METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 13, 2000 The regular meeting of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Metropolitan Area Planning Commission was held Thursday July 13, 2000 at 12:30 p.m., in the Planning Department Conference Room, 10th Floor, City Hall, 455 North Main, Wichita, Kansas. The following members were present: Frank Garofalo, Chair; James Barfield; Chris Carraher; Bud Hentzen; Bill Johnson (late arrival); Richard Lopez; John W. McKay, Jr., Jerry Michaelis; Susan Osborne-Howes (late arrival); George Platt; Ray Warren, and Harold Warner. Ron Marnell was not present. Staff members present were: Marvin S. Krout, Secretary; Dale Miller, Assistant Secretary; Donna Goltry, Principal Planner; Scott Knebel, Senior Planner, Stephen Banks, Senior Planner; Barry Carroll, Associate Planner, and Karen Wolf, Recording Secretary. 1. Presentation on Development Trends Stephen Banks, Senior Planner, Land Use Division, presented information from the Highlights section of the 2000 Development Trends report. He compared the 1999 development activity with 1998, and gave additional information from the report and other comments to explain some of the factors affecting development activity. Mr. Banks explained some of the additions to this years report having to do with institutional construction activity and analysis of all commercial construction by different geographical makeup’s of the county. He then talked about current efforts to bring the last five years of Development Trends data into the Geographic Information System to be used as a Comprehensive Plan monitoring tool. Mr. Banks answered questions from Commissioners and noted the Commissioners comments about improvements to one of the maps and a table that would be helpful. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Osborne-Howes arrived at 12:50 p.m. Johnson arrived at 12:52 p.m. 2. Public agenda: Request to amend Zoning Code to add provisions for “containers” and increase the allowable area for outside storage in “LC” Limited Commercial District. BOB KAPLAN “Commissioners, I have given you a hand-out, and all I want to do, for a couple minutes, is just ‘have coffee with you’, if you will, and just chat a minute or two about an issue. This is not an adversarial situation at all. I am presently representing Budget Box. Mr. Bill Helbrook is here from Budget Box and they are picking up the tab for my time today. But there are a lot, a lot of people in the community, particularly retailers, who are interested in the subject. Mrs. Frost, the lady in the front row who just walked in, is a ShopKo Manager. She tells me, and I do not represent ShopKo or Mrs. Frost, but she told me that she had storage containers, and on two occasions she has lost her storage containers because of violations of current outside storage ordinances. There are just a lot of people interested in the subject. What I did, at Marvin’s invitation, I did attend Development Review and we also had coffee there and talked about it. I have given you a handout and I am not going to repeat anything in the handout. You can all read as well as I can. The first page of the handout is nothing more than just a transcript, ladies and gentlemen, of the statements I made at Development Review. I just simply reduced them to writing, and there is no need for me to repeat them. The second page of the handout is a proposed ordinance that we took the liberty of authoring. Understand that that is not an ordinance that we are going to present to anyone. It is for review. It is for starters, if you will. The third page is simply a summary of the existing zoning provisions on outdoor storage. We have some issues between us, between myself and perhaps some members of Marvin’s staff, and even OCI, as to what is applicable to containers and what isn’t. As an example, on the summary provision, IV-B.3.b. (Screening Standards), I read that as applying to outside open storage and not to containers. My impression of reviewing the ordinance is that we really do not have any regulations that deal specifically with storage containers, per se. We are getting a lot of calls, OCI is getting complaints, Planning is familiar with it, the Council members are familiar with it. It is a situation where I think there are some compelling reasons to deal with it and to attempt to adopt a regulation that sets some standards and some guidelines for everybody. Quite frankly, with no Code provision, it is simply not practicable for myself or some other applicant representative to come up here on every single case with people who want storage containers. They are not all large discounters. They are not all Wal-Marts. I was up here on Wal-Mart and that is fine and good for Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart can afford to spend the money and we had to go through an amendment to a CUP, which this Commission approved, and we are currently implementing that. Very, very, very expensive procedure. We are spending about $50,000 out there in screening and landscaping in order to accommodate storage boxes. Not every Mom and Pop, not every sole proprietorship, not every Hobby Lobby and single Mom and Pop ownership can do that, nor can they afford to have me come in here and amend CUPs or attempt to change zoning so that they can have one or two containers one or two months per year for Christmas or back to school, nor can the lessors, nor can the people like my client, Budget Box, afford to pay me to come in to put out one box for a small retailer for two months per year. They get a couple hundred bucks a month for the box and they just can’t afford the procedure. So we need to take an overall look at it. I am not expecting any action today. The reason I came to you today is that I would like to have this Commission direct staff and I am not sure that it is really necessary to direct them, or at least permit staff to work with me a little further on the issue and to try to come back with some kind of refined proposal that is going to save us all a lot of time. It is going to save this Commission a lot of time hearing these cases individually. It is going to give the lessors a guide where they know what they can do, they know what can’t do. Right now, it is as hazy as it can be, in my opinion. It is going to avoid having to come up here like for Mrs. Frost on ShopKo and I will be able to tell her this is what the Code provision is, ma’am, and this is what you can do and what you can’t do and what you can’t do. So I think that it is well advised that we work on the subject. It came to the forefront here eight or nine months ago when Mr. Sparkman and his crew started writing citations to people for the illegal placement of boxes that they had been using for years. Nobody has been saying anything and everybody has been doing it. It doesn’t mean it was lawful, it means that it has been happening all over town and there have been some complaints and OCI has gone out and they have started issuing citations and we have started getting a lot of calls. So basically, that is what I wanted to share with you today. There is really no downside to permitting us to work further on it. I think Mr. Krout felt that we ought to come to the Commission and present this conceptually, at least, at this point. I went a little bit further with some proposed regs. As I say, that is a starter. I am not going to get everything I want, obviously, and I may not get anything at all, but I think we need to start looking at it. This is not unique to Wichita, it is Maine to California, and it is Canada to the Gulf. Retailers today are using storage containers. I want to show you what we did for Wal-Mart. I am just as proud of it as I can be. Bill, would you show them that little picture of what we did at Wal-Mart? What happened at Wal-Mart was that we had containers we had to remove. We came in, we got the Community Plan amended. Once we got all of the improvements made, we asked permission for some temporary use of about four boxes on the basis that we properly screen it and make it look attractive. I am just really, really pleased with what Budget Box was able to do with those containers. If you looked at that and you didn’t know it, you couldn’t tell that that was anything but a cedar fence. You wouldn’t even know what was behind it. That is actually not a fence, per se, that cedar is attached directly to the boxes. We have not had, and I think Mr. Sparkman will bear me out, we have not had a single complaint. I have talked to the neighborhood associations; they are aware of this, they know what we have done. They have consented to it. I think that is a very, very attractive treatment. The reason I showed you that picture is that that is sort of a entrée to what I would like to see in an ordinance because of the fact that these boxes come in, they go out, and when you need a box, I don’t have time, nor do the applicants have money, to come to this Commission to change a zoning because they want to put in a box for back to school or a box for Christmas shopping. It is kind of an immediate thing. I think this situation works and works very well. I think it is very, very nice. That is in place at the Wal-Mart store and it is really worked well. So, those are basically my comments. I would take any questions, but I would simply ask you to extend to Mr. Krout the authority to continue looking at this. I will continue meeting with staff and attempting to come up with a proposed ordinance that we can bring back for your review. If you want to hear from either one of these folks, they are available. We did not publicize this meeting, I did not ask anybody to attend. I could have gotten many, many people up here. I have had a lot of calls. There are people who want boxes that now can’t have them. That is basically where it is.” GAROFALO “So you haven’t actually sat down with staff on this?” KAPLAN “Yes, we did.” GAROFALO “Oh, you have?” KAPLAN “That is true, Frank. I talked to Kurt Schroeder first, in OCI. Kurt and Randy and I visited initially because these problems arose and I had a conference with Kurt and Randy. I am not going to say that Kurt supports or doesn’t support anything. I don’t want to quote anybody, but I believe that they are open to looking at it. My take on this, Mr. Garofalo, was simply that this has become more of a policy issue. It is not just an individual case issue. I think we need a policy on this because it is so widespread and it is so common throughout the community. I don’t want to deal with it on an individual case-by-case basis. I can’t imagine that you do either. I think we just need some policy. Then I went to Marvin and was invited to Development Review. We discussed it further and it was suggested that we put it on the agenda, just figuratively to have coffee and for you to think about it and see if you would permit us to go forward with us. I don’t need action today, I just want to continue massaging it.” GAROFALO “You are suggesting this just for the ‘LC’ district?” KAPLAN “Yeah, I am, Mr. Chairman. I really think that is where the need lies, in the ‘LC’ district. I think it ought to be limited to the ‘LC’ district. That is where our retailers are and that is where our issues are.” KROUT “Do you foresee the need at any time for these to be located in front of the main building as opposed to in a side or rear yard?” KAPLAN “Marvin, I am certainly not contemplating that. I am thinking of rear lots and to the rear of buildings. I am not thinking of any front parking areas or areas that are accessibly viewed from an arterial street at all. I thought I kind of put that in there, maybe I didn’t, but that is my intention if I didn’t put that in there. So it would be rear lot, rear storage only, and I think that is going to fit. Even the ordinance, as I drew it, and I drew it with some liberality, after talking to my client, obviously advocating from my client. This is what I would like to have if I had my druthers. And I am not suggesting that that is what is going to happen, but even at that, I think rear storage only. I don’t think they need to be out in front.” BARFIELD “You mentioned several retailers, you mentioned Mom and Pop stores, but aren’t we basically talking about a few regional or national retailers?” KAPLAN “Actually not, Mr. Barfield. You would be surprised. Bill Holbrook will speak to that. I was surprised at that, too because I did not realize how many of these things were being built. It is not all of the discounters. I think Bill can speak to any number of clients. This is just one lessor. There are a number of lessors in Wichita that do this. Bill can answer that question better than I, but a lot of the Mom and Pops need one box or two boxes. They are not Wal-Mart, they don’t need 50 boxes. But seasonly, I use Hobby Lobby as an example because they are one that has come to my attention. But you would be surprised how many small retailers are using storage containers. The trend today is nobody is warehousing. If you want to buy a 6-pack of toilet tissue, you are going to have to recognize that you are going to pay more for it if we are going to build a warehouse to house it until we can put it on the shelf. It is nobody’s marketing concept. Everything in the store is on the shelf for sale and they don’t warehouse much. You can criticize that, I guess, but they work on small margins. They make a lot of money, but they make it on small margins. At least that is the education that I have gotten.” BARFIELD “What is cost of this screening?” KAPLAN “In the Wal-Mart situation?” BARFIELD “Well, I understood you to say that that was basically what you were suggesting.” KAPLAN “Oh, on the wood? I don’t know. Bill, do you want to speak to that?” BILL HOLLBROCK “I am operations manager for Budget Mobile Storage here in Wichita. To answer your questions, we spent somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,500 in wood, just the supplies, and then it took us a couple of days to attach it to surround the four units. And to answer another question, two very small places that I talked to yesterday that we have units at, so you know that we don’t always just work for bigger companies. We have a unit at Cora’s Homestyle Cooking; we have a unit at the Starlight Drive-In Theater, right down the street from us. So we do