MINUTES CITY COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 1, :00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PROCLAMATIONS

Transcription

1 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 1, :00 P.M. The Regular Meeting of the City Commission was held at 7:00 p.m. in the City Commission Room. Mayor Linda Morse and Commissioners Michael L. Dodson, Usha Reddi, Wynn Butler, and Jerred McKee were present. Also present were the City Manager Ron R. Fehr, Deputy City Manager Jason Hilgers, Assistant City Manager Kiel Mangus, City Attorney Katharine Jackson, City Clerk Gary S. Fees, 12 staff, and approximately 25 interested citizens. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Morse led the Commission in the Pledge of Allegiance. PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Morse proclaimed May 5, 2018, Poppy Day. Ellie Thayer, Poppy Princess, and Susan Bergsten, President, and Linda McClung, Historian, American Legion Auxiliary, were present to receive the proclamation. Mayor Morse proclaimed May 6-12, 2018, National Travel and Tourism Week. Karen Hibbard, Vice President, Manhattan Convention and Visitors Bureau; and Neal Farmer and Ben Sigle, Co-Chairs, and Dr. Kevin Roberts, Member, Manhattan Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) Steering Committee, and CVB staff were present to receive the proclamation. Mayor Morse proclaimed May 12, 2018, Letter Carrier Food Drive Day. Patrick Schnieders, Food Drive Coordinator, Branch 1018 National Association of Letter Carriers, was present to receive the proclamation.

2 Page 2 PROCLAMATIONS (CONTINUED) Mayor Morse proclaimed May 2018, Building Safety Month. Emily Koenig, President, Flint Hills American Institute of Architects, and President-Elect, Kansas American Institute of Architects; and Darren Emery, Deputy Building Official, and Ryan Courtright, Senior Plans Examiner, City of Manhattan, were present to receive the proclamation. Mayor Morse opened the public comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS Hearing no comments, Mayor Morse closed the public comments. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner McKee called attention to the Flint Hills Discovery Center (FHDC) dinosaur exhibit that would be opening soon. He said the exhibit uses virtual technology and allows you to pretend to be an actual dinosaur. Commissioner Reddi stated that the Be the Dinosaur exhibit at the FHDC will be opening on May 12, She said the Flint Hills Regional Conference will be held on May 16, 2018, at the Manhattan Conference Center with representatives from Fort Riley, Kansas State University, and others speaking on regional impacts and partnerships. She extended congratulations to the Kansas State University graduates and stated that Sunset Zoo will be offering free admission to moms on Mother s Day, May 13, She encouraged the community to sign-up for the many activities and programs with Parks and Recreation for this summer. Mayor Morse stated that May is bike month and encouraged citizens to go to the City s website for additional details. CONSENT AGENDA (* denotes those items discussed) MINUTES The Commission approved the minutes of the Regular held Tuesday, April 17, 2018.

3 Page 3 CONSENT AGENDA (CONTINUED) CLAIMS REGISTER NO The Commission approved Claims Register No authorizing and approving the payment of claims from April 11, 2018 April 24, 2018, in the amount of $2,311, LICENSE The Commission approved a Tree Maintenance License for the calendar year 2018 for Out on a Limb Tree & Home Care, 105 East Valley Street Lot 7, Wamego, Kansas. ORDINANCE NO ISSUE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS - SOUTH DELAWARE AVENUE STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS (SM1706, CIP #SW081P) The Commission approved Ordinance No authorizing the issuance of General Obligation Bonds to finance the costs of the South Delaware Avenue Stormwater (SM1706 CIP #SW081P) Improvements project. FIRST READING - AMEND - SCHOOL ZONE TIME - MANHATTAN HIGH SCHOOL WEST CAMPUS The Commission approved first reading of an ordinance amending Section of the Code of Ordinances, changing the time of the School Zone for Manhattan High School West Campus from all day to 7:15 am-8:15 am and 2:15 pm-3:15 pm, school days only. AWARD CONTRACT BLOCK ALLEY, BETWEEN RATONE STREET AND BERTRAND STREET (ST1712) The Commission accepted the Engineer s Opinion of Probable Cost in the amount of $119,649.00; and awarded and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract in the amount of $95, with Amino Brothers Company, Inc., of Kansas City, Kansas, for the 1100 block Alley Improvements between Ratone Street and Bertrand Street (ST1712) BLOCK ALLEY, BETWEEN HOUSTON STREET AND PIERRE STREET, ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS (ST1504) The Commission accepted the Engineer s Opinion of Probable Cost in the amount of $57,444.00; accepted the explanation from the City Engineer as to why the bids exceeded the Engineer s Opinion of Probable Cost; awarded and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a contract with Amino Brothers Company, Inc., of Kansas City, Kansas, for the1500 block Alley Improvements between Houston Street and Pierre Street (ST1504) project, conditioned upon a reduction of the costs associated with that project so that the benefit district funds are adequate; and in the event that condition is not met, that portion of the bid is hereby deemed rejected.

