Planning Commission

CITY OF DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 18, 2013 6:30 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Gunter Hansen, Doug Chambers, Herman Hicks, Dennis Poteete, Mitch Adams, Pat Baer, Kathy Willis MEMBERS ABSENT: Josh Kippenberger, Shawn Riley, Jack Hezlep CITY STAFF PRESENT: Cody Bird, City Planner, Marcia Hartman, Recording Secretary CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: Approve Minutes of Thursday, June 6, 2013 Planning Commission Meeting and Minutes of Thursday, June 20, 2013 Planning Commission Meeting MOTION: Mitch Adams SECOND: Doug Chambers VOTE: 7-0-0 PUBLIC FORUMOPENED PUBLIC FORUM CLOSED AGENDA ITEM NO: 1 DESCRIPTION: Final Plat – K-15 Plaza 5th Addition GENERAL LOCATION: Northwest corner of Greenway St. and Buckner St. APPLICANT: Rockport PB Investments, LP AGENT: Baughman Co. – Kris Rose REASON FOR REQUEST: Divide one large tract into 4 lots in order to allow the sale of one lot for use as a church. BACKGROUND INFORMATION:  The area proposed for platting is a replat of the K-15 Plaza Second Addition.  The request is made in order to divide one large tract into 4 smaller lots to allow the current owner to sell lots to prospective buyers.  Platting of the property pursuant to Derby Subdivision Regulations is required whenever land is proposed to be divided or further divided into more than two lots.  The subject property is approximately 9 acres in size and is located at the northwest corner of Greenway Street and Buckner Street. DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 1 of 9   Existing “B-3 General Business” zoning will remain and is sufficient to accommodate existing uses.  Lot 3 of the proposed plat is currently being considered for use as a church site. Churches and places of worship are permitted uses in the B-3 Zoning District. The existing building is proposed to be remodeled to accommodate the church use.  The preliminary plat for this site was considered and approved by the Planning Commission on June 6, 2013, subject to retaining the existing 10 ft. utility easement along the north side of Greenway Street. STAFF COMMENTS:  Lots – All proposed lots meet or exceed the minimum lot size and lot frontage requirements of the B-3 Zoning District.  Setbacks – All lots are shown to provide the required building setback lines, including a 25 ft. setback line on the north side of Lots 3 and 4. The 25 ft. setback on Lots 3 and 4 was required at the time of preliminary plat review to meet the minimum setback requirement from the adjacent R-4 Residential development.  Easements – Utility easements shown on the plat were dedicated and accepted with a previous plat of the subject property. No new easements are proposed, and to date, no additional easements have been requested. The 10 ft. utility easement along Greenway Street is shown to remain as required by the Planning Commission during consideration of the preliminary plat. The applicant has proposed declaration of a blanket easement for private utilities to serve all lots within the plat area. Said easement would provide for the installation, maintenance, repair and removal of private utility lines within any common area (areas not occupied by a building). The declaration was submitted as a restrictive covenant; however, City staff is suggesting that language for private utility easements be included on the face of the plat with a reference to the recorded covenant for details pertaining to notification and costs. The draft restrictive covenant submitted also includes language pertaining to public utility easements. Staff recommends that this language be removed from the restrictive covenant. Any easements determined necessary for public utilities across one or more of the lots of the proposed subdivision may be recorded by a separate instrument with the terms of such agreement specified in the conveyance instrument.  Access Control – Complete access control is shown on Buckner Street except for openings to allow existing drive approaches. There is also complete access control at the southwest corner of the property to restrict access drives at the intersection of Nelson Drive and Greenway Street. No additional access control is required. DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 of 9   Existing Streets – All proposed lots have adequate access to a public street. Additionally, the proposed cross-lot agreement will allow greater flexibility for patrons to reach their destinations from any street adjacent to the development.  Existing Parking – The applicant has proposed a restrictive covenant which would allow all Lots joint access and cross-lot parking to and across the common areas (identified on the attached Exhibit “B”). Staff recommends that the cross-lot parking be included on the face of the plat similar to the private utility easement noted above. The applicant is advised that additional accessible parking spaces and accessible aisles may be required in order to be in compliance with the current edition of ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Accessible parking and accessible aisles should be coordinated with the Building Trades Official.  