Emma Simmons Testamentary Trust Memorandum • i
LAW OFFICES
HAMPTON, ROYCE, ENGLEMAN S NELSON
E.S.HAMP ON NINTH FLOOR,UNITED BUILDING c.w.wwcN paaa•wal
JOHN O.ROYCE BOX 207 B.I.LITOWICX(lea]-Ma)
HOWARD ENOLEMAN 4NUE ROYCE I1e91-IOY)
C.STANLEY NELSON _ SAUNA,KANSAS 67401
JACK N-STEWART
TOM W. MARION ,
(013)
W.DEAN OWENS
827-7231
r
N.ROYCE NELSON .
March 8, 1974
Salina City Commission
City-County Building
300 West Ash I:'.,
Salina, Kansas 67401
Re: Emma Gebhart Simmons Trust
Application for Commercial. Zoning
Petition No. 3380 f
Dear Members of the City Commission:
We understand that the above matter has been placed on the t
agenda for the meeting of the City Commission to be held on
March 11, 1974, at 4:00 o'clock P . M. Enclosed find a Memo-
randum
which we have prepared on behalf of the Emma Gebhart
Simmons Trust, and we hope that each member of the City
Commission will have an opportunity to review the Memorandum
prior to the meeting.
The first part of the Memorandum is a narrative outlining the
basic reasons why the application for rezoning of the property
is consistent with the Comprehensive City Plan, prepared by
Wilson & Company, and adopted in September, 1964 .
Attached to the Memorandum is a .copy of the Petition filed
herein. You will note that the `Petition includes a number of
schedules setting forth the traffic patterns and capacities
of the major arterial roads providing access to the property, .
together with additional data supporting the requested commer-
cial zoning application.
Inserted loose leaf in the back of the Memorandum is a copy
of the Preliminary Plat of Meadowlark Acres Addition No. 3.
The subject real estate is identified as the red area on the
Preliminary Plat; and the area designated for commercial
utilization in the Comprehensive City Plan of 1964 is identi-
fied by the black hash marks on the Preliminary Plat .
Salina City Commission
March 8, 1974
Page 2
•
We trust that the enclosed information will assist you in
arriving at your decision with respect to this matter. It is
submitted that the commercial development of this property is
appropriate, inevitable and advisable. We strongly urge you
to approve and adopt the recommendations of The Metropolitan
Planning Commission for the commercial classification of the
property.
Respectfully submitted,
HAMPTON, ROYCE, ENGLEMAN & NELSON
By
Tom W. Hampton/jdl
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Thomas E . Darnell
Bucher & Willis
605 West North Street
Salina, Kansas 67401
•
•
.
lugs, and shall give notice in like 10:1111111"r as that required for the - -
• original zoning recnnuucnclntinus. Such notice shall fix the time
and place for such healing and contain a statement regarding the • . •
proposed changes in regulations or restrictions in in the boundary of
any zone or district. It such proposed amendment is not a general
revision of existing ordinances and wilI affect.specific property, it .
shall he designated by legal description and general street location •
and in addition, to such publication notice, wriilen notice of such
proposed amendment shall be mailed to all owners of lands located
within two hundred (200) feet of the area proposed to be altered
' and an opportunity granted to interested parties to be heard. Failure
to receive such notice shall not invalidate any subsequent action
taken. Such notice is sufficient to permit the planning commission
to recommend amendments to zoning ordinances which affect only
a portion of the land described in the notice or which give all or any
part of the land described a zoning classification of lesser change .
• - than that set forth in the notice: Provided, That recommending a
zoning ee classification of lesser change than that set forth in the no- ,r
Lice shall not be valid without republication and, where necessary,
remailing unless the planning commission shall have previously
established a table or publication available to the public whielp
designates what zoning classifications are lesser changes authorized
within the published zoning classifications. The procedure for
- the consideration and adoption of any such proposed amendments .
• shall be in like manner as that required for the consideration and
adoption of the original zoning ordinance except where herein-
. before or hereinafter modified. For action on zoning amendments, .
a quorum of the planning commission is more than one-half of all
• - the members. A vote either for or against an amendment by a •
majority of all of the planning commissioners present constitutes
a recommendation of the planning commission; whereas a vote
either for or against an amendment by less than a majority of all of
the planning commissioners present constitutes a "failure to recom-
• mend." When the planning commission submits a recommendation
• of approval or disapproval of such amendment, the governing body
If it approves such recommendation may either adopt such recom-
mendation by ordinance or take no further action thereon, as ap- .
, propriate. In the event the planning commission submits a "failure
to recommend"to the governing body.the governing body may take
such action as it deems appropriate. U ion receipt of a recommen-
dation of the pdanrnn commissar which-flip l,vsrrningbody_dis-
a u_Lygicy thy. c�rvnig pod jiall ream such recommendation lo
• (IIc planmmg. ceunnlssion with..a Statenlcnkspccifying.the basis for
tlwaptnt/MI and sodtatannitierldaticta shall be-LOASidui.d int.like.
ninncr_as 1_ant—Ceir juircd (or-ll c_original_zoning rcconimcnda_tions .
"retnlucd to the planning commission. If such mnendrnent shiill
` r�ct the boundaries of any zone or.disn'ict, the ordinance shall
describe, the boundaries as amended, or if the city has made provi-
sion for the fixing of the same upon an official map which has been
• incorporated by reference, the amending ordinance shall define the
change or-the boundary as amended, shall order the official map
to be changed to reflect such amendment and shall ameird the
•
• section of the ordinance incorporating the same and reincorporate
such map as amended.
- Regardless of whether or not the planning commission approves
or disapproves a proposed zoning amendment or "fails to recom-
mend," if a protest against such amendment be filed in the office
of the city clerk within fourteen (14) days after the date of
the conclusion of the public hearing pursuant to said ublica-
Linn notice, duly signed and acknowledged by the owners of twenty
percent (201) or more of any real property proposed to be re-
zoned or by the Owners of twenty percent (20%) of the total area,
excepting public streets and ways, located within or without the
corporate limits of the city and located within two hundred (200)
feet of the boundaries of the property proposed to be rezoned the
• ordinance, adapting such umnudurent shall not he passed except by
• at least three-fourths (%) vote of all of the members of the council- •
or bond of commissioners.
45 •
•
1
1
1
1
1
' MEMORANDUM
for
1
SALINA CITY COMMISSION
' on behalf of
Emma Gebhart Simmons Trust
I
1
1 0
1
1
HAMPTON, ROYCE, ENGLEMAN & NELSON
' UNITED BUILDING
SAUNA, KANSAS
1
1
M E M O R A N D U M
' TO: Salina City. Commission
SUBMITTED on behalf of Emma Gebhart Simmons Testamentary Trust
Re The conformity of Petition No. 3380 to
rezone to Class "D" 29.23 acres located
t at the Northeast corner of Ninth Street
and Magnolia Road (hereinafter referred
' to as "the subject land") with the Com-
' prehensive City Plan
Fvq!
q .
In connection with the proceedings concerning the rezoning of
the subject land, questions have arisen concerning whether or
not the rezoning of the land to Local Business. District-D would
' be consistent with the Comprehensive City Plan adopted in 1964 .
The following discussion will show that such a zoning classi-
fication is more. consistent with the principles embodied in
the Comprehensive City Plan than is the current zoning " classi-
fication of Residential-A.
_ l
'
In order to determine whether or not a certain action is con-
sistent with the Comprehensive City Plan, one must necessarily
determine the principles that are embodied in the plan. One
I paramount principle of the plan concerns its flexibility . At
Page 31 of the Comprehensive. City Plan, the following language
is ,found:
"GENERALIZED LAND USE . Three illustrations of
' existing land use were prepared for inclusion in
' this planning document and in the Transportation =;
Study: , i
., '.. ; Salina Proper
' Planning Area
Central Business District
In using them for reference purposes it should be
t remembered that they indicate general patterns of
use; a generalization necessary because of size
and reproduction problems . They are, however, of
1
•
I
I Memo .
Page 2
•
' much value in that generalization is neccesary in
many of the. analysis and projection processes.. . .
I .' ' `
. (Emphasis added. )
The flexibility: of the Comprehensive Plan is evidenced by the
' free:-form.manner in which the commercial designations are :drawn
for::the area: ;,With respect to-`the subject tract of land, the `•
boundariesrof .the commercial. area on the Generalized Development
' - • Plan `:show- that ;the ,total area of :the same is in excess of the
area presently zoned commercial. The current fac.ts' indicate , i
that the area .that : is currently zoned. commercial is'.less than ,,A
' is reasonably "necessary and the expansion of the commercial 4
zoning would be consistent with' the Generalized Development '
Plan:
4t'
IIt is clear that the predominant intent of the drafters of the
Comprehensive City Plan was to recognize the appropriateness of : H
I this area for commercial development and to allow a reasonable
amount of commercial development on the property in question.
