METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 19, 2001 The regular meeting of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Metropolitan Area Planning Commission was held Thursday, April 19, 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; Dorman Blake; Kerry Coulter (late arrival); Frank Garofalo; Bud Hentzen; Richard Lopez; Susan Osborne-Howes; George Platt; Harold Warner; and Ray Warren. James Barfield, Bill Johnson; Ron Marnell, and John W. McKay, Jr., were not present. Staff members present were Marvin Krout, Secretary; Dale Miller, Assistant Secretary; Donna Goltry, Principal Planner, Scott Knebel, Senior Planner; Bill Longnecker, Senior Planner; and Karen Wolf, Recording Secretary. 1. Consideration of Proposed Amendments to the Unified Zoning Code regarding parking and storage on residential lots. DONNA GOLTRY, Planning staff "This item is looking at the parking and storing of vehicles portion of the Unified Zoning Code. I have handed out, at your desk today, a newly updated list of proposed changes to those items that deal with parking and storage. I have added in some additional information on other related definitions that I am not proposing any changes to, necessarily, from what you have seen in the previous drafts, but trying to collect all of the items that deal with parking and storage more in one centralized location; so you can focus on it. In terms of defining garages and parking areas, what we have attempted to do is to add some accessory type uses, which would be boats, trailers and RVs to specifically set out that those are allowed to be parked inside your garage, or in the case of the definition for 'parking' that they would be allowed to be parked as a parked item. That means you can park it up to 72 hours. Now, I have had a lot of difficulty coming up with a clear way to state this because we are allowing motor vehicles, boats, RVs and trailers—trailers are subject to some size limitations—we are not allowing inoperable vehicles to be parked in private parking areas. So, if you look down under parking, under the first definition in Section II-B.10.a—that is the next to last definition on Page 1, this is one that has been difficult to structure so that it is clear to everybody. I have just been consulting with legal counsel from the City and the County and they have a further suggestion that would probably clear up once and for all the ambiguity on the exception part. That is to use parenthesis so it would be 'parking' means the temporary location for not more than 72 consecutive hours, of motor vehicles (except for inoperable vehicles). We try to stay from parenthesis. You don't know how hard we try to stay away from them in writing legal documents. It is one of those 'no nos', but we have written this 6 ways around and it isn't clear no matter which way you write it; and if you use those two little parentheses, obviously they have a valid reason to be—because just doing that alone, as Joe was suggesting, clears it up." WARREN "Let me get that again. You put parenthesis around 'except for inoperable vehicles'?" KROUT "That is on 'a' on the first page and 'd' on the second page." GOLTRY "Yes. On 'a' and then 'd'. I think maybe, after much struggle, that hopefully gets to a clear interpretation of what we are saying. Now, we can still argue about whether or not we think this is the right thing to do because this is showing that you can park your trailer, your RV, or your boat, in your private parking area on a temporary parked basis. Not on a stored basis, but on a parked basis. If you will turn to Page 3, and if you look under the definition of 'Wrecking/Salvage Yard', this last sentence has been added: 'in the unincorporated area of the County only, the term 'Wrecking/Salvage Yard' shall not include the storage of—and please add these three words—inoperable vehicles or—salvage materials as permitted in Section 19-22 (c) of the Sedgwick County Code'. What that phrase will be doing is incorporating, by reference, the Nuisance Code that was adopted by the County relating to inoperable vehicles and storage of salvage materials whereby they are allowing them to store up to 9 vehicles in a yard so long as it is not occupying the front yard setback, although they have a maximum distance setback limit of 100 feet, and so long as it is screened. Are there any questions about that before I go on?" WARREN "I would assume that that doesn't mean the commercial salvage yards…we're not talking about them, are we?" GOLTRY "No. What we are doing is excepting out of a commercial salvage yard that you can have these private salvage/inoperable vehicle storage yards operating all over the County now. Then, in the last two areas where we deal with storage of vehicles, RVs, boats, etc. in residential areas. This is where they are treated as a residential accessory use. Now, because of the differences and how the City and the County are approaching, at this point, what you can store as a residential accessory use, what I am suggesting is that we break it out and we have one section that deals with what can be stored in the back yard in the City, and one section that deals with what can be stored in the County. So that is why you see items 11 and 12 as separate lists. On the City's part, they are basically saying—and I reformatted it to put it more in outline form again because of the same thing that we talked about earlier today, we have just had so many people misinterpret what the list meant because it is a list that has a lot of modifying clauses with it. So many people get lost in the list and can't interpret which type of trailer we mean and what was excepted. Well, it is probably clearer if you just put it out in a,b,c and d format. So that is where it is at this point. You can see that we have added (1) unoccupied recreational vehicles and boats, (2) trailers are exempt from motor vehicle registration, (3) Motor vehicles excluding any and inoperable vehicles. In the City, you are not allowed to store your inoperable vehicles in your back yard as a residential accessory use. In the County, it is (1) unoccupied RVs, (2) boats, and (3) trailers that are exempt from (4) motor vehicle registration. Motor vehicles that are permitted as specified in Section 19-22(c) –that is in the Nuisance Code—and (5) construction equipment with less than 50 horsepower, which was something that was discussed in the Advance Plans Committee and recommended in order to allow people to have their construction equipment, the small construction equipment stored on-site. I am sorry that several of our people from the Advance Plans Committee are not here today—Mr. McKay and Mr. Marnell and Ms. Susan Osborne-Howes, because we have walked through this for several weeks and this is a version that they haven't been able to respond to since I just prepared it. And I know that both Mr. Hentzen and Mr. Garofalo have been through this, we have gone through our many weeks of discussion. But I regret that Mr. McKay, Mr. Marnell and Ms. Osborne-Howes aren't here to participate in this discussion today as well. I would specifically like to ask if Mr. Lang from the City or Mr. Blase from the County have any modifying comments that they want to make, or if Mr. Krout has any comments to make." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions from the Commission?" WARREN "I still have a question on this Wrecking/Salvage Yard. We are replacing….to me, that is a commercial salvage yard, or what you would call a junk yard or automobile salvage yard…and you are saying that that is not what that means? That this is more for a private yard, not commercial?" GOLTRY "Are you asking can we store inoperable vehicles in the back yard, would that make it a commercial operation?" WARREN "No. I am saying, does this include a commercial operation?" KROUT "No." WARREN "Where do we describe commercial operations?" GOLTRY "A Wrecking/Salvage Yard is a commercial classification. If you have more than 9, you do become. Is there something missing here? That is possible." KROUT "Let me try to explain. What we have done is—Wrecking/Salvage Yard is a definition that we had and we are proposing to retain—just to clarify a little bit in terms of materials, and the Code does say that a wrecking/salvage yard does require industrial zoning and a Conditional Use. But what we are doing here is making an exception, and the purpose of the exception is to recognize the new Nuisance Resolution that the County has. That says that the exception is that you can have almost unlimited storage of your own household items and inoperable vehicles, up to 9. Because the State law says that over 9, it becomes a salvage yard and you need a license. But you can do those things in your back yard as long as they are screened and 100 feet back from your property and that is not a wrecking/salvage yard. That is a permitted use within the County in a residential district because that is the resolution that the County approved last week. So all we are doing here is saying that if someone has that stuff behind their fence on residential property and they meet all of the standards in the County's Nuisance Resolution, Section 19-22(c), it is not a wrecking/salvage yard." WARREN "I think I follow you on that. I guess what I am concerned with is with the wording as it is, this last sentence says 'In the unincorporated area of the County only, the term 'Wrecking/Salvage Yards shall not include the storage of inoperative vehicles, and yet in commercial we do allow storage of inoperative vehicles. So I hope we aren't excluding the storage of inoperative vehicles in a commercial salvage yard by what we are writing here." KROUT "It doesn't." WARREN "Well, it does, in my opinion, unless you have another description for the commercial. It looks to me like you have put the two of them together, and it seems to me like we need a description for a commercially operated, licensed salvage yard." GOLTRY "I think, Mr. Warren, if you look back to that previous sentence, it says that a wrecking/salvage yard is 'for the collecting, dismantling, storing and/or salvaging of', and then it lists what you store and salvage. It is machinery, equipment, appliances, inoperable vehicles, vehicle parts, bulky waste, salvage material, junk or discarded materials." WARREN "Well, I guess what I am saying is that that last sentence then contradicts that." GOLTRY "Do you mean the one 'in the unincorporated area'?" WARREN "Yeah. You are still talking about a wrecking/salvage yard." GOLTRY "Okay. I think I see what you are saying. (Pausing to read) I hear what you are saying now. What you are saying is is the exclusion there, and I think I want to call on Aaron for this." AARON BLASE "I am an Assistant County Counselor. I am not sure that this directly answers that question, but in Section 19-22 (c), in order to be properly exempted, the salvage material and the inoperable vehicles must be the personal property of the occupant of the property. I don't know if that is going to make it a personal storage issue versus a commercial operation. I think that is the intent of that." WARREN "I think what I am looking for here is some kind of a separation and identification through definition of a commercial salvage yard versus this thing we are trying to allow in the way of a private property-type salvage yard. I think if you keep that last sentence in that, to read it, it talks about 'Wrecking/Salvage Yard', which is what you are calling a commercial use. It says there that you can't have any inoperable vehicles." GOLTRY "If you read the Section 19-22 (c) in its entirety, I think it makes clear that if you get to the point that you would have to have a commercial salvage license, that you could no longer do this. Probably, legally, it addresses the issue you are raising because of the full text of the Nuisance Code. I can see where, if you were just reading it independently, you would come up with that reading." WARREN "I am just reading what you provided us with today." GOLTRY "Right. Within the Nuisance Code, it spells out when it is a residential use and when does it become a commercial use, and when is it the private property and when is it not the private property. That is the distinction between a private residential use and a commercial use." WARREN "Marvin, I would still wonder if there couldn't be in the definition, something that separates the private Wrecking/Salvage Yard from the commercial." KROUT "I think our purpose is not to create a use called the private salvage yard of things that are allowed in a residential district, but what we are trying to say is you are allowed to have a certain amount of outside storage if it is properly screened and with the regular paving, and that is counted in the County as an accessory use, apart from a residential use." PLATT "It is not a Wrecking/Salvage Yard." WARREN "Yes it is. You have identified it as such here 'in the unincorporated area of the County only, the term 'Wrecking/Salvage Yard" shall not include the storage of inoperable vehicles'. PLATT "Shall not include." WARREN "I understand that, but we do have wrecking and salvage yards that do include that. Maybe there is more. I will wait until you read more." GOLTRY "Yes, I think I handed them out last time, perhaps." WARREN "Yeah, I've got it." GAROFALO "Is the number of inoperable vehicles for the County, …shouldn't that be in here somewhere?" GOLTRY "The County's number is 9—is it up to or including 9? Because that is where you are required by the State to get the