Yes, I think that's a good thing.

That's what I was like, that's why I was thinking about it.

I guess if it's just like very much.

Oh, so just wrong.

Yeah, I can't remember.

All right, thank you.

Yeah, we don't have to be a different two.

Yeah, I'm right now because once you put this out in there, just trying to be down in the track.

I didn't think I did it.

Yeah, look at the different things.

Oh, right.

Oh, did I tell you guys that you're another change?

Yeah, we're telling me why I just share it down.

Good morning, Wichita, and good morning to all of you.

Thank you for joining us for this week's City Council meeting.

We call this meeting to order.

With us this morning is Pastor Mark Usri with New Testament Christian Church to provide our invocation.

Following the invocation, we will have our Pledge of Allegiance, and we ask that you please stand for both.

Grant wisdom to each district office to Lily, Mayor Willie Lu Wu.

Give them courage to act justly and compassion to listen with understanding.

May their words be respectful, their decisions be fair, and their actions reflect the integrity and the care for all of our community.

Guide them to work together in unity, setting aside personal interests for the greater good.

Bless our community God with peace, with progress, with hope.

And let this meet in this morning, God and future meetings throughout this year.

Help guide our community to growth.

Help us to be respectful, as Jesus do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Amen.

Any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Awards and proclamations.

May I please ask the entire council to join me at the front and the representatives and friends of the Wichita Public Library.

The proclamation reads, the City of Wichita, Kansas founded in 1870, whereas for one hundred and fifty years, the Wichita Public Library has served as a cornerstone of our community by providing free and equitable access to information, resources, and programs that support lifelong learning.

And since its founding in 1876, the library has fostered literacy, inspired imagination, and championed intellectual freedom for residents of all ages and backgrounds.

Whereas the Wichita Public Library has continually evolved to meet the changing needs of Wichita by embracing innovation, technology, and creative programming while remaining a trusted and welcoming public space.

Whereas strong community partnerships and volunteerism advance the library's mission by expanding opportunities for learning, civic engagement, and meaningful connection.

Whereas the public library remains a vital hub for curiosity, creativity, and community engagement, and the city of Wichita recognizes its lasting impact on generations of residents and its enduring commitment to community well-being.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Wichita City Council does hereby proclaim February third, twenty twenty-six as Wichita Public Library's one hundred fiftieth anniversary day.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

Today we're celebrating something truly remarkable.

It's where children discover the magic of stories.

Students chase big dreams, and job seekers find support, neighbors connect.

It's not just information, but it's one another.

Wichita Public Libraries spark joy and quiet moments of reading in lively programs and conversations, and in the simple comfort of knowing that there's a place where everyone belongs.

Through change, growth, and generations of readers, it's remained a steady, generous presence in our community.

We look forward to celebrating this milestone all throughout 2026 because one day isn't just enough.

So we invite everyone to come in, especially today.

We've got um a display happening, and we're inviting our residents to share their wonderful library stories with us all throughout the year.

But on February 10th next week, Michael Threats, who's the new reading rainbows host, he's coming to the library.

Um, our best-selling author Kate Quinn is launching her new book, The Astral Library.

She's coming on the 17th of April of February.

Be sure to get your tickets.

The Academy Awards shorts are coming up, the Big Read book.

It's it's actually an amazing book.

It's a poetry called The Catalog of Unabashed Gratitude, and it celebrates community.

We're also adding a community garden at our Maya Angelo branch.

More art is coming to the Walters and Alfred branches.

We'll have ice cream socials to celebrate with our friends in the summer reading, and a civic passport is being launched this year in partnership with the Kansas Leadership Center.

Here's to a hundred and fifty years of curiosity, community, and joy, and to many more chapters to come.

Thank you.

May I please ask the Friends of American Heart Association to come forward and any council members who would like to stay.

The proclamation reads the city of Wichita, Kansas founded in 1870, whereas cardiac arrest is a leading cause of death worldwide, with more than three hundred fifty thousand out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occurring annually in the United States, and only about ten percent of victims surviving.

Whereas approximately seventy percent of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occur at home, making bystanders often family members the first and most critical link in the chain of survival.

Yet only about forty-one percent of victims receive immediate CPR, and fewer than twelve percent receive AED assistance before advance help arrives, despite evidence that prompt CPR can double or triple survival rates.

Whereas more than twenty-three thousand children experience out-of-hospital cardiac arrests each year, including infants and youth participating in sports, and studies show women are less likely than men to receive bystanders CPR due to fear of causing harm, legal concerns, or discomfort with physical contact, barriers that can be addressed through education and awareness.

Whereas the American Heart Association's nation of life survivors, life savers, rather initiative seeks to double survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests by 2030 through CPR and AED education, public access to defibrillators, and cardiac emergency response planning, and encourages all to raise awareness by wearing red on National Wear Red Day on February 6, 2026 in support of heart health.

Now, therefore be it resolved that the Wichita City Council does hereby proclaim February 2026 as American Heart Month.

Thank you, Mayor Wu and to the council members for this honor on behalf of myself and Heather, who is here.

Thank you.

Please bear in mind that this is not a period of dialogue with council or a question and answer period.

This is your opportunity to address the city council with your concerns.

Speakers will please speak into the microphone.

Please state their name and address to the record.

Order and rules of decorum will be observed.

We have no speakers signed to up today.

Would anyone in the public like to address the council?

Please state your name and your address.

Good morning.

Bill Stout, District 5.

Almost everybody up here knows me.

I wouldn't be here today if someone would have taken the time to return my call or respond to my email, but no such luck.

I'd like to open with a quote.

We have the opportunity to invest in Wichita's safety, so we have the resources we need to keep you and your loved ones safe.

On March 3rd, say yes to watch Wichita win.

If those words sound at all familiar, it's because they came from an advertisement that's currently running on local media, radio, and across internet platforms.

The advertisement, not surprisingly, was paid for by Wichita Forward.

