Planning Commission

CITY OF DERBY MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING September 17, 2015 6:30 P.M. 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 3. A. Regular Meeting Minutes of September 3, 2015 Approve the regular meeting minutes of September 3, 2015 as presented. 4. PUBLIC FORUM 5. NEW BUSINESS 5. A. Zone Change: Northwest corner of Louisa St. and Westview Dr. from R-1 "Single-family Residential District" to I-1 "Institutional District." Approve the request to change the zoning district classification from R-1 "Single-family Residential District" to I-1 "Institutional District" based on the facts stated in the staff report and forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council. 5. B. Vacation Request: Vacate a Portion of Platted Access Control and Platted Front Setback Adopt a resolution recommending vacation of 20 feet of platted complete access control and 5 feet of platted front yard setback and instruct staff to forward the resolution to the City Council for consideration. 1 6. ANNOUNCEMENTS 7. ADJOURNMENT 2 Planning Commission Meeting 3. A. Meeting Date: 09/17/2015 Submitted By: Marcia Hartman, Planning & Engineering Admin. Subject: Regular Meeting Minutes of September 3, 2015 Recommend a Motion to: Approve the regular meeting minutes of September 3, 2015 as presented. Attachments Minutes of September 3, 2015 3  CITY OF DERBY MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING September 3, 2015 6:30 P.M. MEETING MINUTES 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present Mitch Adams Pat Baer Larry Gould Herman Hicks Dennis Poteete Jessica Rhein Edward Sheldon Van Willis 3. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 3. A. Regular Meeting Minutes of August 20, 2015 Recommend a Motion to: Approve the regular meeting minutes of August 20, 2015, as presented. Moved by Van Willis, seconded by Pat Baer, to approve the regular meeting minutes of August 20, 2015, as presented. Vote: 7 - 0 Other: Mitch Adams (ABSTAIN) Paula Langworthy (ABSENT) 4  Kathy Wills (ABSENT) 4. PUBLIC FORUM 5. NEW BUSINESS 5. A. Site Plan Review: Lot 1, Block A, Derby Professional Center Addition General Location: North of Meadowlark Blvd., west of intersection with Dry Creek Dr. Applicant/Agent: Applicant: Monte & Carol Ysidro Agent: Christian Phillips, Innovative Construction Services, Inc. Reason for Request: Addition to existing dental office Background Information: A request for site plan review has been submitted for a site north of Meadowlark Blvd., west of the intersection of Meadowlark Blvd. and Dry Creek Dr. The proposed site is a portion of Lot 1, Block A, Derby Professional Center Addition. Site plans for the existing medical office building were reviewed and approved November 20, 1997. The approved site plans were specifically limited to the first building on the site, and did not include provisions for additions or future buildings. Site plan review for the proposed addition is required because the value of the improvements is greater than 50% of the value of the existing facilities, and because the proposed addition affects the overall design relationship of the site. Lot 1 is approximately 3.4 acres, which is sufficient to accommodate the proposed addition. The portion of the site proposed for development is zoned B-1 "Office Business District" and is appropriately zoned for medical and dental offices. Staff Comments: 1. Legal Description. The legal description of the site is Lot 1, Block A, Derby 5 1. Legal Description. The legal description of the site is Lot 1, Block A, Derby Professional Center Addition and is shown as such on the site plans. 2. Building Setbacks. The proposed building addition does not encroach into any platted building setback. 3. Easements. The proposed building addition does not encroach upon platted easements. 4. Access. There is an existing 24 ft. drive approach to Meadowlark Blvd. which provides sufficient access to the site. No new access is proposed. 5. Streets. The site is adjacent to Meadowlark Blvd., a 4-lane arterial street with an existing westbound decel lane to serve the development. No improvements to the public streets are necessary. 6. Parking. Medical and dental offices are required to provide 1 parking space per 300 sq. ft. of building floor area. The total building area for both the existing portion and the proposed addition is 6,017 sq. ft., thus 21 parking spaces are required. A proposed new parking lot along with reconfiguration of a portion of the existing parking lot results in 64 parking spaces, exceeding the minimum parking requirement. Parking calculations shown on Sheet T1.1 need to be updated to reflect the parking shown on the drawings. Parking spaces are required to be 19 ft long. Proposed parking spaces are shown to be 18.5 ft long and should be adjusted to meet the requirement. Excess space is available in the circulation aisle to accommodate the change. 