7.1 Zone N Industrial Park
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
7/12/04
TIME
4:00P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 7 DEAN AN DREW AGENDA:
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
ITEM DEVELOPMENT
NO. 1 1a BY: BY:
Page 1
Item
Application #PDD04-1, filed by Pavers, Inc., requesting a change in zoning district classification from
1-2 (Light Industrial) to POD (1-2) (Planned Development District) and preliminary development plan
approval to allow a concrete batch plant on a 3.15 acre tract of land legally described as Lots 3 and
4, Block 14, Northeast Industrial Park Addition to the City of Salina, Saline County, Kansas. The
subject property is addressed as 505 Francis Avenue.
Background Information
The plat of Blocks 13 and 14 of the city's Northeast Industrial Park was approved and recorded in
1977. Lots 3 and 4 in Block 14 were purchased from the city's Urban Renewal Agency by Wilfam
Company (predecessor to Wilson Constructors and Pavers, Inc.) in 1978. The Planning
Commission approved a redevelopment plan for Lot 4 on July 3, 1979 to allow construction of an
office and maintenance shop. No development plan for Lot 3 was ever submitted or approved. A
building permit to construct a 40 ft. x 70 ft. building on Lot 4 was issued on September 9, 1980. A
building permit to construct a 40 ft. x 40 ft. addition onto the west side of Pavers, Inc., facility was
issued on June 12, 1995. In May of 2002, Pavers, Inc. applied for a fence permit to extend an
existing chain link fence to the west boundary of Lot 3 to expand their storage yard. No gate was
shown on the plan and there is no record of a driveway permit being issued for the driveway
entrance off of York Street.
Nature of Request
The applicant has moved a portable batch plant on to their construction yard. This plant is being
used to provide concrete for the Water Well Road 1-135 interchange project and other KDOT
projects in the area. The applicant would like establish this concrete plant as a permanently
approved use on their site and to be able to produce concrete for City projects. To do this they must
get their plant certified by the Public Works Department.
The proposed plant location is on Lot 3 just south of where Chester Street ends. The Pavers, Inc.
site is currently zoned 1-2 (Light Industrial) and is located in the city's Northeast Industrial Park. This
property must be rezoned to 1-3 or a Planned Development District must be approved to allow the
placement of a ready-mix plant which is a listed permitted use in the 1-3 (Heavy Industrial) district.
Creation of a Planned Development District would allow the City Commission to approve a specific
use and development plan for the site but to keep other 1-2 use limitations and development
standards in place. Staff did not feel comfortable recommending a change to straight 1-3 zoning in
this area. A similar approach was used for the approval of the Builder's Choice and Smoky Hill
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
7/12/04
TIME
4:00P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 7 DEAN AN DREW AGENDA:
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
ITEM DEVELOPMENT
NO. 1 1a BY: BY:
Page 2
Construction ready-mix plant near the airport.
The proposed batch plant facility will consist of aggregate storage piles (rock, sand, etc.) that will be
located east of the plant, an aggregate bin in which raw materials will be dumped, a conveyor belt
that will carry materials to the batch plant itself and a hopper that will be used to unload the concrete
product into waiting ready-mix trucks. There is also a plant control room in a trailer at the plant site.
It appears that ready-mix trucks currently enter the site from a gated driveway on York Street,
receive their loads from the hopper, circulate on-site and exit on Chester Avenue.
Zoning Ordinance Requirements
It this request is approved, the underlying zoning as far as development standards for the tract would
remain 1-2 (Light Industrial). Because this is a POD request, the Planning Commission may approve
an individual use (concrete batch plant) as part of the plan approval process. Where the POD
application or site plan does not specifically indicate an exception or variation to the 1-2 standards,
the following 1-2 district regulations would apply:
1. Permitted Use - All permitted uses in the 1-2 district plus a concrete batch plant.
2. Minimum Lot Area - 5,000 sq. ft.
3. Minimum Lot Width - 100 ft.
4. Minimum Lot Depth - 100 ft.
5. Front yard setback - 25 ft. (80 ft. from York Street proposed)
6. Side yard - No Minimum
7. Rear yard - No Minimum
8. Maximum structure height - No limitation
9. Maximum Lot Coverage - 500/0
10. Off-Street Parking - Off-street parking requirements will be determined by the zoning
administrator based on the number of employees at this site.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
7/12/04
TIME
4:00P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 7 DEAN AN DREW AGENDA:
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
ITEM DEVELOPMENT
NO. 1 1a BY: BY:
Page 3
11. Use limitations in the 1-2 district are as follows:
(1) All operations, activities and storage shall be conducted wholly inside a building or buildings,
unless nearest point of such operation or activity is more than two hundred (200) feet from the
boundary of any zoning district other than an 1-1, 1-2, or 1-3 district and except that storage
may be maintained outside the building in side yards or rear yards if such storage area
is separated from public streets and other property (except property located in an 1-1, 1-2,
or 1-3 district) by screening of not less than six (6) feet in height.
(2) Servicing and maintenance of vehicles shall be permitted only when such is necessary to the
conduct of a permitted use.
(3) If a lot in an 1-2 district adjoins a residential district, screening shall be provided at the lot lines
sufficient to protect, on a year-round basis, the privacy of adjoining residential uses, however,
if the property actually utilized for permitted or conditional nonresidential purposes (including
accessory parking areas) lies two hundred (200) feet or more from an adjoining residential lot
line, no screening is required along that lot line.
(4) No building shall be used for residential purposes except that a watchman may reside on the
.
premises.
Suitability of the Site for Development Under Existing Zoning.
The site is currently zoned for 1-2 uses. To allow a concrete batch plant in this location as a
permitted use the city's Zoning Map would either have to be amended to rezone this tract to 1-3 or a
Planned Development District would have to be tailored specifically for the proposed use. Staff
recommended the latter approach to avoid opening up this site to all 1-3 uses without review and
approval by the City Commission. Also there are certain operational aspects of a concrete batch
plant that are best suited to a Conditional Use Permit or POD process where conditions of approval
can be imposed.
The subject site is not located within the 100 year flood plain and although there are some existing
easements and utilities on Lot 3 that would restrict construction on portions of the lot, there is
adequate buildable area to accommodate a concrete batch plant.
Character of the Neighborhood
The character of the York Street and North Street corridors is predominantly industrial. The 1-1
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
7/12/04
TIME
4:00P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 7 DEAN AN DREW AGENDA:
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
ITEM DEVELOPMENT
NO. 1 1a BY: BY:
Page 4
(Industrial park) district is the city's most restrictive industrial zone. It is designed to accommodate
and encourage high quality industrial development in an office park or industrial park-type setting.
The 1-2 (Light Industrial) district is designed to accommodate general manufacturing, fabrication,
assembly and warehousing. The 1-3 (Heavy Industrial) district is designed for those industries which
are apt to have an extensive impact on the surrounding area. A concrete batch plant is classified as
one of those industries or uses and is only listed as a permitted use in 1-3.
The property involved in this application is currently zoned 1-2. All adjacent properties are also
zoned 1-2 except for the lot to the north on Chester Street and the property on the east side of
Francis which is zoned 1-3. These properties are not located within the NEIP. There is no existing
or proposed residential development in the vicinity except for the surviving house at the SW corner
of York and Chester. Two privately used storage buildings are located west of the site and Total Turf
Care is located on the north side of York Street. Any future development to the south would be
buffered from this site by 100' of railroad right-of-way unless there was a change in the status of that
right-of-way. All property located within the NEIP urban renewal area is either zoned 1-2 or C-1.
Staff is not necessarily concerned about the proposed use in the proposed location or Pavers Inc. 's
proposed site development plan but would be concerned about a blanket change to 1-3 zoning. The
request area is not a highly visible location, however, the City of Salina is spending a substantial
amount of public dollars to acquire and clear property and enhance the entryways to the proposed
North Ohio Overpass and 1-3 zoning would no longer be appropriate where it exists today when that
project is completed. It appears that any negative impacts from the outdoor storage of aggregates
and vehicles could be buffered or reduced by the use of adequate setbacks, solid fencing and/or the
installation of landscaped buffers and screening trees between the proposed storage piles and York
Street. The primary off-site impact will most likely be blowing dust.
Public Utilities
1.
Water service is available from a 6" water main located in York Street.
2.
Sanitary Sewer service is available. A manhole and 8" line is located along the south side of
the property.
3.
Storm Sewer - Surface drainage is to the northwest to York Street.
4.
Streets and Access - This tract has frontage on York Street and Chester Avenue but Chester
is not improved all the way to Pavers, Inc. 's property line. A 30 ft. access drive opening on
York Street was constructed for the batch plant. Ready-mix trucks and other vehicles appear
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
7/12/04
TIME
4:00P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 7 DEAN AN DREW AGENDA:
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
ITEM DEVELOPMENT
NO. 1 1a BY: BY:
Page 5
to access the site through this gated entry. All circulation will be on site and it is proposed
that ready - mix trucks exit the site via Chester Avenue.
Conformance to Comprehensive Plan
The city's adopted comprehensive plan designates this area as appropriate for Industrial
development. In addition to the plan map, the following Development Policies should be used to
guide development decisions:
19
111
114
116
Access to individual building sites within business parks should be via an internal circulation
system. Site access from peripheral arterial and collector streets should be limited to major
entrances serving the overall development area. industrial traffic and related conditions
should not adversely affect other nearby land-use areas.
Adequately screened off-street parking and loading facilities should be provided within all
business and industrial sites, and the consolidation of parking areas and driveways serving
two or more uses should be encouraged.
Compatible building design and setbacks should be encouraged. Building materials or
structures incompatible with the image of a high-quality development, such as chain-link
fences, outdoor storage facilities, etc., should be avoided in areas visible from public streets
or adjacent parcels.
Particular attention should be given to screening and visual separation between business and
industrial uses and other nearby land-uses. The periphery of industrial areas should be
heavily landscaped and attractively designed. Where new industrial parks border commercial
areas, residential neighborhoods or major roadways, earth berms should be considered as a
buffer. This type of transitional treatment is particularly important in the northern and
southern areas of the community.