4 Page 4 CONSENT AGENDA (CONTINUED) KDOT APPLICATION - GEOMETRIC IMPROVEMENTS GRANT - US 24/TUTTLECREEK BOULEVARD AND RETAIL PLACE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS The Commission authorized City Administration to submit an application to the Kansas Department of Transportation for the Geometric Improvements (GI) Grant for improvements to the US Highway 24/Tuttle Creek Boulevard and Retail Place intersection into the Manhattan Marketplace Shopping Center KDOT APPLICATION - CITY CONNECTING LINK IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CCLIP) GRANT - FORT RILEY BOULEVARD, WESTWOOD DRIVE TO US 24 The Commission authorized City Administration to submit an application to the Kansas Department of Transportation for the City Connecting Link Improvement Program (CCLIP) Grant for improvements along Fort Riley Boulevard from Westwood Drive to US Highway 24/East Poyntz Avenue. KDOT APPLICATION - CONSOLIDATED PLANNING GRANT - MOBILITY MANUAL AND BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SYSTEMS PLAN (CIP #CD015P) The Commission authorized City Administration to collaborate with the Metropolitan Planning Organization on submission of a Kansas Department of Transportation Consolidated Planning Grant application to develop a Mobility Manual and a Bicycle and Pedestrian Systems Plan, and approved the reallocation of funds from Capital Improvement Program #CD015P, to provide the City s grant match. AIRPORT LEASE AGREEMENT - THE HERTZ CORPORATION The Commission authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an Automobile Rental Concession Lease Agreement with The Hertz Corporation at the Manhattan Regional Airport for a term of - December 31, APPLICATION EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT The Commission authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to approve an application for 2018 Emergency Solutions Grant funds in the amount of approximately $249, and execute any grant-related contracts if funding is approved. PURCHASE - TRANSFER STATION SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATION REPLACEMENT PROJECT (SS1803, CIP #WW177E) The Commission authorized City Administration to purchase a replacement lift station for the Transfer Station Sanitary Sewer Lift Station Replacement Project (SS1803, CIP #WW177E) from Smith & Loveless, Inc., of Lenexa, Kansas, in an amount of $46,967.00, to be paid from the Wastewater Fund.

5 Page 5 CONSENT AGENDA (CONTINUED) RESOLUTION NO A - DISPOSE - TRANSFER STATION SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATION The Commission approved Resolution No A authorizing the disposal of the City asset Transfer Station Sanitary Sewer Lift Station once replaced. APPOINTMENT - RILEY COUNTY LAW BOARD SEARCH COMMITTEE The Commission appointed Pat Hudgins to the Riley County Law Board Search Committee. BOARD APPOINTMENTS The Commission approved appointments by Mayor Morse to various boards and committees of the City. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Appointment of Ron Orchard, 2048 Hayes, to fill the unexpired At-Large term of Jonathan Eden. Mr. Orchard s term begins immediately and will expire on October 31, Human Rights and Services Board Re-appointment of Matthew Jepsen, 3313 Effingham, to a three-year term. Mr. Jepsen s term begins immediately and will expire March 9, Mayor Morse opened the public comments. Hearing no comments, Mayor Morse closed the public comments. Commissioner Dodson moved to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner McKee seconded the motion. On a roll call vote, motion carried 5-0. GENERAL AGENDA FIRST READING - REZONE - APPROXIMATE 19-ACRE, FIVE BLOCK AREA (R-3/M-FRO/UO, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WITH MULTI-FAMILY REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT AND UNIVERSITY OVERLAY DISTRICT, TO UCR, URBAN CORE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) John Adams, Senior Planner, presented an overview of the item. He highlighted background information on the Urban Core Residential (UCR) District, summarized key points in the findings, and provided an overview from the Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board meeting and their recommendation.

6 Page 6 GENERAL AGENDA (CONTINUED) FIRST READING - REZONE - APPROXIMATE 19-ACRE, FIVE BLOCK AREA (R-3/M-FRO/UO, MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WITH MULTI-FAMILY REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT AND UNIVERSITY OVERLAY DISTRICT, TO UCR, URBAN CORE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) (CONTINUED) After comments and questions from the Commission, John Adams, Senior Planner, responded to questions from the Commission regarding orphan lots and the proposed UCR District. He informed the Commission that this type of development has enjoyed success in college towns in the Midwest and provided examples of the Urban Core Residential District being done in other university communities. Mayor Morse opened the public comments. Hearing no comments, Mayor Morse closed the public comments. After additional discussion and comments from the Commission, Commissioner Reddi moved to approve first reading of an ordinance rezoning the 19.2-acre identified area, generally located between North Manhattan Avenue and 12 th Street, from Ratone Street to Vattier Street, plus the north half of the blocks between North Manhattan Avenue and 11 th Street and Vattier Street and Bluemont Avenue from R-3/M-FRO/UO, Multiple-Family Residential District with Multi-Family Redevelopment Overlay District and University Overlay District, to UCR, Urban Core Residential District, based on the findings in the Staff Report (See ), and the recommendation of the Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board Planning Board. Commissioner McKee seconded the motion. On a roll call vote, motion carried 5-0. RESOLUTION NO B - POLICY - MEETING PROCEDURES AND PUBLIC COMMENT GUIDELINES Kiel Mangus, Assistant City Manager, presented an overview of the item. He highlighted reasons to adopt a public meeting policy, discussed areas for public engagement, presented items unchanged from the prior public comment decorum, and highlighted changes made from the prior draft of the resolution. He then responded to questions from the Commission and clarified that work sessions would adjourn by 10:30 p.m., discussed the procedure for those wishing to speak, and highlighted the process for those wanting to provide additional information to the Commission. Katie Jackson, City Attorney, responded to questions from the Commission regarding the quorum for the City Commission and provided additional information on the proposed Resolution.

