Memorandum
City of Lawrence
Planning Department
TO: |
City Commission and City Manager
|
FROM: |
Linda M. Finger, Planning Director |
CC: |
Dave Corliss Debbie Van Saun |
Date: |
January 11, 2005 |
RE: |
Recommended revisions to the Development Code, Ordinance No. 7851, prior to or as part of the second reading |
As the business community and general public begin to become more familiar with the proposed Development Code, some good questions have been raised about points that could use additional clarification or correction prior to adoption of Ordinance No. 7851 on second reading. The questions raised have been, for the most part, in regard to: uses prohibited in the CD District, use terminologies; some density and dimensional table typos; the status of single-family residences as non-conforming uses in RM Districts; and a landscape measurement standard. Staff’s opinion is that it would be both prudent and appropriate to address the issues raised now through appropriate revisions to the text of the Development Code. This can be done by the City Commission prior to the second reading and publication of Ordinance 7851 (the Development Code). [*Please note: To make these text revisions, without referring the Development Code back to the Planning Commission, will require a super-majority or unanimous vote by the City Commission.]
Article |
Section No. and Title Subsection No. and Title |
Recommended Text Change |
4 USE TABLES |
20-403. Non-Residential Use Table
Use Category: Eating and Drinking Establishments
|
|
4 USE TABLES |
20-403. Non-Residential Use Table
Use Category: Food and Beverage Sales |
|
5 USE REGULATIONS |
20-501. Use Standards
(i) Eating & Drinking Establishments Involving Alcoholic Beverages (3) Standards that Apply in CN1 District |
|
5 USE REGULATIONS |
20-501. Use Standards
(i) Eating & Drinking Establishments Involving Alcoholic Beverages (4) Standards that Apply in CO District |
|
5 USE REGULATIONS |
20-501. Use Standards
(x) Restaurant, High-Turnover |
|
6 DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL STDS |
20-601. Density and Dimensional Standards Table
(a) Residential Districts |
|
10 LANDSCAPING |
20-1009. Landscape Material Standards (c) Trees, (2) Sizes, (i) Shade Trees and (ii) Ornamental Trees |
|
15 NONCONFORMITIES |
20-1502. Nonconforming Uses
(b) Expansion Add new subsection (iv) |
Add new text to permit expansion of existing single-family structures in RM districts. Revise text to read: “(iv) Expansion of a single-family residential structure in an RM district, that existed on January 24, 2005, is allowed.” |
15 NONCONFORMITIES |
20-1502. Nonconforming Uses
(c) Loss of Nonconformity Status
|
Add a second paragraph to subsection (2), similar to that in the existing Zoning Ordinance, to permit rebuilding of nonconforming single-family residences in RM districts. New paragraph to read: “Detached single-family residential structures that are registered nonconforming uses in an RM district shall be permitted to rebuild, except when located in the floodway overlay district. The nonconforming residential use can not be rebuilt to a greater density than existed before the damage. Rebuilding shall be allowed only if setback and parking requirements of the district are met. Reconstruction must be commenced within 12 months from the time the damage occurred.”
|
17 USE TERMINOLOGIES |
20-1702. Use Categories
(s) Eating and Drinking Establishments (6) Fast Order Food |
|
17 USE TERMINOLOGIES |
20-1702. Use Categories
(s) Eating and Drinking Establishments (8) Restaurant, High-Turnover |
|
17 USE TERMINOLOGIES |
20-1702. Use Categories
(s) Eating and Drinking Establishments (9) Restaurant, Quality |
|
17 USE TERMINOLOGIES |
20-1702. Use Categories
(w) Food and Beverage Retail Sales |
|
Update on Duplexes in RM Districts:
Indian Hills Neighborhood and LAN raised the issue in early January 2004 about the degree or transitional use duplexes have served in the RMD and RM districts for existing neighborhoods and the fact that RMD zoning will convert to RM12, which does not specify a building structure type, as does the RM-D today. The Neighborhoods hypothesized in their presentation that a large number of existing duplexes have been “townhoused” (each side individually sold) for owner occupancy. In pursuit of a solution, staff and the Commission agreed to look at the possibility of initiating rezoning of some of the existing townhoused duplex areas to an appropriate single-family residential district [either RS3 or RS5] in the new Development Code. To that end, staff has developed maps of all the areas currently zoned RMD and RM-1 with parcel lines and addresses identified. LAN has offered to coordinate neighborhood volunteers to do the field work to determine where single-family or duplex structures exist today in the RM-D and RM-1 districts. As this field work inventory is completed, staff will develop a cross-reference database to try and determine what duplex structures are owner-occupied. When completed, this information will be presented to the City Commission with staff recommendations for areas that would fit the criteria of being “townhoused” and “owner occupied” and the RS district (based on lot size) appropriate for initiation of rezoning to RS3 or RS5.
Staff Recommendation: Revise on a super-majority or unanimous vote, the text of the referenced sections in the table above to address the issues and concerns raised by business and property owners. This can be by a separate motion prior to approval of the second reading of Ordinance No. 7851, or as direction to staff in the motion approving the second reading of Ordinance No. 7851.