Planning Commission Agendas

Planning Commission AGENDA Monday January 25, 2016 6:30 p.m. MUNICIPAL ANNEX 1304 MAIN STREET City of Blue Springs  Bartolotta Travis Graham Banks Chairman Sanders Peil McCall Duhon Billups Haney Craddolph Wallace  PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY If you will require special accommodations to allow your participation in this meeting, please call 228-0207 (voice) or 228-0250 (TDD) 1. The Chairman will open the public hearing and call for exhibits from the City Attorney. 2. Staff comments 3. Applicant will make a presentation (See time limits on next page) 4. Witnesses in favor of the petition will be called to speak. (See time limits on next page) If you wish to testify, please raise your hand to be recognized. When you are called upon by the Chairman, please come forward to the microphone at the podium to be sworn in by the Public Stenographer. State your name and your address clearly, and make your comments to the Commission. Please refrain from repeating points made by others. 5. Witnesses opposed to the petition will be called to speak. (See time limits on next page) If you wish to testify, please raise your hand to be recognized. When you are called upon by the Chairman, please come forward to the microphone at the podium to be sworn in by the Public Stenographer. State your name and your address clearly, and make your comments to the Commission. Please refrain from repeating points made by others. 6. Questions and General Discussion 7. The Chairman will close the public hearing, and the Commission will consider the facts and approve or deny the request.  A recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for their review and action.  City of Blue Springs PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MANAGEMENT CRITERIA  Introduction – Open Public Hearing - Introduce Items – Call for Exhibits  Staff Presentation – No more than 10 minutes  Questions from Commission – No time limit  Applicant (petitioner) presentation – No more than 15 minutes  Questions from Commission – No time limit  Proponents – each – No more than 5 minutes (No Redundancy)  Questions from Commission – No time limit  Opponents (if using a spokesperson) – No more than 15 minutes  Questions from the Commission – No time limit  Opponents (each) – No more than 5 minutes (No Redundancy)  Questions from Commission – No time limit  Commission discussion  Close Public Hearing  New items will not be started after 10:00 p.m. unless decided by the Planning Commission. Special Meetings will be called when necessary with the recommendation of Staff and the Chairperson. ###  Municipal Annex – 1304 W Main Street PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Monday, January 25, 2016 - 6:30 p.m. Planning Commissioners please call 228-0207 if unable to attend 1 CALL TO ORDER – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - CONSENT AGENDA (All items under Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.) a) MINUTES January 11, 2016 2 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FINAL PLAN / PUDF-12-15-5133 / “Indigo Hills Amended PUD Lots 30-38 and Tracts D and E” / South of 40 Highway, west of SE Elizabeth Street, north and east of Fleming Park 3 FINAL PLAT / PF-12-15-5134 / “Indigo Hills PUD – 2nd Plat Lots 30-33” / South of 40 Highway, west of SW Elizabeth Street, north and east of Fleming Park 4 OTHER BUSINESS – The next scheduled meeting is Monday, February 8, 2016. 5 ADJOURN If special accommodations are required for citizen participation in this meeting, PLEASE CALL 228-0207 (VOICE) OR 228-0250 (TDD) 01.25.2016 Page 1 of 1 kf  City of Blue Springs 903 Main Blue Springs, Missouri 64015 Planning Commission MINUTES Monday, January 11, 2016 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Blue Springs was held in the Municipal Annex located at 1304 W Main Street on Monday, January 11, 2016 with the following members, guests and staff in attendance: ATTENDANCE Ken Billups Mitchell Peil Joe Haney Ginger Duhon Lynn Banks Phil Bartolotta LaTasha McCall Chairman, Travis Graham Scott Allen, Community Development Director Jim Holley, Community Development Assistant Director Matt Wright, Associate Planner Ben McCabe, City Engineer Nancy Yendes, City Attorney Kent Edmondson, Councilman – District 2 (Mayor Pro-Tem) Karen Findora, Recording Secretary Jim Leacock, Public Stenographer Mike Genet, Blue Springs Examiner ABSENT Planning Commissioner Jason Sanders Planning Commissioner Byron Craddolph Planning Commissioner James Wallace CALL TO ORDER Chairman Travis Graham called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with a request that everyone stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Chairman Graham requested action on the Consent Agenda with a motion APPROVAL by Commissioner Mitchell Peil, a second from Commissioner Lynn Banks, and a unanimous vote, the Minutes of December 28, 2015, were approved as submitted. P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 1 of 14 kf AGENDA ITEM 2 Chairman Graham informed the Commission that Agenda Item 2 would not PUBLIC HEARNG be heard and has been pulled from the agenda. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / CUP-12-15-5124 / “Quack’s Paint & Collison, LLC” / 3005 SW Westbound US 40 Highway AGENDA ITEM 3 The public hearing for Agenda Item 3 was opened at 6:32 p.m. with a PUBLIC HEARING request for exhibits from the City Attorney. Ms. Nancy Yendes introduced REZONING / RZ-12-15- Exhibits 1 thru 8 for Agenda Item 3 into the public record on behalf of the 5125 / “2501 NW South applicant. Outer Road” Exhibits: 1. Staff Report with attachments 2. Affidavit of Publication in B.S. Examiner on December 26, 2015 3. Application with attachments 4. 185 ft. Notification Map 5. Names/addresses of property owners within 185 ft. of site 6. Copy of letter sent to said property owners 7. Title IV, Land Use Section – B.S. Code of Ordinances (by reference) 8. 2014 Comprehensive Plan (by reference) STAFF COMMENTS Matt Wright, Associate Planner, stated before the Planning Commission is a request to rezone three parcels of land located on the north side of NW South Outer Road. The current zoning of said property is “GB” (General Business) and the applicant would like to rezone the property to “RC” (Regional Commercial). This would allow additional uses on this site that are not currently permitted in General Business. The total site contains approximately 5.6 +\- acres and currently has two buildings in the center of the site. The applicant has requested to amend the rezoning to only rezone the center parcel with the two buildings which is approximately 2.92 +\- acres. Mr. Wright distributed an exhibit showing the area highlighted. The applicant is proposing to renovate or replace the two existing buildings on the site. Mr. Wright stated that permitted uses that are currently permitted on site include retail and manufacturing limited. Proposed uses that require rezoning to regional commercial and conditional use permit would be vehicle sales and possibly vehicle repair limited. The site meets the intent of the regional commercial zoning district due to its location with high visibility from I-70 and surrounding land uses which include other regional commercial zoning districts. Staff recommends approval of the rezoning either as originally requested or as amended by the applicant’s request. P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 2 of 14 kf  Commissioner Mitchell Peil asked if there had been any returns of the 185 ft. notification letters. Ms. Karen Findora, Recording Secretary stated there had not. APPLICANT Rich Hoffman 31B Lake Shore Drive Lake Latowanna, MO 64086 Mr. Hoffman stated that they intended to only rezone the center of the property because that is the area