OVERLAND PARK PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. June 11, 2012

Transcription

1 OVERLAND PARK PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING June 11, 2012 The Overland Park Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 1:30 p.m. by Mrs. Janie Thacker, Chair. The following members were present, constituting a quorum: Mr. Mike Flanagan, Vice Chair; Mr. Tom Lance; Mr. George Lund; Mr. John Brake; Mr. Bob Gadd; Mr. David M. Hill; Mr. Thomas A. Robinett and Mrs. Kim Sorensen. Mr. Edward Ned Reitzes and Mr. Steve Troester were absent. Also present were: Mr. Jack Messer, Director of Planning and Development Services; Mr. Keith Gooch, Senior Planner; Ms. Danielle Zeigler, Senior Planner; Mr. Aaron Dubois, Assistant Planner; Mr. Steve Horner, Senior Assistant City Attorney; Ms. Pam Fortun, Senior Storm Water Treatment Engineer; Ms. Alysen Abel, Civil Engineer II; and Ms. Kathleen Behrens, Recording Secretary. Approximately 30 people were in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 14, Chair Janie Thacker presented the May 14, 2012, Planning Commission meeting minutes for approval. Mr. Mike Flanagan moved to approve the May 14, 2012, Planning Commission meeting minutes. Mr. George Lund seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 9 to 0. CONSENT AGENDA (Approved Items A, B, C, D, E, F, G and I; and continued Item H) A. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL St. Thomas Aquinas Visitor Bleachers Pflumm. Application made by St. Thomas Aquinas. B. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Gracious Senior Living West 110th Street. Application made by IKM, L.L.C. C. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Frida s Patio 7200 West 121st Street. Application made by Barnds Brothers, Inc. D. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL The Sweet Life of Brookdale Court Lamar. Application made by Landplan Engineering, PA. E. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Johnny Brusco s Pizza Cherokee Plaza South 8909 West 95th Street. Application made by Johnny Brusco s Pizza. F. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Days Inn 6800 West 108th Street. Application made by Days Inn.

2 Page 2 G. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Corporate Woods Building 27 Smoker s Kiosk Grandview. Application made by The Weitz Company. H. FINAL PLAT NO Corbin Park Condominium 6901 West 135th Street. Application made by Green Engineering Services, Inc. I. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL McDonald s West 135th Street. Application made by Phelps Engineering, Inc. Chair Thacker presented the Consent Agenda for approval and asked if there were any items to be discussed separately. Mr. Tom Lance requested that Item I be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion. Mr. Flanagan moved to approve Consent Agenda Items, A through G, including all stipulations, and to continue Item H to the July 9, 2012, Planning Commission meeting. Mrs. Kim Sorensen seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 9 to 0. Mr. Lance understood that Item I was a request for a McDonald s restaurant at West 135th Street. He referred to page No. 16H of the staff report, where it discusses the rear elevation, and asked about the exterior downspouts. There were four exterior downspouts shown in the report, and he asked if they could be placed inside the wall cavity or inside the building in some way. Assistant Planner Aaron Dubois responded that the proposed McDonald s was not a newly built restaurant, and the applicant is renovating the exterior of an existing store, which has current drainage from the roof through downspouts. Unless the applicant was to rebuild the entire McDonald s restaurant, there would not be a way to internalize the downspouts. Mr. Lance asked if they could be placed inside the room of the wall cavity. Mr. Dubois stated that there is no plan to change the existing masonry and it will remain as is. Mr. Lance asked if they could drain through the roof into the room inside. Mr. Dubois stated that the applicant could provide further details on the construction of the building and what it will allow. Mr. Howard Johnson, construction manager for McDonald s Corporation, Mastin, stated if they were constructing a new building for McDonald s similar to what they did at Collage and Metcalf, the inside downspouts would work out. However, since the proposed application site involves a renovation, they cannot go through the roof of the existing building, because the freezer/cooler is located just below the roof. Mr. Lance moved to approve Consent Agenda Item I, Final Development Plan Approval for McDonald s, West 135th Street, including stipulations a through h. Mr. Thomas Robinett seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 9 to 0. REZONING NO Vicinity of the northwest corner of 191st Street and State Line Road. Rezoning requested from RUR-J, Rural District, Johnson County, and PRUR-J, Planned Rural District, Johnson County, to PRN, Planned Residential Neighborhood District, to allow a planned residential neighborhood. Application made by Polsinelli Shughart P.C. (Approved)

