Loading...
5.1 Hospice Center Conditional Use Appeal CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 5/21/2012 4:00 P.M. AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL: 5 NO: BY: Development Services Planning FINAL APPROVAL: ITEM NO:1 BY: Dean Andrew BY: Page 1 ITEM: Public hearing on an appeal filed by Jack Hinnenkamp on behalf of Salina Regional Health Center of the Planning Commission’s April 17, 2012 decision not to approve Application #CU 03-2B requesting approval of an amendment of the original Conditional Use Permit approved for the Hospice Center in 2003. The subject property is zoned R (Single Family Residential), is legally described as Lot 1, Block 1 in the Replat of Lots 1-14, Block 1 of the Replat of River Meadows Addition to the City of Salina, Saline County, Kansas and is addressed as 730 Holly Lane. The applicant is appealing the Planning Commission’s failure to approve the Salina Regional Health Center’s request to amend the original Conditional Use Permit to allow the addition of office and clinical space for Veridian Behavioral Health and construction of 33 additional parking spaces at the Hospice Center facility. BACKGROUND: See attached Background Reports. Nature of Current Request Representatives of the Salina Regional Health Center and their architect recently met with the City’s Development Review Team (DRT) to discuss their pl ans for relocating Veridian Behavioral Health’s offices and clinic space from the Santa Fe Medical Plaza at 501 South Santa Fe to the hospice facility on Holly Lane. In the view of the Health Center the hospice space, which has 12 living units, has been underutilized since the time of the Hospice Center’s opening in 2007. In reviewing Salina Regional Health Center’s plans to relocate office and clinical space for Veridian Behavioral Health to the existing hospice facility, Planning staff believed this would be a change in the character and intensity of use from a facility that is primarily residential in character (a hospice) to one where hospital related administr ative offices and clinical treat ment space would become the predominant use. Currently Wing A of the hospice facility contai ns two rooms and four suites and no change is proposed. Wing B also contains two rooms and f our suites and the other wing is occupied by administrative offices for Hospice. The Health C enter’s plan is to convert Wing B to offices for Hospice and the current Hospice office space to o ffice space for Veridian. In addition, the Health Center is proposing to convert the basement area currently used for st orage to additional office and clinical space for Veridian. Today, the Hospice faci lity is two-thirds resi dential and one-third office area. Under this proposed change the facility would become three-fourths office and treatment space and one-fourth residential space. Hospitals and hospital related facilities are a conditional use allowed in the R district, but because the proposed hospice facility was characterized as a resi dential-type use at the public hearings held in 2003, Planning staff believed that neighboring property owners should have an opportunity to have notice and an opportunity to comm ent on the proposed change in the character and intensity of the CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 5/21/2012 4:00 P.M. AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL: 5 NO: BY: Development Services Planning FINAL APPROVAL: ITEM NO:1 BY: Dean Andrew BY: Page 2 use of this building. T herefore, Planning staff determined that an application needed to be filed to amend the original Conditional Use Permit (#CU03-2) to allow hospital related clinical and office uses in addition to a hospice facility at this location. The role of the Planning Commission and City Commission in this case is to first determine whether the applicant’s proposed change in use from a hospice facility with twelve (12) living units to primarily a medical / office facility would have any negat ive impacts on the surrounding neighborhood and to secondly determine whether the applicant’s conceptual site plan for use of the property would be compatible with the use of adjacent properties. Zoning Ordinance Requirements Nursing homes, group homes, hospitals and hospital related facilities are allowed as conditional uses in the R district. The Commission must find that the proposed conditional use will comply with all applicable zoning ordinance requir ements within the R zoning distri ct. The applicant's proposed behavioral therapy facility would be considered a non-residential occupancy. The Zoning Ordinance sets out the following requirements and limitations in the R district: R-Standard Existing 1. Setbacks: Front Yard - 25 ft. 150 + ft. from Holly Lane Side Yard - 15 ft. 100 + ft. from the north property line, 200 + ft. from the south property line 2. Maximum Structure Height 35 ft. 18 ft. 3. Minimum Lot Area 10,000 sq. ft. 6.87 acres 4. Maximum Lot Coverage 30% 8% 5. Off-Street Parking – Nursing homes must provide six (6) spaces for the first three thousand (3,000) square feet of gross floor area and one (1) space for each additional one thousand (1,000) square feet with a minimum of six (6) spaces per establishment. Hospitals must provide one (1) space for each bed plus one (1) space for each two (2) employees (other than doctors) plus one (1) space for each doctor assigned to the staff. A more intensive use such as medical clinic must provide 1 space for each 200 sq. ft. of floor