In the City’s first comprehensive zoning map adopted in September 1965, this site was zoned M-1 (Manufacturing) in part due to adjoining a rail line on its western side. The site retained this industrial zoning until September 1985 when it was rezoned to R-3, multi-family, for the development of this senior living facility. Following the rezoning, two site plans relating to the construction of the building were approved. In June 1999, the zoning was updated with a special use permit for a nursing home; two additional site plans were approved later for building additions. With the adoption of the Unified Development Ordinance in 2009, the district title was changed to R-18 (Medium Density Residential) and with all such districts having the Planned Unit Development (PUD) designation added later.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPERTY
Constructed in several stages since its initial rezoning, the site now contains a 72,000+ single story building for senior housing resting on 8.60 acres. It features several wings extending from a central corridor with a portion of the structure resembling an asterisk *. It has over 100 rooms for residents plus the usual staff areas, offices, cooking, and dining rooms. Some 133 parking spaces encircle the building with its sole access point being onto Walnut Street in the southwest corner of the property. A small portion of the owner’s property does connect to Lexington in the northeast corner of the site, if a secondary means of access is required later.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AREA
Other than the small apartment complex zoned I-1 sited between part of Carmel Hills and Walnut Street, the entire vicinity is zoned R-12. Single family homes are the dominant housing stock although there are a few duplexes scatted through the area.
PROPOSAL
Mick Slutter, Renaissance Infrastructure Consulting, seeks approval of a preliminary development plan to construct a single story, 9,556 square foot addition onto the east side of the current Carmel Hills building. This new wing is slated for a dialysis center for both residents of both Carmel Hills and non residential patients. According to the applicant, the proposed facility will have 10 employees, with a doctor, and 25 dialysis stations; but no sleeping or living units. The new wing will be connected to the eastern end of the complex in a vacant grassy area left for future expansions of the facility. The building materials used for the façade will match that of the existing building: cream color siding with a brick wainscot under a tan asphalt shingle roof. It will be accessed from the parking lot via a entry on the south side of the addition.
The applicant states that the total count for dialysis treatment is 72 patients per day with 50% of those patients coming from the Carmel Hills facility. The dialysis center will operate Monday through Saturday, from 5:00 am through 7:00 pm.
Consistency with Independence for All, Strategic Plan:
This proposed addition is a step towards implementing a strategy of the Independence for All Strategic Plan which is to ‘Ensure that land use policies and housing and strategies incorporate Community for All Ages best practices.
Comprehensive Plan Guiding Land Use Principles:
This site, along with properties in this neighborhood, is designated for ‘Residential Neighborhoods’ by the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Such areas would feature a variety of single family detached homes, attached single family homes, townhomes, and multi-family dwellings. The plan also mentions such residential uses could also support sites of local commercial and personal service activity can be appropriate.
Historic and Archeological Sites:
There are no apparent historic/archeological issues with this property.
Public Utilities:
Water, sanitary sewer, and electrical services are connected to this property.
Environmental:
City Engineering has reviewed the submitted stormwater plan and found it acceptable; there are no other comments related to this issue.
CIP Investments:
There are no City or Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) capital improvement projects (CIP) planned for this area.
Zoning:
As noted previously, this site has been zoned multi-family since 1985. Permitted R-18 uses include duplexes, apartments, multi-unit houses, churches, schools, home-based child-care centers, government buildings, parks, cemeteries, home gardens, and field crops. Nursing homes, bed/breakfasts, and homeless shelters being a few of the uses which require special use permit approval. Being a Planned Unit Development (PUD) district, there is some flexibility in the types of land uses and in this case the owners seek to make the dialysis center open to nonresident patients, a use which normally requires office or commercial zoning.
Parking and Driving Surface:
Carmel Hills currently maintains 133 parking spaces; with 16 spaces added the east side of the lot for this clinic. The number of parking spaces required for the residents of Carmel Hills is one space per four units; as most of the residents don’t drive, the proposed parking is adequate. The City Fire Department indicates that provided that as the addition will be equipped with the proper fire alarm and sprinkler systems, a secondary access point is not required.
Buffering and Screening:
The existing side of the property closest to where the dialysis center will be sited has a fair amount of landscaping but no fencing to buffer the facility from single family home to the east. With additional traffic being anticipated with the center being open to nonresident patients, the existing landscaping needs to be supplemented on the east side of the property closest to the new center.
Recommendations and decisions for proposed preliminary development plan must be based on consideration of the criteria listed in Section 14-703-05-H:
1. The consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
The City’s Comprehensive Plan notes that “All Neighborhood areas include high-density multi-family development, medium density townhome and duplex development as well as pockets of local commercial activity.” The existing use and proposed development plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The consistency with the PUD standards of Section 14-902, including the statement of purpose.
This type of application is in accordance with Section 14-902-01-E which states “promote attractive and functional residential, nonresidential and mixed-use developments that are compatible with surrounding areas.”
3. The nature and extent of Common Open Space in the PUD.
There is no open space provided with this application.
4. The reliability of the proposals for maintenance and conservation of Common Open Space.
There is no open space provided with this application, CH MO Property Holdings LLC owns the entire property.
5. The adequacy or inadequacy of the amount and function of Common Open Space in terms of the densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan.
There is no open space provided with this application.
6. The extent to which the proposed use will adversely affect the capacity of safety portions of the street network or present parking problems in the vicinity of the property. Whether adequate provision for public services, provides adequate control over vehicular traffic, and furthers the amenities of light and air, recreation, and visual enjoyment.
This proposed project will not adversely affect traffic or the street network in the vicinity of the project.
7. The extent to which the proposed use will have a substantially adverse effect on adjacent property and the development or conservation of the neighborhood area.
With the provision of additional screening/buffering as being required as a condition of approval, any impacts on the neighborhood should be minimal.
8. Whether potential adverse impacts have been mitigated to the maximum practical extent.
No significant impacts are expected with this application.
9. Whether the Preliminary Development Plan represents such a unique development proposal that it could not have accomplished through use of (non-PUD) conventional zoning regulations.
But not for the PUD designation, this combination of health services would not be possible and would require the property to be rezoned or for the operation of the dialysis center.
10. The sufficiency of the terms and conditions proposed to protect the interest of the public and the residents of the PUD in the case of a plan that proposes development over a period of years.
This project will continue under one ownership.
Draft Planning Commission minutes:
"Case 22-810-01 – Preliminary Development Plan – 810 E. Walnut Street
Staff Presentation
Stuart Borders presented the case. Mr. Borders presented the Commission with a vicinity map, noting the area and surrounding zoning. He presented the Commission with an aerial map indicating the project area and explained the surrounding land uses. Mr. Borders outlined the following conditions:
1. The use of this proposed addition for dialysis patients that are not residents of this facility is acceptable.
2. Additional screening/buffering is needed along the eastern end of the property, which may include fencing and/or additional plantings. The applicant shall work with City staff to finalize a landscape plan for additional buffering on this end of the site.
3. The ADA parking spaces throughout the parking lot need to be updated with proper marking and signage.
Applicant Comments
Mick Slutter, 400 E. 17th Street, Kansas City, stated he and Jeff Stockman, 1710 Wyandotte St, Kansas City, the architect for this project and they are both available for questions.
Public Comments
Toby Sutherland, 821 E. Lexington Ave, stated he lives near the north side of the property. He said their north property line is overgrown. Mr. Sutherland questioned if the facility is for seniors or rehabilitation. He stated this is a residential neighborhood and there are already enough vacant medical offices that could be utilized. Mr. Sutherland said he is also concerned about traffic through the residential neighborhood. He stated he told management recently that they are not good neighbors, and they don’t keep up their property. Mr. Sutherland said he frequently sees residents and/or employees raising their voices and fighting outside the facility. He said they frequently have homeless people around the facility, and he’s requested management to hire security.
Mr. Stockman stated unfortunately the owner is not in attendance, so he is unable to speak about the concerns raised by Mr. Sutherland. Mr. Stockman said the proposed addition they estimate the dialysis center will help 78 people a day and half of those will come from inside the facility. He stated there will only be about three people an hour coming to the business from outside the facility.
Mr. Borders noted if the Commissioners are concerned about the landscaping on the north side of the property, the second condition can be amended to state that:
2. Additional screening/buffering is needed along the eastern and northern end of the property, which may include fencing and/or additional plantings. The applicant shall work with City staff to finalize a landscape plan for additional buffering on these ends of the site.
In response to Commissioner Nesbitt’s question, Mr. Borders stated they do have a current business license for the facility. He said he’s not aware if it’s for a nursing home or rehabilitation facility.
Motion
Commissioner Wiley made a motion to approve Case 22-810-01 – Preliminary Development Plan – 810 E. Walnut Street, with conditions as outlined by staff and amended to include screening/buffering on the north side of the property as stated above. Commissioner Nesbitt seconded the motion. The motion passed with five affirmative votes."