7 Page 7 GENERAL AGENDA (CONTINUED) RESOLUTION NO B - POLICY - MEETING PROCEDURES AND PUBLIC COMMENT GUIDELINES (CONTINUED) Kiel Mangus, Assistant City Manager, responded to questions from the Commission regarding presentations from developers, consultants, and project engineers. He provided additional information on the general guidelines on the process for presentations and public comments. Katie Jackson, City Attorney, provided clarification on the presentation section for public hearing and general agenda items. Ron Fehr, City Manager, informed the Commission that additional clarifying language could be added to allow broader definitions for presentations and provided examples of prior Chamber and Kansas State University presentations. After comments and questions from Mayor Morse, Katie Jackson, City Attorney, provided clarification on the public comment section for public hearings and general agenda items. She responded to additional questions on the proposed Resolution and provided clarification on Item D(2)(e). Mayor Morse opened the public comments. Michael Walter, 2921 Arbor Drive, former president of the homeowner s association for Warner Park and Arbor Heights, provided examples of past City Commission meetings where he spoke for longer than five minutes. He informed the Commission that he understood the desire to streamline meetings; however, he did not want to compromise having an interface with the community. He requested the Commission let representatives of homeowner s associations and organizations speak longer than five minutes. Richard Hill, 3513 Stagecoach Circle, representing the landlords of Manhattan, stated that he has attended Commission meetings in Overland Park and Olathe and has never been cut off from speaking more than five minutes at these two cities. He informed the Commission that he is going to speak for more than five minutes and that five minutes is not practical or an adequate amount of time. He voiced concern when the Commission is affecting his livelihood and the livelihoods of landlords, he needs more time to speak than five minutes. Hearing no other comments, Mayor Morse closed the public comments. Commissioner Butler stated that there appears to be flexibility regarding public engagement in the proposed Resolution. He asked if associations or organizations could be part of the City staff presentation.

8 Page 8 GENERAL AGENDA (CONTINUED) RESOLUTION NO B - POLICY - MEETING PROCEDURES AND PUBLIC COMMENT GUIDELINES (CONTINUED) Katie Jackson, City Attorney, said that it would be up to the City staff member to allow who to present on the item. She stated that the interpretation of the proposed Resolution is correct, and the City could add non-city presenters to an item. Kiel Mangus, Assistant City Manager, responded to questions from the Commission regarding organizations and presentations by City staff and affected parties. He provided an example of prior presentations from the rental registration program focus group discussions. Ron Fehr, City Manager, provided additional information on presentations by City staff. He stated that generally, the presentation by City staff or whoever is presenting, is providing a recommendation for action that the group is proposing for approval. He offered additional comments for the Commission to consider regarding presentations and recommendations. Commissioner Butler stated that if someone is engaged on an item, like the homeowner s association with City staff in advance, this could be on the agenda when the agenda is planned with the mayor. He stated the flexibility in the policy is already there and can have one person designated to be a spokesperson. He said the purpose of the policy is to focus the discussion on the key things. He reiterated that the flexibility is already in the policy to do so and was not advocating for changing anything in the way the policy was written. Commissioner Dodson stated that in the past, items of significant importance have come to the Commission, for example, items from the Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board and those kinds of presentations have comments from citizens who have voiced concern about a particular item. He stated in most cases, the issues are known prior to the meeting. He said that overall, the Commission is trying to achieve some equity and to make sure that every citizen has the ability to speak before the governing body and to speak in a way that they are not intimidated. He stated that it is important for citizens to have a dialog with the Commission and to balance between this and getting the business of the city done. Commissioner Reddi provided an overview of the changes made to the policy versus the policy initially prepared for the Commission s consideration. She stated the Commission also receives information from citizens and are easily accessible to the public. She said the proposed changes in the Resolution will help the Commission avoid late night decisions. She stated that she was comfortable with the changes that have been made and need to try this for a year or two and see how it works.

