MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Wichita, Kansas, February 13, 1996 Tuesday, 9:07 A.M. The City Council met in regular session with Mayor Knight in the Chair. Council Members Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers; present. Cathy Holdeman, City Managers Office; Gary Rebenstorf, Director of Law; Patricia L. Burnett, Deputy City Clerk; present. The invocation was given by Jeanne Bonner, Pastor, Hyde Park United Methodist Church. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was participated in by the Council Members, staff, and guests. Minutes -- The minutes of the regular meeting of February 6, 1996, were -- approved approved 7 to 0. AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS SERVICE CITATIONS Mayor Knight presented Distinguished Service Citations to those present. PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Knight presented the Proclamations that were previously approved. UNFINISHED BUSINESS S/D 93-78 S/D 93-78 - PLAT OF THE BRADFORD NORTH ADDITION LOCATED SOUTH OF 29TH STREET NORTH AND WEST OF TYLER. Continued from February 6, 1996. Council Member Cather Council Member Cather said a letter has been received from the Department of the Army, Kansas City District, Corps of Engineers which states that DA authorization is not required in this instance and that his opposition is not appropriate. The problem Council Member Cather was investigating is not present. Documents Certificate of Petitions and Restrictive Covenant. Letter of Credit Irrevocable Letter of Credit, dated January 23, 1996, in the amount of $5,000, from the State Bank of Colwich, 8725 West Central, Wichita, Kansas, signed by James D. Ashcraft A.V.P. Water 100% Petition for construction of Water Distribution System Number 448-88983 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) ($313,000 S.A., $72,000 Water Utility Reserves) (Hold for development) Water 100% Petition for construction of Water Distribution System Number 448-88984 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) ($157,000 S.A., $23,000 Water Utility Reserves) (Hold for development) Sewer 100% Petition for construction of Lateral 122, Westlink Sewer (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) Project No. 468-82565 ($450,000 S.A.) (Hold for development) Sewer 100% Petition for construction of Lateral 123, Westlink Sewer (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) Project No. 468-82566 ($230,000 S.A.) (Hold for development) Storm Sewer 100% Petition for construction of Storm Water Sewer No. 472 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) Project No. 468-82567 ($425,000 S.A.) (Hold for development) Storm Sewer 100% Petition for construction of Storm Water Sewer No. 473 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) Project No. 468-82568 ($280,000 S.A.) (Hold for development) Paving 100% Petition for improving of left turn by on Tyler Road at Meadow Knoll, Project No. 472-82679 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) ($8,000 S.A.) (Hold for development) Paving 100% Petition for improving of left turn lane on 29th Street North at Keith, and; one lane on 29th Street North from the west line of Bradford North Addition east to the east line of said addition, Project No. 472-82680 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) ($60,000 S.A.) (Hold for development) Paving 100% Petition for improving of Keith from the south line of Lot 42, Block 1, north to the south line of 29th Street North; Brookridge from the south corner of Lot 3, Block 2, north to the west line of Keith; Wedgewood and Bellwood from the east line of Keith, east to the north line of Meadow Knoll; Wedgewood from the south line of Lot 1, Block 5, north to the north line of Lot 1, Block 5; Keith Courts adjacent to Lots 35 through 42, Block 1; Lots 52 through 57, Block 3; Lots 45 through 51, Block 3; and, Lots 1 through 8, Block 4; Bellwood Court adjacent to Lots 22 through 25, Block 3; Wedgewood Circle adjacent to Lots 3 through 18, Block 5; Wedgewood Courts adjacent to Lots 34 through 41, Block 3, and Lots 9 through 15, Block 4; and, Brookridge Courts adjacent to Lots 30 through 33, Block 1; Lots 11 through 24, Block 1; and, Lots 1 through 7, Block 1 of said additions; sidewalk along one side of Keith; along the east line of Reserve A; along the west line of Reserve C; along one side of Wedgewood and Bellwood from the west line of Keith to the north line of Meadow Knoll; along one side of Brookridge; and within Reserve D, Project No. 472-82681 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) ($1,080,000 S.A.) (Hold for development) Paving 100% Petition for improving of Meadow Knoll from the west line of Tyler Road, west to the west line of Lot 50, block 5 of said addition; Meadow Knoll Courts adjacent to Lots 1 through 8, Block 5; Lots 33 through 38, Block 5; Lots 9 through 17, Block 6; Lots 18 through 28, Block 5; Lots 12 through 20, Block 3; and, Lots 34 through 47, Block 6 of said addition; sidewalk to be installed on one side of Meadow Knoll and within Reserve F, Project No. 472-82682 ($490,000 S.A.) (Hold for development) Motion -- Ferris moved that the Petitions be approved and the Resolutions be adopted; the documents be received and filed and recorded with the Register of Deeds; the plat be approved as recommended and the Mayor be authorized to sign. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-037 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Water Distribution System Number 448-88983 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-038 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Water Distribution System Number 448-88984 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-039 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Lateral 122, Westlink Sewer (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) Project No. 468-82565 in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-040 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Lateral 123, Westlink Sewer (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) Project No. 468-82566 in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-041 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Storm Water Sewer No. 472 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) Project No. 468- 82567 in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-042 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Storm Water Sewer No. 473 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) Project No. 468- 82568 in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-043 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing improving of left turn by on Tyler Road at Meadow Knoll, Project No. 472-82679 (west of Tyler, south of 29th Street North) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-044 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing improving of left turn lane on 29th Street North at Keith, and; one lane on 29th Street North from the west line of Bradford North Addition east to the east line of said addition, Project No. 472-82680 in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-045 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing improving of Keith from the south line of Lot 42, Block 1, north to the south line of 29th Street North; Brookridge from the south corner of Lot 3, Block 2, north to the west line of Keith; Wedgewood and Bellwood from the east line of Keith, east to the north line of Meadow Knoll; Wedgewood from the south line of Lot 1, Block 5, north to the north line of Lot 1, Block 5; Keith Courts adjacent to Lots 35 through 42, Block 1; Lots 52 through 57, Block 3; Lots 45 through 51, Block 3; and, Lots 1 through 8, Block 4; Bellwood Court adjacent to Lots 22 through 25, Block 3; Wedgewood Circle adjacent to Lots 3 through 18, Block 5; Wedgewood Courts adjacent to Lots 34 through 41, Block 3, and Lots 9 through 15, Block 4; and, Brookridge Courts adjacent to Lots 30 through 33, Block 1; Lots 11 through 24, Block 1; and, Lots 1 through 7, Block 1 of said additions; sidewalk along one side of Keith; along the east line of Reserve A; along the west line of Reserve C; along one side of Wedgewood and Bellwood from the west line of Keith to the north line of Meadow Knoll; along one side of Brookridge; and within Reserve D, Project No. 472-82681 in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-046 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing improving of Meadow Knoll from the west line of Tyler Road, west to the west line of Lot 50, block 5 of said addition; Meadow Knoll Courts adjacent to Lots 1 through 8, Block 5; Lots 33 through 38, Block 5; Lots 9 through 17, Block 6; Lots 18 through 28, Block 5; Lots 12 through 20, Block 3; and, Lots 34 through 47, Block 6 of said addition; sidewalk to be installed on one side of Meadow Knoll and within Reserve F, Project No. 472-82682 in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Ferris moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. NEW BUSINESS NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD INITIATIVE 1995 ANNUAL REPORT. Pat O'Donnell Pat O'Donnell, Neighborhood Initiative Coordinator and Loaned Executive with Boeing, gave a status report on the Neighborhood Initiative. The Neighborhood Initiative is people, either individually or collectively, doing what they can to address the multiplicity of needs present in this community. Public Safety The Wichita Police Department and Sedgwick County Sheriff have initiated community policing which is a philosophy that depends upon police officers actively working in partnership with neighborhood residents to solve neighborhood problems. As 1996 began, the City Council approved a four quadrant plan of action that takes community policing city-wide. Sedgwick County began community policing in the Oaklawn/Sunview area and is now expanding their program. The Fire Department efforts to support the Neighborhood Initiative have been focused on increasing visibility in neighborhoods and supporting neighborhood activities. A new drug court program was initiated in October, 1995. Defendants participate in a drug treatment program. First appearance is held at City Hall and subsequent consultations with the Judge are held at the Northeast Substation. Neighbor to Neighbor Forming strong relationships between local government and community residents is an important factor in the Neighborhood Initiative. Neighborhood residents have made a great deal of progress in working together to take back their neighborhoods. Youth and Family Providing economical, cultural, recreational, and educational resources in the community is an important part of the Neighborhood Initiative. Appearance and Maintenance How a neighborhood looks has a direct impact on how citizens feel about their community. A well-maintained neighborhood also has a positive impact on the amount of criminal activity. Neighborhood residents made significant contributions towards improving the appearance of their neighborhoods. Plans for 1996 Plans already in progress for 1996 in the Neighborhood Initiative include: Ensure community-wide support for City- County Community Policing Enhance relationships with City Council and County Commission Involve more key City and County Department Heads Open another "lighted School" Neighborhood Center Initiate special training and education by a national leader in the Asian Community Support neighborhood based business and economic development Develop new efforts to respond to youth-in- need Support anti-gang and youth violence prevention Enhance the Neighborhood Initiative process Mayor Knight Mayor Knight inquired if anyone wished to be heard and no one appeared. Motion -- carried Knight moved that the Report be received and filed. Motion carried 7 to 0. ZONING/SIGN CODE PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED UNIFIED ZONING CODE/PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SIGN CODE. Marvin Krout Director of Planning reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 96-106. MAPC Recommendation: Approve (11-0). Staff Recommendation: Approve. The need for new zoning rules to help guide development and redevelopment in the City of Wichita and unincorporated Sedgwick County has become more obvious and more pressing in recent years. Both the City's current ordinance, which was last "overhauled" in 1946, and the County's current resolution, which dates back to 1958, are difficult to follow and understand, contain unnecessary standards and requirements for some situations and inadequate ones in other cases, and there are inexplicable differences between the two codes which add to the confusion. These codes have been the source of frustration for the staff responsible for administering them, for applicants and their agents, for affected neighbors, and for appointed and elected officials. The process to consider revisions to the city and county zoning codes began in 1993, with the hiring of a consultant team to develop an "issues analysis" and proposed outline for a new zoning code. Over a dozen meetings were held to invite citizen input during the development of these products, including meetings with both governing bodies. The consultants' contract was amended in 1994 to include preparation of a first draft for a new unified zoning code. This draft was completed and distributed for comments late in 1994, and three more public meetings were held to receive comments on this draft. The MAPC next appointed a special subcommittee, which reviewed the draft page-by-page over a period of several months, making dozens of additional changes. The MAPC received the revised draft in September of last year, and after holding several informal meetings, conducted a public hearing on December 14 of last year. The Commission held two more discussions on the proposed code, and on January 11 of this year voted unanimously to recommend that it be adopted, along with accompanying changes to the City sign code and to the City/County fee schedule for filing of applications. The September draft had included a proposed new Agricultural zone which would be appropriate for future remapping of large portions of the unincorporated land in the county. But, as a result of concerns expressed at the MAPC hearing that this concept needed more exposure and more discussion, staff and MAPC both agreed to remove this new zone from the proposed code at this time. Two important "ground-rules" governed the development of the code, and these eliminated much of the controversy that was present in previous attempts to rewrite the City code: 1) No "remapping" of the official zoning maps for individual properties to less intensive districts would be attempted as a part of the development of this new code, and no significant reduction of "use rights" would be proposed for any existing district classifications. The new code would contain some new standards that might affect the development of some properties in minor ways, but the list of uses permitted in each existing district would not be reduced. 