OVERLAND PARK PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. September 26, 2005

Transcription

1 OVERLAND PARK PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING September 26, 2005 The Overland Park Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 1:30 p.m. by Mr. Edward Ned Reitzes, Chair. The following members were present, constituting a quorum: Mr. David Hill, Vice Chair; Mr. Tom Lance; Mrs. Kim Sorensen; Mr. Richard Collins; Ms. Janie Thacker; Mr. Charles Hunter; Mr. George Lund; Mr. John Brake; and Mr. Mike Flanagan. Mr. John Skubal was absent. Also present were: Mr. Bob Lindeblad, Current Planning Manager; Mrs. Leslie Karr and Mr. Keith Gooch, Senior Planners; Mr. Mark Stuecheli, Senior Transportation Planner; Mr. David Dalecky, Planner; Mr. Kirk Coonley, Principal Engineer; Ms. Julie Williams, Planner; Ms. Danielle Zeigler, Planning Technician; and Mrs. Barbara Potts, Recording Secretary. Approximately 20 people were in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 22, 2005 Mr. George Lund moved to approve the August 22, 2005, Planning Commission meeting minutes. Mr. Mike Flanagan seconded, and the motion passed by a vote of 9 to 0 to 1, including the vote of Chair Edward Reitzes who voted on all agenda items. Mr. John Brake abstained. CONSENT AGENDA: (Approved items A through I and K, L, M, O and P; Withdrew items J and N) A. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL Corporate Lakes Vicinity of the southeast corner of 121st Street and Metcalf. Application made by Kaster Architects, Inc. B. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Blue Valley West High School Antioch. Application made by Horst, Terrill & Karst Architects, P.A. C. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Fieldstone Office Park Building Metcalf. Application made by Kaster Architects, Inc. D. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Crystal Village Vicinity of 78th Street and Antioch. Application made by Schlagel & Associates, P.A. E. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Budget Muffler Recycling Box 9501 West 87th Street. Application made by Planet Aid, Inc. F. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL What A Find Recycling Box 8201 Santa Fe Drive. Application made by Planet Aid, Inc.

2 Page 2 G. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL BP Gas Station Recycling Box 8940 West 95th Street. Application made by Planet Aid, Inc. H. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Kid Care PreSchool Recycling Box 6920 West 82nd Street. Application made by Planet Aid, Inc. I. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Overland Park Lutheran Church Clothing Donation Center Box 7810 West 79th Street. Application made by American Clothing Company. J. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Overland Park Christian Church Clothing Donation Center Box 7600 West 75th Street. Application made by American Clothing Company. K. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Mount Olive Lutheran Church Clothing Donation Center Box 9514 Perry Lane. Application made by American Clothing Company. L. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Johnson County Christian Church Clothing Donation Center Box Antioch. Application made by American Clothing Company. M. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Bethany Lutheran Church Clothing Donation Center Box 9101 Lamar. Application made by American Clothing Company. N. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Atonement Lutheran Church Clothing Donation Center Box 9948 Metcalf. Application made by American Clothing Company. O. FINAL PLAT NO Blue Valley Business Center Tenth Plat Vicinity of 160th Street and Foster. Application made by Chrisman Land Surveyors. P. FINAL PLAT NO Corporate Medical Plaza Third Plat Vicinity of the southeast corner of 107th Street and Nall. Application made by Henderson Engineers, Inc. Current Planning Manager Bob Lindeblad announced that Consent Agenda items J and N have been withdrawn from the Consent Agenda. The remaining items are ready for approval. Mr. David Hill stated that he will abstain from voting on Consent Agenda item B. A motion was made by Mr. Flanagan to approve Consent Agenda item B with no stipulations. Mr. Hunter seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 9 to 0 to 1. Mr. Hill abstained. Ms. Janie Thacker requested that Consent Agenda items E, G, K, L and M be removed from the agenda for separate discussion.