they would like to develop. They are not sure what they would like to do with the other two tracts. Mr. Hoffman stated that they will clean up all three tracts, and they are going to widen South Outer Road. Mr. Hoffman stated that they will sell muscle cars out of this site but no vehicle repair will be done. QUESTIONS Commissioner Ken Billups asked the applicant if there was some reason that they don’t want to rezone the other two lots. Mr. Hoffman stated that there are a couple of things that are not allowed in Regional Commercial zoning that they may want to add at a later date. Like a bar/restaurant or repairs on vehicles. Mr. Hoffman stated that he would like to leave these two lots open. Mr. Scott Allen, Director, Community Development, stated that uses like bar/restaurant are not allowed in Regional Commercial so staff understands why the applicant would want to retain that General Business zoning until a more specific use is identified. Commissioner Billups thought that looking at a Master Plan perspective he felt that rezoning all three lots would make more sense. Commissioner Billups stated that his preference is to zone all three but understands their reasons to rezone just the center. Commission Lynn Banks asked if there were particular addresses associated with the area that is to be rezoned. Mr. Wright stated that the addresses that would be included in the rezoning would be 2501 and 2525 NW South Outer Road. WITNESSES IN FAVOR None. WITNESSES OPPOSED None. HEARING CLOSED With no further discussion, Chairman Graham closed the public hearing at 6:42 p.m. MOTION Commissioner Mitchell Peil recommended the approval of Rezoning / RZ- AGENDA ITEM 3 12-15-5125 / “2501& 2525 NW South Outer Road.” PUBLIC HEARING REZONING / RZ-12-15- 5125 / “2501 NW South Outer Road” SECOND Seconded by Commissioner Ginger Duhon. P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 3 of 14 kf VOTE Ken Billups – Aye LaTasha McCall – Aye Joseph Haney – Aye Mitchell Peil - Aye Ginger Duhon – Aye Byron Craddolph – Absent Lynn Banks – Aye James Wallace – Absent Jason Sanders – Absent Phil Bartolotta – Aye Travis Graham, Chairman - Aye (APPROVED 8-Aye, 0-No) The public hearing for Agenda Item 4 was opened at 6:44 p.m. with a AGENDA ITEM 4 request for exhibits from the City Attorney. Ms. Yendes introduced PUBLIC HEARING Exhibits 1 thru 8 for Agenda Item 4 into the public record on behalf of the VACATION / VAC-12-15- applicant. 5131 / “Indigo Hills PUD 2nd Exhibits: Plat” / SW Indigo Hills 1. Staff Report with attachments Drive, northwest of SW 2. Affidavit of Publication in B.S. Examiner on Elizabeth Street December 26, 2015 3. Application with attachments 4. 185 ft. Notification Map 5. Names/addresses of property owners within 185 ft. of site 6. Copy of letter sent to said property owners 7. Title IV, Land Use Section – B.S. Code of Ordinances (by reference) 8. 2014 Comprehensive Plan (by reference) Matt Wright, Associate Planner, stated before the Planning Commission is a STAFF COMMENTS request to vacate a 1,500 sq. ft. street easement that is part of the Indigo Hills PUD. This street is an extension of SW Indigo Hills Drive to SW Elizabeth Street. In the original Preliminary Plat of Indigo Hills this was intended to be an extension that would become a cul-de-sac that was named SW Patricia Circle. The revised Preliminary Plat and PUD Concept Plan was approved in February 2015 that would remove this street extension and have lots fronting SW Elizabeth Street. Therefore, the street is no longer needed for future development and was made a condition that it would be vacated prior to approval of the PUD Final Plan and the 2nd Plat of Indigo Hills. Mr. Wright stated that staff has visited the site and the former street has been removed along with the curb and gutter along south SW Elizabeth Street. There was a fire hydrant in that street easement and it has also been relocated to the right-of-way of SW Elizabeth Street. There was also a street light that was relocated. Mr. Wright stated that vacating the street will allow the applicant to proceed with the development as approved with the PUD Concept Plan and the Preliminary Plat. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the vacation. Lindsey Woods, Owner APPLICANT 903 SE Willow Place Blue Springs, MO 64014 P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 4 of 14 kf QUESTIONS None. WITNESSES IN FAVOR None. WITNESSES OPPOSED None. HEARING CLOSED With no further discussion, Chairman Graham closed the public hearing at 6:48 p.m. MOTION Commissioner Ginger Duhon recommended the approval of Vacation / AGENDA ITEM 4 VAC-12-15-5131 / “Indigo Hills PUD 2nd Plat.” PUBLIC HEARING VACATION / VAC-12-15- 5131 / “Indigo Hills PUD 2nd Plat” / SW Indigo Hills Drive, northwest of SW Elizabeth Street SECOND Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell Peil. Ken Billups – Aye LaTasha McCall – Aye VOTE Joseph Haney - Aye Mitchell Peil - Aye Ginger Duhon – Aye Byron Craddolph – Absent Lynn Banks – Aye James Wallace – Absent Jason Sanders – Absent Phil Bartolotta – Aye Travis Graham, Chairman - Aye (APPROVED 8-Aye, 0-No) Jim Holley, Assistant Director of Community Development, stated before AGENDA ITEM 5 the Planning Commission is a request from Davidson Architecture and PUD FINAL PLAN & Engineering, to construct a 85,796 sq. ft. grocery store, and an attached SITE PLAN/DESIGN 6,219 sq. ft. retail space on 10.10 +\- acres, and detention basin on 0.97 +\- REIVEW / PUDS-10-15- acres. 5052 / “White Oak Marketplace” / SW Corner of The property is located on the west side of SW 7 Highway, south of SW Sunset Ave. & 7 Highway Sunset Avenue. The property is zoned “GB” (General Business). & AGENDA ITEM 6 Mr. Holley stated this project is a three phase development. The first phase PRELIMINARY PLAT / is defined as a grocery store and attached store retail space. The second PP-11-15-5060 / “White Oak phase is defined as residential located more on the western portion of the Marketplace” / SW Corner of site. The third phase involves the construction of retail pad sites. Sunset Ave. & 7 Highway & This particular PUD defines only phase one and that is the grocery store AGENDA ITEM 7 development. FINAL PLAT / PF-11-15- 5061 / “White Oak Mr. Holley stated that in Section 401.050 of the City’s UDC defined a Marketplace” / SW Corner of grandfathering clause basically a completion of development, in short that Sunset Ave. & 7 Highway says, “If you started the process of a development prior to the adoption of the 2015 UDC, you could proceed forward under the former 1996 UDC requirements.” In this case that is what the applicant is doing. P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 5 of 14 kf  The PUD shows access to the site along SW 7 Highway which is currently the signalized access that will remain. The applicant will construct a median from that location and it will precede south to just before another access right before the Mall at Fall Creek property line. There will also be a right in and right out only access in the center of the site along 7 Hwy. The southernmost access will be a full service access and it is primarily to accommodate deliveries. It doesn’t allow for a left turn in. The applicant is proposing two access points along Sunset Ave. One will be located between the residential and commercial portion and then a center access between a pad site and the detention area. There were prior discussions about providing cross access easements between this site and Mall at Fall Creek and this site and Central Bank. There is a six (6) ft. grade difference between this site and Mall at Fall Creek. The applicant has proposed to make up three (3) feet of that grade difference on this site so in order for there to be cross access the Mall at Fall Creek side would