Drainage – A drainage plan was not required. The proposed plat does not affect the existing drainage and no improvements are proposed or required.  Public Improvements – The City’s Subdivision Regulations require applicants to guarantee the installation of public improvements, typically provided in the form of petitions. Because the site is already developed and no new public improvements are required, petitions for public improvements are not necessary. o Water and Fire Protection – Derby Fire and Rescue staff has reviewed the plat and determined that existing water lines and fire hydrant locations are sufficient for fire protection.  Plat Binder – A plat binder addressing property interests and encumbrances has been submitted and reviewed. There are 5 recorded dedications of right-of-way in favor of Kansas Gas & Electric Company for which the locations are not clearly defined. In lieu of showing the locations on the plat, instead the right-of-ways are identified as notes on the face of the plat along with the film and page number of the recorded documents.  Developer’s Agreement – A Developer’s Agreement was submitted and is being reviewed by the City Attorney. Any recommended changes will be communicated to the applicant or their agent.  Restrictive Covenant – Staff has requested that the applicant or their agents review the proposed restrictive covenant to make changes noted previously in this report and other substantive modifications. The revised restricted covenant is not required to be submitted for further review, however, the applicant should be aware that the restrictive covenant is not enforced by the City.  Benchmark – The location of the benchmark used for the survey of the site is not clearly identified. Staff is requesting that the benchmark location be more clearly defined. RECOMMEND A MOTION TO: DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 3 of 9   Approve the Final Plat of K-15 Plaza 5th Addition to Derby, Sedgwick County, Kansas subject to staff comments and authorize the applicant to proceed with preparation of the Final Plat tracing. Attachments:  Final Plat  Exhibit “B” DISCUSSION: Baer – declared his employment with Baughman, but indicated that he had not been involved with the project and could be an objective participant. Bird – presented the staff report and noted that the applicant and City staff have coordinated two separate instruments to be recorded: one to provide shared access of parking and one for private utilities. The owner of the lot will proceed with the restrictive covenant which will address building façades, common areas maintenance and other private matters. Baer – asked what had been resolved regarding the sign discussion from the previous planning commission meeting. Bird – answered that the prospective buyer was undecided as to how they would proceed. He indicated that when the buyer is ready to proceed, there is a separate sign permit required, and staff will be able to ensure the sign location is not within the easement. Hansen – mentioned Commissioner Hezlep’s prior concern regarding façade color and asked if it was covered in the covenant. Kris Rose, Baughman Co. – answered that the restrictive covenant required all buildings in the development to have earth tones. In addition, he indicated that the sign will be removed possibly during remodeling. Bird – added that it was staff’s recommendation that the sign could be handled at the time of the remodel in order to take advantage of equipment already on site and as a cost saving measure. Hicks – asked if there might be concerns from the other businesses on adjacent lots with regards to increased volume, such as music, coming from the church. Would there be restrictions on the church for noise levels? Bird – answered that churches are a permitted use in the B-3 zoning district, as are the current existing uses. There are no additional restrictions pertaining to churches. Baer – mentioned that they would need to comply with all noise requirements of the City. Hicks – clarified that his concern was for neighbors and businesses that may be affected by loud sounds such as singing, preaching, music, instruments, etc. Rose – indicated that he will notify the owner regarding the concern for increased sound levels. Dan Squires, City Engineer – Added that it could be addressed in the restrictive covenant by establishing a tenant ordinance. Poteete – asked what will be on the final plat regarding the changes to the separate documents. DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 of 9 Bird – pointed out two new notes added to the face of the plat. The notes indicate that the property owner will record two separate documents: one to address shared parking and access, and the other for private utility lines. These documents are noted by title on the face of the plat. The parking and shared access dedication is a blanket easement over the common areas, which is not easily shown on the face of the plat since the lines defining the area would be overlapped by the property boundary line. For the private utility