Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

There's a lot going on up here.

You could get a job here. You could try a job here in the mail room. Or maybe you can print them for all of us. We'll pick them up Friday. You deliver them.

Give them to an intern.

Yeah. something. Make sure I'm in the right spot. Look at us. We're getting closer to the seat of power.

I know. Right in the middle. Man, this is a whole new perspective on the world. Who's this? Yeah. Okay. Can you still see me when I go like this? Can you hear me better? The lights a little better in the other chair for you though.

It'll get distributed. Yeah, those are off, aren't they? I think those are lights. What do you guys think? The big cans. There's even lights in the ceiling way up. Those aren't on either. Maybe there's a switch to be thrown. Yeah. Find it. Maybe. Maybe you were right. Maybe those are speakers. We get new speakers. The lights are not on way up in the ceiling.

How are you? I'm good. What's going on? Um, my mother-in-law is moving into assisted living tomorrow. At Tall Grass? At Tall Grass. Starting probably starting hospice in like a week or so. Yeah, she's and and she's gonna end up with probably about eight months.

Recording in progress for the I got a little

Okay, ladies and gentlemen, calling the City of Leewood Planning Commission regular session meeting to order. Secretary, please call the role. Adelman, here. Fron here. McGuran here. Belzer here. Block here. Stevens here. Fishman here. Coleman here. We have a quorum. Uh this mean just I forgot to mention this Tuesday January 27th 2026. Uh are there any changes to tonight's agenda for staff? There are no changes tonight, Mr. Chair.

Okay. Thank you. Get a motion, Mr. Chair. Commissioner Black, I move for approval of tonight's agenda. Thank you, Commissioner Black. Second. Second, Commissioner McGurn. All in favor of approve approving tonight's agenda, please signify by saying I. I.

Oppos? Nay. Tonight's agenda is approved. Uh before we get on to the agenda, I do just want to make one announcement. After our last uh regular session meeting in November, we received the resignation of Scott Carlberg due to him moving out of state. U I just like to take a a few minutes to talk about Commissioner Carlberg. Um even though he was only on the commission for just less of three years, I think he brought a very unique perspective to us uh especially in the world of energy and certainly educated me on what was out there and what the possibilities could be. So, I want to thank him for that uh and for all of his his efforts for the three years that he was on the commission. Anyone have any more comments?

Just that I completely agree. I I thought Scott uh uh brought depth of knowledge in the energy sector with all the different jobs that he had had held over his career um that were fascinating and um u detailed. And I also thought it was very nice that on his departure, he left a documentation of what he thought could help the city uh going forward. So, I'm sure he'll be missed. Okay. All right. With that, uh we'll move on. Our first item is approval of the minutes for the November 25th, 2025 planning commission meeting. Are there any changes or amendments to the minutes from the commission? Mr. Mr. Chair, Commissioner Black,

I move for approval of the minutes from November 25th, 2025 planning commission meeting. Commissioner Block, second second. Commissioner Bellzer. All in favor of approving the minutes for November 25th, 2025, please signify by saying I. I oppose. Nay. Minutes are approved. Case 124-25, Leewood Fire Station 1 and Park. Request for approval of a revised preliminary development plan located south of 96th Street and east of B east of Lee Boulevard has been continued to our May 26, 2026 meeting. That's not a typo. Correct.

That's correct. Um, and it's been pushed out several months because the mayor wanted a chance to take it back to a work session with the governing body since we do have two new governing body members and just wanted a chance to um completely bring them up to speed before um that body would be hearing or voting on anything. So, um work sessions with the governing body get a little busy this time of year with uh budget and everything else they have going on. So, that is the soonest state that we're able to get it out to. Is there any chance that it gets moved up on the calendar or that's pretty? That would be the soonest you would hear it. Thank you.

All right. On the consent agenda tonight, we have five items. Do any commissioners wish to pull any of the cases off the consent agenda? Mr. Chair, Commissioner Black, I move for approval of tonight's consent agenda. Thank you, Commissioner Black. Second. Second, Commissioner McGern. All in favor of approving tonight's consent agenda, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed? Nay. Consent agenda is approved. That brings us to old business. Case 4725, Chadwick Place, Villas of Chadwick. request for approval of a resoning from SDNCR planned neighborhood commercial retail district, SD O plan office District and AG agricultural district to RP2 plan cluster detached residential district and RP3 plan cluster attached residential district preliminary development plan and preliminary plant located south of 135th Street and east of Chadwick Street. Steph Carrie, do you have this one?

I do. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Please proceed.

