Mission Valley Neighbors counter pro-Mission Chateau arguments

A view of the revised site plan for Mission Chateau.

We’ll hear more about what the Mission Valley Neighbors Association has to say about the Tutera Group’s revamped plans for Mission Chateau during the neighborhood meeting scheduled for this Thursday, but communications from the group the last week-and-a-half suggest they still have plenty of concerns with the project.

The group delivered a letter to the city last Monday, a night before the planning commission meeting during which the commissioners gave the revamped designs for Mission Chateau — which included the addition of more “villas” and a reduction in the size of the main independent and assisted living facility — positive reviews.

In the letter, MVNA member Brian Doerr tells the commissioners the group is “anxious to see a significant re-design of the proposed Mission Chateau project; one that can fit for the entire community, one that can be embraced by the neighbors, and one with which MVNA can be enthused.”

The document also reiterates the group’s contention that the density of the project is unsuitable for the site, and that the density of the Benton House project on Somerset Drive should — against the arguments of John Petersen, the attorney representing Tutera — serve as a precedents.

See the full text of the letter below:

https://dfv6pkw99pxmo.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Mission-Valley-Neighbors-Association-Response-to-MVS-Correspondence-7-1-2013.pdf

The group also sent out an email to members after the meeting laying out their continued concerns with the redesign:

Dear Members of MVNA,

Tuesday, July 2nd at the Planning Commission work session the Tutera Group presented a revised plan. The minor modifications to the proposed plan included:

1) Changing the main building orientation from north-south to east-west.

2) Adding six villas (three rental duplexes) facing the existing villas on either side of a street.

3) Including some minor architectural changes.

4) Only decreasing square footage from to 387,244 to 351,240 square feet (9% reduction) i.e. not much.

5) Only decreasing the number of residents from 450 to approx. 432.

6) Decreasing the number of parking spaces by 16 (when more are needed, especially on holidays or special occasions).

7) Expectations that the construction will take at least 2.5 years! This thing is still MASSIVE!

The Tutera group did not address:

1) The size of the Skilled Nursing Unit/Memory Unit -136 beds compared to (St Luke’s South Hospital is 120 beds). This is still too massive to be a subordinate accessory to the principle Independent/Assisted living building.

2) The exact phasing of the construction is incomplete as they want to build the SNF/Memory Unit first. The subordinate structure cannot be built before the principle building.

3) Safety Issues regarding the detention pond across from Corinth Grade School and next to the Corinth Gardens Apartment Homes. (We asked that it be placed underground to reduce the risk of childhood drowning. Dry detention facilities can reduce the adjacent property values 3-10%.)

4) Maintaining usable green space as written in the Village Vision, 2007.

MVNA’s Concerns:

1) As currently proposed it would be the 2nd largest retirement community in Johnson County. (on 18 acres).

a) The largest is on 100 acres.

b) The third largest is on 65 acres.

2) The Mission Valley site is zoned R-1a (the lowest density zoning). Most existing retirement facilities are zoned higher-density.

At the Previous Planning Commission meeting one of the commissioners stated that the “elephant in the room was the size of the proposal”. An elephant that is 9% smaller is still an elephant.

There is a neighborhood meeting with the developer THIS THURSDAY:

July 11th at 7:00PM at Shawnee Mission East High School Cafeteria.

The planning commission has expressed a desire for the neighbors to be “enthused” about the plan. It is very important to attend and vocally express your dissatisfaction/concerns with the proposed plan.

For more information visit the pvkansas website with the MVNA responses to Tutera’s letter: https://pvkansas.com/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=3071

MVNA BOARD