3 Page 3 Mr. Hill moved to approve Consent Agenda items A, C, D, F, H, I, O and P, including all stipulations. Mr. Charles Hunter seconded, and the motion passed by a vote of 10 to 0. The following Consent Agenda items were removed by Ms. Thacker for separate discussion: Consent Agenda item E Final Development Plan for Budget Muffler Recycling Box 9501 West 87th Street. The applicant is requesting approval of a final development plan to allow the placement of a recycling box for clothing. The recycling box is approximately the same size as a vending machine found in front of grocery stores. The proposed box is to be located on the west side of the parking lot adjacent to the Arby s Restaurant parking lot. Ms. Thacker expressed concern that the recycling box would be highly visible to customers dining at Arby s Restaurant. She asked if the recycling bin could be placed at a more appropriate location on the property. Ms. Uli Stosch, Planet Aid, Inc., 1403 Murray drive, North Kansas City, Missouri, explained that several locations were discussed with the property owner of Budget Muffler, and this was believed to be the best location. However, she agreed to talk to the property owner regarding a more appropriate location. Ms. Thacker indicated that the plan also shows the recycling information on three sides of the box. She asked if the lettering could be omitted on the side facing Arby s Restaurant. Ms. Stosch agreed that the lettering could be removed on the side of the recycling box that faces Arby s Restaurant. Ms. Thacker commented that she has seen several cars parked in the lot of Budget Muffler. She expressed concern that the people driving into the lot to donate clothes would not be able to access the recycling box because of the parked cars. Ms. Stosch explained that the only car that is parked in the Budget Muffler lot is the owner s car. She said his car is parked there during the day, so she believed there would be no problem with access to the recycling box. A motion was made by Mr. Hill to approve Consent Agenda item E, Final Development Plan for the Budget Muffler Recycling Box, 9501 West 87th Street, subject to stipulation a, as well as to address the three concerns raised. Mr. Flanagan seconded, and the motion passed by a vote of 10 to 0. Consent Agenda item G Final Development Plan for BP Gas Station Recycling Box 8940 West 95th Street. The applicant is requesting approval of a final development plan to allow the placement of a clothes recycling box at 8940 West 95th Street. The proposed recycling box will be located on the east side of the parking lot.

4 Page 4 Ms. Thacker said her concern regarding Consent Agenda item G was the removal of the lettering on the side of the recycling box that faces the adjacent property. Since that issue has already been addressed in the previous item, she moved to approve Consent Agenda item G, Final Development Plan for BP Gas Station Recycling Box, 8940 West 95th Street, with stipulation a. Mr. Hill seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 10 to 0. Consent Agenda item K Mount Olive Lutheran Church Clothing Donation Center Box 9514 Perry Lane. The applicant is requesting to locate a clothing donation center box at the southwestern corner of the parking lot. The proposed box is to be located in the corner of the parking lot adjacent to the carport of a multi-family development. The construction of the box is approximately eight feet tall, has an eight-foot by six-foot floor space and is similar to a typical residential storage shed. The walls will be constructed of plywood. The recycling box will have two deposit windows and a door. The pitched roof is finished with asphalt shingles, and the walls of the box will be painted a tan color. Ms. Thacker indicated that the proposed location for the recycling box is directly opposite the exit from U.S. 69 Highway. She expressed concern that the recycling box will be highly visible to drivers exiting from U.S. 69 Highway. She asked if an alternate location would be possible. Mr. Darrell Leise, American Clothing Company, 1401 Fairfax, Kansas City, Kansas, offered to move the recycling box to the opposite side of the parking lot along the southeast corner. He commented that the southeast corner of the parking lot is not visible from the exit ramp from U.S. 69 Highway. Ms. Thacker moved to approve Consent Agenda item K, Final Development Plan for Mount Olive Lutheran Church Clothing Donation Center Box, 9514 Perry Lane, subject to stipulations a and b, with the understanding that the location of the clothing donation center box will be located on the southeast corner of the parking lot. Mr. Tom Lance seconded the motion, which passed by a 10 to 0 vote. Consent Agenda item L Final Development Plan for Johnson County Christian Church Clothing Donation Center Box Antioch. The applicant is requesting to locate a donation clothing center box at the northwestern corner of the parking lot along the property line. The adjacent single-family properties have existing fences that will provide screening from the recycling box. Ms. Thacker suggested that the clothing donation center box should be located on the grass rather than on the parking lot pavement. She expressed concern that the proposed location of the donation center box would be too close to the residential area. Mr. Leise confirmed that he could place the donation center box on the grass. He offered to work with the City staff in reference to a more acceptable location for the donation center box that would be further from the residential properties. Ms. Thacker moved to approve Consent Agenda item L, Final Development Plan for the Johnson County Christian Church Clothing Donation Center Box, Antioch,

