Olathe Planning Commission Denies Special Use Permit for Starfish Project Foundation on July 27, 2026
Olathe Planning Commission Meeting – July 27, 2026
The Olathe Planning Commission held a public hearing and ultimately voted 5-3 to recommend denial of a special use permit (SU26-0006) for the Starfish Project Foundation. The proposed use was for community food and personal support services (nonresidential) at a three‑acre property southwest of W. 135th Street and S. Brougham Drive, currently occupied by a 15,000‑square‑foot former retail building. The meeting included a staff presentation, extensive public testimony from 33 registered speakers, and commissioner deliberation. The final decision on the permit rests with the Olathe City Council, which will consider the recommendation at its August 18, 2026 meeting.
Consent Calendar
- The consent agenda, containing five routine items, was unanimously approved by a vote of 8‑0. No items were pulled for separate discussion.
Public Comments & Testimony
Public testimony was divided, with many speakers expressing support for Starfish’s mission but opposition to the specific location adjacent to the Briarwood residential neighborhood.
- Supporters (including volunteers and clients):
- A long‑time volunteer testified that Starfish diverts about 2.5 million dollars worth of food from landfills annually and serves 400–1,000 people per day (including family members who receive food indirectly).
- A client shared that Starfish helped his family avoid hunger during economic hardship; another supporter noted that the organization helps police officers and provides dignity to foster children.
- Several speakers argued that crime and homelessness already exist in the area and that denying the permit would not eliminate those problems.
- Opponents (Briarwood residents and neighbors):
- Residents cited increased traffic, safety concerns for children walking to nearby Tomahawk Elementary, and fears that the high‑volume distribution hub would attract loitering, vagrancy, and trash.
- One neighbor noted that the property has only one entrance/exit, which would exacerbate congestion during school hours.
- Several speakers emphasized that the special use permit is a land‑use question, not a referendum on the organization’s worth; they argued the use is incompatible with the adjacent single‑family homes.
- A speaker questioned the accountability of the board, noting that the building is owned by a sponsor of the organization, and raised concerns about past operational problems at Starfish’s previous locations.
Discussion Items
- Staff Presentation: Kim Hollingsworth (Planning) and Charlie Love (Engineering) presented the application. Key points:
- The property is zoned CP‑1 (neighborhood commercial) and designated Community Commercial in the comprehensive plan.
- The proposed hours are Monday–Friday 9 am–5 pm and the second Saturday of each month 10 am–2 pm.
- Estimated peak traffic: 40 vehicles per hour, well below the 98 trips typical of a grocery store. The site has 114 parking spaces, far exceeding the minimum 19 required.
- Staff recommended approval with stipulations, including a two‑year permit duration instead of the standard five years, a waiver for one small box truck for palletized donations, and requirements for final site development plan, landscaping, and screening.
- Commissioner Questions:
- Several commissioners asked about the compatibility with the adjacent R‑1 residential district, the applicant’s action plan for emergencies, trash prevention, and the role of the box truck.
- The applicant (Joni Morlan) stated the truck is used 2–3 times per week for large donations; passenger vehicles handle school pickups. She confirmed a board‑approved action plan and that security cameras will be installed.
- The chief development engineer clarified that a city CIP project will add right‑turn lanes at the 135th/Brougham intersection, improving capacity.
- Commissioner Deliberation:
- Commissioners opposing the permit (Sealing, Chapman, Lynn, Toronas, Brown) cited incompatibility with the residential character, safety concerns, lack of objective data on past operational impacts, and the intensity of the proposed use (1,000 visitors per day).
- Commissioners supporting the permit (Corcoran, Brigita) argued the traffic is lower than previous uses, the two‑year sunset provides oversight, and the use is needed. Commissioner Brigita floated a one‑year term with additional conditions, but no formal amendment was voted on.
Key Outcomes
- Motion to deny the special use permit (SU26-0006) passed 5‑3. Commissioners voting yes (to deny): Lynn, Sealing, Chapman, Toronas, Brown. Commissioners voting no (in favor of approval): Corcoran, Brigita, Chair Janner (who stated he would vote no on the denial motion, meaning he supported the permit).
- The Planning Commission’s recommendation of denial will be forwarded to the Olathe City Council, which will hold a public hearing on August 18, 2026. A supermajority (5 votes) of the council is required to approve the permit if the commission recommends denial.
- All public correspondence and hearing records will be transmitted to the city council.
Meeting Transcript
Like to call tonight's meeting to order. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. And to require as we begin our meeting this evening, I'll take a moment to acknowledge that we do have a quorum of planning commissioners present with eight of nine in attendance. Commissioner Breen was unable to attend this evening. I want to thank everyone in the chamber and everyone online for attending this meetings this evening's meetings. Planning commission meetings are an important part of the process for interpreting and applying the city's comprehensive plan and 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 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 to 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 this meeting. Should that interaction take place as a result of a business relationship or other extended interaction, which we refer to as ex parte communication, commissioners will report that interaction when we reach that item in the agenda. For those of you who are new to attending a planning commission, I cover that every meeting. But we have a lot going on tonight, and I'll talk through the process as we go so everybody has a full understanding when we get to that item in the agenda. I do want to make a couple of notes on some misinformation that I came across and just to make aware. Your commission members here are not elected individuals. Okay. We were all appointed by either mayor bacon or mayor Copeland. Um they serve here on a voluntary basis. And we are here to help the city council to make our final decisions. To reemphasize what I said, it will be the city council that makes the final decision. Whether we pass or deny the application here, it still goes to the city council and they have the final say. And they can do the opposite of what we do if they want. There's no scenario where this issue comes to a close tonight. Um it will move on to the city council uh regardless of the outcome of this evening's activities. Um we are per purely just the venue for the public hearing for everybody to come and state their position. Um I state it in a respectful manner manner, and when we get to that item in the agenda, I'll expand on that just a little bit more. Before that, now we'll move on to the consent agenda. Uh this evening we have five items on our consent agenda. The consent items are listed, considered routine by the planning commission and may be approved in one motion. There is no public hearing held for consent items. And there will be no discussion unless there's something that a commissioner requests that it be pulled from the consent agenda and considered separately. Commissioners, do we have anything that uh falls under that category that you'd like to have additional information from staff? If not, I'll call for a motion on the remaining items. Mr. Chair, I move to approve the consent agenda. Thank you, Commissioner Silling. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner Chapman. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. That most motion passes eight to zero. Now we'll move on to the regular business, and tonight we do have one scheduled public hearing. Before we uh begin, I would like to take uh make a few statements about the special use permit application process. The case will be presented by staff, and after the staff's presentation and recommendation, we'll begin calling individuals up that have signed up to speak. I want to thank everyone who is attending this evening. This case is obviously garnered a lot of interest uh and we appreciate participation of everyone.
openpublica.com