ANDOVER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION /

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS

April 18, 2006

Minutes

The Andover City Planning Commission met for a regular meeting on Tuesday, April 18, 2006 at 909 N. Andover Road in the Andover Civic Center.  Chairman Quentin Coon called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.  Commission Members present were Lynn Heath, Charlotte Bass, David Martine, Byron Stout, Ron Roberts, and Jeff Syrios.  Others in attendance were Director of Public Works and Community Development Les Mangus, Administrative Secretary Deborah Carroll, City Clerk/Administrator Jeff Bridges, and City Council Liaison Caroline Hale.  Commission Member Jan Cox was absent.

Call to order.

Review the minutes of the March 21, 2006 Planning Commission meeting.

Byron Stout made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Jeff Syrios seconded the motion. Motion carried 4/0/3 with Charlotte Bass, Lynn Heath, and David Martine abstaining.

Review the minutes of the March 21, 2006 Planning Commission meeting.

Communications:

Review the City Council minutes from the March 14, 2006 and March 28, 2006 meetings. The minutes were received and filed.

Review the minutes of the April 4, 2006 Site Plan Review Committee Meeting. The minutes were received and filed.

Review the minutes of the April 11, 2006 Subdivision Committee meeting. The minutes were received and filed.

Review the Potential Residential Development Lot Report.

Communications

VA-2006-02: Review the vacation of a portion of the south 20’ utility easement on 603 Crescent Lakes Drive.

Les Mangus explained the requested vacation of a portion of the rear yard utility easement on Lot 12, Block 2, Parcel A, Fourth Phase, Crescent Lakes Addition results from the subdivision design engineer platting around an existing 20 foot utility easement over an existing sanitary sewer interceptor. No conflicts have been received from the utility providers since all other utilities are located in the front yard. Staff supports the vacation as requested do to the unusual configuration of the easement and the lack of other conflicting utilities.

Chairman Coon asked the applicant to come to the podium to explain this request.

Donn Armstrong of 1601 E. Harry, Wichita, stated he is the land surveyor for this project. He stated the foundation plan was used which did not show the deck with an overhang roof which encroached into the easement. He explained only the small triangular portion of the easement is requested to be vacated.

Jeff Syrios asked if only the deck roof is hanging into the easement. Donn said that entire portion of the deck is into the easement.

Discussion continued about the dimensions of the area to be vacated. Donn said it would be 8 – 10 square feet total area.

David Martine asked if all utilities are already installed. Les said this is an unusual arrangement. It is one of the few areas in the newer developments where the sewer is in the rear and all other utilities are in the front easement. This will be more acceptable to staff for maintenance purposes.

Quentin Coon asked if it is an 8” sewer line. Les said it is a 12” and only buried 10 to 12 feet.

David Martine made a motion to recommend approval by the Governing Body for this vacation of easement as requested. Lynn Heath seconded the motion. Motion carried 7/0.

VA-2006-02: Review the vacation of a portion of the south 20’ utility easement on 603 Crescent Lakes Drive.

David Martine made a motion at 7:11 p.m. to recess the Planning Commission and to convene the Board of Zoning Appeals. Lynn Heath seconded the motion. Motion carried 7/0.

BZA-V-2006-03: Review the variance of the dimensional provisions for the location and height limitations for a fence, from the required restriction of an open, non-security fence not exceeding four feet in height in the front yard and to allow a six foot closed fence on property zoned as R-1 Single-Family Residential and located at 428 E. Willowbrook.

From Les’ memo: The proposed variance of the dimensional provisions for the location and height limitations for a fence is the result of the owner’s desire to fence what would typically be a rear yard with a 6-foot privacy fence. Because of the configuration of the house facing south, the area west of the front is classified a side yard, which prohibits closed type of fences over six feet in height beyond the 25 foot front yard setback. This is a unique configuration, which definitely deserves consideration of a variance. Staff supports the variance as applied for.

Chairman Coon asked the applicant to come to the podium to explain this request for variance.

Gary Adams, property owner of 428 E. Willowbrook, explained in detail the existing and proposed plans for his property. Gary Adams submitted a letter from John Ewing, the west neighbor, in support of this case. He also submitted a petition of support from surrounding neighbors and noted that Keith Zinn did not sign the petition due to his position on the City Council. Gary further explained the fence will be 10’ back from the property line which will connect to the existing cedar fence and will include an access gate. Gary said his property is unusual design at 95’ x 229’ and the left hand side is used for garden area. He said this proposed fence will be 30’ from the edge of the gravel road.