The problem is it was filmed in a fire station using a public employee, a fireman identified as Warren.

Now you might ask, why is that concerning?

Well, it's a clear violation of city policy to have a city employee take a public stance on any issue on an agenda or campaign.

It was filmed inside a fire station, station one, and someone at the city had to authorize it.

I want to know who, and I want to know how they're going to be held accountable.

See, I worked for the sheriff's department.

My father retired from the PD, as did many other members of my family.

And I'm acutely aware of the policy regarding taking a position on a political campaign.

In fact, it's a firable offense to even display a campaign sign in your yard when working for one of those organizations.

I'm disgusted by this ad.

I'm disgusted by the fact that someone allowed it to happen, and I'm disgusted by the continued efforts of Wichita Forward to influence a special election, one that many of us think should have never happened in the first place.

You as a body decided against the will of the people to force an election on a piece of legislation that you didn't even compose.

It was written by a third party special interest group, and I assure you, no one voted for them to write law.

The group has shown their true colors multiple times.

First with an ad that implied anyone who opposed their sales tax initiative was a communist.

That was absurd.

Then they sent out a mailer in giving false information about where, when, and how to vote, and giving information about how much you'd save in property tax.

Problem is the math doesn't support their claim.

And now we have this ad using a public employee as a political pawn.

No one would even answer the phone.

I sent all of you an email.

No one had the courtesy to even accept and respond to it with even a gotcha would have been fine.

Couldn't have that.

Kept getting voicemail, called the main switchboard, someone finally answered, sent me over to City Council office, and I was told, and probably this is the part that bothers me the most.

Quote, it's up to the council members if they want to talk to you and return your call or address your concern.

Wow.

That's some top-notch public service, guys.

You know, I'm disappointed.

I'm opposed to this poorly written ordinance because it's too vague, it's far too rushed, pushed and written by a third-party special interest group, and the people involved have shown themselves to be less than trustworthy.

As a Wichitan, a taxpayer, and a former public servant in this community, I demand to know who authorized the ad, and I want them held publicly accountable.

The ad not only violates policy, it violates Kansas election law.

And yes, I checked.

Most of you should be ashamed of yourselves.

You appear to be dodging accountability and you're supporting the will of special interests above the overwhelming majority of people in Wichita who will be forced to bear the burden of this unjust taxation in the event it actually does pass.

And on a final note, should by some miracle it pass, considering the current polls.

I'd love to see a hand recount.

Thank you.

Thank you, Bill.

Would anyone else from the public like to address the council?

I see none.

I have a question for the city manager.

Um, this was a question that was posed to several council members uh regarding the filming of a commercial, and I would like to hear from legal what is happening at the current moment.

Well, I'll jump in um initially.

Um, yeah, there does seem to be again.

I don't know what link he's referring to or if there's a specific one.

We did a little look to see, and I didn't see the exact um link that he was speaking of, um, but there is if as identified concern with uh city employee using city resources in a city facility, then that would warrant more investigation.

Um, but I don't have the um link to investigate, so I'm not sure um what he's uh referring to, but we'll do some more digging to see if we can find the actual link that he's referring to.

Yeah, I would concur that is a concern if that is um the case.

I have not seen the ad, but I would like to pursue this if there's someone can provide that information.

Thank you, city manager and city attorney.

Uh, the other point of uh clarification.

Thank you, Bill, on bringing up the information regarding voting.

Um, I'm gonna put this on the record.

This is on the Sedgwick County election page.

Um, again, February 10th is the deadline for voter registration for this special election.

February 11th is the first day to send mail ballots for this special election.

February 17th is the early in-person voting at election office.

That's where it begins.

Uh February 24th is the last day to request a mail ballot.

February 26 is early in-person voting beginning at satellite locations, and lastly, March 3rd is the date of the special election, and mail ballots must be returned by 7 p.m.

to be counted that day again.

This information is on the Sedgwick County election website.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the next item?

Mayor, it looks like there's someone that are wanting to speak on the council.

It's not showing up on our screen.

Yeah, it's not showing up on our board.

Mayor, sorry.

Um, I just wanted to comment to um Mr.

Stout, I don't have an email from you.

Um, I just did a quick search, so if I missed it, I apologize.

But the last email I have from you is from 2025.

So um I just wanted to know I'm not ignoring you.

I I didn't get it for some reason.

If you'd like to re resend it to me, I'd be happy to take a look.

Thank you.

Mayor, I want to just echo those sentiments.

Mr.

Stout, I also don't have an email from you, just searched.

Um, so I apologize, but every Friday I try to carve out time to respond to emails to get it down to zero and respond to voicemails.

So happy to speak with you, but please know that I was not ignoring you.

I'll echo the last thing I'll have from you is on September 3, 2024.

I see no further comments.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the next item?

Consent agenda items one through 16.

Council members, are there any items to be pulled?

I see none.

I will move to approve consent agenda items one through 16.

Second, sorry, so we're used to that.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Board of Bids and Contracts dated February 2nd, 2026.

Morning, Mayor, City Council, Josh Laubert, Department of Finance.

The Board of Bids and Contracts convened yesterday, February 2nd, 2026, for the following items.

For engineering, we have water distribution improvements, sanitary sewer improvements, paving and paving to serve Pineway edition phase two for Pearson Construction LLC for an aggregate bid total of 599,712.65 cents.

We have the video security camera expansion at various intersections or the physical cameras for Sandifer Engineering and Controls Incorporated for $604,902 and 74 cents.

We have the belt press roller assembly parts for Alpha Laval Incorporated for $91,393.29s.

We have the Enterprise Support Services Renewal for Microsoft Incorporation for 115,008 and 35 cents.

We have the trash and recycling containers and collection for park and facilities groups for change order for Waste Connection of Kansas Incorporated for an amended estimated monthly cost of $19,760 and seven cents.

We have the indirect cost allocation plan change order for MGT Impact Solutions LLC for an amended amount of $8,500.

