Monday, February 8, 2016

Shawnee County Annex

6:00 PM



Roll Call and Announcement of Hearing Procedure:  Christi McKenzie, Chair, called the meeting to order and asked for roll call to be taken.


Members Present:  Christi McKenzie, Nancy Johnson, Jerome Desch, Brian Jacques, Pat Tryon, Dave Macfee and Matt Appelhanz.  With seven members present, a quorum was established and the meeting was called to order.


Members Absent:   None.


Staff Present:  Barry T. Beagle, Planning Director; Joelee Charles, Administrative Assistant; and, Ashley Biegert, Assistant County Counselor.


Approval of January 11, 2016, Public Hearing Minutes:  Mr. Tryon moved to approve the January 11, 2016, Public Hearing minutes, seconded by Mr. Jacques, and with a unanimous voice vote, the minutes were approved.


Communications:  There were no communications by staff.


Ex Parte Communication by Members of the Commission:  There were no Ex Parte communications expressed by members of the Commission.


Declaration of Conflict of Interest by Members of the Commission or Staff:  There were no declarations of conflict of interest by commission members or staff.


Zoning and Subdivision Items:


1.    James Bassett Subdivision (Preliminary and Final Plat Phases) [P16/03] by Schmidt, Beck and Boyd Engineering for property located on the east side of SW Docking Road approximately 1,320-feet north of SW 57th Street in Dover Township.


Mr. Beagle stated the request was for approval of a preliminary/final plat that would divide the 44.44 acre property into two residential lots.  The two lots would each be accessible by two 60’ wide legs which were currently not compliant with the 200’ frontage plat exemption.  The resulting plat of subdivision would bring it into compliance with the Zoning and Subdivision Regulations.


Water service would be provided by Osage County Rural Water District No. 8 and sewage disposal would be provided by individual septic systems approved by the Shawnee County Health Agency.  Staff was recommending the preliminary and final plats be approved as submitted. 


Ms. McKenzie asked if there were any questions for Mr. Beagle.  Mr. Jacques asked if any of the neighbors had contacted staff.  Mr. Beagle stated none had.


Mr. Desch asked if the properties could be replatted in the future.  Mr. Beagle said additional lots would not be feasible due to the lack of public street access.


Ms. McKenzie asked if the applicant was present and wanted to make a presentation.


Mr. Rick Schmidt, Schmidt, Beck and Boyd Engineering, 1415 South Topeka Boulevard, Topeka, Kansas 66612.


·         Stated the applicant was also present to answer any questions.

·         Indicated Mr. Beagle had covered the details of the request.

·         Available to answer any questions.


Ms. McKenzie asked if anyone had any questions for Mr. Schmidt.  Mr. Desch asked if they were going to build houses on the properties.  Mr. Schmidt stated they would be building two houses.


Mr. Desch asked if it was compliant with the Health Agency’s requirements.  Mr. Beagle said it was.


Mr. Macfee asked what determined the number of lots and couldn’t there be additional lots.  Mr. Beagle said each lot had to have their own frontage.  It would be difficult to further divide since each lot currently has only 60-feet of frontage.


Ms. Johnson asked if they could put another road in and put something in the back.  Mr. Beagle said there were only two long legs for access which would prevent additional lots.  Mr. Schmidt stated they would have to come back and replat further if other lots were to be considered.


With no one to speak in favor or in opposition, Ms. McKenzie closed the public hearing and asked for discussion from the members.


With no discussion by the Commissioners, Ms. McKenzie asked for a motion.


Mr. Appelhanz moved to recommend Approval of the proposed subdivision; seconded by Mr. Macfee.  With a vote of 7-0-0, the preliminary and final plats were Approved.


Public Comment on Non-Agenda Planning and Zoning Items


There were no comments on Non-Agenda Planning and Zoning items.


Discussion of Planning Related Issues


1.    Building Code


Mr. Beagle stated the County Commission approved  the formation of a 20‑person Building Code Committee (BCC) on January 21st.  It consists of individuals with various skill sets.  Their first meeting is scheduled for February 10th at 5:30 p.m.


The County Commission had also set some expectations for the BCC in changing the time frame to prepare a recommendation from two years to one year and stated the building code program would need to be completely self sufficient so as to eliminate a tax footprint.


Mr. Beagle said he had asked the County Commission about working with the City.  The County Commission deferred that to the Building Code Committee (BCC).


Ms. Johnson asked if it could be completed in one year.  Mr. Beagle said the County Commission didn’t want to go beyond election cycles.  He had told them the Building Code Exploratory Committee members had indicated it could take up to two years.


Mr. Jacques asked if there was an expectation to work with the City.  Mr. Beagle had asked the County Commission.  Commissioner Archer said there were no facts or data on cost savings.  They were looking to the Building Code Committee’s recommendation.


2.    Comprehensive Plan RFP


Mr. Beagle said four (4) proposals were received from firms in Buffalo, New York; Chicago; Lenexa; and Omaha.  The County’s Technical Selection Committee had made a selection but they weren’t announcing the name until negotiations were finalized.  He was meeting with representatives this week to work out the details and then it would be submitted to the County Counselor’s office for review.  He was pleased with the responses to the RFP and the selection made by the committee.  He thought they would end up with a good product.  The firm’s proposal included public engagement which would help define opinions.  The Comprehensive Plan would be utilized as a decision making tool.


Mr. Beagle said there would be a meeting with County officials and the Planning Commission would be part of that process.  They would need to think about current County issues to be addressed by the consultant in getting the process started.  There would also be a steering committee comprised of County citizens that would be the principal driver and the sounding board to the staff and consultant.  He wanted the Planning Commission members to identify possible members to serve on the steering committee as well as any of them that would like to be included.


Ms. McKenzie asked how many members would be on the steering committee.  Mr. Beagle said typically there would be 10-12 initially.  Anything larger could be unwieldy.  Focus groups could then be created which would identify key issues to the consultant.


Ms. McKenzie asked if Mr. Beagle would have to go back to the County Commission for approval of the steering committee.  Mr. Beagle responded in the affirmative.  Mr. Beagle hoped to finalize discussion with the consultant this week and go back to the County Commission in two to three weeks.


Ms. Johnson was surprised the consultant was not locally based.  Mr. Beagle said they needed to match certain skill sets.  Other firms may have already had other commitments.  Two of the companies who were sent proposals and responded to the RFP have worked in Shawnee County before.  The two companies from outside the state were possibly trying to establish a presence here in the Midwest.


Ms. Johnson asked how companies found out about the RFP.  Mr. Beagle said information was sent out directly to five companies and they had also placed it on the American Planning Association’s website.  You never knew who was going to respond.  He was appreciative of the APA website since it gives RFP’s national exposure and there was no charge for the posting.


Ms. Johnson said she wanted Mr. Beagle to meet with John Hunter of Heartland Visioning to talk about focus groups.


In conclusion Mr. Beagle stated there had been no discussion with the County Commission regarding the steering committee.  They might be able to offer additional names.




Ms. Johnson moved to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Jacques.  A unanimous voice vote declared the public hearing be adjourned, which was at 6:25 p.m.