NIMBY — or Not In My Back Yard — became a talking point this week as the Shawnee City Council debated a permit for a U-Haul climate-controlled storage center.

“I don’t want to sound like literally a NIMBY,” said Councilmember Kurt Knappen, as he reflected on his childhood growing up near a U-Haul facility. But, “Is that something I would want in my neighborhood? I’m not sure that it is.”

Driving the news: The proposed development at 7020 Silverheel Street sits between Kansas Highway 7 and Silverheel Street in western Shawnee.

• It would consist of two buildings — one of 123,630 square feet and the other 28,628 square feet — that would house a retail shop for U-Haul rentals and equipment and 1,000 units of indoor self storage space.
• Developer Tom Zarda said the proposal would bring a project to a tract that has seen little or no interest from potential businesses.

Why the pushback? Despite smooth passage by the planning commission earlier this month, the idea ruffled the feathers of some nearby residents, who worried about its location directly across from Maranatha Christian Academy’s new school and its proximity to other schools, preschools and an apartment complex for ages 55 and up.

• Some councilmembers said they’d received emails and texts in opposition to the project.
• Four neighbors who spoke against the development mentioned traffic and noise as concerns for the schools and their own neighborhoods.

What they’re saying: “Willow Ridge houses sell within two or three days because the community is so beautiful, you can sit back on your porch any time,” said Stella All. “That’s all going to change if you add more on top of the school.”

• She added that the development would be bad for residents of nearby senior living apartments: “People move in in their senior years to feel safe and secure,” she said. “If you put this type of development next to a senior community it’s going to be horrible.”
• Her husband, Dennis All, also spoke: “We’re very concerned about our property values. We don’t have any crime to speak of.”
• Celeste Jasperson said she was a relative newcomer to Shawnee and moved to the city for her grandchildren. She said the idea of traffic and noise in a quiet area is dismaying, and she was also troubled by the self storage aspect.
• “I have heard, and I don’t have facts to back this up, that these places are sometimes used when people are homeless and don’t have another place to go,” she said.

Developer’s response: Zarda and a U-Haul official on hand Monday sought to reassure councilmembers about the potential for crime.

• The storage units would be entirely inside a secure building, unlike outdoor units that have lately been a target for thefts, they said.
• Shawnee Police Chief Sam Larson said that, based on a comparison between local storage facilities and other types of businesses, “I don’t think crime will be an issue with these.”

Discussion: Several councilmembers said they were “stuck” or “struggling” with the decision about a major development on what has been a difficult tract to develop.

• Councilmember Tammy Thomas said the 1,000 units are likely to bring in traffic, despite some reassurances that a nearby dentist office would generate more than the storage.
• Others said it doesn’t fit the neighborhood: “It does seem kind of like a big monstrosity to be in what feels like a smaller area,” said Councilmember Jill Chalfie.
• Others opposing it suggested the city hold out for a better development that might be brought about by the new school.

The vote: A majority of the councilmembers agreed with Knappen and voted 5-3 against approving the permit. Then it got complicated.

• Since the city planning commission had earlier unanimously approved it, the council needed a super majority of six votes to reverse that decision and deny it.
• After two tries, the council could still only muster five votes.
• Moreover, there was little interest in sending the matter back to the planning commission for more review, since some councilmembers said they were unlikely to change their votes.

The upshot: So the proposal is unofficially dead for lack of action, unless the developer tries again with a different plan.

• Councilmember Eric Jenkins warned that the council’s reluctance may come back to haunt them later.
• Under city zoning ordinances, U-Haul can operate its retail shop on that land, but only needs a special use permit for the self storage.
• There’s nothing to stop someone from introducing another, less palatable plan that wouldn’t need the council’s direct approval, he said.
• “I can guarantee you every point you brought up tonight that you don’t want it is going to be the same point you have then and you’re not going to have any sayso about it,” he said.
• He disagreed that the development would affect the schools but said the landowner should have some rights also: “You guys are going into a crap shoot here on what you’re going to wind up with, and this is a pretty non-nuisance type of building, frankly.”

Roxie Hammill is a freelance journalist who reports frequently for the Post and other Kansas City area publications. You can reach her at [email protected].