So, this was continued from the September meeting after the planning commission voted to continue it. Um, I'll give you just a little bit of history on that and then and then move on. Um the applicant originally proposed its development um for um RP3 zoning for the entire site um of about 15 and a half acres. Um the planning commission had concerns um about the density of the proposed development regarding the number of units and total amount of open space and empty space um on the site. Uh there was a motion to vote for approval. That didn't pass. it was a tie. Um so the um applicant requested for the case to be continued rather than to be voted um for denial um and moved to the governing body. So this is the current submitt before you. Um some changes have occurred um with this. There is now um RP3 zoning at the northern side of this site. um eight lots for 16 units of twin villas and then RP2 for the rest of the the I'm of the remainder of the site. Um this has so both RP2 and RP3 um have a stipulation in the LDO for uh a minimum of 6,000 square feet per dwelling unit. Um this uh this proposal proposes uh RP2 zoning um at 14,188 square feet per dwelling unit and RP3 at 11,300 square feet per dwelling unit. Um RP2 comes to 2.9 dwelling units per acre and RP3 comes to 3.9 dwelling units per acre. Um the street layout has not changed since you first saw this project. Um the open amenity space in

the northeast corner remains with this as well. Basically the only change is that we've had um a reduction in the number of units and uh density for the for the site. And I'm open to uh answer questions. I I would also reiterate too that the um golden criteria that we evaluated the first time we still um we still agree with all of those and the um uh Let's see. Um the character of the neighborhood for instance is generally medium density surrounding. Um it's now the zoning and uses of properties nearby. All properties are zoned either RP3, MXD or RP2. Um and the suitability of the subject property is you know the resoning of medium density residential is RP2 and RP3 is suitable and staff's um estimation. Um staff doesn't consider denial of the application relative gain to public health or safety in any way or welfare. Um, and according to the uh comprehensive plan, you know, there's a goal for the current comprehensive plan, there's a goal for increased number and variation of housing and um that includes home ownership alternatives to the standard large lot residential subdivision. And staff does recommend approval of this case. All right. Questions for staff?

I do have questions. Mr. Fishman. Yes. Uh, on the original submitt, uh, were each of those housing units duplexes? They were twin villas. All of them. Twin villas. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner McGern, I just want to remind myself do I I vaguely remember that on the parcel of land and maybe the document to look at is C2.1. Can we bring up C2 which is page 95 out of 342.

Okay. Maybe I can recall if you want to go ahead and ask the question while we pull it up or do you need to see it? Maybe I can answer the question or or Yeah, the basic question is on the do I remember correctly that in the top right corner of the property that either on uh this property or the next section of property, there was an issue with how that street was going to be um cut through and and attached to an existing street that or excuse me, a a new street that would continue on from Regent Park.

Did they solve that problem?

Um well, so there I mean In our in our estimation, it's not necessarily a problem that we can solve or the applicant can solve. It's that agricultural piece of land has not been sold. And you know, I I believe that both applicants for both Regents Park and the developers for Regents Park and um and this site have reached out to that person to um inquire um and with no luck. So um you know, at this point that is what it is. Um the plan I mean a long range plan to connect those streets is still in place. Um they do align but um there's you know you can only do what property owners will you know they have property owner rights for that. So

based on city planning though there's no chance that that they they'd be putting or we'd be putting the road in the wrong spot for the future. This is where the road's going to continue on and it does align with at some point in time. Um theoretically yes. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, it like Carrie said, it matches up where um Regent's Park is stubbed out to the east of this. So, they line up on each side of that little remaining parcel. And like Carrie said, that's about as close as we can get for now until someone is able to get a hold of that middle parcel, but we have ensured that they will line up. Very good. Thank you,

Mr. Block. Um I don't remember seeing that soil um study in the last packet. Maybe I'm not remembering that right. The Yeah, I mean it was just extensive. I just didn't know if anything changed as to if that was a new requirement or again maybe it was in the last one I just missed it. But it just you know again I maybe because I'm scrolling and not flipping pages that it just seemed I'm not exactly adept at soil studies so I don't really really look at those in depth but um you know I don't know the applicant would be able to change from the staff side. They're required I guess is what I'm trying to say. Additional questions from staff. I had a couple questions. Can you put the side by side of the new and the old please?