have to cut somewhere in the neighbor of three (3) feet to meet up with that access point. Staff doesn’t know if that will ever happen but the applicant has made the effort to accommodate cross access at this location. The applicant has also talked with Central Bank to see whether or not there was opportunity to provide cross access. Both parties have determined that there is not an opportunity to provide that access so that Central Bank then is left with coming out to Sunset Avenue. The customers will have to come up make a right turn to the south and keep going or make a u turn to go on to north 7 Highway. Otherwise they will simply come out of the site and travel southbound on 7 Highway. The applicant is proposing 418 total parking spaces that represents approximately 12% over the minimum number required which in this case is 368. Staff is recommending that the applicant provide ten (10) bicycle parking spaces. It wasn’t required under the 1996 UDC but staff is recommending the spaces be installed with this project. The applicant is required to install public sidewalk along 7 Hwy. as well as along south Sunset Avenue. The sidewalks will be required to meet ADA requirements. The sidewalk that is located on the southern property line doesn’t meet up with the existing sidewalk that comes from the Mall at Fall Creek. Staff has added a condition that during the building permit review process the applicant will have to resolve that issue so that those two sidewalks meet. The applicant has provided for pedestrian circulation throughout the site. The applicant submitted an alternative compliance landscape plan. They are proposing 234.5 plant units less then what is required for our code. Their reasoning for doing that has to do with it being a commercial retail site and visibility issues. The applicant has submitted a storm water management report. A “Development and Maintenance Agreement” must be executed outlining P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 6 of 14 kf  construction and maintained responsibilities for on-site storm water management systems and storm water quality best management practices before the issuance of a building permit. The applicant is required to provide areas for outdoor seating and the like. The applicant provided to staff with a rendering of a planter with a seat wall which would be located at the northeast corner. Other than that, staff hasn’t seen anything else. QUESTIONS Staff recommends approval of the PUD Final Plan & Site Plan/Design Review with 22 staff conditions. Commissioner Billups stated that he noticed that in the site plan report that it read that the elevations were conceptual and was concerned that what the Commission was looking at in their packet would not be what is constructed. Mr. Holley stated that the reason the report reads that way is because the elevations are not the actual construction drawings. From staff’s stand point when they get the construction drawing elevations they take them and compare the two and if there are substantial changes to the plans then the applicant is required to go back through the Planning Commission. Commissioner Billups asked what the elevation change was between White Oak and the bank. Mr. Holley stated that he thought it was somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 feet. Commissioner Billups was concerned that you would see an 8 foot wall from the bank. Mr. Holley stated that it would be a combination of a wall and landscape slopes. Commissioner Billups was also concerned with silt run off. Ben McCabe, City Engineer, stated that Public Works would keep a close eye on the project as it’s constructed. Mr. McCabe stated that DNR will be involved with the process. Commissioner Billups was concerned with the water run off towards the bank from the detention basin. Mr. McCabe stated that staff has reviewed the applicant’s storm water management plan and feels confident that the water will be detained with no issues to the bank. Commissioner Billups asked can the sidewalks be installed to meet ADA requirements with the hard slope that is between the grocery store and the Mall at Fall Creek. Mr. Holley stated that the sidewalk can meet the requirements. The reason is because in that portion of the site there is a six foot grade difference and that’s where cross access was proposed. As you move east on the site the grade becomes less and less and by the time you reach the street right-of-way and because the sidewalk has to meet the street right-of-way your grade is fairly insignificant there. The entire slope will be less than 5%. Commission Peil questioned the median. Mr. Holley stated that the median that is going along 7 Hwy. starts roughly just past the signalized intersection. It will run through 7 Hwy. all the way up to the applicant’s south entrance. The south access point is a full access point so they will have full left movements as well as right. Mr. Holley stated that the Preliminary Plat covers the entire development which includes Lots 1 – 5. The Final Plat doesn’t cover the entire development, it excludes the residential portion of the development. P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 7 of 14 kf  Mr. Holley stated that the easements for both water and sewer have been provided on the Final Plat. There may be some easements that may need to be vacated. That will come later as their site plan further develops. Future sidewalk will be needed as well. Staff is recommending approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat with eleven (11) staff conditions. Commissioner Billups asked if there would be a cross access easement to Mall at Fall Creek. Mr. Holley said there will be one provided for future access. APPLICANT Chris Hafner, Davidson Architecture and Engineering 4301 Indian Creek Parkway Overland Park, KS 66207 Mr. Hafner thanked staff for working on the project and stated that it is always a pleasure to work with them. Mr. Hafner stated that the actual centralized entrance to the grocery store is a three-quarter which means it’s a right in, right out and left in. It prohibits the left out traffic which is the same configuration that you have at Sunset and 7 Hwy and then a full access south. Mr. Hafner stated that he agrees with all staff conditions. The applicant stated that as for amenities the applicant is wanting to provide that seat wall public space/gathering space both at the intersection of the retail building and the grocery store which is what they provided on the rendering. The applicant may do the same thing at the opposite corner of the grocery store which would be the northwest corner so whenever the residential development comes in there would be connection. Mr. Hafner stated that they tried to work with the bank on the different elevations. No one could come up with a good solution so they felt for best interest of safety for both customers that they would just allow access on to Sunset and to 7 Hwy. for the bank. QUESTIONS Commissioner Billups suggested that they may look at relocating the building sign. Commissioner Lynn Banks asked if Mr. Hafner received a letter of intent from Price Chopper. Mr. Hafner stated that he doesn’t have that information with him but he has meet with the Cosentino family several times concerning this development and was told to proceed with the process to get the store built. MOTION Commissioner Michell Peil moved to approve PUD Final Plan & Site AGENDA ITEM 5 Plan/Design Review / PUDS-10-15-5052 / “White Oak Marketplace” with PUD FINAL PLAN & twenty two (22) staff recommendations. SITE PLAN/DESIGN REIVEW / PUDS-10-15- P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 8 of 14 kf 5052 / “White Oak Marketplace” / SW Corner of Sunset Ave. & 7 Highway SECOND Seconded by Commissioner Joe Haney. VOTE Ken Billups – Aye LaTasha McCall – Aye Joseph Haney - Aye Mitchell Peil - Aye Ginger Duhon – Aye Byron Craddolph – Absent Lynn Banks – Aye James Wallace – Absent Jason Sanders – Absent Phil Bartolotta – Aye Travis Graham, Chairman - Aye (APPROVED 8-Aye, 0-No) STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approval by the Planning Commission is based on the representations of any drawings presented as part of this application and does not waive any requirement or development standard contained in the UDC nor any condition required by the Planning Commission as part of this approval. 