Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

[Music] All right, everybody. Good evening and welcome. My name is Chris. I'm chairman of the planning commission. Myself and my fellow commissioners welcome you this evening. Uh please rise and join us for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [Music]

Thank you and welcome. And we welcome everyone watching from home. Tonight's agenda consists of the minutes from the last meeting, reszoning, general development plan, and preliminary plat for Sullivan Ranch, resoning plan development concept plan, and plan development final project for Rampage Athletics. Then we'll hear a community monthly development report. So, at this time, I would entertain a motion for approval for the minutes for the last meeting, September 8th. So moved. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? I I.

Any opposed? All right, that passes. Moving on to Sullivan Ranch. The applicant has requested the continuence of his three items. So, at this time, I would consider a motion for continuing until the next meeting for the three items for Sullivan Ranch. Still move. I have a motion. I'll second. And a second. All those in favor?

I. Any opposed? All right, quick work of that. We're moving on. I will now open the public hearing for agenda item number three, 4, and 7, which is the reasonzoning RZ07259644. Planned development concept plan PDC0725-9645. and plan development final plan PDF09259682 for Rampage Athletics. At this time, I'll ask for exhibits from our city attorney, Josh Newell. half of James, the city attorney, we would move to admit exhibits 1 through eight for this matter.

Thank you. And forgive me for not looking over and realizing that Joshua's not here. Welcome. Uh all those that are here that would like to speak either in favor of or opposition to this project, please rise and we'll swear you in collectively, everybody that's here for Rampage Athletics, that'd be you two. Sorry. Anybody else that wants to speak about Rampage Athletics will get just sworn in since it's a public hearing. Swear testimony about this case. I do.

All right. I see Miss Fry at the podium ready to tell us about this project.

Chantel Fry, associate planner, 903 West Main Street, Blue Springs. I have been sworn in. Good evening, chair and commissioners. Before you this evening is a request for a reasonzoning, a PD concept plan, and a PD final plan for Rampage Athletics, excuse me, located at 2001 Northwest 9th Street. The property is currently zoned MF14, which is a moderate density multifamily district. The first request is to reszone the subject property from MF14, the modern density multif family district to a PDC, which is the plan development commercial, which would expand the range of permitted uses to better serve the surrounding community and neighborhood. The 2014 comprehensive plan includes the subject property as neighborhoods which are defined as areas for residential living arranged in a connected pattern of streets and blocks to provide access to civic and neighborhood amenities. The comp plan also states that the areas designated as neighborhoods should all have connections to gathering places of neighborhood center to meet daily needs through the PD zoning. All uh land uses would be allowed in for general business except of the following. Marijuana and cannabis related uses, adult entertainment uses, bar and tavern establishment uses, manufacturing, service stations, outdoor sales and storage, and a helop a helopad and a helport. Any standards not specified will revert the to the Blue Springs Unified Development Code in effect at the time of this development. It is already a developed site and so staff reviewed the resoning request under the nine review criteria including the staff report and finds that the request is in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The proposed zoning

and development of this site with the PD zoning is appropriate and staff recommends the approval of the reszoning of the site to a PD commercial. We also recommend approval of the PD concept plan and also approval of the PD final plan with conditions list in staff report and I'd be happy to answer any questions and the applicant is also here. Thank you, Miss Fry. Any questions for staff? Oh, go ahead. You go right ahead. I heard. Did you mean Southwest 9th Street? That's what the paper said and I think I heard you say Northwest Ninth Street. Probably was my error. Um, just double checking. Yeah, Southwest 9th Street. That was my error. Excuse me. That's okay. Thank you.

In Blue Springs, what are what are other churches classified as? Do we have any other Well, this isn't classified as a church. It's classified as assembly. Okay. Do we have any churches in Blue Springs that are classified under general business? I believe we do. We But I wouldn't I don't know. Um because we don't have churches, we have assemblies. That's what we refer to them as. Yes. So, we would have other assembly uses in a commercial zoning district because uh under our unified development code, we do not make a distinction between a place of assembly and a religious place of assembly. Any other questions for staff?

Would you remind us just a brief history? This came before us a couple months ago. Yes. Of why that why they had to come back so we can kind of get refreshed on that.

