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

ANDOVER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION /

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS

January 17, 2006

Minutes

 

The Andover City Planning Commission met for a regular meeting on Tuesday, January 17, 2006 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 David Martine, Lynn Heath, Jan Cox, Ron Roberts, Quentin Coon, 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 Member Jeff Syrios was absent.

Call to Order

 

 

 

Review the minutes of the December 20, 2005 Planning Commission meeting.

 

Charlotte Bass made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Ron Roberts seconded the motion. Motion carried 5/0/2 with Jan Cox and David Martine abstaining.

Review the minutes of the Dec. 20, 2005 Planning Commission meeting.

 

 

Communications:

Review the City Council minutes from the December 13, 2005 and December 27, 2005 meetings. The minutes were received and filed.

 

Review the minutes of the January 3, 2006 Site Plan Review Committee Meeting. The minutes were received and filed.

 

Chairman Nelson commended the Site Plan Review Committee for all their dedication and hard work.

 

Review the Potential Residential Development Lot Report.

Communications:

 

 

SU-2005-04: (Continued from November) Public hearing on an application for Special Use to establish a Used Automobile Sales Facility in the B-5 Highway Business District located at 1611 W. Ledgerwood Drive, Andover, Kansas.

 

Chairman Nelson opened the Public Hearing at 7:03 p.m. He announced that the Commissioners received a letter from Richard Krehbiel, President of Wholesale Fireworks and agent for the applicant, stating the withdrawal of the application for Special Use. The letter states the company is no longer owned by Mr. Krehbiel.  The item was removed from the agenda.

SU-2005-04: (Continued from November) Public hearing District located at 1611 W. Ledgerwood Drive

 

 

SU-2005-05: Public Hearing on an application for Special Use to establish 48 Multiple-Family dwellings for the elderly and handicapped in the R-4 Multi-Family Residential District located south of Willowbrook Street, between Sunflower Lane and Sunset Drive.

 

Chairman Nelson reported the Commissioners have received a letter just prior to tonight’s meeting concerning this case. Chairman Nelson asked the audience for a show of hands to show those attending in favor and opposition to this application.

 

Clark Nelson asked for Les Mangus to summarize this matter before the applicant is heard. Les said this subject property was zoned a few years ago to R-4 Multi-Family Residential with a special use that limited the use of the property to an assisted living facility only. There were several public hearings which discussed traffic issues, access, buffers, and etc. The situation was worked out at that time with the applicant and neighborhood. There still remains R-2 Single-Family zoning on the north and west sides of this subject property that would act as a buffer between this use and the existing residences. The applicant tonight would like to remove the limitation to an assisted living facility which would allow them to build housing for seniors and the handicapped with or without the services of assisted living as it is licensed by the State of Kansas.

 

Chairman Nelson asked if any members of the Planning Commission needed to disqualify themselves. Seeing none, the applicant was invited to the podium.

 

Mike McCown of D.F. Osborne, developer and builder, said this company has developed several senior housing projects like the one requested tonight. He understands the concerns of the surrounding neighbors and believes this special use application will be a better neighbor because there will be less traffic (no service trucks) and no employee traffic making this a quiet neighborhood.

 

Clark Nelson asked for an explanation for the difference from the neighbors perspective between the existing special use and the one applied for tonight. Mike McCown said the proposed use will be quieter with less traffic. He said there will park like settings and top-notch landscaping.

 

Lynn Heath asked about access to this property. Mike McCown explained Sunset Drive will be extended to the north. Lynn Heath asked if this would create access onto Willowbrook. Mike McCown said no it would not; the only access would be from Highway 54 on the south of the property.

 

David Martine asked about the existing Galloway home. Mike McCown said there are no plans to change their property.

 

Their was general discussion about access to the Galloway property. Mike McCown said the road would be paved from this new facility to the south.

 

Chairman Nelson asked if anyone else was present to speak in favor of this matter. Hearing none, he asked for anyone in opposition of this matter to come to the podium to speak.

 

Frank Galloway of 359 S. Sunset Drive, and is the owner of the existing house in question. He explained his concern of being “pinned in” between Andover Crossing Apartments and this high density use as proposed. Mr. Galloway explained the recorded easement that runs from his personal driveway north to Willowbrook. This easement has been maintained by the Galloway’s up to this date. He said there is no way to move or change this legal easement. He stated that if this property is developed as applied for, the traffic would use his easement in front of his house to and from Willowbrook Street.

