7.1 Zone Golden Eagle 2
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE TIME
6/3/02 4:00 P,M.
1 & la
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
DEAN ANDREW
PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
BY:DA
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
AGENDA SECTION:
NO,
7
ITEM
NO.
BY:~
Item
Amended application #PDD93-6B, filed by Excel Development Corp. requesting approval of an
amendment to the Golden Eagle Estates Planned Development District and an amended preliminary
development plan to allow construction of a elderly housing facility consisting of apartments and an
assisted living facility on property legally described as Lots 1-11, Block 1 in Golden Eagle Estates
Addition No.2 to the City of Salina, Kansas. The subject property is located on the north side of
Magnolia Road east of Huntington Road.
Backqround
On October 26, 2001, the Planning Department received an application from Architectural Design
Associates of Lincoln, Nebraska on behalf of the Excel Development Group requesting amended
preliminary development plan approval and a change in underlying zoning district classification from
R-2 (Multi-Family Residential) to R-2.5 (Multi-Family Residential) to allow construction of a 140 unit
elderly housing facility on property legally described as Lot 1, Block 1 of Golden Eagle Estates Addition
No.2. The subject property is located on the north side of M~gnolia Road east of Huntington Road.
The current zoning of this property (PDD/R-2) would allow the construction of up to 60 town home units
with a maximum of 4 units per building on this 6.73 acre site or a density of 9 dwelling units/acre. The
original plan proposed by the applicant called for construction of a single two and three story structure
with 100 independent apartment units and 40 assisted living units, a density of 21 units/acre, more than
double what the current zoning allows. The proposed building had a 65,000 sq. ft. footprint, was 522
ft. long along the front (Magnolia Road) side and had a proposed height of 54 ft. in the three story
section.
Because this application involved a change in zoning, notification was sent out to adjacent property
owners and a public hearing was held by the Salina City Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on this application on December 4, 2001. At the conclusion
of the hearing the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend denial of the applicant's request. The
Planning Commission expressed concern that the magnitude and scale of this housing project as
proposed would be incompatible with the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
On January 7, 2002, the City Commission considered a request from Excel Development to have this
application sent back to the Planning Commission to allow the company and its architect to revise their
plan for the site and present their revised plan to the Planning Commission. The City Commission
voted 4-0 to keep this application alive and sent it back to the Planning Commission to give the
applicant a chance to prepare and submit a revised site development plan for the project.
Since that time, the applicant has worked on revisions to the site plan that attempted to address the
concerns expressed by both neighbors and staff during the public hearing held December 4, 2001.
Based on the configuration of the site, comments by City Planning and Engineering staff and the
concerns expressed by neighboring property owners, the applicant has developed several site plan
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE TIME
6/3/02 4:00 P,M,
AGENDA SECTION:
NO.
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
DEAN ANDREW
PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO,
Page 2
BY:
BY:
options over the past four months. They have now submitted a revised plan that they and staff believe
to be a workable solution.
Summary of Revised Plan
The applicant's revised plan now incorporates Lots 2-11, Block 1, into this multi-unit elderly housing
facility. This has increased the size of the proposed development site from 6.73 to 9.77 acres. A
retention/detention pond with walking path has been added west of the building and is accessible to
residents of the facility. The two (2) access drives originally proposed from Magnolia Road have been
reduced to one main entrance. This main entrance leads to a perimeter drive that accesses the main
entries on the south and east as well as the parking lots, the parking garage, and the loading area on
the north side of the building.
The building configuration has been reworked in such a way that the overall length of the building has
been significantly reduced from the originally proposed length of 522' to 433'. The building has also
been reduced from a three-story 54' high building to a two-story 37' high building. Lots 2-11 along the
west and north perimeter of the site would be eliminated and incorporated into the building site. A
potential building site for future townhome development is now being proposed on the eastern side of
the property, along with a private road with access from Eaglecrest Avenue that would terminate in a
cul-de-sac. This proposed road will be private and could provide an additional entrance to the facility
from the north. However, the applicant does not plan to develop the cul-de-sac and town home buildings
at this time.
Review Process
The applicants/developers have asked that the review of this proposed project be divided into a two-
step process and in Salina's PDD regulations there is a two-step process already established.
Step one was for the Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing to consider whether the PDD
should be changed on Lots 1-11, Block 1 of Golden Eagle Estates Addition No.2 to allow multi-family
housing for the elderly and an assisted living facility. If this zoning change and the applicant's
preliminary development plan are approved, the parameters for the project will be set: maximum
building height, maximum lot coverage, minimum setbacks, number of parking stalls and amount of
signage, etc. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing, the Planning Commission made
a recommendation to the City Commission which was favorable and has been put into an ordinance
rezoning the property. A favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission and approval on
1 st reading by the City Commission would tell the developers they can build what they'd like to build on
the property.
Step two would take place when the applicant has developed detailed plans for the project and is ready
to build. These detailed plans would go back to the Planning Commission for "final" development plan
approval. At this stage, the Planning Commission would look at the architectural appearance of the
building, landscaping and screening, site lighting, signage, the design and function of the pond area,
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE TIME
6/3/02 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION:
NO.
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
DEAN ANDREW
PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO.
Page 3
BY:
BY:
etc. Staff would wait until this stage to request more detailed information about the pond's storage
capacity and how it will look, function and drain and to where it will drain. Additional detail about utility
extensions and fire protection will also be required at this time.
Staff would note that the addition of Lots 2-11 to the development site would also necessitate a replat
of the property to eliminate internal lot lines and platted utility easements. This would be done
simultaneously with the submittal of a final development plan.
Zonina Ordinance Reauirements
The current development limitations on this property were approved in 1999 and incorporated into
Ordinance No. 99 - 9960 They currently read:
1.
Development limitations shall be as follows:
b.
Lot 1, Block 1 of the replat area shall be limited to 60 single-family attached dwellings
containing no more than 4 units per building.
Lot 2-11, Block 1 and Lots 1 & 2, Block 2 shall be limited to the uses permitted and the
lot size and bulk regulations specified in the R-2 Multi-Family Residential District.
a.
2.
Separate final development plan applications for the two cluster townhome areas (Lot 1, Block
1 and Lot 3, Block 2) shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to development of
those areas.
The PDD process allows the City Commission to create a customized zoning district for a proposed
development including the limitation and addition of uses, and modified lot size, setback and other bulk
and density requirements. In staff's analysis, the applicant is only asking to include multiple-family
dwellings for the elderly as a permitted use in this PDD. It does not appear that any other modifications
are being requested. The proposed 130 units on this 9.77 acre lot (13 du/acre) are within the density
limitations of the R-2 district. The independent living facility is similar to multiple-family housing while
the assisted living facility is similar to a group care facility, both of which are conditional uses in the R-2
district.
Suitability of the Site for Development Under the Existina Zonina
This factor deals with whether there are substantial reasons why the subject property has remained
vacant as zoned or cannot be used in accordance with the existing zoning.
The subject site is a flat piece of undeveloped ground with 845 feet of frontage on Magnolia Road. No
portion of this site is in the 1 DO-year flood plain, however, the site does sit lower than Magnolia Road.
This site is currently zoned R-2 and is suitable for residential development, however, R-2 zoning does
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE TIME
6/3/02 4:00 P,M,
AGENDA SECTION:
NO.
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
DEAN ANDREW
PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO.
Page 4
BY:
BY:
not permit elderly housing facilities and group homes by right. Therefore, the applicant is requesting
a change to this PDD to support the type of higher density, elderly housing development they are
proposing.
This site is predominantly bounded by undeveloped, residentially zoned property except for five (5)
developed lots along the eastern property line, which consist of single family dwellings. Eaglecrest
Drive (which is platted but undeveloped) adjoins the north and west property lines and residentially
zoned property north of Eaglecrest Drive is undeveloped at this time. To the south of the property is
Magnolia Road and properties along the south side of Magnolia Road are zoned residential and are
predominantly undeveloped at this time as well. A sewer pump station is located directly across the
street on the south side of Magnolia Road.
The proposed development will be located on the southeastern fringe of the community and is
surrounded by new residential development and residentially zoned undeveloped property. The
Comprehensive Plan calls for medium density residential housing on this parcel. The applicant's
revised proposal meets the density requirements of the R-2 district and therefore the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Character of the Neiahborhood
This factor deals with whether the requested zoning change would be compatible with the zoning and
uses of nearby property.
The site abuts River Trail Addition on the east and is part of Golden Eagle Estates, a mixed-use
residential subdivision. Neither River Trail Addition nor Golden Eagle Estates are fully developed so
direct impact on surrounding properties is limited to the single-family residences located east of the
subject site along River Trail Road and Aidan Court. The property north of Golden Eagle Estates
subdivision is outside the city limits, as is the property east of the River Trail Addition. Properties along
Huntington Road, which provides the western border to Golden Eagle Estates, have been developed
as single-family residences and currently back up to the undeveloped property along Eaglecrest
Avenue. Properties south of Magnolia Road are also predominantly undeveloped, however, upon
development, orientation of these residences will be towards Sierra Drive, facing away from Magnolia
Road.
The residences in these subdivisions are moderate to large-sized homes of approximately 2,000 to
2,800 sq. ft. on quarter-acre lots. They are traditionally low profile, fairly modern homes and typically
between twenty (20) feet and twenty-five (25) feet tall. The area is newly developed so there are few,
if any, matures trees providing shade, screening or a break in the horizon. The site and surrounding
development is located on level ground once used for agricultural purposes. In general, the horizon is
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE TIME
6/3/02 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION:
NO,
ITEM
NO,
Page 5
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
DEAN ANDREW
PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
BY:
BY:
comprised of an unbroken line of single-family dwellings. And while this facility will have a profile larger
and taller than that of a single-family residence, the relationship of the size of the building to the size
of the property will have the effect of visually reducing the impact this structure will have on the rest of
the neighborhood. In addition, the applicant will provide extensive landscaping around the building and
along the property lines to provide visual continuity with surrounding residential buildings.
The Planning Commission and City Commission have made a policy decision to allow nursing homes
and group day care facilities in residential zoning districts as conditional uses because they recognized
that some locations on residential streets or in the midst of single-family residential areas might not be
appropriate for such facilities. Staff would note that the elderly housing and assisted living complex
proposed for this location is in a proposed residential development but shares a property line with only
five residential properties. In addition, the applicant has maximized the distance from their building to
existing residential development by locating the building 270' from the east property line. Any future
residential development will be separated from this facility by front yard setbacks, landscaping and
streets adjacent to the property.
Southeast Salina is a transitional area and is characterized by a composition of undeveloped
agricultural land and new residential development. This part of the community is a mixture of rural and
urban development with the land along Magnolia Road to the levee identified as a primary growth area
for the city. In addition, Magnolia Road is a busy east-west arterial, and planning practices identify
higher density uses as appropriate adjacent to arterial streets with limited access. Therefore, not only
is a development of this type appropriate, it is desirable as a buffer between Magnolia Road and new
residential development to the north.
Public Facilities and Services
1.
There is an existing 16" water main along the south side of Magnolia Road which is adequate
to meet the proposed facility's domestic water supply and fire protection needs. The details of
needed water main extensions and hydrant locations will be worked out during the final plan
review.
2.
Sanitary Sewer - The existing sanitary sewer line at the southeast corner of this site is more
than adequate to meet potential sewer needs. The sewer connection from the site to the
interceptor sewer line would be a private sewer line and would be designed by a licensed
engineer and installed by a plumbing contractor.
Storm Drainage - Details of the applicant's storm drainage system will be addressed during the
replat and final development plan phase of this project.
3.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE TIME
6/3/02 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION:
NO.
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
DEAN ANDREW
PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO.
Page 6
BY:
BY:
4.
Streets and Traffic - One (1) driveway connection is proposed along Magnolia Road and a future
private road is shown from Eaglecrest Drive. Employees, residents, visitors and service vehicles
would use Magnolia Road as their primary means of ingress to and egress from the elderly
housing facility; future townhome development will use Eaglecrest Drive to gain access to the
private road. In terms of traffic impact, published studies produced by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers indicate that single-family detached homes would produce more trips
per unit per day than retirement communities or nursing homes.
Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan
1.
land Use Map - Salina's Comprehensive Plan shows this site as being appropriate for medium
density residential development of 8-14 dwelling units/acre. The current zoning in place on this
site would allow up to 60 units (9 units/acre). The residential density proposed by the applicant,
up to 130 units on 9.77 acres is consistent with this medium density designation.
2.
land Use Plan - Salina's Comprehensive Plan does not contain any policies relating to the
development of elderly housing but the plan does contain the following Residential Development
policies which should be used to guide land use decisions:
R-9
New medium - high-density housing should be located in selected areas along major
streets, adjacent to major activity areas such as commercial/office areas and large
institutions, or adjoining similar existing multi-family development. New higher-density
development would also be appropriate adjacent to public parks or other significant open
space features.
R-10 New medium and high-density areas should be developed as overall, planned residential
environments. Within larger development areas, a range of housing types should be
encouraged, with each area sharing a common character and unified environment.
