Loading...
7.1 Zone Hanson Court Add CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME AGENDA SECTION: Development O~GINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR NO. AGENDA: 7 PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT NO. 1 BY: Roy Dudark BY: Item Application #Z93-10, filed by the Salina ~City Planning Commission, requesting a change in zoning district classification from the C-5 (Service Commercial) District to C-3 (shOpping Center) District on property legally described~ as Bl~ock 1 and Lots 1-10, Lots 12, 14, 16, 18 and the West 20' of Lot 20 in Block No. 2, Hansen Court Addition to the City of Salina, Kansas (aka 1300 and 1400 Blocks of E. Iron.) Background On August 3, 1993, the Planning Commission considered an application filed by Bill Medina to rezone adjacent property from R-2 to C-5 to allow construction of offices. Following discussion and comments from the applicant, the Commission determined that C-3 zoning would allow the applicant to do what he was proposing and would be more compatible with the surrounding office and residential development than C-5 zoning. The Planning Commission voted to recommend a lesser change to C-3. The Commission then expressed interest in having staff initiate an application to downzone the remaining C-5 area to C-3. The original application was filed on September 3, 1993 and all affected property owners were notified of the proposed change. The Planning Commission requested on October 5, 1993 that this application be tabled to November 16, 1993 to allow the application to be amended to include Block 1. All property owners who would be directly affected and all adjacent property owners have been notified by mail. COMMISSION AC~ON MOTION BY SECOND BY THAT: Page 2 CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 12/13/93 4:~ P.M. AGENDA SECTION: O~GINA~NG DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR NO. AGENDA: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT ITEM: NO. BY: Roy Dudark BY: Staff Analysis All of the uses that have been developed in this area or that are being proposed (business and professional offices) are permitted in the C-3 district. If this downzoning were approved, the status of existing uses would be unchanged. The types ~of uses that could occur on the undeveloped tracts would be more restricted under C-3. . It is staff's observation that some of the city's greatest land ~ use compatibility conflicts have occurred where C-5 zoning abuts directly against residential zoning. The primary difference between C-5 zoning and C-3 zoning is that C-5 allows a number of uses that involve outdoor display and storage such as used car sales, equipment sales and rental, and contractor's storage yards. C-3 requires all storage and display of goods to be within an enclosed building. C-3 also allows less lot coverage (40% vs. 50%) and restricts the amount of paving coverage in the front yard to 60% vs. 100% in C-5. Staff believes a lesser change to C-3 zoning would be more compatible with the surrounding office and residential uses than the current C-5 zoning. The Executive Plaza office park development is zoned C-3 and a portion of Mr. Medina's holdings were recently rezoned from R-2 to C-3. Downzoning Block 1 as well as the remainder of Block 2 would make the zoning designation uniform in this area and would be a closer fit with the character of the existing development than C-5. If the City Commission believes that C-3 zoning is more appropriate for this East Iron corridor you should proceed with approval of this zoning map amendment. COMMISSION AC~ON MOTION BY SECOND BY THAT: Page 3 CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 12/13/93 4:~ P.M. AGENDA SECI/ON: O~GINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR NO. AGENDA: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT ITEM: NO. BY: Roy Dudark BY: Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this amended application on November 16, 1993. Following presentation of the Staff Report and discussion and questions, the Commission voted (6-0) to recommend approval of this zoning map amendment. The Planning Commission cited the following reasons in support of their recommendation: 1) the area is adjacent to a C~3 District and 2) a change to C-3 zoning would be more compatible with the surrounding office and residential development than the current C-5. City Commission Action If the City Commission concurs with the recommendation, the attached ordinance should be approved on first reading. The protest deadline expired on November 30, 1993 and no petition was filed. Second reading would be scheduled on December 20, 1993. If the City Commission disagrees with the recommendation, it may: 1) overturn the Planning Commission and deny the request provided four (4) votes are in support of such action; or 2) return the application to the Planning Commission for reconsideration citing the basis for disapproval. Encl: Application Vicinity Map Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes of 10/5/93 and 11/16/93 Ordinance No. 93- 9610 COMMISSION AC~ON MOTION BY SECOND BY THAT: PUBLICATION DATE No Later Than Sept. 14, 1993 APPLICATION NO. Z93-10 HEARING DATE October 5. 