Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board

MINUTES MANHATTAN URBAN AREA PLANNING BOARD City Commission Room, City Hall 1101 Poyntz Avenue Thursday, July 17, 2025 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Brad Buser, vice-chair Ryan Wilson Ann Christian Kelly Karl Shelley Carver Debbie Nuss Hannah Fehr, chair STAFF PRESENT Barry Beagle, Senior Planner; John Adam, Assistant Director of Community Development; Ben Chmiel, Senior Planner; John Verssue, Planner III; Lance Wackerla, Planner I 1. CALL TO ORDER 1.1 The chair called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Staff called roll and stated there was a quorum. 1.2 Open Public Comments: There were none. 2. CONSENT AGENDA 2.1 Approve the minutes of the June 30, 2025 Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board meeting Buser moved to approve the consent agenda; Carver seconded. Motion passed 4–0–3 (Fehr, Nuss, and Karl abstaining). 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.1 A PUBLIC HEARING to consider the REZONING of Meadowlark Hills Retirement Community, a 55.84-acre tract of land located at 2121 Meadowlark Road, from PUD, Planned Unit Development District, to MX, Mixed Use District (applicant: Bradley Buser, Anderson Knight Architects; file no. REZ-25-072) Buser recused himself as the applicant. Beagle gave the presentation and recommended approval. There were no questions from the board. MUAPB Minutes Page 2 07/17/2025 Public hearing opened The applicant, Brad Buser, Anderson Knight Architects, said Beagle’s presentation was comprehensive. Buser said that replacing the PUD with a normal zoning district would simplify development in the future. He asked if the board had any questions. There were no questions from the board. Public hearing closed Nuss moved to recommend approval of the rezoning; Christian seconded. Motion passed 6–0. 3.2 A PUBLIC HEARING to consider the REZONING of 330 Vattier Street, a 0.17-acre lot, from RM, Medium-Density Residential, to RM, Medium-Density Residential, with O-EN, Established Neighborhood Overlay (applicants: Zachary and Michelle Burton; file no. REZ-25-077) Wackerla gave the presentation and recommended approval. Wilson said that when the property was previously rezoned the argument was made to remove the O-EN overlay. He asked if the overlay was being added to the property to avoid certain design standards. Wackerla said the O-EN had originally been removed from the property since the RM allowed for multi- family uses which were less subject to the design guidelines within the overlay. He said in a normal zoning district that there could be multi-family design requirements based on the number of units, which differed from the O-EN design guidelines. Wilson asked why switching back to the overlay was being requested in this case, specifically. Wackerla said he would let the applicant answer the question. Public hearing opened The applicant, Zac Burton, said that the project was underway, with footings and concrete work already being done. He said there were setback advantages without the O-EN overlay, but that the O-EN would allow the building to blend into the neighborhood and look less like an apartment building as required by the multi-family design standards. He said he had conversations with neighbors regarding the style of the building and property and would be working to make the project as compatible as possible. Public hearing closed Nuss moved to recommend approval of the rezoning; Carver seconded. Nuss said she appreciated the efforts by the applicant to work with the neighborhood. Karl asked for clarification on how the project was allowed to move forward with the setbacks potentially changing due to the rezoning. Wackerla said he had been involved with the building permit process and that the location of the MUAPB Minutes Page 3 07/17/2025 building was compliant with both the RM, and the RM/O-EN, and that the only difference would be the cladding materials of the finished building. Motion passed 7–0. 3.3 A PUBLIC HEARING to consider the REZONING of 5111 Murray Road, a 0.97-acre lot, from Riley County SF-3, Single-Family Residential District, to ICS, Industrial/Commercial Service District, with the O-A, Airport Overlay (applicant: Charles and Julie Brunner; file no. REZ-25-067) Wackerla gave the presentation and recommended approval. Nuss said the neighborhood meeting report stated there had been no attendees but there had been two discussions over the phone between residents and the applicant. She asked if staff knew what the questions asked over the phone were about. Wackerla said he thought the applicant had told him they were general questions about the rezoning process, but he said he was unsure. Nuss asked why the report referred to the meeting as the second neighborhood meeting for the property. Wackerla said there had been a prior meeting for the annexation. Public hearing open There were no comments. Public hearing closed Nuss moved to recommend approval of the rezoning; Buser seconded. Motion passed 7–0. 3.4 A PUBLIC HEARING to consider the CONCURRENT PLAT for Cedarhurst of Manhattan, a 15.07-acre lot located on the west side of Kimball, across from Berkshire Circle (applicant: Katelyn Wolf, Bartlett and West; file no. SUB-25- 045) Wackerla gave the presentation and recommended approval. Buser asked for clarification on the ownership regarding the off-site easement. Wackerla clarified the ownership and the easement. Public hearing open The applicant, Katelyn Wolf, on behalf of Dover Development, said they had been working with both the neighborhood and staff to make sure that all comments and concerns were addressed. She added that Dover Development would become the owner of the 15-acre portion once the plat was filed. Rachelle Banwart, 1840 Grand Vista Lane, said she did not have any major concerns with the project but asked about construction start times, reducing light pollution, moving the trash area further south, and water pressure concerns. MUAPB Minutes Page 4 07/17/2025 Public hearing closed Nuss moved to approve the concurrent plat of Cedarhurst; Buser seconded. Nuss said the construction start times were outside of the board’s purview, but she hoped the developer would be receptive to the neighborhood’s request. Buser added that construction start and end times were regulated by ordinance and were standardized. Motion passed 7–0. 3.5 A PUBLIC HEARING to consider the COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT to include an amendment by reference to the Move MHK! Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Master Plan (applicant: City of Manhattan, file no. CPA-25-060) Verssue presented the staff report and recommended approval. Karl asked why the plan was separated into multiple parts on the City’s website. Verssue said it was likely due to file size. The board confirmed they had received an email for public comment from Mel Borst. Nuss said regarding the comment by Borst that there was little to do since the City Commission had already adopted the plan and his comments would have had to have been added to the plan before its adoption. Public hearing open Phil Anderson, 1719 Fairchild Avenue, said he had worked with an architecture firm to produce a conceptual riverfront plan that had been shown to both the city and the public. Nuss clarified that the board was acting on the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and not the riverfront plan proposal. Verssue further clarified that the riverfront plan was a private effort that had yet to be formally adopted into any official plans by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Public hearing closed Nuss moved to recommend approval of the comprehensive plan amendment; Buser seconded. Nuss said she was impressed by the quality of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the level of community engagement by both staff and the public. Fehr agreed. Motion passed 7–0. 4. REPORTS AND COMMENTS 4.1 Planning updates from staff. Adam said there would be PI-2 rezonings in the future. MUAPB Minutes Page 5 07/17/2025 4.2 Comments from Board members. There were none. 4.3 Next meeting: Chair announced the next meeting is August 4, 2025 5. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 6:49 p.m. Submitted by Lance Wackerla, Planner I