R-11 New higher-density residential development should include a distinctive landscaping and
open space system as an integral part of overall site design.
Plannina Commission Recommendation
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Excel Development's revised proposal on
May 7,2002. Following presentation of the staff report and recommendation, representatives of Excel
Development gave a presentation describing their proposed facility and the reasoning behind their
proposed site layout. Several citizens spoke in favor of the project and several adjacent property
owners in River Trail developers spoke in opposition to this requested amendment to the Golden Eagle
Estates plan. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 8-0 to
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE TIME
6/3/02 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION:
NO.
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
DEAN ANDREW
PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
ITEM
NO.
Page 7
recommend approval of this application.
recommendation on the following findings:
BY:
BY:
The Planning Commission based their favorable
1) The proposed site with its arterial street frontage is suitable for an elderly housing facility;
2) Public utilities are available and adequate to serve the proposed use;
3) The proposed project, as revised, would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and
would serve as a buffer or transition use between Magnolia Road and single-family housing to
the north; and
4) The proposed project, as revised, conforms with the medium density residential land use
designation for this parcel in the Comprehensive Plan.
The Planning Commission's recommendation included the following conditions of approval:
1.
Development limitations shall be as follows:
a.
Permitted uses on Lot 1 Block 1 of the replat area shall be limited to a multi-unit housing
facility for the elderly consisting of no more than 114 independent living and assisted
living units.
b.
Permitted uses on Lot 2, Block 1 of the replat area (the townhome area) shall be limited
to 16 single-family attached dwellings containing no more than 4 units per building.
c.
Development on Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 shall be subject to the bulk regulations specified in
the R-2 Multi-Family Residential District.
2.
Final site development plans for the elderly housing facility and townhome area (Lot 1, Block 1
and Lot 2, Block 1) shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission prior to
issuance of a building permit for either site.
The City Engineer shall approve plans and specifications for the proposed storm water collection
system and detention/retention pond prior to approval of a final site development plan for Lot
1 or Lot 2.
3.
4.
The City Engineer shall approve plans and specifications for any public water and sewer line
extensions prior to approval of a final site development plan for Lot 1 or Lot 2.
A final replat shall be approved prior to final approval of the amended planned development
district.
5.
6.
The applicant shall submit legal assurance to the City consenting to the establishment of a future
special assessment district for the paving of Eaglecrest Drive. Said assurance shall be valid for
a 15-year per!od an~ legally binding on existing and future own.ers of land within the
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE TIME
-1--/02 4:00 P.M.
ITEM
NO.
Page 8
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
DEAN ANDREW
PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
APPROVED FOR
AGENDA:
AGENDA SECTION:
NO,
BY:
BY:
Final plans for development of Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 1 shall be submitted within five
(5) years of final approval of the amended planned development district.
City Commission Action
7.
If the City Commission concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission the attached
ordinance should be approved on first reading. The protest period for this application expired on May
21,2002 and no protest petition has been received. Second reading would be held in abeyance until
a replat of Lots 1-11 is submitted for the property.
If the City Commission disagrees with the recommendation of the Planning Commission, it may; 1)
overturn the Planning Commission and deny this request provided there are four (4) votes in support
of such action; or 2) return the application to the Planning Commission for reconsideration citing the
basis of its disagreement with the recommendation.
Enclosures:
Application
Vicinity Map
Plat Layout
Original Site Plan
Revised Plan
Excerpt of PC Minutes 12/4/01 5/7/02
Ord. #02 - 10083
cc:
Craig Larmon
Jay Vallicott
Tim Howison
Dan Meinhardt
Publication Date November 8. 200 1
Hcariog Date Decanber 4. 200 1
Application No, NPDD93-6B
Date Filed October 26. 200 1
$375,00
Development Plans Attached Yes FiliDgFee
Ownership Certifiœte Received KG Receipt No,
APPLICATION FOR AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (p.D.D)
REVISED
Applicanfs Name Architectural Des1en Associates. P .C.
ApplicanfsAddress 7501 "0" Street. Suite 105. LmcoJn. NE 68510
Telephone (Business) 402-486-3232
Project Name Golden Eagle Estates / Retkement CommunitY
Owner's Name Meinhart. Dan / Howison. Tim
Owner'sAddress 1402 Sherwood. Salina. KS / 721 Neal. SaHna" KS
Legal Desaiption of Property to be rezoned (attach additional sheets if necessary)
Lot(s) One (1 ) throum Eleven (11) in Block No. One (1 )
in ReDJat of Golden Eagle Estates
Approximate Street Address Mwmolia Road & Pinnacle Drive
Area of Property (sq. fl and lor acres) 9.77 Acres
Present Zoning P.D.D. R-2 Use Vacant
Proposed Zoning P.D.D. R-2 No Chan,e Use Medium Densitv Multjple-Familv
Is the P.D.D. to be utilized in conjunction with another zone or independenUy? In conjunction with existing
adjacent R-2.
Are there any covenants of record which affect the proposed development (attach copy)?
Yes. See original oJat
List reasons for this request (attach additional sheets if necessary) To adjust PPD Unit count from 60
+ 20 duDlexes to 130 max. in existinf! R2 zonin,.
Anticipated time period for substantial completion A 2002 start with 16 mo. construction.
Total ground occupied by buildings (sq fl)65.000 +/- sf. bulldine + 24.000 Housine = 90.000 sf. +/-
Describe any non-residential uses proposed Assisted Living Care / DID1n¥ / Game & Activity
Soaces / Limited Administration Offices
Number of housing units proposed: Single family NA Multi-family 130 max.
Relationship between the application and the Land Use Plan It maintains the multiple-family use.
revising it 1Ì'om low to medium densitY.
Applicant(s)
Signature
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Subdivision
8.
9.
10,
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18,
19.
¿-~.~
Owner(s)
Signature
~~~
If the applicant is to be represented by legal counsel or an authorized agent, please complete the foUowing in order
that correspondence and communications pertaining to this application may be forwarded to the authorized
individual.
Name of Representative Jay Vallk:ott. Architectural Desi2ll Associates
Address 7501 "0" Street. Suite 105. Lincoln. NE 68510 Business Telephone 402-486-3232
m~
JJ_UJJJ
ìrt;-'3. EB~~
=.. ~ ..
-- -
~_:,
: .
/' '~::ÕJ
í~~ ...- , -:. i~~/'
, /..~ .r:ï¡, " ~
." . . ..", I ~
C -= - -- ~J'
:-r. ',--:'-rr~' ",' '
.--_: ' I; I . _¿-'.-I- :.:--; é '
:-;-'c... ,........ .
~__II', :,1.,....
--,.' ':"",,"",,-,,",,, ,('~~
"'. ' I . ,::: ,', - ;-'" ,
-,'-- \. J . ¡~.,,~ :
, " ,I'; -. .iI -- .' , ,
'--',," 'III .--,,-. ,'-,
: '. I, ' : . '7)' :
, ,-. , . . --
, ,',.of-I""',',",'" :'.
, , 'I .A ~-' "
- - n n . 'L, t. , ,,'.I ' '~Cf n .
, I '
I - I,:
. '.'-
."A_,q..~ J.--¡
- I 1/1, ,
\--_L--l-; ::
n- I ,
"
APPLICATION #PDD93-6B
FILED BY GOLDEN EAGLE ESTATES
N
W-<>- E
R-1
s
- -
Feet
800
0 100200
400
600
........-....
....--..........,.........,.......----........,....
CD
m4ffl6:
, ,
I'
t
1S111nG.
::: cì
L
- -
MAGNOUA ROAD
5 88'15'558 W
W 1135.158'
w
w
,"
~
~
~
. T
"
PCIHi' CII" '
SOUTH I ~ tEI.fllNG
Wen! '" CXIRID
TIf",RaW
SVSUVV, 'vullv(1 'tÍ lUnWWO",\ IUtJWtJ.l11tJv I ZCIC-8D (lOt) .aoq,¡ 01188 ø'1I ooar¡ ~0N1. ,0.10114 101 81- ~ ~~
A . ). V !I a. .~' d sa-¡vJoos&y dJsea ¡v.m-¡oe-¡¡qo,¡y y~ ~~
. I
(:) ~
1,1.1
W ...-' :äæ
C) I--
> C) a:
N ~
Z - q
W
c( () c:.. ') ~
-I W Lú
a.. a:: c :z
-I <
--I
<C 0..
Z
-
C)
-
~
0
'----
-r- -J
' -t---
I \
I ,
¡ I
I 1
, I
¡ I
,
, ,
." I
..--1
e
N
@j
S
III
Ð
\
,--------,
,
,
\
,
,
ti\
{
\.
@
,
,
/
e
- - /
,
';z;
IE
I. ::
,~
I
:~
15
,
II
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
,
'I
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
"
I!
ii,
L :1
. lilli II
1.le.1 I;
I II
.II!I~ I-
1IIIIIi J
I ...... II
..
SVSUVV 'vUIlvC1 'tÍ IUnUlUlO,,\ UaWaJI au I ZI:ZI:-8IIt (COt) "'0'1" 01188 IN '.1081IfI ,uA18 ,0.1011, I. HI -tJft8 ~ ~I..iw I
A . .). v.. a .~.d S~1t'OOSsy ùJpa([ f8.R\-.owUqo.ry V~ LaL:i!l
, I
I I
t ,i
I"
I ,
I I I
t i ,
, , f t t
-,
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
0
I
I
'I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
1
I
0
I
I
I
I
i
I
0
I
I
I
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
'0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
I
I
I
0
I
I
_oJ
C-')
LLl '
C
~
" C)
C)
'"
I-
2
LoU
::s
~
ëf
LU
C
ø
'2
Z
Z
<C
..oJ
~
:;a
m
<
-
en
-
0
z
:a:
N
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
;Iiiji.i: IE!
IIIII ~I
' =,
111111 I l!!J 'I
Iflill I . ~,'
~~¡J ;1
~~~" l::t I
::::: II ~ :
'..... I I
."".
"..
'. ,
....... I, i
""'.11- :
I
,
,
------~
----
/ ' ,'- ~ '-r---~ 6>
I I I I "<' " , I' ,
" , , , " '\
I : @ "e " """"\ " e ,
i I I I / "\~', í \ I -,---
I I , L______---, <\, ", ,~
,I ILL' -----'" e ",',', ' "\ i
! L______-- ----I '-'-" \~ I €
! -........... "" ,/, ,~--- ------ \,/
~-_._---------------------_.--'......, """'-." »~~>' --------------_::-:::':_:~,
' '-~......." ~' x ' -", '
I '....... /' '" ",""'-.
'......., " '
"'-. '" "" "<"
", '", " " ", "
" , , '"' ", ""
'-.," , "
"'" ','"
'" , \
\, " \
'" '\ \
\ '- "
\ \ \
\ ,\
\. '\ \,
\ "
\ \
\ \
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \
\ \,
\ \,
\ \,
\ \ \
\ ' \
" \ " , ..-
','. \~_'\_"":':::::'::
\ - -.\::::'-------
\ .- ..
~'\ \ e
, ..
~\ " L----_mh-
~\ Ln___-
'i\
Wó,-
\ '
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
i
-T----RËD
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
'1
18~
31
~i
@
€
=
b
n
ÞO:
N
\ - - --,
\ r-----
I I
\ \ e
I I
\ \
';'\m~I,=~--_~
---.,,---
I
I I
I ..
I
I
I
I
L-
¡-'
:,. í'
I !
, :
i j
, I
ti
414.6!;'
-----------
I(;2lF II=-" I ~A Architectural Design Associates P,C. Retirement Community Salina~Kansas
~ .::: n.A'1.. SuIte 1057501 '0' Str.et LIncoln, HI: 88510 Phone (402) 488-3232 "
PINNACLE
--DRIVE-
------i
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
------~
i I ff I
B ;Iill
II 1181
i"
t L !
I
I ..
c::
z
."
5:
::J
l!!J
t:
~
t:
SVSUV'V tVUI/Vler tNlunUllUO') JUôWô'/lJôv 12£2£-98t (20t) ouoqd OT989:iN 'uloaun ¡o°"1S ,0. TO!lL !lOT ~Ins ~ I ~r=:Il.ï1ø I
A . ~. ¡J . a ':J'd 8a-"'JOO_&y td¡saŒ p.m-'O~rqO.IV V'-IY - ~
I
,
/L_~
, ,
f ,
, I
, ,
, ,
) ,
" :
/ :
: '
, I
( ,
, '
, ,
, '
, I
, I
, '
, I
, I
: ,r1- - ----
n'-+L_-
, , :
, , ,
: ) I
II ,,' :
1/ :
" I
f :
, I
¡ r:~:~,
I ¡~,»'.
'I L,,~.'
, ..~,...
': ,
) :
i: :
f-J.-L- --
/1 ¡! ','
'Ii I 1:-0""., '
¡ II i ¡'~ / '.