9 Page 9 GENERAL AGENDA (CONTINUED) RESOLUTION NO B - POLICY - MEETING PROCEDURES AND PUBLIC COMMENT GUIDELINES (CONTINUED) Commissioner McKee stated that he is more comfortable with the revised policy than the initial proposal. He provided clarification on the Resolution and stated the purpose of City Commission meetings is to conduct business and receive public information. He stated that it is imperative for him to receive information from the public to conduct business. He stated that everyone who wants to speak on an issue should be able to and said that it is reasonable to limit the amount of time that one individual should be able to speak, but not the total amount of time or total number of speakers. He voiced support for the proposed policy. Mayor Morse stated that it is easier and more user friendly the way City Commission meetings are conducted currently. She said some of the proposed changes are more rigid than we are used to and stated that we will notice that feeling as we try this. She stated she was willing to try the new policy; however, she advocated for the public to provide input and did not want to limit the public. She stated that in a democracy, constituents need to be heard. She asked if there should be more time allowed for a representative of a group. Kiel Mangus, Assistant City Manager, responded to questions from the Commission and provided information from a recent rezoning that included two homeowners association (HOA) representatives that spoke as well as individual neighbors in the HOA that spoke during public comment. He provided considerations for those HOA representatives speaking as a group and individuals also speaking on the same item. Katie Jackson, City Attorney, provided additional information on the item and informed the Commission that a person speaking, the speaker, is a group or a person. She provided an example from the City of Shawnee that created a process with a registered citizen interest group to balance the issue. She then responded to questions from the Commission and stated that if the Commission is interested in this type of policy, City staff could explore this type of policy to create citizen interest groups. Kiel Mangus, Assistant City Manager, and Ron Fehr, City Manager, provided additional information about special interest groups and the importance to validate those speaking and representing special interest groups or associations. After additional comments from the Commission, Kiel Mangus, Assistant City Manager, and Katie Jackson, City Attorney, responded to questions from the Commission. They informed the Commission that the policy is to treat those wishing to speak equally and stated that an individual can still provide a presentation in five minutes.

10 Page 10 GENERAL AGENDA (CONTINUED) RESOLUTION NO B - POLICY - MEETING PROCEDURES AND PUBLIC COMMENT GUIDELINES (CONTINUED) Commissioner Reddi provided feedback on the proposed public comment policy and stated that she wanted options for organizations wishing to speak. She stated that she did not want to be anti-public comment for Commission meetings. Kiel Mangus, Assistant City Manager, informed the Commission that if the proposed Resolution is passed, there would need to be public education on the new meeting procedure and public comment policy. Mayor Morse stated she would not support having a form similar to the USD383 form included in the packet to sign and fill out in order to speak. She said the form is a formality that she was not interested in and was not willing to go there with the City s process. After further discussion and comments, Katie Jackson, City Attorney, provided clarification on the proposed Resolution for Item C-3, the adjournment time for nonlegislative meetings by 10:30 p.m. Also, based on comments from the Commission, she suggested the first bullet point on Item C-4(a)(iii) could be changed with the motion to read that the presentation by City staff and/or other listed presenters, or their designees, on the agenda item. Ron Fehr, City Manager, provided additional clarification and information regarding adding language to include, or their designees, with listed presenters. After discussion and comments from the Commission, Commissioner Dodson moved to approve Resolution No B, as amended by the reading of the City Attorney, setting meeting procedures and public comment guidelines for the City of Manhattan. Commissioner Reddi seconded the motion. On a roll call vote, motion carried 5-0. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERLY UPDATE Eddie Eastes, Director of Parks and Recreation, provided an overview of the Parks and Recreation Department. He highlighted the Department s community outreach, engagement and impact; discussed major projects and timelines for indoor recreation facilities; and highlighted the community-driven projects including the Peace Memorial Auditorium Renovations, the Johnny Kaw Plaza, and the Bluemont Hill Scenic Overlook Platform.

11 Page 11 GENERAL AGENDA (CONTINUED) PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT QUARTERLY UPDATE (CONTINUED) Randi Clifford, Director of Recreation, presented an overview of various recreation activities and events. He highlighted new recreation programs and the waterparks schedule for He then responded to questions from the Commission regarding the increased number of tournaments at Anneberg Park due to the new playing surface and discussed advertising and marketing efforts to attract seasonal employees for the pools and other recreational activities. Casey Smithson, Park Superintendent, provided an overview of the Parks Division including Forestry, City Parks, Cemeteries, Horticulture, and Park Maintenance. He also provided information on activities, renovations, and projects. Wyatt Thompson, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation, provided an overview of trails available in the community. He highlighted major projects in the planning, design, and construction phases as well as future projects. Susan Adams, Flint Hills Discovery Center (FHDC) Director, provided an update on the FHDC and the number of guests in 2017; highlighted recent grants received; and discussed donations, sponsorships and the proposed changes with the 2019 Budget. She also highlighted the 2018 exhibits and events at the FHDC. After comments from the Commission, Ron Fehr, City Manager, responded to questions from the Commission regarding the proposal to transfer Transient Guest Tax funds to Anneberg Park improvements. He stated this item would be discussed with the Commission during the 2019 budget proposal. Scott Shoemaker, Sunset Zoo Director, highlighted the parking lot expansion project currently underway and the Zoo Strategic Master Plan. He also provided the 2018 special events schedule and provided an update on the Expedition Asia exhibit. Eddie Eastes, Director of Parks and Recreation, provided an overview of the quarterly update. He responded to questions from the Commission regarding comparative data to provide in the future on the number of tournaments and participants utilizing Parks and Recreation facilities, both before and after improvements, as well as data for the pools and recreation programs. Mayor Morse opened the public comments. Hearing no comments, Mayor Morse closed the public comments. As this was a discussion item, the Commission took no formal action.

