Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

the best place to work. I love working here. I feel very blessed. I love it here. I look forward to coming to work every day, being a part of this team. Like a family away from home where everyone feels like everybody knows their name. A city that supports you. We see that with our benefits, a pension, vacation days, job security, being able to be heard. We feel valued. We feel respected. Lee Summit is a very progressive city. It's growing. It's thriving. We have this drive towards not just doing a job but doing it with a spirit of excellence. I had the opportunity to continue to grow regardless of 30 plus years doing this kind of work. It's more than just dollars and cents. We're here really to give back

providing a service to better a community to go out and serve people to be a part of something bigger than yourself.

If I would have known what I know now years ago, I would have been here much sooner. Hello, Lisummit. I'm Jordan. Here's your flash briefing for the week of February 23rd. Are you trained in handsonly CPR? The Lisa Fire Department has launched Pulse Point Respond, a free 911 connected mobile app that alerts citizens trained in handsonly CPR when CPR is needed nearby in a public location. CPR can be started in the critical minutes before emergency services arrive. Learn more at city of ls.net/pulseoint. Interested in tickets to the Lee Summit Parks and Recreation February fatherdaughter dances? There are still spots available for this Friday, February 27th. Don't wait to register. Get your tickets at lsps parks.net. City council will meet for regular session Tuesday night at 6 in council chambers in city hall. Meetings are open to the public or watch live on the city's YouTube channel. If you can't watch, catch the recorded meeting on demand on the YouTube channel or by subscribing to the council debrief newsletter, which breaks down three to four key agenda items. Subscribe at city ofls.net. And the city has a variety of ways for citizens to stay uptodate on what's going on around Lee Summit, including newsletters, social media, and the weekly flash briefing. Receive information involving road closures, city events, council meetings, and more. Catch the update on all of our social platforms. Stay informed. Thanks for listening and have a great week.

Keeping 500 miles of public sewer lines flowing keeps utility costs low and our environment healthy. The Lee Summit Water Utilities Operations Team does this every day. Sewer lines can be blocked with everything from roots to flushable wipes to food grease. When a potential blockage is identified, teams use detailed mapping to locate access points. My camera's at 18038.

A camera truck parks at one end of the sewer line and a jet truck at the other. The camera truck carries a rover type camera which the team lowers into the manhole. The operator then drives the camera into the pipe where it views and records from its adjustable lens. Here it can identify the cause and precise location of the blockage. The jet truck will then use high-pressure water to remove the blockage. Starting at the opposite end of the line, the operator inserts the jet head into the manhole. Pressurized water shoots out of the head, clearing out debris and propelling it forward. The camera observes this process, and the two operators communicate via walkie-talkie to coordinate movement.

Holding it right there. Go ahead and fire it up half pressure. I'm in front of you. Once the jet head has passed the blockage, the operator reels it back in. The camera can then inspect the pipe to see if the blockage is cleared. Yeah, go ahead. Pull out. We're done.

With the job complete, the camera is removed, cleaned, and returned to the truck, and the crew moves on to the next job. In addition to addressing identified problems, the team will systematically check every line in the city in a 5-year period, keeping costs low and our community healthy today and for years to come. Welcome to the Lee Summit sign department. We are going to walk you through our process from start to finish. We make signs as needed here. It's not like we just go out into the field and place a speed limit sign here. No parking here. Our traffic engineers, they go through and they'll do field studies. They'll send us down an engineering work order for us to go out, place new signs or remove signs as needed. Coming from the material, our blanks come in and they're just aluminum blanks. We can put our white, our red, our, you know, our fluorescent yellow, green, whatever. And basically what it looks like is just that there. Throw it up into the the roller. And once we got it covered, take it to our workt here and Tim will cut the corners, cut all the access off to where it's uh lined up, right? As far as the plotter and the software that we use. There's a street name sign there, and he's going to go ahead and print that out on the plotter so you can see the plotter and how it operates and runs. There's standards for the height, even just on letters on the sign. Basically what we have on the computer there is it's pretty much set up to those and it goes through. It's got a very small but sharp needle that goes through and cuts

everything out letter by letter. Once that's done uh cutting, our next stage would be bringing it over here. Currently picking out the sign letters right now. We call it weeding or picking or however you want to call it. Next, putting it on the transfer tape. Then after it's taped, we bring it over to the roller. That's where we apply it to the actual sign blank. And we'll roll it through one time just to get the air bubbles out. And the last stage is basically just uh taking the transfer tape off the front of it. And there's a finished product of street name sign. We'll take you out to the field and show you our process that we go through. We're going to go out and follow our sign guys, get something installed for you. This is where we check our underground utilities. Tim, you got AT&T?

AT&T is back here. Google. So, we should be good to go. We normally put all of our stuff together out in the field. Then once the base is installed, we'll go ahead and put the post in there. Come up to perfect. That's how we do it. Simple, quick. Council member Hodes,

thank you. I love where you guys are coming from. You're local and you're all kind of coming together. But where I'm struggling with from the last time that we talked about this, I think I actually grew up in my district. We moved here my sophomore year in high school. My parents still live in the same house and um I just went through high school here and then have stayed in Le Summit ever since. The neighborhood that my parents live in is Canterbury. My favorite thing, and I still do it to this day, is I love to go running. They have the best sidewalks. I feel like you can go for days. So now I still get to do that since I live not too far from them. Um, I get to use those same routes that I took during high school. And it's just fun.

We're a big soccer family. I love sports. I love to watch sports. And it's even more fun to watch sports when my kids are in it. I coach my middle daughter Josie's team. I have since kindergarten. We do the basketball. We do softball. We're going to do volleyball. And it's just so much fun. is to get more family activities here. You know, I don't want to have to be driving my family to say the Kansas side or any other city but my own. And I want to be able to invest in our city and make family memories in our city.

Open the public hearing on the matter of K1 Speed, Dentures, Crack Shack, Blue Jeans Golf. I just want to say thank you for bringing us to these Sundays. I grew up at this. My grandpa take us there. So, I'm excited that now I can take my kids there. Bill number 23- year pre-construction services for the downtown market plaza project.

I am just as excited as everybody else about the downtown marketplace. I'm extremely excited about the community that it's going to bring bringing more family things to do to the city and right in the heart of it. when you presented the numbers the first time you came to us it was you 25.5% and then

you know people were like oh you know being on council it's not a lot of work not a lot of I think it was a bit of a surprise when there's so much info that you realize you just don't know even something as simple as sidewalks like you don't realize how much goes into something like that after a couple months I'm like okay finally you you know, catching the groove of how things work, learning new things, but also feel like I've got some things under my belt as well. It's It's been a great experience so far.

Hey, hey, Oh yeah.

Good evening everyone. Welcome to the planning commission meeting for Thursday, February 26, 2026. Can I get a roll call attendance, please? Ed Yarington here. Sherry Frasier here. Terry Trafton, Dana Arth present. Jessica Gno, present. Tanya Jana Ford, present. Chip Tazinski, present. Randy Benrook, present. Thank you. Can I get a motion to approve the agenda? Madam Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Second. Can we get a roll call vote on that, please? Ed Yarrington? Yes. Sher Frasier?

Yes. Dana Arth, yes. Jessica Greno, yes. Tanya Jana Ford, yes. Chip Tazinski, yes. Randy Benrook, yes. Thank you. Do we have any public comments tonight related to the planning commission business in general? Not related to any applications here. Looks like we have none. So, we will go on to the approval of the action letter. Can I get a motion for that? Madam Chairman, I'd like to approve the vote for approval of the action letter. Second. Can we get a roll call vote? Eddie Arrington, yes. Sherry Frasier, yes. Dana Arth,

yes. Jessica Greno, yes. Tanya Jenna Ford, yes. Chip Tazinski, yes. Randy Member, yes. Thank you. Okay, we will move on to the public hearing. I will now close the regular meeting and open the public hearing in the matter of application PL 2026-038 comprehensive plan amendment thorough fair master plan city of Lee Summit applicant would all those interested in speaking to this matter please stand up and be sworn in by staff

I promise to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so God Thank you madam madam chairman At this time, I'd like to recuse myself from this item. Okay. Thank you. All right. The applicant has a presentation. If you'd say your name and address for the record, please.

Uh, yeah. John Parsing, uh, 220 Southeast Green Street. At least I'm in Missouri. All right, you ready? Good evening. John Persing, uh staff engineer with public works. Uh please enter into the record exhibit A, list of exhibits 1 through eight. Please enter exhibits exhibit A 1 through eight to the record.

All right. Well, uh, thank you for this opportunity this evening to come and talk to you about our comp plan amendment. Um, specifically, this will be an amendment to the thoroughfare master plan. Um, a little background about what we're doing and why we're doing it here. Um, so going back to 1996 was the last time we had a look at the thorough affairs in this area near in the southwest uh corner of town Shearer. Um, so a lot's changed since 1996, uh, with the especially with the PRI land coming on board. So, uh, public works now has a few projects in the area near Shear to, uh, redo shear shear road, um, from 291 out to Samson in two phases, as well as Long View Boulevard north of Shear. So in order to move forward with those projects, it became necessary to do an alignment study and really get an understanding for how the thoroughares will look in the area before we uh proceed with those projects. So I'll just kind of jump right into it here. So we ended up we put out an RFQ and hired uh ended up hiring Lock Mueller to do this alignment study. And you know, uh there's kind of there's a lot that goes into these these lines on the map. That's for sure. Um you know, we're looking at things the topography, the drainage, um environmental concerns as well as engaging stakeholders. So there was lots of talk with PRI, the school district, as well as uh public meetings to gather input and try to come up with some solutions that work for everybody. So, I'd like to take the next couple minutes and just kind of go through this uh image here and show you what you're looking at. Uh let's see if I can get my laser pointer. Yeah. So, as I said, there's a

couple capital improvement projects in the in the five-year CIP. And this black line here, you know, that shows pretty much the existing Shear Parkway or Shear Road. And as I move through this presentation, I want to make a distinction between Shear Parkway and Shear Road. So Sheer Parkway will be the fourlane arterial road that you know out here um past Samson it's already four lanes and then it drops. So we'll continue that four-lane crosssection through here and the black will be the the uh public works um performed taxpayer you know project. And then once it peels off here, this green, this will continue that four-lane section down here through to Hook Road where there'll be a future interchange um with 291. So, as I said, you can see here's um so we're currently we have under design uh phase one of Sheer Road, which will be from Ward out here to Jefferson, and then in the future, we'll come out and connect all the way out past Samson. Um, so I guess I'll just kind of walk you through uh some of the decisions we made here and how we got to this point with this with these alignments. Um, starting down here at Hook Road back when 291 was constructed. Uh, all this land was set aside for the interchange. So that's really kind of nails us in and is a good starting point for us. As we move to the west, um you'll you'll see this Rock Island Activity Center is denoted here and that's slated to be a big commercial development. Um that's currently PRI land. I'll also note that PRI Land on this image, it's kind of hard to see, but this white outline, you can see everything that PRI owns. You'll notice a couple uh little islands here of other private owned lots, and we'll talk about that in a bit. But so as we

come off this this uh Hook Road interchange, we didn't want to, you know, go right through the Rock Island activity center. So we come up here along the west side to give access to it and try to leave Good Lots, you know, and we worked with uh the PRI representatives and they were all on board with this. So um as we move to the west, you know, we have this this uh privately owned lot here that's not PRI. We had to kind of make a decision which way to go on that. So, we ended up going south. Uh, this bisects Shear Road and Hook Road. Kind of puts that intersection right there in the middle and still leaves some some decent room between the Lee Summit West High School there. And then as we head north, um, you know, we're really just trying to get in between these other private owned lots and, uh, you know, stay out of this. You you'll see the electric utility here is this red line. and you know we're minimizing storm crossings, expensive bridges, coververts, things like that. So that was a a lot of thought and then once we get here now we're back into the existing right away and you know we'll utilize that as we go out that way. Um we also needed to line up Long View Boulevard so we knew where this intersection was going to hit. Uh we had conversations with the school district. Um, so this is where they have a plan school and that really drive that coupled with the Park West property here. If you're familiar, uh, Parks and Wreck has a master plan for that. Uh, I just wanted to show it to you real quick. So, here's the master plan for that Park West property. You'll notice here the, uh, the designated area for that Long View Boulevard there. So, um, so yeah, that's really really what drove the alignment here on Long View is getting around that school property and

accommodating the Park West property. And then down here, there's currently uh platted right away with this Monarch View subdivision to tie in that Long View Parkway. Um, so let's see. I guess we can talk about some of the uh the crosssections that we're looking at for this. So, uh, for the sheer parkway part, which is the four-lane section that will connect on the west and run all the way down to that Hook interchange, we're looking at a fourlane four-lane cross-section with a grass median as well as uh pedestrian facilities. Um, and I guess multimmoal facilities with bike trail and sidewalk on either side, plus uh utility corridors so we can keep utilities out of the road and not inconvenience the public when maintenance is necessary. Um, for the Long View Boulevard section, we're still looking at a four four-lane cross-section grass median um with a shared use on one side and a sidewalk on the other. And then for the shear road section, which to refresh your memory is is this section through here, we're looking at a three-lane section with a shared use path and a trail or shared use path and a sidewalk on either side. Uh let's see here. So here's our current thoroughfare master plan. um just kind of blew it up here in this area so you can can really see what we're looking at. And I show you this so this next slide hopefully doesn't look like quite a mess. This is that thoroughfare master plan with uh with our proposed amendment overlaid to it. So here you can see the the uh parkway how it plays with the current uh

thoroughare master plan. And then here on Long View, um, you know, there's a slight deviation here to accommodate that Park West property. Let's see. So, so yeah, that's uh that's that's really what I got for you. So, this and like I said, this uh this amendment here will really be a stop gap for until public works can come back in the next year or two. We plan to revise the entire thoroughfare master plan. And so this will give developers something to develop against, you know, so they know what to expect as far as rightaway and alignments of our future roads as well as line up our capital improvement projects coming in the future. So with that, I'd uh welcome any questions.