service lines, the exact locations are not known; therefore, the current owner has chosen to dedicate a 10 foot easement over existing private utility lines, 5 feet on each side of the line. Because the locations of these lines cannot be precisely located, they are not shown on the plat and are therefore referenced in the notes. MOTION: Doug Chambers SECOND: Herman Hicks VOTE: Passed 7-0-0 AGENDA ITEM NO: 2 DESCRIPTION: Vacation Request – Vacate a portion of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Path Easement on unplatted land commonly known as 801 E Madison Avenue, Derby, Kansas. (Public Hearing) GENERAL LOCATION: Southeast corner of Madison Avenue and Woodlawn Boulevard (Derby Middle School) APPLICANT: USD 260 AGENT: Baughman Co. REASON FOR REQUEST: Accommodate Derby Middle School Expansion BACKGROUND INFORMATION:  The subject site is located on the south side of Madison Avenue on an unplatted parcel owned by Unified School District 260.  The School District dedicated a 20 ft. Pedestrian and Bicycle Path easement along Madison Avenue to accommodate a segment of the City’s Hike & Bike Path.  In April of 2012, citizens within USD 260 voted to approve a bond issue to underwrite new school facilities and improvements to existing facilities. Improvements include an expansion to the existing Derby Middle School to provide additional space and an improved entrance area.  A part of the new building expansion is planned to be constructed over a portion of the existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Path easement. The applicant has requested that the affected portion of the easement be vacated to allow the planned construction. DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 of 9   The City Hike & Bike Path is the only improvement contained in this easement. STAFF COMMENTS:  Along with the request to vacate a portion of the easement, the applicant also proposes to grant a new segment of Pedestrian and Bicycle Path easement to replace the vacated portion. The proposed new portion of easement would curve to the north around the proposed building addition.  The applicant discussed this vacation request and proposed new portion of easement with City staff prior to submitting their application. Staff indicated that the proposed arrangement was agreeable, subject to the required procedures for proper notification, public hearing and approval.  Notice of Public Hearing was published in the official City newspaper on July 3, 2013 and mailed to affected property owners on July 8, 2013.  To date, staff has not received any public comment either written or verbal concerning this vacation request.  If this vacation request and concurrent new grant of easement is approved by the City Council, the existing Hike & Bike Path would be removed and relocated approximately 20 ft. north of its current location. The path would be curved around the proposed building addition, but would not otherwise impact the function or use of the path. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution recommending approval of the proposed vacation of a portion of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Path Easement, conditioned upon the owner of the property granting a replacement portion of easement, and instruct staff to forward the Resolution to City Council for consideration. Attachments: Site Map Resolution DISCUSSION: Baer – declared his previous involvement with project work for the Derby Middle School improvements through his employment with Baughman Co. He further declared that his involvement does not constitute a conflict of interest, and that he is able to remain impartial in the discussion. Bird – presented the staff report and explained that the proposed expansion of the existing middle school would encumber the existing Hike & Bike Path. The applicant has proposed to dedicate a new 20 foot easement in order to reroute the path around the future expansion of the building. Hansen – asked if it was an extension of the existing middle school on the east side. Bird – answered that it is on the north side. Hansen – asked if it was pushing it to the east. Baer – answered that it was to the north. He explained that the easement runs east and west, adjacent to the parking lot on the north side of the middle school. When the bike DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 6 of 9 path was constructed 3-4 years ago, the expansion of the building entrance was not anticipated, and thus the owner has requested that the path be relocated to allow the building expansion. The request includes dedication of a new segment of easement which would allow construction of the rerouted path. The realignment would result in the loss of a few parking spaces, but the new path and curbs would still meet required guidelines. Poteete – asked if the school will need the parking spaces that will be lost. Bird – answered that the school will lose a few parking spaces, but indicated that the plan for the new entrance also included efforts to better accommodate accessible parking in front of the building. The parking layout is anticipated to be reconfigured