3 Page 3 Mr. David Hill recused himself from consideration of this item, as he works for the Blue Valley School District. They are continuing negotiations with the applicant for a potential school site. He left the meeting during this discussion. Senior Planner Keith Gooch presented Rezoning No , located at the northwest corner of 191st Street and State Line. This is a request for rezoning from RUR-J, Rural District, Johnson County, and PRUR-J, Planned Rural District, Johnson County, to PRN, Planned Residential Neighborhood District, to allow a planned residential neighborhood. This is a 5.65 acre piece of ground. Referring to the vicinity map, he noted the property to the north and to the south was recently rezoned to PRN; however, 191st Street was not included in that rezoning. When this entire property was annexed several years ago, the 191st Street right-of-way was not included in that annexation; therefore, the City cannot act on rezoning that strip of ground to the Planned Residential Neighborhood. The plan included in the staff report is identical to the plan approved for Walnut Trails. The plan shows that 191st Street will dip to the south and come back to meet State Line in about the same location, east of where it enters the property. The existing right-of-way will be developed potentially with a school site, open space and residential lots, as well as additional streets inside the Walnut Trails Subdivision. This request meets the Future Development Plan, and staff recommended approval subject to stipulation a. Mr. John Petersen, Polsinelli Shughart Law Firm, 6201 College Boulevard, appeared on behalf of the applicant, Walnut Trails, owner and developer. He explained that his client has reviewed the staff report and accepts all stipulations proposed. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. Upon receiving no comments, she closed the hearing. Mr. Flanagan moved to recommend approval to the Council of Rezoning No , northwest corner of 191st Street and State Line, subject to stipulation a. Mr. Lance seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 8 to 0. Mr. Hill recused himself from voting on this item. Mr. Hill returned to the meeting. REZONING NO Vicinity of the northeast corner of 159th Street and Metcalf. Rezoning requested from CP-1, Planned Restricted Business District, to CP-1, Planned Restricted Business District, and CP-2, Planned General Business District, to allow a commercial center. Application made by Andrew J. Schlagel. (Approved) Mr. Gooch presented Rezoning No , located in the northeast corner of 159th Street and Metcalf. The applicant is requesting rezoning from CP-1, Planned Restricted Business District, to CP-1, Planned Restricted Business District and CP-2, Planned General Business District, to allow a commercial center, which is a 10.7 acre tract of land. The vicinity map of the area shows this property originally rezoned with the property to the north that is zoned CP-1 and developed with a day-care facility and a bank. The property to the east is zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential District, which is developed as single family. The property to the south is zoned CP-1, CP-2, and CP-3, and is currently undeveloped. The property across Metcalf is a Wal-Mart, which is zoned CP-2.

4 Page 4 Mr. Gooch presented the 2004 approved plan for the area, which shows Metcalf, 159th Street, and the property in question to be rezoned to CP-1 and CP-2. There is a large multi-tenant building in the rear of the property, which was what was previously requested in He presented the proposed current plan, which shows Metcalf on the opposite side, as well as the existing bank and day-care facility, and the property in question. The line splitting the CP-1 and CP-2 zoning runs down the drive with CP-2 located along Metcalf, and Tires Plus, a multi-tenant building with parking on the east side, and a fast food restaurant. There are six buildings in the rear that are multi-tenant. A total of 90,154 square feet is proposed for the site with a total of 396 parking spaces, which meets ordinance requirements. There are three amenities proposed on this site, which were required by the Site Design Standards. The amenities shown on the map include a patio adjacent to Building D1, a second patio near Building D6, and a green space amenity near Building D4. Mr. Gooch noted that since the proposed site is located adjacent to R-1, Single-Family Residential property, a fence would typically be required where the commercial property meets the residential property. This is a large, expansive area, with some drainage along the northeast corner of the property. Staff will work with the applicant on how to best buffer and landscape the properties to the east at the time of final development plan. Staff is not certain the fence is the best way to screen. They could possibly use additional landscaping, buffering and other types of vegetation to provide screening, as well as a fence. The proposed building elevations by the applicant include the use of Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) block, painted brick and stucco for Tires Plus, which is located along Metcalf. The remainder of the center is proposed to be three colors of brick, CMU block and three colors of stucco. Staff will work with the applicant at the time of final development plan to obtain the exact materials to be used, as well as the building elevations. The Comprehensive Plan calls for the proposed property to be appropriate for commercial uses; therefore, this request conforms to the Future Development Plan. Part of the multi-tenant D4 building located in the rear is a two-story building, but the remainder is single-story. Staff recommended approval of Rezoning No , including stipulations a through y with a minor correction to stipulation h, which should read concurrent with construction of any buildings, removing the word residential. There is no residential component of this proposal. He also noted that stipulations p and q will be determined at the time of final development plan, which both talk about concurrent construction with the submittal of construction plans for site development or building permits. Staff will look at each of those stipulations individually, so that when a pad site comes in, they will not have to start constructing Best Management Practices (BMP) for an entire piece of property or storm water treatment facilities. However, staff can work with the applicant to work on a lot-by-lot basis, which will depend upon what the applicant is proposing to construct. This issue will be negotiable at the time of final development plan. This process is typical throughout the City. He offered to answer questions about the proposed application. Mr. Flanagan referred to the proposed plan where one-fourth of the plan has been approved previously on the south side, which has been approved for along time. He asked if there will be some connection to the internal roadway from the existing road. Mr. Gooch stated that there were two connections to the south, and he indicated on the map where the connections would be placed. Since the connection was done in

5 Page 5 the 1990s, it would likely be redone before any development occurs on the site. He also clarified that there was a connection to the drive where the bank and the day-care facility are currently located. Mr. Lance asked if the Tires Plus proposal would be a new building and if the drawing was provided by Tires Plus. Mr. Gooch agreed, stating that elevation drawing was provided by the applicant. Mr. Lance referred to the colored rendering, the left-hand side where there is a triangular cap on one bay, and noted the roof overhang is set back. He asked if that technique could be used on the Tires Plus building. He also noted another elevation where the two-story building was shown, stating that the signage shown there is at the spandrel level between the first and second floors. He asked if those were signs for the first floor. Mr. Gooch stated that he would have to ask the applicant, but he did not see a location for a second story sign. If someone had the first floor and two bays with and one sign for both bays, Mr. Lance asked if someone on the second floor would need signage, such as a sign inside the building. He did not want to see that type of scenario at this location. Mr. Gooch stated that issue could be addressed when the final development plan is submitted to determine where the signs should be placed. The sign criteria may also dictate where those signs should be. Mr. Lance asked if the glass would be mirrored glass. Mr. Gooch stated that mirrored glass would not be used. Mr. Andy Schlagel, Alhambra, Planning Consultant, appeared on behalf of the property owner, who owns the 10 plus acres of land and has owned this land for the last 40 plus years. He stated that representatives of the engineering firm were also present, as well as a representative from Tires Plus, the developer/builder. He noted that they have updated the plan, and there is a drop of square footage on the site of about 20,000 square feet to update and modernize the building mass, and to move the building away from the neighborhood and closer to the street. He noted that there were many stipulations to this project that staff has set out and modified and to which he agreed. He referred to the question about signage, and was not sure they had completely determined the potential signage for the second story element, but there would be sign criteria once that building is designed. He offered to answer questions about the project. Mr. Lance asked what the timeline for the project would be. Mr. Schlagel stated that the timeline is immediate for the first phase, which involves the Tires Plus tenant. They are hoping with that construction, it will spark additional development. Chair Thacker asked if it was anticipated that the exterior finish on the Tires Plus building would be similar to the other retail buildings. Mr. Schlagel stated that staff has been very explicit regarding the type of materials to be used, with an intent to match the design of the center. Chair Thacker asked if the color renderings represented how the project will appear. Mr. Schlagel stated they have attempted to use the same type of materials shown in the renderings with a little lighter coloring, but similar palate of materials. Chair Thacker clarified Mr. Schlagel s comments to mean there would be a color match, but not necessarily a materials match. Mr. Schlagel stated that staff had indicated a concern in their report regarding the amount of CMU block that will be used. This would represent the more similar type of brick or stone that is being proposed for the center. However, he understood the materials used on the center were slated for replacement, and this is an issue that will be further discussed at the final development plan stage.

6 Page 6 Mr. Lance asked about the downspouts shown on the east elevation and to the south. Mr. Schlagel stated that they would ensure the downspouts are enclosed and not visible. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. Upon receiving no comments, she closed the hearing. Chair Thacker referred to the Tires Plus building and asked how it would appear compared to the other buildings on the site. She did not see many similarities between that proposed building and the others within the center. Mr. Gooch stated that the colors, materials and design that will be used will be very similar. Mr. Lund moved to recommend approval to the Council of Rezoning No , northeast corner of 159th Street and Metcalf, including stipulations a through y, and revised stipulation h. Mr. Bob Gadd seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 9 to 0. REZONING NO Vicinity of the northwest corner of 129th Street and Quivira. Rezoning requested from RP-3, Planned Garden Apartment District, and R-1, Single- Family Residential District, to RP-3, Planned Garden Apartment District, to allow an apartment complex. Application made by Polsinelli Shughart PC. (Continued) Mr. Flanagan moved to continue Rezoning No , northwest corner of 129th Street and Quivira, to the July 9, 2012, Planning Commission meeting. Mrs. Sorensen seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 9 to 0. SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO West 95th Street. Special use permit requested for a three-year period of time to allow a drinking establishment. This property is currently zoned CP-2, Planned General Business District. Application made by Johnny Brusco s Pizza. (Approved) Mr. Dubois presented Special Use Permit No , located at 8909 West 95th Street. This is a request for a three-year period of time to allow a drinking establishment. The property is currently zoned CP-2, Planned General Business District. The request from Johnny Brusco s Pizza is to operate a new location in the Cherokee South Shopping center at the southwest corner of 95th Street and Antioch. The exterior walls of the tenant space are located within 200 feet of residentially zoned property; therefore, triggering the requirement for a special use permit for a drinking establishment. The Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) limits initial drinking establishments to three years. The site is located on the western edge of the existing shopping center. Staff recommended approval of Special Use Permit No for a three-year period of time. Mr. David Hall, West 45th Street, appeared on behalf of the applicant. Chair Thacker asked if the applicant was in agreement with the three-year period of time for the special use permit. Mr. Hall agreed.

7 Page 7 Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. Upon receiving no comments, she closed the hearing. Mr. Flanagan moved to recommend approval to the Council of Special Use Permit No , 8909 West 95th Street, for a three-year time period. Mr. Gadd seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 9 to 0. SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO Wycklow. Special use permit requested for a ten-year period of time to allow a pot-bellied pig. This property is currently zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential District. Application made by Stacie Ayala. (Withdrawn) Chair Thacker announced that Special Use Permit No , 22 Wycklow, has been withdrawn and no motion was required. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL International Community Church 8637 West 96th Street. Application made by Dalrymple Construction Company, Inc. (Approved) Mr. Dubois indicated that the applicant is requesting approval of a revised preliminary plan, stating this was a request from Dalrymple Construction Company, Inc., for the International Community Church, located at 8637 West 96th Street. The property is currently zoned CP-1, Planned Restricted Business District. This is a request for the Sylvan Grove commercial development at the southeast corner of 95th Street and Antioch, to allow a 13,300 square foot building that will be used as a church. The revised preliminary plan and public hearing is triggered with this request due to the building location of 11 feet from the surrounding property. The original plan called for a setback of 45 feet. He provided an aerial photograph of the location, which shows the last two vacant lots of the development. Duplexes align the property to the east. The site plan calls for an 11-foot setback along the eastern property line. A total of 54 parking spaces have been provided, meeting ordinance requirements. At the time of final development plan, staff will ensure the Site Design Standards have been met with this application. The applicant has provided a conceptual landscape plan showing street trees along 96th Street, parking lot landscaping, and foundation plantings along the building. Additional landscaping will be required along the eastern property line at the time of final development plan. Staff will ensure the landscaping plan meets ordinance requirements. The applicant has submitted preliminary elevations, showing a building completely constructed of brick with precast concrete accents, soldier course accents, and windows are located throughout the building. Staff will ensure all architecture standards are met at the final development plan stage. He presented a color rendering, showing that the applicant plans to use a brick material similar to the brick used in the remainder of the center. Staff is working with the applicant on the architecture and the site designs and is supportive of their request. Staff recommended approval of Revised Preliminary Plan for International Community Church, subject to stipulations a through j. Mr. Lance asked if the application had gone through the Site Plan Review Committee process. Mr. Dubois stated that the plan had not gone through that process.

8 Page 8 Mr. Randy Dalrymple, Dalrymple Construction Company, Inc., 7030 West 107th Street, appeared on behalf of the applicant. Chair Thacker asked if the applicant was in agreement with stipulations a through j. Mr. Dalrymple agreed. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. Mr. Tim Lopatofsky, Lopatofsky, Klein, Lopatofsky, Lopatofsky and Lopatofsky, Inc., 8675 West 96th Street, appeared on behalf of the owners of the two buildings that will be impacted by the proposed plan. He pointed out the buildings on the map and stated that their concerns involved a common drive that was built in He felt a joint easement may be needed for the drive between the church and one of the buildings, because it is not large enough without sharing the proper 24 feet. Currently, the drive has been built onto the church s property, and it has been used since 1977 as a common drive and maintained by the owner and prior owners. There is a dumpster in the right-of-way easement, which he felt was an inappropriate location. There is also a retention area under the parking lot and a drainage pipe that comes up through the property of the first building, which also affects the second building owned by Lopatosfsky and Klein. He explained that his concern with that situation involved a 15-inch pipe. He was not aware of whether anyone had checked the size of the creek tributary to know if it was large enough to handle additional flow that will come from converting this area to a paved lot from a grass lot. Mr. Dalrymple referred to the trash enclosure, stating this issue was discussed last week with the Uhl Engineering firm, the project s civil engineering consultant, and they understand the concerns. They felt they could find a location for the dumpster that would suit Mr. Lopatofsky s needs and get the dumpster away from their property. Regarding the access easement, he noted that they had no problem with obtaining that easement in order to allow two-way traffic at the entrance coming into the site. Regarding the easement for the sanitary sewer, he agreed to work with Mr. Lopatofsky to try and connect it into the structure. He felt they may have to increase the size of the downstream piping in order to handle the amount of water that comes through there. Civil Engineer II Alysen Abel referred to the storm water issue, stating when staff typically reviews storm water studies of this nature, they also look at the downstream issues. With the current detention area, and the underground detention being installed, the release rate of the underground detention will mimic the conditions of the grassy unimproved area that currently exists, and it should not have any impact. With no further comments, Chair Thacker closed the public hearing Chair Thacker asked if the issue of the easement would require an additional stipulation or if it was something staff would work out with the applicant. Since it is a private agreement, Mr. Dubois stated that staff can work with the applicant to ensure that easement has been recorded at the County by the final plan stage. He also pointed out that Mr. Dalrymple has already approached the property owner to the south about resolving the easement issue. Mr. Gadd asked about remedying the dumpster issue. Mr. Dubois stated that the dumpster issue is something that can be addressed with Site Design Standards. There is a stipulation that requires the applicant to meet these standards, but staff did

9 Page 9 not get into a lot of detail on where that trash enclosure would be located. Staff can stipulate that the dumpster be moved off the edge of the property to somewhere internal if the Planning Commission desires. However, staff can work with the applicant on this issue at the final plan stage as well. Mr. Gadd felt a new stipulation might be needed to provide assurance that the applicant will come to an understanding with staff on that issue. Mr. Dubois agreed to add a new stipulation to address that issue. Mr. Lund referred to the sanitary sewer and storm sewer and asked if both issues were being discussed or considered separately. Mr. Dubois stated only the storm sewer issue was being discussed. Mr. Lance requested the project go through the Site Plan Review Committee process and that request be added to the motion when made. Mr. Hill agreed with Mr. Lance s comments. He understood that staff worked extensively with the applicant on the project. He felt the plan presented could continue to be refined. In the context of the project being zoned CP-2, he felt a twostory building is being shown to emerge straight up almost at the corner of the property line. He also sees a large mass that is somewhat imposing up against the edge of the other adjacent properties. One appears to be a day-care facility and the other is duplexes. He wanted to see some further conversation about building design, location on the site and how it responds or reacts to its surroundings. Mr. Flanagan asked if the item needed to be continued so the plan can go before the Site Plan Review Committee, or if they should approve the plan on the condition that it first be approved by or go through Site Plan Review. Mr. Hill stated that he would favor a continuance of the application, so that the Site Plan Review Committee can further discuss the project. Mr. John Brake agreed with continuing the application request. Chair Thacker asked what timeframe would be involved with the project if a continuance is granted. Mr. Dubois felt the next Planning Commission meeting on July 9, 2012, would be an acceptable timeframe to bring the project back to the Planning Commission, if agreeable with the applicant as well. Mr. Darylmple agreed to the continuance. Mr. Flanagan moved to continue the Revised Preliminary Plan Approval for International Community Church, 8637 West 96th Street, to the July 9, 2012, Planning Commission meeting, so the plan can be considered by the Site Plan Review Committee for consideration of some issues brought up on the design plans. Mr. Hill seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 9 to 0. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL Corbin Park Vicinity of the southeast corner of 135th Street and Metcalf. Application made by Carson Development, Inc. (Approved) Mr. Gooch presented the Revised Preliminary Plan for Corbin Park, located at the southeast corner of 135th Street and Metcalf. The property is zoned CP-2, Planned General Business District, with 135th Street on the north, Metcalf on the west,

10 Page th Street on the south, and Lamar on the east. He presented the previously approved plan, noting that eight to nine pad sites were being changed with fairly minor changes. Pad site 17 has the largest change where there used to be a dead-end aisle, and now they have located it along the entrance off Lamar, and making it smaller in size. There is a C-2 building, which is the JC Penney s, that is already constructed. There is also Von Mauer and Lifetime Fitness, which used to be two buildings and will now be one building with a total of 43,000 square feet. Building D1, located along the main street, and buildings to the north are being constructed and are almost finished. D1 represents a 3-story building with retail on the first floor and office on the second floor, or it could be all retail or all office. They have angled parking that will be screened from the main street by landscaping. The largest changes shown on the map include Buildings E and F. Building E will consist of a multi-tenant strip building that would include approximately six tenants. Staff worked with the applicant to look at sidewalks and landscaping. There is about 140,000 square feet of development in this location, some truck docks, and a drive that goes around Building E. There are no tenants in this area yet, and staff is waiting for more information to come out through the final development plan. Staff is concerned about the screening of the rear area, as well as berms and landscaping along 138th Street, which will be determined at the final development plan once tenants are known and the architectural design of the building is determined. He referred to the F group, stating there were three buildings in this group. Staff will also ensure there are sufficient parking and sidewalks between buildings E and F, and the remainder of the shopping center. There is a total of 41,000 square feet between the three buildings. The largest building is 25,000 square feet and the other two buildings are 8,000 square feet each in size. On the previous plan, there used to be four buildings at the roundabout. The northeast corner of the roundabout is now a gazebo with a fountain. Staff is still not satisfied with the design of the northeast corner of the roundabout, but has agreed to wait until the final plan is submitted due to the fact there are potential changes because the buildings have not yet been finalized with tenants. Additional amenities are being constructed on the site, which are located near Von Mauer and in the areas between the buildings. The applicant provided some color drawings of the amenities around the site. The D1 Building location is along the main street, which shows the angled parking. The northeast corner of the roundabout is also shown, as well as the elevation with the fountain. Another amenity is shown at 135th Street and Metcalf. He pointed out that the pad sites in Corbin Park they had first discussed are all owned by a separate owner. The internal land is owned by Carson Development, the applicant for the current request. A bank owns all the pad sites. A stipulation is included in the staff report that requires the detention facility serving this site to be constructed prior to Pad 14 or 15 and receiving a Certificate of Occupancy. This will depend on Carson Development working with the bank to purchase that ground. He presented a plan that was submitted by the owner of Carson Development, and is what staff expects to be built prior to Pad 14 or 15 and the Certificate of Occupancy being issued. Another amenity is located near Building C2, which will include a fountain and possibly a water feature. The owner of Carson Development is still working through the process on this feature, and it would not be constructed until Building C2 is built. There are a total of 4,631 parking spaces on site, which equates to 4.25 spaces per 1,000 square feet. The UDO would require 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet based

11 Page 11 upon the size of the Corbin Park, which is over one million square feet; therefore, a deviation is required. A deviation was granted in 2008 to reduce the parking to 4.31 spaces per 1,000 square feet. Another deviation would be required to further reduce the 4.25 parking spaces. Staff went through the five criteria, which are outlined on page No. 49 and 50 of staff s report, and they feel comfortable granting that deviation for the reduction in parking. Mr. Gooch presented the building elevations for Building E, as well as Building E, which is three stories and located on the main street. Staff is comfortable with the building elevations; however, they will further review them at the time of final development plan, as well as the landscaping screening of the truck dock along Building E, and the amenities. Staff recommended approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan for Corbin Park, subject to stipulations a through m. Mr. Gadd asked where the condominiums would be built. Mr. Gooch stated that the condominiums, as they are called on the plat, are located below the JC Penney s store. He outlined on the map where the Corbin Park condominiums were located on the first floor, which are retail shops that will be sold back to this developer. Mr. Jeff Degasperi, 6240 West 135th Street, Degasperi and Associates, appeared on behalf of the applicant, as well as the owner/developer, Carson Development, as well as Green Engineering, the civil engineer for the project. He noted that their primary goal, with the redesign, is to create a plan that is more marketable in today s conditions with general visibility of some of the shops, as well as some larger footprints for some of the shops. The east side has not yet developed. Some of those strategies they have developed to indicate better visibility, and some use about the same amount of square footage. They are actually dropping square footage on the entire site by 13,000 square feet with the proposed reconfiguration and a few minor revisions to the pads. Overall, they anticipate maintaining the high quality standards of the design and materials of the project, which are evidenced in the landscaping plans and building elevations. They plan to maintain those high design standards while working with staff. Mr. Degasperi referred to the screening on Building E, stating this building will be one of their first phase buildings after they finish construction of the buildings surrounding Von Mauer and JC Penney s. There is a lot of activity occurring to secure tenants for that building, as well as the other buildings that are finishing up development. They plan to be thorough in screening the four-sided architecture for this building by providing enhanced landscaping from the back of 138th Street and to screen all of the activities. Only a couple of docks will actually be screened with masonry walls or solid walls and landscaping. The other doors are primarily surface doors that will be screened similar to the interior buildings there. Some of the amenities on the site were enhanced, especially the amenity at 135th Street and Metcalf, which will now be a nice cascading waterfall feature with some signage and great landscaping. There is also the roundabout feature, which is a similar scaled down version, including a natural waterfall, trellises, a gazebo, and places for pedestrians to sit in front of the fountain. This creates the streetscape that continues throughout the entire development all the way out in front of Building E. He offered to answer questions about the project.

12 Page 12 Chair Thacker asked if the applicant was in agreement with all the stipulations. Mr. Degasperi agreed. Mr. Gadd asked what the timeline was for the project. Mr. Degasperi stated that they would begin with the new large Building E on the east side. They are planning to move past the preliminary development plan, pending securing the tenants for the building. They can then proceed to bring a final development plan to the Planning Commission. They anticipate having a building ready to go by the end of the year. Mr. Lund asked if there would be sidewalks along Metcalf and along 135th Street. Mr. Degasperi agreed, and stated sidewalks were part of the Master Plan. He was not sure of the timing of that construction, but that they had obtained all the necessary easements for the planned sidewalks. The outer buildings on the eastern portion are finished, and the adjacent sidewalks will be constructed. Mr. Gooch added that there would be sidewalks included on the pad site at 135th Street and Metcalf. Mr. Degasperi stated that those sidewalks would be constructed with the amenity. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. Upon receiving no comments, she closed the hearing. Mr. Flanagan moved to recommend approval to the Council of the Revised Preliminary Plan for Corbin Park, southeast corner of 135th Street and Metcalf, subject to stipulations a through m. Mr. Lund seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 9 to 0. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL The Vineyards Vicinity of 159th Street and Quivira. Application made by Phelps Engineering, Inc. (Approved) Mr. Gooch presented the revised preliminary plan for The Vineyards, located at 159th Street and Quivira. This is a request to allow changes to The Vineyard, a single-family subdivision. There is a street network partially constructed on this property from original rezonings. The property is zoned RP-OS, Planned Open Space. The location of The Vineyards is generally surrounded by single-family residential on small lots and large lots, as well as some rural residential property. The property was most recently rezoned in 2010, which included a total of 133 lots on acres for a density of 1.48 lots per acre. The applicant is now requesting a total of 129 lots on the same acreage, which equates to a density of 1.4 units per acre. A new developer has purchased the property and feels these changes are required to allow the property to be more marketable. The changes include using more of the existing street network. He outlined on the map the connection to the west property line, which has been moved to the south approximately 300 feet from the previously approved plan. A trail is proposed to be constructed along this open space down to 159th Street. In addition, the street connection to the existing single-family home along 159th Street is now a cul-de-sac, but is proposed to be platted as three lots. In order to get three lots, the removal of that one property owner s home would be required. This lot is now proposed to be platted as Lots 8, 9, and 10 with the possibility of the existing home to be torn down. Other changes include the amenity area that is now located at the northeast corner of the roundabout, which used to be on the west side in the 2010 plan. A trail

13 Page 13 connection will also be provided between Lots 92 and 93, which will go out to the trail connection around the pond. Another trail connection will be constructed between Lots 107 and 108, to 159th Street. Even with the amount of open space decreasing by.41 acre, the open space is more than is what is required by the ordinance. Most of the perimeter buffer adjacent to the large lot subdivision is all similar to the 2010 plan, except for one location. That buffer varies from 60 to 75 feet around the property. The only change occurs at the southeast corner of the site, which will be a reduction of about 10 feet, from 60 to 50 feet in the Tu Lakes area, to allow for the trail connection to be located between Lots 107 and 108. Staff supported the reduced buffer to allow the trail connection and still feels 50 feet is a substantial buffer from the property owner to the east. Staff recommended approval of the revised preliminary plan for The Vineyards, subject to stipulations a through n. Mr. Flanagan understood there was an existing home on Lot 9, and that at some point they expect the house to be removed. He asked if the proposed three lots would be included. Mr. Gooch pointed out the line on the map, stating the existing house will likely not remain in order to construct the three lots requested. Three homes would be built on that property, or the lots could be reconfigured to allow the house to remain on the property. Most likely a teardown of that home will occur. Since a cul-de-sac has been added, the widening of 159th Street, and the fact the home will lose its access from 159th Street, Mr. Flanagan asked if access will be provided through the entrance to The Vineyards. If a cul-de-sac remains, he did not see anything going into that property, such as a driveway. Mr. Gooch stated there could potentially be a driveway off the cul-de-sac, so that they could keep the house in its current location. Mr. Brick Owens, Nearing Staats Prelogar and Jones Landscape Architects, 3515 West 75th Street, Prairie Village, appeared on behalf of the applicant. He stated that Mr. Harold Phelps with PEI Engineers, the civil engineering firm commissioned by Mr. Jeff Ashner and the Wilshire Communities Development, was also present. He explained that they were developing their final lots in the Wilshire Farms project, and moving on to their next target. He explained that he had been asked to look at the project in the beginning to make good development decisions in this economic time. The plan is to continue those with the Wilshire Farms concept, which is to provide amenity centers and get it built first, as well as size the lots to the marketplace that Wilshire Farms has tested and proven to be very successful. Mr. Owens explained that their changes were primarily to create 75-foot wide lots that would allow them to build a house like Wilshire Farms had been building for the last three or four years, as well as trail connections. It was upon staff s insistence that they provide those trail connections between the lots. Creating the trail connections is tricky for developers to do. With some manipulation between some of the lots and some compromise on both sides, they were able to provide strong access points to the bike trail they plan to run along 159th Street and from all pods of their development. The center point of the project includes the existing lots, which total about 28 lots. About 25 of those lots will be immediately marketable for the type of homes the developer is proposing to build. A small number of the streets and lot lines are being changed, so that they can bring them online now and not have to wait for other parts to come along, or reposition the lots into 75-foot lots. The next idea was to create an amenity center that would enhance the quality of the neighborhood and community. The amenity center has been moved from the west side of the cul-de-sac to the east side of the cul-de-sac to connect with the lake. Two lots

14 Page 14 were removed from where the amenity center is proposed northeast of the roundabout, and two lots were located to the west of the roundabout where the amenity center was originally proposed. Mr. Owens noted that the applicant was in agreement with all stipulations. He referred to stipulation i, stating the idea was to get the market, development, and cash flow moving to create the ability to develop the existing lots to 28 lots in the middle portion of the site. The building permit is not allowed until after all the storm water facilities are in place; however, those lots have already been negotiated. He pointed out on the map the lots the applicant is proposing to develop, which are the larger lots in the middle of the property around the roundabout. They purposely did not move any of the property lines so that the utility connections can remain in place. They will be building on the larger lots in the first phase, similar to the Blue Stem project. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. Mr. Edward J. McDevitt, West 159th Street, Olathe, stated that he owned the acreage to the west of the proposed site and moved there in 1987, shortly after the Morse annexation of At that time, Overland Park city limits ended at 159th Street. He was excited to know they have a new opportunity to move some property in that area. He has participated in previous activities involving The Vineyards, dating back to 2005 and earlier. He felt the new owner might want to consider dropping the Vineyard name, because he felt there were some associated negative connotations with that name. Primarily, he was concerned with the drainage issues from the east to the west where it starts at the top of the hill. This was an issue that was supposed to be addressed by a berm of some type that was proposed by Overland Park and accepted by The Vineyard, at that time to reduce the drainage that was washing out his driveway on his side of the property. According to the maps, he noticed a trail that comes down to his eastern property line that was not going to be there before. There was going to be a 75-foot barrier on his property. He has a house on one acre and an additional nine acres where he keeps horses, and his entire property is fenced for the horses. The fence is electric down the entire east side across the back and down the west side. He was not sure a bicycle fence along an electrical fence would be an ideal situation for this subdivision in the future. Mr. McDevitt referred to another issue regarding the move of heavy density acres or lots to the west, stating it would leave the middle and east side more open. He was concerned about the additional drainage caused by those issues. Also, in earlier meetings, there were discussions about how to handle the drainage, and there was going to be some type of drainage system that would deflect down to the southwest corner, which is currently where his house sits. A 10-foot trail is being proposed with the 159th Street widening project to be located within a few feet of his front sidewalk. This trail will be situated next to his front steps. Additionally, they moved the power pole to the property line with some agreement with the City. He had worked out something with the City to move a large sewer that was going to be located in that corner. His concern with the new trail going in was the fact there will be a lot going on in that corner, and how it would affect his attempt to sell the property when he retires. He did not feel the property would be sellable with the current road construction and what is going on with the corner, which he perceived as a deterrent. He felt the impact the development project will have on that side of the street should be revealed. Mr. McDevitt referred to the sanitary sewer issue, stating a sanitary sewer exists on his nine acres to the west of his house, and he saw no plans on The Vineyard showing

15 Page 15 how the developer intends to hook the lots on the western side of the development to the sanitary sewer. That sewer was installed when the Mills Farm subdivision was put in directly across the street, and they had to bring an outlet onto his property. He was also concerned about the higher density on the left, and that the new drainage ditch to be installed is sized properly to accommodate all the additional lots that are proposed. Mr. Dan O Rourke, West 157th Terrace, stated his house adjoins the property on the east of the property. He has been concerned with this property for several years and the last information he had was that the property was supposed to be oneacre lots. He was never notified of any other change on this property in He had attended a meeting a couple of years ago regarding a Morse Task Force development committee in which there was a desire to keep low density housing in the area, including this project next to him. He questioned the status of that objective. Mr. O Rourke referred to the sanitary sewer issue, noting he had attended a County Commission meeting on this issue several years ago, which resulted in a 51 percent majority favoring the sanitary sewers. Part of that plan took what was considered one lot at the time, over into another area to be included as part of the sanitary sewers. He wondered if those sewer lines would run with that area down to Tu Lakes. He asked if there would be any berms situated along the area of his home. He noted that the previous owner had dug a trench in the area that was supposed to have taken care of the drainage issue. After that work was done, his sump pump was running constantly even though it had been about three weeks since they had a rain event. Some other work was done soon after, but it totally changed the lay of the land in that area. There was also a big hole dug where trash was buried, which was approved by the City to do. Mr. Dan Smith, developer of The Vineyard, West 157th Place, referred to one of the speaker s statements that they were not informed of the development. He pointed out that the last time they planned a rezoning, a party was held at his home, which many of the neighbors showed up in support of the new plan. Another speaker previously spoke about trying to sell his home, and he said he had tried to buy that property when he bought the Vineyard; however, they could not come to an agreement on the price. He explained that he has been building in Overland Park for 38 years and knows that all drainage and sewer issues must be worked out before the project can move forward. The debris that was buried in the hole that was dug, as previously mentioned, was approved and supervised by City staff. The project that ended up occurring in that area involved storage for some curbs that were taken from another project until they were able to be moved. Upon receiving no further comments, Chair Thacker closed the public hearing. Mr. Owens referred to the issue raised about the trail connection on the west, the sanitary sewer in the corner and storm water. He noted that the best business decision in dealing with sanitary sewers is not to change them if nothing is wrong with them. The system that was designed, initially proposed and approved is the same system they will be using for the proposed development. No changes are being proposed to that system since it is working. Although the project is located in a sewer district, they are not going to impose a sewer district on their neighbors to the east, because they are on large lots and have septic systems. According to Overland Park standards and regulations, the system is designed to be expanded at a future date. In regard to the west side, there are many things going on at the intersection near the applicant s property. He pointed out that the applicant is proposing a storm sewer