View Other Items in this Archive | View All Archives | Printable Version

ANDOVER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION /

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS

June 21, 2005

Minutes

 

The Andover City Planning Commission met for a regular meeting on Tuesday, June 21, 2005 at 909 N. Andover Road in the Andover Civic Center.  Chairman Clark Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.  Commission Members present were Lynn Heath, Jan Cox, Jeff Syrios, and Charlotte Bass.  Others in attendance were Zoning Administrator Les Mangus, Administrative Secretary Deborah Carroll, and City Clerk/Administrator Jeff Bridges and City Council Liaison Caroline Hale.  Commission Members David Martine, Quentin Coon, Ron Roberts were absent.

Call to Order

 

 

 

Review the minutes of the May 17, 2005 Planning Commission meeting.

 

Lynn Heath made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Charlotte Bass seconded the motion. Motion carried 4/0/1 with Jeff Syrios abstaining because he was absent from that meeting.

Review the minutes of the May 17, 2005 Planning Commission meeting.

 

 

Communications:

Review the City Council minutes from the May 10, 2005 and May 31, 2005 meetings. The minutes were received and filed.

 

Review the minutes of the June 7, 2005 Site Plan Review Committee Meeting. The minutes were received and filed.

 

Review the minutes of the May 10, 2005 Subdivision Committee meeting. The minutes were received and filed.

 

Clark Nelson thanked Caroline Hale for her attendance and input at the Planning Commission meetings.

 

Review the Potential Residential Development Lot Report.

 

Election of Subdivision Committee Officers. Clark Nelson reappointed Charlotte Bass, Jan Cox, Ron Roberts, and Clark Nelson to the committee.

 

Jeff Syrios made a motion to approve the appointments for Subdivision Committee. Lynn Heath seconded the motion. Motion carried 5/0.  

Communications:

 

 

SU-2005-02: Public Hearing on an application for Special Use to establish a Public Post-Secondary Education Facility in the I-1 Industrial District at 715 E. 13th Street, Andover, Kansas. Chairman Nelson opened the Public Hearing and asked for a report from the Zoning Administrator.

 

Les Mangus said this application for Special Use for a Post-secondary Education Facility at 715 E. 13th Street is an addition to the special use granted in 2003 for BCCC to convert the former Raytheon building into classrooms. His opinion of this conversion of prime industrial property to non-taxable educational facilities remains that there is no value to the Community in creating an incompatible college campus in the middle of the industrial area that has taken 40 years to build. With that said, the previous special use set a precedence to allow this expansion to consume the remainder of the existing building. The previous public hearing concluded with an approval that limited the use to a portion of the existing building, and a fair warning that to expect zoning for expansion beyond the existing building would be frowned on. There was a copy of the minutes in the packet for that previous case for the Planning Commission review.

 

Dr. Jackie Vieti, President of Butler Community College at 901 S. Haverhill Road, El Dorado, Kansas, said 2 years ago the school acquired 60,000 square feet of space on 13th Street. She said their future need is for additional space for general education classroom space, and 2 technical programs will be moved from the El Dorado campus to Andover. They also plan to centralize the information technology programs within the expanded facility.

 

Clark Nelson asked about Butler Community College’s long term goals with respect to 13th & 21st locations. Dr. Vieti said the intention is to consolidate the locations to be under 2 roofs instead of 3. They think it is in the best interest of the City of Andover to return some of the college owned property to commercial use. The expansion on 13th Street would allow the portable classrooms on the 21st Street location to be eliminated. Eventually the 10,000 square foot building permanent building would be vacated that is on the northeast corner of 21st Street. She said she is not sure of the length of time the school district will allow them to stay in the facility adjacent to the high school.

 

Clark Nelson asked about the increase in the number of employees expected for this expansion project. Dr. Vieti said as the result of the occupation of 13th Street, 11 full time faculty positions were added and additional support staff. This expansion will add 2 full time faculty members immediately as well as support staff. She said this expansion will add between 350 and 500 new students.

 

Clark Nelson asked about the comfort level of having school students located within an industrial area. Dr. Vieti explained community colleges are being turned to for work force development purposes. She thinks this makes this an ideal relationship which is supported in theory by several communities. She said the plan for Butler Community College in Andover was to build a multi-building campus on the land they own on the southeast corner of Andover Road and 21st Street, but after further consideration, the 13th Street facility is more efficient and less costly to occupy.

