Downtown Review Board

East Conference Room – 903 W. Main Street – City Hall DOWNTOWN REVIEW BOARD MEETING AGENDA Thursday, March 16, 2017 - 4:00 p.m. Board Members please call 228-0207 if unable to attend 1 CALL TO ORDER A. Approval of February 22, 2017 & March 2, 2017 meeting minutes 2 REVIEW OF PROJECT APPLICATIONS A. DRB-03-17-5726 / 902 SW South Avenue / Contractor Storage – Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Design Review 3 OTHER BUSINESS 4 ADJOURN If special accommodations are required for citizen participation in this meeting, PLEASE CALL 228-0207 (VOICE) OR 228-0250 (TDD) 03.16.2017 Page 1 of 1 kf  City of Blue Springs 903 Main Blue Springs, Missouri 64015 Downtown Review Board MINUTES Wednesday, February 22, 2017 A meeting of the Downtown Review Board of the City of Blue Springs was held in the City Hall East Conference Room located at 903 W. Main Street on Wednesday, February 22, 2017 with the following members, guests and staff in attendance: ATTENDANCE Jennifer Hauschild Scott Allen, Community Dev. Joe Haney, PC Rep. Chris Sandie, Public Works Cindy Miller, Chairman Kent Edmondson, Councilman STAFF Matt Wright, Senior Planner ABSENT Yvonne Woods Councilman Chris Lievsay Jackie Fairbanks, PC Alt. Rep. James Wallace, PC Rep. Karen Findora, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER Chairman Cindy Miller called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA Chairman Miller requested action on the Consent Agenda with a motion by APPROVAL Board Member Jennifer Hauschild, to approve the minutes for November 18, 2016, a second from Board Member Joe Haney, and a unanimous vote, the Minutes of November 18, 2016, were approved as submitted. AGENDA ITEM 2A. Matt Wright, Senior Planner, stated before the Downtown Review Board is DRB-02-17-5693 / “1204 a request for approval for the replacement of a deck located at 1204 NW B NW B Street” / New Deck Street. The deck consists of a 10 X 10 (100 sq. ft.) wood deck and associated stairs at the front entrance of the house. APPLICANT Kay Murphy, owner stated that the old porch consisted of concrete. It expanded the entire front left side of the house. To clear the stairs, the DRB Minutes – 02.22.2017 Page 1 of 3 kf  previous owners had to build a bigger deck over the concrete deck and the concrete deck is now falling away from the house. Water is now getting in there and the new owner will need to remove the concrete as well and install a smaller deck. QUESTIONS Scott Allen, Director, Community Development, asked if the request was just for the deck since other work is going on at that location. Mr. Wright stated that it’s just for the deck. MOTION Board Member Joe Haney moved to approve DRB-02-17-5693 / “1204 NW AGENDA ITEM 2A. B Street” / New Deck. DRB-02-17-5693 / “1204 NW B Street” / New Deck SECOND Seconded by Board Member Jennifer Hauschild. Yvonne Woods – Absent James Wallace – Absent VOTE Joe Haney – Aye Kent Edmondson – Aye Jennifer Hauschild - Aye Chris Lievsay – Absent Scott Allen – Aye Jackie Fairbanks – Absent Cindy Miller, Chairman - Aye Chris Sandie – Aye (APPROVED 6-Aye, 0-No) AGENDA ITEM 2B. Matt Wright, Senior Planner, stated before the Downtown Review Board is DRB-02-17-5694 / “816 SW a request for a new home located at 816 SW Jones Street. John Broker is the Jones Street” / New House applicant with Michael Yancik being the property owner. The applicant is requesting to build a 1,289 sq. ft. single-family house in the Downtown Zoning District. APPLICANT The applicant was absent. QUESTIONS Chris Sandie, Director, Public Works, asked if the alley in the back of the property would affect the setbacks. Mr. Wright stated that it would not. The alley way is not abandoned. Councilman Edmondson asked if the applicant could come to the City and ask to abandoned it. Mr. Sandie stated that they could, but he wasn’t sure if there were any utilities in the alley way. When you abandon an alley, half goes each direction. Mr. Wright stated that the alleys are treated like a side yard. Chairman Miller asked if Mr. Yancik owns the property to the west. Mr. Wright stated that he does. He further stated that this was the property they requested to demolish with the Historic Preservation Commission. The Commission wanted to see that house remain, but was okay with him parceling it off to another house between the existing house at 202 and this lot. The City hasn’t heard of any other plans for that home. As far as the