1993 DATE FILED Seot. 3, 1993 VICINITY MAP ATTACHED YES FILING FEE -0- OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE RECEIVED FIR RECEIPT NO. (INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION ARE ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS FORM) APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE DISTRICT ZONING MAP (REZONING) 1. Applicant's Name: Sa]tna City Piannincj Commission 2. Applicant'sAddreas 300 W. Ash, P.O. Box 736 ZipCode: 67402-0736 3. Telephone (Business): 826-7260 (Home): 4. Owner's Name: (Multiple Owners) 5. Owner's Address ?1p Code: 6. Legal description of property to be rezoned (attach additional sheets if necessary): ~)A.~.q~ Lot(s) Lots 1-10· Lots 12, 14, 16, 18 and the W 20' Of InBIockNo. 2, and ali of 1 Lot 20 In Hansen Cou~t Addltinn Subdivision Metes and bounds description if unplatted (a Surveyor's Certificat~ must be filed with this application and if approved will be required to be platted): 7. Approximate street address: 1400 £. Iron 8. Area of property (sq. ft. and/or acres): 9. Present zoning: C-5 Use: Fast food restaurant: offices, vacant 10. Requested zoning: C-3 Use: No change 11. Are there any covenants of record which prohibit the proposed development? (Attach copy): 12. List reasons for this request. (Attach additional sheets if necessary): C-3 zoninq would be more compatible'with the surroundinq office and residential devel0pment. 13. Supply factual data showing the effect the request will have on present and future traffic flow, schools, utilities, refuse collection, surrounding properties, etc: (Attach additional sheets if necessary) No change in existing dewlo.nment 14. Will there be sufficient off-street parking provided for the requested use? Explain: Existing development meets city parking gtanda~d~. 15. List exhibits or plans submitted: Vicinity Map PROPERTY OWNER(S) APPLICANT'S If the applicant is to be repr~nt~ by I~al coun~l or an authoriz~ agent, please complete the following ~ that corr~nd~ce and communications pe~aining to this application ~y ~ fo~ard~ to the a~horiz~ individual. NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE: ADDRESS: ZIP CODE: TELEPHONE (Bu~n~): AR~ CODE: ~ite - Planning Cana~ - CiW Clerk Pink - Ins~ion ~ld - A~i~nt (Rev. 8/~) 101 IPLEASE DO NOT D~ACH) ~'- ''~x:-~-~; I ' A 1 i cati on #Z93-10 ................. SalinaPP 't ~~ C1 y Planning Commission R'S !LAT .:.. R-2 · Iron Avenue "03 II lB I0 mmmllimm m~ · Stapl er · , , PDD j R.2· R s ~ mmmmmmm 21 . . J uest Area . Glenni fe,l Hi 11 School · 7. ~ "' Indian Rock Park 4 3 4 2 6 5 8 3 8 7 8 4 Salina Planning Commission October 5, 1993 Page 2 ~. Andrew said it would give us so~e time to allow us ~ r~ew it before it ts presented. ~ Mr. ~orris said at the last meeting he did e~ u ~. a conce~ with others who questioned the balance of ':" ground~up there, and I would hope that their in thatN would involve the anticipated use the balance that ground. ~, Chairman said the ground and are not · included particular application. She the '~ applicant if was clear on what the concern there? · : Mrs. McArthur .d no, not fully. ~.. Chairman Seaton if we had a map. ;.. Mrs. McArthur aske¢ he was discussing common areas? .... Chairman Seaton said Mr. Andrew showed the around to the east. Mrs. McArthur said that goes with that house. Mr. Andrew Said he thought Mr. Morris Is saying, is that there was some concern about this Lot 5, or the tract that goes with the ina1 house up there, that should somehow be addres! whether there Is any anticipation or whether it ~ible to further divide that lot to create an add~ out of this property~ what the contours are, re~ :ic that is, whether there is any plan to do Mrs. McArthur said it depend he buyer. I have no interest in doing there, whoever buys that lot with the 2 acres. Mr. Dudark said if plan were to be with that Lot 5 shown it is, it would be .l~ited to one dwelling be( of the PDD, unless there were a reapplication a new plan presented and a d~w hearing. They wouldn't ~ any right to add a second d~lling, or third dwelli~ or something like that in there b~cause it would be a ~q . you wouldn't