license. That is included in the Nuisance Code." GAROFALO "Is that somewhere in here?" KROUT "I don't think it needs to be." BLASE "It doesn't need to be. There is not a number mentioned in the County's Code. It just refers to the state statute, which allows you to have up to 9, and beyond that you need to get state certified as a salvage yard." GAROFALO "So in other words, if somebody reads this, they have to know what the state statute says. Wouldn't it be simpler to put it somewhere in here—quote it so that those folks will know that they can only have up to 9?" BLASE "That was an option that the Board of County Commission looked at, but opted, instead, to simply refer to the state statute." MICHAELIS "Are there any more questions of Ms. Goltry?" WARREN "I might just point out that on Page 27 of our existing Code, on Item 'B' at the top, it calls for a salvage yard. It says 'see Auto/Salvage wrecking salvage yard'. If you go to auto wrecking/salvage yard, there isn't one." GOLTRY "On your current Code? That is correct. That is an error on those. That has been corrected on this draft. That cross-reference is right." MICHAELIS "If there are no further questions of Ms. Goltry, we will open it up to the audience. I would just like to emphasize that we would like to limit the comments to the particular topics we are on today and not necessarily get into other things and what the County has recently approved. Keeping that in mind, is there anyone here to address the Commission." Coulter arrived at the meeting at 1:20 p.m. JOHN DAILEY "My address is P.O. Box 381 Valley Center, Kansas. I have been a resident of the unincorporated Sedgwick County for just about 30 years. At the top of the page was what you and the public was given last week, so that has changed a little bit. Some of this has, from what it used to be, and some of it is what is proposed to be. I wanted to show you the comparisons. The next one down is a definition that was used when the 1996 book was printed. You can see that there are changes in actually the next four. They have incorporated and switched around the next four to what they are proposing now. It changes the meaning of the wrecking yards. One particular thing, the storage yard and an arrow there. It was meant for inoperable vehicles. Now they are calling it vehicle storage yard and you can't have that now. It always clumped in with the wrecking/dismantle business-type yard. The storage yard, and particularly out in the County is what I am talking about, not in the City, you could have the storage yard and it didn't have to be a wrecking yard; it could just be a storage yard. The number 3 that has the circle on it is from the proposed. It says that there are no non-conformities created by the adoption of this Code. Well, then, you go to Page 224 on the proposed Code, and it says that you have to register them. Well, if there is no non-conformities, why do you have to register these? And notice that you have to register them by January of 1997. This is already 2001. Something that is made a non-conformity by this Code cannot be registered by January of 1997. So there are some loose things in here, and like particularly the container law that you have had, there is something new in it. There is something new in every little bit of this that they have tightened up a little bit so it is not conforming. But if you don't go down and register it, then by what they have, it is non-conforming. The letter 'h' that I have highlighted there is in the proposal, and it makes the landowner have the burden to prove that he is innocent. That should be changed. If they don't know and if they are consistent with what their zoning is, they are doing what they are supposed to be doing. I would bet that most of the people in the County don't know that this new book is coming up. So they think they are okay, so how do they know to register what they need to register? Down at the very bottom, there is, out of the state law book, 2,000 supplements; there is the back up of what you and I would call the 'grandfather law', and it is that if it is existing, then it is okay. It doesn't say that you have to register it. It is the Zoning Department that is saying that it is registered. The back page is just to show you that in the middle 80s, probably 1984 by the number, they started zoning the whole county, with particular notice to (a) and (c). If you would compare what they had back then, like in continuing existence, in other words 'grandfathering', you could continue that indefinitely. That doesn't say in perpetuity, but it says indefinitely. So unless you are informed that you need to do something, if you need to register, that you have no idea. The (a) up there, somewhere it is the Administrator that is supposed to keep the non-conforming records. It is not saying that the landowner must go down and register this, it is up to the Zoning Administrator to let the person know that they are putting them on a list so they would know they are not conforming. They would have that on their records and they wouldn't bother you. That is about it. If you could compare those things of what it has been and what is proposed and see the differences, and compare that—the definitions, and check into Item (h) about making you prove your innocence, that would be a lot of improvement on this. Are there any questions?" MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of the speaker? Okay, thank you sir. Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item?" CHARLES PEASTER "I live at 9453 North 135th Street West in Sedgwick County. I have been a resident in the County since 1979. After many, many hours with a task force, it looks like we have finally come up with a workable plan for not only nuisances but for the Zoning Code. The question on your salvage yard, I believe that part of the reason for that was because this County has mandated that we start recycling material by the year 2003 or they are going to increase the taxes. They are going to put a tax on us if we don't start recycling. One of the things I brought up at one of the meetings was the fact that if I have a barrel out there and it has aluminum cans or plastic bottles or tin cans in it, that it could be considered a salvage yard, and that was the reason for the exemption in the County. If I fenced it, rather than having it in a building. The only thing that I don't like about this issue is the trailer. The reason for that is that I have a vehicle trailer that has to be licensed, and the way this reads, it is still not clear to me whether that would be in violation or not, even though it is on my property, and maybe the attorney for the County could answer that. Other than that, I think we finally came up with something that is workable for everybody that lives in the County, and I would like to commend the Legal Department and the County Commission on coming up with this. Hopefully you will pass this also and then they can put this in the Zoning Code. Thank you." GAROFALO "Exactly where are you referring to on your item? Is it item (c) here in the middle of the second page? The definition there?" PEASTER "I believe it is there on Page 12. Yes. The last page says 'trailers that are exempt from motor vehicle registration by the State of Kansas. If the vehicle carries over 2,000 pounds, including the weight of the trailer, it must be licensed with the State'." GAROFALO "You are talking about the last page?" PEASTER "Yes, sir." GAROFALO "Do you have the same thing that we do?" PEASTER "Yes, I do. It is what was laying here." GAROFALO "So on the last page where it says 'trailers that are exempt…Item 12 (c)?" PEASTER "Right. It is saying that this can be permitted in the unoccupied if it is not registered. But any trailer that carries a gross weight of over 2,000 pounds including the trailer must be registered with the State of Kansas, according to the Highway Patrol. If it was a car trailer, which most of them with the weight of the car on there is going to exceed 2,000 pounds. If it goes up to 6,000, then you have to get a trailer license for up to 6,000; if it is over 6,000—it goes from 6,000 to 12,000—if it is over 12,000, it says 12 plus." MICHAELIS "Are there any further questions? Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else to speak? Please come forward." GENE LAMAN "I have lived in Sedgwick County for 48 years. Is there a provision in this code that protects those that might go to the hospital and have their car sitting out? If there a provision for those that might die, and in death would there be a time period for these cars to be set? Is there a provision for those people that might be called into military duty that might be gone for 6 months or a year, or maybe even 2 or 3 years? Is there a provision for those? When I was drafted into the army, my pay was cut by about 80%. Out of the 20% that I had left, I paid storage on my private stuff. When it came time for me to come home, I was extended for 4 months, or to the duration. This happened to be back when they put up the Berlin wall, not when they took it down. After I came home, I still had a 2-year active duty once a month, 2 weeks, a year that I had to perform, which took my vacation time. After that, I still had 2 more years of inactive reserve, which I had to maintain all of my army issue for. I would like to see some kind of provision to protect these people because when they leave, they have no idea where they are going or how long they are going to be gone. See, I am one of those people that carried the pack, the full army gear, for 20 miles or more with an M-16 hooked over my shoulder. Bud Hentzen comes by my place, and he knows that there is an American flag that flies out there by my barn every day. That is kind of a reminder. I am kind of one of those that believes that I have a right to park my car in front of my garage and can be sure that it is there when I get ready to get in it, whether it is today or tomorrow, or next week. I kind of think that I earned that right after 6-1/2 years of service as a draftee. That is pretty much what I have to say. Does anybody have any questions?" MICHAELIS "Any questions of the speaker? Thank you, sir. Is that something we can answer?" GOLTRY "I have talked with Kurt Schroeder fairly extensively, and the way it is handled is that if you have a vehicle that is parked for an inordinate length of time and somebody calls in a complaint about that, they go to investigate and look at what the situation is because they look at the idea that when you go on vacation and you leave your car parked for a couple of weeks, that is considered to be a customary residential accessory use. So, when they go to investigate the complaint, they determine that because this is just a vacation or some such thing like that, it is a customary residential accessory use. Now, after they evaluate the situation, if they find that it is something that is out of hand, something that is excessive, they will provide notice to them that they need to move the vehicle. Let's say that you lived next door to someone who went away and left their car parked for a year, you might feel a little differently about it at that point. They would look into those circumstances. But again, you would have notice provided before any action was taken, so there would be the opportunity to do something about the situation. We have talked around about this issue a lot. It is a difficult issue to grapple with, to say the least, because we all want to be able to be flexible and be allowed to do what is a customary residential use and that is when you have gone on vacation for a couple of days, it is not a big problem. On the other hand, you don't want to be boxed in to where you have a neighbor who never moves anything from the front of their house. So that is kind of where we landed on it. We had a lot of serious discussions about whether there was an appropriate way to incorporate it, but feel that this case-by-case analysis on the customary accessory use is probably the better way to handle it. There is some discretion." MICHAELIS "Is there anyone else to speak on this item? Seeing none, we will bring it back to the Commission." HENTZEN "I would like to ask Mr. Blase a question about the man with the trailer. Does it have to be State authorized? Can he park his trailer in his driveway under what we have here today?" BLASE "If the question is can he store it, and if we are talking about time greater than 72 hours, I don't think under this, he could. I don't think he could, in the County." HENTZEN "So you don't think he could?" BLASE "I do not." HENTZEN "Do you think he should be able to?" BLASE "I do the will of the Board of County Commissioners, so I will let them answer that question." HENTZEN "I was at that meeting the other day and I don't think they addressed this part. A guy that has a trailer that happens to be big enough to have a state requirement on it, 72 hours is nothing. You might not use it in that time and he can't keep a trailer even out in the County, out under the fir trees or whatever?" WARREN "Bud, I think a more important point is that we are not talking, necessarily about a big truck. We are talking about a trailer that might carry a big load. It might be a little trailer and they put a Bobcat or something on it. A Bobcat weighs 7,000 pounds, so you have to register that trailer for an over 2,000 pound load. It doesn't have to be a very big trailer—we are not necessarily talking about anything great big, we are talking about something that is