 

Clark Nelson asked if the safety of the students is in question in an industrial zoned area. Dr. Vieti said this is not a concern.

 

Lynn Heath asked if the school expansion will only be inside the existing Raytheon building. Dr. Vieti said there are 3 buildings in the complex. The north building will be expanded and will use a portion of the existing building on the south. The college is in the process of acquiring the second building on a long-term lease and the third building which is a 10,000 square foot stand alone building. She said they also envision construction of an advanced technology center which will also be a perfect fit for the industrial area paid for with private resources.

 

Clark Nelson asked if the special use request is for the building or for the 20-acre site. Les Mangus said the legal description is very complex and consumes the existing buildings and adjacent parking. The portion published is only for Tract #5.

 

Vince Haines from Prigmore, Krevins, Haines, & Limon Architects P.A., 101 S. Star, El Dorado, Kansas, and designer for this facility explained the history of this property. He said Tract #6 is not included in this request, and is an oversight on his part. Vince Haines said he would like to amend the application to include Tract #6. Les Mangus said that change cannot be made without the proper notices. Dr. Vieti said Tract #6 is not critical to the current plan of the school. They plan to sub-lease it to the current occupant (Sleep Apnea Co.).

 

Jeff Syrios asked for the name of the current owner. Dr. Vieti said the college has signed a long-term lease agreement with Carl Solomon who agrees with the plans for this property. Jeff Syrios said this school in the Industrial zoned area is not consistent with the Comprehensive Development Plan for the City of Andover. He also is concerned about a buffer between the Industrial zoning to Single-Family dwellings. Dr. Vieti said this sharing of Industrial property is part of a national trend of partnership for training with industrial employees. She said this cohabitation would bring businesses to the area for convenience of training.  Jeff Syrios said this may keep out some industrial prospects. Dr. Vieti said this building has been vacant for a long time and she thinks the occupancy of the school and improvements they will make is an asset to the city.

 

Jeff Syrios asked if the future plan of the school is to vacate the facility on 21st and Andover Road, the building connected to the high school will remain, and the 13th Street facility will be totally occupied.

 

Jan Cox asked if the property on the southeast corner of Andover Road and 21st would be sold. Dr. Vieti said they plan to sell it, especially the frontage which has far greater value to the City of Andover for commercial development. She said the Board has not decided whether to sell the entire property.

 

Jeff Syrios asked Les for his opinion on this request. Les Mangus said he is opposed to this request because the city would never plan to put a group of students in an industrial park especially if there were aspirations of growth in the industrial park to the east. He recognized the special use has already been approved for half of the building now; it is too late to call it back.

 

Lynn Heath asked if this is hampering the growth of the industrial park and how many lots are still available for development. Les said there are 2 lots available along 13th Street, 1 which is owned by Sherwin Williams, the other owned by Mr. Solomon (Tract 1), and the remainder of the undeveloped Andover Industrial Park which is +/- 60 acres. There was further discussion about development of the industrial property.

 

Jeff Syrios asked if an industrial site could be built on Tract #5 of this property. Les explained that Tract #5 encompasses the portion of the building that the college wants to use now. Tract #6 is a small building that is trapped in the middle of the college so the potential for industrial use is not good. The property that is requesting the special use permit is subject to the lease by the college which will include all of Tract 5.

 

Hearing no further public comment in favor or opposition of this application, Chairman Nelson closed the public comment and reviewed the Rezoning Report.

 

SU-2005-02: Public Hearing on an application for Special Use to establish a Public Post-Secondary Education Facility in the I-1 Industrial District at 715 E. 13th Street

 

 

 

ANDOVER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION                  

 

Agenda Item No. 5

 

 

REZONING REPORT *

 

 

 

CASE NUMBER:

SU-2005-02

 

 

APPLICANT/AGENT:

 

Butler Community College

 

 

REQUEST:

Special Use to allow the expansion of the Post-Secondary Education Facility in the I-1 Industrial district.

 

CASE HISTORY:

BCCC already occupies a portion of this existing building.

 

LOCATION:

715 E. 13th

 

 

SITE SIZE:

20.1 acres

 

 

PROPOSED USE:

BCCC classrooms in the remainder of the existing building.