5 Page 5 including stipulations a and b, with the understanding that the applicant will work with City staff to find a location that is more appropriate for the clothing donation center box. Mr. Lance seconded, and the motion passed by a 10 to 0 vote. Consent Agenda item M Bethany Lutheran Church Clothing Donation Center Box 9101 Lamar Avenue. The applicant is requesting to locate a clothing recycling box at the southeastern corner of the parking lot. The proposed recycling box will be located along the south property line and screened from the adjacent single-family residence by an existing fence. Ms. Thacker expressed concern that the location for this recycling box is also located near residential properties. She asked if there will be screening around the recycling box. Mr. Leise said the plan is to construct a privacy fence around the recycling box, so it will not be visible to the adjacent property owner. Ms. Thacker moved to approve Consent Agenda item M, Final Development Plan for Bethany Lutheran Church Clothing Donation Box, 9101 Lamar, with stipulations a and b. Mr. Flanagan seconded, and the motion passed by a 10 to 0 vote. SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO West 87th Street. Special use permit requested for a three-year period of time to allow a drinking establishment in conjunction with a restaurant. This property is currently zoned CP-2, Planned General Business District. Application made by Evangelina Garcia. (Continued) Mr. Hill moved to continue to October 24, 2005, Special Use Permit No , West 87th Street. Ms. Thacker seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 10 to 0. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL Corporate Lakes Lots 7 & 8 Vicinity of Metcalf and 121st Street. Application made by Payne & Brockway, P.A. (Continued) A motion was made by Mr. Hill to continue the Revised Preliminary Plan for Corporate Lakes Lots 7 & 8, vicinity of Metcalf and 121st Street, to the October 10, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. After a second by Mr. Hunter, the motion passed by a vote of 10 to 0. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL Carriage Woods Vicinity of 103rd Street and Nall. Application made by Phelps Engineering, Inc. Senior Planner Leslie Karr said the request is for approval of a revised preliminary plan for an eight-lot single-family development. No changes are proposed to the approved layout and architectural quality of the proposed units. She explained that

6 Page 6 this project was approved as Rezoning No , and the applicant was Stratford Villas. At that time, the two significant issues were the location of the discharge of storm water from the site and the stream corridor encroachment. She said the revised plan changed the location of the storm water discharge. She commented that there are no proposed changes to the stream corridor. She explained that the deviation approved with Rezoning No will cover the current application. Mrs. Karr said staff had raised concerns about the location of the storm water discharge because of significant flooding issues on the west side of Rosewood, north of 103rd Street. She said that the four houses in Monitor Square, which are to the east and adjacent to this project, experience significant flooding on the north side of 103rd Street. The initial proposal was to discharge storm water on the south side of 103rd Street to avoid any impact to those houses. The developer was not required to submit a flood study. The current applicant has submitted an expanded Preliminary Storm Water Management Study that includes an analysis of the feasibility of detention and a flood study. The staff has reviewed the flood study and agrees with the conclusions. Given the extensive study done by the applicant, staff believes there is nothing more to be gained by further study or modeling. Staff recommends approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan, subject to stipulations a through h, as outlined in staff comments. When asked by Mr. Richard Collins whether the facts changed between the time the initial study was approved and this particular study, Principal Engineer Kirk Coonley indicated that the facts have not changed. Mr. Collins inquired whether staff believes that there will be no negative impact on those homes in Monitor Square by discharging the storm water on the north side of 103rd Street. Mr. Coonley confirmed that to be correct based on the staff s ability to model flooding conditions. Mr. Collins questioned whether this would also apply to the property owners to the north who front onto 102nd Street. He referred to Lot No. 14, which is immediately to the north on 102nd Street, and asked if that lot would be impacted. Mr. Coonley assured the Planning Commission that there would be no negative impact on any of these homes. As he explained, the elevation is above the stream level. Mr. Hill recalled that one of the conditions of approval was to place fill in the driveways. He asked if the current plan includes filling in the existing driveways that exit onto 103rd Street. Mrs. Karr deferred to the applicant to indicate how he foresees filling in the property for development. Mr. Tim Tucker, Phelps Engineering, 1270 North Winchester, Olathe, Kansas, said the retaining walls are going to be removed and the area will be extended straight across the property to fill in the gaps.

7 Page 7 Referring to the written staff comments, Chair Reitzes referred to the detention study conducted by Dr. Bruce McEnroe, Ph.D., P.E., which concludes that detention is not beneficial to this site. He asked the origin of the detention study and whether it was authorized and paid for by the City. Mr. Coonley explained that certain areas within the City are designated for detention studies. He commented that upstream from 103rd Street in this particular watershed is one of those designated areas. Although staff generally accepts that detention is not usually official in the lower third of the water-shed, the study was completed and paid for by the applicant to show that detention would not be beneficial to the site in this particular case. Chair Reitzes invited comments from the public in regard to the Revised Preliminary Plan. There being none, he closed the hearing and referred the item for action. Mr. Hill moved to recommend to Council approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan for Carriage Woods, vicinity of 103rd Street and Nall, subject to stipulations a through h. Ms. Kim Sorensen seconded, and the motion passed by a 10 to 0 vote. PRELIMINARY PLAT NO Carriage Woods 5308 West 103rd Street. Application made by Phelps Engineering, Inc. (Continued) Mr. Hill moved to continue Preliminary Plat No for Carriage Woods, 5308 West 103rd Street, to the October 24, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. A second was made by Mr. Flanagan, and the motion passed by a 10 to 0 vote. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL Overland Park Target Vicinity of the southwest corner of 151st Street and Lowell. Application made by Davidson Design Group. Planner Julie Williams said the applicant is requesting a revised preliminary plan approval to allow a 9,500 square-foot retail building with 47 parking stalls in the Overland Park Target development. The originally approved plan for the development showed a 6,000 square-foot restaurant with 65 parking spaces. The proposed building will be composed primarily of EFIS and brick in colors approved for the overall development. The architecture matches other approved buildings in the area. She indicated that the proposed revision represents a 3,500 square-foot increase in overall floor space for a total of 216,600 square feet. Although the footprint of this building is larger than what was approved, Ms. Williams said that fewer parking spaces are required for a retail building than for a restaurant. This site was included in the Preliminary Storm Water Management Study that included the adjacent Target store. In that study, it was presumed there would be more impervious surface than is proposed with this revised plan. As a result, the storm water runoff has been reduced, and adequate facilities are available to receive the runoff from the site, even with the increased building square footage.