Thank you. Yeah. Do you have a presentation? Oh, you don't. Okay. So, do we have any questions for staff or applicant? I'll start down here. I mean, they're all one and the same. Yes. Thank you, chair. Um, I'm assuming none of this is scheduled yet. This is just kind of getting it a plan out there, as you said, for developers to kind of uh respond to.

Yeah. So, so this these roadways shown in black, these are in the five-year CIP plan. And then this dotted section through south of Shear on Long View as well as this green section that that'll be developing development driven in TBD in the future. Okay. Um with this new intersection for Hook, are we closing off the old one, the old exit? Uh it looks like you got a couple offramps or on-ramps cutting right through it. Uh yeah. Yeah, we would. Okay. I

think that's all I have. Thank you, Chair. Okay, Commissioner Janna Ford. No questions for me, Chair. Thank you. Commissioner Frasier. Okay. I say this, this is my backyard. I uh just a couple of clarifying questions. So, um, where the the dotted line for Long View Boulevard that runs parallel to Samson there. So, that's going to be and I think on the next slide, um, you've there's a little bit of deviation, not

um, it show there. There you go. So, it's got a the green is the original or the current and then the dotted uh, gray or black here is the proposed or correct. Correct. Okay. Great. And did I understand you correctly and you said that Samson Road will become fourlane? Uh, sorry if I said that. I missp Sam Samson Road is not really part of this. Um, Long View Boulevard will become that'll become fourlane section through there. Yeah. Um, and excuse me.

The other question I have is you said you had discussions with the school. Does the the size of the circle um indicate the um whether it's a high school or elementary? Um no, you know, they they provided this bubble map and that was about as much detail I think as they were willing to share. Yeah. Okay. Perfect. Um I think that's all I think the other questions have already been answered, but thank you. Okay. Thank you,

Commissioner Yington. Um staff is this the reason we are here today for this um uh recommendation um is because it's just a um an adjustment to the comp plan. Is that right? Amendment to the comp plan. Uh yeah. Is that right? Okay. Yeah. Yeah. So specifically the thoroughfare master plan. Okay. So it's just amendment. Okay. Thank you. I just have a question. Um, what determines when you what determines when you decide to do this? Is there a certain trigger or something like that?

Um, I I'm assuming when you say do this, are you talking about the the capital improvement projects that the city's going to perform? No. Well, when you get when you start mapping it out to show future developers what the roads might look like, John, I can answer that one for you. In advance of the funding.

Yeah. So, um, we know that PRI is coming on online. So, we want to control that growth and have the ability to kind of guide the development and how that's going to look in the future. So, we know we're going to grow in that area. We we're going to know we had new um infrastructure uh demands in that area. So, to get ahead of that, um this is when we kind of say, hey, we need to update what we have. So, the the current thoroughare master plan is a little older document. Um so, now we're kind of looking at taking a look at it. This area is coming online. um what adjustments do we need to make that? So that's what kind of triggers this. Okay. So we might see more of these with the additional P. Okay. I'm just wondering.

Is there anyone who wishes to speak in support or opposition to this application? Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. I have a question about approval. Okay. I just have one question. Giddings. I have a question because I've studied this about Stewart Road. What happens to it? Because it looks like this runs parallel to Steuart Road.

Can you answer that, Shannon? Or right here. This Steuart Road here. Doesn't it stay unchanged as a So does Stewart Road just dead end then? So Stewart Road will ch remain unchanged the classification. Um and then once a road is fully designed out and implemented in that area, the Stewart road will be redesigned to connect up to it um to make sure that uh thoroughare and traffic flow can flow uh and according to um the needs of the area.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any more questions from the commission? And I'm assuming the applicant has already responded to any questions. So you don't have any more responses. So hearing no further testimony, I will close the public hearing and reopen the regular meeting. I'm assuming no discussion from the commission. So I would Oh, sure.

I just wanted to say thank you for your um anticipation of routing and staying away from existing neighborhoods so we don't have that to deal with in planning commission for the next three years. Thank you. All right. I will entertain a motion. Mr. Arrington. Yes. I move to approve applicant application number PL202638 comprehensive plan amendment thoroughfare master plan city of the summit applicant. Second. Can we get a roll call vote, please? Ed Yarrington. Yes. Sherry Frasier. Yes. Dana Arth. Yes. Jessica Gau. Yes. Tanya John Ford. Yes. Randy Benbrook.

Yes. All right. We will move on to the next one. I will close the regular meeting and open the public hearing in the matter of application PL 2026-039 comprehensive plan amendment future land use map update city of Lee Summit applicant. Chair. Yes. Um we will do um since this is a comp plan amendment um we will need to take action on item A1 and uh Commissioner Tisinsky will also need to recuse himself from that item as well. Okay. He has to go back out there now.

And so there is no is there a presentation on this one? No presentation. This is just where you would uh this is the resolution adopting the amendment uh that you guys just heard. Okay. So, do we have any questions from the commission on this? I'm assuming not. And does anyone want to speak in support or opposition of this one? And you don't have a you don't care to respond. So, we'll just move on to closing the public hearing and reopening the regular meeting. No discussion on the application. So I would entertain a motion on this.

Okay. All right. Good. Okay. I move to approve resolution 2026 2026-02 a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Lee Summit amending the comp plan comprehensive plan future land use map. So that is the wrong item the one prior to we need items A1 um resolution 2026-01. You want me you want me do it? Where is it? This one? Yeah, this one. Yeah. Okay. Hey, I'll do that one, too. I got it. Okay.

This one. So, this one right here. Mhm. Yeah. I move to approve resolution 2026-01, a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Lee Summit adopting the Sher Road, Sher Parkway, and Long View Boulevard alignment analysis as a revision to the Lee Summit thoroughfare master plan as presented. Second. Get a roll call vote, please. Ed Yrington, yes. Sherry Frasier, yes. Dana Arth, yes. Jessica Gano. Yes. Tanya Jonah Ford. Yes. Randy Benrook. Yes.

Right. Thank you. So, now we're going on to because it feels like we we did A1 already and then we did it again. So, I'm a little confused on that. So, now we're going on to item B. Okay. So, we did read that. This one I just did. Okay.

Okay. So go ahead and read. I'll do it again. Well, okay. Wait a minute. I have to close the regular meeting and open the public hearing in the matter of application PL2026-39 comprehensive plan amendment future land use map update city of Lee Summit applicant. And do we have a presentation on that? Oh, we have to. Okay, this is confusing because we don't normally do approvals to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So,

thank you. And I guess Mr. Mr. McGuire has his presentation. All right. Good evening. Shannon McGuire, planning manager. Please enter into the record exhibit A list of exhibits 1 through seven. Sorry. What were the exhibits again? Exhibits A, list of exhibits 1 through 7. Exhibits A 1 through 7 noted and entered into the record.

All right. So, the city of Lee Summit is coming before you today to propose an amendment to the 2021 Ignite Conference of Plan Future Land use map uh to approve uh some updates to that map for two projects that have previously been approved by city council. Uh those two projects are going to be Olden Village there at 291 and 50 as well as Ovation kind of just east of 291 on 150. Um the purpose of today's application is to align the adopted future land use plan with those projects that have already received um approval. So if you remember back in January of 25, the city council approved the PDP for Oldm Village. Um so the existing uh future land use shows that as a commercial um future land use. Um with that particular project there's a lot of kind of a mix of uses there. So we're recommending to update that future land use map to reflect a mixeduse land use category. Uh back in February, uh shortly after that, um the council approved the PDP and resoning um for Ovation. Uh if you remember that there just kind of on the east side of 291 on the south of of 150. The existing comprehensive plan shows that as a residential category one. Um so the northern uh portion of that property is a mix of duplexes with a conceptual um apartments and conceptual uh commercial there. So what we're recommending is to realign the future land use map to match those uh those uses of a residential category 2 which is our medium density uh land use for residential as well as that mixed use since we have kind of a mix of uses between commercial and residential there as well. So just to kind of remind you what that future land use map is. it geographically displays uh development

types and desired um intensities throughout the the um community. So it kind of shapes kind of what we want to see and where we want to see that. So uh this again this application is to to realign this map so it is accurate and reflects what is currently been approved and the actual land uses that we have out there today. So with that, um, this subject does meet the requirements of the UDO and the Ignite comprehensive plan and staff does recommend adopting that future land use, uh, amendments as I have presented today and I can answer any questions you may have.

Thank you. Do we have any questions for the staff or applicant being one and the same? Commissioner Yrington. Anyone else have any questions down here? Okay. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in support or opposition of the application? I see none. So, hearing no further testimony, I will close the public hearing and reopen the regular meeting. Are there any commission discussions for this application?

All right. I will entertain a motion. I move to approve application PL2026-039 comprehensive plan amendment future land use map update city of Lee Summit applicant second. Can we get a roll call vote please? Ed Yarrington. Yes. Sher Frasier yes. Dana Arth yes. Jessica Gau. Yes. Tanya Janna Ford. Yes. Chip Tazinski. Yes, Randy Benrook. Yes. Thank you.

So, with this resolution, we go ahead and reopen the regular meeting and go through that process again. Uh, yeah, it's a regular meeting is not a public hearing. So, you'll just um take action on that and u Oh, so just Yep. We can go ahead and skip to the reading of the motion then. Okay. Can I get a motion on that one, please? I move to approve resolution 2026-02, a resol a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Lee Summit amending the comprehensive plan future land use map. Second. Can we get a roll call vote? Ed Yrington, yes. Sher Frasier, yes. Dana Arth, yes. Jessica Greno,

yes. Tanya Jonah Ford, yes. Chip Tazinski, yes. Randy Benbrook. Yes. All right. Thank you. We will move on and I will close the regular meeting and open the public meeting in the matter of application PL2024-281 reszoning from RP4 to PO and preliminary development plan. Mole is at Moly Acres Office Building 414 Southeast 3rd Street Roads Real Estate LLC applicant. Chair, I just want to make sure that you meant to open the public hearing and not the public meeting. Oh, I said it wrong, didn't I? Yes, that's what I do mean. Do should I resay it? Sure.

Okay. We are closing the regular meeting and opening the public hearing in the matter of application PL2024-281 reszoning from RP4 to PO and preliminary development plan Molly Acres Office Building 414 Southeast 3rd Street Rose Real Estate LLC applicant. For all of you that plan to speak on behalf of this application, if you would stand up at this time and be sworn in. I promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, help me. Thank you. Does the application applicant have a presentation? Okay. If you would stand, come to the microphone and give your name and address for the record, please.

Correct. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, planning commission. Uh Jeff Roads, Roads Real Estate owner. Uh currently live at 4280 Woody Creek, Fort Collins, Colorado. Here today to present. Thank you for allowing me to stand before you in the planning commission. Um, currently I am the owner of an existing adjacent property to the property that we're putting before you today. Uh, that property is located at 410 Southeast Third Street, also known as Leanding Professional Center. And what I'm putting before you today and what our application was for, there was an adjacent property that was purchased known here as 414 as part of our application um that we are looking to reszone reszone as you mentioned out of uh essentially uh planned apartments and into commercial office space. Um the existing buildings that are there are going to be completely duplicated, identified exactly the same same materials, same roof, same structures as as the two buildings that are existing on Third Street. So, we're just looking to enhance those by adding additional property. Uh we're going to beautify the space by following the city's guidelines as far as landscaping and buffer zones. Um, we already have existing parking to satisfy this additional building. So, we won't be adding additional parking spaces um on the lot itself. Currently, we have in excess of parking spots on the 410 Southeast Third Street, but we are also going to be adding a few additional parking spots. I believe it

was four, but we've came slightly short of the four due to the property boundaries. Um, but it was through conversations with the planning commission that they felt that we the parking that we were supplying and the parking that was going to be on site was going to be ample space enough to be able to satisfy the new building. The size of the building, 2500 square ft. Um, it has not been marketed. It has not been leased. It has not been preleased. Um, but of course it's meant to house a some type of commercial office aspect being insurance, dental. Um, I'm pretty strict on my property and as far as managing it. I do manage it myself. Um, you may say, why am I here from Colorado? I went to school of central Missouri State. So, I'm from the area originally. Went to school here. So, um, manage the property myself, but we try to maintain a high level of clientele. Um there's some people I just will not allow and we feel that uh the property that we have here brings value to the downtown area as far as professionalism goes as well. So I would open up for any questions that you may have.

All right. Thank you. We we will probably get to some questions after we get another presentation from staff. Okay. Adair Bright, senior planner. I'd like to enter into the record exhibit A, list of exhibits 1 through 16.