be able to do any m~re than what was a~o. d. That's not to say that some time,in the future s ~bo. who owns that may come forward with ~plan for that ~rea but the plan could be nothing other tha~ one home. ~ MOTION: Mr.! n moved that Application #PDD93-8 be ~able~J until meeting on November 2, 1993. ~ SECOND= Mr seconded the motion. VOTE= vote was unanimous (6-0) in favor of the motion. carried. #4. Application #Z93-10, filed by the Salina City Planning Commission, requesting the rezoning of Lots 1-10, Lots 12, 14, 16, 18 and the West 20' of Lot 20 in Block 2 of the Hansen Court Addition from C-5 (Service Commercial) District of C-3 (Shopping Center) District. (1400 Block E. Iron) Mr. Andrew explained that this was an application that was initiated by yourselves and carried out by staff. On August 3, of this year, you considered an application filed by Bill Medina to rezone land from R-2 to C-5 to allow additional commercial office area to be developed and at that time we recommended that the property be approved for a lesser change to C-3 which would be Sallna Planning Commission October 5, 1993 Page 3 -'. consistent with the executive office plaza to the east. f During that meeting the possibility was discussed of ."~ -initiating an application for the remainder of that area · . zoned C-5 to downzone it to C-3. That has been initiated, the affected property owners notified and the adjoining ':" property owners notified. As we noted at that time, C-3 ~ would allow all the uses that have already been developed -' in this area and are being proposed, which include ~? business and professional offices. If this downzoning -.,~ were approved the status of those properties wouldn't change, if they were conforming under C-§, they would i remain as conforming uses in C-3. The only changes would · ... be the types of uses that could be developed on the :. undeveloped tracts would be more restricted. The primary .. differences between C-3 and C-5 are outlined in your report. C-3 does not allow any outdoor display or storage .. of goods or equipment. C-3 has more restrictions on lot coverage, you can only cover 40% of your lot and the type of parking paving coverage that you can have, you've got to have additional landscaping out adjacent to the street " where as in C-5 you could .basically pave out to the property line. So those are the primary differences. Our belief is that this change to C-3 would be more compatible "' with the surrounding development and would be compatible '~ with the existing development that is there.. What could of and should have been done was including the property one block to the west, the Marketaide and the Top Hat Dry ... Cleaners' property in this application. If you believe .: this is a proper step, we could, at a later time bring an -. application forward and notify them and initiate a change .. for that block as well. That would provide more - consistency along this corridor and more protection for . the surrounding area. With that I'll see if you have any '- questions. · ' Mr. Hardman asked if there was the possibility of amending the application to include Block I rather than file a new separate application? Mr. Dudark said at'this point you couldn't expand. You could only reduce it in size. So it would take another advertisement to do that. You could table this application and you could file an amended application and publish that notice and then combine the two together for another day, if you wanted to do that, it is possible. Mr. Hardman asked if that would be more efficient? · . Mr. Dudark said it is going to take time whether we ':. proceed with this and come back and take the other block .. on its own, it would be the same amount of time,, it's whether or not you want to have both of them considered -: together. Mr. Hardman said that it seemed 'that the two are so closely tied together that there's not inclined to be opposition in one block and not in the other and it would require City Commission action only one time instead of two. Mr. Dudark said that was true, also some advantage to one ordinance published. Mr. Andrew said the primary time consideration said is Just collecting the list identifying the property owners and compiling that list and getting the notices out. That would be the same whether it were filed separately or attached to this application. Chairman Seaton asked If there were further comments from the public. She asked if everyone was notified and was .'- there any response. Salins Planning Commission October 5, 1993 Page 4 Mr. Andrew said yes, we got a response from Dr. Huseman's · veterinary clinic. He Just had questions about whether that would change the status of his business and that is a ~.