Crescent Springs blocks 17-unit apartment complex plan

UPDATE: The original version of this story contained some imprecise wording and sentence structure that led to some unclear meaning. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused and have edited the relevant lines for better clarity. –LINK nky editorial, Nov. 26, 2025.

Crescent Springs City Council voted down a proposed concept plan for a 17-unit rental housing complex Monday night.

The decision came down to a 4 to 2 vote after both elected officials and community members voiced concerns about increased traffic, water retention, the complex’s effect on property values and concerns about road access.

“They voted no,” Brian Fullenkamp, a partner at Legacy Management, the development company that had wanted to develop the land into rental properties, said after the meeting. “We don’t have anything else to do, as of right now.”

The Kenton County Planning Commission had approved the plan in September, after which Council Member Jeannine Bell Smith appealed the plan to the council for additional approval.

The council discussed the plan at their meeting in October, where Thomas Breitenstein, the attorney of the land’s owner, David Heidrich, had asked three of the council members, Bell Smith, Jeff Smith and Carol McGowan, to recuse themselves from voting on the issue because they had expressed concerns about the development before the planning commission.

In the end, Council Members Bell Smith, Smith, Don Kiely and Mark Wurtenberger voted against the plan. Council Members Bob Mueller and McGowan voted in favor of it.

The land in question spans about an acre on the northeast corner of the intersection of Ireland Avenue and Harris Street in Crescent Springs. Queen City Avenue flanks the land to the east. The areas around the parcels are a mixture of single-family, multi-family and commercial developments, most notably a nearby Panera Bread and a paint store.

Plans to develop the land date back to 2007, when former owner JACS Property submitted a development plan to the county to build 32 townhomes across three buildings.

Only a portion of the roughly two acres in the original development concept was developed into condos, and the remaining land eventually fell into receivership before being sold by the county master commissioner, effectively dividing the property rights to the land in half.

Read our latest deep dive into NKY’s housing shortage here.

Ireland Properties, an LLC, bought the remaining land in 2017 but struggled to find a way to develop it. Ireland Properties later contracted with Legacy Management, a Fort Wright-based property management firm, to revise the original concept plan and head up asking for a variance from the county.

The new concept plan called for two buildings with a total of 17 housing units. Plans for the first building called for a 15-foot setback from Ireland Avenue and Harris Street. Plans for the second building called for a 12-foot setback from the adjacent commercial lot and a 15-foot setback from Ireland Avenue. Each unit would have had rear-entry two-car garages and walk-out access onto Ireland Avenue.

Typically, the zone where the property sits requires 25-foot setbacks, but the planning commission had approved variances with the concept plan in September, a point that proved to be a sticking point among the development’s critics. Plans also called for a water detention basin (in addition to the one nearby) along with attendant landscaping and signage.

No official action took place after the discussions in October, which focused largely on the setback variances, water detention infrastructure, street access and the fact that the properties would be rented out. Many of these issues would reemerge at Monday’s meeting.

Bell Smith and McGowan seemed affronted by the call for recusal at the October meeting.

McGowan said she believed it was “inappropriate to ask three members, which would take away a majority, to not have a conversation regarding what’s in our city.” In spite of this, McGowan was actually one of the council members who voted in favor of the plan.

When the developers and their contracted engineer, Don Stegman, came up to answer questions before the council, Bell Smith even said, “we deserve a apology.”

Three residents spoke out against the development, reiterating many of the concerns brought up by Smith, Bell Smith and others: traffic, water retention infrastructure, access, potential light pollution and the fact the developers were seeking rental tenants, rather than buyers.

One resident, Dawn Johnson, noted that water tended to congregate in the area already and worried that more might create problems with icy patches on the roads. No residents spoke out in favor of the development.

Only one Council Member, Mueller, viewed the development somewhat favorably, although by the end of the meeting, he had come to acknowledge some of the residents’ concerns. He said he appreciated the work and planning the developers had put into the project and believed this was likely the best use of the land.

“I think we have an opportunity to look at someone who has come forward with the concept over a number of years, who wants to develop the site, versus– we don’t know what may come,” Mueller said. “But I do believe it will develop.”

At one point, Bell Smith asked whether Mueller would be willing to recuse himself from the proceedings, since he had worked as a realtor and could, hypothetically, work with the developer in the future.

“Will you be helping rent these apartments or these leases?” Bell Smith asked him. “Would that be part of a job that you will do?”

Mueller said they would have to hire him to do that, which they hadn’t, and deferred to the city attorney for clarity on whether his profession created a conflict of interest.

“Do you have any direct financial interest in the outcome of this?” said City Attorney Mike Baker.

“No,” Mueller said.

“Then he is qualified to vote,” Baker replied.

Kiely and Wurtenberger sat silently throughout the discussion.

Stegman, Fullenkamp and Ross Kreutzjans, also of Legacy Management, attempted to address the concerns of the council and the residents, but it wasn’t enough to sway the vote. Finally, Mayor Mike Daugherty called for a motion. Mueller made the motion, and McGowan seconded the motion. Then, the council cast its vote against the development.