8 Page 8 Staff recommends approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan for the Overland Park Target, subject to stipulations a through e. Mr. Bernard Weiner, managing member for Cannon Development, 5915 North Echo Canyon Parkway, Phoenix, Arizona, said he has worked closely with the City staff and with the applicant. He is in agreement with stipulations a through e. After confirming that no one wished to speak for or against this item, Chair Reitzes declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Hunter moved to recommend to Council approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan for Overland Park Target, vicinity of the southwest corner of 151st Street and Lowell, subject to stipulations a through e. Mrs. Sorensen seconded, and the motion passed by a vote of 10 to 0. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL Shoppes at Deer Creek Woods III Vicinity of the northwest corner of 135th Street and Riley. Application made by Olsson Associates. Senior Planner Keith Gooch said the applicant is requesting approval of a revised preliminary plan to allow a revision to an existing commercial plan. He explained that this request is a substantial change from the approved preliminary plan and, therefore, requires a public hearing. Mr. Gooch indicated that the revised preliminary plan alters three proposed buildings located in the Shoppes at the Deer Creek Woods III development. He explained that the property originally rezoned in 2004 was approved for five commercial buildings for a total of 126,000 square feet of commercial development and a 30,000 square-foot single office building located on the north side of the creek. This application is proposing to reduce the commercial square footage to a total of 108,119 square feet. The parking lot locations are similar to the original zoning plan. He commented that no other changes are proposed on site except for a decrease in the size of the four buildings. The applicant plans to use the same materials as previously approved on Deer Creek Woods I and II developments, as well as the same sign criteria for Shoppes at Deer Creek Woods II. Mr. Gooch referred to the proposed Buildings 1WS and 2WS that will be decreased in size from 35,500 to 32,000 square feet. He said that Building 3WS is now 9,188 square feet in size, compared to 17,500 square feet with the original plan. He noted that Building 4WS has decreased by 500 square feet to 21,000 square feet. Mr. Gooch pointed out that Building 5WS has been changed to a fast food restaurant, but the proposed restaurant does not have adequate space for stacking of vehicles. However, the building has a substantially larger area for parking lot than required by ordinance. Therefore, at the time of Final Development, staff will work with the potential applicant to ensure that sufficient stacking is available. Staff recommends approval of the Shoppes at Deer Creek Woods III, subject to stipulations a through j.

9 Page 9 Mr. Korb Maxwell, Polsinelli Shalton Welte Suelthaus, 6201 College Boulevard, representing K-150, LLC, and Greenleaf Properties, said he agreed with staff s description of the project and stipulations a through j, as outlined in the written staff comments. Chair Reitzes announced the public hearing for this item, declaring it closed when no one responded. Ms. Thacker moved to recommend to Council approval of Revised Preliminary Plan for Shoppes at Deer Creek Woods III, vicinity of the northwest corner of 135th Street and Riley, with stipulations a through j. Mr. Hill seconded. Mr. Hill complimented the overall developers of this project in regard to the detail, character and the proportion of these buildings. He said this type of project is exactly what the Site Plan Review Committee asks applicants to try to achieve. He believed this is a good project in terms of the architecture. The motion passed by a vote of 10 to 0. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL LionsGate Office Centre Vicinity of the northeast corner of 143rd Street and Metcalf. Application made by Kaster Architects, Inc. Ms. Williams indicated that the applicant is requesting revised preliminary plan approval to allow a two-story, 16,315 square-foot bank building with a drive-thru. She explained that the previously approved preliminary plan shows a 12,700 squarefoot bank building. The proposed revision accounts for an overall increase of 3,615 square feet for a total of 68,715 square feet. The currently approved plan also shows a 50-foot setback along the western property line, while the proposed revision shows a 30-foot setback. The building architecture is consistent with the approved plan and will be constructed of stone veneer, EIFS and a concrete tile roof. She said a total of 66 parking spaces are provided. Staff recommends approval of Revised Preliminary Plan for LionsGate Office Center, subject to stipulations a through c. When asked by Ms. Thacker the reason for the change in setback from 50 feet to 30 feet, Ms. Williams replied that the reduction in setback is to accommodate the increased building size and to retain the same parking lot. Mr. David Kaster, Kaster Architects, 7304 West 130th Street, Suite 170, reviewed the staff comments with the applicant/owner, and he is in agreement with stipulations a through c. There being no response to the announcement of the public hearing, Chair Reitzes entertained a motion. Mr. Hill complimented the architect on this project. He believed it is an example of the type of detail, scale and proportionality that the Planning Commission is looking for, and he appreciated the good work.

