Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Dear Heavenly Father, be with us this evening as we do the business for the city and the community. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen.

Tonight will be a relatively brief meeting, but we do appreciate everyone showing up. We've generally said that, amongst the planning commission, that even if there's lots to discuss, we still want to meet, and if you guys want to talk about anything, any projects, or the future of the city, or broker development, or, you know, possible future agenda items, let's get you that opportunity, because it will be a good time to discuss. This will be item C, approval of the agenda.

I'll move to approve the agenda for July 13, 2026. Second. All in favor? Who do you want to talk about? Aye. Aye.

Very good. This will be item D, Citizens' Comments. And Mr. Chair, you may open and close Citizens' Comments. All right, I'll open and close Citizens' Comments. Very good. This will be item E. Second agenda, this will be to approve the minutes from the June 8th regular planning commission meeting with the signbearance request to Cal State RV and the conditional use permit for all available sales locked.

I will make a motion to approve the minutes from the June 8th, 20.5th regular planning commission meeting. Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Very good. As mentioned, there aren't any items for today, so we're just going to advance. And we'll move on to the staff report. So, periodically, I like to kind of subject you guys to sort of economic data as where you're looking at things that I thought duplex analysis would be appropriate. As you're aware, the governing body and city council approved a resolution that restricted developments for rezoning to 40% for duplexes and 6% for single family. It does have a provision in there to waive the provisions of the resolution if it's deemed by practically impossible to apply them. For example, if you only have two lots, you can't say, well, this one is 60, this one's 40, it just doesn't count that way. There's been a lot of questions and comments about this. I didn't meet with the Wichita Area Builders Association, both individually with some of my colleagues, and then both down at the Wichita Area Builders Association meeting and spoke with some developers about that. And so there's been a lot of questions and comments about duplexes. And I felt that given some more of the questions and comments that have come up, I figured I'd do some just general analysis. And if you have any questions about it, you can ask me about it. But as you know, every three months we get raw data from the county. So they'll send us parcel data. And a parcel is basically a taxable geometry that the county uses to make taxing your property and other properties as well. And so that parcel data is sent to the city every three months. We can pull that data. and use it through what's called GIS, which is Geographic Information Systems. We use Environmental Science Research Institute software to take that data, parse that data, and analyze that data. And so, like I said, we get it every three months. The data becomes updated in ownership, appraised value, assessed value, and changes that they see on that particular parcel. And so I took that, first I analyzed the city of Goddard and I took all the duplexes that were split that have become twin homes, I pulled that data out, and then I took all the duplexes that were not split in Goddard and I pulled that data out, and then I took all the twin homes in Sedgwick County that were split and I pulled them out, and then I took all the duplexes in Sedgwick County and I pulled them out. That way I can look at them individually, both Goddard twin homes and duplexes, and Sedgwick County twin homes and duplexes, and make a determination of like, How many of them are owner-occupied? How many of them are renter-occupied? And the ones that are not owner-occupied, the ones that are just renter-occupied, where do those property owners actually live? Are they in the state of Kansas? Are they somewhere else? And so just kind of looking at that information to make a determination. Is there that distinction that some of us have been hearing about twin homes? Is there any distinction between a twin home and a duplex? And so this information will be presented to you guys if you, like I said, if you have any questions, feel free to interrupt. But this is the percentage of duplexes in Goddard that have not been split. So we took 154 duplexes or 308 units that have not been split. Of those, 4.5% are owner-occupied, which means somebody who owns that duplex has the ownership address as that duplex. And so let's say that the duplex is 123 North Main Street. That person has the ownership listing of that duplex as 123 North Main Street. So there's a property address and an owner address. All this information is listed on the parcel records that we get from the county. So, for example, anybody here who owns their house, it would say that your property address is 123 North Main Street, and the owner who owns that house, their address is also 123 North Main Street. If it's different, if it says the property address is 123 North Main Street, but the owner's address is 567 North Main Street, we know that it's probably a rental property because the owner doesn't live there, so it's probably going to be a rental property. That's kind of the rationale we used for pulling this data. We exported it out as an Excel sheet. I ran it through ChatGPT to make up to remove any discrepancies. For example, 123 North Main Street versus 123 Main Street might have flagged as being not the same address. And so we used AI to remove any discrepancies that might have flagged it as inconsistent or not a true match. And so that's what we did. By we, I mean me. for the duplexes in Goddard and outside Goddard. So this is what we came to in Goddard, that we have about 4.5% for ownership and about 95.5% for renters.

Yeah, on that, so if I, correct, if I was just using the duplexes and one duplex is two units yeah so if i let's say that i have that we had one one duplex in all of goddard yeah i owned it yeah i lived in it yeah but i also rent it out you know it's a duplex i can't live with both so i live in one bring out the other would it be 50 50 or would it be 100%?

No, it would be 100%. So if you owned the duplex and you lived on one side and rented out the other side, it would say that it's owner-occupied. Yeah, because I can't make that distinction because since the parcel ID covers the whole duplex, that parcel is for the whole duplex, I can't see what's happening on one half versus the other. It just says that the owner who owns that parcel lives there, or the owner address lives there. Yeah, but it doesn't make a determination. I can't see what's happening on the other side of the duplex because it's under one parcel ID. So in theory, yeah, if somebody owned a duplex and they rented out the other half, it's going to say, well, it's owner-occupied because I can't see what's happening on the other half. We know at least one owner lives there, but the other half might be his mom or somebody else. That's a good question. So of the red, which is the renters, where do they reside in a state? So this is where they're from. We got six in Florida, one in Georgia, 24 in Texas. The majority obviously is going to be in Kansas, but we do see that investors are out of state and they are investing in the duplexes that are not being owner occupied. So, duplexes have been split in dollars, so out of the 106 units or 153 duplexes that have been split, how many of those are owner-occupied, meaning that the address, and now you have two separate tax IDs, so this one might be a little bit more accurate than the previous one, because now you're taking a duplex and you have two separate tax IDs, so I can look at each half and say, is this one renter-occupied, or is this one owner-occupied? So I can look at all of them collectively. This one, it comes out that 53.8% are actually owner-occupied, and 46.2% are renter-occupied. So of those 53, or 106 units, or 53 duplexes, so basically I'm looking at 106 sides of a duplex, of those 53%, 53.8% are owner-occupied, and the other 46% are renter-occupied. And so that becomes kind of interesting because you see that as developers build the duplexes, they're all of a sudden incentivized to split it in half if somebody wants to own half of it. So that becomes an interesting market because now the county identifies this as a twin home just like we identify it as a twin home. But then they also say that once a duplex is split, they actually call it single-family detached and single-family detached, even though technically it should be single-family attached and single-family attached, or twin-owned, but they call it a twin-owned as well, but they just say it's single-family detached. But it's just interesting that the developers have that incentive to actually split it, and then once they do split it, a little slightly more than half actually become owner-occupied. But out of the red section that is, rents are occupied. If I could go to the next one. Go back, then. Thank you. Out of the red section that is rents are occupied, these are where the investors are from. Once again, the vast majority of the Twin Homes, from an investment perspective, are in Kansas, and then we see some of them maybe are in Alaska, Texas, Illinois, and California. So then I'm going to do the same thing again except in the county. So duplexes that haven't split in all of Sedgwick County. So I took about 1,767 duplexes for about 3,534 units, and they're almost exactly 50-50. So everything that's happening around Goddard where they're splitting a duplex, we're kind of seeing the same thing. It's almost an exact split where they're saying, hey, these are now becoming owner-occupied twin homes. which is kind of an interesting phenomenon because we do see that some developers are saying this is a new starter home which is half of the duplex and they are selling them as half of a duplex to elders who want to own them So, of the red, any investors by state for non-ownership for Twin Home units in the county, we see that it's a lot bigger, obviously, because there's more investors now, and there's a wider array of Twin Homes that are available. And so we see that, you know, we have Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and pretty much almost all the rest of the states, except for some, have jumped into the foray of investing in duplexes around the Central County area. Still, the vast majority, as you can see, 1,455 are still in Kansas, with others starting to dive into the flurry as well. These are the duplexes that have not been split. So these are all of the duplexes in Sedgwick County that have not been split in twin homes. There's about 7,202 duplexes or about 14,000 units that have not been split. These are just duplexes. And about 8.9% once again are owner occupied and then 91.1% are winter occupied. It's just reinforcing the fact that every time you see a duplex split, you have a 50-50 chance of actually saying, well, half of it's going to be owner-occupied and the other half might be renter-occupied. But if it's un-split, there's a higher probability of it just being renter-occupied with in-state investment but also out-of-state investment. And then as you can see, the more units that you add, the investors tend to trail from all over the place. Now we're actually including Canadian investors as well who are investing in duplexes from outside the state. So that is it for that. Are there any questions related to this analysis of twin homes versus duplex and ownership?

But the new rules that they just passed concerning duplexes, do those apply to duplexes and twin homes? Yes.

So what will happen is twin homes largely come about after the duplex is built. But the duplex can't exist without the resolution being passed, unless the city council decides they don't want to apply the resolution. The resolution is largely design oriented. It also involves ratios like I said 60-40. There's also an element for trees, for neighborhood amenities, things of that nature that was passed by the city council. The percentage of garage doors and windows and then design standards as well as alternative layouts for the duplexes, up to five. And so they have to propose several additional typologies of duplexes that we would consider acceptable. And so after that, if the city council deems it appropriate, then they'll say, in order for us to approve this rezoning, we're going to require you to adopt a restrictive covenant that applies these design standards and additional standards onto the development. As you know, the Planning Commissioner will see every rezoning first, you guys can make any recommendations you want, and then ultimately we'll go up to City Council so you can make a final decision on the matter. And then the assumption is that in some cases they're going to require this, or almost all cases they'll probably require this, unless it's deemed practically impossible to apply it in certain situations. are you saying that somebody would come in here do their proposal that's completely contrary to their resolution yes and that's possible it is possible given if given a situation if somebody said it's it is possible however probable but they could potentially come before the city council and the planning commission say this is what i would like to propose And perhaps their design standards that they're proposing look good, theoretically look good, but it doesn't comply with what the resolution lays out. And so then at which point the city council could make a determination that they feel that the resolution doesn't apply to this particular development. Also, if the development's too small, maybe if the development's only four duplexes on a small piece of track of land, they may feel like obviously they can't have an active amenity on just five acres of land, or something like that. But yes, in theory, it could. Is there any questions related to that? Moving on, this is a comprehensive plan update. So July, which is this Thursday, from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m., there will be the City Leadership Visioning Workshop. I believe we already have Jamie Coyne saying he would go. Is that correct yet? We have Preston Black has confirmed he would be able to go, Jim Milligan. This is the one that all planning commissioners are encouraged to go if you can make it. And that's the one from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. this Thursday. There's also the Visioning Workshop of the Steering Committee, which we have Jim Milligan, Preston Black, and James May be able to go. I'm in. Okay. So we have the three on the Steering Committee who will be able to make it to that. And then from 6 to 7.30 p.m. is the Comprehensive Plan Public Open House. Anyone's welcome to go to that. That's not something that we're saying you have to go to or anything of that nature. It's open to anybody and everybody. So you're welcome to attend if you want to. Ideally, we would like to get as many as we can to the 10 to 12. If we can't, we totally understand. The city council will be there, and as many members of the planning commission as we can get. And then, of course, the visioning workshop steering committee is going to support those on the steering committee. So any questions related to that?

I just have a comment. If you are available for the 6 to 7.30, it's a very interesting time to listen. Typically, there will be citizens from Goddard there, and you get to hear their opinions and listen. And it's just interesting to see what they have to say. I know it's early on in the process, and I think there's at least two more of these planned. And the farther it gets along, the more verbal they get. But it is interesting if you have the time, even if it's only 15 or 20 minutes to pop in and listen to this. I can't, it was when we did the bicycle.

Yes, bicycle .

And we had some public meetings. And it's just interesting to listen if you have the time, so.

Yeah. Yeah, and we really also did a fantastic job of presenting the city and presenting what they believe the city wants. And so they're doing a very good job of facilitating these events. And so obviously they'll be at all three, so you guys will get to interact with them as well. And we believe they're doing a fantastic job, so that being said. Now, is there anybody else that is able to make it to the 10 to 12? I should be there.

I'm not sure I'm able to make it. I'm going to try, but it will depend on how the week goes.

Very good. I'll mark you as a Navy. I've been trying to rearrange my schedule, but I haven't marked yet. That's fine. Absolutely. We understand everybody's busy.

I feel a cold stretching through. Signal's coming up.

We're being recorded. No, very good. Obviously, we understand everybody's working professionals and if they can make it perfect or not, then we totally understand. Well, there it is. Any questions related to this? Nope. All right. That's all I have. Any questions or comments?

Right now, it's just duplexes. We recognize, and this has happened before, that

You know, it almost indicates like the city only really cares about storm shelters for residents who live in duplexes and we're indifferent to those who live on slat homes or single family or apartments and we recognize that that's come up. There has been a question about adoptive ordinance that would require ICC standards because there are ICC standards for storm shelters. It's just becomes a little bit more Not too bad, but technical because of the fact that every time you add these things, it adds more cost. And so the question is, how much cost does the city want to incur for future developers or future homeowners? Does it make sense? you know obviously perhaps and some council members have indicated they are in agreement that it makes sense to have a storm shelter on a slab on grade for a single family why not and so that that question has come up but right now this is something that it only applies and it only applies if there's a resolution imposed for rezoning so everything that's already been passed right now everything all the duplexes that have already been passed the resolution will not apply to because it's already gone through entitlements All right. Next meeting will be August 10th, 7 p.m. I'll make the motion to be adjourned. Second. All in favor?

Aye. Very good.