12

13 Page 13 Staff Report To: From: REZONING Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board John Adam, Senior Planner Hearing Date: April 16, 2018 Re: Applicant: Property Owner: Property Address: Total Area: Rezoning a 19-acre (5-block) area from R-3/M- FRO/UO to UCR along North Manhattan Avenue. City of Manhattan Various Area lies between N. Manhattan Ave. & 12th St., from Ratone St. to Vattier St., plus the north half of the blocks between N. Manhattan Ave. & 11th St. and Vattier St. & Bluemont Ave acres Date of Neighborhood Meeting: February 12, 2018 Date of Public Notice Publication: March 26, 2018 Date of City Commission: April (1st reading); May 15, 2018 (2nd)

14 Page 14 General location map n 1 inch = 600 feet

15 Page 15 BACKGROUND The 2035 Comprehensive Plan introduced the idea of higher-density development in proximity to the university campus. The Urban Core Residential designation is intended primarily to provide opportunities for university-oriented student housing in core area neighborhoods on identified blocks adjacent to the east side of the KSU campus where neighborhood services and amenities are in close proximity (Comp. Plan, p. 46). City Administration drafted standards and specifications for the district in 2014, holding meetings with developers and architects, property owners, and the general public. The district was adopted by Ordinance No on June 6, Staff evaluated the impacts of development on public utilities before considering this rezoning action. REVIEW OF MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED AND STAFF FINDINGS The following items will help to determine if the specific property is suitable for the rezoning request. These are the 13 matters to consider when rezoning as found in Section A. Whenever the Planning Board or the Governing Body acts upon a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that is not a general revision of existing regulations and affects specific property, they shall address the following matters: 1. The existing use of property Residential uses of various densities and institutional uses. Staff Findings The property is being used according to current zoning allowances. 2. The physical and environmental characteristics of the property The rezoning area is generally flat and rises gently toward the north end, but there is no topographic variety otherwise. Staff Findings There are no topographic features that affect the question of rezoning. 3. The zoning and land uses of nearby properties North R-3/M-FRO/UO, Multiple-Family Residential with Multi-Family Redevelopment & University Overlays. Single-family houses converted to apartments.

16 Page 16 South R-3/M-FRO, Multiple-Family Residential with Multi-Family Redevelopment Overlay, and PUD, Planned Unit Development. Singlefamily houses converted to apartments, apartment buildings, and midrise condominium apartment buildings. East R-3/M-FRO, Multiple-Family Residential with Multi-Family Redevelopment Overlay. Single-family houses, single-family houses converted to apartments, and apartment buildings. West U, University. Campus of Kansas State University. Staff Findings This area sits along the seam of three different kinds of areas: commercial, residential, and institutional. 4. The suitability of the property for land uses to which it is restricted under current zoning The area has been used for low- and medium-density urban development for over a century. Current zoning restricts uses to housing single-family, townhome, twofamily, and multi-family at a density limit of one dwelling unit per 1,000 square feet of lot (43 dwelling units per net acre). The area has been zoned for multiplefamily development since 1925, with a brief exception noted below under zoning history. Staff Findings The area appears to be suitable for its current zoning. That is not to say it would not also be suitable for rezoning. As noted in the previous consideration, this area lies along the juncture of different kinds of use districts, which was why it emerged as a prime candidate for UCR zoning in the development of the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The character of the neighborhood The existing mix of uses include single-family and multi-family residential and commercial uses of various ages. North Manhattan Avenue, a major collector street, bounds the area on the west, separating it from the KSU campus. To its east the pattern of development is identical to the subject area. Staff Findings This area is an edge, a transition opportunity zone between areas of two very different characters, which is why the UCR district was created.

17 Page The compatibility of the proposed zoning district with nearby properties and the extent to which it may detrimentally affect those properties There are primarily two adjacent zoning districts: University (U) and Multiple-Family Residential/Multi-Family Redevelopment Overlay (R-3/M-FRO). On the south side are PUD developments for apartment buildings and for a hotel. The hotel and the Campus Bridge Lofts are on the same scale as the UCR and served as conceptual models for the district. The M-FRO to the east is piece by piece converting to higher densities. UCR is much higher density. Both districts were purposefully designed to be placed near the university, which is the land use creating the housing demand that both districts are meant to accommodate. Proximity to the University is a positive attribute for this zoning district. To the east the density tapers off in degrees to avoid putting non-compatible zoning districts adjacent to one another. Staff Findings The proposed rezoning is compatible and will not have any detrimental effects on nearby properties. 7. The conformance of the requested change to the adopted Comprehensive Plan for the City of Manhattan. (If the proposed amendment is in accordance with said Comprehensive Plan, it shall be presumed to be reasonable) The proposed rezoning area is indicated on the Future Land Use map of the 2035 Manhattan Area Comprehensive Plan as Urban Core Residential (UCR) (see map at Exhibit 3). Policies of the UCR category follow. UCR-1: Characteristics The Urban Core Residential designation is intended primarily to provide opportunities for university-oriented student housing in core area neighborhoods on identified blocks adjacent to the east side of the KSU Campus where neighborhood services and amenities are in close proximity. However, other opportunities for urban apartments/condominiums exist in the Downtown. Urban Core Residential developments should incorporate streetscape amenities; including wider sidewalks and landscaping that enhance pedestrian walkability and safety. UCR-2: Appropriate Density Range/Building Height Densities for Urban Core Residential will typically be as much as 100 dwelling units per net acre or more. Building heights will be mid-to-high rise and will typically range from five to eight stories.

