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 28, 2005
RE:	Recommended revisions to the Development Code, Ordinance No. 7851,  as part of the second reading

On January 18^th, the City Commission took additional testimony on the Development Code prior to considering Ordinance No. 7851 on second reading.  Two types of areas of concern were raised.  Mr. Banks expressed concern with the structure of the nonconformities section (Article 15) in relationship to the State Statutes (K.S.A. 12-758). Ms. Ellermeir, Mrs. Wolfe, Mr. Geyer and Mr. Morse raised concerns with the loss of predictable building types through the collapsing of the RMD & RM-1 districts in the new code into one district, RM12.  They also expressed concern for greater predictability of development in neighborhoods and the need for protection of existing development patterns (through standards for  building type and building massing), specifically in those areas currently zoned RMD and RM-1.

Staff was asked to prepare a written response to the concerns raised. In the interim time, staffs from Planning and the City Manager’s office have met with individuals interested in the issue raised by Mr. Banks.  On Monday the 24^th individuals contacted by Mr. Banks or Mr. Mark Anderson from the real estate, appraisal, insurance and legal professions met with staff to express their concerns with the specific impact of creating non-conforming uses out of detached dwellings in RM districts.  A memo was prepared by staff for this meeting in which code revisions were suggested. This memo was distributed to meeting participants and to the City Commission on Monday the 24^th. The recommendations in the memorandum of the 24^th are incorporated into the table that is a part of this memo. 

The two sets of concerns that are responded to in this memo are:

1.           Nonconformities Article (15) and Kansas Statute 12.758

K.S.A. 12-758 establishes that (land use) regulations, “shall not apply to the existing use of any building or land, but shall apply to any alteration of a building to provide for a change in use or a change in the use of any building or land after the effective date of any regulations adopted under this act. If a building is damaged by more than 50% of its fair market value such building shall not be restored if the use of such building is not in conformance with the regulations adopted under this act.”

AND

2.           Neighborhoods Issue: Duplex Type of Development in RMD and RM-1 and Protections to Neighborhoods of Similar Replacement Structures in Case of Redevelopment.

The concerns expressed by multiple speakers can be summarized as:1) concern with the lack of an equivalent RMD district in the Development Code that would restrict building type to no greater than duplex structures; and, 2) concerns with loss of neighborhood stability through redevelopment of existing RMD and RM-1 zoned properties as multiple-dwelling units (more than 2 attached) across lot lines.

Section 20-601(h) of the Development Code was written to address the issue of scale of development on RM zoned properties that abut RS zoned properties. However, there are revisions that could be made to this section and other sections in the Code to provide a greater level of predictability of structure type in RM12 zoning districts.  One recommendation by the public was to create a duplex only zoning district and this has been incorporated into staff’s recommended revisions as a subcategory of RM12.  If created at this time, the new RM12D district could be used to rezone (in the future) those properties identified in the field survey work being done by LAN volunteers now, that are RMD and RM-1 areas developed with duplexes today.

Also included in the attached table of recommended revisions are the original revisions recommended in a memo to the commission at the January 18^th meeting.

Recommended Action:

Adopted on second reading of Ordinance No. 7851 the revisions outlined in the attached table.

