OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Planning Commission Meeting - September 23, 2024: Denial of Home Flats Rezoning and Preliminary Site Development Plan

City Council — Monday, September 23, 2024
BodyOlathe, Kansas
SessionCity Council
DateMonday, September 23, 2024
StatusFILED
Video Record
Meeting Thumbnail
⇩ GET FROM SOURCE

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:04

I would like to call tonight's meeting to order.

0:06

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

0:11

I pledge allegiance to the file.

0:18

Yes.

0:33

We begin our meeting this evening.

0:35

I'll take a moment to acknowledge that we have a quorum of planning commissioners present with all nine in attendance.

0:40

Welcome, Commissioners.

0:42

Want to thank everyone in the chamber for attending tonight.

0:45

Sorry we didn't arrange for concessions or anything.

0:47

You're on your own there.

0:49

But planning commissions are an important part of the process of interpreting and implying the city's comprehensive plan and its unified development ordinance.

0:58

It's important that our meetings are conducted with dignity and respect.

1:02

That applies to every person in attendance.

1:05

We strive to provide an atmosphere where the ideas and opinions of all participants are held in the highest regard.

1:11

Finally, the actions on the issues we discuss here are ultimately under the responsibility of the city council.

1:18

As a planning commission, we're here to help the council as our elected representatives to be fully informed so they can make the best choices for our city.

1:26

By statute, the planning commission strives not to engage with any party on the issues on our agenda prior to the meeting.

1:33

Should that interaction take place as a result of a business relationship or any other interaction, which we refer to as ex parte communication, commissioners will report that interaction when we reach that item on the agenda.

1:47

We'll now move on to the consent agenda.

1:50

This evening we have five items on our consent agenda.

1:53

Commissioners, do you need to pull any items for additional information for our questions from staff?

1:59

Mr.

1:59

Chair, I'd like to pull out of a PR 24-0009.

2:05

I will need to recuse myself from consideration of this item as my company's involved with the engineering services.

2:11

Okay.

2:11

All right.

2:12

Thank you, Commissioner Corcoran.

2:14

Any other items that uh need to be pulled or inquiries from commissioners.

2:20

Okay.

2:20

If not, um I will entertain a motion for passage of the consent agenda excluding item D.

2:30

So moved.

2:32

Thank you, Commissioner Brigida.

2:34

Do I have a second?

2:35

Second.

2:35

Thank you, Commissioner Creighton.

2:37

All those in favor say aye.

2:40

Opposed, nay.

2:41

And that motion passes nine to zero.

2:48

Now we'll move on to the remaining item on the consent agenda, PR two four-zero zero zero nine.

2:55

Uh there are any questions from Commissioners on this issue?

2:59

If not, I'll entertain a motion on this.

3:02

Mr.

3:03

Chairman, I would move for the uh passage of item D, PR 24-0009, subject to all staff comments, stipulations.

3:12

Thank you, Commissioner Crane.

3:13

Do you have a second?

3:14

Second.

3:15

Thank you, Commissioner Breen.

3:16

All those in favor say aye.

3:17

Aye.

3:18

Opposed nay.

3:19

And that passes 8 to 0.

3:27

All right, so we'll move on to regular business, which is our public hearing tonight, which I'm sure is why everybody's here.

3:33

So let's talk a little bit about how this process works and what we'll be doing this evening.

3:39

So this is a rezoning application.

3:41

Uh the case will be presented by staff, and after staff's presentation or recommendation, the applicant will be present and will begin calling on individuals who have signed up to speak.

3:53

I want to thank everyone who's attending this evening.

3:56

Uh, your participation is very important to the process, uh, and we're glad that uh to see so many people engaged in that process.

4:04

We understand that comments and feedback uh that the public has submitted to the city already.

4:10

Uh we have several letters, emails, uh, we're appreciative of that.

4:15

Those comments have all been read, uh expressed uh through the with the all the commissioners here prior to the meeting, and that same packet gets passed on to the city council, and I'll have that as well.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Land Use Planning█████████████████████████████████████████████62%
Transportation Safety█████████12%
Community Engagement███████9%
Procedural████5%
Public Engagement██3%
Affordable Housing██3%
Engineering And Infrastructure██3%
Environmental Protection█1%
Miscellaneous█1%
Summary of Proceedings

Planning Commission Meeting - September 23, 2024: Denial of Home Flats Rezoning and Preliminary Site Development Plan

The Planning Commission met on September 23, 2024, at 1:00 PM to consider a consent agenda and a public hearing for the rezoning of approximately 15 acres west of 161st Street and South Merlin Road to allow a 202-unit multifamily and mixed-use development known as Home Flats. After staff presentation, public testimony, and commission deliberation, the commission voted 9-0 to deny the rezoning and preliminary site development plan.