2) No property which is now considered a legal, conforming use under the present zoning codes would be made "nonconforming" by the adoption of the new unified code. That means that there will be no restriction on rebuilding damaged buildings that is placed by state statute on "nonconforming" uses, and it means that the zoning officials will be able to certify to prospective purchasers and lenders that the property is not encumbered by the stigma of a "nonconforming" label. The proposed new code contains four new districts that increase the options for re-zonings: - SF10, a category for single family subdivisions with larger (10,000 square foot) minimum lot size than the current single family district. - NO, a true "neighborhood office" district, with more limited uses and intensity permitted than the current "general office" category. - OW, a category to permit office, warehouse, "showroom", and limited manufacturing uses. - IP, a category to encourage modern industrial parks similar to the Comotara park in northeast Wichita. The code also contains a "special purpose" district, the PUD (Planned Unit Development), which is intended to permit special mixes of uses and special development standards that may not fit neatly into one of the "base" zoning categories -- a kind of "make it yourself" district. And the code contains a new overlay district -- the PO (Protective Overlay), which is a tool for limiting the uses or placing special conditions on a property, beyond the limitations set up for the "base" district, which may be appropriate in a limited number of situations to ensure that the proposed development "fits in" with its neighbors and will not be changed to some other incompatible use. This overlay is meant to replace the City's occasional use of restrictive covenants, which can only be "volunteered" by applicants and are more difficult to enforce. Properties in the City's RB ("four-plex") district are proposed to be included as part of the MF-29 (multi-family) district, which permits the same maximum density but allows more than four dwelling units in a single building. There are a number of other changes proposed in development standards, such as: allowing accessory apartments in single family zones by conditional use, allowing assisted living complexes "by right" in apartment zones, establishing new categories and size limitations for group homes, broadening the retail uses permitted in the OC (Office-Commercial zone, to be renamed NR: Neighborhood Retail), reducing some parking requirements, and adding some setback requirements. Special uses that are now reviewed and approved by the City and County Boards of Zoning Appeals as "use exceptions" would instead be reviewed by the MAPC as "conditional uses". MAPC approval or denial of such uses would be final unless the applicant or some other qualified party appealed the MAPC decision to the governing body. The new code also contains new and more descriptive names and symbols for most existing zoning districts, new and improved definitions, more logical organization, more cross-references, new tables and charts, and other features that are intended to make the document more "user-friendly". The conversion of the official zoning maps will involve a one-time cost of approximately $8,000 for materials, labor, photography, etc. Funds have already been encumbered for this purpose in MAPD's budget. Because of the additional changes suggested to the draft since the MAPC's consideration, a 2/3 vote of the members of each governing body is required to approve the new code, or to approve any other changes to the code. If the code is returned to MAPC for reconsideration, then the governing bodies may, on second consideration, approve any changes by a simple majority. Agenda Report No. 96-107 MAPC Recommendation: Approve (11-0). Staff Recommendation: Approve. CPO Recommendation: 4 of 6 CPO Councils made recommendations; all were to approve as recommended by MAPC As the proposed Unified Zoning Code was entering the final stages of review several months ago, staff realized that the City's Sign Ordinance (Chapter 24 of the City Code) needed to be amended at the same time. Most of the sign rules are tied to the different zoning districts, and since most of the names of the existing zoning districts are proposed to be changed, the Sign Code must be changed to follow the same new names. In addition, there are several new zoning districts proposed in the new zoning code, which must be assigned an appropriate set of sign rules. The Office of Central Inspection had been reviewing the sign code for some time, drafting proposals to eliminate ambiguities in the code and to deal with several "problem" issues like banner signs. They assembled a technical committee comprised primarily of sign company representatives to review the staff proposals that they had been developing, plus proposed sign rules for the several new zoning districts. This committee met over a two month period and made recommendations strictly relating to the new zoning code. They are continuing to review other aspects of the Sign Code. The recommendations of the technical committee and the staff were forwarded to the MAPC for consideration along with the proposed new zoning code. Public comments were received at the December 14 MAPC meeting. On January 11, the MAPC voted unanimously to follow the staff recommendations on the Sign Code amendments. After the MAPC meeting, the recommendations of staff and of the committee were forwarded to CPO for their comments. Four of the CPO Councils voted to recommend that the City Council follow the recommendations of the MAPC and staff; one Council chose not to make any recommendations, and one Council will not review the issue until their February 8 meeting. The areas of disagreement between staff and the sign company representatives revolved around the proposed rules for the proposed new OW (Office-Warehouse) and IP (Industrial Park) districts. These districts were developed to provide alternatives to the current commercial and industrial districts in the zoning code, that would be more compatible and more accepted where residential areas are nearby. They contain more use limitations and require greater setbacks than the existing districts. The staff's original proposal was to apply the sign rules for the office and office-commercial districts, which are more limited than the rules for other commercial and industrial districts, to the OW and IP districts. The committee members believed that these rules would be too restrictive. There was substantial compromise on both sides, but several areas of disagreement remained: 1. The committee members recommended that "off- site" signs (billboards) be permitted in the OW and IP districts. Off-site signs are not permitted in the office and office-commercial districts or the downtown business district, and they are not permitted in tracts that are governed by CUPs (Community Unit Plans), but they are permitted in other commercial and industrial-zoned tracts. Staff was strongly opposed to this as contrary to the intent of these new, more limited-purpose districts. 2. The committee members recommended that freestanding ("pole" or "ground") signs along the streets in these new districts be permitted whether or not the street provides vehicular access to the lot. Staff had initially proposed that freestanding signs only be permitted on streets with vehicular access (e.g. no freestanding signs along a freeway where lots are "backing up" to the freeway). At the MAPC meeting, staff suggested a compromise by which a sign of up to 64 square feet in size (the committee recommended signs up to 150 square feet in size, on any frontage, with or without access control) would be permitted on a street that does not have vehicular access, but only in lieu of any building signs facing that same street. As part of this discussion, staff also recommended that the "bonus" provision on sign heights as recommended by the committee (permitting signs to increase from 20 feet to 25 feet in height if the lot frontage contained fewer than the allowable number of signs, based on one sign per 150 feet of frontage) be limited to situations where the number of businesses on the lot exceeds the number of signs. In other words, the bonus should be limited to situations where a two or more businesses are sharing a single sign when they could have had separate signs. 3. The committee members recommended that "building" signs (mounted on the walls of the building) may occupy up to 20% of the area of any building facade, as is permitted in the commercial and industrial districts. Staff recommended a 10% limitation, which is still much more signage than permitted in an office district. The amendments to the sign code should not result in any additional administrative cost to the City. Marvin Krout Director of Planning, responding to questions, said the sign code is being reviewed in a more comprehensive way by the Office of Central Inspection with a committee primarily comprised of representatives of sign companies. There will be more on the sign code in the future. Regarding protest petition notification, the Director of Planning explained that until 1992, the State Statutes required notification, in cities, 200 feet. The Planning Commission had established a policy for a sliding scale of notification from 200 feet up to 1,000 feet depending on the size of the tract (tract of over 25 acres would be 1,000 feet, under 3 acres would be 200 feet, and variances for tracts in between). Until 1992, the Planning Commission Policy was followed on written notifications but the State Statutes also has a section on protest petitions which requires that if the property area within a 200 feet radius of the area of request has petitions filed by property owners representing 20 percent of the land area protesting the rezoning - a 3/4 vote by the City Council would be required to override. Even though a notice may have been sent for a certain number of feet, the area calculated for protest petitions was always 200 feet. In 1992, there were a combination of changes in the state law and local ordinances that inadvertently changed those rules. This was not realized until there was a lawsuit in a recent case. The combination of changes left the City with the situation where the City's current ordinance now reads that the protest area will be calculated on whatever the Planning Commission policy is for notification. The original draft of the Code reverted to the pre-1992 rule. The Planning Commission's recommendation is that there is confusion in having different protest and notification areas and that the protest and notification areas should be the same. Staff's concern is that it is difficult to achieve super- majority votes of governing bodies and that the super-majority vote requirement should be related more to the property that is closest to the property in question. Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris said that people within 200 feet may have a valid protest petition but if the notification area is 500 feet, and there is a large tract of land within the 500 feet, it may be difficult to get a valid protest petition. Too large of protest area can cause either difficulty in getting valid protest petitions, or may make it too easy for one property owner to effectively block a project. The reversion back to the 200 feet protest area makes sense and is work some dialogue. Marvin Krout Director of Planning, regarding the difference between the C.U.P. and a P.U.D., stated that C.U.P.s are a part of the present zoning code. Commercial C.U.P.s are a requirement when there is single ownership of more than six acres zoned light commercial or commercial. The governing body is able to impose restrictions on what otherwise may be permitted in commercial or light commercial zoning. The Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) is a new concept which might be referred to as a "make it yourself" district. A C.U.P. is an overlay that has restrictions added to the zoning district - the original zoning rules stand and there are additional restrictions or exceptions made. A P.U.D. is its own district - there is no underlying zoning district. The ground rules are set and the map designation is an individual district and may be for any use, combination of uses, and of any size. There have been several instances when a specific use of property was agreeable but surrounding residential properties did not want commercial zoning which would allow undesirable uses. Mayor Knight momentarily absent with Vice Mayor Kamen in the Chair. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight inquired if anyone wished to be heard. Sharon Feary Sharon Feary, President of Historic Midtown Citizens' Association (HMCA), spoke against any zoning which impedes viability of the neighborhood. The issue is whether or not the P.U.D. is a sound part of the new ordinance. The P.U.D. could be used by people hoping to bring things that normally would need much less restrictive zoning into a very protective zoning area. Sending the P.U.D. back for review would be time consuming and might lead to losses of many of the good items. It is hoped the P.U.D. will be used for innovative, wonderful things for the good of everyone in Wichita. A watchful eye needs to be kept on the P.U.D. and not let it be used to sneak inappropriate land uses in through the back door. Also, there is concern regarding the 30 day time period for zoning cases. For many neighborhoods, this is not enough time to do the necessary work involved in visiting with MAPD staff, neighborhood organizations, and people in the protest petition area. This is especially true when the application is filed during the holidays or during bad weather. A period of at least 45 days would give the volunteer neighborhood organizations the time needed to more effectively address issues of concern. Karen Rutherford Karen Rutherford, 2313 Waters Edge Circle, addressed the following issues of concern: (1) Definitions Section II-B, terms: adjustment, amendment, intensify, and ornamental tower are not adequately defined and should be clarified. The definition for intensity focuses only on the uses of underlying zoning districts. Consideration should be given to more than the number of cars and people a land use will involve. It should also take into consideration the effect of the land use. (2) Appeal Time Frame Throughout the proposed code, most appeals must be filed within ten days of the date of the hearing. A proposed minimum of 30-45 days would allow appointments with legal counsel or other professionals if needed, and would allow time to submit required information to the appropriate officials at the city or county. (3) Amendments and Adjustments to CUPs A CUP is restrictive in nature. The proposed zoning code fails to list the criteria on which decisions should be based for approving or denying amendments and/or adjustments to CUPs. The same criteria listed in Section V-G.6 (a-3), Variances, as well as those listed in Section V-I.6 (a-d), should also be listed in Section V-E.13 and 14. Also, throughout the proposed zoning code, building height increases are generally limited to 10 percent; however, a 20% increase is allowed with a CUP adjustment. It seems odd that a larger increase is allowed on property that has more restrictive regulations than property not covered by a CUP. A 20 percent height increase is too significant to be considered as an adjustment. The limit, at the very most, should be 10 percent, and then only for a legitimate need - not for just aesthetics or desire. The proposed zoning code allows too much interpretation of land uses. As proposed, the only criteria which must be considered when determining an approved use is the intensity of the proposed use as compared to approved uses specifically listed in the CUP. At minimum, both the criteria for variances and for zoning adjustments should be met. (4) Appeals Under Section V-F.4, publication and notification information for appeals, as proposed, only the appellant, planning commissioners, and property owner would be notified. All property owners within the original notification area should also be notified of any and all appeals and subsequent hearings. (5) Building Permits It should be added that absolutely no permit, even conditional, would be issued for any project where an appeal has been filed and is pending. (6) Planning Director Section VI-G.5 and .6, appeal process for zoning and administrative adjustments, is written for an applicant, not for an aggrieved citizen. The language should be changed to read more like Section VI-H.1 - "The Zoning Administrator's interpretation may be appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals." Motion -- Ferris moved that the public hearing be closed; and the Director of Planning review the speakers' concerns and report back with recommendations to the City Council in two weeks. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen said that definitions that are not understood should be clarified. There might be compromises between the 200 foot notification and the 1,000 foot notification. Also, Council Member Kamen said he would like to find out who pays for the notification (city or developer). Regarding the number of days for the notification procedure, it is unknown whether that includes weekends and holidays. The last speaker did not delineate why the P.U.D.s could be used in an offhand manner to go against the Council's desired purpose. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. IRB - MIDLAND/ PUBLIC HEARING AND ISSUANCE OF INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS - MIDLAND/MACARTHUR PARK, MACARTHUR PARK L.P. (District III) Cathy Holdeman City Manager's Office reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 96-108. On August 15, 1995, the City Council approved the issuance of a Letter of Intent for Industrial Revenue Bonds in an amount not to exceed $4,500,000 to Midland Properties, Inc. Bond sale proceeds will be used to finance the purchase and rehabilitation of the MacArthur Park Apartments, a 216-unit garden apartment facility, located at 4244 South Hydraulic in south Wichita. MacArthur Park Apartments is a 216 unit garden apartment project built during the mid-1960s by a church sponsored group. The initial objective was to provide quality, moderately priced housing for residents of southeast Wichita. On April 22, 1986, MacArthur Park Apartments was acquired by MacArthur Park, Inc., a Kansas Corporation owned by three local businessmen. Bond sale proceeds will be used to acquire and rehabilitate the 216 units. The rehabilitation will consist of the replacement of most appliances (including the addition of dishwashers) and the carpeting as well as most kitchen cabinets. The renovation will occur over the first 12 months and stabilization of project income should occur within the first 24 months. The sources and uses of funding for the project are summarized in the following table: Sources of Funds IRB Proceeds $4,500,000 Corporate Funds 300,000 Total Sources: $4,800,000 Uses of Funds Acquisition $2,600,000 Rehab Costs 1,450,000 Bond Reserve 365,000 Issuance Costs 160,000 Working Capital 225,000 Total Uses: $4,800,000 The rehabilitation of this apartment complex will enable the project to house approximately 400-450 wage earning individuals. The use of tax-exempt IRBs will allow a savings which can be passed on to the tenants through competitive rents. In order to qualify for tax-exempt financing at least 20% of the units will be reserved for lease by families or individuals whose annual income is not more than 50% of the median income for the Wichita area. Depending on family size, tenants in these units will have combined gross incomes that average less than $20,000 per year. The facility is expected to generate $28,000 each year in ad valorem taxes. Midland/MacArthur Park, L.P., will be required to provide an acceptable EEO/AA Plan and Water Conservation Plan to the City prior to issuance of bonds. The Letter of Intent to Midland Properties, Inc., dated August 15, 1995, expires on February 15, 1996; prior to the adoption of the bond ordinance for the issuance of bonds. It is recommended that the Letter of Intent be extended for a two month period to April 15, 1996 to enable the closing on the bond issue to be accomplished prior to the expiration of the Letter of Intent. Midland/MacArthur Park, L.P., agrees to pay all costs of issuing the bonds as well as the City's annual administrative fee for the term of the bonds. Midland/MacArthur Park, L.P., is not requesting abatement of ad valorem taxes on any part of this project. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight inquired if anyone wished to be heard and no one appeared. Motion -- Cather moved that the Letter of Intent be extended for two months to April 15, 1996; the Public Hearing be closed; Documents including: Bond Ordinance, Trust Indenture, Lease Agreement, Land Use Restriction Agreement be approved and the Mayor be authorized to sign; the Bond Ordinance be placed on first reading. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance authorizing the City of Wichita, Kansas, to issue its multi-family housing revenue bonds, Series III, 1996, (Midland/MacArthur Park, L.P.), in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $4,500,000 for the purpose of paying the costs of purchasing, acquiring, rehabilitating, furnishing, and equipping an existing multi-family housing facility located in the City of Wichita, Kansas; authorizing the execution and delivery of a trust indenture by and between the City and Boatmen's Trust Company, in the City of Kansas City, of a lease between the City and Midland/MacArthur Park, L.P., a Kansas Limited Partnership, as tenant; approving the form of a guaranty agreement between the tenant and trustee; approving the form of a limited guaranty agreement between Midland Properties,Inc., and trustee; authorizing the execution of a land use restriction agreement by and between the city, the trustee and the tenant; and authorizing the execution of a bond purchase agreement by and between the City, the tenant, and Stern Brothers & Co., Kansas City, Missouri, as underwriter, introduced and under the rules laid over. Council Member Rogers left the Bench. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion -- Knight moved that the Council recess to executive session to consider consultation with legal counsel on matters privileged in the attorney-client relationship relating to legal advice and contract negotiations, and the regular meeting be resumed at 10:45 a.m. in the City Council Chambers. Motion carried -- carried 6 to 0. RECESS Council recessed at 10:18 a.m. and reconvened in regular session at 10:45 a.m. Council Member Rogers present. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight announced that no action was necessary as a result of the executive session. Motion -- Knight moved that the rules be set aside and Item 6 be taken up out of order. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. (Item 6) ROSS PARKWAY APTS. DESIGNATION OF PREFERRED DEVELOPER - ROSS PARKWAY APARTMENTS. Cathy Holdeman City Manager's Office reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 96-110. On December 22, 1995, the City Council approved the donation of the Ross Parkway Apartments, located at 3703- 3717 Ross Parkway (Plainview area), which was owned by the Prinville Bank, Oregon. The property contains approximately 2.65 acres of land with four (4) three-story concrete apartment buildings. The structures have been vacant for over five years and are considered to be in a blighted condition. The City has initiated a request for proposals for the purchase, rehabilitation, and/or demolition and redevelopment of the Ross Parkway Apartments. Three developers submitted proposals to rehabilitate the Ross Parkway Apartments. The proposal recommended for the preferred developer is from Lakeshore Property Management. The proposal offers to acquire the property for the amount of back taxes, and the costs the City has incurred to acquire the property. The developer will obtain all of the necessary permits from the City. The refurbishment includes new carpet, paint, kitchen cabinets and bathrooms. Windows, doors and roofing will be replaced and the exterior will receive a new facade. In addition, the developer will landscape the grounds, construct two new playgrounds, resurface the parking and fence-in the perimeter. The developer estimates that if the transaction can be closed by March 4, 1996, the project can be completed by the end of the summer of 1996. This proposal is considered more acceptable than the others because it requires no public assistance; financing is readily available; back taxes and other costs the City has incurred will be paid; the project can be completed by fall of 1996; the developer's plans includes a private development for extensive landscaping and the addition of playground equipment. The other proposals did not offer this extensive combination of redevelopment activities and redevelopment could not be completed within in these time frames. Lakeshore Property Management's redevelopment proposal offers to purchase the property for back taxes which are estimated at 10,564.32 plus other City costs included in the administration and closing of the property. The Law Department will develop a purchase contract stipulating terms and conditions of the sale, which includes payment of back taxes. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight inquired if anyone wished to be heard and no one appeared. Motion -- Cather moved that the preferred developer be approved and the Mayor be authorized -- carried to sign the contact for purchase of the property. Motion carried 7 to 0. VENTLESS HEATERS REPORT ON VENTLESS HEATERS. Cathy Holdeman City Manager's Office introduced the Item. John Stark Supervisor of Air Quality for the Health Department reviewed the Report. According to information from ventless heater manufacturers, there has not been a fatality in the United States attributed to ventless heaters equipped with oxygen depletion sensors (ODS). ODS equipped ventless heaters shut off when predetermined oxygen levels drop below a certain levels. The Consumer Product Safety Commission's National Injury Information Clearinghouse and Triodyne, a private consortium of consultants and engineers who perform research for litigation cases, indicate that fatalities have occurred from ventless heaters but it is not clear whether their data includes ODS equipped ventless heaters. These deaths were attributed to carbon monoxide poisoning created by ventless heaters. There is data that suggests that ventless heaters are detrimental to indoor air quality. Ventless heaters emit carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and water vapor (promotes mold/mildew growth). The indoor air pollutants cause respiratory irritation which can lead to secondary illness by weakening the body's immune system. Tests conducted by the ventless heater industry determined that levels of these indoor air pollutants increased significantly during heater operation and continued to increase over time. It may be possible that levels of carbon monoxide will be elevated in a room where a ventless heater is operating to a level that causes harmful health effects, even though the oxygen level has not been lowered to the point where the ODS would have shut off the appliance. Ventless heater operating instructions require the heater to not be operated without a window open for adequate ventilation. A person who is cold enough to want to turn the ventless heater on is not going to want to open a window at the same time. Almost by definition, the heater will not be operated according to manufacturer's instructions. The heaters are usually located in an occupied room and could be a fascination for small children - therefore could be a source of accidental burns. A number of states and some Kansas cities have banned the use of the ventless heater. Based on the indoor air quality degradation effects and safety issues, it is recommended that the Environmental Health Sub-Committee work with staff to develop a recommendation regarding the use of these products. Mr. Stark said he was unaware of any deaths, emergency calls, or complaints of illness in Wichita which were due to ventless heaters. Pat Richardson Pat Richardson, Plumbing and Heating Board, responding to a question, estimated cost of venting these heaters to be from $125 to $150. This estimate does not take many factors into consideration. Mr. Richardson stated that the Plumbing Board unanimously voted that ventless heaters be outlawed. David Dewhirst David Dewhirst, President of Midwest Environmental Products, manufacturer's representative agency employed by Empire Comfort Systems to market their product in a five-state region, said they have been tracking the safety history of ventless heaters (new generation equipped with ODS) which have been built since 1980, in accordance with the Consumer Products Safety Commission Guidelines. The appliance has an unbelievable safety record from the standpoint of accidents and deaths, and from problems due to indoor air quality. There are five world-wide manufacturers that made ODS ventless heaters and over the last 25 years more than 20 million of these heaters have been placed into the markets of 25 countries on three continents. Not only has a fatality not been seen, there has not even been seen a health issue raised. There are seventy different models of vented and unvented room heaters manufactured in this country. Vent free heaters represent 50 percent of the units sold. The American National Standards Institute, the American Gas Association, the National Fire Protection Authority, National L.P. Gas Association, Gas Appliance Manufacturer's Association, and other considered learned individuals have been following these heaters over a long period of time. There have been absolutely no problems reported to any of the people who are involved in these organizations. Further, all of the cities that ban ventless heaters did not move to ban them after ODS were introduced. The cities that currently do not allow unvented heaters never allowed them in the first place. All of the national model codes, NFPA codes - all of the changes in the codes made in the last ten years have all been made to relax the restriction on unvented heaters - not to make them more restrictive. The vent free heaters are tested in accordance with the AGA standards as a home furnace and they are no less or no more hazardous from the standpoint of fires or child protection or clearance to combustibles than any other furnace that would be made. The costs to retail install the vent free heater would be around $250 to $300. The inexpensive vented room heater, counting the vent, would be in the area of $500 to $600 retail installed. A high-efficiency furnace (90 plus variety with the less expensive vent) would be in excess of $1,000 retail installed. There are thirteen national gas utilities that install and sell vent free heaters which are the Empire brand. These people are generally charged with the safe handling of the fuel. In the fifteen years these appliances have been in Wichita, there have been no incidences note worthy enough to work their way back through the channels of distribution (licensed installing contractors). No home owner has ever been disgruntled enough with their heater over a concern of personal health to contact his contractor who would then contact up to the distributor. The Mechanical Board and Electrical Boards have blessed the product. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight said it seems that if there is a concern, the City's Boards, composed of people with knowledge and understanding of these matters, might be the appropriate venue to evaluate the matter on behalf of the City Council. Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris said the City Council should deal with life, health, and safety issues. The Health Department cannot recall any incident where a ventless heater has caused a health problem. It is known that the ventless heater has never caused a fatality. City's staff has commented that while there could be health and safety issues, the heaters have been in existence for quite some time and there is no documented evidence that there has been a health safety issue. Motion -- Cather moved that this matter be referred to the Plumbing, Mechanical, and Health -- carried Boards for review. Motion carried 5 to 2. Ferris, Gale - No. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight asked that Staff meet with people with opinions on this matter and ensure organization so they can participate in discussion before the matter is brought back to the Council. Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris said Staff should be instructed to try to have a joint meeting with the Boards to hear the opinions at one time. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight asked the City Manager's Office to find the best way to facilitate the information flow to the Boards and the convening of the Boards in joint session if possible. TREASURY ANNUAL REPORT 1995 TREASURY ANNUAL REPORT. Roger Clark City Treasurer reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 96-111. The Department of Finance began publication of an annual report on treasury and investment activities with the 1994 fiscal year. Presented is the 1995 Treasury Annual Report. The 1995 Treasury Annual Report reports on the year's performance of the Pooled Fund investments, as well as the separate investment portfolios for Group Life, Cemetery, Wichita Housing Authority and Special Assessment Prepay. [Pension funds investment performance is reported separately from the Treasury Annual Report.] The Monthly, Quarterly and Annual Financial Reports also report on investment transactions during the course of the year and at year-end. The investment program of the City involves daily decisions on investment of public funds to earn a rate of return until those funds are required for the appropriated purpose. As set out in the City's Investment Policy adopted by the City Council, the investment of City funds is conducted under the priority order guidelines of 1) safety of principal, 2) liquidity to meet cash flow requirements, and 3) rate of return to provide the highest earnings consistent with the higher priorities of safety and liquidity. Highlights of the investment activities of the City during 1995: (1) The volume of investment transactions was high in 1995 with Pooled Fund transactions at $2.5 billion on an average portfolio of $176 million. (2) Safety was protected during the year in the form of the high grade of all portfolio investments, and the collateralization of certificates of deposit and repurchase agreements. (3) Liquidity was assured in that cash flows are projected over a four year horizon and no investments were liquidated prior to maturity to meet any unexpected cash requirements. (4) The investment earnings (in dollars) for all portfolios increase from 1994 to 1995, reflecting the generally favorable market conditions for the year. Some portfolios (Housing Authority and Special Assessment Prepay) show lower rates of return as higher interest investments matured during the year and were replaced by lower interest investments as the market rate declined through the year. The principal investment portfolio, the Pooled Fund Investments, exceeded the performance of the benchmark 91-Day Treasury Bill and the State Short Municipal Investment Pool. (5) The market conditions for 1996 are expected to result in lower rates of return on investments. In 1995, the City's Investment Policy and program also received the Certification of Excellence Award from the Municipal Treasurer's Association of the United States and Canada. Of the more than 86,000 units of government in the United States, this is a recognition achieved by only 108 governmental entities (Wichita is the only one from Kansas) since the recognition program started in 1990. Investment income is a revenue source to many funds in the City budget. Earnings from the Pooled Fund Investments are allocated monthly to the separate funds participating in the pool based on each fund's proportionate average daily balance in the pool. All City investment policies and practices are in conformance with State law and City ordinance governing investment transactions and reporting. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight inquired if anyone wished to be heard and no one appeared. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight said this appears to be a very strong performance which may have something to do with the way the financial nomenclature is handled. A lot of it also has to do with a very strong year and market for investments. It is good news for the City Council and, certainly, good news for those who rely on funds represented. Motion -- carried Knight moved that the Report be received and filed. Motion carried 7 to 0. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Council Member Ferris momentarily absent. RAILROAD MERGER REVIEW OF RAILROAD MERGER AND IMPACTS ON CITY. (Requested by Mayor Knight) Agenda Report No. 96-112. Late in 1995, the Union Pacific Railroad (UP) filed documents with the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) seeking permission to acquire the Southern Pacific Railroad (SP). A decision is expected by August of 1996. Both of the railroads operate in Kansas, but only the UP has lines through Wichita. In December, 1995, the City's railroad consultant, De Leuw Cather Company, provided information from the UP's official merger document showing the UP's intention, if the merger is approved, to route coal and grain trains directly through Wichita to points south such as Fort Worth, Houston, or Mexico (called the Kansas City Bypass). Coal Trains from Wyoming and grain trains from Nebraska would pass through Topeka, turn southwest on the newly acquired SP tracks to Herrington, and through Wichita. None of the shipments have origins or destinations in Kansas; they are simply passing through on their own schedule, night or day. The UP has said they project an increase of ten or more trains per day which would double its trains through Wichita. The UP plans to spend $100 million upgrading tracks and bridges along the route. The efficiency gained by routing trains through Wichita will save the UP $780 million annually, according to the merger documents. Although there are several cities negatively impacted by the Kansas City Bypass, none will be so severely impacted as Wichita where many of the daily 150,000 motorists have the potential to be stopped by the trains as they block thirteen important east-west arterials within the City. Another fourteen arterials would be impacted in Sedgwick County, Kechi, and Haysville. In all, 180,000 daily trips could be delayed across the entire County. More importantly, the trains will lengthen and interrupt response times for the community's fire, police, and ambulance services. Letters have been sent to the ICC and the Governor's office expressing concern over the impacts of the proposed Bypass on Wichita, and calling on the UP to participate financially in improvements to reduce the impacts if the Bypass plan is implemented. A plan that would provide grade separation for Central, Murdock, and 13th Street, submitted by the railroad and presented to the Council in October of 1995 is estimated to cost $66 million. Neither the State or the City has any authority to stop the trains or to constrain their schedules due to interstate commerce protections. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight said it is hoped the City Council can agree to adjoin support from the Governor, State Legislators, Senators, and Congressmen to make concerns known to the ICC (now the Surface Transportation Board - STB). Bill Stockwell Planning Department said the City has not previously had unit trains (coal, grain) which are 110 cars long and which cannot be controlled as to when they come through the City. Mr. Stockwell said he talked with the Kansas City Chamber of Commerce on February 12th, 1996, and was told that Kansas City is close to an approval stage of a $70 million overpass for one of the railroads which will alleviate some of the delays in Kansas City. Other experts have said the UP will still want to spend the $100 million and still send the coal trains from Wyoming through Wichita. The Chairman of the UP is trying to get Governor Grave's endorsement of the merger. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen said the only solution would be to raise the main lines or find an alternative route around the City. Bill Stockwell Planning Department said the UP would not favor alternative routes around the City. It would add greatly to their expense which has to be compared to the expense of doing the OKT line at $100 million. Regarding the previous Railroad Study recommendations, said Phase I has nothing to do with this particular problem. Phases II, III, and IV are efforts to gain elevation of tracks from Douglas Avenue north to 17th Street. The Study has merit but does nothing for the problem further north of 21st and south of Kellogg. Ambulance and emergency medical vehicles have a problem today with railroad traffic and have worked around this but with double the amount of trains, the situation would have to be looked into again. There are no jobs, industries, or destinations for these trains in Wichita. Council Member Cather Council Member Cather spoke to the problem of police vehicles being detained and urged the public to let their concerns be known now. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight stated that the only real option the City has is to join with those in the community, the State, and in Washington to try and oppose this unless the merger results in significant assistance to alleviate some of the problems. Mayor knight said his major concern is that the winning cities of tomorrow are going to have to offer quality of life options, live-ability - the finest features available in terms of working, living, and visiting. This is an assault on those quality of life options. The City has spent a lot of money trying to synchronize traffic signals and trying to move traffic more efficiently - making massive investments of public funds to allow people to move as smoothly as possible in the City. It has been computed that the expense is justifiable because of the value of time, fuel, inconvenience, and clean air. Once people understand or have to live with this, they are going to recall that this occurred under the watch of this Council. "I want to, on behalf of the Council, serve notice now that I am opposed to this unless we can have the significant assistance in trying to relieve the congestion." The Governor and the legislative delegation in Washington ought to be in opposition to this unless they are willing to enter in to very serious partnerships in bringing a remedy to this. In March, at the National League of Cities, the Council ought to meet with their delegation and this one item that ought to be very high on the subject list. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole said a great deal of money has been spent in neighborhoods and areas that are currently impacted and are vulnerable to the current train traffic. These are places people will simply flee from if the train traffic increases to the extent discussed. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight said he would like to be allowed to work with the City Manager to develop a strategy to return for Council consideration. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight inquired if anyone wished to be heard. James Irlandi James Irlandi, President of Skill Transportation Consulting, Inc., advisor to the Kansas Shippers Association ((KSA) - UP-MP, SFE, and SSW Shippers Groups, said members of the KSA were not contacted regarding the trackage rights to the BNSF Railroad. Since several members have given UP thousands of cars of business, it is believed this neglect demonstrates the attitude of UP and SP toward their small Kansas customers. The attitude of neglect, coupled with UP's car ordering system, has convinced the majority of the directors of the three associations to vote to participate in the UP-SP merger. The increased concentration of the rail industry in Kansas and, specifically, the combination of carriers (BNSF and UP-SP) which serve this area by direct and joint line service reduces the ability of the majority of the members of the Association to obtain competitive rail rates and services. It is apparent that future UP-SP expressed emphasis on main line and single line service will preclude service to the majority of the member shippers. Past experience with the UP has shown a curtailment of service on main lines to local shippers, giving preference to through train traffic to the exclusion of local originations and termination. Some shippers on KSW have waited more than a month for UP cars to be used in loading to destinations beyond the junction point at Wichita with UP. Shipping concerns are compounded by the further rail concentration created by the subject merger. Without competitive options, the shipper is at the mercy of mega carriers. Restoration of a competitive balance in south central Kansas is essential to the survival of the rural economy of the region. A visit to Wichita will reveal that there are some 75 car loading facilities in the Wichita switching district with no activity because they are empty. At other switching facilities where SP has concentrated service, the elevators are full of grains. Geographical location and railroad practices dictate the thrust of marketing. Motion -- Knight moved that Mayor Knight be authorized to work with the City Manager, Bill Stockwell, and Marvin Krout on a strategy for Wichita, in conjunction with Sedgwick County, the State Delegation, Governor Graves, and the Federal Delegation to aggressively oppose the merger unless there are certain features available to soften the impact on the City of Wichita and Sedgwick County. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. RECESS The City Council recessed at 12:22 p.m. and reconvened at 1:07 p.m. ALARM ORDINANCE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ALARM ORDINANCE. (Requested by Vice-Mayor Kamen) Keith Brown Cash Services Manager reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 96-113. The current false alarm ordinance has a three part fee structure: (1) a permit fee of $10 for residential property and $20 for commercial property, (2) a false alarm response fee of $10, and (3) a tiered panic false alarm fee of $10 for the first alarm within six months $25 for alarms two and three within six months and $50 for all subsequent alarm within six months for residential property and a fee of $25 for the first alarm within sixty days, $100 for all other alarms within the sixty days for commercial property. The current ordinance does not require alarm monitoring companies to provide the City a list of their customers, making the required permit section of the ordinance difficult to administer. The current system generates permit applications to alarm owners who are not in the data base when they have a false alarm. Under the current system the administrator has no way of knowing how many alarm systems exist. Council Member Kamen on three different occasions held meetings with several of the alarm monitoring companies conducting business in the Wichita area. The purpose of the meetings were to get ideas from the various companies on how to change the false alarm ordinance to better serve the citizens, the companies and the City of Wichita. The meetings resulted in the following changes to the false alarm ordinance: 1. Elimination of the permit fee of $10 for residence and $20 for commercial properties. 2. A flat fee of $12.50 for each panic false alarm for residential properties and $50 for each panic false alarm for commercial properties. 3. Increase the false alarm response fee to $12.50 from $10. 4. All alarm monitoring companies are required to provide the City Treasurer a list of all their customers and provide weekly updates of installed or disconnected alarm systems. 5. If the false alarm response fees or panic alarm fees are not paid within sixty (60) days of such notification a late fee of ten dollars ($10) shall be added to the amount due. The alarm user and alarm monitoring company will be notified by certified mail that the communication center (911) will not respond to further alarms from the alarm monitoring company unless the delinquent fee and late charges are paid. The final draft of the ordinance was sent out to fourteen different alarm monitoring companies so that they could provide their final comments prior to submission to the governing body. Responses were received from two of the companies, the comments were as follows: 1. The ordinance provides one (1) free false alarm response fee per year, and this company would like to see that increased to three (3). 2. The ordinance provides alarm monitoring companies two (2) minutes to cancel alarm calls to 9-1-1 that are false without being assessed a fee. The company would like to see that increased to three (3) minutes. 3. One company expressed a concern about the $10 penalty if false alarm fines are not paid within thirty (30) days. 4. One company did not want to provide the City Treasurer with their customers list because they fear a loss of confidentiality. 5. One company wanted the panic false alarm fee for commercial property to be the same as the fee for residential property. All of these issues were fully discussed in the meetings with the alarm companies. To the extent possible the concerns of the alarm companies were taken into consideration in the preparation of the ordinance. The increased false alarm response fee and the elimination of the permit fees will result in a neutral revenue position. The requirement of alarm monitoring companies to provide customer list will make the administration, billing in particular, more accurate and more cost effective. Keith Brown Cash Services Manager, responding to a question, said that, as part of the agreement, the false alarm billing function will be brought back to Wichita. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight inquired if anyone wished to be heard and no one appeared. Motion -- Kamen moved that the modified false alarm ordinance be approved and placed on -- carried first reading. Motion carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance amending Sections 3.40.020, 3.40.070, 3.40.090, 3.40.100, and 3.40.105 of the Code of the City of Wichita, Kansas, pertaining to definitions, operational practices of alarm businesses, and response fees, and repealing the originals of said sections and also Sections 3.40.081, 3.40.082, 3.40,083, 3.40.085, 3.40.086, and 3.40.087 of the Code of the City of Wichita, pertaining to user permits for alarm systems, introduced and under the rules laid over. SALARY ADJUSTMENT SALARY ADJUSTMENT. Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 96-114. City Manager Chris Cherches was appointed in 1985. Since 1990, the salary history for the City Manager has been as follows: Year Salary Level 1990 $100,000 1991 1992 1993 1994 $105,000 1995 1996 The City Council has not taken action concerning the City Manager's salary for 1995 and 1996. To assist in determining a fair and reasonable compensation package for the City Manager, the Personnel Office was requested to review peer cities and local public chief executive officer (CEO) salaries. In a survey of 19 peer cities, the average salary level was $122,271 (four of the cities were 1995 salaries with 1996 salaries not yet set). On a related compensation matter, CEOs with vehicle allowances ranged from $415 to $650. Other local public CEO salary levels are: Sedgwick County Manager $103,228 Wichita Public School Superintendent 112,100 Wichita State University President 135,118 The City Council conducts a performance evaluation of the City Manager in executive session. Salary and compensation increases are acted upon in open meeting. Like all employees, the City Manager's compensation is a combination of merit consideration and cost- of-living adjustment (for inflation). In the case of most other City employees, a pay adjustment for inflation or contract settlements is separate from merit review. In the case of the City Manager, the City Council considers both in concert. For 1995, employees represented by unions or the nonunion Employees' Council averaged (combined) a 2.5 percent cost-of-living pay adjustment with individual merit an additional consideration. For 1996, the cost-of-living adjustment averaged 2.15 percent again with individual employee merit review an additional consideration. Under the City's employee union contracts, the typical annual merit pay increase averages 5 percent. Combined cost-of-living and merit pay will then exceed 7 percent. The City Manager's currently assigned six-year- old City vehicle is in need of replacement. In lieu of a new vehicle acquisition, the Council should consider a vehicle allowance. This is more than norm for other CEOs in peer cities as well as for City department directors. The City Fleet staff projects that the operating costs for a new City vehicle assigned to the City Manager would exceed $525 per month. In consideration of both cost-of-living (inflationary adjustment) and merit, the recommendation before the City Council is to address City Manager compensation in three parts: Item Action (1) 1995 Salary Increase to $108,250 (3%) retroactive to 1/1/95. (2) 1996 Salary Increase to $111,500 (3%) retroactive to 1/1/96. (3) Vehicle Allowance Authorize vehicle allowance of $500 per month Compensation for the City Manager is included in the annual City Budget (General Fund). Mayor Knight Mayor Knight inquired if anyone wished to be heard and no one appeared. Motion -- Ferris moved that the adjustments in 1995/1996 City Manager salary and vehicle allowance be approved; that the City Manager be evaluated annually and the City Manager's salary be adjusted accordingly; and the ordinance be placed on first reading. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight asked Council Member Ferris to be responsible for initiating the review for the 1997 increase. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance pertaining to the compensation of the City Manager and repealing Ordinance No. 42-246, introduced and under the rules laid over. APPOINTMENTS APPOINTMENTS TO CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. Civil Rights and Services Board (1 vacancy - Cole) Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities (1 vacancy - Gale) Police & Fire Retirement Board of Trustees (1 vacancy - Cole) Wichita Commission on the Status of Women (1 vacancy - Gale) Wichita Public Building Commission (3 vacancies - Cole, Gale, Kamen) Appointments will be for terms expiring June 30, 1997. Motion -- Cole appointed Dave Perrin, Public Building Commission, and moved that the -- carried appointment be approved. Motion carried 7 to 0. Motion -- Gale appointed Bobbie Goldberg, People with Disabilities; Judy Gisel, Status of Women; and Anne Silva Keith, Public Building Commission, and moved that the -- carried appointments be approved. Motion carried 7 to 0. Motion -- Knight moved that the rules be set aside and an appointment be made off agenda. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. Motion -- Gale appointed Gary Wetzel, Codes Standards and Appeals, and moved that the -- carried appointment be approved. Motion carried 7 to 0. CONSENT AGENDA Knight moved that the Consent Agenda, including Addendum Item, except Item 28, be approved in accordance with the recommended action shown thereon. Motion carried 7 to 0. BOARD OF BIDS REPORT OF THE BOARD OF BIDS AND CONTRACTS DATED FEBRUARY 12, 1996. At 10:00 a.m., Friday, February 9, 1996, pursuant to advertisements published, bids were received, publicly opened, read aloud and tabulated for the Board of Bids and Contracts: (Ref: Bid analysis report attached to Board of Bids Minutes 2/12/96) PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION: SEWERS, PAVING AND WATER MAINS AS PER SPECIFICATIONS 1996 Contract Maintenance Preparatory Curb and Gutter Repair and Miscellaneous Concrete Repair at various locations. (132258/112000) Traffic to be maintained through construction. (Council approval date 01-23-96) (District all) Williamson Construction - $275,000.00 (Engineer's Construction Estimate) Ralph Wulz Riverside Tennis Complex (Central and Nims). (472-82669/785493) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 01-05-96) (District VI) Ritchie Paving - $79,930.50 (Total Base Bid Items with Add. Alt. 2) Water Distribution System to serve Smithmoor Fourth Addition (south of Harry, east of Webb). (448- 88878/733022/470380) Traffic to be maintained during construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 11-29-94) (District II) Hopper Construction - $27,340.20 Water Distribution System to serve Windwood and Hedge Apple Addition (south of 21st, west of Maize). (448- 88961/733048/470382) Traffic to be maintained during construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 11-21-95) (District V) WB Carter Construction Co., Inc. - $102,031.00 Water Distribution System to serve Windwood Addition (south of 21st, west of Maize). (448- 88957/733055/470383) Traffic to be maintained during construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 11-21-95) (District V) WBW Contractors - $44,367.00 Lateral 37, Main 12, Southwest Interceptor Sewer to serve Sunridge Second Addition (south of 21st, east of 119th St. West). (468-82487/742536/480345) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 08-15-95) (District V) AND Lateral 38, Main 12, Southwest Interceptor Sewer to serve Sunridge Second Addition (south of 21st, east of 119th St. West). (468-82513/742544/480346) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 11-07-95) (District V) Nowak Construction - $37,974.00 (Aggregate Total) North Shore Boulevard from 13th Street North to School Circle to and including cul-de-sac; Ponderosa from EL of the plat to EL of North Shore Boulevard; Warren Circle to and including cul-de-sac; North Shore Circle to and including cul- de-sac; Briarwood Circle to and including cul-de-sac; and Decel Lane on the south side of 13th Street North to serve North Shore Boulevard, Spinnaker Coves Hoskinson Addition (south of 13th, east of Ridge). (472-82612/763383/490441) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 07-25-95) (District V) Ritchie Paving - $533,315.25 Baytree, Britton, and Callahan from the south line of Sterling to the east line of Baytree, and Britton Circle, serving Lots 12 through 27, Block 1; Callahan Court, serving Lots 34 through 38, Block 1; and Baytree Court, serving Lots 12 through 16, Block 2, Sterling Farms Sixth Addition (west of Tyler, north of 21st). (472-82631/763409/490443) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 02-06-96) (District V) Ritchie Paving - $268,167.78 Knight moved that the contracts be awarded as outlined above, subject to check, same being the lowest and best bids within the Engineer's construction estimate, and the Mayor be authorized to sign the contracts for the City. Motion carried 7 to 0. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/FLEET & BUILDINGS DIVISION: DEMOLITION OF SIX (6) LOCATIONS AS PER SPECIFICATIONS Group I - Key Construction, Inc. - $ 7,887.00 (Total Net Bid) Group II - HD Mills dba Southwest Salvage - $23,300.00 (Total Net Bid) Group III - Key Construction, Inc. - $ 5,349.00 (Total Net Bid) Group IV - Key Construction, Inc. - $ 1,800.00 (Total Net Bid) GENERAL GOVERNMENT/OFFICE OF CENTRAL INSPECTION: DEMOLITION, REMOVAL OF STRUCTURES, AND CLEAN-UP OF THREE (3) RESIDENCES (206334) AS PER SPECIFICATIONS Item 1 - Midwest Contractors - $1,480.00 (Total Net Bid) Item 2 - Midwest Contractors - $2,640.00 (Total Net Bid) Item 3 - Cornejo & Sons, Inc. - $2,280.00 (Total Net Bid) VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS, BOARDS, AND AGENCIES: PLUMBING REPAIR SERVICES AS PER SPECIFICATIONS Brake, Inc. - Group I - $34.50 per man per hour - Group II - $33.00 per man per hour PARK & RECREATION DEPARTMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/FLEET & BUILDINGS DIVISION: WING ROTARY CUTTING UNITS (170266, 170258, 130807) AS PER SPECIFICATIONS Johnson County Sales & Service - $143,700.00 (Total Net Bid) <$ 8,000.00> (Less Option #1 Lump Sum) PARK & RECREATION DEPARTMENT: FOUR WHEEL DRIVE SKID STEER LOADER (173252) AS PER SPECIFICATIONS White Star Machinery - $20,279.00 (Total Lump Sum) - $ 381.00 (Option #1 Lump Sum) - $ 224.00 (Option #2 Lump Sum) WATER & SEWER DEPARTMENT/WATER DISTRIBUTION DIVISION: WATERWORKS SUPPLIES (181222) AS PER SPECIFICATIONS Group I - Wichita Winwater Works, Co.- $3,622.50*** (Total Net Bid) Group II - Price Bros. Co. Pipeline Services- $ 840.00 (Total Net Bid) Group III - Hajoca Corp. - $2,098.00 (Total Net Bid) Group IV - D.C. & B. Supply, Inc. - $ 288.50 (Total Net Bid) Group V - Water Products of Oklahoma - $ 574.50 (Total Net Bid) Group VI - deleted Group VII - Heartland Waterworks Supply, Inc.- $ 721.60 (Total Net Bid) Group VIII - D.C. & B. Supply, Inc. - $ 383.60 (Total Net Bid) Group IX - Ferguson Enterprises - $ 887.00* (Total Net Bid) Group X - Water Pro Supplies - $ 720.00 (Total Net Bid) (plus applicable sales tax) *1% - 10th ***2% - 30 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/FLEET & BUILDINGS DIVISION: FINNEY STATE OFFICE BUILDING MAIL ROOM AND SECURITY COUNTER ALTERATIONS AS PER SPECIFICATIONS Coast to Coast Builders - $35,000.00* (Architect's Estimate) *negotiated PARK DEPARTMENT/CENTURY II: STAGE FLOORING AND INSTALLATION OF FLOORING AS PER SPECIFICATIONS Group I - Acme Floor Co., Inc. - $23,520.00 Group II - Farha Construction, Inc. - $31,444.00 Knight moved that the contracts be awarded as outlined above, same being the lowest and best bid. Motion carried 7 to 0. LICENSE APPLICATIONS APPLICATIONS FOR LICENSES TO RETAIL CEREAL MALT BEVERAGES. Renewal 1996 (Consumption on Premises) Stuart W. Gribble Wichita Sportservice,Inc.*338 S. Sycamore St. (Consumption off Premises) Roy E. Brockmeier QuikTrip #315 1530 S. Maize Rd. Roy E. Brockmeier QuikTrip #360 3935 W. 13th St. Paul A. Dawson Metro Beverage Co.3233 N. Rock Rd. New Establishment 1996 (Consumption off Premises) John G. Harmon Casey's General Store5562 South Seneca *General Retailer--beer sales derive less than 50% of gross revenues. Motion -- Knight moved that the licenses be approved subject to Staff review and -- carried approval. Motion carried 7 to 0. PLANS AND SPECS. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. a. Drainage, Paving, Channelization, Signalization and Landscaping Improvements at the Intersection of Harry and Edgemoor. (468-82138/724179/420517 & 472- 82668/706291/405183) Traffic to be maintained during construction with one lane, one way traffic at all times. (Council approval date 03-21-95 & 01-09-96) (District III) b. 1995 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Program - Reconstruct the 8" Sanitary Sewer in the alley west of Dodge Street from the first manhole south of Third Street to the end of the line south of McLean (west of Seneca, south of McLean). (468-82558/621235/533226) Third Street and alley to be closed to traffic. (Council approval date 07-18-95) (District VI) Motion -- Knight moved that the plans and specifications be approved and the City Clerk be instructed to advertise for bids to be submitted to the Board of Bids and -- carried Contracts by 10:00 a.m., February 16, 1996. Motion carried 7 to 0. c. 1996 Contract Maintenance Asphalt Street Heater-Scarification at various locations. (132266/112000) Traffic to be maintained through construction. (Council approval date 01-23-96) (District all) Motion -- Knight moved that the plans and specifications be approved and the City Clerk be instructed to advertise for bids to be submitted to the Board of Bids and -- carried Contracts by 10:00 a.m., February 23, 1996. Motion carried 7 to 0. SUBDIVISION PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. a. Lateral 1, Main 18, Southwest Interceptor Sewer to serve Hickory Creek Estates Addition (south of 13th, west of 119th Street West). (468-82562/742601/480352) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 01-23-96) (District 5) b. Water Distribution System to serve Robbins Farm 4th Addition (west of Broadway, north of 55th Street South). (448-88929/732982/470376) Traffic to be maintained during construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 10-17-95) (District 4) Motion -- Knight moved that the plans and specifications be approved and the City Clerk be instructed to advertise for bids to be submitted to the Board of Bids and -- carried Contracts by 10:00 a.m., February 23, 1996. Motion carried 7 to 0. PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES. a. Lateral 351, Southwest Interceptor Sewer to serve Robbins Farm 4th Addition (west of Broadway, north of 55th St S.) - $57,000.00. (468-82485/742502/480342) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 09-12-78) (District V) b. Lateral 360, Southwest Interceptor Sewer to serve Winwood Addition (south of 21st, west of Maize) - $161,200.00. (468-82525/742569/480348) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 11-21-95) (District V) c. 16th Street North from WL and extended WL of Lot 1, Block 4 to EL of Lot 33, Block 2 and EL of Lot 9, Block 4; 16th Street Court from NL of 16th Street North to and including the cul-de-sac serving lots 8 through 20, Block 2; 16th Street Court from NL of 16th Street North to and including the cul-de-sac, serving Lots 21 through 33, Block 2; and Aberdeen from EL of Socora to EL of Lot 14, Block 4 and EL of Lot 9, Block 5 Socora Village & Wesley West Addition (east of Tyler, south of 17th) - $203,202.00. (472-82279/763417/490444) Does not affect existing traffic. (Council approval date 09-12- 95) (District V) d. Socora from the SL of Westlink Village 16th Addition to SL if 17th Street North, all in Westlink Village 16th Addition (east of Tyler, south of 21st Street North) - $16,000.00. (472-80747/763474/490450) Socora to be closed during construction. (Council approval date 08-29-78) (District V) e. Water Distribution System to serve White Tail Addition (south of 13th, west of 127th Street East) - $52,440.00. (448-88767/732396/470317) Traffic to be maintained during construction using flagpersons and barricades. (Council approval date 11-30-93) (District n/a) f. (Amended) Paving Mosley, from First to Second Streets (Old Town Street Improvements) - $670,200.00. (472-82374/705371/405127) Motion -- Knight moved that the preliminary estimates be approved and filed. Motion -- carried carried 7 to 0. STATEMENTS OF COST STATEMENTS OF COST. a. (First Partial) Intersection of Sycamore and Maple Streets - $360,333.00. Financing to be issued at this time - $360,333.00. (472-82627/706242/405178) b. (Second Partial) Freeway in the Central Business District: Total estimated cost to be incurred through 12/95 - $41,993,805.00. (Less bonds previously issued - $2,000,000.00; less other sources of funding - $1,409,875.00) Bonds to be issued at this time - $20,000,000.00. (700609/400047) c. (First Partial) Freeway on Kellogg at Dugan Road: Total estimated cost to be incurred through 12/95 - $6,748,000.00. (Less other sources of revenue - $1,748,000.00) Bonds to be issued at this time - $5,000,000.00. (700898/400300) Motion -- Knight moved that the Statements of Cost be approved and filed. Motion -- carried carried 7 to 0. STATEMENTS OF COST (CHESNEY). a. Lateral 84, Sanitary Sewer #23 to serve Lots 1-14 inclusive & Lots 59-67 inclusive, Block 1, Harbor Isle Addition - $74,534.00. (468-82408/742312/480323) b. Lateral 33, Main 12, SWI to serve Sunridge Second Addition - $53,584.00. (468-82158/742353/480327) c. Lateral 352, SWI to serve Northridge Lakes Addition - $147,633.00. (468-82488/742437/480335) d. Lateral 12, Main 13, Southwest Interceptor Sewer to serve part of Lark Second Addition - $122,343.00. (468-82443/742254/480317) e. Lateral 82, Sanitary Sewer #23 to serve the Moorings Fifth Addition - $12,275.00. (468-82358/742379/480329) f. Lateral 349, SWI to serve Buckhead Addition - $190,436.00. (468-82477/742361/480328) g. Lateral 1, Main 16, SWI to serve Lake Ridge Second Addition - $332,585.00. (468-82335/742346/480326) h. Storm Water Sewer #460 to serve Prairie Woods Addition - $107,641.00. (468-82467/750620/485098) i. Lateral 3, Main 17, SWI to serve part of Forest Lakes Addition - $53,692.00. (468-82301/742403/480332) j. Lateral 2, Main 17, SWI to serve part of Forest Lakes Addition - $95,664.00. (468-82300/742395/480331) k. Storm Water Sewer #459 to serve Reflection Ridge Seventh and Eighth Additions - $84,707.00. (468- 82460/750653/485101) l. Storm Water Sewer #434 to serve Reflection Ridge Seventh and Eighth Additions - $192,723.00. (468- 82213/750646/485100) m. Water Distribution System to serve Forest Lakes Addition - $22,621.00. (448-88699/732818/470359) n. Water Distribution System to serve Forest Lakes Addition - $29,469.00. (448-88700/732826/470360) o. Water Distribution System to serve Buckhead Addition - $106,775.00. (448-88925/732792/470357) p. Water Distribution System to serve Sunridge Second Addition - $45,707.00. (448-88553/732784/470356) q. Water Distribution System to serve Harbor Isle Addition - $41,914.00. (448-88854/732743/470352) r. Water Distribution System to serve Pawnee and West Industrial Park Second Addition - $37,772.00. (448- 88915/732735/470351) s. 50th Street South from EL of Broadway to and including the cul-de-sac at the WL of Southglen Third Addition - $102,644.00. (472-82006/763102/490413) t. Rock Island (Old Town Phase III, Part 2) - $223,777.00. (Less bonds previously issued - $112,000.00) Bonds to be issued at this time - $111,777.00. (472- 82475/706010/405155) u. Mead (Old Town Phase III, Part 2) - $633,528.00. (472-82485/762666/490369) v. Accel/Decel Lane on the west side of Broadway from the NL of Lot 1, Block 1 to the SL of Lot 1, Block 1; and on 47th Street South from the EL of Lot 1, Block 1 to the major entrance; and sidewalk constructed on the west side of Broadway and the north side of 47th Street South, Dillon 11th Addition - $127,987.00. (472-82539/763029/490405) w. Meadow Oaks & Pepperwood from the south line of 28th Street North to the west line of Edgemoor Circle; Edgemoor Circle from the north line of Pepperwood to & including the cul-de-sac; Pepperwood Circle from the east line of Edgemoor Circle to the east line of Lot 47, Block 2, Meadow Oaks Addition; Meadow Oaks from the south line of Pepperwood to & including Meadow Oaks Circle; & both Meadow Oaks Courts adjacent to Lots 51-54 and Lots 56-68 in said Block 2, Meadow Oaks Addition - $356,468.00. (472-82354/762997/490402) x. Median in Broadway from a point 200 feet more or less north of the south line of Lot 1, to a point 420 feet more or less north of the south line of Lot 1, Dillon 11th Addition - $22,261.00. (472-82540/763037/490406) y. Water Distribution System to serve Lake Ridge Second Addition - $75,935.00. (448-88729/732768/470354) Motion -- Knight moved that the Statements of Cost be received and filed and the City Clerk be instructed to prepare the proposed assessment rolls. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. WDS PETITION PETITION (100%) FOR WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM TO SERVE OAK RIDGE ADDITION (NORTH OF 29TH STREET NORTH, WEST OF RIDGE). (District V) Agenda Report No. 96-115. The signatures on the petition represent 100% of the improvement district. The water line will serve Oak Ridge Addition, a new single-family development. The project includes an oversized line along 29th Street North that will have capacity to serve future developments. The estimated project cost is $55,750, with $40,750 paid by Special Assessments and $15,000 by the Water Utility. The Utility share is for the cost of pipe in excess of eight inches in diameter. Motion -- Knight moved that the Petition be approved and the Resolution be adopted. -- carried Motion carried 7 to 0. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-047 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Water Distribution System Number 448-88976, Oak Ridge Addition (north of 29th Street North, west of Ridge) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Knight moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. BOARDS MINUTES MINUTES OF ADVISORY BOARDS. Board of Appeals of Air Conditioning, Refrigeration, Warm Air Heating & Boilers, 1/26/96 CPO East Council 2, 1/22/96 CPO Southeast Council 3, 1/25/96 CPO Southwest Council 4, 1/25/96 CPO Northwest Council 5, 1/24/96 CPO North Central Council 6, 1/24/96 Historic Preservation Board, 1/8/96 Wichita Police & Fire Retirement System, 1/8/96 Wichita/Sedgwick County Board of Health, 1/11/96, Subcommittee 1/23/96 Wichita/Sedgwick County Solid Waste Management Committee, 1/8/96 Motion -- carried Knight moved that the Minutes be received and filed. Motion carried 7 to 0. STREET CLOSURES/USES CONSIDERATION OF STREET CLOSURES/USES. There were no street closures/uses considered. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGREEMENT TO RESPREAD SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN CAPITAL ADDITION (SOUTH OF 13TH, RESPREAD AGREEMENT WEST OF ROCK ROAD). (District II) Agenda Report No. 96-116. The developer, W. K. Capital Enterprises, Inc. platted an addition called Capital Addition, and has submitted an Agreement to respread special assessments in the addition. The land was originally included in numerous improvement districts for a number of public improvement projects. The purpose of the Agreement is to respread Special Assessments on an equal share basis for each lot. Without the Agreement, the assessments will be spread on a square foot basis. The Agreement will save the City time in recalculating special assessments for each newly platted lot and will equalize the assessments for each lot, making it easier for the developer to market the lots. There is no cost to the City. Motion -- Knight moved that the Agreement be approved and the Mayor be authorized to -- carried execute. Motion carried 7 to 0. AGREEMENT/REPORT FEDERAL EQUITABLE SHARING AGREEMENT AND ANNUAL CERTIFICATION REPORT. Agenda Report No. 96-117. In March 1994, the U.S. Department of Justice issued A Guide to Equitable Sharing of Federally Forfeited Property for State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies. The guide contains regulations pertaining to law enforcement agencies that receive forfeited assets through the Federal Equitable Sharing Program. One of the regulations contained in the guide requires an annual Federal Equitable Sharing Agreement and Annual Certification Report to be submitted to the Federal Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture. The Federal Equitable Sharing Agreement and Annual Certification Report stipulates that the City of Wichita agrees to abide by the regulations contained in A Guide to Equitable Sharing of Federally Forfeited Property for State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies and provides a report of revenues and expenditures of federally forfeited assets received by the City. This agreement and certification must be signed by the chief law enforcement official and a representative of the governing body in order for the City to be eligible to receive forfeited assets through the Federal Equitable Sharing Program. In 1995, the City received $58,272.45 in forfeited assets through the Federal Equitable Sharing Program and expended $14,975.22 in forfeited assets on the local match for the DARE grant and on informant payments. The fund balance at the beginning of 1996 was $151,371.07, and in 1996, $60,000 in forfeited assets are anticipated to be received. Failure to submit an annual Federal Equitable Sharing Agreement and Annual Certification Report may result in: (a) being barred, temporarily or permanently, from further participation in the Federal Equitable Sharing Program or (b) civil enforcement actions in U.S. District Court for breach of contract. Motion -- Knight moved that the Federal Equitable Sharing Agreement and Annual Certification Report be approved and the Mayor be authorized to sign. Motion -- carried carried 7 to 0. CENTURY II/HYATT HOTEL CONTRACT AMENDMENT - ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR COMBINED CENTURY II/HYATT HOTEL HEATING/COOLING EQUIP. HEATING AND COOLING EQUIPMENT. (District VI) Agenda Report No. 96-118. On October 10, 1995, the City Council approved a contract with Professional Engineering Consultants, P.A. (PEC) for engineering services related to the replacement of part of the heating and cooling equipment that serves the Century II Convention Center, Expo Hall and Main Library. The contract was in an amount not to exceed $40,000. The Agreement between the City of Wichita and Stormont Trice Development Corporation requires the City of Wichita to provide cooling, water heating, and related services for the Hyatt Hotel in a new combined energy plant. PEC has done engineering work for the replacement equipment under their original contract. In this Contract Amendment, the Scope of Services for engineering services is modified to provide for demolition of the existing heating/cooling energy plant and the construction of a new combined heating/cooling energy plant which will serve Century II, Expo Hall, the Main Library and the Hyatt Hotel. It has been determined that construction of one combined plant is more cost-effective and more energy efficient than to renovate the existing plant and construct a separate plant for the Hotel. Although the City's up-front cost is higher than we had planned for the scheduled plant renovation, the new combined plant will provide new highly efficient equipment and cut energy costs to the City by as much as 40%, or approximately $100,000 annually. The planned renovation only replaced part of the old equipment. Stormont Trice requires that the new energy plant is to be in operation no later than January 17, 1997 which makes prompt action necessary. The 1995 Capital Improvement Program Project (PB-129) identifies $550,000 for replacement of the Century II chillers and related modifications. PB-131 identified $45,000 for renovation of the Century II boilers. The original contract with PEC was in "an amount not to exceed $40,000" with an additional amount up to $1,000 for expenses and was being paid from Projects PB-129 and PB-131. The Contract Amendment will also be paid from these projects. This amendment provides that "...professional architectural and engineering services are limited to no more than $191,152." This is an increase in the maximum engineering costs by $151,152 and includes all related expenses. Motion -- Knight moved that the Contract Amendment be approved and the Mayor be authorized -- carried to execute. Motion carried 7 to 0. PROPERTY ACQUISITION PROPERTY ACQUISITION - PORTION OF 1004 E. MURDOCK (TRACT #17). Agenda Report No. 96-119. The Murdock Improvement Project from Waco to Wabash, approved by Council on June 14, 1994, will require the partial acquisition from fourteen tracts along Murdock from Waco to Wabash. One of these tracts is tract #17, which is owned by Mike Bulleigh. The property is more accurately described in the tract map and legal description. Murdock will be upgraded to a five lane arterial standard. The subject tract contains approximately 15.98 square feet. Due to the small size of the takings, the estimated value of the properties are minimal. The property owner has agreed to sell the property for $200. The 1994 Capital Improvement Program includes $150,000 to acquire the necessary right-of-way for the project along Murdock from Waco to Wabash. The funding source is General Obligation Bonds. The budget of $325 includes $200 for acquisition and $125 for closing costs, and title insurance. A budgeted amount of $2,375 has already been approved for the purchase of seven other tracts. After the purchase of this parcel, there will be six more left to purchase for the project. Motion -- Knight moved that the budget, property acquisition, and the contract(s) be approved and the Mayor be authorized to sign the necessary documents. Motion -- carried carried 7 to 0. PROPERTY ACQUISITION - 9TH AND GROVE. Agenda Report No. 96-120. The property at 2323/2325 East Ninth Street has been identified as a potential opportunity purchase. The site contains 19,250 square feet. It is improved with two connected buildings totaling 3,416 square feet. The property is currently vacant. The improvements are concrete block construction and are approximately fifty years old. Most recent uses have been a variety of clubs and bars. The property is located on a major intersection. Its condition and usage has had a negative impact on the neighborhood for some time and the owner has offered this property to the City for acquisition and development. The owner has agreed to sell the property for $54,000. The County has the property appraised at $58,340 for tax purposes. The property is in a deteriorated condition and would require complete renovation both internally and externally if the improvements were to be kept. In accordance with redevelopment plans in the north central area, this property has been targeted for demolition and redevelopment. A budget of $65,000 is requested for this transaction. This includes $54,000 for the purchase, $1,000 for closing costs and $10,000 for demolition. The source of funding with be from either the CDBG income or from the appropriate designated source. Motion -- Knight moved that the budget, property acquisition, and the contract(s) be approved and the Mayor be authorized to sign the necessary documents. Motion -- carried carried 7 to 0. FRANCHISE ASSIGNMENT ASSIGNMENT OF FRANCHISE FROM SHELLEE K. MORRISON D/B/A KID'S KAB TO JAKS, INC. Agenda Report No. 96-121. On August 1, 1995, a franchise ordinance was approved for operation of a specialized children's transportation with Wichita city limits. Since that time, the original franchisee has established a corporation called JAKS, Inc., under which her service operates. The franchise agreement, Ordinance No. 42-823 permits transfer of the franchise with the permission of the City Council. Motion -- carried Knight moved that the Assignment be approved. Motion carried 7 to 0. (Item No. 28) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT APPROVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT - COLE MOWER. Agenda Report No. 96-122. On September 20, 1995, the City filed an eminent domain proceeding to acquire a tract of land in connection with the Ice Rink Project. This tract is a parcel of land at the southwest corner of McLean Boulevard and Maple Street. The tract is improved with a 6,000 square foot concrete building with a 3,600 square foot, pre-engineered, metal addition. The tract is currently occupied by Cole Mower Service. The City's appraisal of the tract established the fair market value of the land and buildings at $250,000. The owner refused the City's offer at the appraised value and after negotiations in which the owner countered with an offer of $500,000 the owner refused the City's final offer of $350,000. On November 13, 1995, the court-appointed appraisers filed their report in this case. They assessed damages of $500,000 for this tract. The Court allowed the appraisers fees in the total amount of $5100 and assessed court costs of $66.50 against the City. Council took action in December 1995 to abandon the eminent domain proceeding and as a consequence it is responsible for paying the reasonable expenses incurred by the landowner in defending the eminent domain proceeding. The owner of the property has offered to sell the property to the City for a purchase price of $416,000. In addition, he has established the sum of $10,000 as the amount of the expenses he incurred (attorney fees and appraiser's services) in defending the City's prior eminent domain proceeding. Regardless of whether the City acquires the property from the owner, the law requires the City to pay what the court orders in the way of reasonable expenses. It is likely that the court would allow the owner more than the $10,000 that he has offered to accept in connection with this sale transaction. In addition, it is unlikely that the City could initiate future eminent domain proceedings to acquire this land and obtain an appraisers' award less than the owner's offer price of $416,000. The acquisition of this property will fill out the City's ownership of the block bounded by Maple on the north; McLean on the east; Sycamore on the west; and Kellogg on the south. The costs associated with this acquisition and abandoned eminent domain action will be paid by the City-at- large out of Ice Rink Project property acquisitions funds. The City has the authority to purchase the property and accept the offer to compromise the owner's claim against the City for reasonable expenses in connection with the abandoned eminent domain proceeding. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole recalled that it was discussed that the total price for acquisition would be $416,000. Council Member Kamen Council Member Kamen spoke against the acquisition and stated that there is no way the City will get that amount of money back. The owner made the decision not to accept the City's first or second offer and may not choose this offer. Motion -- Ferris moved that the acquisition of property at 333 West Maple be approved with the amount not to exceed $416,000, including all costs. Motion carried -- carried 6 to 1. Kamen - No. LIMOUSINE SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR CHARTER LIMOUSINE SERVICE - RICE LIMOUSINE SERVICE. Agenda Report No. 96-123. Willard W. Rice has submitted an application to operate a charter limousine service in Wichita. At present, Mr. Rice does not own any cars, however, two vehicles have been identified that he can purchase - both 1988 Lincoln Town Cars. MTA has received written and verbal assurance from Mr. Rice's insurance agent that his service would be covered under the appropriate commercial policy. The MTA Board approved issuance of the Certificate of Convenience upon legal review of the limousine service insurance policy. License will not be released until the vehicle(s) are inspected and approved by WMTA. Motion -- carried Knight moved that the Certificate be approved. Motion carried 7 to 0. IRB - BOEING EXTENSION OF LETTER OF INTENT - BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANE GROUP. Agenda Report No. 96-124. On March 24, 1992, the City Council approved the issuance of a Letter of Intent for Industrial Revenue Bonds in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000,000 to the Boeing Company. Bond sale proceeds have been and will continue to be used to finance the modernization of Boeing's plant facilities and provide facilities and program equipment required for new business. The Letter of Intent was issued for a four-year term expiring on March 24, 1996. Of the $2.0 billion contained in the March 24, 1992 Letter of Intent, $774.0 million has already been expended by Boeing, leaving a balance of $1.226 billion. Boeing has committed $120.0 million of the remaining balance for a future bond issue. Extending the Letter of Intent will provide Boeing with $1.226 billion in resources projected for planned improvements over the next four years. Bond proceeds will be utilized by The Boeing Company as guarantor to finance the continued modernization of its plant facilities and provide facilities and program equipment required for new business. Bond proceeds also will be utilized to provide new, updated machinery and equipment which will allow Boeing Wichita to effectively compete for new commercial and military production programs and to sustain on- going programs. The acquisition of new equipment is deemed essential to keep on-going programs competitive with advancing technology and to acquire new business which may evolve during the next four years. Boeing agrees to pay all costs of issuing the bonds and agrees to the City's administrative fee of $2,500 for the term of the bonds. Costs for extending the Letter of Intent will be included in the costs to issue the bonds. Boeing requests that the City Council grant a tax abatement on the project's improvements and equipment. Boeing currently pays approximately $5,343,286 in real and personal property taxes on property it owns. Boeing also pays $180,869.59 as an in lieu of tax on property it has acquired with prior bond issues during the last 10 years. Motion -- Knight moved that the extension for a four-year period ending March 24, 2000, be -- carried approved. Motion carried 7 to 0. ADDENDUM ITEM 30a RECOVERY SERVICES NEIGHBORHOOD COURT-IN-PATIENT/OUT-PATIENT TREATMENT CONTRACT. Agenda Report No. 96-135. On February 7, 1995, the Bureau of Justice Assistance approved a Phase II Comprehensive Communities Program grant in the amount of $1,864,649. The City Council approved the grant award documents on February 28,1995. The grant provides funding for community policing, community mobilization and prevention initiatives, comprehensive gang initiatives, Neighborhood Municipal Court including drug courts with diversion to treatment and community- based alternatives to incarceration. On May 9, 1995, the City Council awarded a contract to a service provider for the drug treatment services for the Neighborhood Municipal Court drug court. On January 15, 1996, the service provided terminated the contract with the City because the business was sold to another company who no longer wished to provide the drug court treatment services. The grant provides a total of approximately $94,000 for drug/alcohol treatment for the drug court component of the Neighborhood Municipal Court. To continue the drug court treatment component, a notice of Request for Proposals was published in local newspapers and sent to 42 community agencies. On February 7, 1996, a Staff Screening and Selection Committee recommended Recovery Services Council's proposal because it offered more flexibility in programming for clients, included a more versatile proposal, and demonstrated knowledge and experience in the field. Recovery Services Council will assist the Neighborhood Municipal Court in providing in-patient and out- patient drug/alcohol treatment to selected clients referred by the Court. No local funds or matching funds are required for the grant. A total of approximately $94,000 is budgeted in the Comprehensive Communities Program grant budget to pay for treatment services. Clients will be asked to pay for a portion of their treatment costs. The term of the agreement would be six months starting February 1, 1996, and ending July 31, 1996, with an option for the City to extend the contract if the grant is extended. Motion -- Knight moved that the Contract be approved and the Mayor be authorized to -- carried execute. Motion carried 7 to 0. ASSESSMENT ROLLS PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLLS. Proposed Assessment Rolls have been prepared for 42 paving projects, and it is necessary to set a public hearing date. Informal hearing with City personnel will be held February 28, 1996. Motion -- Knight moved that the hearing on the Proposed Assessment Rolls be set for 11:00 a.m., Tuesday, March 5, 1996, and the notices of hearing be published at least once not less than 10 days prior to the date of the hearing. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. AMENDING RESOLUTIONS AMENDING RESOLUTIONS FOR STORM WATER SEWER NO. 434 AND LATERAL 11, MAIN 14, SOUTHWEST INTERCEPTOR SEWER. (Districts IV and V) Agenda Report No. 96-125. On April 21, 1992, the City Council adopted an authorizing resolution for Storm Water Sewer No. 434. On August 22, 1995, the City Council adopted the authorizing resolution for Lateral 11, Main 14, Southwest Interceptor Sewer. Each project has been completed and is scheduled for the August 1996 Bond Issue. It has been determined that the resolutions contain errors that should be corrected by amendment. The storm water sewer lists an incorrect legal description and the sanitary sewer has an incorrect budget amount. Resolutions have been prepared that bring the resolutions into conformance with the original petitions filed by the property owners. Motion -- carried Knight moved that the Resolutions be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-048 A Resolution amending Resolution No. R-92-254 pertaining to the construction of Storm Water Sewer No. 434, Project No. 468-82213, presented. Knight moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-049 A Resolution amending Resolution No. R-95-309 pertaining to the construction of Lateral 11, Main 14, Southwest Interceptor Sewer, Project No. 468-82469, presented. Knight moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. DISCLOSURE UNDERTAKINGS AMENDING ORDINANCES TO UPDATE DISCLOSURE UNDERTAKINGS RELATIVE TO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND NOTES. Agenda Report No. 96-126. In 1994, the federal Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") approved amendments to its Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule"), which controls how underwriters may market municipal securities. The amendments to the Rule essentially prohibit underwriters from bidding upon or agreeing to market municipal bonds or certain notes unless the Issuer or another "Obligated Person" (within the meaning of the Rule) furnishes a written undertaking to provide certain ongoing public disclosures for the use of the trading markets while the bonds are outstanding. The City established such undertakings by separate ordinances adopted in 1995, creating Code Sections 2.05.010 (for Bonds) and 2.05.020 (for Notes). However, in the time period since the original creation of the City's Master Written Undertakings, the SEC has issued interpretive guidance that effectively requires certain changes in the existing undertakings, and several underwriters have also indicated that particular technical changes to the undertaking would increase their level of comfort as to their own satisfaction of their obligations under the Rule. Although the Rule, by its terms, applies to underwriters, brokers and dealers, rather than Issuers of municipal securities, the practical effect of the Rule is such that the City will not be able to market general obligation Bonds and Notes through underwriters unless the City maintains the written undertakings required by the Rule (including modifications and updates made necessary by SEC interpretive releases). Consequently, it is appropriate and in the best interests of the City to adopt the amendments necessary to conform the existing undertakings to the positions taken in the most recent SEC releases. As part of the procedure for amending the existing undertaking, the City will need to mail a Bond Counsel opinion and copies of the amended undertaking to the information depositories and agencies designated by the SEC to receive and publicize municipal securities information. However, the costs of such mailings will be minimal. Motion -- Knight moved that the Ordinances be placed on first reading. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance amending Section 2.05.010 of the Code of the City of Wichita, Kansas, establishing a master undertaking to provide ongoing disclosure in connection with general obligation bonds issued by the City of Wichita, Kansas, for distribution in public offerings, introduced and under the rules laid over. ORDINANCE An Ordinance amending Section 2.05.020 of the Code of the City of Wichita, Kansas, establishing a master undertaking to provide ongoing disclosure in connection with general obligation temporary notes issued by the City of Wichita, Kansas, for distribution in public offerings, introduced and under the rules laid over. ORDINANCE SECOND READING ORDINANCE. (First Reading 2/6/96) ORDINANCE NO. 42-995 IRB - Ritchie An Ordinance authorizing the City of Wichita, Kansas to issue its Industrial Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series II, 1996 (Ritchie Land and Building Company) in the aggregate principal amount of $995,000 for the purpose of refunding certain outstanding City of Wichita, Kansas, Industrial Revenue Bonds; authorizing execution of a trust indenture by and between the City and Intrust Bank, N.A., Wichita, Kansas, as trustee; authorizing the City to lease the subject facility to Ritchie Land and Building Company; authorizing the execution of a Bond Purchase Agreement by and between the City, Ritchie Land and Building Company, and Cooper Malone McClain, Inc., as purchaser of the bonds; approving the form of the guaranty agreement by and between Ritchie Land and Building Company, as guarantor, and Intrust Bank, N.A., Wichita, Kansas, as trustee, read for the second time. Knight moved that the Ordinance be placed upon its passage and adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. PLANNING AGENDA Marvin Krout Director of Planning stated that Items 35 through 40 could be considered as consensus Items unless the Council desired to withhold other items. Motion -- Knight moved that Planning Agenda Items 35 through 40 be approved as consensus -- carried Items. Motion carried 7 to 0. A 96-3 A-96-3 - REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY ADJOINING THE CITY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF 55TH STREET SOUTH AND 1/2 MILE WEST OF BROADWAY. Agenda Report No. 96-127. Clayton Kissack has requested that property under his ownership be annexed into the City of Wichita. Mr. Kissack is requesting annexation so that he can receive water to his property, obtain a building permit and put a manufactured home on his lot. This request is scheduled for consideration by the Wichita City Council during the February 13, 1996 City Council meeting. The unplatted tract of land is approximately 1.03 acres in size. The property is located south of 55th Street South and 1/2 mile west of Broadway. The property is zoned "R1" suburban residential district under the Sedgwick County Zoning Resolution. Upon annexation, the County "R1" suburban residential district will convert to the "AA" one family dwelling district under the City Zoning code. The conversion from County to City zoning will accommodate the existing use of the property. Water services are located along 55th Street going east from Gold. A main extension may be necessary to serve the property. However, an existing main extends part way into the property and may possibly be used to provide service. If the existing main is used for such service, fees in lieu of assessment will be required. The main to be extended is an oversized supply line. If his property is annexed into the city prior to construction of this line, oversizing costs will be paid by the City of Wichita Water Department. If he is not annexed prior to such construction he will pay all project costs. This line will serve as his distribution line as well as his supply line. Sewer services are in the area. There is a main sewer along 55th Street, if the property owner wants service, he will need to build an extension from a man- hole to be served. Fire protection can be extended to the requested annexation area within a 3 « minute response time from City Fire Station No. 19, located at 600 W. MacArthur. Upon annexation, police protection will be provided to the requested annexation area by the officers and equipment of the Patrol West Division of the Wichita Police Department serving the western portion of the City. This property is located within the urban growth area of the City of Wichita as delineated by the comprehensive plan for the metropolitan area, and is also inside the Policy 32 urban service area. The property is located within an area that can be served with the extension of water and sewer services. The property owner will be responsible for the cost of connecting to water and sewer when the service is requested. The total appraised value for the property and improvements is $8,490 resulting in an annual city tax revenue of $30.72 based on 1995 ad valorem tax levies. Motion -- Knight moved that the annexation request be approved and the annexation -- carried Ordinance be placed on first reading. Motion carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance including and incorporating certain blocks, parcels, pieces, and tracts of land within the limits and boundaries of the City of Wichita, Kansas, and relating thereto, introduced and under the rules laid over. A 96-3 A 96-4 A-96-4 - REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY ADJOINING THE CITY GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF 127TH STREET EAST AND 1/4 MILE SOUTH OF KELLOGG. Agenda Report No. 96-128. Joe Lee has requested that property under his ownership be annexed into the City of Wichita. This request is scheduled for consideration by the Wichita City Council during the February 13, 1996 City Council meeting. The tract of land is approximately 167.09 acres in size. The property owner has indicated that the property will be used for a single-family development. The property is currently in the process of being platted, with a revised final plat going to the Subdivision committee on February 8, 1996. Metropolitan Area Planning Commission (MAPC) will review the final plat on February 15, 1996. The property is located west of 127th Street East and 1/4 mile south of Kellogg. The property is zoned "R1" suburban residential district under the Sedgwick County Zoning Resolution. Upon annexation, the County "R1" suburban residential district will convert to the "AA" one family dwelling district under the City Zoning code. The conversion from County to City zoning will accommodate the proposed use of the property. City water lines are in the area. A water main runs south along 127th Street and stops 1,100 feet short of Harry Street (coming from Kellogg). If annexation occurs before the property owner hooks up to city water lines, the City will pay the cost of any oversizing of the line (8 inches and over). The property owner will be responsible for paying for the water distribution system and his share of supply. Sewer services would be provided through the Four Mile Creek sewer plant. Fire protection can be extended to the requested annexation area within a 4 minute response time from City Fire Station No. 15, located at 7923 E. Lincoln. Upon annexation, police protection will be provided to the requested annexation area by the officers and equipment of the Patrol East Division of the Wichita Police Department serving the eastern portion of the City. This property is located within the urban growth area of the City of Wichita as delineated by the comprehensive plan for the metropolitan area, and is also inside the Policy 32 urban service area. The property is located within an area that can be served with the extension of water and sewer services. The property owner will be responsible for the cost of connecting to water and sewer when the service is requested. On the basis of the foregoing information, it is concluded that the annexation of the property in question will not result in an extraordinary expense to the City-at-large. Motion -- Knight moved that the annexation request be approved and the annexation -- carried Ordinance be placed on first reading. Motion carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance including and incorporating certain blocks, parcels, pieces, and tracts of land within the limits and boundaries of the City of Wichita, Kansas, and relating thereto, introduced and under the rules laid over. A 96-4 D-1699 D-1699 - DEDICATION OF A UTILITY EASEMENT IN AN AREA SOUTH OF 37TH STREET NORTH AND EAST OF ARKANSAS. Agenda Report No. 96-129. MAPC Recommendation: Accept the dedication. As a requirement of an approved lot split (L/S- 0914), additional easement (2-feet) was obtained in order to increase the width of an older easement to present day standards. The dedication has been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Motion -- Knight moved that the Dedication be accepted and the documents be recorded -- carried with the Register of Deeds. Motion carried 7 to 0. D-1700 D-1700 - DEDICATION OF ACCESS CONTROL TO 37TH STREET NORTH FROM AN AREA EAST OF ARKANSAS. Agenda Report No. 96-130. MAPC Recommendation: Accept the dedication. As a requirement of an approved lot split (L/S- 0914), a residential property with existing access to an internal street (Agnes) was required to dedicate complete access control to the abutting arterial street (37th Street North). The dedication has been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Motion -- Knight moved that the Dedication be accepted and the documents be recorded -- carried with the Register of Deeds. Motion carried 7 to 0. S/D 94-72 S/D 94-72 - PLAT OF THE MEADOW OAKS 2ND ADDITION LOCATED EAST OF OLIVER AND SOUTH OF 29TH STREET NORTH. (District I) Agenda Report No. 96-131. Staff Recommendation: Approve plat. MAPC Recommendation: Approve plat. (8-1) Petitions, all 100%, have been submitted for sanitary sewer, municipal water, and paving improvements. A Certificate of Petitions has also been submitted. In order to provide for the ownership and maintenance of Reserves the applicant has submitted a restrictive covenant. To provide for off-street parking, for lots adjacent to narrow streets, this covenant also requires that four (4) off- street spaces be provided for each such lot. This plat has been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission, subject to conditions and recording within 30 days. The dissenting Commissioner was opposed to the filling of portions of this tract that are now designated as floodplain. Documents Certificate of Petitions, Restrictive Covenant from Mathias Eck - 3AH-Inc. Water 100 Percent Petition for Water Distribution System Number 448-89010 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) $56,000 S.A. (Hold for development) Sewer 100 Percent Petition for Lateral 68, Main 5, Sanitary Sewer No. 23 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) $46,000 S.A. (Hold for development) Paving 100 Percent Petition for improving of Shadowridge from the west line of Parkwood, west to the east line of Beacon Hill Road; and, Shadowridge Court adjacent to Lots 1 through 10, Block 2, of said Meadow Oaks Second Addition, Project No. 472-82686 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) $228,000 S.A. (Hold for development) Motion -- Knight moved that the Petitions be approved and the Resolutions be adopted; the documents be received and filed and recorded with the Register of Deeds; the plat be approved as recommended and the Mayor be authorized to sign. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-050 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Water Distribution System Number 448-89010 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Knight moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-051 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Lateral 68, Main 5, Sanitary Sewer No. 23 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Knight moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-052 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing improving of Shadowridge from the west line of Parkwood, west to the east line of Beacon Hill Road; and, Shadowridge Court adjacent to Lots 1 through 10, Block 2, of said Meadow Oaks Second Addition, Project No. 472-82686 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Knight moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. S/D 95-58 S/D 95-58 - PLAT OF THE MEADOW OAKS 3RD ADDITION LOCATED WEST OF WOODLAWN AND SOUTH OF 29TH STREET NORTH. (District I) Agenda Report No. 96-132. Staff Recommendation: Approve plat. MAPC Recommendation: Approve plat. (Unanimous) Petitions, all 100%, have been submitted for sanitary sewer, municipal water, and paving improvements. A Certificate of Petitions has also been submitted. In order to provide for the ownership and maintenance of Reserves the applicant has submitted a restrictive covenant. To provide for off-street parking, for lots adjacent to narrow streets, this covenant also requires that four (4) off- street spaces be provided for each such lot. This plat has been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission, subject to conditions and recording within 30 days. Documents Certificate of Petitions and Restrictive Covenant from Mathias Eck, 3AH, Inc. Water 100 Percent Petition for Water Distribution System Number 448-89011 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) $30,000 S.A. (Hold for development) Sewer 100 Percent Petition for Lateral 69, Main 5, Sanitary Sewer No. 23 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) Project No. 468- 82571 ($50,000 S.A.) (Hold for development) Paving 100 Percent Petition for Pepperwood Circle adjacent to Lots 36 and 42 through 46, Block 2, of said Meadow Oaks Addition and Lots 1 through 12, Block 1 of said Meadow Oaks Third Addition; and, sidewalk is to be installed along the south and east side of Pepperwood Circle from the west line of Lot 46, Block 2, Meadow Oaks Addition to and along the north line of Lot 43, Block 2, to the east line of said Meadow Oaks Addition, Project No. 472- 82687 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) $97,000 S.A. (Hold for development) Motion -- Knight moved that the Petitions be approved and the Staff be instructed to prepare the necessary Resolutions; the documents be received and filed and recorded with the Register of Deeds; the plat be approved as recommended and the -- carried Mayor be authorized to sign. Motion carried 7 to 0. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-053 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Water Distribution System Number 448-89011 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Knight moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-054 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing construction of Lateral 69, Main 5, Sanitary Sewer No. 23 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) Project No. 468-82571 in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Knight moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. RESOLUTION NO. R-96-055 Resolution of findings of advisability and Resolution authorizing improving of Pepperwood Circle adjacent to Lots 36 and 42 through 46, Block 2, of said Meadow Oaks Addition and Lots 1 through 12, Block 1 of said Meadow Oaks Third Addition; and, sidewalk is to be installed along the south and east side of Pepperwood Circle from the west line of Lot 46, Block 2, Meadow Oaks Addition to and along the north line of Lot 43, Block 2, to the east line of said Meadow Oaks Addition, Project No. 472-82687 (south of 29th Street North, west of Woodlawn) in the City of Wichita, Kansas, pursuant to findings of advisability made by the Governing Body of the City of Wichita, Kansas, presented. Knight moved that the Resolution be adopted. Motion carried 7 to 0. Yeas: Cather, Cole, Ferris, Gale, Kamen, Rogers, Knight. Z-3183 Z-3183 - REQUEST FOR ZONE CHANGE FROM 'G' MOBILE HOME DISTRICT TO 'BB' OFFICE DISTRICT, LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 750 FEET SOUTH OF 47TH STREET SOUTH ON THE WEST SIDE OF MERIDIAN AVENUE. (District IV) Marvin Krout Director of Planning reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 96-032 A. Staff Recommendation: Approve the zone change. CPO Recommendation: Deny the zone change. MAPC Recommendation: 11/30/95 - Approve the zone change. 01/25/96 - Moot vote. The applicant requests a zone change from the 'G' Mobile Home District to the 'BB' Office District to allow existing real estate offices, as well as other offices, to operate from an existing manufactured home. In September, 1995, the Office of Central Inspection cited the applicant for zoning code violations and for an advertising sign that was illegally located without a permit and which advertises an illegal use at the location. At that time, the manufactured home served as the mobile home park office, Lange Real Estate office and offices for other businesses. At the MAPC hearing on November 30, 1995, a property owner, who owns considerable undeveloped land in the vicinity, spoke in opposition to the request and expressed concern regarding the businesses which have been operating in violation of the Zoning Code for over two years, and that approval of the request constitutes "spot zoning." The president of the Southborough Estates Homeowners' Association spoke in favor of the request and indicated that the presence of the office results in better maintenance of the entire area. A petition signed by a number of homeowners was presented in favor of the zoning request. At the January 9, 1996, City Council meeting, Council Members Cather and Rogers said they were uncomfortable with the request and considered the application a case of "spot zoning." The application was returned to the MAPC for reconsideration. At the MAPC meeting on January 25, 1995, the applicant's attorney indicated that the request should not be considered "spot zoning" because it is a reasonable request and will not be detrimental to any nearby property owners. Also submitted were opinions of two licensed real estate appraisers stating that the application would not detrimentally impact nearby properties. Council Member Gale Council Member Gale said the CPO concern was the use of the private drive but he had received a petition from the homeowners for approval. The area needs to flourish and this is critical to the area. Council Member Cather Council Member Cather said this is spot zoning in the area and it is not appropriate. Council Member Ferris Council Member Ferris said this is not true spot zoning as it is not far from light commercial zoning. The City has tried to use "BB" zoning as transition from residential to commercial. Spot zoning is not a good argument in this case. Council Member Cole Council Member Cole stated that she could not see how this is a buffer as it is surrounded by residential. Motion -- Gale moved that having reviewed the record of hearing before the MAPC and in accordance with Policy No. 10 of the MAPC previously adopted by this Board, and having reviewed the factors contained therein and the factors stated by the MAPC, the Council concur with the findings prepared by Staff approved, subject to the recommended conditions, and the Ordinance be placed on first reading. Motion -- failed failed 3 to 4. Cather, Cole, Kamen, Rogers - No. Motion -- carried Kamen moved that this Item be reconsidered. Motion carried 7 to 0. Motion -- carried Kamen moved that this Item be deferred two weeks. Motion carried 7 to 0. Z-3189 Z-3189 - REQUEST FOR ZONE CHANGE FROM 'R-6' GENERAL RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO 'BB' OFFICE DISTRICT, LOCATED 1/4 MILE EAST OF ROCK ROAD ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PAWNEE. Marvin Krout Director of Planning reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 96-133. MAPC Recommendation: Approve, subject to replatting within one year (12-0). Staff Recommendation: Approve, subject to replatting within one year. CPO Recommendation: Deny (6-0). The applicant requests a zone change from the 'R-6' General Residence District to the 'BB' Office District for a 3.5 acre portion of Lot 1, Block 1, Oak Knoll Addition, generally located ¼ mile east of Rock Road on the south side of Pawnee. The site was originally planned as the second phase of the residential condominium complex located to the east; however, the property has not yet been developed. The applicant proposes to rezone the property to 'BB', and has indicated that if the zone change is approved, he will file for a Use Exception for a residential self-service storage facility. To date, the applicant has not completed a site plan for the proposed development of the property. The existing City Zoning Code allows the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to grant a Use Exception for residential self-service storage facilities on properties zoned 'BB' Office District and 'LC' Light Commercial District, subject to a number of conditions and requirements as stated in section 28.04.183 of the Zoning Code. The BZA may require any other conditions as deemed necessary to provide for adequate buffers and orderly development of the site. Under the existing Zoning Code, the area property owners would be notified of any request for a Use Exception and the BZA would hold a public hearing to consider the request. In the proposed "Unified Zoning Code for Wichita-Sedgwick County," self-service storage facilities would be permitted in 'BB' and 'LC' zoning as a Conditional Use. Therefore, the request would require a public hearing before the MAPC, and potentially consideration by the City Council if the Planning Commission's decision is appealed to the governing body. Irregardless of whether the property is developed under the existing Zoning Code or the proposed "Unified Zoning Code," any request for a self-service storage facility will require additional public hearings. However, if 'BB' zoning is approved, the site could be developed with any other use permitted by the 'BB' district without additional public hearings. The subject property is bordered by the existing condominium complex to the east, single family homes to the south, a contractors equipment storage yard (zoned 'E' Light Industrial) to the west, and four-plex units on the north side of Pawnee Avenue. A number of single family homes, located southwest of the applicant's property along Lori Street, also are directly adjacent to 'E' zoning. At the MAPC hearing on December 28, 1996, one area resident expressed opposition to the request and noted concerns about the various types of uses that could be developed on the site. The resident also questioned if development on this site would be compatible with the surrounding area. After discussion, the MAPC voted unanimously to recommend approval. However, on January 11, 1996, the CPO2 met to consider this request and voted 6-0 to recommend denial. Motion -- Kamen moved that having reviewed the record of hearing before the MAPC and in accordance with Policy No. 10 of the MAPC previously adopted by this Board, and having reviewed the factors contained therein and the factors stated by the MAPC, the recommendation of the MAPC be approved, subject to the recommended conditions, and the Planning Department be instructed to forward the Ordinance for first reading when the plat is forwarded to the City Council. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. DR 95-26 DR-95-26 - METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING DEPARTMENT FILING FEES. Marvin Krout Director of Planning reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 96-134. Staff Recommendation: Approve the adjustments. MAPC Recommendation: Approve the adjustments. The fee schedule, which is in Chapter 2 of the City Code (which is adopted by separate County resolution) needs to be amended to reflect all the changes in the new unified zoning code, including: making the changes in district names, establishing fees for rezoning to the several new proposed districts, and adjusting fees to reflect procedural changes that increase or decrease processing costs. In addition, the Planning Department has undertaken an analysis of our cost to process various types of applications periodically; the last time that fees were adjusted was in 1991. The proposed new fee schedule includes the following adjustments: - Increases in the filing fees for larger acreage rezoning cases and for vacation cases. We are not proposing an increase for small acreage (up to 3 acres) re- zonings, and no changes are proposed in the fees for community unit plans, subdivisions, lot splits, variances, street name changes, or zoning "adjustments". - A sliding scale for conditional uses, depending on acreage, similar to the current set of charges in the County. In the City, where many of these proposed conditional uses are currently treated as "use exceptions" approved by the BZA, there is only a flat fee for all such cases. The proposed new schedule also includes a half-price fee for renewal of conditional uses which have time limits that have expired. - A new "rebate" of 15% of the fee for rezoning applications that are withdrawn within one week of the MAPC hearing, recognizing the savings in staff work otherwise required to proceed on to the governing body with the case. - Reduction in the fee for filing an appeal to the County's BZA on an administrative decision or interpretation, from $350 to $50, to be consistent with the City's fee for appeals, which was reduced by the City Council last year. There would be no cost for an applicant or other aggrieved party to file an appeal to the governing body on a decision of the MAPC regarding a conditional use permit or CUP (originally, staff had recommended a $100 fee for this type of appeal). Staff contacted nine other cities to compare our fees to theirs, as was done in previous analyses. With the proposed changes, Wichita falls in the mid-range of these cities for re- zonings and in the upper-range on plats. Planning staff estimates that the proposed changes will result in a 5-6% increase overall in the revenues from applications fees. In 1995, the department collected $147,066 in application fees. Mayor Knight momentarily with Vice Mayor Kamen in the Chair. Motion -- Ferris moved that the Ordinance be placed on first reading. Motion carried -- carried 7 to 0. ORDINANCE An Ordinance amending Sections 2.26.010, 2.26.020, and 2.26.030 of the Code of the City of Wichita, Kansas, pertaining to fees and charges for planning and zoning applications and proceedings, and repealing the originals of said sections, introduced and under the rules laid over. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion -- Knight moved that the Council recess to executive session to consider consultation with legal counsel on matters privileged in the attorney-client relationship relating to pending and potential litigation, legal advice, and contract negotiations; preliminary discussions relating to the acquisition of real property for public purposes; and the regular meeting be resumed no later -- carried than 2:45 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Motion carried 7 to 0. RECESS Council recessed at 1:55 p.m. and reconvened in regular session at 2:37 p.m. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight announced that no action was necessary as a result of the executive session. ADJOURNMENT The City Council meeting adjourned at 2:37 p.m. Pat Burnett Deputy City Clerk ADDENDUM ITEM 7A CONVENTION HOTEL HYATT HOTEL ESTOPPEL AGREEMENT, SECURITY AGREEMENT, AND CERTIFICATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF STC CONTRACT. Gary Rebenstorf Director of Law reviewed the Item. Agenda Report No. 95-247 D. The implementation of the private-sector financing of the hotel project is scheduled to be completed shortly with the closing of the $15,900,000 loan from the consortium of local lending institutions and the $5,166,000 equity contribution by East Bank Hotel Associates, L.L.C. (EBHA). In order to complete the closing, EBHA, the lenders, and Regent Partners (the equity investor) have requested approval of an estoppel agreement, and the lenders requested approval of a security agreement and Certificate of Assignment in order to address certain technical legal issues not addressed in earlier city-approved documents. The estoppel agreement provides City approval of certain documents and certification of certain facts required for the debt and equity closing. This includes approval of the German bank providing the $4,000,000 letters of credit that comprise the major portion of the private equity financing. In addition, the estoppel agreement provides for continuation of the hotel lease with EBHA as tenant if Regent Partners replaces Stormont Trice Corp. (STC) after curing a default on the Lease caused by STC or following an incurable default by STC. In such case, Regent Partners (as managing member of EBHA) would be required to provide a hotel operator acceptable to the City. The security agreement is required in order to provide the lenders with a security interest in the personal property belonging to the hotel, City, and not EBHA, will own all personal property in the hotel, a separate agreement is needed in order to perfect a security interest for the lenders. The City has already agreed to this arrangement in the Lender Protection Agreement approved on January 30, 1996. The Certificate of Stormont Trice Development Corporation and Consent to Assignment of its Contract to Lender is a closing document requiring the City's consent. The action of the City is to approve the Certificate; however, the consent of the City does not change or amend the terms of the Master Development Agreement or waive any rights of the City under the Master Developer Agreement. Under the agreement, Stormont Trice Development Corporation is assigning its rights under the Master Developer Agreement as collateral security for the loan by the lender banks for the hotel project. Council Member Gale momentarily absent. Mayor Knight Mayor Knight inquired if anyone wished to be heard and no one appeared. Motion -- Ferris moved that the agreements and the Certificate of Assignment be approved; and the Mayor be authorized to sign the necessary documents. Motion carried -- carried carried 7 to 0. COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS JOURNAL 160 FEBRUARY 13, 1996 Page COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS JOURNAL 160 FEBRUARY 13, 1996 Page 299 A