alley goes the owner would have to work with the owner of 803 Walnut to vacate the alley. It could potentially be a utility easement. DRB Minutes – 02.22.2017 Page 2 of 3 kf MOTION Councilman Kent Edmondson moved to approve DRB-02-17-5694 / “816 AGENDA ITEM 2B. SW Jones Street.” DRB-02-17-5694 / “816 SW Jones Street” / New House SECOND Seconded by Board Member Jennifer Hauschild. VOTE Yvonne Woods – Absent James Wallace – Absent Joe Haney – Aye Kent Edmondson – Aye Jennifer Hauschild - Aye Chris Lievsay – Absent Scott Allen – Aye Jackie Fairbanks – Absent Cindy Miller, Chairman - Aye Chris Sandie – Aye (APPROVED 6-Aye, 0-No) OTHER BUSINESS Chairman Miller stated that the Design Team formed a sub-committee to look at design review guidelines and recommendations, to help people coming in the district with their renovation projects. They are currently working on pictures that deal with awnings, signage, materials, lighting, etc. The Committee is looking at what other cities are doing. The information will be added to the booklet that talks about the CDBG and MCRC funding. Once the draft is completed it will be presented to the DRB. The plan is to have it completed by the Design Team Sub-Committee by March and then the draft will be presented to the DRB and Historic Preservation Commission so that they can review and make recommendations. The draft will go to City Council in April. Chairman Miller thanked Matt Wright for all the work that he has put in to this project. Chairman Miller stated that the next Design Team meeting would be March 10th. Those folks that attended the meetings are Steve Miller, Jeff Sykes, James Wallace, Matt Wright, Pam Abarelli, Shauna Markley, Cindy Miller, John Broker, Lyle Shaver, Randy Sallee. The City appreciates the builders’ input. MEETING ADJOURN With no further discussion, a motion was made by Board Member Jennifer Hauschild to adjourn at 4:14 p.m. Seconded by Councilman Kent Edmondson. _______________________________ Respectfully Submitted by, Karen Findora, Recording Secretary ____________________________________ __________________________ Cindy Miller, Chairman Date DRB Minutes – 02.22.2017 Page 3 of 3 kf  City of Blue Springs 903 Main Blue Springs, Missouri 64015 Downtown Review Board MINUTES Thursday, March 2, 2017 A meeting of the Downtown Review Board of the City of Blue Springs was held in the City Hall East Conference Room located at 903 W. Main Street on Thursday, March 2, 2017 with the following members, guests and staff in attendance: ATTENDANCE Jennifer Hauschild Scott Allen, Community Dev. Joe Haney, PC Rep. Chris Sandie, Public Works Cindy Miller, Chairman Kent Edmondson, Councilman STAFF Matt Wright, Senior Planner ABSENT Yvonne Woods Councilman Chris Lievsay Jackie Fairbanks, PC Alt. Rep. James Wallace, PC Rep. Karen Findora, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER Chairman Cindy Miller called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. AGENDA ITEM 2A. Matt Wright, Senior Planner, stated before the Downtown Review Board is DRB-02-17-5699 / “803 W a request for approval for solar panel installation at 803 W Main Street. The Main Street” / Solar Panels applicant is proposing 26 solar panels on the front side of the building. The Installation City doesn’t have any regulations in the Downtown Development Code for solar panels so staff didn’t make a recommendation. Staff is looking to the DRB for their recommendations on how we should proceed with solar panels in the downtown area in the future. Councilman Edmondson questioned if the applicant would be placing the panels along the front slope of the home along Main Street. DRB Minutes – 03.02.2017 Page 1 of 2 kf APPLICANT James Dawson, KC Electrical Contractors Mr. Dawson stated that there will be four panels along the front slope. Mr. Dawson stated that there are eight (8) panels facing the south and nine (9) panels facing the east and west. QUESTIONS Chairman Miller asked the applicant why they were wanting to install the panels. Mr. Dawson stated that the applicant would like to basically diminish their electric bill. They have engineers that take the wattage that is used throughout the year and build a sized system that fits between 90% & 95% of their electric bill. Mr. Dawson stated that electric companies don’t like to receive a buyback of electricity, they try to keep it just below the 100% range. When they do have an over production during the month, they only get $0.02 