Section	Recommended Revision	Issue Revision Addresses
20-204 (a)	Add a subsection (3) to create a subcategory of “RM12” that would restrict buildings to duplex or no more than 2 attached dwellings units in “RM12-D”.	Concerns raised by Ms. Wolfe, Mr. Morse, Mr. Geyer, and Ms. Ellermeir regarding loss of predicable building form & neighborhood protections provided by ex. RMD district.
20-402	Add “P” to table for Detached Dwellings in RM districts	Removed nonconforming use status of (single-family) detached dwellings in RM districts. Conformance with KSA 12-758.
20-403	Add “P” to Brewpub use and “P*” to Fast Order Food & to Food and Beverage Sales uses to permit in CD district. Delete Restaurant, High-Turnover use.	Corrects issues raised about existing uses in Downtown becoming non-conforming uses.  Conformance with KSA 12-758.
20-501(c)(3)	Revision to “Attached Dwellings” Use Standard to limit the number of attached units in RS3 to two.  This would limit only the maximum number of attached units in RS3. The maximum number in RSO and RMO districts would remain 8.	Concerns raised by Ms. Wolfe, Mr. Morse, Mr. Geyer, and Ms. Ellermeir regarding neighborhood stability & preservation of streetscape upon redevelopment of existing RMD & RM-1 properties.
20-501(h)	Delete Use Standard for Detached Dwellings	Removes requirement for special use permit for detached dwellings in RM districts. Conformance with KSA 12-758.
20-501(i)(3)	Revise section to apply to uses in CN2 and to remove “Involving Alcoholic Beverages” qualifier from this section.	Corrections correspond to change in allowed uses in Downtown and use standards for those uses.
20-501(i)(4)	Revise section to apply to uses in CD district and to replace use standard for deleted use of  Restaurant, High-Turnover.
20-501(x)	Delete use standards for Restaurant, High-Turnover use.
20-601(a)	Correct lot frontage for RS5 to “40’” and min. Setbacks for Side, Exterior to “20/10” for RS5 and “15/10” for RS3.	Removes conflicts in RS5 and RS3. Provides consistency with other RS districts in Side, Exterior setbacks.
20-602(h)(2) (ii)	Revise the “Height Limit on Projects Adjoining Certain Residential Zoning Districts” to allow the minimum setback to apply to structures of the same or lesser height to detached dwellings they are adjacent to.	This, in conjunction with the new RM12-D district will address the concern raised by Mr. Morse as to built form and massing of redevelopment or infill be consistent with established patterns in the neighborhood.
20-1009(c)(2) (i) and (ii)	Corrects measurement standard for shade and ornamental trees 2 ½” in caliper.	Makes standard consistent with Industry Standard [American Nurseryman].
20-1502(c)(2)	Transfers standard from existing code to new code to permit redevelopment of an existing, non-conforming detached dwelling use in any district subject to compliance with setback and parking requirements.	Goes beyond standard set in KSA 12-758 to allow reconstruction of an existing non-conforming detached dwelling use in any district.
20-1503	Revise text for Nonconforming Structures to be non-complying structures to remove onus of non-conformity from these properties. Delete subsection that regulates Merger of Lots.	Creates non-compliance as a separate category from nonconformance, consistent with the current zoning code. This authority goes beyond KSA 12-758.
20-1504	Revise text for Nonconforming Lots to be non-complying structures to remove onus of non-conformity from these properties. Delete subsections re:  Merger of Lots.
20-1505	Delete Other Nonconformities	Section not needed with changes proposed to sections 1503 & 1504.
20-1506	Revise Registration of Nonconforming Uses to make it voluntary for existing nonconforming uses until they apply for expansion of the building/use or alteration of the use. Require registration of use prior to processing of application. Detail database process staff will follow to record known nonconforming uses after code adoption.	Removes requirement for owner of nonconforming use to register upon Code adoption. Places registration requirement on NC use owners prior to processing applications for revision to ex. nonconforming uses.  Revisions are consistent with KSA 12-758.
20-1702(s)(3), (6), (8) & (9)	Revise Use Terminology for (3)“Bar or Lounge” to delete last sentence that established 10PM service as the distinction between a restaurant and a bar use. Revise Use Terminology for (6) “Fast Order Food” to  better define the use. Delete Use Terminology for (8)“Restaurant, High-Turnover.” Revise Use Terminology for (9) “Restaurant, Quality” to better define the use.	Revising “Bar or Lounge”  is responsive to comment from C. Magerl at Jan 18 CC mtg. Revisions to subsections (6), (8) & (9)  are to be consistent with changes in allowed uses in Downtown and use standards for those uses.
20-1702(w)	Revise Use Terminology for “Fast And Beverage Sales” to  remove coffee shops and delicatessens from the use.	Revisions are to be consistent with changes in allowed uses in Downtown and use standards for those uses.
20-170-	Add to Use Terminologies a definition for noncompliance.	Consistency with revisions proposed in Article 15 pursuant to KSA 12-758 changes.
entire code	effective date of January 24, 2005 replace with March 16, 2005	A delayed enactment date to allow items cycling through February Planning Commission to be considered by City Commission under the same zoning code.