Exhibit A 1- 16 noted and entered into the record. As mentioned, the applicant is requesting approval of a reszoning from RP4, which is our planned apartment residential district to PO, which is planned office, and a PDP for development of an office building at 414 Southeast 3rd Street. There is one modification being requested, and staff analysis will be provided later within the presentation. The existing zoning is RP4 which was approved in 2005 as part of a s city initiated resoning. The property to the north contains the Charles apartments. The property to the south across Southeast Third Street contains single family residential. To the west are multi-tenant office buildings and to the east across the Charles apartment access drive are more single family residential despite their zoning district. The proposed land use is compatible with the existing office development and the intensity aligns with the surrounding uses since it is kind of a mismatch of different kinds of uses. The future land use map designates the subject property as being within the downtown activity center. The activity center is proposed to include a range of commercial, industrial, and residential options and the center is intended to develop as walkable mixeduse nodes. The proposed development supports the resilient economy focus area by growing business activity within the downtown area. The proposed building will be 2500 square ft and the property will be required to replplat and combine with the lot to the west so that all PO district requirements are met as far as lot area. The applicant is proposing to add four additional parking stalls to the existing parking lot of the office development for a grand total of 81 stalls. A neighborhood meeting was held on December 11th and the applicant had

reported that one member of the public attended and questions were centered around any additional parking and the location of the construction entrance. Since the project was submitted prior to the adoption of the new architecture and building design standards, it was reviewed under our previous standards. The applicant is proposing a mix of bricks, stone, and acrylic stucco, all which will comply and match the existing office buildings at Front Third Street. The building matches all of those, and it will visually blend into the area given its size and scale. The applicant is requesting approval of modification to allow the parking lot to encroach 5t into the required setback to the north. staff is supportive of the request because the pavement that will be encroaching into the setback is just for cars to back out and turn around out of the parking stalls and doesn't actually contain a parking stall. Also, the residential use to the north has a parking setback of 10 ft from the same property line. Therefore, the proposed encroachment is not expected to negatively impact the residential use. There's also existing vegetation between the parking lots which should help mitigate any kind of impact that could occur. With the conditions of approval shown here, the application meets the requirements of the UDO and the goals of the Ignite comprehensive plan. And I'm here for any questions that you may have.

Thank you, Miss Bright. Do we have any questions for the staff or applicant? I'll start with you, Commissioner Ben Brookke. Yes, I got a quick question. Um, for let's start with the applicant. You could probably answer this. The additional four parking spaces, are those parking spaces you need that you desire that you want to support this new building

being the being that the tenency has not fully been identified yet, I don't have a probably a clear defined answer for that. But as far as the activity on the existing building and the parking lot, we have um the parking is sufficient. Um, I typically visit this my I visit this property probably about every four to six months and I actually have become friends with majority of my tenants. Um, I'm very reachable landlord and man manager of my properties and I've never gotten push back that there's not enough parking but um I would also like to just to make sure that I provide parking as needed for those which I was in full agreement to be able to add the four parking spots without you know without any argument back to the city. I was happy to do that.

Okay. Thank you. That's all I had. Chair. Thank you, Commissioner Tuzinski. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Just a couple quick questions for the developer here. Um, so it's a 2500 foot building. So each unit will be about 1,250 ft each. Correct. And again, depending on the teny of the building, it could be one taking. Yeah. And are these two stories? Is there a second floor that's also available? It is not. It's just a single single story drop ceiling. And the dormers are existing that are shown are just false dormers. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Jana Ford. No questions, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Commissioner Yurington.

Yeah, real quick. Just trying to understand your space. How many parking spots are in each one of your your spots right now in your development? So, if we had an overview of the of the map, there's actually a total of four buildings that are in the existing property and we're adding the additional one um property to it. So, the parking lot actually is um centered somewhat around the other four buildings. Um we've shown on our development plan um have to actually see if it's actually on one of my slides here are the ex these are the existing buildings that are in place that we're going to be matching. So when we join the two buildings, there will be a uh concrete walking path that will actually come to the new building on 4 414 Southeast 3rd Street. So there will no be not be parking directly at that building. It will be part of the existing parking. And you can see here's building D, C, B, and A. Obviously the ones B and A that are existing on Third Street that we're matching.

Okay. So that's a a community parking for those all those buildings. That is correct. Yes. Okay. Um, and each, um, I correct me if I'm wrong, each like 2500 square f feet building, does that require like nine spots per building? That's a question for staff. So for office in the downtown area to be four per, thousand, four per,000. So he has 2500. It would be 8 something round off to nine spots. And each one of those spots uh of those of those nine would be one ADA spot, I believe. So ADA is is calculated through the parking lot as a whole. Okay.

Um so 50 stalls and below require one ADA with van accessible. Um 100 to uh 50 or so 49 to 1 to 49 is one. Okay. So we're looking at we should have roughly 45 spots to park a community spots to accompany all those 2500 times five. Okay. All right. Yep. Thank you. So, if there's 81 already, 81 spots and we need 45 is it do we even need those four? I guess that's a question I would have for staff. Maybe I misunderstood that.

Yeah, when this property was originally approved with their PDP, they were approved with 77 stalls. Believe it was five of those were in excess. So, we're adding four for a total of nine to help provide the necessary parking for this building itself. The parking I was out there today. It wasn't full. I don't know if it frequently does get full, but it's just there in case we do need it. In case there are tenants that do need it. Okay. So, so those four wouldn't be part of the community lot. They would be they will they'll be added up here if you can see. So, there's an existing dumpster. I believe it's here. Mhm. Correct.

And so, this one is going to go away and then the stalls will be added in that area and that's why they're going to be encroaching on that setback. Okay. Thank you.

Is there anyone here who wishes to speak in support or opposition of the application? Any more additional questions from the commission? Did Did the applicant have anything else to add to our Did you have anything else to add to the Okay. All right. Hearing no further testimony, I'm going to close the public hearing and reopen the regular meeting. Is there any commission discussion or a motion on this application? Yeah. Um I have a question I think. Um do we need to reopen or it's a comment or question?

So if the question or comment in includes new facts, it will need to be reopened through the public hearing. If it is just a comment or a question clarifying uh testimony that has already been presented, um we can move forward. Okay. Comment. Okay. Um or maybe it's a if you want to go ahead and pose your comment. Um we can determine the proper process forward. Perfect. Thank you. Essentially, I'm I'm okay with the reszoning, but not with the additional parking considering the usage and the excess of numbers already. So I

So that could be a comment based on the uh motion. Um okay. Of how you're going to vote. Okay. Commissioner Benbrook. Yeah. Can I maybe maybe be best to get some clarifications? Um, are we underparked or overparked on this facility considering the new building, the current parking plus the four additional? What is the code minimum? And what do we have? The current parking plus the four proposed we would be meeting code. Okay. Are we over parked? Do we have an excess? We're currently overparked right now. Since there's not that building there,

okay, but with the new building, we'll be adequate to what is with the additional stalls, we would be meeting the requirements. So, we're not overparked. We are perfect. We're meeting. Thank you. Did you want more clarification on that, Commissioner Yarrington? No. As I as I understood it, there's nine spots per 2500 uh square feet building and you have five five of those, right? 9* 5 is 45 spots. That includes the ADA. We have 81. So, not all buildings are 2500 square ft. There's some other buildings that that have different square footage.

Okay. I wasn't here in 2025, so I apologize when it was proposed. Okay. So according to the square feet that the the staff and and and city know that we we're comp comparable to that. We are good. Yeah, we're good. Thank you. This has been a night of confusion. I know we're here we're here to vote on reszoning reasonzoning and not the parking spots, but just question. Sorry.

Well, I think the objective here is to make sure we're not requiring the applicant to do more than they have to do as far as the parking. So, okay. So, I think we have clarification on that and I am ready for a motion. Madam Chairman, I'd like to I guess I move to recommend approval of application number PL2024-281 reszoning from RP4 to PO and preliminary development plan, Lyacres, Office Building, 414 Southeast 3rd Streets Real Estate LLC applicant. Second. Can we get a roll call vote, please? Eddie Arrington, yes. Sher Frasier, yes. Dana Arth, yes. Jessica Gano, yes. Tanya Jonah Ford, yes.

Chip Tazinski, yes. Randy Benrook, yes. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. I will now close the regular meeting and open the public hearing in the matter of application PL2025-195 reszoning from A to P CP2 and preliminary development plan Douglas Corporate Center approximately approximately 9 acres located at the southeast corner of Northeast Lee Summit Road and Northeast Douglas Street Dmer Brothers Investments LLC. Would everyone who plans to speak on behalf of this application please stand up and be sworn in at this time?

I promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help me God. All right. Does the applica as does the applicant have a presentation? You please state your name and address for the record. Uh Jeff Barts, uh own engineering, 8455 College Boulevard, Overland Park, Kansas. Thank you. This one right? Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Good evening. I'm here to just give you a quick brief on what Douglas Commons is. Um I believe it's in your report as Douglas Corporate Center, but uh same project. Uh we're just updating the name a little bit. Um this project includes five commercial lots is what we're proposing. Uh this is on Douglas Street, uh just kind of on the east side of where the big Discovery Park project is. Um and just west of the airport. Um just to give you some background on this project, uh this is a very complicated site. It's kind of a peace meal of old rightway, um, additional land that was acquired, and part of this resoning process is to kind of get it all to one commercial zone instead of three different zones. Um, other challenges with the site, um, there is a stream corridor that goes through there. Um, we've worked with the city staff uh to provide waiverss uh for that buffer. This is a a stream that is very low quality. It's been demolished several times over the course of construction of Douglas Street and the airport. So, there really isn't a lot of high value vegetation there. That said, uh we did get it identified and wetlands uh identified where that boundary actually is and that's what we're proposing to preserve. Uh so the the quality of vegetation that is there, that's what we intend to keep and we're just reducing that buffer from the the large buffer requirement that the city ordinance says. Um another complicated issue with this site is the large water transmission main that cuts through the site um kind of along where the old rightway was. Um, so this plan is very particular in that it kind of keeps the ground the same elevation uh over that pipe so that we don't have to relocate it or change that in any fashion. Um, and the other one is just that we're adjacent to the airport and with that comes some restrictions on height. Um,

just to let you know that we are aware of that. We are meeting those and have no concern of meeting those. Traffic improvements proposed. Uh we are proposing adding two right turn lanes off of Douglas northbound. Um those would be the right turn into our new street and a new right turn onto the Douglas Street that continues north to the airport. Um pending warrants. Uh we are proposing a traffic signal that would align with the entrance to both our street and the main entrance to the approved apartments to the west from Discovery Park. Um, just a quick rundown of kind of what each lot has and kind of what we're expecting. And just to preface this with we don't know exactly what the tenants will be in these in spaces. Uh, but we have looked at kind of what the space will allow uh for each lot. And so this lot, lot one is the smallest lot. Um, it's a little trickier and really only has the space to have a drive-through type either restaurant or coffee shop. Uh but just keep that in mind as we go through these that none of these are really set in stone. Um the intent for this is to be sold to a potential user at which time they would come back to the planning commission with final development plan and then you would see the final renderings and materials and all that. Um, again, I'll quickly breeze through these. Just kind of another restaurant in lot two, more of the traditional drive-thru, sit-down casual restaurant. Lot three is proposed to be more of a retail restaurant, um, kind of mixeduse space. Uh, and then lot four, uh, we've kind of allotted for a sea store with gas pumps. And then lot five u a more of a

selfservice storage facility. Um and we are aware of the condition that u this will need to come back to a revised preliminary development plan with a special use permit for this use. So we are in acknowledgement of that. So keep it short and sweet and I'll be available for any questions. Thank you. I didn't see you back there until you got up.

Uh, good evening, Hector Jr., senior planner. I'd like to enter into the record exhibit A, list of exhibits 1 through 20.

Exhibit A, 1 through 20, noted and entered into the record. So, as the applicant has stated, uh this application is kind of a two-prong application. There is a reasonzoning component which is approximately three and a quarter acres that uh is composed of the area right at the intersection where Douglas uh turns toward the airport and uh continues northeast on the site. Uh so more specifically it's this lot 4 area where the proposed sea stores is located is primarily the the boundaries of the area that's currently zoned agricultural and is proposed to be reszoned CP2. Uh the bulk of the application uh associated with the resoning is for the plan for the overall development of uh the five lots that are shown here and as Mr. Uh Bart had acknowledged there is a condition about number five about that coming through at some future point with the separate uh preliminary development plan and special use permit application. Uh just to orient everyone to the location to those that are not familiar with it. Um here you can see the the north south runway of the airport here just to the immediate east. Um here to this kind of what we call it kind of bubblegum color colored here at the norththeast corner northwest corner of Coburn and Douglas is the initial phases of Discovery Park that are currently going up. Um there's this kind of camel color to the north of that that will be an apartment development that's already been previously approved um and it'll be coming um fairly soon we believe. um the general character of that area.