2. The stormwater basin will incorporate storm water quality features as well as stormwater control. A planting scheme incorporating native vegetation and inspection and maintenance procedures shall be incorporated into the construction plans. 3. A “Development and Maintenance Agreement” and “Shared Access Agreement” must be executed outlining construction and maintenance responsibilities for on-site storm water management systems, storm water quality best management practices, and shared access roadways prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. To maintain the waterline loop from Luttrell east to 7 Highway, a waterline connection must be made across the proposed senior housing lot. 5. The applicant shall designate the access points for sewer and water facilities for the three lots to be developed in Phase 3 in the building permit drawings. 6. The developer will be required to install the public sidewalks along both frontages, and said sidewalk shall meet the minimum standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) along SW 7 Highway as well as City standards. 7. An ADA Sidewalk Plan will be required with the construction plans to ensure compliance with ADA provisions. ADA compliant cross slopes are required for sidewalk areas across proposed drives. The City suggests a 1% cross slope in the right of way. 8. The proposed sidewalk at the south end of SW 7 Highway does not line up with the existing sidewalk adjacent to the development to the P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 9 of 14 kf  south. This will need to be corrected on the building permit plans. 9. Staff recommends that a minimum of 10 bicycle parking spaces be provided for this development. 10. An approval letter from MoDOT accepting the traffic impact statement and all improvements that occur in their right-of-way is required prior to building permit issuance. 11. A raised concrete median is required on 7 Highway from Consumer Lane to the proposed south entrance. Left-ins can be considered at the middle access point as the development moves forward, pending MoDOT approval. 12. Approval of the Alternative Compliance Landscape Plan in accordance with Section 407.040.I of the 1996 UDC is provided with this application. Said approval is for Phase 1 of the White Oak Marketplace PUD only. 13. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy certificates, all roof, building and ground mounted equipment, including but not limited to, utility meters, backflow prevention devices, trash receptacles, electrical transformers, telephone boxes must be wholly screened from view (100% opacity) or isolated so as not to be visible within 300 ft. of street right-of-way, parking lots, or residentially zoned property. 14. The storm water basin will incorporate storm water quality features as well as stormwater control. 15. A “Development and Maintenance Agreement” and “Shared Access Agreement” must be executed outlining construction and maintenance responsibilities for on-site storm water management systems, storm water quality best management practices, and shared access roadways prior to issuance of a building permit. The City’s generic agreements are attached for review. 16. A City of Blue Springs Right-of-Way permit will be required for work along a. Sunset Avenue. 17. A right-of-way permit from MoDOT will be required. 18. A land disturbance permit from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) along with the associated storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) is required with the construction plans. 19. A construction permit for public infrastructure (Sanitary Sewer, storm sewer, and water) is required prior to commencing construction activities and shall be acquired from the Engineering Division of Public Works. 20. Any facilities intended to be dedicated to the City of Blue Springs P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 10 of 14 kf  must be constructed up to City of Blue Springs standards and specifications. 21. Maintenance bonding is required for public infrastructure – water, sanitary and sewer. Per City Code, following construction of public improvements a maintenance bond in an amount equal to one-half (½) the cost of construction and satisfactory to the City Attorney shall be posted with the City Engineer or his/her designate, guaranteeing against defects in construction for a period of two (2) years. 22. Following construction, As-Built Drawings (also known as Record Drawings) are required for public infrastructure. MOTION Commissioner Mitchell Peil moved to approve the Preliminary Plat / PP- AGENDA ITEM 6 11-15-5060 / “White Oak Marketplace” with eleven (11) staff PRELIMINARY PLAT / recommendations. PP-11-15-5060 / “White Oak Marketplace” / SW Corner of Sunset Ave. & 7 Highway SECOND Seconded by Commissioner Ginger Duhon. VOTE Ken Billups – Aye LaTasha McCall – Aye Joseph Haney - Aye Mitchell Peil - Aye Ginger Duhon – Aye Byron Craddolph – Absent Lynn Banks – Aye James Wallace – Absent Jason Sanders – Absent Phil Bartolotta – Aye Travis Graham, Chairman - Aye (APPROVED 8-Aye, 0-No) STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approval by the Planning Commission is based on the representations of any drawings presented as part of this application and does not waive any requirement or development standard contained in the UDC nor any condition required by the Planning Commission as part of this approval. 2. An approval letter from MoDOT accepting the traffic study and proposed right-turn lanes must be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. All improvements within the 7 Highway right-of-way must be coordinated with MoDOT. 3. The five (5) foot sidewalk along 7 Highway and a 4-foot sidewalk along SW Sunset Avenue must be installed, or a financial guarantee submitted, prior to City Council approval of the Final Plat. 4. An associated ADA Sidewalk Plan will be required with the construction plans to ensure compliance with ADA provisions. ADA compliant cross slopes are required for sidewalk areas across proposed drives. The City suggests a 1% cross slope in the right of way. 5. Existing water and sewer easements will need to be vacated once the P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 11 of 14 kf  associated utilities are taken out of service. This requires action by both the Planning Commission and City Council. 6. The proposed sidewalk at the south end of 7 Highway does not line up with the existing sidewalk on the development to the south and shall be revised with the construction plans. Additional easement may be needed in order to make the appropriate sidewalk connection. 7. Prior to building permits being issued, the Final Plat shall be recorded with Jackson County and all required documents must be returned to the Community Development Department once the plat has been recorded in order to obtain any building permits. 8. A raised concrete median is required on 7 Highway from Consumer Lane to the proposed south entrance. 9. The stormwater basin will incorporate storm water quality features as well as stormwater control. A planting scheme incorporating native vegetation and inspection and maintenance procedures shall be incorporated into the construction plans. 