In In!
it i it Ii
: /,
I ,
, ,
I ,
, ,
I ,
, ,
, I
, I
, I
, I
, ,
I
,
J
1
ill
II
:.
I
,
,
,
,
!
..
-----
Salina Planning Commission
December 4, 2001
Page 10
SECOND:
VOTE:
. ompson stated you that same buffer exists on 9th Street right off of
Crawford, at the Lutheran Churc e was a home taken out of there and they
extended their parking lot and there' at buffer fence that adjoins the
residential area. Mr. Chairman I would m that we approve application
#CUO1-12 with design option three as I feel that' . e best interest of both
the community and the church.
Mr, Hedges seconded the motion,
#5.
Motion carried 6-1 (Salmon).
Application #PDD93-6B, filed by Excel Development Corp. requesting amended
preliminary development plan approval and a change in underlying zoning
district classification from R-2 (Multi-Family Residential) to R-2,5 (Multi-Family
Residential) to allow construction of a 140 unit elderly housing facility on
property legally described as Lot 1, Block 1 in Golden Eagle Estates Addition
No.2 to the City of Salina, Kansas. The subject property is located on the north
side of Magnolia Road east of Huntington Road.
Mr. Andrew gave the staff report as contained in the case file.
Ms Koepsel gave a PowerPoint presentation on this site 'au ring the first half of
Dean's staff report.
Mr. O'Leary summarized how drainage and utilities would be handled on the
site and reminded the Commission that there are no plans to improve Magnolia
in the near future.
Mr. Andrew finished his portion of the staff report,
Mr. Webb asked are there questions of staff? I have a couple right quick Dean,
The underground garage is that to satisfy the parking need or is there another
reason for that and maybe we should address that to the applicant?
Mr. Andrew stated I think that would need to be addressed to the applicant, I
think our review found that they had slightly more parking than what we would
require as a minimum but again we didn't have a good handle on how many
employees or staff people they might have to figure that into their parking
needs, but I think the purpose of the garage is to provide weather protected
parking for the residents and also to meet their needs without having to take up
a lot of surface space. If you take the parking and the ring road and all into
account, it is a fairly tight fit on the 6,7 acres,
Mr, Webb asked now the other quick question I have is toward the north end of
the property where the delivery areas are, you say that is fairly tight but does
that fit within our specifications as far as the landscaping.
Mr, Andrew stated we have a minimum buffer or separation requirement of 15
ftand I believe they have that there. It is the narrowest point on the plan but on
the east it is 20 ft, and up in that comer it is about 15 ft.
Mr. Webb asked are the applicants here and would they like to address the
Commission?
Craig Larmon, I am one of the owners of Excel Development Group, we are
located in Lincoln, Nebraska. Just a quick note about Excel.. we are a fairly
small company, we have five facilities in Nebraska that we have developed and
we also manage the facilities that we develop. So when we go into a community
we are there long term, we are not in to just build a building and then leave and
you never see us again so we are there managing the facility and I think that is
Salina Planning Commission
December4,2001
Page 11
an important factor about our company. What brought us to Salina is we
actually responded to a brochure that we received in the mail from Tim Howison
and Dan Meinhardt regarding this property and our marketing person has lived
in Salina for a while and she said it is a wonderful community and that we ought
to take a look at it and so that is what started this whole process and we have
been probably looking at this now for well over a year and are finally now at a
point to where we wanted to make sure that we were able to put together an
investor group that would put the money in to invest in this to make this a
possibility. We have talked to some of the area banks to see if financing would
be a possibility and all of those elements have now come together and we have
started obviously with the schematic design of the building and now we are here
before yoù folks to go through the planning process. Just real quickly let me just
say that we have been very pleased with the process that Salina has for this.
The staff has been very receptive and has been very easy to work with, things
are very well laid out, it is very clear what the requirements are and so that has
made our job a lot easier and we have really enjoyed working with the staff, In
the staff report, they asked for us to provide some additional information about
the types of housing and services we provide and I want to do that. And also
why this property cannot be developed under current density limitations. So I
would like to address both of those and I have a handout here and I also have
some extra copies if members of the audience would like one. I would like to
distribute those if I may. The facility doesn't have a name yet but we will get to
that in the future, The facility is a retirement community and it is a bit unique in
that it provides under one roof both independent housing services as well as
assisted living and let me just talk a little bit about the independent living. This
particular development would have 95 independent living apartments, these are
one, two and three bedroom apartments. They have full kitchens, it would be
very similar to an apartment building or an apartment in an apartment complex,
but what makes it really different are the amenities that the building offers and
also the services, It is a rental concept, there are no entrance fees, it is not a
buy in, the residents come and rent from the facility on a month to month basis
and so from that standpoint, it takes less financial resources than obviously a
retirement community that would have entrance fees that either are refundable
in some cases or not refundable in other cases but in our case it is just a one
month security deposit and it is a monthly rent, a month to month rental basis.
Some of the rental amenities as you come into the entrance of the building it will
have a living room, that would be typical of a large living room in a person's
house, it would have a fire place and living room furniture and probably a piano
and very nicely decorated. You would have a main dining room, private dining
room, ice cream parlor, library and resident computer room. A wellness area
with a swim spa, a beauty and barber shop, a bank, a guest room and game
room for cards and pool table and then underground parking. The underground
parking is by design from a service standpoint, we are serving an older
population that enjoys the comfort and convenience of enclosed parking and it
is a tempered space and so that is designed just as a service amenity of the
building. And then the services that we provide our meals, housekeeping,
transportation, social programs, wellness programs and then of course 24 hour
staffing that comes with the assisted living component of this project and in all
of the apartments the residents would have available a wireless emergency call
system that they can keep with them or there are units in the apartments so if
they had a health emergency they would be able to contact the staff that is in
the assisted living part of the building and they could respond to health issues.
And on the assisted living part of the building this would be 40 to 45 units again
we are just in schematics right now so we do not have a final building design
but these numbers are very close to what they will be, 40 to 45 assisted living
apartments. Assisted living is for residents who can live independently but need
some assistance to do so and those apartments are a little bit smaller than your
independent apartments, there will be studio and one bedroom apartments and
unlike the independent apartments the assisted living apartments are more of
an efficiency design. They will have a refrigerator, a microwave and a sink but
no stove top cooking facilities in the assisted living portion. For the assisted
living residents we are providing three meals a day so it is really not necessary
for those residents to have to cook meals, On the independent side we are just
serving a main meal of the day and a continental breakfast. Again it is rental, it
is month to month, 24 hour medical staffing, we will staff 16 hours a day with
LPN nurses and then the third period and third shift is usually staffed with med
aides or with people with some sort of medical training but would not be
Salina Planning Commission
December 4, 2001
Page 12
licensed nurses. The services provided there, the management of medications
is a real important key service. Assistance with dressing and bathing, nutritional
meals, housekeeping, transportation and activities, If you take care of a
person's diet and if they are eating well and they are taking their medications
properly and at the proper times and are surrounded by other people, we do
very well as a human being. As we get older we start to lose some of those key
components and it is like taking one leg off of a three legged stool and you start
to have problems, Other facts about this project, the average age of the
residents will be in the low to mid 80's so that means that we will have residents
that are in their 60's and we will also have residents that are in their 90's and
even in their 100's. The facility will employ 15 full-time employees and then the
equivalent of 10 full-time employees on a part time basis. So our annual payroll
for the facility will be about $500,000 a year and the property will pay
somewhere in the area of $100,000 plus in property taxes, It is a for profit
corporation so we do pay property taxes and that is an important consideration.
Dean had mentioned about the City parks obviously we are providing quite a bit
of amenities in the facility and I am not sure Dean, if we said that we wouldn't
want to pay any of the park fee, I am not sure that that is really an accurate
account and I am sorry if we represented that way but I think we obviously
should participate in some parks fee and we will cross that bridge when we get
to it and we want to participate in the community and we will be providing quite
a bit of services on site for the residents, The outside environment will have
walking paths and you know in our experiences with our residents they will
typically spend pretty much all of their time in the facility and utilizing the
services we provide. And then I just put together some questions and answers
that you might have regarding zoning consideration and this I think ties in with
the question on why are we asking for so many units? And is that really
necessary? As I said, our design combines both independent and assisted, and
that is a very attractive arrangement for seniors as they arß. looking at a time in
their life when they want to get out of their homes and into a facility that
provides services such as this. It is nice to know that you can go into a facility
like this, start out in the independent apartments and some residents eventually
then will move to assisted living as their needs increase some never have to but
it is nice knowing that if you move into a facility like this you can stay in one
place until you get to the point that you need skilled nursing care. We are not a
nursing home, but we can take care of people's needs pretty much up until they
are need of that skilled more heavier care and so when we design these
facilities we look at it from the assisted living standpoint and that is the most
labor intensive part of the operation and it really takes 40 assisted living units to
run efficiently. We are going to staff the same, essentially the same, you add a
few more hours as you get beyond 20 units but we are going to, the basic core
staffing is going to be the same whether we build 20 units or 40 units so 40
units really becomes an efficient level to operate at and then as we look at the
independent side we know from our experience that for every one assisted
living unit that will pretty much take care of two to three independent units. We
try to hit that mix of two to three independent apartments for every one assisted
living department and what that does is enable that assisted living to be able to
accommodate the needs of the independent apartment population as they age
and as they need those services. Will the facility result in traffic congestion and
noise, typically 65% of our independent apartment residents and 20% of the
assisted living residents drive a car. That is why we anticipate about 73 of the
140 residents will have a vehide on site. The building features underground
parking which will significantly reduce the number of vehicles that will be
surface parked and we showed those four detached garage buildings on the
plan just to have them there to say you know this might be a possibility but
chances are that those will not be built but we would like to have that option if
that was needed, The facility will provide scheduled varitransportation for
residents that don't have a vehicle and then food deliveries are typically made
twice a week and really our truck traffic is pretty minimal. Dean made reference
to a loading dock on the back, we really don't have a loading dock per se that is
where the trucks will pull in and off load it is off loaded on two wheel carts and
into a door and it is not like a factory or commercial building that has a loading
dock. Does Salina need this facility? We have had a market study done by
independent company that shows the demographics are here that will support a
facility like we are proposing. Obviously if that were not the case we would not
be able to attract the investors to invest the money to make this project a reality.
And the features of the building and the services are not available in Salina on a
Salina Planning Commission
December4,2001
Page 13
month to month rental basis so we feel that we are really bringing something
that is needed and will provide a service to the community. What are the
benefits of the project to Salina and the neighborhood? There are many
reasons to welcome a retirement community into a city and a neighborhood,
Traffic is minimal and outside environments are quiet and well landscaped.
Demands on public services such as schools, police, swimming pools and
parks are minimal, residents are friendly and often do volunteer work in the
community and in the case of this proposed facility, the retirement community
will also provide a buffer between the busy Magnolia Road and the residential
housing development to the north, I just might also point out and you folks also
look at plans all the time so I am sure you are aware and that you realize that
pictures are two dimensional and they can't show the depth and the angles of
the building and while this building is quite long it does have a lot of angles to it.
It is not just a monolith building stretched out that whole length, there is relief,
there is depth. We have built these similar facilities in other communities and
they are well received. I am going to turn the floor over to our architect and he is
going to share with you some of the design features of the building. Before I do
that can I answer any questions?
Mr, Thompson asked in terms of off-street or parking for employees how many
would you need on any given shift?
Mr. Larmon stated I would say probably 15.
Mr. Thompson asked and does the plan have those built into them?
Mr, Larmon stated yes there is adequate parking to accommodate that.
Mr, McDowell asked what is a swim spa?
Mr. Larmon stated it is a 20 ft, pool, 20 ft. in length and about 6 ft. in width and
about 3 1/2 ft. deep and it has jets in the pool itself that offer resistance current
for swimming so you can swim in place if you prefer to do that and then it also
has whirlpool jets for water therapy. So our wellness exercise program will
utilize that pool and those features, It is enclosed and is inside the building,
Mr. McDowell asked is there any age requirement?
Mr, Larmon stated yes there is 55 is the minimum age. You realize that we have
very few 55 year aids but we do set that age of 55 as a minimum.
Mr. Thompson stated thank you.
Jay Vallicott, I am with Architectural Design Associates in Lincoln and I am
working with Excel on this project and I am kind of in a dilemma because my
drawings are over there and I am over here and it is hard to separate an
architect from his drawings so I may want to bring those over as well as I did
bring overlays to simulate what I have on the board so maybe Vicki or
somebody could help me with that portion as we go through that so I am going
to hand those to her. Basically these simulate what the Planning Department
has already shown you for this development and a little bit of what Craig has
already talked about. We came and met with the staff here under the process
that you have here which Craig has already mentioned is fairly well structured,
come in and do an introductory review of what you are looking to do, get
acquainted with the different staff departments, get their feedback as you go
through things, try to respond to those needs and concerns and walk the project
on through and that is really the process that we have been in. As we got
started on this project it was an R-2 zoning, it is under a POD program which at
first we thought, well ok that is a program to allow us flexibility within the zoning
to do exceptions and variations to the original concept. It wasn't until later that
we got into the fact that well no we are still probably going to have to adjust the
zoning on this project and not just be able to fit it in under the R-2 requirements,
In both cases the staff I think has shown that the comparison between R-2.5
and R-2 are really fairly similar all the way through but they do allow for a little
more density, they do allow for a little more height. At one point in talking to the
Planning Department they had possibly looked at an R-3 in here and we didn't
feel we needed that level of involvement or change in the zoning for that. The
Salina Planning Commission
December4,2001
Page 14
,.