 

Clark Nelson asked Les if this is a private or public easement. Les said the court ordered Dr. Ellis to give the rights of ingress and egress to the Galloway’s to the north from their house out to Willowbrook Road. The rights were granted to the Galloway’s as owners of that house. The rights to access are not on Galloway’s property, they are on the Ellis property. If the applicant would extend a public road from Highway 54 to touch the corner of the subject property, they would overlap the Galloway’s rights to ingress and egress to Willowbrook Road. Clark asked if this would negatively impact the Galloway’s access rights. Les said he did not perceive any negative impact. Mr. Galloway continued to explain his concerns about the use of the road and the diminished resale value of his property if this application is approved. Mr. Galloway said he has a letter of intent from Duane Wadley to buy his property and Mr. Wadley would build the assisted living facility per the existing special use ordinance. Clark Nelson said that Staff has advised him that the public use of the easement road is not an illegal act.

 

Xury Hole of 318 Willowbrook said he is concerned about the proposed development building to the east of Sunset Drive. Les showed the parcel boundaries have not changed from the previously approved special use case. There was general discussion about platting details which is not relevant to this special use application. Mr. Hole said he is concerned about increased density with this new application.

 

Duane Wadley, President of Wadley Company and developer of the previously approved special use. He said he plans to buy the Galloway’s property thereby eliminating any easement problems, all access to the assisted living facility would be from the south with no access to Willowbrook, 1 large building, less traffic, less noise, less population, and less clutter. The building will be 1 story and low profile and satisfies all the concerns of the neighborhood. He said this is an issue of 2 developers competing for 1 piece of property. Duane explained that his previous contract with Dr. Ellis has expired but he hopes to renew it. There was discussion about contract issues between Mr. Wadley, Dr. Ellis, and the Galloway’s. Mr. Wadley said the purchase of the Galloway property is contingent upon the contract with Dr. Ellis being renewed.

 

John Laffen of 301 S. Sunflower Lane asked if the proposed building would be a single level. Mike McCown said yes it would be.  John Laffen asked if the restriction for assisted living were removed, would that allow any multi-family dwellings on that property. Clark Nelson explained this application restricts the applicant to multi-family dwellings for the elderly and handicapped with and/ or without assisted living.

 

Quentin Coon asked for clarification from Les. Les said the prior special use limits the use of the property to an assisted living facility only. Les suggested the motion include “to add multi-family dwellings for the elderly and handicapped to the limitation of assisted living” so there are only 2 possible uses for the property.

 

John Laffen asked Mike McCown if his company planned to develop the R-2 Single-Family residential buffer as well. Mike McCown said yes, they will develop the buffer.

 

Kenneth Boone of 235 Sunset Drive asked if the density of the development will be increasing with the new applicant. He also asked for a guarantee that the development would be limited to 1 story units. Les Mangus said as this property is zoned today, the R-4 zone allows density of 14 dwelling units per acre. This could net out to be 55- 60 units in an assisted living fashion and could be 45’ high in this R-4 district. Les said with a special use, the Planning Commission can attach any conditions they see fit.

 

Kenneth Boone asked how the Galloway’s access road be restricted from the general public traffic in and out of Willowbrook. Les Mangus said a letter of intent between a potential developer and a property owner does not guarantee anything. He said this is an issue for when the ownership of the property actually changes. Access controls will be discussed during the platting process. General discussion continued.

 

Frank Galloway continued his concerns about the road. Clark Nelson explained that legal issues are not relevant to a special use application.

 

Jan Cox said her understanding is that the neighbors are concerned about the access of this development to Willowbrook. Les Mangus said nothing has changed from the application of 4 years ago. No property has changed hands, there is still a court order giving Galloway’s access to Willowbrook, the conditions are all the same.

 

Mike McCown said that he is sensitive to the neighbors concerns, but there is the risk of increased traffic using the access road into Willowbrook. The McCown application plans for access only onto Kellogg. Clark Nelson repeated again that access plans for this piece of property have not changed from the approved plan of 4 years ago.

 

Xury Hole asked the applicant to draw their planned access road from Kellogg past the Galloway’s property. Clark Nelson said the issue tonight is not the access road, but only the special use of assisted living.

 

Caroline Hale clarified the property boundaries to the east. Les said the Galloway’s road is in a line between the intersection of Sunset & Willowbrook, and the Galloway house.

 

Linda Galloway of 359 S. Sunset Drive pointed on the map to show the eastern boundary of the subject property, and she said the piece of property is not usable between the road and the tree line. Clark Nelson said he still does not see a negative impact to the current right-of-way if this application is approved.

Caroline Hale said she does not feel the neighbors are concerned about the Galloway’s losing their access to Willowbrook; they do not want the general public using that easement road to travel from that neighborhood to and from Kellogg avoiding the intersection of Kellogg and Andover Road. The previous developer had offered to purchase the Galloway property; thereby the access road into Willowbrook goes away.