7. Circulation Aisles. The two-way circulation and access aisle between parking spaces is shown to be 25 ft. in width. The circulation aisle should be reduced to the 24 ft. minimum width requirement to allow the parking spaces to be 19 ft. as noted above. 8. ADA. ADA Standards for Accessible Design require accessible parking spaces based upon the total number of spaces provided. When 51 to 75 parking spaces are provided, 3 accessible parking spaces are required. 4 accessible parking spaces are proposed, which meets the requirement. Van accessible spaces are shown on the site plans to be 11 ft. wide with a 5 ft. accessible aisle, meeting the requirements for van accessibility. Details on Sheet C6.1 do not match the dimensions shown on the site plans, and should be updated appropriately. Detail 120 on Sheet C6.1 for signs marking accessible parking spaces is consistent with ADA requirements for signage. Signs are noted to be typical, and shall be included for each accessible parking space. The maximum rise for ADA ramps is 30 inches. The applicant shall ensure that proposed ramps to the entrance of the building do not exceed the 30-inch maximum rise. Level landings shall be provided in accordance with minimum dimensions as required by ADA. Details shall be included in the revised plans for handrails as required for ADA requirements or applicable building codes. 6  The applicant or their designated agent shall ensure that all accessible parking spaces and routes meet the requirements of ADA standards, including locations, widths, aisles, slopes, signage and pavement markings. Final inspection of accessible parking spaces and accessible routes shall be coordinated with the Building Trades Official. A note shall be added to the plans which states: "Where discrepancies exist between the approved plans and the minimum requirements to meet ADA, the more stringent of the two shall prevail, as determined by the City of Derby." 9. Pedestrian Access. In accordance with the City's design criteria for commercial developments, a pedestrian connection to existing public paths is required. The City requirement to provide a pedestrian connection was adopted subsequent to the initial site plan approval for this site (1997), and therefore, there is not currently a connection to the public hike and bike path along Meadowlark Blvd. Requirements for site plan approval are applicable to all new developments and substantial remodels or additions, therefore, the requirement for a pedestrian connection is applicable. The applicant shall prepare an exhibit and be prepared to explain how the pedestrian connection will be achieved. The applicant shall ensure that slopes for the entire path meet ADA tolerances. 10. Signage. A free-standing ground sign for this site was recently reviewed and approved by City staff. The location of the sign should be shown on the revised site plans. The applicant shall be prepared to explain if and how any wall signs are proposed on the building. The applicant is advised that any signs proposed in the future require a separate permit prior to installation. 11. Site Lighting. No lighting is identified on the site plans. The applicant has indicated that can lights are proposed under the soffits of the building addition to match existing lighting. Can lights are downward facing and are not expected to cast light onto any adjacent streets or properties. The applicant is advised that if site lighting is proposed in the future, all lighting is required to be screened or shielded to prevent intrusion of light or glare onto adjoining streets and properties. 12. Landscape/Screening and Buffering. A landscaped street yard is required in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance. The ordinance specifies that lots with a depth of between 250 ft. and 400 ft. shall provide a minimum of a 15 ft. landscaped street yard. The provided landscaped street yard exceeds the minimum 15 ft. depth requirement. Landscaped Street Yard. At the time this lot was originally platted, the Planning Commission required a 45-ft. landscape easement along the 7 Meadowlark Blvd. street frontage. A landscape plan was also required which provided for the installation of the existing earth berms and street trees. The landscaping required at the time exceeds the City's current requirements. Within the landscaped street yard, one shade tree is required for every 500 sq. ft. of the required yard. The minimum number of shade trees required for the landscaped street yard is based upon the following calculation: 500 ft. street frontage x 15 ft. street yard = 15,000 sq. ft. / 500 = 15 shade trees required. A sufficient number of existing trees and shrubs are in place to fulfill the current street yard tree requirement. Additional landscaping is proposed along the front of the building which further contributes to the visual appeal of the site. Parking Lot Screening/Landscaping. Existing earth berms were installed to provide the required screening for the parking areas when the site was originally developed. Sheet C2.1 shows the existing berms are approximately 2 to 3 ft. above the finished elevation of the parking