R-2, the way that it is set up and just to clarify one aspect in the report, It keeps
referring to this site allowing 60 units. That site was approved for 60 units at the
time it was zoned in 1999 but by density and acreage we really could have put
97 some units on this site under the actual R-2 zoning density for the 6,5 or 6,7
acres that we are looking at. And then under the Comprehensive Plan that was
talked about there was talk about low density, medium and high and I guess as
I looked at the zoning and being an outsider here I will say there is a
disadvantage, there are some disadvantages of being from Nebraska I will say,
but not on Saturdays, but according to the different zoning categories R-2 gives
us a 14.5 units/acre density, R-2.5 gives us 21.8 units/acres and R-3 43.6
units/acre so I, was associating those to well ok that is a low density, medium
density and high density and I thought our R-2.5 with the Comprehensive Plan
talking about medium density was probably right in line with what we are
looking to do and I still feel that it is probably an appropriate approach to the
project that we are looking at in that it does allow under that 147 units and we
are obviously coming in under that and as Craig has mentioned we are really
working with that mix a little bit but that is the current status of where we are at.
We feel that we have come in as what was outlined in the staff report, We have
really pulled back away from the perimeter of this project. This project would
allow us to be 20 ft, away from the front road, we are about 53 ft. and that is our
closest point. This project zoning would allow us about 20 ft. on the sides of the
property setback, we are about 75 ft. According to the staff report the rear yards
would allow us 25 ft., again we are about 45 ft. at out tightest location and then
we are more open from there so we do feel like we have reflected setback
requirements here and have been lenient on those or been generous in terms
of those. Of course it does help our benefit of our looped road and things that
we are looking at. We came in with, actually what staff didn't tell you, is that we
originally came in asking for three driveways on the front so we already felt that
we made concessions when we were backing up to tw,Q, because we would
have taken a driveway right off our back road there also. But I guess we feel
like two are appropriate on here because we have one addressing our primary
independent living and then one that would address -direct access to our
assisted living and giving identity to both of those in terms of their access and
need as well as staff has requested and we have no difficulty with really just
trying to minimize our service road access off of our east drive. It does come
around in back as Craig has already mentioned, our service area really is just a
rear parking lot that is large enough to facilitate truck maneuvering and then his
ability to leave on that. I think the Conditional Uses are somewhat parallel in
both the R-2 and the R-2.5 both allow for multi-family dwellings, both allow for
and actually call for hospitals, sanitariums, rest homes, so I don't think that we
are coming in with a product that is not appropriate for this type of zoning. What
we seem to get down to is people's terminology of massiveness of this project
and our heights. One aspect of height is that the zoning limit in R- 2 is a 50 ft.
elevation. A lot of codes from other communities and things will look at a sloped
roof and they will count the height from the eave to the peak and divide that by
two so you are taking the average height of your building at that point rather
than here in Salina you are taking the utmost peak or high point of the building
and calling that your height limitation but what that really does is it means that
we could come in here with almost a five story building having a 50 ft. straight
front on it and a flat roof so I guess we feel like we have lowered the impact of
what this zoning would allow by going to the 6/12 or 5/12 roof pitch and pulling
the eave line down on this building. I think the next picture I will go to is a
colored rendering of the front of the building. We just isolated one part of this
building, this is the Magnolia Road front, this would be the center focus of the
building there. The two story step down for the building adjacent the east
property and facing the east and then the three story is more in the center core
and the far wing. As Craig rnentioned, the arnenitiesof this, mo'st of the
amenities are occurring in the center core of this where we have the main
dining areas, the activity areas, the pool spa, library and things are in the center
core portion and when I call it center core, I am talking about this front portion
here with it. In terms also of addressing the building height in relation to the
adjacent facilities, the building is already there. We have turned the two story
portion and butted it up really perpendicular to the property line in lieu of
something that could be parallel to the property line and 50 ft. tall. So I guess
we do feel like we have responded to understanding that people are there. We
also understand and realize that a good portion of this site out of the 43 letters
that were sent out to the adjacent lots only five of those actually have homes on
Salina Planning Commission
December 4, 2001
Page 15
them, the other adjacent lots are yet to be developed or streets put in or any of
that so we feel that our timing is really good here in terms of getting here before
the whole area is developed, people do and I agree which I am sure that the
people that are coming out here do generally want to see what is going to be in
your backyard, of course the other side of that is that people love moving into a
corn field because there is nobody there to bother them, but in some reality you
have to realize it isn't always going to be a corn field, I grew up next to a
hospital and by the time I moved away from my home there were four-story
parking garages and other things backing up to my site and our house isn't
there anymore because it is a parking lot itself. So things do change over time
whether you are in an open environment out here or whether you are in a
downtown setting or different setting. I guess we are feeling that some of the
things also deal with zoning. As the history laid out, when this- development
was first looked at it was a mixture of proposed R-2 zoning and some R-3
zoning and that R-3 zoning was changed out for this PDD concept approach
and I guess that is where we are back saying hey we are trying to work within
the concepts that you have for planning and I think that is a good option to have
something in there that is conditional and allows for flexibility so that not
everything has to be so rigid. But in this case the staff from the Planning
Department itself has recommended that we go for a zoning change and that is
what we have been trying to do is follow the recommendation given by
producing the loop road or the loop water service and these various features. I
am going to go ahead and show and I think after this elevation what I have are,
Vicki has pretty much covered what the existing site looks like, This is standing
also on the south side of the site looking directly to the north kind of a
panoramic view altogether, here are the existing lots on the east property and
then actually in here there is yet to be a road put through and other housing so
right now we are pretty much open field and don't feel like we are encroaching
on a fully developed community as of yet, even though tbßre are some homes
there, From this elevation just looking across the street this one is looking
directly south then, Pinnacle Drive and again there are really no developments
or no houses developed in this area. The only thing that-we are having to live
with is this lift station that we so graciously get to contribute to. Under the
program we have been asked to share in and so right now all we have across
the street from us is a sanitary lift station so I guess we are again feeling like we
are at the right time and at the right stage to come into this development. The
building is designed such that it is three story. To start putting this down on a
one to two story building starts spreading out the magnitude of the structure
quite a bit more, starts moving people farther away from the center hub. It is the
type of thing that you can see fits on a six plus acre site. To go back and start
trying to put this on a 12 acre site or larger site just to justify the density doesn't
seem to make sense either so we were very happy with the site design and
features that were there when we came in. I do want to touch base on height
that we talked about, and this picture isn't really going to reflect it. But as we
have all referred to a ditch along the north side of Magnolia Road there, the fact
is that it is a ditch but that whole site is about 4 ft, lower than Magnolia Road.
So when we have looked at it and said well we have got some concerns that
have been raised about water depths and how to deal with those I guess it was
our thought and we felt it was appropriate that we would elevate the building to
be approximately the same height as the road that serves it rather than having
to dip down and come back or be in a recessed portion there, That was part of
the overall view of looking at elevating this building, it wasn't just to get it out of
the potential water difficulties which we could handle if we buried it down, we
would just have more construction involvement with water proofing, but also to
get it up to an elevation that is appropriate with the existing Magnolia Road as
well as its future development. I am going to show you from these two
photographs a few photographs of an existing facility that has been done in
Nebraska. This is again very similar to the front entrance that we are looking at.
As you can see it has some depth to it, it is not as long as the one you are
seeing because we have taken the wing that comes out toward you on our
design and stretched it out further, this was almost like a double horseshoe type
design, But that would be the Magnolia Road elevation that you are looking at
here. Actually the site on this one drops downhill so there is a potion that is four
stories here. Believe it or not that is the height on our backside. So that is the
side that would face Magnolia, This next one is the side that really is facing our
existing tenants, if you want to say. the people to the east, this is our assisted
living entrance and again, the wings come out toward you but the main primary
Salina Planning Commission
December4,2001
Page 16
part of the building is set back and this is the two story portion that we are
looking at here so we have considerably less immediate impact to those tenants
right now or those homeowners, The back side of this, no building like this really
has a back because somebody looks at if from some direction, when we talk
about the service area, this has a fenced dumpster area back here and area for
trucks to circulate. So that is kind of the back side that would be abutting our
north future tenants and then those units as we have already talked about are
scheduled as somewhat duplex units. Some duplexes are owned by people, at
least one side might be, other times duplexes are just leased areas so I don't
know if we are dealing with actual homeowners. We have talked to the existing
landowners there about an option to purchase those in the future and maybe
incorporate those in with our retirement center. Not everybody wants to move
right into a building at times. Some people want to go through the transition of
having kind of their own home, but somebody else takes care of the yard and
yet if they need services and things that is a concept that has been
administered in the past by Excel as well. So those lots along there are
potential options that we ourselves may have ownership of and deal with and
we have addressed that in teRns of the buffering and landscaping. Right now
we show buffering and landscaping completely around the perimeter of the
building. On the site here we have noted in our landscape schedule that this
might be optional buffering if we actually take over those adjacent lots but first
things first we just really want to address this as a freestanding lot, want to
address it in terms of the zoning. I think again staff has done a really great job
leading questions and getting answers because our first thought was gee can
we get it zoned the way we want it, and they are wanting to know where are we
putting the cars for this stall and where are we handling the easement for the
water utility services and we are saying hey we just want to know if we can do
this first and then we are more than willing to work with you on the details, thus
out of the options I think that the Planning Commission h.~s before you we are
strongly looking for going with option number one or number two there. I guess
we don't really want to have to back up and go through, I guess we feel like we
have gone through all the exercise that has been asked of us to get to this point
so to table this and look at future things we don't know what would be future
more things you need to look at options in terms of spreading the building apart,
taking it apart lower levels. I think that we have already gone through what the
design concept here is and that is to economize the efficiency of the services
being provided here and that happens best of all in a single structure. The
second option that is given there when it talks about a conditional approval on a
preliminary basis, I have a lot of owners that want me to do things on a
preliminary basis and I never know what they mean by that in terms of does that
mean get started but I am going to stop you somewhere and so that
terminology bothers me a little bit right there, Our best approach right now
would be to get approval on this so we can go back and tie down investments,
tie down the production process and kind of have this project underway and I
guess that would be our request for your consideration. I understand there are
others here to address you and you may have other questions so I am available
to answer any questions you may have right now.
Mr. Webb asked are there questions of Mr. Vallicott?
Mr. Hass stated I just have a question about the surface height of the building
that will be filled into the level of Magnolia Road and is probably more a
question for Shawn. The drainage that goes to the east, will that loop back
around to the pond on the west side or how will that all work because it appears
that this will be substantially higher than those homes to the east?
Mr: Vallicott stated that is where we hire those magical people called engineers
to figure that out. We have submitted a preliminary drainage contour plan and
yes there is some refinement in that area but our intent would be that since
most of this site is approved to be drained to the Magnolia Road ditch and so
we are just dealing with a proportional amount that was in excess of the
previously approved to be used for the overflow essentially or the detention
pond so that is something that we feel we can handle with the grading and not
interfere with the adjacent grades.
Mr, O'Leary stated I might add to that Commissioner, The existing site is
already contoured in that direction that is how we got to that point in the
Salina Planning Commission
December 4, 2001
Page 17
beginning, It drains today in that direction and elevating it 4 ft. or whatever the
dimensions are will actually just assist in that discharge. So yes the majority of
discharge will come directly into the ditch and a small portion will be detained,
Mr, McDowell stated you said that we were looking at the options on page 11 of
the staff report and you were saying you could live with option one or two, I
don't understand one, Is one saying that we are not changing the zoning from
R-2 to R-2,5 and that this would fit within R-2, is that what that means?
Mr. Andrew stated no it says that if you believe that the proposed building
design and site plan that has been presented to you today would be compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood then you could approve the amendment to
the PDD as submitted. And the amendment to the PDD is to go from 60 to 140
units and to approve this specific plan for this site.
Mr. McDowell asked is that a zoning change?
Mr, Andrew stated yes,
Mr. McDowell stated ok.
Mr, Andrew stated it is a zoning change because the current zoning ordinance
that is in place on this property limits it to 60 units with no more than 4 units in
the building and we are talking about 140 units in one building. So that is an
amendment to the existing zoning ordinance.
Mr. McDowell asked and the whole issue of building height, this was originally
or interimly or the last time it is a PDD so there may be, am I right, there is a
limit but because it is a planned development the Planning Commission then
has flexibility to modify that right and to approve it lesS- than the maximum
allowable for that zoning district?
