THE NEW BOSTON CROSSING, AKA TEN59

WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON?

On the corner of K-10 and highway 59, a project called New Boston Crossing has been proposed. Originally, a proposed mixed use project, it has now evolved into an exclusively commercial project. The developers have also changed the name, renaming the project "Ten59". This project is directly west from the Baker Wetlands Discovery Center and will irrevocably destroy over 70 acres of Wakarusa River floodplain and 3 acres of Wakarusa wetlands. The developers, Jeff Lange and Phil Bundy from Wichita, have attempted to put commercial on this land for over 10 years, with each proposal encroaching and destroying more floodplain for pure profit. The location is directly west of the Baker Discovery Center in the Haskell-Baker wetlands, creating concerns about the environmental impact of the development and the proximity to the historical Haskell Farm where it is known that children fled the residential boarding school. Their remains could be within the floodplains in the historic Wakarusa Wetland complex.

The developer plans to do this by "fill and build", a tactic that is concerning due to it's ability to shift the burden of a floodplain onto other locations. The developer cannot provide us key ecological information regarding remediation, long term stewardship plans of the site, or any information regarding plans. Unfortunately federal and state regulations are lax and our local City has failed to stop this project despite massive public outcry.

This project is a very complex project and requires numerous steps before the developer can actually move any dirt. We are currently waiting for the City of Lawrence to review a floodplain development permit (submitted 02/10/26), waiting for the Planning Commission to review a preliminary plat and rezoning request (submitted 11/24/25), and waiting for a FEMA CLOMR (more info).

WHO HAS TO APPROVE WHAT?

The table above shows who has jurisdiction over what components of approval for this project.

GENERAL STEPS TO DEVELOPMENT

Annexation ✔
Preliminary Plat [SUBMITTED]
Permits
1. Local floodplain permit [PENDING]
2. FEMA permit to fill floodplain [PENDING]
3. Ground disturbance permit
Comprehensive Plan Amendment [APPROVED BY PLANNING, PENDING ON CITY AND COUNTY COMMISSIONS]
Rezoning
1. Initial zoning effective 03/04/2024 ✔
2. Rezoning request for new plat [SUBMITTED]
Breaking Ground

THE GHOST OF PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE

Comprehensive Plan Amendment: A Comprehensive Plan is arguably not a binding legal action and is more a philosophical understanding of how and where the City wants to grow. It's not a question of "can we" but a question of "should we". Plan 2040 states "[t]he comprehensive plan is a binding land use document that outlines the general principles, goals, and policies the community of unincorporated Douglas County and the City of Lawrence value and expect within the community." and "All development proposals must comply with the Comprehensive Plan. If a proposal does not comply with Comprehensive Plan requirements, then the applicant must pursue a plan amendment. In pursuing an amendment, the applicant must show that the proposal is reasonable within the context of the entire Comprehensive Plan." While an approval or denial of this Comprehensive Plan amendment does not have a direct kill switch effect on the project, a project's conformance with the Comprehensive Plan is one of the Golden Factors considered for rezoning. This is also the only item that will come up before the Planning, City, and County Commission. The amendment requires unanimous voting amongst all Commissions, one Commission can kill the amendment. This happened in 2024 when the County Commission voted against the Comprehensive Plan put forth by the developer of New Boston Crossing. Unfortunately, this did not stop the City Commission from rezoning the property a day later.

PAST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT

The developer's past and current projects are not in conformance with the current Comprehensive Plan, Plan 2040, because they are building significantly into the floodplain which has routinely been designated Open Space. Since a Comprehensive Plan Amendment requires an unanimous approval from all three local governing bodies (Planning, City and County Commissions), this amendment failed. On 03/04/2024 the Douglas County Commission denied the comprehensive plan amendment due to expansion in the floodplain and it's conflict with County values of preservation of open space and floodplain conservation.

CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT

For a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to be enshrined in Plan 2040, all 3 Commissions must approve the amendment. So far, this amendment was approved by the Planning Commission. The reasoning given by the Planning Commissioners include: the property is already annexed and zoned so it has to be developed, we should trust the system. To watch the meeting and read more about this meeting click here. The City and County Commissions must still review and approve this amendment before it becomes solidified in our Plan 2040.

Preliminary Plat: Must conform with zoning, as this is a legal agreement between the City and the developer for what the site will look like with minor alternations. If the developer fails to get the rezoning required, the current plat submitted will be useless until they get the rezoning approved. This does not stop the developer from submitted another plat or re-submitting another rezoning request. This kills this specific project but not a project overall. The Planning Commission can put reasonable restrictions on the plat. Once the preliminary plat is approved it goes to the City Commission as a final plat. The City Commission is responsible for dedicating right of ways, so once the preliminary plat gets approved by the Planning Commission, it cannot be drastically altered by the City Commission. Preliminary Plats expire after 2 years.

THE PAST PRELIMINARY PLATS

The original concept that was approved in NOV 2023. The Planning Commission approved a Preliminary Plat, which later expired in NOV 2025. The developer let the mixed use concept die and went to exclusively a commercial concept.

