9. REZONING NO Vicinity of the northwest corner of 143 rd Street and Metcalf Avenue

Transcription

1 9. REZONING NO Vicinity of the northwest corner of 143 rd Street and Metcalf Avenue 1. APPLICANT: Andrew Schlagel is the applicant for this request. 2. REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting a rezoning from CP- O, Planned Office Building District, to CP-1, Planned Restricted Business District, to allow for a commercial development. 3. LOCATION: The approximately 8.77-acre tract is located at the vicinity of the northwest corner of 143 rd Street and Metcalf Avenue. 4. CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD: The subject property is in a developing area of the City. Apartments have been constructed along both sides of Metcalf Avenue to the north. The 143 rd Street corridor is primarily residential in character, with the exception being the intersection of 143 rd Street & Metcalf Avenue, where a shopping center is being developed on the southeast corner, and a small office park is under development at the southwest corner. A church has been constructed at the northeast corner of 143 rd Street and U.S. 69 Highway. 5. LAND USE AND ZONING PATTERNS: The property in question was the subject of a rezoning application for commercial development in Both the Planning Commission and City Council denied the application, because the proposed commercial zoning did not comply with the City s Master Plan, which had shown the property for low-density residential development. In 2000, the property was the subject of an application for office development. The Planning Commission voted 10 to 0 to deny the application for offices, but the City Council voted 9 to 1 to approve the application. The office zoning remains in place to this date. The subject property is currently undeveloped. Adjacent property to the north is an apartment complex zoned RP-3, Planned Garden Apartment District. A new plan for office development was recently approved by the Planning Commission for vacant property zoned CP-O to the east across Metcalf Avenue. Diagonally across the intersection of 143 rd Street and Metcalf Avenue to the southeast, is a developing shopping center on property zoned CP-2, Planned General Business District. Property across 143 rd Street to the south is a newly developing office park. Adjacent to the west is a church on property zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential District.

2 6. ANALYSIS OF APPLICATION: a. DEVELOPMENT PLAN: The current approved plan for office development on this tract includes three office buildings totaling 76,750 square feet. The plan proposed by the applicant depicts 58,750 square feet of retail space on approximately 8.77 acres, resulting in a floor area ratio of.153. The plan includes four buildings sited at the perimeter of the site, with the parking area internal to the site. The plan includes small plazas and other design elements. Loading areas are screened from view with walls, and a solid hedge surrounds the parking lots. Pedestrian connections are provided to the public streets and between each building, and there appears to be a significant amount of landscaping proposed. The building elevations indicate buildings constructed of brick, block, stone and EIFS, with horizontal seam metal roof. A private drive has been constructed with the adjacent apartment complex that will also provide access to the proposed commercial development. Access to the private drive is limited to right-turn only movements from both 143 rd Street and Metcalf Avenue. Since this application was submitted prior to the adoption of the Shopping Center Design Guidelines, the plan is not required to comply with the new guidelines. Therefore, the staff did not perform a detailed review of the application for compliance with the guidelines. Nevertheless, it is the staff s opinion that the proposed plan complies with the general direction given by the guidelines. The staff is satisfied with the site layout and the building elevations, for this stage of the approval process. The staff s primary concerns related to this case are discussed in the Traffic Impacts, and Master Plan sections, later in the report. b. TRAFFIC IMPACTS: The Transportation staff required that a traffic impact study be submitted for this rezoning request for two reasons: to illustrate the traffic impacts of the proposed change from office to retail development, which will result in increased trip generation from this site, and to determine the appropriate totals for possible contributions for future ramp improvements at the 135 th Street and U.S. 69 Highway interchange. The study was prepared by a traffic consultant, who followed a scope of work developed by City staff. The City s travel demand model was used to determine the future year impacts. Trip generation totals for both the proposed retail project and the land uses in the previously