Mr. Andrew stated right. You could do that as to height and some other things
but what you couldn't do is leave the zoning R-2 and push the density to a
category that didn't fit in R-2. You could have left it R-2 and approved a
variation for height but not for the density.
Mr, McDowell asked so you are not guaranteed that you have a certain height
in this because it is a planned development?
Mr. Vallicott stated right and that was, all I knew was that we had various
options that came under the PDD to vary from the standards. What those limits
were I wasn't real sure until Dean came back and said well I really feel we are
going to have to recommend you for a change of zoning to really accommodate
what you are looking to do here. Most of that is driven by the density factor, The
height just kinda is a freebie that comes in there with it because then all of the
sudden the 54 ft, height isn't an issue anymore because under that you are
allowed 75 ft. I believe so we are in no way encroaching on that nor would we
look to.
Mr. McDowell stated thank you.
,",' '" ,--'
Mr, Webb asked are there any other questions? Hearing none are there other
people in the audience that would like to speak to this issue? If so please come
forward and state your name and address.
Raymond Russin, 2354 River Trail Road, I purchased that property this summer
with my wife on the assumption that the R-2 zoning and the plan with a density
of 60 units would be what we would have in our backyard. The current plan puts
that access road 20 ft. from my back property line and the building roughly 60 ft.
from my back property line. This is the equivalent of better than a 5 story
building and it is nearly two football fields in length. I am against the zoning
change and I have some of my reasons. The proposed structure I have just
mentioned is immense. I believe that the adjacent properties thàt are zoned R-1
should have either the same zoning or one classification different and that is
what we have right now, I am in an R-1, my backyard, this open area is R-2, By
moving it to an R-2,5 we jump a whole classification. I am uncomfortable with
that. The size of the building is simply an intrusion on my sense of living in a
Salina Planning Commission
December4,2001
Page 18
residential neighborhood. I will have no privacy in my backyard. I have no
objection to even a two story private home built on the other side of the property
line, that is one person, open on either side. I feel already violated by this, I
don't know how big a structure it is going to take to keep me from seeing the
building or from the residents of the building from looking at whatever I do in my
backyard because their angle of regard is so very high. I believe that, and I
hope not naively, that when we entered into looking at the property and looked
at the zoning that that is what we could trust. This is a commercial enterprise. If
my information is correct, going to R-2.5 would raise the same zoning that the
Chapel Ridge Apartments have behind the mall. Now while it is unlikely with our
increasingly aged population that a business like this retirement home is going
to fail, with an R-2.5 it could become an apartment house and frankly the nearly
100 units for the independent living are exactly that. I don't know what the
Commission would decide if this did not get labeled a planned retirement
community but was simply called an apartment house. I don't know. My concern
is if the zoning change is permitted and the structure constructed our property,
our home which we have lived in for not quite 6 months yet would decrease in
value. Since the purchase of the home I have spent an additional many
thousands of dollars on landscaping, an irrigation system, a well and a shed
workshop, I find it almost funny that I had to get city approval before I could
locate my 12 ft. x 24 ft. shed in the backyard, I had to identify where it would be,
I had to have pictures or drawings of what it would look like. My covenants in
River Trail require me to paint it so that it matches my home and I am very
comfortable with that because those requirements protect my neighbors'
property values. I would hope that the Excel Development Corporation is held to
the same standards for our community, for our neighborhood as I have been
held to, I may be naive, but I truly trust the City and the planners and the
Planning Commission because I see you as protectors of our neighborhoods
and property values, Please act in a way that reinforces tbj:lt trust. My concem,
and you probably know this far better than I, that if homebuyers like myself
cannot have faith and trust in the zoning of nearby but undeveloped land than
who is going to risk their money to buy a home that ís not surrounded by
complete development? I know there was some allusion to Well you can't
, expect to live in a corn field forever". I never had that expectation, I knew there
would be development, that is fine. I have absolutely no problem at all with the
original zoning, with 60 units be they configured into duplexes, tri-plexes, quad-
plexes, The other envisioned plan was the cluster housing, I have no problem
with that either. Those are appropriate, they fit with the community as I see it
developing. Some material that the City sent me that sort of details to the
uninformed like myself what the structure and sort of the guidelines for you
gentlemen says that the Planning Commission must determine whether the
property is suitable for development under existing zoning. Well I think the fact
that there have been idea concepts that have come forward, a number of them
that handle the existing zoning, speaks yes to that it certainly can be developed
and developed well with the existing zoning, That other information or that
information goes on to say that the request must be compatible with existing
zoning and uses or will it adversely affect adjacent properties. I don't believe
that it is compatible, I am very sure that I have been told by realtors that it will
adversely affect my property value. I don't mean this to sound snide, but the
architect made some comment about possibly purchasing the vacant lots that
ring Eaglecrest Drive, maybe they would like to offer me a price for my home
and what I have put into it so that I don't lose my value if this structure is built.
Also to be considered I am told is if there will be an unreasonable increase in
traffic and I can't answer that. I don't know if the increase will be reasonable, but
it will be significantly greater than what will be generated by 80 fewer housing
units or 80 fewer family units in that space, the original 60 unit limit. That traffic
increase will come from, aswê' Have already heard, from a variety of sources,
Nearly 100 of the units will be independent living. I have already mentioned, to
me that is an apartment house. We know that they are going to be rented by the
month. I don't know how else one defines an apartment house except the place
where you get an apartment and can rent by the month or some other lease
factor. These people are with an age cap of 55 very active. My mother who just
moved here from Connecticut will be 84 in less than a month. She is out every
day, multiple times during the day, There will need to be staff and we have
heard some of the numbers of the staff and for the assisted living facility there
are going to be three shifts of workers, people coming and going at three
different times of the day. There will have to be deliveries for food and linen and
Salina Planning Commission
December 4, 2001
Page 19
other supplies so there will be an increase in truck traffic and under the current
plan that truck traffic is driving essentially 20 ft, from my backyard. And while it
is not significant it is something that needs to be considered. I just ended 15
years of volunteer service in Lindsborg as the Assistant Director of their
Emergency Medical Service. There is going to be emergency vehicle traffic and
some week will go by and there won't be any and there will be some weeks
where there are 10 or 15 calls, but again the location of where ambulances
come to assist those who need to go to the hospital, where they park, how they
load, all has an impact on at least myself and my neighbors, some of whom are
here. The residents of the independent living units are going to be active people
and they are going to come and go. So that is my point about the traffic, it is
going to go up. I don't know how seriously it is going to go up but I do have a
concern with the closeness of the planned eastemmost access because it is
separated from River Trail Road which is my access to Magnolia Road simply
by the depth of my lot plus 20 ft. That is a fairly short distance. I have other
concerns, light pollution, perhaps other sources of sound pollution, visual
pollution in terms of the size of this structure. Ultimately, I think it is a
commercial venture being plopped down in the middle of the neighborhood
because the neighborhood is incomplete. This disregards those of us who are
there right now. If the neighborhood had not had any construction in it I would
accept that argument, but what about those of us who have come and settled
there? The architect also happened to mention that there is no development to
the south across Magnolia from the point of Pinnacle Drive. That is an absolute
truth, But if you go just a little bit to the west there is a lot of development there
and it doesn't look like at the rate of development, in my estimation, that from
Pinnacle Drive west it will not be very long before that entire strip is built on
because right now I don't think that there are probably more than three lots that
either don't have homes or where there are not homes under construction. So I
really do request and I do this very respectfully that you "eny this request and
that regardless of the nature of the forthcoming plans, the zoning at the R-2
classification be maintained. I know that there are others to speak. I do have
most of these comments in written form for you. -
"
Mr, Webb stated thank you. Would anyone else care to comment?
John Heline, 2064 Leland Way and I am here representing the developers of
the River Trail Addition. They have a number of concerns about this particular
request as they feel that it is quite an infringement on their development to the
people that they have sold properties to who have invested sizable dollars in
these single-family residences. This isn't just changing from an R-2 zoning to an
R-3, As you are well aware, the present zoning is a restricted R-2 zoning. It is a
Planned Development District which says you can only have X number of units,
which are 60, if it were a straight R-2 development I think you could have 97. So
we have a restricted zoning issue that is in place now that has been changed
several times and it is very compatible to the neighborhood. The project that is
being proposed I think is a very fine project and I think that it would be a very
good asset to Salina, but it is a massive project and it would appear that it is
being crammed into way too small a space and particularly in a residential area.
Just how massive is it? 585 ft. long, if I am not mistaken, the 100 block of south
of Santa Fe, the 100 block north of Santa Fe I think is about 1,000 ft. Isn't that
right? Roughly 1,000 ft. From Santa Fe to Fifth Street is 250 ft. So we have a
building that is 580 some feet long, 480 some feet wide, that would be the east
end of the project. So we are taking half of the 100 block of N. Santa Fe and
extending it from Santa Fe to the railroad tracks and we are going to add about
15 ft. to 20 ft. to the top of it and set it right in the middle of a residential district.
That is a massive structure right in single-family housing. Now, we have
assisted living units in Salina' now. One on east Crawford,' h'ówêver there is
commercial properties on two sides, there are apartments on one side and
there is single family residential on the north side. We have another one on
East Kirwin, very much again there are buffers between that and single-family
housing, We have places that are McCall Manor, again it is buffered to single-
family housing, We have the one just north of Dillons, just north of Albert, Drury
Place, but it is buffered from single-family housing. These are wonderful
institutions and they are a real asset to the community. But they shouldn't be
placed in a spot in the community where it has destroyed the enjoyment of
other folks property. Now the developer has mentioned that there are not a lot
of houses in River Trail. I can't tell you the exact number that have been built
c"," '. '",C"','" .'
Salina Planning Commission
December4,2001
Page 20
but I can tell you that there are approximately 42 lots that are serviced with all
services. Out of those 42 lots, 34 or 35 have been sold to people that have built
homes or are in the process of planning to build a home so it isn't just a vacant
com field. They bought those sites with the anticipation and knowing that there
would be development to the west, but a reasonable development and
something that would be compatible to a residential neighborhood. And that is
all they are asking is to keep something that is compatible to a residential
neighborhood. Mr. Russin made a lot of excellent points I will try not to repeat.
But in this layout as you see, their main service entrance is right at Mr. Russin's
backyard. This was replatted at one time in cooperation with the folks of
Eaglecrest to be able to make it more compatible. There is no buffer at all from
Sisco semi's bringing food in, They are driving right through his backyard. If he
is on his patio he is probably 50 ft. or 60 ft. away looking up at a 50-same-foot
high building, This is an infringement. It is really a pollution. The most active
area, in my way of thinking, and I don't mean to talk about your business, I don't
know, but it would appear to me that the area where they have the supervised
care, the 40 units, is adjacent to the residential area with no buffer. This is
where the trucks come, the laundry trucks come, this is where the ambulance
comes with the sirens, this is where the visitors come, this is where the
employees come because this will be the concentration of the employees, That
is the real commercial venture and it is adjacent to a residential area of homes
that have an average price of $200,000 plus without a buffer. When those
people bought those houses they thought they had a buffer. A great project. It
is just too small. Imagine if you would Presbyterian Manor. Now it is a taller
building, but let's just take and encircle that building with a road and that is what
you have here. Presbyterian Manor sits on a 40 acre site. They have methods
of buffering between their building and a residential area, From looking at the
plan, there basically isn't any green space. There is a little but not very much. If
these gentlemen, their families in their backyard they are 20 ft. away from a
street and a main service entrance to a commercial veñlure. They really are
and I think that he pointed that out quite well. This area will be lighted all the
time. Now you can direct light away but you still have the tight pollution, you still
have the glow, you still have the radiation. The backyards of all of these homes
will be lit every night. Every night of the year, without question. I live probably
2,000 ft. from Central Mall and I have light in my back yard. That is just the
nature of the beast, we can't change that, but we do have that pollution, we
have the visual pollution of looking up at a huge structure plopped in their site, I
had a concern about drainage, however, I think that has been answered
because the drainage for the residential area is in cooperation with the other
development and it would be maintenance on the pond but he has covered that.
One other thing about the park fees and then I will let somebody else speak.
The River Trail Addition donated a portion of land for a park in lieu of paying a
fee. It was accepted by the City with the anticipation that the dollars acquired
over a period of time through the building process of River Trail and I am not
sure if that was involved in the other subdivision or not, but that money with the
intent to use it to develop that park, the neighborhood park and I think that is the
intent of the process. Just because the developer comes in and doesn't use the
park shouldn't relieve them from the responsibility of developing that park.
There will be homeowners in River Trail that will never use the park, but they
have paid a fee, And I think that fee should be standard, it is there for a
purpose. If these gentlemen moved into River Trail and signed an affidavit that
said hey I am not going to use the park so I am not going to pay this $100 or
this $200, I don't need to and this is what we have here, If they use it for
another service and if they waive those fees that means those dollars don't go
to that park and the owners of the property around have been deprived of a
contribution to their neighborhood park. I really think that is all that I have, I do
thank you for your attentive listening but again, keep in mind the massive size
of this, it is a commercial venture, it is placed in the residential district without a
buffer. So when you sit on your back patio, see how you would like to look at a
55 ft, building that is 60 ft, from your property line.