This is how to become a vendor with the city.

And these are open public opportunities out on the street today.

And I'd be happy to try to answer your questions and recommend your approval.

Thank you, Josh.

Questions for staff.

I see none.

I move to approve the board.

Board of Bids and Contracts dated February 2nd, 2026.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Petitions for public improvements.

Good morning, Mayor.

City Council members, Paul Gunzelman, Public Works and Utilities for the record.

I have some new petitions for your consideration this morning.

The signatures on the petitions represent 100% of the improvement districts.

And the petitions are valid per Kansas statute.

Arveta, second edition, located in district five.

The projects will provide water and sanitary sewer improvements required for an existing residential development.

Fossil RAM edition located in district five.

The project will provide paving improvements required for an existing commercial development.

Hoover Industrial Park, second edition, located also located in District 5.

Project will provide sewer improvements required for an existing commercial development.

Thank you, Paul.

Questions for staff.

I see none.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 70.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Funding for replacement of large water meters.

Good morning, Mayor.

Uh, members of city council for the record, Don Henry Public Works and Utilities.

Uh, the item before you at the moment um recommends approval of funding for replacement of water meters for commercial and industrial applications.

This is necessary to promote the accurate uh measurement of water usage and collection of the associated revenue.

Um, this project will um continue to replace aging turbine style water meters with new ultrasonic type meters.

Ultrasonic type meters provide an advantage over the old turbine style in terms of the accuracy of reading, uh longer life expectancy, less maintenance, and um the uh more accurate uh collection of revenue through time.

Uh this is especially true where um the the aging meters tend to slow down and and under-read as a result of wear and tear on the mechanical components inside of the meter.

Ultrasonic meters are able to pick up on discrete flows within industrial applications where you have higher flows and and you have a discrete increase in flow, such as a uh drinking fountain or an individual toilet flush or a sink faucet is turned on.

The old turbine style isn't as capable of picking up those discrete increases, whereby the newer technology does, leading to more accurate ratings.

City council authorized funding in the amount of $600,000 to begin the meter replacement program in March of 2022.

An additional 200,000 was authorized in 2023.

And uh the water distribution division has made great progress on this project.

In fact, they've completed a change out of all of the six-inch and larger meters.

They've completed the four and the three-inch meters and have been chipping away at the two-inch meters, and the um outcome today due to the uh improved uh technology and newer meters is an increase in revenue of more than half a million dollars a year.

Staff will use the requested funds to continue the two-inch meter change out program.

Uh the current adopted CIP includes $300,000 yet in 2025 and $300,000 in 26 for water distribution meter replacements, and staff is recommending authorization of the full amount at this time.

Therefore, it's recommended that the city council approve the project, adopt the resolution, and authorize the necessary signatures.

Thank you, and I'll stand for any questions you have at this time.

Thank you, Don.

Questions for staff.

I just have one.

Can you go back to slide number 29?

I wanted to know of these two-inch meter um pipes, uh, readers rather.

Um, where are these located mainly?

Are they throughout the city of Wichita or are they focused in a specific district?

They they would be throughout the the city.

Um a two-inch meter is is um it could be used in a variety of applications, whether it's um smaller manufacturing or food service, um, those types of applications.

And lastly, of those old turbines, what's the age expectancy of that type of uh turbine versus the new ultrasonic?

Um, if it's okay, I'd like to call Matt Townsend to the to the bench to give you some uh more details on that.

Good morning, Mayor, Council, Matt Townsend Water Distribution.

Uh to answer the question, the turbine style meters uh can last anywhere from 10 to 15 years, uh, but they will say start to slow down over time as Don stated because of the slowing of those mechanical components inside.

Whereas the ultrasonic meters don't have any moving components inside, it's mainly the battery life, and the batteries on these units are warrantied for 10 years.

But we've also seen them last a bit longer than that, and it'll just be a simple battery replacement.

Thank you, Matt.

Yes, ma'am.

I see no further questions for staff.

We will now open it up for public comment.

I see no one from the public.

I will bring it back to the bench.

Uh, since this is in all districts, I will go ahead and move that the council approve the project, adopt the resolution, and authorize the necessary signatures per charter ordinance 211.

This item requires a two-thirds majority vote.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Zone change request in the city from SF-5 single family residential district to MF-18 multifamily residential district for a senior living development.

Generally located on the southeast corner of East Gilbert Street and South Rock Road.

8,031 East Gilbert Street, District 2.

Good morning.

Scott Wedd from the planning department here to present this one.

So for this case, as you heard, uh the applicant is requesting a zone change from SF5 to MF18 for multifamily zoning.

Sidem is being heard today because there are protests that were submitted against the application from within the notification area.

And I'll show you a map that illustrates that.

In terms of the request, the applicant has indicated that they are requesting the zone change in order to be able to use the site for six quadplexes for a total of 24 dwelling units.

In terms of the property, it's located as you can see here at the southeast corner of Gilbert and Rock Road.

It is approximately three acres in size, consists of one ownership parcel, and is developed with a church building and related parking.

In terms of context, properties to the north, south, and west are all zoned SF5 and developed with single family homes.

Property to the east is developed with USD 259's Bostick Elementary School and zoned SF5.

Here's the zoning map.

In terms of the staff report, the staff report provides additional information about development standards, compatibility standards, screening, landscaping, and parking.

In terms of review, on December 18th, the Planning Commission reviewed the request and recommended approval, and that vote was 90.

Two members of the public spoke on this item with concerns about traffic, street flooding, and children's safety related to the drop-off and pickup operations over at the school.

On January 14th, the district advisory board reviewed the request and recommended approval of the zone change as requested by the applicant.

And that vote was 60, and no members of the public spoke on this item at that meeting.

Four protests were received against this application.

They make up 7% of the total protest area, which is less than the 20% state threshold.

Therefore, the zone change can be approved with a simple majority of four of seven votes.