Standards for Review of Preliminary Development Plan
A development plan shall not be inconsistent with the following general standards:
(1 )
The planned development will not substantially injure or damage the use, value and
enjoyment of surrounding property nor hinder or prevent the development of surrounding
property in accordance with the land use plan.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
7/12/04
TIME
4:00P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 7 DEAN AN DREW AGENDA:
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
ITEM DEVELOPMENT
NO. 1 1a BY: BY:
Page 6
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
The site will be accessible form public roads that are adequate to carry the traffic that will be
imposed upon them by the proposed development and the streets and driveways on the site
of the proposed development will be adequate to serve the residents, occupants, or users of
the proposed development. Traffic-control signals will be provided without expense to the city
when the board of commissioners determines that such signals are required to prevent traffic
hazards or congestion in adjacent streets.
The development will not impose an undue burden on public services and facilities, such as
fire and police protection.
The entire tract or parcel of land to be occupied by the planned development shall be held in
a single ownership, or if there are two (2) or more owners, the application for such planned
development shall be filed jointly by all such owners.
The development plan shall contain such proposed covenants, easements and other
provisions relating to the bulk, location and density of residential buildings, nonresidential
uses and structures, and public facilities as are necessary for the welfare of the planned
development and are not inconsistent with the best interests of the area. Such covenants,
easements and other provisions, if part of the development plan as finally approved, may be
modified, removed or released only with the consent of the board of commissioners after a
public hearing before, and recommendations by, the planning commission as provided in
section 42-404(b)(1). All such covenants shall specifically provide for enforcement by the city
in addition to the landowners within the development.
The location and arrangement of structures, parking areas, walks, lighting and appurtenant
facilities shall be compatible with the surrounding land uses, and any part of a planned
development not used for structures, parking and loading areas, or accessways, shall be
landscaped or otherwise improved, unless said open space would accomplish the intent of
this section if left in its natural state.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On June 15, 2004 the Salina City Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Paver's
Inc. 's application for approval of a Planned Development District to allow the operation of a concrete
batch plant on their construction yard located at 505 Francis Avenue in the Northeast Industrial Park.
At the conclusion of the public hearing the Planning Commission voted 8-0 to recommend approval
of a preliminary development plan and a change in zoning district classification for Lots 3 and 4,
Block 14 from 1-2 to Planned Development District subject to the following conditions:
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
7/12/04
TIME
4:00P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 7 DEAN AN DREW AGENDA:
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
ITEM DEVELOPMENT
NO. 1 1a BY: BY:
Page 7
1.
Development limitations shall be as follows:
2.
a.
Permitted uses on Lot 3 and 4 shall be limited to a concrete batch plant plus any use
permitted in the 1-2 district.
b.
The concrete plant shall be equipped with cement dust containment equipment which
meets KDHE standards.
c.
The concrete batch plant shall be placed on a foundation or anchoring system that
complies with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
d.
A 6 ft. solid wood screening fence shall be erected to screen all developed frontage
from adjoining York Street.
e.
Truck traffic to and from the concrete plant shall enter and exit from the gated entrance
on York Street. If concrete trucks use Chester Avenue the roadway must be paved to
public street standards. In lieu of paving Chester Avenue to public street standards the
applicant may initiate the vacation of Chester Avenue. If Chester Avenue is vacated
the roadway may be paved to city driveway standards.
f.
Development on Lot 3 shall be completed in substantial conformance with the
approved development plan on file with the Planning Department and associated
submittals.
The applicant shall submit a revised preliminary development plan containing all noted
corrections prior to consideration by the City Commission.
City Commission Action
If the City Commission concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission the attached
ordinance should be approved on first reading. The protest period for this application expired on
June 29, 2004 and no protest petition has been received. Second reading would be scheduled for
July 19, 2004.
If the City Commission disagrees with the recommendation of the Planning Commission, it may; 1)
overturn the Planning Commission and deny this request provided there are four (4) votes in support
of such action; or 2) return the application to the Planning Commission for reconsideration citing the
basis of its disagreement with the recommendation.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
DATE
7/12/04
TIME
4:00P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: APPROVED FOR
NO: 7 DEAN AN DREW AGENDA:
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
ITEM DEVELOPMENT
NO. 1 1a BY: BY:
Page 8
Enclosure:
Application
Vicinity Map
Site Development Plan
Elevations of Portable Plant
Excerpt of PC Minutes 5/18/04 & 6/15/04
Background Report - Northeast Industrial Park
cc:
Neal Saskowski, Pavers, Inc.
Application No. IIPDDO4-1
Date Filed April 16, 2004
Filing Fee .$375.00
Receipt No.
Publication Date APril 22, 2004
Hearing Date May 18, 2004
Development Plans Attached Yes
Ownership Certificate Received -KG
APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (P.D.D.)
I.Applicants Name Pavers Inc., 505 Francis Street, Salina Kansas 67401
2. Applicants Address 505 Francis Street, Salina Kansas 67401
3. Telephone (Business) 785-825-6771 (Home) 785-827-6910
4. Project Name Pavers Inc. concrete plant
5. Owners Name Pavers Inc.
6. Owners Address 505 Francis Street, Salina Kansas, 67401
7. Legal Description of Property to be rezoned (attach additional sheets if necessary)
Lot 3 in Block No. 14
In East Garden Addition to the City of Salina'! Saline County Kansas
8. Approximate Street Address 505 Francis, ayproximately 800 feet west of Office Building
9. Area of Property (sq ft or acres) 3.15 acres
10. Present Zoning 1-2 Use Construction office'! warehouse'! yard
11. Proposed Zoning P D D Use Concrete Ready Mix Plant
12. Is the P. D. D. to be utilized in conjunction with another zone or independently?
In conjunction with the 1-2 of which it is a part
13. Are there any covenants of record, which affect the proposed development? None are known
14. List reasons for this request To maintain a competitive position for our main line of work'! which are concrete
pavement, concrete sidewalks, concrete driveways, concrete curb and gutter and other miscellaneous concrete
structures
15. Anticipated Time Period for substantial completion within 6 months
16. Total ground area occupied by buildings (sq ft) The concrete plant has a 8'-0" by 40'-0" trailer that houses the
computer controls'! concrete laboratory eqIDpment, and admixtures for concrete. This facility is portable and on
wheels.
17. Describe any non-residentialllses proposed We are currently zoned 1-2 and are using it for a construction office
and storage yard. The change is requested for use of a portable concrete plant on the west 1/3 of the lot. The
concrete plant has the following components: storage bins for rock and sand'! conveyor to load rock and sand in the
plant bins~ portable trailer for computer controls~ concrete laboratory'! and admixture storage~ use of electricity and
water for 12roduction of concrete. The lot will also be used for truck parking.
The 1EQPosed concrete plant is a Coneco Lo Pro and is designed to be portable. The utilities will be permanent as
will the foundation that the plant will set on. Based on workload and our schedule this plant may be moved to other
locations across the State of Kansas for use. This P. D. D. allows Pavers Inc. to use it on our 1EQPerty for our
company contracts located in and around Salina.
18. Number of housing units proposed Single Family none
19. Relationship between this application and the Land Use Permit
Multi Family none
Similar to present use
Applicant( s)
Signature
.
--uJ ~
Owner( s )
Signature
-
-..J ~d ~
J f Wilson, President
J f Wilson, President
If the applicant is to be represented by legal counselor an authorized agent, please complete the following in order
that correspondence and communications pertaining to this application may be forwarded to the authorized
individual
Name of representative Neal Saskowski, Vice President
Address P. O. Box 1967'1 Salina Kansas 67402-1967
Telephone (Business) 785-825-6771 office 785-452-3079 mobile
'.' ."
PAVERS, INC.
505 Francis Ave. * P. O. Box 1967 * Salina, Kansas 67402-1967
785-825-6771 * (FAX) 785-825-0584
July 5, 2004
City Planning Department
Director 0 f Planning
P. O. Box 736
Salina, Kansas 67402-0736
Attn: Dean Andrew
Re:
Pavers Inc. Concrete Batch Plant
505 Francis Ave.
Dear Sir:
In accordance with your letter dated June 23,2004, we have made the following changes per the
approval of the Salina Planning Commission for the Planned Development District to allow the
operation of our concrete batch plant.
1. Lot 3 and 4 will be used for operation of a concrete batch plant plus any permitted use in
the 1-2 District.
2. The concrete plant is equipped with dust containment meeting KDHE standards. See
attached pages and copy of permit.
3. The concrete batch plant will have a Uniform Building Code foundation designed by a
licensed structural engineer for the support of the structure. No foundation will be
designed for the control/storage trailer.
4. A 6' -0" solid wood fence shall be installed along the frontage of York Street providing
screening from the York Street viewing.
5. If the city elects to have Pavers Inc. vacate Chester we will pave it meeting City of
Salina driveway standards. If Chester is not vacated, we will pave it to City of Salina
Street Standards. In either case we will be able to use that gated entrance for the concrete
plant operation.
6. All requirements of the final approved application will be completed within the time
specified on the application after final approval by the City of Salina.
..
RECEIVED
JUL 0 6 2004
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
We hope that the enclosed meets with your approval. If you need any further infonnation, please
feel free to call me at 825-6771 extension 209.
Sincerely,
Pavers Inc.
.....
Neal Saskowski
Vice President
Cc: concrete plant DO 50
'-
CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Dean Andrew
.Director of Planning
300 West Ash . P.o. Box 736
SqJina. Kansqs 67402-0736
City of
TELEPHONE. (785) 309-5720
FAX . (785) 309-5713
TDD . (785) 309-5747
" E-MAIL. dean.andrew@salina.o[Q
WEBSILE. www.salina-ks.gov
Salina
April 7, 2004
Jeff Wilson
Pavers, Inc.