David Martine asked for the height of the proposed fence. Gary said it will be 6’ cedar fence. Gary said he has an 8’ easement on his property on Mr. Ewing’s side and the fence will be setback 8’ from the property line.

Lynn Heath asked if the existing fence belongs to the applicant or to Mr. Ewing. Gary said he owns the fence.

Ron Roberts asked if the Ewing’s have seen the sketch plan submitted tonight. Gary said they have seen it. Ron said the letter from Mr. Ewing leads him to believe the fence will run straight across from the garage. Gary said the fence will be 18’ out from the garage and that John Ewing has been to the property to see the post holes for the proposed fence.

Chairman Coon asked if anyone else from the public wished to comment on this case.

Kenneth Boone of 235 Sunset Drive and rear neighbor to Gary Adams said he supports the request as presented because it will enhance the area.

Chairman Coon asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak. No one did. Chairman Coon declared the Public Hearing closed at 7:21 p.m. and began the review of the factors and findings. Chairman Coon reminded the Commissioners of the 2 letters submitted by the applicant.

BZA-V- 2006-03:

428 E. Willowbrook

F.

The Board shall not grant a variance unless it shall, in each case, make specific written findings of fact directly based upon the particular evidence presented to it which support all the conclusions as required by K.S.A. 12-715 as listed below:

True/ Yes

False/ No

1.

The variance requested arises from such condition which is unique to the property in question and which is not ordinarily found in  the same zoning district, and is not created by an action or actions of the property owners or the applicant;

X

2.

The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the rights of adjacent property owners or residents;

X

3.

The strict application of the provisions of these regulations from which a variance is requested will constitute unnecessary hardship upon the property owner represented in the application.

X

4.

The variance desired will not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity, or general welfare; and

X

5.

Granting the variance desired will not be opposed to the general spirit and intent of these regulations.

X

G.

In determining whether the evidence supports the conclusions required by Section 1-107(D)(1), the Board shall consider the extent to which  the evidence demonstrates that:

1.

The particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical condition of the specific property involved would result in a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship upon or for the owner, lessee, or occupant, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the provisions of these regulations were literally enforced.

Les said if it wasn’t for this house facing south, this subject area would otherwise be the rear yard where a fence would be permitted all the way to the property line.

X

2.

The request for a variance is not based exclusively upon a desire of the owner, lessee, occupant or applicant to make more money out of the property.

X

3.

The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the subject property is located, and

X

4.

The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light or air to adjacent property, substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.

X

Having considered the evidence at the hearing and determined the findings of facts have been found to exist that support the five conditions set out in Section 10-107D1 of the Zoning Regulations and K.S.A. 12-759(e) of the state statutes which are necessary for granting of a variance, I Lynn Heath move that the Chairperson be authorized to sign a resolution granting the variance for Case No. BZA-V-2006-03 as requested. David Martine seconded the motion. Motion carried 7/0.

David Martine made a motion at 7:26 p.m. to adjourn the Board of Zoning Appeals and Reconvene the Planning Commission. Lynn Heath seconded the motion. Motion carried 7/0.

Revisions to the Cornerstone Preliminary PUD Plan and the Final PUD Plan of the Cornerstone 1^st Addition.

Les Mangus explained the proposed amendments and conceptual plan to the Cornerstone PUD which provides a better connection between the east and west halves of the Cornerstone residential property. To create more defined “neighborhoods”, and add to traffic calming, the developer proposes to place a roundabout in Cornerstone Parkway (collector street) at the future intersection of another collector street, and to eliminate one of the street crossings across the floodplain in the Cornerstone 1^st Addition. The revised plan seems to create a much better flow of the collector streets without great sacrifices to keeping the houses from facing the collector streets. The Subdivision Committee has reviewed the revised plan, and suggested some adjustments as noted in the minutes of the April 11, 2006 minutes.

The proposed changes to the overall PUD layout require no formal action of the Committee at this point, but an Amended Final PUD Plan of the Cornerstone 1^st Addition will have to be reviewed and approved to implement the changes to the existing approved final plan.

Greg Allison from MKEC Engineering represented the owner to present the proposed changes to this land plan.

1. Added 2 roundabouts on collector streets added for traffic calming. These will be focal points of the development.
2. A reinforced concrete box culvert with the road on top will be eliminated across the large lake and replaced with a weir to control detention and run off.
3. Approved Preliminary PUD cul-de-sacs along Andover Road that will be moved for improved drainage throughout the residential area.
4. Increase detention capability of the pond system.
5. Round-a-bout will be central aesthetic feature which will decrease the size of the median on Andover Road. Les said he agrees with the smaller median size.
6. The 5-acre park has been moved to the east side of the plan. Greg said the park will also provide a buffer for the future commercial area.

Quentin Coon asked if the concept design would be similar for both roundabouts. Greg said yes they would be similar.

Charlotte Bass asked for the reason for the smaller median. Greg said the median would not need to be as long with the roundabouts.  Les said the shorter median is not a traffic calming device, but will functionally work better to allow better access off of the collector street into the commercial area that abuts Andover Road.

There was general discussion about the green belts in the development. Discussion continued about the entry features.

Quentin Coon asked why a pedestrian bridge could not be built across the lake instead of the weir. Greg said the banks are at 4-1 and 3-1 slope which makes it impossible to build an accessible path and it would be too expensive to build a bridge.

Ron Roberts was concerned about losing access points to the green areas. Ron said the Subdivision Committee has asked for some 25’ wide access points into the green areas and for a footpath across the lake. Discussion about park areas continued. Greg said the 5-acre public park was moved to separate it from the school.

Discussion continued about the 2 neighborhood pools to be built in this plan.

Lynn Heath asked how many of the existing trees would be lost during this construction. Greg said they intend to save as many as possible.

Lynn Heath asked if there was a way to design access to the north from the 5-acre park to the reserve area around the lake.

Rob Ramseyer representing Ritchie Development said they try hard to maintain the tree rows. He said they plan utility easements around the tree rows in order to save them. Rob said a minimum of 3, possibly 4 community pools are planned for this development.

Discussion continued about the lakes being connected under the collector streets with large culverts.

David Martine asked about the size of the lots. Rob said the green colored lots on the plan are 90’ x 140’, yellow lots are 75’ x 120’, and brown is 85’ x 130’. Rob said the average minimum lot size is over 10,000 square feet.

Quentin said he likes the sidewalk around the round-a-bout. Ron Roberts asked if the sidewalk would be 8’ wide. Greg Allison said yes it would be.

Greg Allison said this plan will be submitted at the May 16, 2006 Planning Commission meeting.

Revisions to the Cornerstone Preliminary PUD Plan and the Final PUD Plan of the Cornerstone 1^st Addition.

Review the Sketch Plan of the Prairie Creek Addition.

From Les’ memo: The proposed plan is the development of 160 acres of single family homes, 14 acres of multi-family homes, and 4 acres of neighborhood business at the corner of Prairie Creek Rd. and 13^th St. The residential plan includes the typical retention/detention ponds and a 5-acre public park site. The Subdivision Committee has reviewed the plan, and suggested some adjustments as noted in the minutes of the April 11, 2006 minutes. Staff supports the plan pending the resolution of a few detailed concerns, including the extension of off-site water, sewer, and paved streets.

Chris Rose from Baughman Co. presented this plan for the applicant. This development consists of 355 single-family lots, 27 multi-family lots, and 1 3-acre commercial lot. The developer is requesting input from the Planning Commission about this design.

David Martine asked if Parcel 3 is the commercial lot. Chris said that is correct.

Chris said a public park will be dedicated to the city within the development.

David Martine asked where the multi-family lots are located. Chris said they will be in Parcel 2 on the west side of the development.

Quentin Coon asked if the pipeline reserves can be used for foot traffic. Chris said that is the intent. Ron Roberts said the Subdivision Committee asked for 25’ access into the open areas.

David Martine asked if Reserves C, K, G, and H are lakes. Chris said yes they are.

David Martine asked if the remaining hedgerow on Prairie Creek Road would remain during construction. Chris said it will be removed during road improvements.

Chris said they have lowered the minimum square foot of the lots for an average of 12,000 square foot lots. Text has been added to show this change.

Chris said a 5’ wall easement has been added along Prairie Creek Road and 13^th Street North on the back side of the lots. The wall will be concrete or vinyl. A median entryway will be added on the 66’ collector streets. The sign will be on the wall itself and the median will be landscaped. The wall is planned to be 6’ high.

David Martine asked if there would be a sidewalk on the north side of 13^th Street. Les said the existing 10’ sidewalk on 13^th Street is on the north side and will continue. None of the properties on the south side of Prairie Creek Road are annexed into the city.

There was discussion about lining up the stub street on the west side access to Prairie Creek with the cul-de-sac across the street.

Discussion continued about a median on collector streets and 1 at the entrance ¼ mile down that line up with the north entrance to the multi-family parcel.

Lynn Heath asked if the commercial parcel would be zoned B-2 Neighborhood Business. Chris said yes it would be.  

David Martine asked about the marketing intent with all the lot sizes mixed throughout the addition. Discussion continued about lot sizes.

Quentin Coon said he thinks this design is too “cookie cutter”. He also did not like the straight runs of the streets. He understands the difficulty of designing the development around the pipelines.

Jeff Syrios said that curvilinear streets would give more of a “country feel” to the area.

David Martine asked if he would be able to vote on this project since his property abuts this development. Les said he should abstain if he has a financial interest in the subject property, or if he has a particular bias to the project.

David Martine asked if the developer is planning to market these lots to one level of income. Phil Meyer of Baughman and agent for the applicant stated this is one market with 3-6 footprints, 2-4 builders to choose from. This will be done in phases of 30- 60 lots at a time.

Jeff Syrios asked if there is an optimal preferred percent of multi-family per development. Les said every community has their own standards. Les said during research for the Comprehensive Development Plan he found out some communities have 42% multi-family homes of residential development. Here in Andover it is less than 10%. Most other communities are around 10% multi-family lots.

There was general discussion about the placement of the reserve areas which will serve the drainage plan. Quentin Coon said he liked the multi-family being in a different parcel.

Lynn Heath and Quentin Coon asked for access and connectivity of the green spaces. Ron Roberts suggested 25’ access easements dedicated to the reserve so there is no encroachment on it from houses being built next to them.

Ron Roberts said in the General Provisions, triplexes need to be allowed due to the larger lot size. Les stated in the R-3 Multi-Family Residential District, single-family one and two family dwellings, attached, are 5,000 square feet per dwelling unit, 3 and 4 family attached dwelling units 3,000 square feet per dwelling unit.

David Martine asked about the text for Parcel 1, maximum dwelling units is 355. Les said the PUD text limits the maximum number of dwelling units to what is stated in the parcel description.

Discussion continued about the wall on 13^th Street. Lynn Heath asked if there would be a wall between the single-family and multi-family parcels. Chris said yes there would be one built on the single-family side.

David Martine asked about the paving and if it would be phased as well. Phil said he would need to meet with staff to meet city requirements. He said the intent is to start in the southwest corner of the subdivision and work east and then north. Engineering issues have not all been decided. He said they plan to get a Preliminary Plat filed and ready for the May Planning Commission meeting. The intent is to phase the paving to the first collector street then continue from there.

David Martine asked if there will be monument signs with landscaping built at the collector streets. Phil said he and Chris need to meet with the developer about this issue. Discussion continued.

Review the Sketch Plan of the Prairie Creek Addition.

Annual Review of the Comprehensive Development Plan.

Members are reminded to submit comments and suggestions in writing before the May 16, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. Les said he is in process of the annual review of the Comp Plan and has noted the 2 new elementary schools, the first 5 acre park in the Cornerstone development, potential 5 acre park in the Prairie Creek Addition, Library construction in 2006-2007, Andover being included in the Wichita Area Metropolitan Planning Organization for transportation planning, and land use- preservation of natural features to take a firmer stand on the preservation of waterways and greenways, trying to make them more of a contiguous system rather than sporadic.  

Annual Review of the Comprehensive Development Plan.

Member Items:

By-Laws were included in member packets for information. Ron Roberts stated there was an amendment made to the starting time of the Planning Commission meetings. Jeff Bridges found the amended copy.

Jeff Bridges asked if there are any topics the members would like to discuss with the City Council during the joint workshop meeting on Monday, April 24, 2006 at 6:45 p.m. at the Central Park Lodge. Lynn Heath said R-1/R-2 lot size PUD versus straight zoning and B-2 restriction to 5,000 square foot maximum building size.

Quentin Coon asked if the Kellogg corridor would be part of the workshop. Jeff said with some of the projects that are in the conceptual stage, the Yorktown intersection will have to be built.

Lynn Heath asked about the YMCA. Jeff said they want to build here but they don’t know where or when.

David Martine asked when the 13^th Street paving would start. Jeff said in June.

Charlotte Bass asked if the Country Store is open for business. Les said the garden center portion is open only and can be reached off of Andover Road or off of Hwy. 54.

Ron Roberts- none

Byron Stout- none

Jeff Syrios- none

Caroline Hale- none

Member Items

David Martine made a motion to recess the meeting at 8:35 p.m. to the City Council Workshop meeting on April 24, 2006 at 6:45 p.m. at the Central Park Lodge. Byron Stout seconded the motion. Motion carried 7/0.

Adjournment

Respectfully Submitted by

__________________________

Deborah Carroll

Administrative Secretary

Approved this 23^rd day of May 2006 by the Andover City Planning Commission/ Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Andover.