Mr, Webb asked John in your considered opinion, being a realtor of
longstanding, if this was approved, how much would the lots have to be
discounted in River Trail in order to be able to sell them?
Mr, Heline stated I really don't know, that is something that would take a study.
The only thing that I could say is that any time we find something that is
Salina Planning Commission
December 4, 2001
Page 21
offensive to a home, it does devalue property. To what level I can't tell you, I
don't know. But I don't think that would make any difference. To use another
example, say you decide to put a thoroughfare through here. You would have a
devaluation of property but without a thorough study it is hard for me to tell you
what that amount would be. But you are putting a commercial venture right
adjacent to residential property it will have an affect. How far that affect carries
back I can't tell you. If you get three blocks away maybe it doesn't have any
affect but it is certainly a hazard for the folks and they purchased this property
in good faith. So I think this is a question that Mr. Thompson knows a great deal
about that when they are going to invest a considerable amount in a home they
want to know what is around them.
Mr. Webb stated I agree with that premise, but the way that it is zoned right
now, they could lower the roof 4 ft. and eliminate about 50, or less than 50 of
the units and not have to do anything at all.
Mr, Heline stated they would have to have not more than 60 units. Not only the
number of units, those are four units to a building, that is the zoning as it is now.
You couldn't have 60 units in one building, it is not zoned for that because it is a
Planned Development District and granted there can be some deviation, but
here you are taking all of that and putting in one huge massive structure. Any
other questions?
Mr. Webb asked would anyone else care to speak?
Richard Houghton, 2342 River Trail Drive. I am a builder here in town and there
are basically six lots that sit on this side of River Trail and abut the property and
I own two of them. I own two homes on them, I have over $400,000 invested in
them and whether John wants to put a price on it or not I really feel that we are
looking at somewhere between a 10% to 15% devaluation of the property if this
project is built. And so I am looking at it as a monetary reason, I also live where
their main entrance is going to be for their assisted living, -it is, going to back up
to my backyard. I have a covered deck, a hot tub, a shed, a privacy fence,
irrigation, a well and I am not opposed to a 60 unit development in R-2 behind
me. When I bought the lots I went down to the City, I checked it out and that
was what was on the plat" that is fine but it is a far cry from a 55 ft, monstrosity
sitting in my backyard. Traffic-wise the gentleman alluded that he would have
12 spaces for employee parking, That might be, but with that size of facility I
find it hard to believe that you have a bank, a hair stylist, service work for the
cooks, dishwashers or whatever the laundry service, and you are going to do
that with 12 people, I just can't see it. Light pollution my bedroom faces to the
west, no matter what kind of blinds I put on I am going to have light in my
bedroom, I really feel that it is a development that is commercial in scope,
commercial in size. There are spots in Salina that are already zoned R-2.5 that
they can build on and that is my opposition to it.
Mr. Webb asked anybody else care to comment?
Harold Bloom, 2348 River Trail Road. I live between Richard and Ray and I just
want to go on record that I agree with everything that they say and that it will be
an intrusion on my privacy. I really don't want to be looking at it out of my
backyard.
Mr. Russin stated one last thing. Earlier this afternoon Mr. Thompson made a
comment in another issue about where you chose to live and what kind of a
situation is there when you buy and I firmly agree with what you said. That had I
known that thiS project was going to be there i11yWifè'and I wOuld never have'
bought. We didn't come in with that information. I came here to the City, talked
with the people, found out what the plan was, those 60 units: no more than a
four plex we were fine with that. So this is a big change and we feel like we kind
of got blindsided,
Mr, Webb stated thank you, there being no others to speak on this issue I will
bring it back to the Commission,
Mr. Andrew reemphasized the Planning Commissions options as listed on page
11 of the staff report.
Salina Planning Commission
December 4, 2001
Page 22
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
#6.
"',',r,,,., ',- "
','- r> " '-,- ", '.,"
Mr. Thompson stated I just have to say that I am very much opposed to the
project and in favor of item number five, and my reasons for that are many, If I
were a developer in either River Trail or the other one on the south side, I think I
would be more than upset with the project that is being proposed and I know
having been on the Planning Commission as long as I have that the people who
reside in Golden Eagle had expressed their concern about covenants being
violated and their expectations not being met and it is unfortunate when you
look at that map that we can only go 200 ft. beyond to ask people about what
they feel about it. Really the only people involved in that are the people the two
or three of them that own land and two or three builders who have purchased
land and it would almost be to our advantage if the developers on this particular
project were to take those adjacent lots because it would give us a little bit more
distance of 200 ft. to request property owners in that area what they thought
about it. People out in, that area have built some really nice homes. All the way
from $150,000 to $250,000 homes and their expectations are that they are
going to be surrounded by a residential area and we have made some
amendments to the plan to accommodate Golden Eagle in the past that would
give them some additional space in terms of the R-2 but this just goes beyond
belief to me. I think that we do need retirement homes, we need those kinds of
things for citizens, but we certainly need to make sure that we put them in the
appropriate place and I don't think this is the appropriate place and so I would
move to deny the application.
Mr. Hedges seconded the motion,
Motion carried 7-0,
Application #SR01-1, filed by the Salina City Planning Cômmission, requesting
an amendment to Section 36-78 of the Subdivision Regulations to require that
all utilities in new residential subdivisions be placed underground. Continup-
from November 6, 2001, - -
Mr. Andrew gave the staff report that was sent to the Planning Com"",~sion.
Mr. Webb asked are there any questions of staff?
Mr. Hass asked are the cable TV cables typically under~round?
Mr. Andrew stated my understanding is the c~'",lê TV goes where KPL goes,
and if KPL goes underground they share t~ "trench and if they are on poles
they rent space on the poles but I willleP',e KPL people answer that.
Salmon stated Dean I know',~ê talked one time about this waiver that in
som laces it is so loose tÞ'(it is meaningless but I don't know how in the
world y would tie it dowr,:J specifics,
Mr. Andrew st d r:;ílnk that it would be difficult to get more specific other than
to look at terrai ~~s which we have cited as physical conditions of the land.
For exampl if you ::.~d severe slopes or backyards that went up hill or
somethi with drainagè-"'.:?ncerns, there is one provision in there where we
said' at you are going to -r,~e for underground wiring would be in an area of
s éling water or a major drainö,:'e area or something, KPL is really not going
0 want to put their wire undergrouÌì-¿~nd have it exposed to standing water, so
there could be a waiver granted in that ,"-:1';e because of the physical conditions.
But primarily this is just an opportunity fòr-...I(PL to give you some input about
whether they can live with this, if they think it~. ~d put them in a bind on any of
the provisions, and also for you to ask any questiol'~ou have of them.
Greg Jackson, KPL. ~
Tom Sydow, KPL, ft looks fine, "'-'--,-,
Mr. Jackson stated yes as Dean has put it out here, it is very well-"'¡.:ritlen; it
takes into consideration several different communities, I can see that it\,~s a
combination of the best of different communities within Kansas, so good L'\
Dean.
MINUTES
SALINA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY COMMISSION ROOM
MAY 7,20024:00 PM,
MEMBERS PRESENT:
James Hass, Rick Hertzenberg, Tom Hedges, Hampton
McDowell, Ray Salmon, Roger Stein brock, Clay Thompson, and
Margaret Yarnevich
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Paul Webb
DEPARTMENT STAFF:
Andrew, Cooper, Burger, Kissinger, Koepsel, O'Leary and Fisher
#1.
Approval of the regular minutes of April 23, 2002,
The minutes of the regular meeting of April 23, 2002 were approved as
presented.
#2,
Amended application #PDD93-6B, filed by Excel Development Corp, requesting
amended preliminary development plan approval and a change in underlying
zoning district classification from R-2 (Multi-Family Residential) to R-2,5 (Multi-
Family Residential) to allow construction of an elderly housing facility consisting
of apartments and an assisted living facility on property legally described as
Lots 1-11, Block 1 in Golden Eagle Estates Addition No.2 to the City of Salina,
Kansas. The subject property is located on the north side of Magnolia Road
east of Huntington Road, Returned by the City Commission for reconsideration
on January 7,2002,
Mr. Andrew gave the staff report as contained in the case file.
Mr, Hass asked are there any questions of staff?
Mr. Steinbrock asked Dean in the original, since I wasn't on the Commission
when this first started, what was the reasoning for wanting just one access road
there off of Magnolia?
Mr, Andrew stated part of the reasoning, well there are a couple of reasons
there. One when the property was replatted it was platted with restricted
access along Magnolia Road except for one opening along Magnolia opposite
Pinnacle Drive, So under the current plat that is the only location you could
have a driveway today. They could as part of this process request additional
driveways. What one of the concerns is of the Engineering Department is the
fact that Magnolia Road is only two-lane and is seeing increasing traffic. The
concern is if you have too many left-turn opportunities, too many openings for
people making left turns on Magnolia you are going to have more stacking and
more backed up traffic. So the thought was to minimize the number of locations
at which you could make left turns, until we reach a day where Magnolia gets
improved.
Mr. Steinbrock stated well I was looking at it from the aspect of safety from the
other vantage point for access vehicles to get in and out without a problem and
I know what that future possibility of having that road off the back. They could
go around the back then but you know there is only that one entrance and for
some unfortunate reason there is something that causes a fire or something up
there in that front area then there is only that one access point.
Mr, Andrew stated certainly that has been done in some other cases, The
Chapel Ridge Apartments that are next to Central Mall there, there is an
emergency access, it is not for general public traffic, but it is there for fire
vehicles or emergency vehicles to get through from the Central Mall parking lot
into those apartments in an emergency. Certainly that is something that the
Salina Planning Commission
May 7, 2002
Page 2
Planning Commission could look at if that is a concern, That maybe it is not a
public opening for traffic but some sort of temporary emergency access. It
could be gravel or some other surface that will allow the Fire Department to get
in or an EMS to get in from the back side as well on an emergency basis. That
is something that could be considered.
Mr, Steinbrock stated thank you.
Mr. Hass asked are there any other questions of staff? Hearing none are there
representatives of the application that would like to make a presentation, and if
so please state your name and address for the record,
Craig Larmon, 5101 Central Park Drive, Lincoln, Nebraska, gave a power point
presentation in regard to the history of Excel and their nursing facilities and their
locations. He also addressed the concems from previous meetings and went
over their revisions.
Mr. Hass asked are there any questions of the applicant? I have one. The
ownership of the facility, can you disclose that? Or just briefly summarize how
that would be handled?
Mr, Larmon stated yes, there is an investor group of 6 investors. Three of those
investors have ties to Salina. I really cannot disclose them at this point and
time, but there are ties to Salina with three of the investors. And then of course
our company will be an investor and then the current owners of the land would
also be an investor,
Mr. Hass asked what percentage does your company have.?
Mr. Larmon stated our company will have approximately 1_5%.
Mr. Salmon asked and you will provide the management?
Mr. Larmon stated yes sir.
Mrs. Yamevich asked does assisted living include nursing care if it gets past the
point where they can live by themselves? Nursing home care or do they have
to move?
Mr. Larmon stated it is not nursing home care, it is not skilled nursing and that is
determined by regulations that fall under the Kansas Residential Care Facility
Regulations. Kind of a rule of thumb is if a residenfs condition is stable and
predictable and is within the license, within staff and their licensure to be able to
take care of that stable and predictable condition then that is kind of a guideline.
The assisted living is just what it says, it is to assist residents to live
independently so to the extent that a resident, for example, might require
transfers from a bed to a wheel chair we would not be staffed to be able to
accommodate that kind of activity. A nursing home would be staffed to be able
to do that. The residents will need to have a certain degree of independence
and be able to care for themselves with assistance, It is a wonderful concept
and you have some very fine assisted living facilities in Salina already.
Presbyterian Manor and the Sterling House are all good facilities and our
research indicates that they are full and that there is room for more.
Mr, Hass asked are there any members of the public that would like to address
the Commission? If so please come forward and state your name and address.
Don Wiser, Senior Vice President of the Salina Area Chamber of Commerce.
We are very supportive of this project. I want you to know that we believe Excel
Development Corporation has been very cooperative in making the changes
necessary to get approval on this project. We believe that it is going to be a
Salina Planning Commission
May?,2002
Page 3
quality project. It is going to enhance the neighborhood. It will create about 30
new jobs in this community and be an asset to the entire community,
Tom Mulhern, Director of the Saline County Commission on Aging. I want to
express two brief opinions and I come here on my own behalf, I am not
speaking officially for the Saline County Commission on Aging, although the
Commissioners there are aware of my opinions on this and that is what I am
sharing. First there is a strong demand for senior housing in Salina and that
demand is going to continue to grow over the next 15 to 25 years because of
the population shift. And that growth will be particularly strong in south Salina
from all indications. The second point that I would like to make is that properly
managed senior housing facilities make good residential neighbors. They are
quiet, they are attractive and they generally enhance the quality of their
neighborhoods and I think that we have several good examples of that in Salina
already. I have no opinion about the quality or the competence of Excel
Corporation to take this on because I don't know anything about them, but I am
just speaking about the need for senior housing and the fact that senior housing
projects make good neighbors.
