Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board grants variances for 104‑unit Village at the Fort project in Fort Harrison
Summary
The board unanimously approved modification requests for phase‑one of the Village at the Fort (Fort Ben LLC), allowing longer block length, adjusted parking setbacks and relief from the 5% carpool‑space requirement because of site grade and reuse authority coordination.
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Lawrence Board of Zoning Appeals unanimously granted variances on June 16 for a phase‑one development at Fort Harrison (petition 26 LSB10), clearing the way for a 104‑unit mixed‑use project that includes about 2,800 sq ft of ground‑floor retail and 170 parking spaces.
Grant Deon of the Ridge Group presented the project as a co‑development with Rebar Companies and said the site’s configuration within the Fort Harrison reuse area creates practical difficulties for certain PUD design standards. The team requested relief from a 450‑ft maximum block length (the design measures roughly 600 ft), modification of the parking‑setback line on the west face that fronts Lee Road, waiver of the 5% carpool parking requirement, and flexibility on a 2‑ft elevation separation between commercial and residential entrances because of site grades.
"We feel like our development and project is consistent with the Fort Harrison master use plan," Deon said, noting coordination with Fort Harrison reuse authority staff and local officials.
City staff and Fort Harrison stakeholders described long‑running coordination with the developer and recommended approval, citing site topography, lot configuration and reuse‑authority agreements made during the design process. City staff also noted the project will bring walkability and new rental housing to the Fort Harrison area.
After discussion, the board voted unanimously to grant the requested modifications, finding the site constraints and prior reuse authority consultations constituted practical difficulties that support the relief sought. The approval allows the developer to proceed toward construction under the approved phase‑one plan.

