change on the abutting tract to the south, ZON2003-00003, when 
3.14 acres were changed from LI to SF-5 to effectuate Harvest Ridge Addition.  During the 15-months since this application 
was filed, additional houses have been constructed in the Harvest Ridge Addition and other residential subdivisions along 
Maize Road.  This increases the sensitivity for ensuring compatibility and buffering for any nonresidential use on Maize Road, 
and argues for retaining the land in low-density residential uses.  Significant neighborhood opposition to industrial zoning was 
expressed when the case was heard previously (80+ protest petitions filed with County Clerk).  Upon receipt of notices for 
this hearing, several protestors have re-filed and new residents have added their protests.

Based on these factors plus the information available prior to the public hearing, staff recommends the request be DENIED. 

This recommendation is based on the following findings:

1.	The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood:  Two distinct areas surround this site; Maize Road is the boundary 
between them.  West of Maize Road, the land located both to the north and west of the site is zoned SF-20 and is 
mainly in agricultural or low-density residential use.  The land south of the site is being developed as Harvest Ridge 
Addition, zoned "SF-5" Single-family Residential with 165 single-family lots in the first phase and another 245 approved 
as part of a preliminary plat on the western edge of the site.  As of June 30, 2006, 38 homes were completed or under 
construction.  The unincorporated community of Schulte is located to the southwest of Harvest Ridge Addition.  St. 
Peter the Apostle Catholic Church and school is located in this community.  The area east of Maize Road is zoned LI and 
is a large industrial area, anchored by the Wichita Mid-Continent Airport and Cessna Aircraft.  A freight terminal is 
located on the northwest and northeast corners of K-42 and Maize Road (103rd Street West) and the remaining land 
north of K-42 is vacant.  The land located south of K-42 area is zoned LI and SF-20 and developed with industrial park 
types of uses.  The subject tract is one-half mile west of the property owned by Wichita Airport Authority and over one-
half mile west of the area labeled 'Airfield, Approach Protection (AO)' of the "Airport Land Use Legend"  (Airport Layout 
Plans for Wichita Mid-Continent Airport, Sheet 16 of 17).  The property lies beyond the boundaries of the area identified 
for acquisition by the Airport.  It is within the Airport Airspace Conical Surface with a height limit of 1482.5 feet, which 
is about 150 feet above the site elevation of 1,340 feet.  

2.	The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The property could be developed with 
a single-family use as underway on the adjoining property to the south and planned for the property to the west.

3.	Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property:  LI zoning at this location could 
allow uses that are incompatible with the single-family homes on the south and west boundaries of the site and 
compromise the viability of the property to the north for residential development.

4.	Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and Policies: The "2030 
Wichita Functional Land Use Guide Map, as amended May 2005" of the 1999 Update to the Wichita-Sedgwick County 
Comprehensive Plan visually portrays this area as appropriate for "urban residential" use and within the "Wichita 2030 
urban growth area".  Urban development mix comprises predominately urban residential use with concentrations and/or 
pockets of major institutional uses, local commercial uses and park and open space uses.  Residential Locational 
Guideline 1 recommends low-density residential uses be separated from adverse surrounding uses such as major 
industrial uses with appropriate buffering including open space, water bodies, abrupt changes in topography, and 
landscaping treatments.  In contrast, the property east of Maize Road (not included in the application area) is visually 
portrayed as "employment/industry center", which is defined as centers or concentrations of employment in industrial, 
manufacturing, service or non-institutional sectors.  Land Use-Industrial Strategy IV.A1 recommends protecting industrial 
areas "from encroachment or expansion of residential land uses by requiring appropriate buffers for expansion of the 
residential use when a nuisance situation is likely to be created."  The Industrial Locational Guidelines recommend:  (1) 
industrial areas should be located in close proximity to support services such as major arterials, truck routes, highways, 
utilities trunk lines, rail spurs, and airports and as extensions of existing industrial uses, (2) industrial traffic not feed 
directly into local streets in residential areas, and (3) located away from existing or planned residential areas, and sited 
so as not to generate industrial traffic through less intensive land use areas.  The requested site conforms to the 
industrial locational guidelines for close proximity to major arterials, belt highways, airports and connection to industrial 
land to the east of Maize and along K-42.  The requested site conflicts with the industrial locational guideline of locating 
industrial uses away from planned residential areas (Harvest Ridge Addition) and sited to prevent traffic through less 
intensive land use areas by channeling traffic from the proposed site onto Maize Road (103rd Street West) that then 
must travel south past Harvest Ridge to K-42 or north through developing residential areas to Kellogg.

5.	Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: The requested zone change would introduce an unknown 
amount of industrial land use and traffic.

6.	Opposition or support of neighborhood residents:  Significant neighborhood opposition to industrial zoning was 
expressed when the case was heard previously (80+ protest petitions filed with County Clerk).  Upon receipt of notices 
for this hearing, several protestors have re-filed and new residents have added their protests.

However, should MAPC choose to pursue a zone change to industrial zoning, Staff recommends that the zone change be 
APPROVED TO IP INDUSTRIAL PARK SUBJECT TO A PROTECTIVE OVERLAY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

1.	A building setback of 100 feet shall be provided on the north, south and east property line.
2.	The following uses shall be prohibited:  auditorium or stadium; animal care, limited and general; convenience store; 
restaurants with drive-through or in-car service and with more than 2,000 square feet gross floor area; tattooing 
and body piercing; wireless communication facility. 