10. A “Development and Maintenance Agreement” and “Shared Access Agreement” must be executed outlining construction and maintenance responsibilities for on-site storm water management systems, storm water quality best management practices, and shared access roadways prior to issuance of a building permit. 11. Note that all items listed under “Public Utilities” of this report as provided on pages 4 and 5 shall be completed as described prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. MOTION Commissioner Mitchell Peil moved to approve PUD Final Plan & Site AGENDA ITEM 7 Plan/Design Review / PUDS-10-15-5052 / “White Oak Marketplace” with FINAL PLAT / PF-11-15- eleven (11) staff recommendations. 5061 / “White Oak Marketplace” / SW Corner of Sunset Ave. & 7 Highway SECOND Seconded by Commissioner LaTasha McCall. VOTE Ken Billups – Aye LaTasha McCall – Aye Joseph Haney - Aye Mitchell Peil - Aye Ginger Duhon – Aye Byron Craddolph – Absent Lynn Banks – Aye James Wallace – Absent Jason Sanders – Absent Phil Bartolotta – Aye Travis Graham, Chairman - Aye (APPROVED 8-Aye, 0-No) STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approval by the Planning Commission is based on the representations of any drawings presented as part of this application and does not waive any requirement or development standard contained in the UDC nor any P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 12 of 14 kf  condition required by the Planning Commission as part of this approval. 2. An approval letter from MoDOT accepting the traffic study and proposed right-turn lanes must be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. All improvements within the 7 Highway right-of-way must be coordinated with MoDOT. 3. The five (5) foot sidewalk along 7 Highway and a 4 foot sidewalk along SW Sunset Street shall be installed, or a financial guarantee submitted, prior to City Council approval of the Final Plat. 4. An associated ADA Sidewalk Plan will be required with the construction plans to ensure compliance with ADA provisions. ADA compliant cross slopes are required for sidewalk areas across proposed drives. The City suggests a 1% cross slope in the right of way. 5. Existing water and sewer easements will need to be vacated once the associated utilities are taken out of service. This requires action by both the Planning Commission and City Council. 6. The proposed sidewalk at the south end of 7 Highway does not line up with the existing sidewalk on the development to the south and shall be revised with the construction plans. Additional easement may be needed in order to make the appropriate sidewalk connection. 7. Prior to building permits being issued, the Final Plat shall be recorded with Jackson County and all required documents must be returned to the Community Development Department once the plat has been recorded in order to obtain any building permits. 8. A raised concrete median is required on 7 Highway from Consumer Lane to the proposed south entrance. 9. The stormwater basin will incorporate storm water quality features as well as stormwater control. A planting scheme incorporating native vegetation and inspection and maintenance procedures shall be incorporated into the construction plans. 10. A “Development and Maintenance Agreement” and “Shared Access Agreement” must be executed outlining construction and maintenance responsibilities for on-site storm water management systems, storm water quality best management practices, and shared access roadways prior to issuance of a building permit. 11. Note that all items listed under “Public Utilities” of this report as provided on pages 4 and 5 shall be completed as described prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Allen informed the Commission that staff has received a few names of those interested in attending the National Planning Conference and will discuss it further with Chairman Graham. Staff will inform the Commission this week as to who will attend the conference. P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 13 of 14 kf  Mr. Allen stated that the next agenda meeting will consist of a few items for Indigo Hills to finalize their project: Final Plat and PUD Final Plan. Mr. Allen also stated that the Council will be meeting in the new building in February and staff will keep the Commission informed as to when their first meeting in the new building will be. City staff is conducting training and finalizing some of the AV equipment. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Monday, January 25, 2016. MEETING ADJOURN With no further discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Joe Haney to adjourn at 7:36 p.m. Seconded by Commissioner Mitchell Peil. _______________________________ Respectfully Submitted by, Karen Findora, Recording Secretary ____________________________________ __________________________ Travis Graham, Chairman Date P.C. Minutes – 01.11.2016 Page 14 of 14 kf  PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: January 25, 2016 Agenda Item: 2 Case File Number: PUDF-12-15-5133 Project Name: Indigo Hills Amended PUD Lots 30-38, Tracts D and E Type of Application: Planned Unit Development Final Plan Request: Approval of the Indigo Hills Amended PUD, Lots 30-38, Tracts D and E, Final Plan Applicant: Woods Custom Homes / Shawn Woods Property Owner: Woods Custom Homes / Shawn Woods Engineer: Construction Engineering Services, Inc. / Lee Bodenheimer Attorney: N/A Location (Address): N/A General Location: South of 40 Highway, west of SW Elizabeth Street, north and east of Fleming Park. Area: 13.34 +/- acres Lots: 19 lots/units and 2 tracts Existing Zoning: “SF-7/PUD” (Single-Family – Planned Unit Development) “SF-12/PUD” (Large Lot Single-Family – Planned Unit Development) Existing Land Use: Undeveloped Comprehensive Plan Designation: Neighborhood Attachments:  PUD Final Plan  Landscape Plan  Building Elevations/Floor Plans Planning Commission: January 25, 2016 City Council: N/A Planner: Matt Wright, Associate Planner Reviewed By: Scott Allen, Community Development Director Page 1 of 8  Project: Indigo Hills PUD Final Plan Plan Case Number: PUDF-12-15-5133 Figure 1. Vicinity Map / General Location Map Figure 2. Project Site (Aerial Photo) Page 2 of 8  Project: Indigo Hills PUD Final Plan Plan Case Number: PUDF-12-15-5133 BACKGROUND INFORMATION/SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting approval of the Indigo Hills Amended PUD Final Plan for the 2nd Plat. The Final Plan is located south of SW 40 Highway, west of SW Elizabeth Street, and north and east of Fleming Park on approximately 13.34 +/- acres. A total of 19 residential units are proposed (9 single-family and 10 single-family villa units) and approximately 6.03 +/- acres of common open space. The only deviation from the PUD Concept Plan is the addition of one (1) additional single-family lot (Lot 37) at the north end of SW Marguerite Street. This area was originally included as part of Lot 38. The one (1) additional lot does not increase the overall number of units in the PUD by more than 5% and therefore the PUD Final Plan is in substantial compliance with the approved PUD Concept Plan. PREVIOUS ACTIONS/APPROVALS:  The City Council approved the annexation of the site on November 17, 2003 (A- 12-2003).  The Indigo Hills PUD was rezoned (R-2-2004) from County “AG” and “GB” to “SF- 7” (Low Density Single-Family) and “SF-12” (Large Lot Single-Family). The rezoning was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on February 9, 2004 and approved by the City Council on February 16, 2004.  The Indigo Hills PUD Concept Plan (PUD-1-2004) was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on February 9, 2004 and approved by the City Council on February 16, 2004.  