505 Francis Avenue
Salina, KS 67401
RE:
Pavers I nc. Concrete Batch Plant
505 Francis Avenue
Dear Mr. Wilson:
. This letter is ion regard"to the portable concrete batch plant located at your construction yard on
Francis Avenue. This property is zoned 1-2 (Light Industrial) and located in the Northeast
Industrial Park (NEIP) urban renewal area. The 1-2 district allows contractor's offices and
- construction yards but does not allow concrete batch plants. Although someone from Pavers,
Inc. apparently brought some drawings of a portable batch plant into the Planning Department
in the fall of 2003, no building permit, zoning certificate or Temporary Use Permit has been
applied for or issued for the plant.
In order to bring the plant into compliance with the Zoning O"rdinance and other local codes
you would need to apply to rezone your property to 1-3 (Heavy Industrial) or a Planned
Development District (POD) and if the zoning change is approved, apply for a building permit
as well as electrical, plumbing and mechanical permits for the plant and place the plant on a
foundation that meets the Uniform Building Code.
If this plant were "located on a job site instead of your construction yard we would be more
inclined to loOk at it as a temporary use but it appears likely that you will want it to produce
. concrete beyond the four projects you have active in the Salina area right now and in order for
the Public Works Department to certify this plant it would have to remain on this site
, permanently or get re-certified every time it is relocated and returned.
In 1998, Smoky H ill Construction proposed relocating a portable batch plant they had been
using on the Magnolia interchange project to their construction yard on West Magnolia Road.
Their construction yard was also zoned 1-2 and they applied for approval of Planned
Development District to allow the plant to be located on their site. Builder1s Choice went
through a similar zoning process for their site on Centennial Road. We would recommend that
process for your property as well. Smoky Hill's "portable" plant has not been moved or
relocated since it was set up in 1998~ " "
" ~
Shawn O'Leary, the Director of Public Works, has taken the position that he cannot certify your
plant to provide concrete for City projects until and unless Pavers, Inc. brings its plant and
Pavers
April 8, 2004
Page 2
property into compliance with all local codes. The Planning Department would be willing to
issue 'a Temporary Use Permit to allow. the plant to remain in operation once an application is
filed to create a Planned Development District for the plant site. The Temporary Use Permit
would remain in effect while Pavers, Inc. was going through the zoning and permit review
process. Your plant could not be certified bY the Engineering Division until the zoning and-
permit approvals are final.
If you have any questions about the rezoning process feel free to contact me at 309-5720.
Please find attached all appropriate zoning application materials and the Planning Commission
. calendar. If you have any questions about the pla-nt certification process please contact
Shawn O'Leary, Director of Public Works at 309-5725.
Sincerely,
c:;) ~ C(
~ - - - - -
Dea nAnd rew
Director of Planning and
Community Development
cc:
Shawn O'Leary
Mike Morgan.
Mike Roberts
. Brad Johnson
DA/kf
'.
II
-~"---.~---
Application #PDDO4-1
Filed by Pavers, Inc.
1-2
/"//
--
,"
/
-
.,.,
/'
//
,",/
~/
~
r~.~
/"~/
,/
///
/,'
,-"'"
/
//~
1
R-
,"
,
-,'
...--"
/""
//
.^
.
.
.
.
.
... .
.- .. . . . .
.
.. ..
.
.
. ~
. 0:::
'. ol
~.8! ..~.
- ... .
«
.
.
/"
0
0
r
R-2
R-2
"lJ
m
z
z
:Þ
<
(f)
:Þ
<
.
W
-1
«
0
~
«
0
R-
I
I
L""~__"
1 Inch = 300 Feet
.
.
.
.
.
.
... .
)' ...:
.
. .
.,.. .
. .
. .-
.. ..
-----
---"-"--
.
..
"""'.t"""'~'--
I I ~
"I ------
6' ~--
~ I ......- -"'"
f~ ..........
~ ..........
~ {~ I 20' U\E .......... ..........
~~ I 1---- ----
~ I .......... ..........
ADD I "~ L., .......... ..........
. ' ~i
"~~ '
~, .
250.2t
AVENUE
.
100t
6
)
s
-
....
'11 ~
~
êo
12'O!
co
~
7 ~
.,,¡.
-
t')
ADD~
26
25 .
23 24 .
21 22 .
19 20 .
17 18 .
15
13
11
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
'b
Q)
~ EAST
to
-
.
.
I
I
I
I
I
---1
AVE.
r--T--
I II
I
I
I
I
L_-
sot.
~
«.
60' ~
-
13
æ
N
~
@
;,.
-
.0
..-
pi')
12
~
......
@~
4
5
~
-
.
....
t')
N
:;t:
26
10
in CÐ
CÐ
19 10
.
10
Ø)
9
in
(J')cn
-
..0
......"
nz
d
0) «..
..- co
0:::0)
~
173.75'
271.81 t
~
«..
It)
e::: en
~'
U')
W
:J: 'in
U en
173.89'
,
@~
N
;.....
0
d
It) ..
1")"'"
N
,,;
0)
....
4
3
271.67'
INDUSTRLA,L
3
2
~
0:::
0
>-
.
CÐ
DO
a)
pt')
N
1
80'
284t
(
.',1, ",.- ..
.' .'..:' :,~<,' :.:
-, .
." , .
.,~".~<".' '.".'-;""'.:"'.
. .
" ., ..
..' '
. "
::'3. ? 9'
, -
, ..
. ','
1"
(\.
1\ \
.'
a
~
~
.Ð
.~
~
4
, OJ
~
~
~
~
~
!f\
~
--
. ,..', .:
.
'.',
.'...,-"5
. ' ...,
. . - -'
:~\~
-, - - "
\
,
.
. .
..~-
\
\
\
.
. -,
, .
. .
..
"
. ,
, )..' ...' "
. . - :. ~ ..,-::.;-~~; .
+
-
- . ~
',. .:~':.
. " ,'.:','-"
, .... ,
,'. .'
" ,
.'; '.
-~....
-
J"" ...£ - ~ L2
'--'-
_J
CHESTER AVENUE H_____-tr)-
ð)
(}
....
l
1979
REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN
- -. . ,
.
"
. .
. _././';.'..
-.-,..;.-..,.....-,,-. ~' .
.-.. .\.:.~.~'.'
-- . .. ..,.... -' ,
.-,~ A~ '.. ... ..:'
.---- .~'. . ~.-', '~..
t"\ ---- . .,...;-, ---- . .
~ ~', A-
'" -- .\. .....,..', ~
~ ,;.- --.. ~.-- . ..
~. ...¡)-~, ~.
~' ---. \, -----
~-, \ --. ,
~ ~ -- ~ ~ -...
--- .. -- \ ---- --
':.\ - ..\-
~ - -- -, .
~. ---- ~ -----
~,..- ...... -- ,
.....' ),0.-. ...
,,>. ""--
'- --
.Q\ -
»
. ,
-
,
, -
~--
FRANCIS STREET
-~-_.- - ----_._,---- .-.- ,-
'" .
._,
--- ------.---..-....--
---- --
CORNeR5fON~ 5URVeYlNú
Richard Langley
785-823-:6011
FAX 785-820-9693
P.O, Box 2745
Salina. Kansas 67402
. ,
,.
'.
S89.53'58~E
----
'bli 2004-2.3
/
6' .0" Hien" '.. .. .,"', Fonce
for ~ '~
~ ~
.-
IN"" .......
C"J
e.....
0
~
~......--
...--"--
'I
....
~
ëS
" Choa¡~r Street Vaclted
C~ 'II. I'avomtllt (rom
1:.11.1$111>1 atrct( $II 11110 pI~ ~nl.anœ.
~
~
I
I
I
I
I
40
v+
I "'v
I
Pace 2 of 2
~
.,
W
Lt
d
~
~
0
~
~ hr.
1U = 60'
LEGEND:
& Stçtlon Comer
0 Stt 1/2. rebal". &: cap (L.s. 11332 Cornerstone)
@ FOUND {VOl' Ie,)
'X".
Sf.tt +. çu t 1" conçrete
(p) Plotted
(m) Mea&ured
(c) Colculottd
RiCEIYED
JULIS.
I'LAHMIHG ~AT"iM'T
.- - .
..
" ..
. ., .",-
CDN.E.CD
.
CCN-,E-CD
@
. CONCRETE BATCH. PLANT
The LO-PRO@ may be set up either as a Permanent Plant or used as a Portable.
Both the aggregate and cement storage compartments are- expanded by bolt-on
extens.ions, which makes for economy, compactness, and often eliminates. the
.'.[teed for auxiliary storage or feeders.
The LO-PRO@ plant is equipped with eight cubic yard batchers- ten cubic- yard
batchers optional. .
The maximum mòtor size on the La-PRO@, plant is 15 HoP., which reduces starting
current, often a source of trouble in remote areas.
The removable running gear includes a .fifth wheel hitch and four (4) 10:00-20
tires with spring suspension and air brakes. (In some cases load Hmits m.ay
require tandem axles.) .
# '
The electrical system includes:~200 amp main service, all motor controls, and fac-
tory installed wiring 0 t. ,
Standard batch controls include semi-automatic cementt air--manual aggregate,
with full a.utom~tion optional.. .
The entire structure is a single weldment, requiring no hinging.of bin members or
main frame - providing greater structu rat strength and simplified erection.
SPECIFICATIONS (BASIC .PLANT)
PRODUCTION CAPACITY:
Theoretical Capacity - 120 to 150 cu. yds. per hou r.
AGGREGATE BIN:
900 cu. ft. (33 cu. yds.) gross water level-1200 cu. ft. (44 cu. yds.) heaped.
Three compartments divided two at 18.5 cu. yds. each and one at 7 cu. yds.
*Furnished complete all welded construction with five 12" x 78" double
clam type fill gates eac h with 4112" diameter air cyl inders and single soleno~d
valves. Gates arranged two in each 18.5 cu. yd. compartment and one In
7 cu. yd. compartment.
* May be arranged for fou r or five compartments.
AGG.REGATE SATCHER: n. .
8 or 10 cubic yard capacity furnished with 30" live bottom type disc.h~rge
belt conveyor on flat type carrying idlers with continuous rubber skirting.