And I wanted to mention that too that graphic that um well it's in the presentation as well. Um so in the staff report the graphic of this side by side the changes um we didn't pick up the the units on the east side of the loop of the street in that graphic. Um but that's hasn't changed from what is you know included in your packet as the as far as the plans go. So and this has been updated in the presentation as well. Okay. So just one

just going on commissioner uh Fishman's everything on the left were duplexes and then on the right everything is duplexes duplexes except for the eight gray uh gray colored. So, the ones So, the ones on the um inside of the loop, there are six six structures for 12 units. And then we have two more on the east side of the loop. Um two more structures for four more units. So, the gray ones are the duplexes. Everything else is detached.

Okay. Thank you. And what is the number of units from the old original submittal to the resubmitt? Here we're fighting each other. Sorry. Is this the graphic you're looking for right here? No. Director had had the correct one earlier. So, how how many units are we going from one to the other again? From one to the other. So, there's 16 units of twin villas and 34 of the uh residential detached. You mean total? Total from from original to the resubmitt. That's 50. 62.

Originally 62 units were proposed when you saw this in the fall. That is now being reduced down to like 50 50 uh 50 units. Yes. 50. So we do have a reduction when we go from when we go from the twin villas down. We are reducing that and that's really based on a lot of the comments that was made at the last planning commission meeting. Okay. And then the open space is still the same. That hasn't changed. It's been reduced by it's very incremental like um nominal.

And I can look that up for you if you'd like. I think it was by about like it was like by point two acres something like that. Let's see. It's still mainly the detention ponds and everyone's front yards and

yeah and it's still exceeding the LDO's requirement of 30%. So the original was um the original proposal uh provided 50.8% 8% of open space above the 30% requirement. And then for um we have this separated out by RP2 and RP3, but we've got 57.95% in the RP2 and 50.29 in the RP3. Any additional questions for staff? Okay, with that I'll invite the applicant to come forward.

Julie, we have a presentation pulled up on there. Okay, there we go. Good evening everybody. Uh Patrick Reutder with Clover Architects. Address 8813 Penrose Lane, Sweet 400, Lanexa, Kansas. Uh good to see all you again. Um thank you staff kind of going through everything. Um I don't have a lot to add, but hopefully kind of just add some clarifying um piece of information to kind of what you guys heard. Um as you as we noted overall site about 18.84 acres taking what is pretty two long parcels uh going with RP3 and RP2 zoning. Um some of that land goes to rightway along 135th and then about 4.1 acres of that goes to the RP3 on the north and then 11.6 acres that RP2 on the south. Um, so as staff noted again, um, kind of similar development that we're proposing here to Aventino or Leebrook, um, trying to put the slightly more dense, if you will, uh, Twin Villas along 135th with the single family to the south. Uh, trying to kind of match some of that existing zoning that's around there with the single families, you know, to the south and to our east now. Um, and the RP3 zonings both to the east and to the west. Um, as I noted, last plan had 62 dwelling units total. Uh we now have 50 with the split here. So a 19% reduction in density. I know that was one of the talking points last time about how dense the site is. Overall green space um we did a kind of a net number at 56%. Um so I think we're a little higher than last

time and a lot of that has to do just because the single family homes don't take up as much space as a twin villa does. Um so overall a slight uh increase there. Um we still have the same connections like they mentioned out to Chadwick into 137th. um that future connection to the east. Um I can promise you it align since I designed both projects. Uh so we did the Lashbrook 135 and so we have all the CAD backgrounds. So I can tell you within like maybe a couple inches which is pretty good. We should be pretty close in that connection there. Um and that was worked out with the that land owner I know at the time of the Lashburg project because we had to um do that as part of that approval back in 2019. Um so with us lining here we shouldn't have any issues. Excuse me. Um again, so yeah, we have eight twin villa buildings, 34 single families. Um right now we're looking at um proposing three to four bedrooms, probably two and a half to three and a half baths. Um two different types of either one and a half stories or kind of reverse ranch with either two or threecar garages. Um and looking with op floor plans with options for main floor living and bedrooms um and optional finished basement. Um, some of the amenities we have is that dog park in the northeast corner and then that park space on the southeast corner. Um, and overall we're anticipating this to be a maintenance provided community as well. Um, just a few of the concept um, designs. I know that elevations and everything aren't approved at part of PDP, but kind of want to give you guys a taste of what we're looking at. Um, and then some additional home concept designs. Again, kind of similar to to Leebrook. Um, and then kind of overall material pallet. Again, fairly, you know, standard of what you see in a residential community. Um, with that, happy to answer any questions you guys may have.