So the recommended action is recommended city council adopt the findings of the planning commission, approve the requested zone change, authorize the necessary signatures, and instruct the city clerk to publish the ordinance and resolution after approval.

And again, that would require just four of seven votes.

Alternatives include the following.

That would require five of seven votes because it's an override of the planning commission.

Or as always, you can return the case to the planning commission for additional consideration, just simply requires a simple majority.

Quick note about the process that city council policy is that the public hearing for planning items occurs at the planning commission meeting.

According to the policy, the city council does not typically receive public comments on zoning items.

With that, I'll take you through some of the graphics.

So here's the aerial map, which was described earlier.

Here's the zoning map.

Here's the map from the comprehensive plan showing that this site is located as recommended for commercial use.

Here's the protest map.

Again, there were four protests that were received.

Three of them were two of them entirely, and one portion of a third one were in the protest area that added up to seven percent of the protest area.

Here's a site plan that was uh submitted by the applicant as part of the application.

And with that, I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you, Scott.

Questions for staff.

I have a couple.

Um I know that this is the Korean uh Presbyterian Church.

Is that the applicant that is going to build these quadplexes then?

No.

Uh Minnonite Housing is uh the organization that's proposing to build the homes.

I like hearing that there are more housing units to be made available in the area.

Um I know that this is a high traffic area.

Have they alleviated any of the concerns regarding traffic?

There were uh concerns that were expressed.

Part of those had to do with parking.

Um, and as you can see on their site plan, they do uh show garages and uh driveways leading up to those to help provide the parking.

And you can also see uh parking that's located uh to the north and to the south of the existing church building.

Thank you, Scott.

Any further questions for staff?

I see none.

This resides in Councilmember Tuttle's district.

Thank you very much.

Um, I just want to thank Scott and the Metropolitan Area Planning Department for all your hard work on this.

I also want to state that I have had ex parte communication with the applicant and with the agent, not only during the DAB meeting, but also in my office, we had a meeting to learn more about this project several months ago.

I'm happy to see this come forward.

I know there's some concerns about the neighbor, but I'm confident it can be resolved.

Um we need more housing.

We know that.

We need more housing for every sector in our community, but especially for seniors.

So, with that, I will move that the city council adopt the findings of the MAPC and approve the requested zone change, authorize the necessary signatures, and instruct the city clerk to publish the ordinance after approval.

Thank you.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 7-0.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Zone change from SF 5 single family residential district to GO General Office District.

Generally located on the south side of West 37th Street North and within one half mile east of North Ridge Road.

Hello, Scott Weddell again from the planning department.

So as you heard, for this one, the applicant is requesting a zone change from SF5 to GO General Office.

This item is being heard today because the DAB and the Planning Commission recommendations are different, and also because protests were submitted against the application from within the notification area.

In terms of the request, the applicant has indicated they are requesting the zone change in order to be able to use the site for medical office and multifamily uses.

In terms of the property, as you can see here, it's located on the south side of 37th Street and to the east of Ridge Road.

The subject site is approximately seven and a half acres, just a little bit over seven and a half acres in size, consists of one ownership parcel, and is developed with a single family house and related accessory structures.

Properties to the north, east, and south are zoned SF5 and developed with single family dwellings.

To the north, between the road right of way and the dwellings is a landscape berm in a platted reserve.

Properties to the west and southwest are zone GO.

They're within a community unit plan, and consists of a mixture of undeveloped land, office, and institutional uses, and also multifamily residential, and the institutional use is a combination of a church and a school.

In terms of the staff report, the staff report provides information about development standards, compatibility standards, screening, landscaping, parking, signage, and land uses.

In terms of review, on December 18th, the planning commission reviewed the request and recommended approval of the GO request.

And that vote was eight to one.

Four members of the public spoke in opposition to the application at that hearing.

Their comments communicated the following concerns.

Increase in density would not be in character with the single family dwellings nearby.

That 37th Street is a two-lane street, and the increase in traffic would be a challenge.

Also the possible decrease in property values and introduction of potential noise and light pollution.

On January 5th, the district advisory board reviewed the request and recommended denial of the GO district and approval instead of neighborhood office in O district.

That vote was five to three.

In support of the recommendation, the DAB made findings that the requested GO district and proposed high density multifamily development would be out of character with the single family dwellings nearby.

Additionally, they found that multifamily could have a negative impact on nearby residential properties with an increase in traffic, whereas office is not likely to have a similar effect.

One note about this is that the most notable difference between the two zoning districts is that the NO neighborhood office district promotes permits office uses but not multifamily by right.

The NO district requires a conditional use permit in order to allow multifamily.

At that meeting, at the DAB meeting, 10 members of the public spoke in opposition to the application, expressing the same general concerns as those mentioned at the MAPC meeting.

In terms of protest, 29 protests were received against this application.

Nine were located in the protest area and equal 21% of the total protest area.

So therefore it exceeds the state threshold of 20%.

And any approval of zone change will require a supermajority or six of seven votes.

And that is for either the GO or the NO, uh, will either one will require a six out of seven.

Authorize the necessary signatures and instruct the city clerk to publish the ordinance and resolution after approval.

Again, that would require six of seven votes.

Alternatives include the following.

That would require five of seven votes because it's an override of the planning commission.

Or as always, you can return the case to the planning commission for additional consideration with a simple majority vote.

Again, a note about the process that the city council policies at the hearing, public hearing for planning items occurs at the planning commission.

And according to the policy, City Council does not typically receive public comments on zoning items.

So with that, I'll take you through some of the uh photos and graphics.

So here's the aerial, which was described earlier.

Here's the zoning map again, that was described earlier as well.

Here's the map from the comprehensive plan showing that this area is recommended for residential and employment mix.

Here's the protest and notification map.

It's a little bit of a different shape this time, at least in terms of notification, because there's unincorporated Sedgwick County to the northeast.

On this map, you can see the red, which are the protests that are in the protest calculation area, and the blue, which are protests that were received outside of that area.

