Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

e e e e

e e e e

e e e e

e e e e

e e e e

e e like to call the like to call the January 27th 20125 city of gardener Planning Commission to order would you all please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance to of the United States of America and to the rep for it stands one nation God indivisible withy and justice for all start with roll call starting on my right commissioner Berg presid commissioner cols present commissioner Sila here commissioner junman here commissioner Mater here commissioner vmid here forum is present um move on to the consent agenda all matters listed within the consent agenda have been distributed to each member of the Planning Commission for study these items are considered to be routine and will be enacted upon by one motion with no separate discussion if separate discussion is desired on an item from either the Planning Commission

or from the floor that item may be removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda and we just have the standing approval of the minutes from December 17th 2024 any uh anybody from the commission like to anybody from the floor okay hearing none I'll entertain a motion on this I'll make a motion that we approve the consent agenda I'll second it have a motion by commissioner Mater with a second by uh commissioner bonmi all those in favor I I opposed motion carries six to zero moving on to the regular agenda we have item number one Intermodal Industrial Park item number 24-34 d07 rezoning preliminary development plan preliminary plat this is a public hearing item and item number 24-34 d10 final development plan and final plat located at the northeast corner of the intersection of 175th Street in CLA Road staff presentation good evening Commissioners happy day after Sunday football again item uh number one is the uh 24-34 07 and 24-34 d10 uh we thought we'd go ahead and put these both together uh but they will be two separate uh motions at the end uh first uh 07 is for zoning the preliminary development plan the

preliminary plat and then of course the second is for the final development plan and final plat as you can see from your screens the a modal uh Industrial Park consists of approximately 186 acres and is located at the Northeast intersection of 175th Street in Clair Road East of the park is located within the city of ala and is zoned M2 actually I'll tell you what let me just go to the next screen here east of the park is located within the city of Alan Zone M2 General indust industrial and uh the red portion that fronts on to 17 f is Zone BP which is planned Business Park uh South is rur County Rural uh and CP3 city of Gardner plan commercial District which was the clar crossing development that came in last year uh East is uh is a property uh and red almost kind of triangular shape uh it's C it's Zone cp2 uh which is city of gardener planned General business however that uh that plan expired a long time ago so as mentioned before this side contains approximately 186 Acres total square footage uh planned uh for this development is around 2.8 million square ft uh total planned open space is 55.7 Acres or around 30 uh% of the total site the Pate plat will consist of eight

lots and seven tracks uh those seven tracks are generally for uh the uh private Street uh located within the develop and the tracks mainly again open space and also for retention all utilities are available to this site the final development plan which is lot one of the development which is located at the very Southeastern uh portion of the preliminary so the final development plan again is uh wat one uh and the proposed development is a 468,000 ft building and the final plat uh will consist of one lot and three tracks as you can see it kind of uh goes up with the tracks to the north uh that's really for the offsite uh retention that's will be needed for this uh development of lot one uh lot one is approximately 25 acres and again uh the tracks are for storm water retention and for Private Drive the subject property was de Annex from the city of ala in October 2024 and then uh subsequently anex by the city of Garder uh later on in December of the same here uh prior to the annexation the city of ala Was preparing to hear an application for Industrial Development on the site uh the plan before you tonight is roughly the same uh that was submitted to the city of OA at the present the property is

undeveloped staff findings that uh we found that both the plary and final development plans are in substantial compliance with the Land Development code site is capable of accommodating the building used in Access and will not negatively impact RightWay or adjacent properties the project is generally consistent with good planning and design the proposed use is compatible with uh what a lot of the surrounding properties and what is being developed especially to the north and to the east they did request uh two deviations uh the two deviations being requested are B basically in the same uh under the same code uh one is for massing and the other one is for transparency uh the massing uh standard is for all Street facing facades uh shall break break down components of the main Mass with a single wall panes longer than 100 ft by using at least one of the following uh the wall planes uh this this building is almost half a million Square ft and for them to break that down into smaller links would have been almost impossible for them to do but uh you know the the bearing roof line and the required spacing uh uh is is not met but based on the large scale this building then the Tilt up wall construction type this requirement is not necessary staff believes that enhance facade material and colors changes along with building setbacks from the public realm provide an adequate appearance for a warehouse uh staff is support of the variance dealing with massing uh transparency the standard is uh 15% at all Street facing

facades um while they don't meet that they they're at 5% but we measure our transparency rates 2 feet to 8 ft and we all know that these house buildings are upwards of right around 30 30 ft in height if we were to take all the glass and transparency that this that this proposed building has uh it'd be at a total of 19% so it's well above the standard but it does not meet our guidelines in the in the Land Development code uh the applicant has had uh has enhanced the Landscaping along clear Road and hundred 75th Frontage and which also helps block the view of the bay doors uh the staff is also in support of of this deviation request staff recommends approval of the applications 24304 d07 and 24304 d10 a resoning pimary development plan preliminary plat final development plan and final plat with conditions listed in the recommended mode motions put the up thank you Bob um if the as if the applicant is here tonight would like to make a presentation uh please come forward uh state your name and address for for the public record hello my name is Darren alang I'm a development manager for patony development my name is Jud Clawson I'm