~ permitted use in C-3 and well as C-5, so there wouldn't be ¥. any change. Chairman Seaton said she knew he was concerned about the effect on the marketability of the property area. Mr. Andrew said it. is all developed along Indiana Ave. The portion that's along Iron, they were planning business and professional offices there anYWay, Which is allowed in Mr. Hardman asked if we would Consider this in 4 weeks? Mr. Dudark said November 16 would be the hearing, if you -i~ were to combine the two and you want to go to that ... alternative. Mr. Hardman said in the .best interest of the City Commission, we should Just table this and vote Jointly. Mr. Dudark said or Just direct that the application be amended to include the block to the west and that the hearing be scheduled on November 16, 1993. MOTION: Mr. Hardman made a motion to direct the application to be amended to include the block to the west and that the hearing be scheduled on November 16~ 1993. SECOND: Mr. Morris seconded the motion. Mr. Hardman asked if Mr. Dudark had a call from Block 1. Mr. Dudark said yes, I got a call from Gary Ray of ':' Marketaide about it. He wasn' t aware that some · undesirable uses could go in there. I think he would be in agreement on this. VOTE: The vote was unanimous (6-0) in favor of the motion. .-~ Motion carried. 95. A~lication #Z93-11, filed by William J.. stove~ re,sting a change in. zoning district classificat~n from ~1 (Single-Family Residential) to R-2 (Multi-F2~lly :- Residen~al) on property legally described as ~e~ 11, Block 7 ~L~ the Replat of Faith Addition to thC/City of i.. Salins (aka~ Meadowbrook). / Mr. Andrew re,wed the Staff Report. /The applicant, ~'~ Wil 1ism Stover wa~resent. / ..~' Mr. Andrew said you' ~ceived an iden~cal a~plication for this particular lot ~n Decembe~w 1992, and it was ~. considered by you on JanUary 5,/~993. In the background , ~ghlights the history on thi~~p at the C ty~ Commission : l~~ng did not receive ~~a result the ordinance . ~ n~ter ~.denial of a zoning ~ h~ months before th~catigK can be f~led agate. That six month ~. ~~piicant ~s brought this '-- applicat~on f~n. He is seeking ~ go from R to .. R~~I x~ this lot, i~ s~me. This proper~ has been .. zoned S~le~as originally p~tted in 1961~e City at a tax sale~ 1989' a~.e_ ap.plicant: ~The .. ~cxano~ £teheilsS l:~ta~th~atn las sm~nr;le:_efal~e ~o°me.C°nS~erU~~. MINUTES SALINA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COMMISSION ROOM November 16, 1993 4:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Duckers, Morris, Hardman, Haworth, Allen, and Garnett MEMBERS ABSENT: Seaton, and Larson DEPARTMENT STAFF: Dudark, Andrew OTHER STAFF= Dahl The hearing began at 4=00 p.m. Mr. Hardman welcomed the newest member to the Planning Commission, Clarke Garnett. 91. Approval of the regular minutes of October 19, 1993. MOTION= Mr. Morris moved that the regular minutes of October 19, 1993 with one correction on page 12 be approved as corrected. SECOND: Mr. Allen seconded the motion.. VOTE: The vote (6-0) was unanimous in favor of accepting the corrected minutes. #2. Amended Application #Z93-10, filed by the Salina City Planning . Commission, requesting the rezoning of all of Block i and Lots 1-10, 12, 14, 16, 18 and the West 20' of Lot 20 in Block 2 of the Hansen Court Addition from C-5 (Service Commercial) District to C-3 (Shopping Center) District. (1300 and 1400 Blocks E. Iron) Tabled on October 5, 1993. Mr. Dudark gave the Staff Report. He said this application goes back to a zoning case that was submitted for a tract of land off of Iron Avenue. The request, some of you may remember was to apply for a zoning change from R-2 to C-5. During that process, with input from surrounding property owners and also some Staff comments that related to some of the uses that were permitted in C-5 that could be of some concern, particularly automobile sales, contractor storage, ~ boat and RV sales, various things that were allowed in the C-5 District that would not necessarily be compatible with an office type area and this is primarily that kind of an area, the rezoning was changed to a C-3 recommendation. That was what was approved because the applicant wanted to build a professional office and that was permitted in C-3. We got to looking at that, in fact all of the uses in here that are existing are allowed In the C-3 District. There is some ' vacant property here in front where this office building is planned. There is some vacant land over here on the south side of Marketaide which could be developed. Staff presented this to the Planning Commission and you concurred in a down-zoning application. We