This recommendation is based on the following findings:

1.	The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood:  See previous findings

2.	The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: See previous findings

3.	Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property:  LI zoning at this location could 
allow uses that are incompatible with the single-family homes on the south and west boundaries of the site and 
compromise the viability of the property to the north for residential development.  The change to IP accompanied 
by the recommended protective overlay lessons this impact by reducing the nature and variety of institutional, 
commercial and industrial uses permitted.  Incompatible industrial uses are prohibited; screening and buffering is 
improved to provide more physical separation.  Eliminating some institutional and commercial uses avoids the 
hodge-podge nature of unrestricted industrial zoning where high intensity retail uses are found side-by-side with 
industrial/manufacturing establishments.  This hodge-podge tends to drive away large industrial park types of users, 
which was offered as the purpose for rezoning this tract, that of having large-scale shovel-ready industrial property 
available in proximity to the airport and K-42.

4.	Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and Policies: See previous 
findings

5.	Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: See previous findings

6.	Opposition or support of neighborhood residents:  Significant neighborhood opposition to industrial zoning was 
expressed when the case was heard previously in 2005 (80+ protest petitions filed with County Clerk).  Upon 
receipt of notices for this hearing, several protestors have re-filed and new residents have added their protests.  
These protestors have indicated opposition to the change and requested the residential zoning remain.

DONNA GOLTRY Planning staff presented the staff report.  She commented that the applicant had provided three handouts at today's 
meeting, which were a "projected sightline artist rendering", a "Limited Industrial Zoning Examples" booklet, and a booklet of additional 
information, background information, and correspondence.  In addition, she referred the Commission to a typographical error on Page 6 
of the Staff Report under the alternative #1 recommendation.  She said under the building setback discussion" east" should be "west".
 
BOB KAPLAN, Attorney said he was appearing with TERRY SMYTHE, BAUGHMAN COMPANY on behalf of the Dugan Family 
Partnership.  He said there were two issues of major concern.  The first was protection and expansion of the airport; and the second 
was protection of those residents currently living in the area.  He said the airport issue involves the preservation of land for future 
expansion of services and related industries, including the possibility of inter-modal and multi-modal facilities.  He said he felt the city 
was missing a big opportunity if they did not look at containerized cargo revenue and inter-modal services.  He commented that the 
Greater Wichita Economic Development Coalition had done due diligence on the 80 acre parcel, and added that McCallum Sweeney 
Consulting, the consultant for the project, was preparing a report for the Kansas Department of Commerce on the site.  He referred the 
Commission to correspondence from Victor White to Mayor Mayans regarding land acquisition west of Mid-Continent Airport.  He said 
it was also recommended that the land west of the Airport be acquired for industrial use.  He concluded by referring to the case where 
the City of Louisville, was forced to purchase 1,591 homes and displace over 4,000 people in order to complete a much needed airport 
expansion.      

TERRY SMYTHE, BAUGHMAN COMPANY referred the Commission to the booklet that contained "Limited Industrial Zoning Examples", 
which gave examples of industrial zoning throughout the City that were adjacent to single family zoning.  He mentioned the setback 
requirement of 100 feet and said once the property is platted; Baughman Co. would know the type and location of buildings to be 
constructed at the site. He referred to the detention pond on the drawing, which would run along the entire south side of the property.  
He mentioned that Baughman Co. had been involved in the platting and subdividing of the Harvest Ridge Plat to the south of this parcel 
and that the owner/developer was aware of the proposed LI zoning request.       

ALDRICH asked if the application were approved, would the applicant have objections to rezoning to Industrial Park (IP)? 

SMYTHE said they had no objection to rezoning to IP.  He also responded to several questions concerning the artist's rendering of the 
sightlines, commenting that the building in the lower drawing was 65 feet in height; while the building in the upper drawing was 35 
feet.   

BISHOP expressed concern about trucks going to and from the property through the residential neighborhood.

SMYTHE said the truck traffic would most probably use K-42.   

MCKAY asked that since Mr. Dugan owned everything west of the airport, why was this particular lot picked? 

SMYTHE explained that most of the property from Maize Road east was already committed or under contract to be purchased by the 
City.  

MCKAY asked if Baughman had contacted any of the people who protested the rezoning in 2005.

SMYTHE replied that they had not contacted anyone.   

CHANGE TAPE TO 2 SIDE A

ERIC W. LAMP, 11101 W. 31st STREET SOUTH said he has become more appreciative of the planning process, how important zoning 
is, and how zoning impacts people.  He thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak on the issue and also thanked MAPD 
staff for their unbiased recommendation to deny the application.    He suggested that if the applicant were truly interested in what the 
surrounding residents thought, they would delay the application until Harvest Ridge was fully developed.  He said he was also 
concerned about truck traffic traveling north along Maize Road.  He added that he felt the property was already "boxed in" with 
residential.  And, that Mr. Kaplan was not representing the Airport, but rather a private citizen who was interested in developing his 
property.  He said he wanted to go on record as protesting the application.  

