Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

call tonight's meeting to order. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

As we begin our meeting this evening, I'll take a moment to acknowledge that we have a quorum of planning commissioners present with six of nine in attendance. Commissioners Corcoran, Landon-Burgitta are unable to attend this evening. I want to thank everyone in the chamber and online for attending this evening's meeting. Planning commission meetings are an important part of the process for interpreting and applying the city's comprehensive plan and unified development ordinance. It's important that our meetings are conducted with dignity and respect. That applies to every person in attendance. We strive to provide an atmosphere where the ideas and opinions of all participants are held in the highest regard. And finally, the actions on the issues we discuss are ultimately under the responsibility of the city council. As a planning commission, we're here to help the council as our elected representatives to be fully informed to make the best choices for our city. By statute, the Planning Commission strives not to engage with any party on the issues on our agenda prior to our meeting. Should that interaction take place as a result of a business relationship or any other interaction referred to as ex parte communication, Commissioners will report that interaction when we reach that item on the agenda. We'll now move on to the consent agenda, and this evening we do have three items on our consent agenda. The consent items that are listed are considered routine by the Planning Commission and may be approved in one motion. There's no public hearing held for any of these items. There will be no discussion unless the Commissioner requests that a specific item be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. Commissioner, do you have any issues on the consent agenda that fall under the category that you'd like to pull for additional information or questions from staff? Well, seeing none, I will call for a motion on these items. Do I have a motion for the consent agenda?

Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we adopt the consent agenda as submitted by staff.

Thank you, Commissioner Trones. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner Chapman. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. That motion passes 6-0. Move on now to our regular business, and this evening we do have one scheduled public hearing. The first public hearing is a request for the approval of rezoning for the row at Uptown southeast of 133rd and Blackbob Road. Mr. Jury is here to present the case. Welcome, Nathan. No.

Is it on now? Perfect. Okay. All right. Thank you, Chad.

Welcome again.

Good evening. Nathan Jury, Senior Planner. Before you tonight is a request to rezone a property from the Ag or the Agricultural District to the PD or Plan District, and also to approve a preliminary development plan for the proposed 133rd and Black Bob mixed use project, also being named as the row at Uptown. The subject property is generally located at 133rd and Black Bob Road, highlighted in yellow on your screen, located at the southeast corner of that intersection. It is five acres and does include an existing single-family home on the property, as well as some trees. The applicant is proposing and requesting to rezone the site from the Ag District to the PD District to allow them to pursue a mixed-use development. The property is between commercial zoning and uses to the south and west as well, and residential zoning and uses to the north. It's also adjacent to an Ag Zone property to the east that houses Evergy's substation. The planned district or PD zoning is not one that we use too often, so I do want to provide a little bit of explanation on this use or on this zoning district for the record. The UDO does provide the PD district as an option to encourage innovative land planning and design that is not possible under conventional zoning districts. Applicant is pursuing this PD district because conventional zoning does not allow for their requested townhome and commercial uses on the same zoned property. So every planned district is unique. The UDO does require, and this is because the UDO does require each PD to establish their own zoning standards applicable to just their lot. The applicant did submit their proposed zoning standards for your review in the document entitled the zoning design standards for the row at Uptown. It's in your agenda packet. The proposed standards do establish land uses, setbacks, site and building design and other requirements as outlined in the PD district for our requirements for the UDO. To go over some of that, I'll provide a high-level overview of the proposed standards, but the easiest way to walk you through that is really just to give you an overview of the site development plan as well at the same time. So first and foremost, the applicant does want to create a walkable mixed-use development that allows both commercial and residential uses. The applicant is proposing to limit land uses on this property to those in the R3 district, as well as those in the C1, except for a couple uses that don't necessarily make the most sense next to residential, being animal care with outdoor kennels, as well as drive-through uses with the traffic and how tight the site is with all the drives being accounted for. So that's their proposed uses. In terms of their site development, they are proposing to provide two access drives off 133rd Street. The development will install 133rd from Black Bob all the way to the east property line. Full access will be requested on the Far Eastern Drive with limited right in, right out only access on the Western Drive closest to Black Bob. Two commercial buildings are proposed on this project with a little over 5,000 square feet and commercial building area. There are five, three and four-story townhome buildings with a total of 44 dwelling units. And the development also includes three active open space areas as well. For the proposed standards for the PB district, applicant is proposing to provide a minimum amount of commercial area. There's a maximum density of 12 units per acre as well. They're also setting some building height, open space, and setback requirements that are typical in zoning districts as well. And those generally just meet the, or those are all similar to existing zoning districts nearby, like commercial zoning districts that typically allow that taller building. And then the R4 district to the north as well also allows like up to a four-story building. In addition to that, site design standards are similar on this proposed PD to other typical developments of similar nature. The developer is also proposing some architecture standards just for their PD zoning. And these standards proposed do exceed our typical building design standards for commercial and residential buildings. The developer does intend to require the French Renaissance architectural style to be used throughout the development. In addition, they are committing to using 100% Class I materials, exceeding our UDO requirements, and also committing to a minimum amount of glass and other facade treatments that also exceed UDO. Overall, these are great-looking buildings that will be finished very nicely by the developer. As for placemaking, the developer did provide some conceptual images of how they intend to finish the proposed active open space areas. These areas will be finished in a way that exceeds our typical UDO requirements. These images show everything from paving materials, lighting, street or outdoor furniture to be used throughout. In addition, the development will comply with landscape standards for typical UDO as well. So overall, that's the PD as proposed with just a high level overview of their proposed standards. So how does this really relate to the rezoning request before you tonight? So in Elevate Olathe, the Future Land Use Map, the site is designated as community commercial. as a future land use. The proposed PD regulations do require that a minimum amount of commercial area is provided with this development, aligning with that future land use designation. In addition, the proposal meets several Elevate Olathe policies and goals. including two that I do want to highlight specifically. LU 2.5 encourages mixed-use development and commercial centers, and also HN 4.2 promotes the construction of missing middle housing and transitional areas. Throughout the Elevate Olathe update for the comprehensive plan, staff did receive a lot of feedback about housing and affordability. And that was a common theme that was implemented throughout the comprehensive plan. So this proposal does provide that missing middle housing in a transition area that is really between the community or the existing commercial to the south, as well as future residential to the north. And so staff does see this fitting the comprehensive plan and its policies. Overall, the neighborhood and public notice requirements were met. Staff has not received any correspondence from the public regarding this case. And the request does meet the golden criteria as outlined in the staff report. And staff recommends approval of the rezoning request with just one stipulation to comply with the proposed PD standards. As far as the preliminary site development plan, I will mention that in the published staff report, there was a a stipulation regarding phasing. And after discussion with applicant, we did want to clarify what a single phase of construction meant. And so in working with applicant, we worked on the wording for this, and we do want to revise that stip to say a building permit must be issued for at least one commercial building prior to certificate of occupancy for the last residential building. And that's agreeable with staff and the applicant as well. So this item will be considered at the August 4 City Council, and I'll stand for any questions, and the applicant is also here to answer any questions if needed.