So a couple months ago we were here under a complete reasonzoning to general business. at that time. Um, we listened to the your your the chair and commissioners and you guys had requested to come back as a PD with some of those restricted uses um because you didn't want to see anything of nature that would bring heavier traffic such as the service stations, manufacturing, industrial. So I excuse me the applicant and I after that meeting went back and we discussed all of these uses and narrowed it down to where anything at this point if it's on that list it's excluded and then anything new would have to come back through us anyways to amend that PD.

So anything new that would come in the future other than what their intended use that we're approving for today. No, no, no. The the reasonzoning this evening is to a plan development zoning district that is based off of the same land uses included in the general business zoning district with the specified excluded land uses that are in the packet this evening. So that is the primary difference of this coming back is that these seven or eight things are are listed and excluded. Yes, that's correct. Okay, I understand it. And any questions after getting the update?

Has there been any letters or anything opposition for against this? I have not received any letters for or against. All right. Is the applicant here like to give a quick rundown or long one? Either way, I'm not restricting. Uh my oh my name is Michael Scott and um we are like we said we came before and uh we tried to include all the exceptions that that were requested of us and so I hope I think we've done that and so we just put it before you uh today so we can keep on keep on. Any questions for the applicant? Uh yeah chair. Yes.

I I think I missed that meeting probably earlier in August. Can you just give a brief rundown of what the proposed use is for for this So, we use it as a church for we use it for some of our food programs and then I have an office there and then Rampage we partner with them. They're using the evenings and they do um dance stuff. So, they work out of our gym and use it uh in the evenings. Got it. Okay. Thank you. That's what brought all this up. They went to pull um we didn't realize it was apparently it got the zoning got changed before we bought it to multif family and so we're just trying to get it back to to the place where it was before. making things right. Okay. Any other questions for Mike? Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody here that would like to speak in favor of this project? Seeing none, is there anybody here that would like to speak in opposition to this project? Please uh make your way to the microphone. We'll give about three minutes each and uh we're here here to hear you.

Okay. Uh my name is Sher Frost. I live at 821 Southwest Gradent Lane. My house is directly um in that bottom part, the curve. Uh so my backyard is butts up to like the church uh property. So I'm like directly behind them. I'm not I'm against this. I'm not for that being reszoned. Um I have a lot of concerns. You know, I've kind of looked into the fact that this can affect property value. This can affect a lot of changes in our neighborhood. I thought that Blue Springs was somewhat against spot zoning, which is basically what this seems to be because it's all residential around there. It's single families or multifamily homes. And then there's going to be this business like right in the middle. And I understand it's like starting from a church, but once it's approved the general business, even though I know there are like, you know, certain things that they're not going to be able to use, it could be anything. Um, I feel like, you know, our neighborhood, I know that, you know, they're saying and that can be a lot of like helpfulness in our community, but on my side of the the building, you know, our neighborhood is a lot of retired people, uh, single people. There's not a lot of kids. Well, there's almost no kids. I just don't see how that's going to really help our neighborhood because it's not like something that our community would use. You know, I also feel like, you know, this we're not that far from Seven Highway and so while it is several streets over, there is big access that it could become very busy depending on what's in there. And you know, Rampage could be there

two years or it could be there three months, you know, so there's no guarantee that they're going to be staying there and then we have no idea what's going to happen. My other big concern about this is that I realize they're saying they didn't really know like know, but the truth is they're still functioning as a business. It's not like they stopped when they found out, you know, they don't have a business license. That would be 3 minutes. So they continue to please. Is that all? Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else? Name and address, please.

Uh, my name is Kelly Smith. I live at 2219 Southwest 9th Street at the the bottom of the curve, just a little bit further down on the corner. Um, three years ago, we moved from California, uh, getting away from areas that are unseemly and trying to get to a neighborhood that is safe. Um, I I appreciate what they're using it for now, but as Sher said, once it goes general business, it won't be anything that you listed. Understood? How about a Dollar General? We had a shooting up there not too long ago in that neighborhood. What would that bring in? Not only could somebody go in there, rob it, and get away into the neighborhood. As Sher said, we have a neighborhood. Our HOA is probably 90 to 95% senior citizens, most living by themselves, having people come through our backyards because that's what it would be, you know, trying to break into our homes. Those are the things that we fear. Those are the things we don't want to see. So yes, unfortunately although it's being used for a wonderful thing right now, the probability of it further down the line could be um disastrous for us as well as our property values as well.

So thank you for sharing your thoughts. Thank you.

Anybody else? My name is Bob Frost. I'm a building contractor. I live at 8619 South 7 Highway. And uh I constructed several houses in this neighborhood a few years ago. And many of my clients were uh single people, retired people, and they had a few years on them like I do. And we went in with a fact and a thought that that would be a single family or a family type neighborhood. And now we're coming up with this business use right in the middle of our neighborhood in our backyards and front yards in some cases. Uh to me it seems not not a very good thing to do. I think there should be more exploration done to this. I I was assuming that I had heard other places that um churches can be built in R1 resid in residential area with a special use permit. Why couldn't this be put down to a special use type thing where when if this business goes away, it still is R14 multifamily. Uh that would be to me a solution to the problem because I I don't think that uh I wouldn't want that in my front yard or backyard with a thought of a business coming in, a parking lot put in with cars coming in and out from 8:00 in the morning till 10:00 at night. Uh a lot of traffic and stuff like that. There's a lot of kids in part of the neighborhood over there running around and we don't need the extra traffic on that either. So, I think that uh it's a very honorable use to do what they're doing to get the kids, you know, something to do and things to do. But I think we need to do a little bit more research on this and and if this business would go away,

the zoning needs to go away with it, not just continuous perpetual since it was not zoned that way to begin with. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else? Mr. Shaver,

L Shaver, 1325 Northeast Hilltop Drive, Blue Springs. Uh, our family owns the uh forplexes both to the uh west and to south of this property. Uh, I think Bob Frost made some good points. I think uh I have no problem with the business that's going in that's currently there. I think uh they're doing a great job, but I have a problem with zoning essentially general business even with the exceptions. That's an extremely broad category as you well know. I'm not telling you anything you don't know. And uh once it's zone, general business with even with the restrictions, any business that fits that category, you have a very difficult job turning down because zoning changes uh downward are very difficult to make as you know. So I'm I'm against it. I think we need to look at alternatives as Bob Frost mentioned a variance that would allow the business to continue as it is but not reszone it to to general business because it's it is uh essentially residential all the way around in some form and you end up with Allen or spot zoning which is usually considered a poor practice in city planning. Thank you. Anybody else?

Uh, I have not kept up on this and I wish I knew more about it, but what I do know, I'm Gary Baker. I live at 817 Southwest Granite Lane. My property backs right up to the back of it. It's wide open. Got a fence there, but you sat on your dick. Can see it all. So my only point is is that I am opposed to any additional changes to the zoning to that property. Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else speak now? Seeing none and hearing none, um I will close the public comment section of this hearing. Anything else from staff? No, we're happy to answer any questions uh from the testimony that was just heard. U but we do not have any additional information, chair, we'll ask the applicant if they want to speak uh after we're done here. For now, we'll start with you.

Is there a way to grant Rampage Athletics a special use permit and not change the zoning? No, there is not the zoning. The way the unified development code is listed, we do not have something called a special use permit. We have conditional use permits and those uses that are allowed by a conditional use permit are identified in the code um per zoning district. Uh for example, a school in the general business zone requires a conditional use permit. um other land uses uh in the general business zone and in other zoning districts that are specifically identified as allowed only with approval of a conditional use permit. Only those uses can be granted a conditional use permit based solely upon the land use. Um, and we do not have a means to alter or grant a quote variance through approval of a conditional use permit for land uses in the approved land use table. Uh, the approved land use table lists uses that are allowed by right uh lists that are used by or allowed by conditional use permit approval and uses that aren't allowed at all. So, we can't simply just allow a, you know, apply the conditional use permit process unless it's specifically identified under the code as being allowed to use that process.

Can we put a a time constraint or a condition on the resoning? So, so my problem here is I don't have a problem with Rampage being here. Okay. I have a problem with Rampage moving on the church selling to their point earlier Dollar General opening up like and and not necessarily Dollar General but I mean that's that's a legit concern. You put that to general business then we have a problem.