Here's the aerial.

And with that, I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you, Scott.

Questions for staff, beginning with Councilmember Johnston.

Scott, could you can you go through the difference between uh GO and NO?

Yes.

Does NO allow duplexes?

Um that is an excellent question.

Uh yes, it does, sir.

So uh in general, the difference is is that uh GO is general office, so it's intended to be a more intensive uses that are located there.

Um again, the focus is on office, but it does allow for a variety of residential uses as well.

NO is intended to be more of a neighborhood office, so more compatible with residential uses.

Um there are limitations, more limitations of what can be done in in O uh neighborhood office.

One of the first ones is in residential.

Um in GEO, it allows single family, duplex, multifamily accessory apartments, assisted living group homes.

So you you get the idea that there's quite a few residential uses that are allowed.

In the NO district, it only allows single family, duplex, group home, and short-term rental by right.

Now, as you heard, um, they can apply for a conditional use if they're in the inno district for multiple multifamily.

Uh, there is a limit though on the density for that, and that's like uh 14 and a half uh units per acre somewhere around that ballpark.

So that's one of the more significant differences when it comes to this case and part of the discussion that's taking place here.

Uh, there's also uh other limitations when it comes to public and civic and also commercial uses.

Um, for instance, commercial uses geo would allow uh broadcast recording studio, funeral home, uh hotel motel, uh, but that is subject to some additional conditions.

Um whereas NO would not allow for those uses that I just listed off, but it does allow for other commercial uses, medical services, office, um, ATMs.

So you just get the sense that GEO allows a lot more than in O.

Okay.

And I think I think you said this parcel is seven acres.

I think it's actually five acres and the parcel to the west that's empty as seven acres.

Huh.

Okay.

Our staff report does say uh seven and a half, but uh yes, sir.

I'll defer to you on on this one uh in terms of the the size there.

Thank you for the correction.

Okay.

Further questions for staff.

I have one.

So what exactly is um the applicant trying to do?

What type of apartment complex is being proposed?

How high, um, how far apart from or how close will it be to the residential homes, single family homes that are right there?

Sure.

Um, for this one, sometimes as you saw with the last case, we get site plans that show what their intended development would be.

With this one, we don't have that.

Uh what we do have is just an indication uh that they would uh potentially would like to look at future medical office and multifamily residential development.

Uh we don't have a layout, we don't have a concept more uh descriptive than that, and they're not required to do that with zoning cases.

Uh they certainly can if they want to, but they're not required to.

So uh unfortunately I don't have any uh graphics that I can show you that would show what the layout would be.

In terms of how close they are to residential, though, on this aerial, uh it's not zoomed in very close, but you can see that there is a street that would separate it from residences immediately to the east.

However, on the south, the property line, uh, it would be shared between the single-family homes and this proposed uh site.

Scott, well, any time that um housing questions come up with um zoning changes.

I always ask this question because it does guide me in my decision making.

Um, has this applicant engaged the residents and has the applicant addressed some of the concerns by the residents that are already established in that area?

Yeah, um, as to my knowledge, I'm not aware of any uh outside meetings that they had.

Um I'm gonna flip over to the MAPC meeting minutes just to confirm they have their agent, uh Mr.

Miller spoke, and I want to see if he's referenced any kind of meetings with them.

I don't believe so.

No, I don't see any uh indication that they've met with residents outside of uh just hearing the concerns at the public meetings.

Thank you, Scott.

Councilmember Ballard.

Thank you, Mayor.

Scott, if the applicant is here, is can we ask for any clarification on what his potential plans are?

I will defer to legal on that one.

Councilmember, you may ask for clarification from the applicant.

Okay.

Would you mind Jennifer?

Is it fair to ask him what his plans are as far as the residential goes?

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Hi, thank you for being here.

Good morning.

Just kind of curious, the mayor um asked some questions, and I just kind of like to follow up what your potential plans are as far as the residential.

Yeah, the initial intent was to develop the southern two-thirds of the property with multifamily apartments, and then the north third with uh potential professional or medical office in the future.

Um this site does require on site detention, and as of right now, those two ponds would be on the south and on the north side, so there'd be an additional buffer on the south side of the property between the property lines and the houses.

Thank you so much.

Any further questions for staff or the applicant?

I see none.

This resides in council member JB Johnston's district.

Thank you, Mayor.

Excuse me.

We had a robust uh discussion at DAB.

Um very good discussion, long discussion.

Uh I did meet with the applicant before uh beforehand, and I did suggest to him to talk to residents.

I'd say that is a very limited effort in talking to residents, talk to a few uh residents did not indicate that he made uh good attempts to talk to them.

So I am going to uh motion that we approve the zone change to NO, which is neighborhood office that's per DAB.

Uh override a move to override the planning commission, adopt alternative findings, and approve rezoning the property to NO neighborhood office.

In support of this motion, I offer the following findings.

Approval of the GO zoning would allow more intensive uses and would be detrimental to the residential uses in the area.

Approve NO allows for development of the site with less potential for adverse impacts of nearby residential uses, and I might add it was the residents that suggested NO because they would be in favor of duplexes.

So I thought that was a good uh compromise on their part.

So councilmember Glascott.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I will not be supportive of NO today.

I think General Office uh fits this district when I was looking at the Golden Rules.

I can't see a reason um to vote in the opposite, and so I will not be supportive of that today.

My brother lives right at that intersection uh 37th and uh ridge and so near there, and I think it's in line with the rest of the community in that part of the uh city.

Councilmember Tuttle.

Thank you.

I have a question for legal Jennifer.

I this doesn't happen very often when you know we um we usually approve or deny we don't change, and so um you know thank you to council member Johnston and Johnston.

I know you've been working on this for a long time.

Have had I know I've received many many emails from this.

What happens if we make the change today?

Uh does it just happen and then the applicant has a new zoning status?

I mean, I've never I haven't had this one happen.

So could you just maybe walk me through a little bit because what if now this new status doesn't fall in line with what the applicant had planned?