DEBBIE THOME, 203 S. CEDAR PARK CIRCLE said she supported the staff report to deny the application. She said she used to live in 
the area on Maize Road, and that is was a very busy street; that was why she moved.  She said they have no assurance of how the 
airport will develop the land.  She said she feels that the Commission should consider the residents that live there.  

NORMA JEAN THOME 12214 W. McArthur said she supported the staff recommendation to deny the application. 

BOB KAPLAN said he thought protection of the neighborhood was important and that he believed it could be accommodated.  He said 
if the application is approved, he would like to invite Dr. Lamb, Ms. Thome and other interested parties to participate in the planning 
process and design of the retention pond, berming and landscaping.  He said he would be more than willing to meet with the group 
opposing the application.  He concluded by explaining that Mr. Dugan was not going to develop the property, but hold it for airport 
development.   

There was brief discussion concerning K-42 being an "industrial corridor"; property ownership surrounding the parcel; and whether the 
developer of Harvest Ridge (Paul Kelsey) or the people who purchased homes in the development were aware that K-42 was 
considered an "industrial corridor".    

SMYTHE commented that as a major client, they inform Mr. Kelsey of all decisions that will affect his property.  

ALDRICH explained that as Vice President of Windy City Railway services, he has seen a tremendous increase in inter-modal 
transportation needs over the last five years.  He said it is a multi billion-dollar industry, and that one of Wichita's long-range 
transportation goals was to be a hub; not only for air and rail transportation, but other forms of transportation.  He said the economic 
impact to the City and surrounding community was priceless and, therefore, he was supporting the zone change to IP. 

MOTION:  Approve with zone change to Industrial Park (with the protective overlay).	

ALDRICH moved, ANDERSON seconded the motion.

GISICK asked staff several questions concerning the Industrial Park protective overlay, particularly with regard to waterfowl.  

GOLTRY said she thought it was appropriate to bring up the issue, so that it can be studied more closely during the platting 
process (wet detention versus dry detention).   

DUNLAP commented that activity was being denied on the east side of the airport, where there are already platted cul-de-
sacs from an existing taxiway.  Regardless, he said he supported the application. He mentioned that the Union Pacific 
Railroad has offered to build an inter-modal terminal in Gardner, Kansas and expand that to connect to the old Gardner 
airbase.  He said there were also plans to move the I-35 corridor and that Wichita may be left out of this important 
development.

MARNELL said he has served on the Airport Board, and that they would have already purchased the property surrounding the 
airport, if they had the funding.  

BISHOP commented that she was reluctantly going to support the motion.  She said K-42 was definitely an industrial corridor 
and that she did not believe it was appropriate for residential development.  She said IP was probably the best compromise.  

WARNER called the question.        

SCHLEGEL asked if the motion included the protective overlay?

ALRICH said that was correct. 
    
		MOTION CARRIED 13-0. 

				---------------------------------------------------

5.	Case No.:  CUP2006-30 DP 49 Amendment #6 to DP49 – Royal I LLC Community Unit Plan – Royal I, LLC c/o 
Occidental Management, Gary Oborny (owner); Ron's sign Co. c/o John Saindon (agent) on property described;  

That part of Lot One (1), Dean-Rupert Third Addition, Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas, described as beginning at 
the northern-most N.W. Corner thereof; thence S 89 49' 45" E, along the north line of said Lot One (1), 161.52 
feet; thence S 00 (10' 15" W, 88.02 feet; thence N 89 (49' 45" W, 5.07 feet; thence S 00 (10' 15" W, 10.14 
feet; thence N 89 (49' 45" W, 10.88 feet; thence S 00 (10' 15" W, 72.84 feet to the northern-most south line of 
said Lot One (1); thence N 89 (49' 45" W, 145.05 feet to a lot corner of said Lot One (1), being 171 feet south of 
the place of beginning; thence N 00 E, 171 feet to the place of beginning.  Generally located South of Central 
Avenue, on the east side of Rock Road.

BACKGROUND: The applicant proposes to reduce sign spacing requirements for DP-49 Cobblestone Alley Community Unit 
Plan.  DP-49 is a 7.7-acre CUP with seven parcels located on the southeast corner of Central and Rock Road.  The CUP has 
an irregular boundary with discontinuous frontage along Rock Road.  A bank is located on the corner tract that is excluded 
from the CUP.  Next, two commercial buildings (a restaurant and a furniture store) are located south of the bank and are part 
of the CUP.  Moving southward, a Westar substation and another commercial building with a rug store and a restaurant are 
excluded from the CUP.  Moving farther south to the site of this request, a retail/office building, a strip center and a 
restaurant (Freddy's) comprise the remaining 290 feet of frontage on Rock Road within DP-49.

Currently the strip center is undergoing a major renovation after the loss of one of its major tenants, Cinemas East.  Another 
anchor tenant, Bicycle Peddler, remains but the rest of the center is being leased to several new retail/personal service types 
of businesses.   Signage for Bicycle Peddler and two previous tenants is affixed to the existing Freddy's sign, but the 
intention is to remove the three tenant panels from the Freddy's sign and reposition it on the new sign centered on the 
renovated strip center.

"Exhibit A" shows the proposed monument style sign.  Total sign height is less than 20 feet in height and sign face area is 
approximately 130 square feet.  The sign would be positioned between two existing signs at a location about 500 feet south 
of Rock Road.

