[00:00:01]
I WANNA WELCOME YOU TO THE CITY, UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR AUGUST, TUESDAY, AUGUST 6TH, 2024.AND WE'LL CALL THIS, UH, MEETING TO ORDER.
AND I'LL LOOK FOR, PLEASE REVIEW THE
[2. Consideration of Approval of Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes: July 16, 2024.]
MINUTES IN YOUR PACKET.WE'LL SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY CHANGES OR COMMENTS.
IF NOT, I'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION IN A SECOND.
THE MEETING'S MINUTES PASSED FROM LAST TIME.
SO FOLLOWING THE AGENDA, WE'LL
[3. General Consent Items: Items listed under General Consent are usually approved as a group with the proper motion from a member of the Planning Commission. Members of the Planning Commission may pull any item under General Consent for separate discussion and/or action.]
MOVE ON TO THE GENERAL CONSENT ITEMS. UM, ITEMS LISTED UNDER GENERAL CONSENT ARE USUALLY APPROVED AS A GROUP WITH A PROPER MOTION FROM A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY PULL ANY ITEM UNDER GENERAL CONSENT FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND OR ACTION.
WE HAVE NUMBER A, CASE NUMBER DD TWO TWO DASH 0 0 0 2 3, CONSIDERATION OF A DE-CERTIFICATION REQUEST FOR 29 0 9 SHORT DRIVE LOCATED NORTH AND WEST OF COBELL AND BRYANT.
ANYBODY WANNA HEAR THAT SEPARATELY? OKAY.
I'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION ON THAT IN A SECOND.
WE'LL MOVE TO THE ITEM NUMBER FOUR
[A. Case No. SP23-00030; Public Hearing and Consideration for a Site Plan for Frost Phase II, located northeast of Memorial and Rhode Island. (Wayne Frost; Ward 3)]
ON THE AGENDA.THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS, ITEMS LISTED TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE USUALLY DISCUSSED AND CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY BY MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
EACH ITEM PROVIDES AND OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK REGARDING THE AGENDA ITEM.
COMMENTS MUST BE DIRECTED AT THE CHAIR OF THE MEETING.
NUMBER A, WE'LL TURN OVER TO BECCA TO PRESENT TO US CASE NUMBER SP 23 DASH 0 0 0 3 0 PUBLIC HEARING AGAINST CONSIDERATION FOR A SITE PLAN FOR FROST.
PHASE TWO, LOCATED NORTHEAST OF MEMORIAL AND RHODE ISLAND MECCA.
UM, SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN FOR A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT INDOOR STORAGE BUILDING LOCATED ON RHODE ISLAND AVENUE JUST NORTH OF MEMORIAL ROAD.
THE APPROXIMATE ONE ACRE PROPERTY IS A PART OF THE LEVITTS NORTH PARK PLATTE, AND WAS RECENTLY REZONED IN NOVEMBER OF 2022 TO THE Z 21 TRIPLE 0 24 FROST AUTO ACCESSORIES EXTENSION, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH SPECIFICALLY ALLOWS AN INDOOR STORAGE STRUCTURE.
THE PUD LIMITS THE NUMBER OF STORAGE UNITS IN THE STRUCTURE TO 17 AND DOES NOT ALLOW ANY EXTERNAL STORAGE OR OUTDOOR PARKING.
THERE IS A SENSITIVE BORDER TO THE NORTH, WHICH WAS ADDRESSED DURING THE REZONING AND REQUIRES BOTH A 70 FOOT SETBACK AND AN EIGHT FOOT TALL PRIVACY FENCE.
BOTH OF WHICH REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET WITH THE SITE PLAN.
THE PUD ALLOWS FOR A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 18 FEET, THOUGH THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE IS ONLY 16 FEET TALL.
THE BUILDING FACADE MATCHES THE EXISTING FROST AUTOMOTIVE STRUCTURE ON THE SOUTHERN PARCEL.