 

 

ADJACENT ZONING AND EXISTING LAND USE:

 

 

North:

I-1 Industrial- Sherwin Williams factory

 

South:

I-1 Industrial- vacant Andover Industrial Park

 

East:

Butler County Agriculture- 80 acre farmstead

 

West:

I-1 Industrial- vacant land

 

 

 

Background Information:

 

 

 

 

* Note:    This report is to assist the Planning Commission to determine their findings from the evidence presented at the hearing so as to base their rezoning recommendation on the required 17 factors found in Section 11-100 H of the Zoning Regulations.  The responses provided need to be evaluated with the evidence and reworded as necessary to reflect the Planning Commission’s considered opinion. Sample motions are provided to ensure the accuracy of the motion and facilitate the summary of the hearing for the minutes. Conditions attached to the motion, if any, should be carefully worded to provide instructions to the applicant and facilitate enforcement by the Zoning Administrator.

 

(As per Article 11, Section 100 of the City of Andover Zoning Regulation – 1993)

 

 

H.

Amendments to Change Zoning Districts. When a proposed amendment would result in a change of the zoning district classification of any specific property, the report of the Planning Commission, accompanied by a summary of the hearing, shall contain statements as to (1) the present and proposed district classifications, (2) the applicant’s reasons for seeking such reclassification, and (3) a statement of the factors where relevant upon which the recommendation of the Commission is based using the following factors as guidelines:

 

 

 

FACTORS AND FINDINGS:

 

 

 

YES

NO

1.   What is the character of the subject property and in the surrounding neighborhood in relation to existing uses and their condition?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

Noted on page 1 of this rezoning report

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Clark Nelson said this was approved in 2003 and it is too late to change it now.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

2.   What is the current zoning of the subject property and that of the surrounding neighborhood in relation to the requested zoning change?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

Noted on page 1 of this rezoning report

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Concur- Lynn Heath said this will be a buffer between the adjacent single-family home and the industrial park.

Les Mangus said that due to the creek in the floodplain, the area does not lend itself to any development. 100 yds. from the college property to Republican Run Creek.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

3.   Is the length of time that the subject property has remained undeveloped or vacant as zoned a factor in the consideration?

 

 

 

x

STAFF:

 

 

 

x

PLANNING:

The industrial park has not developed as quickly as anticipated.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

4.   Would the request correct an error in the application of these regulations?

 

 

 

x

STAFF:

 

 

 

x

PLANNING:

 

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

5.   Is the request caused by changed or changing conditions in the area of the subject property and, if so, what is the nature and significance of such changed or changing conditions?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

Raytheon moved out of the building & BCCC occupies +/- 1/3 of the existing building now.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

6.   Do adequate sewage disposal and water supply and all other necessary public facilities including street access exist or can they be provided to serve the uses that would be permitted on the subject property?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

All are in place and adequate.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

 

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

7.   Would the subject property need to be platted or replatted in lieu of dedications made for rights-of-way, easements access control or building setback lines?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

Dedication of 13th Street right-of-way to 50’ ½ street required.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur. Les said today the street has a 35’ dedication and the minimum standard is 50’. The applicant said this is not a problem.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

8.   Would a screening plan be necessary for existing and/or potential uses of the subject property?

 

 

 

x

STAFF:

 

 

 

x

PLANNING:

 

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

9.   Is suitable vacant land or buildings available or not available for development that currently has the same zoning as is requested?

 

 

 

x

STAFF:

 

 

 

x

PLANNING:

 

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

10.                                                                                                                                                                                                                If the request is for business or industrial uses, are such uses needed to provide more services or employment opportunities?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

BCCC enrollment continues to grow.

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Concur.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

11.                                                                                                                                                                                                                Is the subject property suitable for the uses in the current zoning to which it has been restricted?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

The use of a portion of the existing building by BCCC makes it less desirable for industrial users.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

12.                                                                                                                                                                                                                To what extent would removal of the restrictions, i.e., the approval of the zoning request detrimentally affect other property in the neighborhood?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

No detriment is perceived.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

13.                                                                                                                                                                                                                Would the request be consistent with the purpose of the zoning district classification and the intent and purpose of these regulations?