Raymond Russin, 2054 River Trail Road. This is not the first time that I have
been before the Commission and I wish to address the application to establish
this residential community in my neighborhood. I request that you reject this
proposal for the following reasons. First, I have had many e-mail conversations
with Craig, and I want to say that he and his corporation have been quite
responsive to some of the things that we have asked for, and I do believe that
this kind of project is something which is beneficial to the community, to the City
and is needed. However I don't believe that this is the right location, the right
site for this, While an adjustment to the proposed origiftal plan, a reduction
from 140 or 130 units to the 100 units now or possibly 114, and the removal of
the third story, along with the movement to the west, there are still some things
that still remain. What remains is the fact that this building is still 422 ft. long.
That is 122 ft, longer than a football field. It has a square footage of 65,000 sq,
ft. Under that roof is 1,5 acres. If you just looked at a 2,200 sq. ft. residential
home, it would contain 29 of them in that space, It will be lower, but it will still
have a height greater than any building in the area including the two churches
that are on the comer of Magnolia and Ohio. Second, when my wife and I
purchased our home in June of last year I was told and believed that the
adjacent property was zoned R-2 and in a PDD, which added very tight
restrictions to that. That it would contain townhomes. Had we even the
slightest hint that a structure such as this one was being proposed, we would
never have purchased our home. Third, regardless of what the development is
labeled this is a commercial enterprise in a residential neighborhood. It does
not belong in a residential neighborhood. The sheer size of the structure alone
will remove the sense of a residential neighborhood. Originally the Planning
Commission expressed very much that concern with the magnitude and scale
of the building. On the plus side as I have already mentioned, developments of
this type are a good thing and provide an important service to the community.
The placement however should not be in a residential community in a
residential neighborhood, Next, since the December 4 meeting when this group
unanimously rejected it, the original plan, USD #305 has purchased the
property immediately south of River Trail Road for future development for an
elementary school. Now I agree that that may be some years in the coming;
but this is something that more than likely will happen. We need to consider
whatthecongestion and the traffic congestion, especially early in the morning
and the afternoon is going to be like with an elementary school right across the
street from the River Trail I Magnolia intersection. Ultimately the request by
Excel Development is to place a commercial establishment in a residential area.
When the original planning for this area was made by the professional city
planners here, they saw fit to restrict the number of housing units for the area
even while zoning it R-2. With that PDD there was a tight restriction placed on
the number of units that could go there. I believe that the judgement made by
these professionals was sound then. And especially since the development of
Salina Planning Commission
May 7,2002
Page 4
River Trail has proceeded quite rapidly along with the development on the south .
side of Magnolia Road. To permit the requested change will have certain
consequences. One of these possible consequences, I can't guarantee it, but I
am very, very concerned about it is that our home will decrease in value. Since
I made the purchase of that home I have spent many thousands of dollars on
landscaping and an irrigation system and a shed and workshop for myself, In
order to have a 12 ft. x 24 ft. shed located in my backyard I had to come to the
city for permission. The location of it was limited in terms of where I could place
it in relationship to the lot and my house. The style of the building was or is
actually controlled both by the City and by the covenants in my neighborhood.
No zoning change was involved and it was very clear the intent of all these was
to protect my neighbor's property values. That is what those covenants are
there for. In fact the covenants even require me to paint that shed the color of
my house. This request to change will have another consequence. I frankly,
and I don't think that I would be alone, would have great hesitation in the future
should I move in Salina to buy a piece of property next to undeveloped land
regardless of how it is zoned. I think this is a very crucial point that I wish to
place before you, I know that nòthing is forever, but to take a clearly residential
development, that is not yet completed in its growth and to make this kind of a
major change, and it is commercial, we have a bank, we have a beauty parlor,
we have an ice cream parlor. This is more than simply an elderly residential
facility and indeed earlier on at one of the other meetings, Craig or someone
else called it an apartment building and that is exactly what it is, So I want to be
clear this is an apartment building regardless of who lives in it, I do understand
that the owners of the land wish to gain the greatest benefit to themselves and if
the land were not suitable for development under its current zoning I could see
this request and I might actually support it. However, the land is suitable for
development other than the proposed project as indioated in the original
concept for the site. The proposed project is not compatible with that concept
and I believe that it will adversely affect adjacent property _values. Furthermore,
if for whatever reason the proposed business does not produce adequate
revenue or earnings for the investors then the use of the building might change.
I don't know whether a use of that building to go from elderly housing to regular
housing would need to come before you. But probably if it did considering the
investment that people would have in it, it would stand to reason that this body
would allow that change. Traffic issues, an apartment building in a residential
neighborhood and the financial risk to myself and my neighbors, because we
are the ones that are bearing all the risk. If the project indeed enhances the
neighborhood Excel wins and we as its neighbors win. However, if the property
values decline Excel bears no risk. The risk is all on us as individual property
owners. I would also like to take just a minute to read a little excerpt from an
editorial that was published on December 10 following the December 4
meeting. "Despite these advantages, members of the Salina Planning
Commission killed the proposal by denying a required zoning change, It was a
good decision, the arguments against the facility were good ones. It was too
close to a residential neighborhood. It would have changed the landscape for
the worst and population density along with the accompanying vehicle traffic
would have far exceeded that recommended for residential areas. Fortunately
for all of us, local officials can afford to say no in cases like these. Salina is an
attractive market for new stores, restaurants and businesses and senior living
facilities. We don't need to sacrifice residential areas in order to win new jobs
and construction projects." Thank you very much.
Richard..Houghton, 2342 River Trail, Ray lives two doors down. I live in the
middle of the block and the facility is definitely a commercial venture. You can
call it an apartment house, you can call it an assisted living facility. I do
appreciate Excel'~ changes in their proposal, they have been receptive to what
we have said. I do have some concems. One is the value of my property. If
you back up to commercial your property is going to decline in value and it is a
tougher sale. If it is a tougher sale you have to reduce your price. Second
concern that I have is if you decide to approve this request, is the green area.
They are saying 270 ft, from my property line to their building. Well that just
Salina Planning Commission
May 7,2002
Page 5
becomes green area because it is all proposed, if you build townhouses as a
buffer than you have a buffer between my house and a commercial facility. And
my property values are in tact. Otherwise we just have a field. And the other
concerns that I have are the same as what has been voiced. Thank you,
Jerry Unruh, 2347 Aidan Court, And I have most of the same opinions that my
neighbors have. I am a little concerned that USD #305 just purchased the
adjacent land for the amount of land that they did is I think a little over
$300,000. And that land I am sure at that time was looking at single-family
being across the street where children would be coming from. As a tax payer I
would think that would be better utilized at that point. I am the same way, if I
had known that that land, and I did check into it. I came up here several times
checking into the zoning and everything like that to see what was going to
happen in the future because I moved from one side of town to the other hoping
to retire at that area to put quite a bit of my investment life into that home and if
I would have known that they were going to do this I probably wouldn't have
bought there, Not that I have anything against the facility. I think it is a great
facility, I just think that it needs to be somewhere else in this town.
Mr, Hass asked where do you live?
Mr. Unruh stated 2347 Aidan Court,
Mr. Hass stated I am trying to find that.
Mr, Unruh stated if I was to look out my front window that is what I see.
John Heline, 2064 Leland Way. I represent the developers of the River Trail
Addition. We have been through this project before, Mr, Russin has made an
excellent presentation so I will try not to repeat many ot his comments. This
particular project appears to be an excellent project, And I think that it is a good
project for Salina. I just believe that it should be located in an area that it would
be more compatible to. And it frankly isn't compatible in the backyards of
residential families. You look at the history of this property and as short a time
as three years ago at the request of the owners, the POD was restricted to the
density requirements plus not over four living units per building. If anything in
the past three years has changed, that change should strengthen that decision
made by the Planning Commission and the owner's at that time. Since that
time, River Trail alone has had 20 new homes constructed. Many of these folks
as have mentioned today checked out what was planned for that vacant area
and they found that one to four unit townhouses would be very compatible to
them, So they didn't worry about it. I have seen nothing in economics in the
area that would change to say this thing should be drastically changed to a
commercial development. I think the homeowners point that out. We look at
the density indications and they all meet the R-2. However we are not talking
about R-2 we are talking about POD which is a very restrictive form of R-2. It is
put in there so that the Planning Commission and the City has control of what
goes in there and could really speak to the concerns of the to many owners of
single-family residences what is planned for that area, What we have done, we
have accumulated all of these living units into one building. Now the builders
have indicated the height of the building at 37 ft, Is that correct? And I believe
in the previous meetings they have indicated that it would be raised out of the
ground some four or five feet.
Mr. Vallicott stated approximately four feet for flood control.
Mr, Heline stated yes approximately four feet, so this puts it in excess of 40 ft.
Now I sit here and it is hard for me to visualize 40 ft. You are all familiar with
the parking garage that the Salina Regional Health Center just constructed.
Now I do not want to imply that this particular structure is going to look like the
parking garage. Don't get me wrong. But I want it as a point of visualization.
The top edge of that parking garage, I am talking about the top parapet. Now it
Salina Planning Commission
May 7, 2002
Page 6
is pretty high isn't it? As you drive by and look at it it is pretty high. That is 43
ft. So when we stop and think what is 35 ft, and 4 ft.? 41 ft. to 43 ft. that is
pretty good sized. It is 270 ft. from the property line of these owners. A typical
lot in the better neighborhoods, say they run 90 ft. frontage, so imagine
stepping down to your neighbor's house three doors away and looking at a
building the height of the Salina Regional Health Center parking garage out of
your back yard. Most people have their greatest investment in their home.
Because probably their greatest assets, one of the' greatest periods of
enjoyment of that home is weekends, holidays etc. That is when you have the
most activity in a commercial type venture as this, When you have visitation,
that is when most families have the opportunity to visit the folks in the homes, in
the evenings and on holidays. All of these homes will suffer from light pollution
because you are going to have a light on the parking lots from sundown to
sunup and you have to be a long ways away to not be influenced by light
pollution, You are going to have noise pollution, Emergency vehicle
requirements will be greater in this type of facility than they are in a typical
residential neighborhood. You will have vehicular traffic for services. You have
food service trucks, now maybe each food service company will only come
once a week, but I don't know of any establishment that will be satisfied with
one food service supplier. You have laundry trucks, You have soft drink trucks.
You have trash trucks. When the trash truck comes by your house it comes
during the daytime, probably between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The City doesn't
handle trash for this type of operation, It is private haulers. Most of that is done
from about 4:00 a,m. to about 8:00 a.m. or 9:00 a,m. I can tell you for a fact, I
live about a quarter of a mile from Central Mall and I can count on the trash
days at about 4:30 or 5:00 a.m, they have that 4 yard dumpster up in the air
banging it to open it. Those are commercial trash haulers, the City has nothing
to do with it. That is noise pollution, This is a business venture, They call it an
apartment. An apartment is where you rent living quarters to individuals. When
you start providing services, you provide food, in their previous presentation
they indicated that they welcomed the neighborhood to come in and participate
in the food service, that is operating a food service. The 100 members of the
apartments are entitled to come and use the cafeteria. You have other facilities
that are in there to service the residents, and that is fine, this makes it a good
project. It does not make it a good neighbor to the residential development.
One other point, Excel does not wish to accept the financial responsibility of
adding the duplexes that would be a buffer. It may not be financially feasible for
them and I can appreciate that as a good business decision. However, I really
don't think it is fair for them to ask the homeowners there to accept a potential
loss of value in their home because they do not wish to accept an additional
responsibility, Typically home values will decrease when backing up to a
commercial type of property and that occurs in two ways. A reduction in price
or an extended period of time over normal marketing time. Right now in Salina
we have a typical marketing time and for this type of house it is approximately
90 days. If that is extended to 180, to 210 days, look at what it has cost that
homeowner in that delayed time, This is a reduction in value, Excel I believe
today said that their company would have roughly a 15% investment in the
project, Or not over 15% I believe. My guess is, I don't know that, but the
average homeowner has a greater equity percentage in their home than Excel
will have in this project. The Planning Commission approved a restricted PDD
just in River Trail alone, the houses that have been built exceed 4 million dollars
in value. Now if each one of these houses suffers a percentage of loss,
whether that be 5%, 10% or whatever, say it is 10%, that is adding on these
,house an average of $170,000 that is adding a $17,500 figure to their mortgage
loan or their equity that is gone and it is not recoverable through no fault of their
own, When they purchased these homes with the understanding and the
assurances from staff of the City actions of the Planning Commission some
three years ago, that this was residential property. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hass asked the six lots that abut this development how many of them are
occupied or have homes on them?