area. Because the applicant indicates that they will be offering counseling sessions in addition to medical care to patients, the use will be more intensive than a nursing home yet less intensive than a medical clinic. Therefore, hospital parking requirements could be used to determine total number of parking spaces for this use. The applicant's conceptual site plan shows the proposed construction of 33 additional parking spaces north of the building which would bring the total number of available parking spaces to 62 spaces which staff has determined is adequate to support the proposed use (behavioral therapy clinic). CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 5/21/2012 4:00 P.M. AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL: 5 NO: BY: Development Services Planning FINAL APPROVAL: ITEM NO:1 BY: Dean Andrew BY: Page 3 6. Landscaping – Landscaping is not required for si ngle-family dwellings and two-family dwellings in the R district, however, it is required for c onditional uses in residential districts such as schools, churches and assisted living facilities. According to the Landscaping Regulations, ten (10) square feet of landscaped front yard is required for each lineal foot of street frontage. With a street frontage of 1,033 lineal feet for this subdivision, the Hospice facility was required to provide at least 10,330 square feet of landscaped area on t he site. Twenty one (21) shade trees were required. The existing hospice facility has an extensively landscaped area with well over the required number of tree units. The original plan was to develop this land in such a way that the facility and parking lot would be screened from the street by landscaping. 7. Buffering – Hospice was required to screen all of the parking areas from the Holly Lane right of way with a 3 ft. high landscape buffer. Parking lots with over fifty (50) parking spaces are also required to provide parking lot islands equal to 5% of the total parking area. These islands are in addition to the required front yard landscaping. The existing parking lot contains 39 spaces; the proposed parking lot expansion would bring the total to 62 spaces. 8. Signs – As a conditional use, this facility would be limited to one (1) ground sign not to exceed 32 sq. ft. plus two (2) wall signs. There is an existing Hospice identification sign out along Crawford Street and two existing wall signs on the building. This applicant plans to rebrand the Crawford sign and wall signs. Staff Comments / Analysis 1. The Planning Commission was supposed to consider whether the proposed conditional use will comply with all applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements within the R zoning district. The existing Hospice building location and f ootprint conform to all applicable setback requirements and lot coverage limitations of the R zoning district. No changes to the existing building footprint are proposed by the applicant. Existing landscaping and off-street parking conform to the Zoning Ordinance and the approved site plan. The R district regulations requi re that hospitals and hospital related uses, rest homes and nursing homes located in R districts be “directly acce ssible” from a collector or arterial street. The River Meadows Addition has frontage on Crawford Street (an arterial street) and both the Planning Commission and City Commission previ ously made a finding that the Hospice site was directly accessible to Crawford Street via Holly Lane. 2. The Planning Commission was supposed to consider whether the proposed conditional use in this location will contribute to the welfare and convenience of the public. CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 5/21/2012 4:00 P.M. AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL: 5 NO: BY: Development Services Planning FINAL APPROVAL: ITEM NO:1 BY: Dean Andrew BY: Page 4 Hospice centers traditionally provide programs and services that benefit the community and region. The Hospice facility has contributed to the welfare and convenien ce of the public by providing expanded services for patients facing terminal illnesses in the community and region. The applicant believes that the services offer ed by Veridian Behavioral Health will also contribute to the health and well being of the Salina community. The question for the Planning Commission and City Commission is whether a behavioral therapy clinic would contribute to the welfare and convenience of the public in this location. 3. The Planning Commission was supposed to consider whether the proposed conditional use will not cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood and that it will not dominate the immediate neighborhood. When the Hospice facility was first proposed, the River Meadows property was vacant and inaccessible and the four lots (Lots 1-4) on the east side of Holly Lane were equally inaccessible and undevelopable. Without development on the west side of Holly Lane, there is little prospect that the property owners on t he east side would ever have the public street access to their lots they currently enjoy. The Hospice project made those lots developable, so it increased rather than dama ged the value of those vacant lots, although they are still undeveloped. The Hospice site, the proposed site of reloca ted offices and clinical space for Veridian Behavioral Health, is a relatively isolated location. East Crawford Street lies adjacent to the north property line and is classified as a major arterial street