3 approved development on this site are listed and compared in Table I. TABLE I Trip Generation Estimates Land Use A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Intensity ADT* In Out In Out Proposed Development General Retail 58,750 s.f. 4, Current Approved Use Office 45,500 s.f Day Care Center 13,750 s.f. 1, Bank with Drive-Through 3 windows 1, Bank (General Office) 8,750 s.f Total Trips 2,760 2, Difference (Proposed Approved Use) 2, * Weekday Average Daily Traffic (two-way) Table I shows that despite the change to more intense land uses, the trips in the morning peak hour will decrease substantially (215 fewer trips), while the number of afternoon peak hour trips will increase to a modest extent (54 trips out a total 442 trips for the proposed project). The total trips using the site in a typical 24-hour time period (Average Daily traffic - ADT) will increase dramatically, from 2,760 to 4,840, a result which is not surprising considering the steady traffic that a retail development will attract as compared to the very cyclical traffic associated with an office development (heavy traffic in the morning, evening and during the lunch hour). To determine the impact of those added trips on the surrounding street network, the staff directed the consultant to study five intersections during afternoon peak hour conditions under four different traffic scenarios: existing conditions, existing plus development conditions, projected 2020 conditions with Master

4 Plan office use on the site, and projected 2020 conditions with the proposed retail use. Tables II and III list the results of the intersection capacity analysis calculations. For reference purposes, Table IV contains the breakdowns for each Level of Service (LOS) category. TABLE II Capacity Analyses Summary Existing Conditions Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Existing Conditions Existing Conditions With Proposed Project* LOS (Level of Service) Delay (Sec./Veh.) LOS (Level of Service) Delay (Sec./Veh.) 135 th & SB U.S. 69 D 46.4 D th & NB U.S. 69 D 40.5 D th & Metcalf F 84.0 D st & Metcalf C rd & Metcalf D 40.1 D 41.1 * Assumes that the Metcalf Avenue, 135 th to 151 st Street improvements are complete.

5 TABLE III Capacity Analyses Summary 2020 Conditions Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Intersection 2020 Conditions With Existing Office Zoning Conditions With Proposed Project 1 LOS (Level of Service) Delay (Sec./Veh.) LOS (Level of Service) Delay (Sec./Veh.) 135 th & SB U.S. 69 F 97.6 F th & NB U.S. 69 C 21.2 C th & Metcalf F F st & Metcalf C 25.1 C rd & Metcalf D 46.9 D Assumes that 135 th Street will contain four through-lanes in each direction by 2020, that the 135 th Street ramp improvements will be completed and that Metcalf Avenue will include three through lanes in each direction north from 139 th Street. TABLE IV Level of Service Criteria For Signalized Intersections Level of Service Total Delay Per Vehicle (Sec.) A <10.0 B 10.1 to 20.0 C 20.1 to 35.0 D 35.1 to 55.0 E 55.1 to 80.0 F >80.0

6 An analysis of Table II shows that all of the intersections studied will operate in the desirable LOS D range, even after the site traffic volumes are added to the existing traffic volumes. The main reason for that result is the currently-under-construction project to widen Metcalf Avenue between 135 th Street and 151 st Street. In the short term that improvement will provide for good traffic operations in the surrounding area. When traffic conditions in 2020 are analyzed in Table III, however, two problem areas are identified - the west side of the 135 th Street and U.S. 69 Highway interchange and the intersection of 135 th Street and Metcalf Avenue. Those problems are anticipated despite the assumption that major projects (eight through lanes on 135 th Street, Antioch Road to Metcalf Avenue; new ramps in the northeast and southwest quadrants of the 135 th Street and U.S. 69 Highway interchange; and six through lanes on Metcalf north of 135 th Street) will have been completed by that time. This development will add some trips to that problem area, but the net impacts of the retail use of the site, as compared to the approved office use, are not significant. Part of the reason for that minor impact on the 135 th Street intersections is that a higher portion of the office-generated trips were projected to use the interchange area in comparison with the retail trips. Another reason for the small impact is that the total number of trips from this site traveling to 135 th Street is relatively small compared to the extremely high traffic volumes expected on 135 th Street in the future. Each of the intersections near the site 141 st Street, and Metcalf Avenue. Despite the relatively small effects of this project on the operation of surrounding public street intersections, staff is concerned with the impacts of this proposed change in land use. The issue is with internal access to this site. Figure 1 shows the relative location of this retail area in relation to the adjoining apartment complex. Two driveways provide direct access to the retail area - one on Metcalf Avenue and another on 143 rd Street. As discussed earlier, the Metcalf Avenue improvements are now under way and once completed, will prevent any left-turn movements from occurring at that driveway. When 143 rd Street is improved to a four-lane divided roadway west to Antioch Road in the future, the existing driveway that now provides full turning movements will be limited to rightturn-only movements by a barrier median. Those access