to adjust for the accessible parking. There is adequate parking on the remainder of the site to address the middle schools needs. There have been some past concerns involving congestion in the area; however, proposed modifications may be able to address some of the circulation concerns. Poteete – asked the distance between the sidewalk and the curb on Madison. Rose – answered 25 feet. Hicks – asked for clarification on the location of the bike path. Bird and Squires – referenced the exhibit provided to identify locations of the existing parking and bike path. MOTION: Herman Hicks SECOND: Gunter Hansen VOTE: Passed 7-0-0 MEETING DATE: July 18, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO: 3 DESCRIPTION: Review of Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) APPLICANT: City of Derby REASON FOR REQUEST: Requirement of Planning Commission Bylaws BACKGROUND INFORMATION:  Per the Bylaws of the Derby City Planning Commission, one of the duties of the Commission shall be: “To determine the conformance to the Comprehensive Plan of public improvements, facilities or utilities of a type embraced within the recommendations of the plan which are proposed for construction or authorization and to report upon such conformance or nonconformance within 60 days to the Governing Body unless conformance is otherwise determined by reviewing the city’s Capital Improvement Program (KSA 12-748).” DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 7 of 9   The City Manager’s Recommended Budget was presented to the City Council on July 9, 2013.  Citizen input is requested starting in June and will continue until August. COMMENTS:  Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan provides Goals and Policies for development and redevelopment within the city.  Many of the goals and policies are realized through the creation and implementation of the CIP.  A list of planned CIP projects for 2014-2018 is attached for review and reference. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Capital Improvement Plan as being in conformance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. ATTACHMENT: City Manager’s Capital Improvement Plan Dan Squires, City Engineer – introduced the proposed CIP and stated that one of the responsibilities of the Planning Commission is to conduct an annual review of the CIP to ensure its conformance to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. This process occurs every year during the budget cycle. Squires noted that many of the goals and specific projects included in the Comprehensive Plan have been met or completed, respectively. He continued by summarizing the proposed projects included in the CIP for 2014. Hansen – asked about construction of a third fire station indicated in the CIP. Has a location been determined? Squires – answered that the third fire station is intended to serve the northwest area of the City and would be located near Patriot Avenue and Buckner Street. Poteete – asked if the presented budget was balanced and whether adjustments were required. Squires – answered that the budget is balanced for 2014. Wills – asked if the park projects were tied to the upcoming sales tax ballot, and if not approved, what would happen to the project. Squires – answered that if the sales tax is not approved, the City would not have adequate funding to finance the parks projects and they would not be pursued at this time . Kathy Sexton, City Manager – clarified that the Warren Riverview Park project included in the CIP was not tied to sales tax. Warren Riverview Park is listed along with Madison Avenue Central Park because both parks will be designed by the same landscape architect at the same time. Funding for Warren Riverview Park would be funded by a General Obligation bond rather than sales tax. She indicated that designing the two parks at the same time results in a savings of approximately $120,000. MOTION: Doug Chambers SECOND: Mitch Adams VOTE: Passed 7-0-0 DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 8 of 9 COMMUNICATIONS: Bird – announced that a public hearing will be held at the August 1, 2013 Planning Commission meeting for review of the proposed Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District plan. He also let the Commission know that an application requesting vacation of a portion of utility easement has been received and would be reviewed by City staff. The vacation request will likely be heard at the August 15th Planning Commission meeting. Hansen – asked about the status of Menards. Bird – answered that Menards has not submitted plans for a building permit. He added that the variances Menards requested and which were approved for the fence and wall signs are active, effective for 180 days. Before the 180 days expires, Menards can submit a request for an additional 180 day extension to the Board of Zoning Appeals. One extension has already been requested and approved. MOTION TO ADJOURN: Pat Baer SECOND: Gunter Hansen VOTE: Passed 7-0-0 Meeting adjourned at 7:27pm Marcia Hartman Pat Baer Recording Secretary Chairman DERBY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 9 of 9