The maximum number of sign locations on the Rock Road frontage would be four per Wichita Sign Code, based on the 
spacing of 150 feet apart per sign.  The Wichita Sign Code does not authorize requesting an increase in sign locations as an 
administrative action.  It requires a variance, or within a CUP, can be allowed by a CUP amendment.  In contrast, while 
reducing the separation between two signs to as low as 100 feet could be done by administrative action (Wichita Sign Code 
24.04.251) so long as it does not increase the total number of sign locations, it is simpler to include it in this amendment 
request.  The proposed ground signage is otherwise in conformance to the Wichita Sign Code.

The property is located on a commercially developed strip of Rock Road.  A Dillon's and large restaurant are located to the 
east on property zoned LC.  The properties to north, northwest and south are zoned LC and developed with a variety of 
restaurants, retail shops, and other commercial uses.  The property to the east is LC and an apartment building, buffered by a 
creek.  Residential use on property zoned "SF-5" Single-family Residential is located east of the creek.  
CASE HISTORY:  The property is platted as Dean-Rupert Third Addition, recorded May 1, 1987.  DP-49 Cobblestone Alley 
was originally approved February 20, 1973, and has been amended four times previously. 

ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE:

NORTH:	LC		Retail, office, restaurant, bank
SOUTH:	LC		Retail, office, restaurant
EAST:	LC, SF-5		Apartments, creek, single-family residential
WEST:	LC		Grocery store, restaurant, convenience store, shopping center

PUBLIC SERVICES:  The proposed amendment pertains only to signage regulations and has no impact on public services.

CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES:  The Comprehensive Plan Land Use-Commercial/Office Objective/Strategy III.B.2 
seeks to integrate the development of out parcels to planned retail centers through combined signage.  The current signage 
followed this strategy more rigorously with the shared signage on one pylon sign by the strip center and the restaurant, 
whereas the proposed amendment will allow a new sign to be shared by the tenants in the strip center and a separate sign 
for the out parcel.   However, the current sign is large and ungainly in appearance and does not have sufficient room to add 
two additional tenant panels.  Sign control is one of the elements that can be established by CUPs (Unified Zoning Code, 
Article III, Section III-C.2.a Purpose) with the general guidelines of character of the development appropriate to the 
neighborhood and to minimize any diminution to surrounding property.  The proposed sign will be typical of the signage 
already in place along Rock Road and should not significantly affect the surrounding property.

RECOMMENDATION: Based upon information available prior to the public hearings, planning staff recommends that the 
request be APPROVED to allow one additional ground sign on Parcel B, Tract 1 substantially in conformance with Exhibit "A" 
and to reduce the spacing between signs on Parcel B, Tract 1 with Parcel B, Tract 2 and with Parcel B, Tract 3 to no more 
than 100 feet. 

This recommendation is based on the following findings:

1.	The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood: The property is located on a commercially developed strip of Rock 
Road.  A Dillon's and large restaurant are located to the east on property zoned LC.  The property to north, northwest 
and south is zoned LC and developed with a variety of restaurants, retail shops, and other commercial uses.  The 
property to the east is LC and an apartment building, buffered by a creek.  Residential use on property zoned "SF-5" 
Single-family Residential is located to the east of the creek.  

2.	The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted:  The existing signs nearest the strip 
center are not designed to allow a sufficient number of additional tenant panels.  The applicant has documented to staff 
that he has attempted to have the adjacent parcel owners to use joint signage and/or redesign their signs and was 
unable to get their consent.  The applicant will be refurbishing the adjacent sign to the south when the tenant panels are 
removed to improve the appearance and compatibility of the signs.

3.	Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property: The sign would not be significantly 
different in spacing than other ground signs along Rock Road, so should not be out of character with the existing 
development pattern.

4.	Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and policies: The 
Comprehensive Plan Land Use-Commercial/Office Objective/Strategy III.B.2 seeks to integrate the development of out 
parcels to planned retail centers through combined signage.  The current signage followed this strategy more rigorously 
with the shared signage on one pylon sign by the strip center and the restaurant, whereas the proposed amendment will 
allow a new sign to be shared by the tenants in the strip center and a separate sign for the out parcel.   However, the 
current sign is large and ungainly in appearance and does not have sufficient room to add two additional tenant panels.  
Sign control is one of the elements that can be established by CUPs (Unified Zoning Code, Article III, Section III-C.2.a 
Purpose) with the general guidelines of character of the development appropriate to the neighborhood and to minimize 
any diminution to surrounding property.  The proposed sign will be typical of the signage already in place along Rock 
Road and should not significantly affect the surrounding property.

MOTION:	   To approve. 

HILLMAN moved, HENTZEN seconded the motion, and it carried (13-0).

			---------------------------------------------------

6.	Case No.: CON2006-27  - Hawk Enterprises, Inc. c/o Richard Doughty (owner); T-Mobile USA c/o George Wyrick 
(applicant); Ferris Consulting c/o Greg Ferris (agent) Request Conditional use for a 150-foot wireless communication 
facility on property described as;     

In Lot 1, Conner Third Addition, a subdivision in Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas, beginning at the Southeast Corner of 
Lot 1, Conner Third Addition, the point of origin; go southwest along the South Lot line of Lot 1, 100 feet; then North 57 
feet; then East 80 feet to the East property line of Lot; then Southeast 8 feet to the point of origin.  Generally located 
Southeast corner of 29th Street and Porter (1325 W. 29th St. N.). 
	