deal with small businesses, Mom and Pops, quite often.” BARFIELD “I was thinking more in terms of retail, because that is where he was putting the emphasis at.” MICHAELIS “This is for Mr. Kaplan. Bob, are you thinking that this is going to be limited to non-stacking?” KAPLAN “They won’t be stacked, Jerry. There will be no stacking at all. I don’t anticipate that they ever will.” MICHAELIS “Maybe you could incorporate that language?” KAPLAN “Oh, absolutely. I don’t know if there is stacking going on, but I would agree with that. Most of these units are 8 feet. Some of them are made to order. Budget Box makes their storage containers. They are all a manila color, and all made to order. Some of them do use a shipping container, the kind of things that are shipboard that come from the continent to the United States on board ship and I can see where some of those are not very aesthetic, but no, we will not stack them. I am not wanting not to screen them. I am wanting screening that is affordable and almost immediate. I am not wanting to spend, like Wal-Mart has to spend, $50,000 to screen their containers. Just not everybody can do that." MICHAELIS “Okay, so the screening like was on those, that would be the responsibility of the lessor?” KAPLAN “Well, I guess it would be a matter of contract between the lessor and his tenant as to who was going to pay for it, but if we affix that cedar to the box itself, it can remain on the box, and I think wherever we take the box, we can use that, except for the additional. In this case, we ran it over to the rear wall of the building, so that it looks like a fence from the rear wall of the building, all the way around. I think you would have to agree, looking at that picture if you haven’t been out there on site, that you really can’t tell what you see there. You wouldn’t know what was behind it. There are four storage containers within that enclosure, but you would never know it from looking at it. It could be a dumpster, for that matter.” MICHAELIS “It looks good.” KAPLAN “Yeah, I think we did a creditable job with that. I am really pleased with the way that turned out.” WARREN “Do I understand now that the vendor, the supplier of these boxes will be providing the screening also? Or make it available, is that what I am hearing?” KAPLAN “If we can. I think, Ray, if we can do it in the manner proposed where we attach the screen, the cedar wood directly to the box. See, under the present outside storage ordinance, we have landscaping and site screening requirements, and some of that may find its way into this, too, I’m not saying it won’t. I just don’t agree that all of the screening requirements in the existing zoning regs are applicable to storage containers. I think it was written with the intent of concealing outdoor storage. Certainly you don’t find storage boxes in there. You find things identified, but not storage containers. Donna is going to disagree with me on the intent, but that is my reading on it. I just think we need an ordinance dealing with this, and I don’t think we have one.” GAROFALO “Well, under the current regulations, does this sort of screening comply? Or was it approved by Kurt Schroeder?” KAPLAN “This was approved by Kurt Schroeder, but this was done at my request on behalf of Wal-Mart, understanding that we were in the process of implementing the masonry fencing, the cyclone fencing, the netting and the landscaping. This was a temporary thing only; it was given to me for 30 days. We have had some problems getting our crews on site. See, I didn’t know. I would have raised Billy you-know-what if I had realized that to build a 12-foot fence I needed structural engineering drawings and plan review….I thought a cyclone fence was a cyclone fence, and it is to the height of 10 feet. Once you exceed 10 feet, I needed a structural engineer and an architect and prints and I had to go to a plan review. I never knew that or I would have never agreed to 12 feet. So we really got held up. It is in plan review now. We are waiting for a building permit to build a chain-link fence because it is 12 feet high. We have to set footings and everything. I was not aware of it, or I would have argued for 10 feet. So that has kind of held us up, but we are doing 12 feet.” OSBORNE-HOWES “Do you envision this being in addition to current outdoor storage? When I think of Wal-Mart, they already have lots of outdoor storage. Would this be in addition to that outdoor storage?” KAPLAN “Well, yeah. I am not suggesting to do away with the existing regs at all.” OSBORNE-HOWES “I know, but I mean for these containers. Do you envision this to be allowed in addition to the current outdoor storage?” KAPLAN “Oh, no. The current amendment covers it as far as the Wal-Mart store is concerned.” MICHAELIS “But you are still going to stay within a certain percent?” KAPLAN “Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah, I really am not bringing to you a specific proposal. I wrote up something kind of as I see it. Actually, as my client sees it, of course, because that is my job. And then it is just kind of for review, and then Mr. Krout and his staff did not really make any comment on it, beyond saying that they would look at it, and if the Planning Commission will allow, we will continue to try to massage it and see what there is. I don’t know, in the final analysis, whether I will have Mr. Schoeder’s support or Mr. Krout’s support, or not. I hope I do, but I may not. But I just want you to give me a chance to work at it because I cannot accommodate the calls I have had on an individual case basis. It is just totally impractical, and you don’t want an agenda full of outside storage cases, either. Like Mrs. Frost. She is sitting here suffering because she doesn’t have any storage at Shopko. And when somebody orders a 67-cent bedding plant, she has to send her runner down to the storage unit to pick it up and bring it back. And she can address that. Customers don’t like it, she doesn’t like it, and it is not practicable. And you are just not going to change the marketplace; you may not allow a new regulation. If that sounds argumentative, I don’t mean it to be, but these discounters and this outside storage is with us. Like I said, it is Maine to California and it has been going on for years. We can’t eliminate it, so we need to regulate it, and we need to regulate it in a manner so I don’t have to deal with all or the cases, or somebody else doesn’t have to.” JOHNSON “Of course these are storage boxes, but now, Marvin, what about storage trailers. Are they going to fall into this same thing, or since they have wheels and tires on them, they would be exempt?” KROUT “Well, if you want to treat these differently, we can. I think there has been a question as to whether or not these containers are outside storage or not. It is clear that if they are on wheels, they are, and we think it is pretty clear that it is outside storage because it is not a building on a permanent foundation. So it is outside storage, whether it looks like a container or not. But I think you could clarify that. I am not sure you would have to go to all of the trouble, necessarily, of this special definition, in treating this particular kind of storage differently than other outside storage. The issue is: is it screened or not. The rules are in ‘LC’, you are allowed 10% by right, 20% by Conditional Use permit. That seems to be the main problem that Mr. Kaplan is talking about, is the fact that people are wanting to increase their storage over 10%, and they would like to do that without coming back for a Conditional Use each time and have it reviewed. Maybe you don’t make that only an exception. If you think that is a good idea, maybe it is a good idea for any type of screened storage. In the ‘LC’ district, you are supposed to screen with the same material as the main building, or another material that is approved administratively that has some landscaping attached to it. You saw some portable landscaping with this portable closure. I am not sure whether that would meet our requirements for landscaping or not. I think the key issue isn’t so much that we should be treating these different than any other outside storage, but should we increase the amount of percentage of storage that is allowed to 20%, so you won’t have to do Conditional Uses each time.” WARREN “Kind of in reference to what you are talking about here, Marvin, we talk about outdoor storage, and I think we have two factors. We have outside display and then we have outside storage. I think you pretty much throw them all together when you come to your 10%, don’t you?” KROUT “No, we don’t. Display can be in addition to the enclosed screened storage." WARREN “And what are the limits on display?” KROUT “Well, in the ‘LC’ district, there is supposed to be no more than 10 feet beyond the building, and that is all. That is the only limit.” WARREN “And you can’t infringe upon your parking or come into the parking.” KROUT “Right.” WARREN “I think there is a big difference in these and what you are talking about; the trailer, the on-wheels trailer. I think there is a big difference. I hope that we can isolate that difference so we can make reference to one or the other.” BARFIELD “I think you would have a problem doing that.” WARREN “I don’t think so. I think Marvin could make an extension to these so we can describe them properly.” KROUT “And you would need to do it. What the Ordinance says now is that you have to screen the storage. That means if you have a trailer on wheels you have to have a 6 or 8 foot screen, so it may be taking care of itself already.” BARFIELD “Identification for the ones we were talking about. Those are called shipping containers. The way I understand it, we are now talking about storage containers.” KROUT “We do allow trailers to park for up to 48 hours or something like that, in back of a building. Is it 48 or 72 hours, Randy?” RANDY SPARKMAN (From the audience) “It’s 72 hours.” GAROFALO “Mr. Holbrook, do you have a comment?” HOLBROOK “Yes. I would like to respond to Mr. Barfield’s comment. There is certainly a difference between a storage container and a shipping container, and at Budget Mobile Storage, we are very proud of our units. Our units are assembled right here in Wichita; they are designed with one purpose and one purpose only--storage. It is ground level storage. We have doors on both ends. They are not retired shipping containers. We are not as heavy, we don’t make holes in parking lots. Ours are all neutral, they come in one color, beige, and we are more than happy, in the ‘LC’ zoning, to do exactly what we have done here to anybody. Of course, we had to reflect that back in our cost to the client, but as a service to our clients, we want the backs of their buildings or the sides of their buildings to look good. We are not here in Wichita to put some big, ugly, worn-out crate in front of something. We are proud of our units and we take good care of our units. Every time they come in, they get touched up on paint, and they get cleaned before they ever go back out. We will stand behind our units any time and ask Randy to inspect them at his convenience.” BARFIELD “I understand that, but I think from my own standpoint, basically the screening you have done, what we saw there, would not apply to what I identify as a shipping container because of the fact of it being on wheels it is going to extend above your screening.” HOLBROOK “Shipping containers can be ground level also.” BARFIELD “Yeah. I have a question, if I might, from the lady from ShopKo.” HOLBROOK “Sure.” BARFIELD “Was yours a shipping container that you had a problem with?” ROSE FROST “I am the Store Team Leader of ShopKo on north Rock Road. We have only had storage containers and we dropped those right after our grand opening because the influx of business was great. Since then, we have had to get rid of all of our storage containers because of being in Limited Commercial, isn’t that right, Randy?” SPARKMAN (From the audience) “That’s correct.” FROST “Then we had to get an off-site warehouse, which is on the west side of town, so I have to go clear out west to get my merchandise because there aren’t many warehouse facilities on the east side of town. Then we need storage containers, so we can supply the need for the customer.” BARFIELD “So you are talking about permanent location, then? You want them to be permanent?” FROST “Yes. I would like to consistently run with around 5 to 10 containers and enclose it in a fence, paint the fence the same color as the building.” GAROFALO “Mr. Krout has a question.” KROUT “If you have permanent need for 5 to 10 containers, have you talked to ShopKo about building an addition?” FROST “Yes, we have discussed that. Because we are going on some new systems for inventory purposes, it should cause our inventory levels to go down, so therefore, eventually we would like to work within our building and not have containers at all, but right now, the way I am seeing it, permanent to me would be for at least the next year or two.” KROUT “But not really permanent in terms of years.” FROST “Well, but do you know what? I can’t say that at this point. Because in the notes they have given you, yes, most of the store is selling square feet. Our back room is 10,000 square feet and it is very hard to work within that. We are just here to make the customer happy. That is what I want to do, make it convenient for the customer.” KROUT “I will just mention to the Commission that in addition to the issue of zoning, one of the issues the City Manager’s office has raised, and we are trying to look into, is if and how these are taxed, or should be taxed. They are not real estate, but they are probably personal property, but we don’t think that they are being taxed now and we are going to have a lot of square footage in these things. They probably ought to be treated not necessarily more favorably than real estate. That is an issue that I think we need to look at at the same time that we are looking at the zoning.” MCKAY “Who owns these storage units?” KAPLAN “The lessors; companies like Hawk, Budget Box.” MCKAY (To Holbrook in audience) “Don’t you pay taxes on the property?” HOLBROOK (From audience) “I am the Operations Manager. Our corporate offices are here in Wichita. That is a question