Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

Monday, October 4, 2004

 

Chair Jack Hausmann called the regular meeting of the Wayne Planning Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, October 4, 2004, in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building.  Roll call was taken with the following members present:  Don Endicott, Vicki Pick, Marie Mohr, Kyle Nelson, Bill Reeg, Randy Brenner, Sharon Braun, Chair Jack Hausmann, and Chief Inspector/Planner George Ellyson.  Absent:  Darrell Miller.

 

Motion made by Commissioner Braun and seconded by Commissioner Reeg to approve the minutes of the Monday, August 2, 2004 meeting as presented.  Chair Hausmann stated the motion and second.  All were in favor; motion carried unanimously.

 

Commissioner Miller arrived at 7:35 p.m.

 

Chair Hausmann stated that the order of the agenda items would be changed.

 

Inspector Ellyson updated the Commission on the proposed Chapter 90 Zoning amendments.  A meeting held last week with representatives of the Landlord Association, City Attorney, Lowell Johnson, and himself, resulted in the outcome that more clarity needs to be given to the proposed amendments.  Therefore nothing was placed in the agenda in regards to the proposed amendments other than the update.  Inspector Ellyson stated that hopefully he will have the opportunity to get the proposed changes updated and sent to the attorney for review and another meeting held with the Landlord Association representatives before the amendments are presented at a public hearing.

 

Chair Hausmann then moved onto the next agenda item, the discussion and presentation regarding mobile home courts, presented by Robert Woehler of Woehler Trailer Courts.

 

Robert Woehler, 1910 Centennial Road, was present to discuss the moving permit ordinance specifically 2000-11.

 

BJ Woehler, 1910 Centennial Road, was present to discuss the moving permit ordinance.  His main issue was establishing criteria for moving mobile homes into Wayne.

 

Chair Hausmann asked if Inspector Ellyson had any specific questions.  Inspector Ellyson questioned what type of guidelines, as nothing was put in writing.  Are they addressing the 1979 homes that were built with HUD guidelines?  What verifies that those homes are still adequate, that they still meet the egress standards, that they have smoke detectors, all of these things?

 

BJ Woehler stated that the life safety standards that are addressed in the rental properties, they would be willing to accept having them added to the trailers and addressed in an ordinance.

 

Inspector Ellyson asked about the electrical?  BJ Woehler stated that the wiring was changed in 1976.

 

Inspector Ellyson stated that it was at the discretion of the Planning Commission as to whether or not they wish to re-evaluate it, look at it or change it with criteria regarding the mobile home industry.

 

Chair Hausmann noted for the Commission that he had visited with City Administrator Lowell Johnson regarding Woehler's request.  Administrator Johnson was of the opinion that something needs to be done with regards to the moving ordinance.

 

Chair Hausmann asked for any further comments or suggestions on the agenda item.  Motion made by Commissioner Reeg and seconded by Commissioner Pick directing Inspector Ellyson to work on revising the moving permit ordinance.  Chair Hausmann stated the motion and second.  All were in favor; motion carried unanimously.

 

Chair Hausmann stated the next agenda item was the discussion of amending the Wayne Municipal Code, specifically those sections pertaining to the permitted accessory uses and structures.

 

Inspector Ellyson stated that the City Administrator has asked the Commission to look into the accessory use language within the zoning regulations.  At the July meeting, Draft 1 was presented to the Commission.  As a result of discussion at that meeting, Inspector Ellyson stated that he was directed to revise the language pertaining to accessory uses and structures.  Enclosed with the Commission's packet was Draft 1a which included strikeouts (deletions) and bolding (additions).

 

Inspector Ellyson stated he had some additional information that he wanted the Commission to review.  A drawing was also provided with regards to Section 90-703 Accessory Uses subparagraph c – vehicle access.  Inspector Ellyson noted for the Commission that over the years he has been with the city, he has been able to get property owners to set their garages, which are located in the rear of their property and access from the alley, to set them perpendicular to the alley a minimum of twenty feet from the alley.  This would/will allow for alleys to be cleaned and maintained easier, as the vehicles will be parked on the owners' property rather than butting out into the alley.  The other change was with respect to accessory structure size.  The language was revised to say that collectively all existing and proposed structures, including the primary and all accessory structures, do not exceed 50% of the entire lot area and/or collectively all the accessory structures do not exceed a total of 960 square feet.

 

Chair Hausmann asked for any further comments and/or discussion regarding accessory uses and structures.  Inspector Ellyson stated that the draft before the Commission is based on suggested language from Blair and Hastings.  Commissioner Braun questioned how big a three-car garage would be.  Inspector Ellyson noted that in the drawing he depicted a three-car garage being 36x26 or 936 square feet.  That combined total would include the little 7x10 storage sheds or any other accessory structures that may be on the lot itself.  The combination of structures would take into account those plus any proposed structures.

 

Inspector Ellyson stated that the minimum lot size in an R-1 zone is 7,000 square feet, which would be a lot 70x100.  Earlier language included a target value of 800 square feet on accessory structures, which met with some resistance.  The number is somewhat arbitrary, but it is a place to start.

 

Commissioner Braun questioned if that would be the same for an R-2 and R-3?  Inspector Ellyson stated that the minimum lot size area is smaller.

 

Chair Hausmann opined that generally that is the area where you would find more multi-family units and three-car garages per structure.

 

Commissioner Braun opined that she would like the percentage changed to 60 percent on a lot area versus 50 percent.  It gives the property owners more flexibility.

 

Inspector Ellyson stated that as a planner, one thing you need to keep in mind is the impervious areas roofs create.  In other words, rainfall does not penetrate shingles, and one thing to consider and think about is that as you develop more roof area over a lawn or yard, you tend to increase runoff but you also increase the velocity of that runoff.

 

Chair Hausmann opined that some of the discussion taking place could be brought up at the public hearing.

 

Commissioner Endicott questioned how big is a 3,700 square foot house?  Inspector Ellyson stated that it is a good size home.  Commissioner Endicott opined who would put a 3,700 square foot home on a 70x175 lot.  Really it is kind of a mute point.  You have already exceeded what someone would put on the lot with the 50 percent figure.  Inspector Ellyson stated it is pretty close to accurate.

 

Commissioner Endicott asked if the 50 percent would be workable.  Inspector Ellyson stated that is a figure pretty consistent with other communities.

 

Inspector Ellyson stated that the previous language asked that the attached accessory structures be included.  The revised language omits the attached accessory structures.

 

Paul Lindner, 601 Westwood, questioned if someone owned three lots and wanted to place a garage on one of the lots.  Inspector Ellyson stated that once you place the garage on its own legal description, it becomes the primary structure and then it is regulated by the setbacks of the parent district.  Mr. Lindner questioned if you have three lots and a house located on three lots, you can have a bigger garage.  Inspector Ellyson stated that the maximum size of the garage would be 960 square feet.  Mr. Lindner and Inspector Ellyson discussed one if his particular lots that he owns with respect to the proposed language of accessory structures.

 

Chair Hausmann stated that he would entertain a motion.

 

Paul Campbell, of Wayne, questioned what would happen to the garages already built.  Inspector Ellyson stated that nothing would happen.  They would be considered legal non-conforming.

 

Motion made by Commissioner Miller and seconded by Commissioner Nelson to establish a public hearing regarding the amending of the Wayne Municipal Code, specifically those sections pertaining to the permitted accessory uses and structures for the November meeting.  Chair Hausmann stated the motion and second.  All were in favor; motion carried unanimously.

 

Chair Hausmann stated the next item on the agenda is the discussion of amending the retail store language, with a presentation by Commissioner Don Endicott.

 

Commissioner Endicott noted for the Commission that the contacts with his legal friends did not have any information for him.  Commissioner Endicott spoke with a friend of his from Massachusetts.  During that conversation, Endicott's friend opined that the Commission is headed down the right path with the language that has been preliminary drafted.  Commissioner Endicott's friend opined that there are other issues that cannot be addressed with the ordinance.  This person is very willing to work with Endicott and the Commission to look at the city's ordinance and proposed language, and advise as to what they are doing right or wrong.  Some other suggestions were made, such as addressing/establishing a relationship with the county, as well as a regional type relationship with other communities.

 

Commissioner Endicott opined that he should have a short list, possibly by December as to whether or not Wayne would be on that list.  The 100,000 square foot stores, such as those in Seward, will probably be the future.  They will probably announce within the next few days that an additional forty will be built.  Commissioner Endicott stated that he will be back in touch with his friend and will be ordering his book that gives sample ordinances as to how to write them rather than trying to re-invent the wheel.  Endicott's friend would also be willing to review any ordinances that the city would write and make suggestions from those submitted and what direction the city should go.

 

Commissioner Reeg questioned what type of work this person does for a living.

 

Commissioner Endicott stated that he is a consultant, but that the majority of his life is spent preventing urban sprawl such as the Wal-Mart's, K-Mart's, the Home Depots.  This consultant stated that what the city is doing is right and even if the city's name is not on the short list, that the city should not stop going in the direction they are.  One example the consultant gave us was in Mission, Kansas, one of the stipulations of the ordinance they had drafted stated that the parking had to be located in the rear of the building and that the parking had to be covered.

 

Commissioner Endicott stated that he had spoken with County Commissioner Kevin Wurdeman regarding zoning in the county.  Kelvin indicated that it might be hard because of some people in the ag area.  Commissioner Endicott asked why some of the ag people are against zoning and they indicated they did not want anymore government regulation.

 

Commissioner Endicott stated for the Commission that he would continue to gather information from the consultant and from Mission, Kansas in their ordinance that was passed.

 

Commissioner Endicott opined that the Commission should pursue visiting with the County and try to visit with some of the area community business people.

 

Chair Hausmann asked that Commissioner Endicott continue to pursue gathering information regarding retail store language.

 

There being no further business, motion made by Commissioner Braun and seconded by Commissioner Pick to adjourn the meeting.  Chair Hausmann stated the motion and second.  All were in favor; motion carried unanimously.