 

Kathy Bowman of 327 Sunflower asked for clarification of zoning requirement changes, garages, traffic, etc. Mike McCown said this will be a single story facility with garages, no assisted living services, nice development with brick fascia, no service trucks, and community clubhouse.

 

David Martine asked if this will be 1 building or several small houses. Mike McCown said it will all be connected, but there is no final design yet. There was general discussion about other senior facilities in Andover. Les reminded everyone that the only difference in this application and the existing special use is whether assisted living services within the building are required or not. They are both multi-family housing for the elderly and handicapped, One is required to have services within to obtain the State license and the other does not. Discussion continued.

 

Quentin Coon asked if a new plat would be submitted. Les said yes and at that time access issues would be addressed. Today nothing legally prohibits access to the north. There are no conditions of access control in the existing special use.

 

Clark Nelson asked if the height of the facility could be a condition of approval. Discussion continued about other possible restrictions. Les Mangus said if the members wish to limit the height, they need to put a number on it. A typical single-family residential maximum height is 35’. The applicant said he is not sure that height limitation would be acceptable to the project.

 

Diane Boone of 235 Sunset Drive said the new developer has not spoken to the Galloway’s which might have relieved some of this controversy. She is also concerned about access from Willowbrook to Kellogg if this property is developed.

 

John Laffen asked if this application is denied tonight, can another application be submitted in the future for the same thing. Les said there is no restriction on the filing of applications but there is filing fees each time. Mr. Laffen asked for this application to be denied, to give Duane Wadley time to work out a contract with Dr. Ellis and the Galloway’s. Clark Nelson said contractual negotiations are not the duty of the Planning Commission. Les Mangus suggested the members NOT limit access in the motion because the platting details have not been worked out.

 

Clark Nelson closed the public comment portion of the public hearing and discussion returned to the bench at 8:10 p.m. for consideration. Chairman Nelson began the review of the rezoning report.

SU-2005-05: Public Hearing on an application for Special Use located south of Willowbrook Street, between Sunflower Lane and Sunset Drive.

 

ANDOVER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

 

Agenda Item No. 6

 

REZONING REPORT *

 

CASE NUMBER:

SU-2005-05

 

APPLICANT/AGENT:

 

Harvey Ellis living trust/ Mike McCown of D.F. Osborne Co.

 

REQUEST:

Special Use for multi-family dwellings for the elderly & handicapped in the R-4 Multiple Family Residential district

CASE HISTORY:

Subject property is currently zoned R-4 with Special Use limited to an assisted living facility.

LOCATION:

South of Willowbrook Street between Sunflower Lane and Sunset Drive.

SITE SIZE:

4.78 acres

 

PROPOSED USE:

Multiple family dwellings for the elderly & handicapped.

 

ADJACENT ZONING AND EXISTING LAND USE:

 

North:

Vacant R-2 Single-Family Residential owned by the applicant. Existing R-1 Single-Family Residential- Willowbrook neighborhood.

South:

Butler County Agriculture- single family residence on 0.96 acres. R-4 Multi-Family Residential- Andover Crossing Apartments

East:

Vacant B-1 & B-3 property owned by the applicant.

West:

Vacant R-2 single-Family Residential owned by the applicant. Existing R-1 Single Family Residential- Willowbrook neighborhood.

 

Background Information:

The agent desires to construct multi-family housing for the elderly & handicapped without the restriction to an assisted living service facility.

 

* 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:

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Noted at the beginning of this report.

 

 

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:

 

 

 

PLANNING:

Noted at the beginning of this report.

 

 

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:

Public facilities can be extended.

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur.

 

 

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:

Platting required.

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur. Access and height issues will then be addressed.

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

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

 

x

 

STAFF:

Site Plan Review 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?

 

 

 

STAFF:

N.A.

 

 

PLANNING:

N.A.

 

 

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:

Would provide a needed service and possible employment opportunities.

x

 

PLANNING:

Jan Cox said if the assisted living use is removed there would be little employment opportunity. Clark said we are adding to the existing assisted living use.

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

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

 

x

 

STAFF:

 

x

 

PLANNING:

 

 

 

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?

 

 

 

STAFF:

No detriment is perceived.

 

 

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:

 

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:

Provides alternative housing for the elderly & handicapped.

x

 

PLANNING:

Concur

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

 

 

YES

NO

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

 

 

 

STAFF:

None at this time.

 

 

PLANNING:

A number of people were present at the public hearing in opposition to the application.

 

 

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?

 

x

 

STAFF:

Approval as applied for.

x

 

PLANNING:

 

 

 

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:

N.A.