spaces. Parking lot screening is required to be 36 inches in height. Additional earth grading shall bring the berms up to the 36-inch height required, or additional shrubs may be provided to achieve the parking lot screening. Landscaped parking lot islands are required for parking lots with 50 or more parking spaces. There are 64 parking spaces provided, which would normally require 2 landscaped parking lot islands. The Planning Commission may determine if the proposed landscaping for the site is adequate to fulfill the intent of breaking up large expanses of monotonous parking areas. Equipment and Trash Receptacle Screening. Screening is required to reasonably hide from ground level view, all ground-mounted mechanical equipment, loading docks, trash receptacles or similar uses. A 6 ft. wood privacy fence is proposed at the east end of the building to screen the trash area and air conditioning units from public view. The applicant shall verify if there are any other ground-mounted mechanical units, electric transformers or other items which require screening. Miscellaneous Landscaping Notes. Landscaped areas are required to be provided with a permanent water supply. Notes on the landscape plan indicate that new landscaped areas will be provided with an automatic sprinkler system. The sprinkler system is required to be equipped with an automatic rain-sensing device. Irrigation is not required for established trees or natural areas that 8  remain undisturbed by development activities. The applicant is advised that final acceptance of the landscaping is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Acceptance will be based upon the landscape plan as approved at site plan review. The applicant is required to maintain landscaping in good condition, including replacement of dead or diseased plants and trees. Existing trees which are removed due to disease or death shall be replaced with the same type or as approved by the Zoning Administrator. Any alterations to the landscape plan subsequent to site plan approval by the Planning Commission shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval. Substantial changes to the plan require review and approval by the Planning Commission. 13. Drainage. When this site was originally platted, an arrangement was made to over-detain stormwater in the pond north of this development. No additional stormwater detention is required on this site. The new parking lot will be graded to direct stormwater runoff across the existing parking to a flume at the west side of the site. The flume discharges directly into the adjacent creek which is acceptable. Rain leaders are proposed to be installed to accept runoff from the roof and the front landscaped areas. The rain leader pipe is proposed to discharge into the adjacent stream north of the existing parking lot. The outlet of the rain leader pipe shall be provided appropriate erosion control measures. 14. Utilities. Fire Protection. Derby Fire Department staff has reviewed the site plans and approved the plans as presented. Water. Water lines are not identified on the utility plan. The building addition is proposed to connect to the domestic water service of the existing building. The applicant shall verify that the existing water service is adequate to provide service. Sanitary Sewer. Sanitary sewer service is also proposed to connect to the service for the existing building. The applicant shall verify that there is adequate capacity in the existing service line to provide for the new addition. Others. Gas, electric and communications services are not identified on the utility plan. The applicant is responsible for coordinating with private utility companies to ensure that any new connections are installed underground. 15. Design Standards. Elevations of the existing building and proposed addition are shown and materials are identified. The elevations and renderings do not show the retaining walls and ramps at the southeast corner of the building. 9  The materials of the addition are proposed to match the existing building. The existing building is faced with brick, with wood siding on the sides and rear and an asphalt shingle roof. The city's design criteria identifies the proposed face brick as an acceptable building material. The Planning Commission may determine that the wood siding is acceptable at the rear of the building if development or conditions at the rear of the site would reasonably preclude the need to express the design theme used at the front of the building. The colors of the existing building are generally earth tone and are compatible with nearby development. 16. No Smoking. City ordinance prohibits smoking in public places and places of employment. The applicant is required to post “No Smoking” signs to establish a 20-foot smoke free zone at all entrances to the facility. 17. Miscellaneous. The finished floor elevation noted on Sheet C2.1 reads 192.50. This is believed to be 1292.50 based on the legend which notes to add 1200 to spot elevations. The applicant should verify the proposed elevation of the finished floor. 