with Phelps engineering of civil engineers and land servers for project with us tonight is also my business partner Dan Finn serves as a project civil engineer record and the project manager so um okay great you got the screen up and um uh so I work for pan development we're a uh worldwide developer we have 16 offices in the United States uh our corporate office is in Southern California we also have three offices in Canada and I believe there's nine in Europe um so we do and this is 95% of what we do is industrial uh all over the country we do it for a lot of big clients that um that have us build these buildings all over the place um we're owned by one person his name's Carl panon he lives in Florida uh he's quasi retired he's somewhat retired his son is taking over the business and he um is running his name's Aiden and um we uh yeah and then there there's all of our offices um the St Louis office is where I'm from and uh we do we cover kind of from I would say Ohio to Kansas City and then probably the southern border of Missouri up to almost up to Canada taking Chicago out of it so we cover a pretty good part of the country so great thanks Ken um just kind of some followup uh from Bob's presentation um try to skip over uh anything so it's not a repeat but uh it's uh basically as uh presented here about 2.8 million square ft of new

industrial uh type buildings uh kind of the smallest one is about 100,000 square feet larger the largest one's about 500,000 square feet so kind of a a mix of different um building sizes for the different types of tenants that we see in the market uh some of these buildings may be split Tendencies uh as well so it may not all go to one it just we don't really know yet but uh that's uh kind of what we see in the market on this uh there's eight buildings uh planned for the site and as Bob mentioned there's 186 total acres here um bounded by Clare Road on the west and uh Interstate I35 on the north um and then uh 175th on the south and really kind of that half mile line uh with OA there uh on the Eastern side and then it jogs up around the new Coca-Cola plant uh there and ties back into 167th Street up at the top of the page there uh so that's the overall boundaries of the overall Park and this map shows the plan phases uh of each of the buildings in the park and I'll just kind of walk you through that a little bit uh the first building is in the lower left southwest corner phase one there building number one lot one and that's the final development plan before you tonight is is for that building and then we'll be coming back uh to the city uh for approvals on the subsequent building but our plan is is uh come in off of 175th Street there'll be a new Private Road uh going north um on the east side of lot one there uh that lines up with the with the road that was approved with the plan for Clair Crossing to the South and it's just right to the west of the power line easements that run all the way up and down through the there and we've been

coordinating with everg on those appr approvals and uh we have preliminary approval from them for the plan here we still have to work out final details for um Transformer locations and things like that for the plans yet but uh uh all's looking great uh on that standpoint and then we'll continue to build um Road a to the north uh the next building will be uh in that northwest corner uh shown as phase two there and then we'll flip over to the east side and build the two buildings up the east side there and then continue our way to the north and come out the north end up there by phase five um with the project this plan also shows various Road improvements all around uh the project that have to be built at different stages there was a very in-depth traffic study that was done and coordinated with the city for turn lanes and um signals and all those things come online at different points when the traffic starts to Warrant their the necessity for those but at least with the first phase there's turn lane improvements there where the new Drive comes into uh 175th there's turn Lanes um um along Clare Road there um and uh and then as more buildings come online and traffic becomes heavier then there's the need for signals to come in and and those types of things and they'll be updated traffic studies at each stage to to document kind of how things are planned so um I'm going to continue on here um preliminary plat um kind of shows you know where the various New Lots and and tracks are um you see the power line easement running up along uh the east side of the the tra h Road that's in there and then there's a Southern Star

gas pipeline that runs kind of at a an an angle parallel with I35 and you can see it there on the south side of lot five and seven and that's a utility we've also coordinated with as far as encroachments uh there's uh overall landscape plan uh for the plan for the park with the not only internal uh plans but also uh plantings all along the internal roads um along 175th Street you see there on the south side of lots one and two uh um the plantings there along the street and on the on the west side of lot one and the Northwest building there along the east side of Clare Road the road plantings and stuff all along there for screening and buffering and there's a lot more detailed plans but that's just kind of the overview uh this is the detailed plan for the first building phase one um so with this project here uh this will be U we will build you know the section of the private drive going north off of a 175th there that's shown on the east side of the building it'll terminate for today in a temporary turnaround and then it eventually continues to the north as as more buildings come online we'll continue that road further to the north uh it has um parking for employees and visitors on the West and East sides of the site of the building and then truck docks and trailer parks on the North and South sides of the building and you can see that overhead power pole and evergy power line eement on the east side there kind of for for reference Clare roads on the left side the west side there and 175th on the south this is the final plat for for this uh first building will obviously be rededicating right away through there

and then um platting the lot and platting the we'll actually plat the track for the entire length of the Ring Road up and around just just not build all of it at this point in time um we'll also include a storm water detention parcel at the very Northern end of the site it's sort of at the top of the page is that triangle that you see up there that's a storm water detention Basin that will be built up front and then as new buildings come online it's already sized for those other buildings that go into that particular Basin so getting that work done early uh and upfront so that kind of saves on future grading down the road and such uh there's a um a landscape plan for uh lot one this matches the preliminary plan there was a a a new sheet on your chairs I believe um tonight when you came in um this replaces the landscape plan that was in your packet um that was included by air it does did not the old one did not match the plumbery plan this one does so this is a more detailed landscape plan calls out all the spe and stuff and it complies with the pimary plan that was part of the packet so we wanted to make sure that you had the right landscape plan as you were review on this tonight um as you can see not too uh exciting but this is the floor plan for the the warehouse um potential for offices typically in the corners uh of these types of buildings and depending on the tenant needs you know those offices could expand further and such but typically the offices are on the corner elements of the building and then the warehouse space is on the obviously the the mass of the building in the center were also very detailed elevations that were provided uh that Bob also spoke to with with uh the plan and talked about the deviations uh we

worked through you know the those architectural comments and and uh concerns with with staff and arrived at what we feel is a good compromise on the on the building design it's very aesthetically pleasing uses good materials and colors um and with that um I'll just kind of close with anticipated schedule because we always get asked about schedule timelines and stuff obviously we're here tonight for our first entitlement approval with uh what you've seen uh we would then go to the February meeting for city council and um while that right after that we'll be um going to the airport commission and then the board bard of County Commissioners uh since this project lies within one mile of New Century we have to get that approval while that's going on we'll be feverishly working on doing um plans permit plans and coordinating with staff the final design details and going through permitting process um we'll obviously be pulling land disturbance permit first so we can start moving dirt kind of when the weather breaks here for the spring uh put in sewers and the utilities and and masquerading of the site and then following that with building construction we'd anticipate uh um starting construction uh sometime in April or second quarter um of this year and then uh we'd like to have the building done by the end of uh the fourth quarter so hopefully by the end of the year we'll see U how that goes so that's kind of the overview big picture-wise and Darren and I are available for any questions and uh we'll go from there right thank you um I think we'll probably hold off on questions for now we'll open up the public hearing and then then we'll go through questions and might have you guys come back up

question thank you all right um uh since this is a public hearing item we'll now open the public hearing if anyone would like to comment on this item please come forward and state your name and address for the public record um individual I believe are allotted uh 3 minutes and then individuals representing a group um seven minutes can I ask a point of clarification so that the just for my clarity and those that might be watching um this this is a a a rezone preliminary plan and the preliminary plat Al together in the public hearing correct and and the rezone is because the land came over as what OA had annexed it into that's what I'm just I'm trying to understand the process it can be it be a little confus yeah so the the rezoning is actually triggered because at the time of Deann xation from that OA zoning is is lost right so it reverts back so it reverts back to a County zoning District okay and therefore by coming into the city it retains that County zoning until a development proposal comes in requesting a resoning okay to our to our standards because otherwise it's in the county I believe Bob said the r the r okay just wanted to conf it's in so because it wasn't updated in ases for me to check yeah it's ases does not help us when it's this kind of the record caught up yet yeah because they a lot of times they're getting the records from the various cities or the county and yeah as they come in that's

when they get triggered I was really lost in the minutia I just wanted to make sure because this is a little something different than what we've seen so I just in case others might have had the question on what we were having the public hearing for correct so it it is on the rezone from the county R to this District that's being proposed proposed with the preliminary development plan and flat so those comments would be entertained as part of the public hearing yeah we'll entertain that and and even if there's comments on any of the package you know including the final that's why we kind of package the presentations together because sometimes there may be something that comes up that affects both the documents good good point Thank you thank you sorry for the the interruption apprciate theity um seeing as no one is approaching the microphone i' entertain a motion to close the public hearing so moved second uh motion by commissioner Mater to close the public hearing with a second by commissioner Sosa all those in favor I I I opposed all right motion carries 6 to zero close public hearing um all right uh commissioner discussion we'll start uh on my right commissioner B I have a couple questions um and I'm not sure it's for staff or not I saw on the overall site plan it has a notation says alignment by others what does that mean I see which where on the plan are you talking about just to make sure that we're all looking at the same thing um looks like the street is it 167th and southedge Lane say future head HED Lane by

others you're talking about on the far East side of the of the document I think Jud I I can speak to that uh so um the city of OA over there is realigning a Hedge Lane in 167th with that location uh we showed it graphically for reference to so you know people looking at the picture know what's going to happen there but uh we're not designing that and this that's not part of this project so that's why the reference to others is was no okay okay thank you um I noticed on the Landscaping plan it says FF uh that stands for finished floor elevation I believe okay it it's probably a carryover notee from the from the grading plan that the landscape architect likes to use uh the Contours from the grading plan as he's laying out the planting plan so he knows if he's planting in a flat area or slope so those types of labels come over from the grading plan okay all right thank you yes sir those that's all questions I have yeah a couple of questions I'm gonna ask the obvious uh why are you here and not in AA can we gain a bit of understanding as to how we got so lucky to have this conversation not early so that's not part of what you all are deciding the question yes here C and then I'll I'll also just add to that just for clarification on those things those are likely conversations between the client and the City of OA they're not necessary for our public hearing purposes it's that both those parties agreed to that situation so um I can't even say that we necessarily

know that much about it as staff I thought you might say that I understand um so maybe I'll try to ask are we open to the city policy guidelines on irbs in this discussion no also not part of this so anything that comes into that element ising all that is the city council decision okay you guys are just looking at element of it yeah of where the fun the buildings are coming from if at all the buildings could never get built hypothetically you can still approve the resing so uh what about occupancy of the future buildings could you are tenants tenants of course uh are there any tenants identified are we open moving on so I I can I can make the comment that the the tenants will have to be consistent with the plan that's being put in front of you and approved so any tenants on this would be in would have to be in line with that zoning category that is being asked for usually um I think it's fair to say this first building even though it's the final plan I'll mention of this is a speculative building I Believe by that by that applicant so I don't think anybody's been identified at this point in time for those that may happen as future phases come along though right so as each building comes along it may not be a SPEC Building it may be a custom build so that's the options I believe that the applicant has available to it I'll let you that's I wasn't sure if you already had it I'll maybe add a little color to that as well no there are no uh tenants identified at this point in time typically rfbs from prospective tenants

come out um um and provide that you know the building you know must needs to be occupied say like in six months or something like that so typically developers have to build things uh speculatively so that they can meet the RFP requirements for the tenant to be able to land them um I will tell you though that this building has a you know typical uh design to it that would appeal to uh the vast majority of tenants that would want this type of space as far as you know clear height in the building uh dock spacing trailer storage uh you know parking for customers parking for you know those types of things have been factored in to make it widely popular among the rfps that uh patani would expect to receive to be able to compete uh in that market and bring tenants into this facility no that's fair U what about the buildings you said the first one targeted to be done by Q4 of 25 uh I would imagine all eights are dependent upon occupany so this might be a very tough question to answer but in maybe the best scenario looking at even inside of the 10year window when would an ideal goal for all of the Lots you're exactly right commissioner is totally Market dependent we've got to obviously lease the first building before we go into the next one and stuff but ideally I mean it'd be great if we could just go from one building right into the next and you can kind of see here this one building was about a year so it'd be great if we were building another one in 26 and another one in 27 or maybe faster uh I mean right and uh that's that's what we would love to do and I know panani is really wanting to uh bring some great high quality tenants here to the city and uh would love to build this

park out just as fast as the market will allow us to do it I will had commissioner Colmes um as part of the staff look at the adjacent land uses in that we took a look at the aims Aerials for about the last I I'll say about five years or so and as you know just from seeing it there's been significant growth in this type of use in this Southern OA area all the way down um and it's kind of amazing how quick the market has put buildings into place over the last five years here so I think the city anticipates that that kind of pattern that you're witnessing out there today would continue but again it is very Market driven right there's oh on this one there's also you know the competition between the Commerce Center at the airport south ala this area um is all going to be competing for different users at that point in time yeah I mean they're certainly they're they're surrounded so quick question about the construction jobs uh I I saw and of course the I'm getting to traffic that's where I'm going nothing um I saw in the uh the meeting minutes or agenda packet from 21st that uh was 1200 plus construction jobs that are going to be inside the first year um would it be fair to say that assuming buildings are going in every year that that 1,00 plus construction jobs or new jobs to the area is is a fair f safe assumption we're making that's all we're making anyway right I can't really answer that one I'm going to pass to well I tell you what let me let me give you the point to the question because number it matters but

ultimately I'm talking about any of the traffic that's going to be created by the new jobs and of course uh any of the tenant traffic and I know uh we have um I forget the date but we passed an ordinance to do some construction there up at two I believe Claire road if I'm not mistaken but could we could you talk a little bit about the responsibility of that stretch of roads and ultimately any any traffic concerns that may or may not come out of sure I'm going to interject for a second just to help with this because there's actually several phases to consider here there's the construction stage traffic then there's kind of the during build right as they increase with each phase of the project and then also there's the element of coordin coordinating with the development of the South which is clar crossing which is also approved here um there's a variety of things that are going to happen along these adjacent roads so like during construction um as part of the public Improvement permits and as part of of the um design criteria that the city has the applicant or those in the construction side will have to make certain safety improvements that were coming out of the traffic study anyway so they're going to have to do some of those improvements adjacent to the existing Road or as part of the existing road but then there'll also be construction entrances and different things that may not look permanent initially because they're really designed to keep things like mud and other things and debris from getting out on the road so you might see the gravel type um and I when I say gravel it's the large ab3 elements there to help knock the mud and dirt out of tires before they get on the road stuff like that so during construction they they will have to accommodate for that Workforce

obviously to park off the roadways they won't be able to be on the streets themselves and also they'll have to have entryways and things like that that meet those construction guidelines standards at public work has for that phase of the development so in case I they may have an answer more of the overall view I just wanted to give you the technical background of what the city's going to be requiring no that's fair I appreciate it and so is it probably fair to say that the the thousand plus I mean to your point it's going to be in phas not like a thousand plus people that would be are are coming into the construction site the same period I think that's probably meant more as kind of an overall from start to finish you know you've got obviously sheet rockers that are working on the building but they're not there when we're pouring foundations you know things like that so I think that's kind of meant to be kind of accumulative over the entire construction of the project but Dave's absolutely right um you know day one when we show up you know the the excavators are going to be there and they're going to pull in and and unload their scrapers and back hose and things like that and start working and um I would imagine that you know we'll have site access probably off of CLA Road at least initially and do a construction entrance on that West Side to come into the site CLA roads fairly low in traffic volume at that location being out there a lot I just kind of makes a lot of sense to have your construction entrance there and then you know then traffic can come out and to and from 170 F stre at some point we're going to be constructing um the private drive a which is the north south road on the east side um and once that gets put in then we've got another access point there to access the Eastern side of the site as well as other areas of the property that need to be accessed at that point and we can put in the permanent drive on on CLA so there's

kind of a staging that will happen uh with the construction Improvement so that it always that we always have some type of construction access uh that's available that's U authorized by the city as part of the construction PR permits um to be able to safely access the site get workers in get Workers out and then obviously we have to have the public improvements completed and open to uh traffic and accepted by the city before we can get our certificate of occupancy and start bringing you know tenant people in and their customers and their employees and such so certainly does that help answer your question it does maybe uh I I could I I think I have more question questions and I probably can get answered but uh I'll I'll close with what responsibility does the city have as it relates to the the transportation maybe the city and the county with of course I'm talking post construction with things that are obviously when they're done and active so there's a couple things that are going to go on through this project um the and I'm going to kind of start with the city and county portion of this the city is already beginning to look with the state at The Interchange at 175th and I35 this this whole stretch from there to the eastern city limits which are now the eastern boundary of this property as we look at that that whole stretch of 175th street is getting evaluated um and so Public Works is already looking at what that may be as an ultimate configuration the current County Carnet plan which is their driver for arterials shows 175th ultimately as potentially a six Lane arterial at that point and I think Claire is shown as a four-lane in that Carnet plant um initially each developer along this

stretch will have responsibilities and obligations regarding the peripheral Road improvements we in our code have a requirement that the developers that are adjacent to these arterials contribute to that peripheral Road cost to improve the road they have to make their safety improvements obviously to accommodate the development so things like the turn lanes that um Mr cla's talking about as well as some other elements the signalization and things those will all have to be done as part of those safety improvements driven by the sa traffic study but in addition to that there is that per peripheral Road cost which goes from the center line to that half of the road that is adjacent to that development so Clair Crossing has the same situation to the South right so they they are obligated to make contributions in escrow either to that or to build that road to a certain approved standard in this particular case there's not a traffic enough traffic driven I I want to take this back in this particular case you have actually three contributors of traffic you'll have City oriented traffic that are citizens that either may live in the area or come to work in that area so there will be a public element to phasing or to phasing and also the cost payment of this but then each developer is contributing kind of based on their development impact and what their traffic studies are showing and what we believe is fair but the third component to this thing that's difficult to assess is 175th Street traffic if you look at it is coming from Missouri Overland Park you know all the corridor OA it's cutting through here those cities will likely not contribute we will probably as a city be looking for funding from the county and some other things we have to make arguments to get that so there

will be a a public component taking it to six Lanes probably at some point in time this development in and of itself as well as clar Crossing does not drive that six Lane solution now they do have some obligations at the intersections because of turn movements and the need for additional pieces to that as well as some of the signalization that's being triggered by those two developments but not all the traffic on 175th Street can be attributed to just this development or to the development of Clair Crossing or the properties to the east associated with grata so we try to figure out the proportionality of that and yeah help to get to a formula that basically says this is your contribution so Public Works had figured out a cost that they're working on with each of these developers to say here are the assumptions this is the costs We Believe are your contributions to that and then that's generally going to be put into an es grer dedicated to these specific segments of roadway improvements as they're able to be made so since these properties I'm sorry for the long explanation no no this is really good this is help we don't we don't encounter this very often at Planning Commission this this is a little unusual I I'll I'll I'll I'll wrap up quickly since these are adjacent properties is there again just looking back at responsibility in the future of traffic and who is is going to be part of it the city of ela and us would there be any sort of I mean there's Coca-Cola developments there's obviously FedEx and other developments that are Ian a thousand yards away that are increasing the traffic so when you look at 17 fit in general I guess my question we're talking about a 10year plan uh is the city of ala or is it just Johnson County and us that it would

probably involve all all of those jurisdictions because once the 175th Street if ala continues to Annex and they're on both sides of 175th Street generally the county drops out of responsibilities for maintenance and for upep but through the Carnet plan we can apply for funds from the county and the cars it actually becomes a cars program at that point in time carip is The Guiding plan document but the cars program as well as Mark funding potentially in this scenario so it could go as a joint project with multiple jurisdictions it really comes down to what length of improvements how far does that project take us um we have started that discussion with the state obviously at The Interchange because of the development interest that's been going on here we have control of 175th street from The Interchange to this boundary basically Al though there's still a piece of this that's also um where epic landscape is that's still in County so that's still an unan nexed area and then you have OA to the further east of that property um I think the issue will be if this is approached as one large project 175th Street corridor from The Interchange to I'll say 169 right Highway that may change the way we approach funding and what the roles of each jurisdiction is and how this goes about it could be that because of the development pressure at this intersection between the interstate and here that you may see the city say well we know we need to make these improvements because we've got citizens in Rada and the Treadway now we've got development interests with the commercial development that we need to bring our portion of it in line so we may have to bring segments of it in at a time um I think the city's goal in the

whole process has been to try to find a way to do as much as possible as early as possible so that we're not dragging this out for 10 15 20 years in projects like you've seen in other places right where it's this half mile and then all of a sudden it's the next half mile and so on so forth so we've been trying to work on ways to get either multi-jurisdictional cooperation or some kind of supplemental grants through Economic Development funds at the state or whatever we can to help with getting this pushed along as quickly as can mean we've seen it's really easy for the de developer say that's not my problem yeah and then It ultimately is the community's problem so correct uh thank you this is my last question um the the funding that's proposed for for this the 10-year project is that from the date assuming there would be an approval is it from that date to 10 years or is it by individual building project is this all one big project I'm talking about the IRB that's up for discussion no no so I'm I'm trying to I'm trying to ask as it relates to the building of each one of these eight buildings okay so this is coming to you as one whole resing one but they're going to come back and do culinary plans basically for each of the phes is that fair yeah that right so every way he broke it down into buildings earlier you're going to have a new meeting for each time they go through got it that preliminary final plan landscap plan all that probably get tired of this at all yeah there'll be there'll be a final plan for each of this is one preliminary plan tonight for the whole area sure yeah all right I'm I have no

further questions at this time oh okay I had a few questions but they were basically covered by Commissioners Berg and comms the only one that I have left is about the transparency I know it's being reduced from 15 to five I just wondering what was the purpose of the change are you guys trying to save try to meet Energy Efficiency or is that for materials privacy what was the reason some of it is efficiency and the the other part of it is privacy I mean a lot of these big Warehouse users they don't want a they don't want an off lot of glass they like glass at the office areas where the people are mostly sitting and working but in the warehouse area typically they don't like it and and a lot of and sometimes they even have us covered up because it's a security risk for them I mean it's a security thing yeah so yeah I just want to add that I think from an economic perspective I think it's great that such a a large development is coming to to Garden we taking advantage of the you motor is five minutes from here so I think it's great thank you than you yeah thank you um chair I've got several several questions okay um so my first question um I think we had a new piece of something on our uh desk this evening landscape plan what was different um in this one laying on the that stamped January 27th compared to what's in here so there's this is a little bit confusing but I'll do my best so the preliminary plan package and the final plan package came in is two separate applications

initially the preliminary plan package the landscape sheet in the preliminary plan that one is the landscape plan it's being proposed for the overall development okay when the final plan came in it was noticed and didn't get caught until today so it was noticed that the sheet that's the landscape in your final plan had not been updated and adjusted to match the preliminary plan so that one sheet is just a replacement for it the biggest change I think and Jud you may be able to to respond to this too the biggest changes that that sheet aligns with the preliminary plan which met the comments that staff had provided proposed to their initial submitt that they gave us the initial submitt had more deciduous trees to it and we wanted more of that landscape screening because of the dock doors facing 175th so what you you'll see or notice the most about the changes is the fact that there's less deciduous and they beefed up the um actual screening with some of the evergreen trees and things like that yeah that that's a fair statement Dave uh it just basically it was a different design uh meant for a different city um and we needed to have the plan updated and it was included by error um and so we needed the plan updated to match the prary plan that is in your packet that is correct so we didn't want to get out of syn on the Landscaping yeah so that's why staff Bel we could give you that sheet because if you looked at the p plan that it this aligns with that so you're you're seeing both sheets they're both the same these two sheets yeah I mean it has the same stamp of the same date landscape architect both in the 16th but these counts are

different so it looks like it's less we're going from more to less this one aligns with your preliminary here because there's no there's less than what there was originally there are less deciduous trees and things like that yes but it be up the I I just did a quick look I didn't have a chance because it's like we got an extra one here we went down by I don't know 12 same same went down by one same same went down by 27 I don't know I'm quick math I'm not good math went down by two went down by seven same yeah went up by one so we have one that went up right so this is the current where we have less trees so what I'll say is the deciduous trees definitely were what would weuse well everything was except for the last one or in the top one this your this sheet should be toss but but why did go previous requirement from different commun saying that they needed more trees so what we write under their code so when they was looked at by the city of O under their code they had different requirements than what we have morees screening but we also had made comments initially on the initial submitt that brought them up to our standards that's correct initial subm we had G standard that that new sheet yes sheet yes minim yeah those Meet The Gardener standards and we just wanted to make sure our final plan for lot one um I'm sorry speak up a little bit we just wanted to make sure our final plan for lot one matched the the preliminary plan so that we weren't out of sync on it so that's all we were doing is making sure

that our final plan matches the preliminary okay yeah so I was I was comparing it to what was in the site plan and that's the final plan sheets there so that's why it changes on the final but it's a site plan it's not a final development plan it's part of the it's part of their final development plan packet but it says site plan on here yeah that's what the sheet will say but so the development plan includes architectural elevations and site plan and grading plan and a lot of other plan sheets as well I guess I'm just typically used to seeing it as you know literal final development plan called out and all I have is a final plat and here's my preliminary but this is still in the city of ala dated this September 26 what's G I mean the dat CL so my final class right here and this one does say the city of gardener that

so because it's a different city reement we can always it's right this is the only thing final for this this is final the S lots of different things thanks for getting down I thank you for working with me Dave you know I always okay okay all right okay that helps clarify that thank you so much yep okay um and then I had another question about traffic study um I read the uh the minutes from the city of ala Planning Commission meeting and um they approved the the rezone and um preliminary development plan and one of the conversation topics was traffic and I saw in our motion or suggested motion right um that that the construction plan it's within here um location of proposed traffic including but not limited to a whole list of things right so it's it's only being reviewed by public works so Public Works is are they yeah so Public Works is responsible for any of the public improvements in the arterial rways and things like that so they're the department an agency that has the responsibility for reviewing all public Improvement plans and that includes Drive approaches that may be within the right of way that includes turn lanes that includes any kinds of enhancements to that roadway so their staff handles What's called the public Improvement permit section of this the language that they have asked that that we put in there is very

similar to the storm water language which is above that there's a condition in there they're starting to standardize their comments so that everybody understands that just because you see this in this concept form in these development plans when they start applying the technical specs there may be some changes that occur so you might see Drive entrances that are not exactly what this drive Insurance looks like from a width standpoint or from a a curve radius standpoint so they've started kind of putting those out there so that the engineers and the designers know that they have to go to the technical specs to make sure they're Meeting those requirements within the right ofo so this this plan will require actually I believe it requires quite a significant area of RightWay I think that's being asked for on 175th Street and so part of the concerns are you're going to have extended drives in there for a while right that are not part of the roadway system but they're in the RightWay so they have to be designed and located correctly in order to work as as kind of that I'm going to call it an interim kind of Drive because what'll happen is under the public projects later where Lanes may be added that drive will shorten that throat will shorten to the Drive Entrance because you're adding more Lanes to the roadway itself so that's why that language is is being recommended within there it's it's going to probably become on projects of this scale on arterials you're going to probably see that same kind of standard language because there have been times I will say this I've worked in other jurisdictions where somebody has taken the site plan and they'll come back and go well we don't need to do anything to change it this is what got approved well

there are a whole bunch of constructions uh specs that the Public Works people have on storm water traffic those kinds of improvements that they will enforce during that public Improvement section okay or that public Improvement permit yeah process sorry just hoping you know this is a very very large scale item that we've never seen at least I can recall from not time not the city garden never and so I just feel that due diligence really needs to be done um and traffic on 175th right now is already terrible it's terrible so I can't imagine a development of this size going in without extreme due diligence done on 170t that that road is a nightmare this is this is going to be and I'm going to I'm going to expand it because for us as planners and the Planning Commission um our concern is not just right here with this one development right now it's really from I'll even say from Cedar Niles which is where you go into the McDonald's or the Walmart entry there so from that Cedar Niles area all the way to this Eastern portion um we are going to see a lot of development in interest in the coming years here and and I'm not talking decades we're we're seeing the inquiries we're seeing the interest and therefore you're absolutely right the coordination level of this is going to be really really important and I think that's another reason why Public Works is saying they going I want to get some of these standard statements into these planning approvals so that there's no surprises when these folks come in for their applications and all the specific construction drawings start coming in and they've got to meet those standards so they should be designing to those things I'm just a little surprised that something of this size Planning Commission didn't see a traffic study or

anything relative to that no traffic study was submitted as part of this and it was considered there something I I I did some digging on the Ala city of ala no yeah it's not in your packet but typically what happens storm water reports and traffic studies are reviewed by the technical staff at Public Works to Ure that they're meeting the requirements to allow you to see that so okay so we will see them you will probably see traffic memos and things like that with later phases of this there is a traffic study already here for the overall development the preliminary traffic study has been done it's been reviewed by public works and they found it acceptable for meeting all the requirements that's what's driving things like the right turn lanes and the traffic signalization and everything like that that's all coming from a very large technical document that quite frankly even for planners I look at some of it and I have to rely on a traffic engineer to tell me okay this is what they're actually suggesting so the the the basis is being used is what was built as the foundation when this is already seen at a different mic correct correct so it's unusual for us to necessarily bring you the whole traffic study because they're they can be hundreds of pages long and a lot of it is very technical and um if we we have it some points allowed like the engineer for the developer might explain or answer those kinds of questions or I think we've had past instances jud's been involved with these where we've had the traffic engineer that did the study come in and talk to you on those yeah this is this this project is a large project there's no doubt about it it's larger than most I will tell you the the technical foundational side with the storm water um as well as the traffic is getting a lot of scrutiny okay I mean it's okay the hard part right now is we're all trying I think to figure out okay how does this all come together

given all the development interest that could happen with some of the commercial activities and things that we're we're anticipating lots of lots of moving Parts lot of moving Parts absolutely um one other just a comment on the on the rezoning um I had noticed again I read the Planning Commission notes there were stipulations put in as far as like um no poultry packaging no um Bus Barn no there like certain uses and it sounded like there was agreeance to that um from o again it's a different municipality but keeping us within guard rails of what do we really want um you know the city of Garder to see from I35 you know you want a meat packing plant I mean teach their own but this is you're never going to get bare back okay you just you can't unless you demo the building and start over but and and two that to my I didn't do my homework thoroughly and recall what um what restricted uses are within Gardener MP to so that might already be covered and its moot point so I'm going to give you kind of a two-part answer okay thanks one one part with OA oa's code's very different for the zoning category that was being asked for so there may have been uses in there that are listed that we do not have listed in the MP agree too um the other part of it is as part of this development plan as you know when we go to these plan districts this is going to be the regulatory plan so if something is proposed let's say of a spec let's say they get somebody who is interested in doing a use like that but it changes the building footprint significantly or it changes the fun function around it significantly they're going to have to come back through for

Planning Commission at that point so every one of these Final Phase items so phase one we kind of know will be this one building in this format which is going to limit certain uses automatically so we're not too worry about it but each of those next phases as they bring final plans together and hopefully have somebody or they're looking to serve some particular use we will have the opportunity to eval valate that and possibly put a limitation that it's for that use or it's for those uses at that point in time so we'll we'll see those at different phases I think it's it's fair to also say that this has been an issue of discussion that we've had with the applicant regarding what we believe are appropriate uses and not appropriate uses here sure okay um just one more super quick note um it I thought I saw in the phasing plan that for the what we'd be seeing final tonight were there additional tracks associated with a final for tonight yeah so and I think the applicant mentioned this I think Bob mentioned this too so there's three other tracks and so when you if you pull that final plat sheet that's real elongated the three tracks are the roadway uh what would be the private roadway track okay so that'll be a private road that kind of goes goes on the east side of this phase one lot one curves up and around the two Lots at the top of that are or tracks at the top of that are for storm water detention purposes so we at the city require that those be dedicated at this point in time so that they can do the design work because this lot's going to ultimately drain to those facilities plus as U the applicant mentioned there'll be a number of other Lots at a later stage that'll

also drain into this but by dedicating these tracks now we can have access to those if there's something that comes up after it's put in place so let's say that um I hate to say this but I will say it let's say this is the only building that's built okay and nothing ever happens which I would hope doesn't and I know the applicant hopes doesn't happen but if it does these dedicated tracks allow us then to monitor that storm water system to make sure functioning correctly gives us the ability to enforce upon that lot owner the improvements or the maintenance elements that they would have to do to keep that going so hopefully that makes sense perfect yeah that makes so much sense I think I'm good on questions thank you guys for standing up and entertaining questions I know it's long one thank you no problem thank you I don't have any questions by the other commission um I just had a couple questions um uh one just kind of like relating to the the private Street um what was the kind of is the reasoning behind that basically we don't want to have a public Street connecting over to oa's like 171st Street what's the reason for that so I think there's a couple things going on and I'll the applicant can clarify these but I I will say the city because this does not this roadway as proposed would not connect to any other public Street the city did not want to accept maintenance responsibility for that roadway and the costs that are associated with it we felt the private development should deal with those costs in that situation um I will say that as the development pattern seems to be unfolding in OA there is likely not going to be a roadway to connect to at least at this point I think at one time they were talking about it Jud I don't know if you want to expand a little bit on that or not that's correct at one point in time there was going to be a