The -intent of the 'plan was certainly not to limit the commercial , .:, �
' development to the -configuration ;as shown on, the plans, but 1
rather to allow flexibility at a"later date so that the
commercial development in this area would be consonant with
111' the relevant considerations at the- time that the area is deve-
loped. ' The best evidence of this„intent to. encourage flexi- .
,' bility .is;. found':in• the last paragraph 'of the Foreword. of the
Comprehensive City Plan, where it is stated: "The plan, presented '' `.I
in "the form of words, maps . and::charts, ,is. not- intended to be -
a rigid set of rules and regulations Continuous planning must -
' be the watchword. "
. ,
The Comprehensive>City Plan intends that 'future zoning decisions
' • be made. on theHbasis of the relevant factors as- they exist at
the time of the 'development of a certain area together with the
consideration of the Comprehensive City Plan' s general appro-
I priateness standard. Thus, the current zoning decision should
be based on the facts as they exist now rather- than on the basis
of some earlier configuration that does not in any manner purport
Ito establish fixed zoning boundaries . •
I
. .
I
Memo
tPage 3 .
' At the time the Comprehensive City Plan was adopted, the extent
of future commercial 'and industrial development in the southern
I. sector of Salina was unknown and probably unforeseen. The fact
• that the commercialization and industrialization of this area
was unforeseen is evidenced at Page 31 of the Comprehensive '
ICity Plan where it is stated:
x in t i !.y
"Extractive .f'and industrial non-manufacturing uses ,`
' product :storage and ,contractors '
yards,, manufacturing, transportation, utility and
related :industrial-type uses are quite naturally cm
` concentrated in the vicinity of railroad yards •
:This : is both logical and :desirable. "
I Furthermore,. the map: on Page 15 of :the Comprehensive City Plan
indicates. that at the time of its adoption, there were very
few employees working .in the southern sector of Salina.
' Although it is assumed that the. ,commercial designations in the
Comprehensive City Plan' show only the appropriateness of the •
' area for: commercial development and are not designed to be fixed
boundaries, it would appear that the uncontemplated large in-
dustrial growth in' the South Industrial. Area of Salina and the .'
' commercialization and industrialization at the Salina Airport
Authority would indicate that the .commercial development in
this general area should be larger and greater than was expected
IF in'1964 : Thus, any" weight attributed .to the configurations in
the Comprehensive`: City. Plan . forcommercial zoning should. be
:interpreted in .view.`of the unforeseen commercial and industrial
,development•which; warrants more commercial development in the
: subject area than, was envisioned. in 1964 .
• .
It is commonly acknowledged that commercial areas tend to develop "
near manufacturing and industrial areas so that they can service
the industrial and manufacturing areas and because of the volume
' of traffic normally associated with this type of area. At Page
31 of the Comprehensive City Plan it is recognized that generally,
industrial and manufacturing areas, are buffered from higher-
class uses by retail and wholesale commercial activities .
1
' Memo
Page 4
In the current case, it would not be feasible for retail and
wholesale commercial activities to serve as a buffer zone with
' respect to the industrial and manufacturing activities in that
area. First, the manufacturing and industrial operations in
the southern area of Salina are concentrated in two distinct
' areas, i.e. :. the, South Industrial Area and the Airport Complex, Hi
neither- one ;of;which is :located so ,that commercial development
around the, area'would be feasible. The' ideal area: for commercial
• r `development is the. area around the intersection.of Ninth Street
and` Magnolia .Road:where both of these industrial areas can
easily be serviced. and where business will benefit from .the .
1 traffic flow to and from both industrial areas .
It is necessary .to determine the highest and best use of the
subject land and in so doing One must consider what is in the
best interests of Salina concerning its reasonable and logical
future development.
' At Page' 31 -of the Comprehensive City Plan it is stated that
" . the large area immediately south of South Junior High
' School . , should be substantially developed before further.
- extensions. to the south- are permitted" . Page 6 of the Com
prehensive City Plan indicates that the planning with respect
' to a. certain sector of the City should be based upon knowledge
' of the City 's economy and the analysis and projections or
trends that the 'economy is likely to take. The industrial
and commercial development of certain segments of the southern
' part of Salina is' a trend which was probably not fully en-
visioned at the time of 'the adoption of the Comprehensive City
' Plan. Furthermore, as set forth - at Page 6 of the Comprehensive
City Plan, '.".trading is the major or basic reason for Salinas '
existence and growth. Of course, accessability ' is of vital
Iimportance to :trade and retail, wholesale and service industries
of the City which are the principal sources of income" . This
is recognized at Page 7 of the Comprehensive City Plan.
' As industry moves to the southern sector of Salina and as the
population increases in this area, it is obvious that commercial
' businesses will desire to locate in that locality in order to
•
.
•Memo ' - -
. , .
IPage 5 :
I .
serve the industrial and manufacturing concerns , in order to
• serve the general population and in order to take advantage of
the resulting increases in traffic flow. The subject land is
ideal for commercial development because of its location near
the intersection of the two major arterial roads in that area
of our City. Also, commercialization .here would be complimented
' . by, the develbpment_ of land in other corners of this intersection
'currently having :substantial commercial development:'. This would
certainly be ;consistent ..with the best overall. development of .
' the relevant sector of. Salina since traffic resulting from
commercialization would not be placed in residential areas and :" I
' since strip commercial developments would be less likely to
occur.
As is indicated. in the Comprehensive City Plan, it was desirable '
in 1964 and is currently desirable that the entire tract of land
of which the subject tract is a part should be developed both .
. for commercial : and residential purposes: The only feasible;
development of the subject land is for commercial purposes .
The petitioner owns a substantial amount of land north and east f
' of the subject land, the reasonable development of which for ,
residential purposes is not possible unless the proposed plat ,
is accepted. This .is necessary ' to give future owners of this
I adjoining residential land some "idea astto the total plan for
development "of",the area. Otherwise, .they will be hesitant to '(
i " locate on this adjoining land because of their uncertainty as If
' to -the future commercial development in the area. They will
undoubtedly recognize that the only feasible use of the land'
adjoining Ninth Street and Magnolia Road near the intersection
arterial roads is for commercial purposes
of these two major.
' . " The fact that the petitioner owns a substantial amount of land
I adjoining the subject land on the north and east indicates that .
the petitioner has the greatest interest in assuring that the .
entire tract is developed in a reasonable and logical manner.
I Furthermore, the proposed plat with respect to the subject land
and the adjoining land owned by' the petitioner has been carefully
considered and developed by professionals .
I
I .
I
I
' Memo
Page 6
Mention has. been made concerning "over-zoning" which can be
undesirable if overused, but is not undesirable in and of '
' itself. The following text from Page 35 of the Comprehensive
City Plan discusses this aspect as follows:
"The key .to the amount of land required for. commercial
' ` and '_servicer;activities lies-in an economic analysis of : _ . . J
- t <the community.• Since Salina is a recognized retail, ,-.
; ..,,wholesale-and service trade' center it is understandable. ,
that a larger-than-average percentage of land would be , ,
.` devoted to these purposes .^ There are, however, other . .. '"
I . factors and conditions to consider in this particular
evaluation.. " The area usedlfor commercial purposes in
. the .City includes a considerable percentage of land
' which . is zoned for other uses : Because of so-called
• 'pyramidal' type of -zoning, business developments are
permissable in the light and heavy industrial zoning:.
I , .districts. In addition there are those commercial
uses which are actually non-conforming uses in resi
`` dential districts . A direct comparison of land •
' actually :used for .commercial and service purposes, , ;
within areas presently zoned for commercial and service _ '
..; type uses, indicates that approximately one-half of the ::
. commercially zoned area is available for new commercial ;'
II or new service type uses. This 'over-zoning' is caused .
by a number. of factors, among them: speculation, poor , -i.
locations and shifting areas of influence. Whatever ; i
• the cause;,:, vacant commercially-zoned. land has a. detri
, . .:Hy. mental ,effect.: upon existing or potential residential
•' ,developments in .the areas adjacent. to it . JA . Concerted
<.effort- should be made to return much of the vacant '7
commercial.;;land to more restrictive type zoning districts
I ' Speculative:-rezoning to commercial uses,- assuming an
• acceptable location, should be made only when actual
development can be reasonably assured.. If developments
do not materialize within a reasonable period of time,.
I. these new areas should be returned to an appropriate . .
residential zoning district status . "
•
.
I _ .
I . • -
I
• ,
' Memo
Page l
Thus, speculative zoning is an accepted practice assuming (1)
an acceptable location, (2) reasonable assurance of actual
' development, and (3) reversion to prior classification after .
' a reasonable period of time if development does not occur.
With respect to the subject land, the Comprehensive City Plan
'
• indicates without doubt. that the location is . acceptable, and. . ,
the;.locationof'"the subject land at the intersection of major
arterial. roads together with inquiries to the. petitioner con-
I g 'cernincommercial development of the land indicates that the
City,.;can be reasonably assured of the actual commercial •'
development of,,the area: In any event, in fairness to. the .. c
' proposed residential area in the entire :tract the potential
and future purchasers should be' given a clear understanding
.. of:the extent of, the potential .commercial development of, the, :': • .