18. Corrected Plans. Following Planning Commission approval, the applicant will need to revise the site plan documents to incorporate all corrections or comments and submit 3 revised copies to the City. Changes on the site plan sheets shall be clouded, and a list of all changes shall be provided, noting which comment each is addressing. The applicant is advised that building plans will not be reviewed until revised site plans are approved. Recommend a Motion to: Approve the site plan for Lot 1, Block A, Derby Professional Center Addition, subject to staff comments and discussion. Cody Bird, City Planner presented the staff report. He pointed out that the existing building was built in 1998 and at the time of plat approval, a 45 foot landscape easement along Meadowlark Blvd. was required. Since that time, regulations have changed and landscaping requirements have been modified. Bird asked the applicant and agent if they had additional comments. Applicants Monte & Carol Ysidro and agent Scott Service, Kaw Valley Engineering said they did not have additional comments. Commissioner Baer commented on the parking lot island requirement. He felt the landscaping near the doors and main entrance met the intent of the landscaping requirement. He asked if a path for pedestrian access to the site would be provided. Bird replied that the existing portion of the development was constructed before 10  the requirement to provide pedestrian access was adopted, and therefore a connection to the public hike and bike path was not included. The staff report requested that the applicant provide a drawing explaining how a pedestrian connection will be achieved. Scott Service, Kaw Valley Engineering said he felt there was ample room on either side of the drive for a pedestrian connection and wouldn't have trouble providing access. Commissioner Rhein asked for clarification regarding the number of ADA parking spaces to ensure the requirement is met. Service said they reviewed the staff report and have modified the site plan to ensure ADA compliance. Commissioner Willis asked if 4 parking spaces for ADA accessibility is the minimum ADA requirement for this parking lot. Bird said the minimum requirement is 3 ADA accessible parking spaces. The site plans show there are 4 ADA accessible parking spaces, which exceeds the requirement. Commissioner Poteete asked if the addition of the new parking lot was an indication of plans for a future expansion, and asked if that would necessitate additional parking lot islands. Service said the original site plan prepared in 1997 showed 3 proposed buildings on the property. The parking lot configuration proposed would accommodate all 3 buildings. He explained that there are more parking spaces than required by the city, which is what the owner desires. He indicated that there are 2 islands on each side of the entry drive and a small island in the northeast corner of the parking lot. The small island will be turned into parking stalls, however, there will be additional green space in a new island located near the main entrance. Moved by Dennis Poteete, seconded by Van Willis, to approve the site plan for Lot 1, Block A, Derby Professional Center Addition, subject to staff comments and discussion. Vote: 8 - 0 Other: Paula Langworthy (ABSENT) Kathy Wills (ABSENT) 6. ANNOUNCEMENTS Cody Bird, City Planner thanked Commissioners for taking time to review the City Council videos regarding consideration of the proposed STAR (Sales Tax and Revenue) Bond district. Currently there is not a scheduled date for the item to be presented to the Planning Commission in the future. Bird announced that there will be 2 public hearing items presented at the September 17, 2015 11  Planning Commission meeting; the items will be a zone change request and a request to vacate access control and a portion of a front yard setback. Commissioner Willis asked Bird if the Planning Commission's role in the STAR Bond district process is to assess whether the plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Bird replied that is correct. Commissioner Gould complimented Marcia Hartman, Planning Assistant, on assembling and writing the minutes. Hartman thanked Gould for his comments. 7. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Pat Baer, seconded by Herman Hicks, to adjourn the meeting at 6:47 p.m. Vote: 8 - 0 Other: Paula Langworthy (ABSENT) Kathy Wills (ABSENT) _____________________________ _____________________________ Marcia Hartman Mitchell J. Adams Recording Secretary Chairperson 12 Planning Commission Meeting 5. A. Meeting Date: 09/17/2015 Submitted By: Cody Bird, City Planner Agenda Category: New Business Subject: Zone Change: Northwest corner of Louisa St. and Westview Dr. from R-1 "Single-family Residential District" to I-1 "Institutional District." General Location: 421 N Westview Dr. Applicant/Agent: Applicant: Cross Way Church Agent: Joplin Emberson, Lead Pastor Reason for Request: Seeking appropriate zoning for existing