Some residents of a Lawrence neighborhood are petitioning to keep a vacant lot in the area unfilled.
They lost a battle in their fight Wednesday, but they — as well as the supporters of a development project there — are determined to win the war.
Related story
A preliminary rendering of housing for seniors near 25th St. and Cedarwood Ave.
The disputed lot is adjacent to the United Way building, 2518 Ridge Court, and the proposed development would likely face Cedarwood Avenue. Douglas County owns the lot and, in its Wednesday evening County Commission meeting, agreed to give it to Tenants to Homeowners on the condition that it build housing for middle-income seniors there.
Jean Affalter led the home- and land-owner opposition to the plan at the meeting, where she gave commissioners a petition with 57 signatures — many from multiple members of the same household — asking them to kill the plan.
Affalter and several others who spoke at the meeting said they didn’t want to see more rental property in the area. The traffic flow and especially the water and sewer systems just couldn’t handle any more residents, Affalter said. She’s also upset with what she said has been a lack of notification on the land transfer from the county to Tenants to Homeowners. Her petition also cites projected lower property values as a reason against development.
“The neighbors are not happy,” she said in an interview. “We want a park there — more building will further push families with kids away.”
Rebecca Buford, executive director of Tenants to Homeowners, is herself a resident of the neighborhood. She disagrees with Affalter’s opposition, saying that she understands it’s disappointing to see vacant land go but that the project is a much-needed one that will ultimately benefit the surrounding residents.
“We’re a much better developer and neighbor than someone just out for a profit,” she said of Tenants to Homeowners.
The organization does plan to develop rental properties — to the neighbors’ chagrin — but that’s because rental is what seniors want, Buford said, and they do plan on offering long-term accommodations, such as five-year lease agreements. The homes will also be one-story “cottages” with some communal space.
This kind of housing for senior residents is desperately needed in Lawrence, said Hilda Enoch, a member of the Kaw Valley Older Women’s League, who was part of the committee that originally came up with the idea of involving Tenants to Homeowners but never thought that it could afford land. Then another member thought of asking the county for its lot.
“This kind of housing makes seniors’ lives easier,” she said.
But Tenants to Homeowners has a long way to go before it can even consider breaking ground. Thanks to the commissioners’ support, it now has site control of the lot but it will need to be rezoned for multidwelling and probably re-platted, too. It’s during this process that representatives will need to inform the neighbors of the development plans, said Scott McCullough, director of the planning department for the city.
Affalter said she’ll continue to try to block any development in the area and to try to get the city to upgrade the water main infrastructure outside her home of more than 35 years. She says her group is against rental properties, not seniors.
“I’ve already got my name in the pot,” she said about the civic process.
Comments
oneeye_wilbur 9 months, 2 weeks ago
Seniors don't have. any money to buy homes. And those who have homes will not likelymbebable to afford. Them. Would mrs at falter be against. 3 unrelated seniors. Renting a house in her neighborhood?
merrill 9 months, 2 weeks ago
That neighborhood is loaded with dilapidated rental properties that probably should be hit with neglect complaints. Rehab or tear them down.
That is likely the image neighbors have of rental units. Slumlords galore. Their concern is legitimate in spite of the fact that Tenants to Homeowners presents a very different concept.
LadyJ 9 months, 2 weeks ago
Cedarwood is being advertised on Craigslist for less than $3,200,000 for 122 units. It says that is around $26,000 a unit. Surprised the city hasn't bought it.
Tomato 9 months, 2 weeks ago
Who NIMBY's seniors?
Seniors top the list of "best kinds of neighbors."
oneeye_wilbur 9 months, 2 weeks ago
What Ms. Affalter should be addressing is how the county commissioners can turn over taxpayer owned property without it being listed for sale to the highest offer. After all, it is a county asset in the City Limits of Lawrence. What does Baldwin think about the county commissioners giving away land.
This is the screwiest thing yet. Now then, if Fritzel bought the land and wanted to develop rental housing for seniors would the neighbors complain?
Just asking some questions here. Is the person spearheding the effort related to a person who lives in Arly Allen's neighborhood where rentals are bad. After all, Arly said that tenants should live in units built for tenants? So that is what Tenants to Homeowners is proposing but the group has no plan to move the tenants to a Homeowner status.
God, Lawrence is just so screwed up with Planning and the "old guard" that thinks that each and every piece of ground in the city is theirs.
This town needs another Quantrill and a Greensburg Tornado.
JackMcKee 9 months, 2 weeks ago
I sympathize with the neighbors. Apartments and rentals have sprung up like weeds all over Lawrence in the last 5 years.
srj 9 months, 2 weeks ago
How is Tenants to Homeowners funded? When I went to a meeting some 15 years ago, they got basically 75% of the profit from someone selling their T2H house. So they have made no money that way in five years.
oneeye_wilbur 9 months, 2 weeks ago
Again, how can the County Commission give away land that belongs to the taxpayers and not only that is in the city limits of Lawrence. What do the folks in Baldwin think about their "stakeholder" partnership in county owned land.
Ms. Affalter and the neighbors need to question how this land can be given away and not put up for sale to the highest offer. It is a county asset.
Since when has the county commission started giving away assets, but of course they are nly following the Lawrence City commission who wants to give away an entire city block which is now a parking lot, they want to give it away to Fritzel.
Where is Hugh Carter on the City Commission on this matter? He wants to attract retirees? And there is the rub!. He only wants rich folks who will buy the $300,000 homes that no one is buying and maybe a new campaign is needed. Welcome to Lawrence buy the $300,000 home and we will keep your taxes the same and stick it to everyone else!
As for the project in question : How does the property tax work on the Tenants to Homeowners's property.
This is a bigger problem than just some drainage issue. This is now class warfare in yet another neighborhood and a County Commission that has become generous with the public's assets.
hear_me 9 months, 2 weeks ago
Drainage and the lack of adequate city utilities are legitimate concerns. Too often, new construction causes serious problems for existing structures. The city should be more responsible in sorting these things out. The neighbors should not have to defend themselves. And wouldn't it be great if this were part of an urban renewal program? Shame on the city. It lets new development proposals turn into a feud where everyone takes sides and nobody wins.
JayhawkFan1985 9 months, 2 weeks ago
Lawrence is a progressive community. We should be ashamed of ourselves. Don't give in to fear, hatred and suspicion. If you aren't happy with your neighborhood then talk to the property owners and the city. But dont blame a group of people who haven't even moved in yet.
oneeye_wilbur 9 months, 2 weeks ago
Seniors are not welcome unless the are rich! Unless they donate to The Williams Fund. But the question remains that thus far not even the Journal World has the guts to tackle. How can the County Commissioners give away land that belongs to everyone in the county and the land is in Lawrence? Wilburnad oneeye and sees collusion here.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.