City Council - Regular Meeting

14:46 – 15:15•HSHillary Shields

We pause for a moment of reflection and gratitude for the opportunity to serve our community. Grant us wisdom to make thoughtful decisions, humility to listen with open minds, and courage to do what is right even when it is difficult. Help us to treat one another and every member of our community with respect, recognizing that while we may not always agree, we all share a common commitment to the well-being of our city. May our work tonight be guided by integrity, compassion, and a spirit of service, and may the decisions we make contribute to a stronger, safer, and more welcoming community fo

17:02 – 17:31•HSHillary Shields

Thank you. So I want to say a big shout out to LS Goal, who's been hosting a whole series of really amazing Football Friday events. The last one is going to be this Friday. So if you haven't had a chance to come out to Green Street, they've been having watch parties and kids activities and face painting and bubble guy and all kinds of stuff. So one last chance to do that. Also have Farmers Market Wednesday and Saturday. And then finally, I want to say Good luck to Council Member Pryor's daughter who's playing in her all-star game tonight.

1:28:38 – 1:29:04•HSHillary Shields

Thank you, Mayor. So we talked a little bit about the but-for test, which I understand doesn't apply specifically legally in this case. But can you talk a little bit, or can the developer talk a little bit about if this type of a package wasn't approved, what would it look like developing this property? Would it happen at all? What kind of a time frame? What would be different if there weren't this financing structure in place for the public improvements?

1:30:36 – 1:30:54•HSHillary Shields

A follow-up first. Yes. But if a council for, I understand that we've approved a lot of these over the years, but if for some reason they wouldn't approve them for any projects, would the property develop at all, do you think? Probably not. Okay. Because that's part of why it's been vacant for so long is the lack of infrastructure.

1:31:01•HSHillary Shields

Okay, and then if the developer has anything to add.

1:33:01 – 1:33:15•HSHillary Shields

And I would guess, or maybe you can confirm, like, being able to know that you've got the funding to construct all of Todd George Parkway at one time, it's probably more efficient, cheaper to do it than to do This section, then this section, then this section, is that?

1:33:45 – 1:34:11•HSHillary Shields

So yeah, it is significantly more efficient for both the city as well as the developer to do it Cohesively and then when we talked you've talked about I think mr. Bush I guess do like the connectivity of trails planning the parks selling the property of the schools Streets utilities all of that. Is this something that if you were to sell it off bit by bit by I can imagine that you could have an idea of what the master plan is, but it'd be harder to implement?

1:35:40 – 1:36:16•HSHillary Shields

Okay. This question is probably more for Mr. Bushek. So if we wanted to put in all this infrastructure without this kind of financing plan, like if the city, because we have like a capital improvements plan, but if the city just said we're just going to build these roads and the sewer and then hope that development follows, how would that impact our taxpayers differently? I think that would be the existing taxpayers paying for everything versus just having the folks developing this land paying kind of for themselves and leveraging that through the incentive process. Is that kind of accurate or

1:38:14 – 1:38:34•HSHillary Shields

Right. I think I've just got one more, and then I'll stop. Could you go to slide 16, the one that had kind of the cost-benefit analysis? So right now, per year, this entire 1,000 acres is only producing $4,000 in tax revenue. That's all the jurisdictions, right? Correct. That's the city, the state, everything.

1:38:37 – 1:39:27•HSHillary Shields

Okay. And then, as far as the benefit to the developer, both the improvements that are going to get built, the tax abatement, all of it, there's no risk to the city here, right? Like, we're not writing anyone a check. you build this and your property values increase such that your taxes would increase some of that will get spent on improvements some of that will go to the taxing jurisdictions and some of that will you just won't have to pay that's the abatement right yes that's correct and but there's never like a time when the city might be on the hook to put money down to make this happen it

1:40:02 – 1:40:47•HSHillary Shields

And so if it's successful and everything's built out the way that they're hoping, the city could go from that $900 a year to over the 30 years, let's see, we've got 63 million in pilots and then the 20 million single family and the 197 million sales tax. So if everything works out, the city could see significant more revenues. If nothing happens. and this doesn't develop, we stay at our $1,000 a year. And I think I've asked this before when we had kind of more conceptual, but the city feels like those revenues will be adequate to pay for any additional services, any additional police service, fire service, water utilities, staff, that those revenues will be more than enough to cover the additional burden on the city?