Consent Calendar

  • Five consent items were approved unanimously (9-0) after one item, PR24-0009 (119th & Ridgeview Retail), was pulled from the consent agenda due to Commissioner Corcoran's recusal (his company provided engineering services). That item was then separately approved (8-0) subject to staff stipulations.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Approximately 15 residents signed up to speak, nearly all in opposition to the proposed development. Key points included:
    • Character and density: The three-story buildings would dwarf surrounding single-family homes and single-story retail, altering the neighborhood's character. Density at 14 units per acre is significantly higher than the 3–6 units per acre in nearby residential areas.
    • Traffic and infrastructure: Merlin Road and the 161st Street intersection are already congested; a single access point and turn lanes are insufficient. Concerns were raised about cumulative impacts from other approved developments (Heritage Ridge, Hilltop Farms) and the future widening of 159th Street and I-35 construction.
    • Property values: Many speakers argued the development would reduce home values and desirability, with several stating they would not have purchased homes if they had known such a project was planned.
    • Developer reputation: A resident cited poor online reviews for similar Home Flats properties in Michigan, alleging rodent infestation, management issues, and that the developer incentivized positive reviews with gift cards.
    • Process concerns: Some speakers requested a delay, noting the revised plans were released only four days before the meeting, leaving insufficient time for community review.
    • Height and visibility: The subject property sits at a higher elevation than surrounding areas, making the proposed three-story buildings (up to 45 feet) even more prominent.
    • Commercial need: Opponents noted ample existing retail and daycare options nearby, questioning the demand for additional commercial space.

Discussion Items

  • Staff Presentation: Emily Carillo (Senior Planner) detailed the proposal: 202 residential units (53 in a mixed-use building, 149 in multifamily), 4,000 sq ft of future commercial, a daycare, and two requested waivers (frontage build-out from 80% to 63.9% and setback from 15 to 20 feet). Staff recommended approval with stipulations, including use restrictions, height/density limits, and a six-foot berm with evergreens along the western property line.
  • Commission Questions and Concerns: Several commissioners questioned density (14 units/acre vs. 3–6 in adjacent areas), building height, traffic study adequacy (done on Tuesday, Sept. 10, but not accounting for all future developments), and compatibility with the neighborhood. Commissioner Brown highlighted difficulty turning onto Merlin from 161st Street. The applicant (Vishale Aurora) stated the project targets workforce housing and that Magnus Capital Partners intends to own and manage the property long-term.
  • Deliberation: Most commissioners found the proposal inconsistent with the Golden Criteria criteria, especially regarding character, density, traffic safety, and adverse effects on nearby properties. A motion to delay was withdrawn; the commission proceeded to a vote.

Key Outcomes

  • Motion to deny (RZ24-0015): Passed 9-0. The rezoning and preliminary site development plan for Home Flats were denied. The decision will be forwarded to the Olathe City Council for final consideration at the October 15, 2024 meeting, along with all written and oral comments received.

Meeting Transcript

I would like to call tonight's meeting to order. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the file. Yes. We begin our meeting this evening. I'll take a moment to acknowledge that we have a quorum of planning commissioners present with all nine in attendance. Welcome, Commissioners. Want to thank everyone in the chamber for attending tonight. Sorry we didn't arrange for concessions or anything. You're on your own there. But planning commissions are an important part of the process of interpreting and implying the city's comprehensive plan and its unified development ordinance. It's important that our meetings are conducted with dignity and respect. That applies to every person in attendance. We strive to provide an atmosphere where the ideas and opinions of all participants are held in the highest regard. Finally, the actions on the issues we discuss here are ultimately under the responsibility of the city council. As a planning commission, we're here to help the council as our elected representatives to be fully informed so they can make the best choices for our city. By statute, the planning commission strives not to engage with any party on the issues on our agenda prior to the meeting. Should that interaction take place as a result of a business relationship or any other interaction, which we refer to as ex parte communication, commissioners will report that interaction when we reach that item on the agenda. We'll now move on to the consent agenda. This evening we have five items on our consent agenda. Commissioners, do you need to pull any items for additional information for our questions from staff? Mr. Chair, I'd like to pull out of a PR 24-0009. I will need to recuse myself from consideration of this item as my company's involved with the engineering services. Okay. All right. Thank you, Commissioner Corcoran. Any other items that uh need to be pulled or inquiries from commissioners. Okay. If not, um I will entertain a motion for passage of the consent agenda excluding item D. So moved. Thank you, Commissioner Brigida. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner Creighton. All those in favor say aye. Opposed, nay. And that motion passes nine to zero. Now we'll move on to the remaining item on the consent agenda, PR two four-zero zero zero nine. Uh there are any questions from Commissioners on this issue? If not, I'll entertain a motion on this. Mr. Chairman, I would move for the uh passage of item D, PR 24-0009, subject to all staff comments, stipulations. Thank you, Commissioner Crane. Do you have a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner Breen. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com