Conveyor drive comp-Iete with 10 H.P., T.E.F.C. electric motor. enclosed
type shaft mounted gear reducer and guarded V-belt drive.
SCALE SYSTEM SUSPENSION HOPPER TYPE:
8 yard-3D,000 lb. gross capacity with 30.000 lb. X 25 lb. minimum gradu-
ated dial.
10 yard-40,OOO lb. gross capacity with 36.000 lb. X 30 lb. minimum gradu-
ated dial.
AGGREGATE CONVEYOR:
30" wide deep troug h with factory sealed bearings. Drive complete with 10
H.P. T.E.F.C. electric motor. enclosed shaft mounted gear reducer and
guarded V-belt drive. Rubber lined collecting hopper furnished at con~
veyor discharge complete with rubber sh roud.
CEMENT BIN:
One or two compartment 215 barrels gross volume total. Complete with 4"
pneumatic fill pipe system with quick disconnect coupling and atmos-
phere vent.
CEMENT FEEDERS:
Two each - 9" diameter screw feeders arranged for charging from bottom
of cement compartment. Each feeder equipped with head shaft mounted
10 H.P., T.E.F.G. electric motor and guarded V-belt drive.
CEMENT BATCHER:
8 or 10 cubic yard capacity complete with 14" diameter redrculating auger
with 15 H.P., T.E.F.G. electric motor. enclosed type scréwdriver reducer
and guarded V-belt drive. '.
Batcher discharge via 10" diameter butterfly valve operated by three inch
diameter air cylinder with double solenoid valve for "inching" type control.
SCALE SYSTEM SUSPENSION HOPPER TYPE:
8 yard~6,OOO lb. gross capacity with 6,000 lb. X 5 lb. minimum graduated
dial. 10 yard-10,OOO lb. gross capacity with 7,200 lb. X 61b minimum grad-
uated dial.
HIGH PRESSURE AIR SYSTEM: .
71/2 H.P., T.E.F.G. electric motor driven, two stage, tank mounted air com-
pressor with 80 gallon receiver. Air system furnished complete with ~ir
distribution manifold. all necessary piping for air cylinder and solenoid
valve operation and complete with filter, regulator and lubricator.
LOW PRESSURE AIR SYSTEM:
5 H. P.. T.E.F.G. electric motor driven low pressure. high volume blower for
cement aeration, complete with 16 diffusers and all necessary piping and
pressure relief valve.
WATER SYSTEM: .
Furnished with 2" Auto-Stop type water meter complete with totalizing
register, hot water disc calibrated for cold, and all necessary piping from
meter.to dischafge~ Met~r furni~hed with inlet strainer_þ_ytle_ssall required
supply piping, valves, pumps and reservoirs.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:
Completely prewíred from main service panel for 200 amp, three phase. 60
Hertz, 230 volt operation complete with magnetic starters with 115 volt
coi Is for each plant motor.
All motor circuit wiring protected by individual circuit breakers. All elec-
trical components housed in a NEMA 12 dust tight steel enclosure.
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM:
Rear mounted 19.000 lb. capacity single axle with (4) 10:00-20 -12 ply tires
and air brakes. Running gear complete with heavy duty spring suspension.
and fifth wheel rub plate with king pin. (Tandem axles may be required.)
BATCH CONTROL SYSTEM:
Model 200-A housed in a NEMA 12 Panel. including: start. emergency stop
pushbutton for cement feeders with semi-automatic cutoff of cement
feeders by single reed switch on scale dial; (3) momentary ~ontact push-
buttons for air-manual aggregate fill. aggregate batcher dIscharge and
separate "inching" control for cement batcher dump gate.
Panel also includes pushbuttons for aggregate conveyor. aeration blower,
and cement batcher vibrator.
TOTAL PLANT HORSEPOWER: 67112 H.P.
MEASUREMENTS
Overall Length ...... ...........................58'-9"
""".""""",.".."".".,."""" ..... .
Towing Length (king pin to. rear extremity).........................................50'-0"
. . 14'-0"
TowIng Height.................. '...................,................. .......................
Tow'lng W'ldth. .... ...................................10'-0"
.......................................... .
'" 13' 10"
ChargIng Height of Aggregate BIns.................................................. -
D 'scharge Clearance .................................12'-4"
..'" '.""..",.,."."""""",.""
Empty Weight:
On Running Gear.................................. ............... ...............19,000 tbs.
On King Pin........................................................................19,000 Ibs.
Total.......................... ,.,..,..",-.,.",.".",.,.,.,..",..""""..""".38,000 Ibs.
NOTE: CON-E-CO assumes no responsibility for foundation design. Consult fact,?r.y for column lo~ding.
"If extensions are added to the cement or aggregate bins, structural addItion WIll be requIred.
'-;"';Aggregate batcher capacities are contingent upon filling from all 5 feed gates.
EXCERPT OF MINUTES - APPLICATION #PDD04-1
SALINA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY COMMISSION ROOM
MAY 18, 2004 4:00 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Britton, Funk, Hass, Hedges, Krug, Naccarato, Ramage, Simpson
and Yarnevich
MEMBERS ABSENT:
DEPARTMENT STAFF:
Andrew, Burger, Cooper, Fisher, Johnson, Koepsel and O'Leary
#5.
Application #PDD04-1, filed by Pavers, Inc., requesting a change in zoning
district classification from 1-2 (Light Industrial) to POD (1-2) (Planned
Development District) and preliminary development plan approval to allow a
concrete batch plant on a 3.15 acre tract of land legally described as Lots 3 and
4, Block 14, Northeast Industrial Park Addition to the City of Salina, Saline
County, Kansas. The subject property is addressed as 505 Francis Avenue.
Mr. Andrew gave the staff report which is contained in the case file.
Mr. Britton asked are there any questions of staff? Hearing none would the
applicant care to comment?
Neal Saskowski, I am Vice President of Pavers. I do reside at 2604 Carolina
Drive.
Mr. Britton stated to get started Neal just address some of the things that Dean
has talked about, the things that City staff still has questions about to help clarify
those as much as you can.
Mr. Saskowski stated we purchased this to enhance our business. Setting it up in
our yard what we wanted to do was have a Temporary Use Permit to make
concrete for our purposes for our own projects. We do have one project that we
are doing for the City of Salina which is a water line project which we are also
replacing some sidewalks and curbs and driveways which we wanted this to be
certified by the City so we can use it for that project also. That is how this all
came about. This is a portable concrete batch plant. The control unit which
carries the computer is also used as a laboratory and some add mixture storage
is in a 40 ft. type reefer van. It is self-contained with heating and air conditioning
and lights and things like that and that is exactly what it looks like. It is capable of
being taken apart, you hook onto it with a tractor trailer rig and you tow it down
the road to your next location. Some of the issues, the survey, there again, I
hired a professional surveyor to survey the land and would presume that he could
get the information correct and we relied on that and that actually failed. The
issue with Chester Avenue we just received the agenda and if I read that right
Salina Planning Commission
May 18, 2004
Page 2
they want all of our traffic to enter and exit through Chester and I think now you
have a different opinion on that Dean?
Mr. Andrew stated yes because that was the public street access but that is
partially the Planning Department's fault because we weren't aware of the
entrance off of York Street on the west side, but I will let the City Engineer speak
to that as they have been reviewing the circulation plan. Chester Avenue is not
paved all the way from York to the entrance of the construction yard.
Mr. Saskowski stated as the diagram shows we do have two locations, one off of
Chester and there is also a driveway that comes in off the west end of our lot onto
York Street.
Mr. Johnson stated the York driveway is in excellent condition and very functional
which raises the question of do we want traffic off of a public street with paved
access or do we want to force traffic to go to an unpaved public street and I think
that answers itself. A lot of that would depend on your wishes and how it would
be most functional for your business to. I don't think that we would necessarily
close the door on having Chester as an option, we would probably want to see
some improvements to Chester to allow that so a lot of that would depend on
your business plan and how the traffic circulation would work best with your site.
Mr. Saskowski stated currently 70% of our lot is unpaved. It is gravel surfacing.
We probably create more dust driving through our lot than this concrete plant will
create. One of the things you place hand in hand is your sand and rock stock
piles normally have moisture in them, so they normally are not as dusty. The
portland cement is a different story, it is a very fine powder. We do have a dust
containment system on it for when it is filling the plant. We don't have a dust
containment system on it when it discharges into the truck. The cement is mixed
at the same time that the sand and the rock are which helps alleviate some of
that dust problem there. The office, being that this is a portable plant, the
possibility of this thing being 100% permanent and never moving is probably 50 /
50 or less. We do work throughout the state of Kansas. If we have a project that
we deem that we want to take this plant to and produce our own concrete we are
going to pick it up and move it, take it out there. If we have work in the Salina
area we would like to be able to use it in our yard. I have had a lot of discussion
with Shawn on the certification process. The City of Salina is the only city that I
have been around where they have the certification process and I think Shawn
will back that up a little bit. To certify a concrete plant it has to be set up, you
have to have your scales and your water meter certified, checked and certified as
a measuring device. You have to produce concrete that meets a contract
standard. Those are the three biggest issues that you will find in getting a plant
certified. The City of Salina, they did a very in depth survey of it, pretty in depth
process of going through everything to make sure that everything is up to a
standard that would be good quality concrete. The screening issue, there again,
when I first started working for this company York Street was still a dirt street
paved down to Francis. I have been out there quite a while. The building straight
across from us was previously owned by the family that has owned my business,
Total Turf Care is in there now. The most traffic you are going to find on York
Salina Planning Commission
May 18, 2004
Page 3
Street is when the trains go across Ohio. Besides the traffic from the people that
know of the street or ou r traffic ou rselves, we do have 60 to 70 employees that
come in and out of there, the screening, I am a little up in the air about it. It is in
an area where if you are driving down Ohio Street and you want to be able to see
our yard you can see it but you almost have to looking for it and the same thing
going down North Street.
Mr. Hass asked are you opposed to vacating Chester? Do you have an access
point there?
