Lee’S Summit Planning Commission

LEE’S SUMMIT PLANNING COMMISSION

Minutes of Tuesday, May 23, 2006

The Tuesday, May 23, 2006, Lee’s Summit Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairperson Trainer at 6:01 p.m., at City Hall Chambers, 220 SE Green Street, Lee’s Summit, Missouri.

OPENING ROLL CALL:

Chairperson Trainer Present Mr. Christopher Present Ms. Rosenquist Present Ms. Funk Absent Mr. Reece Present Mr. Pycior Present Mr. Atcheson Present Mr. Gray Present Mr. Fristoe Present (entered at 6:04 p.m.)

Also present were Tom Scannell, Current Planning Division Manager; Jennifer Thompson, Planner; John Mautino, Assistant City Attorney; Kent Monter, Development Engineering Manager; and Chris Hughey, Planning Technician.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

There were no changes or corrections to the agenda. On the motion of Mr. Reece, seconded by Mr. Gray, the Planning Commission voted unanimously by voice vote to APPROVE the agenda.

1. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA

A. Application #2005-052 – FINAL PLAT – The Enclave at Lakewood Pointe, Lots 1-14 and Tracts A-F; Longhorn Asset Management, applicant

B. Application #2006-056 – PRELIMINARY PLAT – Cedar Creek Village, 2nd Plat, Lots 30-44 and Tract A; Hoke Enterprises, applicant

C. Application #2006-74 – FINAL PLAT – Douglas Corner, Lot 1A; Fischer Family, LP, applicant

D. RESOLUTION 2006-01 – A Resolution Approving the Location, Extent and Character of All Public Improvements Described in the City of Lee’s Summit 2007-2011 Capital Improvements Plan

On the motion of Mr. Atcheson, seconded by Ms. Rosenquist, the Planning Commission voted unanimously by voice vote to APPROVE the Consent Agenda, Items 1A-1D. PLANNING COMMISSION 2 May 23, 2005

2. Continued Application #2005-281 – REZONING from AG to R-1, east side of Pryor, 1/4 mile north of Hook Road (proposed Whispering Woods); Brookside Investments, Inc., applicant

Chairperson Trainer opened the hearing at 6:02 p.m. and announced that Application 2005-281 was continued to June 13, 2006, at staff’s request. She then closed the hearing.

(The foregoing is a digest of the secretary’s notes of the public hearing. The transcript may be ordered.)

3. Application #2005-060 – PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN – Henson-Case, 1270 NE Delta School Road; Glen Henson, applicant

Chairperson Trainer opened the hearing at 6:02 p.m. and announced that Application 2006-060 was continued to June 13, 2006, at staff’s request, to allow for proper notification. She then closed the hearing.

4. Application #2006-067 – SPECIAL USE PERMIT – Renewal for Communication Tower, 1740 SE Hamblen Road; Union Pacific Railroad Co., applicant

Chairperson Trainer opened the hearing at 6:03 p.m. and announced that Application 2006-067 was continued to June 13, 2006, at staff’s request. She then closed the hearing.

5. Application #2006-070 – PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN – Birchwood Church, 5701 NE Anderson Drive; Birchwood Church, applicant

Chairperson Trainer opened the hearing at 6:03 p.m. and announced that Application 2006-070 was continued to June 27, 2006, at the applicant’s request. She then closed the hearing.

7. Continued: #2005-282 – PRELIMINARY PLAT – Whispering Woods, Lots 1-202 and Tract A-G; Brookside Investments, Inc., applicant (to be continued to June 13, 2006 at staff’s request)

Chairperson Trainer announced that Application 2005-282 was continued to June 13, 2006, at staff’s request.

6. Application #2006-073 – VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY – Leinweber Road from I- 470 to Independence Avenue; LBC Development Corp., applicant PLANNING COMMISSION 3 May 23, 2005

Chairperson Trainer opened the hearing at 6:04 p.m. and asked those wishing to speak, or provide testimony, to stand and be sworn in by the court reporter.

Mr. Kevin Sterrett explained that the roadway right-of-way had been abandoned several years ago when M-291 / I-470 was constructed. That right-of-way had never been vacated and the Planning Commission had approved the preliminary plat for the I-470 Business and Technology Center in January. Earlier this month, the City Council had approved the rezoning and preliminary development plan. The applicant had sent letters to Aquila, Missouri Gas Energy, Southwestern Bell and Comcast Cable notifying them of the proposed vacation, and had notified the City’s Public Works Department as well. There had been no objections.

Following Mr. Sterrett’s presentation, Chairperson Trainer asked for staff comments.

Mr. Scannell entered Exhibit (A), list of exhibits 1-12 into the record. He stated that staff recommended approval of the vacation of right-of-way and confirmed that this portion of Leinweber Road had been abandoned during the highway construction. The various utilities that had been notified had not raised any objections to vacating it.

Following Mr. Scannell’s comments, Chairperson Trainer asked if there was anyone else present wishing to give testimony, either in support for or opposition to the application. Seeing none, she then asked if the Commission had questions for the applicant or staff. As there were none, she closed the public hearing at 6:08 p.m. and asked for discussion among the Commission members, or for a motion.

Mr. Reece made a motion to recommend approval of Application 2006-073, Vacation of Right- of-Way, Leinweber Road from I-470 to Independence Avenue; LBC Development Corp., applicant; subject to staff’s letter of May 19 2006. Ms. Rosenquist seconded.

Chairperson Trainer asked if there was any discussion of the motion. Hearing none, she Chairperson Trainer called for a vote.

On the motion of Mr. Reece, seconded by Ms. Rosenquist, the Planning Commission members voted by voice vote of eight “yes” and one “abstain” (Mr. Atcheson) to recommend APPROVAL of Application 2006-073, Vacation of Right-of-Way, Leinweber Road from I-470 to Independence Avenue; LBC Development Corp., applicant; subject to staff’s letter of May 19 2006.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

There were no public comments at the meeting.

ROUNDTABLE

Mr. Reece reported that he had attended the CDC meeting last week. PLANNING COMMISSION 4 May 23, 2005

Ms. Rosenquist asked for a copy of the Resolution that was on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Scannell said that he would get a copy to Commissioners, as it was inadvertently left out of the packets.

In reply to a question from Mr. Gray, Mr. Scannell reported that Mr. McKay was going to make a presentation to the Council on land use, followed by a presentation to the Planning Commission. That would probably be in June or July. He added to Mr. Atcheson that the Council hearing it first was just a matter of policy.

Mr. Gray asked if it was not correct that as a matter of State statute, the Planning Commission was responsible for planning for the City. Mr. Scannell confirmed that it was. Mr. Gray remarked that in that case, the procedure should be to present the information to the Planning Commission first. Mr. Mautino stated that he did not have a definitive answer at the moment. He believed that it concerned the nature of how matters which were considered by the Commission were then handed off to the Council. However, Legal could prepare a formal memorandum to the Commission. Mr. Gray said he would like some clarification of the process, and Mr. Mautino said he could send an email and copy it to the rest of the Commissioners as required.

Mr. Christopher asked how this differed from the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Scannell explained that this was the information presented to the Mayor some time ago regarding the amount of available ground that could be developed. She had been using it in her State of the City speeches. Mr. Christopher observed that this information was already in the Comprehensive Plan. He asked if it was more detailed, and Mr. Scannell answered that it had nothing to do with changing the Comprehensive Plan. The report just provided the information concerning how much usable ground was available after the LDS property and some other large lots were taken out.

Mr. Atcheson remarked that Mr. Gray might have wanted to take it a step further and basically revisit the Comprehensive Plan. He knew that the Thoroughfare Master Plan was being worked on, but was not sure who was actually working on it. Mr. Scannell answered that the Thoroughfare Master Plan would be presented to the Planning Commission on June 27th, and it would be part of a Comprehensive Plan amendment for the Commission’s consideration.

Chairperson Trainer asked about the schedule to do all the parts of the city. Mr. Scannell estimated that it would be this year, and it was Mr. McKay’s plan to do that annually, including staff reviewing the land uses for the entire city. He added this was a long-term process that could take several months with all the background work that was needed. He agreed with Chairperson Trainer that historically, the process was to break it apart into components. Staff would also be looking at doing some smaller-scale neighborhood plans.

Chairperson Trainer stated that she would call Mr. McKay on Friday, and would come in to talk with staff as well. She remarked that the Commission now had several issues that they could not seem to resolve. One was the joint meeting with the City Council and the difficulty in scheduling it.

Ms. Rosenquist felt there was a certain lack of communication, especially in view of the Council having the information first. Chairperson Trainer said she would see if she could schedule a meeting with staff on Friday, and Mr. Scannell told her that both Mr. McKay and Ms. Tyrrel would be out of the office on Friday because of the upcoming holiday. Chairperson Trainer asked him to check about Thursday. PLANNING COMMISSION 5 May 23, 2005

Mr. Christopher had seen some documents that might be helpful to the Commission, particularly the Comprehensive Plan and the Thoroughfare Plan; and some changes had definitely been made in both. There were also the projections for growth over the next 10 years. Mr. Scannell said the latter was part of the Water and Storm/Sewer plan. Mr. McKay probably intended to roll that into his planned presentation to both the Commission and City Council; as it was mainly new information. Mr. Christopher considered this a very useful document, as it showed staff’s insight into where development would be happening. Mr. Scannell explained to Mr. Atcheson that Mr. Zhan had done population projections for the consultants doing the Water/Sewer report, so they could figure out what planning was necessary for infrastructure. Mr. Christopher felt that this and the Thoroughfare Plan were especially relevant to figuring out where the Commission needed to be going.

Mr. Christopher explained to Mr. Atcheson that as a rule, the Design and Construction Manual would assume that the sewer lines being built would carry the loads including the stormwater. Mr. Monter stated that hopefully, what was being constructed today was better quality. Clay pipes that would break down and allowed much more infiltration were no longer used, for example. The Design and Construction Manual had completely re-evaluated factors like heavy flow days. Mr. Atcheson remarked that trying to be more aggressive about enforcement of building regulations and aspects like connections was as important as better building materials. Mr. Reece felt that the City was facing a serious situation with capacity in the future if they did not look at water and sewer thoroughly now. It could mean a situation down the road where the City would have capacity issues and so would have to cut off new development. Mr. Monter agreed, remarking that ultimately that would come to the City and the Commission.

Mr. Scannell introduced Mr. Chris Hughey, a new Planning Technician who had started just this week. Mr. Mautino remarked that he had seen Ms. Brennan at City Hall and she seemed to be doing well.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, Chairperson Trainer adjourned the meeting at 6:22 p.m.

PC052306