 

 

PLANNING:

N.A.

 

 

COUNCIL:

 

 

 

Having considered the evidence at the hearing and the factors to evaluate the rezoning application, I Quentin Coon, move that we recommend to the Governing Body that Case No. SU-2005-05 be approved to add R-4 Special Use B (3) “Multiple dwelling units for the elderly and handicapped whereby density and parking requirements may be varied from the standards otherwise required by these regulations.” to the existing special use of Assisted Living based on the findings of the Planning Commission as recorded in the summary of this hearing with 11, 12, and 13 in support of the motion.  Motion seconded by David Martine. There was general discussion.

 

Jan Cox said she would like to see conditions placed on this for the maximum number of dwelling units being 48 and maximum height of single story of 36’. Discussion continued about the possible restrictions.

 

David Martine said adequate restrictions will be placed on the development both during platting and at Site Plan Review Committee. There was further discussion. Clark Nelson asked if the applicant would agree to a maximum of 48 units. Mike McCown said he was not prepared to answer that question.

 

Quentin Coon said he did not mind a restriction for maximum height. He said R-4 already limits the height to 45’. There was more discussion.

 

Clark Nelson said there is a suggestion for an amendment to the motion to limit the maximum number of units and the maximum height of the facility. Quentin Coon did not agree with the suggested limitations.

 

 Motion as originally stated carried 5/2 with Jan Cox and Lynn Heath in opposition.

 

Les Mangus said that no further notices will be mailed and that this case will be heard by the City Council on February 14, 2006. David Martine asked for notes about density and etc. be included in the Site Plan Review Committee packets. Clark Nelson reminded the audience of their protest petition rights and said he appreciated the comments by the neighbors.

 

 

 

Review the Final Plat for the Summerfield Addition located one block east of Andover Road and south of the middle school and railroad tracks.

 

Les Mangus said this is a matter of housekeeping. This plat was approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in 2002. There have been some changes in ownership of this plat it has gone through several signings to get ready for recording. With that delay, the plat becomes null and void if not recorded within 6 months of its approval. It now has to be re-approved by both committees. There have been no changes to the lines of the plat, only the ownership. There was general discussion about the location of this property which abuts the Andover Middle School.

 

David Martine asked about the proposed use of this property. Les said it is zoned for multi-family residential.

 

Discussion continued. Les said Summerfield senior housing project is a trade name for the elderly housing complex (platted as Koob Tracts) and there is nothing recorded that names that property Summerfield. Jan Cox said this is confusing.

 

David Martine asked about conditions placed on this plat. Les said all conditions had to do with the zoning. This property has been through several public hearings.

 

Lynn Heath made a motion to re-approve the Summerfield Addition Final Plat as originally approved. Quentin Coon seconded the motion. Motion carried 7/0.

Review the Final Plat for the Summerfield Addition

 

 

Election of a new Planning Commission Chairperson. Clark Nelson has been appointed to the City Council. He also serves on the Subdivision Committee. Clark Nelson announced his resignation from these committees and he suggested Lynn Heath be appointed to the Subdivision Committee to fulfill his vacancy. Lynn Heath agreed.

 

Ron Roberts made a motion to approve the appointment of Lynn Heath as the Chairman Subdivision Committee. Charlotte Bass seconded the motion. Motion carried 7/0.

 

Clark Nelson suggested Quentin Coon fulfill the Chairman position and have Lynn Heath as Vice-Chairman until May 2006. Both men agreed.

 

Ron Roberts made a motion to approve Quentin Coon as Planning Commission Chairman with Lynn Heath as Vice-Chairman until May 2006. Charlotte Bass seconded the motion. Motion carried 7/0.

 

 

 

Member Items:

Lynn Heath- Asked if anyone would fill the vacancy on the Planning Commission. Jeff Bridges said the Mayor would be appointing someone at the next City Council meeting.

Jan Cox- no comments

Ron Roberts- no comments

Clark Nelson- no comments

Quentin Coon- Asked if Serendipity Estates is zoning is done. Les Mangus said the next step will  be the Final PUD.

Jeff Syrios- absent

Charlotte Bass- no comments

David Martine- Said he appreciated Clark Nelson as a member. All members agreed. Clark said he has enjoyed working on this committee keeping the best interest of the City of Andover at heart.

Member Items

 

 

Charlotte Bass made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:37 p.m. Lynn Heath seconded the motion. Motion carried 7/0.

Adjournment

 

 

 

Respectfully Submitted by

 

__________________________

Deborah Carroll

Administrative Secretary

 

Approved this 21st day of February 2006 by the Andover City Planning Commission/ Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Andover.