18 Page 18 UCR-3: Location Urban Core Residential uses are intended to be concentrated in areas adjacent to the KSU Campus, but may also be appropriate as part of the Central Core District in Downtown. UCR-4: Accessory Uses Encourage the integration of neighborhood serving retail uses (e.g., drycleaners, coffee shop) on the ground level of Urban Core Residential buildings where viable, typically in areas with high visibility and pedestrian/bicycle activity. UCR-5: Design Standards Develop design standards tailored to address the unique characteristics of Urban Core Residential uses full lot coverage, structured parking, taller heights and increased visibility from multiple vantage points recognizing that the urban character of these uses will demand a flexible approach to ensure densities can be achieved. In general, place the greatest emphasis on the design at the street level to retain a pedestrian-oriented character. Avoid plain, monolithic structures or blank walls on the backs or sides of buildings and incorporate high quality exterior materials. UCR-6: Parking Location and Design Integrate structured parking garages and screened tuck-under parking with the overall design of the building they are intended to serve. The incorporation of active uses, such as retail, into the ground floor of freestanding parking structures included as part of multi-block developments is strongly encouraged where viable based on market demand and visibility. UCR-7: Pedestrian and Bicycle Orientation Provide clear pedestrian and bicycle connections with generous sidewalk widths and low-level lighting in areas with high pedestrian and bicycle activity to increase public safety and connectivity. Provide secure bicycle parking for residents that is integrated with the overall design of the building, typically in the form of a storage room that is accessed from building common areas or an exterior entrance. Staff Findings The proposed rezoning conforms to the Future Land Use Map and to the Land Use Policies of the Comprehensive Plan.

19 Page The zoning history of the subject property and the length of time it has remained vacant as zoned The lots in these blocks date back to the original plat of the city. Prior to zoning the lots were developed apparently exclusively with single-family dwellings. Some of those dwellings or lots have converted to other uses (offices and education-related establishments) while some have been converted to multi-family dwellings. The area has been zoned, for the most part, for apartment buildings since In 1940 the area between Ratone Street to the alley north of Thurston Street (i.e., the northern block and a half) was rezoned to A, One-Family. In 1964 it was changed to B, Multiple Family while the area south of it up to Bluemont Avenue became the newly created B-1, Multiple Family, which allowed 65-foot-tall apartment buildings at a density limit of one dwelling unit per 700 square feet of lot (62 D.U./acre). The current R-3 zoning designation was applied to the whole area in 1969, reducing the potential density again to 43 units per acre. In 1987 the area was downzoned to R-2 and R-M, then upzoned between 2003 and 2005 to its current designations. All lots but one currently have development on them and have had so for decades. Staff Findings The subject area is not vacant and has been a multi-family district since zoning existed in Manhattan. 9. Whether the proposed district would be consistent with the intent and purpose of these regulations The purpose of the Manhattan Zoning Regulations includes: dividing the City into zones and districts; regulating and restricting the location and use of buildings and the uses of land within each district; protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; protecting property values; and regulating and restricting the height, number of stories and size of buildings, the density of population, and the appearance of buildings ( 2-101). The proposed district is designed to create a higher-density area in an optimal location from a transportation and land use proximity perspective. The district regulates height, placement, appearance, and density. The aesthetic controls address personal safety through lighting and transparency requirements, and they are intended to protect and enhance the livability and value of the immediate area and the community as a whole.

20 Page 20 Regarding property values, this rezoning will have some unpredictable results. It is possible some land owners will enjoy an immediate windfall profit. It is possible the zoning will not be used for many years. It is possible that some lots will be orphaned, so to speak, by their location and surrounding circumstances: a single Wardstandard lot cannot redevelop on its own because there is a minimum development size requirement of 15,000 square feet. This standard is necessitated by the intent of the district: to provide for high-density multiple-family development with accessory neighborhood-scale retail and services designed to serve the surrounding area, with a residential density of no less than...58 dwelling units per acre (Sec ). Staff analysis of development scenarios concluded that it is not possible to achieve even the minimum density and to meet minimum parking requirements and screening requirements (on corner lots) on a 7,500-square-foot lot. It is difficult to do so on even a 15,000-square-foot lot. This zoning district will change the face of these blocks over time, but only if its density potential is protected from underdevelopment. Corner lots that are next to relatively new apartment buildings or buildings with a greater number of units may not have interested buyers until the market for midrise development is strong enough to warrant buying and razing that newer apartment building. In those cases they would be orphaned until there is a strong market, which could be a few years or several years. Until then, they would not be able to develop the property beyond its current use. Nevertheless, property valuation for tax purposes will likely rise over time as interested buyers, who are trying to collect enough lots to develop as they envision, bid up the price of land in the district. It will take some time perhaps years before property owners see changes in valuation because the County Appraiser will need several data points (i.e., comparables) to determine that valuations in the area are going up. Some properties may not immediately enjoy the full windfall or realize the full potential of their zoning; according to the Riley County Appraiser s Office this is an experience common to the area now. The office receives between 30 and 50 appeals annually from owners of property in the area east and southeast of campus. The rationalization for an adjustment on these values is made on a caseby-case basis, though county appraisers have been willing to yield to appeals in the past when properties were reasonably orphaned and/or undevelopable. Balancing the numerous possible consequences of the rezoning has to account for the possibility that a few lots may not be able to redevelop for years because of orphaning. But the overarching purpose of zoning is protection of the general welfare: the proposed rezoning will have a positive impact on the community by

