METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 22, 2001 The regular meeting of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Metropolitan Area Planning Commission was held Thursday, March 22, 2001 at 1:00 p.m., in the Planning Department Conference Room, 10th Floor, City Hall, 455 North Main, Wichita, Kansas. The following members were present: Jerry Michaelis, Acting Chair; James Barfield (late arrival); Dorman Blake; Kerry Coulter; Frank Garofalo; Bud Hentzen; Bill Johnson (late arrival); Richard Lopez, Ron Marnell (late arrival); John W. McKay, Jr.; Susan Osborne-Howes (late arrival); George Platt; Harold Warner and Ray Warren. Staff members present were Marvin S. Krout, Secretary; Dale Miller, Assistant Secretary; Donna Goltry, Principal Planner, Scott Knebel, Senior Planner; Bill Longnecker, Senior Planner, and Karen Wolf, Recording Secretary. 1. Approval of meeting minutes for February 8, 2001 WARREN "I have a minor change. I will give it to the secretary." MICHAELIS "Okay. If there are no others, I will entertain a motion to approve." MOTION: That the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission approves the minutes of February 8, 2001 as amended. MCKAY moved, WARNER seconded the motion and it carried unanimously (8-0). --------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Consideration of Subdivision Committee recommendations MICHAELIS "Is there anything we need to pull out for consideration?" MILLER "Item No. 2/3 needs a little bit of explanation." MICHAELIS "Is that the only one? Okay. Is there anyone here wishing to speak on any of these subdivision items? Then we can take items 2/1, 2/2 and 2/4 through 2/11 in one motion." Subdivision Committee items 2/1, 2/2, 2/4, 2/5, 2/6, 2/7, 2/8, 2/9, and 2/10 and 2/11 were approved subject to the Subdivision recommendations MCKAY moved, WARNER seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (8-0). 2/1. SUB2000-117 – Final Plat of WICHITA BOEING EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION ADDITION, located south of MacArthur, west of Broadway. A. Municipal services are available to serve the site. City Engineering needs to comment on the need for any guarantees or easements. A petition is required for the turnarounds at the terminus of Gold Street, Waco and Wichita. 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. City Engineering needs to comment on the proposed vacation of the contingent maintenance access easement along the Riverside Drainage Ditch. The applicant shall retain the easement on the plat. E. The primary access is through Gold Street. An emergency access is located at the south end of Wichita Street, and complete access control has been dedicated along Wichita and Waco. The final plat shall reference the access controls in the plattor's text as being dedicated to the appropriate governing body. F. Mann Street, located adjacent to the north line of the plat, is not open and should be vacated. The applicant shall contact the property owners to the north to attempt to have this half-street right-of-way vacated. A portion of this street right-of-way will need to be retained as a hammerhead turnaround for Wichita Street. G. A CUP Certificate shall be submitted to MAPD prior to City Council consideration, identifying the approved CUP (referenced as DP-110) and its special conditions for development on this property. H. 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. I. 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. J. The legal description needs to be revised by deleting "of the S ½ of the SW corner". K. 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. L. This property is within a zone identified by the City Engineers' office as likely to have groundwater at some or all times within 10 feet of the ground surface elevation. Building with specially engineered foundations or with the lowest floor opening above groundwater is recommended, and owners seeking building permits on this property will be similarly advised. More detailed information on recorded groundwater elevations in the vicinity of this property is available in the City Engineers' office. M. 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. N. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities which 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.) O. 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. P. 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 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. Q. 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. R. The owner of the subdivision should be aware of the fact that the development of any subdivision greater than five (5) acres in size may require an NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Further, on all construction sites, the City of Wichita requires that best management practices be used to reduce pollutant loadings in storm water runoffs. S. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. T. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. U. 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. V. The applicant is reminded that a disk shall be submitted with the final plat tracing to the Planning Department detailing this plat in digital format in AutoCAD. This will be used by the City and County GIS Department. ---------------------------------------------------- 2/2. SUB2001-09 – Final Plat of RITCHIE OFFICE PARK ADDITION, located south of 29th Street North, east of Ridge Road. A. The applicant shall guarantee the extension of sanitary sewer and City water. B. City Engineering needs to comment on the need for any additional guarantees or easements. No additional guarantees or easements are needed. 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. The drainage plan is approved. The drainage improvements may be included as part of the paving guarantee. The Kansas Division of Water Resources needs to comment on the stormwater drainage directed toward the lake. No comments were received. E. County Engineering advises the applicant to ensure that the plat does not include property within the 100- year floodplain. F. The applicant shall guarantee the paving of the proposed interior streets to the industrial street standard. G. The 64-ft cul-de-sac width needs to be increased to 70 feet to conform with the Subdivision Regulations for industrial subdivisions. A modification has been approved by the Subdivision Committee subject to the submittal of a restrictive covenant limiting the lots adjoining the 64-ft cul-de-sac to office uses. H. The turnaround for the cul-de-sac needs to be increased to 130-ft right-of-way to conform with Subdivision Regulations. A modification has been approved by the Subdivision Committee subject to the submittal of a restrictive covenant limiting the lots adjoining the 64-ft cul-de-sac to office uses. I. City Fire Department needs to comment on the street names. The through street needs to be named Ritchie Circle. The cul-de-sac should be named Ritchie Court. J. Based upon the platting binder, property taxes are still outstanding. Before the plat is scheduled for City Council consideration, proof shall be provided indicating that all applicable property taxes have been paid. K. 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. L. On the final plat, the MAPC signature block needs to reference "J.D. Michaelis, Acting Chair". M. This property is within a zone identified by the City Engineers' office as likely to have groundwater at some or all times within 10 feet of the ground surface elevation. Building with specially engineered foundations or with the lowest floor opening above groundwater is recommended, and owners seeking building permits on this property will be similarly advised. More detailed information on recorded groundwater elevations in the vicinity of this property is available in the City Engineers' office. N. 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. O. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities which 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.) P. 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. Q. 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 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. R. 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. S. The owner of the subdivision should be aware of the fact that the development of any subdivision greater than five (5) acres in size may require an NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Further, on all construction sites, the City of Wichita requires that best management practices be used to reduce pollutant loadings in storm water runoffs. T. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. U. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. V. 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. KGE has requested additional easements. A temporary easement will need to be established by separate instrument for any facilities in need of relocation. W. The applicant is reminded that a disk shall be submitted with the final plat tracing to the Planning Department detailing this plat in digital format in AutoCAD. This will be used by the City and County GIS Department. ------------------------------------------------------- 2/4. SUB2001-28 – One-Step Final Plat of FLAT CREEK ADDITION, located on the east side of 119th Street West, north side of Pawnee. A. The applicant shall guarantee the extension of sanitary sewer and City water to serve the lots being platted. B. 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-6, Single-Family Residential and allow for the lot sizes being platted. C. If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning department for recording. D. County/City Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant's drainage plan. County/City Engineering have approved the drainage plan. City Engineering has required a drainage guarantee. E. County Engineering needs to comment on the need for improvements to perimeter streets. No improvements are required. F. The plat proposes complete access control along the plat's frontage to Pawnee and 119th St. West. The final plat shall reference the access controls in the plattor's text. G. The applicant shall guarantee the installation of the proposed streets. The guarantee shall also provide for sidewalks on one side of the through street and loop streets (64-ft right-of-way). H. 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. I. For those reserves being platted for drainage purposes, the required covenant which provides for ownership and maintenance of the reserves shall grant, to the City, 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. J. It appears that the width of the through street and loop streets are measured as 64 feet although incorrectly labeled as 70 feet. K. Lots 7, 8 and 11, Block F, exceed the maximum lot width to lot depth ratio of 2.5 to 1. A modification has been approved by the Subdivision Committee. L. The County/City Fire Department needs to comment on the plat's street names. Revised street names are required. M. 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. N. The applicant needs to verify the location of the pipeline easement indicated in the platting binder. If this easement is on this site, it should either be shown or verification provided that it is off-site or has been released. O. The owners noted in the platting binder need to be signatories to the plat, or a revision to the binder showing that the site's ownership is only in the party now shown on the final plat. P. 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. Q. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities which 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.) R. 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. S. 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 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. T. 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. U. The owner of the subdivision should be aware of the fact that the development of any subdivision greater than five (5) acres in size may require an NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Further, on all construction sites, the City of Wichita requires that best management practices be used to reduce pollutant loadings in storm water runoffs. V. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. W. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. X. 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. KGE has requested additional easements. Y. The applicant is reminded that a disk shall be submitted with the final plat tracing to the Planning Department detailing this plat in digital format in AutoCAD. This will be used by the City and County GIS Department. ------------------------------------------------------------ 2/5. SUB2001-23 – One-Step Final plat of REGAL MOTORS ADDITION, located on the east side of Broadway, north of 31st Street South. A. Municipal services are available to serve the site. City Engineering needs to comment on the need for any guarantees or easements. No guarantees or easements are required. 