Questions for the applicant? Mr. White, did we see this soil study the last time or is it something different? I was trying to look I don't I'm not sure why it's in there. Um, I don't think it's changed though. Okay. I mean, we haven't we got the geotech and we haven't updated it. So, it just seemed more extensive than what I was used to in the past, but maybe my memory is not good. Yeah, that's not something that planning typically requires. So, I'm sure they had to do it for their own purposes and um just made it its way into our packet, but that's nothing that um the planning department requires or needs to review. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner McGern.

One quick question. You did a nice job of referencing the kind of the amenities within the house, number of bedrooms, bathrooms, all that kind of stuff. What do you think is the typical square footage um of the single family home? Yeah, I think we were talking about 1,800 square feet, I believe, is what we were looking at. Okay. And uh I mean, it's all kind of dependent on, you know, setbacks in the lot. I mean, obviously, it's pretty flexible based on what they want to do, but as long as it sits within the setbacks. So, you see a noticeable amount of variety with the housing.

Yeah. Yeah. And I think um what we're proposing here, I think it's very complimentary to what is kind of across the street and all of around us, right? I mean, you have Lashbrook's uh mixeduse project there on the corner um of like the main intersections. Then you obviously have the town homes that are behind that, the fourplexes, and then obviously that same kind of duplex and also recently I think reszone single family there. And then um similar then obviously to the south the single family and then to our uh west as well. Um, so I think it offers like a pretty good variety of kind of what's everything that's around there. Um, I know that uh Rick Oto as a developer wouldn't propose something he knew he couldn't sell. So, um, I'm pretty confident that we'll get this one done. I mean, based on how everything is going out at East Village in terms of home sales, this is a little bit different product. So, we're pretty confident it'll be successful.

Thank you. Any additional questions for the applicant? Yes, I do have a question. Uh, with respect to the open area in the northeast corner of the project. Yes. I think I heard you mention that that was intended to be a dog park. Correct. Is it going to be fenced? Yes. I think that's a actually code requirement. And maybe I missed it in the application, but what type of fence? Typically, um, I can get a a cut sheet and send it over, but typically what we do is kind of a like a five foot black aluminum fence. Um, usually we use like an Aristar type product. Um it's fairly similar to a lot of the residential fences that you see, but it's nicer. It's aluminum, so not like wood pickets or anything.

If I may, we don't typically require those um specifications until the final development plan is submitted and then we would go over it. Then yeah, I do know it's a code requirement here to be fenced though. Well, just for curiosity, this is not a chain link fence, is it? No, certainly not. Okay. No, no, no, no, no. I I couldn't get away with that. I don't want that. I wasn't familiar with your description of the fence. It's like a four like a like a just like a half inch picket every four inches on center vertical. Okay. Thank you. I'm sure I could Google a picture, but Okay. Thanks, Commissioner. Commissioner BL,

one more. Um, on the homes, I think the twin villas would be built on spec, but the did I read somewhere that the homes would be custom? Um, potentially. Yeah, it's Yeah. So the renderings are I mean they could really be in it's all Yeah. I mean at this point we're trying to allow for you know variety. Obviously we want it to be a cohesive development which is why we kind of have that material board but yeah it's like any other single family you know neighborhood. Okay. All right. Thank you. Any additional questions for the applicant? Patrick. One question. What's uh the price point that you're thinking about for the the villas versus single home?

Yeah. Um, so I believe that we're targeting for each side of the villas to be about 1 million and then the single family homes we're targeting about I think we're talking about 1.2 but Courtney has a little bit better for that. Um, Courtney Oto Oto Development 15200 West in Fitz Terrace, Lanexa, Kansas. Um, for the town homes we'll probably start around 800. We're trying to keep them a little bit lower to make them a little more cost effective. Obviously new homes are expensive. Um, We're trying to keep those a little bit less. And then the homes, like he said, will probably be one to 1.2 starting.

Thank you. Any additional questions? Okay. Thank you. Thank you all. Appreciate it. Hey, this case does require a public hearing. With that, I will open up the public hearing. Anyone in the audience is invited to come up and speak uh on this case. Mr. Chair, Mr. Black. Seeing none, I move to close the public hearing. Second. Second, Commissioner Fronze. All in favor of closing the public hearing, please signify by saying I.

I. Opposed? Nay. Public hearing is now closed. That brings us up to discussion by the commission. Anyone like to speak on this case? Uh, Commissioner Nman, I want to commend um the ODOT group. I think this is a much improved plan. Thank you for bringing it here.

Thank you, Commissioner Nelman. Mr. Fishman, I'd like to uh concur with with that. I appreciate that the applicant heard uh our comments and suggestions and made substantial changes to this one and uh at this plan and uh I think this looks like a much much better plan to me. Thank you. Any other discussion by the commission?

U I would just like to state that um I think this is a good plan. It's it's we try to diversify our our housing stock in the city. And I know there's no amenities, no pickle ball courts, no pool. Uh which I think is fine. I think you're going to find a homeowner that just wants to live in Leewood, wants a smaller home, and doesn't want any of those other things. So, I think it's going to be a good addition to our housing stock in the city. All right. With that, I'll entertain any motion. Mr. Chair, Commissioner Black, I move for approval of case uh 4725 Chadwick Place Villas of Chadwick. Thank you, Commissioner Black.

Second. Second, Commission. Commissioner Fron, is that you? Yes. Okay. Second, Commissioner Fron. I saw I saw Commissioner McGern leaning forward. Uh, any discussion on the motion? Okay. All in favor of approving case 4725, please signify by saying I. I. Oppos? Nay. Case 4725 is approved. Thank you very much, gentlemen. Good luck.

That brings us up to case 329-25, Cornerstone, Dick Steakhouse and Oyster Bar. Revise final development plan. Miss Yuing. Yes. Please proceed.

Thank you. Uh Cameron Yuing, planner 2. This is case 329-25, Dick Steakhouse in Oyster Bar. This is located at the southeast corner of 135th Street and Brier Street within the Cornerstone Development. The applicant is requesting approval of a revised final development plan to renovate and repurpose the existing building that is located at 4971 West 135th Street for Dick Steakhouse and Oyster Bar, a Sitown restaurant. Currently on the site, there is an existing onestory 4,900 foot building. This was originally constructed in 2005. Um, and most recently the building was um owned and occupied by Ricard Dumpling House and they did have a special use permit for a drive-thru associated with that um establishment. The applicant is proposing to add approximately 350 square ft of building addition. Um, this would increase the overall building square footage to about 5,200 square feet overall. Um that would include the addition of the walk-in cooler at the southeast side of the building. It's a site plan. Um at this time, the applicant is not proposing any new building materials to the facade. Um only new paint colors. The applicant is also proposing to include two outdoor patio spaces as part of this application. There's an outdoor patio space proposed to the east side of the building. um approximately 1300 square feet in size. This would serve as an outdoor dining space for guests. There is a separate outdoor patio located to the south side of the building, which would be approximately 118 square ft in size overall. And this would serve as a private outdoor space

um specifically for guests who are utilizing that private dining room. For the outdoor patio, um, specifically the one that is located to the east of the building, the applicant is proposing a three- foot tall breeze block wall to enclose the ends of the patio space. This proposed wall is currently encroaching into the 10- foot um utility easement that runs along the eastern property line. No additional parking is being proposed with this application, only minor parking lot improvements. Um, so, excuse me. A portion of the existing drive-thru would be um converted to green space, removed entirely and put into green space instead, while the other portion would be utilized as the outdoor patio space, which is directly east of the building. A new curb would be constructed um just to close off that entrance to the drive-through lane and make that look neat. The applicant has provided a final landscape plan as well as a phototric study. Um, both of these meet the requirements of the Leewood development ordinance. The applicant shall also be responsible for a park impact fee and public art impact fee due to the um addition of building square footage. Those amounts have been listed within the staff report. And then moving on to staff comments. There is one staff comment um that is regarding stipulation number three which reads, "Prior to the governing body meeting, the applicant shall revise the final development plan so that no vertical structures are proposed within the 10-ft utility easement or that the utility easement has been vacated and recorded. Um as I stated before with the current proposed plan, there are the three foot tall breeze block walls that are enclosing the patio to the east of the

building. Um the patio itself would be considered a horizontal structure which would be okay to be encroaching into that easement when we're getting into the breeze block. That is more of a permanent vertical structure and there have been concerns um from our department as well as public works about the encroachment into that. So, we are asking for the applicant to revise plans uh prior to the governing body meeting to revise that. Um, and with that, I do recommend approval with the 27 stipulations listed in the staff report. And if there are questions, I'd be happy to answer. Thank you.

Miss Yuing, any questions for staff? Mr. Block, I missed the second patio. Where is that? I'll have it. So on here there is a very small rectangular piece um just to the south side of the building. North is going to be on your left side of the screen. That little approximately 15 by seven box is the outdoor patio. Are you looking right next to the trash reception?

Yes, just south of the trash enclosure. South or west? Sorry. West. It's Yeah, it's on the west side. Good. Commissioner Fishman, uh, in regard to the breeze block wall, uh, can you explain to me where the breeze block wall is and is it now erected within the easement? So, the prior owner must have done that.

So, currently on the existing site, that is just the Yes, it's just the drive-thru lane. There are no walls um to the east side of the building, so those would be completely new and constructed with this project. Is that cross-hatched area there just to the east of the building, is that the easement itself? Yes. Okay. And uh just to clarify, there is a portion of the wall that is on the easement, correct? That would have to be removed. Yes. as proposed partially it is encroaching and would need to be removed.

Okay. Are is does the applicant proposed to leave the wall there or does the applicant proposed to remove the wall? Just to clarify, the wall is currently not existing. It is part of the existing correct. They are proposing to build the breeze block wall within the easement. staff is um requesting a stipulation that they revise the plan to remove it. I see. Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. The is a public utility easement and while horizontal um um improvements like the patio are fine, it's the vertical improvements that are causing concern. Staff had um worked with the applicant um to actually remove the uh proposed cooler that they're putting. They pulled that, excuse me, they pulled that out of the uh the easement, but the breeze block wall is still being proposed. So, we are requesting that also to be out of the public utility easement. All right. Thank you very much. Yeah. Thank you. Additional questions for staff. Seeing none, I'll invite the applicant to come forward.

Good evening. My name is Kevin Timonss and um currently I own Nick and Jake's restaurant. Sir, can you just state your business address for the record, please? For the new address. Your business for this address. Um well, my current address is 6830 West 135th Street, but that's in Overland Park. So, that's fine. Sorry about that.

I'm I'm usually good with a microphone, but I' I I don't know that I've been in this setting before. So, uh, 25 years ago, we owned Nick, we opened Nick and Jake, and for ever people thought we were in Leewood because of the way the lines work. Um, Nick is my son, Jake is my partner's son, and both of their grandfathers are Richards, uh, Dick Watkins and Dick Timonss. And this is the concept that I think my business partner and I always wanted to build was a a high-end um, steakhouse. And this is a dinneronly joint that'll um have a moniker established 1938, which was the year my dad was born. And we hope that when you walk into the building, you'll feel like it was built in 1938. So, our designers procured lots of antique cabinets and shelves and all that. um to um to to just kind of encapsulate the the south patio. We've got a private room that's already that's currently there with a window uh on the south and we thought it'd be nice if someone had a 2 and 1 half hour dinner and they had 30 extra minutes they'd go outside and have cocktails and a cigar or something like that outside. So that's why it's such a small space, but we thought it would would be a nice thing. Um, we're really hoping to bring uh Prime Wagu, great oysters, a great martini bar to Leewood. We know there are a few already here. Uh, we know the Capitol Grills coming into Overland Park and people are are like, "Are you worried about that?" And we're like, "No, bring it on. We're going to be a really cool steak joint." When this was um built in 2005, it was zoned had two 206 seats. We have 148 seats and I think we just lost two seats at our oyster bar

at a recent meeting. So, we're far below that, but um it's a high check average, slow turn, heavy wine, and um um really kind of that that place that you always wanted to to build and be a part of. I'll open up to questions if you have any. Any questions for the applicant? Mr. block. Um, what are you what are you proposing to do with the wall? Would you try to vacate the easement or or or do something different? The breeze wall. Yeah. If there was a utility problem, we'd take it down.

That the walk-in coolers are not going to approach the eastment because we can't take a walk-in cooler out. But if there was some kind of utility problem that that that breezeway is, and our architect is here to probably talk about that more, that is not a problem to us. Just take it out. In fact, that breezeway wall wasn't We felt it would enclose the patio a little bit, but it wasn't even there for our first couple drawings. So, well, if I if I read this correctly, I think you could do a fence. You just can't do like a masonary wall if if I understood, you know, something more permanent. But, so I think you could still separate the space is I think what the packet said. Yeah. I don't know the

No. Okay. I thought that's how I read it. Yeah. I think uh Brian indicated or yeah I'll let Brian speak.

Brian Scoville, city engineer. So um when we work with utilities in the rideway quite often uh we don't regulate public utility easements but we have a responsibility to uh work through a process for vacating easements. Also when we review plans we review uh proposed improvements on easements. Typically, the only improvements we allow to be built over a public utility easement is concrete flatwork. The horizontal elements that were mentioned, we're talking about concrete that can be cut out and removed if they need to excavate. Uh, typically utility companies won't put the concrete back. So, it's at even if you do the flat work, it's at your risk as an owner. Um, we don't allow walls. Uh we do allow fences because they can often be just, you know, taken down. Sections of fence can be taken down. If a post has to be torn out, they can usually put a post back with a new concrete or foundation. So, we're not real concerned about a fence style type system that can be sections can be removed. Uh we do that on our projects and we just did it a couple weeks ago on a project, but uh anything that would be uh a block wall where the utility couldn't get in there within a matter of hours, they would just tear through it and the owner would be left with a de demolished wall and the rep, you know, whatever repercussions of that and they would have no recourse. So it's a matter of protecting the property owner as much as it is ensuring the utilities have access to their facilities. Sir, is there anything planned with the parking lot? It looks, you know, like I don't know, the crosswalks and stuff, the photos we saw were kind of looking like it's showing its age a little bit. Did you plan to do anything outside beyond the landscaping and

Well, we we've I mean, the place in our opinion has been let go and um we plan on enhancing the the landscaping immensely. uh per code. And um we're skinning the parking lot, putting a whole new parking lot in with there's uh two or three different uh brick uh walks that go through it. So, we we'll we'll replace all that. Um you can count on this looking phenomenal. I think we've increased the green space uh by removing the drive-in the drive-thru. So, I don't know if I answered your question or not.

Yeah, I did. Thank you. We're fired up. Like, we're fired up. We're fired up to do this concept and we're fired up where it's at. And what we worry about is cannibalizing Nick and Jake and it's a mile away and we feel like the price point and the dinner only um is not going to cannibalize. It's going to be a completely different crowd. Commissioner Bzer,

um, thank you for the explanation about the name. That was my first question is, is it a chain? Is it original? So, I love the whole concept of how you came up with a name just like Nick and Jake. And um, I love that. I just have a quick question about um, where you have the chef's counter and then there's those two rectangles. Is the kitchen open? No. View, we called it we're calling it a chef's counter. the the there's 26 seats around the bar. The chef's counter has half of those seats and that is more of a wine centric um cappuccinoentric and a pass through for drinks to the servers. Um but there's no it is not open.

Okay. Thank you. And then the other side is going to be we're collecting Papy Van Winkle for the other side. Put it that way. It's going to be more of a bar. Commissioner McGurn, I just want to say thank you for Nick and Jake and thank you for this. It's it's awesome that you have found a an opportunity to take something that is in disrepair and bring it back to life and create something completely new. So, thank you. Thank you. We're excited. We're really excited. Any additional questions for the applicant? Just a comment. Uh, I'd like to congratulate you on uh proposing to join the everinccreasing number of steak restaurants in the area. It's amazing, isn't it?

Steak prices are going like this and we're keep opening them. Well, you know, it sounds to me like it's going to be pretty high-end and uh I and I'm sure that if it's run with the degree of quality that has been utilized with respect to Nick and Jake, it will be just great. Well, I appreciate it. And so, um, congratulations to you on this. I think it's a great idea. I appreciate it. We, we've hired we hired our chef three weeks ago. When your planning team seemed to think that this is something that might work, we pulled the trigger. Uh, because we didn't want to do that until then. And by the way, these these gals have been amazing. And, um, we have our first tasting tomorrow. Um,

well, I'll be there. And yeah, it's one o'clock. So, it's a limited table, but we we've got a we've got one of the best designers. We've got one of the best architects in town, and we're hoping to if things go well with here and then city council. We're hoping to really get going very quickly. So, I appreciate it. Any additional questions for the applicant? Mr. Chairman.

Yes, Commissioner. I might u add that uh yeah I I agree the the plan is really done well is handsome improvements and I hope you can figure out the the patio um solution the bruise block would have been a great idea there and there's also a custom planter and structured greenwall at the south end of that same patio that's in the easement. And so the the I I hope you find a solution to not being able to include those encroachments. Yeah, I'll let Jim talk about that, but I think we're we're not planning on putting a lot of money into anything that's into the easement, but just to be more aesthetically appeasing for people that might be sitting out there.

Okay, great. Any additional questions for the applicant? Okay, that brings us up to discussion. Any discussion by the commission on this case, Mr. B? It's kind of already been said, but I I think it's, you know, would be a great addition. I I guess I'm kind of fired up, too. I, you know, that's kind of my neck of the woods, kind of this part of of Leewood, the Southside, uh, and have something like that in a space that, you know, when it was Winsteads and vacant for a long time. I know Dumpling House, uh, improved it, but, uh, I think it'll even be a sharper building and, uh, excited to, uh, to see it open.