2:00:19 – 2:00:44•HSHillary Shields

Thank you, Mayor. I actually just had a couple of follow-up questions kind of based on some of Council Member Rader's questions. When she was asking about whether there were any additional incentives that might be requested, on that slide 15, there were some items that had a double star by them that said these would be... office and retail for business attraction evaluated case by case. Can you explain just a little bit what that those double stars kind of mean and what that would look like?

2:01:01 – 2:01:19•HSHillary Shields

So I guess I had understood your comment before to be like an industrial component, excuse me, can come in and say we need more than 75%. So are the numbers that are the 75 industrial, 50% residential, are those set in stone and the only thing that's negotiable is the office and retail or?

2:01:21 – 2:01:57•HSHillary Shields

Okay. Okay, thank you. I just wanted to clarify on that. And then kind of following up on the I-470 question, there is that Struther Road interchange that was constructed several years ago. Correct. So I know that doesn't fix all the 470 issues, but it seems like that was sort of constructed to plan for development in this area. So right now it just kind of goes – I mean, I'm not going to say nowhere. There's development on one side of the road, but on the other side, that interchange is just not really serving anything currently, right? I used to work up there, and it always seems strange tha

2:02:04 – 2:02:15•HSHillary Shields

But I'm just saying like, like just, just the left of where your, your mouse is right now. Like there's, we put in, or somebody put in that big Strother interchange. Is that, that was anticipating this area development?

2:02:35•HSHillary Shields

Okay. So we can always do better, and I'm sure the mayor talked a little bit about what we've been working on with 470, but it seems like some of this is anticipated in terms of the infrastructure that's already been put in?

2:45:58 – 2:48:16•HSHillary Shields

Thank you, Mayor. So, I will be supporting this application. I think that this is, we've talked about before when this has been presented to us in a conceptual form, this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. It's an opportunity a lot of cities never get to be able to make this kind of proactive, forward-looking, master plan development of this amount of area. We've seen the charts. I don't think we saw them tonight, but if this PRI land, land reserve land, was a city in Missouri, it would be, I don't want to misquote, but around the size of Grain Valley. It's... huge. And it would be irrespo

3:08:04 – 3:08:16•HSHillary Shields

Thank you, Mayor. I move for a second reading of Bill number 26-120, an ordinance approving the Arborside Land Clearance Redevelopment Authority LCRA Redevelopment Plan pursuant to the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority Act and authorizing and directing further actions in connection therewith.

3:13:06•HSHillary Shields

Thank you. I move for second reading of bill number 26-121, an ordinance approving the petition for establishment of the Arborside Community Improvement District and authorizing and directing further actions in connection therewith.

3:46:51 – 3:47:33•HSHillary Shields

Thank you, Mayor. So generally, like when you say that you recommend approval with these conditions. That's basically saying like under the comprehensive plan or strategic plan, the UDO, like when you compare this project to that, it kind of ticks the boxes of something that meets the requirements that we have set out for you, right? That's kind of what you're saying? Okay. So as far as like condition six, for example, about the rear facade and the types of materials, The reason why staff is not recommending that is because it doesn't match the new material requirements that we adopted. I think it was just a few months ago, something like that.

3:47:34 – 3:48:37•HSHillary Shields

Is that right? Yes. OK. So would that then be a policy consideration for us, whether we wanted to keep that requirement in or modify? Is that within the discretion of the council to say we want to strike or modify that? Yes. OK. But staff, just based on the current UDO, Our recommendation is to keep it because it'd be consistent with this, the letter in spirit of the UDO. Okay. Um, condition eight about the canopy. You said you feel like that's basically been addressed. Um, the ordinance, it looked like that the ordinance attached to our packet didn't have that is. Yes. So would that condition

3:50:36 – 3:51:16•HSHillary Shields

OKAY. THAT WAS GOOD. MY NEXT QUESTION IS, TO WHAT EXTENT WOULD IT INCREASE THE COST TO DO WHAT'S REQUIRED UNDER THE EDO VERSUS WHAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY PROPOSING? AND SO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE AROUND A $2 MILLION COST INCREASE? AND I THINK THE STAFF'S PRESENTATION, THE PROPERTY THAT'S BEHIND YOU, THERE WILL BE A PRETTY LARGE BUFFERING OF LANDSCAPING AND THE TENSION, I ALWAYS GET TENSION RETENSION MIXED UP, BUT THE KIND OF OPEN AREA FOR WATER CAPTURE. SO THERE'S ALREADY KIND OF A LARGE OPEN SPACE AND ALSO The property that's across the street is industrial zoned, is that right?

3:51:29 – 3:51:43•HSHillary Shields

So your position is kind of it's the folks who are traveling on the road, they're already expecting to see industrial buildings because it's an industrial area and it's just not that many. CARS A DAY THAT SEE ANYTHING AT ALL BECAUSE IT'S A LOWER TRAFFIC STREET.

3:52:09 – 3:52:51•HSHillary Shields

That makes sense. Appreciate it. And then I guess kind of back to staff. So it seems like for us, the question that we would weigh with this is what's intended to be accomplished with the four-sided architecture in the code? Is it worthy of a modification in this case since it's facing an industrial area, lower traffic street? Do we kind of grant a variance given that General this is our requirement, but in this specific location. It may not make as much sense That's kind of the policy decision before us for that specific item Yes, and if you would choose to do that, then you would just amend

4:08:34 – 4:09:51•HSHillary Shields

Thank you, Mayor. I think overall, this particular use in this location, I think, makes a lot of sense. This almost feels like a discussion that we have a lot in terms of, will rooftops bring commercial development or not? And in this case, it seems like they have, that there's a lot of new rooftops going in right there. And now we've got a grocery store and some other retail tenants that want to come in. seems like we're kind of achieving a goal that we talk about a lot here. I think in terms of grocery store on high traffic, Douglas, near a lot of housing, near the school, to me it makes a l

4:24:39 – 4:25:00•HSHillary Shields

I move to second reading of bill number 26-122, an ordinance approving rezoning from districts PI Plan Industrial, RP4 Plan Department Residential, and PO Plan Office to CP2 Plan Community Commercial and Preliminary Development Plan for Dillon's on approximately 15.71 acres of land located near the southwest corner of Northeast Tudor Road and Northeast Douglas Street, all in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 33, the Unified Development Code of Ordinances for the City of Lee Summit, Missouri.

4:25:07•HSHillary Shields

So I'd like to make an amendment to that requirement six. Do we have proposed language for that, for a motion? Excuse me.

4:25:40 – 4:25:58•HSHillary Shields

So I move to amend approval condition number six to state that the western facade shall contain one class one or class two building material in at least two colors comprising at least 50% of the primary facade area. Does that work? Yes.

4:46:32 – 4:46:53•HSHillary Shields

Thank you. So in terms of the cost that this is going to be funding, so it looks like there's the off-site improvements, the streetlights and things like that. And then there's also the site work. So is this a particularly challenging site to develop because of the topography? Is there something particular about this store or would it be difficult for anything to go in there?

4:49:03 – 4:49:56•HSHillary Shields

Sorry, I know it's late. How about this? I am not opposed to the package overall. The percentage seems fine. If it comes back, I would like to understand more fully how this complies with the laws and how it would be structured because those are not questions for 1035 PM, but there are questions that I will have. And then a similar question probably about the rear access drive, because that doesn't necessarily seem like a public improvement. Some of this just seems like normal site work. So I just want to understand to what extent these are extraordinary issues. It sounds like they're not maki

4:50:19 – 4:50:34•HSHillary Shields

Generally, yes, at this level around the 14%. doesn't give me heartburn. And the clear public improvements in terms of new street lights and things like that, I have no issue with. I just want to know more about the others. So that's all I have. Thank you, Mayor.

5:08:27•HSHillary Shields

Thank you. I move for second reading bill number 26-123, an ordinance accepting final plan entitled Limone-Smith Business and Rail Center Track Day as a subdivision to the City of Leasel, Missouri.

5:08:54•HSHillary Shields

I move for second reading of bill number 26-124, an ordinance vacating a portion of a certain easement located at 201 Southwest Oldham Parkway in the city of Lee Summit, Missouri.

5:09:22•HSHillary Shields

I move a second reading of bill number 26-125, an ordinance vacating a portion of utility easement located at Park Ridge, 8th, Platt, lots 370 to 379 in the city of Leesmont, Missouri.

5:09:47•HSHillary Shields

Move to second reading of the number 26-126. An ordinance accepting final plat entitled Hook Farms 3rd Plat Lots 216-258 and tracks MNNO as a subdivision of the City of Leeson, Missouri.

5:10:13•HSHillary Shields

Move for second reading bill number 26-127, an ordinance accepting final plant entitled Eagle Creekville as first plat, lots 1 to 51, tracks A through E as a subdivision to Lee Summers, Missouri.

5:10:47•HSHillary Shields

Move for adoption of Bill Number 26-116, an ordinance vacating certain utilities in the Old Village Development, generally located south of Highway 50 and west of Highway 291, south of the City of Lee-Summit, Missouri.