Lee's Summit

Code Statement

All issues pertaining to life safety and property protection from the hazards of fire, explosion or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures and premises, and to the safety to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations, shall be in accordance with the 2018 International Fire Code.

FDC

IFC 903.3.7 - Fire department connections. The location of fire department connections shall be approved by the fire code official. Connections shall be a 4 inch Storz type fitting and located within 100 feet of a fire hydrant, or as approved by the code official. Action required: Show the locations of the FDC's and supply hydrant within 100'. Not all FDC's are within 100'.

Hydrants

IFC 507.5.1 - Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 300 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. Action required: Provide a hydrant plan that shows covereage for ALL buildings. It is my understanding that there was'nt going to be a connection to KCMO water south of the river. What is the plan to get water to the site that will meet the fire flow requirements of 2018 IFC Table B105.1(2) with a 50 % reduction for automatic sprinkler systems and standpipes.

Water Supply

ly a 50%reduction onIFC 507.1 - An approved water supply capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to premises upon which facilities, buildings or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. Action required: Provide a water study for the project. Fire flows shall be provided for the entire project that meets the requirements of 2018 IFC Table B105.1(2) . The amended 2018 IFC allows for a 50% reduction of required fire flow for buildings with automatic fire sprinkler systems.

Fire Lanes

IFC 503.2.1 - Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (6096 mm), exclusive of shoulders, except for approved security gates in accordance with Section 503.6, and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (4115 mm) AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS D105.1 Where required. Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet (9144 mm), approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For purposes of this section, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. D105.2 Width. Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet (7925 mm), exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. D105.3 Proximity to building. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet (4572 mm) and a maximum of 30 feet (9144 mm) from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. D105.4 Obstructions. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located over the aerial fire apparatus access road or between the aerial fire apparatus road and the building. Other obstructions shall be permitted to be placed with the approval of the fire code official. Action required: Make access adjustments to the applicable builds to meet this requirement.

Misc.

D104.3 Remoteness. Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. Action required: A second access to Norfleet shall be provided as part of this project.

Approved per TIA

DE C&O #01 Eng Plans – FDP/PDP

All required engineering plans and studies, including water lines, sanitary sewers, storm drainage, streets and erosion and sediment control shall be submitted along with the final development plan. All public infrastructure must be substantially complete, prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy.

DE C&O #03 Eng & Insp Fees

All Engineering Plan Review and Inspection Fees shall be paid prior to approval of the associated engineering plans and prior to the issuance of any infrastructure permits or the start of construction (excluding land disturbance permit).

DE C&O #07 Easements

All permanent off-site easements, in a form acceptable to the City, shall be executed and recorded with the Jackson County Recorder of Deeds prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Substantial Completion or approval of the final plat. A certified copy shall be submitted to the City for verification.

DE C&O #09 FDP Reviews

Certain aspects of the development plan will be further reviewed during the Final Development Plan phase of the project. This includes detailed aspects of the design to help ensure that the plan meets the design criteria and specifications contained in the Design and Construction Manual.

DE C&O #11 Pavement Thickness

Private parking lots shall follow Article 8 of the Unified Development Ordinance for pavement thickness and base requirements.

Please provide photos of the tree massing areas in the north/northwest portions of the property. This is needed to help justify the modification request for a high impact buffer in this area.

It was noted the multifamily parking has been reduced to 1.3 cars per apartment based upon "recent historical data within the Kansas City metro". Please provide more detail describing what this data is. It was mentioned in the recent meeting that Lenexa City Center, Downtown OP, KS were references. Please provide this detail.

Please reconcile the tree caliper sizes between the plans and the narrative. If smaller tree caliper sizes are requested, this would require a modification. If all tree caliper sizes are revised to meet the minimum standards, a modification is not required.

Please provide the design guideline reference materials.

Revise Sheet L500 to include the landscape table. Provide the required number of trees and shrubs for the street frontage along I-470.

The Design Standards table on Sheets C002 and C003 needs to be revised. Staff suggests the individual lot setbacks should be reflected from the distance of each lot to the perimeter property boundary of the project site. The parking lot setbacks should reflect what is actually proposed within the lots/tracts. There are some places that have a 0' setback for the parking lot, but most are not.

Will Sheet A1.01 be revised to reflect the Shared Pakring Model as provided by Michael Park?

When resubmitting, please only submit 4 sets of the revised sheets only. Please resubmit by April 2nd.

Requesting additional detail and explaination in the shared parking table for review (e.g. break down the demand and supply by building and parking lot/area; perhaps summarize an aggregate of the specific buildings and shared parking relationship north and south of Paragon Parkway separately to provide some spacial references). This comment coincides with the Planning Comment related to parking.

Sheet C002: The individual lot lines are still not clearly shown. As previously requested, revise a sheet, or add a new sheet, to clearly show lot lines.

Provide in Narrative form a list and justification for all Modification Requests: (currently it’s embedded within the response letter—this is something we include in the PC/CC packet and would like a clean version). oPkg. lot setback along I-470 and other areas within site (parking lot within Tract B—need justification and requests o28-foot pole lighting o20-foot buffer area along I-470, and other places? oParking lot screening along I-470 oMetal panel—if used? % of EIFS--need to know for modification purposes. oRoof-top screening material---not sure exact material--we can work with you on this.

Need PDP criteria response to be provided in separate narrative form, refer to Section 2.260.C, 1.2.3. of the UDO.

Elevations have not been received for hotel(s), (hotels would require separate PDP for future approvals), if not provided at this time.

Additional apartment bldg. elevations are needed at this time for the views seen from View High Pkwy and the view looking south at the apartment bldg. Staff cannot move forward without these elevations. There are to many unknowns (i.e. building materials, potential modifications, etc.).

No revisions were received for the medical office bldg. and entertainment venue elevations—the medical building will be highly visible from View High Pkwy, etc.

The proposed table outlining the setbacks for each lot isn’t accurate for the parking areas as the site plan shows (i.e. parking setbacks, some are on the P/L?) Attached is an example of a design standard table we used for a another similar "large project site" to establish design standards for the lots.

No breakdown of apartment unit type/# of bedrooms Total # of units, does the 390 include the apartments within the 2-4 stories over the retail area? Where did the required 695 spaces (code required), come from?

Additional review is need for the shared parking model/table. Provide additional detail for this model and cite the sources in which the model is analyzed from. Staff has used the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers), to analyze parking data, along with our UDO parking standards.

Table on A1.01—the parking matrix has some mislabeled numbers/sq.ftgs/parking counts. Specifically, the general office square footage losted in the table is different for the general office when comparing to what's on the plan to what is shown in table. It appears to be off by 5,000 sq. ft., however not sure which one is right? This makes a difference on total parking numbers.

Need justification, along with photos, and maybe a general layout of the existing tree masses along the river in the north, northwest portion of the site—this is needed to justify the lack of need of a high impact buffer in this area---which is technically required.

It’s difficult to write staff report without knowing exact building materials proposed for the various buildings (will modifications be needed?)

The landscape table needs to be updated to reflect the following: Landscape table doesn’t account for the parking lot screening along View High Pkwy as requested. Landscape table doesn’t account for the street trees/shrubs requirements for both street frontages.

The response to drive aisle widths isn’t clear---maybe provide a note they will be met.

Update the Plat sheet. The lots and tracts need to be defined more clearly--the boundaries are unclear Label the NW orientation for all streets.

Requested building material sample for all proposed metal—haven’t received. Does the material plan sheet correlates with the proposed materials on the elevation sheets?

Axonometric projection requested---staff is okay if this is provided at a later time.

Code Statement

All issues pertaining to life safety and property protection from the hazards of fire, explosion or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures and premises, and to the safety to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations, shall be in accordance with the 2018 International Fire Code.

Dumpsters

IFC 304.3.3 - Dumpsters and containers with an individual capacity of 1.5 cubic yards [40.5 cubic feet (1.15 m3)] or more shall not be stored in buildings or placed within 5 feet (1524 mm) of combustible walls, openings or combustible roof eave lines.