7 restrictions mean that, in the future, the only left-turn access for both the shopping center and the apartment complex will be at the driveway located near the north end of the apartment complex opposite 141 st Street. Under that scenario, the north-south internal apartment drive parallel to Metcalf Avenue would bear the brunt of the retail left turn traffic. Another internal drive connects to the 141 st Street drive, but is not as direct a route. The drive parallel to Metcalf Avenue would be the likely choice for the customers heading to the 141 st Street driveway to turn north onto Metcalf Avenue and for those customers entering from the west on 143 rd Street. Staff estimates that up to 1400 retail trips a day could use the north-south drive. That drive is not designed to be a major through-route. It contains numerous driveways situated where the apartment tenants are required to back out onto the drive to exit their garages. The argument can be made that the office uses previously approved for this site also would have used the north-south drive. That is true, but as the traffic study clearly shows, the shopping center is projected to generate over 75 percent more trips on a daily basis than the office complex. Considering the potential conflicts with apartment traffic and the traffic from the retail center, which would occur throughout the day and into the evening hours, staff cannot support this request. The City Council will need to make a determination as to whether or not this project will be subject to a requirement to contribute toward the future construction of new ramps in the northeast and southwest quadrants of the 135 th Street and U.S. 69 Highway interchange. In the last few years, other projects in the general vicinity of that interchange have been required to pay a proportionate share of the estimated cost of the future improvements, based upon the development s projected share of the trips using the ramps. Within the last year, three projects closer to the interchange have been required to make payments for the future ramps. Two other projects, located farther from the interchange (at the northeast corner of 135 th Street and Lamar Avenue and the southwest corner of 143 rd Street & Metcalf Avenue) have not been required to contribute toward the cost of the future ramp construction. Refer to Figure 2 for a location map identifying each of the projects mentioned above.

8 Staff has calculated the amount of the payments for the two ramps, based upon traffic projections provided in the traffic impact study. In this case, an adjustment was made to account for an anomaly in the traffic projection process. The end result is a contribution that it proportionately in line with other recent payments. If the City Council determines that the ramp payments will be required, the attached stipulations should be attached to the zoning ordinance. If not, then the ramp contribution stipulations can be omitted. c. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: A small stream crosses this site, flowing from south to north. Because of the stream crossing this property, the majority of the site is significantly lower than either 143 rd Street or Metcalf Avenue. The applicant has received their 404 permit from the Corps of Engineers to enclose the stream, and since the application was submitted prior to the adoption of the stream corridor ordinance, there is no requirement to preserve the stream. A preliminary stormwater management study has been submitted and approved for this project. The proposed plan shows a trash enclosure located within what will be a public storm sewer easement. Since the trash enclosure is a permanent structure, it needs to be relocated outside the public storm sewer easement. The grading plan must match the proposed grades for 143 rd Street and Metcalf Avenue at the right-of-way line. Public storm sewer plans must be submitted prior to or concurrently with construction plans submitted for a site development permit. 7. CONFORMANCE WITH THE MASTER PLAN: a. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP: The Future Development Plan depicts this tract as Office. The proposed commercial zoning is not in conformance with the plan. b. GOALS AND POLICIES: There are several goals and policies of the Master Plan that this application conflicts with: Goal 3: Locational Criteria for Commercial Development Policy 3.1: Follow Locational Criteria for All Commercial Development

