08/21/03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS exactly what is required of them until they are into the review process. At the same time, many lament the sameness of multi-family developments in Overland Park in terms of building design, materials, and other aspects of site plans. This sameness is said to be the direct outgrowth of the city adhering religiously to certain design requirements such as earth tone colored masonry building materials. Many voiced a desire to create a distinctive style and feel for development in the city that would be easily identified as "Overland Park." An important, but difficult assignment will be to quantify standards where possible to inject more certainty in the system while maintaining the ability to modify standards and encourage alternative design solutions that result in a better, distinctive product. Improve the User-Friendliness of the Current Design Guideline Manual While the current guidelines are better written and illustrated than some, there is consensus that additional illustrations of key concepts need to be added, particularly with regard to parking lot landscaping, building design, and architectural criteria. Similarly, key definitions need to be added to make clear the meaning of important terms. Balance the Need for Specificity in Early Submittals With Time and Expense Associated With Detailed Preliminary Plans Again, like many communities involved in design review, Overland Park faces the quandary of what level of detail and information to require in preliminary plans. City staff and review bodies like to see as much detail as possible so that they can fully understand the impacts of the development early on. On the other hand, applicants prefer more conceptual applications and plans until they have at least preliminary approval to avoid spending money and time only to have to significantly alter plans later in the process at the direction of review authorities. Revamp Density Bonus/Incentive System There is widespread agreement among city staff and advisory committee members that the current density bonus/incentive system is not working well. The main problem is that density bonuses are routinely granted pursuant to the design guideline provisions for improvements, amenities, or land dedications that would be required as a matter of course in other progressive jurisdictions. For example, a density bonus may be granted for attached garages, which the market is calling for without any encouragement from the cityr or for additional parking lot interior landscaping beyond the minimal six percent (6%) that the city now requires. While the basic incentive system is sound, it needs to be adjusted to produce more tangible benefits for the city and to improve the quality of development beyond minimum modern standards. CITY OF OVERLAND PARK, KANSAS 2 OCTOBER 7, 2002