21 Page 21 making available a new by-right zoning district that allows a development product till now only achievable through a planned unit development process. It has the potential to transform the area into a more populous and vibrant place, utilizing existing infrastructure and reducing sprawl. Staff Findings The proposed zoning district is consistent with the intent and purpose of the zoning ordinance. 10. The relative gain to the public health, safety, and welfare that denial of the request would accomplish, compared with the hardship imposed upon the applicant that would result from denial A failure to rezone will mean a continuation of the current levels and types of development, which have been largely the same since 1925, when the area was first zoned B, Second Dwelling House, a district that permitted single-family homes, apartments, boarding houses, and fraternities and sororities. Despite that long history of greater densification ability for land owners, there are still quite a few under-developed lots. A change as dramatic as the UCR could be the catalyst to spur the kind of renewal the Comprehensive Plan envisioned. No change would have a null effect: the public the applicant in this case as represented by the City would not suffer particular hardship. The area would continue to remain static or redevelop at a moderate density, and another location could be found to apply the UCR district. Staff Findings There would be no relative gain to the public health, safety, and welfare if this request is denied, but neither would there be pronounced hardship to the public as applicant. 11. Whether adequate sewer and water facilities, streets, and other needed public services exist, or can be provided, or serve the uses that would be permitted by the proposed zoning district The new district will increase demands on streets and utilities. Public Works has examined build-out scenarios including a maximum build-out and determined that utilities can handle the additional load. Stormwater: the increase in impervious surface will not appreciably increase the watershed s total production (i.e., a 20% increase in 2% of the watershed). Public Works anticipates long-term upgrades downstream as a result of growth in general; their analysis of the UCR s impact did not sharpen that anticipation.

22 Page 22 Water: water flows are adequate to serve the increased density. Individual buildings may need to add pumps to maintain residential service pressure for upper floors of new buildings. Sanitary sewer: adequate to handle the growth. Streets will take on additional traffic, but the system has capacity. In this case, however, proximity to the university will result in less vehicular trip generation because other modes are viable alternatives. Staff Findings Adequate sewer and water facilities, streets, and other needed public services currently exist to serve all permitted uses of the proposed zoning district. 13. Such additional matters as may apply in individual circumstances There are no other applicable factors. 14. The recommendations of permanent or professional staff In the past ninety years of multi-family zoning, this area has really not changed a great deal. The permitted density of the UCR district is meant as an incentive to redevelop the properties in the proposed district; the clear expectation is that those blocks, wholly or in large part, will be razed and redeveloped over the next several years by parties who acquire the individual lots. The single-family/multi-family nature of the area will eventually be replaced by large mid-rise housing with structured parking. To avoid a hodge-podge of quality and massing, the new district requires a minimum density and has design controls to create visual and spatial interest, especially at the pedestrian level. The intent of the City in creating the district is to effect such a change in order to create greater housing opportunities close to campus and services, thereby reducing reliance on the automobile and promoting greater health. This area is an ideal spot to open up to the kind of housing market that has had great interest and success in the Midwest for the past several years, to capture some of the apartment growth that is happening out on the edges of the city and bring in to where shopping, school, and entertainment are, where the infrastructure is already in place and waiting to be more efficiently utilized. Although the rental market is soft now, it will not always be so. With NBAF coming on line in a few years, it would be better to be ready ahead of that demand.

23 Page 23 Staff Conclusion Based on the findings in this report, City Administration recommends approval of the proposed rezoning. ALTERNATIVES 1. Recommend approval of the proposed rezoning of approximately 19 acres generally comprising a single tier of blocks east of North Manhattan Avenue between Ratone Street and Vattier Street from R-3/M-FRO/UO, Multiple-Family Residential District with Multi-Family Redevelopment & University Overlays, to UCR, Urban Core Residential District, based upon the findings in the staff report. If your approval is also based upon evidence presented at the hearing, or other evidence, that should be stated as part of your vote. 2. Recommend denial of the proposed rezoning, stating the specific reasons for denial based upon the factors set forth herein. 3. Table the proposed rezoning to a specific date for specifically stated reasons. POSSIBLE MOTION The Manhattan Urban Area Planning Board recommend approval of the proposed rezoning of the identified area along North Manhattan Avenue from R-3/M-FRO/UO, Multiple-Family Residential District with Multi-Family Redevelopment & University Overlays, to UCR, Urban Core Residential District, based upon the findings in the staff report. Prepared by: John Adam, Senior Planner Date: April 10, 2018 Enclosures 1. Proposed rezoning area 2. Existing zoning 3. Future Land Use Map from the Comprehensive Plan 4. UCR regulations (Sec of the Zoning Regulations)