that our C.E.O. knows.” MCKAY “Somebody is paying taxes somewhere. It may not be the user on the side, but somebody is paying taxes.” KAPLAN “John, I can’t imagine that they don’t, and come October, you won’t find a storage container available in this town because they will all be on-site. When it gets closer to Christmas, every lessor will have every box out. The storage yards will be empty and devoid of boxes. That is the demand. One more sentence comment and then I will be quiet. To impose the existing outside storage regulations on every temporary user of a box is just unnecessarily burdensome. We need some relief in there, particularly for the temporary and smaller user.” KROUT “Is the relief you want relief on the 10% or relief on the landscaping?” KAPLAN “Both, really, Marvin. The 10% we would like to see raised to 20%. The Commission may not agree with that, that is a future subject, but the landscaping, if Hobby Lobby wants one box for two months, and to require them to build a permanent fence or a masonry wall or spend $10,000 for landscaping to put in one or two boxes for one or two months, they can’t do it, which means they can’t have a box at all. That is just not fair.” GAROFALO “Are there any other questions or comments? I just want to make the comment that this can be a very touchy situation for neighborhoods and people who live in the areas, so it is something that we have to look at pretty carefully. Do we need a motion on this?” KROUT “Well, maybe just a little bit of discussion about what you would like to do with it. Let me tell you that Donna has been working on the package of zoning amendments. You know, there are several amendments that we talked about in the Comprehensive Plan dealing with more flexible setback and parking rules to encourage rehab and infill, and there are a number of other clean-ups that we are looking at. There is this idea of an R5 district, and of mixing housing types within the single-family district without having to go to public hearings. All of that is in the Comprehensive Plan and we have been drafting proposed amendments to deal with those. You could deal with this issue and add it to the other things that we are in the process of drafting, and we could give you some suggested language. I would suggest also that just like the last time we--and I don’t remember whether it was zoning or subdivision or both; John, you may remember better than me--but we appointed a Planning Commission subcommittee of three, four or five members to look in more detail and talk about this. That has worked out pretty well for us in the past. We would like you to do that to go over these amendments that we are preparing anyway. So maybe you can just add this to the list in terms of discussion.” GAROFALO “That sounds reasonable to me.” WARREN “It seems to me that this need is real. I don’t think it is hypothetical. It is there. Our attitude should be ‘how can we help you without having a negative impact on neighbors?’ It is as simple as that. We ought to take that attitude, I think.” MCKAY “I don’t disagree with you, Ray, but the thing is that the American way is to establish a policy and then abuse it until somebody slaps you on the wrist. That is the only thing I am concerned about. If we say we are going to change the zoning or change the regulations, or whatever it might be, and all of these people we are talking about, we are talking about on a temporary basis. What is temporary? I will guarantee you that if you set it in there without some kind of rules or regulations, temporary is going to be 12 months out of the year. Why? Because it is more convenient to walk out and pick out a product than to walk across the street or drive across town to pick it up.” WARREN “And I don’t have any problem with that. I don’t know why that is a problem. Say it is going to be there two years. As long as it doesn’t have a negative impact on residents or whoever.” MCKAY “It does have a negative impact.” WARREN “I think it is going to be a Conditional Use of some type.” MCKAY “That is what we are trying to get away from.” WARREN “Well, okay. I think we should have, though, some way to make sure, and again, we can start out with ‘how can we help you’?” KROUT “We are also talking about the possibility of licensing these like we license portable signs. That way we have an identifiable person, we know where his inventory is. If there are some abuses, you can also then pull a license. So it is more than a zoning question.” WARREN “As far as a taxing question, it is ridiculous to think that those are not personal property as equipment. If they are not real estate, then they are.” MCKAY “Do you want a motion, or just a recommendation that you look into it?” GAROFALO “Well, why don’t we just go ahead and have a motion to refer it to staff and staff present it however they see fit, along with the other zoning amendments.” MOTION: That the item be referred to the staff to add provisions for containers and increase the allowable area for outside storage in “LC” Limited Commercial District and bring it back to the Planning Commission for review. MCKAY moved, WARREN seconded the motion. GAROFALO “Is there any discussion?” MICHAELIS “I don’t know whether this would be appropriate, Marvin, but I guess I would leave it up to you to decide whether you want to get a small subcommittee out of here to work with you on that. That can be up to you.” KROUT “That’s fine. We would like to. So, if Commissioners who are interested in participating on that would let me know, we will figure it out.” VOTE ON THE MOTION: The motion carried unanimously (12-0). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3. The adoption of the Hilltop Neighborhood Revitalization Plan as a part of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Comprehensive Plan. RAY ONTIVEROS, Planning staff “Good afternoon. This is about the hearing on the adoption of the Hilltop Neighborhood Revitalization Plan, a plan that was handed out a couple of weeks ago to the Commissioners. We do have copies here in case you need to look at it, and I have made a couple of overheads. GAROFALO “Was that on June 15? I didn’t get one.” ONTIVEROS “I believe so. Also, I am going to pass out a summary of the comments I have this afternoon because I am only going to highlight this. This process began in the spring of 1999 with involvement, even before we were active with making use of our grant that we received from the State. You have heard this consulting firm’s name before: Development Concepts of Indiana. This is one of those four original neighborhood plans. The process that the consultants took worked with the neighbors, and they had several sessions where they analyzed themselves in the neighborhood through a SWAT analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. Then they followed that up with another session that is in summary form. It is called a PARK analysis, where it is more action oriented, and the letter ‘P’ stands for items to preserve in their neighborhood, the ‘A’ is items to add to their neighborhood, and the ‘R’ is for removing of some undesirable aspects of their neighborhood. The ‘K’ is to keep out future unwanted uses. So they went through two very intense sessions at the Hilltop Free Church, and we do have some people who can speak about that. But in my case, I am going to boil down this 40-page document into just a couple of statements. As I mentioned, we passed out a short summary of these items. The plan is about two components and again, with these neighborhood plans, it is important to remember that sometimes they are not so much about new development and site plans and growth issues, they are more about stabilizing what is there, especially eliminating some of the negative aspects. So we do have a community development plan that the consultants identify here as well as a physical development plan. Of all of the plans we have had, this one probably focuses the most on the simple things of cleaning up, property maintenance and code enforcement. There is a lot of that. We did talk about this with you three months ago when we had that preliminary, so we don’t have to repeat a lot of the things that happened there. This has been updated a bit since we last met because the consultants added some more material, especially on historic preservation, and about the infrastructure. But in the issues that the residents raised, it was crime, the perception of the area, and the image it had. Now, the landlocked structures and access and difficulties with easement and parking were other problems; vacant and abandoned buildings, trash and property conditions. So you can see that it was about cleaning up the area. It was very important. Also, the relationship between the Manor, the cooperative portion of it bordering on Oliver, and then the western part, the single-family homes. As a refresher, I have an overhead with the boundaries. In your document you should be able to see pretty clearly that Lincoln is on the north and Harry on the south, and then we have Oliver over on the east and on the west is Bluffview. That is one of our smaller areas, but it is pretty densely populated and very important to the grand scheme of improving older areas. The nine goals that were developed in the plan again reflect a lot of these social and economic concerns about the crime in the area. Avoiding, eliminating, keeping out drugs, slum landlord conditions in a few cases, as well as difficult tenants. We also got together with landlords who also voiced their concerns about some of their fellow landlords and about tenants. So this is going to tie in very nicely with some of the other work the City has been doing in terms of incentives to help improve housing without going to inspection programs. That has been on a different track, but this is more about how we can voluntarily do something to correct that situation. The main highlight of this area is in this diagram here (indicating) which summarizes the improvements.” MCKAY “Ray, is that in our book?” ONTIVEROS “Yes, that is on Page 35. Basically, it talks about improvements to housing. It identifies No. 1. I will show you an overhead that shows some ornamentation and some similar improvements, but a lot of it is that. There is also a recommendation to eliminate this dividing fence between the Manor area here (indicating) and the rest of the residences and actually create a greenway. You will notice a little space here also. Being tightly packed, we know some housing that could be improved, but some that need to be removed. We have property that has difficulty with access. Right now there are lots here that do not have frontage. The open space, as far as the third component here, to clear out a little bit and get rid of some units. It doesn’t mean that everything in here is substandard, it is just an indication that the park may be located slightly off from what is shown here, but that is part of the implementation here, to identify those properties that really need to be removed or renovated. Then, of course, one of the highlights is the activity center which is receiving many more activities here and good use, but then they have activities for the children and the young adults. That is another one of those social and economic concerns. The park provides a wonderful opportunity there, but it is something that we have to work with the police, recreation, and the school system and so on. So, these are some things that again take us beyond the traditional just physical planning. In my notes I also have just a quick discussion about the historic preservation aspects of this plan that we talked about before, in that it is well recognized that this was the wartime housing that was very limited. There are not many places in the Country that exist. We don’t want to preserve it just for the sake of preservation, for the 60 years that it has been there. But on the other hand, there are some buildings and some homes that could very well be maintained. We need to check that out. That is not to be done immediately, but something we will do with a follow-up survey. As we talked about before, it is not to impose regulations or conditions or change the status of these properties to then require people to go through hoops to get improvements. That is not what we want to do. We just want to try to have as many benefits through funding or through new schemes to improve the façade and the appearance of some of these properties. So that is something that we will look into the old records on where some information has been gathered before by previous historic preservation planners, and we will go back to the community and talk to them about. The report also has a section on infrastructure. We discussed that before. Again, we are not dealing with massive redevelopment or clearance, so the infrastructure that is there, the water and sewer lines are old. So far, they are functioning, but again, if we had any major changes, and we would like to encourage commercial along the edges. We have commercial here (indicating) and we have some uses here that are not quite as desirable as people would like to see, but that is what is there. If we had anything major happening, we would need to look at that much more carefully with Public Works. For the most part, it is a fairly good bill of health as far as the infrastructure. So we can continue to move ahead without major costs coming up and biting us. The next step is, at this point, something that was addressed in the document, and we, as staff, follow up on these. We wish we had the opportunity and the funding to get a full-scale $50,000 plan, which had many more maps and recommendations and specifics, but this is really the job of the community or neighbors, the local lenders, the development community, the neighborhood associations. All of these parties come together. We kind of gather around these plans; it is a kick-off point and we try to do some things. Some of the most important things to follow up are the formation of a community development corporation or an association to get things going, to receive funds, to apply for grants, to do some local education, and maybe even enforcement of their own standards, etc., to help people understand what it is all about. Obviously, property conditions, maintenance, Code