new urban planning and land use - wyandotte county,...

#RW-2017-11 and #PR-2017-37 November 13, 2017 1

Urban Planning and Land Use

701 North 7th Street, Room 423 Phone: (913) 573-5750 Kansas City, Kansas 66101 Fax: (913) 573-5796 Email: [email protected] www.wycokck.org/planning To: City Planning Commission From: City Staff Date: November 13, 2017 Re: Vacation Petition #RW-2017-11 and Plan Review Petition #PR-

2017-37 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Wil Anderson and Daniel Snead Status of Applicant: Representatives BHC Rhodes 712 State Avenue Kansas City, KS 66101 Requested Action: Approval of Vacation of Right-of-Way and Final Plan Review Date of Applications: August 25, 2017 Purpose: To vacate right-of-way to close access on South Bethany Street to build three (3) BPU buildings Property Location: 342 South Bethany Street

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.wycokck.org/planning


Existing Zoning: R-1(B) Single Family and M-2 General Industrial Districts Existing Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1(B) Single Family District

South: None (Interstate 70) East: R-1(B) Single Family District West: R-1(B) Single Family District Existing Uses: North: Single family homes

South: Interstate 70 East: Single family homes West: Undeveloped land Neighborhood Characteristics: The character of the neighborhood is dominated by the Board of Public Utilities buildings and facilities. Their compound is bordered by single family homes to the north and Interstate 70 to the south. Total Tract Size: .54 acre Master Plan Designation: The City-Wide Master Plan designates this property as Public/Semi-Public. Major Street Plan: South Bethany Street is classified as a local street. Advertisement: Wyandotte Echo – September 14, 2017

Letters to Property Owners – Vacation: September 14, 2017 and September 27 and Plat: September 14, 2017 and September 27, 2017

Public Hearing: November 13, 2017 Public Opposition: None to date PROPOSAL Detailed Outline of Requested Action: The applicants, Wil Anderson and Daniel Snead with BHC Rhodes on behalf of the operator, Board of Public Utilities have submitted two applications. Mr. Anderson wants to vacate a portion of South Bethany Street in order to build a guard house, establishing a control checkpoint for the BPU facility. Mr. Snead filed a plan review to construct three (3) buildings, a guard house for site access, a hydrant building to repair and maintain fire hydrants and a pipe supply building to protect PVC pipes from solar degradation. City Ordinance Requirements: Article XXI Sections 27-502 – 27-709 and K.S.A. 12-504 to 12-506 and 12-512b and Article VIII Sections 27-340 – 27-765


FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED

1. Neighborhood character. The character of the neighborhood is dominated by the Board of Public Utilities buildings and facilities. Their compound is bordered by single family homes to the north and Interstate 70 to the south.

2. The extent to which the proposed use would increase the traffic or parking demand in ways that would adversely affect road capacity, safety, or create parking problems.

The proposed use should not increase the traffic or parking demand. By vacating a portion of South Bethany and constructing a guard house and new buildings, the flow of vehicles in and out of the property will be controlled and monitored.

3. The degree of conformance of the proposed use to the Master Plan. The proposed use conforms to the Master Plan.

4. Development of such character that it can be used safely without

danger to health, or peril from fire, flood, erosion, excessive noise or other adversity.

Development is of such character that is can be used safely without danger to health, or peril from fire, flood, erosion, excessive noise or other adversity.

5. The extent to which utilities and public services are available and

adequate to serve the proposed use.

a. Water service

Available

b. Sanitary sewer service

Available

c. Storm water control

To be designed to meet City Code

d. Police

Police service provided by the East Patrol, District #114


e. Fire

Fire service provided by Station #9

f. Transit

Kansas City ATA does not provide transit service near this property.

g. Schools

Kansas City, Kansas USD 500

6. Streets are designed so as to provide a safe, convenient and functional

system for vehicular traffic, and having such width, gradient, location and structural quality as to accommodate prospective traffic as determined by existing and probable future land and building uses.

Streets are designed to provide a safe, convenient and functional system for vehicular traffic and having such width, gradient, location and structural quality as to accommodate prospective traffic as determined by existing and probable future land and building uses.

7. Assurance that buildings, lots, blocks, parcels and streets are so

arranged as to afford adequate light, open space or air, to facilitate fire protection, and to provide for long-term sustained real estate values.

Buildings and lots are so arranged as to afford adequate light, open space or air, to facilitate fire protection, and to provide for long-term sustained real estate values.

8. Development patterns are designed with due regard to topography, so

that the natural features of the land and vegetation shall be protected and enhanced.

This is not applicable. 9. Adequate sites are provided for schools, parks, playgrounds, and

other community services so that residents of all neighborhoods shall have convenient access to such facilities.

This is not applicable.

10. Vacation will not create utility conflicts.

The vacation will not create any utility conflicts.


11. The capability of the proposed use to meet applicable ordinance and other requirements.

The proposed use is capable of meeting applicable ordinance and other requirements.

KEY ISSUES None

STAFF COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS Urban Planning and Land Use Comments:

1. Subject to approval, a $50.00 rezoning ordinance publication fee shall be submitted to the Urban Planning and Land Use Department immediately following the Board of Commissioners meeting.

2. With the proposed building addition and site expansion, what is the intended use of this BPU facility compound?

Applicant Response: The use of the property is unchanged. The improvements will provide better storage capabilities and site access.

3. Will the three buildings be constructed in phases, or will all of them be built at the same time?

Applicant Response: The project is anticipated to be built within one year period in two phases.