Understood. Uh, one suggestion that I might make is that um, and if the applicant were agreeable to it is that because this is a planned development zoning district, it's essentially writing its own zoning district code. And so what has been brought forth this evening is to allow all of the uses in general business allowed by right. um and then not allowing those ones that have been specifically identified. Um the request could be modified um to essentially require certain land uses in there that are more problematic than say a gymnastics or dance or things of that nature which could be allowed by right or other land uses could be allowed by right uh and then even more could be allowed by a conditional use permit. The problem with applying a as was suggested like an automatic that if this business goes away then the zoning goes away is it's kind of the term is like reverter zoning. So if the if the use goes away or if the zoning or the project never gets built to change the zoning then the zoning automatically reverts back. Um the problem with those are they're hard to track for staff. um you know if this changed land uses 30 years from now, the staff 30 years from now may not know about it. And two, by that time the property could have traded hands four times and the current owner would then have their property reszoned against their will and that could open up the city to legal challenges. So that's why we don't really ever recommend doing a revert clause in zoning. the PD zone allows enough flexibility for us to if the applicant would so choose to do

so um based upon what happens here this evening or we could even take a recess or continue this to another date to allow the change to be further discussed. We could do that. Um but we can't simply just apply a conditional use permit process in this case. Um, and we can't I mean essentially the a recommendation could be made to the planning commission to add a reverter clause, but I think staff would uh not recommend that option as we have other options available to us. I just like to figure out a way where we can allow Rampage to operate there legally and not open the neighborhood up or city up to any any future problems, businesses or

like you said, legal action if it gets reszoned and then goes back something like that like something that protects all parties.

Right. The other option we could do is through the PD process, rather than listing what could be approved through a conditional use permit or what can't be approved, we can list specific land uses that we feel are appropriate for the site. Uh we can't do a singleuse plan development because uh or a PD zone that only allows one specific land use because that's in violation of state law. But we could do one that say allows for a gymnastics place, maybe an assembly use, um a library, uh office buildings, things of that nature, um that are appropriate given the residential surroundings versus, you know, a retail store, uh restaurant, things of that nature. So there there are some options with the flexibility within that zoning.

I think that would be a good idea. personally try to figure out a way to allow Rampage to continue to operate and kind of make everybody happy here because that'd be my concern too. If if I'm if my backyard is this, I I would be under the same problem. Yeah. So there there are options.

Yeah. Chair. Yeah. So if we were to pursue if if the thought was to pursue that, I assume your recommendation would be to continue it to evaluate what options would be best.

Um potentially uh the applicant would typically the applicant makes that request to ask it to be continued uh to allow some more time to research the matter and maybe um change it. I just want to look at one thing real quick. And this is where I might need our uh attorney's expertise in the matter. Um we advertise tonight's public hearing as Let me just read this real quick. public for the purpose of hearing interested in the request by Michael Scott to reszone from MF14 to Oh, that was a we must have had the wrong one. bring up page uh 24 of the planning commission pack.

Yeah.

Mike, you need five or 10 minutes. I'll call for a recess if we do. Yeah. Absolutely. Um I hereby call a 10-minute recess. We'll come back

right where we left off. All right, we're back at it. Um, let's get back to business. Mike, some further clarification for us perhaps?

Yes. So, um, after consulting with our attorney and also the applicant, um, can you go back to that public notice, please? So, we realize that there's an error in the public notice. Um, and there are sections of the code that allow us to if we screw up in that part, then we're still allowed to continue with this public hearing except where we're required to put a nose in the newspaper. Um or u there's one se you know that's required by state law. So where we said in there that we're reszoning from uh MF14 to general business that is not correct. We're reszoning to a planned development zoning district. And so because of that we would need to uh renotice the public hearing um

which would force a continuence. Uh we could yeah we could continue it to and so the next available date that we would be able to get notice uh out in a reasonable amount of time or by to meet this the state statute with it which is 15 days would be the October 27th uh planning commission meeting and we will re you know staff will send out new letters we will uh put a new ad in the newspaper and send new resident letters out. um put new signs on the property to say that we are reszoning from MF14 to plan development. Uh and that will give us enough time to work with the applicant to uh maybe tweak or modify his proposed plan development district. Um taking into account the information that was discussed here uh tonight during this public hearing and based upon the feedback with the planning commissioners. Okay. So because of the error that was discovered by virtue of us just discussing this, this item technically cannot be heard by us tonight or should not be heard.

It should not be heard. That's correct. So therefore um I will declare a continuence staff would request a continuence of this based upon our error and um the circumstances and ask that it be continued to a date specific which would be October 27th. I would uh does it I believe it's October 27th, isn't it? Can we confirm that? Yeah. What's it say? the 20th. Yep. It would be No, it would be the 20th of city. Oh, right.

The 13th. Not we don't have enough time to make the 13th. Yeah, we still have the notice because the notice if if we sent it to the examiner to on Wednesday, it would get posted on uh September 27th, which would not get us to the 15 days we would need. So, it would be October 27th. Okay. And the applicant is on board, even though you may not have a choice with this. Um, does it need to be a motion or just declared by myself? mutually agreed upon continues. I don't remember, but I mean um

charting on uncharted territory. Yeah, we don't do this at all. I I I believe a motion to continue is in order is the way we do it too. City council. I would so move to continue this topic uh to the October 27th meeting uh for renotice to go out. I have a motion about a second. Second. All those in favor? I I

Any opposed? And having said that, since we were in the middle of a public hearing, I will close the public hearing. This now has been continued until October 27th. We welcome all of you back here then to further this uh item. Anything else that you can think of that I'm missing since we just geared upon sign? I don't know if it's a technicality or not, but do we need to not close the public hearing if we're continuing it? Correct. Oh, because we're Well, we going to renotice it. So, yeah, I guess it doesn't really matter. That's what I was about to say is since we're posting a new notice for a public hearing,

you can you can close it and restart with the based off the new notice. Okay. Anybody else have any other thoughts that may need to be considered in this unique situation? I just hope we can come figure out a way to allow Rampage but not change everything. So, well, they got a couple more weeks to get creative and work on it. Fabulous. All right. Thank you. Thank you everybody. And uh we welcome you back. I mean, we're not kicking you out. You can stay for the boring stuff, but you probably don't want to stay for the boring stuff that we're going to hear. Uh so we'll look forward to seeing most of you back October 27th.

All right. Um moving on from that uh those three items, we are ready for the development report. Hello. Check.

Good evening, commissioners. Uh, Logan Day, uh, associate planner, 903 West Main Street. Um, tonight we are looking at the monthly report of August. Um, and just have a couple things to note for commissioners. Um so based off this graph we can see that the total total housing count is down from last year. Um however we have built more square footage in comparison to last year um with a little over 10,000 a little bit more feet. Um then we've seen kind of a uptick in codes cases with the majority of those code cases falling under the public health safety and welfare um in comparison to last year. This is there. Um also last month we had both Boulder Springs and the retreat at Chapman Farms were approved within that month as well. And then we also had a slight decrease in total signs permits in comparisons to last year. Um but other than that we're pretty steady on with sign permits. Does the commissioners have any questions?

Anybody? Seems pretty self-explanatory. Thank you. No problem. Thank you. All right. Anything else from up here before I close the meeting? Any other business? Any business about business? Anything else from stats?

No, we don't have anything. Um I guess our comprehensive plan R request for proposals RFP went out last week. Uh we've already received a few different inquiries. Um so that's good. We've got we're getting interest in it. So that is usually a good sign that we'll get a competitive bidding process and u some good consultant firms that will want to work on our comprehensive plan. So, that's a good position to be in. That's great. When is the deadline for when the council is going to pick one?

Um, as of right now, we have a it was posted for 60 days and then uh there'll be an internal meeting and then consultant review and we hope to have a be able to bring forward a contract for city council by the end of the year. All right. Well, if nobody has anything else, I will close this meeting. And I would entertain a motion. Second. We need a motion. Oh, you need a motion. Still move. I was moving it and seconded it. We got it now. I've got a motion. I'll second her motion. All those in favor. Any opposed? Good evening. This meeting is closed. Moving it and second, baby.