FDC

IFC 903.3.7 - Fire department connections. The location of fire department connections shall be approved by the fire code official. Connections shall be a 4 inch Storz type fitting and located within 100 feet of a fire hydrant, or as approved by the code official. Action required: Show the locations of the FDC's and supply hydrant within 100'.

Hydrants

IFC 507.5.1 - Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 300 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. Action required: Provide a hydrant plan that shows covereage for ALL buildings. It is my understanding that there was'nt going to be a connection to KCMO water south of the river. What is the plan to get water to the site that will meet the fire flow requirements of 2018 IFC Table B105.1(2) with a 50 % reduction for automatic sprinkler systems and standpipes.

Water Supply

ly a 50%reduction onIFC 507.1 - An approved water supply capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to premises upon which facilities, buildings or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. Action required: Provide a water study for the project. Fire flows shall be provided for the entire project that meets the requirements of 2018 IFC Table B105.1(2) . The amended 2018 IFC allows for a 50% reduction of required fire flow for buildings with automatic fire sprinkler systems.

Fire Lanes

IFC 503.2.1 - Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (6096 mm), exclusive of shoulders, except for approved security gates in accordance with Section 503.6, and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (4115 mm) AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS D105.1 Where required. Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet (9144 mm), approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For purposes of this section, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. D105.2 Width. Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet (7925 mm), exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. D105.3 Proximity to building. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet (4572 mm) and a maximum of 30 feet (9144 mm) from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. D105.4 Obstructions. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located over the aerial fire apparatus access road or between the aerial fire apparatus road and the building. Other obstructions shall be permitted to be placed with the approval of the fire code official. Action required: Make access adjustments to the applicable builds to meet this requirement.

Misc.

D104.3 Remoteness. Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. Action required: A second access to Norfleet shall be provided as part of this project.

Code Statement

All issues pertaining to life safety and property protection from the hazards of fire, explosion or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures and premises, and to the safety to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations, shall be in accordance with the 2018 International Fire Code.

Dumpsters

IFC 304.3.3 - Dumpsters and containers with an individual capacity of 1.5 cubic yards [40.5 cubic feet (1.15 m3)] or more shall not be stored in buildings or placed within 5 feet (1524 mm) of combustible walls, openings or combustible roof eave lines.

FDC

IFC 903.3.7 - Fire department connections. The location of fire department connections shall be approved by the fire code official. Connections shall be a 4 inch Storz type fitting and located within 100 feet of a fire hydrant, or as approved by the code official.

Hydrants

IFC 507.5.1 - Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 300 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official.

Water Supply

IFC 507.1 - An approved water supply capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to premises upon which facilities, buildings or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction.

Fire Lanes

IFC 503.2.1 - Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (6096 mm), exclusive of shoulders, except for approved security gates in accordance with Section 503.6, and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (4115 mm) AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS D105.1 Where required. Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet (9144 mm), approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For purposes of this section, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. D105.2 Width. Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet (7925 mm), exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. D105.3 Proximity to building. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet (4572 mm) and a maximum of 30 feet (9144 mm) from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. D105.4 Obstructions. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located over the aerial fire apparatus access road or between the aerial fire apparatus road and the building. Other obstructions shall be permitted to be placed with the approval of the fire code official. Action required: Make access adjustments to the applicable builds to meet this requirement.

Legal Description

Please submit an electronic copy of the legal description. Microsoft Word document or selectable text PDF are the preferred file formats. The legal description can be emailed to the planner's email address above.

On Sheet C002 define more clearly, the boundaries for the proposed lots and tracts.

Label the NW orientation for all streets.

The UDO requires parking lot islands to be 10 feet in width when trees are planted within the island, please revise.

There were no standard details provided for pavement thicknesses, the proposed vegetated porous pavement, accessible signs, trash enclosure, curbing, etc. It is assumed this will be provided at final development plan stage and will meet UDO standards.

The parking lot setbacks from ROW are not met along I-470. A 20 foot setback is required, will this be requested as a modification?

On Sheet C007 provide dimensions of drive widths at the island bump outs. Driveway widths shall include the pavement and not the curb and gutters. Clarify the limits of the dimension. Call out the type of curbing that is proposed.

Provide a standard comment indicating the location of all oil and gas wells, whether active, inactive, or capped. Reference the source for determination.

Provide dimension for the south driveway, see Michael Park's comment regarding the need for sidewalk.

Lable sidewalks on both sides of Paragon Pkwy. Label all internal sidewalks within the site.

Provide a table establising the proposed setbacks for each lot.

Provide additional detail for the proposed amenity courtyard. Provide additional detail for the proposed entertainment venue.

Can a general phasing schedule be provided?

The parking calculation for a hotel with a restaurant or lounge is 1.5 parking spaces per room. It's noted the parking calculation used for the proposed hotels is 1 per room. Please clarify if the hotel(s) will have a restaurant or lounge (open to the public), associated with the use.

Additional detail in a table format is needed for the total number of proposed apartment units (for each building), including the breakdown of number of bedrooms and or type of units. Are any efficiency or studio units proposed? Are the apartment units proposed above the retail/office building part of Lot 3? The total number of multi-family units listed on Sheet A1.01 indicates 410 apartments. The label for the apartment building states 390 units. There is no label indicating the number of units for the 2nd through 4th floors of the retail building. We are assuming there are more than 20 units proposed? Please clarify.

It's noted a shared parking model is proposed. Can additional detail or a report be provided explaining the methodology used to determine the parking needs?

The calculation for the medical office is 5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft., is it the intent to use 4 per 1,000 or was this an oversight?

Revise the photometric plan to show the limits of where the foot candle reading reaches 0. Provide justification for the 28-foot parking lot pole height. The UDO does require lower pole heights when adjoining properties with residential uses. Staff understands the distance to the homes is quite long, however additional detail from the applicant is requested. Will there be proposed building lighting? Can this be included in photometric plan at this time? If provided at final development plan stage, all lighting shall meet UDO standards.

Provide a table detailing the proposed FAR and/or densities for each lot.

There are conflicting building heights noted for the medical office building between sheets A1.01 and A2.01.

Provide the hotel building heights and square footages.

Elevations were not received for the proposed stand-alone restaurant, apartment building, hotel(s), and the parking garage. Is the intent for this preliminary development plan to cover all buildings?

Elevations for all sides of buildings are needed for review prior to moving forward to public hearings.

The medical office building elevation seems to be lacking additional elements. Perhaps, there could be additional details or material changes?

The entertainment building elevation is lacking vertical and horizontal elements. Can additional detail be added?

Provide leaders identifying the proposed exterior building materials referencing the exact location on the building.

Has it been determined if metal paneling or EIFS is proposed? Some of the elevations indicate either/or. Also, where metal is proposed, please provide the percentage for each elevation. Staff recommends no more than 30% for a given elevation.

Can an axonometric projection be provided showing the viewpoint from the from the SW point of view for the development? Can an architectural street section be provided showing the streetscape corridor looking through Paragon Pkwy?

Can floor plans be provided for the buildings? It would assist in understanding proposed projections for the buildings.

Provide detail on how proposed Roof mounted units and/or ground mounted units will be screened. Staff is unsure about the proposed screening method for the medical building. Can building material sample be provided? Can a building material sample be provided for all proposed metal materials?

Are any signs/monument signs proposed for the site that may require approval through the Governing Body (exceeding our standards)? If so, provide a detail of the sign and it can be reviewed as part of this application.

Provide a trash enclosure detail, or if provided at final development plan stage, the closure shall meet the UDO standards.

On Sheet A1.01, are the labels for the four buildings on either side of Paragon Pkwy accurate for all buildings with respect to the total sq. ftg. and uses or just for the building on which it is labeled?

On Sheet A1.01, is the total square footage of the 2-story restaurant 11,070? The other multi-story buildings have the square footages for each floor called out, this one did not. Please clarify.

On Sheet A1.01, the hotel square footage and height is not labeled. Staff suggests shifting the hotels further to the west to allow for a service road behind the hotel.

Can the building footprints (only) be labeled for clarification? The footprint square footage is needed to calculate landscape requirements.