church and to allow the church to operate a preschool Background Information: Cross Way Church has requested that their church site at 421 N. Westview be rezoned from R-1 "Single-family Residential District" zoning to I-1 "Institutional District." The legal description of the property is the south 250 ft. of Lot 4, Gerteis Addition to Derby, Sedgwick County, Kansas. The property consists of approximately 1.7 acres. The existing church building was originally constructed in 1960 and is currently operated as a legal nonconforming use within the existing R-1 zoning district. Church staff originally contacted the City to request confirmation of the property's current zoning for an application to the State in order to operate a preschool. Preschools in R-1 zoning require approval of a conditional use. Churches also require conditional use approval within R-1 zoning districts unless the church is an existing legal nonconforming use. Both churches and preschools are permitted uses within the requested I-1 "Institutional District." If approved, the I-1 zoning designation would allow the church to operate a preschool without any additional zoning approvals. Zone change requests require a public hearing: Notice of the public hearing was published in the Derby Informer on August 26, 2015. Notices were mailed to neighboring property owners as prescribed by state law. Signs advertising the public hearing were placed on the property 14 days in 13  advance of the public hearing. The official ownership list of the notification area is on file at City Hall. Staff Comments: Section 1100(I) of the zoning regulations provides the guidelines for development of Findings of Fact which act to support the Planning Commission's recommendation in a rezoning case. The Planning Commission may find that not all factors will be relevant to this zone change request. Factors determined to be relevant by the Commission should be given consideration relative to both positive and negative findings. In order to properly make a recommendation to the City Council, the Planning Commission must make specific and substantiated Findings of Fact supporting its recommendation. FINDINGS OF FACT The following are the rezoning factors the Planning Commission must consider, a brief explanation of each factor, and staff's opinion of findings for each factor: 1. THE ZONING, USES AND CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD: (Factual description of the application area and surrounding property as to existing zoning, land uses, general condition, age of structures, etc.) The subject property is a 1.7 acre portion of a platted lot located at the northwest corner of Louisa St. and Westview Dr. The existing church structure was originally constructed in 1960 and continues to operate as a church. The existing parking lot serving the church is paved and is maintained in good condition. Structures on nearby properties appear to be in good repair and are being well maintained. Existing single-family homes were primarily built in the 1940's and 50's. Existing zoning and land uses adjacent to the proposed rezoning area are as follows: Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses Direction Zoning Land Use North I-1 "Institutional District" - Skilled nursing and rehabilitation - Senior living East R-1 "Single-family - Public school facilities and athletic Residential" fields 14  South R-1 "Single-family - Single-family homes Residential" - Public park - Duplexes R-2 "Two-family Residential" West R-1 "Single-family - Single-family homes Residential" 2. THE SUITABILITY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THE USES TO WHICH IT HAS BEEN RESTRICTED: (How is the property currently zoned and what uses are allowed on the property? Are there uses suitable given surrounding zoning and site criteria? Are the current allowed uses the only ones that might be appropriate for this property?) The property is presently zoned R-1 "Single-family Residential" which is the city's most restrictive zoning district and is limited to single-family homes and accessory uses. Adjacent properties are developed for a variety of uses ranging from single- and two-family homes to skilled nursing facilities, public parks and public school facilities. Retail and commercial uses also exist in close proximity to the property. There are a variety of uses surrounding the property, including uses consistent with the I-1 zoning requested. The property is suitable for uses not allowed within the present R-1 zoning. Uses permitted in the requested I-1 zoning are suitable for the subject site. 3. EXTENT TO WHICH REMOVAL OF THE RESTRICTIONS WILL DETRIMENTALLY AFFECT NEARBY PROPERTY: (Can the uses allowed in the requested district be good neighbors to existing development? This is a subjective question. The focus should be on facts, not fears, and should be based on issues that zoning can address [for example, allowed uses, minimum lot size, height, setbacks, traffic generation, landscaping and screening, use limitations, etc.]) The requested