10 Page 10 Mr. Hill moved to recommend to Council approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan for LionsGate Office Centre, vicinity of the northeast corner of 143rd Street and Metcalf, subject to stipulations a through c. Mrs. Sorensen seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 10 to 0. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL Deer Creek Commons Office Building Vicinity of the southwest corner of 127th Street and Metcalf. Application made by Opus Northwest, L.L.C. Mrs. Karr said the applicant is requesting approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan for the Deer Creek Commons office project. The proposed plan is to change Lot No. 10 from a 12-story, 256,480 square-foot office building, to a five-story, 240,000 squarefoot office building. She indicated that the overall square footage for the office park will be reduced from 513,815 square feet to 494,780 square feet. The applicant is proposing a 20-foot setback from 127th Street on the north side of the property where the requirements in the CP-O District are 30 feet. Therefore, a deviation is required for the proposed 20-foot setback. Mrs. Karr indicated that the development of Lot No. 10 is proposed in two phases. She explained that the first phase will consist of a five-story, 190,000 square-foot office building and a parking deck. The second phase will consist of a three-story, 50,000 square-foot building addition with an expanded parking deck. She indicated that 15 percent of the required parking, which is primarily in the parking garage, is proposed for an 8.5-foot-wide compact space as opposed to a nine-foot standard space. She explained that the 8.5-foot-wide dimension is somewhat wider than the minimum eight-foot space that the ordinance allows for compact spaces. However, it is similar to other compact parking spaces that have been approved for other office developments with parking garages. Fire access drives are required for this property. A drive on the north side of the building will be constructed with the first phase of the project. A fire access drive on the south side of the building will not be required until the second phase of the project. Mrs. Karr explained that this property is adjacent to U.S. 69 Highway and does require a 100-foot greenway linkage. In addition, this property contains a substantial stream corridor adjacent to the greenway linkage. The developer has agreed to dedicate additional property within the greenway linkage to the City for park purposes. Mrs. Karr indicated that a Preliminary Storm Water Management Study has been submitted and accepted for this project. In order to establish site grades along the Foster Street frontage, a preliminary plan and profile of this street is required. However, because the process by which Foster Street will be constructed is not yet known, she explained that it is difficult to determine when the required information will be available. Therefore, staff has included stipulations to cover several possibilities in regard to this issue. The proposed building does not encroach into the stream corridor, but the proposed grading and fire access roads on the west of the building do. Mrs. Karr explained that the fire access roads are necessary for the fire department to provide adequate safety

11 Page 11 for the building. Additional fill is necessary on the land that encroaches into the steam corridor for the construction of the access road. The staff supports the deviation requested for the reasons as outlined in the written staff comments. According to Mrs. Karr, some of the stipulations attached to the previously approved revised preliminary plan for this site have an effect on this application. She explained that one of the stipulations was for the construction of a portion of Foster on this site, and on 127th Street, between Foster and Metcalf, concurrent with the development of any portion of the site west of Foster. It is expected that after this revised plan approval is acted upon by the Planning Commission, the owner will apply for final development plan approval for the property west of Foster, which will trigger the requirement for the construction of Foster. The Public Works Committee is scheduled to review a request for an Improvement District to construct those sections of street at its meeting on September 28, If the Committee recommends approval of the formation of the Improvement District and the City Council subsequently acts on that approval, the street construction issue will be a moot point. If the Improvement District is not recommended for approval, the staff will recommend alternative stipulations to address the construction of the street when the preliminary plan application goes to City Council. With the construction of U.S. 69 Highway, the state acquired additional right-of-way for a potential overpass over the highway at 127th Street. Mrs. Karr explained that this right-of-way is larger than normal in order to accommodate the fill needed to construct an overpass. Although there is not a current time frame for constructing the overpass, she said staff has recently questioned the merit of relinquishing rightof-way when future needs for that right-of-way are unknown. In the past, she explained that some areas of right-of-way that appeared to be unnecessary and vacated were required for improvements along major highways. Because of the potential for unforeseen uses for the existing right-of-way, staff recommends that the stipulation from the previous preliminary plan approval, which called for the vacation of part of the 127th Street right-of-way, between Foster and U.S. 69 Highway, not be included in this application. Mrs. Karr indicated that the additional right-of-way plays into the setback deviation that is being requested by the applicant. The ordinance technically requires a 30-foot setback. She explained that the Planning Commission or City Council can grant a deviation if they find that the requirements for a deviation can be met. Because the additional right-of-way for an overpass is a unique situation to this property and has a wider than normal right-of-way, it is staff s opinion that the intent of the ordinance is met by the proposed 20-foot setback. The staff is supportive of the deviation for the setback, as well as the stream corridor setback deviation, and recommends approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan, subject to stipulations a through i as outlined in the written staff comments. Mr. Jeffrey Magnuson, Opus Architects and Engineers, 3010 West 43rd Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota, said he concurred with all staff recommendations. He offered to answer questions. Chair Reitzes said the written staff comments indicate that the overall square footage has been reduced by 19,035 feet. However, the change in one of the office buildings