BACKGROUND:  The applicant is seeking a conditional use to permit the construction of a 150-foot monopole wireless 
facility for use by T-Mobile USA.  The proposed site is zoned GC General Commercial and at the southeast corner of 29th 
Street North and North Porter Avenue, adjacent to the Little Arkansas River. 

The character of the surrounding area is largely residential in nature, with various commercial and office uses scattered along 
29th Street.  The application area (see attached site plan) is approximately 0.40 acres located on a wedge-shaped lot 
bounded by 29th Street to the north, Porter Avenue to the west and single-family residential development to the south.  The 
site is well screened from surrounding properties, as the property is heavily wooded.  However, the proposed tower would be 
located within approximately 25 feet of 29th Street right-of-way and adjacent single-family lots. Therefore, approval of this 
request would also require a waiver of the compatibility setback.

CASE HISTORY:  The application area is located within Lot 1 of Conner 3rd Addition recorded September 19, 1985.  The 
subject parcel was rezoned from AA One-family Residential and LC Light Commercial to its current GC General Commercial 
designation on March 6, 1984. This application was originally submitted as an administrative permit (BZA2006-00027) and 
was denied (follow-up letter attached).  In accordance with Section III-D.g(4) of the Unified Zoning Code, this conditional use 
application is an appeal of the administrative denial.

ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE:
NORTH:	LC	Retail/Office
SOUTH:	SF-5	Single-family residential
EAST:	NA	Little Arkansas River
WEST:	LC; SF-5	Commercial; Single-family residential

PUBLIC SERVICES:  No municipally supplied public services are required.  The site has access to 29th Street, which is a 
three-lane minor arterial with a traffic count of approximately 6,300 vehicles daily.

CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES: The Wireless Communication Master Plan is an element of the Comprehensive Plan 
that outlines the guidelines for locating wireless communication facilities.  The Location Guidelines of the Wireless 
Communication Master Plan indicate that new facilities should be located:  1) on multi-story buildings or other structures; 2) 
on existing poles in street rights-of-way, parking lots, or athletic fields; 3) on existing towers for personal wireless services, 
AM/FM radio, television, school district microwave antennas, and private dispatch systems; 4) in wooded areas; 5) on 
identified city and county properties; or 6) on highway light standards, sign structures, and electrical support structures. The 
Design Guidelines of the Wireless Communication Master Plan indicate that new facilities should:  1) preserve the pre-existing 
character of the area; 2) minimize the height, mass, or proportion; 3) minimize the silhouette; 4) use colors, textures, and 
materials that blend in with the existing environment; 5) be concealed or disguised as a flagpole, clock tower, or church 
steeple; 6) be placed in areas where trees and/or buildings obscure some or all of the facility; 7) be placed on walls or roofs 
of buildings; 8) be screened through landscaping, walls, and/or fencing; and 9) not use strobe lighting.

While the proposed site is in a wooded area, in staff's opinion, the applicant has not provided sufficient justification as to 
why the existing towers in the vicinity cannot be used to satisfy service needs. Staff has not received any structural analysis 
on the AM towers to the southeast justifying their exclusion.  At the very least, the applicant has not shown why they could 
not use an existing tower in conjunction with a shorter new tower to minimize the negative impacts.  Furthermore, given the 
adjacency to the scenic Little Arkansas River and single-family residential development, the proposal does not preserve the 
existing character of the area.  Finally, it is worth mentioning that there has been significant neighborhood opposition to this 
application, including a petition signed by 11 neighbors and an e-mail correspondence in opposition to the proposal.

RECOMMENDATION:  Planning staff finds that the proposed wireless communication facility does not conform to the 
guidelines of the Wireless Communication Master Plan. Based upon these factors and the information available prior to the 
public hearings, planning staff recommends that the conditional use application and the request to waive the compatibility 
setback be DENIED.

The recommendation for denial of the waiver of the compatibility setback is based upon the following findings, required by 
Section V-1.6. of the Unified Zoning Code as set out below:
 
1.	Impact on safety and convenience of vehicular and pedestrian circulation: The proposed site is located on a wedge-
shaped lot approximately 60 feet in width at the proposed location of the tower. Waiving the required setback could 
have serious impact on vehicular and pedestrian circulation in the event of structural failure.

2.	Impact on existing uses in surrounding areas: The proposed facility is located approximately 25 feet from the abutting 
single-family lot and increases the intensity of use on the existing lot. This indicates a negative impact on the 
surrounding single-family uses.

3.	Compatibility with existing or permitted uses on abutting sites: The proposed facility is not compatible with the single-
family residential uses abutting the subject property and is not visually compatible with the adjacent scenic Little 
Arkansas River.

4.	Effect on public health, safety or welfare: Given the proximity to the 29th Street right-of-way and neighboring single-
family uses, approval of this request would have a negative effect on public health, safety and welfare.

The recommendation for denial of the conditional use permit is based on the following findings:

1.	The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood: Given the adjacency to the scenic Little Arkansas River and 
single-family residential development, the proposal does not preserve the existing character of the area.  

2.	The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted:  The request requires waiver of 
the 150-foot compatibility setback.  Given the site's proximity/adjacency to the 29th Street right-of-way and single-
family residential development, the site is not suitable for the proposed conditional use.

3.	Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property:  There will likely be negative 
visual impacts upon surrounding properties.  This will particularly impact the view from the Little Arkansas River 
and the neighboring residential properties.  
 
4.	Relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare as compared to the loss in value or the hardship imposed upon 
the applicant:  While cellular telephones are generally beneficial to the public health, safety and welfare, the facts 
of this case outweigh those general benefits.  The proximity of the proposed conditional use to public right-of-way 
and residential poses potential safety risks to adjacent property, particularly in the event of structural failure.  This 
fact, combined with the possibility of other placement options available to the applicant, does not provide 
insurmountable loss or hardship for the applicant.

5.	Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan:  The application and 
proposed conditional use do not fully conform to the Comprehensive Plan, the Wireless Master Plan and 
compatibility setback requirements of the Unified Zoning Code.

DALE MILLER Planning staff presented the staff report.

ALDRICH out @ 3:41

WARNER asked if the existing tower at Amidon and Chisholm Creek served T-Mobile's purpose, why do they want to build another 
tower?  

MILLER said they were trying to provide total "in-building" coverage. 

There was brief discussion concerning AM towers and how it was inappropriate to have cellular antennas on an AM tower.  

GREG FERRIS representing T-MOBILE USA said he was surprised that staff recommended denial of the application, since he felt that 
this was an excellent site for a cell tower.  He said when T-Mobile wants to expand coverage the first thing they look for is an existing 
tower, a tall building or a raw land site (that is in compliance with the City's wireless plan), in that order.  He mentioned that the City's 
Wireless Plan specifies locations that are most suitable for tower location.  He provided the Commission a picture of a tower that T-
Mobile was constructing in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma.  He said they could build towers at 120 feet, as opposed to 150 feet, and still 
meet their minimum criteria for coverage and capacity.  He suggested that the Commission might be more inclined to approve the 120-
foot tower.  He said the proposed tower location was zoned General Commercial, mixed use, was in a wooded area, and the majority 
of the tower would be hidden from the roadway and property owners.  

GISICK asked how many companies could utilize the tower besides T-Mobile?  

FERRIS commented that the plan requires three carriers.  He briefly explained the color-coded map, which indicated levels of coverage.  
He said their goal was to provide "in-building" coverage since many people are now getting rid of landlines and using cell phones only. 


MOTION:  Approve 150-foot tower at this location.	

MITCHELL moved, ANDERSON seconded the motion, and it carried (11-1).  BISHOP opposed. 

			---------------------------------------------------

7.	Case No.:  ZON2006-15 – Kansas Home Source, LLC c/o Robert Redmon and Cook Construction, LLC c/o Larry 
Cook Request Zone change from "GO" General Office and "TF-3" Two-family Residential to "LC" Limited 
Commercial on property described as; 
	
Lots 5 and 6 except that part taken for Condemnation Case CC-66769 and except the West 20 feet for street, on 
Seneca Street, West Park Gardens Addition, Sedgwick County, Kansas.  Generally located Approximately 1/3 mile 
south of Harry Street, on the northeast side of the Seneca Avenue – Dora Avenue intersection.
	
BACKGROUND: The applicants request a zone change from "TF-3" Duplex Residential and "GO" General Office to "LC" 
Limited Commercial on the site: Lots 5, 6 & 7, West Park Gardens Addition.  The lots are narrow and deep; 73-feet (x) 
389.8-398-56-feet.  The applicants' recently removed three vacant and condemned single-family residences from the site 
(per GIS; built 1910, 1931, 1940), which is now vacant.  The site is located between a salvage yard on its east side and 
Seneca Avenue on its west side, almost mid-mile between Harry Street and Pawnee Avenue.

As noted, development abutting the east side of the site include what was railroad right-of-way (ROW), which has been 
leased out (by the City) to a Wichita Iron and Metal, a salvage yard, on a month to month lease: the lease is projected to be 
long term, as the salvage yard has been at this location since the 1980s.  The salvage yard is zoned "LI" Limited Industrial, 
except for a "TF-3" zoned 50-foot buffer between it and the site.  The City's Public Works' Central Maintenance facility 
("LI") finishes off development east of the site up to Meridian Avenue.  Abutting the south of the site is a 1.28-acre "LC" 
zoned lot (Z-2859, "A" Two-family Residential to "LC" Light Commercial, 1988) developed as single-family residential.  
South of this "LC" zoned property and between a "LC" zoned saving and loan business (Z-3213, "GO" General Office to 
"LC", 1997), there are at least seven (7) "TF-3" zoned single-family residences, most of them all brick, built between 1930-
1940.  Approval of Z-2859 and Z-3213 included dedication of 20-feet of street ROW.  Beginning north of the subject site 
there are two vacant lots zoned "TF-3" and a single-family residence (built 1922, wood siding) zoned "TF-3".  Beyond these 
three properties, the east side of Seneca is almost stripped out up to Harry Street with mostly "LC" zoning, some "GO" and 
"NR" Neighborhood Retail and a "GC" General Commercial zoned property.  
  
Properties west of the site, across Seneca, include Alley Park (a city park), are zoned "MF-29" Multi-family Residential, and 
the "LC" zoned Seneca Bowl, free standing retail and strip retail. Alley Park is directly opposite the site and has a municipal 
swimming pool, community facilities, ball fields and play ground.  Stanley Elementary School ("MF-29") abuts the northwest 
corner of the 15.33-acre park.  North of the park, across Esthner Avenue, is a neighborhood of mostly singe-family 
residences zoned "MF-29".   

Any development on the subject property will be required to meet access management regulations, all compatibility setback, 
height, noise and design standards, the Unified Zoning Code's (UZC) landscaping, screening and any other applicable codes 
and development standards.      

CASE HISTORY:  The subject properties are platted as Lots 5, 6 and 7, the West Park Gardens Addition.  The West Park 
Gardens Addition was recorded with the Register of Deeds October 27, 1923.  Lot 6 was rezoned (Z-2165) from "A" Two-
family Residential to "BB" Office in 1979, with the dedication of 20-feet of street ROW.   The 1996 UZC changed "BB" to 
"GO" and "AA" to "TF-3".  The site and the area around Alley Park were annexed into the City in 1951.  The District 
Advisory Board (DAB IV) unanimously approved the requested zone change and Protective Overlay, as recommended by 
Planning, at their July 5, 2006 meeting.  No one spoke against the request at the meeting.

ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE:

NORTH:	"TF-3" "GO"		Single-family residences, vacant lots, office 
SOUTH:	"LC","TF-3"		Single-family residences, savings and loan, self-storage 
WEST:	"MF-29", "LC"		Public Park, single-family residences, bowling alley, retail
EAST: 	"LI" "TF-3"		Buffer strip, salvage yard, Public Works Maintenance Yard
			
PUBLIC SERVICES:  The site has access to Seneca Avenue.  Seneca is a four-lane arterial along the site.  Current traffic 
volumes along this portion of Seneca are approximately 20,548-20,965 vehicles per day.  The 2030 Transportation Plan 
estimates that traffic volumes on this portion of Seneca will increase to approximately 22,000 vehicles per day.  Water, 
sewer and all other utilities are available.  There are no CIPs scheduled for this section of Seneca.  
 
CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES:  The 2030 Wichita Functional Land Use Guide of the Comprehensive Plan classified 
the site as "urban residential".  The Commercial Locational Guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan recommends that 
commercial sites should be located adjacent to arterials and should have site design features, which limit noise, lighting, and 
other activity from adversely impacting surrounding residential areas.  The request, with the implementation of the UZC's 
compatibility standards, current access management standards, the UZC's required landscaping and screening, the other 
provisions of a proposed protective overlay and any other applicable codes and development standards, mostly conforms to 
the Land Use Guide and the Commercial Locational Guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan.            

RECOMMENDATION:  Although the 2030 Wichita Functional Land Use Guide of the Comprehensive Plan classified the site 
as "urban residential", the proposed zoning more closely reflects an already established trend towards nonresidential rezoning 
and development along this east side of Seneca.  From 1971 to 1997 this eastern section of Seneca (site included), across 
from Alley Park and extending a block north (Merton Court) and south (Jewell Street) of the park, has had at least ten (10) 
approved rezoning cases from, Single-family Residential, Two-family Residential, or office to some type of office, retail or 
commercial zoning, with some of these including use exceptions and covenants.  When the site and the areas north, south, 
and west of it were annexed into the City in 1951, they were identified as some type of two-family or multi-family residential 
zoning, even though the site's immediate area was abutting an already industrial zoned area on its east side.  This abutting 
eastern area was annexed into the City between 1940 and 1950.  Since that time the industrial uses east of the site have 
remained and attracted reinvestment (recent improvements to the City's Public Works Central Maintenance facility), while the 
residential uses between the industrial properties (east) and Seneca (west) have declined and have slowly began to be 
replaced with nonresidential zoning and uses.  Those most recent nonresidential developments include a savings and loans 
(Z-3213, "LC", 1997) and self-storage (Z-2604, "BB" Office, 1984, BZA 53-84, BZA 54-88, built 1984).  The most recent 
residential development along this section (between the abutting eastern industrial development, abutting western Seneca 
frontage, between Merton to the north and Jewell to the south) is the single- family residences built in the mid 1950s in the 
Fulgroat Addition (recorded July 6, 1954) and the Seneca Haven Addition (recorded February 29, 1957).    The applicant has 
proposed a Protective Overlay ("PO") that would restrict "LC" uses on the site.  The proposed "PO" generally recognizes the 
site's close proximity to the 15.33-acre Alley Park, Stanley Elementary School, the residential development around them and 
the declining residential value of the site and its area between the western abutting Seneca and the eastern abutting "LI" 
zoning and its industrial development.   
 
Based upon information available prior to the public hearings, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the "LC" zoning and the 
following provisions of Protective Overlay # 175: 

1. 	Prohibited uses on the site include limited and general correctional placement residences, limited and general day 
care, limited, private and public recycling collection stations, reverse vending machine, bed and breakfast inn, car 
washes, convenience stores, hotels/motels, recreational marine facility, night club, commercial parking area, indoor 
recreation and indoor entertainment, second hand store, service station, tavern and drinking establishment, vehicle 
repair limited, asphalt or concrete plant, outdoor storage and pawn shops.  As defined in the UZC, a pawnshop is 
an establishment primarily engaged in the loaning of money on the security of property pledged in the keeping of 
the pawnbroker and the sale of such property.  A "quick cash" (a recently introduced business in the community) 
business that loans money with title to homes, automobiles or other property as collateral to secure the loan and 
does not engage in deposit banking is considered a pawn shop and would be a prohibited use, per the PO.  

2.	On site pole lights shall be no higher than 14-foot.  They shall be hooded and directed onto the site and away from 
abutting and adjacent residential development and zoning.  No pole lights shall be located within the required 
compatibility setbacks. 

3. 	A restrictive covenant binding and tying the properties together as one site/use will be recorded with the Register 
of Deeds.  The restrictive covenant will include signage, cross lot access (including cross lot access to the abutting 
north and south properties), drainage, landscaping and parking for the site.  

4. 	Dedication of access control onto Seneca Avenue, per approval of the Traffic Engineer. Lots 5, 6, and 7, West Park 
Gardens Addition, will be treated as one site and conform to the current access management regulations.

5. 	Signage on the site will be as allowed in the "LC" zoning district, but be only a monument type of signage.  No 
building signage on its north or south sides of the building.

6. 	Dedication of 20-feet of right-of-way along Lots 5 and 7's Seneca Avenue's frontage. 

This recommendation is based on the following findings:

1.	The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood:  Development on the west side of Seneca Avenue is 
distinguished by what is south and north of the  "MF-29" zoned City Park.  South of the park there is "LC" zoned 
development including offices, a bowling alley, restaurants and retail.  North of the park there is less than a block 
of "MF-29" zoned single-family residential development holding out from the nonresidential stripping out of Seneca, 
above and below Harry Street.  The nonresidential zoning is mostly "LC".  Development on the east side of Seneca 
(between Merton Court, next block north of the site, and Jewell Street, next block south of the site) is in a gradual 
transition from single-family residential development to nonresidential development, ranging from office, retail and 
including a self storage site.  This side of Seneca is also being stripped out, with the added influence on the area of 
a large area of "LI" zoning and development abutting it and extending east to the Arkansas River.  The site and the 
abutting areas (as above defined) north and south of it, form a narrow "waist" of properties shaped by Seneca 
(west) and the "LI" zoned area to its east.  The "LI" zoning follows the contour of McLean Boulevard, which in turn 
follows the contour of the Arkansas River.  Within this "waist" of properties residential development is in decline.   
 
2.	The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The property is zoned "TF-3" 
Duplex Residential.  The applicants' recently removed three vacant and condemned single-family residences from 
the site (per GIS; built 1910, 1931, 1940), which is now vacant.  The site's long time immediate proximity to "LI" 
zoning and its industrial development has gradually eroded its value as a site for residential development.      

3.	Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property: The proposed "LC" zoning 
with the proposed "PO" would allow similar types of development as already established north and south of the 
area.  The implementation of the provisions of the Protective Overlay and the standards of the Unified Zoning Code 
over the whole site would limit the adverse impact on the adjacent residential developments and the park.

4.	Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and policies: The Land Use 
Guide of the Comprehensive Plan identifies the subject property as appropriate for "urban residential" development, 
but failed to recognize its declining residential value, due to its abutting location to long time industrial development 
and zoning.  The Commercial Locational Guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan recommend that commercial sites 
should be located adjacent to arterials and should have site design features, which limit noise, lighting, and other 
activity from adversely impacting surrounding residential areas.  With the provisions of the proposed Protective 
Overlay, the site is largely in conformance to the Land Use Guide and Commercial Locational Guidelines of the 
Comprehensive Plan.

5.	Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: Community facilities should be minimally impacted.  

MOTION:	 To approve. 

HILLMAN moved, HENTZEN seconded the motion, and it carried (12-0).

			---------------------------------------------------

8.	Case No.: DER 2006-11 - Request Review zoning area of influence boundary

DALE MILLER Planning staff presented the report.  He said staff was requesting that the Commission direct them to conduct a public 
hearing on August 17, 2006, to review proposals to modify the existing zoning area of influence boundaries that are used for small 
cities to determine when they hear zoning cases that are in the unincorporated areas of Sedgwick County.   

 
MOTION:  Direct staff to hold a public hearing on August 17, 2006.	

MCKAY moved, ANDERSON seconded the motion, and it carried (12-0).
 
			---------------------------------------------------

The Metropolitan Area Planning Department informally adjourned at 4:01 p.m.


State of Kansas	)
Sedgwick County	) SS


     I, John L. Schlegel, Secretary of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Metropolitan Area Planning Commission, do hereby certify 
that the foregoing copy of the minutes of the meeting of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Metropolitan Area Planning 
Commission, held on _______________________, is a true and correct copy of the minutes officially approved by such 
Commission.  

     Given under my hand and official seal this ___________ day of ____________________, 2006.



     			    	 __________________________________
     			    	John L. Schlegel, Secretary
     			    	 Wichita-Sedgwick County Metropolitan
				 Area Planning Commission

(SEAL)




 


July 20, 2006  
Page 24