Lee's Summit

BUILDING ELEVATIONS. Provide color elevations for the proposed buildings (only black and white elevations have been provided): Five Four Restaurant & Drafthouse building; and Popeye's.

ROOF-TOP MECHANICAL SCREENING. To comply with City ordinance, RTUs shall be fully screened from view on all sides via building parapet walls of a height at least equal to the height of the units being screened. The use of a separate screen system is not allowed on new construction buildings. 1) It isn't clear from the Panda Express building elevations if the composite bamboo material that will screen the units on three sides comprises parapet walls with the bamboo composite as the exterior finish material, or if said material is a separate screen system independent of the building architecture. 2) The Casey's building elevations show the RTUs being screened via a separate screen system rather than vertically extended parapet walls as required by the UDO.

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.

The description of access 6 in the TIA is not correct as it references itself and claims to provide access to 3 pad sites but the plan only shows 2.

Because the trail access across the Field House parking area is 10 FT wide, and the Mulit-use trail on the East side of Jefferson is 10 FT wide, please extend the sidewalk west of Jefferson to match the 10 FT width.

Final approval of the plans will not be given until MoDOT approves any improvements within their ROW.

The SB left Turn lane at Access 2 as well as the northbound turn lane at access 3 do not meet the minimum lengths specified in the TIS. Please move Acess 3 further to the North in order to lengthen these turn lanes and provide the required 150 FT of storage.

The signal at access 2 is not shown.

TIS reccomends 300 FT of storage for the SB right turn lane on MO 291, plans only provide 200 FT. The lane should be extended as far as possible and MoDOT will need to approve any deviation from the TIS.

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 site development permits or the start of construction (excluding land disturbance permit).

DE C&O #04 Cert FA or Escrow

All subdivision-related public improvements must have a Certificate of Final Acceptance prior to approval of the final plat, unless security is provided in the manner set forth in the City's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Section 7.340. If security is provided, building permits may be issued upon issuance of a Certificate of Substantial Completion of the public infrastructure as outlined in Article 3, Division V, Sections 3.540 and 3.550 and Article 3, Division IV, Section 3.475 of the UDO, respectively.

DE C&O #06 Land Disturbance

A Land Disturbance Permit shall be obtained from the City if groundbreaking will take place prior to the issuance of a site development permit, building permit, or prior to the approval of the Final Development Plan / Engineering Plans.

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 #13 ADA Sidewalk Ramps

All ADA sidewalk ramps shall be constructed by the developer at the time the street is constructed.

A United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) permit may be required for work within the juriscictional stream near the proposed in-line detention basin. A jurisdictional determination letter shall be submitted during the Final Development Plan phase 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.

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. Consult with Water Utilities to determine if there is adequate fire flow for the proposed buildings per IFC Table B105.1(2). A 50% reduction is allowed for having an automatic sprinkler system.

Miscellaneous Correction

Provide a drawing showing turning movements on the fire lanes for a 44' straight fire truck. Show movements to shared parking lot accesses, private roads and particularly the aerial acesss lanes next to the apartment building. Not provided

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. Provide a complete hydrant plan showing public and private hydrants. Hydrant distances are measured around the buildings and not through them. Public hydrants shall be located and spaced per design standards Who will be responsible for the maintence of private hydrants on the access roads? Provide hydrants on four lane roads and roads separated separated by medians arrange hydrants on either side of the street wit an average spacing of 500 feet (IFC Table C102.1). Show public hydrants along Oldham Parkway

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. FDC's not shown. Additional hydrants may be needed to meet this requirement.

Miscellaneous Correction

Provide a phasing plan for road construction.

LOT 8 INTERNAL CIRCULATION. It was discussed in the applicant meeting that the proposed site layout compromises the functionality of the southernmost row of parking abutting the drive-through lane entrance because drive-through queues will block in said spaces. Additionally, the easternmost parking spaces in that same row are effectively forced to exit out of the parking lot during times of higher customer volume by circulating through the abutting drive-through lanes and thereby negatively impacting drive-through operations due to a lack of a by-pass lane. The issue above was acknowledged during the applicant meeting to be addressed, but the resubmitted plans remain unchanged as it relates to this particular issue. There is also no written response addressing this matter accompanying the resubmittal. Staff will not move forward with PDP approval of Lot 8 without a detailed written response regarding the intentionality of the parking lot layout and how it is consistent with Chick-fil-A's operations. If no response is provided, staff will only recommend conceptual approval of Lot 8 that will require future prelimary development plan approval under separate application.

PLAN BOUNDARIES/LEGAL DESCRIPTION. The legal description for the Abundant Life Church property simply reads "Part of Lots 11 and 12, Clearview Acres...". This description is too vague to mean anything. A detailed description of the actual boundaries of said property is required for inclusion in any approval ordinance for the subject application.

LOT INFORMATION (PRELIMINARY PLAT). 1) Label the dimension for the east property line for Lot 1. 2) Label the dimensions for the west property lines for Lots 2 and 3. 3) Label the dimension for the shared east-west property line separating Lots 3 and 4. 4) The east property line dimension for Tract A is labeled as 554.01', but scales approximately 798'. No preliminary plat sheet addressing the comments above was provided with the latest resubmittal.

SIDEWALKS. Sidewalk connections between the public streets and the individual lots shall be provided to accommodate and encourage pedestrian usage, particularly considering that Phase 2 of Oldham Village includes multi-family development. Pedestrian connectivity shall be provided to all proposed lots.

BUILDING ELEVATIONS. 1) Scalable and dimensioned architectural building elevations of all elevations for each building is required for preliminary development plan approval. Staff has communicated to the applicant, and the applicant has acknowledge, that only those lots with full architectural building elevations shall proceed looking for preliminary development plan approval as part of the subject application. All other lots with only renderings shall be considered for conceptual approval and shall require future preliminary development plan approval under separate application. 2) Regarding the proposed car wash elevations and the use of clear glass along the length of the tunnel, provide detail as to the maintenance program that the user follows to maintain the integrity (both aesthetic and otherwise) of the glass in a wet environment.

SITE DATA AND PARKING TABLES. 1) The Lot Area listed in the site data table on Sheet C.101 for Lot 11 do not match measured area in the PDP plan set. Also the listed lot areas for Lots 1 and 11 don't match what was depicted on the previously submitted preliminary plat sheet. 2) Provide the impervious coverage information for each lot in addition to the overall coverage listed for the development.

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 site development permits or the start of construction (excluding land disturbance permit).

DE C&O #04 Cert FA or Escrow

All subdivision-related public improvements must have a Certificate of Final Acceptance prior to approval of the final plat, unless security is provided in the manner set forth in the City's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Section 7.340. If security is provided, building permits may be issued upon issuance of a Certificate of Substantial Completion of the public infrastructure as outlined in Article 3, Division V, Sections 3.540 and 3.550 and Article 3, Division IV, Section 3.475 of the UDO, respectively.

DE C&O #06 Land Disturbance

A Land Disturbance Permit shall be obtained from the City if groundbreaking will take place prior to the issuance of a site development permit, building permit, or prior to the approval of the Final Development Plan / Engineering Plans.

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 #13 ADA Sidewalk Ramps

All ADA sidewalk ramps shall be constructed by the developer at the time the street is constructed.

DE C&O #14 Common Area Sidewalks

All sidewalks adjacent to a common area tract, unplatted land or any land where no structure is intended to be built, and is required, shall be constructed by the developer at the time the street is constructed.

Sanitary sewer upgrades for Phase 1 identified by Water Utilities may be deferred until Phase 2, contingent upon the existing building at 1204 SW Jefferson St. not being utilized for tenants or occupants.

Change 5' sidewalk to 10 shared-use path from Jefferson to M291 (south side) and from Jefferson to Fieldhouse (south side). Can be done with FDP.

Access 3 needs to be moved farther north to allow for a 150' SB turn lane. This is shown in recommendations in the TIS.

Realigned Jefferson should be 3-lane section with TWLTL to match existing Jefferson to the south. (TIS)

Show improvements required by MoDOT. SB turn lane extension at Oldham. Verify that other MoDOT requirements are Phase 2.

Access 5 is too close to existing church office access. Would like to see church access closed or Access 4 and 5 consolidated to meet Access Management Code. Church access closure will be a condition of approval and only closed after parking lot in that area is completed.

Throat lengths in TIS. Accesses 3, 6, and 10 have substandard throat lengths. TIS should make recommendations on if these are acceptable and why or why they need to be improved. The biggest issue I see is with Access 6 WB. Substandard throat length will affect internal circulation.

Shared use path is shown as 8'. Needs to be 10'.

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.

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. Consult with Water Utilities to determine if there is adequate fire flow for the proposed buildings per IFC Table B105.1(2). A 50% reduction is allowed for having an automatic sprinkler system.

Miscellaneous Correction

Provide a drawing showing turning movements on the fire lanes for a 44' straight fire truck. Show movements to shared parking lot accesses, private roads and particularly the aerial acesss lanes next to the apartment building

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. Provide a complete hydrant plan showing public and private hydrants. Hydrant distances are measured around the buildings and not through them. Public hydrants shall be located and spaced per design standards Who will be responsible for the maintence of private hydrants on the access roads? Provide hydrants on four lane roads and roads separated separated by medians arrange hydrants on either side of the street wit an average spacing of 500 feet (IFC Table C102.1).

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. FDC's not shown. Additional hydrants may be needed to meet this requirement.

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.

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. Consult with Water Utilities to determine if there is adequate fire flow for the proposed buildings per IFC Table B105.1(2). A 50% reduction is allowed for having an automatic sprinkler system.

Miscellaneous Correction

Provide a drawing showing turning movements on the fire lanes for a 44' straight fire truck.

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. Provide a complete hydrant plan showing public and private hydrants. Hydrant distances are measured around the buildings and not through them. Public hydrants shall be located and spaced per design standards Who will be responsible for the maintence of private hydrants on the access roads?

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. FDC's not shown. Additional hydrants may be needed to meet this requirement.

LOT 8 INTERNAL CIRCULATION. It was discussed in the applicant meeting that the proposed site layout compromises the functionality of the southernmost row of parking abutting the drive-through lane entrance because drive-through queues will block in said spaces. Additionally, the easternmost parking spaces in that same row are effectively forced to exit out of the parking lot during times of higher customer volume by circulating through the abutting drive-through lanes and thereby negatively impacting drive-through operations due to a lack of a by-pass lane. The issue above was acknowledged during the applicant meeting to be addressed, but the resubmitted plans remain unchanged as it relates to this particular issue. There is also no written response addressing this matter accompanying the resubmittal.

PLAN BOUNDARIES/LEGAL DESCRIPTION. 1) The plan boundaries include all of the property owned by Abundant Life Church that includes the original church site that now houses their Admin/Education/Counseling facility. The northernmost portion of said property is proposed to house regional detention. What improvements, if any, will take place on the portion of the property that houses the original church site? 2) Revise the vicinity map to include the Abundant Life Church property and the Leland's Commercial Park property in order to match the plan boundaries. 3) The legal description for the Abundant Life Church property simply reads "Part of Lots 11 and 12, Clearview Acres...". This description is too vague to mean anything. A detailed description of the actual boundaries of said property is required for inclusion in any approval ordinance for the subject application.

STREETS/DRIVES (LOT 8). The parking lot drive entrance/exit at the northwest corner of the site scales at 22' width (excluding curb and gutter). A minimum 24' width (excluding curb and gutter) is required.

LOT INFORMATION (PRELIMINARY PLAT). 1) Label the dimension for the east property line for Lot 1. 2) Label the dimensions for the west property lines for Lots 2 and 3. 3) Label the dimension for the shared east-west property line separating Lots 3 and 4. 4) The east property line dimension for Tract A is labeled as 554.01', but scales approximately 798'.

SIDEWALKS. 1) Sidewalk connections between the public streets and the individual lots shall be provided to accommodate and encourage pedestrian usage, particularly considering that Phase 2 of Oldham Village includes multi-family development. The only internal private sidewalk shown on the plan is along one side of the "7" street. Pedestrian connectivity shall be provided to all proposed lots. 2) The linework on the Sidewalk Plan (Sheet C.104) does not make it apparent that a sidewalk is being provided along the south/west side of SW Oldham Pkwy. A dimensioned label is provided, but no sidewalk is shown.

STREET NAME LABELING. SW Oldham Pkwy (east-west street) is mistakenly labeled as SW Jefferson St on the plans.

SETBACK TABLE (SHEET C.101). 1) Lots 10 and 8 are proposed to have 10' rear setbacks. However, it doesn't appear that conditions exist that would make it difficult for either lot to be developed to maintain the typical 20' rear setback for a commercial lot. Staff recommends 20' minimum rear setbacks for all buildings in the development. 2) The side yard setback proposed for all commercial lots is 0'. Staff will recommend a minimum 5' setback for all of the commercial lots, subject to compliance with any building and/or fire code requirements for greater separation between the buildings. 3) Lot 4 is listed in the table as having a proposed 20' front setback for the parking lot, but the parking lot scales as having a 15' setback from SW Oldham Pkwy at its closest point. Revise to meet the 20' standard. 4) Lots 8-10 are listed as having proposed 10' parking lot front setbacks. These particular lots front onto the private "7" street. Parking lot setbacks from a private street are measured from the edge of the private street pavement as opposed from the property line. Based on that fact, it appears that the minimum 20' setback from the private street edge is met. Revise the table to read "20'" for the front parking lot setback for these lots. 5) The front parking lot setback for Lot 2 shall read 20' instead of 0'. 6) The building setback from the MoDOT R/W for Lot 5 is listed as a minimum 10', but the building appears to scale as having only a 5' setback from said R/W. Reconcile the setback conflict.

BUILDING INFORMATION. Dimension the building footprints on all of the pad sites. The comment above was previously made, but not addressed on the resubmittal.

BUILDING ELEVATIONS. 1) Scalable and dimensioned architectural building elevations of all elevations for each building shall be submitted as part of this application. The building elevations shall have callouts of all exterior building materials and colors. Only partial elevations for the north and west elevations of a Popeye's were provided. Renderings of a Panda Express, Smalls Sliders and Q39 were provided in lieu of architectural exterior building elevations. Renderings are helpful artistic representations that convey what a building will look like, but they only serve as a supplement to scalable architectural drawings. 2) Regarding the proposed car wash elevations and the use of clear glass along the length of the tunnel, provide detail as to the maintenance program that the user follows to maintain the integrity (both aesthetic and otherwise) of the glass in a wet environment. The previously made comments above were not addressed in the resubmittal.

SITE DATA AND PARKING TABLES. 1) The Lot Areas in acres and sq. ft. for Lots 3-10 do not match the information listed on the accompanying preliminary plat drawing. Revise and recalculate the FAR and impervious coverage percentages based on the corrected lot area information. 3) Both tables list Lots 9 and 10 as "N/A" for building area, but the site plans show buildings on each of those buildings. Review and revise all data table information to match the information depicted on the plans. 4) Provide the impervious coverage information for each lot in addition to the overall coverage listed for the development. 5) Add Lot 11 and Tract B information to the Site Data Table.

PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING. The area to the east and north of the fitness tenant has large unbroken spans of pavement for the parking lot. To comply with parking lot landscape requirements, every four rows of parking shall include a landscape island of at least ten feet in width to break up the large expanses of hardscape. Regarding the previously made comment above, staff didn't do a good job explaining the UDO requirement for the applicant to address it on the resubmittal. The UDO calls for a continuous 10'-wide landscape island to be provided across the entire width of every 4th parking row so as to create "pods" of parking areas broken up by the linear landscape areas.

LIGHTING. No lighting or photometric information has been provided. Provide lighting and photometric information in accordance with the requirements of UDO Article 8, Subdivision 5. The response to the previously made comment above is that the information shall be provided at the time of FDP. Add a note to the plans indicating that the proposed development will comply with the lighting standards under UDO Article 8.

Stream buffer determination appears to be based on incorrect drainage area calculations. Sheet C.200 shows the drainage area immediately upstream of the upstream end of the proposed detention basin, but it appears there are additional areas draining to the stream beyond this point. In this case, it would appear the point to be measured would be the outlet end of the detention basin. Please evaluate and provide a determination of the existing condition drainage area to the outlet of the proposed detention basin.

Preliminary determinations based on the City's GIS shows the drainage area to the point described above is very close to 40 acres. If greater than 40 acres, please be advised this would require moving the stormwater detention basin outside the limits of the stream buffer, or alternatively, a waiver from the City Engineer would be required.

Sheet C.200 and Sheet C.202: The proposed detention basin shows contours without any elevations, labels for emergency spillway, labels for outlet structure, or other preliminary information needed for the Preliminary Development Plan. Please provide elevations for the contours, and labels for the emergency spillway and outlet structure, and ensure the emergency spillway is located in an appropriate area for emergency discharge.

It would appear the proposed detention basin shall be subject to the more stringent requirements of TR-60, including wider flat top, increased freeboard between the clogged condition and the top of dam, and other criteria listed in TR-60. Please review TR-60 and ensure the preliminary design will fit within the footprint shown on the Preliminary Development Plan.

This resubmittal is incomplete due to a lack of an updated TIS. This review is not considered a complete review and additional corrections may be necessary.

The RIRO connection will be required with the Phase 1 improvements. The City will not take the rights to the Oldham Pkwy ROW without the approval of this access.

There is a lack of pedestrian connectivity with this plan. There should be a pedestrian connection to the park to the west as well as pedestrian ways connecting each pad site to the sidewalks on the street. Additionally, there should be sidewalks on the private "7 Street" and along Jefferson.

The new Jefferson Street connection should be constructed with Phase 1. Not constructing this will limit access to the Jefferson Street businesses and force more traffic to Percels.

The EB-WB movements at the full access does not show a through movement. Please shwo which lane this would be assigned to.

The SB Left turn does not appear to meet the minimum storage and taper requirements.

The TIS indicates that you plan to have a signal at the full access intersection, however the signal does not meet signal warrants and is not shown on the PDP Plan. If you can properly demonstrate the signal meets warrants, please indicate signals on the plan.

Please show any improvements required by MoDOT on the plan, i.e. turn lanes, sidewalk, improvements to MO 291. MoDOT approval will need to be documented before PDP approval.

PLAN BOUNDARIES/LEGAL DESCRIPTION. There is a lack of clarity as to the plan limits for which the subject application for Oldham Village Phase 1 covers, particularly when compared to the plans provided for the separate but associated Oldham Village Phase 2 application. The legal description for both application plan submittals are identical and cover approximately 45.41 acres, but most of the improvements on the Phase 1 plans cover the area immediately along SW Oldham Pkwy. However, it appears that some improvements on the Phase 1 plans are also shown on the old CK Enterprises and Elite Fence sites plus what looks like a building footprint just north of the CK Enterprises site. Clearly call out the actual boundaries of the Phase 1 application and grey out or hatch out the portion of the area not covered by this plan and revise the legal description accordingly.

STORMWATER DETENTION. Show the location of all existing and proposed detention basin(s) serving the proposed development.

STREETS/DRIVES. Label the widths of all the private streets/drives that will come off SW Oldham Pkwy, SW Jefferson St and the internal private drives and streets.

VACATION OF EASEMENTS/ROW. 1) Show, label and dimension the location of all proposed easements. 2) The proposed layout will require the vacation of right-of-way and possibly easements as well under separate application prior to the issuance of any building permits.

SURROUNDING LAND USES. Label the existing zoning of adjacent development located within 185' of the project site.

LOT INFORMATION. Show, label and dimension all of the proposed lot lines, including lot numbers.

SIDEWALKS. 1) Label the proposed sidewalk width on the sidewalk plan. 2) There is a segment of sidewalk missing along east side of SW Oldham Pkwy through the S-curve section. 3) Sidewalk connections between the public streets and the individual lots shall be provided to accommodate and encourage pedestrian usage, particularly considering that Phase 2 of Oldham Village includes multi-family development.

SETBACKS. What setbacks regulations are sought to govern the PMIX-zoned development? Is the intent for standard CP-2 setbacks or some customized version?

BUILDING INFORMATION. Dimension the building footprints on all of the pad sites.

LIGHTING. No lighting or photometric information has been provided. Provide lighting and photometric information in accordance with the requirements of UDO Article 8, Subdivision 5. The response to the previously made comment above is that the information shall be provided at the time of FDP. Add a note to the plans indicating that the proposed development will comply with the lighting standards under UDO Article 8.

BUILDING ELEVATIONS. 1) Scalable and dimensioned architectural building elevations of all elevations for each building shall be submitted as part of this application. The building elevations shall have callouts of all exterior building materials and colors. Only partial elevations for the north and west elevations of a Popeye's were provided. Renderings of a Panda Express, Smalls Sliders and Q39 were provided in lieu of architectural exterior building elevations. Renderings are helpful artistic representations that convey what a building will look like, but they only serve as a supplement to scalable architectural drawings. 2) Regarding the proposed car wash elevations and the use of clear glass along the length of the tunnel, provide detail as to the maintenance program that the user follows to maintain the integrity (both aesthetic and otherwise) of the glass in a wet environment.

SITE DATA TABLE. 1) The site data table information on Sheet C.100 doesn't correlate to the actual plans. For example, the table calls out Lots 1 and 2 being multi-family residential, but the revised Phase 1 plans no longer include any residential. Update and revise all site data table information, including the parking table information, to reflect the most recent plan revisions. 2) Provide impervious coverage percentages and FAR data for each individual lot in the site data table.

MODIFICATION REQUEST NARRATIVE -- GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - ENVISION LS OVERLAY. Because the subject property is located within the EnVision LS overlay area, please review the pertinent development standards that apply to the multi-family and commercial sites found starting with UDO Section 5.640. Provide documentation/response indicating how the development standards of the overlay are being met and provide a modification narrative for all aspects said requirements that are not being met.

COMMON AREA NOTE. Revise the common area note on Sheet C.100 to state that the POA (not HOA) shall own and be responsible for maintenance of all common area tracts.

LANDSCAPING/SCREEN BUFFER. 1) A high-impact buffer, which includes a 6' fence or wall, is required along the west boundary of the development where it abuts the existing single-family residential subdivision. The landscape plan shows plant materials, but does not appear to include a wall or fence. Revise. 2) Landscaping is shown across the curb cut to the church property to the west and the curb adjacent to the 5,000 sq. ft. building in the northwest area of the development. 3) There are small areas where it does not appear that the 2.5' parking lot screening requirement is being met. At this PDP stage, just add a note to the plans that landscaping will be provided in accordance with the requirements of Article 8. Final details of said requirement and all other landscaping requirements will be reviewed and approved at the FDP stage.

OVERALL SITE PLAN (Sheet C.101). The overall site plan shown on this sheet includes information in a table that doesn't match what is graphically depicted on the sheet and includes lots that are not part of the Phase 1 plans.

MISCELLANEOUS. 1) Please clarify what the intent and scope of activity on the former CK Enterprises and Elite Fence properties are. The Phase 1 plans appear to show improvements on said properties, but they conflict with what is shown on the Phase 2 plans. 2) The Water Utility Plan - South sheet (Sheet C.501) shows development south of the SW Oldham Pkwy alignment that does not show up anywhere else on the Phase 1 plans, but shows up on the Phase 2 plans.

DRIVE-THROUGH QUEUING. Show that adequate queuing spaces are provided for all drive-through facilities in the form of a minimum 5-car stacking from the order box and 4-car stacking from the pickup window without backing out into the parking lot drive aisles.

PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING. The area to the east and north of the fitness tenant has large unbroken spans of pavement for the parking lot. To comply with parking lot landscape requirements, every four rows of parking shall include a landscape island of at least ten feet in width to break up the large expanses of hardscape.

Stream buffer was not addressed along the south portion of the project. The detention basin appears to be proposed within the limits of this stream buffer, which is not allowed. Preliminary calculations show this stream is subject to a 60 foot stream buffer on either side of the stream's ordinary high water mark, and the City will not support a waiver to this requirement. Considerable revision to the plan and stormwater report is therefore required. Please evaluate and revise as appropriate.

If applicable, any detention basin where the dam is greater than 10 feet in height shall meet the requirements of TR-60, including minimum widths at the top of dam, spillway and emergency spillway design with greater freeboard requirements, dam construction requirements, etc. Please review TR-60, and ensure any preliminary design of a detention basin dam meets the minimum requirements.

Setbacks from adjacent property lines were less than 20 feet from the 100 year clogged condition/zero available storage condition within the detention basin. Please ensure any detention basins proposed for the development meet the 20 foot setback requirement.

No further review of the stormwater study was conducted due to the issues related to the comments above.

Please refer to previous applicant letter. Only those public storm lines and inlets along Oldham Pkwy. will be considered public. All others will be considered private. Please revise the plans as appropriate.

Please refer to previous applicant letter. Only those public water mains along Oldham Pkwy. will be considered public. All others will be considered private. Please revise the plans as appropriate.

A suitable development agreement shall be executed for improvements to the sanitary sewer system. Details concerning these improvements shall be forthcoming.

Informational Comment: Site plan did not show the detention basin. North site plan did not show detention basin. South site plan did not show detention basin. It was not shown until Sheet C.201 on the grading plan. Please show the detention basin on the site plan(s) as this shall be required as part of Phase 1.

Stormwater Study Comment: No analysis was conducted along several points of interest downstream of the project to ensure detention isn't causing a rise in the HGL along Cedar Creek. Please provide a detailed analysis (i.e., HEC-RAS?) of the downstream system along several points of interest to ascertain the detention system is not creating a worse situation in terms of peak flows and increased HGLs downstream of the project. Please be aware this analysis should be more in-depth, as there are residences and/or businesses downstream of the project that might be impacted. For purposes of rationale, detention shall be considered the default mitigaton strategy, unless it can be proved that detention is creating a rise in the downstream floodplain. A HEC-RAS analysis is likely required in this instance rather than simple calculations. Please review, evaluate, and revise the stormwater report as required.

The site plan should be more clearly labled and the usage for each lot should be specified, i.e. Fast Food, Sit Down Restaurant, Retail, etc (even if it is just an assumed use). Please also lable the access points as they are described in the report.

The Intensity/Units do not seem to match up to the most recently submitted site layout. It is difficult to check the trip generations without a proper site plan. If the site plan you used for your study is not the most current, but is more conservative, a statement could be made to that effect.

Pass-by trips were calculated at 15% of the volumes on MO 291 from the counts you collected in 2022? If it is from the interchange study in 2015 more updated information is needed. Please clarify.

It was stated that the signal warrants for 4 hours were not met, were the peak hour warrants considered?

Since a traffic signal is not warranted for any other reason than LOS calculations, has any consideration been given to an alternate intersection configuration such at a roundabout at this location? Could the site configuration be changed to increase the trips as needed to meet the warrant.

All curb return radii should be a minimum of 35 FT to meet city design guidlines. If not able to make these adjustments please provide and engineering reason why.

The access location to Lot 5 is noted as being too close to the 4 way intersection to the south. This prohibits the construction of a left turn lane necessary for the development. Please adjust the entrance further to the north in order to meet the city's acess guidlines and allow for the warranted turn lane.

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.

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. Consult with Water Utilities to determine if there is adequate fire flow for the proposed buildings per IFC Table B105.1(2). A 50% reduction is allowed for having an automatic sprinkler system.

Miscellaneous Correction

Provide a drawing showing turning movements on the fire lanes for a 44' straight fire truck.

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. Provide a complete hydrant plan showing public and private hydrants. Provide a complete hydrant plan of public and private hydrants. The Water Utility Plan -South does not match the other plans (blue building).

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. FDC's not shown. Additional hydrants may be needed to meet this requirement.

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.

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. Consult with Water Utilities to determine if there is adequate fire flow for the proposed buildings per IFC Table B105.1(2). A 50% reduction is allowed for having an automatic sprinkler system.

Miscellaneous Correction

Provide a drawing showing turning movements on the fire lanes for a 44' straight fire truck.

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. Show the locations of the public hydrants along Oldham Parkway and private hydrants on Lot 8.

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. FDC's not shown. Additional hydrants may be needed to meet this requirement.

Miscellaneous Correction

Locate the hydrants on the south side of the building on Lot 2 on the islands where the main is located to get them out of the collapse zone.

SITE DATA TABLES (SHEET C.100). - It appears that the building area square footages listed for Lots 1 and 2 are only for the building footprints and not the gross building square footages. List the gross square footages for each multi-family building. Additionally, the listed square footages appear to be transposed. Correct and ensure that the listed number of residential units corresponds to the correct lot number. - The FAR listed for Lot 3 is incorrect. It should read 5.95% based on the information provided, not 16.81%. - The listed use for Lot 3 is multi-tenant, but it was staff's understanding is that the target user is a sit-down restaurant hence the need for such a high number of parking spaces. Lot 7 should be listed as commercial multi-tenant with drive-thru.

PARKING CALCULATION TABLE (SHEET C.100). - The listed building square footages for Lots 4-7 appear incorrect and don't match the square footages provided in the site data table above it. Correct. - Revise the listed provided parking ratios to reflect the correct building square footages for Lots 4-7. - The commercial restaurant drive-through sites do not meet the UDO's minimum 14 parking space per 1,000 sq. ft. of building area for Lots 4-7. The minimum parking requirements of the UDO shall be met. - The information listed for Lots 8 and 9 is transposed. Correct. - Provide a dwelling unit breakdown of both multi-family sites based on the number of bedrooms to verify and compare compliance with UDO parking requirements for a multi-family development.

COMMON AREA NOTE. Revise the common area note on Sheet C.100 to state that the POA (not HOA) shall own and be responsible for maintenance of Tracts A-C.

PARKING LOT DESIGN. - It appears that the northeast corner of the Lot 2 parking lot doesn't meet the minimum 20' setback from the ROW. - It appear that the western boundary of the Lot 3 overflow parking lot doesn't meet the minimum 20' setback from the ROW, nor does the northeast corner of the Lot 3 parking lot from MoDOT ROW. - Lots 6 and 7 do not meet the minimum parking lot setbacks from MoDOT ROW. - A spot check of multiple internal drive aisles show pavement widths of 21' to 23' versus the minimum required 24' of pavement width in areas that are flanked by landscape islands on both sides. All internal drive aisles intended for two-way traffic shall have a minimum 24' of pavement width. - All parking lot boundaries shall be constructed with CG-1 curbing. Line types change on certain lots from the standard double line to indicate CG-1 to a single line on the overflow parking on Lot 3, all of Lot 4, all of Lot 5, part of Lot 6, etc. Revise.

TRASH ENCLOSURES. - Trash enclosure areas shall be improved with a Portland cement concrete pad and a Portland cement concrete approach 30 feet in length, measured from the enclosure opening. The pad and approach shall be improved with a minimum six inches of full depth unreinforced Portland cement concrete constructed on a sub-grade of four inches of granular base course. A number. Not all trash enclosures are shown with the required pad in front of their location. Those that do not have the minimum pad length of 30'. - The location of the Lot 2 trash enclosure conflicts with shown parking space locations. - It is assumed that Lot 1 will have trash enclosures somewhere on-site, but none are shown. - Add a note stating that trash enclosures shall be constructed in compliance with the requirements of Article 8 of the UDO.

LINEWORK/ERRANT LINES. There are a number of errant lines appearing to depict building locations on earlier iterations of Lots 1, 3 and 4 of the submitted plans. Remove these old building locations.

PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING. As discussed in both pre-application meetings, staff recommends softening the amount of impervious coverage created by the parking lot between the Lot 1 and 2 buildings by providing significant landscaping that includes trees along the long island dividing the area. Staff also recommends the addition of more treed islands to break up the longer parking bays.

LANDSCAPE BUFFER. A typical RP-4 type of development (i.e. apartments) requires a high-impact landscape buffer when abutting a single-family residential development. No fence or wall appears to be proposed where the proposed apartments adjoin the single-family residential. However, it appears that the landscape area between the two uses is 30'-wide versus the typical 20'. Please address how the proposed landscaping in this area is intended to provide a buffer between the uses.

CONNECTIVITY/SIDEWALK. - Provide a connection between the proposed development and the abutting park to the west. - It appears that sidewalks are provided along both sides of SW Oldham Pkwy, but it doesn't appear as though there is any sidewalk connection coming off of SW Oldham Pkwy to facilitate pedestrian access to/from the individual pads. Pedestrian connectivity is required within and between all the proposed sites per UDO Section 5.640.B. - What is the intent to provide pedestrian connectivity for the Lot 3 overflow parking that requires crossing traffic to reach the destination it serves. At a minimum, a signed and striped pedestrian crossing should be provided.

GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - ENVISION LS OVERLAY. Because the subject property is located within the EnVision LS overlay area, please review the pertinent development standards that apply to the multi-family and commercial sites found starting with UDO Section 5.640. Provide documentation/response indicating how the development standards of the overlay are being met.

PROPOSED USES. Early pre-application meeting included at least one potential use (a car wash) that fell under the list of prohibited uses contained in UDO Section 5.650.E. Please review the list and confirm whether any such uses are being considered for the development. If so, such uses shall be identified and will require specific City Council action to consider as part of this process.

APARTMENTS SITES. - As expressed by staff in both pre-application meetings, staff is concerned with the heights (4 stories) of the apartment buildings in the areas adjacent to the abutting single-story, single-family residences to the west as it relates to the visual impact and height contrast between the uses. Staff discussed options such as flipping the Lot 2 building so as to have less of the building closer to the residences to mitigate negative impacts. Staff once again recommends this approach. - In the same vein, staff recommended and continues to recommend lowering the number of stories on the west side of the site to once again mitigate compatbility concerns against the single-story structures to the west. The lost height on the west side could be added to the east side of the development that is oriented away from the existing residential. - Provide a section of the site to show height relationship between the proposed apartment buildings and the existing abutting residential to the west.

SIGNAGE. All proposed signage shall meet the requirements of the PMIX zoning district under Table 9-1 of UDO Section 9.260. The provided Chick-fil-A elevations exceed the allowable number of wall signs.

FUTURE LOT 9. With no identified potential land use or building elevations for Lot 9, the future development of said Lot 9 will require going through a separate future preliminary development plan process.

COMMERCIAL ELEVATIONS. - The typical commercial elevation provided is for a multi-tenant building that appears to be designed for the proposed Lot 7. The title block reads "Lot 10", revise or remove. - With the only other elevations provided being for a specific user (i.e. Chick-fil-A), it is recommended that a design handbook be provided to establish architectural and material requirements to govern the remaining commercial pad sites so as not to require the need for separate preliminary development plan approvals via public hearings for their future development. - Provide elevations for the repurposed building on Lot 8 (the old CK Enterprises building).

MECHANICAL SCREENING. Add a note to the plans indicating that all roof-top and ground-mounted mechanical units shall be completely screened from view on all sides in accordance with the requirements of UDO Section 8 and the EnVision LS Overlay requirements.

A Traffic Impact Study for the development.

Oldham Parkway is MODOT owned. Any activity related to this roadway will require an agreement with the City of Lee's Summit and MODOT. Coordination with both parties will be required.

More information is needed on the new design of Oldham Road through the developement before proper review can be given. Please rpovide detailed plan and profiles for the roadway.

The section of sidewalk between the US 50 ramp and Oldham Road should be removed.

a sidewalk connection should be provided to the park on the west side of the development.

The drive thru entrance is very close to the entrance on Lot 7. Ordering stations are not shown and depending on their location the back-up could cause circulation problems.

Please remove the extra “Pool Deck” and “Dog Park” labels in the Lot 2 north parking lot throughout the plan set.

Grading is shown extending beyond the western property line. Please note that an agreement with the adjacent landowner(s) will be required that allows this work to be done.

Please provide top and bottom wall elevations.

Grading will be looked at more closely with the overall stormwater layout during the Final Development Plan review.

The City’s mapping shows existing storm sewer running through the site. This isn’t shown. Please include and address.

The plans don’t clearly show what is happening to the drainage out of the proposed detention basin. Please clarify.

The storm sewer layout in the storm study does not match the layout in the plans. Please reconcile.

Do the 2 basins function separately? Please clarify as the plans and Storm Study don’t match and are unclear.

The existing basin appears to be completely regraded in the proposed condition. Is this design included in the study?

How is drainage being handled on Lot 9?

Only storm sewer along the public street, Oldham Pkwy, will be public. The rest will be private. Please revise accordingly.

Please show the existing sanitary sewer extending west beyond the property line.

The water line extension shown north and east of Oldham Pkwy, as shown, will be private. In order for those lines to public, they will need to be located outside of parking spaces and meet all City location and separation requirements.

Additional comments will be forthcoming pending clarifications based on these comments.