' subject tract
The alternative to the petitioner's request for rezoning and . . i
I the proposed area development plat would seem to. include the
following risks: (1) relatively slow and uncertain development
of the subject land and the adjoining land owned by the petitioner,.
'' (2) a haphazard ,and piecemeal development of the subject land
and adjoining land owned by the petitioner without consideration
: of the totality of the .development, and (3) eventual strip- .
II type land uses . .. These results are certainly discouraged by
the Comprehensive City Plan and by the, current policy of the
City. .With. respect to strip-development. the Comprehensive City .
' Plan at 'Page 35 provides as follows ,
The spotting areas of residential land use., indicate ;'
} the farm-type dwellings as well as the strip-type
. residential developments along section-line ' roads t.iStri p-t ype. land use should be controlled for a
I
number of very Important reasons. Valuable land
behind these 'structures is often land-locked with
respect to future street access, economical and - . , .
I acceptable subdivision of the areas is difficult if
not impossible to attain, and properly located and
sized utility easements cannot be established without
Iunnecessary expense. These section-line roads are I
the most logical extensions of the municipal major
1 1
1
• Memo
Page 8
' thoroughfare system and rights-of-way of the proper
and uniform width are vital to such a street system.
' The procurement of adequate rights-of-way through
strip developments is costly and, in many instances,
prohibitive. • ! Eventually. the land owners and the
whole community lose money. " ,
'
VS; a -sa 1 .� ,
This • is•'best' .illustrated by the difficulties which would be ;
'`encountered ,when' it 'becomes 'necessary to widen Magnolia. If
' the additional property. were taken from the south side of ;. ,�
'_Magnolia it would be -necessary to acquire a substantial portion . : ,
' 'of the property presently developed and used .for a veterinary
, clinic and motel and such taking would no doubt be costly. The
General Development Plan of the; Comprehensive City Plan esta- ,
' blishes that commercial. utilization of the subject land is both
appropriate, inevitable and advisable. Since the plan is geared
to` the general..appropriateness of a specific area for .a specific
I use and does not purport to establish quantities with respect
to such use and since the development of the southern sector
• ' of Salina since- 1964 indicates that a sizable quantity of this >
I land would be appropriate for commercial purposes, the
petitioner's rezoning request and proposed plat is undoubtedly
most consistent with the Comprehensive City Plan and the
' approval of the petitioner's rezoning request and proposed plat
would be--in the best interests of our City.
I Of course, a relevant consideration with respect to this. matter
is the- possible damage to adjacent property owners . The laws
of the State of Kansas recognize that a person living within
1 200. feet of the property may have a direct interest in the
- development due to possible loss of reasonable use or value of '
his property due to the proposed development, which is evidenced
by a statutory provision for legal protest . In the case at
' hand, the requisite 20% of adjoining landowners have not pro-
tested so as to require a three-fourths vote of the City
' Commission.
The Planning Commission has also recognized this . problem. At 'I
' least three times they have required commercial property abutting
residential properties to be set back 40 to 60 feet and have
1
1 .
•
' Memo
Page 9
' required the installation of a fence and plant materials to
protect the view of residential structures within 100 feet of •
' the proposed commercial development . It should be noted that
the rezoning of the subject land to commercial is designed in
such a manner that a commercial structure will not be placed
• .
1l
within 100 feet of any existing residential development.
Inrthis regard, it •should be noted that protestors to . the .east
? , are'located' a• great<.distance from .the proposed commercial
developmentiand`that 'their property will be buffered by sub dd
stantial:'residential . development of the petitioner's land
I , , .:' .adjoining and;east of., the •proposed `commercial : development
Furthermore, a great many of ' the protestors to the south are
buffered, by Magnolia Road, a major arterial, and by a commercial ,
' development:on the south side of -Magnolia Road: This commercial
development'.on the: south side of Magnolia Road includes an
animal hospital which requires Class E. General Business District .
. .Zoning and a lower. use classification."than the use proposed
by. the petitioner. '., The subject land is located further from .
' these protestors than the land currently being utilized ford/I._: ,
•' this lower ',use: Thus, it would appear •that the proposed ',',
commercial :development would not destroy any residential
. ',property~-values in the area or restrict the use-of presently , Ai,
' . developed property in that area
, - At no time throughout the Proceedings 'before the Planning .
' Commission and the City-Commission has any evidence been adduced �!:
to' show>that 'the•:commercial development:of the subject land
would destroy residential property values or restrict the use '1,';
of presently developed property :,!
• It "has repeatedly.,been mentioned `that _the Land Use Plan prepared ,i
I by Oblinger-Smith Corporation, of Wichita, Kansas, for The . .
'Salina Metropolitan: Area Planning Commission is inconsistent
with the petitioner's rezoning petition. This point merits
I . little discussion since this plan is only proposed at this time
and has not been adopted and since The Metropolitan Area !'
Planning Commission was aware of this proposed plan when it 4
Iapproved the petitioner's rezoning petition. . Accordingly, any I
1
I
I .
1
1
Memo
Page 10
1 possible approval of the plan. by The Salina Metropolitan Area
Planning Commission would necessarily have to be interpreted
1 consistent with their prior affirmative action with respect
to the subject land. At the very least, the approval of the
rezoning application by the Planning Commission is an implied
amendment to the proposed land use plan. which will no doubt
be reflected in the proposed plan before it is adopted
3 ?'
III •
s r 'I
I
1
•
i
1
1 '
,t Y
i
+ L.
1 r
i
4
1
1
1
• ---requested .below at .oniplcte as 'possible. Previous zoning petition_ nave been
I 1 , tabled or denied because of insufficient information -:
s '..
This is a .general form for' al1 rezoning requests: if there is other data, note
' requested on the form., which you feel is pertinent to your request, please note
same on question ;,14 and file it with the form
If more space is needed, please use the back of the form.
I1. Applicant`s name ." Raymond E. Haggart, Trustee
' 2. pp address 300 W. Ash, Salina, Kansas
. Applicant' s a
3. Telephone number (Home) 3-3449 (Business) 825-5004
' 4 Legal description of property requested to be rezoned:
A. Lot c,..": Block -- Addition s-' , 5
yr,prt
4 y y ' t 2A`✓y` }
"f B. Metes.and "boundsdescrnptionrif not" platted . .. n
1' e fi si eqc t s. <xrs.nf x < x .. i.. -
s r Y1 • t7
y r c? k r4 �t i_ s rr See 1 attached "Exhibit A" S .ht FA xl 7 h tY:4.
y 3ip.1 .� 1. ` ' yr 4•a2 4
Note If not platted„a Surveyor' s Certificate must. be filed with the appli-
cation,: showing building= locations and easements -H 4 - ':;j
V { Py4 ra I tFi
' 5. Area (in square feet or acres) of property 29. 23 acres .2,
, b. , Property. owner's -name . . `-.Gebhart Simmons Testamentary Trust '-` ` .1
7. Present zone and use-of ,rproperty "A -- Single-Family Residential t
1
' 8. Proposed zone andwuse of,property .' "D” Local B i
• usness Fi.
;.,. , .4 , ` ^; '
.9. ; Is ':there something special:(other than ownership), about the area in question
that makes it more feasible to rezone this area rather than attempt to acquire .
Y
'
property- presently zoned for the type of use intended? Please specify "`. '1
: •rtt,'•
Nr{, 1i ;;1 •,?.. ; n.4 .1 h f .".w FY s .I}V e 4l1
.
rn , , rtSee .attached, reply- . ..., , , ,ar, ). 11
I ;. fry. 7_<t tr. .s 6 .r �v ...zas'j -' d'.i$'' ,Js
, 10. Supply .,factual data showing need for rezoning in this area -'' ,' :.- r :4 «<c;� v,:.,11
Y:� +i Y e f1 .n k; y .d rt A .. i , :; i tY -t .� �i ,t ‘. T t ) �C i" ue
41 t = :;7:"4-':4-f4:117:: :'....:-See a ttached reply '� , �• V t 1iA,$.}
- 11: Are there any 'restrictive covenants on the property Which would affect they '.
-intended use if the. property were rezoned? No 4
(Attach a copy :of the covenants and/or deed restrictions -,if_any are in effect )
12. Supply factual: data showing the effect the proposed zone and use will have
' on present and future traffic flow.
See attached reply l�
I13. Will there be sufficient off-street parking provided for more intensive
use? Yes a �I
14. List exhibits or plans submitted: Legal Description, "Exhibit A" ; p
•' a l
General Development Plan , "Exhibit B"
'
IATTACHMENT TO APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT
. .
. "
Reply to Question #9
: . •
The question before us is not one of acquiring land somewhere
Ielse. The ovmer of this property is presently preparing a
development plan for the area owned -- as shown in "Exhibit A"
and "Exhibit B" . A plan for development is useless without
assurance that the plan can be implemented. Approval of , . •
zoning and the approval of the development plan is necessary.
for this assurance. By approaching the development of this
property in a logical, systematic and orderly manner, the , . . :,..„. ' ..... ..::.
owner needs a commitment by the City as to allowable. use of 1 -f'5'::2"..;:fi.::
*:-. ..i: ' land. The-. reasonableness of thiS request will be, substantiated:1 :24'
...te:•:.51:i4.;:: ' - .
:,g,,,n:,,:' t.,, in the- reply to Question #10. ..t - - • .::-.144...;:t W:;;.5e.;$1,:;::`,t-411t4
•I „.;,,,,,n4, . . .. . _ ,- , , . :,, ,._,. /f...d.,...-s„.., , a,.. :, . ,, . -. t( _"::‘,97k.--'7,a:,C5';'•-•4.,44,WM,-,-V-,%•71.
''-::.-1-"?—',/'- • - 5:=■,..,1 ii'. ,.V:■';'; .k0-,4:. . : -;,J,•:.• ':: _-:,-„-:::,„.:4111,,thi,"-Z%gfrOi- :•,,A,-4:x".4
•;;;:cc-_-- 4443:-.44-4,-,i12.-„,•: ::,,:typti.: -.:L...:.,:42:-y.:, -....„ -',... -• • ,-. :.
„,„ •„I.• 4:, ?„,.:•:-.<4.tr-41t.,.
I . ,,-..--,-::•_.0.:- .•-- - -:- -.- .- ,•,, ..;:,-::::,-.-1.,-- T.,5:7,9,.*,;; ;;:',-
, 4:41.;,44,,,-, Reply •to Question 710 ,:r- -c, ..-..1...'''' -41;2 ,21:Yq.Cif•;:-V1,;:ft,t•-a
- -. . ;-;-:15-:: .' 1:;,:j ,.„.: 1-..,), . `', 2,: .- ; : , t .. ';;11.■-•. :4-s-e,...:gy;:y..,....4).;?m,„,.,,N4,1;;:si
I :-..;_, The Timing is Proper: - Intermittent requests for commercial ..,- -, ,._ • :" ,:i
land in this area have been exp3erienced by the owners- during
the last three years. . Magnolia Road was recently connected --to./..C__:.?-y:_7,I
ICentennial Road, changing traffic pattern relationship between
': --.-;- :- - a major work area and the property in question.: The airport * --.:
over the last three years of industrial development has - . •A '-' - • • -'"
increased substanti-allyito the . south of- Schilling Road: • There ..
are better than. 800 persons employed in the industrial areas
south of Schilling 'and about. 2, 500 persons Presently employed.-'
I — in the airport industrial area. 'Traffic movement between work
and housing is'ia:major. factor, accounting for around 30% of -,; :::;;4•il
- -ir-.-:•:-:?':',
all vehicle trips within a city the size of Salina. - It appears - --,:.:;T1
-
. . . --,,i. -11
.. 4 I4 • with the, major:,restrictions to traffic movement .on Ohiosouth , :, .--..i.j,
•A-1SL: - of ' Belmont and also..north of Cloud Street on .9th Street, that
the interiection'of:Magnolia .and 9th has a tremendous . advantage, .; ,7.,.;
for.. future commercial growth It is also apparent that an --: ; .. .,I1
interchange,: off r-35. onto Magnolia is:- feasible.:.,: It. would " im- -4.-t,..,: .........2:1
prove traffic movement for the City and reinforce the':commer-taF;Q: l
.54:a
I: i.::Cf''.e.. . .: cial potential for the area in question -.--_::: :,- -.:.:_-:-_--.7'_--;;;;;-.- .-,-.. :.:22:zi
' -'-' - ' ' s., • . ':- 4',.../',':-',...ff-7.... `.:."-::- Lc:3)4Y 't---2`-' .:YEV:0;:'iri
..-:,P'.'." ' . -
• . '' : Need for Additional Commercial Land: . The word "need" is quite
:r!..• ..
interpretive until such a time as a potential developer estab-
lishes it as a fact. This year such a fact was voiced by a ......
I representative of La major retail firm who desired, at the •
moment, to purchase an option on twenty-three of the gross
twenty-nine acres of land being requested for rezoning. The
I general dimensions of the property in question are designated
to meet their needs.. .
• - ;
,
I
. •
I .
,
IExpected Land Demand: The location is• shown by the existing
and legally adopted Land Use Plan .tobe proper for commercial.. .
development. The extent of commercial development, in north •
I . and south length, was set by the length of marginal access
road needed to align with access points platted on the
Wallerius Plat -- due west of our shown Haymaker Road. The
I depth of commercial was set by reasonable standards. for other .
than non-strip commercial retail sales developments. We con
' cur with '.the comprehensive plan' s general recommendation: '; The '
site is .well balanced for providing, .retail shopping for both "
local end regional retail trade, highway service activity, and
' °R neighborhood shopping service It is a convenient.locationi:A.b F? =,4
` for .sho shoppers going . or coming -from
w PP 9 g g'-from work 'as well ,as'providing r;,
a:-- fine location:for reinforcing highway service activities , `
I. `< -,such: as motels with the shopping function y. _,t .,',:,;7k2- ,- 411,:i4.:.1; '
'i, , ai - �1' -r« µF:. ` > t * '3 f'k-1 3;
The development of, the site would require a minimal:cost for ,
public improvements on this _site for water, sewer, or street t.. •' s
(most costs of which must be borne by the developer anyway) ..:,41
I Magnolia- Road and 9th Street are both designated as major ,,. t
arterials''' and Magnolia Road appears' to be only one of two .r:1
' major streets which can connect with 1-35 and cross. uninter- '•
I rupted east through the City.' h L '
= i
Traffic. control lights are already provided at the intersec. .
111 - tion and marginal .access roads are proposed. by the developer r, �
to maximize.-the'.traffic efficiency on the arterials `Adequate ;
water, sewer, police, and fire protection are present. , ;z u ;.1
l -F it i,i, f Sr C.g
4 :
It appears from present activity in the area (recent develop- <-
s. ,ment`of 55 acres 'of:land for commercial) that there is a strong (`
' - demand for commercial in this area.' it. I
l� i 1 3 x r .S gi-A ° A u1 4 � 1W
to Question X12 + a
Reply
' The proposed zone is expected to allow the property to develop -- f
at a moderate. 'commercial density. When the property is
developed, it. is expected that additional traffic. will be j
attracted into the area. The level of increase is difficult
I to project due to a lack of satisfactory base data on traffic
movement throughout the city and traffic relationships to
known existing land uses.
I.
An investigation of present traffic capacity and potential >
I capacity along the major arterials adjacent to the property
described for rezoning discloses the following:
I
., .. y f ... .. ..
South Leg of. Intersection: . Magnolia and Ninth Street
' Right-of-Way Width 180 feet
Approach Width 48 feet :
Green Time 45�
I .1973 Traffic Count 8, 550 vpd
1973 Traffic Capacity 18, 500 vpd
Volume/Capacity . 46
I .
North Leg of Intersection: Magnolia and Ninth Street
Right-of-Way Width 180 feet
IApproach Width. 48 feet '-
- Green Time
1973 Traffic Count 12, 470 vpd 4
I `, ° 1973' Traffic Capacity 18 , 500 , vpd " f
' Volume/Capacity " ' -t
i.e
` East Leg of...-Intersection :- Magnolia and Ninth Street: " -R `
^ ? ,;:Right-of-Way''-Width 60 feet . ' - ,`i
li ;.
r ,
' Approach-Width 31 feet ryz.,._c ,-,-' ?
Green -Time '. 35% ,. « K"1' ' 1.-y-P t
1973. Traffic Count : 4 ,160 vpd .: -f;_:
' 1973 Traffic Capacity 10, 600 vpd z
Volume/Capacity; 39 i
' West Leg of Intersection: Magnolia and Ninth Street..
• Right-of-Way Width Unknown \--
Approach. Width'.,. 31 feet. y
' Turning Lane Left, no sequence ;.
Green Time 35$ " r,y
1973 Traffic : Count 5,450 vpd a
I
1973 Traffic Ca acit �'
p y " 15,000 vpd
�•' =-Volume/Capacity . 36 a `i<
I 1a Utilizing the Liesch- Capacity. Charts for the estimated traffic
,: 7 capacity of_ the intersection,- only the north leg.:of :Magnolia.-.;,,r:
;; and Ninth Street-is approach the design capacity of the pres .r
Iz ent traffic system (v/c = . 67) - Even then, there is a margin
of 33% increase in traffic, as well as the capability- in the
' future of expanding Ninth Street to .a . six-lane-:street,.without
any additional purchase of land. At such time as this improve
ment would be made, the design capacity of the street would , ; H.
Iincrease to over 21, 000 vpd.