12 Page 12 does not amount to that much square footage. He asked if there is a reduction in the square footage of another building. Mrs. Karr replied that there is no other reduction. She indicated that the only change is on Lot No. 10, so the only reduction is what would be impacted by that building. In response to Mr. Lance s inquiry regarding the color of the glass on the exterior of the building, Mr. Magnuson said the glass is a semi-reflective blue glass. He commented that the overall effect of the building will be light colors. Mr. Lance asked if the applicant would consider another type of glass other than the semi-reflective blue glass. In his opinion, there are too many buildings in this area with that color. Mr. Magnuson said he would take that suggestion under advisement. No comments were offered in response to the announcement of the public hearing, and it was declared closed. Mr. Flanagan moved to recommend to Council approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan for Deer Creek Commons Office Building, vicinity of the southwest corner of 127th Street and Metcalf, subject to stipulations a through i. After a second by Mr. Hill, the motion passed by a vote of 10 to 0. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL Corporate Medical Plaza Nall. Application made by Henderson Engineers, Inc. Mr. Gooch said the request is for approval of a Revised Preliminary Plat to allow a revised office plan for Corporate Medical Plaza. He explained that this revised plan is a significant change from the approved preliminary plan and does require a public hearing. The applicant is requesting approval to move Building 3 to the southeast corner of the site. Buildings 1 and 2 are not being changed from the previously approved plan. The overall square footage is proposed to be increased to 161,989 square feet. Mr. Gooch indicated that Building 3 was originally decreased by a previously approved plan to allow an expansion to Building 1 and is now proposed to be a 60,000 squarefoot building with an underground parking lot. Access to this parking area is from Ash Street, which also services the apartment complex to the east. He noted the only other change involves the parking lot where Building 3 was originally proposed. It has been altered. He said that a total of 725 parking spaces are provided on site, which is more than required by the Unified Development Ordinance. Mr. Gooch said staff finds the elevations acceptable. He commented that the Transportation Staff has reviewed the plans and also finds the improvements acceptable. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Revised Preliminary Plat for Corporate Medical Plaza, subject to stipulations a through i, as outlined in the written staff comments.

13 Page 13 Mr. Dan LeBlanc, Henderson Engineers, 8325 Lenexa Drive, said he has reviewed staff s comments and recommendations, and the developer is in agreement with all suggestions. There being no response to the announcement of the public hearing, Chair Reitzes entertained a motion. A motion was made by Mr. Hill to recommend to Council approval of the Revised Preliminary Plan for Corporate Medical Plaza, Nall, subject to stipulations a through i. Mr. Flanagan seconded. Mr. Hill believed the proposed development is very attractive. He stated that he is proud to have a development of this quality in Overland Park. The motion carried by a vote of 10 to 0. PRELIMINARY PLAT NO Buck s Crossing Switzer. Application made by Schlagel & Associates, P.A. (Continued) Mr. Hill moved to continue Preliminary Plat No for Buck s Crossing, Switzer, to the November 14, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. A second was made by Mr. Lund, and the motion passed by a 10 to 0 vote. PRELIMINARY PLAT NO Southern Lake Vicinity of 154th Street and Switzer. Application made by Schlagel & Associates. (Continued) A motion was made by Mr. Hill to continue Preliminary Plat No for Southern Lake, vicinity of 154th Street and Switzer, to the November 14, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Hunter seconded, and the motion passed by a vote of 10 to 0. PRELIMINARY PLAT NO Coffee Creek Farms Vicinity of 167th Street and Switzer. Application made by HNTB Corporation. (Continued) Mr. Hill moved to continue to October 10, 2005, Preliminary Plat No for Coffee Creek Farms, vicinity of 167th Street and Switzer. Mr. Lund seconded the motion, which carried by a vote of 10 to 0. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL Boudreaux s Restaurant Vicinity of the northeast corner of 135th Street and Riley. Application made by Al J. Mueller Construction Company. Ms. Williams said the applicant is requesting final development plan approval to allow a 6,800 square-foot restaurant and related parking. She noted that a total