I-1 zoning is intended for moderate density and moderate intensity institutional uses and limited office uses. I-1 zoning is generally used as a buffer between residential uses and more intense commercial uses or arterial streets. Building height and setback requirements for the requested I-1 zoning are generally compatible with the requirements of adjacent institutional and residential properties. I-1 zoning has requirements for providing a landscaped buffer along property lines adjacent to single- and two-family residential uses. The existing church parking lot is approximately 80 ft. from the nearest property line adjoining a single-family residential property, and existing trees are appropriate to meet the requirements for the landscaped buffer. Other property lines do not require 15  buffering. The property was originally developed for church use and has continued to operate as such. The proposed rezoning is not expected to significantly impact traffic generation. 4. LENGTH OF TIME THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS REMAINED VACANT AS ZONED: (Factual information, but its importance may be somewhat subjective. A property may be vacant because the current zoning is unsuitable, but there may be other reasons not related to zoning. Some examples might be a glut of available property of the same zoning district, financing problems, land speculation, fragmented ownership, lack of available public services or other development problems.) The existing church facility was constructed in 1960 and the use has continued since that time. The significance of this factor may not be a relevant consideration in this zone change request since the property is not vacant. 5. RELATIVE GAIN TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE AS COMPARED TO THE LOSS IN VALUE OR THE HARDSHIP IMPOSED UPON THE APPLICANT: (The protection of public health, safety and welfare is the primary basis for zoning. The relationship between the property owner's right to use and obtain value from their property and the City's responsibility to its citizens should be weighed.) Land use restrictions fall under the jurisdiction of police power, conferred to the City from the State. Police power includes the responsibility for a city to provide for the protection of the safety, health and welfare of the community. Zoning of land into categories or districts has long been recognized as an appropriate means of ensuring that proposed uses of land are compatible with neighboring land uses. The rezoning of the subject property from R-1 "Single-family Residential" to I-1 "Institutional District" should not have an adverse impact on the community's health, safety, or welfare. Rezoning of the property to allow for uses already existing at this location should not have any impact on the value of adjoining properties. Public infrastructure needed to serve the subject property is already in place and no negative impacts to community resources is anticipated. 6. CONFORMANCE OF THE REQUESTED CHANGE TO THE ADOPTED OR RECOGNIZED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: (Does the request agree with the adopted plan recommendations? If not, is the plan out-of-date or are there mitigating circumstances which speak to the nonconformity?) The requested I-1 "Institutional District" zoning is consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the property as being "Public/Semi-public," which includes churches and religious uses. 16  The Comprehensive Plan encourages integration of compatible land uses rather than a strict segregation of uses. The proposed I-1 zoning is compatible with the adjacent properties, and is appropriate for integrating I-1 uses into this area. 7. IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON COMMUNITY FACILITIES: (Are water and sewer available for extension? How are roads impacted? Can other community facilities [for example, police, fire, parks, libraries, and schools] handle the increased development? Should be based on factual information referencing standards used to make the determination.) Municipal utilities and services are already provided to serve this site and no additional burden is anticipated that cannot be accommodated with existing resources. Any impact on the library, parks or schools will be negligible. 8. OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT OF NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS: (This is just one of the factors to be considered and by itself is not sufficient reason to approve or deny a request.) At the time of this writing, City staff has received one inquiry about the zone change request: Staff responded to general questions about uses permitted in the I-1 zoning district and why the church has requested the zone change. The individual commented that he did not oppose the rezoning, and that he would likely not attend the public hearing. 