 

 

 

x

STAFF:

The I-1 District is intended for light industrial uses.

 

 

x

PLANNING:

Concur.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

14.                                                                                                                                                                                                                Is the request in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and does it further enhance the implementation of the Plan?

 

 

 

x

STAFF:

No expansions of BCCC are mentioned. The plan generally promotes growth of the industrial job base.

 

 

x

PLANNING:

Concur

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

15.                                                                                                                                                                                                                What is the support or opposition to the request?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

None at this time.

 

 

 

PLANNING:

None at this time.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

16.                                                                                                                                                                                                                Is there any information or are there recommendations on this request available from knowledgeable persons which would be helpful in its evaluation?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

This application completes the conversion of a viable industrial site to an incompatible use, which will eventually be surrounded by industrial users.

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Concur.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

17.                                                                                                                                                                                                                If the request was not approved, would this result in a relative gain to the public health, safety and general welfare which would outweigh the loss in property value to or the hardship experienced by, the applicant?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

The public gains additional educational opportunities and loses industrial jobs and tax base.

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Concur

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

Having considered the evidence at the hearing and the factors to evaluate the rezoning application, I Charlotte Bass, move that we recommend to the Governing Body that Case No. SU-2005-02 be modified & approved to allow the expansion of the Post-Secondary Education Facility in the I-1 Industrial District based on the findings of the Planning Commission numbers 5, 6, 7, 10. 12, and 15 in support as recorded in the summary of this hearing and that the  following conditions be attached to this recommendation:

  1. Contingent upon the right-of-way dedication.

Motion seconded by Lynn Heath. There was further discussion about a formal connection between the school and the industries.  Motion carried 5/0.

 

 

 

Z-2005-04: Public Hearing on proposed change of zoning district classification from the R-1 Single-Family Residential District to the B-1 Office Business District at 1139 N. Andover Road, Andover, Kansas. Chairman Nelson opened the Public Hearing and asked for a report from the Zoning Administrator.

 

Les Mangus said this application for change in zoning district classification is adjacent to vacant business property already owned by the applicant in an effort to put together a site with enough Andover Road frontage to support a reasonably sized office building. The previous public hearing for the adjacent property concluded that the change was compatible with surrounding properties and in conformance with the comprehensive plan’s objectives to look at each request to convert residential property along Andover Rd on a case by case basis. Staff supports approval of the application.

 

Dave Rathbone of Venture Enterprises said he currently owns the property adjacent to the north with Dr. David Foley. He said he purchased the subject property at 1139 N. Andover Road about a month ago. He showed the Planning Commission a site plan sketch of the office building that has a residential flair he hopes to build. He said this office building will be occupied with an accounting firm, and an oil firm. Both of these businesses will have a small number of employees. He said the existing home on the site is planned to be moved to the back lot and remodel the home and sell it. That home would then face Main Street.

 

Dave Rathbone said the property adjacent to the west is just a garage with fishing boats in it. There is no residence on it.

 

Hearing no further public comment in favor or opposition of this application, Chairman Nelson closed the public comment and reviewed the Rezoning Report.

Z-2005-04: Public Hearing on proposed change of zoning district classification from the R-1 Single-Family Residential District to the B-1 Office Business District at 1139 N. Andover Road

 

 

 

ANDOVER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION                  

 

Agenda Item No. 6

 

 

REZONING REPORT *

 

 

 

CASE NUMBER:

Z-2005-04

 

 

APPLICANT/AGENT:

 

Venture Enterprises

 

 

REQUEST:

Change of zoning district classification from R-1 Single-Family residential to B-1 Office Business District.

 

CASE HISTORY:

Existing single family residence

 

 

LOCATION:

1139 N. Andover Road

 

 

SITE SIZE:

99.97’ x 156’ = 15,595.32 sq. ft.

 

 

PROPOSED USE:

+/- 5,000 sq. ft. office building

 

 

ADJACENT ZONING AND EXISTING LAND USE:

 

 

North:

B-2 Neighborhood Business- vacant land owned by applicant

 

South:

R-1 Single-Family Residential- existing residence

 

East:

B-6 Business District- Treescapes nursery & landscape contractor

 

West:

R-1 Single-Family Residential- existing storage buildings

 

 

 

Background Information:

The applicant owns the adjacent vacant property to the north and desires to expand the area zoned for the construction of an office building.