enforcement, these are the things that in the City’s Redevelopment Incentives Task Force, one of the tracks has been to do something about that. You remember from the past few months, the rental inspection. Well, that is not on the table. There are some measures to try to get this neighborhood to work with their landlords and tenants. That is an area where we will tie in with the City. On education, I have an item here that I refer to as home improvement education. What people can do with limited incomes and some of them with limited opportunities? They have the money but they just can’t get the loans. The banks aren’t willing to go as far along with helping out with loans as some people would like. Again, it is because of the location and the property values. This slide is in your books on Page 38. This is a little grainy because it was blown up. It is a before and after. This is not here; it is in Norfolk, Virginia. It is similar, just block-type housing that is very plain. It didn’t have much going for it. Actually the neighborhood really suffered. It was low income and the image was really poor. People avoided the area, knowing that. What they did was have local architects work with them to add features ,whether it was shutters or porches. The porches were a big feature, and landscaping obviously. So taking the little boxes that they had there and just doing some changes such as that. It makes for a wonderful improvement. That is the kind of thing that we have to pick away at in these situations we have because we know that we are not going to have enough to buy out all properties and start all over, as we found out in Plainview, obviously, five or six years ago. But if we can come up with some creative ways, people will understand them and if they can get some funding for them, then some of these things can happen. I do see that we have Councilmember Phil Lambke in the audience, and Sharon Askew, the former president of the neighborhood association is here. I will stop now and hear any questions you may have. You have my summary. I will be happy to turn this over to anybody else who wants to offer testimony or respond.” GAROFALO “Are there any questions of Ray?” MCKAY “Ray, on Page 21, you have a breakdown of the survey, like 78% of the respondents rent their homes. What connections or what notification or correspondence you have had with the landlords of that 78%?” ONTIVEROS “This survey was passed out by the consultants among people who attended the meetings. There were some landlords and some owners that were there and participated. We had a follow-up meeting afterwards where the survey was not involved, so we never surveyed them separately. We heard them more in a talk session about their issues and some of those were incorporated in the text, including the screening of tenants, funding assistance to help people with improvements, and the other one was community policing. There was a lot of support for that.” MCKAY “I guess where I am coming from is that if you are going to do anything, whether it be this neighborhood or any other neighborhood, you have to deal with the people who are going to put the bucks out that owns the property. I guess my question is what input of the landlords,…there was some talk about absentee landowners and all of this, and if they are willing to participate, does the tenant really have the ability and the desire to make this work?” ONTIVEROS “According to the 1990 census, there was about 51% renters. Staff thinks it is about 60%. This is of the people that were there responding, so it is not the survey of everybody, so it may be less than that.” MCKAY “That is the reason why I am asking if we knew the percentage of landlords. In other words, if 49% of the people who live there own the property, then you are dealing with 49%. You could get 15 or 20% of the absentee landlords, you might get something accomplished. But if it is 60% absentee landlords and you can’t get them to participate, that 40% is kind of dead in the water.” ONTIVEROS “They have participated by coming to meetings. Some of their results are mixed in with this, but we know that to continue on, they will have to be a player. They have come to at least one follow-up meeting we have had, and some of them have been picked for some of these other city task forces that have been formed to provide their input.” MCKAY “Do you know what percentage of landlords were there in relationship to ownership?” ONTIVEROS “No, I don’t. I don’t think it was very high.” MCKAY “To me, that was the biggest fallacy in the whole thing. You have to deal with the landlords; the people who own the property. You are asking them to spend the money, regardless of whether they borrow it, or it is a grant, or whatever.” BARFIELD “Well, as a follow-up to that, you can look over here and it says that it is difficult to recapture the investment put into the home. Is that coming from the landlord or is that from the tenants?” ONTIVEROS “A lot of the people that spoke own property there, and a lot of owner/occupant property owners were there. But some of the people that spoke talked about, from their prospective, they own a home, but they also own a couple of others. They talked about the difficulty in getting funds, and difficulty in some of their renters that they had. So, there is no real good separation of all of the owners and the tenants. But we had a good turnout in terms of owners that live there. That is all I can say on that.” MCKAY “You did have, did you say?” ONTIVEROS “Yes, people who have the homes and actually live there.” HENTZEN “Ray, we have had discussions on other neighborhoods, such as Orchard, Mid-Town, now Hilltop, and I believe there are several more.” ONTIVEROS “There are a couple of others coming up later.” HENTZEN “Has anybody thrown numbers at those things that you say ought to be done. Is it $50 million apiece, $100 million? Have they thrown numbers at any of those things?” ONTIVEROS “In center-city, the one downtown, yes, we had some numbers there. Actually, we are going through another stage to even refine those numbers more. In Mid-Town North, we have a couple of improvements, which we have some numbers to a road improvement and to land acquisition. This one here did not have as much because we weren’t yet at the point of any specifies. That is one of the steps that we have identified that needs to be done in terms of identifying properties that would be needing to be bought and removed, as well as those road improvements, having a couple of cul-de-sacs instead of landlocked parcels there. So we have to get to that next stage. A lot of it depended on this consultant’s time frame and the information they got as well as the priorities that were set by the community. In this case, we didn’t get to that stage yet, but we are focusing almost automatically on all of the other ones coming up, including an estimate of costs.” HENTZEN “While I think about it, the governing boards, city and county, somehow or another have to have a figure of some kind, otherwise if they say ‘yeah, this is a good idea, let’s do it’ and then we get people’s hopes up and then we don’t do a darn thing about it. I hope we don’t head down that road any more.” ONTIVEROS “No. Part of the purpose is to get these prioritized so that there are a few items that the people will support and really want. Then we focus on those and get the best estimates we can get for costs of those as opposed to just trying to just do a whole area with all of the improvements and find out it is over our heads in terms of ability to pay. So, yeah, it happens in different stages, and in this case, we still need to continue on and the residents hopefully will pick up on that, too.” MICHAELIS “Ray, this is the first one of these I have really sat in on. Just briefly, are we looking to adopt a plan that we think is feasible and then are we asking the City government, the Federal government to fund this, privately fund it, or a combination of both? Where are we going on this?” ONTIVEROS “The combination, yes. What we are doing in this case is promoting and pushing for adoption as part of the Comprehensive Plan. It helps so much when it comes to seeking funds from federal or state organizations to have an adopted plan, as well as corporations and foundations. So that is a big step, to have an adopted plan. It is also real important not to have it so tight that we are limited to doing some things that may not be feasible down the road. So we try to maintain that edge to have the flexibility there. But that is where we are headed, towards adoption and then, as I mentioned, there are action steps that have to be identified, or tasks. There are some things the City will do, a lot of things the neighborhood will do for itself. Some things will be done together with perhaps developers. Or people that rehabilitate, you know.” MICHAELIS “Are there criteria that says ‘okay, the Federal Government is going to put up this much or the local government is going to put up this much and the landowner has to put up this much’. Anything like that?” ONTIVEROS “The City is doing some incentives, which identify some of those types of criteria and the procedures. If you do this, this is what the City will do. But that is for the City. However, the Federal Government also has programs that has their own criteria in terms of matching or in terms of contributions. What the Federal Government wants, if you have the land for example, and not be thinking about getting land. So there are requirements there. It is a matter of anything that the City is proposing. Of course, the Manager’s office, Administration and the Council members have been watching the process to see what the needs are out there. They will tailor programs that zoom in on these prevalent, most important needs. That is how the City’s programs will develop. The State and Federal Government already have their criteria. Private corporations and foundations also want to see implementable plans, so there is much work to be done, yet to identify that and show how this could work to all of those agencies.” GAROFALO “Are there any other questions of Ray? Council member Lambke is present. Phil, do you want to address the Commission?” LAMBKE “I would like to relinquish my time to Mark over here. He is working with the Hilltop Improvement Alliance and he has a lot of stuff started out there.” GAROFALO “Okay, we will hear from him.” MARK “I live at 210 West Citation in Andover, Kansas. I am a local businessman, have been interested in the neighborhood there at Hilltop, and I think where I would like to start at is to recognize the folks from Hilltop that have come here today. We have Mike Hungria, the community policing person. Mike has been very active, and the police have been very active in the last three or four years in establishing a community policing initiative there. Sharon Askew has been past president of the neighborhood association. If everyone from Hilltop would please stand up. We have quite a posse we brought down here today. These folks have been active in the neighborhood and are interested in the well being of Hilltop. Some of the other people here that I know, and I frankly don’t know all of these folks, Heath Kinzel next to Mike there. Heath has broken ground on the first new home in Hilltop since 1942. He is the youth minister of Hilltop Urban church, which has also just now completed the building of a 13,000 square foot facility there in the neighborhood. I guess from my prospective, in the last two or three years, many, many good things have happened there in Hilltop, and certainly Phil Lambke and the City tearing down the old community center and building a new community center with Head Start moving in as the main tenant, it was very, very influential in the neighborhood there in addressing some of the problems which Ray made inference to. There are a lot of good things going on there in the neighborhood. I guess the adoption of this plan, the Hilltop Improvement Alliance has been established, Gay Quisenberry is the Execute Director there and since the first of the year, they have been doing some programming there in the community center. There are after school youth programs and they have also have a summer program going on right now, a Tae-Kwondo class that the neighborhood kids have been going to. I guess the point is that there are a lot of private initiatives going on and efforts in working in conjunction with the City. I don’t think anybody is suggesting that the City or you folks are going to adopt this plan and magically pony up $50 million and solve all of the problems. It is a grass roots movement and a group of people that are interested in the neighborhood keeping the integrity of the neighborhood from the standpoint of affordable housing for honest people that need a decent place to live. I think that pretty well sums up what is going on there and the improvements that have been made. The Community Garden is something that has been established for three or four years, and I think the City has taken quite a bit of pride in that. I think from a funding standpoint and applying for grants, it is very important to have a blueprint like this which can convey to the world, if you will, what the status of the neighborhood is, the issues we are trying to confront, and the various players that are in it. So, I guess I would ask that you adopt this as a blueprint and a plan not to build expectations. I think we have a lot of groundswell of support and initiatives and things going on there in the neighborhood, unlike the neighborhood scene in the last ten years. So to not adopt this plan, to me sends a message that we don’t care and we are going to let you continue to stay there and slug it out. It is going to be a cooperative effort from all of the parties involved. Via Christi, a contiguous neighbor has been very supportive and active within the Hilltop Improvement Association, and supportive of the changes there in the neighborhood.” GAROFALO “Commissioner McKay raised the question about the absentee landlords or people who don’t live there but own property. Have you had any contacts with those sort of property owners and if so, what are their reactions?” WHITMAN “I believe we have gotten a positive reaction from several of the major landlords in the