I I'm just curious.

Yeah, and I will defer to planning if you want to add anything, but I think this will be the vote of council.

It's the final decision of the governing body.

There's always the right for an applicant to make an appeal to district court.

There's limited basis for appeal.

Um Scott, do you have anything to add?

I mean, I think it's your final decision, and it's up to the applicant to do with it what he deems appropriate.

And let me may I clarify, was there a second to that motion?

I just you did not yet.

Councilmember Johnston.

We'll need a second before we have further discussion.

Is there a second for council member Johnston's motion?

I'll second for discussion.

Councilmember Tuttle seconds it further discussion, Councilmember Johnston.

Thank you, Mayor.

I will mention that the seven acres to the west, which abuts uh St.

Catharines and Ascension.

Um their uh retirement home is already zoned, GO.

They can already put apartments on there.

Um that's not a bad thing, that's a good thing.

Um but I just think that the that five acres surrounded by two sides, uh, would be a good buffer zone for for uh for uh duplexes, honestly.

So have housing, just not have an intensive use of housing.

A lot of discussion on 37th Street.

37th Street is uh is a two-lane road that is very very busy.

Um it needs to be improved, it's not in the CIP for the next 10 years.

I will ask the city manager to put it in the CIP if we can work it into there.

Um I did take city manager by there when school and just happened to be going letting out, and the amount of traffic is enormous from that school at that time, and it's all on 37th Street.

So a lot of kids in that area in the morning and the afternoons.

So again, I think apartments are fine on that seven seven acres, which is already permitted.

I just think that five acres, it's a it's a good buffer for that neighborhood, and it just makes sense looking at the map too.

Council member Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh Jennifer, just a point of clarification.

Yes, Councilmember.

Is what needs the supermajority, six out of seven.

Um that would, yes, but this is also an approval a change.

So this because there's a protest position petition over 20 percent, this will also require six of seven votes.

So council member Johnston's motion will require six votes as well.

You are correct.

Okay, and it's because we had a 20 percent protest.

That's what triggers the supermajority under state law.

Councilmember Tuttle.

Thank you.

And and Jennifer, I'm sorry we're we're making you work today.

So if it doesn't get the supermajority of six out of seven, then can you please just remind us what happens?

No action taken today.

And um to clean up the record and based on state law, I think on I'll defer to Scott, I think we'd ask for a motion then to um to deny to clean up the record so there's a clear denial if that fails.

Okay, thank you so much.

Just want to make sure we're following procedure.

Thank you.

Councilmember Johnston.

Yeah, the dab vote was five to three.

Um three of the people who voted no, two of them want to deny it completely, keep it single family.

One of them wanted to have it be GO.

So just to clarify that, that's what that was the five-three vote.

And five people have voted for the NO.

I have a question for you, Councilmember Johnston.

Uh MAPC approved it eight to one for GO.

Would it be appropriate to return it back to MAPC with new information regarding what they plan?

And given that there's still a lot of discussion to be made.

I'm just asking this does reside in your district.

Yeah, in this case, I don't think so.

I think we had a robust discussion at the district advisory board.

I think the neighbors were very reasonable.

Um they didn't want just no for no re you know for no reason.

Um they just wanted to buffer it between their neighborhood and uh and the other apartments will which will probably go on that seven acres.

Uh Scott, do you know if the seven acres next to this five-acre site have they indicated that they will be doing multi-family?

Excellent question.

Um, I'm not aware of a case of a zoning case at that location, and as I look at it, um, the map shows that that is already zoned GO, so they would not have to come to the planning department uh to proceed with their project.

Um that would be something we could inquire with MABCD to see if there's any permits that have been pulled.

But at this at this point, uh I'm not able to provide an answer on whether or not what their intentions are council member Johnston.

Mayor, I think that'd be good questions for uh Mr.

King since he's a developer.

Yeah, um, just to clarify the parcel in discussion today is seven and a half acres.

The parcel to the west is about uh ten and a half acres.

And the parcel to the west, which is owned by a ascension affiliate, is currently zoned for GO, and it does have at the moment a CUP overlay, which which has some unit um per acre restrictions on it currently.

Councilmember Glascock.

Thank you.

I was just gonna make a substitute motion for discussion.

I would move or the substitute motion that we would adopt the findings of the MAPC, approve the requested zone change to GO General Office District, authorized the necessary signatures and instruct the city clerk to publish the ordinance after approval.

Second motion and a second.

So further discussion on the substitute motion now.

Councilmember Tuttle.

Just want to make sure with legal this would have to have six of seven to pass, correct?

That's correct.

This requires six votes to pass.

Okay, just want to make sure.

Thank you.

Further discussion from the bench.

I have a couple of questions.

So I think from this bench, we're all interested in housing.

However, what is most appropriate for specific neighborhoods?

And I always defer to the council member who is the expert for his or her district.

Um I always go and uh defer to that individual.

Um so my questions really are gonna probably be for council member Johnston.

Um again, one of my guiding principles is has the applicant contacted the residents in the area and had engagement, because I think that um one of the things that I appreciate from uh the Wichita Independent Neighborhood Association, the WING group, is that they always want to just feel engaged, uh feel heard, and then an applicant uh share those plans with residents who are already established in the area.

Do you know of I know that they spoke with some residents, but what what has that been like?

The conversations I know he spoke to at least a couple.

Um I I'd probably defer that to Mr.

King.

I did go and walk the neighborhoods and knock on the doors to of the residents immediately to the east and to the south of the property.

Uh, granted, not everybody was home.

I did not have the opportunity to meet with everyone.

Um I think overall the comments and feedback that were received were um a lot of concern about the traffic on 37th Street and about the traffic surrounding the children that attend the school and um you know general plans and and potential light pollution and similar things from the apartments, granted, which all of that would be uh addressed in planning per current code.

The light pollution uh is one of the concerns that I think I heard from some emails that I received.

