A plan for townhomes at 119th and Lone Elm is in limbo after developers and nearby residents butted heads at the Olathe City Council meeting last week.
Developers want to rezone the 7.7-acre lot to allow for low-density multifamily residential housing — a request that the city’s planning commission unanimously recommended last month that the city council deny.
The city council, however, proved to be more torn.
After hearing from the city, developers and nearby residents, the Olathe City Council voted 5-2 to remand the project back to city staff for further review.
Mayor John Bacon and Councilmembers Jeff Creighton, Kevin Deneault, Robyn Essex and Dean Vakas voted to send the project back to staff.
Councilmembers LeEtta Felter and Matthew Schoonover, who expressed their preference for approving the project outright, voted against the remand option.
At the center of the debate was how the lot, which has sat vacant for years, could best be used. The councilmembers who voted to remand the project asked staff to try to incorporate commercial space into the plan.
Schoonover, Felter and the developers argued that housing is a better use for the site.
A rezoning (from a Neighborhood Center designation to R-3, low-density residential) would allow developers to move forward with plans for a 10-building, 71-unit townhome development.
City staff will further analyze the project proposal before returning it to the city council for another vote.
“Holding this property hostage”
Olathe city staff initially recommended denial of the project to the planning commission because it conflicts with several goals of the city’s long-term land use plan, PlanOlathe.
Staff said that the area near 119th and Lone Elm, in particular, is well-positioned for potential commercial development because of its proximity to the 119th Street extension project.
That $55.7 million project aims to connect a mile-long gap of 119th between Northgate and Woodland Road.
Calling it the “missing link,” staff said the extension will lead to more traffic and visibility in northwest Olathe, increasing the need for retail.
Developers disagreed, saying no retailers have expressed interest in the property since it was zoned for commercial use more than 20 years ago.
“Holding this property hostage for some dream of retail to show up at this seven-acre corner, this little small piece of property, is really not a good idea in our opinion,” said Attorney Curtis Holland, who spoke on behalf of the developers.
Felter and Schoonover, who cast the dissenting votes last week, argued that creating affordable housing is a more pressing need than adding commercial space in that area.
“I’m having a hard time figuring out why we should deny building additional housing, bringing people in to live in Olathe, getting the property tax associated with these houses in favor of speculative commercial development that may or may not happen,” Schoonover said.
Neighborhood opposition
While the city council, staff and developers went back and forth about the best use of the land, nearby residents voiced different concerns.
Residents of the Foxfield Townhomes community, which sits directly next to the proposed project site, have voiced opposition since developers first hosted a neighborhood meeting last fall.
Many of them sent letters to the planning commission, spoke at that meeting last month, and attended city council last Tuesday night. At times, some of the dozen or so Foxfield residents in attendance interrupted Holland as he answered the city council’s questions.
Residents’ primary concern is that the townhomes would potentially be rental properties and that those residents would use Foxfield’s community pool and trail system, which are paid for by their homeowners’ association.
Developers said that they offered for residents of the new development to pay some of Foxfield HOA dues, but said current HOA members rejected the offer.
Two Foxfield residents addressed the city council, urging them to shut down the project.
“I think you’ll find if you have a rental property, some will take care of it, some won’t,” said Foxfield resident Arthur Reinhardt.
Councilmember Essex shared some of the residents’ concerns.
“You’re either renting or transient, and you’re coming in and out,” Essex said, “or you’re purchasing, and you are investing in a community and settling down.”
What happens next
The proposal will not go back to the planning commission after staff reviews it. Instead, it will return straight to the city council for another vote.