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. The plat proposes two access openings along Broadway. Traffic Engineering needs to comment on the access controls. Traffic Engineering has approved one opening. E. The centerline of Broadway needs to be denoted on the final plat tracing. F. The right-of-way width from the centerline of Broadway needs to be denoted on the final plat tracing. The Subdivision Regulations require a 50-ft half-street right-of-way for plats along arterials. G. The applicant shall guarantee the closure of any driveway openings located in areas of complete access control or that exceed the number of allowed openings. H. The signature line for the County Clerk needs to be revised to reference "Don Brace". I. The signature line for the MAPC Chairman needs to be revised to reference "Jerry Michaelis, Acting Chair". J. Based upon the platting binder, property taxes are still outstanding. Before the plat is scheduled for City Council consideration, proof shall be provided indicating that all applicable property taxes have been paid. K. The current ownership of the railroad needs to be included on the plat. L. This property is within a zone identified by the City Engineers' office as likely to have groundwater at some or all times within 10 feet of the ground surface elevation. Building with specially engineered foundations or with the lowest floor opening above groundwater is recommended, and owners seeking building permits on this property will be similarly advised. More detailed information on recorded groundwater elevations in the vicinity of this property is available in the City Engineers' office. M. 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. N. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities which 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.) O. 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. P. 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 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. Q. 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. R. The owner of the subdivision should be aware of the fact that the development of any subdivision greater than five (5) acres in size may require an NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Further, on all construction sites, the City of Wichita requires that best management practices be used to reduce pollutant loadings in storm water runoffs. S. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. T. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. U. 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. V. The applicant is reminded that a disk shall be submitted with the final plat tracing to the Planning Department detailing this plat in digital format in AutoCAD. This will be used by the City and County GIS Department. ------------------------------------------------------------- 2/6. SUB2001-24 – One-step final plat of JESSEE THIRD ADDITION, located west of Broadway, south side of 33rd street north. A. Municipal services are available to serve the site. City Engineering needs to comment on the private sewer easement proposed on Lot 2 for the benefit of Lot 1. The private sewer easement is acceptable. B. The private sewer easement needs to be established by separate instrument. C. City Engineering needs to comment on the need for any guarantees or additional easements. No guarantees or additional easements are required. D. If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning department for recording. E. City Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant's drainage plan. The drainage plan is approved. F. 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. G. Lot 3 exceeds the maximum lot width to lot depth ratio of 2.5 to 1. A modification has been approved by the Subdivision Committee. H. This property is within a zone identified by the City Engineers' office as likely to have groundwater at some or all times within 10 feet of the ground surface elevation. Building with specially engineered foundations or with the lowest floor opening above groundwater is recommended, and owners seeking building permits on this property will be similarly advised. More detailed information on recorded groundwater elevations in the vicinity of this property is available in the City Engineers' office. I. 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. J. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities which 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 316-729-0102) 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 be aware of the fact that the development of any subdivision greater than five (5) acres in size may require an NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Further, on all construction sites, the City of Wichita requires that best management practices be used to reduce pollutant loadings in storm water runoffs. O. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. P. Recording of the plat within thirty (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 disk shall be submitted with the final plat tracing to the Planning Department detailing this plat in digital format in AutoCAD. This will be used by the City and County GIS Department. ---------------------------------------------------- 2/7. SUB2001-27 – One-Step Final Plat of HAL LOEHR ADDITION, located west of 295th Street West, north side of Pawnee. A. Since neither municipal water nor sanitary sewer is available to serve this property, the applicant shall contact the Environmental Health Division of the Health Department to find out what tests may be necessary and what standards are to be met for approval of on-site sewerage facilities and water wells. A memorandum shall be obtained specifying approval. The applicant shall be relocating the lagoon to 50 feet from the east property line. Health Department requires the approval of two waivers to permit the lagoon to be located closer than the required 100 feet from property lines. B. If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning department for recording. C. County Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant's drainage plan, and on the accuracy of the boundaries of the floodway reserve. The Master Drainage Plan needs to be reviewed. D. The plattor's text shall note the creation of the Floodway Reserve in addition to including the standard floodway language. E. The lot exceeds the maximum lot width to lot depth ratio of 2.5 to 1. A modification has been approved by the Subdivision Committee. F. County Fire Department has required a 20-ft driveway to the shed and a turnaround to conform with Fire Department's requirements. G. The applicant is advised that if platted, the building setbacks must be 35 feet to conform with the Zoning setback standard for County section line roads. H. 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. I. 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. J. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities which 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 316-729-0102) 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 be aware of the fact that the development of any subdivision greater than five (5) acres in size may require an NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Further, on all construction sites, the City of Wichita requires that best management practices be used to reduce pollutant loadings in storm water runoffs. O. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. P. Recording of the plat within thirty (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 disk shall be submitted with the final plat tracing to the Planning Department detailing this plat in digital format in AutoCAD. This will be used by the City and County GIS Department. --------------------------------------------------------------- 2/8. SUB2001-29 – One-Step Final Plat of W.H.H. Addition, located on the south side of 27th Street South, west of Seneca. A. City Water services are available to serve the site. The applicant shall guarantee an extension of sanitary sewer. City Engineering needs to comment on the need for additional guarantees or easements. No additional guarantees or easements are required. 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 the need for improvements to perimeter streets. No improvements are required. E. This property is within a zone identified by the City Engineers' office as likely to have groundwater at some or all times within 10 feet of the ground surface elevation. Building with specially engineered foundations or with the lowest floor opening above groundwater is recommended, and owners seeking building permits on this property will be similarly advised. More detailed information on recorded groundwater elevations in the vicinity of this property is available in the City Engineers' office. F. 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. G. 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. H. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities which 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.) I. 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. J. 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 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. K. 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. L. The owner of the subdivision should be aware of the fact that the development of any subdivision greater than five (5) acres in size may require an NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Further, on all construction sites, the City of Wichita requires that best management practices be used to reduce pollutant loadings in storm water runoffs. M. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. N. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. O. 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. P. The applicant is reminded that a disk shall be submitted with the final plat tracing to the Planning Department detailing this plat in digital format in AutoCAD. This will be used by the City and County GIS Department. ------------------------------------------------------- 2/9. DED2001-05 – Dedication of a Utility Easement, located south of 13th Street, east of Hoover. OWNER/APPLICANT: Charles W. Hinkle, 1402 W. 35th Street North, Wichita, KS 67204 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The east 20 feet of the west 150 feet of the south half of Lot 19, except the south 30 feet, R.A. Morris Tracts, Sedgwick County Kansas. PURPOSE OF DEDICATION: This Dedication is a requirement of Lot Split No. SUB 2001-15, and is being dedicated for the construction and maintenance of public utilities. Planning Staff recommends that the Dedication be accepted. ------------------------------------------------------ 2/10. DED2001-06 – Contingent dedication of street right-of-way, located south of 13th Street, east of Hoover. OWNER/APPLICANT: Charles W. Hinkle, 1402 W. 35th Street North, Wichita, KS 67204. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The east 30 feet of south half of Lot 19, except the east 330 feet, the west 207.5 feet and the south 30 feet for street, of R. A. Morris Tracts, Sedgwick County Kansas. PURPOSE OF DEDICATION: This Dedication is a requirement of Lot Split No. SUB 2001-15, and is being dedicated for future street along the east line of the plat. Planning Staff recommends that the Dedication be accepted. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 2/11. DED2001-07 – Dedication of a utility easement, located west of Seneca and south of MacArthur Road. OWNER/APPLICANT: Nelson and Nelson, Inc., C/O Chris Nelson, 12220 Jayson Lane, Wichita, KS 67235 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The south 2 feet of the north 10 feet and the east 2 feet of the west 10 feet of Lot 3, Block A, Vilm Gardens Second Addition, Sedgwick County, Kansas. PURPOSE OF DEDICATION: This Dedication is a requirement of Lot Split No. SUB 2001-14, and is being dedicated to conform with the standard utility easement width. Planning Staff recommends that the Dedication be accepted. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Johnson arrived at the meeting at 1:06 p.m. Richard Lopez arrived at the meeting at 1:07 p.m. Kerry Coulter arrived at the meeting at 1:08 p.m. 2/3. SUB2001-26- One-Step Final Plat of COPART ADDITION, located north of 47th Street South, east of Kansas Turnpike. A. Sanitary sewer services are available to serve the site. The applicant shall guarantee the extension of City water. City Engineering needs to comment on the need for guarantees or easements. A guarantee for the extension of sanitary sewer is required. B. The applicant shall dedicate an additional 10 feet along with both sides of the existing sewer easement. Also, a Restrictive covenant shall be submitted addressing construction of the drive crossings over the easement. 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 60-ft drainage easement is required along the north line of the plat. E. County Engineering requests that the plat reflect the established bank lines of Arkansas River. F. On the final plat, Reserves should be denoted to cover billboards and referenced in the plattor's text. G. City Fire Department needs to comment on the need for the installation of a turnaround at the terminus of Madison. A hammerhead turnaround is required. The applicant shall submit a petition for future paving. H. Access controls dedicated along the Kansas Turnpike need to be denoted on the face of the plat. I. The southernmost structure situated within the required 20-ft zoning setback shall not be enlarged to increase its nonconformity and if removed cannot be replaced within the required setback. J. This property is within a zone identified by the City Engineers' office as likely to have groundwater at some or all times within 10 feet of the ground surface elevation. Building with specially engineered foundations or with the lowest floor opening above groundwater is recommended, and owners seeking building permits on this property will be similarly advised. More detailed information on recorded groundwater elevations in the vicinity of this property is available in the City Engineers' office. K. Based upon the platting binder, property taxes are still outstanding. Before the plat is scheduled for City Council consideration, proof shall be provided indicating that all applicable property taxes have been paid. L. 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. M. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities which 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.) N. 