A Revised PUD Concept Plan (PUD-5-2004) for Indigo Hills PUD was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2004 and approved by the City Council on December 20, 2004.  A PUD Final Plan (04-10-19) for the Villas at Indigo Hills was approved by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2004.  The Indigo Hills PUD Preliminary Plat (04-10-18) was approved by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2004.  The Final Plat for Indigo Hills PUD 1st Plat (05-07-11) was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on August 22, 2005 and approved by the City Council on September 7, 2005.  A PUD Final Plan (05-07-12) for Indigo Hills PUD (the Estates portion) was approved by the Planning Commission on September 12, 2005.  A revised PUD Concept Plan (PUDC-02-15-4740) for the 2nd phase of Indigo Hills PUD was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on February 23, 2015 and approved by the City Council on March 2, 2015.  A revised Preliminary Plat (PP-02-15-4741) for the 2nd phase of Indigo Hills PUD was approved by the Planning Commission on February 23, 2015.  A Vacation (VAC-12-15-5131) for the street vacation of SW Indigo Hills Drive/SW Patricia Circle west of SW Elizabeth Street was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on January 11, 2016 and approved by the City Council on January 19, 2016. FUTURE APPLICATIONS/REVIEWS ANTICIPATED OR REQUIRED: A Final Plat (PF-12-15-5134) for “Indigo Hills PUD – 2nd Plat, Lots 30-33” has been submitted and will run simultaneously with the PUD Final Plan. Future Final Plat Page 3 of 8  Project: Indigo Hills PUD Final Plan Plan Case Number: PUDF-12-15-5133 applications will be required for the remaining single-family lots, tracts, and single-family villa units, which are not included with the “Indigo Hills PUD, 2nd Plat” Final Plat. ABUTTING ZONING AND LAND USES: Direction Current Zoning Surrounding Land Uses North: Right-of-Way Eastbound 40 Highway South: AG (Jackson County) Undeveloped/Fleming Park East: SF-7 & SF-12 Single-Family West: AG (Jackson County) Undeveloped/Fleming Park RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the PUD Final Plan with conditions (5). PUD Final Plan Review Criteria The Planned Unit Development (PUD) regulations are intended to encourage innovative land planning and site design concepts that achieve a high level of environmental sensitivity, energy efficiency, aesthetics, high-quality development and other community goals by: a.) Reducing or eliminating inflexibility that sometimes results from strict application of zoning standards that were designed primarily for individual lots; b.) Allowing greater freedom in selecting the means to provide access, light, open space and design amenities; c.) Promoting quality urban design and environmentally sensitive development by allowing development to take advantage of special site characteristics, locations and land uses; and a pattern of development that preserves trees, outstanding natural topography, and geologic features, and prevents soil erosion; d.) A creative approach to the use of land and related physical development; e.) An efficient use of land resulting in smaller networks of utilities and streets and thereby lower housing costs; f.) An environment of stable character that is compatible with surrounding development; and g.) Enhancement of the quality of development in recognition of the level of public investments in the neighborhood. Section 410.050.C, Completion of Development subsection 1 of the 2015 Unified Development Code (UDC) states: “ Any building, development or sign for which an application was submitted to the City before October 5, 2015 shall be reviewed for compliance with the zoning, subdivision and sign regulations in effect before October 5, 2015. Complete application submitted before October 5, 2015 may be approved and permitted may be issued even if the proposed building, development or sign that is the subject of the permit does not fully comply with the provisions of this Page 4 of 8  Project: Indigo Hills PUD Final Plan Plan Case Number: PUDF-12-15-5133 Development Code.” Since the Preliminary Plat and PUD Concept Plan were submitted and approved prior to October 5, 2015, and both are still in effect, the development will be reviewed under the previous UDC provisions (1996) rather than the 2015 UDC provisions. Land Use: The PUD Final Plan include nine (9) single-family lots and ten (10) single- family villa units. The first phase will include all nine (9) single-family lots and both tracts (Tracts D and E). The second phase will include a replat of Tract E for ten (10) single-family villa units. Access: Access to the development will be provided from local streets (SW Elizabeth Street, SW Marguerite Street, and SW Indigo Hills Drive) to SW Bowlin Road and SW 40 Highway. Lot 38 is the only lot that will have direct access to SW 40 Highway, as approved by MoDOT. A Limit of No Access (L/NA) designation has been provided along SW 40 Highway for all other lots and tracts. If Lot 38 is subdivided in the future, access for any new lots must be from a local street, such as SW Marguerite Street. As a condition of PUD Concept Plan approval, a designated left turn lane on westbound 40 Highway at SW Bowlin Road was installed per MoDOT requirements. Sidewalks: Required sidewalks have been shown on the PUD Final Plan and will be installed for each lot prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for each lot where a sidewalk is required. Required sidewalks shall be shown and labeled on each Final Plat. Storm Drainage: A detention area for the 2nd Plat is proposed in Tract D, which will replace a detention area that is currently located on Lot 34. A final Storm Water Management Plan was provided to and approved by the City Engineer. Erosion Control: A Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Land Disturbance Permit along with the associated storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) was provided to ensure maintenance, inspection, and flexibility for erosion control and storm water quality on the project during construction. Minimum Setbacks: There are no minimum setback standards for lots within a PUD, provided that: 1) Adequate separation shall be provided between buildings for access by emergency vehicles; and 2) No setback on the outside perimeter of a PUD shall be reduced below the minimum required by the underlying base zoning district. The applicant has provided for the minimum setbacks as defined above for the PUD Concept Plan and will follow the standard setbacks for “SF-7” and “SF-12” zoning districts for single-family lots. Minimum separation between Page 5 of 8  Project: Indigo Hills PUD Final Plan Plan Case Number: PUDF-12-15-5133 single-family villa units shall be twelve (12) feet, with front and rear setbacks meeting standard setbacks for the “SF-7” zoning district. Landscaping: The applicant has provided a plan showing the landscaping for buffering and in the common tracts. The landscape requirements for the development plan area is defined in Section 407.040, Landscaping and Buffering and is summarized in the chart below: Landscape Types Plant Units Plant Units Cumulative Required Proposed Total 25’ Right-of-Way 60 PUs per 100 ft 394 PUs 0 PUs Buffer to the (525 ft total length) x northeast (Buffer C) 1.25 (without berm) = 394 PUs 25’ Transition Buffer 60 PUs per 100 ft 419 PUs* 0 PUs to the north (558 ft. total length) x (Buffer C) 1.25 (without berm) = 419 PUs Open Space 1 PUs per 500 sq. ft. 282 PUs + 2 PUs Landscaping (139,740 sq. ft.) = (Tract D) 280 PUs Open Space 1 PUs per 500 sq. ft. 245 PUs + 3 PUs Landscaping (120,649 sq. ft.) = (Tract E) 242 PUs Totals: 1,335 PUs required 1,340 PUs + 5 PUs proposed *See note on Landscape Plan: All existing trees within easement will be preserved. Existing trees are a mix of native oaks, walnuts, hackberry and locust, ranging from 6” to 48” in diameter. All healthy trees will remain for an equivalent plant unit total in excess of 419 units. The applicant has provided the required number of Plant Units for the 40 Highway buffer (25’, Buffer C). The Landscape Plan includes a mixture of deciduous trees, ornamental trees, conifers/evergreens and shrubs. A landscape buffer (25’, Buffer C) has also been provided along the north buffer adjacent to the KCP&L substation. All healthy trees within the buffer will be preserved. With the significant amount of existing trees within the buffer, the site will meet and exceed the plant unit count with tree credits. In addition to landscape buffers, landscaping requirements have been met for Tracts D and E. Streets trees have been provided at one (1) tree for every 50’ of street frontage. Each single-family lot and villa unit will also be required to install 45 plant units prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Required landscaping for landscape buffers and common tracts shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the first lot or unit within each development phase/final plat. Page 6 of 8  Project: Indigo Hills PUD Final Plan Plan Case Number: PUDF-12-15-5133 The site meets open space requirements for the PUD. The original PUD contained 4.61 +/- acres of common open space. The revised PUD contains 6.03 +/- acres of common open space, an increase of 1.42 +/- acres. Architectural Character: The applicant has provided proposed building elevations and floor plans for both the villas and the estates. Exterior building materials will include a mix of stone, brick, stucco, and lap siding. Classification: The applicant is proposing to apply the same Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions that are recorded for the 1st Plat. The minimum livable floor area for villas will be 1,250 square feet (Class “H”). The minimum livable floor area for the estate homes will be 1,800 square feet (Class “E”). The Floor Area Classifications shall be noted on the Final plat. Property Owners Association Agreement: The applicant is proposing to expand the existing Declaration of Restrictions that are currently in effect for the 1st Plat. There are two (2) sets of Restrictions, one (1) for the Estate lots and one (1) for the Villas. A copy of the existing Declaration of Restrictions has been provided. The Declaration of Restrictions will be expanded with each Final Plat to include the new platted lots. The Declaration of Restrictions shall be revised to address the maintenance of Tracts D and E when those tracts are final platted. Phasing: The applicant has the following plans for phasing of the PUD:  Phase 1 (2nd Plat): Lots 30-33  Phase 2 (3rd Plat): Lots 34-38, Tracts D and E  Phase 3 (4th Plat): Units 19-28 on Tract E Plat Approval: The Final Plat must be approved and recorded prior to building permits being released. Certificates of Survey will be required for each single-family villa unit once constructed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the PUD Final Plan application subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval by the Planning Commission based on the representations of any drawings presented, as part of this application does not waive any requirement or development standard contained in the UDC. 2. The Minimum Livable Floor Area Classifications shall be noted on each Final Plat. Page 7 of 8  Project: Indigo Hills PUD Final Plan Plan Case Number: PUDF-12-15-5133 3. Required landscaping for landscape buffers and common tracts shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the first lot or unit within each development phase/final plat. 4. All required sidewalks shall be shown and labeled on each Final Plat. 5. The Declaration of Restrictions shall be revised to address the maintenance of Tracts D and E when those tracts are final platted. Page 8 of 8  e Rd ntrys id Cou Lake Tapa Tapawingo Ln Tapawingo Ln st Ea un bo d US 40 Hw y SITE SF-12 SW St t h In go SF-7 be di ngs Lake iza SW Bowlin Rd SW El H ills Dr £ ¤ 40 SW Marguerite St ry SW icko H t SW C Jackson County 44 t tD r h e St S tre t h 44 SF-7 SW SW Hickory Ln PUDF-12-15-5133 & PF-12-15-5134 INDIGO HILLS PUD 2ND PLAT SITE LOCATION MAP 0 300 600 ± 1,200 Feet  PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: January 25, 2016 Agenda Items: 3 Case File Number: PF-12-15-5134 Project Name: Indigo Hills PUD – 2nd Plat, Lots 30-33 Type of Application: Final Plat Request: Approval of Indigo Hills PUD – 2nd Plat, Lots 30-33 Applicant: Woods Custom Homes / Shawn Woods Property Owner: Woods Custom Homes / Shawn Woods Engineer: Construction Engineering Services, Inc. / Lee Bodenheimer Architect: N/A Attorney: N/A General Location: South of 40 Highway, west of SW Elizabeth Street, north and east of Fleming Park Area & Lots: 1.06 +/- acres (4 lots proposed) Existing Zoning: “SF-7/PUD” (Single-Family – Planned Unit Development) “SF-12/PUD” (Large Lot Single-Family – Planned Unit Development) Existing Land Use: Undeveloped Comprehensive Plan Neighborhood Designation: Attachments:  Site Location – Zoning Map  Final Plat, Indigo Hills PUD 2nd Plat Planning Commission: January 25, 2016 City Council: February 1, 2016 Planner: Matt Wright, Associate Planner Reviewed By: Scott Allen, Community Development Director Page 1 of 6  Project: Indigo Hills PUD 2nd Plat Plan Case Number: PF-12-15-5134 Figure 1. Vicinity Map / General Location Map Figure 2. Project Site (Aerial Photo) Page 2 of 6  Project: Indigo Hills PUD 2nd Plat Plan Case Number: PF-12-15-5134 BACKGROUND INFORMATION/SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting Final Plat approval for Indigo Hills PUD – 2nd Plat, Lots 30-33. The four proposed lots are generally located at the southwest corner of the north loop of SW Marguerite Street and SW Elizabeth Street. The proposed Final Plat does not deviate from the previously approved Preliminary Plat and PUD Concept Plan. PREVIOUS ACTIONS/APPROVALS:  The City Council approved the annexation of the site on November 17, 2003 (A- 12-2003).  The Indigo Hills PUD was rezoned (R-2-2004) from County “AG” and “GB” to “SF-7” (Low Density Single-Family) and “SF-12” (Large Lot Single-Family). The rezoning was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on February 9, 2004 and approved by the City Council on February 16, 2004.  The Indigo Hills PUD Concept Plan (PUD-1-2004) was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on February 9, 2004 and approved by the City Council on February 16, 2004.  A Revised PUD Concept Plan (PUD-5-2004) for Indigo Hills PUD was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2004 and approved by the City Council on December 20, 2004.  A PUD Final Plan (04-10-19) for the Villas at Indigo Hills was approved by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2004.  The Indigo Hills PUD Preliminary Plat (04-10-18) was approved by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2004.  The Final Plat for Indigo Hills PUD 1st Plat (05-07-11) was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on August 22, 2005 and approved by the City Council on September 7, 2005.  A PUD Final Plan (05-07-12) for Indigo Hills PUD (the Estates portion) was approved by the Planning Commission on September 12, 2005.  A revised PUD Concept Plan (PUDC-02-15-4740) for the 2nd phase of Indigo Hills PUD was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on February 23, 2015 and approved by the City Council on March 2, 2015.  A revised Preliminary Plat (PP-02-15-4741) for the 2nd phase of Indigo Hills PUD was approved by the Planning Commission on February 23, 2015.  