9. RECOMMENDATION OF PROFESSIONAL STAFF: (Should be based on the preceding eight factors, adopted plans and policies, other technical reports [such as, Capital Improvement Plan, facility master plans, etc.] which speak to the topic and staff's best professional judgment.) Based on the preceding factors, City staff supports the requested zone change from R-1 "Single-family Residential District" to I-1 "Institutional District." Recommend a Motion to: Approve the request to change the zoning district classification from R-1 "Single-family Residential District" to I-1 "Institutional District" based on the facts stated in the staff report and forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council. Attachments Location and Zoning Maps 17  Location Map: 421 N Westview Dr. Proposed Rezone Area N No Scale 18  Existing Zoning Map: 421 N Westview Dr. R-1 B-4 B-4 I-1 R-1 R-3 Proposed Rezone Area R-2 R-1 R-1 R-1 N No Scale 19 Planning Commission Meeting 5. B. Meeting Date: 09/17/2015 Submitted By: Cody Bird, City Planner Agenda Category: New Business Subject: Vacation Request: Vacate a Portion of Platted Access Control and Platted Front Setback General Location: 1015 E. Madison Avenue Applicant/Agent: Applicant: Michael and Mary Thornton Reason for Request: Construct new circular driveway entrance Background Information: The owners of the residence at 1015 E. Madison have requested vacation of 20 ft. of platted access control to Madison Ave. along with 5 ft. of platted front yard setback on Lot 2, Block A, Brookwood 3rd Addition. The property is developed as a single-family residence. The owner desires to construct a circular driveway to better facilitate vehicular access to the site. The owner has a trailer which is backed into the carport on the site. Backing the trailer onto the existing driveway requires the owner to temporarily block traffic on Madison Ave. A circular driveway, if approved, would provide adequate space for a trailer to be maneuvered into position to be backed into the carport without obstructing the public street. Construction of the circular drive also allows vehicles to exit the residence without backing onto Madison Ave. In order to construct the circular driveway, 20 ft. of platted access control along Madison Ave. must be vacated to allow the new opening. The applicant has also requested vacation of a portion of the front yard setback in order to meet the regulation which limits the paved area in a required front yard to 850 sq. ft. The required front yard is defined as the area between the property line and the platted building setback line. A 5 ft. reduction of the required front yard would allow more of the driveway area to be located outside of the required yard. 20  The applicant has also submitted a request for a variance to exceed the limitation on paved area in a front yard. The variance request will be considered by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Staff Comments: Individual lot access to arterial streets is not typically desirable, and therefore, the City plats access control limiting the number and frequency of access points along arterial streets. In limited instances, vacating access control to allow additional access points may be advisable when the new access results in improved safety. Allowing an additional opening to Madison Ave. at this location would provide a safety improvement by allowing the property owner to access their carport without backing into the existing driveway from the public street. Approval of the concurrent variance request to exceed the maximum amount of paving area in a front yard should be a condition of approval of the requested vacation. Vacation requests require a public hearing: Notice of the public hearing was provided in accordance with State law. The notice was published in the Derby Informer on August 26, 2015 and mailed to affected property owners and utilities on August 28, 2015. A sign advertising the public hearing was also placed on site 14 days in advance of the public hearing. Westar Energy responded to the notice with a letter stating that Westar does not oppose the vacation. The letter also indicates that there are street lights along Madison Ave. The applicant is advised that any relocation or removal of any Westar equipment is at the applicant's expense. At the conclusion of the public hearing for a vacation request, the Planning Commission should adopt a resolution stating the recommendation, with or without conditions, and announce the date upon which the City Council will consider the requested vacation. A proposed resolution is attached. Recommend a Motion to: Adopt a resolution recommending vacation of 20 feet of platted complete access control and 5 feet of platted front yard setback and instruct staff to forward the resolution to the City Council for consideration. Attachments Location and Vacation Area Maps Resolution 21 Location Map: 1015 E Madison Ave. 22  Proposed Vacation Area Proposed 20 ft. Opening Existing 30 ft. Platted Building Setback Proposed 25 ft. Building Setback 23  Passed: __________. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DERBY, KANSAS RECOMMENDING THAT THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF DERBY GRANT A REQUEST FOR VACATION OF 20 FEET OF PLATTED COMPLETE ACCESS CONTROL ALONG WITH A PORTION OF THE PLATTED FRONT YARD SETBACK ON LOT 2, BLOCK A, BROOKWOOD 3RD ADDITON, DERBY, SEDGWICK COUNTY, KANSAS. WHEREAS, K.S.A., 12-504, et seq., provides a procedure for the City’s Planning Commission to consider the vacation of certain plats, streets, easements or reservations; and WHEREAS, the City has received a petition to vacate the following described portion of platted complete access control: The east 20 feet of the west 40.5 feet of platted complete access control located along the north line of Lot 2, Block A, Brookwood 3rd Addition, Derby, Sedgwick County, Kansas. WHEREAS, the City has received a petition to vacate the following described portion of platted front yard setback: The south 5 feet of the north 30 feet of Lot 2, Block A, Brookwood 3rd Addition, Derby, Sedgwick County, Kansas. WHEREAS, both the above-described petitions for vacation relate to the construction of a new vehicular driveway to serve Lot 2, Block A, Brookwood 3rd Addition, and may be heard at the same public hearing; and WHEREAS, on September 17, 2015 and in compliance with K.S.A. 12-504, et seq., the Derby Planning Commission held the required hearing to consider the above-described requests to vacate; and WHEREAS, K.S.A. 12-505 provides that no vacation shall be granted if a written objection thereto is filed with the City Clerk, at the time of or before the hearing, by any owner or adjoining owner who would be a proper party to the petition but has not joined therein; and WHEREAS, no such written objection to the vacation was filed with the City Clerk at the time of or before the required hearing on September 17, 2015; and WHEREAS, K.S.A. 12-505 provides that the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation regarding the vacation and submit such recommendation to the governing body. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Derby, Kansas that: 24  Section 1. Determination. It is hereby determined that due and legal notice of the petition to vacate and of the September 17, 2015 hearing on the requested vacation of the following described portion of platted access control located within the corporate limits of the City of Derby, Kansas: The east 20 feet of the west 40.5 feet of platted complete access control located along the north line of Lot 2, Block A, Brookwood 3rd Addition, Derby, Sedgwick County, Kansas has been given by publication and other means as provided by law, no private rights will be injured or endangered by such vacation, the public will suffer no loss or inconvenience thereby, and that in justice to the petitioner, the prayer of the petitioner ought to be granted. Section 2. Determination. It is hereby determined that due and legal notice of the petition to vacate and of the September 17, 2015 hearing on the requested vacation of the following described portion of platted front yard setback located within the corporate limits of the City of Derby, Kansas: The south 5 feet of the north 30 feet of Lot 2, Block A, Brookwood 3rd Addition, Derby, Sedgwick County, Kansas has been given by publication and other means as provided by law, no private rights will be injured or endangered by such vacation, the public will suffer no loss or inconvenience thereby, and that in justice to the petitioner, the prayer of the petitioner ought to be granted. Section 3. Recommendation. Based upon the Determinations stated in Sections 1 and 2 above, vacation of the above-described portion of platted access control and platted front yard setback is hereby recommended to the Governing Body of the City of Derby, Kansas, in accordance with the requirements of K.S.A. 12-505, conditioned upon the following: 1. Reservation to the city and the owners of any lesser property rights for public utilities, rights-of-ways, and easements for public service facilities originally held and currently in existence within the above-described portion of platted front yard setback; and 2. Approval by the Board of Zoning Appeals for a concurrent request for a variance to exceed the maximum amount of paved area in a required front yard. Section 4. Submission. This Resolution will be submitted to the Governing Body of the City of Derby, Kansas for consideration at the October 13, 2015 meeting to be held in the Council Room at City Hall, 611 N. Mulberry, Derby, Kansas, and shall commence at 6:30 p.m. Section 5. Severability. If any provision of this resolution is held to unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, then such provision shall be considered separately and apart from the remaining provisions of this resolution, so as to be completely severable and the remaining provisions of this resolution shall remain in full force and effect. 25  Section 6. This resolution shall be effective from and after its adoption. ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Derby, Kansas, on September 17, 2015. Mitchell J. Adams, Chairman Attested: Cody Bird, Secretary 26