14 Page 14 of 73 parking spaces are provided, which is one more space than is required by ordinance. The building will be constructed of brick, stone and stucco and matches other approved buildings in the Shoppes at Deer Creek Woods development. However, staff is requesting that the arched window above the door on the north elevation and the matching window on the Riley Street elevation should either be rectangular in shape or match the arches above the other windows. Ms. Williams indicated that this site is covered by previously submitted and accepted Preliminary and Final Storm Water Management Studies. The proposed plan is in conformance with those studies. The engineering staff supports this application. Staff recommends approval of the Final Development Plan for Boudreaux s Restaurant, subject to stipulations a through f. Mr. Brett Housman, 3920 Pettis Road, St. Joseph, Missouri, informed the Planning Commission that Boudreaux s Restaurant is a Cajun restaurant. He has no problem with the recommendations from staff with the exception of stipulation f, The arched window above the door on the north elevation and the matching window on the Riley Street elevations shall either be rectangular or modified to match the arches above the other windows. In his opinion, the arched window above the door provides for a more pronounced entry to the building. Mr. Hill asked the details of the elevation, such as where the gas line is going to be located, the location of other service type utilities and whether downspouts will be internal to this project. Mr. Housman said the downspouts will be internal. He commented that the gas line will be located behind a screening wall, and entrances to the service utilities will be located in the rear of the restaurant. Mr. Collins indicated that he would normally go along with staff s architectural design. However, in this case, he did not see that there is an issue with the arched windows. He moved to approve the Final Development Plan for Boudreaux s Restaurant, vicinity of the northeast corner of 135th Street and Riley, subject to stipulations a through e and the deletion of stipulation f. Mr. Hill seconded. Mr. Hill replied that although he has a concern about the windows, he has a bigger concern in regard to the colors of the building and the awnings. He commented that those details were not mentioned in the written staff comments. He asked the proposed color of the awnings and the trim. Ms. Williams assured the Planning Commission that the materials and color scheme have been reviewed and approved by staff. She indicated that the building is a neutral color with natural stone, and the color of the awnings is black. She said the applicant will be required to use the neutral pallet that has been set. Mr. Flanagan stated that he has no issue with the arched window over the entrance. He stated that he will support the motion. Mr. Hill agreed with the previous comment. Since the arched window is being used as an entrance, he believed an exception could be made. He indicated that he will support the motion.

15 Page 15 Mr. Lund said he would not normally agree with the different sizes and shapes of the arches on such a small building. However, he agreed with the previous comments and will also support the motion. Mr. Lance believed the applicant is trying to create a special focus point to emphasize the location of the entrance. He will vote against the motion to eliminate stipulation f, as read into the record. Chair Reitzes agreed with the motion maker that having the different sizes and shapes of arches provides a more unique look. He supports the idea of making the entrance area more distinctive. The motion passed by a vote of 9 to 1. Mr. Lance opposed. SIGN DEVIATION Custard s Last Stand Metcalf. Application made by Santa Fe Signs. The applicant is requesting a sign deviation for a wall sign at Custard s Last Stand in the LionsGate retail development. The tenant space is an end unit on a strip building and has a drive-thru window. The tenant is allowed a sign totaling 10 percent of the façade area, with the proposed sign being 11.3 percent of the façade area. Therefore, a 1.3 percent increase in allowable size is being requested. The applicant was under the impression that the size of the sign was within the required size limits, and the sign was installed prior to a sign permit being issued. Ms. Williams said that a deviation can be granted if the following requirements can be met: 1) Uniqueness; 2) Impact on Adjacent Property Owners; 3) Hardship; 4) Public Safety and Welfare; and 5) Intent of the Ordinance. In reference to Uniqueness, Ms. Williams said that staff believes the applicant s situation is not unique. As she explained, other businesses in the LionsGate retail development have had to install signs meeting the established sign criteria. In terms of the second requirement, Impact on Adjacent Property Owners, Ms. Williams indicated that should the deviation be approved, it is unlikely that the proposed sign would have any significant impact on surrounding owners. Relative to the Hardship, Ms. Williams said the owner has already installed the sign. Therefore, to have a new sign created and installed would create a hardship. Ms. Williams said the fourth requirement is Public Safety and Welfare. Should this sign deviation request be approved, staff would not anticipate any negative effect on public health, safety or welfare. In regard to the Intent of the Ordinance, Ms. Williams said the intent of limiting the area of wall signs is to reduce the visual impact of signage. It is staff s opinion that the 1.3 percent increase in sign area does not increase the visual impact of the sign, and that any reduction would not be visibly noticeable.