It's kind of a transitional area as Lee Cement Road continues north past Douglas. Um there's a lot of larger acreage single family development there along that corridor. Um so right now this site's about less than half a mile about point4 miles um if you're measured from the southern boundary of the proposed center uh from the interchange of 470 and and Douglas. So, it's it's still in close proximity uh to that um one of the more significant interchanges along I470 and is in an area that can provide services to existing area residents for single family development and the the forthcoming multif family and other commercial development that will continue as the Discovery Park area um develops here on that northwestern quadrant of the interchange. Um here the hatched area here kind of denotes again where that lot five is. Um but overall if you if you were include the footprint of that building just to give everyone a an idea as to what the full potential that the developers is considering for this is we're looking at about 31,000 square feet of total lot area. Um if you were to emit this lot, the lot uh lot five, you'd be looking at somewhere about um about 18,000 square feet for the remaining lots here that that uh lie directly along the west boundary east boundary of of Douglas Road. Uh Mr. Barts, I've gone through some of these the typical elevations that that are proposed for the center. Um the materials that you're primarily going to see are cementitious panel, brick, ephus, metal panel and and glass. You know, again, this elevation here to the south on the southeast corner, the lower right hand side of this slide is for that potential future development that would be considered a future point. But

it's included here to show how there's kind of an architectural thread that's being woven through the development. And there are uh there is a design criteria that the applicant is also proposing that's going to govern what the overall look is going to be for that center. The comprehensive plan shows this property primarily as as commercial in nature. there is a little bit of civic and the reason why the civic designation was listed there was that at the time that Douglas Road was um was reconfigured the city had to acquire some property in there uh to make that reconfiguration of the street. So at the time, not knowing what the future kind of held for that piece of property, um the civic land use designation was granted bas based on the city's ownership of that of that site. But that has been conveyed and acquired by the by the developer. So expansion of that commercial land use designation to encompass all of the boundaries in yellow would be consistent overall with the the highest and best use of the property and consistent with the nature of what the developer is proposing for for the remaining six acres of that 9 acre lot site rather. Uh there is one request for modification that does affect two lots. It affects lots two and four. um four being the lot four being the sea store at the far north end of the site and lot two being the drive-thru facility located at the far south end of the site. So, one thing I'll backtrack a little bit here is as you can see that there's it's it's an oddshaped lot. Um it's broad at the top u very narrow at at the south end of it. Uh you've got an arterial road that runs along the western boundary of it. And with that

there is quite a bit of rightway that's actually um within the boundaries of of well I guess that house northeast Douglas Street. Um to give you some point of reference, most arterial streets have a range of rightway between 90 on the low end and upwards of normally probably more in theund 120 sometimes total width of rideway. Um if you were to start measuring the ride ofway here where it starts to kind of jog, there's actually upwards right now of of about 155 ft of total rightway. um down at this very south end, you do get closer to a more normal 100 feet of rideway. Um so a couple areas I'll highlight here is that adjacent to this southern lot, the southernmost lot, u they're proposing about 15, we'll just round it down to say about 15 ft of separation from this drive-thru lane. and the separation between the boundary of that lane to the nearest travel lanes of Douglas Street are somewhere around 70 ft. Um going to the north end, uh you're looking about 75 ft of separation from the proposed or or the perspective boundary of that um sea store parking lot that surrounds a gas canopy area. And they're looking at about a 14 foot setback when measured to the actual right-of-way line. But again, the travel lanes are about 75 ft away from the boundary. Uh there was a neighborhood meeting that was held. Three members of the public attended and there were just general questions about proposed land use. Um what the fate of the of the creek or the drainage area was going to be and just overall just land use questions. Um specifically also including the the convenience store.

Um staff has not received any direct feedback from any any neighbors in opposition nor against. U so with that uh staff is recommending approval of the development subject to conditions 1 through 4 and I'll yield to any questions you may have. Thank you Mr. Sto. I'll start with you Commissioner Yrington. Do you have any questions for staff or applicant? No, I don't have any questions. Commissioner Frasier.

So, I know this is for um the applicant. I know you did you can't say definitively, but can you remind me where the proposed sea store? Um yeah, it's on this map. It's the kind of top left. That would be Which lot is lot four. Okay, that's what I was thinking. Thank you. Commissioner Groono, did you have a question? Not yet. Commissioner Jana Ford.

Thank you, Chair. Uh, this would be for Mr. Sodto. Um, so we're reviewing this PDP lot five. Anything that's in hatched is for reference but not finalized. We will get it back. Correct. Okay. Can I make questions on it? No. On lot five, even though it's not part of this approval. Yeah. Did you ask if you can ask questions on it? Yeah. Like specific questions? I mean, you can ask. Shut me down if I can't. You can ask and we'll see what we can answer. Okay. Well, then this will be for the applicant.

Thank you. Um so in your description of this project you'd indicated primarily propose of one-story structures and I saw all the elevations are at 24 feet max with maybe parapit height additional but lot three um which is slated to be a storage it's not one no that one is three threetory

okay and is that still compliant with like the FAA airspace and everything? Yeah, that that lot is kind of down at the bottom of the hill. And so we're actually almost 20 ft lower than the other side of the property. So that extra those extra stories are still actually lower than the other buildings which are all below what what will be required for FAA. Okay, that makes sense. Um maybe I'll just make as a comment when this comes back to us, it'd be great to have a a section kind of helping identify the relationships with the between everything. So, thank you. That's all. Thank you, Chair. Commissioner Chis Chisinski.

Thank you, Madam Chairman. I have a question for the engineer. So, on those two places where we are asking for uh for a reduced setback um with regards to all of these lots, will they be individually sold or will they be maintained by a single ownership? Individually sold. Yes. The intent isn't individually sold. Okay. And and real quick before you sit down, I do have a question for staff. How often is is Lee Summit Road through this area maintained mode?

I don't believe anyone here can answer that specifically. No. I guess is there a specific concern or

Yeah. Well, what I'm asking for is I mean, you would like a setback, which I tend to agree with, but at at the expense of what? And so, the expense is going to be of some sort of landscaping or something in between that's going to take place. And so, you're going to have less room to put that in. Um, so my question was going to be for the applicant is, I mean, will you will you maintain that right away in exchange for less setback? Is there going to be able way to make it look nice to beautify it for the area because you may you know you may have to put your landscaping elsewhere. Uh that's that's really where I was going for I don't think we have any issue maintaining that ground.

Okay. So if can we put this on as a cont condition of approval of the reduced in and set back that the owner will maintain the rightway adjacent to it. I guess one question I have is just can you kind of define a little bit more what you mean by maintaining the rightway? Just just mowing.

Mowing. Yeah. I mean, yeah, maintaining it. If if they go out there and they cut it, they just cut it all, you know, make it look nice in front of development anyway. A lot of a lot of businesses do that along state rightways, city rightaways, you know, that's I just want to make sure that, you know, in return for the setback, which I mean, I'm okay with. I think it'd be nice to have a nice section there maintained. I mean, that's a great that's pretty much the entry into that corridor. You're going to have a lot of great development across the street from it. I know why you're you're developing that area. You know, hopefully it'll make you a bunch of money. So, but I just want to make sure that we can have it maintained or something with in exchange for

to add some to that. This is going to be like any other uh private development along right away. They they will be required to maintain that right away. Um mowing just like you are required to mow the the rightway in front of your house. Um they're not asking for any reduction in the landscaping um along that street frontage. So all required UDO landscaping will be installed as well. Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Benbrook.

Yeah. One one question um regarding is it lot five in the corner? Is that what it is? Um it looks like there's a current stream running through there. Um I I guess just fill me in on the plan on that real quick. Um it's a stream corridor. Are you working with the Army Corps of Engineers? Are you proposing to fill it in to to cover it over and allow Nope. So, um we are intending to keep the stream as is everywhere except for where it crosses the new street. Um other than that, it'll be the same channel and actually all of the surrounding wetland that's next to it preserved. Okay. So, you're going to build the parking and the street and all that around what is currently there.

Yet, the parking kind of wraps around because we're staying out of that stream corridor or out of the wetland area. Wetland. So, it is classified as wetland. Yes. Okay. Thank you. That's all I had. Thank you. Commissioner Grono, you had a really great um in your presentation, you had a great layout of all of the different lots. Can you pull that up real quick? No offense to staff's presentation.

I'm a sucker for a good presentation. There was one more that had had them all laid out with all of our numbers. That'll work. Um, what I don't know what I was thinking of. There was one in there. It's great, though. Um, what is the walkability path or sidewalks or plan in between all of these? So, this one might be better. Um

the the plan is to have a sidewalk along the west side of the new street all the way through the length of that entire street and there's currently a a wider trail along Douglas and then we'll also make the connection from that along Douglas. It's a little confusing with the names, but um essentially you'll have a sidewalk that loops on from Douglas to Douglas to the new street all the way around. Um we are not proposing any sidewalk on the east side only because there's really nothing to serve on the east side except at the very ends and so we're providing crossings and we've uh are providing payment in lie of to the city as part of that. Right. So now this is probably more for staff or maybe even for traffic of how does this development attach into the other developments that are going on over in that Discovery Park and is there connection points with that walkability paths? Will everyone be able to walk and hang out or is it safe? All of those good things.

I'm trying to see what the best way to show this would be the best way. So right now I'm trying to remember if I don't know if maybe Susan can jo my memory. Is there a signalized intersection here? Not as part of Discovery. No, there's not a current signal planned with Discovery Park. So the location that Douglas Corporate Center has is their south entrance. Where the heck's the mouse? This one. Oh, sorry. This one. Yeah.

Uh, it's about here, I want to say. Seem about right. It's toward the south of their lot. That's going to be directly across from Allora Apartments and then Allora and Discovery Park. They have connectivity with their sidewalks. Okay. So, it will be a signalized crossing that you can get across Lee Summit Road, Lee Summit Road, Douglas, whatever you want to call it there. And so there will be walkability across the the busy street. That's cool. And then what is and this might be more for the applicant again. I'm sorry. What is the timing of your of this development in comparison to the rest of the development that's going on? Spring of this year, next year. Uh spring of this year. Okay, that's exciting. As soon as we can.

Okay, I think that's all my questions for now. Thanks.

Thank you. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in support or opposition of this application? Any additional questions from the commission? Hearing no further testimony, I will close the public hearing and reopen the regular meeting. Any commission discussion on the application or a motion? Commissioner Jana Ford. I move to recommend approval of application PL2025195 reszoning from AG to CP2 and preliminary development plan Douglas Corporate Center approximately 9 acres located at the southeast corner of Northeast Lee Summit Road and Northeast Douglas Street Dur Brother Dmer Brothers Investment LLC.

Second. Can I get a roll call vote, please? Ed Yrington. Yes. Sher Frasier. Yes. Dana Arth, yes. Jessica Gno, yes. Tanya Janna Ford, yes. Chip Tazinski, yes. Randy Benrook, yes. Thank you guys for coming here and presenting that tonight.

All right. I will now close the regular meeting and open the public hearing in the matter of PL 2025-079 resoning from AG to RP1 RP4 and CP2 preliminary development plan Legacy Wood Ridge 815 Southwest Hook Road Griffin Riley Property Group applicant. If all of you who plan to speak on behalf of this application would stand up and be sworn in at this time. I promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help me God. I do. Thank you. And we have a application applicant

presentation which technologically challenged here. So just working through a few things. Okay. And then Okay. And then how? Yeah, you should. And then you just got me got me through. Cool. All right. Thank you.

Well, good evening, commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. Um, I'm Jake Loveless with the Griffin Riley Property Group and our address is 21 Southeast 29th Terrace in in Lee Summit. Um, tonight I'm here to talk with you guys about Legacy Ridge, uh, which this is an opportunity for us to kick off, uh, the long awaited and anticipated, uh, PRI ground and the land improvements associated with that. Um, this property and project is envisioned as a true master plan community that's going to balance live, work, and play um, and do so while supporting Lee Summit's long-term growth plans. So, where are we at today? Um, we started out by meeting with neighbors and listening to their feedback. Um, after that, we met with you and we received your guys's input. Um, we then went back and held an additional good neighbor meeting to continue the conversation and make sure that we were really hearing what people were telling us. Um, we're now back before you with an adjusted plan that reflects much of what we've heard. Um, the themes were pretty consistent. People want more ownership opportunities. They want less density. They don't want apartment buildings. On the commercial side, they prefer that we only show pad sites that are for products that we would actually build ourselves rather than depicting specific end users. Um, unless of course we had a Starbucks. So, and I don't today, so we don't have a Starbucks shown, but in the event that that happens, we'll be in good shape. Um, this version that we present to you tonight is an effort to be responsible and show that we took the feedback seriously that you guys provided and that the neighbors provided so that we can be good good neighbors and be responsive to the planning commission comments that we've heard. So before and I realize there's a lot going on here but um but just kind of stay with me. Before the plan included