notified everyone in the east block, didn't include the west block, and the suggestion was, why don't we combine the two together. Let's have a total application instead of two separate ones. We did that and the hearing on the combined application is today. So our · recommendation which is in the report is to approve C-3 for both blocks. We believe that all the uses that are there are in fact, permitted in C-3 and the C-3 List of Uses is a more compatible list as well as the development character, you would have less front yard parking, there would be some open space in a front yard in a C-3 zone but it is not required in C-5. Also some of the building coverage is more extensive in C-5 than in C-3 District. Given the character of this area, more or less in an office area, starting with Marketaide and '- going down, with Just the one exception, really the Hardee's -'- Restaurant, even though it is a C-3 use, you wouldn't expect · to find it there, and then the executive office plaza. The overall C-3 plan in here is more compatible with the businesses and the surrounding residential area, so our recommendation is to proceed with the change in zoning to C-3 District with reasons of compatibility, based on adjacent uses . Saline Planning Commission :'-. November 16, 1993 Page 2 In the surrounding area. X'd be happy to respond to any questions. Mr. Garnett said the only question that I had was that if paving covers your yard at 60% versus 100%, I would think that Hardee's paving exceeds the 60% maximum tn C-3. Mr. Dudark said they have already completed that so we would not require them to convert. Mr. Hardman asked had there been any correspondence? Mr. Dudark said there were calls from existing property owners. Once they understand what the objective Is they are generally supportive. MOTION= Mrs. Duckers said that since we recommended that Planning Staff do this, combining two different things together, I would move that we approve the Application #93-10 to C-3 In that the area ts adjacent to a C-3 District and a change to .. C-3 zoning would be more compatible with the surrounding office and residential than would the current C-5. SECOND= Mr. Garnett seconded the motion. VOTE: The vote (6-0) was unanimous tn favor of the motion. The motion carried. 93. A~pltcation #Z93-13, filed by First Bank Kansas requesting c~nge tn zoning district classification from (Agricultural) to PC-5 (Planned SerVice Commercial) on East\ 200' of a 5.2 acre unplatted tract located on the side f South 9th Street between Sullivan Drive a] the Subdivision (aka 2850 S. 9th.) Mr. said this is an application to rezone tract of land on 9th Street Just north of the Wal-Ma: property. Earthcare located on this tract of ground. You have a va=ant then the Shoney's Restaurant here, Just to give you location. The applicant ts the front 200 feet f this property which ts foot across, which is a an acre in size. want to develop a branch bank on property. They have site plan drawing of the proposed ~lopment. This Is frontage road. There ts an entrance lrive here off of Street. This ts Sutherland Drive, has only been for Just a little ways in here. The 3f it ts a y platted street, the north half has )letted, south has not. This whole tract ts unplatted, agricultural now. The plan ts to construct the In this location, to have the drive-through traff: off of the frontage road on Sullivan Drive, the new ng would be extended back to this point, they would turn l; where there is an existing paved area for the Earthca3 and drive around the rear, go through the drt and then out and exit either right or left on road. There would also to the parking here be a drive going off the/. .for walk-tn customers. TOre would be exit out here at the same location. There/is a small pond ~ this area. It was Just constructed as/a part of the ] o~ect, it was not a requirement at the/~tme. The property ls~ever been rezoned, it has a Condltt~hal Use Permit for the nt~sery observation and was never p~tted. It ls in the city t~ough. Changing the zoning on ~hts, we had to formalize the drainage plan and : that provide~/ for slight relocation of th~ pond, some enlargement ~f that. It will essentially colle~ water from · . this prope~y and also from part of the Earthcare~slte which will run ~nto the pond. There's an outlet here ~lch will drain ov)6r to the ditch, here between the Frontage~oad and 9th street, and then go north along with other dralnag~tn the .area./This is between other developing areas. You've ~t C-3 zont~ to the south, there's C-5 zoning to the north. Al~the Sa~/s Club area ts C-3 zoned area. The application ts~or P~nned C-5 w~th this site plan as part of ~he proJed~.