A Vacation (VAC-12-15-5131) for the street vacation of SW Indigo Hills Drive/SW Patricia Circle west of SW Elizabeth Street was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on January 11, 2016 and approved by the City Council on January 19, 2016. FUTURE APPLICATIONS/REVIEWS ANTICIPATED OR REQUIRED: A PUD Final Plan (PUDF-12-15-5133) for “Indigo Hills Amended PUD Lots 30-38 and Tracts D and E” has been submitted and will run simultaneously with the Final Plat. Future Final Plat applications will be required for the remaining single-family lots, tracts, and single-family villa units, which are not included with the “Indigo Hills PUD, 2nd Plat” Final Plat. Page 3 of 6  Project: Indigo Hills PUD 2nd Plat Plan Case Number: PF-12-15-5134 ABUTTING ZONING AND LAND USES: Direction Current Zoning Surrounding Land Uses North: SF-7 PUD Undeveloped South: SF-12 PUD Single-Family East: SF-12 PUD & SF-7 PUD Single-Family West: SF-12 PUD & SF-7 PUD Undeveloped RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat with conditions (9). FINAL PLAT Lot Layout/ Requirements: The lot requirements for the “SF-12/PUD” and “SF-7/PUD” zoning districts have been met and match layout and area shown on the Preliminary Plat. Public Utilities: Sanitary sewer for the lots has been installed but not tested to ensure proper construction. Newly installed sanitary sewer must pass testing requirements, as-built drawings provided, and maintenance bonds provided prior to approval of the Final Plat. Water is available for those lots currently being platted. Storm Water Management: Although construction of storm water detention and quality facilities is not complete to date, development of these four lots minimally affect storm water flows. Storm water detention and storm water quality features must be constructed prior to the Final Platting of Phase 3. Additionally, as-built drawings are required prior to the Final Platting of Phase 3 to verify as constructed storm water facilities meet as-designed requirements. When Phase 3 is Final Platted, a drainage easement must be provided over Tract D to ensure the storm water features located on the tract are preserved into the future. Also, there is a small ditch running through the back of Lot 33 that is proposed to be enclosed with a future phase. Prior to issuance of a building permit for Lot 33, plans to temporarily relocate this ditch must be submitted and approved by the Engineering Division of Public Works. Easements: Except for an easement over the newly installed sanitary sewer line, all easements necessary to serve these four lots have been provided as required by City codes and as requested by the City of Blue Springs. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for structures on these four lots, Phase 3 must be Final Platted to ensure easements over public infrastructure are dedicated to the City of Blue Springs. Page 4 of 6  Project: Indigo Hills PUD 2nd Plat Plan Case Number: PF-12-15-5134 Association Agreement: The applicant has provided a copy of amendments to the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions for the Indigo Hills PUD (Estates). The document must be recorded with the Final Plat. Sidewalks: Per UDC Section 406.030. B. a four (4) foot sidewalk is required on one side of all local streets, with the exception that sidewalks are not required on the radius of turnarounds at the end of cul-de-sacs or on cul-de-sacs less than 200 feet in length. A four foot ADA-compliant sidewalk is required along SW Elizabeth Street. Each sidewalk section shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Final Certificate of Occupancy for each lot. Street Improvements: The street improvements required for the street vacation (VAC-12-15- 5131) of SW Indigo Hills Drive/SW Patricia Circle west of SW Elizabeth Street have been completed. No additional street improvements are required with this Final Plat. SW Marguerite Street, at the northeast lot line of Lot 33, will be extended in a future development phase. Streetscape, Common/Open Space & Landscaping: A landscape plan has been submitted with the PR-O Final Plan (PUDF-12-15-5133) identifying the required buffer areas, required plant units, landscape buffers and placement of required street trees. In addition to required street trees, each single-family lot is required to provide 45 plant units prior to the issuance of a Final Certificate of Occupancy. Minimum Livable Floor Area Classification: Indigo Hills P.U.D. – 2nd Plat, Lot 30-33 are classified as Class “E,” requiring a minimum of 1,800 square foot homes. This is consistent with the previously approved PUD Concept Plan and Preliminary Plat, as well as the PUD Final Plan that is running simultaneously with the Final Plat. ACTION BY PLANNING COMMISSION: The Commission is being asked to provide a recommendation on the Final Plat. The plat is reviewed at this time to determine if it conforms to the requirements of the City’s development codes; and there are appropriate assurances that the proposed improvements will be completed, should the developer fail to perform. The Planning Commission may recommend approval, modify approval or, if the plat does not meet the requirements of the City, recommend denial. Page 5 of 6  Project: Indigo Hills PUD 2nd Plat Plan Case Number: PF-12-15-5134 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Final Plat application subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval by the Planning Commission based on the representations of any drawings presented as part of this application does not waive any requirements or development standard contained in the UDC. 2. All required sidewalk improvements along local streets must be installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each lot where sidewalks are required. 3. Prior to building permits being issued, the Final Plats and Amendments to the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall be recorded with Jackson County and all required documents must be returned to the Community Development Department once the plats have been recorded. 4. Newly installed sanitary sewer must pass testing requirements, as-built drawings provided, and maintenance bonds provided prior to approval of the Final Plat for Lots 30-33. 5. Although construction of storm water detention and storm water quality facilities is not complete to date, development of these four lots minimally affects storm water flows. Storm water detention and storm water quality features must be constructed prior to Final Platting any portion of Phase 3. 6. As-built drawings of storm water facilities are required prior to the Final Platting of Phase 3 to verify as constructed meets as-designed requirements. 7. When Phase 3 is Final Platted, a drainage easement must be provided over Tract D to ensure the storm water features located on the tract are preserved into the future. 8. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for structures on Lots 30-33, Phase 3 must be Final Platted to ensure easements over public infrastructure are dedicated to the City of Blue Springs. 9. Prior to issuance of a building permit for Lot 33, plans to temporarily relocate an existing ditch must be submitted and approved by the Engineering Division of Public Works. Page 6 of 6  e Rd ntrys id Cou Lake Tapawingo Tapawingo Ln Tapawingo Ln st Ea un bo d US 40 Hw y Jackson County Jackson County SITE SF-12 Fleming Park t h St SW In SF-7 be digo ngs Lake iza SW Bowlin Rd SW El H ills Dr £ ¤ 40 SW Marguerite St ry SW icko H t SW C Jackson County 44 t tD r h e St S tre t h 44 SF-7 SW SW Hickory Ln PUDF-12-15-5133 & PF-12-15-5134 INDIGO HILLS PUD 2ND PLAT SITE LOCATION MAP 0 300 600 ± 1,200 Feet kson County § ¦ ¨ 40 SITE § ¦ ¨ 40 SW Bowlin Rd r y SW icko H t SW C th 44 St re St th 44 SW PUDF-12-15-5133 & PF-12-15-5134 INDIGO HILLS PUD 2ND PLAT SITE AERIAL MAP 0 250 ±500 1,000 Feet