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.