Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer proposes 184 build-to-rent "bungalows" near I-70 in Bonner Springs; residents raise traffic, density and safety concerns
Summary
A developer told Bonner Springs officials a new 184-unit build-to-rent bungalow community would be lower density than a previously approved multifamily project, but nearby residents at a public hearing pressed city staff and the developer for details about traffic impacts, school capacity, emergency services and neighborhood character.
Jeremy Hall, a developer with Cavin Companies, and city planning staff described a proposal for a build-to-rent community of detached "bungalow" homes near the I-70/Kansas Avenue corridor in Bonner Springs during a public hearing. The preliminary plat would divide the vacant parcel into a roughly 18-acre residential tract and a separate 3.4-acre tract for stormwater detention, and staff said the plan anticipates about 184 rental homes.
The proposal drew pointed public comment. Greg Gibson, of Deerfield Village, said the project was too large for the site and cited what he called "186 rental units in that small space" as "way too many," arguing the layout left only about 10 feet between many buildings and would overwhelm nearby residential streets. Several neighbors raised traffic concerns focused on the K-7/Kansas Avenue intersection and the proposed Davis Avenue access. "How will they like this increase in traffic?" Gibson asked, and other residents said the intersection already experiences long delays.
Why it matters: the parcel was previously rezoned and split in anticipation of a higher-density, federally subsidized multifamily project approved in 2023 that never developed. Planning staff and the developer told the commission this proposal is lower density than that earlier approval, that it is market-rate (no taxpayer subsidies), and that a new traffic impact study specific to this plan has been completed and is under city review.
City planning staff outlined the site and review process. A staff member said the property currently carries mixed-residential and rural-residential zoning, and that the preliminary plat includes one larger residential tract and a separate stormwater tract. On the traffic study the staff member said: "A traffic study has been conducted. Yes. It is a new one. You can't use the same one... It has been completed. It is being reviewed currently." The staff member added that the city engineer reviews the study and that police and fire provide input as part of the review.
Developer Jeremy Hall summarized the Cavin Companies model and tenant screening. "We call them the bungalows," Hall said, describing detached one-, two- and three-bedroom units with on-site management, maintenance and amenities such as a clubhouse, fitness area and dog park. Hall said the company performs income, criminal and credit screening and emphasized that the model is "market rate": "There are no federal, state, county, city of any kind of taxpayer dollars going into this project," he said.
Residents pressed operational and safety details. Questions included whether the Davis Avenue entrance could be limited to exits or emergency access (the developer and staff said the Davis Avenue access is required by the fire code but can be configured as exit-only or emergency-only); whether building heights would remain single-story (staff said the plan calls for single-story buildings); how construction traffic and dust would be managed; expected rent levels and long-term on-site management; and whether additional traffic controls (for example, a signal at Commercial Drive/Kansas Avenue) would be needed given that K-7 is a state highway.
Neighbors also raised concerns about school capacity and EMS coverage. Gibson said he had contacted USD 204 administrators, who he said were unaware of the proposal and shared residents' concerns. Another resident urged the city to address mutual-aid demands on Bonner Springs EMS before approving new development.
What was not decided: during the recorded portion of the hearing there was no final vote on the preliminary plat in the provided transcript. The commission took public testimony and received clarifications from staff and the developer; staff indicated the traffic study and other technical reviews remain under city review.
Next steps: staff review (city engineer, police and fire input) was described as in progress; no final action on the preliminary plat was recorded in the available transcript. The meeting did approve the minutes at the outset by voice vote.
Attributions: quotes and specific claims are drawn from public testimony and staff/developer remarks at the hearing; speakers are identified by name and street or by functional role when names were not provided.