In mid 2024, the developer submitted a new preliminary plat that added subsidized affordable housing south of the stream that bisects the property. We believe this plat was introduced because the United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) did not want the street crossing the stream in the middle of the property. We also believe that the developers of New Boston Crossing poached the affordable housing developer (HOB) who was trying to build on Baker's wetland property. This plat and concept was redacted by the developer. It never went to the Planning Commission for approval.

FUTURE PRELIMINARY PLAT

The preliminary plat submitted to the City for review on 11/24/2025.

A concept provided by the developer. This concept is different from the proposed plat but is generally accurate.

Sporting Kaw Valley Soccer (Indoor/outdoor sports facility (+/-38 acres)
- 3 field turf playing areas to accommodate 6 full size soccer fields, A +/- 200,000 s.f. building for indoor sports
Entertainment District (+/-14 acres)
- Indoor/outdoor golf themed entertainment, indoor bowling/arcade themed entertainment
General Commercial District (+/- 34 acres)
- Fuel service, Extended Stay Hotel, Economy Hotel, Quick Service Restaurants, Tire center, Medical/Dental offices
Lacrosse/Championship Soccer stadium (+/-13 acres) [POTENTIALLY CHANGED]

Rezoning: Arguably the most important part of this process. Securing zoning gives the developer certain land right entitlements. These entitlements mean that the developer can generally use the property to his or her best interest granted they get all permits required approved by the municipality. Securing the right type of land zoning allows the developer to alter their preliminary plat within reason, as zoning dictates the plat. A plat cannot dictate the zoning. Zoning does not expire. Zoning hearings require a review of conformance with the Golden Factors below, but Kansas law doesn't not require the Golden Factors to be the exclusive reason a commission may approve or disapprove a rezoning request.

If the Planning Commission recommends the rezoning, the City Commission can approve it by simple majority (3-2) or deny it by super-majority (4-1). If the Planning Commission recommends no action or a denial of the rezoning, the City can approve the rezoning by a super-majority or can deny the rezoning by a simple majority.

PAST REZONING

The lot on the northwest corner was annexed into the City limits in the late 1970's and remained in RS10 holding zoning. It was never used for anything but agriculture until this development. Since the property was annexed, the County zoning of AG-1 & AG-2 were not valid within the City limits, leading to several rezoning requests.

Approved by City Commission on 03/05/2024. Not included in the legend, the green space is designated open space.

CURRENT ZONING

Not included in the legend, the green space is designated open space.

STEPS TO DEVELOPMENT

Annexation ✔
Preliminary Plat [SUBMITTED]
Permits
1. Local floodplain permit [PENDING]
2. FEMA permit to fill floodplain [PENDING]
3. Ground disturbance permit
Comprehensive Plan Amendment [1/3 VOTES]
Rezoning
1. Initial zoning effective 03/04/2024 ✔
2. Rezoning request for new plat [SUBMITTED]
Breaking Ground

FUTURE REZONING

Current Zoning. This zoning was approved in March of 2024. The area outlined in black are the requested parcels for rezoning. The developer wants to change these zonings to CC (Big C Commercial), the most unrestricted commercial zoning. While the developer is also proposing high density housing south of the stream, they have not put in any zoning requests for this area. We believe they are attempting to secure Sporting Kaw Valley as an anchor before they continue on with their project.

Zoning Request Submitted 11/24/2025

CURRENT FLOODPLAIN BOUNDARIES

Roughly 125 acres of the 178 acre complex is encumbered by regulatory 100 year floodplain. The developer is currently in the process of securing a CLOMR (click here for an explanation of what a CLOMR is) to remove the floodplain from a regulatory viewpoint. This removal of floodplain from regulatory mandates simply removes the floodplain on paper. The fill that the project requests will remove the functionality of the floodplain physically. Destroying the floodplain removes the functionality of the floodplain including:

Flood control and mitigation
Often hosts wetlands which are an endangered ecosystem with unparalleled biodiversity
Water quality regulation
Preserves water table during droughts

There is a single well that was drilled around the time of the SLT building. Plugged in 2011, the well has a static water level of 13 feet, an indication of how far below the surface the water table is.

FUTURE FLOODPLAIN REMOVAL

While we can't be certain the exact amount of floodplain the developer intends to remove, we can assume any of the 100 year floodplain within the areas zoned for the development will be permanently altered. The total estimated removal of the 100 year floodplain is ~70 acres (the areas highlighted above, ~52 acres + 18 acre pond). If you account for the 500 year floodplain the total floodplain removal increases to ~82 acres. Of course, this only counts what is considered regulatory floodplain, and not what is functionally floodplain.

The grading of the site, provided by the developer to the City of Lawrence. The grading follows the zoning the City has given to the developer. It's important to note that the pond is a borrow pit and requires grading in the floodway. The developer is intending to create a pond that is roughly 25 feet deep. Additionally, we can see that the majority of the drainage from the property will go into the stream that bisects the property. This is concerning, as this stream connects directly into the Baker portion of the Haskell-Baker wetlands via a culvert under the South Michigan street.