9 a. Limit Commercial development to the areas shown as Commercial on the Future Development Plan and, where applicable, on specific plan maps. b. Discourage the formation or expansion of strip commercial by focusing new growth in a more clustered pattern. c. Encourage commercial development to locate on sites having minimal slope to avoid substantial grading and disruption of natural drainage and vegetation. Policy 3.2: Follow Locational Criteria for Neighborhood Centers a. Limit to one corner of the intersection of thoroughfares. b. Sites spaced from one and one-half to two-mile intervals, depending upon the density of the surrounding residential developments. c. Other uses such as office (limited to one corner), public and semi-public, parks and recreation, or higher-density residential could be located at the remaining corners to avoid excessive concentrations of commercial traffic and unnecessary duplication of commercial services. Goal 6: Transportation Considerations Policy 6.1: Avoid exceeding street Capacity Discourage the expansion of existing or the inclusion of new commercial development in areas where, even with the street and traffic signal improvements, the additional traffic generated by such development would exceed the handling capacity of the street system. Policy 6.8: Avoid Diversion of Commercial Traffic

10 Discourage the diversion of commercial traffic into residential neighborhoods. Policy 6.9: Ensure Adequate Ingress and Egress Ensure adequate ingress to and egress from commercial developments. At the southeast corner of the intersection of 143 rd Street and Metcalf, a neighborhood shopping center is already under construction. The City s Master Plan envisions only one neighborhood shopping center at the intersections of thoroughfares to serve the surrounding residential development. The applicant s proposal for a second shopping center at this intersection is not in conformance with the Master Plan Policy 3.2a. The staff believes that commercial zoning on this tract will add to the stripping out of commercial development along Metcalf Avenue, between 135 th Street and 151 st Street, which is discouraged by Master Plan Policy 3.1b. Approval of commercial zoning on this tract could lead to additional requests for commercial zoning on the other two remaining corners of 143 rd Street and Metcalf Avenue. Since the only direct access to this project is right-turn only access from 143 rd Street and Metcalf Avenue, the staff believes that Policy 6.9 cannot be satisfied. Because a median break to Metcalf Avenue is available at the entrance to the adjacent apartment complex, there will be a tendency for vehicles accessing this commercial project to drive through a series of private drives within the apartment complex in order to gain access to the median break. That is not a desirable setup, and is in violation of Policy 6.8, regarding the mixing of commercial and residential traffic. This situation is discussed in greater detail in the Traffic Impacts section of the report. The staff believes that the property is a viable tract for office development. Small office tracts similar to this one have been successfully developing in this same area along 135 th Street, 143 rd Street and 151 st Street. As an alternative to office uses, there are a variety of residential uses, as well as public or semi-public uses the staff would find more appropriate.

11 8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As the staff believes the proposed zoning district and land uses are inappropriate for this location, the staff recommended denial of the application. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission considered this application at a public hearing on November 11, There were no speakers at the public hearing. The Commissioners felt that commercial uses were not appropriate at this location, for the reasons stated in the staff report. In addition, the Commissioners were not comfortable with the proposed plan that would require commercial traffic to travel though private driveways within an apartment complex in order to reach a median break. The Commission voted 7 to 0 to recommend denial of the application. Should the Governing Body find the application acceptable, the staff would suggest the following stipulations be included in a motion to approve: a. The development shall be in accordance with Exhibit A (Site Plan), and Exhibit B (Building Elevations), which are filed in the office of the Planning Commission Secretary at City Hall and which are incorporated by reference as if set out in full herein. In addition, the development shall comply with all regulations and standards of the City of Overland Park unless specifically exempted by the Governing Body. b. Development of the tract shall be limited to 58,750 square feet. c. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property shall be preliminary and final platted. d. Prior to or concurrent with the submittal of construction plans for a site development or higher level permit, submit public storm sewer plans for the review and approval of the Engineering Services Division of the Planning and Development Services Department. e. The number, location and geometrics of all driveways and parking areas are subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Services Department. f. Prior to publication of the rezoning ordinance, the owner and/or developer shall submit either $33,488 cash or an Irrevocable Letter of Credit meeting the requirements of City policy in effect at the time of payment, for a term of one year. Irrevocable Letters of

