Developer asks city to defer requests for airport industrial park / LJWorld.com

Archive for Sunday, May 25, 2008

The fate of a proposed industrial park near Lawrence Municipal Airport continues to hang in limbo.

May 25, 2008

The fate of a proposed industrial park near Lawrence Municipal Airport will hang in limbo a little longer.

Lawrence developer Jes Santaularia on Friday asked city commissioners to defer a series of rezoning requests for the project indefinitely. City commissioners had been set to hear the items at their Tuesday evening meeting.

The deferral - which is different from a withdrawal of the plans - came after several city commissioners earlier on Friday said they still had concerns about how much the city would have to spend to extend infrastructure to the site.

"It is no secret that we need land in the future for industrial development, but it still comes down to dollars and cents," said City Commissioner Mike Amyx. "As we've seen the last couple of days with budget hearings, we have a lot of issues to balance."

The proposed business park would be on about 145 acres near the intersection of North Seventh Street and U.S. Highway 24-40 - or generally southwest of the Lawrence Municipal Airport. Santaularia has said the site's prime location near Interstate 70 makes it a logical choice for industrial development. His economic analysis estimates the development could attract 1,600 employees and pay more than $54 million in fees, taxes and other revenue to local governments over 20 years.

But neighbors have opposed the project, saying it would take prime farmland out of production, would add to flooding problems and is too risky for the city.

The project faces a high hurdle at the City Commission. Neighbors have filed protest petitions that will require the project to receive positive votes from four of the five commissioners before it can move forward.

On Friday, City Commissioner Rob Chestnut said he still had questions about whether the project had addressed all the stormwater issues it would create for the area. He also said he wanted to study further how much economic benefit the project would provide to the city.

Commissioner Boog Highberger also said he had questions about stormwater and infrastructure costs, and was concerned about the loss of farmland.

The city has estimated that the first phase of the project would require about $3.1 million worth of street, sewer, water and stormwater improvements. Additional phases would require another $5 million.

Santaularia has offered to pay $1 million of the first phase costs. He's proposed the city pay another million and that the county pay

$1.1 million.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

25 May 2008
at 10:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

KsTwister (Anonymous) says…

Developer to only pay 1/3 ???..”Santaularia has offered to pay $1 million of the first phase costs. He's proposed the city pay another million and that the county pay $1.1 million.”What is wrong with this picture?
25 May 2008
at 11:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

toe (Anonymous) says…

This project just won't fly, because it is underwater.
25 May 2008
at 12:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

Credit dried up.
25 May 2008
at 4:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

stream47 (Anonymous) says…

The business of Douglas County should be agriculture first, and education second. There isn't the kind of rail switching facility needed for distribution centers and either light or heavy industry. Kansas City, 35 miles east, has far better rail service, as does Topeka, 30 miles west. And rail will be the determining factor in years to come, as the trucking industry's margins get worse and worse - and the same for air freight, but even worse and even sooner. Unless there's some quick movement to provide passenger/commuter rail service on a regular basis, there'll be an exodus from Lawrence of commuters who can no longer afford gas to commute to work in Kansas City and Topeka, and a crash in the housing/real estate development market. One wonders if the City and County Commissions are aware of these possibilities…
26 May 2008
at 5:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Dracul (Bill Chapman) says…

Heres' another thing to think of - If the county and city have to fund 2/3 of this wonderful little money tree, do they get 2/3 of the profits? Or will that end up in the hands of the developer? Also should this be built - When it fails (not if, WHEN), is the developer willing to pay 1/3 of the upkeep / maintenance costs for under-used utility lines, pipes, etc.?