I
it
1
2435 Drake Place
Salina, Kansas 67401
March 24, 1974
Honorable Commissioner Robert Caldwell
City of Salina 1
415 E: Crawford
Salina, Kansas 67401
Re: Petition #3380-
Dear Mr: Caldwell,
At the last Commission Meeting concerning Petition #3380, you
ask why Attorney's were representing the Petitioner and the
Protesters: We, as interested citizens, attended the Planning
and Zoning's first meeting on this petition because we felt
it involved us:' The Petitioner was represented by an Attorney,
we tried to represent ourselves. We brought up the traffic. --'-
problem, he assured us that there would be no problem. We
brought up the possibility of flooding, he assured us there ✓ '
would be none and so it went. Each time we brought up some-
thing that we felt strongly would affect us as residents of
Key Acres, he "shot us out of the saddle". One interested
citizen in the area hired Mr. King to represent the residents
of Key Acres: As interested citizens, we talked to residents, t'
and tried to see how they thought the rezoning would effect us.
Most feel the way we do, that we do not need more business in
this area and that the land in question would be better as
a housing area than a business because it is very close to both
the South Jr: High and the South Sr. High.
We know that the Commissioners are intelligent public servants
and very capable of making their own decisions without the need
of Attorneys and we are sorry it seemed necessary for the sit-
uation to be handled as a court case.
We trust that you will weigh the facts that have been presented
by Key Acres residents when making your decision on Petition
#3380.
We appreciate the time and consideration you have given this
issue.
■
Sincerely yours, 11
Mr. Ron Moss
Mrs, Ron Moss
I
+` LEGAL DESCRIPTION•
M1
I • .:":11 I .. .
IC 1 { T t: .
A tract of land situated in . the Southwest Quarter of Section :
25, Township 14 South, Range 3 West of the Sixth Principal. Meridian
'
in Saline County, Kansas.
' Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Section 25;. thence
S 89°34 '.28" . E along the. south section line of said Section 25 , a . _ '
distance of. 87. 20 feet to the point of intersection with the east
Iright-of-way,,of 9th 'Street; thence N 0°15.' 54." E along the east
right-of-way:;line,, a,_distance of 480. 00 feet to the point of
} beginning, thence north .on: a. bearing of N. 0°15 ' 54'',E, a distance
' -" ▪ of:. 1482.68 feet, "..thenceeast -on. a bearing of N 89°44 ' 06" E, a ; ` ` "A
distance, of 190 00 feet, thence southeasterly on a bearing of `-'x`
c S 47°38 '05 6"',E, a distance= of 485 19[:feet, thence .east on a bear �Y .``"�;
r ` ing Of,'S 89°44:`06' 'E,=,a distance of 200 . 00` feet, ,thence south on a y'
k .. bearing of S ,0°15 ' 54 W, a :distance,,of. .876-. 78 feet;::thence in a= , a
' southerly direction .on a -'curve :to ' the: left: having a.:radius of '•4,
720 00 feet, a ;distance of 505-. 98 feet; thence southeasterly :on :a
- line having a bearingof; S-40°00' 00'' E, a distance,. of 266`. 46 feet,
' - thence °east on a bearing of S 89°34 '28" E, a distance of 25000 .
• feet; thence southeast: on a bearing of S. 6.1°20 ' 23 ; 6 ", .E, - a distance , T
of 116. 26 :feet; thence west on a bearing of N 89°34 ' 28" W, ' a . dis- t;
' tance of 899. 08 feet; thence north on a bearing of°N .0°25 '31" E, a
leftahaving .a8 radiuseof.._175n00?feet,lwa_distance ofc229. 64 feet, fi ' ,�;
thence--northeast on a_ bearing of N 74 45 ' 30 E, a distances of 'K '. ' ;�p��
283. 37.-feet; : thence northerly on . a curve to ..the right having a a ' ' . ,ti;
radius of: 125.00. feet, adistance' of. 163.68.' feet; thence.:west on u'
' a bearing of N 89°44 ' 06" W, a distance of 50 00 feet ,,r„ ,6„'
jyy�, . 1 M. i a� 'g '1Aj .
S +.. A, i X ' r �,,:l f e fro �. , F4 ��
-. ,y :;.,...;?,..y..;?,:-:,r t' .r*'^rz" x F s ,iK a Est_ t x ` 3 ` 4(a Ps y Tr3, ',
Is ,i„y + �'. i'i � i ° s } �ti ni .(• �i'PP'Yi.rC " Si1 5'}.tt�E`'a `i w° 7�1
i t u N t } i ,. ¢tr 0^ � � a
1 1I C- , Ii(S 4- Z' , y,-;4 31 S fey' LdS.: x 3 t},i�'5,4-.i' kh? fi '1�E +
of 1 w` }3LCI , 1 , F ,...:1,V 1 �i ?�::::----4."1 ::::,1 ,-;:4 1:-, ,,'',2:13,4 1
::-L---22-1't:: 1
2 l 4 i 3 till,
f
t S R ....} c'� t t � �" 41 4
I . •
I
•
•
ty }_-�
I SAFETY DEPARTFIENT February 26, 1971
STATE HIGFIWAY COFiIISSION
TOPEKA, KANSAS
ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE
•
US-81 Alt.
' : SALINE COUNTY
' LOCATION: US-81 & K-272 Jct. (Magnolia Road) located 0.4 mile South of. Salina, Kansas
PERIOD: January 1, 1966 to.December 31, 1970
' 5.0 Year
Total Total Number Total Number Total Number . Total
I. . Number.of of'Personal:, ` of Personal of Fatal r
Year Number: of >�'
Accidents Injury- Accident.. . Injuries Accidents `.'Fatalities r.l
1 r s.. , n tid tL 14 r .. dl
1966 2
♦ O x
. is 1 1 �, a�
a f-
1967 j ; ;r;3
3 ; . 1 1 : 0 0 : :.1■I
1968 4. °, 1
9 0 0 ` 0 0 to 1
I . '. 1969 1 s 0 ,- •` -, .. :
0 _ 0 ,..Tz u:D• y
<<,
' 0 ;
' TOTAL 10
9 c i r
' r
1
•
Accident Rate 10 X 10,000,000 = 8.04 Accidents per 10 Million Entering Vehicles
' 6810 X 365 X 5 0 s' t
Fatality Rate 1 `X 10,000,000 ' 0 80 Fatalities per 10 Million Entering i Vehicles,.
' iyK -„--.6 8 1 0,X.365:-
a 'r s i :i '"sy, r'y < r'rrt r.. rJU , '` t rQ rx '#�4.y r
7 i s a`'S• i F, t wq, r3 -
' This accident experience is based on the actual accident reports available to this. .i
office
Compiled by: L 5., s 1�l
I • Checked by: R. G
bw
1.. - f
I
I
•
•
•
I . . .
' Stafe geigitu*ate eomntiooton of anoao
March 10, 1971 ,
I . ROUTE: U5-81
COUNTY: Saline
LOCATION: Magnolia Road (K-272)
' intersection south of Salina
' - TO:Mr. D. W. Bassett, Assistant City'Engineer, Salina; Kansas. --:
DATA: :-A determination of a warrant for the. installation of a traffic
control signal l ; x ,�` �`�^x 't•1 .
i�' . t?'r r ...rda vd�'1 tf�r t'i id 's'
DESCRIPTION Hourly one-way traffic counts for a 24-hour period on '
` each.?leg' of-f the Intersection,' beg inning at. 8:00 a m s;i" :%J.. irgi 'i
' •Tuesda February- 16,'`19.71 , at the intersection of US-81 F' 4`g' i
Y.
and"Magnolia Road -(K-272) south of the cit of Salina +L £rz t>'
Kansas y -- , 4 eyY34I
- • "' ` ?-,. ru'. yk
WARRANT . ::-‘'''.7?-, x • . cr tr txl . �ia
DETERMINATION Speed warrant.applied. for: signal when the 85-percentile `,, ie • l
speed of- major.-street traffic exceeds 40 tIPH..: Use 709; :j
of minimum vehicle volume for urban area ° F " ;
1
' WARRANTING COND III OS
. E� t d.4i.-1'
24 hour Period.
s
IMajor Street tIInor Street .4
Requ J'red ° 5kr `
Ito 3
' Vehicles
VEHICLE r" �t �:
` Per Hour 420 ," 105 s "'y Y-4
;' VOLUME - Required 1 7'
' ` . �, M1 .: .t 1,. .r
p{t 4 Hours ( ` � '.."'/,‘',,r`--"'-'-,,' Y'F i f . ` �., ;YL� -s ,II
Li WARRANT- - L, ✓ - 2;3 3 • 1" � ,, ..+.F✓' ° ` a
' Actual ': - px c
x
Hours 9 � �,' ha
.
6 ai
I Required • i�
Vehicles .
INTERRUPTION Per Hour , 630
53
IRequired ,
WARRANT Hours 8 8
•
' Actual
•
Hours 2
. 16
I
•
• URBAN HIGHWAYS Da3,4;trill:21T , . Weather: Cloudy
. ....
.7.:- STI.72, IIIGH:1.ff CO:iir.I:ZION ! - --..--''•,-' ' . t.-.. - : r"' . : : 2 . ' ''.'•:: -.•---.7•=.•• ':-.:::-.-::r.--,-
Sal ine , i - ' ..„-ty:e,
•', : .'.- ..• ' : - " ','VIIIIC.12, VOLUIL. COILIT
SUI.21ARY SHL:2
LOCATION: Sa 1 Ina DAL. Wednesday ' DATE; October 20, 1971-
...
