Council delays vote on Red Oak plan amendment for 7040 Brookside Boulevard amid neighborhood opposition

Red Oak Development CEO Tom Staub presented a proposed amendment for the plan development at 7040 Brookside Boulevard, a 10.7-acre site near Prairie View and Leitner Lane, saying the project would build smaller "warehouse-office" units behind retail along Airport and Leitner and include roadway and landscape improvements.

The redevelopment would keep retail facing the major streets and place smaller, single-story warehouse-office buildings to the rear. "We estimate we'll spend about $16,000,000 on the site," Staub said, adding that about 10% of that budget would pay to improve Leitner Lane and that the company planned roughly $1,000,000 for landscaping. He also estimated about 200 permanent jobs associated with the development and described materials and design choices intended to avoid a typical strip-retail look.

Why it matters: staff said the requested amendment is limited to the northeast corner of the original plan development and would require the developer to improve the full length of Leitner Lane adjacent to the site. The planning and zoning commission (PMZ) voted 6-0 to recommend approval; however, several nearby single-family parcels now owned by a homebuilder responded in disapproval during the PMZ/notification process. City staff said that neighborhood opposition could trigger a supermajority requirement on council (four affirmative votes under current vacancy conditions), which complicates approval at this meeting.

Council discussion and outcome: staff reviewed access, drainage and buffering plans and said the warehouse-office buildings would be single-story, would exceed minimum landscape requirements, and would include a masonry wall and a drainage corridor acting as a buffer to adjacent homes. Assistant director of solid waste James Larimore confirmed standards had been addressed through the development review process.

After discussion, a councilmember recommended tabling the item to allow the developer to decide whether to postpone given the supermajority requirement. The developer said he needs city approval by the fourth quarter to meet financing and construction timelines; council and staff agreed June 26 was not viable because of the supermajority issue and said the application will be delayed to July, date to be determined.

What remains open: council did not vote to approve or deny the amendment at the workshop; the applicant indicated it still aims for planned approval by Q4 and asked staff to return with the item for a future council meeting once the applicant and council can ensure the necessary quorum/majority and internal city processes are in place.

Ending: Council asked staff and the applicant to coordinate scheduling and noted the developer would continue due diligence and internal planning while a new hearing date is set.