road on that half mile line yeah between this project and the the existing building to the East and the Coca-Cola project it doesn't look like that road will ever come to fruition so this road just kind of comes back into the Northeast part of the development and just sort of terminates at the last buildings there so made sense for it to really just be a private uh drive at this point that's maintained by the Association where everybody chips in and pays for their Road and stuff so uh lessens the tax burden on uh gardener taxpayers yeah it's less sow plow maintenance we don't have to worry about heavy Hall destruction of the road what you know build a shortcut for somebody else and yeah um I guess just a note like for the you know I know the with the 175th and I35 area area plan um it talked about being a regional commercial area um I just appreciate the staff's explanation and Report just kind of going through the reasons um I guess for real quick could you kind of give like broad Strokes like because I think think the regional commercial said M1 was an appro would fit under that category but M2 technically does not um can you different can you give me the just high level difference between those M1 and M2 so some of it's some of it is looking at it from the perspective at the time unfortunately the way the Subara plan was done they used kind of different what I'll call different terminology right they didn't they didn't exactly say okay this is this they kind of just said well it's this is what it's similar to or this is what we think it is when we looked at this scenario we did take into account that that was kind of I would say maybe more equivalent to the M1 zoning but then we started looking at what's going on with OA as well and and that being that close that adjacency and what's happening there we felt that we

could go to the M2 district with this as a staff recommendation at least to say this is kind of in the character of what you're going to see right next to this so um again the uses themselves will probably as this unfolds we will see what's approvable and what isn't Meeting those things but is it like a general like size like square footage of the of individual buildings maybe like no because these are still individual so these are still individual buildings that would fall under our I believe our general industrial building type yeah so I just needed to check that I'm using the right term there um so the general industrial building type all of these seem to fit under that category and that's where their that's where their architectural will be evaluated is with that okay um I say thank you for addressing kind of the evergy concerns I know we had a development to the South um and just dealing with the power line want to make sure those those it was really kind of interesting um because when that development to the South was going through the city process last year yeah or so maybe about a year ago I can't remember exactly but uh we were um coordinating with everg on our part uh while we were in ALA as well because everg was talking to both of us so um really helped you know coordinate that and and I I will tell you that as they get into construction and improvements they will have to provide letters of um approval from both Southern Star and everg quite frankly sometimes I would say the Southern Star easement there there the gas easement they are very stringent about Crossing and design criteria and all kinds of uses in proximity to those pipelines so um that will be a requirement as part of those permit approvals to make sure that all of that's on file and it'll be the same with evergy because they'll be

protecting an easement that's that's a pretty large transmission area so yeah um yeah and I guess just kind of the final comment I guess I'll say is like I know there's a lot of a lot of discussion on here about maybe things that aren't pertinent to the Planning Commission but I I don't see any any reason why we can't approve the rezoning and the plary plans and the final plans from the discussion things not here um I guess there's more discussion continue that I might I might have Jesse do you want to put up the recommended motions just to see so people can understand and and see that because I don't know that those have been up yet so as you can see oops for the rezoning preliminary development plan and preliminary plat we have a motion with several conditions uh commissioner Mater was referring to a couple of those in regard to the construction elements there again don't be shocked on these kinds of large projects we are going to probably see more of this kind of standardized language as part of conditions just to make sure everybody understands that when they're coming to public Improvement permit time everything's going to going to meet those text specs or at least be meeting the requirements that Public Works has at those points in time so that's why that's there I believe the other condition Bob mentioned was the airport commission and County Board uh approval which is pretty standard here and then at this point it would be approval of the requested def uh deviations per the staff comments and report so um this is also one of those that if you're inclined to utilize this motion you do not have to read the whole Mo the whole motion you can cite that the conditions and and just another thing for clarification since the second motion for this the yeah the second part of this would be contingent on the first

part would have to be AB absolutely so we we do Run final plans simultaneous like this we we've done it for other projects the final plan though does not go to city council so what you would have tonight is um through the preliminary plan if you were to adopt the motion the suggested motion that goes to the governing body then for their decision making the final plan what we do here is there's a condition that should be on there that you have to get that approval it's the first condition that's listed there so even if you approve this final plan tonight if they do not get approval at the uh governing body for the preliminary plan it does not matter that this has been approved by you because we do not have an actual approved preliminary plan at that point that's why that condition is in there does that make sense we're good okay so we would need to separate motions and we would need to take action on the preliminary first sure there's other questions CH sh I can make that motion after review of application 24-30 4-07 resoning and ass preliminary development plan and preliminary plat for in modal Industrial Park the Planning Commission recommends the governing body approve the request to reone

186.22 mp2 planned General industrial district with the associated preliminary development plan and preliminary plat subject to the following four conditions as outlined in the staff report second all right we have a motion made by commissioner Mater and a second by commissioner Sosa all those in favor I I any opposed opposed extensions motion carries 5 to one sure that was commissioner holes yes okay just want to make sure thank you right um since that motion carried U we can go to the final um development plan and final flat motion I'll make that motion after review of application 24-30 4-10 final development plan and Associated final plot for Intermodal industrial park and staff report dated January 21st 2025 the Planning Commission approves the applications and proposed proposed as proposed sorry as proposed and recommends the governing body accept the dedication of right away and easements provided the following conditions are met items one through five in the staff report second we have a motion by commissioner maor and a second by commissioner Sosa all those in favor I opposed oppose extenstions motion carries 5 to one all right I think that's the end of our regular agenda tonight um staff any any discussion items um just very quickly we will have a February meeting so there will be a February Planning Commission meeting I believe February is it

24th we double check my schedule yes February 24th um currently we have one item on the agenda it is for a phase one final plan associated with a previously approved uh Fairfield development so which you might recall it's been a little while since that one's been before us but that's an area that is um jent to ederton just south of Cherokee um popper is the road that comes down to that area there so that's what you'll have before you at that planing commission uh in February that's all I have tonight all right thank you um with that I'll entertain a motion to adjourn make that motion second okay motion by commissioner comes with the second by commissioner Mater all those in favor I I opposed carry six to zero