IT CONTAINS METAL SIDING AND MASONRY WAYNE'S COATING THE SITE PLAN CONFORMS TO THE PUD AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
ALRIGHT, ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HAVE A QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY PLANNER? JUST REAL QUICK, I I COULDN'T TELL FROM THE, UH, SITE PLAN WE HAD, UH, ONE OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE HAD WAS, UH, CONCRETE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE ENTRANCE.
IS THAT, UH, IS THAT ON THERE TALKING ABOUT THE PAVING? YES.
PAVING ALL THE WAY UP TO THE FENCE.
I COULDN'T TELL BY THE, I BELIEVE SO.
I THOUGHT WE ALSO DISCUSSED CHIP WAS GRAVEL UP AS LONG AS IT WAS BEHIND A FENCE, CORRECT? CORRECT.
BUT UP TO THE FENCE, IT WAS CONCRETE.
AND THEN THERE IS GOING TO BE A FENCE ON RHODE ISLAND AVENUE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY PLANNER? OKAY.
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? JUST COME UP AND LET US KNOW YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
MY NAME'S DAN O'NEILL 1 0 1 STONY TRAIL.
EDMOND, UH, ARE WE COMPLYING WITH A, UM, A SENSITIVE ORDER ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE? IF SO, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE BUFFER IS ON THE BACK OF THIS, BETWEEN THAT AND THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THE NORTH SIDE AND KNOW WE HAVE THE SENSITIVE BORDER SETBACK OF 70 FEET.
YOU WHAT SIR? WE DO HAVE THE SENSITIVE BORDER OF 70 FEET AND THE SETBACK.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE AT? HOW FEET? 35 FEET.
IS THERE A DRIVEWAY ON THE BACK END OF THAT? IT'S SORT OF HARD TO SEE IF THE, UH, SITE PLAN COMPLIES WITH THE PUD WHEN YOU DON'T PRESENT THE PUD AS PART OF THE PACKAGE FOR THE FOLKS TO REVIEW.
I THINK THAT IS, UH, MADAM CITY ATTORNEY.
I THINK THAT'S A LEGAL REQUIREMENT THAT IF YOU'RE GONNA AMEND SOMETHING, PARTICULARLY THE SITE PLAN ON A PROJECT THAT YOU OUGHT TO HAVE AT LEAST PRESENTED THE PUD
[00:05:01]
AS A MATTER OF RECORD FOR, FOR THE, FOR THE CITIZENS TO KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON BEFORE.BUT, UH, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE PUD WAS NOT ATTACHED.
NOW, MAYBE IT WAS, I SOMETIMES MY FAT FINGERS DON'T FIND ALL THE DETAILS ON MY CELL PHONE, BUT, UH, I THINK IT'S APPROACH APPROPRIATE THAT YOU HAVE A PUD HERE SO THAT THE FOLKS CAN LOOK AT IT AND MAKE A COMPARISON ON THAT.
IS THERE ANY TREES ON THE BACK END IN THE, UH, UM, THE SENSITIVE BORDER ISSUE AREA? THE 70 FOOT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THERE, MR. O'NEILL? UH, I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S TWO QUESTIONS I HAVE.
I THINK IT'S, UH, PROCEDURALLY INADEQUATE TO CONSIDER SOMETHING AS AN AMENDMENT TO, UM, BASED ON A PRIOR, UH, PUD THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THE MATTER OF RECORD FOR THE CITIZENS TO LOOK AT.
ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? OKAY, MR. FROST, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME AND ANSWER JUST A COUPLE OF THOSE QUESTIONS? ARE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE? SURE.
I THINK WE HAD THE, WE HAD THE SENSITIVE BORDER OF 70 FOOT, WHICH WAS IN THE, IN THE PD.
WAS THERE ANY TREES IN THAT AREA? QUESTION.
UH, ACCORDING, UH, TO THE CITY, UH, COASTS.
UH, AND MY LANDSCAPE, UH, THERE ARE GOING TO BE TREES AND ADEQUATE LANDSCAPING ON THE NORTHERN UH, BORDER.