going out on the highway and haul something. I do agree with you that we probably ought to make a provision for doing that. The very word 'registered' is what gets us in trouble. You can register, for that matter, a trailer with less than 2,000 pounds. You can register a very small trailer, but you don't have to." GOLTRY "There are also agricultural exemptions for trailers and they go up significantly higher in the rating of the vehicle. As I recall, off hand, it is around 16,000. Either 12,000 or 16,000. I would have to go through my notes from the Highway Patrol to verify. But in an agricultural area, it isn't as big of a problem because you already have a lot more latitude of not tagging your trailers." WARREN "In an agricultural area or for agricultural use?" GOLTRY "For agricultural use. Do you really want a semi-trailer in the back yard is what the question boils down to. Because this does allow the boat trailer to be in the back yard." WARREN "What this man is saying, though, is that the exception is that I might have a little 12 foot trailer, not very big, but because it is registered to up to 12,000 pounds, all of a sudden I can't put it out here. We are not talking about an 18-wheeler." GOLTRY "Well, it is exempt, whether you have registered it or not. We didn't say that it was registered, we said that it would be exempt from registration." WARREN "I didn't read it that way, and I don't think the gentleman who stood up here did either." GOLTRY "That are exempt from motor vehicle registration." WARREN "Trailers that are exempt from motor vehicle registration….well, see, this wouldn't be, so all of a sudden, it becomes guilty. It is not exempt because I am going to carry something on it that weighs too much. Two- thousand is little bitty trailer that carries too much." GOLTRY "Do you know what might be of benefit? That is to get the Highway Patrol….it is very complex. Perhaps if we have another meeting, we could ask the gentleman from the Highway Patrol who is involved with these trailers to meet with us and explain it because it is extremely complex. Or alternatively, if you would like for me to, I can give you a little position paper that he helps develop that would outline for you what kinds of trailers we are talking about, to satisfy the trailer issue." WARREN "I think it is important that we recognize that fellow had a point." MICHAELIS "For the benefit of the Commission, we have until May 24 to act on this. It isn't as if we have to do it today. So if there are specific issues, and it sounds like this is one, we may want to do a little more work on that and then come back on it." GOLTRY "And I should say on behalf of the MAPC Advance Plans Committee that the grappled with this issue and we did go over all of the information we got from the State Highway Patrol in one of the subcommittee meetings. That is where the determination was made to come forward with this as a recommendation." MICHAELIS "Are there any other questions or comments? GAROFALO "The gentleman back there that was concerned in the County about leaving vehicles while they are on vacation or whatever, or military leave, does the County zoning person, the Inspector or whatever, do they have the discretion to deal with that?" BLASE "Yes, certainly they have discretion. I can't say that they have a procedure that they follow per se, but they certainly have the discretion. Again, when we prosecute, if it gets to that level, it is in what we would term as a compliance court where we are seeking compliance. If it is a situation where somebody has simply gone on vacation, we have the discretion resting in the Code Enforcement officer, plus on up the line through prosecution. So those instances aren't going to opened up and prosecuted." KROUT "I understand that we have differentiated between the City and County. In the County, you are allowed to park or store operable vehicles in the front yard. In the City, we have the policy in the Zoning Code that limits front yard parking." BLASE "Did you say you were able to store operable vehicles in the County?" KROUT "That is my understanding. If that isn't the intent, that is another good reason for us to revisit this." BLASE "I think that need to be looked at again, but I don't know that that is the intent." KROUT "Donna, I don't know if you ever did get in touch with Glen (Wiltse) about this, because I think the County Code Enforcement has kind of wavered on exactly what it is they want to see in the Code." GOLTRY "Because one of the things that is interesting to pick up the difference between the City and the County is that the storage of these items is restricted in the City to be not inside the required front yard or the required street side yard. We don't have a similar provision in the County. It is something that I think merits thinking about because do you really want them all stored in the front yards?" HENTZEN "Mr. Chair, I think we should defer this and ask staff to look into the military and trailer questions be looked into and get back to us." MICHAELIS "Why don't you put that into a motion?" MOTION: That the item be deferred to the May 24 meeting. HENTZEN moved, GAROFALO seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (10-0). MICHAELIS "I would like to add that maybe we not limit it to just those two things because I think there are some other things that were presented that should be looked at as well." WARREN "Mr. Chair, I just hope that we get a full and complete package of everything that has been agreed to up until now then." GOLTRY "Okay." ----------------------------------------------- 2. Approval of the minutes for March 8, 2001. GAROFALO "I have a couple of relatively minor changes. I will give them to the secretary." MICHAELIS "If anyone else has any corrections, please give them to the secretary." MOTION: That the minutes for March 8, 2001 be approved as amended. GAROFALO moved, WARREN seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9-0). ----------------------------------------------------- 3. Consideration of Subdivision Committee Recommendations MICHAELIS "We need to pull Items 3/1 and 3/8 and take them individually. Are there any other ones that anybody else needs pulled? Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak on Items 3/2 through 3/7? Okay, I will entertain a motion to approve Items 3/2 through 3/7." Subdivision Items 3/2, 3/3, 3/4, 3/5, 3/6, and 3/7 were approved subject to the subdivision recommendations. LOPEZ moved, COULTER seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9-0). 2. SUB2000-105 – One-step final plat of a replat of part of K.T. Wiedemann Business Park, located on the south side of Kellogg, west of Greenwich. A. The applicant shall guarantee the extension of sanitary sewer and City water to serve the site. B. If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning department for recording. C. Since drainage is directed to the Kansas Turnpike, City Engineering has required a letter from the Turnpike Authority indicating their agreement to accept such drainage. D. Complete access control shall be platted along the Kansas Turnpike. E. The applicant shall guarantee the paving of Wiedemann and Chateau to the commercial street standard extending north to Kellogg Drive. F. On the final plat tracing, the MAPC signature block needs to reference "J.D. Michaelis, Acting Chair". G. All owners that are denoted in the platting binder have not been included as signatories to the plat. These owners need to be added to the final tracing or a revised platting binder needs to be submitted indicating that the site's ownership is only in the party now shown on the final plat. H. 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. I. The applicant shall obtain an administrative adjustment to the CUP, reflecting new lot sizes and elimination of decel lane requirement. J. A CUP Certificate shall be submitted to MAPD prior to City Council consideration, identifying the approved CUP (referenced as DP-88) and its special conditions for development on this property. K. A 10-ft utility easement is located along the north line of Lot 3 on the CUP, but not indicated on the plat. L. The year "2000" needs to be revised to "2001". 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. ------------------------------------------------------ 3/3. SUB2001-20 – Final Plat of RIDGE PORT NORTH 4TH ADDITION, located on the south side of 37th street North, east of Ridge Road. A. The applicant shall guarantee the extension of City water and sanitary sewer. B. This plat will be subject to approval of the associated zone change (ZON 2001-05) and any related conditions of such a zone change. Prior to this plat being heard by the MAPC, a zone change shall have been submitted and approved. 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. E. 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. F. For those reserves being platted for sidewalks or drainage purposes, the required covenant which provides for ownership and maintenance of the reserves shall grant, to the City, the authority to maintain the sidewalks or 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. G. City Fire Department needs to comment on the plat's street names. The street names are approved. H. The applicant shall guarantee the paving of the proposed interior streets. This guarantee shall include the installation of a temporary cul-de-sac for Lakeway. The guarantee shall also include sidewalks on one side of the loop street (34th St. North, Lakeway, Brookview and Ridge Port). I. County Engineering shall comment on the need for improvements to perimeter streets. The Subdivision Regulations requires paved access of perimeter streets between the nearest paved segment and the entrance to the subdivision. County Engineering has required a guarantee for the paving of 37th Street North to Lot 1, Block D. J. 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. K. 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. L. It is recommended that Reserve B be extended to 34th North Court and the loop street by access easements or by narrow strips of Reserve between the lots to increase its accessibility and usefulness for all homeowners in the Addition. The applicant has platted pedestrian access easements on the final plat between Lots 25 and 26 and between Lots 15 and 16. M. The bench mark description needs to be corrected. 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 requests additional easements. 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. ------------------------------------------------------- 3/4. SUB2001-25 – Final Plat of MEL HAMBELTON ADDITION, located on the southeast corner of 119th Street West and Kellogg. A. The applicant shall guarantee the extension of sanitary sewer and City water services. 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. A drainage guarantee is required. A letter from KDOT is required regarding their acceptance of drainage directed onto US-54. D. For lots adjacent to railroad tracks, the Subdivision Regulations requires the dedication of 150 feet of complete access control along the street frontage. City Engineering has approved three access openings. A cross-lot circulation agreement is required to assure internal access between the lots. The southernmost opening is approved contingent upon the abandonment of the railroad. Prior to its abandonment, 150 feet of complete access control is required from the railroad tracks. E. Traffic Engineering and KDOT need to comment on the need for additional right-of-way for the future Kellogg freeway/interchange, in addition to the medial opening from Kellogg Drive. Traffic Engineering has required complete access control from Kellogg Drive to U.S. 54 Highway. F. County Engineering requests petitions for left and right turn lane improvements to 119th St. West. G. The joint access openings shall be established by separate instrument. Initial construction responsibilities and future maintenance of the driveway within the easement should also be addressed by the text of the instrument. H. The joint access easement in Lot 2 needs to be labeled as 30 feet. I. The bench mark needs a better described location. J. The easement in Misc. Bk. 654, Pg. 229 needs to be located on Lots 1 and 5. K. 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. L. 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. M. 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. N. On the final plat tracing, the MAPC signature block needs to reference "J.D. Michaelis, Acting Chair". O. 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. P. 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.) Q. 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. R. 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. S. 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. T. 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. U. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. V. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. W. 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. X. 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. ---------------------------------------------------- 3/5. DED2001-08 – Dedication of Street Right-of-way from Scott and Sheila Hoskinson, for property located north of 53rd Street North, east of Ridge Road. OWNER/APPLICANT: Scott and Sheila Hoskinson, 2776 N. Northshore Court, Wichita, KS 67205 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The north 30 feet of of the south 60 feet of the east 110 feet of the west 1/2 of the SW 1/4, Sec. 15, T26S, R1W. PURPOSE OF DEDICATION: This Dedication is a requirement of CON 2000-12, and is being submitted to dedicate 30 feet of street right-of-way for 53rd Street North. Planning Staff recommends that the Dedication be accepted. --------------------------------------------------- 3/6. DED2001-09 – Dedication of Street right-of-way from Scott and Sheila Hoskinson, for property located north of 53rd Street North, east of Ridge Road. OWNER/APPLICANT: Scott and Sheila Hoskinson, 2776 N. Northshore Court, Wichita, KS 67205 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The east 20 feet of the west 60 feet of the SW /4 of Sec. 15, 26S, R1W, except the south 735 feet thereof. PURPOSE OF DEDICATION: This Dedication is a requirement of CON 2000-12, and is being submitted to dedicate 20 feet of street right-of-way along Ridge Road. Planning Staff recommends that the Dedication be accepted. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3/7. DED2001-10 – Dedication of street right-of-way from James and Dianna Wirths, for property located south of 53rd Street North, east of Ridge Road. OWNER/APPLICANT: James and Dianna Wirths, #9 Breeze Court, Valley Center, KS 67147 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The south 15 feet of the north 60 feet of the following described tract: Beginning at a point on the north line of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 22, Twp. 26S, R1W, of the 6th P.M., Sedgwick County, Kansas, said point being 776 feet west of the northeast corner of said NW 1/4; thence south parallel to the east line of said NW 1/4 on an assumed bearing of S 02°42'21", E, a distance of 782.05 feet; thence north 89°59'54" E, parallel to the north line of said NW 1/4, a distance of 297.60 feet; thence S 02°41'41"E, 791.29 feet; thence S 88°51'17"W, 839.09 feet to a point on the west line of the east 1/2 of said NW 1/4; thence N 02°27'09" W on the west line of the east 1/2 of said NW 1/4, a distance of 929.79 feet; thence north 89°59'54" E, parallel to the north line of said NW 1/4, a distance of 330 feet; thence N 02°27'09" W, parallel to the west line of the east 1/2 of said NW 1/4 a distance of 660 feet to a point on the north line of said NW 1/4; thence N 89°59'54"E, 205.23 feet to the point of beginning. PURPOSE OF DEDICATION: This Dedication is a requirement of CON 2000-13, and is being submitted to provide 15 feet of street right-of-way along 53rd Street North. Planning Staff recommends that the Dedication be accepted. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Item taken out of order: 3/1. 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 applicant proposes to include a note on the plat allowing for 5-ft side yard setbacks, which represents an adjustment of the Zoning Code standard of 6 feet for the SF-6, Single-Family District. The Subdivision Regulations permit the setback provisions to be modified by the plat upon the approval of the Planning Commission. M. The County/City Fire Department needs to comment on the plat's street names. Revised street names are required. N. The applicant shall submit a covenant which provides for four (4) off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit on each lot which abuts a 58-foot street. The covenant shall inventory the affected lots by lot and block number and shall state that the covenant runs with the land and is binding on future owners and assigns. O. 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. P. 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. Q. The plattor's text shall include language that a drainage plan has been developed for the plat and that all drainage easements, rights-of-way, or reserves shall remain at established grades or as modified with the approval of the applicable City or County Engineer, and unobstructed to allow for the conveyance of stormwater. R. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities 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.) S. The applicant's engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary's signature. T. To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (Phone 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. U. The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements (specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147) for the control of soil and wind erosion and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant's responsibility to contact all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements. V. The owner of the subdivision should 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. W. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. X. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. Y. The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility easements to be platted on this property. KGE has requested additional easements. Z. 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 the Flat Creek Addition, which was a previously approved last month. It is back before you today because the applicant has proposed a revised plat, which has warranted a new condition; that is Item 'L'. On the staff report, the applicant has proposed to adjust the side yard setbacks from the required 6 feet to 5 feet and proposes to place a note on the plat to that effect. The Subdivision regulations do allow for the zoning setback provisions to be modified by the plat upon the approval of the Planning Commission." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of staff? May we hear from the applicant, please?" RUSS EWY "I am with the Baughman Company, agent for the applicant. This is a pretty straightforward request that we are proposing this afternoon. I would be more than happy to answer any questions that the Commission may have." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of the applicant? Thank you, Mr. Ewy. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor or in opposition to this item? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Commission." PLATT "On Item 'L' do I understand that on the side yard setbacks are being being adjusted to 25 feet?" STRAHL "That should say 6 feet." PLATT "Oh. Okay. That changes things." MOTION: That the Planning Commission recommend to the governing body that the request be approved. PLATT moved, HENTZEN seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9-0). ----------------------------------------------------------- 3/8. S/D 77-23 - WHISTLING WALK ESTATES 2ND ADDITION. The owner of Lot 1 in the above-captioned subdivision (recorded in 1977) proposes a boundary shift between Lots 1 and 2 (see attachment) in order to acquire an additional .631 acres. This is needed due to the installation by KGE of equipment servicing his property inadvertently located outside of an existing easement. The result of the boundary shift would create a lot size of 4.42 acres for Lot 2. The Subdivision Regulation require a minimum lot area of 4.5 acres for lots served by sewage lagoons. The Health Department has approved the request. A modification from the Planning Commission is needed to approve a reduction of lot size for Lot 2. NEIL STRAHL, Planning staff, "This item includes a site plan, in your packet. This is with regards to a plat that was recorded back in 1977, the Whistling Walk Estates 2nd Addition. What we have here is the owner of Lot 1 is proposing a boundary shift between his lot and the lot to the south, Lot 2. That is needed due to KG&E's installation of equipment that was inadvertently placed outside of the existing easement. Typically, boundary shifts do not have to be reviewed by staff or the Planning Commission, but in this case, the result of the boundary shift would result in a sub-standard lot. Lot 2 would be 4.42 acres after the boundary shift and our subdivision regulations require 4.5 acres for lots served by sewage lagoons, and this lot is served by a lagoon. The Health Department has informed me that they are okay with this request, so what we need is a modification from the Subdivision regulations by the Planning Commission so the applicant can proceed with his boundary shift." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of staff?" WARNER "Can he do this by an easement rather than a boundary shift?" STRAHL "He still needs to do a boundary shift. We will probably have to dedicate a new easement also for the equipment." MICHAELIS "Are there any other questions of staff? May we hear from the applicant, please?" STRAHL "He must not be here." MICHAELIS "I will bring it back to the Commission." MOTION: That the Planning Commission recommend to the governing body that the request be approved, subject to staff comments, and that a waiver be granted for the Lot 2 for the reduced size. WARREN moved, GAROFALO seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9-0). --------------------------------------------------------------- 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. I would like to remind the members of the Planning Commission that our bylaws require you to disclose any ex-parte contacts that you may have had regarding any of the applications on today's agenda. So I would ask you to please remember to disclose the nature of any such contacts you have had before we open the hearing on each case, and what if any impact that information may have on your opinion of the request. ------------------------------------------------ MICHAELIS "Is there anyone here that wishes to speak on Items 4/1through 4/5? Okay, I will entertain a motion." LOPEZ moved, BLAKE seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9- 0). 4/1. VAC20001-00011 – Request to vacate alley right-of-ways, located in the alley between Waco and Fairview and North Waco and 21st Streets. OWNER/APPLICANT: Kansas Public Telecommunications Service Inc. AGENT: David McClintock LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That alley right-of-way lying between Waco Avenue and Fairview Avenue and between 21st Street North and 22nd Street North being more particularly described as lying between the following described lots: Lots 1 through 23 odd inclusive on Jewett Avenue now Waco Avenue and Lots 2 through 24 even inclusive on Fairview Avenue all within Judson's Addition to Wichita, Kansas, AND Lots 535 through 557 odd inclusive on Jewett Avenue now Waco Avenue and Lots 536 through 558 even inclusive on Fairview Avenue all within Rosenthal's Subdivision of Meyers and Snyders Out lots to Wichita, Kansas. LOCATION: Alley between Waco & Fairview and N Waco and 21st Street North. REASON FOR REQUEST: Building television studios of KPTS. CURRENT ZONING: Multiple zoning along the length of the alley. LC Limited Commercial along the south, southeast and southwest sides. B Multifamily along the east and west sides, in the middle section of the alley. TF-3 Duplex zoning along the north, northeast and northwest sides. The applicant is requesting consideration to vacate the alley between 21st St N – 22nd St N – N Waco Av – N Fairview Av. The applicant proposes to build a television studio and parking lots. The proposed development will go over the alley and cover approximately the southern half of the alley/ block. Proposed access (per concept plan) to the parking lots will be from Waco & Fairview Avenues. Currently there are single-family homes in the area where the proposed development will be. 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 29, 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 utility easement, 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 the alley right-of-way described in the petition should be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Abandon sewer line that is located under the purposed location (per concept plan) of building and provide guarantee that this section of the sewer line is abandoned. 2. Retain portion of remaining sewer and obtain 20-ft utility easement brining the easement up to current standards. 3. Provide new manhole at the junction of the abandoned sewer line and the remaining active sewer line. 4. Provide temporary easement to cover sewer line until it is abandoned. 5. Maintain utility easement until all utilities are relocated 6. Provide new utility easement for relocated utilities. 7. Provide covenant tying the lots to be used in the development together as one property. 8. Any relocation or reconstruction of utilities made necessary by this vacation shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 9. All improvements shall be done according to City Standards. 10. The applicant shall dedicate an access easement to Waco and/or Fairview, for the proposed parking lots. 11. The applicant shall guarantee the closure of the remaining section of alley or retain it. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Subdivision Committee recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Abandon sewer line that is located under the purposed location (per concept plan) of building and provide guarantee that this section of the sewer line is abandoned. 2. Retain portion of remaining sewer and obtain 20-ft utility easement brining the easement up to current standards. 3. Provide new manhole at the junction of the abandoned sewer line and the remaining active sewer line. 4. Provide temporary easement to cover sewer line until it is abandoned. 5. Maintain utility easement until all utilities are relocated 6. Provide new utility easement for relocated utilities. 7. Provide covenant tying the lots to be used in the development together as one property. 8. Any relocation or reconstruction of utilities made necessary by this vacation shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 9. All improvements shall be done according to City Standards. 10. The applicant shall dedicate an access easement to Waco and/or Fairview, for the proposed parking lots. 11. The applicant shall guarantee the closure of the remaining section of alley or retain it. -------------------------------------------------------------- 4/2. VAC20001-00012 - Request to vacate utility easements and fire lanes, located on the northeast corner of 37th Street North and North Seneca, Lot 1, Sherwood Village Addition. OWNER/APPLICANT: George D. Blum LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All public utility easements & fire lane easements as shown in Lot 1, Sherwood Village Addition, Sedgwick County, Kansas. LOCATION: Generally located on the northeast corner of 37th St N & N Seneca, Lot 1, Sherwood Village Addition. REASON FOR REQUEST: Plat reflects proposed multifamily development; applicant proposes to sell and develop for church. CURRENT ZONING: Subject property is zoned MF-18 Multi-Family. Properties to the north (across IH 235) are zoned SF-6 Single Family Residential. Properties to the east (across the "Big Ditch") are zoned SF-6 Single Family Residential and TF-3 Duplex. The properties to the south (across the "Big Ditch") are zoned GC General Commercial and SF-6 Single Family Residential. The properties to the west are zoned TF-3 Duplex and MF-29 Multifamily. The applicant is requesting consideration to vacate utility easements and fire lanes in Lot 1, Sherwood Village Addition. The property is undeveloped. The applicant proposes to sell the property and develop it as a church. The current plat (approved by WCC, 02-08-83) was for multifamily development, showing multiple pad sites with abutting utility easements and fire lanes. The proposed development of a church would encroach on the platted utility easements and fire lanes. 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 29, 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 utility easement, 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 the utility easements and fire lanes described in the petition should be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. KG&E needs to retain 10-ft KG&E easement as noted on plat, per reference film 45, page 539, generally located as running parallel to IH 235. 2. When developing must use current setbacks, per zoning. 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. KG&E needs to retain 10-ft KG&E easement as noted on plat, per reference film 45, page 539, generally located as running parallel to IH 235. 2. When developing must use current setbacks, per zoning. 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. 5. Requested boundary alterations to County Fire District #1 DAVE BARBER, Planning staff, "The Sedgwick County Board of Commissioners has received petitions from owners of 14 properties requesting that their properties be included within the boundaries of County Fire District #1. These properties are located on the above map; you can see the dark dots on this map. For the most part, they are fairly small tracts of land, and as you can see, they range in size from approximately 3 acres up to 155 acres. All of these properties currently fall within the Colwich Fire District and they are located within 3 miles of the City of Colwich. Under a state statute, when a fire district boundary alteration is proposed within 3 miles of a city with adopted subdivision regulations, a 3/4 vote of the County Board of Commissioners is required to approve the requested boundary alteration, and that is the situation here. Also, state statute requires that the County Board of Commissioners receive testimony from the Planning Commission having jurisdiction over the affected area regarding any incompatibilities between the proposed expansion of the district and the adopted land use plan or comprehensive plan for these affected areas. The intent of this is to evaluate whether the proposed boundary alteration would result in any inconsistencies with the overall growth plan—in this case, in the City of Colwich or of Wichita/Sedgwick County. As you are probably aware, you dealt with one of these requests back several months ago. We had two properties in that situation, and here we have 14. This appears to be a trend in this particular situation, and I think the reason for that is that the Colwich Fire District is a volunteer fire district and has a different level of service than would be otherwise provided with the Sedgwick County Fire District No. 1. As you may recall, the County has fire station No. 33 in the middle of Union township, approximately 1 mile east of the Colwich volunteer fire station. The county does have a mutual aid agreement with the Colwich Fire Department that if called upon, they will provide fire support assistance to them for a fee, which is different than the first- responder agreement that Sedgwick County has with the City of Wichita. In any event, the property owners requesting this petition would be paying a significant increase in tax levies, if they are successful in this request. There is no reason to believe that the County Board of Commissioners will deny this. They have approved others in the past, and this appears to be part of a pattern in this particular area where people want more professional type of fire service and are prepared to pay the cost accordingly for that service. So we have looked at this in terms of implications with the Comprehensive Plan, with the growth plans for the City of Colwich, and we find that including these properties in the County Fire District No. 1 will in no way compromise the future growth and expansion opportunities for Colwich, and in fact appear to be consistent with the Wichita/Sedgwick County Comprehensive Plan. The recommendation is that the Planning Commission make a finding that adjusting the boundaries of County Fire District #1 to accommodate these petitions would be compatible with these Comprehensive Plans and would in no way compromise logical, orderly, efficient growth and expansion in and around the City of Colwich. That is my presentation." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions?" HENTZEN "Dave, do you know how many other small cities in this county have volunteer fire people? Are there other County Fire Districts?" BARBER "No, there are other fire districts, but I don't know how many of them are volunteer. There are a number of fire districts within Sedgwick County, and I suspect more than this one is on a volunteer basis." GAROFALO "Are most of these essentially residences or homes, people's homes?" BARBER "Yes, they are. Most of them are on smaller tracts of land, but there are a couple of farm parcels as well." MICHAELIS "Are there any further questions of staff?" LOPEZ "County Fire District No. 1 is bounded by the dark area on this map, or is it bounded by 85th Street and 21st Street on the south and Ridge?" BARBER "It is bounded on the southeast with the Wichita Fire District; it encompasses the Colwich Fire District, which is all of Union township, with the exception of the areas that are excluded, which is the light blue, and then it abuts up against the Mt. Hope Fire District. So it is a large fire district that goes all the way around Wichita and east, west, north and south." LOPEZ "District No. 1 goes all the way around Wichita?" BARBER "Yes. This is just one of their fire stations that they have—Station No. 33." LOPEZ "What is drawn here as the boundary isn't the actual end of it?" BARBER "No, it is just a small area of their entire district." WARNER "Does the volunteer Fire Department of Colwich have an opportunity to comment on this and can they say no, we don't want to lose this?" BARBER "I think their opportunity is at the public board hearing on June 6 where if they have concern with the pattern that is developing here, I suppose they could make a presentation to the County Board of Commissioners. But I think that is their only formal opportunity." MICHAELIS "Mr. Barber, is this likely to be anything that would be a source of confusion as far as when a call comes in, who goes to it? I mean does everyone have to sit around and look at a map to see who goes where?" BARBER "I think the property owners know which fire district they are in, and as long as the fire district itself is maintaining a good record, they will know who in this area is in and who is out. We have to assume that they are monitoring this and that they can handle this kind of fragmented situation in terms of delivery of service." MICHAELIS "So this is something that could go on and then next week it could come back. In other words, this could go on forever." BARBER "I think so. I think over time, we will see less and less of the area covered by the volunteer fire service." WARREN "The last time this came up, I think there was testimony given at that time that the Colwich Fire Department didn't function at all as far as responding as a fire department. I guess the question I have is are we talking about having the Colwich volunteer system to surrender that whole district? Would that be just by agreement between them and the county?" BARBER "I believe so." WARREN "Is it likely that we will see that district maybe being surrendered, maybe, to the county?" BARBER "I think at some point in time. It may be that the Colwich Volunteer Fire Service will just provide service to the city. But even that, at some point in time, even the city might decide." KROUT "I think that was part of the strategy for locating that station where it is." BARBER "The people are willing to pay for that service, and I think there is not a problem with that. It's a lot to pay." MICHAELIS "Are there any further questions of Mr. Barber? Okay. We just need a motion." MOTION: That the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission submit the findings to the Sedgwick County Board of County Commissioners regarding these current petitions to adjust the boundaries of County Fire District #1. GAROFALO moved, WARNER seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9-0). ----------------------------------------------- ZONING: 6a. Case No. ZON2001-00019 – Ritchie Investment Company, c/o Rob Ramseyer, and Ritchie Associates, Inc. (owners); Baughman Company c/o Terry Smythe (agent) request zone change from "LC" Limited Commercial; "SF-6" Single-Family Residential; and "SF-20" Single-Family Residential to "LC" Limited Commercial; and 6b. Case No. CUP2001-00013 (DP-250) Northridge Plaza Community Unit Plan Amendment #1 (f/k/a Starwest CUP) Amendment #1) – Ritchie Investment Company, c/o Rob Ramseyer, and Ritchie Associates, Inc. (owners); Baughman Company c/o Terry Smythe (agent) request amendment and expansion of the Community Unit Plan. MICHAELIS "There has been a request to defer this case. I will entertain a motion to do so." MOTION: That the item be deferred for 3 weeks to the next meeting. LOPEZ moved, WARNER seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9- 0). ---------------------------------------------------------- 7. Case No. ZON2001-00016 – Patricia G. Wilson-Rank (Owner); Wildcat Developers Inc. c/o Ron Meyer (Contract Purchaser/Applicant); PEC, PA c/o Gary Wiley (Agent) request zone change from "RR" Rural Residential to "SF-20" Single-Family Residential on property described as: That part of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 34, Township 28, South, Range 1 East of the Sixth Principal Meridian, lying South of the Right-of-Way of the Wichita-Valley Center Floodway as condemned in Case A-29459 in District Court of Sedgwick County, Kansas; Except road right-of-way on the West and the South. Generally located on the northeast corner of 71st Street South and Hydraulic. SCOTT KNEBEL, Planning staff, pointed out land use and zoning; and showed slides of the general area. He reviewed the following staff report: BACKGROUND: The applicant requests a zone change from "RR" Rural Residential to "SF-20" Single-Family Residential on a 17.4 acre unplatted tract located at the northeast corner of 71st Street South and Hydraulic. The applicant proposes to develop the site with single-family residences on approximately ½ acre lots. The applicant has submitted a copy of the preliminary plat (attached). The property is located within platting jurisdiction of the City of Haysville. The surrounding area is on the fringe of a developing suburban area with much of the land in the area still used for agriculture. The property west of the site is zoned "SF-20" Single-Family Residential and is being developed by the applicant for single-family residences on approximately ½ acre lots. The property south of the site is zoned "RR" Rural Residential and is used for agriculture. The Wichita-Valley Center Floodway (the Big Ditch) is located north and east of the site. Across the Big Ditch is property recently annexed by the City of Wichita that is developed primarily with manufactured homes on large lots. CASE HISTORY: The site is unplatted. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: R.O.W. Wichita-Valley Center Floodway SOUTH: "RR" Agriculture EAST: R.O.W. Wichita-Valley Center Floodway WEST: "SF-20" Vacant, developing with single-family residences PUBLIC SERVICES: The site has access to Hydraulic, a two-lane section line road, and 71st Street South, an unimproved section line road. Traffic volumes for Hydraulic were approximately 3,900 vehicles per day in 1997 and are projected to increase to approximately 6,200 vehicles per day by the 2030 Transportation Plan. Traffic volumes for 71st Street South along the frontage of the subject property are not available, but they are likely quite low since 71st Street South does not cross the Big Ditch or the Arkansas River to the east. Were a crossing of these two waterways constructed in the future to connect Haysville and Derby, traffic volumes likely would be in the 5,000 to 10,000 vehicle per day range. Public water service from the City of Haysville is available to be extended to the site. On-site sewer service will be provided by septic systems. The applicant indicates that the internal street will be asphalt mat. CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES: The Land Use Guide of the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for "Rural" development. The Rural category is intended to accommodate agricultural uses, rural bases uses that are no more offensive than agricultural uses, and large lot subdivisions with provisions for future water and sewer service. The proposed large lot subdivision conforms to the Land Use Guide. Planning staff has requested a copy of the Haysville Comprehensive Plan on several occasions in the past; however, a copy has not been provided. Therefore, a determination as to the conformance of the requested zone change to the Haysville Comprehensive Plan had not been made at the time this report was prepared. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon information available prior to the public hearings, planning staff recommends that the request be APPROVED, subject to platting within one year. This recommendation is based on the following findings: 1. The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood: The surrounding area is on the fringe of a developing suburban area with much of the land in the area still used for agriculture. The property west of the site is zoned "SF-20" Single-Family Residential and is being developed by the applicant for single-family residences on approximately ½ acre lots. The property south of the site is zoned "RR" Rural Residential and is used for agriculture. The Wichita-Valley Center Floodway (the Big Ditch) is located north and east of the site. Across the Big Ditch is property recently annexed by the City of Wichita that is developed primarily with manufactured homes on large lots. 2. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The site is zoned "RR" Rural Residential, which accommodates very large lot, single-family residential development in areas where a full range of municipal services are not likely to be available in the near future. The "SF-20" Single-Family district requested by the applicant is intended for application in areas where some public services are available and where soils are capable of accommodating septic systems. The "SF-20" district is a more suitable zoning district for the subject property given the ability of the City of Haysville to provide public water to the site and the ability of the soils to accommodate septic systems. 3. Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property: Nearby property is either screened from the site by a major barrier (the Big Ditch), under development with the same use proposed for the subject property, or used for agriculture. No detrimental affects on nearby property from the proposed single-family residential development are anticipated. 4. Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and policies: The Land Use Guide of the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for "Rural" development. The Rural category is intended to accommodate agricultural uses, rural bases uses that are no more offensive than agricultural uses, and large lot subdivisions with provisions for future water and sewer service. The proposed large lot subdivision conforms to the Land Use Guide. Planning staff has requested a copy of the Haysville Comprehensive Plan on several occasions in the past; however, a copy has not been provided. Therefore, a determination as to the conformance of the requested zone change to the Haysville Comprehensive Plan had not been made at the time this report was prepared. 5. Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: Community facilities are adequate to serve single-family residential development on approximately ½ acre lots. KNEBEL "This applicant has proposed to develop the site with a suburban subdivision. This particular property is located within the platting jurisdiction of the City of Haysville. The Haysville Planning Commission did review this zoning change request and recommended it for approval unanimously. Right now, the area is mostly agricultural. Over in the areas where there are trees, there are some suburban large-lot residential development that kind of runs along the interstate. That is the nearest current residential properties. There is a development right across the street to the west that is advertised as a similar subdivision to the one that is proposed. It is owned and being developed by the applicant of this zone change request. It is right across the street to the west. The site would be provided public water service by the City of Haysville. On-site sewer service would be accomplished through septic systems. The applicant indicates that the internal street would be paved with asphalt. The Land Use Guide indicates that this area is appropriate for rural development, which supports large lot subdivisions with provisions for future water and sewer service. The Haysville Land Use Guide indicates that the property is appropriate for commercial development. The Planning staff is recommending that the zone change request be approved, subject to platting within 1 year. These recommendations are based on the findings on Pages 3 and 4." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of staff? May we hear from the applicant, please?" GARY WILEY "Mr. Chair, Commissioners, I am here on behalf of the contract purchaser. We are in complete agreement with the staff comments of platting. I would be happy to answer any questions." WARREN "Have you provided in this, or will provisions be made on the final plat for easements so that when the sewer does come in here there won't be any problems?" WILEY "Yes." WARREN "So you will have urban-type easements?" WILEY "Yes." GAROFALO "Just a simple question. I counted 22 lots, is that right?" WILEY "Yes. The lots are 20,000 square foot plus." MICHAELIS "Are there any further questions of the applicant? Thank you, sir. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak in favor or in opposition to this item? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Commission." MOTION: Having considered the factors as contained in Policy Statement No. 10; taking into consideration the staff findings (The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood: The surrounding area is on the fringe of a developing suburban area with much of the land in the area still used for agriculture. The property west of the site is zoned "SF-20" Single- Family Residential and is being developed by the applicant for single-family residences on approximately ½ acre lots. The property south of the site is zoned "RR" Rural Residential and is used for agriculture. The Wichita-Valley Center Floodway (the Big Ditch) is located north and east of the site. Across the Big Ditch is property recently annexed by the City of Wichita that is developed primarily with manufactured homes on large lots. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The site is zoned "RR" Rural Residential, which accommodates very large lot, single- family residential development in areas where a full range of municipal services are not likely to be available in the near future. The "SF-20" Single- Family district requested by the applicant is intended for application in areas where some public services are available and where soils are capable of accommodating septic systems. The "SF-20" district is a more suitable zoning district for the subject property given the ability of the City of Haysville to provide public water to the site and the ability of the soils to accommodate septic systems. Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property: Nearby property is either screened from the site by a major barrier (the Big Ditch), under development with the same use proposed for the subject property, or used for agriculture. No detrimental affects on nearby property from the proposed single-family residential development are anticipated. Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and policies: The Land Use Guide of the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for "Rural" development. The Rural category is intended to accommodate agricultural uses, rural bases uses that are no more offensive than agricultural uses, and large lot subdivisions with provisions for future water and sewer service. The proposed large lot subdivision conforms to the Land Use Guide. Planning staff has requested a copy of the Haysville Comprehensive Plan on several occasions in the past; however, a copy has not been provided. Therefore, a determination as to the conformance of the requested zone change to the Haysville Comprehensive Plan had not been made at the time this report was prepared. Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: Community facilities are adequate to serve single-family residential development on approximately ½ acre lots.) I move that we recommend to the governing body that the request be approved, subject to platting within 1 year. GAROFALO moved, COULTER seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9-0). --------------------------------------------- 8. Case No. ZON2001-00015 – Walter B. and Angeline M. Richardson; Ronald D. and Pamela K. Lamar; Gregory L. Guerrero; Miguel E. and Maria I. Hernandez; and KPTS, Inc. c/o Dave McClintock (Owners/Applicants) request zone change from "B" Multi-Family Residential to "GO" General Office on property described as: Lot 535 and the South 9 feet of Lot 537, on Jewett, now Waco, Rosenthal's Subdivision of Meyers & Snyders Out-Lots to Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas AND Lots 1,3,5,7,9 & 11, on Jewett, now Waco, and Lots 2,4,6,8,10 & 12, on Fairview, Judgson's Addition to Wichita, Kansas, Sedgwick County, Kansas. Generally located north of 21st Street North between Waco and Fairview. SCOTT KNEBEL, Planning staff, pointed out land use and zoning; and showed slides of the general area. He reviewed the following staff report: BACKGROUND: The applicant requests a zone change from "B" Multi-Family Residential to "GO" General Office on a 1 acre platted tract located north of 21st Street North between Waco and Fairview. The applicant requests the zone change to allow for a northward expansion the existing KPTS broadcast studio that is located immediately south of the subject property. The expansion of the broadcast studio will involve the removal of existing residential structures and the conversion of the existing land use from residential to office use. A broadcast studio is first permitted in the "GO" General Office district. The surrounding area is characterized by a mixture of uses in the middle of the Midtown North neighborhood with commercial uses along 21st Street and residential uses along both sides of Waco and Fairview north of the 21st Street commercial uses. The properties immediately north of the subject property are zoned "TF-3" Two Family Residential and are developed with residential structures. The properties immediately south of the subject property are zoned "LC" Limited Commercial and are developed with a broadcast studio, a parking area, and two residential structures. The properties east of the subject property across Fairview and west of the subject property across Waco are zoned "B" Multi-Family Residential and are developed with residential structures. CASE HISTORY: The platted lots within the subject property are separated by a north-south alley. The applicant has requested the vacation of this alley to allow development of the broadcast studio across the alley's current location. This vacation request (VAC2001-00011) is scheduled to be heard by the MAPC at the same hearing as the zone change request. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: "TF-3" Residential SOUTH: "LC" Broadcast studio, parking area, residential EAST: "B" Residential WEST: "B" Residential PUBLIC SERVICES: The site will have access to 21st Street North through the existing KPTS broadcast studio property. Traffic volumes along 21st Street North are approximately 16,600 vehicles per day. The 2030 Transportation Plan projects traffic volumes on 21st Street North to increase to approximately 22,000 vehicles per day. The City's Capital Improvement Program contains a project scheduled for completion in 2006 to repave 21st Street North from Hood to Broadway and to provide turn lanes where warranted. Public water and sewer service are available to be extended to the site. CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES: The Land Use Guide of the 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for "Commercial" development. The proposed Midtown North Neighborhood Plan also identifies this area as appropriate for commercial development. The proposed broadcast studio is compatible with the commercial land use designation. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the information available prior to the public hearings, planning staff recommends that the request be APPROVED. This recommendation is based on the following findings: 1. The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood: The surrounding area is characterized by a mixture of uses in the middle of the Midtown North neighborhood with commercial uses along 21st Street and residential uses along both sides of Waco and Fairview north of the 21st Street commercial uses. The properties immediately north of the subject property are zoned "TF-3" Two Family Residential and are developed with residential structures. The properties immediately south of the subject property are zoned "LC" Limited Commercial and are developed with a broadcast studio, a parking area, and two residential structures. The properties east subject property across Fairview and west of the subject property across Waco are zoned "B" Multi-Family Residential and are developed with residential structures. 2. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The site is zoned "B" Multi-Family Residential, which accommodates high-density, multi-family residential development and complementary land uses. The site is currently developed with residential uses and is suitable for continued residential use; however, the MAPC has in the past supported the redevelopment of adjacent residential properties for the expansion of existing office/commercial uses. 4. Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property: Detrimental affects should be minimized by the screening, lighting, and compatibility standards of the Unified Zoning Code and the landscaped street yard, parking lot screening, and buffer requirements of the Landscape Ordinance, which should limit noise, lighting, and other activity from adversely impacting surrounding residential areas. Additionally, the subject property is separated from adjacent residential properties to the east and west by a street, which should further limit detrimental affects on nearby properties. 4. Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and policies: The Land Use Guide of the 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for "Commercial" development. The proposed Midtown North Neighborhood Plan also identifies this as appropriate for commercial development. The proposed broadcast studio is compatible with the commercial land use designation. 5. Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: No negative impacts on community facilities are anticipated. KNEBEL "This site is a 1 acre platted tract, located between Waco and Fairview, north of 21st Street. The applicant is the actual property owners, who are under contract to sell the property to the KPTS television station, who is intending to expand their broadcast studio to the north of their current location, which is in the Limited Commercial zoning, just to the south. The current site is developed with residential structures. This is an area that was included in the vacation case that you heard just previously. The property to the east along 21st is developed commercially, and it is residentially developed behind the commercial properties. Across 21st Street you have some mixture of uses; some residential, churches and commercial to the south. Across the street is mostly residential on Waco, but there is one commercial property. The site will have access to 21st Street, which is proposed in the Capital Improvement Program to be repaved and widened at certain intersections. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that the site is appropriate for commercial development. The proposed Mid-Town North Neighborhood Plan, which is currently in the works, identifies this area as appropriate for commercial development. Planning staff is recommending the request for approval, basing that recommendation on the findings found on Pages 3 and 4." MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of staff? May we hear from the applicant?" DAVE MCCLINTOCK "I am with KPTS. Basically I just want to answer any questions you may have. We need to expand the studios, as he said, and we are pleased to be able to do it in this area." PLATT "Where will be tower be?" MCCLINTOCK "The tower that exists may be exactly where it is, or very close to where it is. It won't change much." MICHAELIS "Are there any other questions? Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to this item? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Commission." MOTION: Having considered the factors as contained in Policy Statement No. 10; taking into consideration the staff findings (The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood: The surrounding area is characterized by a mixture of uses in the middle of the Midtown North neighborhood with commercial uses along 21st Street and residential uses along both sides of Waco and Fairview north of the 21st Street commercial uses. The properties immediately north of the subject property are zoned "TF-3" Two Family Residential and are developed with residential structures. The properties immediately south of the subject property are zoned "LC" Limited Commercial and are developed with a broadcast studio, a parking area, and two residential structures. The properties east subject property across Fairview and west of the subject property across Waco are zoned "B" Multi-Family Residential and are developed with residential structures. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The site is zoned "B" Multi-Family Residential, which accommodates high-density, multi-family residential development and complementary land uses. The site is currently developed with residential uses and is suitable for continued residential use; however, the MAPC has in the past supported the redevelopment of adjacent residential properties for the expansion of existing office/commercial uses. Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property: Detrimental affects should be minimized by the screening, lighting, and compatibility standards of the Unified Zoning Code and the landscaped street yard, parking lot screening, and buffer requirements of the Landscape Ordinance, which should limit noise, lighting, and other activity from adversely impacting surrounding residential areas. Additionally, the subject property is separated from adjacent residential properties to the east and west by a street, which should further limit detrimental affects on nearby properties. Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and policies: The Land Use Guide of the 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for "Commercial" development. The proposed Midtown North Neighborhood Plan also identifies this as appropriate for commercial development. The proposed broadcast studio is compatible with the commercial land use designation. Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: No negative impacts on community facilities are anticipated.) I move that we recommend to the governing body that the request be approved, subject to staff comments. LOPEZ moved, BLAKE seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9- 0). ------------------------------------------------------ 9. Case No. CON2001-00023 – Nathan Dudley (owner/applicant) requests a Conditional Use to allow an accessory apartment on property zoned "RR" Rural Residential, described as: The east 365.41 feet of the west 752.24 feet of the north 1,192.1 feet of the North Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 26 South, Range 1 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Sedgwick County, Kansas. Generally located west of Tyler and south of 73rd Street North. BILL LONGNECKER, Planning staff, pointed out land use and zoning; and showed slides of the general area. He reviewed the following staff report: BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting consideration for a Conditional Use to allow an accessory apartment on property zoned "RR" Rural Residential. The site (10 acres) is not platted and located southwest of the W 73rd N – N 87th W intersection, Sedgwick County, Kansas. The applicant proposes to build a 720 sq-ft guesthouse with bathroom &/or kitchen, similar to a studio apartment. The primary house is approximately 1,238 sq-ft in size. The applicant has submitted a site plan showing the proposed use of the subject property. The site plan shows the location of all existing structures, the proposed guesthouse and the existing trees/hedgerows. The applicant has indicated that the accessory apartment will be used by guests while visiting the applicant or could be used for rent to students, but in the long term it will be used by the applicant as a study. An accessory apartment in "RR" Rural Residential Zoning requires a Conditional Use Permit. CASE HISTORY: The property is unplatted and being used for single-family residence. The applicant's property is entirely in a flood plain, per FEMA records; however the applicant's engineer indicates that property's elevation is above the 100-year flood plain. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: "RR" Rural Residential Agriculture EAST: "RR" Rural Residential Single Family Residence SOUTH: "RR" Rural Residential Agriculture WEST: "RR" Rural Residential Single Family Residence PUBLIC SERVICES: W 73rd N & N 87th W are dirt roads at this location. W 73rd N does not extend west of this intersection, instead there is a private (dirt) road leading to the applicant's drive. There are no City utilities available at this site. There is a septic system and a well. The County Health Department will evaluate the acceptability of the existing septic system for the proposed expansion. CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES: The Comprehensive Plan identifies this property as Rural. Rural is intended for application in unincorporated Sedgwick County and accommodates very large, single–family residential development in areas where a full range of municipal facilities and services are not available and not likely to be available in the near future. The Unified Zoning Code requires a Conditional Use for Accessory Apartments in Rural/ "RR" Rural Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the information available prior to the public hearing, staff recommends the application for a Conditional Use for an accessory apartment be APPROVED, subject to platting and the following conditions. 1. The appearance of an accessory apartment shall be compatible with the main dwelling and with the character of the neighborhood, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. The main dwelling is a brick/stone and frame building with a gable roof. 2. The accessory apartment shall remain accessory to and under the same ownership as the principle single- family dwelling unit and ownership shall not be divided or sold as a condominium. 3. The water and sewer service provided to the accessory apartment shall not be provided as a separate service from the main dwelling. Electric, gas, telephone and cable television utility service may be provided as separate utility services. 4. The applicant shall obtain all applicable permits, including but not limited to building, health, zoning and flood plain permits. 5. The accessory apartment shall sit behind the front of the primary unit. 6. The site shall be developed in general conformance with the approved site plan. 7. Any violation of these conditions shall render this Conditional Use Permit null and void. This recommendation is based on the following findings: 1. The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood. The applicant's site and the surrounding area is zoned "RR" Rural Residential. The existing uses are residential and agriculture. The accessory apartment is a customary accessory use associated with single-family residence. 2. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The Code permits an accessory apartment in single-family residential districts provided the site meets specific site and building standards. The applicant and the site appear to meet those standards. 3. Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property. Any detrimental affects would be mitigated by the recommended condition of approval and code required development standards. Currently the lot has extensive landscaping with numerous trees, bushes and hedgerows screening it from its neighbors. The property is sits well off the private road and is screened from it by a hedgerow. The closest neighbor is to the west and trees screen the proposed site. 4. Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and Policies: The Zoning Code anticipated this type of use and makes specific provisions for it. The site appears to comply with all the provisions outlined in the Code for an accessory apartment. Approval of this request will not be contrary to any Comprehensive Plan policies or guidelines. 5. Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: The impact of this development on the community facilities will be minimal. LONGNECKER "The owner/applicant Nathan Dudley is requesting consideration for a Conditional Use to allow an accessory apartment in 'RR' Rural Residential zoning. This property is located just southwest of West 73rd Street North and the North 187th Street intersection. The applicant is proposing to use the accessory apartment, which is going to be a 720-square foot guesthouse with bathroom and/or kitchen—that is yet to be decided—similar to a studio apartment. The primary house is approximately 1,238 square feet. The applicant has submitted a site plan showing the proposed used of the subject property. The site plan shows all of the existing buildings and a lot of the current, existing vegetation, mostly mature trees and hedge rows around the property. The applicant has indicated that the accessory apartment will be used by guests while visiting the applicant, or could be used for renting to students. But in the long term, it will end up being used by the applicant as a study. The case history of this property is that it is unplatted and it now has a single-family home on it, which you can see right there (indicating). You can also see a lot of the mature hedge and trees around the property. There is a private drive that the applicant and the neighbor to the west share. The road that leads to this private drive shoots off of 73rd Street North and that is also a private drive. It is a dirt road. The neighbors to the northwest is quite some distance away and they themselves have a strand of mature trees and hedgerow. Right now there are no public services available at this site. The applicant has a septic system and a well. The County Health Department will evaluate the acceptability of the existing septic system for the proposed expansion that would be made by the guesthouse. The applicant's property is also shown to be entirely in a flood plain for the FEMA records that the city staff has; however, it must be noted that the applicant's engineer indicates that the property's elevation is above the 100-year flood plain. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission considers recommending this for approval, subject to the 7 conditions that are listed in the staff report. We are basing this recommendation on the 5 criteria that are listed on Page 3, including the fact that an accessory apartment is a customary accessory use associated with single-family residences. The site plan appears to meet the standards that are set for accessory apartments. Looking at No. 3, the affect upon nearby properties. Looking at the properties that the applicant has around him and the applicant's own property, it seems like there are a lot of mature trees and hedge around there, and staff feels that the applicant complies with the 7 criteria lined out, that the detrimental effect will be minimal. Nos. 4 and 5, the Comp Plan shows that this can be used in this area as long as the provisions outlined in the Code for accessory apartments are met. Again, in No. 5, the impact of this development on community facilities will be minimal. Are there any questions?" MICHAELIS "Are there any questions of staff?" HENTZEN "Bill, in Item No. 3 in the staff recommendations, does that mean that you are requiring separate sewer, or can they use the existing one?" LONGNECKER "In talking with Mr. Bob George with the County, he indicated that that could be hooked up to the existing septic system. It is just a matter of determining whether that system is adequate for the expanded use." MICHAELIS "Thank you, Mr. Longnecker. Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak in favor or in opposition to this item? If not, I will bring it back to the Commission." MOTION: Having considered the factors as contained in Policy Statement No. 10; taking into consideration the staff findings (The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood. The applicant's site and the surrounding area is zoned "RR" Rural Residential. The existing uses are residential and agriculture. The accessory apartment is a customary accessory use associated with single-family residence. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The Code permits an accessory apartment in single-family residential districts provided the site meets specific site and building standards. The applicant and the site appear to meet those standards. Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property. Any detrimental affects would be mitigated by the recommended condition of approval and code required development standards. Currently the lot has extensive landscaping with numerous trees, bushes and hedgerows screening it from its neighbors. The property is sits well off the private road and is screened from it by a hedgerow. The closest neighbor is to the west and trees screen the proposed site. Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and Policies: The Zoning Code anticipated this type of use and makes specific provisions for it. The site appears to comply with all the provisions outlined in the Code for an accessory apartment. Approval of this request will not be contrary to any Comprehensive Plan policies or guidelines. Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: The impact of this development on the community facilities will be minimal.) I move that we recommend to the governing body that the request be approved, subject to staff recommendations. HENTZEN moved, WARNER seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (9-0). --------------------------------------------------------------- 10. ZON2001-00018 – Gene Vitarelli (Owner/Applicant); Savoy, Ruggles & Bohm c/o Randy Johnson (Agent) request zone change from "MF-18" Multi-Family Residential to "GO" General Office, on property described as: Lot 29, Block 3, Park Meadow Estates, Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas. Generally located on the northeast corner of Harry and Todd. SCOTT KNEBEL, Planning staff, pointed out land use and zoning; and showed slides of the general area. He reviewed the following staff report: BACKGROUND: The applicant requests a zone change from "MF-18" Multi-Family Residential to "GO" General Office on a 2.4 acre platted tract located at the northeast corner of Harry and Todd. The applicant proposes to develop the subject property with office uses. The surrounding area is characterized by a mixture of uses on the developing fringe of Wichita with apartments to the northwest, duplexes to the north, single-family residences to the south, undeveloped property zoned for office development to the west, and agricultural and large lot residential uses to the east. The properties east and south of the site are zoned "SF-6" Single-Family Residential. The properties north of the site are zoned "MF-18" Multi- Family Residential and "TF-3" Two-Family Residential. The property west of the site is zoned "GO" General Office. CASE HISTORY: A zone change request (SCZ-0270) to "C" Commercial was denied by the MAPC and withdrawn by the applicant on November 16, 1971. The subject property was platted as Lot 29, Block 3 Park Meadow Estates Addition on August 18, 1976. On September 27, 1976, the zoning on the subject property was changed (SCZ-0325) to "AA" One-Family and a Conditional Use (CU-160) was approved for the establishment of a multi- family housing development with a gross density of 7 units per acre. The Official Zoning Map dated April 14, 1977 shows the zoning of the subject property as "R-5" General Residence with the restrictions of CU-160 removed from the property, which appears to have been changed as a result of the property being annexed by the City of Wichita. When the Unified Zoning Code was adopted on March 4, 1996, the zoning of the subject property converted from "R-5" General Residence to "MF-18" Multi-Family Residential. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: "MF-18" & "TF-3" Apartments, duplexes SOUTH: "SF-6" Single-family residences EAST: "SF-6" Agriculture, large lot residential WEST: "GO" Undeveloped PUBLIC SERVICES: The site has frontage along Harry, a four-lane arterial street; however, the site has no access to Harry due to platted access control. The site's only access is to Todd, a two-lane collector street that intersects with Harry at the south end of the site. Harry had 1997 traffic volumes of approximately 9,000 vehicles per day. The 2030 Transportation Plan projects traffic volumes on Harry to increase to approximately 13,000 vehicles per day. The projections in the 2030 Transportation Plan assumed that the subject property would be developed with multi-family residential uses. The proposed office uses could increase the traffic volume by approximately 150 vehicles per day. While the increased traffic volume is not significant, the overall traffic generated by the site is high enough (approximately 450 vehicles per day) that planning staff is recommending conditions to ensure that the location of access drives along Todd do not conflict with Harry or the location of access drives to the property on the west side of Todd. Public water and sewer service are available to be extended to the site. CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES: The Land Use Guide of the 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for "High-Density Residential" development. The "High-Density Residential" category is intended to support residential densities in excess of 10 unit per acre, such as garden apartments, condominiums, and special residential accommodations for the elderly. With the exception of a higher traffic generation rate, office uses have similar impacts on nearby properties as high-density residential uses. RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff finds that the subject property is appropriate for office development; however, the "GO" General Office zoning district permits higher intensity uses than can be supported by planning staff. Therefore, planning staff is recommending limitations on permitted uses and additional site design requirements to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential uses. In addition, the location of access drives on the proposed site plan could cause turning movement conflicts; therefore, planning staff is recommending that the location of access drives be approved by the Planning Director and Traffic Engineer. Based upon the information available prior to the public hearings, planning staff recommends that the request be APPROVED subject to the following conditions of a Protective Overlay District: 1. The following uses shall not be permitted: group residence, limited; group residence, general; correctional placement residence, limited; correctional placement residence, general; and hotel or motel. 2. Residential development shall be limited to a maximum density of 17.4 dwelling units per acre. 3. Buildings shall be limited to a maximum height of 45 feet. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a site plan indicating the location of access drives on Todd for approval by the Planning Director and Traffic Engineer and shall develop the site in general conformance with the approved site plan. The applicant shall design the site with access drives that minimize turning movement conflicts by either aligning access drives with the access drives to the property on the west or by separating access drives from both Harry and the access drives to the property on the west by at least 150 feet. This recommendation is based on the following findings: 1. The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood: The surrounding area is characterized by a mixture of uses on the developing fringe of Wichita with apartments to the northwest, duplexes to the north, single-family residences to the south, undeveloped property zoned for office development to the west, and agricultural and large lot residential uses to the east. The properties east and south of the site are zoned "SF-6" Single-Family Residential. The properties north of the site are zoned "MF-18" Multi-Family Residential and "TF-3" Two-Family Residential. The property west of the site is zoned "GO" General Office. 2. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The site is zoned "MF- 18" Multi-Family Residential, which accommodates moderate-density, multi-family residential development and complementary land uses. The site is suitable for multi-family residential uses; however, the site has not developed in the 24 years that it has been zoned for multi-family residential uses. 5. Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property: Detrimental affects should be minimized by the recommended provisions of a Protective Overlay and the existing regulations of the Unified Zoning Code, Landscape Ordinance, and Sign Code, which should limit noise, lighting, and other activity from adversely impacting surrounding residential areas. Additionally, the subject property is separated from adjacent residential properties by a drainage ditch to the north by an arterial street to the south, which should further limit detrimental affects on nearby properties. 4. Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and policies: The Land Use Guide of the 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as appropriate for "High-Density Residential" development. With the exception of higher traffic generation rates, office uses tend to have similar impacts on nearby properties as high-density residential uses 5. Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: Community facilities are adequate to address the additional traffic generated by the development with the recent widening of Harry to four lanes. KNEBEL "This item is a zone change request from 'MF-18' Multi-Family Residential to 'GO' General Office. The site is 2.4 acres located at the northeast corner of Harry and Todd. Todd is between Webb Road and Greenwich Road. The applicant proposes to develop the site with office uses. The map here is a little outdated. This particular property to the west you considered a couple of months ago for the same request; General Office zoning. That was approved and that zone change has been enacted. We are just a little behind on putting things on the map. Other properties surrounding it to the north are multi-family and duplex. To the east and south are single-family. Y