The Metcalf Soccer Complex’s controversial journey through the Johnson County planning process ended last week with approval by the county commission amid continued objections from neighbors who fear usage of the outdoor and indoor fields will cause a “traffic nightmare.”
After more than an hour of discussion and three attempts at amendments on Thursday, commissioners voted 6-1 on each of two votes to approve a conditional use permit and preliminary plat for the complex, which is planned for 67 acres east of Metcalf Avenue between 202nd Terrace and 206th Street.
In doing so, the commission diverged from recommendations of the East Zoning Board to impose stricter limits on the hours for the outdoor fields, turn off field lighting by 8 p.m. or leave the outdoor fields unlit, and shorten the term of the permit to five years.
Instead, the permit commissioners approved allows the outdoor fields to be used from 7 to 10 p.m. seven days a week. The permit length is for 10 years, with a requirement for a report and public comment to the county commission at the five-year mark.
What do developers propose building?
Landowners Cogent Enterprises LLC and Phelps Engineering applied for the soccer development permits last fall with an eye toward providing more practice and game space for youth soccer players.
Located near Stilwell Park, the complex would have four outdoor fields that would only be used for practice when weather or the seasons permit. A 218,000-square-foot building on the site would house another two fields for practice or games played on weekends.
The site also would have a concession and restroom area with a small playground and 374 parking spaces.
Since its inception, the plan has sparked objections from some neighbors concerned that the influx of cars, lighting from the outdoor fields and size of the building clash with the rural character of the neighborhood.
The East Zoning Board in November 2023 recommended denial, but county commissioners sent it back for reconsideration in December.
The zoning board then wrote some restrictive measures concerning hours, lighting and screening, recommended approval and sent it back to the commission.
The three people who spoke at the public hearing Thursday mentioned the size of the complex, with Marlene Carter calling it a potential “traffic nightmare,” and the county’s traffic study “junk science.”
Amy Beau and Kerry Haffner, who each said they were soccer parents, also disliked the prospect.
“It is too big, it is too much and should not be in our neighborhood,” Beau said.
Haffner, recalling long drives to games, said he could relate to the need for more fields. “We absolutely need it. We do not need it here,” he said.
Many questions from commissioners had to do with the traffic impact. Several quoted 700 cars per day increase, although Assistant County Manager Adam Norris noted it would be closer to 400 per day on weekdays.
Public Works Director Brian Petig acknowledged that the traffic increase would be noticeable.
“A development like this, it is impactful, there’s no sugarcoating it,” he said. Neighbors might see cars queueing up before and after games, and “people might struggle with it.”
But Petig said the road infrastructure in the area has the capacity to handle the extra traffic.
How did commissioners differ in their views?
Commissioner Charlotte O’Hara, who was the lone no vote in both the final votes for the plat and the permit, was the most vocally against the complex during Thursday’s meeting, at times using harsh language.
“The community is being raped, it really is,” she said. “This county is being run by the development community, the banking community and big law firms for the last 50 years, and it’s going to continue.”
She called Stilwell “a village. This is a pastoral type of area.” The soccer fields amount to “an extreme, intense use,” she said, also objecting to the size of the indoor soccer building.
Some other commissioners disagreed with that assessment.
Commissioner Becky Fast noted that the area is zoned for industrial use. If the soccer complex is not built, she said, residents could see warehouses and even bigger buildings and heavy truck use.
“So the option isn’t beautiful four-acre farms,” Fast said.
Commissioner Janeé Hanzlick pointed out that the applicant had made significant concessions after earlier meetings with the neighborhood. The number of outdoor fields dropped from the original nine to four, landscaping was added, and the development was situated farther south away from homes, she said.
“To me the applicant has demonstrated he is listening to the neighbors and making those accommodations. I’m not sure what more he could do at this point outside of not having the project, “ she said.
Chairman Mike Kelly proposed that he and O’Hara meet with more residents and city leaders about the future of the entire southern Metcalf corridor, but O’Hara rejected that as “window dressing.”
O’Hara asked for an amendment to add road improvements such as a turning lane to be paid for by the developer, but it was voted down 5-2 by commissioners who noted the public works department should have input first.
She also asked for an amendment that would have removed the option to light the outdoor fields, but that, too, was rejected 5-2. In both cases, O’Hara and Commissioner Michael Ashcraft were the dissenters.
The one amendment that was approved, unanimously, was offered by Ashcraft to call for a public review of the project with public input after five years.