and contains a mix of uses between Ohio Street on the we st and Marymount Road on the east. These uses include intense commercial development at Crawford and Ohio that featur es three fast-food restaurants, and a convenience store with gasoline service. Bi ll Burke Park is just west and north of the subject property; the Smoky Hill River creates a boundary along the west edge of the Hospice site. A condominium / apartment comp lex is north of the s ubject property on the north side of Crawford and a singl e-family area lies on top of t he hill along Vict oria Heights Terrace lies to the east. Clearly the property most directly impacted by the activity that occurs at the Hospice site is the Morse property at 731 Holly Lane directly across the street on the east side of Holly Lane and the four vacant lots on the east side of Holly Lane. When the original Hospice facility was designed, the building was designed to be residential in materials, character and appearance. It is a lo w profile building one st ory in height with a hipped roof. Efforts were made to screen the building and parking lot from the residential lots across the street and to utilize dow ncast lighting. The land west of the Hospice site is flood plain area and has been preserved and maintained as open space. In 2003, staff, the Planning Commission and the City Commission found that the Hospice facility as proposed would not dominate or be out of proporti on with the surrounding neighbor hood and would not create a more undesirable impact than the development of ten (10) single-family homes that the site was then zoned and platted for. CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 5/21/2012 4:00 P.M. AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL: 5 NO: BY: Development Services Planning FINAL APPROVAL: ITEM NO:1 BY: Dean Andrew BY: Page 5 The applicant is not proposing to change the footprint or residential appearance of the existing building. However, the substitution of office space for living space on the first floor and the conversion of the basement from storage space to office and clinical space will clearly increase the traffic flow and activity level at this fa cility. These impacts c an be mitigated by adding additional parking on the north side of the building and reorienting the main patient entrance to the north side as well. The question for the City Commission is whether the addition of office space for Veridian Behavioral Health to the Hospice Center would so change the character of the facility that it would damage the peace, enjoyment and value of neighboring residential properties so as to no longer be a compatible use. 4. The Planning Commission was supposed to consider whether off-street parking and loading areas will be provided in accordance with the standards set forth in Article XI of this chapter, and that such areas will be screened from adjoining residential uses and located so as to protect such residential uses from any injurious effect. Staff has calculated that 56 o ff-street parking spaces would be required to support the addition of Veridian’s operations in this location. The additional parking proposed would be on the north side of the building. 5. The Planning Commission was supposed to consider whether adequate utilities, drainage and other necessary facilities exist or will be provided to serve the proposed use. Existing water and sanitary sewer lines are in place which serve the Hospice facility and are adequate to serve the proposed change in use. Storm sewer inlets and pipes and other drainag e improvements were installed as part of the Holly Lane construction project. 6. The Planning Commission was supposed to consider whether access drives will be provided and designed so as to prevent tr affic hazards and to minimize traffic congestion in public streets. Visitor parking for Hospice is located east of the building while parking for employees is located northeast of the building. All access aisles and parking spaces are paved and any additional parking constructed would have to be paved. There are two driveway openings on Holly Lane and no changes are proposed as part of this application. The existing driveway and parking lot design is adequate to accommodate emergency vehicles and trash trucks. Using standardized trip generation rates, staff estimates that t he Veridian Behavioral Health operation would result in an increase of at least 60 vehicle trips a day on Holly Lane compared CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 5/21/2012 4:00 P.M. AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL: 5 NO: BY: Development Services Planning FINAL APPROVAL: ITEM NO:1 BY: Dean Andrew BY: Page 6 to the trips generated by the Hospice facility alone. There are some visibility constraints at the Holly Lane – Crawford Street intersection and drivers must exercise caution when pulling out on to Crawford which has a 40 mph speed limit. Conformance with Comprehensive Plan The Future Land Use Plan in the City’s Comprehensive Plan designates this area south of Crawford as Suburban Residential. April 17, 2012 Planning Commission Action The Salina Regional Health Center filed an application to amend the or iginal Hospice of Salina Conditional Use Permit, approved in 2003, on March 14, 2012 and a public hearing was scheduled for April 17, 2012 at 4:00 p.m. to receive public input on the proposed change in use. Neighboring property owners were invited to attend the hearing and submit their comments on the proposal to add office and clinical space and additional off-street parking to the hospice facility. Following presentation of the staff report, comment s from hospital and Veridi an Behavioral Health representatives, comments and questions from neighboring property owners and comments and questions from Planning Commissioners, a motion was made and seconded to approve the Salina Regional Health Center’s applicat ion to amend the original Condit ional Use Permit to allow the addition of office and clinical space for Veridian and additional off-street parking subject to several conditions. 1. Permitted conditional uses on Lot 1, Block 1 shall include a hospice center and behavioral therapy offices and clinical space. 2. No changes to the existing 16,000 sq. ft. building footprint shall be permitted. 3. No changes to the residential design and appearance or to the exterior building materials of the existing hospice facility shall be permitted. 4. The primary entrance to the behav ioral therapy portion of the building shall be oriented to face north toward the expanded parking area. 5. Use of the hospice facility shall substantially conform to the final site development plan, landscaping plan and lighting plan approved by the City Commission on March 22, 2004, with the exception of the revised parking plan and signage plan presented by the Salina Regional Health Center. This motion to approve the Salina Regional Health Center’s request to amend the original Conditional Use Permit failed by a 2-5 vote (Birdsong, Bosse meyer, Brooks, Hodges an d Perney voting in opposition to the motion). The result of this vote was a “f ailure to approve” t he Salina Regional Health Center’s request as opposed to a “denial” because there was no motion to deny the application. CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 5/21/2012 4:00 P.M. AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL: 5 NO: BY: Development Services Planning FINAL APPROVAL: ITEM NO:1 BY: Dean Andrew BY: Page 7 With the knowledge that the Salina Regional Health Center could appeal an unfavorable decision by the Planning Commission, staff should have determined whether one of the five members voting in opposition wished to make a follow up motion to deny the application and offer their reasons as to why the Salina Regional Health Center’s proposed amendment should not be approved. This would have more clearly communicated to the applicant and the City Commission the basis of the Planning Commission’s vote to not approve the request. REVIEW AND APPEAL PROCEDURE: Section 42-597.2(d) of the Zoning Ordinance states: An applicant who is dissatisfied with the decision of the planning commission may appeal the decision to the board of city commissioners, provided the appeal is submitted in writing to the office of the zoning administrator within fourteen (14) days from the planning commission’s action. Upon receipt of an appeal from the action of the planning commission, the board of commissioners shall set a hearing date to consider all information, testimony and minutes of the planning commission’s public hearing to reach a decision on the applicant’s request. The board of city commissioners may affirm the decision or return the application to the planning commission for further consideration together with a statement specifying the basis for their disagreement. Upon receipt of a second decisi on from the planning commission, the board of city commi ssioners may affirm, modify or overrule the decision of the planning commission. The board of commissioners shall overrule the pl anning commission by a favorable vote of a majority of the full board of commissioners. Jack Hinnenkamp, representing Sali na Regional Health C enter, filed a written appeal on April 24, 2012 which was within fourteen (14) days of the Planning Commission’s April 17, 2012 decision not to approve Salina Regional Health Center’s application to amend the original Conditional Use Permit for the Hospice Center at 730 Holly Lane. At their May 7, 2012 meeting, the Salina City Commission: 1. Acknowledged receipt of a wr itten appeal filed by Salina Regional Health Center within the 14 day appeal period. 2. Referred this item back to the Planning Commission’s May 15, 2012 agenda to further articulate the reasons for the Planning Commission’s failure to approve the Salina Regional Health Center’s application on April 17, 2012. 3. Set May 21, 2012 as the hearing date to consi der all information, testimony and minutes of the Planning Commission’s pub lic hearing and decision on th e Salina Regional Health Center’s amended Conditional Use Permit application. Planning Commission Follow Up Action Per the City Commission’s direction this item was placed back on the Planning Commission’s agenda to further articulate their reasons for their April 17, 2012 decision to not approve the Salina Regional Health Center’s application. Following a brief recess into closed session, the Planning Commission came back with the following motion by Mr. Brooks which was seconded by Mr. Birdsong: CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 5/21/2012 4:00 P.M. AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL: 5 NO: BY: Development Services Planning FINAL APPROVAL: ITEM NO:1 BY: Dean Andrew BY: Page 8 MOTION: Mr. Brooks moved to d eny Salina Regional Health Center’s Application #CU03-2B to amend the Conditional Use Permit by adding office and clinical space for Veridian Behavioral Health to the existing hospice fa cility, based on the following factors: The proposed change in use from a hospice facility would have negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhood; these negative impacts include the perc eption by property owners and prospective owners that nei ghborhood safety may be diminished, a potential decrease in property value due to an increase in traffic and, a potential decrease in property value due to the nature of the proposed business which would be a change in use from a use that is compatible with single-family residential usage to that of a more incompatible comme rcial usage. The applicant’s conceptual site plan is therefore incompatible with the use of adjacent properties. SECOND: Mr. Birdsong VOTE: Motion carried 5-2. (Birdsong, Bossemeyer, Brooks, Hodges, and Perney in favor; Kennedy and Ryan opposed (Welsh abstained.)) Mr. Andrew stated that a written summary would be attached to the information provided to the City st Commission for their May 21 meeting and stated that the Planning Commission has fulfilled its duty th to clarify the reasons for the April 17 decision. COMMISSION ALTERNATIVES: Option 1. Accept the findings and reasoning of the Planning Commission and sustain the decision of the Planning commission to not approve the requested amendment of the original Conditional User Permit for Hospice of Salina, filed by Salina Regional Health Center. Option 2. Return this item to the Planning Commission for reconsideration with a statement specifying the basis of your disagreement with the Planning Commission’s decision. COMMISSION ACTION: The City Commission should take action as is determined to be in the best interest of the neighborhood and the community based on consideration of all relevant factors. Because the Commission is acting in a quasi-judicial capacity, any motion that is made by a Commission member should include a recitation of the findings and reasons upon which the motion is based. Enclosures: Application Applicant’s Appeal Vicinity Map and Plans Written Testimony Excerpt of PC Mi nutes 4/17/2012, 5/15/2012 CITY OF SALINA REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME 5/21/2012 4:00 P.M. AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL: 5 NO: BY: Development Services Planning FINAL APPROVAL: ITEM NO:1 BY: Dean Andrew BY: Page 9 cc: Jack Hinnenkamp, SRHC Dana Morse, 731 Holly Lane North McArthur, 746 Victoria Heights Terrace r P.O.BOX 799, 1632 S.WEST ST., SUITE 5, WICHITA, KANSAS 67201-0799 (316)264-9181 FAX(316)942-1661 REAL ESTATE SERVICES May 21; 2012 Re: #CU03-2B Salina Regional Health Center- Conditional Use Permit Good afternoon. I'm Jim Gardner, a real estate appraiser from Wichita, Kansas, appearing on behalf of Dana Morse, of 731 Holly Lane, in opposition to the proposed change requested by Salina Regional Health Center in CU03-213, seeking to convert their existing Hospice Center at 730 Holly Lane, to a clinical treatment center for behavioral therapy. I am a Kansas Certified General real property appraiser, with 45 years in the profession. The majority of my practice for the past 20 years has been in litigation related appraisals and testimony for the Courts and attorneys, seeking to determine property values and damages related to a variety of circumstances. I served 12 years on the Wichita-Sedgwick County Metropolitan Area Planning Commission and it's Subdivision Committee, which period included around n00 hearings on 8,000 to 10,000 cases. I also served on the Tri-County Planning Commission for Sedgwick, Harvey, and Butler Counties, and the Kansas Association of Regional Planning Commissions, as both commissioner and chairman. I have not appraised the Morse property, but I am sharing with you, my observations regarding the probable negative impacts and it's diminished value resulting from the proposed changes, converting the Hospice Center to a clinical treatment center. The crux of the subject Conditional Use is whether or not the proposed shift in facility use, from that of a residential hospice center, to that of a behavioral treatment clinic, is an appropriate use in R, Single Family Residential zoning. If the proposed behavioral treatment clinic use is not compatible or an appropriate use in R, Single Family.Residential zoning, the Conditional Use application should be denied and the applicant redirected to a more appropriate location and zoning district. Staff analysis has determined that the Hospice facility is presently two-thirds residential and one-third office area. Under the proposed change the facility would become three-fourths office and treatment space and one-fourth residential space. While hospitals and hospital related facilities are a conditional use allowed in the R district, and because the hospice facility was characterized as a residential- type use at hearings held in 2003, the hospice use apparently found sufficient favor for approval of that residentially compatible conditional use. ' Salina zoning districts proceed from the most restrictive use, residential, to the least restrictive, industrial. The first zoning district which allows medical offices and clinics as permitted uses is the H-M, Hospital-Medical District. Medical offices and clinics continue to be permitted uses in the C-1, Restricted Business District, as business and professional offices, and medical and dental clinics, and guidance centers. Medical and dental clinics continue to be permitted uses in subsequent commercial districts. Staff suggests the role of the Planning Commission and City Commission in this case is to first determine whether the applicant's proposed change in use from a hospice facility with twelve (12) living units to primarily a medical / office facility would have any negative impacts on the surrounding neighbor- hood, and to secondly address the conceptual site plan issues. Planning Staff believes the proposed Veridian Behavioral Health occupancy would be a change in the character and intensity of use from a facility that is primarily residential in character (a hospice) to one where hospital related administrative offices and clinical treatment space would become the predominant use. While located in a residential-type building, the proposed predominant use would be that of a medical office and clinic, with the accompanying traffic and clientele. At this point we should consider the breadth of the scope of"behavioral health services", in our world today. It can range from the relatively benign child and family counseling, to a wide range of Court-ordered and probationary drug- testing, drug treatment, ordered medication, individual and group counseling. It can include a broad range of socially troubled, from bi-polar and manic, to addiction related, de-tox, recovery, and recidivism counseling, to pedophiles and domestic abusers. The width of the range of issues, problems, and people found under the broad umbrella of"behavioral health services", ranges from the benign to the severely troubled and dangerous. I admire the professionals who are called to provide these services and treatment, but having officed next-door to Sedgwick County Comcare for five years, I can personally attest to the wide variety of their patient clientele who populated my parking lot, and congregated outside my front door to smoke, and pass time awaiting their appointment, or waiting on their departure ride, to arrive. In conversation with my professional neighbors, I learned a good deal about the range of their services, and their patient clientele. Many of their patients were there as a result of Court-ordered monitoring, treatment, and counseling requirements. Their diversion or probation was dependent upon their active cooperation and participation in the specified "behavioral health" services. My office and the Comcare office were located in a near-core, commercially zoned area, where we were compatibly situated, in an appropriately zoned district. Had the Comcare office, which functioned as a "behavioral health services clinic" been located in a single-family residential neighborhood, the location would have been entirely inappropriate for the services provided, the traffic generated, and the patient clientele influences. The p oint is that behavioral health services encompass a broad spectrum of services, and patient clientele. As Mr. Hinnenkamp has pointed out in previous presentations, programs and_services change in response to economics, an utilization. Health care programs, including behavioral health care programs and services, change in response to public need, governmental program mandates, Court-ordered service needs, and a host of other factors. All of which make it difficult to predict what behavioral health services and treatments will be provided at a given point in the future. Once the broad umbrella of behavioral health services is an approved Conditional Use, it will not be possible to micro-manage whether they or their patient clientele remain single-family residential compatible. How does this impact the Morse residence? When Mr. Morse determines to sell his property, he, his real estate agent, and the appraiser, will be bound by Kansas law to make full disclosure of any defects or adverse influences which affect his property. The appraiser will have to observe whether a daily congregation of Court-ordered "behavioral health" patient clientele, at the office / treatment clinic across the street is a positive or negative factor affecting the desirability of Mr. Morse's property. The appraiser will have no way to determine whether the patient clientele will be children and families seeking counseling, or a collection of:Court-ordered diversion and probationers. Nor will the appraiser or prospective buyer have any security or future insight as to whether or when the clinic's programs, services, or patient clientele might change. The typical homebuyer, confronted with a choice between two or more similar properties will normally choose the property with the most stability and least risk of the unknown, particularly where issues of public and individual safety are concerned. If a residence is located next to or across the street from a non- residential use, that is a traffic generator, or point where troubled people congregate, it may suffer being the lesser choice, when compared to a similar residential property without the locational detriment. This truth is as apparent for bars and taverns, convenience stores, de-tox centers, and work-release centers, as for behavioral health clinics, in the consideration of residential values in residential neighborhoods. The degree of discounting that such an affected property owner must incur to make his property saleable under those circumstances varies, but generally begins at 15% to 20%, to attract comparative buyers and consummate a sale. I would encourage you to deny the Conditional Use application on the grounds that the proposed use would adversely and negative impact surrounding residential values. Thank you.