 

 

 

* Note:    This report is to assist the Planning Commission to determine their findings from the evidence presented at the hearing so as to base their rezoning recommendation on the required 17 factors found in Section 11-100 H of the Zoning Regulations.  The responses provided need to be evaluated with the evidence and reworded as necessary to reflect the Planning Commission’s considered opinion. Sample motions are provided to ensure the accuracy of the motion and facilitate the summary of the hearing for the minutes. Conditions attached to the motion, if any, should be carefully worded to provide instructions to the applicant and facilitate enforcement by the Zoning Administrator.

 

(As per Article 11, Section 100 of the City of Andover Zoning Regulation – 1993)

 

 

H.

Amendments to Change Zoning Districts. When a proposed amendment would result in a change of the zoning district classification of any specific property, the report of the Planning Commission, accompanied by a summary of the hearing, shall contain statements as to (1) the present and proposed district classifications, (2) the applicant’s reasons for seeking such reclassification, and (3) a statement of the factors where relevant upon which the recommendation of the Commission is based using the following factors as guidelines:

 

 

 

FACTORS AND FINDINGS:

 

 

 

YES

NO

1.   What is the character of the subject property and in the surrounding neighborhood in relation to existing uses and their condition?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

Noted on page 1 of this rezoning report

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Concur.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

2.   What is the current zoning of the subject property and that of the surrounding neighborhood in relation to the requested zoning change?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

Noted on page 1 of this rezoning report

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Concur.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

3.   Is the length of time that the subject property has remained undeveloped or vacant as zoned a factor in the consideration?

 

 

 

x

STAFF:

 

 

 

x

PLANNING:

 

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

4.   Would the request correct an error in the application of these regulations?

 

 

 

x

STAFF:

 

 

 

x

PLANNING:

 

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

5.   Is the request caused by changed or changing conditions in the area of the subject property and, if so, what is the nature and significance of such changed or changing conditions?

 

 

 

x

STAFF:

 

 

 

x

PLANNING:

 

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

6.   Do adequate sewage disposal and water supply and all other necessary public facilities including street access exist or can they be provided to serve the uses that would be permitted on the subject property?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

Water & street exist and sewer can be extended to the subject property.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Clark Nelson asked if this property is subject to the current sanitary sewer. Les Mangus said the sewer main is on Main Street. Properties that face Andover Road have a service lateral that comes off of Main Street and connects. This should be a condition of approval for the property to be platted so that this is a lot and that a sanitary sewer public main be extended up to service the Andover Road properties vs. the service lateral.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

7.   Would the subject property need to be platted or replatted in lieu of dedications made for rights-of-way, easements access control or building setback lines?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

Right-of-way dedications are in place.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

8.   Would a screening plan be necessary for existing and/or potential uses of the subject property?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

Screening of adjacent residential properties would be required.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

9.   Is suitable vacant land or buildings available or not available for development that currently has the same zoning as is requested?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

Both vacant land and buildings are available in the area.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

10.                                                                                                                                                                                                                If the request is for business or industrial uses, are such uses needed to provide more services or employment opportunities?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

Relocation of existing expanding businesses.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

11.                                                                                                                                                                                                                Is the subject property suitable for the uses in the current zoning to which it has been restricted?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

The desirability of residential properties adjacent to Andover Road has decreased with increased traffic.

 

 

x

PLANNING:

Clark Nelson said this proposed use of this property is consistent with the Comprehensive Development Plan.

Lynn Heath said the property along the road is less conducive to R-1 because of the traffic.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

12.                                                                                                                                                                                                                To what extent would removal of the restrictions, i.e., the approval of the zoning request detrimentally affect other property in the neighborhood?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

Increased traffic, lighting, activity, etc. created by normal business operations.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur. Clark Nelson said that in the long run, this will improve the neighborhood as well as the city.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

13.                                                                                                                                                                                                                Would the request be consistent with the purpose of the zoning district classification and the intent and purpose of these regulations?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

 

 

x

 

PLANNING:

 

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

14.                                                                                                                                                                                                                Is the request in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and does it further enhance the implementation of the Plan?

 

 

x

 

STAFF:

Case by case review of commercial applications along Andover Road.

 

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur. Clark Nelson said this neighborhood was discussed during the update of the Comprehensive Development Plan and it was decided that this area from 10th Street north was in need of some modernization.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

15.                                                                                                                                                                                                                What is the support or opposition to the request?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

None at this time.

 

 

 

PLANNING:

None at this time.

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

16.                                                                                                                                                                                                                Is there any information or are there recommendations on this request available from knowledgeable persons which would be helpful in its evaluation?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

Approval as applied for.

 

 

 

PLANNING:

None

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

17.                                                                                                                                                                                                                If the request was not approved, would this result in a relative gain to the public health, safety and general welfare which would outweigh the loss in property value to or the hardship experienced by, the applicant?

 

 

 

 

STAFF:

 

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Clark Nelson said this would not be conducive to improving the general welfare by denial of the application. 

 

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

Having considered the evidence at the hearing and the factors to evaluate the rezoning application, I Lynn Heath, move that we recommend to the Governing Body that Case No. Z-2005-04 be approved to change the zoning district classification from the R-1 Single-Family Residential District to the B-1 Office Business District based on the findings of the Planning Commission 6, 10, 12, 13, & 14 as recorded in the summary of this hearing. Motion seconded by Jeff Syrios. Motion carried 5/0.

 

 

 

Les Mangus said both of the cases tonight will be heard for final approval by the City Council on July 12, 2005.

 

 

 

Annual Review of the Comprehensive Development Plan.

 

Les Mangus stated that State Law requires the Planning Commission review the Comprehensive Plan annually to check for gross changes in the community and to record the changes to use during the next update process.

 

Clark Nelson said having a school use allowed within an industrial area should be studied.

 

Les Mangus said the plan is flexible. He said this was an existing facility which would have been easy for another industry to come in and just change the name on the front.

 

Jan Cox asked if the college is a taxable entity. Jeff Bridges said that for now it is. He said the owner of the property is paying taxes as is the school district because it is a leased facility. After the conditions of the lease are met the college will own the building.

 

Clark Nelson asked if the 21st and Andover Road area continues to develop as commercial.

 

Jeff Bridges explained the reason for having industrial property is to offer well paying jobs, increase the technical proficiency of the community, and to bring people to the community. The college is bringing more people to Andover than any industry could, the jobs are mostly full-time with upper end administrative or clerical positions, it just does not inspire the sale of houses.

 

Les said the Planning Commission now recognizes they have 20 acres of college in an industrial park, that the college eventually plans to move out the 21st Street and Andover Road location. The development of the hospital and medical offices along 21st Street could have significant influence on the type of businesses that move into that area.

 

Clark Nelson asked Les if there were any changes to the city on the south or east sides that needs to be noted. Les said all the improvements to Hwy. 54 and the intersection of Kellogg and Andover Road with the commercial development of the area are already mentioned in the plan.

 

Jeff Bridges said there is a seminar about partnerships with industries hosted by Butler Community College and IBM on Tuesday to train students on IBM business systems. This will be held at the 13th Street campus.

 

Lynn Heath said Butler Community College is also in a partnership with Emporia State University to bring a 4-year education program into Butler Community College.

Annual Review of the Comprehensive Development Plan

 

 

Member Items:

Lynn Heath- none

 

Jan Cox- Suggested topics for future workshops:

1.      Drainage & hydrology

2.      Preliminary Plats & PUD’s

3.      Street design standards and policy

4.      City Attorney Norman Manley explaining conflict of interest and other legal issues.

 

Jeff Syrios- none

 

Charlotte Bass- Would appreciate more information about the procedural fundamentals of the zoning and BZA process from beginning to end.

 

Clark Nelson- Said he appreciated the communication between staff and the Planning Commission.

Caroline Hale- Said she appreciated the working relationship between the City Council and the Planning Commission.

Member Items

 

 

Lynn Heath made a motion to recess the meeting at 8:27 p.m. until 6:00 p.m. on July 19, 2005 for a workshop session before the regularly scheduled meeting. Charlotte Bass seconded the motion. Motion carried 5/0.

Adjournment

 

 

 

Respectfully Submitted by

 

__________________________

Deborah Carroll

Administrative Secretary

 

Approved this 19th day of July 2005 by the Andover City Planning Commission/ Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Andover.