I I ii TratRS E Crt:0 N OF Ninth (t1C-RIAlt) strnnt ..lnd tt-.3,-,,-,11.:. (1....-,424___Ro_ad
FliON SOUTH Oil [ raow WEST ON ! ' PhST
IF1.011 siGitlii ON 11711.0i1 3.1..11:111 ON i a. pritioD1
• ., . TI/L'.. I ;Ninth (US-81 .1-':- •.... ' = ' Ninth (US-81 Al ) Magnolia as
Road ! stn.,'"t 1 TOTAL TOTAL I '1;
-,:- c't1117.?17.4I.: -Al t) Street ....r.t ,Aaanoli a
; •,,w: : s :-r , . m : w • s i E • N .▪ 14 I. S EN !
.: 1
: ...
'' ''.-.: 21 ::" 10•;-4-14 ::`'.7.'" : - 7- 4,5,....,,56.:. ..2.4..2. ...7....1;; ;-;17g,, .... .. . .. ...j);
. -:'''1,1?.,. ;,:lb*:1.5* '••,17,7,.,7,,,...„•:•:„ •..•;„„it,74.,;.7,c....„:7;;•*,•;..7.1.7:-.721,,•.., •te, r i. :, c_ ; . ,, i , :. -., : -4.--;, 11,-. •;::1t.17:f.j.,,t4.5i3.:A. S'isi
I 4; rj-1°:3 A 7 4'1 fia-'44 : `qt ::-1?:I.'li..:fi;.t.''at;'':-!*..--.I?.5..::.52.;..o: I.:2....5.i.":
r
::-• 16-1•Y)
I --,-- 4- : :•-‘1::-/.:--1,-... -' if--- - -. . • • :jf ' ='.1 '2/ '1'-?: I 1 -Z14" ::-Ti;
7 . .5.1'.-: 2 1 ? • 39 ... . .0. . 2 6...15.-.1.11);..1.e:. .... _:.:;
..... •‘,..•,...** *****...........•.•• •.. . .. ••:** *** ,. ...•,,.• •„, . . ••• _. _ ,.. ,
I 71. ' 10:45 I ,....„.:a. ..., .. . • -.,,,....,-,..,; -,,...- -7:7•-, 1 • • - 1 ., - * ::: I -'..."'at.1:1::,I 7 / 5,I 27s,I.
- 1 ' 1 i -00A r -22 '•'*: 47 11 1 -15 7-:' : 0 7 I : 46 : 2 i 5 4 , ;j2,,,!„17 .. . .1.-... ;..1 ,-.51-1
-• -
•
-•-'.'••-.-- • ' •" ''.,,*--5-'1 '1- ' - -',.' I. : : I ' - • - : - 1-Y c-22--- 1,:- '--yr I I)
-. Total ' 4
-sr : : 15 ' "81:'41 27 . : 13 N • Qc..'.1.1.4..9...??..s. 1.1.... ... . 10...i -, ',1
* .•-
. .L 1. ... .. . 1., . . ,L...t, i : : .- I ; s ; 1 - . ::, - ‘-:::---.II:-,-- 1 !•:-1
I
. .•. I Trucks 1: 1 ' : 9 . -.472 L "' 1 2 '''-: 0 2 : 61,.,4, 1..1 .s• .„Q.% Q 2 ...I J
.12103 1 : : - I : . : • - - • • : 1- ,1
I12: 15P 1" 36 : 34 : 23 i 14 15 : 1 7 : 78 1 3 1 ,, ,z,,:.,. . izei .20. 4„z45 , 1
. 71211> 1 ,• .•
: 12:30P 1 23 : 53 :. 18 L 16. 9 : 3 5. : /j6 . . .1. 1 ..3.. ..z.t .z5. . .zos i
..... ....••....... •••• •• •.1, • '4- • •: t
• i st2730••••16",—, . . I , - . .- '. • • : :.
• .•- 1 . . ..
ll
• 12:45: ' r-30 --- : 54 ' 18 113 11' : 9. .3-.-.: .36,.:...2. ..1,:,,,,„5,3_15.1 ‘.1,91, .. . .......I
••••••••••••• ..
: .712 I.45••*•li , . ;. . . .c.,_ 1.....;•,,.. ...,:., _7..7,,.•
.7- '-)-1 :OOP . 1' 29 ';;: : 88 :: 13:q-26 .1. ...i. .1...i ..5 .i.,-? (2.1..5 :,, .2, 4.241. . . . ,....c.„.,...,,,
I t1k;o.ta; 7. .--;;;:::?;;;;•..t'.-;;.-i;,=:.6'9' * 48--. : 10 11 .]::: 215: .. A. '.. .6.i.Za.*;:ei.ii. P .' '''8$. .-;;:j.'cile
1
1-„-:.- -, :•..•-.4,...6:-7.:-....7 ..••7::.• i . •....:: ' . , ,- : , : ;;,,,. , 1.):''i'4: :I ::,}
I
I - ',,,i "::: Trucks - ;3774.;:- 9 : i:•• OHVg 0 0- ---.. 1 1 17 •:. .: 9..:,. ..1.. ..1 ..,..(1;i;.4. 1.. .....: .-.2S...1 ',-;
'-'?te........... .'17V;*:•-•:!.:•...,.7-rjr...77.:.:•7„.; : ,, 1 :,.:,.:::,••,.. - • .-- ,1.. • - •.:,.. • . Ft:: • ; ':.,.t.1.":.y::•:i44•1;44p4
:;.}:41- ' - I %...,,,,,s-s:.--"r'cl-•-PL,Ukr,',5;:-: •-=''',”="`• ' 1:,-..1! •'. t ,' : : '
r*--.PY•tt:' • ' , ••^1.: -'': , '` - • r • - :'•••••••.;•••••• • • •.:••••:....f••••• • •
••'••••••••••••••Is• ••••••••'....!. .t ' • • , t '• •;10- , .,.. W.. '"' '"fi.:>:'I Ai
I i,-;, :‘: : s --- .. ::::..::' " : :: ,'-',-- r*I,t-,-1 , -Ts:: „ , - - :--I . . .. :. ;:.. :.;•,3 4-,„.r,„. ;-, 4..;;-;. 1 :
1 1
2:. t•e 1••■•••••••••••••1,•••••■:•■••:••••■• ■•••,Ie• •: .1 , . . i.1 .. . , : ..,
. ; . .74.,_
•
I I i.. • ;••.• ••• 1.• • itp i••..i......• ..qI
1 .1
' _ -
• .
• .
..........s.... .. reee.....*Poeseedell : ei •• ••r
. ..
: : I . I I 1
: . . 1 • •
• .
• •. .• 4 S
I ..... .....
: i I .. . ..../...e .. ***4
. I : .. . .s.4 •
•
I I I
• •
TOTAL I • •
. •
. •
. -p.
i I '
I l TOTAL I
1. .017.L.S.alli I .1. . , . .. • .. .., .
t 1 1
1".1:AIGItc . • • • 1 • •
..);
I TOTPT2 ! . •
• •
, . I . : .
• I • •
•S . • ' I 4
1 I '
III i-------;itt.T .1-1 /. I ..-- - 1----1-1
. t
I 1
.
-...--- --- ---
•
S.E.C. Form jo. 1413
II
•
• URBAII HIGHWAYS D2'...t 4T
ISTATE RIO PlAY COi,i•IISSIOII NON-ADJUSTED TRAFI IC' COUNT TOPEKA, KANSAS . . .
TRAFFIC VOLIJi iE COUNT
IIilILH SLCTIOit Si Gil LIL:,TiC 7 ,
Location: Ninth (US-81 Alt) St. and Magnolia (K-272) County: Saline
Road
' Day: Monday and Tuesday City x:tXAtt1: Salina
' Date: October 18, 19, 1971 Weather: Cloudy
I _
I ENTERING TRAFFIC ONLY ENTERING TRAFFIC
' STRa ?sT AND DIRECTtOJ •r WI INTERSECTION 4 8 1-IIGI LST HOURS .
Ninth : MagnoliJ Ninth Magnolia 1-11AY 14ajor Cross I
(US-81A1 ):.. Road ( S,-8.1 (K-774) TOTAL Str^et, Strcet�
' .,„ HOUR 11., Leg E. Leg : .ASt'Leg' t•1: Lem d TRAF- Both--Ap Pr�i{nc�ipp�a}l,
�pnY0.3-C l.. ,
Prneohn
1 2_a : 42-:--. : 6 -2. 47 - 3 98 u l,c , <,.;•. f
' • 20 - p 20. 3 43
7 0~ 11 1 19 ..— . ,
•;_/ .. - 17... . 0 - 10 . 2 . 29
' I- 0 0 12 :I
5-6 ' Nana 9 1 37.