I THINK THAT WAS ALL THAT WAS DIRECTED AT YOU OR JUST THE APPLICANT, SO, OKAY.
ANY OF THE CITY, ANY OF THE MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS WE GET ONE TIME? MR. O'DELL, YOU KNOW THAT, WELL, IT'S TRYING TO ANSWER SOMETHING HE SAID NORMALLY ON, NORMALLY WE GET ONE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THE BEHALF, BUT YOU KNOW THAT.
ANY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY.
IS THE LANDSCAPING PLAN PART OF THE P MR. O'NEILL? I IS THE LANDSCAPING PLAN PART OF THE SITE PLAN? AND IS IT IN THE PACKAGE? 'CAUSE I DIDN'T SEE IT.
NO MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE MEMBERS.
I'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION IF THERE IS ONE.
THAT MEANT THAT, UH, PROPOSAL IS APPROVED AND IT ENDS HERE TONIGHT AT PLANNING COMMISSION.
[B. Case No. SP24-00001; Public Hearing and Consideration for a Site Plan for Integrated Electric Phase 3, located on the south side of Hundred Oaks Drive, east of Kelly Avenue. (Integrated Electric; Ward 3)]
ON THE AGENDA CASE OR ITEM NUMBER B.CASE NUMBER SP TWO FOUR DASH 0 0 0 0 1 PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION FOR A SITE PLAN FOR INTEGRATED ELECTRIC PHASE THREE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HUNDRED OAKS DRIVE EAST OF KELLY AVENUE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN FOR A 32,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE BUILDING FOR INTEGRATED ELECTRIC LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HUNDRED OAKS DRIVE JUST EAST OF KELLY AVENUE.
THE SITE PLAN IS LOCATED ON LOT SIX, SEVEN, AND EIGHT OF THE HUNDRED OAKS VILLAGE, PHASE THREE PLAT AND IS ZONED F1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
THE NEW STRUCTURE IS PROPOSED TO MATCH THE EXISTING INTEGRATED ELECTRIC BUILDING TO THE WEST IN ARCHITECTURAL APPEARANCE, INCLUDING EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND COLORS.
THE BUILDING WILL BE 25 FEET IN HEIGHT AND PROVIDES 87 PARKING SPACES.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE LANDSCAPING CODE REQUIREMENT OF 10% TO 5% LANDSCAPE AREA AND PLANT UNITS DUE TO THE PROPERTY BEING ZONED INDUSTRIAL AND NOT FACING ANY MAJOR ARTERIAL ARTERIAL STREET OR BUDDING A RESIDENTIAL USE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE VARIANCE.
ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY PLANNER ON THE PROPOSAL? THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE WHEN I WAS READING THROUGH THIS WOULD BE IS WOULD THEY MEET CODE WHEN IT COMES TO LANDSCAPING, IF ANY OF THE EASEMENTS WERE COUNTED? I DUNNO IF THERE'S ANY PLANNING IN THAT.
SOMETIMES THAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY PLAN AN EASEMENT WHERE IT TECHNICALLY WOULD COUNT AND GET THEM THE POINTS THEY NEED.
IS THERE ANY OF THAT IN THIS SITUATION? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL? PUBLIC COMMENTS? GOOD EVENING.
GREG MASSEY WITH THE RED PLAINS PROFESSIONAL REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, UH, ON THIS APPLICATION.
[00:10:01]
I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD.AGAIN, THE EXISTING BUILDING TO THE WEST, THIS IS BASICALLY A, A DUPLICATE OF THAT STRUCTURE, UH, AND ALL FORMS AS FAR AS MATERIALS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND LANDSCAPING.
AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
ON THE, ON THE LANDSCAPE VARIANCE IS THE, UH, WAS THE OTHER ONES, DID THEY HAVE A VARIANCE TO THEM WHEN THEY WERE, I KNOW THEY'RE ALL RIGHT IN A ROW OR REAL CLOSE TO EACH OTHER.