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. O. 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 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. P. 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. Q. The owner of the subdivision should be aware of the fact that the development of any subdivision greater than five (5) acres in size may require an NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Further, on all construction sites, the City of Wichita requires that best management practices be used to reduce pollutant loadings in storm water runoffs. R. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. S. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. T. 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. U. The applicant is reminded that a disk shall be submitted with the final plat tracing to the Planning Department detailing this plat in digital format in AutoCAD. This will be used by the City and County GIS Department. NEIL STRAHL, Planning staff "This is located north of 47th Street South, east of the Kansas Turnpike. This site was approved last year as a Conditional use for a wrecking and salvage yard. Last week, the Subdivision Committee approved the plat; however, subsequent to last week's meeting, the Water and Sewer Department met with the applicant and agreed upon the submission of a restrictive covenant. This covenant will address an existing sewer line that is located on the western portion of the plat. The covenant will entail increasing the existing sewer easement by 20 feet, 10 feet on each side of the existing easement. Other requirements will involve construction of drive crossings along the easement along with participation of the water and sewer department in that construction. The applicant's agent, Phil Meyer, is in attendance today, and he can elaborate on the requirements. Are there any questions for staff?" PLATT "Is parking going to be allowed on the easement? Did they agree on that?" STRAHL "I don't know. I will defer to the applicant on that." MICHAELIS "Are there any further questions of staff? Thank you, Mr. Strahl. Could we hear from the applicant?" PHIL MEYER "I am with the Baughman Company, agent for the applicant. We did meet with the Sewer and Water Department subsequent to the Subdivision vote. We have reached a compromise. We were at one end to the other at Subdivision where they wanted no parking on the easement—they wanted it wider. We met with them and worked out a compromise to where we will increase the width to 50 feet. We are allowed to park on the easement. We will construct 30 x 30 foot concrete pads over the easement at designated locations. The first phase that is out there today will require 3 crossings. The second phase will probably require 3. They will be built in the same manner. Both parties, the applicant and the Sewer and Water Department are in agreement with this. Our office will draw up a mutual agreement between the two to sign to go with the final plat. I will go into more detail if you would like for me to." WARREN "As I recall, the Subdivision modified that motion so that we were going to require 30 foot, but it had to be open as a surface road. Now, you are saying that 30 foot won't apply, but 50 foot is going to apply and you don't have to keep it open." MEYER "We don't have to keep it open and we are allowed to park on it, which is one of the things we wanted to do." WARREN "And you are agreeable to that?" MEYER "Both sides are agreeable." MICHAELIS "Any further questions of the applicant? Thank you, Mr. Meyer. Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak on this item? Either for or against. Seeing none, we will bring it back to the Commission." MOTION: That the Planning Commission recommend to the governing body that the request be approved, subject to the conditions worked out in the covenant between the applicant and the Water and Sewer Department. PLATT moved, LOPEZ seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (11- 0). -------------------------------------------------------------------- JERRY MICHAELIS, Acting Chair, read the following zoning procedural statement which is applicable to all City of Wichita zoning cases: Before we begin the agenda, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome members of the public to this meeting of the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission. Copies of the agenda for today's meeting, the public hearing procedure, and copies of staff reports on zoning items are available at the table nearest to the audience. The Commission's bylaws limit the applicant on a zoning or subdivision application and his or her representative(s) to a total of ten minutes of speaking time at the start of the hearing on that item, plus up to two minutes at the conclusion of that hearing. All other persons wishing to speak on agenda items are limited to five minutes per person. However, if they feel that it is needed and justified, the Commission may extend these times by a majority vote. All speakers are requested to state your name and address for the record when beginning to speak. When you are done speaking, please write your name and address, and the case number, on the sheet provided at the table nearest to the audience. This will enable staff to notify you if there are any additional proceedings concerning that item. Please note that all written and visual materials you present to the Commission will be retained by the Secretary as part of the official record. If you are not speaking, but you wish to be notified about future proceedings on a particular case, please sign in on that same sheet. The Planning Commission is interested in hearing the views of all persons who wish to express themselves on our agenda items. However, we ask all speakers to please be as concise as possible, and to please avoid long repetitions of facts or opinions which have already been stated. For your information, the Wichita City Council has adopted a policy for all City zoning and vacation items, which is also available at the table with the other materials. They rely on the written record of the Planning Commission hearings and do not conduct their own additional public hearings on these items. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Marnell arrived at the meeting at 1:10 p.m. Osborne-Howes arrived at the meeting at 1:11 p.m. 3/1. VAC2001-00007 – Charles W. Hinkle requests to vacate a 20-foot utility easement, described as: The east 20 feet of the west 160 feet of the south half of Lot 19, R.A. Morris Tracts, Sedgwick County, Kansas. Generally located on the northeast corner of Curtis and 11th Street. LOCATION: Generally located on the Northeast corner of Curtis and 11th. REASON FOR REQUEST: For future development of this site. CURRENT ZONING: Subject property is zoned SF-6 Single Family Residential. Properties to the north, west, south and east are zoned SF-6 Single Family Residential. The applicant is requesting to vacate a 20-ft Utility Easement and proposes providing a substitute 20-ft utility easement. The substitue20-ft easement would be partially located approximately 10-ft. east of the existing easement; with remaining 10-ft located within the east half of the existing easement. There is an 8-inch sanitary sewer line located in this 20-ft easement. The applicant proposes to do a Lot Split contingent on the consideration and recommendation of the vacation request. The applicant proposes to build homes on the parcels created by the Lot Splits. Based upon the information available prior to the public hearing, staff recommends the MAPC make the following findings and recommendation to the City Council: A. That after being duly and fully informed as to fully understand the true nature of this petition and the propriety of granting the same, the MAPC makes the following findings: 1. That due and legal notice has been given by publication as required by law, by publication in the Wichita Eagle of notice of this vacation proceeding one time March 2, 2001, which was at least 20 days prior to this public hearing. 2. That no private rights will be injured or endangered by the vacation of the above-described access control, and the public will suffer no loss or inconvenience thereby. 3. In justice to the petitioner(s), the prayer of the petition ought to be granted. B. Therefore, the vacation of a portion of access control described in the petition should be approved subject to the following conditions. 1. City Public Works requires the applicant to verify the location of the sewer line in the existing easement. If it is as shown on the plat, Public Works does not oppose the vacation request. 2. Utility Representatives has no objection to the vacation request. 3. Any relocation or reconstruction of utilities made necessary by this vacation shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 4. All improvements shall be according to City Standards. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Subdivision Committee recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall verify the location of the sewer line in the existing easement. If it is as shown on the plat, Public Works does not oppose the vacation request and the substitute easement. 2. Any relocation or reconstruction of utilities made necessary by this vacation shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 3. All improvements shall be according to City Standards. BILL LONGNECKER, Planning staff "This is a request to vacate a 20-foot utility easement. The reason for the request is for future development of the site. Currently the utility easement is shown on this line (indicating), and this solid line here. That is a 20-foot utility easement. The applicant is proposing to do a lot-split contingent on consideration and recommendation of vacation request. He is proposing to put a substitute easement, sliding it basically 10 foot over to the west. So the new easement would be located here (indicating) and here. The Subdivision Committee heard this and recommended approval of this vacation request contingent upon the applicant verifying the location of the sewer line, and the existing easement. There is an 8-inch sewer line. If it is shown on the plat, Public Works is not opposed to the vacation request and the substitute easement." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of staff? Thank you, Mr. Longnecker. May we hear from the applicant, please?" ROBERT PRIVIERA "I am with Reiss and Goodness Engineers. We are in approval of all of the staff comments. I have given proof by a survey location of the actual sewer line to the Planning Department. That should be enough to get them on their way." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of the applicant? Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak either in favor or in opposition to Item No. 3/1? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Commission." MOTION: Approve the item, subject to staff comments. HENTZEN moved, LOPEZ seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (13-0). ------------------------------------------------------- 3/2. VAC2001-00008 – Ascension Lutheran Church requests to vacate a 10-foot utility easement, located on the southeast corner of Bekemyer and Tyler, described as: The East ten (10) feet of the West 394 feet of the South 172 feet of a tract described as follows: The North 450 feet of the West 484 feet of the South half of the Southwest Quarter (S/2 SW/4) of Section 16, Township 27 South, Range I West of the 6th PM., Sedgwick County, Kansas. REASON FOR REQUEST: The Church plans to build an educational wing addition over the easement area. CURRENT ZONING: Subject property is zoned SF-6 Single Family Residential. Properties to the north and west are zoned SF-6 Single Family Residential and GO General Office. Property to the south is zoned LC Limited Commercial and property to the east is zoned SF-6 Single Family Residential. The applicant is requesting vacation of a 10-ft KG&E Easement. The applicant proposes to build an educational wing onto the existing Ascension Lutheran Church, which will encroach on the KG&E easement. The applicant has a witnessed Partial Release of Right of Way agreement with KG&E (10-20-01) in reference to the KG&E utility. The KG&E easement is recorded on the Ascension Lutheran Church Addition Plat (June, 1997) and therefore the applicant must vacate the easement as well as obtain the Partial Release of Right of Way. Based upon the information available prior to the public hearing, staff recommends the MAPC make the following findings and recommendation to the City Council: A. That after being duly and fully informed as to fully understand the true nature of this petition and the propriety of granting the same, the MAPC makes the following findings: 1. That due and legal notice has been given by publication as required by law, by publication in the Wichita Eagle of notice of this vacation proceeding one time March 2, 2001, which was at least 20 days prior to this public hearing. 2. That no private rights will be injured or endangered by the vacation of the above-described access control, and the public will suffer no loss or inconvenience thereby. 3. In justice to the petitioner(s), the prayer of the petition ought to be granted. B. Therefore, the vacation of a portion of access control described in the petition should be approved subject to the following conditions. 1. City Public Works has no objection to the vacation request. 2. Utility Representatives have no objection to the vacation request 3. Any relocation or reconstruction of utilities made necessary by this vacation shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 4. All improvements shall be done according to City Standards. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Subdivision Committee recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Any relocation or reconstruction of utilities made necessary by this vacation shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 2. All improvements shall be done according to City Standards. BILL LONGNECKER, Planning staff "This is a request to vacate a 10-foot utility easement. This is a private easement; a KG&E easement that are recorded on the Ascension Lutheran plat. Because it is recorded on the Ascension plat, even though it is a private, 10-foot KG&E utility easement, we need to go through the vacation process to get it noted that it will be removed from the plat. The Subdivision Committee heard this case and recommended approval of the vacation request with the language 'any relocation, reconstruction of utilities made necessary by this vacation shall be the responsibility of the applicant; and All improvements shall be done according to City Standards. Are there any questions?" MICHAELIS "Are there any questions? Thank you, Mr. Longnecker. May we hear from the applicant?" BRAD TEETER "I am with Spangenberg Phillips Architecture, agent for the applicant. We have no objections to the staff report's recommendations. I am happy to answer any questions you might have." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of the applicant? Thank you, sir. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this item, in favor or against? Seeing none, we will bring it back to the Commission." MOTION: That the item be approved, subject to staff comments. GAROFALO moved, WARNER seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (13-0). ---------------------------------------------------------- 4. DR00-10 – Adoption of Midtown North Neighborhood Revitalization Plan. DAVE BARBER, Planning staff, concluded his presentation of the public hearing that commenced on March 8, 2001. BARBER "Mr. Chair, do you want me to recap my presentation from the prior meeting, or do you just want me to conclude from the point where we left off?" MICHAELIS "I would think that we could probably just conclude and maybe summarize a little bit. Then if we have any specific questions, we can ask them." BARBER "I just want to remind the Planning Commission that we have been working on this plan for over a year and a half and there have been some special challenges along the way. I think we are now at a point where we do have a fairly good plan that has the general support of residents and business people in the plan area. It is by no means a perfect plan, nor is there unanimous support for everything in it. But I think it does set a good foundation for future revitalization efforts in the Mid-Town North area. You may recall that we reviewed the 21st Street Improvement elements of the plan with you at the last meeting; some street widening between Park Place and Broadway; 8-foot wide sidewalks along both sides of 21st Street, some street scaping and landscaping and tree planting along both sides. To do that, of course, necessitated the additional right-of-way; maintaining 4 lanes of through traffic, adding turning lanes, reconfiguring Market and 21st Streets on the north side of 21st. I think we are pretty much to where we left off last time. You may recall that there are a total of 8 plan goals; 5 of those goals are geared more to community capacity building and neighborhood programming issues. Three of the goals actually relate to physical improvements in the plan area. One of the goals had to do with encouraging additional economic development in this particular area. Increasing retail commercial activity. We talked about the International Marketplace concept. There was no agreement on this and this is something that I think will have to be left for discussion on another day. We encouraged the establishment of a local business association. I think that pretty much brings us up to where we left off. The 6th goal is to initiate better marketing promotion of the community recreation programs available at the Evergreen Center, especially through local churches, schools and businesses. Although the Evergreen Center itself is not physically located in the plan area, it is an integral part of this community and people in the plan area do use this facility and it is an important part of their 'neighborhood and community'. The other goal was to preserve and strengthen local churches there, seen as an integral element of the neighborhood fabric. The last goal was to preserve historic buildings. There are not a lot of them in the plan area, but one of them is the Nomar Theater. I think the plan encourages incorporating at least the architectural aspects of the building and the façade elements of it in any future redevelopment initiates in the Market and 21st Street area. I think this brings us up to where we left off. There are some neighborhood zoning adjustments that are being proposed in the plan. The plan identified a need to create a better zoning fit with the low-density residential character of the neighborhood. If we look at the existing zoning map, you can see that the darker colored areas are largely high-density residential development areas. Seventy-five dwelling units per acre in the area in brown here (indicating). We go into the green area through here and I think it is down to about 29 DUs per acre. When you look at the actual land-use pattern, you can see that most of the neighborhood is either single-family or duplex, so there is not a good fit between zoning and existing and proposed future land-use opportunities in the area. This is something that I think will have to be followed up in the implementation stage. In terms of the implementation priorities, of course the aspects of the plan that relate to community programming and capacity building don't have any reliance up local government capital investment monies. However, the physical improvements that we reviewed with you last time, particularly the 21st Street improvements do have C.I.P. implications for the City of Wichita, and the total improvement costs are estimated at $3.9 million for the things that we described to you pertaining to the 21st Street improvements. The city has allocated funds in its 10- year C.I.P. They are actually scheduled, at this point in time, for the year 2006. I believe that there is a hope to accelerate that and move it up so that the neighborhood does not have to wait another 5 to 6 years to see some improvements on 21st Street. As I mentioned to you before, there is some interest in the Mercado concept, but no consensus. I think this will be left for further study and debate. As I also mentioned earlier, there are some properties that will need some zoning adjustments and this will require full community support and initiative to make something like that happen. We have just conceptually identified an issue that will now be up to the neighborhood to move that issue forward with more specifics. Develop restoration plans for the Normar Theater. I think it is still yet to be determined what the reuse capabilities of that facility are." Barfield arrived at 1:20 p.m. GAROFALO "Dave, on the 21st Street Improvements, is it in the C.I.P. for that year to begin or to be completed?" BARBER "That is the commencement." GAROFALO "For 2006." BARBER "Yes, the construction commencement. I think some design work might be done earlier, but I believe that that is the current commencement date for improvements. And I know that the Council member for that area has hopes of moving that up perhaps in 2003, rather than 2006. That pretty much brings us to the conclusion of the plan. We are at a state now where we need the Planning Commission's support. The recommendation, of course, is to adopt the Mid-Town North Neighborhood Revitalization Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan. I believe there is a list of members who were on the 21st Street Task Force that was put together about a year ago to resolve some of these outstanding issues pertaining to the actual configuration of the 21st Street improvements. There are a couple of people from the neighborhood here as well. I will turn it back to you at this time." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions for Mr. Barber?" LOPEZ "In the original plan that was first discussed, not these modifications that are taking place, traffic flow from Hood to Broadway was a major concern and this Commission pointed that out a number of times. Right now, it is four lanes and it is a major traffic mess. The only difference that I have seen here in this plan is the improvement of the turn bays at 21st and Broadway. Why hasn't the whole span from Hood to Broadway been addressed in the same manner?" BARBER "If I could speak to that, Mr. Chair. The plan for the 21st Street improvements go west beyond the plan area, as you see it here. I believe there are proposals to put left-turn lanes at Arkansas and Waco. There is a proposal, I believe at this time, to widen the north side of 21st Street all the way down to Hood with 5 to 8 foot of additional right-of-way. But I don't think there are any plans to put any additional travel lanes through, just a couple of turn lanes and making the travel way wider, but no additional lane capacity at this time." LOPEZ "But at the last meeting we had it presented to us that it was going to be expanded to five lanes with parking on each side. You presented that, and now it has changed again." BARBER "There is no fifth lanes here. There are some turning lanes." LOPEZ "So there is no improvement on 21st and Hood to Broadway then." BARBER "No additional lane capacity." MICHAELIS "Are there any further questions of Mr. Barber?" OSBORNE-HOWES "There is no on-street parking like you had talked about before?" BARBER "No. We couldn't get a consensus on that." OSBORNE-HOWES "I think that is one of the questions that Richard brought up." BARBER "Yes, and there was some concern about that, and it has been decided that there will be no on-street parking." LOPEZ "That brings me back to another concern that was brought up; the concept of Mercado. In discussing it with neighbors, it was not restricted to a one-block area, but a much larger concept. And the plan is still restricted to one block, so this plan is still not what some neighborhood representatives are requesting." BARBER "This plan only shows a couple of scenarios that there was no consensus on. So you are right, it is not the definitive statement on the Mercado and there is no direction on that, frankly, in terms of the scale, the location, the size." MICHAELIS "Could we be somewhat in a position here where we could take this, like the Comprehensive Plan and that modifications can be made to it between now and the time it is actually implemented?" BARBER "Absolutely. This is sort of a living document. I think it is a good spring board for some of these 21st Street improvements, but there are some issues that are going to require further discussion with the community, and at some time in the future, perhaps the plan might need to be amended again." MICHAELIS "I think those are the kinds of things Mr. Lopez is talking about. Through the proper channels they can probably be put in there." LOPEZ "Well, this was brought to us as the revised edition, which is mainly the expansion of Broadway and 21st Street at the turn lane. That is the only difference right now. So looking at the other side of the coin, that could be the only thing that can be adopted because the plan, from my prospective and community input, is not complete, versus the Delano plan, when it came here, everybody was in conformance and happy with the Delano plan, or the other plan, the Orchard Park Plan. I believe everybody was pleased with that. This one isn't a done project." KROUT "I think that from the staff's prospective, what we are saying is that this is where we were able to achieve consensus. There are other areas where we can't. You know as well as I, Richard, that the 21st Street improvements have been delayed and delayed and delayed again. One of the main reasons is that there hasn't been a design plan that everybody understands and looks at and signs off on. Now, that is the one solid thing that has come out of this Committee's discussion and recommendations is how are we going to improve 21st Street? That is what leads us to believe that we can advance it to occurring on schedule because now we have an idea about where we need to buy land and what the improvements will generally look like." LOPEZ "Just to refresh your memory, when we first adopted a study and the design portion in 1999 went through, and in 2000 we were supposed to begin right-of-way, and 2001 was construction. And after the design study was repeated, then this thing was kicked back to 2006 for more input. More input has not resulted in a consensus in that neighborhood at this point in time. I don't have any problem with the adoption of the 21st Street and Broadway turn lanes and the rest of the plan still being referred back for more work. But this is not a completed plan." MICHAELIS "Is there any further discussion? Thank you, Mr. Barber, and thank you for your patience on the number of times we started and stopped on this. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this?" KIT P. SANCHEZ "I live at 1838 Arkansas Avenue. Ma'am and gentlemen, it seems that it has been a long time in looking at this plan, and as Mr. Lopez has reviewed, there has been a lot of variation from the original intent. I know that my involvement via the Hispanic/Native American Coalition has been somewhat sporadic, not because I didn't want to be involved, nor in the group, but because the City Council person of the district ordained it that way because of some opposition to the Mercado Plan. It seems to me and the rest of my colleagues that in respect to two primary aspects of this plan, the 21st Street Traffic way and the Mercado that in both instances that we are missing the target completely. Between Hood and 21st and Broadway, for sure, but even yet east, and I know that the boundaries, I suppose, of the funds available to finance much of this project do limit the funding available between 17th Street and I believe 25th, and between Broadway and Arkansas. I will point out, however it is minor, it seems that there is an inclusion for Evergreen Park, I think it is additional police presence. Not that is a bad thing in itself, but at the same time, when the area seems to be having a decrease in overall crime, a location of police outside of the zone that was specified contrary to my point about Woodland Park also being import, mostly in terms of recreation, seem to be contrary to the intent of the project as Ms. Cole has stated before. But more importantly, it seems that the lack of consensus from the business community and from individuals within the community, doesn't portray the scientific study of what might be found if one were to formally ask the residents and the owners of the property in the area affected. As I understand it, in this plan between 21st and 25th Street, between Broadway and Wellington, maybe, all of the homes would go. That is quite a piece of ground. I know that the church is being held as a sanctuary, as it should be; a lot of us in the community consider it holy ground, for a lot of reasons, but the homes, too, have a history. I speak for those that perhaps would find some deference to the idea that one can dictate, as it happened in the 1970s and to other communities before when Urban Renewal came through. So this plan is very, very uncooked or unbaked, if you will. There are a lot of things in there that just don't seem to serve the overall intent that many people had looked upon with a lot of joy in the beginning to think that 21st Street, above all, would receive the type of treatment that it needs to provide the traffic way that would very much mirror what we see on the east side towards Wichita State University. And also the inclusion of the International Market, which began, not only with the Hispanic Mercado, but also with the Vietnamese, or the Indo Chinese, I believe International Market. When the issues of the railroad tracks, and that is a whole 'nother ball game, I know, and also the odor in the area came up, all of a sudden, these weren't so critical to the location of the Mercado. And when the facts seemed to be pointed out that the movement in business and residential seemed to be more west, even towards Amidon, that didn't seem to be so important either. Anyway, there were a lot of things that people found difficult to agree on, but again, there didn't seem to be a scientific approach to checking with the owners and the people that live in the area that would be most affected by the removal of themselves and their properties in the future. The other needs of the people, as far as recreation, I might point out that Evergreen does not stand alone, and it is under used, we know that. I am happy to see that in some way it is being included here. It is good to see that in the plan you have this idea of business support, of recreational activities for youth, but there seems to be a lot of neglect, too, about the other parks in the area. Minisa Park. I know it is outside of this area, and the Woodland Park area there, too. Those are things that the Coalition and myself would have expressed. If you look at the plan there and you look at the partnerships, I believe it is, beyond the task force, which was only formed maybe a year ago in June. You don't see Hispanic/Native American or Hispanic organizations at all." MICHAELIS "Do you need some additional time?" SANCHEZ "I need two minutes if I could, please." MOTION: That the speaker's time be extended two minutes. VOTE ON THE MOTION: The motion carried unanimously. SANCHEZ "Thank you. I tried to note this at an early March meeting at Evergreen. Again, in the presence of the district councilperson, I was not allowed to speak my mind. I only express those ideas that others have brought to my attention through this Hispanic/Native American coalition. I think that our participation in the planning process would have been valuable. I know that other organizations out there, because this is primarily a Hispanic affected program, we think that we should have been included and we hope in the future that if there is any reconsideration, that we will be invited to do so." OSBORNE-HOWES "What was your name again?" SANCHEZ "Kit Paul Sanchez. 1838 Arkansas." GAROFALO "I have a question for you. From your statement, it appears that you are opposed to this plan now? I am not sure whether you are for it or against it." SANCHEZ "I am opposed to the plan in its current form, yes." GAROFALO "Okay, what would you suggest?" SANCHEZ "I would suggest that the Mercado idea, because it is one of the primary issues, be hammered out and that the people in the residential area that are going to be affected by the removal of their homes, by their homes being purchased and such, be scientifically surveyed. I think that we should re-look the issue of Hood to Broadway and the expansion of 21st Street as originally presented. And finally, sir, if there is future participation requested of the public, I would hope that our organization, the Hispanic Native/American Coalition, would be invited. Thank you." GAROFALO "Okay, thanks." MICHAELIS "Any other questions? Thank you, sir. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this item? Please come forward, ma'am." VERONICA CASADOS "I live at 3257 North Hood Court. I serve on the District VI DAB Board as well as was a member of the Task Force that came up with the plan that you see here today. I wanted to respectfully make some clarifications on some statements that were made earlier. No. 1 that I think would be most important to you is that the plan right now is not for taking out homes. We are not taking out any homes in that area. In fact, part of the things we were trying to do in balancing what needed to be done is taking care of the commercial need for the people who are going to be in that area, and respecting the homes that are there, which resulted in us not being able to widen the streets as much as was originally proposed. We did not want to remove anybody from a home because of this, okay? And, I see this as a jumping off point. Most certainly as we present this plan today, it is not complete—we know that. We do though, feel the frustration that this has gone through committee, through committee, through a number of different members voicing their opinions. I guess as a member of the committee, I am frustrated that nothing has been done. I see this as a jumping off place for us to continue. As far as the representation, I do know for a fact that the Hispanic Coalition, and my husband, Leo Casados, was the president and he was approached many times to send a representative to the task force. So most certainly I saw that the Hispanic Coalition had an opportunity to be represented on the task force that came up with the plan that you see today, and for some reason, chose not to. I personally even said 'is someone coming?'; 'is someone coming? Because I don't officially sit on that Task Force. I know that many people were spoken to and no one actually came to the Task Force meetings. Do you have any questions related to the Task Force? I would be glad to help you with those." LOPEZ "You made the comment that it is not going to be expanded to 5 lanes because it would be taking homes. How many homes would be affected by that?" CASADOS "By the expansion of the five lanes? I couldn't answer that. A city official would have to answer that." LOPEZ "I really don't think there were any affected by it. Going for The Market, you made a comment that you didn't continue with the process of expanding the Market, or even putting in the Market area, even considering it because of homes being taken. How many homes would be taken in that one block area?" CASADOS "How many homes would be taken out now or in the future?" LOPEZ "No, right now, in that plan that is there?" CASADOS "None." LOPEZ "Thank you. That is all I needed to know." GAROFALO "This list of names that we were given that says Committee members for the 21st Development. Is that the Task Force people?" CASADOS "Yes. Although, quite honestly, not all of those attended, but all of them said they were going to attend." MICHAELIS "Thank you, Ma'am. Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak on this item? Okay. Mr. Barber, is there anything additional that you need to add?" BARBER "No." MICHAELIS "Okay, we will bring it back to the Commission." LOPEZ "I guess we have a couple of options. But since I have been involved with this for a number of years and it is still not a completed plan, and there is still a lot of unanswered questions about it, I will make this motion." MOTION: That the Plan be referred back to the elected representatives of the District Advisory Board, and that they meet with the representatives of the community before coming back to us with a completed plan. LOPEZ moved. MICHAELIS "I would like to ask Mr. Krout for clarification. What options do we have here? Are we just supposed to find whether this is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? Do we have that option?" KROUT "You do have that option. You can vote to recommend it with changes; you could vote to not recommend it and refer it back, as was suggested. You could do either of those. What I don't know is if you vote to send it back, does that, in fact, delay it from going to the City Council? That is an issue that I will just talk about with the Law office. But that is an option if the majority of the Planning Commission would like to send this back for more discussion. That is certainly an option if you don't feel that it should be adopted." GAROFALO "Maybe Commissioner Lopez can answer this question for me. What seems to be the outstanding issues that remain? The Market, and the road work for over to Hood?" LOPEZ "From the original concept when it was discussed, the issue was widening of 21st Street—that was always an original issue—to the same standard as I-135 west to WSU, and the traffic coming from the west to Hood. It is 5 lanes, and traffic is good. This Commission has always stood on that position that we have to deal with the traffic flow. And we have sent it back a couple of times because of that issue. Then the second one is, of course, the concept of the Mercado. There hasn't been a sitting down and discussing with the total community. This board here is a handpicked board. A 'yes' board, basically. I have stated that at other prior meetings. It is a concept in the mind of officials all over." OSBORNE-HOWES "Well, I read over this plan and I thought it sounded pretty good. I don't think all of the 't's' have been crossed and all of the 'i's' have been dotted, but it looks like there is plenty of room for further negotiations and further ideas. I am looking at a list of people here and it looks like they have representation from the area. I don't see any reason to send it back again. I guess I would have to say that I am a little nervous about the political nature of this, and I am concerned about it. I am going to try to separate my vote and my attitude from that. I think this looks like a nice outline for a plan. It looks like a lot of people have been involved in it, and it looks like there has been a consultant or someone who has worked on this. I don't think that is a proper motion." KROUT "I guess to differentiate between the area east of I-135 and this Broadway to Hood area is that that project was formulated and designed and funded before K-96 opened. We didn't know for sure what the impact of K-96 was going to be. We do know now that the impact has been that it has reduced traffic on 21st Street because it largely does parallel 21st Street and takes off some of the traffic that used to be on 21st Street as an approved traffic route. So the traffic on the segment between Broadway and Hood today is well under 20,000 cars, which is, according to your Comprehensive Plan, the standard for deciding whether to go to a full 5 lanes or now. I think part of the process here was to look at how expensive it would be, because there is a narrow right-of-way and it would be tremendously expensive to do 'takings' all along this section of 21st Street from Broadway to Hood. I don't know how many would be residential and how many would be commercial. It would probably be substantially commercial. But the conclusion that staff came to, and I think it is reflected in the Transportation Plan, and I think that it was accepted by this committee, however they were appointed or represented, that the important thing was to make some key left-turn movements available at the key locations like Broadway, Waco, Arkansas, and then maybe widen the lanes in other places to the more typical standard. That is the kind of approach that we have taken on some other streets too. There are other streets like Hillside and Douglas and west 13th Street, where we think that the impact on the surrounding property may be such that it is just not practical to do a 5-lane improvement. But it also not warranted, according to our current traffic and traffic projections." GAROFALO "It seems to me like the most work that is planned at this point is the street improvements. That is not until 2006 for the construction, which is 5 years away. I can't see what harm there would be in referring it back so maybe some of these other issues can be ironed out because what would be delayed? It doesn't appear to me that anything would be delayed." KROUT "I think that the 21st and Broadway improvements will be delayed once again because we won't be able to say that we have reached a consensus on how to make those improvements." GAROFALO "But we have a 5 year leeway here, don't we? More or less?" KROUT "But the effort is to try to move that up. If you have been driving on 21st Street between Arkansas and Broadway in the last year or three, you know that it is something that probably can't and shouldn't wait 6 years." MICHAELIS "I would think, too, that the difference in cost is going to be tremendous if you are talking about building 5 lanes versus what is in there now." GAROFALO "There is a real possibility of that work being moved up." KROUT "I think there is." GAROFALO "A real, real good possibility, but if it is going to remain at 2006, then I don't see any hurry." BARFIELD "I came in a little late, so if somebody can bring me up to date. Am I hearing that there will now not be the 5 lane street down through there?" MICHAELIS "That is correct." BARFIELD "We have heard all of this talk about the traffic problem at 21st and Broadway, but that is an area that I drive frequently. There is also considerable traffic congestion at 21st and Main or Fairview, I believe it is, and also at 21st and Arkansas, 21st and Waco. How do we propose to deal with those issues?" KROUT "You did come in late, but the plan, as it is laid out is to make left-turn improvements at 21st and Waco and 21st and Arkansas and 21st and Broadway. Does it include Market Street? Okay, and Market. So the idea is that where the critical turning movements are to make left turn improvements in both directions on 21st Street at those locations." BARFIELD "Except that Market is a one-way street. There is not really a problem with Market. The problem is one block to the west." KROUT "But there still is a left turn from 21st Street northbound onto Market Street. And part of the plan is to straighten out that intersection of Market and 21st Street." MICHAELIS "I think we are getting hung up on semantics, and we could sit here and discuss this all day, and I don't know that that is really our position. So in order to move things along here, I think we just need to vote on it and decide whether it is consistent or not. We do have a motion on the floor. There hasn't been a second as of this time." GAROFALO seconded the motion. MICHAELIS "Is there any further discussion?" VOTE ON THE MOTION: The motion carried with 8 votes in favor (Johnson, Warren, Coulter, Lopez, Garofalo, Barfield, Hentzen and McKay) and 6 in opposition (Osborne-Howes, Marnell, Blake, Platt, Warner and Michaelis). -------------------------------------------- ZONING: 5. Case No. ZON2001-00012 – Harlin and Janet Gray (owners); Fred Jelich (applicant) request zone change from "LC" Limited Commercial to "GC" General Commercial on property described as: Lots 1 and 2 Harlin's Addition, Wichita, Sedgwick County Kansas. Generally located on the southwest corner of Central and Tracy. DALE MILLER, Planning staff, pointed out land use and zoning; and showed slides of the general area. He reviewed the following staff report: BACKGROUND: The applicant owns two platted lots (1.1 acres in size) located at the southwest corner of Tracy and west Central Avenue. These two lots are currently zoned "LC" Limited Commercial and appear to be developed with a single-family. The applicant is seeking "GC" General Commercial zoning in order to conduct "vehicle repair, general" (auto body and paint shop) work at this location. The existing building located on the site would be demolished and a new metal building (8,400 square feet) would be built. The shop would have garage door openings on the east and south sides. The primary entrance and reception area would be located on the north side of the building. The applicant's site plan depicts one drive approach to Central and one to Tracy. Both of these drive approaches exist today. The plat permits one access point per lot along Central, with no access control along Tracy. A total of 16 parking spaces are depicted on the site plan. The Unified Zoning Code requires one off- site parking space per 500 square feet, plus three spaces. The applicant needs to provide 20 spaces. A fenced storage area is shown on the southern half of the application area. The screening fence is also shown along the west property line. Surrounding property is zoned either "LC" Limited Commercial or "SF-6" Single-family Residential. Surrounding land uses are: auto parts sales, auto repair, strip center retail sales; bar / restaurant and single family residential. "Vehicle repair, general: is first permitted by right in the "GC" General Commercial district. If the site is redeveloped as proposed, landscape street yard, parking lot screening and buffer plantings will be required. CASE HISTORY: Case Number Z-2880 heard in November, 1987, granted "LC" Limited Commercial zoning for the application area. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: "LC" Limited Commercial; auto repair, auto parts sales, strip retail SOUTH: "SF-6" Single-family Residential; Single-family residential EAST: "LC" Limited Commercial; bar / restaurant, strip retail WEST: "SF-6" Single-family Residential, "LC" Limited Commercial; single-family residential PUBLIC SERVICES: Central is currently a 4-lane arterial (scheduled to become 5-lanes within the year) carrying 22,884 vehicles on an average day between West Street and Anna. By 2030 the traffic volume is projected to increase to 24,019 average daily trips. A 4-lane arterial is designed to carry 20,000 vehicles at a level of service of "D". Municipal sewer and water services are available. Auto repair centers generate approximately 3 trips per 1,000 square feet of area. CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES: The "Wichita Land Use Guide" map depicts this site as appropriate for commercial uses. The "Comprehensive Plan" commercial locational guidelines state that commercial uses not located in planned centers should be guided to other appropriate areas such as the CBD fringe; segments of Kellogg; established areas of similar development; and, areas where traffic patterns, surrounding land uses and utilities can support such development. The "Wichita Residential Area Enhancement Strategy Map" depicts this site a "revitalization" area. Revitalization areas are neighborhoods experiencing structural and market decline, but market and development opportunities still exist. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon information available prior to the public hearings, planning staff recommends that the request be DENIED. However if the Planning Commission feels the request is appropriate, the application should be subject to the following Protective Overlay conditions: A. Permitted uses are restricted to those uses permitted by right in the "LC" Limited Commercial district plus "vehicle repair, general". B. All parking, storage and display areas shall be paved with concrete, asphalt or asphaltic concrete. Parking barriers shall be installed along all perimeter boundaries adjacent to streets, except at driveway entrances or where fences are erected, to ensure that parked vehicles do not encroach onto public right-of ways. C. No off-site or portable signs are permitted. D. Exterior audio systems shall be prohibited. E. All vehicles that are not complete and visually intact or are stored more than 72 hours are to be screened from ground view from abutting / adjoining properties and from abutting streets. Screening shall be of a material approved by the Unified Zoning Code. This recommendation is based on the following findings: 1. The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood. All nearby properties are zoned "LC" Limited Commercial or "SF-6" Single-family Residential. No "GC' zoning and no uses permitted by "GC" are in the vicinity. 2. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted. The site is zoned "LC" and developed with what appears to be a single-family structure. The lot fronts Central, which is a significant east-west arterial. With the Central Street frontage, and the "LC" zoning which allows a wide range of uses, it seems that the site could be developed as zoned. 3. Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property: Approval of the request will introduce additional open storage and a more intense use(s) than is currently permitted on nearby lots. Auto body shops tend to generate more noise and odors than less intense auto repair uses. 4. Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan: The "Wichita Land Use Guide" map depicts this site as appropriate for commercial uses. The "Comprehensive Plan" commercial locational guidelines state that commercial uses not located in planned centers should be guided to other appropriate areas such as the CBD fringe; segments of Kellogg; established areas of similar development; and, areas where traffic patterns, surrounding land uses and utilities can support such development. This site does not comply with these locational guidelines. 5. Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: The proposed body shop would not generate any more traffic than uses permitted under the current zoning. MILLER "This is a request for 'GC' General Commercial on two platted lots located at the southwest corner of Central and Tracy. The applicants are requesting this General Commercial in order to do an auto body and paint shop at this location. The site is currently developed to what looks like a single-family home. I am not sure what the use is because it is zoned 'LC', but it looks like a house. The structure that is on there today would be demolished and they would build a new shop. The depiction of what that shop would look like is attached to the staff report with some elevations. There should be a site plan as well. From the site plan you can see that they are showing one point of access off of Central and one point of access off of Tracy. The main building would be developed facing Central, more or less. There would be an office area fronting Central, then there would be a garage door opening that would face Tracy, and then on the back side, to the south, there would be three more garage door openings that would face this direction (indicating). The back half of the lot basically would be fenced and be used for the storage of vehicles in various states of repair. It would be fenced. They are showing 16 parking spaces by my calculation. I think they need to show 20, but we can work that out if this gets approved. With respect to adopted plans, the Wichita Land Use Guide map depicts this site as appropriate for commercial uses, but the policy statements indicate that commercial use that is not located in a planned center should be guided to other appropriate areas such as the CBD fringe area, segments of Kellogg, established areas of similar development, and areas where traffic patterns, surrounding land uses and utilities can support such development. You can see from the aerial some of the surrounding land uses are an auto repair shop, kind of a strip center that has an auto parts store that has major warehousing back behind and then as you go further east along Central, there are other strip centers with uses that serve automobiles as well. Then immediately to the east, this particular establishment looks like a restaurant/bar, and then there are other strip-center type uses, and then a major shopping center over here (indicating). To the south is a home and other residences further south. There is a home immediately west and another home, although the lot that is immediately west is zoned for residential use and then the rest of the lots further west are zoned 'LC' Limited Commercial. So you do have a lot of Limited Commercial zoning in the area, and you do have a lot of automobile type uses. But those, and I want to emphasize this point, those are all 'LC' Limited Commercial uses, they are not in the 'GC' zoning district. In fact, you can go as far west as almost to the Big Ditch before you hit any 'GC' zoning west of this location, and you can go as far east as Gow, almost to Zoo Boulevard before you hit any zoning that is more intense than 'LC'. Then going north and south on West Street, it drops off of the map north of 13th Street from Central. All of those uses are 'LC' uses. There is an 'LC' with a Conditional Use for car sales. Then to the south, there are only two lots south of Central, before you hit Kellogg that are zoned 'GC'. The reason I am going that far out is that I want to make sure that you understand that even though the uses that are going on in those 'LC' districts, like the car repair shops and some of those, those are uses that are approved in 'LC', but they do not allow outside storage of vehicles. The distinction between the 'LC' and the 'GC' district is that in an 'LC' district you can have a car parked outside for 72 hours before it is considered to be storage. In the 'GC' district, it is permitted by right and there is no prohibition against that. I just want to make sure that you know that if this is approved, that you are permitting a use to allow something considerably different than is what is out there today. Staff is recommending this request be denied, but if you see it as an appropriate use, there are some recommendations for a Protective Overlay on Page 3, Items A through E. We are not supportive of the request because we do not think that the 'GC' zoning and 'GC' uses are appropriate or in character with the neighborhood as it is set up today. We also feel like that with respect to the suitability of the site that it is zoned 'LC'; and 'LC' allows quite a wide range of uses. Therefore, in our opinion, the site could be used as it zoned today without a re- zoning. As I indicated before, we feel like the approval of this request will introduce additional uses into the area that aren't allowed today, particularly open storage and then when you look at the Comprehensive Plan guidelines, this particular request does not comply with those locational guidelines from our prospective. With that, I would answer any questions." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of staff?" BARFIELD "Is your biggest objection the outside storage?" MILLER "I think the biggest objection is that the Comprehensive Plan says that these kinds of uses are supposed to be located either in areas where they already exist, or along Kellogg, or along the CBD fringe, and this is not any one of those places. It is not consistent with the way the neighborhood is developed today in the zoning that is there today." BARFIELD "Can you go back to the slides? I just want to go back to the aerial. I think you pointed out that directly across the street was an auto repair business?" MILLER (Indicating) "The auto repair business is right there." BARFIELD "And right to the west of that is an auto parts store, is that correct?" MILLER (Indicating) "Right here are two homes." BARFIELD "I mean on the other side of the street." MILLER "Oh. There is the auto repair shop there (indicating), and then the parts store is basically east of that." MICHAELIS "Are there any further questions of staff?" KROUT "Dale, we have, for years, distinguished between body shops in General Commercial and limited auto repair in Limited Commercial districts; not just because of the outside storage, but because paint and body shops do tend to cause more complaints in neighborhoods due to the level of noise and the level of odors that commonly occur from the heavier uses. That is why, traditionally, they have been distinguished and the heavier paint and body shops have been treated in the different zoning district. One of the things that you and I talked about was that if this was approved, would the applicant be willing, in addition to the other conditions you have suggested, to keep the overhead doors closed that are facing out south towards the residential district." MILLER "Yes. We will have to ask him if he will agree to that or not." KROUT "Okay. I know that we asked that of someone once before and they said that that was not practical." MICHAELIS "Okay, thank you, Mr. Miller. Can we hear from the applicant, please?" DAL ECK "I am the agent for the applicant. We, of course, picked this site because of the heavy automotive related businesses. And to go a little bit further than what Dale went, directly across the street to the east is this bar, and then probably another 200 feet east of that is another automotive repair place. Then directly across the street to the north from that is another automotive repair place. The automotive repair place directly north of the site, which is Automotive Supply, has a huge warehouse in back, and they also have a machine shop in there also. So within a one-block radius, both directions, there are seven auto repair related businesses. We contend that sure there will probably be a little more noise, but the same basic tools are used, the air ratchets, chisels, hammers, or grinders in an auto repair business as in an auto paint business. The applicant can speak himself about the type of paint he will use, but basically he will tell you that it will scrub off 96% of all of the contaminants released into the air. His business has been in the same location on West Bounous, west of West Street, south of Harry for 18 years. It is on a dirt street in an industrial area. He has outgrown that site and there is no paving there—not a lot of consensus to pave the area. So he picked this site. The cost was one factor; of course, up and down Kellogg the lots are a little more expensive for the smaller guy. We would like to get the same treatment that the body shop at Central received. There is the Scholfield Body Shop right there at Central and Tyler, and it directly abuts residential property on the west side. Going by staff's recommendations that they want to direct these into areas where they are already at, such as the older industrial areas that have the little less expensive houses that have been rezoned and torn down. We feel that this is a better fit in this location than what was approved in that location, if you go by the value of the tax base around. I will let the owners, who are, of course, in favor of doing it. They live directly south of here and I will let them speak as to the noise of the bar directly to the east, and of course, current zoning would allow another restaurant/bar situation where it is on this lot. I think that will entail a lot more noise later in the evening than what the applicant has requested. I think the only other thing I might add is that the residential property directly to the west of this, I believe would be residential, but everything else is Light Commercial along there, so. it probably would be rezoned Light Commercial at some point in time. So there really won't be any direct abutment to residential property with the exception of to the south. The distance from the building to that property line, I believe, is about 90 feet, so that is a little bit of a buffer along with the insulation qualities of the building, so we believe that the noise and the smell will not be a factor. Yes, there are obviously many uses for the site, but I will let the Grays talk about that. The site has been for sale for many, many years and of course now, we can hopefully get something out on that end of it. The applicant will agree to all of the conditions. As a matter of fact, these conditions are conditions that we spoke with staff on at the initial meeting, A through E, and I know that he will agree to keep the doors on the south closed as much as possible. He obviously will have to open them to bring the cars in and out. And he has also agreed to the storage of the vehicles. He is very flexible. He is not asking for anything but an auto body shop, that is his business. He is not asking to be able to sell it for a car lot in the future, or anything like that. Thank you. Are there any questions?" OSBORNE-HOWES "I just want to double-check. Did staff tell you that a bar could go in this location?" ECK "They said that a restaurant/bar could go in there." OSBORNE-HOWES (Directed to staff) "Is that right?" KROUT "Because it is within 200 feet of a residential district, a use that sells more than 50% of its receipts in liquor sales couldn't go in except by Conditional Use. A restaurant that does serve alcohol but it's majority is food sales could." OSBORNE-HOWES "A restaurant could, but not a bar. Okay." ECK "It was my understanding, and I didn't get this from you, Mr. Krout, but a band can still play in that set-up, is that right?" KROUT "Yes." BARFIELD "Sir, can you tell me what the hours of operation will be?" ECK "I believe Mr. Jelich isn't open past 6:00 o'clock, are you sir? " JELICH (From the audience) "It would be like from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m." BARFIELD "And would there be any outside storage?" ECK "He has agreed to store all wrecked vehicles inside. That is one of the reasons for the big size of the building." LOPEZ "Could you point out those other auto body shops and automotive shops you were talking about? Dale mentioned that there was one across the street to the west." ECK "Okay. (Indicating on slide) To the northwest, right here is the West Side Automotive Repair; this area here is Automotive Supply with a machine shop for rebuilding motors and doing machine work, and then, of course, they have just added a big warehouse in the back. There is now probably a warehouse at least as big as the original structure. Then there is a printing shop here; R D Paint supply here. Now, in this location is Allen's Auto Repair. It is a big, huge building. There is a vacant lot here; this is O'Reilly's, and of course if you go down to West Street you have Safe-Light Auto Glass and then going up and down north and south, you have additional ones. Then back here is the bar; right here is the Professional Automotive Repair, which is a full-service auto repair and oil change place. So there all of those in this area right here, and we feeling that we are generally fit in that area." GAROFALO "Mr. Eck, I just want to clarify, make sure that I understood you correctly. On Item E, if this was to be approved, Item E talks about 'all vehicles that are not complete and visually intact or are stored more than 72 hours are to be screened'. Are you saying that your client would put these vehicles inside and keep them inside?" ECK "Yes, sir." GAROFALO "Then what would be outside?" ECK "Basically nothing." GAROFALO "Well, you would have cars that you had already worked on." ECK "Right. And it is the same deal until somebody comes and picks it up and does all of that, yes. But basically, one of the reasons for the size of the building was so that he would have flexibility, knowing that we were going to need to make some concessions. Like I said, he is not asking for unlimited, he is in agreement with all of these Protective Overlay conditions." GAROFALO "So if Item E were changed to say that they would be stored inside, within the building rather than just screened, you would be in agreement to that, your applicant would?" ECK "Yes, that is what we had spoke about. We obviously knew that we would have to screen the entire perimeter behind the building. I don't know if we made it clear to staff or not that we would be willing to put those inside. As a matter of fact, I remember talking about that in the meeting. He would be agreeable to keeping that stuff inside." GAROFALO "Marvin, would they still be required to put up screening if that condition were changed? Say there were going to store the vehicles inside." KROUT "Well, as part of the new construction, there would be a requirement for a 6-foot screening fence along the south line whether or not they were storing outside." MICHAELIS "Mr. Eck, I want to clarify something. I think this is a critical question and answer. Maybe the owner would be the one to answer it, but typically when I go by and see an auto body repair shop, the scenario I see is that the wrecker hauls in a car that is not drivable and sets it on the lot and it sets there for 2 or 3 weeks until the parts come in and then it goes inside and gets fixed and then taken away. So you are saying that whenever that wrecker brings that wrecked vehicle in there that it is going to set inside for the time frame it takes to get the materials to fix that?" ECK "I believe that Mr. Jelich will be happy to answer that. He is saying yes, with the exception of moving in and out to arrange these vehicles. But this 72 hour deal, he doesn't care about being able to do that." HENTZEN "Let's get by this bias that the staff has against auto repair businesses. All kinds of auto businesses. If this landowner is required to put a screening wall all the way around his property, and then we are going to say 'well, you've got to park everything inside'. That is stupid. If we require screening all the way around, what else do you need? With all of the other uses for the auto business surrounding this piece of land, I couldn't figure out a better use for it. I have been out there and I am surprised that the staff recommended denial. It is a perfect use for it. If it doesn't exactly fit the mumbo-jumbo that is in the Comprehensive Plan about west Kellogg or east Kellogg, so be it. We are supposed to decide these things on the basis of an individual case. What is good common sense on this case? Just to barter with the occupant because he thinks it might be denied and he is going to agree to put everything inside? Why don't we just make him put booths in there and put only one car in each booth, so if a customer comes in, they can't see the rest of them. I am sorry." ECK "We appreciate that, Mr. Hentzen. We were thinking along those lines, too, but we were trying to be very flexible with staff to try to give accommodation." HENTZEN "I understand." MICHAELIS "With all due respect, Mr. Hentzen, those were issues that they brought up and suggested that they do. We weren't asking that of them. Are there any other further questions?" BLAKE "I have a question for Dale. Was there any opposition to this site?" ECK "I haven't heard of any. Maybe Dale could say something. The owners are here and maybe they would know more than I. Sorry. But I have not heard of any." OSBORNE-HOWES "I would just like to finish hearing the case before I decide to vote on it. I have a question. This is just a minor question, but I drove by and I couldn't see the sign about the zone change. Is it out there?" ECK "Yeah, it is west of the first house, probably 50 feet." HENTZEN "It is on Central." ECK "Yeah, it faces Central." OSBORNE-HOWES "Okay. I looked and didn't see it." ECK "We put it up where the most cars could see it. It is definitely there." OSBORNE-HOWES "Okay, thank you." MICHAELIS "Before we go further, I would like to remind the Planning Commissioners that it would probably be wiser for us to hold our comments until the public hearing is over." MILLER "Just to respond to Mr. Blake's question, this is going to the DAB on the April 4. They don't meet until after this particular meeting. But I haven't received any phone calls. Whatever that is worth." MICHAELIS "Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak in favor of this application?" FRED JELICH "Hi. I am the one who wants to build the building there. If I sound nervous, it is because I am. I just want to say a few things about your concerns about maybe noise, smell and storage. I don't see a reason why any body shop would want to store a vehicle for a long period of time. A couple of days usually, and I am not wanting to run a salvage yard or anything like that and have old, wrecked vehicles around to use for parts, etc. I have some information on a modern paint booth, just like what is used in all of the newer shops. It conforms to all of the federal and state codes. It says here that they are 96% or more efficient, which is more than what my present booth is because I have an old antique one right now. Plus, over the past 10 or 15 years, the EPA has mandated the organic compounds in paints to be lowered from around 50 to 60% to less than 5%, and that is the part of the paint that you smell. They are 95 to 100% solids now, which means that what is sprayed on the car stays on the car and doesn't go out into the air. Of the part that does go out in the air, the new paint booths are 96% or more efficient in taking those out. As far as the noise, an auto body shop compared to a mechanical shop, I think it is really an unfair thing that we are treated differently. Twenty-five years ago, that was probably the case because there was a lot of metal beating and stuff like that. Nowadays, and over the past, say 20 to 25 years, that has changed from what used to be 5% of parts were replaced and 95% were beat around and straightened, to approximately 95% of damaged parts are replaced, which is a bolt on proposition and maybe only 5% are repaired. There is not any more noise involved in replacing a water pump on an engine, which is allowed in Limited Commercial zoning. One of the reasons that I like this location and I would like to be in this area is because of the other automotive type deals around. The traffic is already there for an automotive repair, plus there is not a whole lot that auto body shops that have access that is easily accessed by the northwest part of Wichita, which is growing. If it was up to me, I would be at the corner of 21st and Maize Road, but I don't think McDonald's would sell me their building very cheap. And I don't think you would let me put it there. That is about all I wanted to say, just those things. If you have any questions, I would be glad to answer anything, particularly about auto body repair. I think if there was any research done now on modern auto body shops, as far as the zoning and the things allowed, if it was done today, I am sure that a mechanical shop and an auto body shop would pretty much be same anymore." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of Mr. Jelich. Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak in favor of this application?" HARLIN GRAY "I own this property and I am trying to sell it to Mr. Jelich, subject to your approval. My wife and I are the residents to the south of there. We expect to continue living there. If you think a body shop makes noise, you haven't lived across the street from a bar. He knows when to go to bed. Those people over there don't know when to go to bed. And that is another whole subject. But if we are tied to a noise problem, I would like to ask you to reconsider that. I think he pretty well explained the odor problem. With those two out of the way, is there something else that I am missing? Okay, thank you. By the way, I have been by Mr. Jelich's body shop. It is neat, it is clean and there are no junk cars there. I have been by his house, it is neat and clean and there is no junk there either." MICHAELIS "Is there anyone else wishing to speak in favor of this application? Is there anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this? Oh, does the applicant need any time to offer any additional comments? Okay. Have there been any outside contacts on this case? Can we start, as a matter of policy to make that a normal statement at the start of the meeting? We seem to pick out certain cases that we ask that question on, and other ones we don't." KROUT "You could ask that question before the public hearings start." MICHAELIS "All right. From now on, we are going to make it part of the opening statement. If you have had any ex parte contacts, please make them at that time." MARNELL "Mr. Chair, I think that would be an excellent idea because it appears to me as if staff has a bias against certain applicants that come forward and always ask that question." MICHAELIS "We are going to make that change." MARNELL "An excellent suggestion." KROUT "If that is true, it is subconscious. Purely subconscious." Laughter here. WARREN "I went out and looked at this site, in fact two different times. I think the question before us is not nearly so much whether this should be General Commercial or Limited Commercial, but the question should be a suitable and acceptable business to put at that location? That decision being made, then we can modify either of those zonings so it is compatible and acceptable to the neighborhood around it. For a long time, I have felt that we have painted an unjust perception on the small 'upscale body repair businesses', and we are using that as a comparison of many years ago when the larger, more ungamely shops were about. I don't think that is what they are now. I think it is a total injustice that we ask a small body repair business to have General Commercial zoning. I don't think that should be necessary. I don't think they are any more intrusive or offensive than a retail tire shop, a muffler shop, and a brake and wheel alignment shop, all of which can go into Limited Commercial. It is certainly no more than a service station with bay doors up and down all of the time; vehicle sales, which we know we approve all of the time with a Conditional Use in Limited Commercial. I would like to say, and most of you know that I live out in Derby, that we have three body shops that are very apparent in our community. We have the Collision Specialists, when you arrive in Derby from the north that is the first building you see. It is very much a part of our community. It is not offensive and I have never heard a complaint about anything—storage or anything else. We have the Shelton Body Shop, which actually backs up right into the neighborhood. It is very well screened, very well landscaped, a part of the community. We have a brand new one, Auto Masters, that came in and took a building that we were all sick of, the old Hamford Ford building, and have made a beautiful building out of it. It is a great attraction. So, again, we approve such things as car washes, convenience stores, national food chains, all of which I think are even more offensive than what we are talking about here. I think until we get around, someday, to recognizing this and revising our ordinance so that these things can be done with a Conditional Use, that we should consider this business and with General Commercial zoning, and limit it to those things that we can put in Limited Commercial. Then, make whatever other limits that we want on there, such as increased screening, which he has agreed to. I think this board should not be influenced by the fact that we are going to go to General Commercial zoning. It is not unencumbered General Commercial zoning we are talking about. We are talking about very limited to allow one use, and that is the only thing that equates with General Commercial. So, I am going to be in favor of this." MICHAELIS "Was that a motion?" WARREN "I will make it a motion." MOTION: I move that we recommend to the governing body that the request be approved, subject to staff comments and the additional provisions of a Protective Overlay below: A. Permitted uses are restricted to those uses permitted by-right in the "LC" Limited Commercial district plus "vehicle repair, general". B. All parking storage and display areas shall be paved with concrete, asphalt or asphaltic concrete. Parking barriers shall be installed along all perimeter boundaries adjacent to streets, except at driveway entrances or where fences are erected, to ensure that parked vehicles do not encroach onto public right-of-ways. C. No off-site or portable signs are permitted. D. Exterior audio systems shall be prohibited. E. All vehicles that are not complete and visually intact or are stored more than 72 hours are to be screened from ground view from abutting/adjoining properties and from abutting streets. Screening shall be of a material approved by the Unified Zoning Code. WARREN moved, BARFIELD seconded the motion. MICHAELIS "Is there any discussion?" PLATT "I want to make it very clear that this Commissioner does not approve of car washes and used car lots and that sort of thing in residential neighborhoods. And I don't vote for them. I think it is a sad day, indeed when we start talking about saying that body shops are compatible uses with people's homes. The saddest thing about it is, it seems to me, is that these things area always approved in certain parts of town, but we don't see them put in other parts of town. I think that is a very, very sad commentary on this community. I shall vote against the motion." OSBORNE-HOWES "I think that zoning has a lot to do with what we are all about here today and what decision we make. I guess I have a question. It is currently 'LC' zoning. Is there any way that this use can go in 'LC' zoning? Does it have to go in 'GC'?" MICHAELIS "Did you get an answer?" OSBORNE-HOWES "Well, I just wanted to know if there is any way. Zoning is what we are doing here today and we can talk about the use, but the zoning, we are talking about changing this to 'GC' zoning. It is adjacent to single-family zoning and I have some concerns about that." GAROFALO "I have some concerns about that also. But given the complex of operations around there, it seems to me like one of the major concerns with 'GC' is the outside storage. The applicant himself has agreed to store these beat up vehicles indoors, and it seems to me that with the applicant agreeing to store the damaged, inoperative, or whatever vehicles indoors, that maybe that alleviates the situation. But I would not support the motion unless that were included in the Protective Overlay as the applicant has suggested that he would do, in addition to having some screening to the south where the residential is. With that change, I would possibly support it." JOHNSON "I think that being associated with a number of body shops that we have been involved in, in fact one was in Derby that we just finished, that market is totally different than even what I can conceived it as being years ago. This day and age, it appears that it doesn't take a whole lot of damage to lots of vehicles to classify them as being totaled. We had a case earlier today about a yard where there were lots of cars and that is why there were so many of them because it doesn't seem like it takes a lot of damage to classify them as being totaled. So they don't sit around like they used to. I think the applicant made a really good comment about basically most of the things are interchanged anymore, like fenders, hoods, grills. With what labor costs today, they can't justify it. So I guess I see what staff's position is, and if this was something that was real noisy or there weren't regulations on fumes and waste and getting rid of the products that comes out of the body shops, I would probably be opposed to this, but I kind of agree with the inside storage of vehicles and the other operations around this, and in this particular case, I could support it. I guess I would like to have staff maybe review the body shop deal again because I guess the last thing is that once we give zoning on a property, it can be a real neat place, or it can be a real eyesore. Maybe there are some regulations or something that could be addressed so that if there was something left setting around too long, maybe it would be done with something other than zoning." HENTZEN "I hate to see us change the zoning. All the zoning there is Light Commercial. Can we give a Conditional Use permit for a specific thing?" MILLER "No." WARREN "We've got to make it General Commercial and modify it down." HENTZEN "Well, that is what we need. Why can't we do that? Let's change the law." MILLER "It is not legal today to do that. It is not the way the Code is written." HENTZEN "Well, we are going to be adopting those Code changes soon, I think, that Donna has been working on. Why don't we do that?" MILLER "I think while we are at it, we might as well throw in all of the automotive uses, put them in 'LC' and say they are a use by right, and then see what happens." HENTZEN "Well, that is one alternative." MARNELL "I wasn't going to comment, but I think I will now. We are in the process of re-writing the Code right now, and I think this might be one of the areas to consider. Another one might be small automobile sales lots because that seems to be one that I think there is a clear staff bias against. At the same time, I think there are probably areas that aren't appropriate to have 500 cars displayed, so maybe we ought to think of that in that context. I know that is outside of this particular issue, so I will limit it to that." BARFIELD "I have two questions for Dale. No. 1, why are we hearing this before the DAB forwarded anything to us?" MILLER "Because the DABs don't meet the second time during the month. When they were originally set up, they were going to meet twice a month so that they matched up with the Planning Commission. Now, all of them but one do not meet twice a month, so our instructions have been to keep these applications moving along, rather than telling somebody that we are not going to move the case on because the DAB doesn't meet and then make them wait until the next Planning Commission following that. So we have been bringing them to you on the second hearing of the month and then taking those comments to the City Council if it goes on." BARFIELD "My second question is, other than the gentleman who owns the property, where is the nearest residence there?" MILLER "Immediately next door to the west." BARFIELD "But isn't that the gentleman who owns the property?" MILLER "No, there is an vacant lot in between. There is this first house here (indicating), and as I understand, the property owner w