16 Page 16 Due to those five reasons, staff recommends approval of he Sign Deviation for Custard s Last Stand, subject to stipulation a in the written staff comments. Mr. Collins said the report indicates that the sign was installed prior to the issuance of the sign permit. He asked whether there was an application on file. Ms. Williams replied that the application has been submitted. She said it is her understanding that the staff member who issues the permits had communicated with the applicant and then was out of the office for a couple of weeks. The applicant was under the impression that the sign was within the allowable limits. Therefore, he installed the sign prior to actually receiving the permit. Mr. Lance expressed concern that this could set a precedent and that other applicants will believe they can install their sign and make the same comment that it was a hardship. In his opinion, applicants need to be aware of the City s ordinance. Mr. Lindeblad said that the sign companies are normally aware of the rules and regulations. He explained that the sign companies occasionally install the sign when pressure is received from the owner/applicant to do so. He commented that another reason might be that the applicant feels inconvenienced by the delay, so he/she will go ahead and have the sign installed. He surmised that there are all types of explanations. Mr. Lance did not believe it was fair to other applicants to allow this occurrence for one individual. In his opinion, all applicants should follow the same rules and regulations. Mr. Lindeblad reiterated that it is a rare occurrence when applicants install a sign without a permit. He explained that hundreds of signs are installed each year, and this type of occurrence usually only happens a few times during the year. Mr. Kevin McQuigg, West 90th Street, assured the Planning Commission that he had no intent of deception in this case. As he explained, he submitted the applications and believed the permits had been issued. However, when he called the City, the staff member who issues the permits was not in the office. Therefore, he installed the sign on Friday with the full intention of visiting City Hall on Monday to pay for the permits. However, after realizing his mistake, he will not start any project in the future without the permit in his possession. He reiterated that he had no intention to deceive anyone or to install a larger sign than what is required. Mr. Collins asked the applicant why he believed he could install the sign without a permit. He assumed the applicant had to provide the dimensions of the sign to the manufacturer. In his opinion, the manufacturer should have been aware of the City s requirement. Mr. McQuigg believed there was a breakdown in communication between him and the City staff. His understanding was that it would be acceptable to combine the signs. He was under the impression that no subsequent applications were required at this point.

17 Page 17 Mr. Lindeblad referred to page 52A. He believed that it was possible that the height of the logo, which is much taller than the height of the letters, was considered the height of the entire sign. Ms. Willams clarified that if the area of the letters and the area of the logo are measured separately, it would be significantly less than 10 percent. However, if the letters were measured separately and then added together, it would be a little over 10 percent. Mr. Hill moved to approve the Sign Deviation for Custard s Last Stand, Metcalf, subject to stipulation a. Mr. Hunter seconded. Mr. Collins stated that he will vote in favor of the application, but with a great deal of reluctance. However, he believed that the City needs to send a clear message to the sign community that this is not acceptable behavior. The City has rules and regulations for a reason. Although he realized that a miscommunication and misunderstanding had occurred between the staff and the applicant, he believed the applicant should have waited until he received the actual permit prior to installing the sign. He will support this motion, but emphasized that if something similar to this incident would be presented to the Planning Commission in the future, particularly from the same applicant, his decision will be considerably different. Mr. Hill agreed with the previous comments. Although he made the motion, he believes this type of approach is unacceptable. He indicated that he will support the proposed application. However, he also wants to make it clear that he will not support this type of incident in the future. The motion passed by a vote of 10 to 0. Mr. Lindeblad welcomed the new Planning Commissioner John Brake and stated that the planning staff looks forward to working with him. Mr. Lindeblad announced that Planning Commissioner Lund participated in the Community Center Design Show last week. When asked by Mr. Lindeblad to give his impression of the show, Mr. Lund replied that he was very impressed, and he believed the show was very well done. Mr. Lindeblad commented that Gould Evans presented the Community Center Design Show, because their firm is the architect for the new community center. In terms of the time schedule, he said that Gould Evans is to submit a preliminary development plan for consideration by the Planning Commission in the first week of January He explained that all of the basic design work has to be completed this fall. He said that staff is anticipating the ground breaking to be in April ADJOURNMENT: At 3:05 p.m., Chair Reitzes declared the meeting adjourned. Minutes transcribed by Barbara Potts. Edward J. Reitzes, Chair