Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leawood council denies Mission West MXD rezoning amid school-safety and traffic concerns
Summary
After hours of public comment from nearby residents and council debate about proximity to Mission Trail Elementary, the Leawood City Council voted unanimously to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation and deny the proposed Mission West mixed‑use rezoning and preliminary plan.
Leawood’s City Council on Nov. 17 unanimously voted to deny a developer’s request to rezone a 22.5‑acre parcel at the northwest corner of 135th Street and Mission Road to MXD‑4 and to approve a preliminary plan known as Mission West.
Planner Julie Hurley had presented the application and staff materials showing the proposal would include two 4‑story residential buildings with about 326 multifamily units, roughly 57,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space, 37,000 square feet of office and three drive‑through pads. The applicant’s traffic study, reviewed by a peer reviewer, concluded that a mixed‑use residential plan would generate fewer peak‑hour trips on 133rd Street than a hypothetical full‑office development of similar size.
Nonetheless, dozens of nearby residents turned out to oppose the project during the public‑comment period, arguing that the scale and placement of four‑story buildings directly across from Mission Trail Elementary School would create safety, traffic and character problems. Speakers cited drop‑off and pick‑up congestion, additional vehicle trips on 133rd and Mission, the potential of retail drive‑throughs to funnel vehicles near school crossings, and the proximity of retention ponds and underground garage entrances to areas where children gather.
Several council members said the application raised questions under the city’s “golden” rezoning factors — especially neighborhood character and public health, safety and welfare — and noted that other large projects approved or pending in the 135th Street corridor (including East Village and Oxford Promenade) make it prudent to pause and evaluate cumulative impacts. Members also said the Planning Commission had not heard the applicant’s traffic engineer in person at its October meeting and expressed concern about hearing the full record.
The applicant asked the council to remand the item to the Planning Commission to address concerns, but councilmembers largely concluded the commission’s denial was appropriate. Councilmember Harrison moved to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation to deny; Dr. Castor seconded. A roll‑call vote followed and the motion passed unanimously.
The denial means the applicant must either revise the proposal substantially or wait the ordinance‑specified period before reapplying (unless the city waives that waiting period). Staff will prepare the formal resolution and next steps for council records.
What it means: The council’s decision preserves the current SDO (Planned Office) zoning on the site; council members asked staff and the applicant to continue dialogue about design alternatives, traffic mitigation and school‑safety measures if the developer returns with a revised plan.