I'd like to know how high up, um, how expansive your multifamily is being proposed.

Well, right now there's no set plans, but uh initial concepts would be a three-story apartment complex.

Um I don't have any specific details on the requirements of the um light poles, but I do know there is a city code for that.

And on the east side of the seven acres as of right now, there is a long line of uh very tall mature trees, which if apartments were to proceed there would more than likely uh remain, which would provide a nice landscape buffer.

Back to the buffering of this no said plans plan.

Um can you talk about back to the two retaining uh yeah?

So since this parcel has kind of been um developed around, there has never been a need or to have any uh drainage for this property since it's going to be a new usage.

Uh stormwater runoff has to be addressed on the south side of the property.

There was uh per my engineers will need to be a detention retention pond, and on the north side, another pond as well.

So on the south side of the property is the natural location for one of those ponds, which would provide an additional buffer uh between the apartments and the housing, in addition to the required fence by code.

Another concern that I heard was um what type of multifamily housing you were expecting we have around the city of which have multiple different types of multifamily.

What is your target market?

Can you explain a little bit more?

Yeah, target market as of right now would be class A apartments, similar to what's been developed to the north and west off of Ridge.

Yes, Avante Innovation.

I want to know a little bit more.

Um so I don't know the applicant, I don't know you.

Can you explain?

I guess the type of developer you will be, or your uh client will be in terms of developing this area.

Seeing that you want to do class A apartments, these are uh tell me about approximately how much a unit you're trying to rent these.

Give me an idea of the type of developer you are.

Yeah, so the market rents in this area for new class A apartments are $1.50 to $1.60 a foot, which are in line with uh what ovation and Avante are currently renting for.

Um so to demand those rents, you have to provide a really class A type product with all the amenities that go along with those rents.

Um couple more questions.

I want to know again.

My biggest concern is that residents in the area feel heard and feel like their concerns are being addressed.

Um can you share what your plan will be in terms of engaging the community that's already established in the area?

Uh I'm happy to uh go back and meet with the uh HOA and the other residents to address the concerns once again.

A lot of the feedback that was received was about traffic, um, which as many of you have already discussed the traffic on 37th coming from the west goes from a four-lane to a two-lane, so it chokes down a lot of traffic, and then people uh go east on 37th and up to Hoover to get on 96.

So a lot of it was traffic and concerns for traffic and what additional development would do to 37th Street.

And because you're again proposing multifamily three stories as the highest, how many units are you expecting?

Um this parcel, you could potentially get 150 units, give or take council member Shepard.

Thank you, Mayor.

I uh Scott, this might be a question for you.

I I just really want to clarify um the golden rules of zoning, and or maybe it's for Jennifer, applies in this case too, right?

We need to be very mindful as to why we are approving or denying a request and ensuring that we are not violating the golden rules of zoning.

Is that correct?

That's that's correct, they apply.

Councilmember Johnston.

Thank you, Mayor.

Mayor, I appreciate your question on on the this subject site.

How many units 150?

Uh I would ask Mr.

King, how many how many units do you plan for the total site between both lots?

Well, once again, everything's conceptual at this moment, and um we're here discussing the seven and a half acre piece.

So everything is subject to change.

I have not submitted any plans.

Uh things are still fluid depending on the outcome of this vote.

Okay, I I think before you said three to 300 to 350 units.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

Between between the two sites.

Between two sides.

Mayor, before we ask any other questions, I I'm sorry, but it's a good discussion to have.

But the the council policy is that the the record at the planning commission will be where we make this decision from, and this is becoming more uh finding fact-finding than than clarifying at this time.

I just wanted just to remind council that we're really limited to the planning commission being the place where this is discussed in depth.

Thank you.

I see no further questions on the board.

Um we have a substitute motion by council member uh by vice mayor Glasscock, seconded by council member Ballard.

Um I see no further comments, so we will open the roll.

The nays have it, four to three.

So we're back to the original motion by council member Johnston and seconded by councilmember Tuttle.

Any further discussion?

Councilmember Tuttle.

Thank you.

Um we must be tracking if uh councilmember Johnston, if you could remind us of the motion.

Um that would be really appreciated.

And um I was gonna say something else, but I lost my journey of thought, so I may come back on the board.

Okay, thank you.

Um I move move to override the planning commission, adopt alternative findings, and approve rezoning of the property to NO neighborhood office in support.

Oh yeah, I already read that.

So there's the motion right there.

Council member uh Glascock.

Thank you, Mayor Jennifer, sorry.

If this were to fail, yes, then what is the status?

Well, at that time there's no action taken.

You can still um it's still um pending.

I mean it can be deferred, it can be um, but I would recommend that there actually be a motion made to to finalize this today.

If it's a denial, I would I would move that it be denied, or I would recommend that there be a motion made for denial.

So quick question for Scott.

If this were to be denied if um Councilman Johnston's motion were to be denied, what is the can you reiterate what is the existing zoning right now and what would be the steps for the applicant to continue past today?

Yes, sir.

Uh well the zoning is currently SF5, so single family zoning.

Um if uh this request is denied today, then the applicant would have to wait uh 12 months before they could bring a similar application uh apply with a similar application.

They could uh bring a similar application or a different sorry, a different application within six months.

Sorry, after I should clarify after six months, they can submit a different application, but they have to wait 12 months if they want to do a similar application.

And who determines whether or not it's similar?

Um would be the staff is the first round of checking that out, and if we think it's close, then we take it to the MAPCU for a decision about whether or not it's too similar or whether it's different.

Okay, thank you for that.

Given that the probably would change my vote.

I believe that GO is appropriate in this area, but given that that fails, at least the neighborhood office allows for more usage than a single family usage, and so I would likely side in favor of unless my colleagues have a different perspective of why I should vote in the opposite.

Councilmember Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, so if this motion fails as well, we could still return it to MAPC for further review.

Scott, yes, Scott agrees and he does.

Yes, you may be return it for further review.