neighborhood. They, of course, have some of the same problems that the residents do, which is ‘gee, if I put money into improving this property, the likelihood of it retaining its value is not good’. They see the positive things going on in the neighborhood and as those things change, they are willing to participate and improve the properties. I would say Mike Hungrea could speak to that better, and that he probably knows the landlords better than anyone here in this room. But they are recognizing that some change is going on there in the neighborhood. I think that some of them are very receptive to working with the neighborhood associations in terms of tenant screening and also in improvements and recognizing that we’ve got to bring our properties up to code. But if the neighborhood is improving overall, their property values are being enhanced.” PLATT “Could you be more specific and tell us more about this Improvement Alliance?” WHITMAN “I would be happy to. Would somebody help me pass out these brochures? The Hilltop Improvement Alliance was formed with Margalee Wright and W.I.N. Several years ago, some of us got together and said that we needed to form an improvement alliance, which we are in the final stages of obtaining a 501.c.3 status. We hired Gay Quisenberry as Executive Director, and the City, with a new community center, has kind of turned over the community center, if you will, from a programming standpoint to the improvement alliance to initiate after-school programs for youth and we have had some success in doing that. It is not meant to be competing with the Neighborhood Association. It is probably more, from my prospective, more of the fund raising arm of the community resources that are out there, and the people that would like to help in a situation such as this and don’t really know how. It is kind of an umbrella organization listening to the neighborhood association, the landlords, the policing--kind of pulling together. You have all seen a mail sack before, it has a drawstring on it. Well, this is the drawstring that pulls together the resources. They are frankly here in the community right now. There are a lot of great public service organizations that are interested and willing to help in this situation. But there has to be some structure and form to it. Mennonite Housing is an example of an organization that has had several contacts with us, and I see that as very fertile ground and a possibility. We are not out to reinvent the wheel, we are out to bring together the resources that are existing in the community; bring them to bear on that neighborhood and address the very problems that are identified here in this study.” BARFIELD “I believe earlier it was mentioned have some problems with banks working with the homeowners and the landlords in this area. Can you talk about that?” WHITMAN “I have had some contacts with Bank of America. They have a CDC, which is basically a community development corporation, which is geared towards making loans in neighborhoods of this nature. Part of the problem has been traditionally that that a lot of the homes are not on permanent foundations, they are duplexes, they are not single- family homes and any one of those multitude of factors make them not want to help them and they send people out the door. Mennonite Housing is probably the best. Andy Bias is a very impressive individual, in my opinion, and is a get going and get something done kind of guy. I believe that he has ideas that is an applicable solution for some situations in that neighborhood. Some of those would be for an individual to buy a duplex and rent half and live in the other half. Getting the banks to bend the rules, so to speak, on the collateral requirements they have in lending is also part of that. Most of the banks have a responsibility to make loans within a broad base of the community, and yet no one bank really wants to own or have to make too many of those type of loans. How we go about it, I don’t have the magic answer, but I do believe that with a document like this (indicating) that serves as a focal point that people can buy into, it helps tremendously, as opposed to having to go out and recreate the wheel with 5 different banks. I envision being able to go to banks and say that we are trying to put together half a million dollars to buy 100 properties in Hilltop. We are going to professionally manage those and work with people towards the goal of homeownership.” MCKAY “Have any physical dollars and cents been put to this study? I guess where I am coming from is that the gentleman made the comment about getting half a million dollars to buy so many units, and…” WHITMAN “We are working with the existing landlords to merely improve the property and I know that Paul Records has talked about certain tenants which are very credit-worthy and reliable people, and an owner carry-type situation.” MCKAY “No, what I am talking about is this, you are talking about a whole area, I don’t know how many units there are totally, but if the average cost to fix one of them up is $30,000, and I am using as an example in this brochure, in Norfolk Virginia, where they said the revitalization cost only $45,000 per unit, which $28,000 of will be spent in the interior and $17,000 on the exterior.” WHITMAN “There is not one house worth $45,000 in Hilltop.” MCKAY “I just used that as an example. Has any market analysis basically been done after physical inspections of any particular area, whether it be owned by a landlord or the owned by the occupant?” ONTIVEROS “When the consultant left, that was one of the issues raised as far as the individual homes that seemed to be needed to be bought out. They need to be identified and then prices attached to those. There is a lot of work to look at the real estate records and the realities of acquiring those. That is one of those, as Jerry brought out, or Bud, one of those action steps that needs to take place, identify some of those in line with the map that we showed and the greenways and the parks. Some of those that would be bought out and/or changed in terms of improved and attach cost to them.” MCKAY “Let’s use this scenario. Thirty per cent of the people who live there own their property. Why not start with 30 per cent. I am talking about to set up a program for them, physically inspect those properties and say it is going to take ‘X’ amount of dollars to fix these properties up and do that as one project, not try to do Utopia, just those 30 per cent. You don’t have to worry about return on your investment because it is their property, they live there.” ONTIVEROS “Property owners there are real supportive of that and with working to improve their own properties. Again, they also see the neighbor’s property that is maybe a rental and that needs work, too, so they are trying to address both.” MCKAY “But as I said, you can’t do everything. To me, the person that would be most important person to talk to is somebody who has spent their money, it is their home, and they live there. Get that started and then maybe it will have a snowballing effect. Then you can start purchasing properties in the area. You will have a feel for cost and a feel for if people are willing to do it, and then you go try to chase your financing down. Here we have a viable project and there are all kinds of programs out there that you can go to, but that is no different from me building an apartment complex. I have to have the dollars and cents of what it is going to cost. I be able to tell the person I am going to try to borrow from that it is a good deal. If you go to anybody and ask them for half a million dollars, they are going to look at you and say ‘for what and why’?” ONTIVEROS “Yeah. The snowball effect is beginning. People are aware and looking at their own properties that they own and live in, but they are also looking at what is around them. So it is like trying to attack this issue on several tracks, knowing that in some cases, we may be more successful, the neighborhood may receive more funds for certain projects than others. But it is all part of the whole picture.” MICHAELIS “I think he is exactly right, though. You start small and get a grubstake there and a model and then build from there. In essence of time, instead of sitting here, dissecting this thing, I think the question is whether we want to support this or not. I certainly would like to thank all of you people that came because that makes a big influence if your influence is shown. I am going to make a motion.” MOTION: That the Planning Commission adopt the Hilltop Neighborhood Revitalization Plan and make it part of the Comprehensive Plan. MICHAELIS moved, PLATT seconded the motion. GAROFALO “Are there any other comments?” BARFIELD “I have a question for the Councilmember. I know the City has committed funds for the community center. Beyond that, has the City made any financial commitments to this project?” PHIL LAMBKE “The community center was funded by CDBG money. That was probably 7 or 8 years ago when it was designated. There was a lot of concern about whether you tear the old building down or build a new one. Finally, we got the old building torn down and the new building built with that CDBG. Headstart now leases the building. They are the anchor tenant in there. As far as I know, the City is not spending any money on that building.” BARFIELD “I meant in terms of this phase of the program, getting beyond the community center, what he is proposing here, and we are talking about adopting this, I want to know if the City has made any commitments to involve themselves in this.” LAMBKE “The City has designated the Hilltop area as a local investment area. That makes it possible for people to get low interest loans. I am not too familiar with this one particular program. I think maybe Mark could explain that to where you can invest $15,000 and get a grant. What is that program, Mark. Okay, Homeowners' 80. So the program is in place to assist people out there that want to buy or improve their house. I don’t see any problem with it. If this plan is adopted, it is not going to cost anybody any money. We are not pledging any money to support this plan. If we adopt this plan, it is not going to cost you or me, or any other taxpayer any money.” VOTE ON THE MOTION: The motion carried with 12 votes in favor. There was no opposition. OSBORNE-HOWES “Just a comment. I really appreciate the fact that so many Commissioners see that it is important for a plan to have some specific strategic strategies in it to make it a good plan.” ------------------------------------------------------------- HENTZEN “Mr. Chair, I have to run across the street for maybe 45 minutes, but I will be back.” Hentzen left the meeting at 1:28 p.m. 4. Approval of minutes for June 15, 2000 WARREN “I have a correction, but I will give it to the secretary.” GAROFALO “Okay. I will abstain because I was not at the meeting.” MOTION: That the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission approve the minutes for June 15, 2000 as amended. MICHAELIS moved, JOHNSON seconded the motion, and it carried with 11 votes in favor. Garofalo abstained. Marnell and Hentzen were not present. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FRANK GAROFALO, 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5. Consideration of Subdivision Committee recommendations GAROFALO “We can take 5/1 through 5/11 in one motion unless there are questions, comments, or concerns on any of them. Is there anybody here to speak on any of these items?” MOTION: That Subdivision Committee items 5/1 through 5/11 be approved, subject to the Subdivision Committee recommendations. PLATT moved, LOPEZ seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (11-0). 5/1. SUB2000-21 - Final Plat of KILLENWOOD POINT ADDITION, located south of 13th Street on the east side of Greenwich Road. A. As this site is adjacent to Wichita’s city limits, the applicant shall submit a request for annexation. B. The applicant shall guarantee the extension of sanitary sewer to serve the lots being platted. This guarantee shall be with the County for service through the Four Mile Creek sanitary sewer system. On the final plat tracing, appropriate wording shall be added to the Mayor’s signature block indicating the City’s agreement to allow a County sewer district to be formed within the City. A sanitary sewer layout is requested. C. The applicant shall guarantee the extension of City water to serve the lots being platted. D. If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning department for recording. E. County Engineering needs to comment on the need for additional right-of-way along Greenwich. 10-foot of additional right-of-way shall be dedicated along Greenwich. The requested dedication has been denoted on the final plat. F. County/City Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant’s drainage plan. The Applicant shall coordinate the removal or modification of terraces on the site with NRCS. City Engineering requests an off-site drainage easement. G. City Fire Department needs to comment on the plat’s street names. The plat’s street names are approved. H. The plat shall denote complete access control along the site’s frontage to Greenwich. I. The applicant is reminded that a platting binder is required with the final plat. Approval of this plat will be subject to submittal of this binder and any relevant conditions found by such a review. J. Provisions shall be made for ownership and maintenance of the proposed reserves. The applicant shall either form a lot owners’ association prior to recording the plat or shall submit a covenant stating when the association will be formed, when the reserves will be deeded to the association and who is to own and maintain the reserves prior to the association taking over those responsibilities. This covenant shall also provide for the Homeowners’ Association to maintain the “parking strip” located between this site’s south property line and driving surface for Killenwood. K. 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. L. The applicant shall guarantee the paving of the proposed streets. M. The owner’s signature block should reference “Killenwood Pointe” Addition. N. The MAPC signature block should reference Frank Garofalo as the Chairman. O. The southwest tie point should reference Section 15, Township 27 South. P. 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. 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. 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. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/2. S/D 00-13 - Final plat of CHISHOLM CREEK 2nd ADDITION, located north of 37th Street North, east side of Woodlawn. A. Municipal services are available to serve the site. City Engineering needs to comment on the need for any guarantees or easements. No guarantees are required. B. If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning department for recording. C. City Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant’s drainage plan. The drainage plan is approved. An off-site drainage agreement is requested. D. Traffic Engineering needs to comment on the access controls. The plat proposes one access opening along Woodlawn in alignment with Crestmark. The dedication of access controls shall be referenced in the plattor’s text. The access controls are approved. E. The described distance and bearing for the southeastern property line as referenced in the legal description of the plattor’s text needs to be included on the face of the plat. F. It is recommended that the utility easements be set back from the south and east property lines appropriately to protect existing tree rows. As requested, the Applicant has increased the utility easements to 20 feet along the east and south property lines. G. If platted, the building setback may be a minimum of 20 feet to conform with the NR District zoning standards. H. The Fire Lane easement and the Declaration of Condominium Line needs sufficient ties to locate it definitely with respect to the subdivision. I. The following note needs to be removed under the Bench Mark: “Note: Minimum building pad elevation requirements will be established on the final plat.” J. The plattor’s text shall include language that a drainage plan has been developed for the plat and that all drainage easements, rights-of-way, or reserves shall remain at established grades or as modified with the approval of the applicable City or County Engineer, and unobstructed to allow for the conveyance of stormwater. K. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities 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.) L. The applicant’s engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary’s signature. M. To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (phone 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. N. The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements [specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147] for the control of soil and wind erosion and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant’s responsibility to contact all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements. O. The owner of the subdivision should 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. P. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. Q. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. R. The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility easements to be platted on this property. S. 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/3. SUB2000-38 - FINAL PLAT of C.J.J. 2nd ADDITION (Formerly Larnard Smith Addition), located on the north side of Kellogg, east of Greenwich Road. A. Municipal services are available to serve the site. City Engineering needs to comment on the need for any guarantees or easements. No guarantees are required. B. If improvements are guaranteed by petition, a notarized certificate listing the petitions shall be submitted to the Planning department for recording. C. City Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant’s drainage plan. The drainage plan is approved subject to KDOT’s approval. A letter shall be provided from KDOT indicating their willingness to accept such drainage. D. 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. E. 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.) F. 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. G. 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. H. 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. I. 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. J. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. K Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. L. 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. M. 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. ----------------------------------------------------------------- 5/4. SUB2000-17 - Final Plat of ANGEL FIRE (Formerly Eck 7th Addition), located on the north side of 47th Street South, east side of West Street. A. As this site is adjacent to Wichita’s City limits, the Applicant shall submit a request for annexation. Prior to this plat being scheduled for City Council review, annexation of the site will need to be completed. Upon annexation, the property will be zoned SF-6, Single-Family Residential and thereby permit the lot sizes being platted. B. The Applicant shall guarantee the extension of City water and sanitary sewer to serve the lots 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. City/County Engineering needs to comment on the status of the applicant’s drainage plan. The drainage plan is approved. A guarantee is required. The minimum building pad elevations for the lowest opening also need to be noted on the face of the plat. E. 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 binder revision needs to be submitted indicating that the site’s ownership is only in the party now shown on the final plat. F. 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. G. 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. H. The eastern portion of Reserve D shall be extended to the street to increase its accessibility and usefulness for all homeowners in the Addition. This may be accomplished through access easements through the lots or extension of the Reserve. The final plat indicates two pedestrian access easements through lots within Block C to improve the accessibility of the eastern portion of Reserve D. I. Traffic Engineering needs to comment on the need for improvements to perimeter streets. No improvements are required. J. The Applicant shall guarantee the paving of the proposed interior streets. This paving guarantee shall also provide for sidewalks on at least one side of the through, non-cul-de-sac streets. K. City Fire Department needs to comment on the revised street names. The street names are approved. L. 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. M. This property is within a zone identified by the City Engineers’ office as likely to have groundwater at some or all times within 10 feet of the ground surface elevation. Building with specially engineered foundations or with the lowest floor opening above groundwater is recommended, and owners seeking building permits on this property will be similarly advised. More detailed information on recorded groundwater elevations in the vicinity of this property is available in the City Engineers’ office. N. The plattor’s text shall include language that a drainage plan has been developed for the plat and that all drainage easements, rights-of-way, or reserves shall remain at established grades or as modified with the approval of the applicable City or County Engineer, and unobstructed to allow for the conveyance of stormwater. O. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities which are applicable and described in Article 8 of the MAPC Subdivision Regulations. (Water service and fire hydrants required by Article 8 for fire protection shall be as per the direction and approval of the Chief of the Fire Department.) P. The applicant’s engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary’s signature. Q. To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (Phone 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. R. The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements (specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147) for the control of soil and wind erosion and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant’s responsibility to contact all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements. S. The owner of the subdivision should be aware of the fact that the development of any subdivision greater than five (5) acres in size may require an NPDES Storm Water Discharge Permit from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment in Topeka. Further, on all construction sites, the City of Wichita requires that best management practices be used to reduce pollutant loadings in storm water runoffs. T. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. U. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. V. The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility easements to be platted on this property. 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. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/5. SUB2000-51 - One-Step final Plat of BELLOWS ADDITION, located on the north side of I-235, east side of Seneca. A. Since neither municipal water nor sanitary sewer is available to serve this property, the applicant shall contact the Environmental Health Division of the Health Department to find out what tests may be necessary and what standards are to be met for approval of on-site sewerage facilities and water wells. A memorandum shall be obtained specifying approval. Standard soil testing is approved. B. City Engineering needs to indicate the status of Wichita water and sewer services for this area and if petitions for future extensions need to be provided at this time. A petition for future extension of sanitary sewer and public water is required. 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 and the need for the platting of a Floodway Reserve for the existing lake. A Floodway Reserve should be platted for the eastern portion of the property. E. Traffic Engineering needs to comment on the need for access controls. The final plat tracing shall reference the access controls in the plattor’s text. Traffic Engineering has approved access control except for one opening along Seneca. F. 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. G. Due to the excessive lot depth, City Fire Department needs to comment on the need for a maximum building setback to accommodate fire prevention equipment. The plat shall include a Floodway Reserve along the eastern portion which would limit construction. H. The lot depth to width ratio exceeds 2.5 to 1 and a modification from the Subdivision Committee will be required. A modification is approved. I. The 50-foot KG&E easement needs sufficient ties to locate it definitely with respect to the subdivision. J. The plattor’s text shall include language that a drainage plan has been developed for the plat and that all drainage easements, rights-of-way, or reserves shall remain at established grades or as modified with the approval of the applicable City or County Engineer, and unobstructed to allow for the conveyance of stormwater. K. The applicant shall install or guarantee the installation of all utilities and facilities 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.) L. The applicant’s engineer is advised that the Register of Deeds is requiring the name(s) of the notary public, who acknowledges the signatures on this plat, to be printed beneath the notary’s signature. M. To receive mail delivery without delay, and to avoid unnecessary expense, the applicant is advised of the necessity to meet with the U.S. Postal Service Growth Management Coordinator (Phone 316-729-0102) prior to development of the plat so that the type of delivery, and the tentative mailbox locations can be determined. N. The applicant is advised that various State and Federal requirements (specifically but not limited to the Army Corps of Engineers, Kanopolis Project Office, Rt. 1, Box 317, Valley Center, KS 67147) for the control of soil and wind erosion and the protection of wetlands may impact how this site can be developed. It is the applicant’s responsibility to contact all appropriate agencies to determine any such requirements. O. The owner of the subdivision should 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. P. Perimeter closure computations shall be submitted with the final plat tracing. Q. Recording of the plat within thirty (30) days after approval by the City Council and/or County Commission. R. The representatives from the utility companies should be prepared to comment on the need for any additional utility easements to be platted on this property. S. 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. ------------------------------------------------------------ 5/6. DED2000-15 - Dedication of a Utility Easement from Keith Stoneking, for property generally located west of Seneca and south of 39th Street South. OWNER/APPLICANT: Keith Stoneking, 6123 N. Custer, Wichita, KS 67204 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The south 2 feet of the north 10 feet of the west 78 feet of Lot 6, Block A, Vilm Gardens Second Addition. PURPOSE OF DEDICATION: This Dedication is a requirement of Lot Split No. SUB 2000-41 and is being dedicated for construction and maintenance of public utilities. Planning Staff recommends that the Dedication be accepted. ------------------------------------------------------------ 5/7. DED2000-00016 - Dedication of street right-of-way from Juanita Doyon, for property generally located south of Boston, east of Broadway. OWNER/APPLICANT: Juanita Doyon, 1506 S. Broadway, Wichita, KS 67211 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The north 10 feet of the south 11 feet of Lot 3, Tosh’s Subdivision of Lot 6, Zimmerly’s Addition to Wichita, Kansas, said tract being located in the SW ¼ of Sec. 28, T27, R1E of the 6th P.M., Sedgwick County, Kansas. PURPOSE OF DEDICATION: As a requirement of Conditional Use No. CON 2000-10, this dedication is being made for the purpose of additional right-of-way along Boston Street. Planning Staff recommends the granting of this dedication be accepted. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5/8. DED2000-17 - Contingent Dedication of Street Right-of-Way from Juanita Doyon, for property generally located north of Harry, on the east side of Broadway. OWNER/APPLICANT: Juanita Doyon, 1506 S. Broadway, Wichita, KS 67211 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The west 12.5 feet of the following tract of land: The south 11 feet Lot 3, all of Lots 5 and 7, Tosh’s Subdivision of Lot 6, Zimmerly’s Addition to Wichita, Kansas, and the north 1/3 of the west ½ of Lot 7, Zimmerly’s Addition to the City of Wichita, Kansas, said tract being located in the SW ¼ of Sec. 28, T27, R1E of the 6th P.M., Sedgwick County, Kansas. PURPOSE OF DEDICATION: As a requirement of Conditional Use No. CON 2000-10, this Contingent Dedication is being made for the purpose of additional right-of-way along Broadway. Planning Staff recommends the granting of this dedication be accepted. ------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/9. DR 00-07 - Request for a Street Name Assignment to Bumgardner Street. APPLICANT: Rita Bumgardner, 31723 W. Harry, Garden Plain, KS 67050-9547 LOCATION: West of 311th Street West, on the south side of Harry Street. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Beginning 2478 feet west of the northeast corner of the NE ¼ of Sec. 34 T27S R4W; thence S 881 feet, east 50 feet, north 881 feet, west 50 feet to the beginning, except the north 60 feet for highway. REASON FOR REQUEST: Street name assignment of a private street. CURRENT ZONING: RR, Rural Residential Note: The property owners of this private street have requested that the street be named Bumgardner and officially recognized as such by the County. The Wichita-Sedgwick County Address Committee was created in 1994 to avoid and correct street naming and addressing problems that were being discovered as a result of increasing growth in the county and of using the new Geographic Information System (GIS) maps and databases. A meeting of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Address Committee was held on June 13, 2000, and it was recommended that the name of “Bumgardner” be assigned to this private street. --------------------------------------------------- 5/10. 1. - Request for Modification of Lot Depth to Lot Width Ratio for Lot Split No. SUB 2000-52, located East of Seneca, South of 31st Street South. ------------------------------------------------------------ Consideration of vacation items GAROFALO “Okay, we will go to the vacation items.” LISA VAN DE WATER, Planning staff “Item 6/3 has been deferred for two weeks by request of the applicant. That is VAC2000-00026. There were a couple of items that the Subdivision Committee came up with that needed to be addressed prior to the Planning Commission hearing them, and he hasn’t had an opportunity to complete those requests.” GAROFALO “Is there anyone here who would like to speak on Item 6/3 VAC2000-00026? Okay. Is there anyone here to speak on any of the other vacation items, 6/1 and 6/2? Okay, I will take a motion on them.” MOTION: Vacation items 6/1 and 6/2 were approved subject to the Subdivision Committee recommendations. LOPEZ moved, MICHAELIS seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (11-0). 6/1. VAC2000-00024 - Request to vacate alley right-of-way, located half block south of Harry and west of Green. OWNER/APPLICANT: Jack Smith AGENT: N/A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The east-west 15-foot alley between Block 1 and Block 10, Eicholtz Addition to Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas LOCATION: ½ block south of Harry and west of Green REASON FOR REQUEST: The land on either side is owned by the applicant. CURRENT ZONING: Right-of-way surrounded by “LC” Limited Commercial and “TF-3” Two-Family Residential ------------------------------------------------------------ 6/2. VAC2000-00025 - Request to vacate a portion of building setback . OWNER/APPLICANT: Dale & Norma Hecox AGENT: Savoy, Ruggles & Bohm, P.A., c/o Mark Savoy LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The interior 15 feet of the 35-foot building setback adjacent to Oak Knoll Road and Pawnee Avenue on Lot 2, Block 1, The Plaza at Cherry Creek Hills Addition, Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas. LOCATION: North of Oak Knoll (old Pawnee) and approximately ¼ mile east of Rock. REASON FOR REQUEST: Development of the site. CURRENT ZONING: “OW” Office Warehouse ----------------------------------------------------- 6/3. VAC2000-00026 - Request to vacate a portion of utility easement. OWNER/APPLICANT: Deborah Lutz AGENT: N/A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The east 6 feet of the west 20 feet of Lot 5, Block 1, Brookhaven Estates 2nd Addition to Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas LOCATION: North of Central and approximately 1/3 mile west of 159th Street East (519 N. Ridgehurst) REASON FOR REQUEST: To install a pool in the back yard. CURRENT ZONING: “SF-6” Single-Family Residential. MOTION: That the item be deferred for two weeks. LOPEZ moved, WARNER seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously (11-0). ------------------------------------------------------------- ZONING: 7. Case No. ZON2000-00025 - Larry Schriner (Owner); Operating Engineers Local 101 c/o Robert Matter (Contract Purchaser/Applicant) request zone change from “RR” Rural Residential to “LI” Limited Industrial with Protective Overlay to limit uses to those required for apprenticeship program on property described as: The east half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 22, Township 29 South, Range 1 West of the 6th P.M. Sedgwick County, Kansas. Generally located 1/4 mile east of Ridge Road on the south side of 95th Street South. SCOTT KNEBEL, Planning staff, pointed out land use and zoning; and showed slides of the general area. He reviewed the following staff report: BACKGROUND: Operating Engineers Local 101 operates an apprenticeship program for heavy equipment operators in Weston, Missouri (see attached brochure). The apprenticeship program teaches the operation and maintenance of heavy construction equipment such as bulldozers, backhoes, and graders. The apprenticeship program is a non-profit organization funded by member construction companies that provides on-the-job training through a three-year apprenticeship. Operating Engineers Local 101 intends to expand their apprenticeship program to Sedgwick County to offer on-the-job training for 15-20 heavy equipment operators at one time. The proposed site is an 80-acre; unplatted tract located ¼ mile east of Ridge Road on the south side of 95th Street South. The subject property is zoned “RR” Rural Residential. An abandoned hog farm is located on the subject property. The subject property is currently used for agriculture with a manufactured home located at the northwest corner of the site. The applicant has requested “LI” Limited Industrial zoning with a Protective Overlay to limit uses to those required for the heavy equipment apprenticeship program. All of the uses proposed by the applicant are first permitted in the “GC” General Commercial district; however, at the suggestion of planning staff, the applicant requested “LI” Limited Industrial zoning with a Protective Overlay since the nature of the propose use is more industrial than commercial in nature. As proposed in the attached site plan, the apprenticeship program involves a classroom and shop building for use as a vocational school and for indoor vehicle repair. Other areas on the site would be used as practice areas to teach the use of earth moving construction equipment. The proposed use also involves the outdoor storage of heavy construction equipment, which would be located further than 150 feet from 95th Street South and, therefore, would not require a screening fence. The east and west portions of the subject property would be maintained as open space to buffer the proposed use from adjoining properties. The character of the surrounding area is agricultural. The subject property is buffered from adjoining properties by existing hedgerows and Dry Creek. All of the property surrounding the site is zoned “RR” Rural Residential and is used for agricultural purposes. The nearest residence to the subject property is a manufactured home located across 95th Street South from the northwest corner of the subject property. Other residences in the area are located more than ¼ mile from the site. The applicant sent a survey to the owners of property within 1,000 feet of the subject property to inform neighboring property owners of the proposal and to receive feedback. The attached survey responses represent 6 of the 11 properties within the notification area, and the responses to the survey are favorable. Since the applicant has indicated that the apprenticeship program will be operated only on a portion of the site located approximately in the middle of the site east to west, planning staff recommends approval of “LI” Limited Industrial zoning only the portion of the site where the apprenticeship program will be operated. Planning staff also recommends a Protective Overlay to limit uses to only those required for the apprenticeship program and to establish high development standards for the site. CASE HISTORY: The site is unplatted. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: “RR” Agriculture SOUTH: “RR” Agriculture EAST: “RR” Agriculture WEST: “RR” Agriculture PUBLIC SERVICES: The site is located on 95th Street South, a gravel section line road with no traffic volume figures available. The proposed use is anticipated to add approximately 50-75 trips per day to the traffic volume on 95th Street South. Due to the remoteness of the site, on-site water and sewer service will be required. CONFORMANCE TO PLANS/POLICIES: The 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan recently adopted by the MAPC indicates that the subject property is appropriate for “Rural” development. The “Rural” category is intended to accommodate agricultural uses, rural based uses that are no more offensive than normal agricultural uses, and large lot residential subdivisions. The proposed use is no more offensive than normal agricultural uses. The 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan contains the following strategy: “in those portions of rural unincorporated Sedgwick County outside the projected urban growth area, allow industrial development only when it is agriculturally oriented, dependent upon a natural resource, or as part of an appropriate expansion of an existing industrial area. The proposed use requires that an extensive land area for earth moving, which is a resource only available in rural areas of the community. The proposed use is also no more offensive than normal agricultural uses. The 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan also contains the following strategy: “expand educational programs and improve academic performance as a means to improve the quality of the local labor force.” RECOMMENDATION: Based upon information available prior to the public hearings, planning staff recommends APPROVAL of “LI” Limited Industrial zoning only for the portion of the subject property necessary for operating the apprenticeship program. Within 14 days after approval of by the MAPC, the applicant shall submit a legal description for the area to be zoned “LI” Limited Industrial. The area to be zoned “LI” Limited Industrial shall be no larger than the area necessary to operate the classroom and shop building, the parking area, the equipment parking area, and the practice areas and shall not include any portion of the subject property that is within the 100-year floodway fringe of Dry Creek. The rezoning should be subject to platting the portion of the subject property to be developed with structures within 1-year and the following additional provisions of a Protective Overlay: 1. The permitted uses for the area zoned “LI” Limited Industrial shall be limited to vocational school; vehicle repair, limited; storage, outdoor; and any use determined by the Zoning Administrator to be necessary for or accessory to the operation of a heavy equipment apprenticeship program. 2. Within 30 days after approval of by the Governing Body, the applicant shall submit for approval by the Director of Planning a revised site plan that is drawn to scale; indicates the approximate location of improvements and uses associated with the apprenticeship program; indicates the size and location of the open space/agricultural buffer on the east and west portion of the site; indicates the removal of all structures, facilities, and debris associated with the pre-existing hog farm; and indicates the location and type of buffer tree planting along the north property line. The site shall be developed in general conformance with the approved site plan. All improvements shall be completed before the facility becomes operational. 3. The hours of operation shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. with no operation on Sunday or official holidays. 4. Only one practice may be operated at a time, and the size of each practice area shall be limited to the size indicated on the approved site plan. After a practice area is closed, the ground shall be covered within the next planting season with a perennial drought-resistant grass. 5. Existing hedgerows and other trees on the site shall not be removed unless necessary for the construction of improvements associated with the apprenticeship program. If trees are required to be removed, they shall be replaced with a like number of trees serving the purpose of screening the use of the site from neighboring properties. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the grading operations associated with apprenticeship program shall be submitted for review and approved by the Sedgwick County Department of Public Works, which may impose conditions on the grading operation to limit the impact of the operation on drainage and erosion. 