Salina Planning Commission
May 7,2002
Page 7
Mr. Heline stated I think they are all occupied with the exception of one that is
under construction on the comer of Magnolia. But those are not the only
affected properties, the ones adjacent across the street in Aidan Court there are
five homes fully occupied. All values in excess of $175,000. So I think that
these homeowners look to you to protect the integrity of the neighborhood, And
again that is not to dispute the fact that Exel has a good operation. It is just not
in the n'ght place. Thank you very much.
Mr. Larmon stated I would just like to comment on a few of the comments that
were made, On the lighting issue, there will be street lights but I don't think
there are going to be any more street lights than if you had 60 units in there or
15 duplexes. If you had 15 duplexes with streets, you are going to have street
lights and that is all we are talking. We are not talking about lighting coming off
the building and shining into the back windows, it will be down directional street
lighting. On the food service, the food service is not open to the public. It is for
the residents and their guests only and I wanted to clarify that. And on Excel's
investment, in addition to our equity investment my partner and I will be
personally guarantying bank debt probably in the low 7 figures, so we have a
significant amount at stake here and I can guarantee you that we are going to
do everything we can to make it successful. So our financial commitment goes
beyond the equity investment in this and I just wanted to point this out. Thank
you.
" .,',...~, ',...
Tim Howison, 721 Neal. I am one of the two owners of Golden Eagle Estates
as well as a partial owner of River Trail as well as Dan Meinhardt. We are not
in agreement with John Heline. As partial owners of River Trail, some of the
things that have been brought up here, the bit about it being a commercial
venture, I feel that this is a fear tactic being thrown"~in there. If it was
commercial it would have had a commercial designation on the zoning. People
are going to live here. And that is why you have a residel)tial zoning district like
this. In reference to the same situation that occurred on Holiday Resort many
years ago and some of the Planning Commissioners were probably on here but
most of you weren't. There was a lot brought up about buffers and everything
else, Most of the streets around there were all open, they were not built on,
Very few homes were built around the Holiday Resort at that time. Since that
time, any of you can drive up there and about every lot that I know of is filled,
There have been numerous resales up there and they haven't been selling for
less money, I am a broker, I have been in the business for 23 years, I have
been in the trenches. The values continue to go up there. They have not gone
backwards. And I would ask anybody to check your County records on property
values up there to see if they are not quite a little higher than what they were
five years ago when Holiday Resort began. As far as the location being correct,
Drury Place, the west side is all backed up to residential. Sterling House on
east Kirwin, there is residential all around it. Sterling House on the hill,
residential backed up all across the back of it. Shalimar Nursing Home or
Assisted care, I am not sure which it is down there in the southeast part of town,
that is totally encompassed in residential. The reason why these are built in
residential areas, now we selected this site for this purpose. Before Excel came
into the picture because of the heavy traffic on Magnolia Road it is a good
location for it. Magnolia will be expanded in the future, there will be more traffic
on it regardless of whether we like it or anybody else likes it because it is going
to become a more major arterial road in the future. The more major arterial
roads tend to draw uses like this, They draw the schools, the schools are going
to create a lot of traffic. I take .exception with what they said on the implication
of what they said about more traffic, it is just the opposite. In prior meetings,
Craig Larmon had covered that there will actually be less traffic when you have
this type of facility as opposed to a bunch of four plexes, It is just the opposite,
Since December when we came back in here, one of the houses that was listed
right over there that one of the people had spoke previously here has sold.
Since then another home built by Dan Dailey is going up. Now I have talked to
Mike Let, which is the builder for Dan Dailey, he has no problems with this.
They have built numerous homes over there, in fact they have built more homes
Salina Planning Commission
May 7,2002
Page 8
in River Trail than any other builder and they are building towards the top end.
So apparently he wasn't concerned about it or he would have resold that lot.
His backs right up to this facility. I guess I am a little confused about some of
the comments of devaluing the neighborhood with the whole facility in that, I
don't know how else to put this but on the north half of River Trail the lots will
get a lot smaller, The housing will get a lot cheaper because of smaller lots.
There are 73 ft. duplex lots over there and they are zoned for duplexes for two
units on one lot. I don't see how, I guess I am a little confused how this is
comparable to this situation because our lots all the way through Golden Eagle
are averaging 80 ft. plus and normally 85 ft. or bigger for one unit. I think it is
an excellent location for this. Excel Development is a class act, I have seen
their facility up there. We have had others approach us, but have turned them
away, We personally visited the facility up there in Lincoln, Nebraska. It was
excellent, what you see on the screen up there is what they have. The outside
landscaping there are numerous berms, a lot of landscaping, they do a class
act on this thing. You can't hardly go 10 ft. that there isn't something changed
on the terrain. They have veranda's coming off of the units where the people
live so that they can go out and drink their coffee in the morning. They don't
have just the standard hallway like you see on some of the fancier assisted care
here in town that looks more like a hospital. They are all store front and
everything, I guess what I am saying is that it just really looks nice, I looked at it
and we looked at it before we would even consider this. But we are in support
of this and I think that it is an excellent place for it. The property value deal to
me is hocus pocus. It is a lot better than looking at 40 privacy fences going
down Magnolia in a 980 ft. linear area which is what that is. They mentioned
400 and some feet on the building but that is less than half of the distance of
the entire linear feet up and down Magnolia, This will look a lot better with a
greener area. We are tickled pink that they are putting &..pond with a fountain
down there and a lot of landscaping and a walking path around it and a gazebo.
We think it is going to be a really nice entry for Goldel'l Eagle Estates when
Eagle Crest is put in, Are there any questions? Thank you.
Mr. Heline stated I would like to correct Mr, Howison's memory in reference to
Sterling House, First of all these are single story structures. Sterling House on
Kirwin or S. Ohio Street is located across the street from a church adjacent to a
low income rental duplex project for elderly and backs up to zoned commercial
property. The property adjacent to the west of it is commercially zoned.
Sterling House on Crawford Street again these are nice facilities. It is a single-
family structure, not a two story structure, so it fits with the neighborhood, it
faces south and looks at a group of apartments. To the East is a commercial
property, to the west is commercial property. Single-family homes can be built
to the north of it and across the street north there have been no single-family
homes built. So these are not properties that are set in residential
neighborhoods, they are set in commercial neighborhoods and somewhat of a
buffer between the commercial and the residential. And you talk about Drury
Place, you have commercial property on three sides, on the front to the East, on
the South and on the North and houses on Lewis Street do back up to this
property, Thank you very much,
Mr, Hass asked are there any other members of the public that would like to
address the application or add anything that we haven't heard already? If not I
will bring it back to the Commission for discussion and action,
Mr. Andrew stated I would probably refer the Commission to page 14 of your"
report that lays out your alternatives that you have available for action.
MOTION:
Mr, Hertzenberg stated it appears that there are sharply divided opinions on the
particular issue, however, I would like to make a motion at this time to accept
the Planning Department's proposal in terms of option number one,
SECOND:
Mr. Thompson seconded the motion.
Salina Planning Commission
May 7,2002
Page 9
Mr, Salmon asked does your motion include the six recommendations by saff?
Mr, Hertzenberg stated yes,
Mr. Steinbrock asked Dean what is the long tenn, in the plan for Magnolia, what
is in the books in the Comprehensive Plan?
Mr. Andrew stated I think in tenns of timing I might refer that over to Shawn or
the City Manager in tenns of where that fIts into our Capital Improvement
Program.
Mr. O'Leary stated as was mentioned earlier, we certainly would expect the
improvements of Magnolia Road as we consider that a major arterial street. We
expect it to be a three lane design so you would actually reconstruct what is a
current County Road standard to an urban type of design. The challenge
comes into when that will happen and we think that is driven by development.
We think it will happen in at least two phases from where it ends today at
Shalimar to the levee system to the east. The first phase would probably
encompass this property or go as far as this property and we think that could
happen in the next five years. Depending upon the will of the City Commission
and the development of the area, financing plans and other issues that are still
out there developing.
Mr. Hass asked are there any other discussion items? Hearing none I will call
for the question,
VOTE:
Motion carried 8-0,
Mr. Andrew stated what the fonnat of this would be is it would go to the City
Commission as a recommendation and I think tentatively- we would be looking
at Monday, June 3, of this item going to the City Commission for their
consideration.
#3,
Application #M02-2, filed by the City Engineering Department, requesting a
detennination by the Planning Commission whether the filling of public drain
easements in Highland Meadows Hamlet and the Replat of East Bank tes
represents a violation of the approved stonn drainage plans for ose two
subdivisions,
/~
~
At this time Mr. Hertzenberg excused himself from the
/
~,'- "",,~.,"< '-""
Mr. Andrew stated I was going to give you an i of what we were going to do
for a fonnat was to give you some introdu ' n of the Planning Commission's
~' ~ole in the initial review and then fo through of the process to actual
~development of the site and how thi 'sue came to you for seeking some policy
g~:~ance. But I think the Cit}t. anager has a couple of opening remarks he
want~.~e about the p c policy implications of this request.
Mr, Kissinger.~~te 0, thank you, Mr. Chainnan and Planning Commission I
am not usuall~ '... c;taff member that you see at this staff table. But this is a
rather com x iSS~:~ we have new developments occurring even just prior
to this eting in here tou.. ~'. I would request and suggest to you on behalf of
th Ity staff that we refonnafl;' ~discussion today and not have this item as an
ction item for the Planning, Com... ic;sion, but an opportunity to review some..
difficult issues that we are addressingL.o~~ in these two particular developments
right now, and also some policy implicatÌ\;.'~ for the future. They would be
better if we are not prepared to ask you to mak...~y decisions today, regarding
this, that may come at a later date, but it presentÍ>'~ Qood opportunity to do a
professional overview of the issues that we have that IÌI.~e your role, the role
of the City staff, Planning and Engineering, the role of lì "'elopers in these
cases, The role of homeowners and their contractors in thes~",~!';es, we have
some occurrences out there thot appear to be different than the"'~~I..:::.
~.
(Published in the Salina Journal on
, 2002)
ORDINANCE NUMBER 02-10083
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF ORDINANCE
NUMBER 8526, THE SAME BEING CHAPTER 42 OF THE SALINA CODE, AND THE
ZONING DISTRICT MAP THEREIN AND THEREBY ADOPTED AND PROVIDING FOR
THE REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITIllN THE CITY AND PRESCRIBING THE
PROPER USES THEREOF.
WHEREAS, all conditions precedent for the amendment of the Zoning District Map,
the rezoning of certain property therein, hereinafter described has been timely complied with, SO
NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Governing Body of the City of Salina, Kansas:
Section 1. AMENDMENT. DISTRICT "PDD (R-2)", MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. That the Zoning District Map of the City of Salina, Kansas, duly
adopted and published as a part of Ordinance Number 8526, the same being Chapter 42 of the Salina
Code, be and it is hereby amended so that the following described property be rezoned as follows,
to-wit:
Lots 1-11, Block 1, Golden Eagle Estates Addition No.2 to the City of
Salina, Saline County, Kansas.
shall become a part of DISTRICT "PDD (R-2)", MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
Section 2. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. The use of said described property shall
be subject to all the conditions, restrictions and limitations as made and provided for in Ordinance
Number 8526, the same being Chapter 42 of the Salina Code with reference to the "R-2", MULTI-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT regulations and development of the property shall also be
subject to the following conditions, to wit:
1.
Development limitations shall be as follows:
a.
Permitted uses on Lot 1, Block 1 of the replat area shall
be limited to a multi-unit housing facility for the elderly
consisting of no more than 114 independent living and
assisted living units.
Permitted uses on Lot 2, Block 1 of the replat area (the
townhome area) shall be limited to 16-single-family
attached dwellings containing no more than 4 units per
building.
b.
c.
Development on Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 shall be subject to
the bulk regulations specified in the R-2 Mutli-Family
Residential District.
2.
Final site development plans for the elderly housing facility and
townhome area (Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 1) shall be reviewed
3.
and approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a
building permit for either site.
The City Engineer shall approve plans and specifications for the
proposed storm water collection system and detention/retention pond
prior to approval of a final site development plan for Lot 1 or Lot 2.
4.
The City Engineer shall approve plans and specifications for any
public water and sewer line extensions prior to approval of a final site
development plan for Lot 1 or Lot 2.
A final replat shall be approved prior to final approval of the amended
planned development district.
5.
6.
The applicant shall submit legal assurance to the City consenting to
the establishment of a future special assessment district for the paving
of Eaglecrest Drive. Said assurance shall be valid for a I5-year
period and legally binding on existing and future owners of land
within the development site. This agreement shall be recorded as a
covenant with the replat of this site.
7.
Final plans for development of Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 1
shall be submitted within five (5) years of [mal approval of the
amended planned development district.
Section 3. That all prior ordinances in conflict herewith as they relate to the above
described real estate are hereby repealed.
Section 4. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
adoption and publication once in the official city newspaper.
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
Introduced: June 3, 2002
Passed:
Kristin M. Seaton, Mayor
Lieu Ann Nicola, City Clerk