Okay, thank you.

That changes my uh conversation right there.

So I would probably still vote in denial that MAPC could maybe come back with something that's uh a further compromise that would allow for it to pencil out and allow development to happen in some capacity.

Councilmember Tuttle.

I'm trying to remind myself, Jennifer and and Scott, you've taught me well.

Our our focus today is is this an appropriate use of the land, right?

That's exactly what I'm trying to keep my my focus on.

So my question if it's okay is to council member Johnston.

Um sounds like there's some discussion, sounds like maybe I know you were asked this a few moments ago.

Is there a willingness for it to go back to MAPC?

Um, or would that be something that you you would entertain?

I'm just curious so that we can keep our focus on is this the most is this an appropriate use of the land?

Yeah, I would not support that.

I think the neighborhood's already been dragged through an MAPC hearing, a DAB hearing.

Um I would not I don't know what new findings there could possibly be that that would change what the use of the intended use of four apartments is okay.

Thank you.

Fair just when a desk.

Yeah.

Councilmember Hoheisel.

Thank you, Mayor.

And just for clarification, council member Johnston.

Um, was your plan discussed at MAPC and uh DAB as well?

Can you repeat that?

Your your motion was that discussed?

I it sounds like it was discussed at DAB.

It was definitely discussed at DAB.

Actually, suggested by several of the neighbors to do that as a compromise.

Okay, we're willing to compromise.

That I don't know.

Okay, I was not there.

I would just uh like to offer to the question about whether or not NO neighborhood office was discussed at the MAPC.

I'm doing a quick review of the minutes, and I don't believe that it was because oh, actually, I take that back.

It looks like uh Mr.

McDonald uh raised that if you look at the minutes they're on page seven of the MAPC minutes, and that idea is brought up that of approving in O neighborhood office instead of GOAT Any further discussion regarding the current motion.

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes 6 1.

Madam Clerk, please call the next item.

Council member appointments and comments.

Councilmember Glascott.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just wanted to correct something for the record from a previous uh speaker in public comment.

Um I got a message from um Ted Bush, the president of the fire union that the add in question or the allegation that it was filmed in a fire station that is inaccurate.

It was filmed in a studio in Old Town, and President Bush was present for that.

Um he also wanted to articulate that the member was off duty.

He was representing the union, and that can be noticed in a union t-shirt in the video.

Um the the president of the fire union is available for any further questions from um members of the public.

So I just want to correct that for the record, given that there's also false information mentioned previously.

Councilmember Shepard.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just want to take the time to say happy black history month.

Black history is American history, and I think we can look right here in Wichita to see that history.

So every week uh I'll try to give a little fact and encourage our community to really take in what history we have here locally.

So Black History and Wichita start at the very beginning of our inception.

Richard Robinson was one of the earliest black settlers in what would become Wichita, Kansas, uh, present before the city was even incorporated.

His legacy lives on today through the Richard Robinson Community Building Association.

It's a CBA that works to promote economic stability by advocating for livable wages, business contracts, serving everyone in need, and preserving black history, strengthen our neighborhoods, and invest in community leadership.

Want to give a huge shout out and a note of gratitude to District One small business owner and founder of the Richard Robinson CBA, Bryce Graham, and encourage everyone to learn more or get involved by following the Richard Robinson CBA and support their work right here in Wichita by visiting RRCBA.com.

Thank you.

And happy Black History Month.

Councilmember Ballard.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just wanted to say thank you to all of the volunteers that helped with the point in time count uh last week.

And also um this Saturday is my district six breakfast at nine o'clock at Evergreen, and then at 11 o'clock at Evergreen following my breakfast, there's going to be a town hall on water.

So would encourage you all to share on your socials.

Um, and hope to see you there.

Councilmember Tada.

Thank you.

I just want to make my colleagues in the community aware about a program that's really important to me and can help some of our most vulnerable residents.

Um we all know the Salvation Army has the red kettle around the Christmas time.

Um, another program that they have is called Share the Season.

And this year I was fortunate to serve as the chair for that program, and we met our fundraising goal just this last week.

So I'm super excited about that.

Share the season has been going on since 2000, and we have helped through this program.

The Salvation Army and Share the Season has raised 4.5 million and helped over 4200 families.

What's unique about this program is that there are three main criteria.

One adult member of the household must be employed or employed within the last three months.

Retired adults must be receiving Social Security retirement income, and it's also for disabled veterans who are receiving veterans' benefits.

And so they also anyone who applies for this program also has free financial counseling and wellness information available from the Salvation Army.

So what this program does is it's for residents who maybe have an unexpected medical expense, maybe they lose their job.

Sometimes it's they have an unexpected funeral or they have to travel to take care of another family member.

They can go to share the season.net, share the season.

This truly is a program that helps the working poor.

And I just thought I would take a point of privilege and just share two testimonials that we've already received with folks applying for funding that I think is really important.

Um applicant said, My husband was laid off in ex in October.

He's working now, but we are so far behind in rent and bills that we are getting our utilities disconnected and we pace face possible eviction.

Another applicant said, I need assistance with paying my rent.

I lost my job a few months ago and I'm starting a new job, but my rent was due on January 1st, and I wasn't able to pay the low, so the late fees are racking up.

My monthly rent is only $395, but with the late fees, I currently owe $575.

Please help me.

I'm a single mom with three kids.

So this program really is intended to help people who could become homeless because of an unexpected expense or an unexpected life's uncertainty.

So if you can again help share the word, share the season.net, people can go and apply.

And thank you to everyone who graciously supported this program this year.

I see no further comments from council members.

Um I just want to say thank you again for those who attended last week's community prayer uh in remembrance of the individuals who lost their lives during the plane crash from Wichita to Washington DC.

So again, thank you.

Um, and with that, I will move to adjourn this meeting.

Second.

Motion and a second, any further discussion?

I see none.

Madam Clerk, please open the roll.

Motion passes seven zero.

We're adjourned.