OVERLAND PARK PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. June 10, 2013

Transcription

1 OVERLAND PARK PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING June 10, 2013 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. Edward Ned Reitzes; Mr. George Lund; Mr. John Brake; Mr. Bob Gadd; Mr. Steve Troester; Mr. David M. Hill; Mr. Thomas A. Robinett; and Mrs. Kim Sorensen. Also present were: Mr. Jack Messer, Director of Planning and Development Services; Mrs. Leslie Karr, Current Planning, Manager; Mr. Keith Gooch, Senior Planner; Ms. Danielle Zeigler, Senior Planner; Mr. Aaron Dubois, Assistant Planner; Mr. Steve Horner, Senior Assistant City Attorney; Ms. Alysen Abel, Civil Engineer II; Mr. Cylus Scarbrough, Planner; and Ms. Kathleen Behrens, Recording Secretary. Approximately 50 people were in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 8, Chair Janie Thacker presented the April 8, 2013, Planning Commission meeting minutes for approval. Mr. Mike Flanagan moved to approve the April 8, 2013, Planning Commission meeting minutes. Mrs. Kim Sorensen seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 11 to 0. CONSENT AGENDA (Approved Items A, B, C, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M and Continued Items D and N) A. DOWNTOWN FORM DISTRICT CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMITY APPROVAL JD Byrider Parking Lot Expansion 7722 Metcalf. Application made by RLS Architects. B. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Firebirds Wood Fired Grill Outside Patio 6601 West 135th Street. Application made by Interplan, L.L.C., for Firebirds. C. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Corner Bakery Café Vicinity of the southwest corner of 135th Street and Glenwood. Application made by Klover Architects. D. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Charles Schwab Vicinity of the southeast corner of 135th Street and Metcalf. Application made by Red Legacy, L.L.C. E. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Glenwood Place 9300 Metcalf. Application made by Shamrock Trading Corporation.

2 Page 2 F. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Pleasant Ridge Middle School 9000 West 165th Street. Application made by DLR Group. G. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Oxford Middle School Switzer. Application made by DLR Group. H. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL The Peanut Metcalf. Application made by The Peanut. I. FINAL PLAT NO Mills Farm Thirteenth Plat Vicinity of the southeast corner of 159th Street and Quivira. Application made by Phelps Engineering, Inc. J. FINAL PLAT NO Summerwood Estates Sixth Plat Vicinity of 164th Street and Rosewood. Application made by Phelps Engineering, Inc. K. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Corbin Park Brewtop Patio 6601 West 135th Street. Application made by Degasperi and Associates. L. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Brookridge Golf and Fitness 8223 West 103rd Street. Application made by Lathrop and Gage. M. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Bank of the West Blue Valley Parkway. Application made by MC Power Companies. N. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL The Fountains Shopping Center Whole Food Market 6621 West 119th Street. Application made by CSHQA. Chair Thacker presented the Planning Commission Consent Agenda for approval and asked if there were any items that needed separate discussion. Mr. David Hill recused himself from voting on the Planning Commission Consent Agenda as he had a conflict of interest with Items F and G. Mr. Flanagan moved to recommend approval of the Planning Commission Consent Agenda as presented and to continue Items D and N to the July 8, 2013, Planning Commission meeting. Mrs. Sorensen seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 10 to 0 to 1. Mr. Hill abstained. At the Chair s prerogative, Chair Thacker requested to move Final Plat No to the beginning of the Regular Agenda items for consideration. FINAL PLAT NO Coffee Creek Crossing Fifth Plat Vicinity of the southwest corner of 167th Street and Switzer. Application made by Phelps Engineering, Inc. Mr. Gooch presented Final Plat No , Coffee Creek Crossing Fifth Plat, located at the southwest corner of 167th Street and Switzer. The property is zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential District. The applicant is requesting final plat approval for a

3 Page 3 29-lot, 2-tract, single-family plat. Access is being provided from 167th Street, and the applicant plans to construct an interim roadway that will connect to the Coffee Crossing, Fourth Plat, located to the south. There is also a connection out to Switzer. In the future, there will be a bridge across the creek located to the west of the application area. The applicant has also agreed to, within the next five years, dedicate the additional ownership he has along 167th Street, which is not part of the plat, but has been addressed through a stipulation with the approval of this plat. In the future, the adjacent property owners and the applicant to the north, can potentially construct 167th Street and an interim road to provide a connection to 167th Street. Staff recommended approval of Final Plat No , subject to stipulations a through s. Mr. Harold Phelps, 1270 North Winchester, Olathe, appeared on behalf of Coffee Creek Land Company, and agreed to the stipulations provided by staff. He offered to answer questions about the plat. Mr. Troester moved to recommend to Council approval of Final Plat No , Coffee Creek Crossing Fifth Plat, subject to stipulations a through s. Mr. Lund seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 11 to 0. REZONING NO Vicinity of the southeast corner of 151st Street and Switzer. Rezoning requested from RP-OE, Planned Open Space Estate Residential District to RP-1, Planned Single-Family Residential District, to allow a single-family development. Application made by Phelps Engineering, Inc. (Denied) Senior Planner Keith Gooch presented Rezoning No , located at the southeast corner of 151st Street and Switzer. The applicant is requesting rezoning from RP-OE, Planned Open Space Residential District, to RP-1, Planned Single-Family Residential District, to allow a single-family development. He presented a vicinity map, showing the application area. Located to the north across 151st Street is property zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential District, that is developed with suburban style lots. To the east are one- to two-acre lots zoned Rural Residential District, Johnson County (RRJ). To the south is the Town and County Manor subdivision, which includes Residential Estates District (RE) zoned properties and are also one- to two-acre lots. The existing Colton Lakes subdivision, located to the west, is zoned RP-OE, Planned Open Space Residential District, and is developed with single-family residential homes. The property was originally included in the Colton Lakes development in the timeframe, and was all zoned together. There are a total of 79 lots on 79 acres, which was approved in However, only the western 30 acres were actually developed and constructed with 29 homes. The eastern acreage was undeveloped, and 152nd Terrace is currently located where there previously was a stub, which stubbed into the undeveloped land and is part of the application area. Carter Street was connected to Town and Country Manor. With that approval, there was originally a plan that included a straight access out to Carter at 151st Street. After discussion, some turns were requested to try to slow traffic to the area, which is shown on the 2007 approved plan. Getting 79 lots on 79 acres equated to one unit per gross acre. A small piece of land located at the northeast corner was included in the original rezoning. That piece is not being rezoned as part of the request and will remain RP-OE, because it is owned by a different property owner.

4 Page 4 Mr. Gooch outlined the area on the map where the applicant is requesting RP-1 zoning, which will have a total of 96 lots on 46.4 acres for a density of 2.06 dwelling units per acre. This is 46 more lots than what was approved in the 2007 plan for this property. In considering the entire existing Colton Lakes area with this request, there would be a total of 126 lots on acres for a density of 1.65 dwelling units per acre. Access to the site is still from 151st Street on Carter, which is a full access with the ability to turn left or right onto 151st Street. Carter will connect where it presently ends at the Town and Country Manor subdivision. There are a couple of turns included, which will help to slow traffic through the subdivision before it reaches Town and Country Manor. Carter also connects to 152nd Terrace, and there is a stub street coming out of the Colton Lakes Subdivision. These lots are between 9,000 square feet and 14,000 square feet in size. The applicant provided a couple of larger lots as they transition into Colton Lakes, which are Lots 41 and 42. The remainder of the site provides buffers between the proposed development and existing homes along England and in Town and Country Manor. There will be a landscape easement with a minimum of 25 feet in width. The buffers are between 40 feet up to 92 feet. The homes to the east are on larger lots, and most of the homes are set back a couple hundred feet from the eastern property line. There are a couple of additional open space tracts located between lots, which include Tract E. Tract B is currently landlocked, and staff has stipulated that this tract will have to be reconstructed to provide a connection to a public street so there can be maintenance of that tract. Staff has also stipulated a trail should be constructed across the southern tract and across Tract C to the homes association pool that serves and includes all the Colton Lakes subdivisions, such as Colton Lakes South and others. There were concerns from the neighbors about whether the pool is large enough to service the entire existing Colton Lakes subdivision, as well as the additional 46 lots. Staff reviewed the traffic impacts, and there are a total of 46 additional lots that will create 460 additional trips based upon ten trips per lot. Those trips will come from 152nd Terrace and also at Carter. No traffic study was done on this due to the fact there was not a significant number of additional trips provided by the proposed layout. Staff reviewed the applicant s plan against the Comprehensive Plan, which shows the area as very low density residential, and has a maximum of one unit per acre. The applicant is currently requesting 2.07 units per acre; therefore, it does not conform to the Comprehensive Plan. There are a couple of other subdivisions in the area, such as Summerwood Estates and Wilshire by the Lake. Those densities are between 1.4 and 1.5 dwelling units per acre, and have been approved by the Planning Commission and City Council within the last three years for that density. The acreage should be limited to 1.5 dwelling units per acre, which is what staff is recommending. Staff can support a similar density on the property as discussed with Summerwood Estates and Wilshire by the Lake, which would total 66 residential lots, not the 96 lots currently proposed. The applicant has chosen to proceed with the higher density of 2.07 units; therefore, staff recommends denial of Rezoning No If the Planning Commission supports the application request, staff has included stipulations a through s. Mr. Steve Troester asked what the average lot size would be south of 135th Street. Mr. Gooch stated there were different mixes of uses, but the average lot size is about 9,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet per acre. When they get to the very low

5 Page 5 density, there is about one unit per acre at minimum. Mr. Troester referred to the previous approval noting it comes out to one unit per acre. He asked what the lot size was for the western half of the property that has already been developed. Mr. Pete Heaven, Mastin, appeared on behalf of Rodrock Homes. He stated one of the problems they are facing went back to This area of Overland Park from Nall to Pflumm, 143rd Street to 159th Street, was studied by the Morse Stanley Area Task Force. At that time the area had very little development. The Morse Stanley Task Force made recommendations. From west to east, from Morse to Stanley, there were very large lot subdivisions encompassing one acre or more, which transitioned down to the more traditional lots in Stanley. An area included in the study was called the Transitional Area. The task force made a comment that the Transitional Area would develop one way or the other, depending on if sewers are installed. This meant once sewers are installed, more traditional lots would be embraced, which has now happened. There is now full sewer capacity. Mr. Heaven presented a picture of an area south of 151st Street, which shows some of the area as estates. In the middle of the picture, it shows what is now known as Wilshire by the Lake. Bluestem is to the north and Colton Lakes is to the east. He felt all these areas were very important, because these areas have all come before the Planning Commission within the last year. In each case, the Planning Commission has blended the existing larger lots with the lots proposed to include a new density calculation. He felt the main issue was the density calculation based on the entire subdivision, not only the lots being added. He felt Bluestem was a good example of this density calculation, which originally had developed lots with a.98 dwelling units per acre. In 2013, last month, 40 lots were added. Those lots alone would have a density of 2.13 dwelling units per acre, which exceeds staff s proposed target of 1.5 units per acre. When the area was put together, they came up with a density of 1.42 units per acre. In the north, the first lots to be developed were in Summerwood. Approximately 108 lots were added to Summerwood, and the density then came out to a little over two units per acre. The blending of the added lots with the existing lots created a density calculation of 1.61 units per acre, which is slightly higher than staff s target, but was approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. Heaven referred to Wilshire by the Lake, stating the development of that subdivision involved three phases. He pointed out the original Vineyard subdivision on the map, stating it was a large lot subdivision. There were then two subsequent additions with 87 lots added to the west and 47 lots added to the east. The original Vineyard subdivision density calculation was.87 dwelling units per acre. The western 87 lots alone were 2.03 units per acre, and the 47 lots alone were 1.77 units per acre, which is higher than the 1.5 target staff has indicated. Adding the lots and dividing by the number of lots yields a density per acre of 1.49, which is below staff s target. He felt this information was important, because they are all in the Morse/Stanley transitional and large lot area. The Planning Commission has seen the size of the lot become less important since 2008, and the quality of the homes put on those lots has become more important. He agreed with all staff s recommendations and stipulations with the exception of the density. He pointed out that they have 28.5 percent open space in the area, which qualifies for the open space designation. There are common amenities available, and they were asked to put in a jogging path from the western side to the eastern side, because the area is considered a single community and subdivision. The home prices for this area will be in the range of $450,000 to $650,000 per home. In considering the entire subdivision, the overall density is 1.65

6 Page 6 units per acre, and Summerwood is 1.61 units per acre. He offered to match the Summerwood overall density if the Planning Commission favored that change. He offered to answer questions about the rezoning. Mr. Hill asked if the applicant had calculated the number of lots they would have to give up from what they have presently designed to reach the 1.5 units per acre target. Mr. Heaven stated that in only considering the east side, they would have to give up about 30 lots to get to the 1.5 units per acre. Mr. Hill asked what lots would be given up when they include the east and west sides. Mr. Heaven stated they would have to give up 11 lots for the blended version. Mr. Troester referred to Summerwood, Bluestem and Wilshire by the Lake subdivisions and asked what the average lot size was for those areas when some of those subdivisions were replatted. Mr. Gooch stated he did not have an average lot size for those subdivisions, but the density in those areas was about 1.45 units per acre for those subdivisions. Mr. Troester clarified that those lots would likely be slightly larger than the existing 9,000 to 14,000 square foot lots compared to the proposed 11,000 to 16,000 square foot lots. Mr. Gooch agreed. He noted that the existing Town and Country Manor lots ranged between.36 per acre up to.48 units per acre. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. Mr. Paul Daly, 9951 West 152nd Terrace, referred to the issue of providing a buffer. He noted that from a transitional standpoint, there is no buffer between the new zoning and current zoning. He felt the buffer did not exist, because that area was intended to have the RP-OE zoning. With the change in zoning, he felt they should have a 75-foot buffer in place that is similar to what surrounds the existing property. He also noted that the applicant had indicated there is no viability to RP-OE zoning in that area. He felt the reality was that according to the City s annual development report using RP-OE zoning, the product line at Bluestem had the most single-family building permits issued in the City last year. Recently, they had a bidding war for one of the homes in this area. He felt the RP-OE zoning was in demand, and the cause for the prior slowdown was the recession. He felt the RP-OE zoning was undersupplied zoning products and no additional RP-OE ground exists beyond the Colton Lakes area. He felt this zoning would perform perfectly by acting as a perfect hybrid between the higher density neighborhoods to the north, such as Windsor Hills, and the very low density homes to the south and to the east, such as Town and Country Manor or W. E. Acres. Mr. Daly explained that he had spoken with some well-qualified potential buyers of the existing property, and discovered there were builders and developers who are willing to buy this ground and let it remain with the RP-OE zoning. He was surprised to learn that none of those buyers were ever contacted about purchasing the property. Per staff comments, he noted that concern was expressed for storm water runoff. He pointed out that they currently suffer drainage issues with their ponds at this time. The homeowners are responsible for the ponds through maintenance agreements. Most homes are designed to drain to the curb. He felt the additional homes and over five acres of reduced open space will place their ponds at greater risk of nitrogen pollution, silting, and rapid downstream runoff.

7 Page 7 Mr. Daly noted that in their meetings with the applicant, they were shown a plan totaling 100 lots. After opposition from the neighborhood, the applicant downsized their request by four lots and did not provide transitions between the current zoning areas and the proposed zoning area. They have currently learned the applicant s request intrudes further into the wooded private lots with the proposal of a trail system. He did not feel the applicant s request was a compromise, and represented an imposition for the sole benefit of the applicant and destruction of the wildlife pathways to their ponds. All types of animals use the current pathways, and he felt minimizing them would make it more difficult for the animals to get to the water. Mr. Daly further explained that the residents of the area bought their homes over five years ago with no trail system ever intended for the area. They feel the trail was entirely unnecessary as they have sidewalks. The proposed trail would be different from other trails in the City, because most trails are usually planned ahead of the homes being sold. In no prior instance has a trail ever been indicated to the residents based on the current proposal. He felt there were other less invasive locations that exist for such a trail, such as between Lots 28 and 29. He felt the original street design was more logical and conducive to a trail at that location. In addition, there is an existing recorded covenant running with the land that prevents any applicant from disturbing Tract D in Colton Lakes without the express permission of the neighbor who bought his home for the sake of its wooded privacy. As a former developer, Mr. Daly reviewed the known variables that drive the potential profit for this project and analyzed different density scenarios. He pointed out that the potential profit is slightly greater at the lower densities than at two units per acre even when adjusted for time. He also noted that there was no known intention by the applicant at this time to use a differentiating name to identify this product line. If approved, he felt they would have substantially different lot sizes and houses. He felt the Meadows at Colton Lakes or Colton Farms seem like appropriate names. Mr. Matt Urbanek, Perry, Colton Lakes, objected to the proposed rezoning based upon two main factors. First, the rezoning is a significant deviation from the original zoning, and the second concerns a safety issue that he did not feel had received adequate attention. As it relates to the zoning itself, staff mentioned it did not conform to the Comprehensive Plan for very low density. He also pointed out that the zoning significantly deviates from the Morse Area Task Force recommendation. He noted that he and his family made the investment in their home to look at an area where the zoning was very low density and rural way of life. He felt the concept of reverse engineering of a trail that has been permanent green space lacked planning even though it does not impact his home. As the proposal relates to safety issues, Mr. Urbanek was specifically concerned about the pool. The pool currently serves many people in Colton Lakes, but adding another 100 homes would cause problems, especially with safety vehicles accessing the area in the summer months. He felt the parking spaces required well exceeded parking capacity leading to double street parking. He also felt the 153rd Street entrance would be cause for concern where there may be children running between cars. The Town and Country Manor subdivision is developed without streetlights and has a very long straightaway that comes off Carter. The other access point at Colton Lakes is curved and does not have any built-in bends to keep cars from accelerating on that street. During the winter months when people may be out exercising or children playing, he felt they would see a significant potential for injuries or fatalities.

8 Page 8 Mr. Urbanek presented some photographs, stating they all show the same elevation. He referred to the photo showing Town and Country Manor from a north to south direction, which is the Carter entrance. He felt the pictures speak for themselves in regard to a planned development, which he felt his family and neighbors did not invest in. He asked that the Planning Commission follow staff s recommendation to deny the application request. Mr. Adam Flavin, Mastin, Colton Lakes, also objected to the proposed rezoning application submitted by Rodrock. He opposed the application, because it does not provide a proper transition between existing lower density, residential zoning and the new proposed higher density zoning application submitted. The original zoning of the property was intended for 50 homes, and the application submitted doubles that number to 100 homes. The request also does not provide for any consideration of existing homeowners as set forth in Policy 2.1. He also opposed the proposed trail system that would include development behind any existing homes. They have a sidewalk system that is in place, and building new trail systems would infringe upon the privacy of the existing homeowners. He felt alternatives existed to any proposed trail system. As the homeowner of Lot No. 26 in Colton Lakes, Mr. Flavin stated he was legally entitled to property rights associated with Tract D. This is a recorded document filed with the Registered of Deeds in Johnson County, and calls for the developer to leave any part of Tract D adjacent to Lot No. 26 undisturbed, and any removal of trees, shrubs or growth would only be done with consent of the owner. This is a covenant running with the land and binding upon all future homeowners of Lot No. 26 and Tract D. He does not consent to disturbances associated with Tract D as he is the owner and does not feel the development of a trail system behind existing homes is any consideration for privacy, especially when clear alternatives exist. Ms. Amy Flavin, Mastin, Colton Lakes, opposed the rezoning application submitted by the developer. She opposed the proposed rezoning, because it does not provide proper transition from existing lower density residential zoning to the new proposed higher density zoning application submitted by the developer. She also was against any proposed trail system that would include development behind any existing homes, which includes her home. She pointed out that they had a sidewalk system in place, and building a new trail system would only infringe upon the privacy of the existing homeowners. Alternatives exist to any proposed trail system. She did not feel development of a trail system behind existing homes gives any consideration for existing development as set forth in Policy 2.1. Ms. Elaine Daly, 9951 West 152nd Terrace, felt the City had done a good job of managing the City s growth in a well thought out manner. She felt Overland Park offered all kinds of diverse housing options for everyone. She asked that the City maintain the integrity of their neighborhood and surrounding communities and deny the proposed request. She felt changing the zoning would result in their neighborhood having two different zoning districts, which was highly unusual. The change would cause the density to increase by 92 percent. This density change is in extreme contrast to the surrounding areas. She also felt it was inconsistent with the philosophy of Rodrock Homes as they have stated in their neighborhood information for the Summerwood development, that Rodrock Homes is committed to creating a serene environment while protecting the integrity of the established neighborhood. She found it highly contrary that they would want to change the zoning and destroy

9 Page 9 the integrity of their established neighborhood. She felt the proposal does not maintain the City s desired 75-foot buffer with RP-OE zoning against R-1 zoning. She also disagreed with the statement that most of the tract will use the 151st Street and Carter entrance. Ms. Daly felt the homeowners in the area would most likely consist of families with young children or school aged children and not empty nesters. All the schools are located southwest of the proposed development. Those taking their children to school or high school students driving to school are going to use the neighborhood streets. She did not feel they would try to make a left turn on 151st Street to get out to the intersection of Switzer down to Quivira to make another left turn. The Soccer Complex is located north of the development, and they would be cutting through their neighborhood to get onto Switzer to head north to use those fields, as well as the Blue Valley Recreation fields. All the additional trips to the school, practices and games will come through their neighborhood. She asked that the Planning Commission follow staff s recommendation to deny the proposed request. Mr. Steven Hollonbeck, 9947 West 152nd Terrace, stated he lived at the end of the street stub that abuts the proposed development. He agreed with the comments made by his neighbors in opposition of the proposed request. He stated that he bought his home a year and a half ago. They knew there would be future development. However, they bought their home in this location based on a belief that the zoning of those homes would be consistent and similar to those of the existing Colton Lakes subdivision. The proposal does not recognize that fact and is in contrast to that belief. Ms. Dianna Garcia, West 152nd Terrace, stated she was in agreement with all her neighbors comments. She referred to the comments made about the pond, and also felt it was a problem. A couple of weeks ago they had three to four inches of rain, and the smaller lake rose to her porch level. Due to the drainage system that exists in the lakes, all of the wood that comes down the little creek that feeds it, had completely covered the grate, essentially creating a stopped drain. She had to pull out all of the debris since she lives the closest to this lake, which she felt would develop into a worse situation as more homes are put in the area, creating more runoff water. There is also a big problem with algae accumulating in that area as well. A couple of years ago, all the fish in that lake died. They then dug out the lake further and filled it. The lake has since been restocked, but the algae that grew in the lake caused this problem. Ms. Garcia referred to the proposed path suggested for residents in the northeast to walk across to get to the pool at the southwest corner. She felt they would cut across streets and go the shortest distance. She disagreed with the philosophy of the blended zoning and felt they were doing that to increase the numbers more in their favor. One side will be high density and the other side lower density, not a blending of density. She also referred to the traffic, stating there was a median on 151st Street, noting there were accidents there all the time from the current traffic that make left turns from the neighborhood over by the library on 151st Street. When they have to cross 151st Street to go west toward Highway 69, there are many accidents due to the left turn and no traffic light. There will also be significant construction on Switzer as soon as they block the road, which will create a worse situation. She did not feel someone would go out to 151st Street and try to continually make a left turn. Half the time, drivers will be going through their subdivision to get to the traffic light where they can make a protected left turn or right turn.

10 Page 10 Mr. Steven Woodard, Mastin, stated he had just moved into his home this past weekend. He came from Windsor Hills subdivision with a 20,000 square foot lot and wanted to move into an area with the same type of amenities and lot sizes. In considering the application request for the site, he did not feel it fits the description of what he bought into. He agreed with the comments of the previous speakers and disagreed with the rezoning request. Ms. Leslie McGowan, Mastin, stated she moved from a Rodrock developed neighborhood north of where she currently lives, because she wanted the space, a bigger lot and the feeling of what they have in the Town and Country Manor subdivision. She was concerned about the density that will result and did not feel it follows anything that currently exists. She was also concerned about traffic in her neighborhood and felt a big issue would arise with all the school children, without street lights or sidewalks. She agreed with the comments of her neighbors. Mr. Neils Hansen, England, appeared on behalf of his adjoining property owners on the east side of the property being considered for R-1 zoning requested by Rodrock. He noted that the property owners along the east side are opposed to the rezoning request. The acreage in question is now surrounded on three sides by lower density development, consisting of custom built homes. High density development would diminish the value of those homes and the quality of life for the entire neighborhood. At the time Overland Park annexed the Stanley Morse area, the neighborhood was given the understanding that the portion of the area from 151st Street to 159th Street and from Antioch to Switzer would remain low density as set forth in the Stanley Morse Area Task Force Study. So far, he felt the City has lived up to this commitment with the exception of the southeast corner. At one point several years ago, the City turned down a 100-lot, R-1 zoning request for the same property that is now being considered. That plan was very similar to the proposed plan by Rodrock. The developer of Colton Lakes had presented a plan to develop the property as an extension of Colton Lakes, which was approved by the City under the existing low density RP-OE zoning. This plan was compatible with existing development and was acceptable to the adjoining property owners. Preliminary infrastructure work was underway when the developer became a victim of the recession and was unable to proceed. Mr. Hansen pointed out that a typical Rodrock development seems to consist of lookalike architecture on small lots. This type of high density, high traffic development tends to devalue adjoining property, as well as it ages as it becoming a less desirable place to live. Distinctive low density development, like what is in place near the proposed property, tends to hold its value and add to the desirability of Overland Park as a place to live far into the future. Since a recovery of the housing market is well under way and the higher value homes seem to be leading the market, he felt the Rodrock organization would want to adapt to this market and make a reasonable return on the lower density plan under the existing RP-OE zoning. He understood the property could not remain undeveloped, but wanted a compatible development in place. He did not feel the current plan was compatible and is why the adjoining property owners are opposing the plan. He asked that the Planning Commission give consideration to the annexation agreement and to the future of Overland Park in arriving at a decision.

11 Page 11 Mr. Jim Hersh, Carter, Town and Country Manor, stated he has lived in his home since He had been tracking what could go in at the end of Carter when he moved into the neighborhood. A church owned that property, and he kept in touch with the City at all times to be updated on the progress of what would happen. In , when the Colton Lakes subdivision began to develop, the new RP-OE zoning came about in order to reduce the developers cost, because they were complaining about the cost to develop RE lots. RP-OE zoning has proved to sell very well, such as in Bluestem. He understood RP-OE would be a viable option on the site, and he did not understand why the developer wanted to develop RP-1. He pointed out that Mr. Mark Simpson tried to develop RP-1 in Town and Country Manor many years ago and failed at that attempt. He also pointed out the uniformity of the area. There is only one square that needs to stay at very low density. There are no street lights or sidewalks. The area is currently very serene and has no traffic. If the proposed development goes in, there will be cut-thru traffic in the neighborhood from the high density houses. He felt the traffic in front of his home will increase 100 percent, since he gets no traffic on his street currently. He felt they have a problem currently with people driving on 154th Street in Town and Country Manor, and there will be four times more cars going down that street. A dangerous situation will be created with the children waiting at the bus stop, especially since there are no sidewalks. He questioned where there were other places in the City that have RE lots abutted to RP-1 lots. Most RE lots stop at a cul-de-sac. W.E. Acres is designed that way which is located next to their subdivision, and Pleasant Valley Farms on the south side is also that same way. He felt Town and County Manor RE lots have a totally different appearance from RP-OE lots and will be vastly different from RP-1 lots, which abutted next to their subdivision. He bought into his home 11 years ago on Carter and felt it was outrageous for the proposed development to happen there and to have nothing but RP-OE zoning in the area. Ms. Michelle Boerner, Mastin, agreed with the previous comments made by the residents, and asked that the Planning Commission decline the proposal, because it will change their lifestyle dramatically. She lives on the pond and recognized a water problem. All of Town and Country Manor drains through that area, and if the proposed trail is put in, it will affect her basement. Mr. Jay Parsons, Perry, agreed with the previous comments made by his neighbors and hoped the Planning Commission would decline the proposal. He has two young children that go to the swimming pool during the summer, and he felt it was important to keep the safety of their neighborhood intact. Currently, with the increased construction going on 159th Street and Switzer, the traffic travels by very fast, especially close to the swimming pool. He felt a dangerous situation was created for the kids who walk to the swimming pool. The traffic during the school year will also put children in danger. Mr. Ryan Keller, Prairie, Colton Lakes, objected to the proposal and agreed with the previous comments. With no further comments, Chair Thacker closed the public hearing. Mr. Heaven stated that the quality of the proposed development has been unparalleled in the City. He noted that the density issue is one the Planning Commission will need to decide. He referred to the proposed trail, stating they were asked to provide that by the staff. If the Planning Commission chooses to remove that component through a stipulation, the applicant would be glad to do so. He referred to the ponds, stating

12 Page 12 they were properly designed for the development according to Mr. Phelps, but they require some maintenance so that they do not flood and fill with algae. He referred to the traffic issue, stating staff had looked at this issue and assured there was no such issue. He referred to Mr. Hersh s comment about where there is no place in the City where RP-OE and RP-1 zoning coexist. The only place these two zonings coexist is at Wilshire Farms and Wilshire by the Lake, which is RE and a large lot subdivision next to RP-1. Chair Thacker referred to the pool capacity and asked about the concern for the usage of that common facility. Mr. Heaven stated that they plan to provide a professional study of the pool. If the pool is over capacity, he understood it would be in their best interest to make improvements so that everyone can enjoy the pool. Chair Thacker asked about the comment made about the buffer that was removed with the new proposal and to identify what has changed. Mr. Heaven stated the only place that lot actually touches the so-called borderline is where they have put in larger lots. There were two areas where this happened, and the rest of the lots of the existing Colton Lakes back up to a common area. He felt there was a sufficient buffer already in place that they will not be disturbing. Mr. Tom Lance referred to the added population relating to the swimming pool and clubhouse and asked for further clarification of that issue. Mr. Heaven stated if the pool is or becomes over capacity as a result of their additions, they will deal with that issue, because they want everyone to be able to enjoy that amenity. In order to do that, they will have to determine the impact by conducting a study. Mr. Gooch referred to the proposed trail and stated that was a component staff directed the applicant to provide. Chair Thacker asked if the trail system was a general objective of the City to connect the existing trail system. Mr. Gooch agreed, and stated that staff reviews the open space districts and tries to get developers to provide trails around ponds and open spaces. This is a long-term approach. Staff wants to ensure there is good connectivity, not only vehicular, but with pedestrians as well. Staff was concerned by the fact that the Town and Country Manor subdivision was developed without sidewalks. There is a good pedestrian path that runs through the area. Chair Thacker felt there was a concern for putting in trails that will disturb existing natural habitat. She asked if this was a minimally invasive type of construction. Mr. Gooch stated that staff s attempt in providing trails through the area would not result in removing any trees. They plan to look at the existing habitat and have the City forester help in the best placement of the trail to avoid disturbing existing habitat, trees, hedgerows and/or buffers. Chair Thacker asked about the impact of the deed restriction for Tract D. Mr. Gooch stated that staff would have to review the deed restriction in more detail. If it limits any construction, that will be determined by staff after that review. Senior Assistant City Attorney Steve Horner stated since the deed restriction is private, it should not impact the City s review of this matter, because that would be something that is dealt with between the private parties. Mr. Troester stated that although he typically favored higher density development from a sustainability factor, he felt the current situation demonstrated going from a too low density development to a too high density development. He also felt the proposal showed the developments in too close of a proximity to each other. He agreed with staff s recommendation to deny the request.

13 Page 13 Mr. Flanagan agreed with Mr. Troester s comments and did not favor the application request. He referred to the map showing the large lots to the east and south, existing Colton Lakes with the one-acre, and the request to bring in the R-1 type subdivision within the middle even though R-1 exist across 151st Street. He did not figure all of this development into the equation. If the design was flip-flopped, he could favor that design, because they would be transitioning from one acre to large lots. He referred to the traffic issue, stating that an increase in traffic would happen no matter what comes through the site, even if one more home ends up getting built on the site. He found the pool issue interesting, because it could be overcrowded if R-1 zoning goes into the site, but he felt it would be designed to support the expanded Colton Lakes subdivision with larger numbers. He encouraged the developer to go back and redesign the plan and come up with something with 1.5 units per acre. He could support such a design. Mr. Hill moved to recommend to the Council denial of Rezoning No , vicinity of the southeast corner of 151st Street and Switzer. Mr. Gadd seconded the motion. Mr. Reitzes felt the proposed plan could work at the location. However, as far as the transition area is concerned or fitting in with the surrounding subdivisions and projects that may come about, he felt they could likely do a better job of transitioning as far as density is concerned and reduce the number of units. Mrs. Sorensen supported the motion, and agreed with the commissioners comments that they need a more appropriate transition. She felt the current proposal was too dense. Mr. Gadd felt the proposal violated the City s Comprehensive Plan Guidelines, and he did not support the application request. Chair Thacker supported the motion, and was in agreement with staff s recommendation. She felt there needed to be an adjustment to the density to make the project more compatible with the surrounding existing developments. The motion made by Mr. Hill and seconded by Mr. Gadd to deny Rezoning No carried by a vote of 11 to 0. SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO Vicinity of the southeast corner of 159th Street and Metcalf. Special use permit requested for an indefinite period of time to allow a lift station. This property is currently zoned CP-2, Planned General Business District. Application made by Johnson County Wastewater. (Continued) Manager of Current Planning Leslie Karr stated since this item was a late continuance, it was appropriate to see if anyone came to speak to this item. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing for comment. Seeing no speakers, she closed the hearing. Mr. Flanagan moved to continue Special Use Permit No to the July 8, 2013, Planning Commission meeting. Mrs. Sorensen seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 11 to 0.

14 Page 14 SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO Blue Valley Parkway. 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 Pat Phelan. Planner Cylus Scarbrough presented Special Use Permit No , located at Blue Valley Parkway. This is a request to allow a drinking establishment for a three-year period of time. Futbol Club and Eatery is the applicant for the request, which is the first request at this location. The area is located in a commercial area. The reason for the request is because a hotel is located to the northeast of the property, and the underlying zoning is R-1. Mr. Pat Phelan, 9016 North Manning Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri, appeared as the applicant for the request. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. With no comments being made, she closed the hearing. Mr. Flanagan moved to recommend approval to the Council of Special Use Permit No , for a three-year period of time with no stipulations. Mrs. Sorensen seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 11 to 0. SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO College Boulevard. Special use permit requested for a two-year period of time to allow the renewal of a temporary commercial use. This property is currently zoned BP, Business Park District. Application made by Merchants Short Term Solutions. Mr. Scarbrough presented Special Use Permit No , located at 6300 College Boulevard, to allow the renewal of a temporary commercial use foe a two-year period of time. Merchants Short Term Solutions is the applicant for the request, which is a vehicle leasing facility. This site is located in primarily a commercial area, which is a Business Park District where commercial uses are only permitted unless they obtain a special use permit. Staff is unaware of any issues at this location from previous requests, but added stipulation a, which allows for a maximum number of ten vehicles to be located on the site. Staff was recommending approval of Special Use Permit No , including stipulation a. Mr. Chris Brock, 9831 Outlook Drive, appeared as the applicant for the request. Chair Thacker asked if the applicant was in agreement with stipulation a and with the two-year period of time. Mr. Brock agreed. Mr. Edward Ned Reitzes asked if the operation was similar to Enterprise. Mr. Brock disagreed and stated they only conduct commercial leasing and are not open to the public. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. Upon receiving no comments, she closed the hearing.

15 Page 15 Mr. Steve Troester moved to recommend approval to the Council of Special Use Permit No , for a two-year period of time, including stipulation a. Mr. George Lund seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 11 to 0. SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO Marty. Special use permit requested for a five-year period of time to allow the renewal of a drinking establishment. This property is currently zoned CP-2, Planned General Business District. Application made by The Athletic Club of Overland Park. Senior Planner Danielle Zeigler presented Special Use Permit No , located at Marty. The Athletic Club of Overland Park, the applicant, is requesting renewal of a drinking establishment for a five-year period of time. The property is currently zoned CP-2, Planned General Business District. The special use permit is required due to the proximity of R-1, Single-Family Residential zoned property. Property to the west is the Hebrew Orthodox Congregation, and the property to the north is City parkland, which is also zoned R-1. A special use permit for a drinking establishment has been in operation at this location since 1983, and the Police Department submitted a letter indicating there have been no alcohol related incidents within the last five years. Staff recommended approval of Special Use Permit No for a five-year period of time with no stipulations. Ms. Sarah Wade, East State Route 58, Pleasant Hill, Missouri, appeared as the applicant for the request. Chair Thacker confirmed with the applicant that the request was for a five-year period of time. Ms. Wade agreed. Chair Thacker opened the public hearing. Upon receiving no comment, she closed the hearing. Mr. Troester moved to recommend approval to the Council of Special Use Permit No , for a five-year period of time with no stipulations. Mr. Flanagan seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 11 to 0. SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO Barkley. Special use permit requested for a ten-year period of time to allow the renewal of a private school. This property is currently zoned CP-O, Planned Office Building District. Application made by Accelerated Schools of Overland Park. Mr. Scarbrough presented Special Use Permit No , located at Barkley. Accelerated Schools is the applicant for the request. The request is for a special use permit for a ten-year period of time to allow for a private school. The zoning is CP-O, Planned Office Building District. Since this is an elementary school, a special use permit is required. This is the second renewal request for this property. The school has operated at the current location since 1996, and staff is unaware of any parking related issues at this location or any other issues. Residential zoning exists across the