737 residential units with 541 of them being for rent and 196 homes for sale. Today we've modified that concept to reduce the total count by 231 units across this property. The majority of the remaining units that we have on the project now are for sale. So, we're proposing today an update of 284 homes for sale, including 88 town homes for sale and 90 market town market rate town homes for rent and 132 active adult town homes. The goal that we had was straightforward. We wanted to create more ownership opportunities in response to addressing the missing middle that exists in Lee Summit. And I'll circle back to that later on, but that's the that's the goal here. That's the theme. We want to reduce overall density on the project to capture the comments that we've received and we still want to be able to have the same highquality amenities that make the development attractive and viable. This next com this next slide that we have here is is pretty straightforward, but I wanted to be able to to, you know, provide the figures for you guys to easily digest to see exactly how much this project has changed. Um, so it's a fairly straightforward slide, but it's intended to show you those adjustments. um with real figures. So we increased the homes for sale as I mentioned from 196 to 284. That's an increase of 88 homes for sale. On the four rent side, we decreased from 541 units for rent to 222 units for rent. The total units on this project were decreased by 231 units. One of the other comments that we heard when we were discussing things with the neighbors and and with planning commission was, you know, why why a

little bit of commercial on this corner. Um, and so what I'm attempting to show here is the road structure, the infrastructure that exists in Lee Summit. Um, as you can see, what we have at this location is is that this is Warden Hook and it's an intersection of a major arterial road and a minor arterial road. That is not incidental. It is signalized already. It's a high visibility corner. It's designed to carry traffic and serve a broader area. As part of Lee Summit, as this part of Lee Summit continues to grow, this intersection is only going to continue to get more busy. It it it will just happen with development in that corridor. We are adding another stoplight to the south of that location on Warden Hook right now as it sits. So again, as this part of Lee Summit continues to grow, that intersection is only going to become more active. From a planning perspective, that's exactly where neighborhood retail and commercial should go. It's not the ideal long-term location for residential front doors to be facing an intersection that's that busy. It is, however, the right location to have smaller scale retail and commercial that serves the surrounding rooftops that you have in that area. We're only proposing 13 and a half acres of 135 acre development to be commercial on that corner. That's it. That is intentional. It's not a regional retail or big box development location, right? It is a neighborhood serving commercial placed at the logical activity node that's consistent with how Lee Summit has operated in other corridors just like this. and we listed a handful of different locations there um where this node pattern's been established and is consistent with those. Um and again, a big part of the reason why this is why we show this as future commercial on that location is because we don't believe it would be a good residential fit to have houses that are backing up to a corner that's that busy and it will only get busier moving

into the future. As the residential builds out around it, the demand will follow and we've seen that pattern across the city. rooftops create the need for services. On this next slide, I'm just showing an example of of retail that we've developed in the past. Um, so when we're talking about neighborhood retail and things like that, this is the only um example of architecture that we gave you in the in the PDP because this is to the comments we received from some of the community members. This is what we would produce, you know, would be neighborhood retail that would be akin to that services that are around and available. So, this is just intended to show as an example of of um something that we might build ourselves. So, circling back to the residential, how does what we're providing to you guys tonight, how does that align with the comprehensive plan and with Ignite? Legacy Ridge was designed to help close the housing gap by offering a range of different options including single family homes, villas, and town homes. This approach supports housing diversity and sustainable growth for Lee Summit. And importantly, the proposed densities that we provide in here remain below everything that Ignite has published for both category 1 and category 2 residential. um to again be neighborly with respect to the comments that we've heard. So this next slide is is super interesting and it's one of the more compelling things that you know I reviewed when evaluating all right why why do we have this product mix out here on this on this project in particular. So, you know, set aside what what Ignite says, what what does the market say about where Lee Summit's at today? And so, right here, you know, when we're addressing the different segments of the

market, when we've got a 135 acre site, it's a very large site. If you were to only build one different product type on this site, you limit the pool of customers that you're going to have available to be able to purchase homes, right? Um there are only so many people that are willing to shop at any single price point within a community. When demand softens for that one product type, absorption stalls. And we actually we we saw a really good example of that here in Lee Summit within the last, you know, however many months of a project that actually absorption stalled for decades. You actually had utilities that were in the ground that had to be replaced because of lack of use. The graphic above is intended to explain kind of the broader context of this. So historically under six months of supply or call it six months of supply that that's the kind of the breaking point between what's considered over supply and under supply in a market. And so the category on the far right what it's showing you is the on current um properties that are for sale in Lee Summit. What is the time on market the remaining months of inventory that we have in supply here in Lee Summit? And what this what this shows us is is that basically if you can I mean 200 to $299,000 is probably a myth for us to be able to put together I mean just is what it is um to put together product offering for that. But 300 to $600,000 um where we still are well under I mean 300 to $399,000 would be a fantastic number to be able to achieve to offer different product supply for folks here in Lee Summit and all the way up to $600,000. We show that we have a significant demand here in Lee Summit. That's the the you know the largest amount of properties that we have is in between that 300 and $600,000 by a wide margin. and we need more of

it. Um because today in Lee Summit, um and this was shocking to me, the average price of a pending sale on a home in Lee Summit was $620,000. The reality is that this reinforces why we're focusing on the missing middle here with this project. Our goal is to create more opportunities for people within that price range of 300,000 to 600,000 and expanding the buyer pool to be able to support steady sustainable absorption across this community for Lee Summit. This is a project that our community needs. So at the end of the day, our goal is simple. We wanted to deliver a thoughtful, financially sustainable community that responds to the market here in Lee Summit where we respect our neighbors and we support the long-term growth of Lee Summit. We have listened. We have significantly adjusted the project that we proposed to you guys here tonight. Um, and we respectfully ask for your support to be able to move this project forward. So, thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Loveless. Mr. Sodto, it looks like you're next. Hector Jr., senior planner. I'd like to enter into the record exhibits 1 through 21. dot dot dot. So if you want to go ahead with that one exhibits one through 21 noted and entered into the record.

And I do have some I do have two additions. Oh okay. Okay. So um the first addition is I would like to also add exhibit 22 which is an updated sheet C1.1 received by the city of Lee Summit uh yesterday, February 25th, 2026. Okay, exhibit 22. And I also am adding exhibit 23, which is an email from Miss Lisa Heler, uh, dated February 21st, 2026. Okay. So, exhibits 22 and 23. Correct.

Please enter those into the record as well. Okay. So, the application in front of you, uh, this body heard almost two months ago. It was January, uh, 8th of 2026. um at that time for those in the audience that may know I assume everyone here in the audience probably knows the outcome of that meeting but the recommendation at that time from the planning commission based on the iteration that was brought before this body about two months ago was for recommendation for denial uh some of the concerns expressed at that time uh by the planning commission as well as some of the the residents that were there um had to do with um some of the points that Mr. U Loveless had touched on uh the location of the the commercial um but it seemed like the majority of the concern especially from residents had to do with more the density of the proposed project. Um perhaps most significantly u might have been or the potential for upwards of 300 apartments which which were just included at that time as a conceptual plan. So there was no um entitlement that was sought at that point, but there was a conceptual plan to show um a potential future land use on that property and that was a 300 dwelling unit apartment complex as as I'd mentioned. So um rather than duplicate a lot of the testimony I' had given at that last meeting which still stands, I'm just primarily going to focus on the areas of change from the difference from that meeting to this one. So given a broad overview, you know, again, for those that weren't here at

the last meeting, uh we're looking at approximately 131 total acres. Uh the iteration that's being brought forth tonight has uh 505 dwelling units. Um an overall density for the residential component of uh 4.6 dwelling units per acre. uh which with this iteration is one unit per acre less than the previous iteration. The previous iteration had a residential density of about 5.6 and uh with the changes that are being brought forth tonight uh that density for the residential piece only has been dropped down to 4.6. Um so here this slide is intended to provide kind of a sidebyside of the the changes provided comparison. So the areas that are colorcoded are the areas in which there has been a change from the previous iteration that was brought before you. And one additional iteration one additional change that was not included in the packet uh because we just received it yesterday is specifically the the area in red here. So the the packet that went out showed a convenience store at this location where it's red. Uh the applicant yesterday submitted a revised plan sheet uh swapping out or eliminated the sea store and replacing it for with an additional uh multi-tenant res uh commercial building uh which and well let me go here. So this image here is is what was in the packet and was went out to everyone. This was actually the original iteration. Um to the immediate south it it stole and to the east it had the the multi-tenant commercial buildings. Um the one I'll point out here is this one here to the south of the sea store which is a multi-tenant commercial building about 14,000 square feet in size. So with the revised plan that staff has received they've removed the sea store

and basically mirrored that type of same building in use to the north. So you had a 14,000 foot building to the south. Now they're removed the sea store and done the same with that uh that lot in the at the hard corner and I'll go through each of the color-coded areas. Um but again just to reiterate some of the reductions um the original iteration including the conceptual development plan with the apartments had about 738 dwelling units. This iteration now before you has 505. The aforementioned reduction in density from 5.6 to 4.6 units per acre is for the residential portion. And as I just mentioned, they've swapped out a convenience store gas station with an additional multi-tenant commercial building in this red area. Now, with the swapping out of the buildings, they did increase the amount of commercial square footage from 66,054 for all six total lots to 73,504. Uh the sea store was about 6600 square ft in in size. Uh the new building is is 14,000. So that accounts for the almost 8,000 square foot difference. So, we're getting 8,000 additional square feet approximately in um building square footage, but we're getting a much less intense land use at that that particular corner. Um I will run through some of the different areas, but just to highlight what has changed and what has not changed. Um so, at the far southwest corner here outlined in yellow, um it was originally proposed as detached single family. uh lots, some of them 50 um 50 foot wide lots, some 60 foot wide lots. That area remains unchanged. So that that is still the same from the previous plan.

At that time there was a modification request to the minimum lot size. Um the UDO requires a minimum 6600 square foot lot area. Uh there are lots in here that are dipping just under that by just about 100 square feet less. So there's just a a a marginal difference in the minimum lot size that was requested. That is unchanged. And again, that's specifically for uh the pot of single family detached that directly abut Ward Road here at the southwest corner of the development. Um this color here, it's kind of a cyan color. There is a slight change to this um in this area. They've reduced the amount of lots by two and the next slide will show a side by side. Um it reduced the density just a little bit from I believe 5.4 units to uh 5.2. Um there were 73 lots as I mentioned and they're down to 71. So the difference here was the only difference here has to do with um the image on in red outlined in red. So all these slides the the red outlined areas are images are the ones that were the previous iteration and the green is what's previously is now being proposed. So the loan change is that uh the we'll call it the kind of primary east west road internal to the site is now being punched through to connect to the um the town home area that abutts it to the west. And in punching through this street, they lost two lots to be able to make way for for that street to go in. But otherwise, the remaining configuration of that area remains the same. That density did go down from 5.4 to 5.2 with the loss of those two lots. So the next area of change here is uh this peony color. Um

so the side by side here shows that they were able to so this is a little bit more this had been a significantly denser product initially um in the middle they had a lot of four unit attached that were kind of particularly smaller um town home lots in in total under the same overall acreage they were looking at about 109 total uh dwelling units in this area and they've They've made it less dense. They've basically reduced that area by about 21 total dwelling units. So that brings the density down from 8.1 here on the left to 6.6 units um here on the on the right. Um there have been there's been some configur reconfiguration of the street network, but it overall generally is the same. they kind of they did this northeast corners where the street punches through and there's a slight change in how this road kind of comes through but overall the general geometry is generally about the same but again the biggest significant difference is a loss of 21 lots through here to decrease that density and and in doing so they were able to kind of open up more of a common area kind of open space in the middle of that town home component Uh this area is more attached single family uh development that they're labeling it as kind of active adult area. This area remains unchanged. So there's no difference to this particular component that had 132 dwelling units. The last area, well, second to last area, um, but the last portion of the residential area that they've made changes to is what used to be a 17 acre 300 dwelling unit apartment area under a conceptual plan. They've now incorporated seeking preliminary develop

development plan approval for 90 dwelling units. So the difference being 210 dwelling unit difference, there's a reduction uh with what's being brought forward here. Um again, there would still continue to be connectivity um from the north and to the south from the internal streets uh to provide that street network uh to serve this town home area. Here's a side by side showing the com the apartments that were conceptually shown before and the the new layout with town homes. And then finally the the last area which was the commercial um previously shown as as a sea store which was 6600 square foot building uh now being replaced with the 14,000t building that mirrors that development to the to the south and is consistent with the remaining five lots that make up the commercial component of the site. Um all of the changes that are being proposed are consistent with the as was the the original iteration continues to be consistent with the the comprehensive plan in terms of providing additional housing options for area residents. Um again one of the things that our UDO does not mention but I know is has been brought up by some of the residents um is um owner versus rent. That's not something that is addressed in our in our UDO. It's again more housing typologies as opposed to how teny is is regulated. Um, in fact, the UDO doesn't regulate tenency whether owner occupied or not. The use is the use whether it's rented or or owned. That's that's what the UDO looks at and what staff bases their recommendations on. Um, none of these elevations have changed. So, these are all consistent with what was previously proposed, except these will now just kind of expand into some of the areas where the

the apartments were shown. So, that uh the town home elevations that were previously included um which some of these are typical here are now being expanded and those would be reflective of what would be proposed there along the Ward Road frontage. Um commercial component again this kind of typical for that area that that would remain in change as well. Um the the phasing of the development is a little bit different in that uh previously they had broken the phasing into I believe at least it was I believe it was three phases. um with this revised uh plan that they're treating all of the residential area as as being phase one with commercial being phase two. Understanding that within those areas of residential areas there may be subphases but generally residential would be phase one, commercial would be phase two. There are a couple revisions based on the the updated plans that we received yesterday um that are a little bit different than what you received in your packet. So the the changes are outlined are identified by the bold um most notably three and six with uh with three having had to include the additional language that development should be in accordance with the revised plan previously dated January 28th. But then the cover sheet or or sheet C1.1 would actually be uh the one that was previously provided provided yesterday by the city dated uh February 25th, 2026. Condition number six there, this one may garner some just future massaging as we make our way through this process. Um but um the most recent traffic study that was provided um reflecting the change from the

previous iteration included the sea store. So with the plan sheet we revised yesterday, there's it's no longer completely in alignment. Um so there may or may not be some additional road improvements or or differences that may be called for with the traffic study. Um that's something that would have to be evaluated to this point. Uh so the condition that we have currently right now and I guess I'll read it just so everyone's aware of uh that I'll I'll paraphrase it. Basically, we're asking for a updated traffic study uh reflecting the change in use for that um corner lot, that corner commercial lot to be provided at the time of final development plan. And that staff would have to make any uh would have to review the updated st traffic report, traffic study at that time. uh for concurrence and um basically construction any required road improvement based on that updated plan um identified by the city would have to be substantially complete prior to the issuance of of any occupancy. So um I'll leave that up there so that everyone can kind of digest it and that may be an area where there may be some amendments to that language that staff or or or this body or perhaps the applicant may want to discuss further. But with all that being said, I will state that uh staff recommends approval can of the proposed development plan subject to conditions one through six.