,: 6_7 113 2 29_ 5 14
I 661 z. 3 Lr47 —1323 13
R._9 27- . '0 ( -1--H 28 3 . 518 i
0- 2u5 9 1 '5 —Ton 538 I -
•... 311 I 201-1 851 618 -
11-1a? 372 1� 255 1 154 795 . a - ,•4
?.Ai.
472 24 248 109 8� 720 ; 109 43
1.111111.1' 391 5. 251 1 1 7 8— 15_642 1 17 -A,
25 27 22 13 817_ ! 651 134 .1
I ._ 00 0 [v 973 1 X204 _ 'pl
: 77 13 503 I6 2O' 1157 980 164 ..
+70 0 359 1 r 973 829 144 r <f
I _ 432 ".` Cr : •:312 : 147 - I . -891 -'744 ��147•. _q� 3 : . . . 0 213 13 704 . . . . - . '_al.
' . 9___ 251 9 152 . 115 ( . 527 . T,
o a 21 11. . 07 02 .. Tj
`II
1021- 91 .. : . 0 5• 18— . 175
• 11_1 2'I 112 : Niantaini - 160-= • _
DAILY 6318• 306 3849 1704 12177 6140 - 1032
PUR 4-5P 477 13 503 164 1157 980 164 t-
FLAK
)tn`r 13_ hours of traffic total both approaches of major street over 470 vehicles
per hour. —_
I9 hours of entering traffic principal. nporoach of the cross street over 105 •
vehicles per houa luring the came above noted highest hours.
I Compiled: liPR A By: 1L"1
Speed -w rrant applied for signal when the 85-percentile speed of major-street
traffic exceeds 40 MPH. Use 70 of minimum vehicle volume for urban area.
I
, .
• ... URBAN HIGIIII,OCS Di...FARTIZ.;11T weather;
• - Slit; IIICI:T.CC CC:laa.1104.1
TOP2KA, ICABCAS .. 'County: Saline -
,s VIIIICL.:3 VOLUIE. COUNT " - -
• ,
... . .
ILOCATION: Salina DAY:_wrcinncrlly DATE: October 20. 1971 '
. .
IIITLRSI:CTIOIT OF: Ninth (RS-RI Air) ct and Ragnnsia_( Cz:272) Road .
I ..._._._.____._
IFraci;i uov,111,,oa I Facii .i.;.."-.ST ON i i'/S.0;',I SO-J71/1 Oil 11 FRO1. 1. 111;ST ON : _
. TIPis, hinth ku oi i Ninth (1.1J-81 1 Magnolia LPL-R-1(01HOUR
iiirrovija- Alt) Street otlagnolia Road . i Alt) Street 1 (R-272) Road ; TOTAL TOTAL
• I
; 11 :S • E t N if : S lE Il • 'll S • E •
I3: 15P • 20' - 43 : 438 L'.62 3 •::.'' !/...i . :.. <9 4 . .:... .: M :??6.....::-.s..
•..)Ii •••• • •I•••.•.,•-:•••.•:•••.,-,, •••-•e, . i• •- • , . - 1 - • : . 1 ..-_,., c-..., I
3:30P . '37"-•-: a :- 5 _I 2 5 2 I 9... .I7 % ?1. ,,,-? 5.,),,,,..,; ..
......••••••• ••• •••-•z•••••r••--• •:•••• • • . -. • 1 .,,,.„, ,,,.,, ...A..„,......
i *Y1.3 I , • •- -,..,..1 . •
d-n : - 1 • „ • , • , .,,,,,, ,,,-,. - ,- . ,,. .;..t.,..--.-
3:45P 36'-•:, : 82 •• 18 1 -18 3 ' 2 4
•3145 .1 •-•-•••••••r•''' ''---:••• •• •••• •• •••••• 4— •• • - 1 . ,,,„ — - 1/2“,:tet
1 ---_,,, - . . ,--- ; ,,-.. t-s-: . , •
•4•o:OoOoP o 0000 7••2•:••6•6•• ••'•16•• , : • ,-or 2‘ ?0. . •I•"•-..'t'",t•'c-?•,-•-.•1..f. ;i.c•r•i:.;,
Total 1110 ; 246 88 1 115 18 : 16 13 23r) . 7 1 ti • 66- • 159 ' 4;.-. . 000 1081 . . ,:,. ' - :
1 •
• i • •• •• -•:••• • •• ..• ..• •i• 1
1 Trucks 1 3 ‘ : 20 2 I 0 2 : 1 .1.. ..zs... ..Q. , ..Q.;..o.;,..2„ , . ..;,..„„..56.. , , , ,
.** 1 *
'414: 15P 1 20 : 72 19 1 21 8 : 2 Z 98 : 1 .1 71, .5„ ,2C1. .282. ......
5 1 : ,..• • • • .. ...e ....• . • • •• . .e. . ..• •• • •••• .
4:30p • . !. . 1 1
. 25 : 75 16 29 7 . 2 ., 6 81 : ..1. 1 .1,.:...2 , v.; 1 222 . .... .-1. .,
l .
'4:36.•.. .1. •'••••"• •***,si*•• * 4 • 44:• 44 •1 •4444.4.• * IT • ?: • * le •- t.. 1 ,,",:. ,..-4- ;i
4:45P 1 29 .: 85 21 1 16 4 : 0 1 7.** 194 52 . ..2...L34;„29 . 1 .362.. .., .,..),: -1,i
• '4:55 I •••••• •••••1. s*** ** * ** ••••
• • • ; 4.6 .7. - • 1 ••,-!-, ct,;,
5:00P
1 24 : 69 19 1 2° 4 : .4. ... •11,• . ••Ql. *: **Q• • •Z••••1.5•,1 .30 • • •286 •• •..•... ' .4";•i
1 "**',"•''''''''''':'•*er"•' sis•• " • '°''•; I *., I _ ,,, ,.. vi: h.•;. ,.,;4,
Total i 98 :301 : 75. 1 86 23 : 7 124 474
*** • • •;• *: ••• •i •• . : 4" f " ••• 1
. il I .tt :AZ,:1.12 L .• .tzui..1.: ,-,,,
Trucks 11 0 ' : 17 : 2 11 ' /2 2 : 0 1 0 16 : .1 . 1 ..0. : .Q.,:.;I•' I 1 :Ai.11 .-'7 ;tii
. ..11
gi ••7 7' '* *'*1'' '':'''' '•• ..1- 7 ": ; f 7 7 ..f! f ': • :' :.I '-7"..:* 1.. :'"r ::,::-•t?;.:',1
•- '');;5 ' I Truck are dual wheeled i' ineleiunit;' ,:m.d:la.r.odr. : i -' '' I -.`, “
••-„;.• **** • ••••••••• •••••• •••• ••.••••••••••n'T"'• ••'• 1"' ",“ 1"•.' ' ''l
lc Truckl ar included: in ttitals below. . 1 • 1. ' 1 . . ... I - --:
i•t
•••••*;.•...:••••:•••••:••••• ••••:•••••:••••• e.• •:• ••••;.•••1•• ••••• .... . . '
• • . • : i : : I
• •
••••......
•••••••••••.....;•••• ••
• •
.1 . •. ....1..,:e... if .
• . .4.
I . I • 1
• ••/ .•••r• ••••• . . . .. . i
r• ".r... .?•• ••f “ ...; * • - i 1
i •
.., ••••„,
• I
i• • ;. •••■;
I : • • i ; 4 I
.. OTAL...1 4 I 7 :911: 284. .311: 116 4.6 _ .1.7-2_ --111.(17-.:--2-3-. -,3-4.-...149-.1-404-' I. 1 -
TOTAL 1
.017.L.s.ani
III
TRuc.:si ;
1612 I 473 I
• - I .J162...... ..• .. 5.3.7 i. 1 31%414 .1 •
.
Tr,,r.„ 7 : 55 . 6 i 3 : 6 : 2 1 4 : 56 : 4 1 2 i 0 i 3 1 1 . I
1
i
!' 1 i I
ius:L I
64 I 118 1
I
8 11 1 6 5 •
I------
IS.H.C. Form Jo. 1/413
•
IURIIfi 1 :{IG!pmys JT"1.1T- 1rT
ST T.3 HIGHWAY ( NON-ADJUSTED TRAFFIC COUNT. :•1 JVi, ,6� .