on the dollar. If a home owner buys 110% of their electric bill that extra 10% they will never pay off, because they will never get enough money from the electric company to cover that cost. The engineer designs it and tries to keep it at about 95% so that it keeps the homeowner at the best production as possible. Chairman Miller informed the applicant that the Downtown Design Team has formed a Sub-Committee to work on design guidelines for the downtown area. Solar panels have yet to be looked at within the guidelines. There was concern that the panels would be very visible and don’t fit in the downtown area. Chairman Miller pulled some photos of examples of the mounted solar panels on homes from the internet. Councilman Edmondson asked the applicant if they have looked at ground mounts in the back yard so that it wouldn’t be seen from the street. They would have to look at the setbacks. Mr. Wright stated that they would be treated as an accessory so it would be 2 1/2 ft. from the side and rear property lines. Mr. Dawson stated that they would be 40 ft. long and 10 ft. wide. There was further discussion and the Board decided to table this project until the Downtown Design Sub-Committee presents their approved Design Guidelines. This should take place in late April – early May of 2017. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Wright stated that the next item to be heard on March 16th is the Clay Swope property located at 902 SW South Ave. Councilman Edmondson was concerned with the lighting for the project. Mr. Wright will take a close look at the lighting for that location. MEETING ADJOURN With no further discussion, a motion was made by Board Member Jennifer Hauschild to adjourn at 4:37 p.m. Seconded by Board Member Joe Haney. _______________________________ Respectfully Submitted by, Karen Findora, Recording Secretary ____________________________________ __________________________ Cindy Miller, Chairman Date DRB Minutes – 03.02.2017 Page 2 of 2 kf  DOWNTOWN REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: March 16, 2017 Agenda Item: 2A Case File Number: DRB-03-17-5726 Project Name: Contractor Storage Type of Application: Conditional Use Permit & Site Plan Design Review Request: Approve a Conditional Use Permit for a “Warehouse, Residential Storage” use and a “Small Commercial Building” type for Contractor Storage at 902 SW South Avenue. Approve a Site Plan Design Review for a 5,600-sq. ft. warehouse, residential storage facility. Applicant: Contractor Storage / Clay Swope Property Owner: Clay & Donna Swope Engineer: Joe Lampen, Lampen Engineering, Inc. Architect: N/A Location (Address): 902 SW South Avenue General Location: South of SW South Avenue, approximately 220 feet east of SW 10th Street Area: 0.55 +/- acres Proposed Lots: 1 Existing Zoning: “T5” (Urban Center) Proposed Zoning: “T5” (Urban Center) Existing Land Use: Vacant (former single family house) Proposed Land Use: Warehouse, Residential Storage Comprehensive Plan Designation: Distinct Destination Attachments:  DRB Application  Site Plan  Building Elevations Downtown Review Board: March 16, 2017 Planning Commission: March 27, 2017 City Council: N/A Planner: Matt Wright, Senior Planner Page 1 of 6 Project: Contractor Storage Conditional Use Permit & Site Plan Design Review Figure 1. Vicinity Map / General Location Map Figure 2. Project Site (Aerial Photo) Page 2 of 6  Project: Contractor Storage Conditional Use Permit & Site Plan Design Review BACKGROUND INFORMATION/SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a “Warehouse, Residential Storage” use and a “Small Commercial Building” type at 902 SW South Avenue. The applicant is also requesting approval of a Site Plan Design Review for Contractor Storage, which includes a 5,600-square foot warehouse, residential storage building on a 0.55 +/- acre site. The subject property previously had a single-family home and detached garage, which were demolished in spring 2016. The property was rezoned from “T3” (Sub-Urban) to “T5” (Urban Center) in September 2016, which would allow a warehouse, storage use with a Conditional Use Permit. The applicant also owns 806 and 808 SW South Avenue, which includes an existing warehouse, residential storage use. PREVIOUS ACTIONS/APPROVALS:  On March 26, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended approval of a rezoning from “LI” (Light Industrial) to “T3” (Sub-Urban) as part of the rezoning for the Downtown Zoning District. The City Council approved the rezoning on April 2, 2007.  