WAS THERE, DO YOU REMEMBER? I MEAN, I DON'T LOVE HAVING VARIANCES.
THAT'S WHY MY QUESTION WOULD BE IS THERE A WAY TO MAKE IT WITHOUT THAT OR IS THERE SOMETHING THERE ON THE LANDSCAPE SIDE? NOT WITHOUT SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING THE BUILDING SIZE, UH, AND THE PARKING WITHIN THAT AREA.
ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM, FOR THE APPLICANT MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY.
I'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION IF THERE IS ONE.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
AND THAT ITEM IS APPROVED AND IT MOVES ON TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR MONDAY, AUGUST 26TH, 2024.
ALRIGHT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
[C. Case No. SP24-00008; Public Hearing and Consideration for a Site Plan application for 10 Hundred Oaks, located on the south side of Hundred Oaks Drive, west of Fretz Avenue. (10 Hundred Oaks Facility, LLC; Ward 3) ]
ITEM NUMBER C.SO CASE NUMBER SP 24 DASH 0 0 0 8 PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION FOR A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FOR 1,000 OAKS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HUNTERS OAKS DRIVE WEST OF FRETS AVENUE.
ALRIGHT, MA'AM, UH, SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN FOR A 12,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE AND GARAGE BUILDING LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HUNDRED OAKS DRIVE JUST WEST OF FRETZ AVENUE.
THIS IS TWO PARCELS OVER FROM THE PREVIOUS ITEM WE JUST HEARD.
THE SITE PLAN IS LOCATED ON LOT 10 OF THE HUNDRED OAKS VILLAGE, PHASE THREE PLAT, AND IS ZONED F1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.
THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS OF THE BUILDING ARE PROPOSED TO BE OF NEUTRAL COLORS CONSISTING OF BRICK VENEER, CMU SPLIT, FACE BLOCK, AND METAL SIDING.
THE BUILDING IS SHOWN TO BE 25 FEET IN HEIGHT AND PROVIDES 13 PARKING SPACES.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO PAY FEE IN LIEU OF DETENTION, WHICH REQUIRES A VARIANCE THROUGH THE STORMWATER ADVISORY BOARD.
THIS ITEM WILL BE HEARD DURING SWABS AUGUST 19TH MEETING BEFORE THIS PROJECT IS HEARD BY CITY COUNCIL.
SINCE THIS AGENDA WAS POSTED, THERE HAS BEEN A CHANGE TO URBAN FORESTRY'S COMMENT ON THIS MEMORANDUM.
IT WAS ORIGINALLY STATED THAT PLANT UNITS AND TREE PLANT UNITS HAD NOT BEEN MET, BUT THIS HAS SINCE BEEN CORRECTED AND URBAN FORESTRY HAS STATED THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IS COMPLIANT.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE SWAB VARIANCE.
DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE ANYTHING TO WISH OR RELY ON THE COMMENTS OF COUNCIL OF CITY STAFF? AGAIN, GREG MASSEY WITH RED PLAINS PROFESSIONAL, UM, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
I'LL, UH, BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF, OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY STAFF OR THE APPLICANT.
ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? OKAY.
NOW I'LL LOOK FOR A OR ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM SIT FROM THE COUNCIL.
I'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION IF THERE IS ONE.
AN ITEM IS APPROVED BY ACCOUNT OF FOUR TO ZERO AND THAT WILL MOVE ON TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
UM, MEETING DATED MONDAY, AUGUST 26TH, 2024.
THAT MOVES US ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER SIX.
DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS. ITEMS LISTED UNDER DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION ARE USUALLY DISCUSSED AND CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY BY MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, CONSIDERATION OF THE GENERAL CONSENT AGENDA.
ITEMS PULLED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION.
WE WERE DONE THAT MOVE ON TO NUMBER SEVEN, ADJOURNMENT.
I'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
THE, THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED.