Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Planning commission recommends approval of Lee's Summit Senior Community after site revisions; neighbors submit protest petitions
Loading...
Summary
After hearing an applicant presentation, staff summary and public testimony from concerned neighbors, the commission voted to recommend approval of a 172-unit continuing care retirement community (preliminary development plan and 40-year special use permit) subject to recommended conditions; staff recorded protest petitions from 13 properties within the 185-foot buffer.
The Lee's Summit Planning Commission on April 23 recommended approval of the preliminary development plan and special use permit for the proposed Lee's Summit Senior Community, a continuing care retirement community proposed at 5101 Northeast Lakewood Way, following an applicant presentation, a staff review of revisions and public testimony from nearby residents.
Applicant Eric Wallash described the rectangular, roughly 12-acre site and said the project would include about 172 units (approximately 104 independent living, 48 assisted living and 20 memory care units) plus about 15 single-story villas near the northerly property line. Wallash said the team had met with neighbors after a March hearing and relocated the backup generator to the southern end of the site, moved and screened the dumpster enclosure, increased the landscape buffer along the northern boundary and reconfigured drives and building wings to reduce overlooking.
Architect Tim Wilson and civil engineer Matthew Creedy reviewed plan specifics, saying the revised layout increases the separation between service areas and neighboring yards, adds 16 evergreen trees at 8'20 feet tall to the buffer (150% of the ordinance requirement for that buffer), and rotates a driveway to create an additional 30 to 70 feet of separation in places. Staff entered revised plans and protest petitions into the record and reported that, to date, protest petitions had been filed representing 13 properties within the 185-foot statutory buffer; if petitioned properties represent at least 30% of the buffer's gross private acreage, the City Council's approval threshold would increase to six votes rather than a simple majority.
During public comment several neighbors said the three-story portion of the building sits close to rear yards, expressed concern about loss of views and privacy, and asked why taller buildings could not be shifted toward the road. Bill Eads and other residents urged the commission to consider additional site reconfiguration; applicant representatives explained that multiple layouts had been studied and that the current placement was chosen for grade, access, operational adjacencies and to limit impacts on a different group of neighbors.
A resident raised operational concerns about hot water service at an existing nearby Arrow Senior Living community (the Princeton). Tim Moore, regional director of operations for Arrow, said crews identified sediment in on-demand hot water equipment, crews performed flushing and mixing-valve adjustments in the previous days, and affected residents reported satisfactory service following repairs.
Staff's recommendation to the commission was for approval of the preliminary development plan (with two conditions reflecting the revised plan) and for a 40-year special use permit consistent with the applicant's request. Commissioners debated site constraints, neighbor outreach and protest petition mechanics, then voted by roll call to recommend approval to the City Council.
Because protest petitions have been filed, the project will appear before City Council with the petitions calculated and verified; that calculation will determine whether a six-vote threshold is required at council to approve the rezoning/preliminary plan and special use permit. The Planning Commission's action is a recommendation that will be part of the council record.
