ITEM NO. 3: CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER 2004 COOPERATIVE 3/16/05 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAWRENCE AND
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS
Receive public comment on the proposed agreement and forward recommendation to the City Commission.
STAFF REPORT
Ms. Stogsdill explained the Commission had sent the draft agreement back to the joint City/KU committee to look at specific issues raised in the public hearing when the draft was presented in 2004. The Commission now received a summary of document revisions.
One additional text change was noted, concerning parking issues raised by the Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods. This text (last paragraph page 4) clarified that parking would be provided in accordance with City standards within the 150’ buffer area:
Further, any new University construction within the 150 foot buffer area shall have a height no greater that its set-back from the right-of-way adjacent to the nearest City-maintained street, and on-site parking pursuant to City requirements shall be provided for student housing structures built within the 150 foot buffer area.
Ms. Stogsdill said questions had been voiced about adopting this agreement separate from the Development Code, which was several months from possible adoption. In Staff’s opinion, this was the correct time to consider the agreement because, if more changes were needed, these could be under discussion by the joint committee while the Development Code was in the review process.
PUBLIC HEARING
Janet Gerstner spoke on behalf of the Lawrence Association of Neighborhoods (LAN). She referenced LAN’s letter to the Commission, which stated their appreciation and support of the revised agreement and the Commission’s “courage and patience to continue with negotiations. LAN was also pleased to see that many of their suggestions had been incorporated in to the document.
LANs’ remaining concerns about parking appeared to be addressed by the new text presented tonight.
LAN supported the revised document, finding it a significant improvement over previous drafts and a benefit to the City, the University and the neighborhoods.
Personally, Ms. Gerstner said the agreement did not contain all the elements she would like to see, but she believed compromise on all sides made this a good agreement.
Carol von Tersch, Oread resident, said she would like to focus on parking issues in the revised document. She was concerned that the new language excluded certain structures, specifically the two Scholarship Halls (one being constructed and one in the planning stages) in the 1300 Block of Ohio Street. These structures would add significantly to the number of residents in the area, while providing absolutely no parking.
Ms. von Tersch said negotiations for this agreement were triggered by the Scholarship Hall controversy, and the agreement did not address that matter at all. She said the University had agreed to require all Scholarship Hall residents to register their vehicles and buy a parking pass for the parking lots a few blocks away. However, she was skeptical that students would follow this direction.
Ms. Von Tersch responded to questioning that she was not requesting any specific action from the Commission because LAN supported the agreement. She said the Oread Neighborhood Association was planning on dealing with the issue by approaching the City Commission to ask for permit parking in the area. She suggested the University might help fund the permit system to relieve the problem.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Burress stated for the record that the Scholarship Hall issue had been one of the reasons for entering into agreement negotiations, but had not been the only reason. Several neighborhoods had been impacted for a long time by University development undertaken without input from the City or area residents. Nonetheless, he agreed that the irony pointed out by Ms. Von Tersch was real.
ACTION TAKEN
Motioned by Burress, seconded by Angino to approve the revised City/KU Cooperative Agreement with the text additions as presented by Staff and forward the document to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval.
Motion carried unanimously, 8-0.