Thank you, Mr. Sodto. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in support or opposition? Oh, I went too far there. Do we have any questions for the staff or applicant? And I will start with you, Commissioner Bimbrook. Not at this time, Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Tisenski. Yeah, I have one question for Jake. You got a second there. Oh, sorry. Okay.

Yeah, Mr. Loveless. I mean, I hate to say it. We miss him. He's great on the board here. Um, could you just do me a favor and explain a little bit of what types of commercial amenities, not amenities, not what type of commercial businesses will you be targeting? And and the reason I asked that is I hope the types of businesses that you're targeting to bring in here are ones that can support this community. Exactly. Right. You know, so so what are you thinking? Could it be a grocery store? Could it be I mean I I know there's one up the street, but what are you thinking?

My my guess is realistically on this on this site grocery store, we might not even have enough space for it. So um maybe it could be a small a small grocery or something like that, but the reality is you're looking more like a daycare. um a a pediatrician um a you know think of any number of different you know small commercial uses um that are services related to the residents that are you know in the immed surrounding area. You look at the other different corners that we were you know kind of calling out as reference points. Um you have you have banks, you have urgent cares, you have um veterinarians, um you know there an insurance office, right? I mean those are the types of uses that we'll have here. mixed in with hopefully you'll have some inline small retail that's there to offer services so you can have hair and nails and all those different things and and little workout workout facilities and things like that. Right. So that's what I would envision here. And then my second question is as as you I I don't know if you were here at the beginning part but at the beginning of tonight's meeting we had amendment to the thorough master plan

which directly impacts the amount of traffic that's really going to be going to that intersection because as you're well aware of there's going to be a new interchange at some point in the future that's going to take Sher Road or Sher Parkway from Hook Road. You Hook Road will be a secondary to that where that'll be the main thorough affair. So with that in mind, what have you thought of as the impact to the commercial to this area? I mean, a it's going to be nicer. I mean, you'll have less traffic off that road, so that'll be great. But then you also have less people going to those businesses. Sure.

And so that's why with regards to like the question about the businesses, if they're items that people like to go to because they're on their way home, you know, it may be out of the way. And I see that that you're going to have some traffic that's going to be rerouted down there probably because we're about at the capacity of what Ward should be able to handle right now, right? Um but the reality is is that you're going to have an offset of all the different housing types that are going to be added in between, you know, call it call it Hook and all the way up to SH because all of that ground is part of what will be whether it's in this phase of the PRI land release or in next phase when some of that ground becomes sewable. All of that is going to be developed. And so, um, long story short, yes, there might be some redirecting, but ultimately there will be more traffic in 10 years on that corner than what there is today. Whether or not sure happens, you know, that extension in that time frame or not.

Yeah. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you, Commissioner Jana Ford. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Loveless, you walked away too soon. Um so I think I only have two questions. Um first of them is just talking about the amenities they've got provided. Um they didn't change but I just want to make sure I understand the intent. So the intent is two amenities service two different housing categories. One being the adult um or active adult, right? Um which would be rented. Correct.

And then all of the single families. Everything else out there is going to have is going to have the other shared amenity center which will be a large amenity center that'll have clubhouse, have pool, there'll be outdoor amenity areas that are there associated with that. The only reason why we keep the reunion product like what we have out at Blackwell right now that's, you know, age targeted, they're villas, they're all singlestory product, right? Um is that the amenities that that that customer looks for is a little bit different um than what you know the other customers might look for. Sure. Okay. No, I appreciate that distinction. Um, so the town homes will will or will not have access to the single family amenities. They will. Okay. Yep.

Okay, perfect. Uh, thank you. And then the other question I have in the original application, um, the town the town homes that you didn't change. Mhm. Um, there were sprinkled like designated off- streetet parking and there isn't anymore. What was the reason for removing those? So, the area before that was in the center of the project, if that's what you're talking about, the area that's in the center, not the active.

Not the active. Yep. Yep. The other ones that previously where we were planning on having those be for rent, we changed up the product type that was in there. We had two different product types that were in there before. One of them was a rear entry product type where you had a two-car garage that was on the back side of the building, but we had, I think the number was, forgive me, roughly 20 more roughly 20 more units that were in there. I think 20 or 21 more units, something along those lines. We can look at those specific numbers. But so, two reasons. One, um, we still do, I believe, have some off- streetet parking that's in there and available. We just don't need as many because we have 20 fewer units in there. We reduce the density by 20 uh 20% that's in that area. And then on top of that, keep in mind, we reposition the entire um driveways there so that every single one of the units that are in there now, you'll be driving directly into the front side of the front side of the house where the garage is located. And every one of the garages that we have out there is a twocar garage with two lanes to be able to stack cars um for anybody that's parking there.

Okay. Um do you mind pulling up the plan just so Not at all. Not at all. Um I don't know who's got what up here right now. We can probably just go on yours because you did a good job of having those sections highlighted. I don't think we need them. So if it's Yeah. No, that's the old one. Yeah. So that one. Go back one more. Yep. Right there. Okay. So that's the new one. This is the new one. That's correct. Did you want to see this one or the old one? I'm sorry. Uh I mean if the maybe we can show the old one, too. Yeah, let's show the old one first. Um I thought we uh That's the old plan right there. You can't

That's the active though, right? I'm talking about the one. I'm sorry. I was I was looking at the There you go. Perfect. Perfect. Okay. Yep. That's out. Thank you. What a great what a great comparison. Yeah, Hector's got it perfect. So, the one on your left um on the screen is the original concept and you can see all those the buildings that are stacked in the center of the of the community there. Um those were rear entry. So, you'd basically be pulling into those those homes through an alleyway,

right? But what that did was that that had a um a unit count then that was 109 units in that in that area that we had before. So what we did was we reracked it to where every one of the homes are now street facing. We got rid of the alleyway that's there. And so every one of the homes will have a twocar garage that you can pull up into. Um there's 21 less units that exist in that in that project. And then we'll still actually we have as much or more area now. We didn't, it doesn't look like we designated it, but we certainly have areas where if it were something that we were concerned with, we could add additional parking. But the reduction in units that we have there, the fact that you're all twocar garages, you've got two lanes to be able to pull in your driveway, we should we're nicely parked on this project.

Okay. Um, does the same idea of being able to stack cars on the driveways apply to the active correct housing? Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Correct. and the reasoning for leaving those then leaving the the I'm going to call them designated like angled parking you have sprinkled throughout the different sites.

Um so I I guess honestly um it was I think it was something that we had kind of conceptually the first time around. We try to add those different those different pieces if um and quite frankly on our final development plan we may add a handful of them here just because as you can see we do have plenty of adequate space to be able to add off- streetet parking. Um, I would think on this one, honestly, we may have just um not contemplated that we needed it and so we just didn't add it in. I'm not trying to make it sound like it was an oversight, but maybe it was a little bit of an oversight, not having a couple spots. Oh, that's fine. I just wanted to ask because a bring awareness, but b you never know what the anticipated usage or the capacity or last thing you want to do is drive through a street where you're you're like trying to stand between two parked cars.

Well, and that's the whole reason why everything that we bring to you guys is is twocar garages. Um the the communities where you see that that parking condition that exists is almost almost exclusively single car garages. Um you can I mean we can think about a handful of different spots around town that exist where there's parking challenges like that and you end up having more cars out on the road. Um twocar garages we haven't seen that in the communities that we have. Okay, that is all I have. Thank you. You're welcome. Commissioner Chisinski. Yes. Sorry. One one follow-up question and and Jake and and Shannon, I'm going to ask a question to you. Can you pull up in your presentation that chart that you had for all the the price ranges and the homes that were available?

Could you pull that up? And Shannon, can you go to that chart that he has up and point out to me what is the range or what is the missing middle on that chart? Because, you know, to me, I have a hard time thinking 300,000 600,000 is missing middle. But I think for me, I'd like to know what the city considers that so that I have an understanding for myself.

So this is the chart and this is off of um data that I just got in the last week. Um and so this is everything that was active in listings and I didn't get this from the city. So this is my information that I'm presenting to you all. Um when I asked the real estate um agent that provided this information to me what she considered currently to be the missing middle um she said 400,000. So um I mean but the reality is is that so what this shows is you can see the number of pendings

so activity that exists in the market in Lee Summit right now those are pending sales and the vast majority of this I mean it it looks like 70% of the activity or close to it maybe it's maybe it's 65% is is in that 300,000 to 600,000 price point and then as soon as you get up north of 600,000 while you still have a handful handful of um of products that's out there that's when you much fewer um you know much fewer pinning sales and so I to me the missing middle is probably in that three to $400,000 range now and I understand that that may be like a oh shoot it's really that expensive at this point in time but the reality is when the data that came from this month was 620,000 was our average average sales price as far as a pending listing on market

let staff answer whatever they want to

missy middle is a function of structure type uh not ownership type or um price point type. So the missing middle when you consider missing middle it's more of that duplex, triplex, forplex um some of that multi-unit uh structure type. So u missy metal house refers to that like I said multi-unit housing types um and it uh works towards the form of the house and not this the ownership or or the price point of it. So, um, typically when you get those duplexes, triplex, forplexes, it does bring that cost point down into that more, you know, what we consider reasonable, uh, than than say your larger single family lots. Um, but again, it really focuses on that structure type versus ownership or price point.

So, it's really I mean, it's really kind of a fallacy to think that the missing middle is a a price point that we can get younger people in. And so we hear people talk about this missing middle, you're just never going to achieve it because realistically it's a like you said, it's a structure. It's a type of of offering as opposed to a price of offering and it may not just not be here in Lee Summit.

I would disagree slightly on that. Um I I do believe we could accomplish the missing middle when it comes to structure type. um that the the types that we call missing um they're missing because historically they're very common throughout the communities. And given the um historical or more recent development types, we've kind of excluded those to either and focused mostly on single family uh traditional that we would think of and u multi-unit apartment types, not those that middle of the duplex to to triplex, forplex type. Okay, that's where that middle comes from. Okay, that makes sense. I think so. I think I'm following you because

I need to clarify a lot of people talking about it. Yeah. So, all right. Thank you. I'm sure Commissioner Grono, can we talk through just because there's been a lot of changes and there's a there's a

a lot there's just a lot with this. Um no offense to you guys, it's fantastic. Um uh can we walk through the way the um the way things are zoned today and then what we're being asked to reszone? Can someone help us with that? Just more of a clarification to make sure we understand Okay. So, here's kind of what exists now out in that area. Everything is green. Green representing agricultural zoning. So with this application, the developer is requesting to reszone the existing egg zone, the existing egg zone property into three different zoning districts. So at the at the we'll start at the north. So at that hard corner of Hook Road and Southwest Ward Road, there is about 16 acres that's being requested to be zoned for commercial use. and then working our way down kind of to that middle swath where it's primarily going to be composed of the the attached single family dwelling units. That swath is going to um being proposed to be reszoned to RP4. Uh the one exception to the attached dwelling units is that um at this far south at this far east end they're proposing the much narrower 40ft wide lot detached single family homes which are still allowed under the RP4 zoning. So um so that's perfectly in line with what's allowed under the RP4 zoning. And then at the very south end then end

closest to the existing subdivision to the south they are proposing RP1 which is planned single family residential where are the the 50 and 60 foot wide lots are being proposed. Again all single family detached of the same nature of what's to the south. The the only difference is that these lots are going to be narrower than the subdivision to the south but in terms of ownership and housing typology detached single family it's going to be identical. what backs up to it. So, so you've got three bands of zoning is what they're requesting here. You're welcome. Commissioner Frasier. So, everything else outside of that still remains agg. Is that correct? Correct.

Okay. Yes. Questions? Commissioner Yarington. Um for Shannon um real quick uh so the staff re looked at the resoning and has been evaluated for the future future land land use map and is and it alignment is that correct I'm sorry Shannon Hector whoever saying this they're we're asking to reszone but it's aligned with our future land use uh uh map and plan. And

so here's a snapshot of what the current future land use map. So it's it's a mix. So right now this area calls for residential one and residential two. Um so it's kind of a transition area um is the short answer. Um so with this plan then yes I mean right now they are requesting u commercial zoning up at the very top corner and if you were to kind of repaint this they're basically asking to extend this existing residential two color to kind of extend that band working your way toward toward Ward Road.

Right. Um technically this far far south end does fall because it is narrower lot. It does fall within the the minimum lot size range for residential two. But if you were just to look at the housing type being single family detach, it does function as residential one. So there is some there is some change but which we kind of expected some of these transition points to happen. Yeah. But it's generally aligned with the future. Yes. And infrastructure impacts stay the same as we discussed before and nothing changed with infrastructure.

Correct. I mean once we get an updated traffic study if this moves forward as proposed there there may be some additional different road improvements that may or may not be required but but generally yes infrastructure okay would be in place. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

I have a question for Mr. Loveless. Before I ask my question, I just want to say um very nice presentation. Thank you. I I appreciate all the hard work you guys put into it. Um my question is do we have to have RP4 for that product type? So to be clear on on our end, we don't have a preference whether it's RP2, RP RP2 with um with with more um stipulations, you know, variances basically um that are called out. We we lean on staff to make a recommendation to us as far as how the zoning works. And they're looking at it, and I don't want to speak for them, but they're looking at it and saying, "You're giving us a PDP, so you're telling us what's going to be there, right? It's not a, you know, this is what it's going to be." and they're looking at it and saying, "How does this best fit into the zoning classifications that we have today where we have a minimum amount of variances and modifications that are required?" But on our end, I don't care. Okay. I don't care. Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. I Yeah, that's that's what because I this is probably more for comment, but I would like us to use the minimum density zoning that we can use for this just in case for some reason the you just you don't go through with it. We've reszoned it and then we're we're trying to we've already talked about the apartments and how we don't want to do that. Then someone else might be able to come in because it's been reszoned. So, um I guess we can save that for discussion. comment on one thing. Sure.