Thank you, Mr. Drury. Does the applicant plan on making a presentation at all? No. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Commissioners, do you have any questions for staff?

Commissioner Tronos? It's really a clarification for me. First of all, thank you for your presentation. I appreciate it very much. So tonight we're approving the rezoning and the preliminary development plan.

Correct.

It's a recommendation to City Council who has the final decision. Okay. So we're not approving the preliminary site plan, just a rezoning request? Correct.

Because, yeah, the PDP is contingent on the zoning.

Okay.

Yes. Thank you.

Okay. Any additional questions for staff?

Chair?

Yeah. Commissioner Chapman, go ahead.

Thank you. Nathan, could you go back to the site plan Yeah. Just a couple of questions. The limited access out of the development onto 133rd Street, you show them a right-hand turn out. Are we to assume they will, if they want to get back onto Black Bob, they're going to do a U-turn there?

So that'll be right in, right out. If they want to get back onto Black Bob, they'll be using, let me annotate this maybe.

You mentioned a temporary roundabout, and I was just wondering, I didn't see that anywhere on the diagrams, if they would be able to use a temporary roundabout. In other words, head east on 133rd, do the roundabout to get back out onto Black Bob. I was just trying to get it clear in my mind, a right turn out of the development there. It just seems like if I'm going out of that development, my initial thought is I'm just going to do a U-turn as quickly as I can to get back out on the black bulb.

There will be a cul-de-sac at the very end of the street for future extensions. If they were eastbound on 133rd, they could use that cul-de-sac to...

Okay, so the cul-de-sac will allow them to do these?

Yes, or if they're internal to the site already, they could use their full access to turn on to 133rd going west.

Okay, all right. And then just one other question. On street parking, within the development itself, I see it looks like there's five or six stalls there just to the right of the commercial development. People visiting, are these streets able to handle, because these driveways look like they're fairly close together. I don't know how much space is actually in between the driveways, and I'm just looking at a situation. Is the assumption that visitors will be parking on the driveways, will they be parking in the streets? It doesn't seem like there's a lot of on-street parking that's set up for this development.

So typically, the townhomes are providing the required at least one and a half stalls or two stalls per. They're providing two-car garage and then enough space in front of that garage to park another two cars. So there's enough space to park four cars, whereas only two. are required for every townhome unit. In addition, that commercial area is providing more parking than is required for a general commercial use. So I'll let the developer speak to how they want to handle parking requirements and restrictions within their own private development. But there is enough parking between the commercial and the townhome units themselves to provide parking for this whole mixed-use development.