' TRAFFIC JOttfir.; ..OUJT
• .; DIT.:R.,..4'1iusI 6IG:i:,'_rZATIG,i
' Location: __ nS 81 K-1Z2 and h1a '
floviia_ Qad_ County -____Saline
Day --T.—
' LcsdalLf204-11 iAkac�
City or iJur� Sa 1 i na
Date:,F�h.CuteC+-1R�F_C2CLI;U::_.l. Wit Weather Clear - _
t z, ENTERING, TRAFFIC OILY . '' L.dT-Ru'G T;LI . td
i LET r .D a::F ▪..TIo i F. JA, •?T7.12:3 'C TIOit -
Magnolia 1 Al jor .,f NT gross
US 81 ;Road ` US 81 K 272 . TOTi Street a Ctree
Do :St.c pa 4,
' '� s
f
HOUR , 4 A'S3.4r- I Both hos 'A n oac h
` ' Leg Le, Leg :11.'''...,;eo _ ' FTC ;,
d.2: -= o.c hes a roach'}
1 }V .L2-1 i �l: h y.. "T. V 7 "^ k'�:t
1-2 _ 6 11 113
3-3 •l Z6--_ 0, _ 17 jl_._._-._.�
' �.-5 2 .��106 C-7-_-_____L_, _J5_J
' —�� S9 --S_9___Y 9 4 182 Jos 152 1Lp 17 --- + - _ -
t _ 1E16 _ ' _'_ -° I! '_ 6,Jbf, _� __50.1.. ___16_1 162
3. 1-9.131. 199_.1.611L._87 -_I 182 21— —_ - -- I t,58 p �5-: ..
tai- 102- 80� 1�� —
i221 3zz.__ L 705• 24 ,_ ____ _ ,668 _ ..rL27: #•' ':r
t 2-3 ,4'_ 2L _ 202 _17 !_ 774. __1_ 466 w.3L
_-zz 70 • 1 2,9___-__ 5p
z•
3- 77_ .5
_3°Z 1R1 _' '5' _d iloy _9io �. _ --
' 5-6 :_3 .4 02 201 _ 61 - _ ��o - -'
�-' � i oz
6 ? -222 _15 ▪178 11 y 583 4 2 -`x< 21,11.15 ,s,-- it
' 2 LG3_ 66_ - - J5
e 10 _
--,, - _L1�. __�. �;8P 6�_. _s. _3t2 .__
l0 12 : 86 21 10 _ _
]0-11 : 56— 3-- �- 1&4
DAILY
81_._ _l ._ _ 40 0
TRAu FJC 4,5 Z:-. _1688 3 i 0Z 548 _ `
I --- 99� 4613.. _ 1041
- J�(1({,\
H0Qlt4-5 395 118 481 61 I 1055 j 876 - . 118
_.-,.... . 2. - hours of traffic' total;-ioth approaches of rxdor street over Ti•20��_ -
vehicles per hour., _
I 6--.__may hou ;; of enter .ng traffic, principal rpproac`. of the cro,s
ovor ._LQ5___ vehicles per hour durinz the • k hichost�,.� cil;ht (.1� .Ar,,:rc;t hotu•s.
Con,-)ilcd .__27.z2-..7_1 ___ _
I When the >-p
3� Dj -- �'�._._.
85 - speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 fiPll,use 70 percent of
minimum vglune requircncnts 'of the Urban Si9ndl U: : rant.'
.. - -..c. .a-' n rl..'e. -. T•
I , URD1N HIGHWAYS DEPA..n1ENT Weather: Cloudy
STATE HIGH'/AY COiIMISSION '
TOPEKA, KANSAS . County: Saline
' _ VEHICLE VOLUME COUNTY Y,
c
SUMMARY SHEET . . .
Tuesday February 16, 1971
ILOCATICH Salina , Kansas DAY Wednesday DATE February 17, 1971
INTERSECTION OF US-81 , K-272 and Magnolia Road
IFROM NORTH ON FRU;I EAST Oil FROM souni OW FROG WEST ON PAST
TIME ST. PERIOC HOUR II'
' INTERVaL US-81 ST Magnolia RdST: US-81 , . ST. K-232 TOTAL TOTAL
W . S E N - :. ' W S E N • W - S • E N !!)
2:00
' .2. 15 Q : 54 12 12 .1 ;.. . .2 4 A9. .: 4 . . 0 5 3 1.34 M
2:15 .. .,.,, r� • hx
:2;3Q. . . . :5: 57 .9 12
.3 . •1.. 2 47 i. . 1 .4 . .5 1.47. . , . . .is 2:.30 -.<. '� . . . . r - .,r:.2"2 c o u,.rxi: ;r�
2:45. 4 45 ll 13: 2: 1/2 4 0 .4 41 4 .Q 4 1:29
3:00. . 4 61 13 :-.16-. . -..z. l :4 .32 .: .i. .1 3 2 1.4Q ,
-. `e
1
Total 19. 213. ..45 ..53. 1Q. ...4. , .14 . :1.59 . .2 . :.2 . .15 . .14_. . . .550
r-', ,
I :Trucks 1 : 9. . .l 11 3 : .. .9. . . ..1 11 .:,. .Q . . .Q 1 . Q. _ . . . . .28
3; 15 4 : 58. :.38 ..19. :. .3 . . :.2 . . . .3. . .42 .• .1. . . .4 . .S . : . :$ . . :18Q
I 3:15
3.30. . . : 4.:.51 . ,25 SQ. . .6. . .1 . 4 ; .4Q . 4 ' .l . 1Q . .1Q . :ZQZ
3:30
.345. . . .4. 94 38 ...67. . . .3 . 4 . 1 6$ . .Q . . .I 3Q 23 3-23 --:75.311A
:
.9.44. . . .c , ;y
:9 $2 .21 2l . . .3 . .2 . .3 . .7•$ . .Q . . .Z 5 6 . .217'
' T9t01 . 18: 271 1,2 14$. 15 . 9 . . .11 22$ : l ,4 . , 54 47 928
.Tracks. . . .Q:;:17. . . .1 3: 9 1 .3 1$ Q Q . , 4 Q 47
' 4:00 7-4::::::::v.:,.;a;
: 1 ♦ 5 t t 's d Tn
4; �5. � 7. 67 .17 32 , 7 , .Q .Q ;121 .; 1. , C:'', .3 . .261
' .4;3Q. . 4. 73 . 23 24,., 4 .5. . . . .7.; $3 ., Q '.4 . , $ , 4 . . .235 ,
i
4:30 s
4;45. . . . . :3. :.68.,..14 .19 :, .6 ., x.2: -:6 ..14$ .; . .2 . 71 : . ,'.13 : ; :19 . '.292 2
I 4:45
.4.44.'. . . . .I ..:.63.:, .33 ..13::2. .1 .-.. .-.9 . . . . .5 , 93 . .3 . .3 . 7. :. :6 _221
' .Total . . . .15. 271 .87 84...1$.; . .7. .1$ .:445 . .6 . . .4 . 34 . ,23 . .1916 1
Trucks 0 6 • 0 1 :: 6 11 1 21 1 0 0 I 38
XORI K .
.lOTALOF .
' .L.S.t. a .. . . . .
TRUCKS
TOTP..t. t11
1 TO
L.S r •
L. .LI. •
' S.H.C. Form Ho. 1413
I 'JRDAMI HIGH4b1YS DEPA. .,;EIJT Weather 'Citudy
STATE H I GH!/AY'`C0(111I SS ION •TOPEKA, KANSAS County.: .•' Saline '.
' VEHICLE VOLUME COUNTY r
SUtIHARY SHEET $$
' s "' Tuesday February 16, 1971 • ',9
' LOCATION Salina, Kansas DAY Wednesday DATE February 17, 1971. ' i '
INTERSECTION OF US-81 , K-272 and Magnolia Road j
FF.Oii KORiH Oil l FROH EAST Oil FROM SOUTH ON FROM WEST ON PAST ' ti
' TINE J ;: ST PERIOC HOUR '
INTERVAL US S1 '` ST.1annolis Rd.ST:'� US=81 ST K-272 TOTAL TOTAL ,
W : S E 6; : W : s E n • 1! S- • E • N i
8:00
', . 8:35A 13 .IJO $0 4Q 29 9 2$ :3 0 $ E 29 b ,,gyp
815': r
=0:30. 4 ::.;1...i7 33 4 . . .5.:. .47.3.::.2 1 1 •3 170 , , ,,
3 „-r, i .r M`4 :
8.4S. 2 .35 •l5 23 ` 4 2 3 46 .1 1 . 0 •1 133 ,
}- n`1 f .,r i 1 511
8.45 • A J u�S
_9.00 0 23 )0 39 6 I `2.. 32 . .3 .0• . 2 .2 100
_Total 39• ;139. . 132 . 135.-.: 3:-...5. . . .12.•. 1153.3-. .9 .2. 11 . •12. 652
I .Trucks. . 0. :-.21.1. .. . 1 I. ..".0.... . .0. . ..0• 16. .1 .0. 5 :0 ti.. 48y ` `
Tru cks.ere. Jual.wileeled•s)o le.uaits and• lic r
I .. . . '
•Trucks•Care. ncJuded iv-. tots s.belry {f:•
7 t ;
. . .i •, , _ r^ t
9:H ...r i f t •i 2 is -t•4,
• 4
1.
1 `. . . .
TOTAL 1 71 . :894 : 386 I.D4 : 86.: 25 55 : 985 : 18 1? 114 : 96 • •
,
' br TOTAL01
L.S. . J 351. 515 i 05 222 31% J
TRUCKS •
TOTE.!. : 6 : 3 • ,6 : 9 : . 2 5 : 66 . , 2 n • In 1
I TOTAI_tit=
L.S.LP,. _ 50 —17 73 I1 161 llDll
111 S.H.C. Form Ho.. 1413