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the plan for removal of all structures, facilities, and debris associated with the pre-existing hog farm shall be submitted for review and approved by the Wichita-Sedgwick County Department of Community Health, which may impose conditions on the site clean-up to ensure remediation of environmental impacts of the pre-existing hog farm. This recommendation is based on the following findings: 1. The zoning, uses and character of the neighborhood: The character of the surrounding area is agricultural. The subject property is buffered from adjoining properties by existing hedgerows and the Spring Creek. All of the property surrounding the site is zoned “RR” Rural Residential and is used for agricultural purposes. The nearest residence to the subject property is a manufactured home located across 95th Street South from the northwest corner of the subject property. Other residences in the area are located more than ¼ mile from the site. 2. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted: The subject property is zoned “RR” Rural Residential. The purpose of the “RR” Rural Residential district is to accommodate very large lot, 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 subject property is suitable for the uses to which it has been restricted. 3. Extent to which removal of the restrictions will detrimentally affect nearby property: The proposed use is no more offensive than the industrial uses permitted by Conditional Use in the “RR” Rural Residential district and is of similar intensity to normal agricultural operations. The site development regulations of the Unified Zoning Code and the additional provisions of the Protective Overlay should limit any detrimental affects on nearby property. 4. Conformance of the requested change to the adopted or recognized Comprehensive Plan and policies: The 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan recently adopted by the MAPC indicates that the subject property is appropriate for “Rural” development. The “Rural” category is intended to accommodate agricultural uses, rural based uses that are no more offensive than normal agricultural uses, and large lot residential subdivisions. While the proposed use is not by necessity rural, it is a use that requires a large contiguous tract typically found only in rural areas. The proposed use is also no more offensive than normal agricultural uses. The 1999 Update to the Comprehensive Plan also contains the following strategy: “expand educational programs and improve academic performance as a means to improve the quality of the local labor force.” 5. Impact of the proposed development on community facilities: The development as proposed should have limited impact on community facilities. KNEBEL “This proposed use is to operate a Heavy Equipment Apprenticeship Program. This program is proposed by a non-profit organization called Operating Engineers Local 101 that currently operates a similar program in Missouri. The purpose of this program is to teach the operation and maintenance of heavy construction equipment. The uses that the applicant has proposed which are shown on the site plan are first permitted in the General Commercial district; however, at the recommendation of the Planning staff, the applicant has requested Limited Industrial with a Protective Overlay, due to the industrial nature of the proposed uses. As you can see on the site plan, the applicant is proposing a building here which would be used for classroom teaching and the maintenance of vehicles. It also would have practice areas, three different ones here toward the south end of the site and then also an outdoor storage area for the storage of the heavy equipment vehicles. They are also proposing open space on both the east and west side of the 80-acre tract as a buffer to the residential properties adjoining this. The site is an abandon hog farm. The property that fronts 95th Street is where the hog farm was located, and in the rear of the hog farm is a wheat field. The applicant has proposed to clean up the site and remove all of the debris and structures left over from the operation of the hog farm. The area surrounding the site is entirely agricultural. There is a manufactured house that is on the subject property. It will remain on the property. The applicant actually requested to change the zoning of this to Limited Industrial but as you will see later, they are not going to need that change for this portion, so we are recommending against that to allow this to continue to be a conforming use. The applicant sent a survey around to the owners on the notification list. The responses to those are attached and appear to be favorable. Regarding the use of this property and how the Comprehensive Plan indicates that it should be used, it is indicated as being an area that is suitable for rural development. The rural category does allow uses that are no more offensive than normal agricultural uses and it is the opinion of the Planning staff that the proposed use fits that classification. The Comprehensive Plan also indicates that industrial development should be allowed in rural areas when it is dependent upon a natural resource and we think that the extensive land area required for the particular operation here is something that is only going to be found in a rural area. It may be a little bit of a stretch to call it a natural resource, but it is definitely a resource. The Comprehensive Plan also has a strategy regarding expanding educational programs as a means to improve the quality of the local labor force, and we feel that this particular application definitely meets that criteria. As I mentioned, the Planning staff is recommending approval of the Limited Industrial zoning, but only for a portion of the subject property which is required to operate the proposed uses. We are also recommending that any of the property of this particular site, which is located within the 100-year flood plain of the Dry Creek, which runs across the southwest corner, not be rezoned Industrial either. We are recommending that this rezoning be approved subject to platting of a portion of the subject property, which will contain permanent structures, approximately in this location here and also several conditions of a Protective Overlay. I will run through those quickly for you. They are listed on Page 4 and 5 of the staff report. The first one would be to limit the industrial type uses to only those uses that are required to operate the program that is proposed by the applicant. We are also asking for an improved site plan, which is drawn to scale and more accurately reflects the locations of the items that are generally shown here on the site plan on the screen. We are recommending limitations to the hours of operations, recommending that only one of the practice areas be operated at a time. They show three on the site plan. And that when one is closed and a new one is started that the old practice area be seeded with grass to prevent erosion.” GAROFALO “Could I interrupt you for just a second. Going back to No. 3 on the hours of operation. In the applicant’s survey to the neighborhood, they put down 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday.” KNEBEL “Correct.” GAROFALO “Why do we have 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.?” KNEBEL “I think those are reasonable and allow a little bit of flexibility for operation. If the applicant is willing to go with 8:00 to 4:30, we certainly don't have a problem with it, but I think that is a little bit too restrictive, in my opinion anyway. The other requirements deal with improvements and use of the land. We are recommending that all of the existing hedgerows which are quite extensive and go basically all of the way around the property be maintained and that if they do need to be removed that they be replaced with some screening trees, basically in like amount to continue to maintain the screen from adjacent properties. We recommend that the operations be operated by an approved grading plan that would be approved by the County Engineer and that the removal plan for cleaning up the existing hog farm be reviewed and approved by the County Health Department. I am available for questions.” MCKAY “I don’t have any problems with the request, but I am really having a problem with what we are supposed to approve.” KROUT “This was filed before we had that discussion on site plans, but Scott has indicated to you that we are expecting them to revise it.” PLATT “You need to add the word practice ‘areas’ on item No. 4 there.” KNEBEL “I did catch that. Thank you.” GAROFALO “Are there any other questions? I have a question. On the Limited Industrial to limit it to that particular area where they will be operating, I think somewhere in here it indicates that they would only use those practice areas for a certain length of time and then they would have to move to another location?” KNEBEL “Well, to the other practice areas on the site, yes.” GAROFALO “Okay. I thought maybe if they had to go elsewhere then would they have to come back in or something?” KNEBEL “That is not the indication I received, but maybe the applicant can answer that question better.” BARFIELD “On No. 3, there are the hours and then the official holidays. Are those going to be still in there?” KNEBEL “Maybe we could say ‘official federal holidays’ or something along those lines. Maybe the official holidays that the applicant requests.” GAROFALO “I think we could ask the applicant about the hours of operation and all of that.“ MICHAELIS “I was going to make a comment on No. 3, too. Actually, I don’t even see a need for No. 3. We have farm ground all the way around there and they are operating 24 hours a day. I don’t know what the difference is. That is my comment. I think No. 3 should be taken out.” GAROFALO “Are there any other questions? Okay, then we will hear from the applicant.” BOB MATTER “I am the Administrator of the Operating Engineers Apprenticeship and training fund. My address is P.O. Box 197 Platte City, Missouri. I think it has been pretty well spelled out what we do and as far as the site plan, we are working quite some distance away, and I do have a local architect on board now who is developing a site plan and has made a survey, I think, of the site. He is on vacation this week so I can’t talk to him, but I will get into that Monday. We will have a site plan; I have been told, within the next couple of weeks. One drawn up by an architect. We have a site similar to this in northern Missouri. The residents have found us to be very good neighbors. We have local people in our training program, we work with the area high schools and take people out of the building trades classes and what not and put them in our apprentice program. They then go out, after a little training and work for the contractors as apprentice heavy equipment people. We do try to be very good neighbors as far as erosion, and that is the reason for different practice areas. We do things like hay bales on the low ends of things; the same thing contractors do on road jobs and building sites. We try to open up a very small portion at one time of the property, and we then seed it back down after it is used. Believe it or not, dirt will wear out if you dig holes in it enough times and cover them up. So we then seed it back down and move on to the next site and try not to open very much up at once. We have been at our present location for 12 years now and the Soil Conservation Service in that county has found us to be very good to work with. In fact we have built some small soil conservation projects on the property that they have came and staked out for us, just like of the area farmers do. As far as the hours of operation, actual equipment running, when we say 8:00 to 4:30, that is stretching it a little because our people show up at 8:00 and we start at 8:00. By the time they get a little safety orientation in the morning, the first thing they do is grab a grease gun and grease the backhoe or whatever they are going to be running that day. It is usually about 8:30 or 8:45 before they even get on the practice area. There again, we like to keep our lunch hour to 30 minutes, just like a real job, but just like other real jobs, it gets stretched out to an hour, so by the time they shut down at 11:30 to get in for lunch and then eat lunch and then get back on a piece of equipment, it is usually 1:00 before they start up again, so then, along about 3:15, we have to start bringing them in and fueling the equipment and get them parked and secured for the evening and get them out the gate by 4:30 and we get the people in training out of there a little after 4:00, so I don’t have to pay the instructors overtime if they stay past 4:30. They will charge it if I don’t have them out of there by 4:30. So our actual hours of operation, I can assure you, will be right through the middle of the day. This is not a rock quarry or anything like that that we are talking about having. We also work with the Affirmative Action entities in all of the areas. We have minorities and females in our program at all times and we help the local contractors in that endeavor also. If you have any other questions or any of the residents are here and have any questions, I would be more than happy to answer them.” BARFIELD “Are you comfortable with the conditions that staff has set?” MATTER “It is basically what we do in the other areas. We don’t intend to open up a big area. We do want to keep a filter belt on the lower side of the property like we have shown you there, and some kind of grass. We can live with those conditions, yeah. Pretty much what we are doing now; we are agricultural people, all of us that do this, and we respect the soil and we respect the community. So we can live with them very easily.” GAROFALO “You don’t have a problem with limiting the zoning change to the area that was pointed out?” MATTER “I don’t have a problem with it. I don’t know why they want to do it, but if that is what they want to do, we can live with it. It would naturally serve our purposes better if maybe we could move up to the top of the hill someday and have a practice area 10 years down the road instead of those there, but if that is what the Commission feels is necessary, we can live with that. We are not here to re-write the rules. There are no plans to come in here and clean this up and build a subdivision. That is not what we are doing this for. We are doing this to make a commitment here. Kansas has made a commitment to build a whole bunch of roads for the next 10 years, and it is going to take some operators and we have made a commitment through our training to try to get some local people involved. That is not an issue with us.” GAROFALO “A point of clarific