In the landscape table, the total sq. ftg. used in the landscaping calculations is less than the total sq.ftg. noted on Sheet A1.01. The total square footage is also noted as something different on Sheet C002 when the lot and tract totals are tallied. Can the total sq. ftg. be confirmed? This could require revisions to the landscape table.

Discussion is needed for the proposed caliper sizes and heights for the proposed trees. As proposed the landscaping minimums are not met.

It is note shrubs are not shown, labeled, or identified on the plan. At final development plan stage this will be requested and shall meet the UDO standards.

Where was the parking lot screening calculated? Technically parking lot screening is required along the I-470 frontage and the View High Pkwy frontage. Staff will recommend screening along the View High Corridor, but could support a modification along the I-470 frontage. Can justification be provided along with photos, and perhaps a count of existing tree masses along the river in the north, northwest portion of the site? This would be to show there is adequate screening to adjoining properties that are currently have a residence located on the property?

Additional review will be required once revised plans have been received to determine if landscaping requirements have been met.

The Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) lists criteria for considering rezoning and preliminary development plan applications. Please refer to Article 2, Section 2.260.B. & C. Please respond in narrative form to the listed criteria in sections B & C, to the extent they are pertinent to this application.

Modification requests. Provide a narrative statement that explains the need for all requested modifications. It's been noted modifications could be needed for: -parking lot setbacks -landscaping requirements -metal panels

General: • Show location of all oil/gas wells, or indicate none are present, and cite the source. • Show phasing of this project. • The individual lot lines are not clearly shown. Revise a sheet, or add a new sheet, to clearly show lot lines. • The plans show a future parking garage to the south of the medical office building. Given the size of the structure, there will be significant Impact to existing parking when constructed. Consider doing any subgrade work for the future garage possible at this time to help minimize future disruptions. • “Public” and “Private” designations included in street name labels is not consistent thru the plan set. Please reconcile. • The Proposed Floodplain boundary runs thru the coffee shop and south hotel. This is not allowed. Please revise.

Sheet C002: • The “Lot 2” label is used twice. Please revise. • Please label the base flood elevation.

Sheet C005: • Include all lines( floodway, stream buffer, etc.) in the Legend and include “proposed” or “existing” as applicable. • What is the “Conceptual Layout” included in the Legend? Please clarify or delete.

Sheet C006: • Label the storm structure upstream of Structure 4803 to the south. • Label multi-use buildings with all uses, not just retail, on this sheet and throughout the plan set as applicable.

Sheet C008: A typical section is not required at this time, but will be required with any Final Development Plan submitted. Remove the typical section shown.

Sheet L500: Please note that only ornamental trees are allowed within public easements.

Add sidewalk along the south side of the proposed RIRO driveway from View High Drive to the development.

Consider moving the proposed sidewalk shown on the north side of Paragon Parkway between the development and River Road to the south side of the street so as to minimize the number of roadway crossings/pedestrian conflicts.

Sidewalk has been omitted from the west side of River Road and a portion of Paragon Parkway (at river crossings). This will be an exception to the typical design requirements that all commercial streets (including private streets) have sidewalk along both sides. However, the omitted areas make sense given the adjacent river areas and otherwise available access routes/sidewalk network for pedestrians related to the places of activity and bridges.

The typical section for Paragon Parkway doesnt seem to match the plans.

General Parking Comments/Questions: The parking table needs additional information and more clarity for staff review. What is the relationship of individual land uses, buildings and areas of land use proposed within the development corresponding to the parking supply proposed for code, market or shared parking needs? The tabulated aggregate assumes all of the parking is shared without any assignment (e.g. multi-family supply is presumably not entirely shared with other uses) or regard to proximity (e.g. separation of parking supply to parking demand or distance between compatible uses that share parking). Furthermore, could there be a summary of shared parking north and south of Paragon Parkway in addtion to the entire site if some of the more detailed information cannot be provided? It appears the "Future Garage" is included in the supply to meet the shared parking model of market demand. Is the "Future Garage" needed or not and when would it be provided if so?