Any additional discussion? Okay. Well, I would just like to echo the comments. I think um I can't remember the name of the restaurant that was back there that that um Gaslight Grill. Gas Lake Grill was a vacancy. Herford House is a vacancy. Uh so I see a steakhouse in that location being perfect um regardless of what's going on in Overland Park. And with your track record at Nick and Jake, I'm I'm fairly feel confident that you'll do well at this location as well. And wish you the best of luck. Welcome to Leewood. Right. Any additional discussion? Mr. Chair, Commissioner Block, I move for approval of case uh 329-25, Cornerstone Dicks Steakhouse.

Second.

Second, Commissioner McGurn. Any discussion on the motion? Okay. All in all in favor of approving case 329-25, please signify by saying I. I opposed. Nay. The case is passed unanimously. Thank you very much gentlemen for coming. Uh just some housekeeping items that we have. U we have uh special call meetings, two special call meetings coming up with joint work sessions with the governing body on February 16th as well as March 2nd. Those will be in the oak room starting at 5:30. That's um and dinner will be included. So, you don't have to worry about that. Uh we also have our regular planning commission meeting next month on February 24th. One thing that I also wanted to I assume then no work session for us because we're doing the work session with the city council. Yeah, since we've got two uh joint work sessions, we figured we would um leave that um to be enough for work sessions for the next two months.

Okay. Uh I'm going to make another plug for the lunar new year for Commissioner Naman. Uh the RSPs are February 13th that they are due and is it makes a great date night, I think, for everyone to to bring their spouses. Mine already said no, so Ken can't help me there. Uh, in addition, we have we've received an email about the National Planning Conference. Did you get everyone's response necessary on that?

Um, Debbie said she has heard from two that are interested. So, if anybody else is interested, um, we we've got budget for two planning commissioners to attend, but if anybody else is interested, go ahead and let Debbie know and we'll um figure out what we're going to do. So, um, but I think she asked if folks could let her know by the end of this week just so we can kind of figure out, um, what we're doing on that and get everybody registered who needs to be. Okay, very good. Anything else from staff?

We do not have anything else. Um, we did just get just this afternoon the first draft of the comprehensive plan from our consultant. So that'll be all the, you know, goals and policies and recommendations. And so, um, we were a little bit busy this afternoon getting ready for tonight, so we didn't have a chance to, uh, really open it up and look yet, but we will be getting that out to everybody, um, here by the end of the week. So, you can start reviewing it. And so, that will be the topic of our March 2nd joint work session with the governing body to go over that draft document. um and have a brief presentation from our consultant and then plenty of opportunity for um feedback and conversation about that. So, we will make sure to get that out to you so you've got plenty of time to um read through and digest and come up with all your uh comments and questions on that.

Very good. Anything from the commission? Commissioner McGron? Uh thank you. I've just got a quick followup and and it's for Michelle and it may be too early to answer. This comes back, this goes back to the November meeting and the um minutes that we approved at the beginning. On page 18, there's a couple of paragraphs basically talking about what the um community or the citizens had commented on as it related to what they thought was missing or dead uh on the burm uh andor the existing landscaping. and and we were thinking we we'd get an update at some point. Is it too early to get an update now or have you guys resolved that?

Let me um double check on that and then I can send out an email just kind of letting everybody know. I know there was a lot of back and forth between staff and the landscaper at the time. And then earlier uh last year, maybe about April or May, we just decided to go ahead and turn everything over to our parks and wreck department who will take excellent care of all that uh plant material. So, let me just kind of double check on that. So, my hope is well before we meet to talk about the plan again, this has been become a non-issue that we don't have people saying again that the city didn't do something

right. I know one time when I was out there, there were big gaping holes in the ground of where shrubs were removed and we were working with the landscaper at that time that to they need to, you know, fill things back in and so, but we just couldn't really release our our parks and rec crew who really wanted to be working on it and taking care of it and putting in good healthy landscaping. Thank you. Anything else from the commission? I missed where that was. I I don't What were we talking about there? What was that? Excuse.

This is in respect to fire station one that we had at the November meeting and some of the public uh comments about the landscaping behind the um along the south side of the property line and along that east property line. I just missed the first part. Thank you. Quick question for the uh chairman. Yes, question. You had mentioned uh two dates for the uh joint work session with the city with the uh governing body. Correct. I only got the first one. Would you give me the second one again? Sure. The first one is uh February 16th and the second one is March 2nd. March 2nd. Okay. Thank you. At 5:30 in the oak room downstairs. Got it.

Anything else from the commission? Okay. With that, uh we are journ. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you. That was a quickie. Well, you know