4. Since the guard house is adjacent to a single family residence, what are the hours of operation of the facility and will the guard shack be manned during those hours? Will there be speakers for site communication?

Applicant Response: The guard house will have 24 hour operation. Speakers should not be required as guards are to greet visitors and deliveries.

5. Are the majority of the parking stalls between the three buildings for employees or for fleet vehicles? Based on the 57 parking spaces between the two park areas, 3 accessible stalls are required.

Applicant Response: The overall number of employees remains unchanged. Parking will be a mix of employee and fleet vehicles.

6. The 6’ privacy fence between the single family homes to the north and the BPU facility shall have masonry columns every 32’.

Applicant Response: A masonry encased column is anticipated.


7. A light cut sheet was provided, but a photometric plan was not. All lighting, whether installed in the parking lot or mounted on a building shall have 90 degree cutoff fixtures. Any light or combination of lights that cast light on adjacent residentially zoned property shall not exceed one footcandle as measured from said property line. Applicant Response: A photometric plan for the only proposed outdoor light has been provided in the latest resubmittal dated September 20, 2017. Footcandle measurements are given and meet the above criteria.

Public Works Comments: Vacation: A) Items that require plan revision or additional documentation before engineering can

recommend approval: 1) None

B) Items that are conditions of approval (stipulations): 1) The storm line upstream of MH 059-098 shall be a private line and maintained by

BPU. Plans submitted for construction permit shall show this line as a private line.

2) The County Surveyor may make separate technical review of right-of-way vacation exhibit, and submits comments directly to the preparer of the vacation documents. If approved, provide revised right-of-way vacation and exhibit(s) in accordance with County Surveyor comments.

3) Construction plans shall meet UG standards and criteria, and shall be reviewed and approved by UG prior to construction permit acquisition.

4) From field investigations and meetings, there are private sanitary sewer lines combined with storm drainage lines on the BPU site. These are considered “illicit discharges”, and BPU shall separate storm drainage and sanitary sewer lines and coordinate with Public Works and Water Pollution Control departments for review, inspection, and approvals.

C) Comments that are not critical to engineering’s recommendations for this specific submittal, but may be helpful in preparing future documents: 1) None

Plan Review: A) Items that require plan revision or additional documentation before engineering can

recommend approval: 1) None

B) Items that are conditions of approval (stipulations): 1) The storm drainage lines and manholes upstream of MH 059-098 shall be a

private line and maintained by BPU. Plans submitted for construction permit shall remove the note regarding a utility easement dedication and shall show the storm drainage system as a private line.

2) Construction plans shall meet UG standards and criteria, and shall be reviewed and approved by UG prior to construction permit acquisition.


3) From field investigations and meetings, there are private sanitary sewer lines combined with storm drainage lines on the BPU site. These are considered “illicit discharges”, and BPU shall separate storm drainage and sanitary sewer lines and coordinate with Public Works and Water Pollution Control departments for review, inspection, and approvals.

C) Comments that are not critical to engineering’s recommendations for this specific submittal, but may be helpful in preparing future documents: 1) None

STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS

Staff recommends that the City Planning Commission make the findings contained within the staff report related to Factors to be Considered, and Key Issues and recommends APPROVAL of Vacation Petition #RW-2017-11 and Petition #PR-2017-37 subject to all comments and suggestions outlined in this staff report.

ATTACHMENTS Applicant Response Letter Vacation Exhibit Site Plan Grading Plan Utility Plan Landscape Plan Building Elevations Site Photographs REVIEW OF INFORMATION AND SCHEDULE Action Planning Commission Unified Government Commission Public Hearing November 13, 2017 November 30, 2017 Vacation Public Hearing November 13, 2017 Not required Plan Review STAFF CONTACT: Byron Toy, AICP [email protected] MOTIONS Vacation: I move the Kansas City, Kansas City Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of Petition #RW-2017-11 to the Unified Government Board of Commissioners as meeting all the requirements of the City code and being in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare subject to such modifications as are necessary to resolve to the satisfaction of City Staff all comments contained in the Staff Report; and the following additional requirements of the Kansas City, Kansas City Planning Commission:

mailto:[email protected]


1._________________________________________________________; 2. _____________________________________________________; And 3. ________________________________________________________. OR I move the Kansas City, Kansas City Planning Commission recommend DENIAL of Petition #RW-2017-11, to the Unified Government Board of Commissioners as they are not in compliance with the City Ordinances and as it will not promote the public health, safety and welfare of the City of Kansas City, Kansas; and other such reasons that have been mentioned. Plan Review: I move the Kansas City, Kansas City Planning Commission APPROVE Petition #PR-2017-37 as meeting all the requirements of the City code and being in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare subject to such modifications as are necessary to resolve to the satisfaction of City Staff all comments contained in the Staff Report; and the following additional requirements of the Kansas City, Kansas City Planning Commission: 1._________________________________________________________; 2. _____________________________________________________; And 3. ________________________________________________________. OR I move the Kansas City, Kansas City Planning Commission DENY Petition #PR-2017-37, as it is not in compliance with the City Ordinances and as it will not promote the public health, safety and welfare of the City of Kansas City, Kansas; and other such reasons that have been mentioned.


Figure 1. Photograph of South Bethany looking north (provided by the applicant).


Figure 2. Site photograph of South Bethany looking northeast (provided by the applicant).


Figure 3. Site photograph of the adjoining property to the north, looking west (provided by the applicant).

new urban planning and land use - wyandotte county,...

Documents