Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council overrules planning commission, approves rezoning for 18 townhomes at Reserve of Iron Horse
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing and planning commission recommendation to deny, the council overruled the planning commission and approved rezoning and a preliminary plan for an 18‑unit attached residential development at 151st & Mission.
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Leawood City Council voted to approve a rezoning and preliminary plan for 18 attached residential units on a 4.5‑acre parcel at the southeast corner of 151st Street and Mission Road, overturning a planning commission recommendation to deny.
Julie Hurley, planning staff, summarized the application: the proposal would build 18 units (four fourplexes and one duplex) with an overall layout that includes underground detention and a 170‑foot Evergy easement along the property’s east side. The developer, represented by attorney Greg Musil, said previous agreements and density credits tied to a 1992 land dedication for Iron Horse Golf Club affect the site’s permissible density. With the easement credit, Musil said the effective density is roughly 1.5 dwelling units per acre.
Neighbors and the Iron Horse Reserve Homeowners Association, represented by HOA president Michael Lynch and several property owners, urged denial. Concerns included the higher density compared with adjacent single‑family neighborhoods, visual impacts where the backs of the proposed units would face existing homes, stormwater and traffic impacts on the single local access road, and the project’s effect on neighborhood character.
Planning commission had recommended denial, citing density and traffic concerns. The council first voted 5–3 to accept the planning commission denial (motion failed to carry). On a subsequent motion to overrule the planning commission, the council adopted the rezoning and preliminary plan by a 6–3 vote; Council members Castor, Sippel and Kane voted no on the overrule.
Why it matters: The decision changes long‑standing commercial future‑land‑use assumptions for the parcel and allows a higher‑density attached product amid a largely single‑family area. The developer must follow detailed site and stormwater requirements before construction.