24 1. Proposed Rezoning Area

25 Page Existing zoning

26 Page Future Land Use Map (excerpt) from Comprehensive Plan UCR area

27 Page UCR regulations (Sec of the Zoning Regulations) UCR. Urban Core Residential District. The UCR District is designed to provide for highdensity multiple-family development with accessory neighborhood-scale retail and services designed to serve the surrounding area, with a residential density of no less than one dwelling unit per 750 square feet of lot area (58 dwelling units per acre). The UCR District permits accessory neighborhood commercial uses within residential buildings, as well as single-use, high-density residential buildings. The district is intended to promote a development pattern characteristic of denser, pedestrian-oriented urban neighborhoods. Purpose and Objectives. The objectives of the UCR District are to promote: A livable urban environment in close proximity to Kansas State University and Aggieville; Viable mixed-use buildings with small-scale, neighborhood-serving accessory commercial uses; Physical design characteristics that create a vibrant, bicycle- and pedestrianoriented neighborhood with a dynamic relationship to adjacent streets; Improved health and well-being of residents by encouraging walking, biking, and community interaction through building design and land use patterns and; Increased safety and security through high-quality design and lighting. A. Permitted Primary Use (1) Multiple-Family dwellings. B. Permitted Accessory Uses (1) Art, film, music and photography studios. (2) Business and professional offices. (3) Churches, chapels, temples and synagogues. (4) Food, beverage, and drug stores. (5) Group day care centers and nursery schools.

28 Page 28 (6) Health and fitness clubs. (7) Personal services (8) Restaurants. (9) Retail shops. (10) Walk-up automated teller machines (ATMs). C. Accessory Use Limitations: The following shall apply to all accessory uses. (1) Accessory uses shall be subordinate to residential uses within the same building. (2) Accessory uses shall be limited to the ground floor. (3) The total gross floor area of all accessory uses within a single building shall not exceed 25% of the gross building floor area, or 15,000 square feet, whichever is less. (4) All accessory uses shall front on North Manhattan Avenue. (5) Prohibited Uses: (a) (b) Drive-in or drive-up uses. Sale of cereal malt beverages, wine, or alcoholic liquor for the consumption on or off the premises. (6) All business, service, storage and display of goods shall be conducted within a completely enclosed building; excluding walk-up automated teller machines, outdoor dining areas accessory to restaurants, sidewalk signs, and temporary merchandise displays located in the spill-out zone. D. Lot Size Requirements (1) Minimum Lot Area: 15,000 square feet. (2) Minimum Lot Width: 100 feet. (3) Minimum Lot Depth: 150 feet.

29 Page 29 E. Bulk Regulations (1) Maximum Structure Height: 85 feet. (2) Minimum Structure Height: 30 feet measured at the vertical façade plane at the top of the building. (3) Yard requirements (a) Minimum Front Yard: 10 feet along North Manhattan Avenue; and 5 feet along any other public street, except that: Access ramps, architectural ornamentation, awnings and canopies, balconies, bay windows, porticos, steps leading to a basement or an upper floor, signs, stoops, street furnishings, roof eaves, fences, and walls not forming part of the building s exterior envelope shall be set back a minimum of 4 feet along North Manhattan Avenue and 0 feet along any other public street. (b) (c) (d) Minimum Side Yard: 5 feet. Minimum Rear Yard: None. No minimum setback shall be required from a lot line abutting an alley, provided applicable vision triangles are maintained as identified below. (4) Maximum Lot Coverage: No maximum. (5) Minimum Residential Density: One dwelling unit per 750 square feet of lot area (58 DU/acre). (6) Minimum Vision Triangles (a) (b) (a) Intersection of two public streets: 15 feet. Alley or private drive intersecting a sidewalk or public street: 15 feet. Private drive intersecting an alley: 10 feet. F. Site Design Standards. The development or redevelopment of any property within this District, prior to, or as a part of, the issuance of any building permit, shall comply with the following design standards:

30 Page 30 (1) Street Trees: Trees shall not be removed from the public right-of-way except under unique circumstances as approved by the City Forester. Any tree that is removed from the public right-of-way shall be replaced by the property owner in the public right-of-way at a location and with a species and at a caliper approved by the City Forester. (2) Pedestrian Easements: As to any lot abutting North Manhattan Avenue, the City shall have acquired a pedestrian easement, up to 4 feet in width, adjoining and running parallel along the entire length of the property line abutting North Manhattan Avenue to be able to construct a wider sidewalk. The City, in its sole discretion, may waive or delay the requirements of this subparagraph. (3) Spill-Out Zone: Ground areas located between a street-facing building façade and a property line that are not in a pedestrian easement shall consist of 30% landscaping (as defined in this Section). Spill-out zone pavement materials abutting the pedestrian easement shall contrast in color and/or texture to delineate private space from the public pedestrian easement. (4) Wall and Fence Standards. (a) (b) (c) Walls and fences located between a street-facing building façade and a property line or pedestrian easement shall be no taller than 36 inches above the nearest adjacent sidewalk, provided applicable vision triangles are maintained. No setback shall be required for walls or fences along an alley, provided applicable vision triangles are maintained. Walls and fences located between a street-facing building façade and a property line or pedestrian easement shall be composed of brick, stone, ornamental metal, and/or textured and integrally colored masonry corresponding to the exterior stone and/or brick of the principal building. (5) Dumpster Screening: Trash and recycling dumpster areas that are not located within a building shall be screened from public view with a sightobscuring masonry wall at least six feet in height, incorporating metal sightobscuring gates.