On August 31, 2016, the Downtown Review Board recommend approval of a rezoning from “T3” (Sub-Urban) to “T5” (Urban Center) for Contractors Storage at 806-902 SW South Avenue. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning on September 12, 2016. The City Council approved the rezoning on September 19, 2016. FUTURE APPLICATIONS/REVIEWS ANTICIPATED OR REQUIRED: The applicant has submitted a Preliminary Plat and a Final Plat that will run concurrently with the Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Design Review. A Final Plat must be approved and recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit for any new buildings or additions. Permits for signage will be reviewed by the Downtown Review Board at a later date. ABUTTING ZONING AND LAND USES: Direction Current Zoning Surrounding Land Uses North: Right-of-Way SW South Avenue (Local) South: Railroad Right-of-Way Kansas City Southern Railroad East: “T3” (Sub-Urban) Single-Family Residential West: “T3” (Sub-Urban) Single-Family Residential DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE (DDC): The following items from the Downtown Development Code (DDC) (Section 404.240) are applicable to the rezoning request: Land Use: The proposed land use is “Warehouse, Residential Storage,” which includes an “enclosed storage facility containing independent, fully enclosed bays that are leased to individuals exclusively for long-term storage of their household goods or personal property.” The use is only Page 3 of 6  Project: Contractor Storage Conditional Use Permit & Site Plan Design Review permitted by a Conditional Use Permit in the “T5” (Urban Center) zoning district. This use is an extension of an existing storage use to the east, also owned by the applicant. Building Type: The proposed building type is a “Small Commercial Building,” which is only permitted by a Conditional Use Permit in the “T5” (Urban Center) zoning district per the Downtown Development Code. The building type is the only commercial building type that permits a single-story building. Height and Area: The minimum height from floor to ceiling of the first floor is 15-feet, measured from grade to eave. The one-story building has a total height of 21.75-feet from grade to roof peak. Setbacks: The following setbacks apply to the development based on the zoning district (T5) and frontage type (front yard): Area Required Setback Proposed Setback Front 0-ft. min. – 15-ft. max. 15-ft. Side 0-ft. min. – 10-ft. max 10-ft. Rear 5-ft. min. 42-ft. Parking and other paved areas must be setback at least 25- ft. from the right-of-way and at least 6-ft. from any property line. Permanent parking has not been provided within 25-ft. of the right-of-way. The only paved area within 25-ft. of the right-of-way is associated with the access drive to the site and storage bays. Access & Parking: Access to the subject property is provided through a single access on SW South Avenue. Access to the site is restricted by residential to the west and the railroad tracks to the south. There is not a specific parking requirement for warehouse, residential storage in the DDC. A minimum of 1 space per 5 storage bays or 1 space per 1,000-s.f., whichever is less, is required per Section 407.010.A. Since 7 storage bays are proposed, only 1 parking space is required. With the access drive and associated pavement, parking can be provided in front of any storage bay, if needed. Sidewalk: The only sidewalk requirement is a 5-ft. sidewalk along SW South Avenue which must be installed or a financial guarantee submitted prior to approval of the Final Plat by the City Council. Page 4 of 6  Project: Contractor Storage Conditional Use Permit & Site Plan Design Review Landscaping: The following landscaping requirements apply to the site: Area Required Proposed Landscaping Landscaping Street 1 street tree per 25-ft. 4 street trees have of street frontage been provided (107.72’ / 25 = 4.3) = 4 street trees required Front 10 plantings between 10 shrubs have been front property line and provided in the building front building line setback Building Design: The applicant is proposing a 5,600-sq. ft. warehouse, residential storage building that will include seven (7) storage bays each with a garage door and separate pedestrian entrance. The rectangular building (40-ft. by 140- ft.) includes a mix of building materials, including brick veneer, fiber