Um, so to provide a little bit of compare and contrast between the RP3 and RP4, um, staff would also be comfortable going with an RP3 zoning, the one thing that that it would do is that it would need to add back a it would need an additional modification. So the biggest the biggest difference um I guess it' be most impactful to this application if it moves forward is that um the RP4 zoning requires the minimum 3500 square ft of lot area for each individual dwelling unit. Um so not structure. So if you have a forplex it would be four times 3500 square feet to to get that minimum lot area. If you go down to RP3 that bumps it up to 4,000 square feet. There are about 10 lots where if you were to go with RP3 zoning that we would need some modifications on because they're just under that 4,000 square foot. They're actually kind of right between 3,700 ft square feet or so. So, we would need to um create an additional modification which we can do. That's not a problem. We can craft one between now and city council if that is a desire for you to do so. Um so um density they're fine at RP3. Um they can meet for each of those areas they can meet that standard. It's really more at that minimum lot size um um factor where there would be a modification that'd be required.

Okay. Um I I would like I would like to talk about that when we go to discussion. Okay. Any more questions from the commission? All right. I have two two requests to comment. I don't know if there are more, but I will Oh, I actually do have three. Okay. And I will

Debbie Yiddings. I don't want it to take into my time to have him pull up a map, though. Which one? I want the one with the colors. The beautiful colors. His biggest one. Not that one. I wasn't going to call you first. The color. It's okay. What? No. I'm just kidding you. No, I will. I actually was going to call on you first. That one. Go back. That one. Okay. Yeah, that one's good. Okay. Can it be blown up any? Not really. I mean, so they can parts of it can be. Yes.

Okay, that's perfect. Perfect. Perfect. That's perfect. Okay. Debbie Giddings. Again, I also want to thank the the developer and I hope that more developers hear from this developer as far as what the public is wanting. I would have liked to have seen the the pink and the the camel be more uh single family homes because if I was shopping, I'd want a single family home instead of buildings. um the the issues that I have and I just want to propose to you because it wasn't talked about and it needs to be talked about before the final plat just to point out to the the commission um the the road namings are awful um and trying to understand this it was hard I had to come up with an a moniker if you took it ward it's ridge and reunion so writ hook it's common and legend so h c and l that's the only way I could figure out the roads. Um, for instance, if you're going west on Hook and you want to turn onto uh the the Commons, um, right now it shows a right left turn only out of Commons. So, where's O' Cars going to go? That's at least in the revisions of what they put online. um the report off of Hook as far as a light on Hook, they can't do it. It's too close to the intersection of Ward. So, there's not going to be a light on there at any point with shear coming in the way it is. It might work. However, there is going to be a light down here as he mentioned for full access at Ward and Ridge. See, I told you. Um, right now it's just left through with right through and right. If we're going to do that intersection, let's do it right. Do

left and right and through because you know that property on the other side is going to develop as well as they're going to have U-turns there. Well, the developer the developer is going to have to allow property to expand that for the U-turn. So, let's do that right and get that done at the same time. Um the other issues are the the roads to the commercial and that has changed somewhat so it's better. However, the those two roads have right in right outs. That's it. And you're going to have cross traffic because there's a southbound ward that's going to cross into that lower commercial and there's going to be a lefthand west that's going to be coming into the commercial. And I see crossing traffic really close there. And so I don't know. I just think I know before the final plan there'll be a lot of revisions and looked at as far as the roads, but I just wanted to point some of those things out to maybe uh have have it looked at a little bit closer. And I agree RP3 is a very good insurance policy for 10 lots. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Willard, if you would come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record.

Brendan Willard, 1201 Southwest Hook Road. Um, first off, agree do like some of the changes that were made. Um, I still don't think we need commercial on this corner. Uh, there's commercial zoning everywhere with vacant land all around us. If you continue on Hook towards the 291 on-ramp, there's a lot there, zone CP2. Continue down Market Street, there's 15 acres for sale next to the Walmart, zone A. Down south, northeast corner, Warden 150, there's an empty lot CP2. Northwest corner, Ward 150, empty lot of PMIX, which is Arborwalk. Um, southwest Ward 150, empty lot CP2 and PO. Uh, southeast warden and 150, there's already businesses. Um, Prior Road in 150, there's PMIX and RP4. Um, basically there's commercial everywhere around us. Uh, this intersection gets busy and adding commercial to it doesn't make any sense. Um, also density of the homes still a problem. Uh, these town town homes are about 14 ft apart. If we go up Ward to um, PCEL, we can see what that looks like. It's basically a long string of houses with no trees, just a little bit of grass and the back of the house. Um, the traffic study ended at the high school. If you continue north, which is where most traffic would go onward, you run into PCEL, which has the double lights and the crossing for the trail there. Um, and then if you go a little further, you hit Ward and Old Ham Parkway and Third Street, which is the on-ramp to 50 Highway. Those intersections are terrible. They always back up. There's always accidents in them, and most of the traffic from this community would have to go that way because there's no right on there's no left onto 291 from Hook Road. Um eventually with the interchange that

might change but as of now most of the traffic is going to go north on Ward to get to Kansas City or Lee Summit. Um overall I would just see like to see a continued decrease in density um decrease the commercial area because like I said there's plenty around it and also just have a little more uh he said that we shouldn't put houses on the that intersection of Hook and Ward. there are already houses on that intersection and you're going to put commercial across the street from them. Um, so just keep an eye on the people who already live there. Thank you. Thank you,

Janet Garden. Just state your name and address for the record when you're ready.

Janet Carton, 2700 Southwest Ward Road. Um, I think Zach basically said touched base on just about everything I wanted to talk about and I do appreciate that you guys have made some of the changes that that you have. They are better. Um, but I agree that we don't need that commercial on that corner. You go down south on Ward Road, you turn left, you turn right, there's a few restaurants, there's a gas station, there's the Quick Trip down there, there's churches up there, there's um assisted living. Uh, we have all the apartments, town homes, and homes right there. um on the corner of on the uh I guess it's the southwest corner of of Ward Road and 150. You head up north towards Third Street. You know, there's grocery stores there. We got a grocery store just on 150. We got Walmart. Uh there's there's already a pediatrician uh down just down from where uh this Legacy Ridge would be. There's a veterinarian just around Hook on the um road leading up towards just um uh parallel of 291 heading towards uh the Walmart there. And I know when we were here last time, I don't remember who it was, but expressed it really the reason you voted against it was because it wasn't a good fit. And I think we all know that eventually something is going

to go on these properties around us. But it is such a lovely area. And I'm not opposed to having homes over there. I I do think that there still needs to be some some condensing in there and the traffic is a concern. You know, listening to this and all the numbers and all the marketing and everything, I I'm just trying to figure out how I'm going to even get out on Ward Road because now I when I pull out, I have to make a U-turn if I want to go north. So, with, you know, the traffic from the school, everything else going in there, um, it just it it just seems a lot. And then we're going to have restaurants and probably, you know, a Costco going up on 350 and 291. So, there's plenty of commercial all around. We We don't need any more commercial. I would feel better if they would put, you know, other homes backing up to Ward and and Hook. If if that's what's going to happen in there, I would feel so much better about having, you know, another home or I I don't know, coming up with something else other than just a, you know, 13 acres of commercial. Um, so those are just um my thoughts and I appreciate getting to speak and you know we're not um you can't buy you can't make any more land. So there's just uh I I I know people um that have said that when they come down that direction, you know, there's the high school and it's it's nice and you know, they they dropped that property 30 ft to put that high school in there to make it more aligned with what what was around there. Um so um just ask for a little respective for the people that are living there and have built our lives in that community.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Right. Do I have any additional questions from the commission that we need to bring forward? Sure. Chair, if you don't mind. Okay. Commissioner Benbrook. Thank you. Quick question. We looked over the um the addition well I should say the expansion of Shear Parkway, Shear Road um and the connection. Uh do we know how the southward extension off of that new um Shear Road is going to align with this little stub up that we're showing here?

Shear no parkways to the left. Shear roads to the right. This window. Okay. One of the shears, the shear twins. Do we know how that works? Yeah. If you give me one moment, I'll pull that up and we can take a look at it. Yeah, that'd be great. I just want to see that before I

There should be There should be in that presentation there should show it. So, and that was just a placeholder, by the way. All right. So, the property in question um for the application before you today is kind of right here if you can see. Okay.

So, we don't have quite an alignment with that south leg. No. Going into that. Okay. So, and then again, you know, the the project the the interchange uh with the rightway is here. Um, and this is just kind of a general u area that we see the the alignment going. So, uh sheer road and the sheer parkway, this is not completely designed out. This just kind of a a what I'll describe as a bubble um of we can see it going in this general vicinity. So, um yeah u with regards to the application before us today, it's not in in direct connection with that. So the uh realignment of of sheer wouldn't be impacted um here.

Okay. If if we go back to the uh presentation of the application, I've got some some additional questions. Uh if we go back to the site plan that showed the 3/4 access and the full access uh intersections, that would be great. There we go. Previously when this came before us, we were talking about having to make U-turns to get into this neighborhood. Has that been alleviated? I will defer that to the review planner and the traffic engineer.

Susan Barry, traffic engineer. Uh, no, we have not alleviated that. The reason that those are not full access is because they're too close to the intersection of Hook and Ward. So, so we have full access on the on the one that's shown south. That's full access, correct? That's correct. So, where do we have the U-turn to enter this? So, this is a 3/4 access right here. Uhhuh. And then, so that's right in, right out, and left in. Left in. Okay. Well, it's hard to see, but yeah, pretty sure it's left in. And then right in, right out up here by the commercial.

Okay. So, do we not have a a required U-turn to get into this neighborhood anymore? I guess previously there was a re u and and I'm going off of memory, but previously you had to make a U-turn to then access this neighborhood. So I think what you're remembering is those large lots on the west side of Ward will now have a median down ward and we'll have to make a right out and make a U-turn to go back north on Ward. I'm thinking that might be what you're remembering

probably. Okay. So the reason that we don't have full access is um our guidelines for signal spacing is a/4 of a mile 1320. Um and so that is why we don't have that 3/4 access and W road is considered a major arterial and our access management calls for 660 ft spacing between full access and I don't remember what that measures out at but it wasn't 660. And then on Hook Road, that's a minor arterial. 400 ft is our spacing. And then in addition to that, we have the influence area of the intersection. And so think of where all your turn lanes are. You don't want access points because then your turn lanes are blocked or your access is blocked. It just the intersection doesn't work when there's all those access points.

Okay. So, for this neighborhood, if they need to go south, they're just going to have to make their way down to uh this road's not labeled, but and hit the full access. Correct. Okay. And if they're going north, they have access all over. That's correct. And if they need to go east, they've got the the main connector to get up to Hook to go east. And west, you're you're coming out and you're you're finding a way through a field.

Yes. This is this is no different than a lot of neighboring cities that use medians to help alleviate traffic concerns. If you think about driving through Overland Park, there's medians everywhere. There's very limited places you can turn. Um the goal is to have everything interconnected so that you don't have to have a bunch of access points onto your main roads. Right.

Thank you very much. That's all I had, Chair. Thank you. Does the applicant care to respond to any public or commission questions, comments? You have any additional questions, sir? We don't have any questions. It looks like I I think we I have some comments, but Okay. So hearing no further testimony, I will close the public hearing and reopen the regular meeting. Is there any commission discussion or comments on this application? Commissioner Ben Brookke,

I'll kick us off since I kicked us off last time. Uh I I appreciate the fact that um our comments didn't go unrecognized and I appreciate the addressing to the concerns of the neighbors. Um it is much less dense. It is um you know uh getting rid of the apartments is is very nice. Um I didn't think they fit there last time. So seeing it come back with row homes or or duplexes or quads is a lot better. Um as far as the commercial is concerned. I was concerned about it when we had the apartments. Um, I still think it might be a little bit much, but I think the market has to has to dictate that and the market will tell you whether you got too much commercial there or not. I do believe we have enough circulation traffic-wise to support it. Um, I I appreciate the effort. I know it takes a lot of work and a lot of manh hours to restructure things like that. So, I I do appreciate the effort to retool and to have discussions with the neighbors and to bring it back to us. So, thank you very much. I appreciate that. Okay, Commissioner Tazinski.