Mr. Saskowski stated I think if the concern is more so of it being gravel I would
almost be more inclined to offer to make it pavement. We are eventually, we own
a concrete plant and I would like eventually to have my whole lot paved and it
would really help with the dust problem. I would prefer if we could use both
entrances, I think it just makes traffic flow a little bit easier for us. To be honest
with you I have never met the resident that lives in the house right there on that
corner next to us. But I have never heard any complaints from him or anything
like that, none to my knowledge as of right now. But as far as the issue of
vacating it, when you say vacate it what does that amount to?
Mr. Johnson stated it would turn over to private ownership. It would no longer
exist as a public right-of-way.
Mr. Britton asked the batch plant will supply your needs on specific projects, but
is this also going to be like Builder's Choice to provide to other contractors to
provide to other people that order concrete by the truck load?
Mr. Saskowski stated right now no. I would envision possibly if we were the
prime contractor on a job it is not uncommon to have a sub-contractor work for
you that may be doing sidewalks or driveways or things like that where we may
sell it to them on our own contract. I don't envision us being a retail business.
Mr. Britton stated ok, and I ask that because of the traffic. Is it going to be a lot of
trucks in and out of there?
Mr. Saskowski stated to give you an example of what we have to do in Saline
County, we have about 7,000 yards of concrete work to do.
'Mr. Johnson stated a lot of what was in the letter that you had sent to us
previously was several KDOT projects in which you guys were supplying concrete
that you were not the prime contractor for.
Mr. Saskowski stated right.
Mr. Johnson stated maybe you were subbed to provide.
Mr. Saskowski stated no we are providing it for our own use. It is specifically for
work that we are doing, placing and finishing the concrete with our own forces.
Salina Planning Commission
May 18,2004
Page 4
Mr. Funk asked but as a sub-contractor?
Mr. Saskowski stated we are sub-contractor on three of the projects. One project
we are the prime contractor.
Mr. Funk asked Shawn do you not permit temporary batch plants for city
projects? Say you are going to pave South Ohio in the next year or something
like that could they set up a temporary batch plant out there?
Mr. O'Leary stated we have done that. Neal is correct in that we have a one-of-a
kind thing, it wasn't our desire, we sort of got forced into it which goes back to a
little history for years and years until the middle 90's we had one ready-mix
concrete operation, Salina Concrete did business here for years and that was
really the only company that could compete. Today we have eight that are trying
to compete for the same concrete ready mix business and that caught up to us
very quickly as a City organization and each of those 8 were wanting to do
business and wanting to be treated equally and wanting to produce the same
materials and we kind of got forced into creating our own certification program to
make sure that it was an even playing field, that each of them were producing the
same quality of concrete and so on so we developed this certification program
and Pavers, Inc. is the 8th of the eight to have applied to us. We had a great deal
of success with the previous seven, five of those were certified to our standard
not because they couldn't meet the standard and each of them had a pretty high
level of standard to meet. Temporary plants we don't have very many of those
offered for us because we have seven permanent plants that can produce it
without having to be portable but we have had that request before and we do
have the means to authorize that if it were appropriate. Again, being able to meet
the standard of quality for the concrete as well as meeting the standards of
zoning and other development issues.
Mr. Andrew stated the distinction for us for a temporary batch plant is that it is
usually set up at the construction site. There is a temporary batch plant set up at
the Ohio - 1-70 interchange by Koss Construction who is the contractor on that
project. That project has an end date and when that project is done that plant is
going to be removed and cease to operate and the site will be restored back to a
development site probably for Foley Tractor Company. The difficulty of this
application is that to a degree the applicant is trying to have it both ways saying
that they are temporary and saying that they are portable, but it is not set up at a
job site, it is not set up at Water Well and 1-135, there is no guarantee that it is
going to be removed when the project is over so we have no choice but to treat it
as a permanent plant. Just as Shawn from a certification standpoint is tryïng to
set up a level playing field for the producers, we are trying on the land use
regulation side to set up a level playing field for the producers and to treat this the
same as the Builder's Choice or the Smoky Hill Construction batch plants where
ingress and egress, screening, dust containment, office facilities and outdoor
storage were all issues that we looked at in those two applications. We can't
from our perspective look at this as temporary or portable because there is not
job that this is tied to. That is why when the Planning Commission requires
screening for a Builder's Choice plant or landscaping or dust containment or
Salina Planning Commission
May 18, 2004
Page 5
permanent office or those types of things those are the things that we feel called
to look at here. If it is in fact the case that this is a temporary plant that is going to
be removed soon, there is a process for that and this is not it. This is only the
process if there is some likelihood that this is going to be a concrete producing
plant in this location for an indefinite period of time because to be a temporary
plant you have to have a removal date.
Mrs. Yarnevich asked he wants it permanent but to be able to move it if he has
too?
Mr. Andrew stated yes.
Mr. Yarnevich asked can it be done?
Mr. Andrew stated I can understand the desire not to have to make permanent
improvements like screening walls and fences and things of that nature for a truly
portable temporary plant, but the applicant can't expect the City of Salina to treat
this plant the same as the permanent producers either.
Mrs. Yarnevich asked I guess my question was if he puts it in as a permanent
fixture is it possible for him to move it? Or is it so permanent that it cannot be
moved?
Mr. Andrew stated it could still be moved, but I think the Planning Department is
obliged to look at this site as if it would be a permanent concrete plant producing
site and to look at those issues as if it going to be here for a long time.
Mr. O'Leary stated that is comparable to the Smoky Hill site, that is one of the
other seven that considers themselves a portable plant from the pictures you
have seen I think it is a question of semantics. In the industry of concrete and
construction there are portable and there are permanent plants, the portable ones
have wheels and trailer hitches and they can go, the permanent ones do not.
Smoky Hill is still a portable plant but they came to you in 1998, went through the
process of screening, zoning, paved access and all of the appropriate things to
be permanent and yet they still reserve the opportunity to be temporary or
portable, when they would see fit. To clarify the point made earlier, what kicked
us into looking at that semantically of is this temporary or is it permanent, when
Pavers, Inc. applied to us for certification there were four active projects, 1-70, this
is a major project, Water Well - 135, a major project, the Centennial - Schilling
project, major, major concrete project and then our water project, these are four
very significant public works projects producing concrete, this is not one little
project of doing a little half block of street, that is a lot of concrete. We believe
that kind of coverage and that kind of production of concrete made this much
more of a permanent issue. They were permanently driving on the streets, they
are permanently generating dust, they were permanently causing nuisances for
the neighbors theoretically that were there and so we believe that despite the
industry standard of portable we felt that this was a very permanent type of use.
Salina Planning Commission
May 18, 2004
Page 6
Mr. Funk asked this picture on the last page, is that the modification to the
portable plant that makes it a permanent plant?
Mr. Saskowski stated no those are actually just additions that you could put on
the plant to increase your capacity of storage.
Mr. Funk stated it makes it look something like the Smoky Hill Plant.
Mr. Saskowski stated yes it is similar.
Mr. Funk asked but a permanent building, fixed building for your controls?
Mr. Saskowski stated if I am not mistaken Smoky Hill has a control trailer also
don't that?
Mr. O'Leary stated I don't know off hand.
Mr. Funk stated it was mentioned in here a permanent building fixed to the
foundation for the computer controls.
Mr. O'Leary stated they have a permanent building there, I don't know if they
have a temporary one as well but that could be the case.
Mr. Ramage stated I was thinking if I was in the concrete business I would want
all my plants temporary so that I could move them around. Give me a little
fl exi b i lity.
Mr. Saskowski stated the moving around is a good point. If we could set it up,
say get a temporary use on Water Well Road and a temporary use out on
Schilling and a temporary use on 1-70 that is great, but the biggest problem you
run into are your utilities. Each time that you set that up your utility cost can vary
anywhere from $5,000 to $15,000 depending on what you run into and that is why
we elected to go with a central location, which we think we are fairly central in our
yard plus we own the property.
Mr. Funk asked on this plat over here do you own that triangle there against York
Street.
Mr. Saskowski stated yes we do and actually that is not fenced.
Mr. Funk stated you have a big pile of something there next to the fence and I
think it is on public right-of-way.
Mr. O'Leary stated the jersey barriers and the five or six vehicles they have for
sale it is not a real pretty site on one of our public streets.
Mr. Simpson asked does your present operation meet Department of Health and
Environment standards as far as dust containment?
Salina Planning Commission
May 18, 2004
Page 7
Mr. Saskowski stated as far as I know it does, the State of Kansas wasn't the
department, it was more of a safety inspection that was performed but part of that
was looked at by him. The State of Kansas now comes out and does safety
inspections for contractors and it is kind of a joint venture with Bassett and who
we belong with and that wasn't an issue. We do have a dust containment system
on the cement silo which basically it is a bag filter that is a pressurized system
that it is blown in pneumatically, the only dust that really is created is normally
when you are actually batching a truck and that is somewhat minimized. I am not
saying it is completely minimized but it is somewhat minimized with the aggregate
being mixed in with the cement at the same time.
Mr. Britton stated are there other members of the public that would like to speak
to this application?
Daryl Toothman, T -N-T concrete I live at 1703 E. North Street and I own the
property at 931 E. North Street which is just south of the batch plant and I am
against it for the dust purpose and the noise of the trucks and certain things like
that.
Mr. Hass asked are you across the railroad tracks from this to the south?
Mr. Toothman stated yes I am right across from Salina Wrecker. There is a little
pie shape there. I just think that it would be a lot of dust and a lot of noise from
the trucks would be a problem.
Mr. Britton asked Dean can you show where he is located? I see it is on the
other side of the railroad tracks. Thank you.
Mr. Toothman stated a lot of times you don't have cement dust but then
sometimes you do and if there is moisture it gets on your equipment it does stick
and it doesn't come off.
Mr. Simpson asked and what was your business again?
Mr. Toothman stated I am T -N- T concrete, I do concrete work in Salina. I have
dirt and stuff on that lot that I use and blankets that I store in the shed.
Mr. Britton asked are there any other members of the public that would like to
speak to this? Hearing none I will bring it back to the Commission. Dean when
you started you kind of indicated that staff may want to work some of those
issues out.
Mr. Andrew stated yes, we didn't really hear much volunteered from the applicant.
The issue for us is that we have treated this as we did the portable Smoky Hill
plant and it has never moved which we treated as permanent. So even after
hearing from the applicant the whole time we have been working on this one time
it is permanent, one time it is only going to be temporary. We think that if this is
going to be considered as a permanent operating batch plant that some site
improvements need to be made that are consistent with that permanency and we
Salina Planning Commission
May 18, 2004
Page 8
need to look at what appropriate screening would consist of and where it should
be located. One issue we need guidance on is the fence line is here but we have
seemingly an increasing amount of outdoor storage in that outside area so one
question is should any type of screening be installed out here or should it be back
at the existing fence line? We would like to have more time to come up with a
specific list of what we think are site improvements that need to be made to
support a permanent operation here, present those to the applicant and to you,
and see if this is really wanting to be considered as a permanent site for
producing concrete. If that is not that the case then the applicant needs to have a
deadline for removal of this plant from this site. Again that is the rationale, the
Smoky Hill plant on West Magnolia for the interchange project was removed
when that project was completed. The Koss Construction plant on North Ohio is
going to be removed and the site restored when that project is done. We can't
just sit here and say that right now for this location. So in the interest of treating
this and the other concrete producers fairly we think that we have to look at this
as a permanent improvement or permanent land use and what site improvements
need to be made to make this fit in with the neighbors, so our recommendation
would be to table consideration of this to the June 1 st meeting to allow us to do
some additional work on what those improvements should be.
Mr. Funk asked if they stop producing concrete here and just use this as a
construction yard, storage yard is it in compliance with that type of operation?
Mr. Andrew stated not the stuff that is out in that triangle along York Street. That
would be something that is just an on-going zoning enforcement thing for any
existing property. But to intensify the use from construction yard to batch plant
we think we need to look at what site improvements are needed to support that.
Mr. Hass asked the property outlined in blue to the west and north, is that all their
property, Pavers, Inc.?
Mr. Andrew stated it is part of Lot 3 it is not all developed but it is part of their land
holding.
Mr. Hass asked is Chester Avenue public or private?
Mr. Andrew stated it is public right-of-way it is just not improved the entire way.
Mr. Britton asked right now we are at 1-2 and without conditional use this has to
be 1-3 for a batch plant correct?
Mr. And rew stated yes.
Mr. Britton asked Vicki can you pull up and show us where the nearest 1-3 is? 1-3
abuts this now?
Mr. Andrew stated yes.
Salina Planning Commission
May 18, 2004
Page 9
Mr. Britton asked for our purposes Dean what would be the difference other than
going through the rezoning process would it just be simply easier on the applicant
for the conditional use? Are there pros and cons since this is going to be delayed
anyway?
Mr. Andrew stated the pros for the applicant of doing 1-3 is they don't have to
submit any kind of site plan or tell you what they are going to do with the property
or how they are going to do it and any use that is allowed in 1-3 could go there.
So that is a positive for the applicant. The negative of that is exactly that. If you
have straight 1-3 you don't have to review any plans, you don't have to see where
anything is, it can move around, you can't put conditions of approval on it and it
would be inconsistent with what was done with the Smoky Hill and Builder's
Choice batch plants and so what we have tried to do is treat this application
consistently with those two, they set the precedent for how this activity is going to
be regulated in Salina so we have tired to be consistent with that and lead this
application through the same process that those two went through.
Mrs. Yarnevich asked are those other batch plants zoned 1-2?
Mr. Andrew stated yes and there are Planned Development Districts for both of
them.
Mrs. Yarnevich asked what if the zoning was changed in their areas? To me it
looks like that a zoning change might even be compatible here. Would it be the
case for those other places would the zoning be compatible to them?
Mr. Andrew stated no. The reason for doing the Planned Development District is
it allows you to approve a particular use but doesn't open up the site to all the
other 1-3 uses like salvage yards, or oil refineries, the other uses in 1-3. 1-3 is
designed for very obnoxious uses so it is given out sparingly. There was
opposition to the Builder's Choice site, so the solution to that was to maintain the
1-2 but to approve a specific plan and add that one use, but not allow any other 1-
3 uses.
Mr. Britton stated there is certainly a difference in the neighborhood
characteristics of driving down Centennial Road and what that has become and
what this is as far as screening and all of those issues and where this location is
is there not Dean?
Mr. Andrew stated right and if you look at the development standards the
restrictions are actually much higher here than they are out on Centennial Road
because of the Urban Renewal standards.
Mr. Saskowski stated I have a couple of comments. I think some of the things
that Dean has just pointed out about tabling this and going over a few things, I will
say in my defense, since we turned in the application on April 16, this is the first
correspondence that I have received which was yesterday so some of these
issues have come up. I don't have a problem going over the issues, I want to get
them so everybody is happy, but that is the first that has come up. The only other
Salina Planning Commission
May 18, 2004
Page 1 0
thing is and I want to point out and I probably shouldn't, Smoky Hill is a
competitor of ours, we bid work against each other all the time and Dean has
mentioned that their concrete plant is in their yard, which it isn't. I do know for a
fact that they have moved it and they have taken it to Chase County and used it
on a KDOT project, no different than I would if I would have been the low bidder
on the project. Both Smoky Hill and Pavers, I nc. are in similar situations, we are
not a permanent fixture as Builder's Choice, Salina Concrete or Smoky Valley or
any of the other people here are, but we are more so. When we have work in
Salina we would like to be able to use it for the function. When we don't have
work in Salina we would like to be able to take it and bring it back. I understand
all the other stuff that goes with it, but that is basically our intent. Maybe there
need to be special rules or different rules or whatever.
Mr. Andrew stated our only response is that all other batch plants in the City of
Salina are operating in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance except this one
and theoretically we could go out tomorrow and try to get them shut down or have
it removed because it is not zoned for this use. What we have tried to do is work
with them to bring this into compliance and into the standard as the other batch
plants in Salina and try to be fair and consistent because maybe the other plants
aren't represented here today but they are watching what we are doing and what
you doing.
Mr. Ramage asked has technology changed to the point to where you ought to be
thinking about somewhat of a change to allow a temporary plant to be permanent
while it is in its permanent place but to be taken to another site if it is used or
needed?
Mr. Andrew stated well if what the applicant has said is correct that has happened
out at Smoky Hill. The only difference is that Smoky Hill got their property
rezoned, submitted a plan to the Planning Commission, did all the things that we
are asking this applicant to do. What they do afterwards doesn't really matter, it
is whether they made their site suitable for a permanent plant.
Mr. Saskowski stated that is what we want to do. We want to come in here an do
this right and that is why we are here.
Mr. O'Leary stated I think the key there is that in the case of Smoky Hill again, if
they did leave and come back they would restore it all to the same zoning
standard or development standard as when they left so the screening would still
be there, the dust control would still be there, the paved roads would still be
there, this plan today is not operating with any standards, none of those
standards are being met and none would be met unless you establish those
standards for them.
Mr. Britton asked Dean you referred a moment ago that this area was under
Urban Renewal at one point and time but there was almost a connection to any
rezoning that might be done now, is there a tie in between the Urban Renewal
project of 30 years ago and zoning as it occurs now?
Salina Planning Commission
May 18, 2004
Page 11
Mr. Andrew stated the Urban Renewal project when it was done there were very
specific covenants that were put on all of these properties. Those covenants
have now expired, but certain properties that were purchased and developed
subject to those covenants, those are still in place. What is not in place is the use
restrictions. The Urban Renewal Covenants don't allow concrete batch plants in
the Northeast Industrial Park. What we have said is that since those covenants
have now expired, those use limitations don't apply. But if you don't recognize
that the Comcare facility and the Weber, Palmer, Macy facility and the supply
warehouse on 2nd Street and the former Rema Bakeware building and all the
other sites that were purchased and developed there were covenants relating to
paving, landscaping, to screening, all of that, everybody that took land and
developed it were subject to those covenants and had to submit a site plan to the
Planning Commission and had to adhere to that plan. If we throw all of that away
we are saying that sites that were paved and sites that did have landscaping that
we don't care anymore, take the landscaping out, remove the paving, all of those
things. So what we have tried to do is maintain on those sites that have been
developed according to conditions of the Planning Commission, to maintain those
restrictions in effect on the sites that were approved based on that. So the zoning
does have a play in there, but there are also a set of covenants. If you had
straight 1-2 zoning you wouldn't have the paving, the landscaping some of the
things that you see. So it is a combination of the zoning and the Urban Renewal
requirements that are there today.
MOTION: Mr. Ramage stated I just heard the applicant say that they want to do this right so
I think that we should give them time to do that, therefore I move that we table
Application #PDD04-1 until the June 1 st meeting.
SECOND: Motion carried Yarnevich.
VOTE:
Motion carried 9-0.
EXCERPT OF MINUTES - APPLICATION #PDD04-1
SALINA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY COMMISSION ROOM
JUNE 15,2004 4:00 PM.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Britton, Funk, Hass, Hedges, Krug, Ramage, Simpson and
Yarnevich
MEMBERS ABSENT:
DEPARTMENT STAFF:
Andrew, Cooper, Johnson, Koepsel and O'Leary
#2.
Application #PDD04-1, filed by Pavers, Inc., requesting a change in zoning
district classification from 1-2 (Light I ndustrial) to PDD (1-2) (Planned
Development District) and preliminary development plan approval to allow a
concrete batch plant on a 3.15 acre tract of land legally described as Lots 3 and
4, Block 14, Northeast Industrial Park Addition to the City of Salina, Saline
County, Kansas. The subject property is addressed as 505 Francis Avenue.
(Continued from May 18, 2004 meeting.)
Mr. Andrew gave the staff report which is contained in the case file.
Mr. Britton asked are there any questions of staff? Hearing none would the
applicant or their representative like to comment? Please state your name and
address for the record.
Neal Saskowski, 2604 Carolina Drive, Vice President of Pavers, Inc.
Mr. Britton asked are there any questions of Mr. Saskowski? Screening would
be one issue that you might want to elaborate on.
Mr. Saskowski stated that is not set in stone. We do currently have chain link
with slats on our facility where it faces Francis. A solid wood fence is no
problem. If that is more of the preference that you would have for the screening
in that area I don't think is a problem.
Mr. Simpson asked what is the concern about where the fence will be or how
much Dean?
Mr. Andrew stated at the last meeting we had comments from the gentleman
that has property to the south and seemed to be opposed to the plant but also
expressed a desire for some sort of screening on the south. We have not heard
from any of the other property owners except him on the south and the owners
on the west have been silent. When we looked at it as a staff we looked at the
visible portion, the most exposed portion, as the developed frontage along York
Street. We are indicating that because this is a PDD that the Planning
Commission can look at other areas that you think might be requiring visual
Salina Planning Commission
June 15,2004
Page 2
screening beyond a chain link fence. The proposal that you have in front of you
is just that frontage on York Street that was discussed. If that is the area that
everybody agrees that screening needs to be provided, then the next question is
whether everybody is in agreement that it should be chain link with slats or
should it be some other form of screening or chain link with slats combined with
something else.
Mr. Britton asked who are we screening it from?
Mr. Andrew stated the public street.
Mr. Britton stated I understand that, but if Chester is closed, who is going to be
going up that direction on the north side?
Mr. Andrew stated I am not so sure that we are as concerned about this area
here. The only thing you have here is this house. The only other thing that you
might conceive of visually is that you will have an elevated roadway coming off
the overpass and you will have some site lines here. But it is a pretty good
distance. The primary emphasis where screening is required is from a public
street and York Street would be that street. If Chester is vacated then Chester
would no longer be a public street.
Mr. Krug asked how much of that green line is chain link fence right now?
Mr. Andrew stated the chain link is located in here not along the green line. This
little portion is not fenced, the fence runs along this location. The plan is to push
the fence out to York. The advantage of that is that it doesn't do much good to
put a screening fence here and then have a lot of materials and things stored
outside of that. What they are doing is planning to push the fence to their north
property line and then all of their storage yard or construction yard would be
inside the fence.
Mr. Funk asked but currently the entire site is fenced?
Mr. Saskowski stated except for the peninsula area.
Mr. Funk asked what is the height of that fence with slats?
Mr. Saskowski stated 6 ft. and it has barbed wire on top of it also.
Mr. Funk asked one strand, three strands?
Mr. Saskowski stated three strands.
Mr. Krug asked your chain link fence that you currently have is 6 ft.?
Mr. Saskowski stated yes.
Salina Planning Commission
June 15, 2004
Page 3
Mr. Britton asked do you intend to use the existing chain link in redoing this? Is
that your plan right now to use it?
Mr. Saskowski stated that was.
Mr. Britton asked but your preference is to use it plus whatever chain link is
needed and then slatted is your preference at least at this point?
Mr. Saskowski stated correct but it is just a preference. Then Chester Street
whether the City wants to keep it as a street and have us improve it to a street
standard or vacate it and we turn it into a commercial driveway, either way works
for us also.
Mr. Britton stated there is certainly a monetary difference for your company.
Mr. Saskowski stated as far as improving the street?
Mr. Britton stated yes.
Mr. Saskowski stated it is going to have to be equal to the streets to carry the
traffic that we will have on it. And I did visit with the owner of the residence right
next to us and he is not opposed to either way. It would be an improvement for
him because he is coming off of a gravel road right now. He was concerned
about whether it would cost him anything because he is going to lose his street
address and we kind of talked about that where Shawn said the City could help
them out a little bit, but I kind of took it like it is just like moving, you just turn in a
new address and notify the post office.
Mr. O'Leary stated for the record Mr. Chairman we would strongly encourage the
vacation of the street. It really has no public value to the City of Salina and has
a great deal more potential for the two owners and we would certainly support a
request for vacation of that and then they could have their will in regard to what
they would do in its place whether that would be paving or landscaping or
fencing or private drives and certainly working out address issues would not be a
problem for us.
Mr. Britton asked in that vacation are their utility easements that are going to
have to remain? I see that there are some manholes they could not find that are
still showing on maps.
Mr. O'Leary stated we are still looking, not that we can't find our sewer system,
but we are looking through the system as Dean mentioned earlier, this is an area
that had a very elaborate infrastructure when the urban renewal process took
place, much of the infrastructure was abandoned in place and we still have
records of that. It is still quite redundant, certainly in the case of sanitary sewer
and there happens to be a line that goes through this vicinity that we do not think
has anymore public benefit but is still there.
Mr. Saskowski stated the best way to describe this is if you look where Chester
is it would be on the west edge of Chester and runs to the south and comes
Salina Planning Commission
June 15, 2004
Page 4
clear to the railroad right-of-way is where they showed where the manhole would
be and then there is another line that, the building straight north of the triangle
there is another line that comes through there and so I went on the other side to
try and find the two directly south of our existing office building. I did find those,
but the ones out on the other side and they are probably on the high end
anyway, I think it was originally set up for lots in that area, so you tie into it and it
probably all flows to the north and goes down York.
Mr. Britton asked are there other questions of the applicant? Hearing none are
there other members of the public that would like to speak to this application for
the planned development district? Hearing none I will bring it back to the
Commission for discussion and possible action.
Mr. Ramage asked if the applicant is willing to put the wood fence in I think it
would be more attractive.
MOTION:
Mr. Simpson moved to recommend approval of the preliminary development
plan and rezoning request with the development limitations as outlined on page
seven of the staff report with the change that a solid wood screening fence be
used along the developed frontage adjoining York Street.
SECOND:
Mr. Hedges seconded the motion.
VOTE:
Motion carried 8-0.
TO:
Salina City Commission
FROM:
Dean Andrew, Director of Planning and Community Development
RE:
Northeast Industrial Park Urban Renewal Project
DATE:
July 12, 2004
Background
The Salina Northeast Industrial Park Urban Renewal Project took place in the late 60s and early
70s. With the assistance of federal funds, the City acquired and cleared property to allow for
expansion of existing industrial uses and to provide an inviting atmosphere for further industrial
growth in an area with access to rail service and 1-70 via Ohio Street through the redevelopment
of the cleared parcels. As part of the project, paved streets, water and sewer lines were
installed to serve the area. Because the urban renewal parcels were very favorably priced and
public improvements were already paid for and in place, purchasers of urban renewal parcels
were required to develop the properties themselves and restrictions were placed on the transfer
or sale of parcels to encourage development and discourage speculation. In addition, to
maintain an inviting atmosphere for industrial development and because one of the purposes of
the urban renewal project was to eliminate blight, a set of protective covenants that run with the
land was filed to regulate development of sites within the Northeast Industrial Park (NEIP).
These regulations served as a supplement to the City's zoning regulations and were also
enforceable by the City.
Examples of Urban Renewal requirements which applied to the development of parcels in the
NEIP include:
1.
Required front yards shall be adequately landscaped.
2.
Access drives and required off-street parking and loading areas shall be paved with
asphalt or concrete.
3.
Outdoor stored materials not displayed for sale shall be screened from view along
adjacent public streets.
4.
Curb cuts for access to parking and loading areas shall be first approved by the City
Engineer.
Original purchasers had notice and knowledge that the purchase and subsequent improvement
of property within the Northeast Industrial Park was subject to the regulations and performance
standards of the Urban Renewal Plan. In exchange for a cleared, ready-to-build lot at below
market costs and paved streets and utilities with no special assessments, the purchasers
agreed (in essence contracted with the City) to develop the property in accordance with the
Urban Renewal performance standards. The purpose of these standards was to prevent the
area from reverting back to its previous condition and appearance. A further stipulation was that
parcels could not be sold until and unless they were "developed" by the owner. Upon
completion of development of the site, the owner was then free to sell the parcel. This provision
was intended to encourage rapid development and prevent speculation and profit taking on
vacant land.
Administrative Policy and Practice
The protective covenants that applied to the development and use of parcels within the NEIP
expired January 1, 1997 and were not renewed or extended by the City Commission. Prior to
that date any owner wishing to develop a parcel in the NEIP was required to submit a final
development plan for renewal and approval by the Planning Commission. The plan was then
forwarded to the City Commission for review and final action. These development plans were
usually approved subject to certain conditions and were considered binding on the developer.
It has been the administrative policy and practice of the Planning Department to continue to
apply the performance standards and the original conditions of approval to parcels that were
purchased and developed subject to an "approved plan" and the protective
covenants/development standards of the Urban Renewal area to attempt to keep these
developed parcels from reverting back to their pre-urban renewal appearance. In other words, if
paved parking, landscaping and screening was required when the property was developed it
needs to be maintained. Examples of properties that were developed subject to an approved
Urban Renewal plan are the Hajoca Corporation Warehouse at 333 Front, Ewy Animal Hospital
at 545 E. North, Pavers, Inc. offices at 505 Francis, and Crown Distributors at 606 N. Ohio.
On vacant parcels in the NEIP developed after January 1, 1997, the Planning Department has
not applied the Urban Renewal standards, just the standards of the zoning district in which the
property is located. The Stanion Electric Warehouse at Ohio and North Streets is located within
the NEIP and zoned 1-2. No site plan approval was required. NEIP standards were not applied
to Stanion's building permit. The paving and attractive landscaping on the site was not required
by the 1-2 district regulations but was done voluntarily by the owner with the encouragement of
staff due its visible location on an entryway into the city. Likewise, the Casey's General Store
site on the northeast corner of Ohio and North is zoned 1-3 (Heavy Industrial). The paving,
landscaping and sidewalks on the site were not 1-3 requirements.
I hope this clarifies for the Commission what the Planning Department's practice has been in the
Urban Renewal area.
0 -
" 12
'J 14
'0 ..
i' ..
.. ..
-" U
...
0 ..
" It
IJ ..
IS ..
" ..
'. 10
.. 2'-
...
.. ...
.. It
OJ 14
.. ..
., ..
.. ..
-" 11
.. ..
'" ..
0 ..
.. ..
rt ~"^-.
~_.
.. -
_to -.... )
~
..
. :-i 'l I fl
ì aD
I; II'IIJOSP(C T
a~
. " tJ 'II II 1 'C
..
.
.
i
'. ro.~'T
.
.!!
i
!!
.
!!,
~
.!!
.!!
.!!
.!!
!!.
~
~
.!!
~
...
II
.
Ava.
..
~'
..
.'
"iii". ..
. .
.. .
.. ..
. ..
. ..
..
. T AHOAAD OIL CO
. ~T
:ffi:
.. ..
.. .
. ..
II
.. :Ii..
..
.
¡..
, ..
.::!.
.::!.
!!
!.
.
!:JŒ
!.
~G
11M..
i
.1..
I
I
i
i
I
i
I
I
!
.
..
.
.
AYL
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..-
oo ..
.. .
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. '"
. ..
I .
. .
.' 4
, .
!!.- .. ..
~
..
.. ..
.. ..
..
,.'
..
.. ..
. .
. ..
.. II
.. ..
.. ..
i
..
..
!!
~
.
~
.:!.
~
!!
!!.
.!
.!.
!!.
~ L.!!
~~
.!!.
~
~
...!!.
. LI NCOIoN
.
..
:! ..
~
.
i
í
I
i
I
i
I
I
i
I
I
i
I
I
9i
I
!
I
,
,
.en. '.
.. ..
.. ..
.. '0
oo ..
'0
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
" ..
.. ..
.. If
0 ..
I .
, .
. .
, .
.. .. .
.. ..
. .þI
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ,.
.. ..
" ..
. ..
. .
. .
. .
, .
~~
:!J-d
..
..
i
" I
. ,.. ..
Q
~
..
i
3
i i
--_.u.....:..-t,
. . ¡
..
,-
i
I
1
,
I
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
,
.--.--,-.--.---. ---.-.--.--.--.-,
--.--.
. I
J .
0 ,
r 0
. J "
" .
" r
.. .
" .
....
08ii
oJ
...
I 0 I
..~
-. -,~,'
~'b"" \
.. .... .
, .........
.,¡ J ,
.
SURV
.
YO
.
.
I
III
"
J8
..
.
nl..l..
I
A
,
'PROJECT BOUNDARY
MAP
I Project Boundary ---..-
I
.
-
.
-
00
-
la
f.
'0 ..
v ~
III
~.~ .-'.~~\ 'I ~ -'-".
~ --- -
,r ,.-"
- .
~
""",0' ---<I . ~
--._.;-.ii-.J I J7
.--1 .. ,-.- ..-- ' "'I
.--... "'.: ---pi
....1
YOR'S
SURV
'J
..
I,
"
"
"
"
-,
'.
: :'
, "
, "
'-.....--.'C.--.--,4
...
.
JI
Joo
M
..
Ie
.
J8 oi Jt
.
~ JJ
M ~,
JO ~
.. "
Ie a
\PLAT
\
.
~,
It
11
"
,......-"
"GO
. -- -
.. a
.' ..
IJ oI!
Ii ,~
.
J'O ..
- ' . --
ltI it
]I ..
:u rt
JS .
If : ..
f------. '
JI :10
.' :,.
u : I'
,
., ;n
., .. J
-
i
-':;'---'-'~
" I
I' :
II "
, I
, ,
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
r
,
JO
Ie
"
- In
Ii
"
,.
J. '
JJ
J..
n'
.
It
I
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
"
d
. :: ----f-,...
_III
! '
.. \
.,
-\
..
" \
..
'.
-
10 IdarJI.
PROJECT
PARK
NORTHEAST INDUSTRIAL
..
-
~
..
-
,I
-
..
-
...
~ ..
w
.
I
-
.
-
.
-
1
,n
RENEWAL
SALINA
URBAN
+
I
...
I
I
¡-
It
KANSAS
SALINA t
"
"
':
"
"
.:
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
,;
"
, l ::
I .'
I I'
:. - - - ..,: ~--
PROJECT 10, lAM. 1-29
Prepared for
UllAJ IElE~L AQEICY
Salina, Kan.u
Con au It I n!1 Enllneer.
, PIII,Men
PRCUECT 1ICUIJM't~
I
"
,
,
,
8(81. In f..t.
:D) 3XI IlOO
t r .
.
00
.
!iOO
0
ICO
BUCHER
,
WILLIS
í
íI
[loW
.
aT
IT. I
;--i H~
~ ~~
I --1---i¡--
, t:
::
::
"
",
!
I
i
....
¡-
I
SURVEYOR'S
,.
. ...
" I I
I) ..
1) ..
" ..
.. .-
.- It Rl
-
. ..
11 ..
.. ..
d It
" ..
." III
II n
,oo ...
... ..
" II
~ ..
II It
" It
,
,. »
.. It II,M'
.. .
10 II
.. ..
'. It
,~ ~~.
n__.
.. »
-~ R...,
r
i
I
j,
,
I
i
,
I
i
I
..1
i
I
4<' I
I
I
'.
'8
..
..
..
..
I'0Il EI T
...~. I
..
.
..
...'
..'
~
..
.. ~
.!:
~
~
.:!.
..
..
~
~
~
..
..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
N .
... ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ,. ..
..!~
.:!.
to
ST~ 011. CD
PIIIOSPf:CT
12
"
I(
A "
~ .
.
VAN HO~HL
.!!.
!:.
-~
LlNCOI.N
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. '.
.1 ..
..
z
~
~
;,
..
.
I.
I '1
I II
. I'
, : ::
I I
: ;:
: ::
,_u,...u,C':._-uu.
~
I
INDUSTRIAL
USE
1\01. .-.,
,."..1." _...-~-;t\."a
....'" --------i
--'~:sí.-~ to : ;u :
H
oil
t
...
t
PE RM ITTED
NON - INDUSTRIAL
(SCHOOL. ADM.)
USE
to
~
)1
H
))
)1
H
"
~
~
)
,.
).0
.,
.IOI
,.
III
to
).0
- UI
u
~,
~
...
))
I)
It I
---;r--'-"'"
"
'1
I'
Ii
I
1
1
,
I
,
1
,
,
,
I
,
I
I
I
I
1
I
,
,
I
I
-I
/1
,'2'0'~
, I
.~---,
,. '"
-
':-------t
,. Z!o '
':~__n___--i
JO
oil
t
,
II
~
,.
~
JO
...... ),
:u
,.
,.
,.
II
..'
i NORTHEAST INDUSTRIAL
PARK
PROJECT
LAND
USE
PLAN
SALINA
URBAN
RENEWAL
.
IINUSIO[
-..
SALIN A.
KANSAS
-+
,.
..
PROJECT RO. KAI, R-29
14
"
,
..
I
1
Prepared for
UIIU IEln.il AGUCY
Sa1 i na, lan.a.
PROJECT IWIDØY-
.0
100
1C81.
ØI
In feet
.
~ ,4"
SUCHER
&
WilLIS
COUll I t I nl Eng In.."
I "amer.
0
300
II(X
!iOO
4
I--J---~'"-
: ':
, :'
, .:
I "
1 I,
, "
I "
I "
'--,
,
ST.
-
-riD II SURVEYOR'S
!
II II . I I
!t .1-
!.I If ~ I !""
.
(Published in The Salina Journal July
, 2004)
ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-10212
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE AMENDMENT OF ORDINANCE
NUMBER 8526, THE SAME BEING CHAPTER 42 OF THE SALINA CODE, AND THE
ZONING DISTRICT MAP THEREIN AND THEREBY ADOPTED AND PROVIDING FOR
THE RE ZO NIN G OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY AND PRES CRIB IN G THE
PROPER USES THEREOF.
WHEREAS, all conditions precedent for the amendment of the Zoning District Map, the
rezoning of certain property therein, hereinafter described has been timely complied with, SO NOW,
THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Governing Body of the City of Salina, Kansas:
Section 1. AMENDMENT. DISTRICT "PDD". PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT. That the Zoning District Map of the City of Salina, Kansas, duly adopted and published
as a part of Ordinance Number 8526, the same being Chapter 42 of the Salina Code, be and it is hereby
amended so that the following described property be rezoned as follows, to-wit:
Lots 3 and 4, Block 14, in the Northeast Industrial Park Addition
to the City of Salina, Saline County, Kansas. (aka 505 Francis
Avenue)
shall become a part of District "PDD". PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
Section 2. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. That the use of said described property
shall be subj ect to all the conditions, restrictions and limitations as made and provided for in Ordinance
Number 8526, the same being Chapter 42 of the Salina Code with reference to the PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. Development of the property shall be subject to the plans on file with
the City Planning Commission and/or City Clerk and the following conditions, to-wit:
1.
Development limitations shall be as follows:
a)
Permitted uses on Lots 3 and 4 shall be limited to uses allowed
in the 1-2 district plus a concrete batch plant. All development
on this site shall comply with the 1-2 district regulations.
The concrete plant shall be equipped with cement dust
containment equipment which meets KDHE standards.
b)
c)
The concrete batch plant shall be placed on a foundation or
anchoring system that complies with the requirements of the
Uniform Building Code.
d)
A 6 f1. solid wood screening fence shall be erected to screen all
developed frontage from adjoining York Street.
e)
Truck traffic to and from the concrete plant shall enter and exit
from the gated entrance on York Street. If concrete trucks use
Chester Avenue the roadway must be paved to public street
standards. In lieu of paving Chester Avenue to public street
standards the applicant may initiate the vacation of Chester
Avenue. If Chester Avenue is vacated the roadway may be
paved to city driveway standards.
Development on Lot 3 shall be completed in substantial
confonnance with the approved development plan on file with
the Planning Department and associated submittals.
Section 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption
(f)
and publication once in the official city newspaper.
Introduced: July 12, 2004
Passed:
July 19, 2004
Monte Shadwick
Mayor
[SEAL]
ATTEST:
Lieu Ann Elsey
City Clerk