Okay. And then just one final question. This is probably a broader question. Nathan, maybe not for you, but for really traffic control. This 133rd has been sitting there forever to be developed, and we're beginning to develop it now. And eventually, I assume it's going to connect to 133rd on the east. And Everyone there is going to be able at some point to get out onto Black Bob from 133rd Street. You can go straight across. You can go right, go left, coming out of this 133rd Street onto Black Bob. Are there plans for traffic control at this location at some point in the future? I mean, where are we on that?

in terms of...

Right on Black Bob. Yeah, 133rd and Black Bob.

I believe there's stoplight plans.

Yeah, I was going to ask that same question. I believe there was the stoplight included with the development to the north, which is much larger, that was part of that when it was voted on and approved. But I was kind of going to question whether the timing of that would change or if it would be dependent on the larger pre-development that goes to the north.

Yeah, Chet Belcher, Chief Community Development Engineer, or officer. We do not have anything in the CIP for that light, and this, with only 44 units, it doesn't meet the threshold to warranty. And you're exactly right, Wayne, Chair Janner, that the units to the north were around 600 units that are approved, so those would be a triggering event for that traffic signal.

Okay. All right. Okay, good. That's all I have. Thank you.

Yeah, good question. Any other questions for staff? Well, seeing none, I will move on now and open up the public hearing. We do have one person signed up for the public hearing. Mr. Morris, you want to make your way up to the podium. You'll be here. You'll have a five-minute timer across that you can see opposing you for your time to speak. If you'll state your name and address for the record. And then the floor will be yours.

Charles Morris, 15122 West 132nd Place, Olathe. We live in the Yorkshire subdivision, which is at the top of that map there. And we've... I've lived there for 38 years. And we've always had problems getting out on Black Bob. We have no other way of getting out except on Black Bob. And it is really tough. And when Marge Vogt was in the council, she promised that we would have a light at 133rd Street when that development starts going in. And I noticed on the plans that 133rd Street does not go straight through. There's a jog around the townhomes in order to extend it on. And I don't know how they're going to get a light there now with that jog in there. And around about that would, I don't know how that would ever work. And also, I noticed on the plans, this development is on actually four different plots, mostly the AG farm. And also part of it is on the Forest Ridge Partners plots. And I don't know if that is the same person that owns both of those LLCs or not. And about a year ago, this lot, there was some warehouses proposed there. We talked about this at the Olathe Public Library. about a year ago, and so I don't know what happened to that plan. And that's really all I can say. Thank you.

All right. Thanks for your time. With no one else scheduled to speak, I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

Mr. Chair, I move to close the public hearing.

Thank you, Commissioner Seelig. Do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Commissioner Breen. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. Moving on then, public hearing is now closed. Is there any additional discussion needed for this item? Seeing none, I will call for a motion on the item, RZ26-0005.

Mr. Chair, I move to approve this item, RZ260005, as presented by staff.

Thank you, Commissioner Sealing. Do I have a second?

A second with the clarification of the revised stipulation that's presented.

Okay. No objections from staff? Perfectly okay. All right. Ms. Will, will you take a roll call vote, please?

Commissioner Breen?

Yes.

Commissioner Brown?

Yes.

Commissioner Taronas?

Yes.

Commissioner Chapman? Yes. Commissioner Sealing?

Yes.

Chair Jana?

I'll just take a moment to say that, you know, once this area continues to be development, obviously it's going to be impacted more by the large development to the north. I encourage council to take a very close look at the traffic patterns there and make sure that we are addressing the needs there that need to be laid out for the increased density in the area. That being said, you know, Mr. Felder, I love this plan. You know, based on what we went through before, I know that wasn't quite what the city was looking for, and we had rejected a prior plan for this law, but I think this is great for this area, and I'm looking forward to it, and I'm glad to vote yes as well.

That motion passes 6-0.

All right. Thank you. City, do you have any announcements for this evening?

Just one. So just a reminder, we talked about it last meeting. There will be a work session tomorrow night for the budget. It starts at 5.30. We'll be talking about general fund, vertical and horizontal projects, and the library fund. So everyone's welcome to attend. It starts at 5.30, and it will be at the police headquarters.

All right. Thank you.

Chair, would you say that again, please?

Yeah, tomorrow night we have the budget workshop for the first budget workshop. It's the general fund, so anything that's not franchise fees or... Location? Police headquarters. Okay. Overall, 56. Sure. Yep.

Thank you. Yeah, glad you brought that up because over the next several weeks there will be many budget workshops that are, of course, open to the public and encourage you to be engaged in the process. There's a lot to it, a lot to think about and... input is welcome as well. So thank you very much. If there's nothing else, this meeting is hereby adjourned.