12 credit are not renewable and may be redeemed at any time prior to the end of the one-year term. Said cash or Irrevocable Letter of Credit shall be deposited with the Director of Finance, Budget & Administration for the City of Overland Park. The funds collected shall be placed in an escrow account set aside for future unspecified transportation planning, design, construction or implementation, and operations in the corridor defined as containing 143 rd Street and extending north to 135 th Street, east to Nall Avenue, south to 151 st Street, and west to Antioch Road. Said work shall be above and beyond that listed in other stipulations to this rezoning. In lieu of submission of the total amount of payment for unspecified transportation improvements, the owner and/or developer may submit partial payments, in cash, prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase of development according to the following schedule: Year of Application for Building Permit Contribution/ Square-Foot of Gross Floor Area NOTE: Any construction commencing after 2011 will be subject to the same 10 percent per year increase. g. The owner and/or developer shall be responsible for a proportionate share of the cost of the design and construction of a future traffic signal at 141 st Street and Metcalf Avenue, based upon City policy in effect at the time of the traffic signal installation.

13 h. The owner and/or developer shall be responsible for the cost of constructing a permanent southbound right turn lane, including the associated deceleration taper, on Metcalf Avenue at the proposed site driveway. The turn lane will be installed as part of the Metcalf Avenue construction project. Once the Metcalf Avenue improvements are completed and all costs are known, the City will bill the owner and/or developer for the right turn lane and the owner and/or developer shall reimburse the City for all costs associated with installation of the turn lane. Alternative Stipulations i. The owner and/or developer shall be responsible for a total payment of $32,755 into an escrow account for the future construction of a northbound on-ramp in the northeast quadrant of the 135th Street and U.S. 69 Highway interchange. Payments shall be made prior to the issuance of each building permit, based upon the following formula. For each building permit application resulting in an aggregate total building square-footage on this site of 29,375 square feet or less, the owner and/or developer shall submit an escrow payment of $.56 times the building area included in the building permit request. Any building permit resulting in an aggregate total building area on this site of more than 29,375 square feet will require payment of the remaining unpaid portion of the required escrow payment. Said cash shall be deposited with the Director of Finance, Budget and Administration for the City of Overland Park. The $32,755 payment referenced above represents 1.14 percent of the estimated total cost of the near-term construction of the northbound on-ramp in the northeast quadrant of 135 th Street and U.S. 69 Highway interchange. After the project is completed and all costs are known, the City will determine if 1.14 percent of the total costs of the interchange improvement total less than $32,755. If that is the case, the owner or developer shall be refunded the difference between $32,755 and the calculated 1.14 percent contribution (including any accrued interest). j. The owner and/or developer shall be responsible for a total payment of $62,481 into an escrow account for the future construction of a northbound on-ramp in the northeast quadrant of the 135 th Street and U.S. 69 Highway interchange. Payments shall be made prior to the issuance of each building permit, based upon

14 the following formula. For each building permit application resulting in an aggregate total building square-footage on this site of 29,375 square-feet or less, the owner and/or developer shall submit an escrow payment of $1.06 times the building area included in the building permit request. Any building permit resulting in an aggregate total building area on this site of more than 29,375 square feet will require payment of the remaining unpaid portion of the required escrow payment. Said cash shall be deposited with the Director of Finance, Budget and Administration for the City of Overland Park. 1. The $62,481 payment referenced above represents 1.15 percent of the estimated total cost of the ultimate southbound off-ramp in the southwest quadrant of 135 th Street and U.S. 69 Highway interchange. After the project is completed and all costs are known, the City will determine if 1.15 percent of the total costs of the interchange improvement total less than $62,481. If that is the case, the owner or developer shall be refunded the difference between $62,481 and the calculated 1.15 percent contribution (including any accrued interest).