cement siding, and 26-gauge metal panels. The north façade, facing SW South Avenue, will include brick veneer and fiber cement siding along with a metal awning 10-feet above grade along the entire front. The east façade includes seven (7) overhead doors for each storage bay and seven (7) pedestrian doors for each storage bay. The east façade includes brick veneer and fiber cement siding. The west façade, facing single family residential, includes brick veneer along the front 40-feet of the building, but is predominantly fiber cement siding. The south façade, facing the railroad tracks, will be entirely 26-gauge metal panels. Due to the location and lack of visibility of this side, staff is not concerned with the use of metal paneling on this façade. The DDC requires at least 75% of the façade be a mix of masonry and fiber cement siding. The applicant has met this requirement with the doors subtracted out of the façade area, as the doors cover over 20% of the façade by themselves. The roofing consists of 26-guage metal panels. The fiber cement siding and metal wall panels will be white with a dark red metal roof. These will be similar colors to the existing warehouse storage buildings to the east, also owned by the applicant. Lighting: An exterior lighting plan has not been submitted. However, the applicant has stated that they will have building- mounted lighting along the east building wall adjacent to the storage bay doors. No ground-mounted lighting is planned. An exterior lighting plan must be reviewed and approved administratively through the building permit process. Page 5 of 6  Project: Contractor Storage Conditional Use Permit & Site Plan Design Review REVIEW CRITERIA: The Downtown Review Board will make a recommendation to the Planning Commission on the Conditional Use Permit request. A Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed according to the following criteria: 1. The application furthers the intent of the proposed zoning district and supports that of any abutting districts. 2. Compliance of any proposed development with the requirements of this Development Code. 3. Whether any additional site-specific conditions are necessary to meet the purposes and intent of this Development Code and the intent or design objectives of any applicable subsections of this Development Code. 4. The impact on the public realm, including the design and functions of streetscapes and relationships of building and site elements to the streetscape. 5. The adequacy of drainage, utilities and other public facilities. 6. Compatibility with the character of the area in terms of building scale, building form, landscape, and site design. 7. Compatibility with the area in terms of operating characteristics such as hours of operation, visible and audible impacts, traffic patterns, intensity of use as proposed or foreseeable, and other potential impacts on adjacent property. 8. The application will not prevent development and use of the neighboring property in accordance with the applicable development regulations. 9. The long range plans applicable to the site and surrounding area are not negatively impacted considering the permanence of the proposed use, the permanence of existing uses in the area, and any changes in character occurring in the area. 10. The recommendations of professional staff. The Downtown Review Board will make a recommendation to the Planning Commission on the Site Plan Design Review request. A Site Plan Design Review shall be reviewed according to the following criteria: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Development Code. 2. The application is consistent with any approved specific plans, overlay districts, concept plans, or other specific design and development policies or standards applicable to this site. 3. Whether any additional site-specific conditions are necessary to meet the intent and design objectives of any of the applicable development standards. 4. The application meets the criteria for all other reviews needed to build the project as proposed. 5. The recommendations of professional staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of both the Conditional Use Permit and the Site Plan Design Review requests. Staff will add conditions to both applications prior to submittal to the Planning Commission for their review and approval. The Downtown Review Board may recommend conditions be added for Planning Commission consideration. Page 6 of 6