Thank you, Madam Chin. Um, yeah, I I would like to mirror Commissioner Ben Brook's comments. I think this is a much better product. It it does have more of a feel to the area. And um I really like that you remove that gas station off the corner because that's going to take a lot of that traffic away. And from the types of commercial businesses that that you anticipate will go in there, I don't see a lot of the the traffic demand that you'd need with a Chick-fil-A or a Starbucks or a gas station, a QT or something like that. I think this will be much more mute. I think there's a lot of parking there for that kind of development. So, we're going to have to see how that works. Um, but overall, I think it's a a good development. I think there's going to be some changes in this whole area between Ward and 291 over the next 30 years, especially with all the development that comes in. And I think you'll see more of this type of product the closer you get to 291. I think it's a great transitionary piece that's going to come off of a really cool, I hope, um, entertainment area over there. Um, between 291 and then transition to this, then transition to your single family the further west you go. I think that's a a great planning strategy and I I think our city does a great job with really thinking about that, making those hard choices. Um, and I think this is a really good step. Would have liked to seen the single family on the south side be a little larger to match what's adjacent just immediately adjacent to the south? Sure. Um, would that have been nice? Does it cost more? Yes. Does it fit a price point for this missing middle? Probably not. So, there's a lot of of ways that you have to weigh these, but I think this is a much better development. And I appreciate the developer really taking the time to listen and actually really to get with the public again. That's really important and to have another meeting cuz that that you get a whole bunch of different alternatives, different ideas and different things, but to really take it into into the process and and come back with something better. So, thank

you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you, Commissioner Jana Ford. Thank you, Chair. Um, I don't want to summarize what he said, but I will make sure to say that I do appreciate the the rework and really respecting what the public and us and council had said and try to figure out how to make it fit where it is. Thank you, Commissioner Grono.

I mirror what they said, but I just I want to take a minute to thank you for your presentation. The amount of time, energy, and the information and data that you collected to present to us was great. It was it was a really great um opportunity for us to dig in, look at it, see what you were saying, see your thought process behind it so that we can make some educated decisions. Thank you, Commissioner Frasier.

I agree. I'd just like to echo everything that was said um beforehand. I I I'm I'm data driven and so all of that information and I believe it was slide seven that you you presented was absolutely fantastic and it will enable me to make a better informed um decision days on market. Great. Um I think last time I believe um I asked the question what's the missing middle? Um what are active adults? Um and I like the fact that you know you came back and and you did address um the reduced density. I mean it that that was absolutely perfect. Um the other piece I just kind of want to comment on is um and and I asked this before you know what is is it agg around uh around what we've proposed today the and I think the answer was yes. So, um, that is still going to be aesthetically pleasing, I'll say, um, to to folks as well. Um, the traffic is I I think we just have to keep we have to continue to monitor and continue to watch that. Um, as someone who had a son and had to pick him up on more than one occasion um, at that high school and certain times of the day, it is just not manageable at all. um don't know how you can fix that, but um other than moving the school, but it is I think the the traffic study um and uh the the new development or the traffic that's going to be going down at 291 and Hook will help hopefully help alleviate that. But again, just wanted to to thank you. great presentation, great data that was presented and um uh we need options and and I think you presented that um there there's been a lot of comment you know about, you know, apartments and that sort of thing, but I think you did come back with, you know,

however we define um uh again multi- multifamily, whether it's a a duplex, a town home, and and also the fact that the town there are some that are rent, some that are owned. So, um appreciate all of that. um the commercial aspect of it. I agree a a a sea store probably would not be the right um the right development there, but um the the types of stores that I think you presented or suggested. Um I'm thinking, you know, nail salon or something along those lines. Um I know you can't um specifically define that right now, but um I think that'll work. There seems to be a lot of parking there that may alleviate some of the some of the traffic issues, but um overall I I appreciate what you guys did. You put a lot of effort into it. So, thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Yrington.

Yes, I'm sure Jake doesn't mind getting compliments. Um but thank you uh to Griffin Riley Property Group for listening to the residents, the community, their needs, their wants, um and their vision. That's really important and and it's important to us as a commission as everyone has said already. Um, so I appreciate that. Um, and the staff staff uh recognizes the reasonzoning is um in alignment with the future land use as they as we discussed. Um, as consistent with the comp plan infrastructure impacts, we're addressing that. Um, and so I I don't see an issue whatsoever with this um to reszone this from egg to RP1, RP4. and I'm glad that you are open to maybe a change to RP3 as well as the the staff in the city. So, I don't know how we gonna we're going to narrate that or or move that forward, but um I have no problem with the RP1 to RP3 or 4 as well as the uh commercial CP2. So, thank you very much.

I would I guess I could echo what I've already said, but I I won't do that. Um, I really like the fact that you went back and worked really hard on this and listened to the neighbors. I I think it's so important um when when we um have these meetings with the neighbors and and just the whole you're being a good neighbor yourself. And I know that there's concern with the neighbors with the commercial. Um I I do see I think there's a I think there's a place by Culver's off of 50 highway and is the Todd is that not Todd George that Ranson. Thank you. Um there is not a lot of traffic in that area where you have the commercial there by Culver's and um the tractor supply store. So, I think the the nice part about that will be that residents can actually walk to those places and that that's kind of nice on a nice day if someone wants has an appointment there at a nail salon or whatever, they can they can walk. So, I I like that. Um I would say the I will concur with Commissioner Yarrington. I'd like to see us reduce that zoning so that like I said, well, first of all, zoning is so important. It's one of the most important things we do and it doesn't make a difference to you guys and your project and if for some reason the project didn't go through, we aren't we aren't looking at an applicant coming to us with more apartments because we've said that we really want to get that missing middle and um that's actually on page 162 of the Ignite plan and I've studied a lot about it and um that was one of that was the recommendation when we did the Ignite plan. So I'm really happy to see you address the missing middle. So, I would say if we don't have any more any more questions or I mean comments, do if we want to change that,

do we do that after we close the public hearing or do we do it now? You'll close the public hearing. Um someone will entertain a motion at that point. Um if someone makes a motion to amend that to downzone it to RP3, that you can do that at that time. Okay. And do um I think Hector mentioned that there's going to be additional modifications because of that. There there will be an additional modification that will be required. Um but uh we I think we have enough guidance to if you do choose to go with the RP3 um between uh tonight and presenting to the city council, we can uh craft that language um and present that at that time to them.

Okay. So hearing no further testimony, I will close public hearing and reopen the regular meeting and I would entertain the motion and modification and I Mr. Benrook.

Yes, I will read the motion. Um, chair, I move to recommend approval of application PL 2025079, resoning from AG to RP1, RP4, and CP2 preliminary development plan, uh, Legacy Ridge 8, sorry, 813, 8:15 South Hook Road, Griffin Riley Property Group, applicant to the planning commission meeting of Feb. Am I reading the right one? Yeah. planning commission meeting of February 26, 2026 to allow for submittal and consideration of the revised application. Did we did were we going to look at that RP3 and change it from C? But I have to read it and then somebody

somebody has to Yes. Second. Okay. So now at this point someone can make a a motion to amend. Okay. That chair, if I may make a motion to recommend a revision. Do I have to read the whole thing and then with the added revision or can I just like specify? I would just make a motion to amend the uh present motion to reduce the RP4 to RP3. I make a motion to recommend a modification to reduce the resoning of RP4 to RP3 keeping all other resoning the same.

I second. Okay. So now we'll get a vote on the first motion and then the second after that. Is that correct? You will vote on the second motion amending the first motion. Okay. Okay. Ed Harrington, yes. Sherry Frasier, yes. Dana Art, yes. Jessica Golo, yes. Tanya John Ford, yes. Chip Tazinski, no. Randy Benrook, yes. All right. So, the motion with the modification has passed. So now you will need to um take action on the original motion as modified. Okay. So we just take a vote on that one.

Correct. Okay. So can we get a roll call vote on that one? Ed Yarrington? Yes. Sher Frasier? Yes. Dana Arth. Yes. Jessica Gau. Yes. Tanya Jonathan Ford. Yes. Chip Tazinski. No. Randy Benrook. Yes. Okay. So that is passed and we will move on and we will thank the applicant once again and we will move on to round table. Do we have any?

Yeah, I just want to be careful when we go and decide to change zoning based on not liking it because of some other potential future reason that may or may not occur. because all you're doing is adding more um what are they called? More uh modifications. So, why don't we just call everything RP1 and then add 50 modifications to it to allow? And that that to me is frustrating because if a if a development comes in and and the staff recommends a certain zoning because of the way the development is and then we just have to go and add more modifications to it just to get it to where we want it because we're afraid of something, then you're I don't think you're doing a disservice. I think you're doing a disservice to staff. So, I think we need to be careful on that. And the reason I I voted no wasn't because of the development, which I thought was great, but it was because we're changing zoning because we're afraid it's going to be apartments. Um, when this developer came in and said they're going to develop this, this is what they want to do. So, I think we just need to be careful. And I would be more than happy to hear a rebuttal on that. But I just think we need to be careful on on making these kind of changes. uh uh because I I think we shouldn't be I mean we have to add already so many modifications to begin with and so now we're just going to approve something else so we can add more modifications to it. So just make everything RP RP1 because that's really what you want and then add a million modifications to it. I think that's what you're trying to get at. So

that's not I would say it was really about protecting us if this application didn't go through because we've seen cases where we go with highest density and then we've made a zoning we've made a zoning change and we can't we can't go back on that unless somebody comes to reszone it to something else. But it's really about that. It had it's really not about the developer. It's about if for some reason the project doesn't go through and experience has taught us that we have to be super careful about the zoning the zoning changes we make.

Yeah. But the developer brought the development to us with lots that were substandard size which caused it to be an RP4. So that's the category that it brought in they brought it into. So, if that's what we want, well, then we should tell the developer to make all the lot sizes equal to an RP3. We shouldn't allow just this this kind of change because you're afraid it's going to be apartments down the road because that's really what this comes down to.

I I was I wasn't afraid that it's supposed to come into apartments. I was being um uh receptive to what the developer saying as well as the staff. They had zero problem changing it from RP4 to RP3. That's why I recommended and I didn't have an issue with it. But that's it's not scared. I'm not scared to develop something that because it's it's going to develop into you need more more land, right? So you couldn't probably produce a category 3 uh apartment in that instance. Correct, Shannon? Um, so

because that that kind of um defends district, the the application before us fit more neatly in that district with the fewer modifications. Can I make that the subject application fit into RP3? Yes, I can. Um, I just have to add a couple more modifications. So, it's less clean. Um, in that sense, um, all development is tied to the approved preliminary development plan. So whether it was RP4, RP3, if it's RP4 and this uh particular project does not um come to fruition, any new development plan would have to come back before this body to seek um uh new entitlement because it would be uh you know going from the RP, the the structure type, the homes, the density here um to apartments would trigger what we would call a substantial change and that would trigger a new PDP to be heard for um the planning commission, city council with all um public notices and mailings and notification requirements. So So that's where I'm coming from.

I hear what you're saying. Yes. So we if that's the case, then it would come back to us anyway, right? So I you know I just think we need to be careful. That's all I'm trying to say. Um the city I believe is they are trying to do the best thing for this community. And some may disagree with that, but again, now we had something come in. We're going to add a whole bunch of more modifications to it. So, um I I all I was offering up is something we should be concerned about and we should we should take caution for doing that. Keep doing that in future reference. Yes.

To get clarity. Um when we get a PDP and that it stipulates and as reszoning, are you saying that the reszoning is tied directly to that PDP? or is it like development of that land is tied to the PDP. So the zoning will stay in place. Um so Commissioner Arth is correct. Okay. Um but the development of the land is tied to the PDP. So significant or substantial changes from that PDP would trigger a new requirement for a new application. Why is that? If a development doesn't fall through like if it falls through

um why is the remainder of the project the reasonzoning? Yeah. So, it's it's two different things. You got two different processes going on here. You got resoning and then the pimary development plan. So, the resoning just kind of reszones the property. It says, "Hey, this is the zoning district. Um, and here's the the development standards within that zoning district. The PDP or the plary development plan is what we look at to um identify the actual development of that. So that's where we um have our criteria of what is substantial and what is not substantial or what is a a substantial change and a minor uh minor change. Is that kind of like a cart pulling the horse sometimes though? Like

they're very intertwined and and they go hand in hand significantly. Um but there are triggers built into the UDO that protects against a bait and switch if that's what you're asking.

Okay. Thank you. So, I just have a couple just a question slash comment. You know, even if we're protecting for something that I mean, let's let's let's be honest here. You know, apartments are the trigger and that's what's happening in 2026. 20 2030 it may be completely different. And so, if we're saying we're trying to protect it from moving to apartments, then in 2030 we're going to want to I mean, it's possible that we might want to flip it anyway, right? To to change it. So to me, I guess I think it's excuse me unnecessary. I like to streamline a process. I don't like saying here it is, but yet you have all these modifications that are attached to it. That's my thing. And and to your second point, you know, it's like Yeah.

But again, and I don't mean to be rude, but that's what you all voted for. You voted to have more stipulations on something and when you just said you wanted streamlined. I know. So that's where I mean I'm following you and that's where I I issue us caution because it I think there's enough safeguards in place that if something falls through and something else comes significantly different it's going to come back to us anyway. I I just offer and I you know I I I'm a passionate person but I just offer us I'm just trying to be I'm trying to offer us stick to a process consistent process. I I I hear what you're saying. Any more round table?

All right, I'm gonna adjourn this at can. Yeah, Miss Tracy Allers, I was at the Lisa EDC meeting on Friday and it was fantastic. And I don't know if anyone else saw you, but I want to give you a quick shout out. You not only made me laugh, but you brought me to tears and it was so good. So, thank you for representing us all so well. I echo that. I was there as well. That's nice. Miss Alers brings me to tear that, you know, in a different way. It was a positive experience for me. I absolutely loved it. So, she is great and is absolutely a um asset to the community for sure.

Well, he's not here now. Um Jessica wanted to tell Jake or we thank you for your service, but he's not here. on the record and it'll be in the Yes, we we can put that on the record. Good idea, Commissioner.

All right. So, I'm going to adjourn this at 7:43. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat.